Opinion: Why Trump shouldn't celebrate the immunity ruling just yet
Opinion by Norman Eisen, E. Danya Perry and Joshua Kolb
Snip
The Supreme Court has explicitly directed Chutkan to determine whether Trumps interactions with state officials and private parties were official and left open the door for her to hold hearings over allegations that involved Pence, too. Chutkan can give both parties the opportunity to develop facts supporting their competing positions and then make her ruling on immunity, ensuring that Trump continues to receive due process throughout.
The prosecution could call witnesses such as Pence or former Attorney General Bill Barr to testify about Trumps actions in the wake of the 2020 election and whether they fell within his official duties as president, along with other supporting documentary evidence. The defense would also have the opportunity to introduce testimonial and documentary evidence supporting Trumps motion to dismiss on immunity grounds and could even put Trump himself on the stand to explain his conduct, just as Meadows did. This approach would assist Chutkan in swiftly ascertaining the nature and scope of Trumps newfound presidential immunity.
Snip
Beyond the procedural considerations, the mini-trial would also serve a vital function for the public allowing voters to learn more details about Trumps alleged election interference. It would utilize the adversarial process at the heart of our criminal justice system to elucidate crucial information about the most grievous attack on our democracy since the Civil War
Snip
As Americans face a stark choice this fall, one made even more complicated by last Thursdays presidential debate, they are entitled to know how close Trump came to decimating our democracy four years ago. That can now begin to happen again so its time for the case to get back on track.
More
This is a very good op-ed and I urge you to read it.
Van Jones could be right - this ruling and a mini-trial could increase progressive turnout.
eppur_se_muova
(37,501 posts)onecaliberal
(36,052 posts)2naSalit
(92,948 posts)That crossed my mind early on. She can expose the evidence in these hearings and it will be heard by the GP and that is really important. Might not have a trial before the election but the whole sordid tale will be heard about, in detail, from whenever she starts to whenever she's done.
Could be a good thing in the long run... I hope.
nakocal
(606 posts)for violating his release conditions and keep him in jail until after the trial.