The Most Absurd Moment From Trump’s Make-or-Break Immunity Hearing

An exchange that underscores the deeply authoritarian peril of Trump’s campaign.

Alex Brandon/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Would a president who orders one of the country’s most secretive and lethal military units to assassinate his political opponents be protected from criminal prosecution? 

That’s the question at the heart of an alarming exchange during today’s make-or-break hearing to decide whether Donald Trump should be immune from criminal prosecution over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. It arrived as all three judges in today’s panel expressed skepticism over the claim by Trump’s legal team that the ex-president is entitled to total immunity for his coup attempt—an argument that, if successful, would effectively end the special counsel’s election interference case before it goes to trial. But the response from Trump’s lawyer only appears to have underscored the deeply authoritarian risk posed by Trump’s reelection campaign. Here’s the exchange:

“Could a president order SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival? That’s an official act, an order to SEAL Team Six?” Judge Florence Pan asked.

Trump lawyer John Sauer dithered, invoking the founding fathers and what they would intend in such a situation.

“I asked you a yes or no question,” Pan interrupted. “Could a president who ordered SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution?”

“My answer is qualified yes. There is a political process that would have to occur under the structure of our Constitution which would require impeachment and conviction by the Senate.”

It’s hard to overstate the terrifying absurdity of the argument. Then again, this is the man who used his executive power to pardon service members who had been accused of war crimes. Though today’s question was an extreme hypothetical—a device often used by judges to test the logic of a legal argument—the response by Trump’s team was entirely consistent with what the former president has been openly running on. Trump has long teased plans to lock up his political enemies. He did it again just yesterday, floating the idea of having Joe Biden indicted if he returns to the White House.

As for wild authoritarian plans to use the military to kill his opponents, perhaps that would fit into his one-day dictatorship

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate