Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Why Trump’s Latest ARGUMENTS are Nothing Short of TREASON

Episode Date: December 25, 2023

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas dissects the legal briefs filed by Donald Trump in the Colorado constitutional disqualification case and in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals where Trump claims absolute immunity and Meiselas explains why these arguments are nothing short of treason. Thanks to Nom Nom! Go Right Now for 50% off your no-risk two week trial at TryNom.com/LEGALAF Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Two recent legal briefs that Donald Trump filed are not only utterly without merit. In my view, let's call a spade a spade. They are treasonous and traitorous documents. Let me explain. First, the 14th Amendment Section 3 disqualification case before the Colorado Supreme Court, where the Colorado Supreme Court ultimately ruled that Donald Trump would be disqualified from the Colorado ballot. Donald Trump argued that he did not take an oath to support the United States Constitution. Let me repeat that.

Donald Trump's argument to the Colorado Supreme Court was that he did not take an oath to support the United States Constitution. And then in the more recent absolute presidential immunity issues and briefings now before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. This after federal judge Tanya Chutkin denied Donald Trump's motion to dismiss the federal criminal indictment against him in Washington, DC, and absolute presidential immunity grounds. Donald Trump argued for king like hour. Basically says that he's immune from any crimes he committed while he was in office.

And he states that his conduct in trying to overthrow the results of the 2020 election. And specifically his conduct relating to the January 6th insurrection constitutes official acts. He's saying that was the job that he had to do as a United States president. These arguments are frivolous, they're dangerous, and they're treasonous and traitorous. Let's go one by one. And as you're spending time with your family and you're maybe introducing them to the Midas Touch network, we show the facts here. the Midas Touch Network. We show the facts here. We show the receipts. We show the documents here on the Midas Touch Network. So first, I want to show you Donald Trump's brief that he filed with the Colorado Supreme Court. For those

of you who say, no, we didn't couldn't argue that he didn't take it oath to support the United States Constitution. Here is the summary of argument. This is Trump's legal brief. He says the framers excluded the office of president from section three purposefully. Section three does not apply because the presidency is not an office quote under the United States. The president is not an officer of the United States.

And President Trump, this is what they're saying in Trump's brief, Trump did not take an oath to quote support the Constitution of the United States. And Donald Trump and his lawyers say, oh, protect and defend the Constitution is somehow different than to support the Constitution of the United States. Trump argues he never said he was going to support the Constitution of the United States. I mean, how black and white can it be? It's right here, often the paperwork, Donald Trump saying he did not take it oath to support the United States Constitution.

Fortunately, the Colorado Supreme Court rejected that argument. Fortunately, the Colorado Supreme Court said the office of the presidency is an office. When you take the oath of office, you are an office, sir. Also, it should be noted that in other legal actions, including for a brief moment in Colorado before Donald Trump then withdrew it, he's tried to move cases to federal court on federal officer grounds. He tried to do it in the New York proceedings by the Manhattan district attorney. And ultimately that got rejected.

He tried to say he's an officer there. Same thing in Colorado, although he voluntarily withdrew it And by the way, when Mark Meadows recently stated that he was an officer the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals said nope You are a former federal officer Mark Meadows You were once an officer when you were Donald Trump's chief of staff However, you were acting outside the color of your official responsibilities by engaging in attempts to overthrow the results of the election. Now, let's take a look at what Donald Trump is arguing before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.

And here's a post that Donald Trump made and again. This is treasonous and traitorous stuff that he is saying. I don't want to mince my words right here Here's what Donald Trump writes. I wasn't campaigning. He's referring to the insurrection I wasn't campaigning. The election was over. I was doing my duty as president to expose and further investigate a rigged install in election It was my obligation to do so, and the proof found is voluminous and irrefutable. Therefore, among other reasons,

of course, I am entitled to immunity. Additionally, puts all in caps, I did nothing wrong. Stop the witch hunt now. Someone who takes zero accountability, zero blame blame is so self unaware of the situation. And here Donald Trump is saying that his activities and trying to overthrow the results of the 2020 election constitutes official responsibilities of the presidency. You might want to read a little document called the United States Constitution. You may want to understand federalism here.

You may want to understand that elections are in the hands of states. And these are states rights issues for people who try to talk about states rights or however they want to gaslight us these Maga Republicans to try to seize power. There is no role within the office of presidency to do anything at all that you did. Go read article two of the United States Constitution. Well, you know who did read article two of the United States Constitution recently, the conservative right wing 11 circuit court of appeals because when they analyze both Mark Meadows and Jeff Clark, former DOJ official Jeff Clark who tried to overthrow the results of the 2020 election with Trump and Mark Meadows, the 11 circuit court of appeals said,

this is not the territory of the presidency at all. This is not what the executive branch engages in. This type of conduct involves electioning and campaigning, and especially when you then start to interfere with free and fair elections, which is the province of states to conduct their own secure elections and you're trying to interfere with that, that is not within the power of the executive branch. What you feed your dog goes a long way to helping them lead their best lives. Nom-nom delivers real, good food, backed by science to help your dog thrive because

everything from strong digestive and immune systems to high energy starts with what's in their bowl. Nom-nom delivers freshly made dog food with every portion personalized to your dog's needs so you can bring out their best. Nom nom's made with real, wholesome ingredients you can see and recognize without any additives or fillers that contribute to bloating and low energy. That's because Nom nom uses the latest science and insights to make real good food for dogs. Their nutrient pack recipes are designed by board certified veterinary nutritionists, freshly made and ship-free to your door.

Nome Nome's already delivered over 40 million meals to good dogs like yours, inspiring millions of clean bowls and tailwax. I feel so much better knowing that I'm giving my dog lily better nutrition and my dog really loves it too. Plus no mnome comes with a money back guarantee. If your dog's tail isn't wagging within 30 days, no mnome will refund your first order. No fillers, no nonsense. Go right now for 50% off your no risk to eat trial at try gnome.com slash legal a f spelled try n o m dot com slash legal

a f for 50% off try gnome.com slash legal a f. Donald Trump is also making that statement because someone probably told him what the ruling in the blasting game. The Trump case was that case was decided in early December, where the DC Circuit Court of Appeals said that Trump's conduct relating to the insurrection in January 6th, that is attempt to overthrow the results of the election as it relates to civil liability, civil cases, monetary damages falls outside the outer perimeter of executive power of executive authority. And therefore, former presidents are not entitled to absolute presidential immunity on civil

cases for conduct that involves electioning and campaigning and election interference that Donald Trump was engaged in federal judge, Kanye, Chutkin, the district court judge who ultimately reports to her boss is the DC circuit court of appeals. Judge Chutkin said, yes, that's okay. Blasting games, she didn't go into the blasting game decision, because it hadn't really been released at the time. Her opinion went up, but she said, you know what, former presidents are not entitled to absolute presidential immunity for criminal conduct period. Criminal conduct is not official acts.

Ever. They will always fall outside the outer perimeter of the text, the history of our constitution, the structure of it. It's a reaction to authoritarians and despots and kings who have limitless power, who would get away with everything that they wanted to do. So clearly our Constitution has some guardrails and doesn't allow absolute presidential immunity from criminal cases. But then again, here's Donald Trump's argument and here's what he says in the argument. And here's his summary of the argument. He says that his power isn't, he's entitled to absolute presidential immunity for his official acts.

The indictment alleges he goes only official acts, so it must be dismissed. So Donald Trump looks at the indictment brought by special counsel, Jack Smith, and says that the indictment by special counsel, Jack Smith, which goes through all of the things that Donald Trump did to overthrow the results of the 2020 election, threatening and intimidating canvassers and his conduct relating to the January 6th insurrection. And Donald Trump engaging in a conspiracy to throw away the actual results and change the results so that Trump can win. Donald Trump says all of those everything that Jack Smith alleges in the criminal indictment are official acts. Again, that's why I want to

call a spade a spade here and say how dangerous this is. Donald Trump is saying, except that everything that Jack Smith says in there is true. And if you accept everything Jack Smith says is true, I am still entitled to absolute presidential immunity because all of those things are things that presidents are supposed to do. No, they are not the history, text, and structure of the Constitution does not support. Who's it does not support people trying to overthrow the results of free and fair elections? This is what Donald Trump is putting in his briefs. This is what his lawyers are arguing. Trump has absolute immunity from prosecution for his official acts. The indictment alleges only official acts so and must be dismissed. There it is on page five.

And then he goes through another 30 pages of analysis about why he believes that to be the case. But then goes and says that he could do anything. There is no limitation on the authority. Kill someone. Sure. Have a cool. Sure. Destroy the Supreme Court. Sure.

Remove judges. Sure. This right here is a framework for authoritarianism. It's just right there. It's the text. It's it is what it is. It is what it is. It's what he's writing.

So as we have these conversations, let's not forget what is actually in this paperwork and why I say it's treasonous and traitorous. Let me know in the comments if you agree. Hit the thumbs up like this video, share this video. Let me know what you think in the comments. Subscribe to the YouTube channel. Have a great day. Hey, mydicemide. Love this report. Continue the conversation by of a great day.