Tangle - Appeals court says Trump is not immune.

Starting point is 00:00:00 Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight.

Starting point is 00:00:19 Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. Breaking news happens anywhere, anytime. Police have warned the protesters repeatedly, get back. CBC News brings the story to you as it happens. Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly.

Starting point is 00:00:44 Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to

Starting point is 00:01:05 your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca. From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul. It is Wednesday, February 7th, and we're going to be talking about Donald Trump's immunity from criminal prosecution.

Starting point is 00:02:06 going to be talking about Donald Trump's immunity from criminal prosecution. An appeals court has just ruled on that, and there's a lot to cover. Before we jump in, though, two quick, very important notes. First of all, tickets for Tangle Live in New York City, now on sale to the general public. Anybody can go buy tickets. There are general admission or VIP tickets. Of course, I encourage you to get the VIP. You can do the meet and greet. You get a free piece of Tangle merch, etc. But the Tangle live tickets are on sale for anybody who wants to come April 17th, New York City. We're going to be at the City Winery, the Loft at the City Winery. It's going to be a really good time. Also, right after you go get your tickets, you should go to our YouTube channel to check out a new video we have about building the perfect electable president. We did something really fun.

Starting point is 00:02:58 We looked at a bunch of presidential history, and we looked at public polling, and we tried to build a president. What do they look like? What are their names? Where are they from? What's their background? What policy positions do they hold? How do they act? How old are they? How many kids do they have? All the stuff to build a candidate that we thought would dominate in the 2024 election. I think it's a pretty fun video. It's pretty unique. And yeah, you should go check it out. If you like it, like our channel, subscribe to the channel, share it with some folks. We're building out that YouTube channel, obviously, along with our podcast and newsletter. All right, with that out of the way, let's jump in with some quick hits.

Starting point is 00:03:52 First up, the House rejected the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in a 216-214 vote, with four Republicans joining all Democrats in opposition. Separately, a vote to provide foreign aid to Israel, separate from Ukraine or border security, a vote to provide foreign aid to Israel, separate from Ukraine or border security, also failed. Number two, a Michigan mother was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in connection with her son's mass shooting at a high school. She's the first parent to be held criminally responsible for their child's mass attack. The shooter's father faces trial on similar charges next month. Number three, Nikki Haley was outvoted by none of these candidates in Nevada's presidential primary, and former President Trump is expected to win the Nevada Republican caucuses on Friday. The state is holding a primary and a caucus due to a conflict

Starting point is 00:04:37 between members of the state Republican Party. We have the story about that in today's episode description. Number four, Tucker Carlson said he's in Moscow to interview Russian President Vladimir Putin, and the Kremlin confirmed that their interview had taken place. Number five, RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel is expected to resign after the South Carolina primary. She's been facing criticism from party leaders, including former President Donald Trump, after a poor fundraising year. There was a major setback for former President Donald Trump in his federal election interference case. A panel of appeals court judges firmly rejected his arguments for immunity yesterday, declaring, quote, former President Trump has become citizen Trump. What we take away from this is that there is no such thing as complete presidential immunity.

Starting point is 00:05:35 The idea is once you are a former president, as this ruling outlines in this case, he is once again citizen Trump and that he cannot be held above the law. against citizen Trump and that he cannot be held above the law. The court writing, we cannot accept that the office of the presidency places his former occupants above the law for all time thereafter. The judges have signaled their skepticism of complete presidential immunity in a January hearing. On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously rejected former President Donald Trump's claim that he is immune to criminal charges of trying to undermine the 2020 election. The panel, composed of two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee,

Starting point is 00:06:16 said that presidential privileges don't shield Trump from prosecution for federal crimes that apply to every American citizen. For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become Citizen Trump with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant, the panel said. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution. Jack Smith, the special counsel leading the prosecution, had previously attempted to fast-track this case to the Supreme Court. leading the prosecution, had previously attempted to fast-track this case to the Supreme Court. Now, Trump is expected to make his own appeal to the high court. Before the circuit court's ruling,

Starting point is 00:06:56 Trump's trial, initially scheduled for March 4th, was postponed indefinitely by Tanya Chutkin, who is overseeing the case. In its ruling, the panel said the case will remain suspended if Trump appeals his decision to the Supreme Court by February 12th, but if the high court declines to hear the case, it will be sent back to the trial judge. If the Supreme Court takes it up, it could issue its own ruling about suspending the trial or attempt to rapidly hear and rule on the case. The speed with which the appeals court heard the dispute and the unanimous ruling it gave increased the likelihood that Trump's election interference trial is heard this year. In a response to the ruling that Trump's election interference trial is heard this year. In a response to the ruling, Trump said on Truth Social, quote, A president of the United States must have full immunity in order to properly function

Starting point is 00:07:33 and do what has to be done for the good of our country. A nation destroying ruling like this cannot be allowed to stand. Trump is facing four separate criminal indictments, though he has capitalized on the charges by casting himself as the subject of politicized prosecutions, helping him dominate the Republican primaries. Previously, we covered arguments about his immunity, and you can find links to those in our episode description. Today, we're going to take a look at some arguments about this ruling from the right and the left, and then my take. We'll be right back after this quick commercial break.

Starting point is 00:08:23 First up, we'll start with what the right is saying. The right mostly thinks the circuit court was correct to reject Trump's claim of absolute immunity, but suggests that the ruling paints with too broad a brush. Some argue that Trump's appeal process grows more complicated as the 2024 election nears. Others say the ruling is a reminder that Trump's legal problems are undermining an otherwise strong re-election bid. The Wall Street Journal editorial board asked, is the presidency at risk of being harried by partisan prosecutors? The D.C. Circuit's three-judge panel makes short work of bad immunity arguments, such as the claim that Mr. Trump can't be criminally indicted because he was already impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate. This isn't double jeopardy, it's legal sophistry. Yet the court also makes too short work of better arguments, the board wrote. If the president could be hobbled by civil suits over official actions,

Starting point is 00:09:10 where is the concern that he might be paralyzed by the thought of partisan indictments the moment he leaves office? Had the D.C. Circuit ruled against Mr. Trump on narrower grounds, e.g. that his post-election actions were electioneering and not part of his official duties, the Supreme Court would have found it easier to turn down a Trump appeal. But now that would mean giving the three lower court judges the final say with a ruling that would seem to permit a victorious Mr. Trump to appoint an attorney general who would try to prosecute Mr. Biden, the board said. As is often the case with Mr. Trump, he and his opponents leave everyone else with only bad choices. On Fox News, Jonathan Turley explained why Trump's appeals process grows more complicated as the 2024 election nears. What former President Trump was advancing was a sweeping and unprecedented

Starting point is 00:09:56 claim of immunity, and it's not surprising that this panel rejected it. The interesting thing about this opinion is that they cite the impeachment and quote from it as saying that the president sought to incite this effort to overturn the election. And that's going to go forward. The most practical impact of this appeal was indeed the delay that it caused. It was very important for the Trump team to try and push this trial back, Turley said. about this case is that Jack Smith is telling every court it's absolutely urgent that we must move this trial forward, and he made it clear that he wants this president tried and convicted before the election. The Supreme Court clearly didn't share that urgency. It refused to do that, and so it's not clear that they're going to feel even greater urgency now, Turley said. The outcome is not surprising for many of us, but what remains the unknown is how this will change the schedule and dynamic of the case. In the New York Post, Isaac Schor wrote that if Trump is convicted, an election win evaporates for Republicans. An NBC poll released over the weekend suggests Trump boasts a five-point national lead over Biden, but there's a fist concealed by the velvet glove of

Starting point is 00:11:02 this top-line result. If Trump is convicted of a felony this year, his lead would turn into a two-point deficit. The former president is staring down the barrel of four separate trials after the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down his outlandish claim to immunity Tuesday morning, so such a conviction is a distinct possibility, Schor said. The media will cover it ceaselessly to the exclusion of the issues Republicans hope the election hinges on. Some voters will consider this unfair, the trials politically motivated, and exactly the scenario for which Democrats have pushed. Nevertheless, it is the reality. The result will be a free fall in the polls for not just Trump, but the Republicans up and down

Starting point is 00:11:41 the ballot who feel compelled to march in lockstep with him, Schor wrote, nominating Trump risks limiting the upside of and potentially even forfeiting this key advantage Republicans have over Biden. All right, that is it for what the right is saying, which brings us to what the left is saying. The left supports the circuit court's ruling but is concerned about whether the Supreme Court will take up the case. Some say the court should either decline to hear the case or quickly affirm the circuit court's decision. Others worry that Trump's strategy of delaying his trial past the election may succeed. The Washington Post editorial board said the Supreme Court should say no to Trump's immunity case quick. The circuit judges have ably dismantled Mr. Trump's arguments,

Starting point is 00:12:31 which were unconvincing to begin with, the board wrote. In 57 pages, the judges lay out the implausibility of the notion that, as they put it, a president has unbound authority to commit crimes that would neutralize the most fundamental check on executive power, the recognition and implementation of election results. Indeed, they explain the president alone has the constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws. How could the president alone also have carte blanche to violate those same laws? The Supreme Court should also decline to take up the case because doing so would curb the possibility that Mr. Trump, because of his statuses as presidential candidate and former president, and because of his determination to use every pretext for delay, might dodge a trial until after the next presidential election, the board added. The court has an opportunity to prove it is neither pro-Trump nor anti-Trump and that it is willing neither to abrogate its responsibilities nor to stretch

Starting point is 00:13:25 its power to achieve political ends some on the bench might find desirable. In Vox, Ian Milhiser wrote that the Supreme Court is about to decide whether to sabotage Trump's election theft trial. It's unlikely that either Trump or his lawyers actually thought the courts would rule that sitting presidents have a right to commit crimes. Instead, Trump's legal strategy is to delay his criminal trials as much as possible. The most important question looming over Trump's election theft case is what the Supreme Court does next, Millhiser said. The justices had their shot to hear this case, and they turned it down. If the Supreme Court does want to put this case back on track, it could do so in two ways. The most straightforward way would be to immediately deny Trump's request to hear the case and to delay, it could do so in two ways. The most straightforward way would be to

Starting point is 00:14:05 immediately deny Trump's request to hear the case and to delay the D.C. Circuit's mandate passed next Monday. Alternatively, the court could issue a rare order known as a summary affirmance, which would mean that the justices would affirm the D.C. Circuit's decision without waiting for briefing or oral argument, Millizer wrote. Should the court go the other route, however, and decide that it needs to review this case, that would be an enormous gift to Trump, one that could potentially lead him to getting off scot-free without ever being tried for his attempt to steal an election. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime,

Starting point is 00:14:50 Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older,

Starting point is 00:15:22 and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. In CNN, Michael Conway suggested Trump's immunity defeat isn't the setback it seems to be. It would be wrong to mistake the decision as a clear-cut victory for efforts to try Trump before Election Day. In fact, the timing of the ruling only increases the likelihood that Trump's strategy of delaying the outcome court has provided detours that will make it hard to complete Trump's criminal trial in D.C. by election day and give voters clarity on his actions before they enter the voting booth. Following Trump's appellate loss, his lawyers can ask the three-judge panel to rehear the appeal or to have their ruling reviewed by all authorized judges in that court, known as a rehearing en banc. While these long-shot tactics have scant prospect of overturning the immunity ruling, they will engender additional delay, Conway added. Even if Chutkin were to begin a trial during the final two months of the election

Starting point is 00:16:34 campaign, both early voters and Election Day voters would be making their choice without knowing if Trump has been found guilty or not guilty of the January 6th criminal charges. All right, that is it for what the left and the right are saying, which brings us to my take. So my position here, you might be unsurprised to hear, remains unchanged. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals was right to thoroughly dismantle the argument that a president has absolute immunity, and the Supreme Court should act quickly to either take the case up, turn it down, or affirm the appeals court ruling. I want to be clear about a few things here. First, the weakest legal arguments from Trump's team have now been put to bed. The idea that a president cannot be criminally indicted because he was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate was always patently absurd, and I don't know anyone

Starting point is 00:17:34 who could think earnestly about that question and come to any other conclusion. If you feel yourself drawn to Trump's argument, just imagine the same argument coming from President Biden, and then see how you feel. The appeals court goes even further, noting that any immunity a president has while in office evaporates when they become a citizen, and it points out rightly that by the time the Senate acquitted Trump, he was no longer in office. This was actually the cited reason from many Senate Republicans for acquitting him, that he wasn't president, so there was no president to impeach. The obvious point is that if you were to accept the legal argument from Trump's team, a president could commit a crime, then resign or leave office, as Trump did, before any impeachment proceedings were complete, and then be immune from impeachment and thus immune from further

Starting point is 00:18:20 criminal charges. That being said, the only piece of commentary about this ruling that actually made me think came from the Wall Street Journal editorial board under what the right is saying. They essentially argued that the court may have slightly overstepped. The board said that the court has already ruled in a past case that a president has absolute immunity from civil liability for official acts, and the appeals court should have engaged the question of whether the charges Trump faced are tied to official acts or not. It didn't, which means there is an open question the Supreme Court might have to address. Part of the Wall Street Journal editorial board's point is that this could open the door to a slew of post-presidency indictments. Like the appeals court did in their

Starting point is 00:19:00 ruling, I find this pretty unlikely, but I don't think it can be dismissed out of hand. It's possible this question, what can of worms we're opening and how the law should limit legal vulnerability for presidents so they can do their job, is worth the Supreme Court taking up. That being said, the board also glosses over the fact Trump isn't facing civil charges here. He's facing federal criminal indictments. No court, including the Supreme Court, has ever said a president is immune from those charges because no former president has ever faced charges like this. Again, it's worth thinking about what Trump is actually arguing. You don't have to read dense legalese from the appeals court to get it. Just look at what he is saying publicly. A president of the United States must have full immunity in order to

Starting point is 00:19:46 properly function and do what has to be done for the good of our country, he said on Truth Social. A nation destroying ruling like this cannot be allowed to stand. When Democratic strategists talk about their election prospects and how the closer we get to the election, the more attention Trump will get and the less voters will like him, these kinds of public statements are a big reason why. A presidential candidate arguing that his being held accountable would destroy our nation and that all presidents should get full immunity should be frightening to any rational American. Again, no president, not Trump or Biden or Obama or honest Abe Lincoln, should ever have full immunity for anything they do. To quote the appeals court directly, former President Trump lacked any lawful discretionary

Starting point is 00:20:31 authority to defy federal criminal law, and he is answerable in court for his conduct. That's the headline statement, and I think it is exactly right. So what happens now? Frankly, I'm unsure. As observers on the left and right agree, I don't think Trump's legal team ever thought this was a winning argument. I think their strategy is to try to delay any trial until after election day. Given the novelty of this situation, I have no position yet on whether Trump is or will be found guilty of some of the things he's been charged with. As the appeals court said, Trump's guilt is far from assured, and that's precisely why we need a trial. I hope voters get one before election day, and I hope the Supreme Court makes whatever decision it's going to make expeditiously

Starting point is 00:21:15 to help ensure that happens. For now, I'm glad to see an affirmation of the idea that no president is above the law. As American citizens, it's a simple idea we should all be able to get behind. We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one is from Derek in Dallas, Fort Worth, Texas. Derek said, is there anything stopping Trump from running again in 2028 if he loses in 2024? He will be four years older, but there is no clear candidate from the Democrats, and it could potentially be a fairly weak candidate. Okay, so I guess we've got a Trump-heavy newsletter today. If Trump loses again in 2024, there is nothing stopping him from running again in 2028. At least not right now. Remember,

Starting point is 00:22:13 Trump is currently fighting felony charges in four separate cases, and while every day that goes by without a plea is a day closer to his eligibility in the 2024 election, it is also a day without an exoneration that hurts his chance of eligibility in 2028. If I had to guess, I would not expect Trump to either receive a conviction or accept a plea deal that bars him from running again, but that would be the only thing that would legally prevent him from doing so. Whether or not Republicans would want him at the top of the ticket in 2028, where by definition he'd be a back-to-back general election loser, is another question. On one hand, it's hard to imagine him ever losing any of his base, which is now the majority of the Republican Party. On the other hand, as conservative columnist Henry Olson recently came on our podcast

Starting point is 00:22:59 to remind me, even a month is an eternity in politics. We can't imagine what will change between now and 2028. That also applies to your second point about the Democrats not having any clear candidates to run in 2028. Right now, there are 23 Democrats in governorships, 213 in the House of Representatives, and 48 in the Senate. Even if you're a very informed voter, I bet you can't name more than 50. Since 2016, we've seen obscure senators, Bernie Sanders, unknown mayors, Pete Buttigieg, and congressional freshmen like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez all become household names on the national political landscape. That's not to say that Mayor Pete or AOC will be the 2028 nominee for president, just that you never know where the next big name in politics will come from. In politics, though, it's really tough to make good predictions more

Starting point is 00:23:50 than three months in advance. For more than a year out, it's almost impossible. If you're looking out to 2028 and wondering what to expect, my advice is to expect the unexpected. All right, that is it for your questions answered, which brings us to our under the radar section. The carmaker Toyota is trumpeting its soaring stock and sales success as proof that its model of leaning into hybrid vehicles rather than fully electric is meant for this moment. The company said it expects to notch $30 billion in annual profit when its fiscal year closes in March, a new record for the storied Japanese company. Consumers have been reluctant to go fully electric because of access to charging stations, issues around affordability, and concerns about range. So Toyota has instead leaned into its

Starting point is 00:24:40 strength in hybrid vehicles, giving consumers an economically and environmentally conscious choice. Other car makers, like General Motors, are now considering their rush into full electric vehicles. The Wall Street Journal has the story about this change in the car industry, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. A quick heads up, that story is behind a paywall. All right, next up is our numbers section. The percentage of U.S. voters who say Trump should not receive immunity from criminal prosecution for actions he took while president is 64%, according to a PBS NewsHour NPR Marist poll released today. The percentage of independent voters who say Trump should not receive immunity is 65%. The percentage of independent voters who say Trump should not receive immunity is 65%. The percentage of Republican voters who say Trump should receive immunity from prosecution is 68%.

Starting point is 00:25:31 The percentage of Americans who say it is essential that a verdict is reached in Trump's 2020 election interference case before the 2024 presidential election is 48%. The percentage of Americans who say that a trial on the charges should be postponed until after the 2024 election is 11%. Trump's lead over President Biden in a hypothetical general election matchup is 47 to 42%, according to a new NBC News poll. And Biden's polling lead over Trump if Trump is found guilty and convicted of a felony this year is 45 to 43 percent, according to the same NBC News poll. All right, and last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story. In more stories of kindness from Tangle readers, Jewish-American Rebecca Peisner wrote in to tell us about visions of

Starting point is 00:26:20 peace, the interfaith night she hosts with her friend Sumayya Bilal, a Muslim American. In a Presbyterian church in Baltimore, faith leaders for local Muslim, Jewish, and Christian communities help facilitate a dialogue between all people on conflict between Palestine and Israel that promotes understanding and healing. I think people need a space where they can be heard, Bilal said, and that just fosters so much connection between people and it makes them feel less alienated, less isolated. Peisner and Bilal have already hosted two Visions of Peace nights and are planning for more. The Baltimore Sun has a story about what they're up to and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast.

Starting point is 00:27:08 As always, if you want to support our work, you can go to readtango.com forward slash membership and become a member. We'll be right back here same time tomorrow. Have a good one. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by John Wall. Peace. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. If you're looking for more from Tangle, please go to retangle.com and check out our website. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada,

Starting point is 00:28:09 which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel

Starting point is 00:28:50 a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+.

Tangle - Appeals court says Trump is not immune.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.