Trump hearing takes 'stunning' turn to assassination questioning

it's the opening of a Pandora's Box and that's a very that's a very sad thing that's happened with this whole situation when they talk about uh threat to democracy that's your real threat to democracy and I feel that as a president you have to have immunity very simple that was former president Donald Trump making the case for presidential immunity it was just a short time ago uh when he made those remarks after arguments were heard in a DC courtroom today stemming from his election subversion c

ase Trump's legal team says his actions following the 2020 election were well within His official capacity as president but special counsel Jack Smith argues Trump broke the law and tried to reverse his loss regardless of the outcome from today's hearing the issue is expected to work its way up to the Supreme Court let's bring in now Jonathan Turley a George Washington University law professor constitutional law attorney and a Fox News contributor and also Carrie cek Urban a Fox News legal edito

r and former counselor to attorney general Bill bar welcome to you both Carrie you were in that room today give us your Topline thoughts and your takeaway from what you saw and heard the former president was stoic he was sitting at council's table he was leaning forward he was obviously paying very close attention to what was happening and I thought one of the most compelling questions posed by the judges and was actually to doj where one of the judges asked well why will this not open up the fl

oodgates if we reject your client's defense of immunity in other words if we say that the president is not immune from prosecution for official acts conducted while in office how will this not become license for political enemies to prosecute each other upon leaving the White House I thought that was a very good question and and really one that gets to the heart of this issue Jonathan thank you very much for joining us as well there was quite a remarkable exchange where the headline basically is

reading that the former president's lawyer argued that presidents can order SEAL Team Six to assassinate political Rivals this was a stunning Exchange in the courtroom with judge pan and former president Trump's attorney let's listen and play this out I asked you a yes no yes or no question could a president who ordered SEAL Team Six to assassinated political rival who was not impeached would he be subject to criminal prosecution if he were impeached and convicted first and so so your answer is

is my answer is qualified yes there's a political process that would have to occur under the structure of our Constitution which require impeachment and conviction by the senate in these exceptional cases as the olc memo itself points out from the Department of Justice you'd expect a speedy impeachment and conviction but what the founders are much more worried about than using criminal prosecution to discipline presidents was what uh James Madison calls in Federalist number 47 the you know the

the new bangled in artificial treasons they were much more concerned about the abuse of the criminal process for political purposes to disable the presidency from factions and political opponents and of course that's exactly what we see in this case is that the case Jonathan can a can a a a president under certain circumstances order the assassination of a political rival and receive immunity for it I don't believe it is the case uh you know this was really I think very illustrative of how the a

rgument went it was a series of jump scares both sides uh were presenting the these parades of horribles that would come if you don't accept our our our argument I think what was clear to me from the argument uh was that probably Trump's AR this argument of impeachment first prosecution later is a dead letter with the panel I don't believe that the judges agreed that you needed a conviction to ever prosecute a president uh but there's still a lot of of ambiguity there the question is what the co

urt described in Nixon versus Fitzgerald as the outer par parameters of presidential Authority or duties and the question is does this fit within that gray area because the the Supreme Court and and the lower courts have struggled for this and it's not clear and and so there's there's legitimate debate here I did not come away thinking the panel was likely to rule with the former president pres at some points they seem to be debating more as whether I'm going to use a sledgehammer or a or a stil

etto I mean it it it they were arguing what is the best grounds for getting rid of this appeal but you know we really don't know and time will tell but what is clear is it won't take much time really interesting finally Carrie I'll get your reaction to what we heard in that courtroom as far as the attorney's debating ultimately this was Trump's attorney debating what the frightening future really is listen what kind of world are we living in if As I understood my friend on the other side to say

here a president orders his Seal Team to assassinate a political rival and resigns for example before an impeachment not a criminal act president sells a pardon resigns or is not impeached not a crime I think that is extraordinarily frightening future we are in a situation where uh we have the prosecution of the chief political opponent who's winning in every poll uh presential election upcoming next year and is being prosecuted by the administration that he's seeking to replace that is the frig

hting future want to get your thoughts and take away from that Carrie well It's tricky because at the end of the day it's very discre discretionary and that's the question and that's what I was getting to or getting at rather with the question posed I believe I think it was uh judge Henderson about the floodgates that will open because at the end of the day you're going to have doj prosecutors or federal prosecutors making decisions as to if a president's not immune um as to what constitutes uno

fficial acts and conduct that would be perhaps in the normal World construed as criminal is not when one is President and some of the examples they went through Obama and drone strikes drone strikes on citizens uh the rationale that George Bush gave for going into Iraq various things that are complicated when not just running this country but leading the Free World and and that where this becomes a potential Pandora's Box if if there's not a difference towards immunity but like Professor Charlie

said it's a complicated issue and and this particular area of immunity has not really been explored and there's big questions over what the political impact of all of this really will be we'll dig into that bit later in the show thanks to both of you for joining us Carrie Jonathan thank you I'm Steve duy I'm Brian kilme and I'm Angley aart and click here to subscribe to the Fox News YouTube page to catch our hottest interviews and most compelling analysis