I think Biden menacing Kamala Harris with a firearm would not be a protected official act. But (question for experts) couldn't he order DOJ to prosecute her if she refused (with absolute immunity) and personally tell her she must decline to certify to avoid prosecution (with presumptive immunity)?
Am I correct that, if Trump won the Electoral College, and Joe Biden held a gun to Kamala Harris' head and told her not to certify the election, this would be within the parameters of official conduct and Biden could not be prosecuted for it?
I’d wager SCOTUS purposefully chose not to define official vs unofficial precisely so that they could hold one standard for R’s and another for D’s. They’ve predetermined the outcome!
He can have her killed, and immediately pardon the killers, and it would constitutionally kosher.
She could do it too, if she acted first.
No one else.
You know what will make it an official act?
Who does it. This is their veto on Biden. They'll just declare anything ge does not official, and anything Trump does will be official. Voila.
That all it is, don't even waste your time trying to game it out.
Look, folks. You might notta liked me pointing that pistol. But there's nothing I take more seriously than the security of the American people. And I'll be hornswoggled if I let the vice president threaten that security.
[done: now he's acting in his role securing the security of the state]
It seems that according toe John Roberts, the President can do many things now as official acts, and we cannot even ask what adverb to apply to describe the act - corruptly, maliciously, evilly, incompetently, etc.
