Also a little more subtly “SEAL Team Six” is the framework here because it was the original shockingly funny hypothetical but none of this military law stuff applies if he just sends the Marshals to kill someone—which, again, he already bragged he did
“Contributors” is not “members.” It means she’s appeared in a panel discussion.
I literally know her. No, she does not support the federalist society. And I think this quote cuts her off in a way that makes her look stupid and gullible
I would like to read the full quote — I do often suspect journalists of using the way lawyer tend to talk to trim their words into their preferred shape — but the link is broken.
She says it’s up there with Dred Scott and korematsu, worst case scenario, gut punch. Specifically notes that it gives Trump a map for what pretexts he needs to set up when he Crimes in the future if elected
mediaview.aljazeera.com/video/fKxCMu...
The counterargument here is hilarious. Roberts specifically listed pardon power as something subject to absolute immunity, the assassins would obviously be pardoned at no risk in this scenario.
It's an extreme hypo, but if Trump identifies a particularly MAGA junior officer and makes that guy his body-man; what stops him from keeping that guy and a signed blank-dated pardon for murder in the Oval (no state law there!), and ordering Lt. Yes-man to shoot anyone who refuses Trump's orders?
I’m not quite sure but I think the law of the District of Columbia still applies in the White House? Like if you punch someone there you go to Superior Court for criminal battery not DC Federal District Court.
I think they cut Claire Finkelstein off, and make her look gullible unfairly. [disclosure: i know CF, and she is under no illusions about where we are rn]
Threat of court martial “Both ways” (for disobeying or for obeying) plus the pardon power from a corrupt criminal president ▶️ obeying v likely
