CNN host Jake Tapper said Monday on his show “The Lead” that former President Donald Trump’s immunity argument was “crazy” because it would allow him to “do anything.”
Reading from former Rep. Liz Cheney’s (R-WY) op-ed in The New York Times, Tapper said, “She warned, ‘If delay prevents this Trump case from being tried this year, the public may never hear critical and historic evidence developed before the grand jury, and our system may never hold the man most responsible for January 6 to account.’ Now, she suggests there’s key evidence against Trump. Grand Jury testimony from Mark Meadows, his former chief of staff, and former White House aide Dan Scavino, that the January 6 Committee did not have that needs to be heard. What do you think?”
Legal analyst Tom Dupree said, “Look, I think the Supreme Court takes these constitutional issues very seriously. I don’t I think they are going to go as far as former President Trump is asking them to go. I don’t think they are going to sign off on the broad scope of presidential immunity Trump is advocating for.”
Tapper said, “That’s crazy, it’s crazy. He’s basically advocating that he can do anything.”
Dupree agreed said, “That’s right,But I think the interesting question is, to me, at least, goes to Congresswoman Cheney’s point, which is to say, is the Supreme Court going to simply say, ‘No immunity here. Let’s get on with the trial,’ or are they going to say that there may be some immunity here, but the contours need to be developed and determined by the district court? If that’s how the Supreme Court decides this case, it could well result in additional delay that pushes this behind the election as the district court has to wrestle with whether these allegations fall within the scope of this immunity.”
Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN