Join this channel to get access to perks:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsMSFwBF-4SWD5msARwYkdw/join
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
Hey ladies and gentlemen, this is Carmine Sabia for Explain America and a Trump vice presidential
0:05
candidate just had it out with a CNN anchor. Before we get started, please make sure you like
0:12
comment, share and subscribe. Those little things really help us out and they help our
0:16
channel continue to grow. J.D. Vance, one of the top contenders to be Trump's vice president pick
0:23
he was on CNN talking to anchor Caitlin Collins when he was talking about presidential immunity
0:28
and how important presidential immunity is. And Caitlin Collins tried to get him with a gotcha
0:33
question about, well, what if the president, you know, ordered this, that or the other? Would that
0:38
be an official act? And what he was trying to explain is that much like Trump's attorneys
0:42
were saying, it depends on the circumstances, what was happening, what was the reason
0:49
And Caitlin Collins, she didn't want to hear any of that. She didn't care about the legal aspects of this. She wanted to get him in a gotcha question because I think they're
0:56
trying to systematically destroy every one of Trump's vice presidential possibilities. Now you guys know where I stand. Tim Scott is my guy. If I could pick the vice president
1:06
it's Tim Scott all day, every day. But I do want you to watch this interview and I want you to tell
1:12
me if you think this was fair and what you think of his answer. Please remember to like, comment
1:18
share and subscribe. I'm Carmine Sabia for Explain America. We love you guys. God bless you
1:24
Take care, everybody. You're a Yale-educated attorney, and I want to get your take on what we saw happen last week, those immunity arguments
1:32
before the Supreme Court where Trump's team, his attorney, argued that a president could
1:36
order the military to stage a coup and to have their political opponent assassinated and be
1:41
immune from prosecution unless this theory that they were impeached and then convicted
1:47
by the Senate. Do you share the view that presidents are basically above the law
1:53
Look, Caitlyn, I think we have to be careful about imputing words into the president's
1:57
attorneys that they didn't actually say. What the president's attorney said is that
2:01
what the president's attorney said, Caitlyn, to be clear, is that there is a checks and balances
2:04
system in our constitution. Now, some things the president does, private acts, are liable
2:10
to criminal penalties, but most of the things that the president does in their official duties
2:15
we have a system of impeachment. We have a system of checks and balances. The legislative branch
2:21
that I'm a member of, the judicial branch, I did not read the president's attorneys as saying
2:26
that the president could order a coup. The president's attorneys are saying that the
2:30
constitutional checks and balances system would address that problem, and I think that's an
2:35
important distinction. But let me stop you right there, because I listened to this. It's John Sauer, Trump's attorney, and when he was asked by one of the justices if the president could order
2:43
the military to stage a coup, and would it count as an official act, meaning he couldn't be
2:48
prosecuted for it, he said it would depend on the circumstances. I mean, what circumstances
2:53
warrant a president ordering the military to stage a coup? Well, first of all, I did say it
2:58
depends on the circumstances. That opens up a whole lot of avenue for context there. But more
3:04
importantly, Caitlyn, he's just saying that would count as an official act. But there are a number
3:08
But that's an official act in your view too? But could I finish the answer to the question
3:13
Caitlyn? An official act, there are a number of checks and balances in our system. There's
3:17
the impeachment process. There's the budgeting authority that Congress has. There are a number
3:21
of ways where Congress has a check and balance control over the president of the United States
3:26
All he's saying is that the criminal liability procedures that exist in this country don't
3:33
cover the president's official acts. And by the way, how could anybody disagree with that, Caitlyn
3:38
Should Barack Obama be prosecuted for killing an American citizen via a drone strike? There are a
3:44
number of examples in American history where if you apply the standard, the lawfare standard of
3:49
the Biden administration against Donald Trump, it would make the presidency impossible to actually
3:55
execute the law. So in the name of taking down their political opponent, Caitlyn, these guys are
4:02
really pushing a legal theory that I think would destroy the presidency, whether a Democrat or
4:06
Republican was in charge. Well, I don't think Jack Smith is running for office, but on what you're
4:10
saying, you're basically saying that if the president orders the military to stage a coup
4:14
you believe the only remediation for that is that he can be impeached or that Congress can restrict
4:20
the budget? Well, Caitlyn, first of all, you're dealing with hypotheticals here that are completely
4:27
outside the bounds of this particular situation. Donald Trump did not order a coup, despite the
4:31
fact that a lot of media people say that he did, on January the 6th. He encouraged people to protest
4:36
peacefully. And of course, most people on January 6th did protest peacefully. What I'm saying is
4:41
that you have to have some measure of liability for the official acts of presidency of the United
4:46
States. And the way to create a check and balance on that system is what the constitution prescribes
4:52
here. You can't have prosecutors, many of whom of course are deeply embedded with the Democratic
4:57
Party, trying to destroy the life of a former president who's now running for president because
5:03
they think that they have a better argument for what that president should have done
5:07
You can have a political disagreement with Donald Trump, and that's totally reasonable
5:11
You shouldn't destroy the presidency in the process. And I think that's what a lot of the
5:15
Biden administration department of justice is trying to do. But you essentially are agreeing
5:19
that, that the presidents should not be able to be prosecuted. Let me ask you something else
#Law & Government
#Politics
#World News


