Clarence Thomas Asks Jack Smith’s Lawyer If There’s No Presidential Immunity- Even For Official Acts 

Let me sum up his argument: "it's only a crime when we say it is"

Who is paying attorney fees? The American people?

We continue to to spend tax $$$$ for incompetent lawyers & judges …! God help us…!

Oh. My. He said there were no crimes committed by prior presidents.

Call it for what it is, corruption.

This is how these criminals wasting taxpayers money with absolutely no accountability.

I’m still shocked that this even went to the Supreme Court and they are entertaining this circus

this hearing is an complete waste of money

No wonder why this country is sinking.

If I was American, this court case would infuriate me that they’re spending so much of my money on it

The lawyer’s voice is very telling

That lawyer talking sounds like the very last dude I'd want talking about The Constitution

When are we going to hold these frivolous lawsuit bringers accountable?

Michael Dreeben, it's only a crime when we say it's a crime.

These prosecutors need to find their way into GITMO.

We the people need to put an end to this nonsense and stop voting for these corrupt politicians.

Would you expect anything less from HARVARD!

This country is going to hell in a hand basket!!! God help us..

Funny. A Harvard lawyer explaining the law to Clarence Thomas. Oh, the irony.

You can literally HEAR the weasel in his voice!😂

its an embarrassment, the court as hearing this case. complete waste of time and money

This is garbage and NOT how I want my tax dollars spent.

Is there anywhere or anything in America that hasn't been destroyed by institutionalised corruption?

A crime against the nation is not protected under immunity! An unlawful act against the citizens of this country is not protected by immunity! It’s not hard to understand!

This is demonic!

This indeed is a lawfare!

the lawyer is so hard to follow. I have listened to him two times, and he goes on and on, going off on tangents and trying to make a point that is not there.

it's ludicrous that jack smith is even allowed in a court room

They're opening not a can of worms but a whole shipload.

No way I could listen to this lawyers voice for 2 minutes

The lawyer for the DOJ is what's wrong with America

Dreeben's argument doesn't hold water. SCOTUS will remand to the district court. Here's why: Dreeben is essentially arguing that, if a president gets a statement from the Attorney General affirming that a particular action is lawful, then it magically becomes lawful. The justices caught this ridiculous argument, asking whether a president would simply choose an Attorney General who affirms *anything* as lawful. Dreeben answered by saying (essentially), "well, we take an oath -- trust us to do the right thing." Which is utterly laughable. Clarence Thomas and others pointed out several examples of potentially unlawful acts and unethical AGs. There is only one way that this ends. The district court side-stepped a finding of fact regarding whether Mr. Trump was engaged in an "illegal personal act" or an "official act." The government's position is that Trump's attempts to influence others to substitute electors and delay voting were personal and illegal. But the President is the administrator of the Justice Department, which has a hand in ensuring fair and equal elections. Doubt it? The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related subsequent legislation gave the Justice Department responsibility to ensure fair elections. Trump as the chief executive is likewise responsible. There's no way that SCOTUS allows us to slide into a banana republic regime where each Administration prosecutes its predecessor. No way.

This bs needs to STOP now

The more words you use to defend your position, the more you delete your argument .

Ever heard of abuse of power, judge?

Supreme Justices should be ashamed.

Sickening!!!!!

These Justice Dept attorneys are trying to pick “Gnat Crap out of Pepper” to argue their case. How embarrassing our legal system has allowed this to go this far.

Mr Dweeben? Wearing it out. God bless America!

Yet these career federal prosecutors have immunity for official acts.

Sad times in America.

This lawyers voice is fkn ANNOYING

Major gymnastics at the Supreme Court. The lawyer should tell it like it is. TDS is in overdrive, who cares about law or precedent or what the "framers" intended. By their logic, almost every President would have, should have faced criminal prosecution from the opposition party for some action that didn't agree with the party on the other side of the aisle. Even politicians, not the President, might be lacking immunity at some point. Be careful what you wish for, because the pendulum always swings, & the very change that has been fought for so diligently, may reverse. Government & its employees at all levels, should be apolitical..

So basically he said they won't prosecute a murder overseas, but will prosecute a simple payment......smh, what garbage

I think that when lawyers try to subvert the constitution like this, the Supreme Court Justices should be allowed to force the lawyer to read the entire constitution to them.

I’m sure this lawyer had his lunch money taken daily

Why doesn’t SCOTUS end this ?!? 🧐

There should be not immunity for criminal acts.

What if you have an activist or corrupt DOJ?

Wow! Thomas used the word “coup” - that is MASSIVE.

This is a really excellent and interesting court case. People who do not understand the role of the Supreme Court may not get it, but this is a vital and very important case.

Fancy lingo, the court should shut it down immediately; what nonsense, what a disgrace.

Dude definitely talks like a lawyer. Lots of words but no substance.

I love how in his argument he admits immunity while arguing there is no immunity

Supreme Court needs to do their job. Do your damn job!!!

There were not crimes… What about watergate?

Every sitting president is immune from city and state justice systems, but not from Congress. It's the responsibility of Congress to address any crime committed by a sitting president, no matter what the crime is.

Let me get this straight. The government lawyer, just in this one clip, argued both that prior to 2016, no US president ever committed a crime, AND that a president shouldn't be tried if they sought advice from their AG because that could present a conflict of interest? I'm no Trump lover, but this all reeks of selective prosecution against the former president. Ugh.

When has Trump conducted a constitutional act?

Civil cases are better than criminal cases.

That lawyers argument was just awful, he was drowning practically.

Listening to people slither through vines of jargon to justify their acts is just so sickening.

I can’t believe this is the America we live in today…shameful

So where is the rest of this Forbes?

The voice of Clarence vs's the voice of Dreeben is quite a stark contrast.

Word salads... The more they talk the more they expose their lies.

Oh so, this is where we are in America. Got it. Smh....

Yes, but only if we say its ok. This is scarry.

I was listening to this on the phone and when my sister walked by she asked me to say hello to aunt Olga ! I told her I think this is a man !

I'm pretty sure the person talking is the elf that wanted to be a dentist from the Rudolph movie.

Oh, we are who we are, and we say so!!!!🤔👈💯

Why didn't you let that segment finish ?

He was not a former president on Jan 6.

Pretty hard to respond to another person of trust that does not live by the charge of his oath.

If this were on the other foot?!?!? HAHAHA

Is trying to overthrow a legally elected president an official act? No. End of argument. Next question. Not complicated.

Former presidents haven't committed crimes???? This lawyer needs to do his own research...😮😮can't believe he just said that..

What does this lawyer identify as? A lawyer??😆🤬

Even Clarence Thomas is playing naive. Because immunity is not read in the constitution. This is 10 points to Jack Smith and 0 point to Clarence Thomas.

If the officials act is done for private reasons, it is a crime.

The justice department response was honestly that there has never been a crime before?! Lmao. What a joke.

This attorney speaks empty words without a substance, hundreds of them when asked a specific question by Thomas.

Emoluments: a salary, fee, or profit from employment or office---perfec description of SCOTUS criminal behavior. Time to charge and indict.

I needed a good laugh

I cannot agree with the argument presented. It seemed quite convoluted and never addressed the question asked by Judge Thomas. I see now why “they” wanted him off of the court.

Didn't even answer the Justice's question...this is something you hear in a high school speech class when you have to speak a certain length

Either a president has immunity or they don't, the job is hard enough as it is. No one in their right mind would want the job if they felt they could be charged with a crime for the decisions they make. JS

Jack smiths lawyer sounds like he has something in his mouth.

Jesus take the wheel because nobody is driving this bus

Why not include Justice Thomas's remarks at the end?

"The reason there were no criminal prosecutions, is because there were no crimes." C'mon Jack, I find that hard to believe.

Who is this Gomes trying to have it one way an at the same time have it another? Hold tight Supreme Court Justices. That’s our Constitution they are wanting to tear up and throw in the trash. We stand with you folks. 🇺🇸

If I had to listen to his voice all day,I'd lose my mind.🤯🤯🤯😬😬😬

This is total political persecution! 💯

The court will use the word of law and common sense! Time to get everyone’s feet back on the ground. I don’t understand how most of these charges are even valid.

Just cannot imagine why American Supreme Court judges don’t know what is a crime.

The "Lawyer's" voice gives it all away. DEI?

Legal officials prosecuting should be called to stand in front of the Supreme Court for questioning. Like Jack Smith.

This is an absolute abomination; they are having a grown-ass debate as to whether or not an ex-president who launched an insurrection on the nation's capitol, should be given immunity. Unbelievable!

Thomas should be off the bench