I hate this thought
🤔💭 Theory 😲💡
What if at some point in the trial the judge comes up with some justification to say Trump cannot be prosecuted because he was a former President, thus giving precedent to protections for Biden and Obama and the other crooks?
That would get immediately appealed by the state and reversed by an appellate court. Not gonna happen.
What if this is their get outta jail card? They dont have a case anyway so now they get to say Trump’s guilty but just couldnt be convicted because hes a former pres, AND you also cant convict Biden or Obama cause now theres precedent.
The problem is that there is no basis in law for such a proposition. It would also piss off 90% of the country. While not every possible scenario has worked its way through the court system in this country, you still need some foundational legal principles to apply in order to arrive at that conclusion. There is simply nothing out there that could support that holding a particular office renders you untouchable. That is about as antithetical to our legal system as it gets. Not even the most hatchet judge of all hatchet judges could make this idea hold water. There is a huge difference from historical practice to the idea that serious crimes could be committed by a president and nothing done about it. In fact, the Constitution itself specifically says that a president impeached and removed can be indicted for that crime. The punishment is not limited to removal from office.
Ok, maybe Im over simplifying the idea. My fear is that the judge will throw the case out and mention that Trump is former pres. Then the idea takes hold that the case was thrown out BECAUSE he was a former pres (by msm and democrats). Another judge then rules on future case against Biden that there is precent for the case to be tossed. Judges can get away with things if there is no public outcry.
District court cases basically aren’t precedential in our legal system. Some states like Minnesota outright say as much. Only courts of appeals or state supreme courts are binding precedent. What a district court judge does or doesn’t do is not really consequential as far as creating precedent goes in the legal system.