Jill Wine-Banking institutions on Thursday poured cold drinking water on a bid by Donald Trump’s legal professionals to dismiss his charges in special counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case by claiming the defense of “presidential immunity.”
Trump would be “destroyed on cross-examination” if he applied that argument, the prosecutor in the Watergate scandal that took down President Richard Nixon explained on MSNBC’s “The Conquer.”
It would only work if Trump “was undertaking anything presidential, one thing inside of his career description” when he did what he is alleged to have finished, reported Wine-Financial institutions.
But “it was his task as a prospect, and candidate is a unique detail,” she included. Trump can not assert he was “acting as president when he was attempting to just take down the election.”
“That is a concern of reality that will have to be determined,” she mentioned. “The jury will say, ‘Yes, he was trying to consider it down.’ He’s declaring, ‘No I was not, I was making an attempt to safeguard election integrity.’ There is no proof that supports that and if he testifies that, he will be ruined on cross-evaluation.”