BlazeTV host Steve Deace says Donald Trump's claim of presidential immunity is “incorrect and wrong and crazy”
Deace: “I don't blame him for asserting it at all because the people that are up against him are incorrect, unconstitutional, and crazy”
Published
Citation From the December 4, 2023, edition of BlazeTV's The Steve Deace Show
STEVE DEACE (HOST): The current makeup of the D.C. Court of Appeals is seven Democrats and four Republicans. Three of the Republicans were appointed by Trump, the other appointed by George H.W. Bush. That's another way of saying the D.C. Court of Appeals is eight Democrats and three Republicans. Okay?
AARON MCINTIRE (CO-HOST): Is that bad?
DEACE: Yeah. That's -- why does that matter? Because that's where Trump will try to go next to appeal this federal judge saying that he does not have presidential immunity as a former president.
Now, what I think he's asserting constitutionally is incorrect and wrong and crazy. Nevertheless, I don't blame him for asserting it at all because the people that are up against him are incorrect, unconstitutional, and crazy. So, you know, I mean, you're left with too many options here when the other side's like, we don't believe in the Constitution. You're not really left with a lot of constitutional options to say, well, you can't do this to me because of the -- we don't care about your Constitution. What we're -- we've moved -- we're post-Christian, we're post constitution.
So, I don't think he's got a constitutional leg to stand on with this claim. I mean, he's -- Trump is essentially saying, once you become president, you can just do whatever you want. You can't be sued. You can commit any crime you want. You have forever immunity. And I think we all recognize if we were to look beyond this current circumstance, that's a pretty dangerous precedent to set. You know what I'm saying?
TODD ERZEN (CO-HOST): It's a pretty dumb one, too.
DEACE: Yeah. And this -- but I don't blame him at all for making that argument because he's up against a frickin' demonic star chamber who would never hear any objective evidence at all. And we all know he's guilty the minute that they -- that trial gavels in. We all know this, right?