Trump Demands Forever Immunity, Even When He 'Crosses The Line' And Does Heinous Crimes

Rule applies to him and, apparently, murder cops.

Jan 18, 2024

It was 1 a.m.

Donald Trump had just finished a long Wednesday, and he was resting his body on the toilet. (Or somewhere.) He had almost been thrown out of the courtroom during his latest defamation trial in the matter of E. Jean Carroll, whom he sexually assaulted many years ago in a department store dressing room. He had gone to New Hampshire to campaign, where he exhibited demented confusion, suggesting once again that one must show identification to buy bread, and also “everything to get into a store.”

The people who love him — who don’t care that he sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll, that he’s under 91 federal indictments, that he’s a traitor to the United States who incited a terrorist attack against the country as part of an effort to overthrow the Republic and overturn the election he lost — they just cheered him on. Do they really think they have to show ID to buy bread? Well, obviously not where they live, but MAGA people aren’t particularly well-traveled, so they likely believe Trump was telling them the truth about the Democrat places.

The Democrat places burned to the ground during the summer of 2020, they believe. The Democrat places are scary hellholes, they believe, not like West Buttfuck Acres where they live. Must protect our way of life in West Buttfuck Acres.

So again, it was 1 a.m.

He needed to go to bed, because his mother-in-law Amalija Knavs, who was one year his senior — Mommy! — was being laid to rest on Thursday, but instead he was on Truth Social all-caps clarifying that when he says presidents should have absolute immunity for all crimes they commit while in office, that he really does mean presidents should have absolute immunity for DOING CRIMES.

Also he said some other (white fascist authoritarian) people should have absolute immunity for their crimes. Murder cops, for instance.

A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES MUST HAVE FULL IMMUNITY, WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM/HER TO PROPERLY FUNCTION. ANY MISTAKE, EVEN IF WELL INTENDED, WOULD BE MET WITH ALMOST CERTAIN INDICTMENT BY THE OPPOSING PARTY AT TERM END.

Projection. No matter how much Dumpy Hitler and his pigfuck followers lie and say Joe Biden is directing “witch hunt” prosecutions against him, the fact is that he’s indicted 91 times because he’s a career criminal, one of the most flagrant this country has ever seen, and he deserves to rot for his crimes.

Also, saying it would be “impossible” for presidents to function without immunity says a lot about what he thinks the job of “president” is.

EVEN EVENTS THAT “CROSS THE LINE” MUST FALL UNDER TOTAL IMMUNITY,

There it is.

OR IT WILL BE YEARS OF TRAUMA TRYING TO DETERMINE GOOD FROM BAD. THERE MUST BE CERTAINTY.

Those are words. “Trauma”? Maybe he hit his head on the toilet right then and it was “trauma.”

EXAMPLE: YOU CAN’T STOP POLICE FROM DOING THE JOB OF STRONG & EFFECTIVE CRIME PREVENTION BECAUSE YOU WANT TO GUARD AGAINST THE OCCASIONAL “ROGUE COP” OR “BAD APPLE.” SOMETIMES YOU JUST HAVE TO LIVE WITH “GREAT BUT SLIGHTLY IMPERFECT.”

What do white supremacist fascists mean when they say “great but slightly imperfect” when it comes to “great but slightly imperfect” and “crime prevention”?

ALL PRESIDENTS MUST HAVE COMPLETE & TOTAL PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, OR THE AUTHORITY & DECISIVENESS OF A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WILL BE STRIPPED & GONE FOREVER. HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE AN EASY DECISION. GOD BLESS THE SUPREME COURT!

Well there you are.

Wonkette pal Popehat sky-tweeted, “I want to write a think piece about how the thirst for presidential immunity is part of a larger authoritarian sentiment leading to things like qualified immunity and thin blue line mentality and this mf just tweets it out.”

That he does.

Recently, one of Trump’s lawyers argued in court — in the case over whether presidents should have absolute and permanent immunity — that presidents must only be subject to criminal accountability if they have first been impeached and convicted by the United States Congress. It was based on absolutely no statute or legal theory that exists, certainly not in this country. The trifling motherfucker (John Sauer) just made it up, which is why legal Twitter started derisively laughing and scratching that dipshit off their holiday party invite lists.

But the appeals court judge Florence Pan interrogated the premise thoroughly — could Trump sell pardons in office and evade accountability? What about nuclear secrets, could he sell those? (Interesting, considering all of his indictments for stealing America’s secrets and hiding them in the basement at Mar-a-Lago.)

Well, his lawyer said, he’d have to be impeached and convicted for it in Congress. (No.)

As one person on Twitter noted, the argument suggested that Joe Biden (currently the president) “could invite Trump to the White House [for] a pardon, give it to him, then murder him, immediately resign to avoid impeachment [and] conviction thereby insuring his immunity and a Harris POTUS.”

You know, if we’re being logically consistent.

But this is not about being logically consistent, or about what these people actually believe presidents, in general, should be able to do. They’re not thinking that far ahead.

This is about Trump believing he should be able to steal America’s secrets, overturn elections, overthrow the Republic, grab them by the pussy without their consent, and never pay a cent or spend a day in prison for it. It’s about him.

And we guess with last night’s Truth Social tweet, he’s saying out loud that he believes the same should be true for all other white fascists like him.

It wasn’t some mystery, it’s just good to have it on the historical record.

Evan Hurst on Twitter right here.

BlueSky!

@evanjosephhurst on Threads!

I have profiles those other places but I think I forgot how to log on.

If you're shopping on Amazon anyway, this portal gives us a small commission.

Want to donate just once?