Jim Schultz, who served as an associate White House counsel under Don McGahn for former President Donald Trump, predicted that his old boss would lose his claim to immunity on CNN Monday via Mediaite.
It has been noted that when asked about Trump’s argument that he is immune from criminal prosecution for acts he committed during his time in office, Schultz predicted that Special Counsel Jack Smith would “swiftly” get the better of Trump on this point.
“So Jack Smith has a winner on this one, right? I do not believe that the Supreme Court — it is now, the Supreme Court rejected the idea of expediting this — but it still goes to the D.C. Circuit Court, and it’s common knowledge in the legal community, D.C. Circuit Court is kind of the warm-up act for the Supreme Court,” argued Schultz. “A lot of Supreme Court justices have come from the D.C. Circuit and this this this is the right tribunal to be hearing it. And I think in this instance, the D.C. Circuit Court is going to act swiftly, and I think they’re going to knock down this immunity claim, you know, very swiftly.”
Trump has urged that he cannot be prosecuted for the actions he took in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
“I wasn’t campaigning, the Election was over. I was doing my duty as President to expose and further investigate a Rigged and Stolen Election. It was my obligation to do so, and the proof found is voluminous and irrefutable,” he argued on Truth Social on Christmas Eve. “Therefore, among other reasons, of course I am entitled to IMMUNITY. ADDITIONALLY, I DID NOTHING WRONG. Stop the Witch Hunt NOW!”
Smith has disputed those arguments, submitting in a recent filing that if the court accepts Trump’s “broad immunity theory,” it “would grant immunity from criminal prosecution to a President who accepts a bribe in exchange for directing a lucrative government contract to the payer; a President who instructs the FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy; a President who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics; or a President who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary, because in each of these scenarios, the President could assert that he was simply executing the laws; or communicating with the Department of Justice; or discharging his powers as Commander-in-Chief; or engaging in foreign diplomacy.”