Liberal SCOTUS Justices Seem to Agree with Jack Smith’s Absurd Argument That President Trump’s Efforts to Secure America’s Elections Were Not an “Official Presidential Act”

During Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing on President Trump’s presidential immunity claim challenging Biden’s DOJ J6 indictments against him, Ketanji Brown Jackson and the other liberal United States Supreme Court Justices seemed to agree with Jack Smith’s argument that Trump’s efforts to secure America’s 2020 election were not an “official presidential” act, meaning Trump’s election integrity efforts following the 2020 election would not be covered under the presidential immunity clause.

Jack Smith’s oral arguments to the Justices were awful to listen to as Michael Dreeben, the individual whom Smith chose to deliver the arguments, had a high-pitched voice that sounded like a woman.

The Left’s actions on Thursday were yet another example of the Democrat’s efforts to “get Trump” before November’s election. 

President Trump’s attorney, John Sauer, made strong opening arguments to the court stating that if President Trump’s presidential immunity is canceled, then Joe Biden could face charges down the road for allowing open borders, resulting in illegal immigrants flowing into the United States of America. Sauer opening statements also included the fact that if presidential immunity is cancelled, then Obama could be charged for droning American citizens and Bush could be charged for leading America into the Iraq War.

Ketanji Brown Jackson responded to Sauer by attempting to embrace the argument that the Chief Executive of the United States (POTUS) has no constitutional right to ensure elections are secure by seemingly agreeing with the argument that Trump’s election integrity efforts were for personal gain. Thus, they are not covered by presidential immunity. 

Laura Loomer posted on this development, “During Oral Arguments in the SCOTUS hearing on Presidential Immunity this morning, @JoeBiden’s DEI SCOTUS pick, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, argued that President Trump was not acting in an “official capacity” on January 6th during his election integrity efforts. Democrats are making the argument that President Trump’s efforts to investigate the 2020 election and to protect America’s election is not an “official act”. What a deranged argument. The US President has an obligation to secure America’s elections from Foreign AND DOMESTIC adversaries!”

Jack Smith’s attorney, Michael Dreeben, echoed Justice Jackson’s talking points, stating that President Trump’s election interference efforts are not “an official presidential act.” Following Dreeben’s remarks, many wondered if Jack Smith’s office was colluding with the liberal Supreme Court Justices.

In his high-pitched voice, Dreeben made deranged statements, even referring to President Trump’s Administration as a regime. Loomer posted about Dreeben’s voice, “Is Micahel Dreeben transgender? I feel like I am listening to a woman.”

Loomer also wrote, “Good news everyone. Nobody is listening to Michael Dreeben’s argument in front of SCOTUS right now… because we literally cannot listen.”

Before Thursday’s hearing, President Trump posted on TruthSocial, “WITHOUT PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR A PRESIDENT TO PROPERLY FUNCTION, PUTTING THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN GREAT AND EVERLASTING DANGER!”

The Left’s latest deranged performance at SCOTUS shows just how desperate Democrats are “to get Trump” before November’s election in an attempt to keep Joe Biden in the White House.

The post Liberal SCOTUS Justices Seem to Agree with Jack Smith’s Absurd Argument That President Trump’s Efforts to Secure America’s Elections Were Not an “Official Presidential Act” appeared first on Loomered.