Ex-Georgia Rep. warns Trump immunity ruling could jeopardize Bush, Obama
A federal appeals court ruled that Trump can be prosecuted on alleged crimes related to the 2020 election.
Former GOP Georgia Congressman Doug Collins warned on Wednesday that a recent immunity ruling against former President Donald Trump could have implications for former Presidents Barack Obama and George Bush for actions they took while in office.
"There are things that need to be held accountable," Collins said on the "Just the News, No Noise" TV show. "I just believe right now they're making false assumptions about what Donald Trump did is part of his executive privilege or overseeing elections. That needs to be discussed. But by this ruling, they're basically opening the door up for the Obama drone strikes which killed Americans and the George Bush policy of detainees and the torture memos that all came up."
"We may agree that those were fine, but somebody in the Department of Justice could say 'you violated the color of the law here, and we're going to prosecute you now that you're out of the office,'" he added.
A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled that Trump can be prosecuted for alleged crimes related to the 2020 election and isn't protected by presidential immunity.
"For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution," the court wrote, according to CNN.
Trump may directly appeal the decision to the Supreme Court or ask the full D.C. Circuit Court to hear the case again.
Collins asserted that the Justice Department has been politicized and insisted that the Supreme Court has to take that into account.
"They've never had a Department of Justice run by President Biden and Merrick Garland. They never had this issue," Collins said in reference to the circuit court hearing. "So for me, it's a little bit frustrating for them to not take into account the fact that this is a fresh encounter, and then to look at what their judge and their ruling may take into, and I'm afraid that the Supreme Court may fall into this same trap."