Fact Focus: Trump wasn’t exonerated by the presidential immunity ruling, even though he says he was

Fact Focus: Trump wasn’t exonerated by the presidential immunity ruling, even though he says he was
President Donald Trump on July 2, 2024, misrepresented in a social media post what the US Supreme Court's Monday ruling on presidential immunity means for his civil and criminal cases. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 04 July 2024
Follow

Fact Focus: Trump wasn’t exonerated by the presidential immunity ruling, even though he says he was

Fact Focus: Trump wasn’t exonerated by the presidential immunity ruling, even though he says he was
  • None of Trump’s pending cases have been dismissed as a result of the ruling

 

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday misrepresented in a social media post what the US Supreme Court’s Monday ruling on presidential immunity means for his civil and criminal cases.
“TOTAL EXONERATION!” he wrote in the post on his Truth Social platform. “It is clear that the Supreme Court’s Brilliantly Written and Historic Decision ENDS all of Crooked Joe Biden’s Witch Hunts against me, including the WHITE HOUSE AND DOJ INSPIRED CIVIL HOAXES in New York.”
But none of Trump’s pending cases have been dismissed as a result of the ruling, nor have the verdicts already reached against him been overturned. The ruling does amount to a major victory for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, whose legal strategy has focused on delaying court proceedings until after the 2024 election.
Here’s a closer look at the facts.
CLAIM: The Supreme Court’s ruling that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution means “total exoneration” for former President Donald Trump.
THE FACTS: Although the historic 6-3 ruling is a win for Trump, he has not been exonerated and his legal troubles are far from over. A delay of his Washington trial on charges of election interference has been indefinitely extended as a result. Also, he still faces charges in two other criminal cases, and the verdicts already reached against him in a criminal and a civil case have not been overturned.
Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and former US attorney for the state’s Eastern District, told The Associated Press that Trump’s claim is “inaccurate for a number of reasons.”
“The court found immunity from prosecution, not exoneration,” she wrote in an email. “The court did not say that Trump’s conduct did not amount to criminal behavior. Just that prosecutors are not allowed to prosecute him for it because of the special role of a president and the need to permit him to make ‘bold’ and ‘fearless’ decisions without concern for criminal consequences.”
McQuade wrote that Trump’s case over classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate won’t be affected, as it arose from conduct committed after he left the White House. She added that any impact on his New York hush money trial “seems unlikely” since the crimes were committed in a personal capacity.
“In addition, the Court’s opinion is solely focused on immunity for criminal conduct,” McQuade continued, explaining that it will not protect him from civil liability in his cases regarding defamatory statements about advice columnist E. Jean Carroll or fraudulent business practices conducted at the Trump Organization.
Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority said former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and are presumptively entitled to immunity for all official acts. Unofficial, or private, actions are exempt from such immunity.
This means that special counsel Jack Smith cannot proceed with significant allegations in his indictment accusing Trump of plotting to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss, or he must at least defend their use in future proceedings before the trial judge.
The case has not been dismissed. It was instead sent back to US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who must now “carefully analyze” whether other allegations involve official conduct for which the president would be immune from prosecution. The trial was supposed to have begun in March, but has been on hold since December to allow Trump to pursue his Supreme Court appeal.
However, the justices did knock out one aspect of the indictment, finding that Trump is “absolutely immune” from prosecution for alleged conduct involving discussions with the Justice Department.
The opinion also stated that Trump is “at least presumptively immune” from allegations that he tried to pressure Vice President Mike Pence on Jan. 6, 2021, to reject certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s electoral vote win. But prosecutors can try to make the case that Trump’s pressure on Pence can still be part of the case against him, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.
It is all but certain that the ruling means Trump will not face trial in Washington ahead of the 2024 election, as the need for further analysis is expected to tie up the case for months with legal wrangling over whether actions in the indictment were official or unofficial, the AP has reported.
Trump is facing charges in two other criminal cases, one over his alleged interference in Georgia’s 2020 election and the other over classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate after he left the White House. Trump’s lawyers have asserted presidential immunity in both cases, but a ruling on the matter has not been made in either.
The former president was convicted in May of 34 felony counts in his hush money trial in New York. After Monday’s ruling, the New York judge who presided over that trial postponed Trump’s sentencing until at least September and agreed to weigh the impact of the presidential immunity decision.
Trump was ordered in February to pay a $454 million penalty as part of a civil fraud lawsuit, for lying about his wealth for years as he built the real estate empire that vaulted him to stardom and the White House. It is still under appeal.
In May 2023, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in 1996 and for defaming her over the allegations, awarding her $5 million. Carroll was awarded an additional $83.3 million in January by a separate jury for Trump’s continued social media attacks against her. An appeal of the former decision was rejected in April. The latter case is still being appealed.
 

 


’Difficult without it’: EU hopes in German leadership comeback after vote

’Difficult without it’: EU hopes in German leadership comeback after vote
Updated 9 sec ago
Follow

’Difficult without it’: EU hopes in German leadership comeback after vote

’Difficult without it’: EU hopes in German leadership comeback after vote
  • Germans head to the polls on Sunday in an election that has been impatiently awaited in Brussels
BRUSSELS:Germans head to the polls on Sunday in an election that has been impatiently awaited in Brussels, where many hope Berlin can swiftly return to play a driving role in EU affairs as the bloc faces a string of crises.
Already suffering from lacklustre economic growth and competitiveness, the EU has been rocked by US President Donald Trump threatening a trade war and reaching out over European leaders’ heads to Russia to settle the Ukraine war.
“We are sometimes afraid of German leadership,” said a European diplomat. “But it is difficult to live without it.”
Incertitude in Germany has added to months of political turmoil in France, where a weakened President Emmanuel Macron in December appointed his fourth prime minister within a year.
The Franco-German engine normally credited with driving the European Union “has not been able to work” and take “major decisions” at a time where “it is more necessary than ever,” said Yann Wernert, an analyst at the Jacques Delors Institute.
“We don’t see much German commitment in current EU legislation,” lamented another diplomat.
The vacuum has been partially filled by others.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, whose country currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency, has been pushing for Brussels to do more to confront Russia, and Italy’s Giorgia Meloni has taken the lead on migration issues.
But the absence has been felt.
“Can the EU act without Germany and France? In case of an emergency this would be possible, but it is better to act with France and Germany,” said a third diplomat.


Sunday’s vote will not immediately solve the problem, as Germany may not have a new government until the spring.
The confident frontrunner Friedrich Merz has said he’s aiming for an Easter deadline. But arduous coalition negotiations tend to drag on for weeks if not months in the country, spelling long stretches of political paralysis.
Questions about the shape of a future coalition government are likely to slow down key legislative projects also at the European level, on anything from migration to defense funding and climate change, said Wernert.
“All Europe is watching this election,” said Daniel Freund, a European lawmaker with the Greens, lamenting the current “lack of movement.”
Some of his colleagues worry about the ripple effect the vote could have on political balances at the European Parliament.
Merz’s conservative CDU-CSU alliance belongs to the largest parliamentary group, the EPP, which currently shapes the chamber’s agenda with support from a loose alliance of centrists, social democrats and greens.
But led by Manfred Weber, a German, the EPP has occasionally sided with the far right over the past year.
The same tactic was used by the CDU/CSU, which last month passed a motion calling for an immigration crackdown with the support of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) in a taboo-breaking maneuver.
“For me, the real question is to what extent what happened in Germany will have an impact on the outcome of the elections and what lessons EPP representatives will draw from it,” said Valerie Hayer, head of the centrist Renew group.
“Will they say... it was a losing strategy or, on the contrary, a winning one?“
If the so-called “firewall” barring cooperation with the extreme right “breaks down” in Germany “it will be very unfeasible to have it implemented here,” added Dane Anders Vistisen, a European lawmaker with the far-right Patriots group.

Lawyers to deliver closing arguments in the trial of man charged with stabbing Salman Rushdie

Lawyers to deliver closing arguments in the trial of man charged with stabbing Salman Rushdie
Updated 4 min 8 sec ago
Follow

Lawyers to deliver closing arguments in the trial of man charged with stabbing Salman Rushdie

Lawyers to deliver closing arguments in the trial of man charged with stabbing Salman Rushdie
  • Lawyers are set to deliver their closing arguments Friday in the trial of a New Jersey man charged with trying to kill Salman Rushdie on a western New York lecture stage
  • The knife attack at the Chautauqua Institution severely injured the Booker Prize-winning author and left him blind in one eye

MAYVILLE: Lawyers are set to deliver their closing arguments Friday in the trial of a New Jersey man charged with trying to kill Salman Rushdie on a New York lecture stage in a knife attack that left the author blind in one eye and with other serious injuries.
Hadi Matar, 27, is charged with attempted murder and assault in the August 2022 attack at the Chautauqua Institution in western New York. He faces up to 25 years in prison if convicted.
Rushdie, 77, was the key witness during testimony that began last week. The Booker Prize-winning author told jurors he thought he was dying when a masked stranger ran onto the stage and stabbed and slashed at him until being tackled by bystanders. Rushdie showed jurors his now-blinded right eye, usually hidden behind a darkened eyeglass lens.
Jurors also heard from a trauma surgeon who said Rushdie’s injuries would have been fatal without quick treatment, and a law enforcement officer who said Matar was calm and cooperative in his custody.
They were shown video of the assault and aftermath that was captured from multiple angles by Chautauqua Institution cameras. The recordings also picked up the gasps and screams from audience members who had been seated to hear Rushdie speak with City of Asylum Pittsburgh founder Henry Reese about keeping writers safe. Reese suffered a gash to his forehead.
From the witness stand, institution staff and others present that day pointed to Matar as the assailant.
Stabbed and slashed more than a dozen times in the head, throat, torso, thigh and hand, Rushdie spent 17 days at a Pennsylvania hospital and more than three weeks at a New York City rehabilitation center. He detailed his long and painful recovery in his 2024 memoir, “Knife.”
Throughout the trial, Matar often took notes with a pen and sometimes laughed or smiled with defense attorneys during breaks in testimony.
His lawyers declined to call any witnesses of their own and Matar did not testify in his defense. Instead, the attorneys challenged prosecution witnesses as part of a strategy intended to cast doubt on whether Matar intended to kill, and not just injure, Rushdie. The distinction is important for an attempted murder conviction.
Matar had with him knives, not a gun or bomb, his attorneys said. And Rushdie’s heart and lungs were uninjured, they noted in response to testimony that the injuries were life-threatening.
Public Defender Nathaniel Barone said Matar likely would have faced a lesser charge of assault were it not for Rushdie’s celebrity.
“We think that it became an attempted murder because of the notoriety of the alleged victim in the case,” Barone told reporters after testimony concluded Thursday. “That’s been it from the very beginning. It’s been nothing more, nothing less. And it’s for publicity purposes. It’s for self-interest purposes.”
A separate federal indictment alleges that Matar, of Fairview, New Jersey, was motivated to attack Rushdie by a 2006 speech in which the leader of the militant group Hezbollah endorsed a decades-old fatwa, or edict, calling for Rushdie’s death. Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued the fatwa in 1989 after publication of the novel “The Satanic Verses,” which some Muslims consider blasphemous.
Rushdie spent years in hiding. But after Iran announced that it would not enforce the decree, he had traveled freely over the past quarter century.
A trial on the federal terrorism-related charges will be scheduled in US District Court in Buffalo.


China’s military drives away Philippine aircraft near Spratly Islands

China’s military drives away Philippine aircraft near Spratly Islands
Updated 8 min 11 sec ago
Follow

China’s military drives away Philippine aircraft near Spratly Islands

China’s military drives away Philippine aircraft near Spratly Islands
  • China claims sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea, a vital waterway for more than $3 trillion of annual ship-borne commerce
  • On Thursday, Philippine guard and fisheries bureau had jointly carried out a maritime domain awareness flight over Spratly Islands

BEIJING: China’s military said it warned and drove away three Philippine aircraft that “illegally intruded” into the airspace near the Spratly Islands on Thursday.
There was no immediate comment from the Philippine embassy in Beijing on the Chinese military’s statement issued on Friday.
China’s Southern Theatre Command accused the Philippine side of attempting to “peddle its illegal claims” through provocation, and warned that the “clumsy maneuver is doomed to failure.”
China claims sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea, a vital waterway for more than $3 trillion of annual ship-borne commerce, putting it at odds with Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam.
A 2016 arbitration ruling invalidated China’s expansive claim but Beijing does not recognize the decision.
On Thursday, the Philippines said its coast guard and fisheries bureau had jointly carried out a maritime domain awareness flight over the Kalayaan Islands, the Philippine name for Spratly Islands.
The mission was to assert the Philippines’ sovereignty, sovereign rights, and maritime jurisdiction in the West Philippine Sea, it said. More than 50 Chinese maritime militia vessels and a Chinese coast guard ship were spotted during the exercise.
It was not immediately clear if that mission, which deployed two aircraft, was the one Chinese military said it responded to.
The latest confrontation comes after Philippine coast guard accused the Chinese navy of performing dangerous flight maneuvers earlier this week when it flew close to a government aircraft patrolling the contested Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea.
Beijing disputed that account.


Trump aide warns Zelensky to stop hurling ‘insults’, start negotiating

Trump aide warns Zelensky to stop hurling ‘insults’, start negotiating
Updated 29 min 27 sec ago
Follow

Trump aide warns Zelensky to stop hurling ‘insults’, start negotiating

Trump aide warns Zelensky to stop hurling ‘insults’, start negotiating
  • Pressure builds on Volodymyr Zelensky to sign away precious mineral rights in exchange for Washington’s help defending against Russia
  • Tensions between Trump and Zelensky over the proposed mineral deal and Washington’s outreach to Moscow have exploded this week

KYIV: The US national security adviser warned Ukraine’s leader to stop hurling “insults” at Donald Trump, as pressure built Friday on Volodymyr Zelensky to sign away precious mineral rights in exchange for Washington’s help defending against Russia.
Tensions between Trump and Zelensky over the proposed mineral deal — which Kyiv has rejected — and Washington’s outreach to Moscow have exploded this week in a series of barbs traded at press conferences and on social media.
Zelensky has warned that Trump has succumbed to Russian “disinformation,” while the US leader has accused his counterpart of starting the war and branded him a “dictator without elections.”
“Some of the rhetoric coming out of Kyiv, frankly, and insults to President Trump were unacceptable,” US national security adviser Mike Waltz told a Thursday briefing at the White House.
“President Trump is obviously very frustrated right now with President Zelensky, the fact that he hasn’t come to the table, that he hasn’t been willing to take this opportunity that we have offered,” he said.
The United States is a vital financial and military supporter of Ukraine, but Trump has rattled Kyiv and its European backers by opening talks with Moscow they fear could end the war on terms that reward Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The spat has turned personal with Trump falsely claiming Zelensky is hugely unpopular among his own people and the Ukrainian leader saying Trump lives in a Russian “disinformation space.”
Tech tycoon and Trump backer Elon Musk weighed in Thursday, saying Ukrainians “despised” their president and that the US leader was right to leave him out of talks with Russia.
Amid the war of words, Zelensky said Thursday he had held a “productive meeting” with US envoy Keith Kellogg in Kyiv.
“We had a detailed conversation about the battlefield situation, how to return our prisoners of war, and effective security guarantees,” Zelensky said on social media after the meeting.
“Strong Ukraine-US relations benefit the entire world,” he added.
However, there was no joint press conference or statements after the discussions, as would typically accompany such a visit.
Trump is calling for Kyiv to hand over access to its mineral wealth as compensation for tens of billions of dollars in US aid delivered under his predecessor Joe Biden.
Zelensky rejected a deal proposed by Trump as it did not include “security guarantees” — Kyiv’s key demand from its Western backers in any agreement with Russia to halt the fighting.
The feud marks a dramatic reversal from US policy under Biden, who lauded Zelensky as a hero, shipped vast supplies of arms to Kyiv and hammered Moscow with sanctions.
Trump has instead criticized Zelensky and blamed him for starting the war that began with Russia’s full-scale invasion three years ago.
“A Dictator without Elections, Zelensky better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left,” he wrote on his Truth Social platform on Wednesday.
Zelensky was elected in 2019 for a five-year term and has remained leader in line with Ukrainian rules under martial law, imposed as his country fights for its survival.
While Zelensky’s popularity has fallen, the percentage of Ukrainians who trust him has never dipped below 50 percent since the conflict started, according to the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS).
Trump’s invective drew shock reactions from Europe.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said it was “wrong and dangerous” to call Zelensky a dictator.
The White House said France’s Emmanuel Macron and Britain’s Keir Starmer will visit Trump next week after European leaders held emergency summits in recent days over how to deal with Trump’s threats to overhaul decades of transatlantic security ties.
The Kremlin, buoyed by its rapprochement with Washington, has hailed Trump’s comments.
Russia, which for years has railed against the US military presence in Europe, wants a reorganization of the continent’s security framework as part of any deal to end the Ukraine fighting.
Putin said Wednesday that US allies “only have themselves to blame for what’s happening,” suggesting they were paying the price for opposing Trump’s return to the White House.
Neither Kyiv nor European countries were invited to high-level talks between top diplomats from Russia and the US in Saudi Arabia earlier this week, deepening fears they are being sidelined.


Survivors of past air disasters offer support after Toronto crash

Survivors of past air disasters offer support after Toronto crash
Updated 33 min 11 sec ago
Follow

Survivors of past air disasters offer support after Toronto crash

Survivors of past air disasters offer support after Toronto crash
  • Survivors of past aviation accidents are offering advice and support to the 80 passengers and crew members of the plane that crashed and flipped over in Toronto
  • The National Air Disaster Alliance was created in 1995 to support survivors and victims’ families and advocate for safety improvements

CONCORD: Sad. Happy. Anguished. Guilty.
Denise Lockie of Charlotte, North Carolina, has felt all of the above in recent weeks, as a string of major aviation accidents brought back memories of crash-landing in an icy river in New York. Sixteen years after the “Miracle on the Hudson,” she and other aviation disaster survivors stand ready to support those who are just emerging from their ordeal in Toronto on Monday.
“Right now, they haven’t even processed what has happened,” Lockie said of the 80 passengers and crew members who survived when Delta Air Lines flight 4819 crashed and flipped over at Pearson International Airport.
There were no survivors when a commercial jetliner and an Army helicopter collided in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 29, a medical transportation plane crashed in Philadelphia on Jan. 31 and a plane carrying 10 people crashed in Alaska on Feb. 6. But in Toronto, not only did no one die, the last of the injured were released from the hospital Thursday.
“It’s amazing,” said passenger Peter Carlson, who spoke at a conference less than 48 hours after the crash. Though he managed to crack a joke — “Nothing beats a good road trip besides an airplane crash” — he later admitted struggling to leave his hotel room.
“I was quite emotional about this whole thing and just really want to be home,” said Carlson, the newest member of what retired flight attendant Sandy Purl calls a “sad sorority and fraternity.”
A history of survival
Monday’s crash in Toronto wasn’t the first time lives were spared during a major aviation disaster there: In 2005, all 309 people on board Air France Flight 358 survived after it overran the runway and burst into flames.
In 1989, 184 of the 296 people aboard United Airlines Flight 232 survived a crash in Sioux City, Iowa. And in 1977, Purl was one of 22 survivors when Southern Airways Flight 242 lost both engines in a hailstorm and crashed in New Hope, Georgia. Sixty-three people aboard the plane died, along with nine on the ground.
“Immediately you have a euphoria because you survived,” said Purl, now 72. “But then you go into what’s known as psychic numbing, which protects you from everything that’s in your brain that you can’t bring to the surface for a long time down the road, if ever.”
For more than a year after the crash, Purl’s strategy was to flee whenever anyone mentioned the disaster. Eventually she was admitted to a psychiatric hospital where she told the staff, “I can’t stop crying.”
A kindly doctor took her hand and reassured her what she was feeling was real.
“For the first time, a year and a half later, people weren’t saying, ‘You look so good! Get on with your life, you’re so lucky to be alive,’” she said. “For the first time, someone gave me permission to feel and to cry and to feel safe.”
Survivors stick together
Both Purl and Lockie are members of the National Air Disaster Alliance, which was created in 1995 to support survivors and victims’ families and advocate for safety improvements.
In 2009, the group published an open letter to the 155 passengers and crew members of US Airways flight 1549 after Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger famously landed the plane in the Hudson River after a bird strike disabled both engines.
“We are grateful and thankful that all survived, but survivors need time to process and comprehend what it means to be an air crash survivor,” the group wrote, encouraging survivors to rest, retreat, rely on others and reserve their rights to privacy.
Paying it forward, Lockie is offering similar advice to those aboard the Toronto flight. She described being in a fog for about eight weeks after her crash, struggling to keep up with her corporate job as her injuries healed and being beset by nightmares and panic attacks.
“Absolutely number one as far as I’m concerned is taking to somebody who can understand,” she said. “I think Delta is a fantastic airline and I’m sure their care team is fantastic, but then again, how many people on those care teams have actually been involved in an aviation incident?”
Friends and family might urge survivors to move on with their lives, she said, but “it just doesn’t work that way.”
“You might have fears that come out later on, and you really have to be able to deal with those,” she said. “So my recommendation is to take all the help you can possibly take.”
It doesn’t take much to trigger memories
While Lockie said her experience hasn’t deterred her from flying often, it has shaped her behavior in other ways. When she enters a store or restaurant, for example, she always checks for the fastest way out.
“You have to be able to calm yourself if there’s something that triggers your emotional aptitude,” she said.
Purl, who returned to work as a flight attendant four years after the crash, said she can be triggered by the smell of gasoline or seeing news footage of other crashes.
“I look at the TV and I see my crash,” she said. “I smell it. I taste it. I see the black smoke and I can’t get through it. I feel the heat of the fire.”
The Toronto survivors may find their experience exacerbates underlying traumas, she said.
“Like the layers of an onion, you pull one back and there’s another layer underneath,” she said.
Her advice: Live one day at a time, seek out people who offer unconditional love and talk, talk, talk.
“And then find a way to make a difference as a result,” she said.