to deal with what are very easy legal questions.

I mean, when, you know, Donald Trump says he has immunity

for whatever he does as a former president,

you mean he can actually go out and shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and he can't be prosecuted?

He can rape people as we know he might have some predilection to do and he can't be prosecuted

because he's immunized against everything, conspiracy to

overthrow the government, steal documents and so I mean it's absurd. The other

argument of course is double jeopardy which is even more laughable the

idea that because you go through impeachment and a Senate trial it would be double jeopardy to try you for things that might

You know interact with or overlap with charges that were brought before the

Constitution itself in Article 1, Section 7, Clause 3 I think it is, specifically refutes that. It says that if you go, if you're being

impeached, that extends only to removal from office and disqualification from office but prosecution and

trial at law will lie nonetheless later on so it's an explicit refutation of

that argument I mean that is a one paragraph dismissal of that absurd argument.

That was Democratic Congress member Jamie Raskin pitch perfect calling out

Donald Trump for his heinous conduct and his absurd argument

about absolute presidential liability from criminal conduct. I'm Ben Myselis

this is the Midas Touch Network. Let's compare some of the Democratic

messaging to the Maggare Republican messaging disaster. I showed you that clip of Jamie Raskin.

Let me show you this other one of Jamie Raskin here. you that

the clip of Jamie Raskin here saying how the Maga Republicans are going after

President Biden for a crime they can't even identify what it is play the clip.

...