Well today the United States Supreme Court granted Donald Trump immunity for conduct described in exactly two paragraphs of a 130 paragraph indictment.

The rest of the indictment against Donald Trump still

stands as of tonight. And the Supreme Court has ordered the trial judge in the case

Tanya Chutkin, to hear testimony in the case from a very long

list of potential witnesses to clarify if some of the remaining charges in the indictment might now fit into a new

category created by the Supreme Court today granting criminal immunity for

some presidential conduct.

That could lead Judge Chutkin to in effect be presiding over

an examination of the evidence similar to or equal to what would occur in the

prosecution in the trial, the actual trial of this case, when prosecutor Jack

Smith would be calling his prosecution witnesses to the witness stand in Judge

Chutkins courtroom, including Mike Pence, to take an oath and testify under oath to prove to the judge that the conduct described in the rest of the indictment

is in no way immune from prosecution even with the Supreme Court's new definition today.

Unlike a trial, Donald Trump does not have to be present for that hearing which could last weeks.

So it would in no way interfere with his presidential campaign.

The 6-3 decision identified two different fears on each side of that decision in the Supreme Court. The majority of the justices

seem to fear a president living under the pressure of unreasonable criminal

prosecutions even though that has never happened in the history of the country.

And the minority of the justices fear a president they now see as in effect sanctioned to break the law. The majority

called the minority's view quote fear-mongering on the basis of extreme

hypotheticals about a future on the law. What the majority saw without today's ruling, this is what they fear, is, quote, the more likely prospect of

an executive branch that cannibalizes itself with each successive president free to prosecute his predecessors

...