Donald Trump’s new argument that he should be immune from being criminally tried in Jack Smith’s election interference case because he’s already been acquitted in an impeachment hearing is a “stone cold loser,” an expert said Tuesday.
CNN’s legal analyst Elie Honig was talking as Trump arrived in a Washington, D.C. appeals court to hear his lawyers argue that he should have political immunity in the case because he was acting his official capacity as president.
On Monday, the former president filed a second motion, claiming double jeopardy as a reason Smith’s case should not proceed. The argument is that he was acquitted of insurrection involving January 6 during a 2021 impeachment hearing, and cannot be charged again with the same thing.
The problem with that, Honig said, was the impeachment and the criminal trial are not even similar cases.
"This second argument on impeachment and double jeopardy to me is a stone-cold loser,” he said. "I mean, it’s not even apples and oranges. It’s more different than that. First of all, they are different charges. The allegations that were made in the impeachment are different.
ALSO READ: How Trump's campaign visits cost local police departments
“Jack Smith is charging obstruction and conspiracy. The impeachment was based on insurrection. So they’re missing each other with that. Second of all, it’s not two criminal proceedings, the impeachment is a political procedure with vastly different procedures.”
He concluded that the motion would be thrown out of court.
“There’s no chance he succeeds with that argument,” he said.
