Former Justice Department officials Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord flattened Donald Trump's recent claim that, without presidential immunity, presidents like Harry Truman would have been unable to act.
Addressing a campaign rally over the weekend in Manchester, New Hampshire, Trump said that presidents would be unable to function without full immunity.
"Harry Truman would not have done — Harry Truman would not have done Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Probably ended the war. Probably. I think so. But he wouldn’t have done it. So many things wouldn’t be done," Trump promised.
"But, you know, you have to allow a president to do his job," he continued. "They’ll make decisions. And, you know, it’s like the police. I say we have to give the police back their power. We’re not going to have any crime, but we protect. What we do. I mean, to me, it’s the best analogy. And the our, our Democrat-run cities are dens of horrible crime right now."
"No, we’re going to have to do this, immunity for the president," he closed. "If you have a president that doesn’t have immunity, he’s never going to be free to do anything because the opposing party will always indict him as soon as he leaves the White House."
ALSO READ: Uncivil war: How Speaker Mike Johnson’s dream of bipartisan decency died in his hands
McCord, the former acting assistant attorney general for national security, explained on MSNBC's "Prosecuting Donald Trump" podcast that comparing Truman's dropping of the bomb and Trump's alleged theft of classified documents and attempt to overthrow an election really is like apples and oranges.
"Clearly, what he's trying to do with this type of reference to the atomic bomb and Truman's decision to drop an atomic bomb during a war," said McCord on MSNBC's "Prosecuting Donald Trump" podcast, "He's trying to convince the American people that doing things like what is considered by our military and our government to be necessary during war could be thwarted."
More significantly, she said, Trump is trying to make it seem as if presidents can't function without immunity.
"Which is ridiculous from the perspective of, you just don't need to commit crimes to be president," she said.
"You don't need to commit crimes in order to prosecute a war during a declared war. You don't need to commit crimes to challenge an election," McCord continued, a reference to Trump's over 60 lawsuits challenging the results of the election in swing states.
There are existing laws of war that govern behavior during wartime, she explained. It isn't part of U.S. criminal law, but rather part of international treaties. Secondly, the U.S. criminal code, in some cases, does address actions taken outside the United States. So, a U.S. national who kills a foreign national outside the country could still be prosecuted.
"You just don't need to commit crimes to do any of that," she concluded.
