Trump's arguments for immunity not as hopeless as some claim

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

48% : A group of former government officials and constitutional lawyers wrote in a legal brief that Trump's argument "would permit countless officials to evade criminal liability."
44% : If they do, the question would become how to define "official acts," and whether the actions forming the basis for Trump's charges, which include many interactions with state and federal officials, qualify under that definition.
38% : That claim, if upheld, would provide Trump with criminal immunity whether presidents enjoy absolute immunity or not.
35% : A related absolute immunity already existsTrump claims he is immune from federal charges on seeking to overturn the 2020 elections.
25% : To quote from Trump's brief before the district court: "President Trump was acquitted ... after trial in the Senate, and he thus remains immune from prosecution.
25% : Here, Trump acknowledges that an impeachment conviction removes that protection - but insists that an acquittal does not.
23% : Trump claims he cannot.
21% : In his late briefs, Trump adds a second line of defense: He claims that his impeachment acquittal independently forestalls his criminal trial because of the ban on "double jeopardy".
14% : Trump's claim that a president must be impeached and convicted before he can be criminally liable for official acts is premised on the background absolute immunity Trump has claimed for the presidency.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.