Biden warns Supreme Court’s Trump immunity ruling sets ‘dangerous precedent’: Live

Melania Trump is unlikely to take up the role of full-time first lady if her husband wins a second term as president, according to a report.

A Trumpworld insider told Page Six that the Slovenian former model has cut a deal with Donald Trump that if he takes back the White House in November she would not have to be on first lady duty 24/7.

Ultimately, Melania believes she can be “hands-on mother and first lady at the same time,” the insider told Page Six.

“She does not want a non-stop schedule of events in the White House, and makes the point she can be both a hands-on mother and First Lady at the same time.

“Donald is close to Barron, but isn’t going to tossing footballs with him when he’s the president and the head of the free world. Donald has already agreed to this, and feels that mothers and parents across the country will understand Melania’s devotion to their son,” they added.

James Liddell and Alex Woodward have this look at one of the key questions of the day.

No indeed Mike Johnson, I certainly can’t think of any recent American president who might be tempted into abusing their powers for sordid personal gain.

No siree, not one name springs to mind, can’t think of a soul to whom that might apply…

Full marks to the commentator responding to Will Scharf here.

Justice Clarence Thomas joined the Supreme Court’s five other conservatives to grant Trump and other presidents unprecedented immunity from criminal prosecution.

But he also wrote his own opinion taking aim at the special counsel handling the election interference case at the center of the ruling – days after Trump’s attorneys made the same arguments in a Florida courtroom.

Thomas went so far as to say that the federal judge overseeing Trump’s election interference case should reconsider whether Jack Smith was even lawfully appointed to the job, giving Trump and the judge presiding over Trump’s classified documents case more legal ammunition in his favor.

“If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people,” Justice Thomas wrote.

“The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding.”

Over seven pages, he goes on to argue against the appointment of special counsels, laying the groundwork for more challenges to Smith’s authority while Trump and his allies undermine his office in court and in Congress.

New York Democrat Joe Morelle is pledging action in an attempt to overturn the conservative justices’ “harmful” decision yesterday.

From the same patch, AOC has also been talking up impeachment.

Attorneys for Trump have reportedly sent a letter to the judge overseeing his hush money trial in New York in the hopes of delaying his sentencing and blocking his guilty verdict in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling that grants him some immunity from prosecution.

The letter, first reported by The New York Times, arrived shortly after a ruling from the nation’s high court that shields Trump and any other president from criminal prosecution for actions considered “official” duties while in office.

The Supreme Court’s monumental decision on whether Trump is shielded from criminal prosecution for his actions in office will likely derail his election interference trial.

Alex Woodward takes a closer look.

President Biden’s re-election campaign has shifted into a full-court press against Trump in response to the incumbent’s disastrous debate performance last week.

On a press call Monday, Biden campaign surrogates including former Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn, Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett and deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks warned that American democracy would disappear in November if Democrats and concerned Americans did not rally behind the president.

The call was organized in response to the Supreme Court’s decision granting Trump and all US presidents limited immunity from prosecution for official acts.

It also appears to be in response to newfound concerns from his own party that Biden isn’t a strong enough candidate to win the presidential election.

Here’s more from John Bowden and Andrew Feinberg.

After his disastrous debate performance, the president did much better yesterday responding to that shocking Supreme Court ruling, telling the nation it gives the executive office, and possibly Trump, the power “to do whatever he pleases, whenever he wants to do it.”

Here’s a full report from Andrew Feinberg.