Signing checks related to his campaign or business is not an official act within the scope of the presidency even if it takes place while he's president and sitting in the oval office.
I don't see how it could possibly be construed as having immunity
Comments
So Hicks' testimony and the actions themselves could all be inadmissible.
I don't see how it could possibly be construed as having immunity
Using the USSC ruling in this way to challenge his felony conviction will surely delay any repercussions until well after the election.