What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

You can get the audio here.

I listened to it live. To their credit, both lawyers were very good (I have listened to a fair few SCOTUS oral arguments by now, both were well above average). Sauer did the best he could with a bad hand, and seems to have settled on playing for time instead of trying to go for the sweeping immunity previously claimed. Dreeban I caught making a mistake or two, to an extent actually supporting the Trump argument (to the surprise of, I believe, Gorsuch (the SCOTUS livestream doesn't put up captions), who then pressed him on the position).

It seems pretty likely that the court is going to rule that actions taken outside of the scope of office are not going to be granted immunity. Dreeban made a very good point that the President has absolutely no role in the certification process of an election, and thus by definition, no action taken by him with respect to the recertification process could be covered as an official act. However, the process, if that is the ruling, is that it needs to go back down on remand for fact-finding as to whether any particular acts are official or unofficial, which is the 'play for time' ploy I mentioned. By the time that gets done, the elections will be over.

That official acts will retain general immunity, at least absent impeachment also seems likely. Levels of immunity for government personnel acting in the course of their work go down to the level of street cops and ambulance workers, it's hardly a novel concept, and i just didn't hear leanings in questioning that enough judges disagreed with that concept.

"Trumps appointees really seem to be leaning towards him even bringing up CIA and military actions carried out abroad and asking why previous presidents weren’t charged. What’s happened the US, even the Supreme Court seems to be having been corrupted by Trump."

They were legitimate questions. Remember, just because the question is asked of counsel doesn't necessarily mean that the questioner disagrees with counsel, but it does provide counsel an option to place, on the record, where he believes the lines should be which can aid in finding an opinion acceptable to more judges. Note, the Trump appointees were pretty damned hard on Sauer as well.