FTA:
Some argue that prosecuting Trump is not worth it because it, too, would put the country through unnecessary agony. They say this is akin to the rationale for Gerald Ford’s 1974 blanket pardon for Richard Nixon—a move widely criticized at the time, which may have cost the Michigander the presidency in 1976. But in the nearly 50 years since then, the public mood has shifted, and we see the merit in what Ford did and the courage it took, considering that the easier path would have been to let Nixon pay for his many crimes. The John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage award was given to Ford by the John F. Kennedy Library 17 years after the fact—a measure of how much the conventional wisdom about the right thing to do can turn.
Some argue for similar leniency for Trump, including the Harvard professor and former Justice Department official Jack Goldsmith, who took up this cause in The New York Times. The gist of his case is that, although Trump is surely guilty, pursuing his January 6 crimes comes at a cost. I deeply admire Goldsmith and respect this point of view, but I think we’d be wrong to abide by it or the notions of others urging the prosecutors to drop their cases.
Let’s not idealize the Ford pardon. It, too, came at a cost. It sent a powerful signal then and now that there are two standards of justice in America. It wrought cynicism and may have enabled or at least encouraged other presidents to break the law. Would Trump have been Trump if Nixon had served time? It’s a counterfactual that can’t be answered. Plus, Trump’s alleged crimes make Watergate look like spitting on the sidewalk.
If we cannot afford the cost of prosecuting our own citizens, even particularly powerful ones, then we cannot afford the cost of existence. The nation needs to be dismantled and rebuilt into one that can afford to uphold its own laws.
Trump had his leniency during the first and second impeachments. Each time, it made things worse.
Ford’s pardon came after Richard Nixxon accepted the fact that he did something wrong and resigned as a consequence. While he believed he did nothing wrong (“I am not a crook”), the fact that he did resign (even if avoiding impeachment potentially was a big reason to do so) shows at least some level of remorse or realization of overstepping boundaries. Nixxon gave up his office as a result of his actions.
Trump does not show any signs of moderating himself. To this day, he claims the election was stolen. To this day, he repeatedly portraits himself as a victim of a witch hunt - particularly to the core base of his followers - inciting fear and hate in a large group of unhinged people. There is no remorse, there is no accepting the consequences of his actions, there is only an urge to rile up people, avoid consequences and enrich himself.
Giving Trump any more leniency would just encourage him to keep doing what he does.
Giving Trump any more leniency would just encourage him to keep doing what he does.
And encourage more Republicans to follow his example.
deleted by creator
It keeps talking about the cost of prosecution- what cost? It wasn’t clear to me. The cost of doing whatever the fuck you want above the law is worse than anything else right?
And I know if I had done any of the things that orange motherfucker did I’d already be in federal prison. The most valuable thing we could do is show that just because you’re some ketchup-on-steak eating criminal mouth breather, you’re not above the law just because you have money and a fucking cult.
The piece mentions a couple, one of which Lindsey Graham touched on as well.
Yet, some conservative lawyers see a parade of horribles that will, as Goldsmith puts it, “probably inspire ever more aggressive tit-for-tat investigations in office by future Congresses and administrations of the opposing party to the detriment of sound government.”
This assumes, of course, that Republicans haven’t already weaponized the courts against anyone they don’t like.
But it also mentions links Goldsmith’s article in the Times:
This deeply unfortunate timing looks political and has potent political implications even if it is not driven by partisan motivations. And it is the Biden administration’s responsibility, as its Justice Department reportedly delayed the investigation of Mr. Trump for a year and then rushed to indict him well into the G.O.P. primary season. The unseemliness of the prosecution will most likely grow if the Biden campaign or its proxies use it as a weapon against Mr. Trump if he is nominated.
It may also exacerbate the criminalization of politics. The indictment alleges that Mr. Trump lied and manipulated people and institutions in trying to shape law and politics in his favor. Exaggeration and truth shading in the facilitation of self-serving legal arguments or attacks on political opponents have always been commonplace in Washington. These practices will probably be disputed in the language of, and amid demands for, special counsels, indictments and grand juries.
In other words, it’ll have the effect of normalizing the things that Republicans have been normalizing for decades. Heads they win, tails we lose.
We’ve run the experiment the “pardon the criminal” route (Nixon) and see what we got? Normalization that you can commit a crime as President and get off scot-free, which emboldened Trump to do far worse.
Maybe we should run the experiment the other way, hold him accountable, and watch the next 40 years and see if that improves the ethics of our elected officials - who now know if they fuck around they’ll find out.
deleted by creator
