The Court Gave Trump Everything He Wanted, But At least Bannon’s In Jail
There is no need to be so blue; Who said it can’t be Christmas in July?
For starters, former trump advisor Steve Bannon began serving a four month sentence at the federal prison in Danbury, Conn., for a contempt of congress conviction. He is one of more than 1,000 prisoners at the minimum security prison, including many sex offenders.
Bannon is the latest infamous prisoner at Danbury. Others include cocaine dealer George Jung, who was portrayed by Johnny Depp in the film “Blow;” the Rev. Sun Myung Moon who spent 11 months in the joint on charges of tax evasion; poet Robert Lowell who was in the prison for five months during World War II after he was jailed for being a conscientious objector; hotel queen Leona Helmsley, in prison for 19 months on income tax evasion charges; and Grammy Award singer Lauryn Hill, who was in prison for three months for not paying her income taxes.
More good news: Rudy Giuliani has been disbarred from practicing law in New York. The one-time “America’s mayor” was disbarred for his efforts to subvert the 2020 presidential election.
And if that isn’t enough positive news, it looks pretty good that trump will lose two of his golf clubs’ liquor licenses. New Jersey does not allow convicted felons to hold liquor licenses and the N.J. Attorney General decided not to renew licenses after trump was convicted on all 34 counts in his criminal hush money trial. The license suspensions were temporarily held pending a full hearing on July 29 when trump “bears the burden of proof to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that they (clubs) remain qualified to maintain licensure, which includes a review of any beneficiaries of the licenses.”
So much for the good news. But before diving into the abyss, the quote of the day and possibly the quote of all times came from Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor who wrote in dissent for herself and Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
““Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune,” Sotomayor wrote.
Because of the ruling, Sotomayor wrote, trump now has “all the immunity he asked for and more,” despite the Constitution not shielding a former president from having to answer for “criminal and treasonous acts.”
Sotomayor said “the relationship between the president and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law.”
The electoral process has been rotting ever since Richard Nixon’s infamous sweating and five o’clock shadow cost him the debate with John F. Kennedy and likely the presidency. Since then, elections have had more to do with appearances than substance, leading up to the current pairing of an amoral, dishonest, bankrupt developer and reality show TV star and an honorable, though aging politician.
Elections should not be a beauty contest or a horse race. Presidents should be judged on what they plan to do. The answer is a new election system where Americans elect a president by choosing proposals, without knowing who made the proposals.
If such a system were in place, Biden would clearly win and trump would be trounced.
A recent blind test conducted by the polling organization, You Gov, found that Biden’s agenda won handily. Of the 28 Biden proposals YouGov asked about, 27 were supported by more people than opposed them. A strong, 24 Biden proposals received support from more than 50 percent of respondents.
The most popular Biden policy proposal is requiring criminal and mental background checks for all gun purchases. The idea was favored by 82 percent of respondents — including 70 percent of voters who identified as trump supporters. Biden’s least popular idea, the only unpopular one of the 28 on the survey, was a pledge of 10 years of U.S. military support for Ukraine in its war against Russia. A total of 30 percent liked the idea.
Trump’s policies were clearly in the dumpster. Of 28 major proposals YouGov asked about, only nine received at least plurality support (more people supported than opposed them). And just six were favored by a majority of respondents.
Trump’s most popular idea was phasing out imports of essential goods from China over the next four years, at 59 percent approval.
The least popular was to give presidents control over independent regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Trade Commission. Only 19 percent supported the proposal, including just 27 percent of trump supporters.
Voters however seem quite oxymoronic as they rate Biden very low and perceive him to be worse than trump on many issues that were considered Biden strengths in the YouGov poll.
For example, recent polls found that voters trust trump more than Biden on guns and gun violence. That is the opposite to the finding in the YouGov date, where voters support Biden’s approach to gun policy, including background checks for all gun purchases and banning sales of assault-style rifles. The YouGov poll found that a plurality rejected one of Trump’s most dramatic gun-related proposals of arming teachers.
Another suggestion is to have the next debate in the morning, as Biden is sharpest between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m., and then quickly slows down, according to reports. Trump, on the other hand, would seem to be his liveliest and most abhorrent around 2 a.m. when he is apparently surrounded by Cokes and McDonald’s while he composes many of his most astounding tweets.
Neither proposal is likely to gain much traction but lovers of democracy should heed the words of James Baldwin, who said, “Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.” Or, to quote Mahatma Ghandi, “a small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history.”
There are possible upsides to the Supreme Court’s outrageous ruling that presidents are immune for actions that are part of their official duties. Because the court decided that presidents are not immune for actions that are not part of their official duties, the federal election subversion prosecution may still be viable. U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan has to consider what can be part of the case now.
Legal scholars Norm Eisen and Joshua Kolb wrote in Lawfare, that a “multiday evidentiary hearing to apply that test would constitute the mini trial… [to] allow a partial adjudication of Trump’s alleged misconduct in the form of determining whether or not his role in the attempted coup is immune from prosecution.”
There would be no verdict, but a hearing would illustrate the facts and help decide when trump had acted within his “core duties” and when he acted as a candidate seeking office. At least voters would have added critical information on which to base their votes.
Chief Justice John Roberts’ logic in the ruling is strikingly obtuse. Robert said that if the president was not granted presidential immunity, the “President would be chilled from taking the ‘bold and unhesitating action’ required of an independent Executive.”
That’s strange because until now, presidents have engaged in a whole lot of ‘bold and unhesitating action’ despite not having immunity from criminal prosecution.
Sotomayor wrote that the ruling allows the President to “violate the law,” “exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain” and “use his official power for evil ends.”
By delaying its ruling for so long, the Republican-controlled Supreme Court effectively eliminated any possibility of any court decisions before the November presidential election. The delays were not caused by special counsel Jack Smith who asked the justices to hear the case on an accelerated basis in December.
“They refused. They took the case on Feb. 28, and the nation had to wait four more months for a ruling,” said Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne. “It’s impossible to believe the majority did not understand the consequences of its foot-dragging. And the further delay that will result from forcing more arguments in lower courts is the icing on this lawless cake.”
Roberts’ comments on the decision and the delays are word speak, bordering on the unbelievable. The chief justice said the ruling does not grant the president immunity for his unofficial acts.
“Not everything the president does is official. The president is not above the law,” Roberts wrote.
Roberts wrote that trump’s communications with members of his cabinet are official acts and that very likely, his discussions with Vice President Mike Pence about fixing the election, are official acts.
Sotomayer wrote that ”the immunity created by the ruling now lies about like a loaded weapon for any President that wishes place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation.”
Three years ago, then Speaker Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.,voted to acquit Trump after his impeachment trial for inciting the insurrection at the Capitol. McConnell explained that he voted against impeachment because “We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation. And former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one.”
The Supreme Court has put a lie to McConnell’s explanation.
In a celebrated interview with David Frost about his resignation over the Watergate scandal, Nixon rationalized that he was innocent of any crime because “When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.”
Nixon said that if “the president approves an action because of the national security — or in this case because of a threat to internal peace and order of significant magnitude — then the president’s decision in that instance is one that enables those who carry it out to carry it out without violating a law.”
Had the Supreme Court ruled then like it ruled yesterday, Nixon would never have resigned.
For a comprehensive look at all of the pending cases against trump, visit www.justsecurity.org/75032/litigation-tracker-pending-criminal-and-civil-cases-against-donald-trump/
For those following the folly of the Supreme Court ruling, refer to Kurt Vonnegut, who wrote that “History is merely a list of surprises. It can only prepare us to be surprised yet again.”
Or Karl Marx, who said that “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.”
President Harry S. Truman also had sage words of advice in times of national tragedies.
“Men make history and not the other way around. In periods where there is no leadership, society stands still. Progress occurs when courageous, skillful leaders seize the opportunity to change things for the better,’ Truman said.
Maya Angelou wrote that “History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, however, if faced with courage, need not be lived again.”
Desmond Tutu offered his wise advice, “We learn from history that we don’t learn from history!”
David Letterman had the most salient observations about trump at a time when trump was attacking President Obama for allegedly being part Muslim.