Of
course not. Truly the Constitution provides that America's chief executive has
limited powers of authority which implicitly means that his conduct is subject
to control.
[The
principle has been a part of Anglo-American law since the Magna Carta of 1215
for Molly limited the power of King John and his successors. Although the
English monarchs of the first half of the 17th century took exception by
proclaiming their divine rights of kings, that you had adverse consequences for
Charles I]
But are
there not circumstances which should incline those charged with enforcing the
law to decline the opportunity to hold the president accountable for his
transgressions?
Yes
We are
living through events which wiser people would not have allowed to occur.
A
healthy nation requires a commitment by its citizenry (at least most of them)
that their shared values, principles and beliefs join them together. One of the
most important is that despite differences on some matters, we trust the
general fairness of our leaders. Those of us who do not have it question the
legitimacy of those exercising authority.
The
simple fact is that a very large number of Americans no longer have that faith.
Of course, one can respond that that that attitude is largely baseless.
Election 2000 was not stolen! But that misses the point. Judgments result from
what people believe. Those beliefs may, or may not, be true. That doesn't
matter. Judgment generates action.
Because
Donald Trump is perceived as a victim of Democratic Party skullduggery, legal
action against him is seen as more of the same. It is illegitimate. Again, the
fact that Trump is an unmitigated reprobate is beside the point as is the high
likelihood that he has some legal culpability. The proceedings against him are
not respected by a sizable proportion of Americans.
As a
nation with seemingly badly frayed bonds of community, we do not need a further
weakening of national unity by alienating a substantial portion of
America. That, I suggest, is the result
of the various "lawfare" activities against Donald Trump.
Is he
above the law? No. But a prudent regard for the nation's best interest is more
important in this instance then that justice be served. He should not have been
charged. But his foes are so consumed by hatred that they are unwilling to
contemplate the consequences of their actions. It is alarming that some may not
even care
