Over the years, Donald Trump has accused Barrack Obama of many things.
Trump accused Obama of not having been born in the United States and thus not having been eligible for the presidency.
Nonsense, of course.
Trump accused Obama of spying on Trump’s 2016 campaign and wiretapping Trump Tower.
Nonsense, of course.
Trump accused Obama of having rigged the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.
Nonsense, of course.
And now Trump’s accusing Obama of “treason” and having conducted a “years-long coup.”
I’m sure this accusation is right. This is not a distraction from the fact that Trump’s name appears repeatedly in the Jeffrey Epstein files and that Trump would like America to be talking about anything other than Epstein.
No, no, no. Now, for the first time in his life, Trump’s correct: Obama committed treason. Trump would never lie about that, and Trump says that Obama’s a traitor: “He’s guilty. It’s not a question. This was treason. It’s time to go after people.”
Hmmm. “Go after people.” Going after people for treason sure sounds like criminal prosecutions to me.
So let’s think about what Trump, and others in his administration, said repeatedly about whether the government could “go after” a former president of the United States when the Supreme Court was considering the possibility of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution.
Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer, now the solicitor general of the United States, insisted that “Without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it.”
Whoa! Obama sure needs immunity. Without immunity, there’d be “no presidency.” That sounds mighty bad.
Before the Supreme Court, Trump argued that he had absolute immunity for all acts unless Trump had been convicted after an impeachment trial. The Supreme Court rejected that absurdity, characterizing it as endorsing a “far broader immunity than the limited one” the court “recognized” today.
But they accepted another of Trump’s arguments. According to the Supreme Court:
Trump argued that all of the indictment’s allegations fell within the core of his official duties. [Citation omitted.] And he contended that a president has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions performed within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities, to ensure that he can undertake the especially sensitive duties of his office with bold and unhesitating action.
Trump won.
Trump sure knew that he had won. Without the Supreme Court’s ruling, he might have faced a long time in prison. That’ll get your attention. In fact, after Trump’s State of the Union address, he made a point of shaking Chief Justice John Roberts’ hand, patting him on the shoulder, and saying, “Thank you again. Thank you again. Won’t forget it.”
“Won’t forget it.”
When it comes to Obama, Trump seems to have forgotten presidential immunity pretty quickly.
Trump is again accusing Obama of misdeeds. Although all of the other accusations were fiction, Trump wants you to believe that this accusation is right.
And Trump wants Obama to be prosecuted for his supposed misconduct, despite Trump’s knowledge that former presidents are immune from prosecution for this sort of thing.
The Epstein files certainly must say (or imply) some devastating misconduct by Trump.
I can hardly wait.
Mark Herrmann spent 17 years as a partner at a leading international law firm and later oversaw litigation, compliance and employment matters at a large international company. He is the author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law and Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy (affiliate links). You can reach him by email at inhouse@abovethelaw.com.
The post Trump, Obama, And Treason appeared first on Above the Law.
Over the years, Donald Trump has accused Barrack Obama of many things.
Trump accused Obama of not having been born in the United States and thus not having been eligible for the presidency.
Nonsense, of course.
Trump accused Obama of spying on Trump’s 2016 campaign and wiretapping Trump Tower.
Nonsense, of course.
Trump accused Obama of having rigged the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.
Nonsense, of course.
And now Trump’s accusing Obama of “treason” and having conducted a “years-long coup.”
I’m sure this accusation is right. This is not a distraction from the fact that Trump’s name appears repeatedly in the Jeffrey Epstein files and that Trump would like America to be talking about anything other than Epstein.
No, no, no. Now, for the first time in his life, Trump’s correct: Obama committed treason. Trump would never lie about that, and Trump says that Obama’s a traitor: “He’s guilty. It’s not a question. This was treason. It’s time to go after people.”
Hmmm. “Go after people.” Going after people for treason sure sounds like criminal prosecutions to me.
So let’s think about what Trump, and others in his administration, said repeatedly about whether the government could “go after” a former president of the United States when the Supreme Court was considering the possibility of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution.
Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer, now the solicitor general of the United States, insisted that “Without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it.”
Whoa! Obama sure needs immunity. Without immunity, there’d be “no presidency.” That sounds mighty bad.
Before the Supreme Court, Trump argued that he had absolute immunity for all acts unless Trump had been convicted after an impeachment trial. The Supreme Court rejected that absurdity, characterizing it as endorsing a “far broader immunity than the limited one” the court “recognized” today.
But they accepted another of Trump’s arguments. According to the Supreme Court:
Trump argued that all of the indictment’s allegations fell within the core of his official duties. [Citation omitted.] And he contended that a president has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions performed within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities, to ensure that he can undertake the especially sensitive duties of his office with bold and unhesitating action.
Trump won.
Trump sure knew that he had won. Without the Supreme Court’s ruling, he might have faced a long time in prison. That’ll get your attention. In fact, after Trump’s State of the Union address, he made a point of shaking Chief Justice John Roberts’ hand, patting him on the shoulder, and saying, “Thank you again. Thank you again. Won’t forget it.”
“Won’t forget it.”
When it comes to Obama, Trump seems to have forgotten presidential immunity pretty quickly.
Trump is again accusing Obama of misdeeds. Although all of the other accusations were fiction, Trump wants you to believe that this accusation is right.
And Trump wants Obama to be prosecuted for his supposed misconduct, despite Trump’s knowledge that former presidents are immune from prosecution for this sort of thing.
The Epstein files certainly must say (or imply) some devastating misconduct by Trump.
I can hardly wait.
Mark Herrmann spent 17 years as a partner at a leading international law firm and later oversaw litigation, compliance and employment matters at a large international company. He is the author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law and Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy (affiliate links). You can reach him by email at [email protected].
