Justice

  The topic is presidential immunity. A complex issue and one the supreme court is wrestling with. The framers of the constitution never expected this to ever be an issue. They certainly felt that no one was above the law. In fact, it was their belief in the integrity, ethics, and moral values of those elected that would prevent that from ever becoming a question. They certainly made it clear that the power of the president wasn't absolute, the reason for the three branches of government. 

  The real question before the court is whether or not Trump broke any laws. Those opposing him certainly believe he did so while his supporters vehemently deny that. Should the president be immune from any prosecution if he did break the law? No, he shouldn't be immune from that. That takes us back to the central question, did Trump break any laws? Not being a legal scholar, I really can't say, only offer an opinion. Legally speaking he is being prosecuted and has been under constant legal attack for quite some time now. He certainly hasn't enjoyed any immunity thus far. It could be argued that a few of his predecessors certainly have or at least received far less attention. 

 I'll cut to the chase. This isn't about whether trump broke any laws or not. That isn't the purpose of this litigation. The sole purpose is to prevent trump from ever holding office again. This has nothing to do with justice. This is solely a political ploy, plain and simple. The final resolution will have to come from the supreme court in any case. You know and I know whatever the outcome is it will be appealed to the supreme court. This is an attempt to force the hand of the court. No, the president does not have absolute immunity from prosecution for committing any crimes, even while in office. That is the answer in its simplest form. But if that were the sole standard, the bottom line, Truman could have also been charged with a crime. He ordered the bombing of two Japanese cities killing thousands! Thousands of people today claim that was a crime against humanity! So, you see the issue here?

 The court is being pressured to delineate what crimes are punishable, and what crimes are not. In short to define exactly what a crime is. Is intent a crime? Is taking an action that not everyone agrees to a crime? What crimes can the president commit? Was it a crime to question the election results? Is trump responsible for the reactions of the people on Jan 6? Is it a crime for not saying certain things that others feel he should have? Is that crime? 

 I don't have answers for those questions, that is going to be left to the court to decide all of that. All I'm saying is that it is obvious the prosecution of trump has nothing to do with justice. It only has to do with politics. It is an attempt to legally remove an opponent from the ballot, or to prevent that person from ever bring on the ballot in the first place. A legal assassination? It appears that way to me. Just what is a president allowed to do during his tenure? Can we make a complete listing of his powers? Executive powers have certainly been expanded since the signing of the constitution. There has been a "power grab" going on for some time now. And then there are "emergency" powers. If a president makes any error while using his emergency powers is that a crime? 

 We are at a critical juncture. The decision of the court will have a profound impact on the American justice system going forth. Each president will be under scrutiny and second-guessed. That isn't anything new, but being prosecuted for that certainly will be. To coin a phrase I hear often, and happen to detest, another tool in the toolbox. The threat of litigation for every decision made that ruffles someone's feathers. Only Congress should have the ability to remove a president from office or the ballot! Did Trump do anything illegal? Just remember this prosecution is coming from the same group that wants to allow Felons to vote, allow illegals to vote and insist that citizenship isn't a requirement to vote in our elections. Is this trial about justice?