On today’s BradCast: The nation appears to be lurching ever closer to a full-blown Constitutional Crisis, as Trump and his team offer a series of extraordinary and largely unprecedented (save for Nixon) claims in support of sweeping Presidential powers, over the past few days, which would place the Executive completely above the rule of law. [Audio link to show is posted below.]
Over the weekend, Team Trump was once again on the offensive in the media, following the disclosure of a 20-page letter sent by Trump’s attorneys to Special Counsel Robert Mueller in January, wherein they argued, among other things, that Presidents cannot legally be subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury, cannot be guilty of obstruction of justice, since they have unfettered power over all Dept. of Justice investigations, cannot be indicted while serving, and have absolute power to pardon anybody for any crime at any time for any reason.
Moreover, on Monday, Trump took to Twitter to charge that the Mueller probe is, itself “totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL” (his caps) and that he has “the absolute right to PARDON” himself. Many constitutional law experts disagree with many of those points.
In response, author, blogger, Slate contributor and Fordham University School of Law legal historian JED SHUGERMAN joins us on today’s show to offer historical, legal, and Constitutional points of clarity and precedent on the power and scope of Presidential pardons, subpoenas, indictments and the expansive interpretation of those powers that Trump and his attorneys have been proffering in recent days.
Among the historically relevant cases and precedents referenced by Shugerman today: United States v. Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton v. Paula Jones, and even the more recent case of Rod Blagojevich, who, Trump recently said, he was considering pardoning after the disgraced Illinois Governor was convicted for trying to sell off the vacant U.S. Senate seat left by Barack Obama when he became President. “It’s no accident that Trump is talking about pardoning [Blagojevich],” argues Shugerman, detailing how Trump sees him as unfairly convicted for simply using his constitutional powers, “even with a bribe, because that’s just politics as normal. It’s an incredibly cynical move.”
“Just because the Constitution gives someone the power to do something, it doesn’t mean they can use it for whatever purpose they want,” he tells me. “Even if you have five good reasons for doing something, but one illegal reason, that illegal reason still makes it illegal.”
“The Constitution says ‘the President shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed’,” Shugerman notes, while explaining why many of the current arguments being made by Team Trump may work effectively for propaganda purposes, but appear to have little legal basis or precedent, particularly while describing that a President would be acting “faithlessly” by pardoning himself. But, even if that happens, he says, he is confident (more so than I) that state prosecutors who are unbound by federal pardons, will pick up the prosecutorial ball against Trump and his cohorts.
[Update 6/5/2018: Shugerman and more than a dozen other distinguished constitutional law experts outline their case against Trump’s expansive pardon powers claim in a letter to Trump’s Whitehouse attorneys now posted here.]
Shugerman also describes the “bombshell” disclosure from that newly revealed letter from Trump’s lawyers, in their admission that the President “dictated” the false written response from Don Jr. after the disclosure of the infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russian nationals to receive “dirt” on Hillary Clinton.
Also on today’s show…
- Republican House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy — believed to be the front-runner to become the next Speaker of the House if the GOP maintains control of the chamber this November — refused to respond to CNN’s on-air questions over the weekend about the Trump attorneys’ concession that they and the White House had lied to the public about the infamous 2016 Trump Tower meeting;
- Despite his continuing lies and chaotic presidency, Trump remains wildly popular among Republicans, according to Gallup. As of his 500th day in office, he enjoys a higher “own party” approval rating than any other President since WWII, other than George W. Bush (following 9/11), at a similar point in their presidencies;
- The U.S. Supreme Court allows a baker in Colorado to discriminate against a gay couple. (More on this tomorrow.)
- Corporate CEOs are now admitting out loud that, despite record profits, a theoretically booming economy and huge recent tax cuts, they have no intention of raising pay for workers;
And, on the day before 2018 mid-term primary elections are held in eight states tomorrow, an Election Integrity author rings in to remind us that Russia isn’t the only threat to vulnerable, easily-manipulated computerized election results in the U.S. — not by a long shot…
“…On Monday, Trump took to Twitter to charge that the Mueller probe is, itself ‘totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL’ (his caps) and that he has ‘the absolute right to PARDON’ himself. Many constitutional law experts disagree with many of those points.”
And one nobody historian.
“Because the United States of America was once a backwater province of the British Empire, it must be remembered that, prior to the Declaration, the Colonies sought, in countless petitions, ‘the rights of Englishmen’; and therefore, even after independence, the work of a certain writer in the former mother country had significant influence on the other side of the pond. William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England are cited and alluded to in The Federalist Papers, which are the commentaries on the Constitution.”
http://www.marvinjones.blogspot...er-moment.html
http://www.marvinjones.blogspot...f-orifice.html