- Joined
- Mar 6, 2019
- Messages
- 26,255
- Reaction score
- 23,937
- Location
- PNW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Yes, that was intended to be a pun.
Prior to the present, Richard Nixon was considered the paradigm of the "lawless President". He abused his position, used government agencies to do his political dirty work, engaged in various flat-out illegal activities, obstructed justice, stonewalled the work of Congress, and was, all in all, a very bad guy. He had competition, however. Of course, there are historical precedents, like Thomas Jefferson having his former VP tried for treason; Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus; and FDR's internment of Japanese during WWII, that were particularly egregious. But most historians believe that Presidents, by and large, have followed the norms of their day and the legal proscriptions that apply to their office. There have been exceptions, and most of them are modern. Ronald Reagan and G.H.W. Bush probably were closest during the Iran-Contra affair; and VP Cheney's activities regarding Valerie Plame, but, again, by and large they recognized that what they were doing in that affair was the exception, and conducted themselves largely within the confines of the law and constitutional norms.
Donald Trump is both quantitatively and qualitatively different. And it's not just "criminality" that I'm talking about here (although there is plenty of that), it is the attitude that "the law" simply doesn't apply to him, or anything he does. It started during his campaign, but has never abated. Accepting assistance from foreign interests; his refusal to release his tax returns was a sign (not a legal requirement, and Mitt Romney tried to do it too) of his indifference to precedent or norms. It is not so much that he did it, but why he does it that is germane.
But it wasn't until he occupied the office that most people realized that his indifference to norms extended to both the law and the Constitution. (The abetting by his party may be a separate thread topic.) The first clue was his refusal to divest from private interests that conflict with his duties as President - and it has been all downhill from there. He hired his family to be his "advisors", in direct contravention of federal law. Cabinet picks and other appointments were not made for competence or appropriateness, or even for policy goals, but to reward cronies (something too prevalent already, but turned "up to 11" by Trump), and often in open defiance of common sense. It has escalated since. He disregards any advice that is contrary to his whims, and castigates (or fires) those who provide it - publicly. He openly flaunts his coziness with foreign adversaries and disses our allies relentlessly. He defies anything Congress wants, unless he is appropriately flattered in the process. He actively interfered with legal processes and investigations (Sessions, Comey, Mueller, Congress), and now is stonewalling everything Congress is seeking. That is the definition of lawlessness.
At least Nixon recognized he was a crook and tried to hide it. Trump simply doesn't care.
Prior to the present, Richard Nixon was considered the paradigm of the "lawless President". He abused his position, used government agencies to do his political dirty work, engaged in various flat-out illegal activities, obstructed justice, stonewalled the work of Congress, and was, all in all, a very bad guy. He had competition, however. Of course, there are historical precedents, like Thomas Jefferson having his former VP tried for treason; Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus; and FDR's internment of Japanese during WWII, that were particularly egregious. But most historians believe that Presidents, by and large, have followed the norms of their day and the legal proscriptions that apply to their office. There have been exceptions, and most of them are modern. Ronald Reagan and G.H.W. Bush probably were closest during the Iran-Contra affair; and VP Cheney's activities regarding Valerie Plame, but, again, by and large they recognized that what they were doing in that affair was the exception, and conducted themselves largely within the confines of the law and constitutional norms.
Donald Trump is both quantitatively and qualitatively different. And it's not just "criminality" that I'm talking about here (although there is plenty of that), it is the attitude that "the law" simply doesn't apply to him, or anything he does. It started during his campaign, but has never abated. Accepting assistance from foreign interests; his refusal to release his tax returns was a sign (not a legal requirement, and Mitt Romney tried to do it too) of his indifference to precedent or norms. It is not so much that he did it, but why he does it that is germane.
But it wasn't until he occupied the office that most people realized that his indifference to norms extended to both the law and the Constitution. (The abetting by his party may be a separate thread topic.) The first clue was his refusal to divest from private interests that conflict with his duties as President - and it has been all downhill from there. He hired his family to be his "advisors", in direct contravention of federal law. Cabinet picks and other appointments were not made for competence or appropriateness, or even for policy goals, but to reward cronies (something too prevalent already, but turned "up to 11" by Trump), and often in open defiance of common sense. It has escalated since. He disregards any advice that is contrary to his whims, and castigates (or fires) those who provide it - publicly. He openly flaunts his coziness with foreign adversaries and disses our allies relentlessly. He defies anything Congress wants, unless he is appropriately flattered in the process. He actively interfered with legal processes and investigations (Sessions, Comey, Mueller, Congress), and now is stonewalling everything Congress is seeking. That is the definition of lawlessness.
At least Nixon recognized he was a crook and tried to hide it. Trump simply doesn't care.
