Trump's Legal Gambit

“Government can easily exist without laws, but law cannot exist without government.”

Bertrand Russell


“Durable political systems ultimately rely on institutions, not individuals.”

Gideon Rachman

“I believe that the law is the most important thing in the world today. I don’t mean the practice of lawyers. I mean the law itself. Normally I sleep well. If there’s one thing that can keep me awake at night it’s a vision, which I sometimes have, of this country being ruled by the wishes of its rulers and not by the rule of law.’

‘Could it happen here?’

‘Of course it could. It’s too bloody easy for a Government to panic and set the law on one side because it happens to be inconvenient. Temporarily, of course. They always mean to bring it back again — some time.”

Michael Gilbert — Flash Point, 1974

“There shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score. And I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.’
‘The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers!’ “
‘Nay, that I mean to do.”

William Shakespeare

Introduction: Stalling the Inevitable

Trump's Legal Gambit

Trump’s legal gambit of using the legal system as a shield for his misdeeds is a strategy that allows the rich like he claims to be the power to stall just long enough to make the possibility of having to pay a price for his misdeeds. It is a strategy that allows for stalling, bleeding the opposition into submission, and ultimately not having to face the consequences of his malfeasance. It is a strategy he has used for his entire life, so why should it be any different now?

Former President Donald Trump’s legal maneuvering, claiming immunity from federal charges tied to the 2020 election, appears to be a delaying tactic, strategically designed to push any trial past the 2024 presidential election. As the legal saga unfolds, questions loom about the effectiveness of Trump’s claims and the potential implications for the rule of law.

Trump’s Legal Gambit: Presidential Immunity Puzzle

Trump’s Legal Gambit: Acting in Official Capacity

Trump contends that his actions were part of his presidential duties, invoking Nixon v. Fitzgerald. However, recent lawsuits challenging election results reveal his dual stance—official capacity as president or personal capacity as a candidate. This nuanced argument hinges on interpreting the “outer perimeter” of presidential responsibilities, leaving legal experts and the courts to navigate uncharted territory.

Impeachment Acquittal as Shield

Trump asserts that the Constitution allows prosecution only for a former president impeached and convicted. Yet, legal experts challenge this interpretation, citing Office of Legal Counsel memos emphasizing the Constitution’s intent to allow post-impeachment prosecutions. The delicate balance between the impeachment process and criminal liability remains a central issue, requiring meticulous examination.

Trump’s Legal Gambit: Stalling for Electoral Advantage

Trump’s delay tactics raise eyebrows, prompting speculation about his intentions. If successful, he could secure a 2024 victory before facing legal consequences. The public awaits a fair resolution, emphasizing the bedrock principle: No one is above the law. The courts are mindful of their crucial role in upholding justice. We trust they must weigh the urgency of resolution against the potential consequences of a delayed trial.

Pardon Power Speculation

If Trump secures a 2024 win, speculation arises about his potential self-pardon. Legal experts, as noted in The Conversation article, cast doubt on this possibility, highlighting that presidential powers are not absolute. The query of whether a president can pardon himself remains contentious. Of course, the Constitution’s framers did not provide explicit guidance on this matter. Is this because they could never imagine politics in 2024? Any attempt by Trump to leverage a self-pardon would undoubtedly face legal challenges and scrutiny.

Trump’s Legal Gambit: Constitutional Principles at Stake

Amidst the legal intricacies, the core dispute revolves around the “outer perimeter” of presidential duties and the limits of executive immunity. The courts face the challenge of defining the boundaries within which a president can claim immunity, especially when the alleged actions involve undermining the democratic process. Balancing the separation of powers with accountability is a constitutional tightrope that demands careful consideration.

Public Perception and Trust in the Judiciary

Trump’s legal strategy also raises concerns about public perception and trust in the judiciary. The courts, aware of their pivotal role as guardians of justice, must navigate these turbulent waters with transparency and efficiency. Any appearance of undue delay or political maneuvering could erode public trust. Emphasizing the delicate balance between judicial independence and public confidence.

Trump’s Legal Gambit: The Specter of a Second Term and Pardon Power

If Trump’s delay tactics succeed, and he secures a second term in the 2024 election, the question of pardon power becomes paramount. While the Constitution grants the president the authority to issue pardons, the idea of a self-pardon remains untested. Legal experts cited in The Conversation express skepticism, noting that such a move could undermine the fundamental principle that no one is above the law.

Upholding Democracy and the Rule of Law

As the legal saga unfolds, the nation grapples with profound questions about the resilience of its democratic institutions. Upholding the rule of law and ensuring accountability for alleged misconduct, even by a former president, is a testament to the strength of the U.S. legal system. The courts must navigate these uncharted waters judiciously, reinforcing the principle that justice transcends political affiliations.

Conclusion: A Defining Moment for American Democracy

In this intricate legal dance, the courts bear the responsibility of safeguarding the ideals upon which the nation was founded. If successfully challenged. Trump’s claims, if found sound, could set crucial precedents for future interactions between presidential powers and the justice system. As the U.S. Court of Appeals and potentially the Supreme Court deliberate, the outcome will not only shape the future of this specific case but will also leave an indelible mark on the principles that underpin American democracy. The eyes of the nation remain fixed on the judicial process, anticipating a resolution that reaffirms the fundamental truth that, in the United States, no individual, regardless of their past or present status, is beyond the reach of the law.

While Trump’s legal arguments may garner attention, legal experts suggest that he’s on shaky ground. The true test lies in whether the courts prioritize justice over political timelines, upholding the principle that even a former president cannot escape accountability. As the U.S. Court of Appeals and potentially the Supreme Court grappled with these complex issues, the nation watches closely, awaiting a resolution that maintains the integrity of the legal system and reinforces the idea that accountability transcends political power.

By Politics-as-Usual

Roger is a retired Professor of language and literacy. Over the past 15 years since his retirement, Roger has kept busy with reading, writing, and creating landscape photographs. In this time of National crisis, as Fascist ideas and policies are being introduced to the American people and ignored by the Mainstream Press, he decided to stand up and be counted as a Progressive American with some ideas that should be shared with as many people who care to read and/or participate in discusssions of these issues. He doesn't ask anyone to agree with his point of view, but if entering the conversation he demands civility. No conspiracy theories, no wild accusations, no threats, no disrespect will be tolerated. Roger monitors all comments and email communication. That is the only rule for entering the conversation. One may persuade, argue for a different point of view, or toss out something that has not been discussed so long as the tone remains part of a civil discussion. Only then can we find common ground and meaningful democratic change.

One thought on “Trump’s Legal Gambit: Delay Tactics and Pardon Power Play”
  1. […] No Immunity for Trump is a brief piece arguing that no one is above the law. Using Trump’s own words in the quotes above, even he realizes that his actions must be held accountable. But true to his life’s pattern, he will do anything, say anything to avoid any accountability for his acts. While I am not a lawyer, I am a retired college professor who knows how to make use of what others say about things they know about. In this case, the overwhelming opinion of legal experts claims that claiming Presidential immunity is a baseless argument. We are not privy to Trump’s lawyers offering advice to their client. Yet, I am certain they advised that this is a groundless argument and he is sure to lose. But he is certain to create a stalling period while wasting the time of the courts. […]

Leave a Reply