...
Trump's Legal Strategy

“It is the spirit and not the form of law that keeps justice alive.”

Earl Warren, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

“There are two ways to acquire the niceties of life:

1) To produce them or

2) To plunder them.

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.”

Paul Valery, French poet, essayist, and critic

“Things happened there that I don’t think are the finest hours for anybody, whether it was a journalist, the legal system or, in that case of the political system, who would say that was an example of when Washington worked best.”

Rahm Emanuel, American politician, former Mayor of Chicago, and diplomat who is the current United States ambassador to Japan

“Legal ethics is a misnomer … lawyers conducting themselves legally are not necessarily conducting themselves morally.”…and …”The zero sum nature of the legal system, combined with the universal adoption of zealotry as the marching orders of practioners and prosecutors, transforms the moral mission of the legal system from one of truth-seeking, storytelling, and justice, to one of fabrication, distortion, and manipulation in pursuit of victory. These victories, however, make us all losers.”

Thane Rosenbaum, American novelist, essayist, and Distinguished University Professor


Introduction

Trump's Legal Strategy

Trump’s Legal Strategy, to confront and confound his opponents has served him well over the years. Donald Trump made a living manipulating the legal system to his advantage. Often, when facing a lawsuit, and he did face many, his mode of operation was to weigh down the opponent with constant motions, and demands for discovery, all to cause the opponent to bleed money and finally withdraw. This strategy served him well when the opposition was an individual or business with limited access to funding his unfounded or unnecessary legal assaults.

As his legal woes mount, his lawyers are following the same tactics but to no avail. Much of his troubles do not have the money problems that his private opponents had. No, now Mr. Trump is the one bleeding money. The States Attorneys and federal prosecutors in both civil and criminal cases do not bleed money. They simply adjust to the conditions and press on.

Trump’s Legal Strategy: The Dance of Arguments

In the delicate dance of legal arguments, Trump’s lawyers navigate a tightrope of contradictions and controversies. This strategy leaves the courts facing a challenging dilemma. The recent hearing before the United States Court of Appeals not only spotlights the ever-shifting legal positions of Trump’s defense but also raises questions about the tolerance of such self-serving behavior within the judicial system.

D. John Sauer, at the forefront of Trump’s legal defense, boldly asserts a novel claim. Presidential immunity from prosecution for official acts, contingent upon Congress impeaching and convicting. This claim, however, sharply contradicts the defense’s stance during the second impeachment trial in February 2021. At that time lawyers David Schoen and Bruce Castor argued for the judiciary as the preferred venue for addressing alleged offenses.

The contradictions extend beyond strategy to the very concept of presidential immunity. Trump’s legal team previously emphasized that such immunity would naturally expire upon leaving office. This claim thus reinforces the fundamental principle that no individual, not even the president, is exempt from the law. Yet, in the recent hearing, they pivot to argue for absolute immunity, introducing a confounding twist to the narrative.

Trump’s Legal Strategy: Does it Impress Judges?

Judges Florence Y. Pan and Karen L. Henderson didn’t hesitate to express their skepticism during the hearing. Pan, in particular, suggested that this legal evolution might have influenced senators during the impeachment trial, potentially swaying the acquittal vote.

The controversy lies not just in the contradictions but in the apparent tolerance of the courts toward such self-serving legal maneuvers. Sauer boldly claims he isn’t bound by past statements. By injecting an element of legal flexibility that challenges the accountability of arguments within the judicial process.

Trump’s Legal Strategy: The Consequences of a Potential Win

This legal saga brings to light a troubling loophole in the concept of presidential immunity. If accepted, it could allow a president to act without consequences in the final days of their term. Bruce Castor, one of Trump’s lawyers, acknowledged this concern in February 2021. He argued that the Justice Department would know how to handle such situations. However, the current stance implies limited options for post-presidential accountability.

As the courts grapple with this legal tightrope, the contradictions and controversies in Trump’s arguments underscore the complexities within the legal system. The lingering question remains: why does the court system tolerate such self-serving legal maneuvers, and what implications does this have for the principles of consistency and accountability in the pursuit of justice? The courtroom drama unfolds, revealing a delicate dance between legal precedent and the unique challenges posed by Trump’s legal tactics. In this intricate legal ballet, the courts must navigate the blurred lines between precedent and political maneuvering, seeking a balance that upholds justice while maintaining the integrity of the legal system.

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.

2 thoughts on “Trump’s Legal Strategy: Confront, Confuse, Confound!”
  1. […] Trump’s Rule-Bending Path to apparent success finds itself filled with the drive for raw power…His tendency to disregard the most basic standards of society gets him into significant trouble over time. Once in trouble, he uses money and the legal system to whitewash the problem away. When, as is currently the case, his troubles cannot be washed away, he resorts to paranoia and prevarication to escape accountability. The question is, is the strategy that served him well for much of his life now failing as he faces very difficult scrutiny, one that does not seem to be going away? None of his prior strategies seem to carry any weight in the environment of a federal courtroom. […]

Leave a Reply