Of Precedents and Presidents

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/01/opinion/trump-prosecution-precedent.html

("Trump's Prosecution Has Set a Dangerous Precedent”)

No, Trump's prosecution has set a dangerous President on a path he has long richly deserved.

Donald Trump abused his office, abused those who dared question his authority and has forever treated the law as an irrelevant nuisance. 

The payment of hush money to Stormy Daniels was not an aberration. It was for Mr. Trump business as usual, and its intended result was not to assure that Melania would fail to discover his dalliance, but to shut down the possibility that this revelation would come to light on the heels of the Billy Bush "grab 'em by the...", boys will be boys, conversation and cost him the opportunity to almost destroy this nation over four torturous years.

This opinion piece should rather be called a hit piece, threatening the Dems with Armageddon  should they refuse to call off Mr. Bragg. And portraying Mr. Trump the victim and Joe Biden the villain in this play.

This essay did not deserve the light of day in this newspaper. Rather, it belonged on the pages of one of Mr. Murdoch's papers. Or better yet, that its author had appeared on Fox News where this thinking would have been lauded and applauded.  

Try this on for size. Mr. Trump was immune from prosecution (or as he would suggest, persecution) while President. He would, should the theory proffered hold true, be free of State prosecution once out of office. And on the Federal level, he could be pardoned for any wrong, whenever and wherever it had been committed, by any succeeding President. Which is exactly as he would like it.

The charging of the former President is not a day that will live in infamy but shall serve as a statement that no man is above the law or beyond our reach. 

Not even Donald Trump.