Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Alan Dershowitz is not our friend and despite his Trump like ego...
Alan Dershowitz is not our friend and despite his Trump like ego he is not the only smart attorney on the planet. Let the Deplorables have him as their mascot:
Famed defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz has emerged as one of Donald Trump’s most full-throated defenders first in the Russia matter, then in the Comey firing. In so doing, he has devised a bold argument, already rapidly being taken to heart by other Trump defenders: an astonishing and novel claim of the president’s absolute personal control over the FBI.
Let’s deal quickly with the most obvious answer to this claim, because it involves only basic logic.
Article II Section 2 of the Constitution explicitly confers on the president the power to grant “reprieves and pardons” for offenses against the United States. It sets no limit on that power. But that would not make it acceptable if a president sold pardons for bribes.
In other words, even the president’s most core powers may not be abused for wrongful purposes—and a president firing an FBI director to protect himself from an espionage investigation would seem about as wrongful as it gets.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/the-danger-of-letting-trump-politicize-the-fbi/527562/
Famed defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz has emerged as one of Donald Trump’s most full-throated defenders first in the Russia matter, then in the Comey firing. In so doing, he has devised a bold argument, already rapidly being taken to heart by other Trump defenders: an astonishing and novel claim of the president’s absolute personal control over the FBI.
Let’s deal quickly with the most obvious answer to this claim, because it involves only basic logic.
Article II Section 2 of the Constitution explicitly confers on the president the power to grant “reprieves and pardons” for offenses against the United States. It sets no limit on that power. But that would not make it acceptable if a president sold pardons for bribes.
In other words, even the president’s most core powers may not be abused for wrongful purposes—and a president firing an FBI director to protect himself from an espionage investigation would seem about as wrongful as it gets.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/the-danger-of-letting-trump-politicize-the-fbi/527562/
Do we really need an explanation of the difference between the use of power and the abuse of power ? If Governor Brown pardoned Charlie Manson and Sirhan Sirhan that would be an abuse of power. If Governor Brown pardoned a man or woman who was wrongly convicted that would be a use of power.
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
