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
Ocelot II
Ocelot II's Journal
Ocelot II's Journal
January 14, 2024
So what Nixon was saying was that if actions that are ordinarily against the law are taken in the interests of national security or other national concerns, those actions should not result in prosecution. He added that he did "not mean to suggest the president is above the law," only that a president has "extraordinary powers" that can be used under certain circumstances to protect the national interest. This is not what Trump is claiming at all. Trump's argument is that a president can't be prosecuted at all for any crimes committed as president - including the murder of political opponents - unless he is first impeached and removed from office, which is ridiculous. Even Nixon didn't suggest anything like that.
Nixon resigned because he knew he was going to be impeached,
and he accepted Ford's pardon because he knew he was likely to be prosecuted. There was never any question about immunity at the time. Sometime later, in 1977, he said in an interview that when a president does something it's legal. Nobody ever actually believed that, though; and Nixon certainly didn't either. In fact, that statement was qualified as referring to acts taken for purposes of national security. Here's a transcript of that part of the interview:
Frost: So, what in a sense youre saying is that there are certain situations and the Huston plan or that part of it was one of them where the president can decide that its in the best interest of the nation or something and do something illegal.
Nixon: Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal.
Frost: By definition
Nixon: Exactly exactly if the president if, for example, the president approves something approves an action, ah because of the national security or in this case because of a threat to internal peace and order of, ah ah significant magnitude then the presidents decision in that instance is one, ah that enables those who carry it out to carry it out without violating a law. Otherwise theyre in an impossible position.
Frost: So that the black-bag jobs that were authorized in the Huston plan if theyd gone ahead, would have been made legal by your action?
Nixon: Well I think that we would I think that were splitting hairs here. Burglaries per se are illegal. Lets begin with that proposition. Second, when a burglary, as you have described a black-bag job, ah when a burglary, ah is one that is undertaken because of an expressed policy decided by the president, ah in the interests of the national security or in the interests of domestic tranquility ah when those interests are very, very high and when the device will be used in a very limited and cautious manner and responsible manner when it is undertaken, then, then that means that what would otherwise be technically illegal does not subject those who engage in such activity to criminal prosecution. Thats the way I would put it. Now, that isnt trying to split hairs but I do not mean to suggest the president is above the law what I am suggesting, however, what we have to understand, is, in wartime particularly, war abroad, and virtually revolution in certain concentrated areas at home, that a president does have under the Constitution extraordinary powers and must exert them with as little as possible. . . .
https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/transcript-of-david-frosts-interview-with-richard-nixon/
Nixon: Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal.
Frost: By definition
Nixon: Exactly exactly if the president if, for example, the president approves something approves an action, ah because of the national security or in this case because of a threat to internal peace and order of, ah ah significant magnitude then the presidents decision in that instance is one, ah that enables those who carry it out to carry it out without violating a law. Otherwise theyre in an impossible position.
Frost: So that the black-bag jobs that were authorized in the Huston plan if theyd gone ahead, would have been made legal by your action?
Nixon: Well I think that we would I think that were splitting hairs here. Burglaries per se are illegal. Lets begin with that proposition. Second, when a burglary, as you have described a black-bag job, ah when a burglary, ah is one that is undertaken because of an expressed policy decided by the president, ah in the interests of the national security or in the interests of domestic tranquility ah when those interests are very, very high and when the device will be used in a very limited and cautious manner and responsible manner when it is undertaken, then, then that means that what would otherwise be technically illegal does not subject those who engage in such activity to criminal prosecution. Thats the way I would put it. Now, that isnt trying to split hairs but I do not mean to suggest the president is above the law what I am suggesting, however, what we have to understand, is, in wartime particularly, war abroad, and virtually revolution in certain concentrated areas at home, that a president does have under the Constitution extraordinary powers and must exert them with as little as possible. . . .
So what Nixon was saying was that if actions that are ordinarily against the law are taken in the interests of national security or other national concerns, those actions should not result in prosecution. He added that he did "not mean to suggest the president is above the law," only that a president has "extraordinary powers" that can be used under certain circumstances to protect the national interest. This is not what Trump is claiming at all. Trump's argument is that a president can't be prosecuted at all for any crimes committed as president - including the murder of political opponents - unless he is first impeached and removed from office, which is ridiculous. Even Nixon didn't suggest anything like that.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayHometown: Minnesota
Member since: Mon Oct 27, 2003, 12:54 AM
Number of posts: 115,790