by
Win
McNamee/Getty
Images)
Over
the
years,
Donald
Trump
has
accused
Barrack
Obama
of
many
things.
Trump
accused
Obama
of
not
having
been
born
in
the
United
States
and
thus
not
having
been
eligible
for
the
presidency.
Nonsense,
of
course.
Trump
accused
Obama
of
spying
on
Trump’s
2016
campaign
and
wiretapping
Trump
Tower.
Nonsense,
of
course.
Trump
accused
Obama
of
having
rigged
the
2016
and
2020
presidential
elections.
Nonsense,
of
course.
And
now
Trump’s
accusing
Obama
of
“treason”
and
having
conducted
a
“years-long
coup.”
I’m
sure
this
accusation
is
right. This
is
not
a
distraction
from
the
fact
that
Trump’s
name
appears
repeatedly
in
the
Jeffrey
Epstein
files
and
that
Trump
would
like
America
to
be
talking
about
anything
other
than
Epstein.
No,
no,
no. Now,
for
the
first
time
in
his
life,
Trump’s
correct: Obama
committed
treason. Trump
would
never
lie
about
that,
and Trump
says that
Obama’s
a
traitor: “He’s
guilty.
It’s
not
a
question.
This
was
treason.
It’s
time
to
go
after
people.”
Hmmm. “Go
after
people.” Going
after
people
for
treason
sure
sounds
like
criminal
prosecutions
to
me.
So
let’s
think
about
what
Trump,
and
others
in
his
administration,
said
repeatedly
about
whether
the
government
could
“go
after”
a
former
president
of
the
United
States
when
the
Supreme
Court
was
considering
the
possibility
of
presidential
immunity
from
criminal
prosecution.
Trump’s
lawyer,
John
Sauer,
now
the
solicitor
general
of
the
United
States, insisted that “Without
presidential
immunity
from
criminal
prosecution,
there
can
be
no
presidency
as
we
know
it.”
Whoa!
Obama
sure
needs
immunity. Without
immunity,
there’d
be
“no
presidency.” That
sounds
mighty
bad.
Before
the
Supreme
Court, Trump
argued that
he
had absolute
immunity
for
all
acts
unless
Trump
had
been
convicted
after
an
impeachment
trial. The
Supreme
Court
rejected
that
absurdity,
characterizing
it
as
endorsing
a
“far
broader
immunity
than
the
limited
one”
the
court
“recognized”
today.
But
they
accepted
another
of
Trump’s
arguments. According
to the
Supreme
Court:
Trump
argued
that
all
of
the
indictment’s
allegations
fell
within
the
core
of
his
official
duties.
[Citation
omitted.] And
he
contended
that
a
president
has
absolute
immunity
from
criminal
prosecution
for
actions
performed
within
the
outer
perimeter
of
his
official
responsibilities,
to
ensure
that
he
can
undertake
the
especially
sensitive
duties
of
his
office
with
bold
and
unhesitating
action.
Trump
won.
Trump
sure
knew
that
he
had
won. Without
the
Supreme
Court’s
ruling,
he
might
have
faced
a
long
time
in
prison. That’ll
get
your
attention. In
fact,
after
Trump’s
State
of
the
Union
address,
he
made
a
point
of
shaking
Chief
Justice
John Roberts’
hand,
patting
him
on
the
shoulder,
and saying, “Thank
you
again.
Thank
you
again.
Won’t
forget
it.”
“Won’t
forget
it.”
When
it
comes
to
Obama,
Trump
seems
to
have
forgotten
presidential
immunity
pretty
quickly.
Trump
is
again
accusing
Obama
of
misdeeds. Although
all
of
the
other
accusations
were
fiction,
Trump
wants
you
to
believe
that
this
accusation
is
right.
And
Trump
wants
Obama
to
be
prosecuted
for
his
supposed
misconduct,
despite
Trump’s
knowledge
that
former
presidents
are
immune
from
prosecution
for
this
sort
of
thing.
The
Epstein
files
certainly
must
say
(or
imply)
some
devastating
misconduct
by
Trump.
I
can
hardly
wait.
Mark Herrmann spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
later
oversaw
litigation,
compliance
and
employment
matters
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of The
Curmudgeon’s
Guide
to
Practicing
Law and Drug
and
Device
Product
Liability
Litigation
Strategy (affiliate
links).
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected].