What if trump isn’t held accountable?

[jp1]

We started down this path when Nixon wasn’t held to account for watergate. Then Reagan wasn’t held to account for Iran/contra. Then Clinton wasn’t held to account for lying about a consensual blowjob. Then baby bush wasn’t held to account for lying us into a tremendously expensive unsuccessful war of choice.

If trump isn’t held to account for attempting to overturn an election he knew he lost every future president will understand that there is absolutely no thing they could do for which they would have to fear accountability.

[jp1]

Sorry. I would have included Obama, carter, and ford in my list but as far as I’m aware the only ugliness from any of their three administrations is when ford pardoned Nixon.

[iris lilies]

Not that it is essential to your question, but I sincerely believe that Donald Trump sincerely believes he won the Presidential election. He did not/does not “know he lost.”

[Alan]

If trump isn’t held to account for attempting to overturn an election he knew he lost every future president will understand that there is absolutely no thing they could do for which they would have to fear accountability.

What does accountability look like in your world? Loss of office? Loss of freedom? Loss of life? What would satisfy that persistent itch?

[catherine]

I do think some of those you mentioned were held accountable--Nixon was forced to resign from the Presidency in disgrace. Clinton was impeached for perjury. And usually Presidents aren't taken to task for going to war because declaration of war has to be authorized by Congress, which it was in this case.

Trump is a different animal, but if he is not held accountable, I think it will bolster his appeal. Frankly, the more we make of this, the more appealing he will be--he will become a political martyr. I'm not saying that the Jan 6 committee shouldn't exist, but sometimes these things have a way of backfiring. I worry that Trump will emerge in 2024, and possibly stronger than ever, depending on where we are with the economy at that point. His followers don't care if he's a womanizer, a liar, an ugly person, and even a traitor--they will stand behind him. I have a lot of FB friends who are Trump supporters and they never cease to amaze me.

[Rogar]

I think first is to identify what actions he should be held accountable for. If he sincerely believed he won the election and the election results were flawed, is it a legal issue. Or one of low intelligence and or poor judgement resulting in a moral issue. We probably can assume that Donald's ego couldn't handle the loss or that he wanted to hold onto power in some form of autocracy, but it seems to me he has a reasonable legal defense and was following the legal advice of Giuliani, his personal lawyer. Trump may be a slime ball, but my take is that he is smart about not getting caught.

But for that matter if Garland decides to pursue criminal or civil charges it's disturbing to think of the threats of violence and death he and his family will have to endure, not to mention overall civil unrest.

[JaneV2.0]

I don't believe for a minute he really thinks he won. Sixty-plus lawsuits and his AG's opinion, along with numerous audits and recounts, should have meant something. Innocent parties don't try to shake down secretaries of state "So look, all I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state." Repeating a lie over and over doesn't make it true--or believable.

He thinks he's entitled to whatever he wants, through fair means or foul. And extortion is nothing new to him--witness his call to President Zelenskyy, in which he held up 400 million in much needed aid suggesting Zelenskyy find some nonexistent dirt on Hunter Biden.

He's been a crook and liar all his life, and though you'd think he'd have to be insane to believe all the non-stop self-aggrandizing he indulges in, I've always resisted the insanity defense in his case.

[LDAHL]

Why not simply work to reduce the presidency to the more modest chief administrator role it was intended to be rather than the quasi-monarchy complete with courtiers and
mandarins it has become? If we decide to treat presidents more as servants than masters, it will be less attractive to bloated egos than it is today. That would require us to quit looking at the office as a sort of wish-granting genie, and to elect representatives who are less willing to surrender power to the bureaucracy to avoid distasteful decisions.

DC has become too much of a sacred precinct. Why not strip away some of the pretentiousness of our political elites and commissar class?

[Rogar]

I don't believe for a minute he really thinks he won either. As a legal issue, can they prove what he believes or doesn't enough to make a case before the courts. Or does that matter.

[JaneV2.0]

Why not simply work to reduce the presidency to the more modest chief administrator role it was intended to be rather than the quasi-monarchy complete with courtiers and
mandarins it has become? If we decide to treat presidents more as servants than masters, it will be less attractive to bloated egos than it is today. That would require us to quit looking at the office as a sort of wish-granting genie, and to elect representatives who are less willing to surrender power to the bureaucracy to avoid distasteful decisions.

DC has become too much of a sacred precinct. Why not strip away some of the pretentiousness of our political elites and commissar class?

I can't disagree with that proposal. And while we're at it, could we bring back the talking filibuster, at the very least?