It's just hilariously disingenuous. Imagine looking at, say, ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY and concluding that the biggest threat to liberty isn't abuse of power, but powerful people refraining from sufficiently wielding their authority out of fear that they might one day be held accountable.
Let’s be real, though. They didn’t conclude the biggest threat to liberty is powerful people being subject to the rule of law.
They concluded that they like Trump, and want Trump to be above the law.
If this had been a D former President coming up, no shot they would’ve given them this.
Also, saying the 'hypothetical scenario' that a leader may use their powers to further their own ends while ruling on a case where a leader used their powers to further their own ends and coming to the conclusion that such a thing could never happen seems a little disingenuous too.
It’s just the ridiculous 9/11 era “torture the captured terrorist to find the ticking nuclear bomb under Manhattan” scenario. They live in terror that in an imaginary hypothetical the most powerful man in the world might be too selfish to make what they think is the obvious decision.
Especially when it is all projection. The current Republican party would indeed try to frivolously prosecute a former president, Dems would send a sternly worded letter
I've made a bit of a hobbyhorse out of Nikolas Sarkozy's criminal prosecutions, and the multiple dimensions by which a similar case would be impossible in the US
I now have a new overarching grounds to add (president = god-emperor)
Like when we all said this guy’s project since he was at the justice department under Reagan was to take down the VRA.
Or Gorsuch & EPA?
Or Alito & reproductive care?
Or Thomas on being a decent human being?
I really don't know how people aren't seeing the writing on the wall that Biden isn't going to win because even if he does win, SCOTUS is going to say he doesn't.