In a new discussion on MSNBC with host Lawrence O’Donnell, historian Jack Rakove, who is a professor at Stanford University, condemned the arguments brought forth by former President Donald Trump and his legal team that he should be held nearly completely shielded from prosecution for actions he took as part of his official duties as president.
Trump’s team is trying to use this idea to shut down a criminal case from Special Counsel Jack Smith that covers Trump’s post-2020 election attempts to stay in power. Trump’s claim is that what he was doing in that period was simply in line with the interests of the presidency. However, there was actually never any legitimate indication of systematic electoral fraud, which Trump nonetheless claimed consistently and tried to use in support of potentially trashing the collective impact of more than 80 million Americans’ votes.
“The argument at first glance seems so absurd that it’s almost impossible to take it seriously,” Rakove said. “The Constitution’s quite explicit. There are two separate processes. […] Those processes are, in certain respects, really quite distinct. And one involves a political judgment as to whether or not it’s a good idea for a given individual to remain the sole holder of the executive power. The second deals with the legal consequences down the road.”
Rakove is referring to the respective processes of impeachment and criminal prosecution. Trump’s team has claimed that prosecution for something done as president can only proceed if disputed conduct was first the subject of both an impeachment and a conviction on impeachment allegations by Senators, but the response is that such processes are substantially distinct. Also presented by Trump’s side has been the idea that for Trump to face impeachment (that culminated in an acquittal) followed by criminal proceedings violates protections against the legal idea of double jeopardy — but again, there’s an established record of distinction between processes and potential punishments across impeachment and prosecution.
