Leftist publication Newsweek has declared in an opinion piece that protecting President Donald Trump is necessary to protect “democracy.”
Newsweek used to be known as an openly leftist publication.
In recent years, the outlet has become more covertly leftist while presenting itself as more of a centrist publication that covers both sides of the political aisle in a “neutral” way.
However, despite appearances, articles from Newsweek are frequently littered with leftist propaganda.
For example, the outlet’s reports on Jan. 6 appear to be “neutral,” but will describe the protests as an “insurrection” or an “attack” on the U.S. Capitol.
Nevertheless, Newsweek now appears to be fearing that stripping Trump of his presidential immunity protections will come back to haunt the outlet’s Democrat allies.
In an opinion piece published as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments about whether Trump was immune from prosecution for acts while he was president, former Deputy Attorney General of Ohio Mark Weaver, a Republican, makes a compelling case for supporting presidential immunity.
Weaver explains why the Founding Fathers thought presidential immunity for official duties was important enough to put in the Constitution.
According to Weaver, presidents must have immunity because being subject to criminal charges after leaving office could prejudice their decision-making and cause them to make bad decisions for the country.
“Absolute immunity is appropriate when the threat of liability may bias the decisionmaker in ways that are adverse to the public interest,” the Supreme Court said in 1972 about whether Richard Nixon could be sued civilly for official acts done during his presidency.
Weaver said the immunity is even more important for criminal liability because jail time is an even bigger potential distraction than civil penalties.
“If a threat of being ordered to pay money for a civil claim is a deterrent enough to distract a president from doing the work of the executive branch, the threat of being sent to prison is a dinosaur-sized distraction,” he wrote.
Why is Trump’s immunity even a question when it’s in the Constitution?
“Partisans seek to use any available tool to attack an opponent without realizing that the tool might someday get turned on them,” Weaver said.
“When law becomes a weapon of political revenge, it’s our democracy that takes the fatal blow,” he concludes.
“Worse yet, it doesn’t uphold justice—it undermines it.”
The increasingly partisan nature of American politics is, unfortunately, eclipsing the good judgment of more than 200 years.
Historically, charging a former president with crimes has never been done precisely because it would damage the country.
Removing such protections would open the door to a revenge spiral that never ends.
The Founding Fathers knew this.
Washington even addressed it, as Weaver pointed out.
In his farewell address, he warned about the “domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities.”
James Madison also addressed political revenge cycles in Federalist 43, describing what is being set in motion today with Trump in fairly accurate terms.
But Democrats have become so short-sighted and have demonized Trump so completely that they’ve lost all reason when it comes to their response to him.
It’s up to the Supreme Court to bring reason back to the situation.
Let’s hope they have the courage to do it.
READ MORE – Arizona Republicans Officially Declare Covid Shots ‘Biological Weapons’
