basquebromance
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2015
- 109,396
- 27,067
- 2,220
- Banned
- #1
Wind, rain and hail pummeled the line of mourners that stretched on for a day and a night in the first act of Richard M. Nixon’s funeral in 1994. It was “a scene worthy of ‘King Lear’”
Lear wasn’t a perfect analogy, because there’s no ghost in “Lear.” Nixon’s funeral had one: Spiro Agnew, the vice president Nixon plucked from relative obscurity as a pugnacious governor of Maryland to be his running mate.
After an investigation into Agnew’s tenure as governor revealed a sordid history of bribery, fraud and corruption, federal prosecutors offered an unusual “plea deal.” In exchange for his immediate resignation, a plea of nolo contendere to a single federal tax violation and a fine of $10,000, Agnew was allowed to pass into private life.
Trump has little to fear from the “criminal referrals” lodged with the Justice Department by the House Jan. 6 committee this week. But the earlier appointment of special counsel Jack Smith to oversee two federal investigations is not political theater. As with every special counsel, Smith has the time, budget and staff with which to pursue Trump, his family and staff. Such investigations can last many years. Add in Trump-focused investigations by the attorney general of New York, the Manhattan district attorney and the Fulton County district attorney in Atlanta, and the legal web in which Trump is ensnared is vast.
I’m not talking about a plea, because I don’t believe there are facts in the public’s view supporting a reasonable theory about the necessary “elements” showing Trump has committed any crime. Period. Only those who have never worked in a White House can doubt that papers often get mixed up in the chaos of a transition, and Trump’s power to declassify when he was president was unlimited. As for the New York and Georgia matters, they seem like very weak legal tea. The idea that Trump intended a riot and occupation of the Capitol? I don’t believe it. And I doubt any reasonable jury instructed on reasonable doubt and the legal meaning of intent would either. But should Trump take the risk that I am wrong?
Trump’s fervent supporters continue to believe he is a noble Jean Valjean of American politics being pursued by a mob of Javerts. But that won’t stop a prosecutor who believes they found the elusive element of “intent.” If Smith — or the other prosecutors — want to indict Trump, an indictment will follow. And political and civic chaos would break loose. Trump didn’t threaten violence in our interview, but he did predict anger, and the country has more than enough anger already. Is there a deal that could spare the nation another collision of the extremes — or even crisis? No one outside of the far right and far left, the one-percenters who thrive on conflict, wants the white-hot anger on all sides that would greet the spectacle of Trump on trial
Trump thrives on battles. But this one has the potential to be ruinously expensive for him, his family and his staff. He has no White House counsel’s office to defend him, only private lawyers expecting to be paid in advance. His Agnew Option would save him untold millions, plus the risk of being convicted of a crime in a hostile jurisdiction. Trump would have to promise to follow the path of other modern former presidents: a memoir, a library and museum, some highly paid appearances, but no more campaigns, for himself or others.
Could he live without rallies? Perhaps, if it meant no more courtrooms. His Agnew Option would not involve suspended sentences, fines or admissions of guilt. Just a laying-down-of-arms on all sides and a commitment from the former president to retire from combat. A settlement.
Trump will never be an Agnew, because Trump scored the greatest upset in US political history and left his mark on politics, the Supreme Court, Middle East diplomacy and more. But like Agnew, he might be ready to move on — not into obscurity, but into a life free of prosecutors.
Lear wasn’t a perfect analogy, because there’s no ghost in “Lear.” Nixon’s funeral had one: Spiro Agnew, the vice president Nixon plucked from relative obscurity as a pugnacious governor of Maryland to be his running mate.
After an investigation into Agnew’s tenure as governor revealed a sordid history of bribery, fraud and corruption, federal prosecutors offered an unusual “plea deal.” In exchange for his immediate resignation, a plea of nolo contendere to a single federal tax violation and a fine of $10,000, Agnew was allowed to pass into private life.
Trump has little to fear from the “criminal referrals” lodged with the Justice Department by the House Jan. 6 committee this week. But the earlier appointment of special counsel Jack Smith to oversee two federal investigations is not political theater. As with every special counsel, Smith has the time, budget and staff with which to pursue Trump, his family and staff. Such investigations can last many years. Add in Trump-focused investigations by the attorney general of New York, the Manhattan district attorney and the Fulton County district attorney in Atlanta, and the legal web in which Trump is ensnared is vast.
I’m not talking about a plea, because I don’t believe there are facts in the public’s view supporting a reasonable theory about the necessary “elements” showing Trump has committed any crime. Period. Only those who have never worked in a White House can doubt that papers often get mixed up in the chaos of a transition, and Trump’s power to declassify when he was president was unlimited. As for the New York and Georgia matters, they seem like very weak legal tea. The idea that Trump intended a riot and occupation of the Capitol? I don’t believe it. And I doubt any reasonable jury instructed on reasonable doubt and the legal meaning of intent would either. But should Trump take the risk that I am wrong?
Trump’s fervent supporters continue to believe he is a noble Jean Valjean of American politics being pursued by a mob of Javerts. But that won’t stop a prosecutor who believes they found the elusive element of “intent.” If Smith — or the other prosecutors — want to indict Trump, an indictment will follow. And political and civic chaos would break loose. Trump didn’t threaten violence in our interview, but he did predict anger, and the country has more than enough anger already. Is there a deal that could spare the nation another collision of the extremes — or even crisis? No one outside of the far right and far left, the one-percenters who thrive on conflict, wants the white-hot anger on all sides that would greet the spectacle of Trump on trial
Trump thrives on battles. But this one has the potential to be ruinously expensive for him, his family and his staff. He has no White House counsel’s office to defend him, only private lawyers expecting to be paid in advance. His Agnew Option would save him untold millions, plus the risk of being convicted of a crime in a hostile jurisdiction. Trump would have to promise to follow the path of other modern former presidents: a memoir, a library and museum, some highly paid appearances, but no more campaigns, for himself or others.
Could he live without rallies? Perhaps, if it meant no more courtrooms. His Agnew Option would not involve suspended sentences, fines or admissions of guilt. Just a laying-down-of-arms on all sides and a commitment from the former president to retire from combat. A settlement.
Trump will never be an Agnew, because Trump scored the greatest upset in US political history and left his mark on politics, the Supreme Court, Middle East diplomacy and more. But like Agnew, he might be ready to move on — not into obscurity, but into a life free of prosecutors.
