The pseudonym "Philo Vaihinger" has been abandoned. All posts have been and are written by me, Joseph Auclair.

Saturday, December 8, 2018

The argument from national security

The president must with impunity be able to ignore the law and perhaps even the constitution to order or empower people to commit what are, or otherwise would be, crimes in order to protect the United States.

He must be able to afford them, too, complete impunity.

And it is equally necessary no one can second guess him or, for that matter, them, unless on his authority.

That position is common in popular culture and entertainment, and was widely ventilated by Republicans during GW's administration, mostly, but not only, in defense of torture in the aftermath of 9/11.

You heard and read it from many sources on the right: "The constitution is not a suicide pact."

But in truth the position and the established practice are as old as the Cold War, at least.

Trump is living proof it's a bad idea.

Powers others used in furtherance of national security he has likely used and will use in connection with crimes committed by cronies, family members, and perhaps even himself that in no way served or were intended to serve our national security.

It is not a good idea to nod our heads and say, yes, Nixon was right: if the president does it, that means it's not illegal.

Nixon, his own conduct an egregious proof of the stupidity of that position.

I hate to be banal but power corrupts.

Thoughts that come to mind watching an episode of Hawaii Five O.

No comments:

Post a Comment