Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "CNN In DEEP TROUBLE With Defamation Case: Legal Analyst Jonathan Turley Warns" video.
-
92
-
I wish they would revisit defamation. I hate 2-tiered justice of any kind. Public figures should receive no extra benefit or extra punishment. Defamation is defamation, and the bar needs to be the same height for public figures as it is for "commoners."
To me, the way they went after Trump had a silver lining, because it lowered the bar to prosecution of presidents for crimes they commit. We've always swept their crimes under the carpet and never go after sitting presidents or former presidents.
For the law to mean anything, it must be applied equally to presidents and plumbers. The law means nothing if our leaders sit above it. No special laws or exceptions for anyone in government or corporations. The corporation shouldn't pay the fine. The executives in that corporation should pay the fine. The cop that gets sued shouldn't have the taxpayers paying off the law suit. The cop should be held directly accountable.
If I were president and I believed that I would have to break the law to save the country, I would break the law AND I would face the music for my decision. I wouldn't hide behind presidential immunity. That's what a principled man would do in that position. "Yes, I broke the law. Here's why." And I would face a jury of my peers, the same as any other schmuck.
If that means the president's hands would be tied and he wouldn't be able to do things like prosecute undeclared wars under War Powers Act for 90 days, then so be it. Our system isn't supposed to run like a well-oiled machine. It's supposed to be hard for ANYone in government to exercise extraordinary powers. This would make it harder for government to change anything, and that's the way it's supposed to be. There's supposed to be friction in government's gears, and strict limits on what it can do.
1