I haven’t posted since just after the 2016 election.  I always figured I owed readers an apology and explanation of the errors in my thinking leading up to the election.  Among many wrong impressions, I learned that this country has bigger problem with sexism than I imagined.  (There’s much more in head on this topic, but that’s not why I’m writing today.

From the beginning of this presidency, I have wondered about preserving rule of law and the rising threats to democracy.  I also have wondered if we will reach a critical moment when past Presidents, such Obama and GW Bush, might speak out together (perhaps joining with other leaders past and present) to denounce the actions of the Trump Administration as antithetical to democracy, freedom, the rule of law, and the constitution.  I worried that rather than a key moment happening, there would be many tiny moments, no unified response to these moments, and it would be too late.  (The frog in the slow warming water parable.)

So is the moment at hand?  According to the NYT, Trump’s lawyers have released a memo  asserting the following:

Indeed, the President not only has unfettered statutory and Constitutional authority to terminate the FBI Director, he also has Constitutional authority to direct the Justice Department to open or close an investigation, and, of course, the power to pardon any person before, during, or after an investigation and/or conviction. Put simply, the Constitution leaves no question that the President has exclusive authority over the ultimate conduct and disposition of all criminal investigations and over those executive branch officials responsible for conducting those investigations.

Open and close any investigation?  If the courts uphold this view, rule of law would be over.  Mathew Yglasias at Vox elaborates on just how bad this could become.

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/3/17421300/trumps-interview-subpoena

From Jonathon Chait:

Trump cannot obstruct justice, according to his official legal stance, because justice is whatever Trump says it is. Before this is over, either Trump’s sweeping claim will survive, or the rule of law will, but not both.

I wonder if we are at the moment when past leaders speak out in a bi-partisan manner regarding this threat.  Or will it just be another 1 degree increase in the water temperature surrounding the frog otherwise known as the Constitution of the United States?