I listened to a Lawfare podcast that said an ex president DOES have some residual right to privilege, albeit very limited, and the SC decision doesn’t truly settle this question once and for all.
I listened to a Lawfare podcast that said an ex president DOES have some residual right to privilege, albeit very limited, and the SC decision doesn’t truly settle this question once and for all.
Don't believe it. That's a lot of 'wistful' ('coulda, woulda, shoulda') thinking. Anything a former official gets is a courtesy, and not by way of right. When it comes down to cases, the facts matter more than the doctrine. Trump's acolytes are engaging in a form of jesuidical thinking, actually dissembling by implying something that really isn't there, a conflating of the formerly high office with an implicit claim that the honorific title of 'former president' is entitled to more than he was due. Trump disgraced himself and his office by his misconduct, and that, in and of itself, is sufficient to negate any sense of obligation that might be thought to be due him as a former president.
I listened to a Lawfare podcast that said an ex president DOES have some residual right to privilege, albeit very limited, and the SC decision doesn’t truly settle this question once and for all.
Don't believe it. That's a lot of 'wistful' ('coulda, woulda, shoulda') thinking. Anything a former official gets is a courtesy, and not by way of right. When it comes down to cases, the facts matter more than the doctrine. Trump's acolytes are engaging in a form of jesuidical thinking, actually dissembling by implying something that really isn't there, a conflating of the formerly high office with an implicit claim that the honorific title of 'former president' is entitled to more than he was due. Trump disgraced himself and his office by his misconduct, and that, in and of itself, is sufficient to negate any sense of obligation that might be thought to be due him as a former president.
They're right.