Among the things I liked best about Mark Levin was his description of Obama. He called Obama “Barack Milhaus Obama”, of course, but he regularly used another term as well, “The Lawless President.”
He used it when Obama ignored a court order on banning drilling rigs from the Gulf of Mexico. (Politico) When the then-President seemed to turn a blind eye to the famed tarmac meeting of Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch. (Washington Times) When the IRS was accused of targeting “conservative” groups. (Forbes)
The implication was always clear. The Democrat President, and by extension the Democrats, do not like the law nor the Constitution or the country’s founding principles. They might learn how to use it to their advantage at times, but they have no respect for any of our institutions.
Levin was an ideal messenger. He was a successful lawyer who had served in a junior position in the revered Reagan administration. He had spent years of his life advocating and fighting for freedom and liberty. He’d written books about it and hosted a talk show.
It was for this reason that I defended Levin when he shifted to support Trump. No matter what, I argued, Levin had done more to promote the Constitution than I ever had.
I was wrong, and I want to publicly apologize.
I thought at the time that he needed to support Trump. I never believed he could, as was regularly promised, “hold Trump’s feet to the fire”. But I thought that having a voice in defense of the Constitution would be valuable when Trump went off the rails. As someone who’d supported the President, Levin holding a line for the Founders would give his words weight as those who had defended Trump lost faith and needed guidance. He could be a lifeline back to liberty.
Instead he has done the reverse, a Judas goat leading patriots along with him over to the Trumpian banner. By giving his imprimatur to Trumpism, he has quelled their natural concerns about Trump’s questionable character and situational ethics. He has explained away lies. He has embraced and promoted the most lunatic of Alex Jones’ political theories, even while disparaging Jones himself… best not to have the listeners hear what Jones is actually saying, lest they realize how similar some of the messages are between “the Great One” and the shirt-ripping jowly man who cries about gay frogs.
Levin has spend a lifetime defending freedom and liberty… while it was profiting him to do so. He worked in the Reagan Administration… so did Melvyn Paisley and Thomas Demery, both of whom were convicted of bribery and corruption charges. Had Levin continued to defend the rule of law, perhaps the comparisons would be unfair.
He doesn’t, though. He promotes Trump, even above the most basic of legal concepts. As example, statutes of limitations.
Eschewing the legalese – dangerous to do when talking about law – these exist to provide a delineation between the time when a crime was committed and a time when it can be punished. They are adopted after consideration and debate by lawmakers, using factors such as available data on recidivism and their personal morality.
It is held that people who have committed a crime in the past and not repeated that crime have grown past their prior nature. They have demonstrated their ability to function as a member of a civil society and their prior crime is thus no longer punishable. The stated purpose of incarceration in such matters – rehabilitation – has been achieved.
The supporting view is that crimes that have been committed more recently than the carefully-determined time limit are still worthy of being punished. There is, absolutely, such a thing as a crime that is in the past and that should not be prosecuted. They have been determined by the Rule of Law.
Laws aren’t meant to be applied blindly, though, not in Trumpworld. Exactly as with Obama, whom Levin correctly termed a Lawless President for actions like publicly influencing his Attorney General, Trump steps in to first imply that the investigation was improper, and then after the indictment, defend a man in the middle of a trial on multiple felony counts including tax evasion and witness tampering.
And, note, by bringing in other politicians to the discussion, there is no way to claim reasonably that this is Trump-as-private-citizen. It’s politician Trump, President Trump, attempting to influence the prosecution of serious crimes.
So, let’s see… between the law and President Trump, where does Levin side? The law, freedom, liberty and the Constitution? Or another Lawless President?
How about on the First Amendment? That’s fairly basic stuff, right? Such as not threatening penalties, as the President of the United States, on anyone who speaks against you even after they are no longer in your employ? That was covered here yesterday. (TNB)
Nope. There’s no attack on the First Amendment according to Mark. Only an attack on press members themselves.
Let me make it clear: I am no lawyer. Any decent lawyer should be able to run rings around me in a discussion of the law, because all they have to do is start citing precise decisions beyond the handful I’ve learned from school and private reading, and I’m in the weeds. But this isn’t difficult stuff. This is the basics, elementary school academics.
Levin is a fraud, as is Trump. Again, I apologize for defending him.
1 Trackback / Pingback
Comments are closed.