In an insightful essay published in the New York Times, Harvard Law professor Jack Goldsmith criticizes the Justice Department and special counsel Jack Smith for pursuing former President Trump. Goldsmith emphasizes that his critique does not defend Trump’s actions to overturn the 2020 election, which he deems “reprehensible.” However, he argues that the potential conviction of Trump will come at a high cost to the legal and political systems, worsening the existing damage caused by Trump’s transgressions. Goldsmith highlights the unfortunate timing of the indictment amidst the 2024 race and acknowledges that while the Justice Department’s intentions may be “pure,” it creates a perception of unfairness among Trump supporters.
Goldsmith points out that this complaint follows previous grievances regarding the FBI investigation into Trump’s Russia ties and allegations of preferential treatment for Democrats like Hunter Biden. He asserts that much of the nation will judge the legitimacy of this case based on this context, potentially resulting in dire consequences for politics and the rule of law. Goldsmith predicts a future scenario where presidential actions in office are subject to tit-for-tat investigations by Congress. Despite these concerns, Goldsmith emphasizes that Trump should not be absolved of his actions. However, he poses the difficult question of whether addressing Trump’s misconduct through criminal law is worth the substantial costs to the country. Ultimately, Goldsmith suggests that the nation must endure these costs in order to find the answer to this question. Read the full essay for further insights.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
