Democrats abandon rule of law and equality before the law

The impeachment trial of President Trump reveals how ready the Democrats are to overthrow the well-established principles of the rule of law and equality before the law in the interests of political expediency. Sharp differences between the Democrat-comprised—-and compromised—House Managers and the President’s legal team marked more than twelve hours of debate—as the House Managers unsuccessfully sought to have the Senate issue subpoenas to compel the production of new witnesses and documents to add to the volume of evidence elicited by the House in its partisan decision to impeach the President.

The views expressed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and one of the House Managers —Jerrold Nadler—on the need for bipartisanship in the impeachment trial were ignored by the Democrats. Not one of the seven House Managers chosen to prosecute the House case was a Republican. The results were predictable. Partisan positions were adopted on every attempt to amend the trial schedule by the Democrats and were correspondingly opposed by the Republicans. The Senate voted on party lines 53-47 except for one amendment 52-48. The Democrat strategy of claiming bipartisanship on one amendment was one very tiny crumb the Democrats could claim to securing bipartisanship. The Democrat tactics seem designed to drive the divide between Republicans and Democrats—to enable the Democrats to claim—when the Senate inevitably acquits Trump – that the trial was not fair—that Trump was indeed guilty—that there had been a massive Republican cover up to prevent more documents and evidence that would have undoubtedly convicted Trump of a crime—which the Republicans claim is non-existent. Such absence of bipartisanship has divided the country in a manner the Russians could never have expected to achieve. Democracy is now at the crossroads as it faces the need for the Courts to step in and deliberate on the claims of the warring parties. It was devastating to see the principle that no one was above the law trashed by the Adam Schiff-led House Managers on Day 2 at the Senate trial. This principle had been affirmed by four distinguished law professors in the House hearings to impeach Trump—yet Schiff argued that the Senate was above the law and could prevent Trump or anyone else using the courts to exhaust all their legal rights, including Executive Privilege to contest the issue of a subpoena by the Senate to give evidence or produce documents.

---

Trump’s inviolate legal rights

Sacrificing Trump’s legal rights because they might lead to prolonged litigation and hold up the Senate trial seemed more important to Democrats, whilst this argument was bitterly opposed by Trump’s legal team. What was being played out was what always happens in any trial—claims by one side being rebutted by the other side and the Judge making the decision to end the deadlock. Only one side can emerge the winner—and usually the other side is left to lick its wounds. These partisan differences of opinion can only be resolved by the Courts. The problem is that the law is not perfect and that lawyers and judges have differing opinions. Trial judges, appellate judges and even higher appellate judges are often proved wrong and see their judgements reversed. Respect for the rule of law and equality before the law for both Trump and the Senate must be determined by a strong and independent judiciary —not the law of the jungle – which separates a democracy like America from Russia. Trump’s inviolate legal rights need to be tested in the Courts—and the Court’s decision respected –—no matter how long it takes.