I thought I would remind people of the context of Richard Nixon’s famous comment:
David Frost: The wave of dissent in America, occasionally violent, which followed the incursion into Cambodia by US and Vietnamese forces in 1970, prompted President Nixon to demand better intelligence about the people who were opposing him on the domestic front. To this end, the deputy White House counsel, Tom Huston, arranged a series of meetings with representatives of the CIA, the FBI, and other police and intelligence agencies.
These meetings produced a plan, the Huston Plan, which advocated the systematic use of wiretappings, burglaries, or so-called black bag jobs, mail openings and infiltration against anti-war groups and others. Some of these activities, as Huston emphasised to Nixon, were clearly illegal. Nevertheless, the president approved the plan. Five days later, after opposition from the FBI director, J Edgar Hoover, the plan was withdrawn, but the president’s approval was later to be listed in the articles of impeachment as an alleged abuse of presidential power.
Would you say that there are certain situations – and the Huston Plan was one of them – where the president can decide that it’s in the best interests of the nation, and do something illegal?
Richard Nixon: Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal.
Frost: By definition.
Richard Nixon: Exactly, exactly. If the president, for example, approves something because of the national security, or in this case because of a threat to internal peace and order of significant magnitude, then the president’s decision in that instance is one that enables those who carry it out, to carry it out without violating a law. Otherwise they’re in an impossible position.
The point is: the dividing line is the president’s judgment?
Yes, and, so that one does not get the impression that a president can run amok in this country and get away with it, we have to have in mind that a president has to come up before the electorate. We also have to have in mind that a president has to get appropriations from the Congress. We have to have in mind, for example, that as far as the CIA’s covert operations are concerned, as far as the FBI’s covert operations are concerned, through the years, they have been disclosed on a very, very limited basis to trusted members of Congress.
The dividing line is the president’s judgment.
President Donald Trump.
Think about that.
Yesterday, Trump’s lawyer Alan Dershowitz went before the Senate and took that one step further.
He claimed that the president not only has the power to do anything in the national interest, it’s even acceptable to rig elections in his favor because that’s obviously in the national interest:
“A complex middle case is ‘I want to be elected, I think I’m a great president, I think I’m the greatest president there ever was and if I’m not elected, the national interest will suffer greatly.’ That cannot be an impeachable offense.”
I think it’s pretty clear that Donald Trump believes that he is the greatest president who ever lived and the national interest rests on whether he is re-elected. So Dershowitz has given him the green light to outright steal the next election.
And a Senate acquittal will validate that belief.