Quote from article: The willingness of government officials to ignore the rule of law in order to buy peace gave us enduring reverence for the principles of the Confederacy, along with countless dead Unionists, mostly Black people, killed as former Confederates reclaimed supremacy in the South. It also gave us the idea that presidents cannot be held accountable for crimes, a belief that likely made some of the presidents who followed Nixon less careful about following the law than they might have been if they had seen Nixon indicted.

Holding a former president accountable for an alleged profound attack on the United States is indeed unprecedented, as his supporters insist. But far from being a bad thing to stand firm on the rule of law at the upper levels of government, it seems to fall into the category of “high time.”

https://open.substack.com/pub/heathercoxrichardson/p/june-13-2023?r=1ekuyr&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

June 13, 2023

“DONALD TRUMP UNDER ARREST, IN FEDERAL CUSTODY.” It was quite a chyron from CNN, marking the first time in the history of the United States that a former president has been charged with federal crimes. And in this case, what crimes they are: the willful retention, sharing, and hiding of classified documents that compromise our national security. Trump’s own national security advisor John Bolton said, “This is material that in the hands of America’s adversaries would do incalculable damage to the United States. This is a very serious case and it’s not financial fraud, it’s not hush money to porn stars, this is the national security of the United States at stake. I think we’ve got to take the politics out of this business when national security is at stake.”

Letters from an American
@sharonecathcart Why are we so hesitant to incarcerate a former US President who allegedly committed crimes when we have no issues in supporting an incursion into another nation and capturing a leader who didn’t “behave” to our accepted norms.
Shouldn’t the rule of law for everyone even apply here at home?

@bouriquet You would think so, wouldn't you?

I think (and IANAL) that the incarceration piece is problematic because of his lifetime Secret Service detail ... but there is no earthly reason why he couldn't be confined to some basic apartment with an ankle monitor and rotating shifts of Secret Service agents each day. No Mar-a-Lago/Bedminster/Turnbury/whatever big-assed property where guests appear.

I think that the hands-off aspects detailed in Heather Cox Richardson's article are what led us here.

@sharonecathcart Perhaps we also need to review the lifetime Secret Service detail benefit, pension etc.
When a high military person is found guilty by court martial, they often are stripped of rank etc.
George Washington thought the office of President shouldn’t be that of a king: it should be limited.
There must be consequences!

@bouriquet

To be honest, I've never understood the automatic lifetime security detail. At one point, it was changed to only 10 years after office, but Obama reinstated the lifetime security detail.

Nixon relinquished his Secret Service detail in 1985, and is the only one to have done so.

Spent the first 16 years of my professional career with the DoD; I think your analysis is spot-on.