A joke is a very serious thing.
–Winston Churchill
The clock has clicked past midnight and it is now April Fools’ Day. In many countries, it’s a day to play practical jokes and to make up outlandish stories and to try to trick others into believing them. I’ve had a lot of fun listening to the faux April 1 stories from National Public Radio.
In the Obama Conspiracy business, birthers are so ready to believe anything and everything, and so slow to give up such beliefs even when they are shown to be false, that it’s really not work the risk of playing an April Fools’ joke with an Obama Conspiracy theme. A major thread of birtherism is the belief that Obama attended college receiving student aid as a foreign student, and yet that was nothing more than an April Fools’ hoax.
Citizen WElls has a rather bizarre April Fools’ article here:
http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/april-1-2013-obama-eligible-birth-certificate-authenticate-obama-born-on-us-soil-to-2-citizen-parents-college-records-found-valid-selective-service-application-no-lies-on-il-bar-application/#comment-277157
Where just about EVERYTHING is true!
In the mean time, in what has to be the biggest April Fool joke of the year, ORYR reports that Mike Zullo will appear on a live broadcast call-in show on April 5.
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/04/mike-zullo-live-broadcast-report.html
Orly Taitz, however, has come up with a very fine April Fools’ joke of her own, in her article titled:
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=410084
how many of arpaio’s flock of frozen fools (CCP) are convicted felons?
Criminal pasts don’t disqualify members of Arpaio posse
Maricopa County Sheriff’s Posse members wear uniforms, have badges, drive county vehicles and some even carry guns. And some of them also have criminal records.
“They have as much power as the deputy wants to give them, including the power to arrest under the supervision of that deputy,” said Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Arpaio wants his army of 3,000 volunteer posse members to look like sworn deputies and sometimes perform the same duties. But an in-depth project by CBS 5 Investigates uncovered a number of posse members with arrests for assault, drug possession, domestic violence, sex crimes against children, disorderly conduct, impersonating an officer – and the list goes on.
These are crimes that are not tolerated in many professions, especially professions with an implied authority.
http://www.kpho.com/story/17159125/criminal-pasts-dont-disqualify-members-of-arpaio-posse
The bed wetters on ORYR are still scared of the word “THE” (TXE).
This supports my theory that each birther (or at least each casual birther) has latched onto a particular bit of “evidence,” what I might call their “birther security blanket,” that protects them against the onslaught of public opinion against them. Any time they are beset by facts and the obvious fact that nobody in authority takes any of this seriously, they pull out their “TXE” and it calms their anxiety.
It’s a scary word. It’s everywhere. Hiding in the shadows. Corrupting our youth.
I don’t know how many times I have to yell at the young ones: He’s just A president! He’s not the President. Okay, fine, he is the President. But he’s not THE President. Okay okay, fine, double-fine, whatever, he’s the greatest president of all time, give me back my chewing gum. But he’s not TXE president, now is he? Got you there, didn’t I? Ha! Birthers rule!
(Wow, these birther wings fit really nicely…time to fly toward the sun! I’m told that today is the one day of the year that wax doesn’t melt.)
Christine O’Donnell Plays April Fools’ Joke, Says ‘Obama’s Right About Everything’
Christine O’Donnell, the tea party darling and failed 2010 U.S. Senate candidate, got in on the April Fools’ Day festivities by tweeting that she woke up Monday morning with a stunning change of heart:
I woke this morning & realized Obama’s right about everything. I’m becoming a Democrat to show my support of his agenda.
Just in case the gag wasn’t even obvious, O’Donnell subsequently referred her Twitter followers to the calendar.
And they’re asking for… a shrubbery!
It’s their totem. If it ever looks like “THE” to them, they know they’re still incepted, or usurpted, or something.
Boy, you nailed Birtherism: Trying to cut down the mightiest tree in the forest with a herring.
President Obama Reveals Truth: Everyone Else Born in Kenya
Turns out, as described in a new affidavit by Barack Obama, President of the United States, that as the lone American survivor of the Forgotten Apocalypse, Barack Obama used his special mutant powers to transport everyone else from Kenya to America, forging their birth certificates, among many other documents, while providing them (us) with fake memories and family histories.
“I was just so alone. I might have been seven at the time. I didn’t realize the extent of my powers. I just made a silly wish, as children do. No one knows this anymore, but Kenya used to be the multicultural power center of the world. They had all the best technology; they were building a FTL [faster than light] spaceship. They were like Atlantis, except real.”
“Before the Apocalypse,” the President’s affidavit continues, “I used to wish I had been born in Kenya. But after the Apocalypse, when I still didn’t know I had been changed, I just wished everyone could come back. I didn’t know then that the radiation fallout had affected the lava in the volcano where I was hiding, changing my DNA, so that now all my wishes come true, though I must admit, a bit unpredictably. I don’t really have any control over how they come true, but they do. I tried wishing that my dreams all come true exactly the way I want, but that didn’t work out very well. I don’t know how the logic of this volcano magic works, but somehow that particular wish made me President of the United States. That I do not understand. It’s not like that wish made me a dictator or anything.
“Well, I could go on and on, but I just wanted to let the American people know the truth. God bless America, or whatever we call it these days.”
Many critics of the President are expressing their belief that they now are vindicated. Within minutes, lead investigator Jerome Corsi released a statement headlined: See, I Was Right To Ask: Where Is (My) Real Birth Certificate?
Supporters of the President, however, argue that American birth certificates are not actually forgeries, because although everyone actually is from Kenya, we all were technically resurrected in America.
Many questions remain, and Press Secretary Jay Carney was inundated with many of them at a 10 a.m. press conference today. The Supreme Court also has been inundated, but court watchers so far have not received any response from any of the justices or their clerks on whether or not it intends to address the question of whether or not anyone other than the President and his daughters are natural-born citizens.
“Are they just going to wait for 2016?” asked Mario Apuzzo, veteran court watcher and constitutional scholar. Despite the puzzlement of the gathered media, given the quite obvious fact that to date there only are twenty-one amendments to the Constitution of the United States, Apuzzo went on to enquire: “Is the President just going to wish the 22nd Amendment out of existence?”
Dr. C,
Do you think Gillar will ever debate your boy? Or are you suggesting that not only is Sampson telling him to duck this particular debate, he is also using it as an excuse to NEVER debate … which is it?
I don’t know what Gillar is going to do. What I am confident about is that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will never file charges against Obama and Zullo will never testify where he is subject to cross-examination.
Who are you referring to? Are you thinking HistorianDude answers to the Doc, or anybody else for that matter? Can’t quite get your brain wrapped around the simple fact that the debunkers are not controlled by anybody?
Christine O’Donnell has Twitter followers? Outside of her immediate family?
Yeah, this guy does have a rather strong and racially tinged odor.
“your boy” lol. More proof the birtherverse, which only exists because of lies, BS, fantasies, and racism, is populated with opportunistic vultures that have no ethics or morals.
That’s not even humorous, but I guess when the standard she’s set for herself is “I’m not a witch”, there’s just no where else to go.
She COULD have tweated, “Guess what? I AM a witch!”
Now that would have been funny.
Nothing is going to happen because in the real world Arpaio has two choices:
First, he or a certified deputy can arrest Obama based on probable cause to believe he has committed a crime under Arizona law. Zullo isn’t certified so he isn’t going to do squat and the chances of a real deputy, or Arpaio, getting to the President in Arizona so they can effect the arrest (you have to put your hand on the person and tell them they are under arrest) are slim…..at best. They would then have 72 hours, as I recall, to get the county attorney to file charges and/or proceed to an arraignment. Think about all that for a minute.
Second option: Get the county attorney to take your case before a grand jury and ask for an indictment. The last Maricopa County Attorney lost his law license for buying into Arpaio’s nonsense and indicting political targets and innocent people.
So…..pigs will fly over the Superstition Mountains before Arpaio and Zullo do anything…..other than shoot off their mouths.
For the set of people “those who have unironically chosen to follow Christine O’Donnell on Twitter,” there is very little that is obvious.
The last Maricopa County Attorney lost his law license for buying into Arpaio’s nonsense and indicting political targets and innocent people.
Here is the disciplinary action and the disbarment of Andrew Thomas. It’s an interesting read. I’m not clear why the Arpaio issue is only considered tangenital compared to Orly.
According to this document, attorney discipline is related to ethics, and there is a difference between law and ethics.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/88741608/Andrew-Thomas-Disbarment-Ruling
Exerpt from Andrew Thomas disbarment (Lisa Aubuchon was his assistant, who was also disbarred). Page 13. The copy and paste does not post in exact format from document.
“Mr. MacDonnell and others straightforwardly informed Mr. Thomas that Lisa Aubuchon was in a fundamental way not ethically capable. They cautioned Mr.Thomas that she was too willing to prosecute regardless of the evidence. She didnot seek justice but rather to win. For her, winning justified any means. The need or such fundamental integrity was clear to his experienced attorneys, but sadly itsabsence was attractive or wanted by Mr. Thomas. He found her willingness to charge ahead without nvestigating or fundamental analysis, to be “brave.” The result was Respondents became alive in imagined interests of others that neverexisted. Evidence of the truth was never needed for such vain imaginings and moreimportantly, never sought nor wanted. For Respondents it did not matter how theyproduced their results as long as their desired outcome could be achieved. They prosecuted innocent people, without evidence, and did not blink.”
Unless you mean sex organs that are a tone of brown, the word is tangential.
😉
Arpaio has zero choices. The police cannot arrest the President, anyway. Criminal charges have no meaning until the President has left office. (Civil cases are different.) As we know, the reason for such immunity, short of impeachment, is to prevent people with ulterior motives and parochial agendas interfering with the business of the presidency. At least one certain birther could be the poster child for this temporary immunity to prosecution.
Yes, there was a lot of talk about indicting Thomas but nothing came to pass. The Feds declined to do anything as part of their Arpaio investigation and that left the state and its disciplinary process.
For those who weren’t there to watch it unfold it was an incredible situation: They indicted judges, members of the county board of supervisors, journalists with impunity. Thomas and Aubuchon have paid with their reputations and careers. Maricopa County tax papers have paid and will continue to pay millions in damages as claims and lawsuits are settled.
The Phoenix New Times lead the way on the story (two of their people were arrested in the middle of the night by Arpaio’s deputies) and for those interested here is a link that will bring up a search of articles containing Thomas’s name from their website.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/search/results/keyword:andrew+thomas/type:all/
For those who weren’t there to watch it unfold it was an incredible situation: They indicted judges, members of the county board of supervisors, journalists with impunity. Thomas and Aubuchon have paid with their reputations and careers.
The disciplinary judge’s decision is a scathing report. It looks to me that if Andrew Thomas hadn’t gotten tangled up with the Board of Supervisors, he would have been the prosecutor of choice to bring down a Grand Jury indictment in Arizona against Obama if they could (perhaps via some claim of voter fraud). He and Arpaio were a team of sorts, and it is the determination of the disciplinary and ethics judge that Thomas would most certainly abuse his office to persecute political opponents (Democrats and otherwise), i.e. the disciplinary judge did not put it past him to use his office to issue jay-walking tickets to political opponents.
For those who haven’t read this fascinating report (link posted above), suffice it to say that Thomas was the one and only prosecutor to date that had the skill to bring a criminal case against Obama. But he was disbarred after the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors questioned his budget (exceeding millions of dollars). After that inquiry, Thomas felt the “independence” of his office as County Maricopa Attorney was threatened, and he went on a personal and private investigation into the finances of Mr. Stapely, a BOS member, even to the point of having him arrested and jailed. He entered into the homes of hundreds of county employees at late hours of the night, without warrants, to investigate what he perceived as a financial fraud to build a “court tower,” and many other ethical violations were committed.
What is UP with these Harvard lawyers?
Orly has not caused any “real” damage yet in the sense that her antics, compared to Thomas’, have not resulted in a party being jailed and charged with a hundred misdemeanors, most of which (in Stapely’s case) were barred by the statute of limitations. Taitz, by comparison, is simply a loose cannon.
Orly keeps carrying on on her website that Arpaio needs to “file a complaint.” I guess she does not know that Apaio’s prosecutor has been disbarred.
Actually the question of whether a sitting President can be arrested or not is still open to a lot of discussion and it is far from settled law/
That said no birther or county sheriff in Arizona is going to be the one to answer that question
Actually Thomas’s legal career was less than spectacular. He was only in private practice for three years before he moved into politics. He served in Fife Symington’s administration. Symington was convicted of bank fraud in the late 1990’s, as I recall.
Thomas ran for Attorney General unsuccessfully and finally won the County Attorney’s job in 2005. It was there that he hooked his star to Arpaio and started down the path to disbarment.
No one I know in the Phoenix legal community thought he was very bright and most thought he was simply a craven politician who thought by hooking up with the sheriff (then the most popular politician in Arizona) he could launch himself into higher office…..attorney general, the governorship or eventually one of Arizona’s senate seats.
Anyway….he and Arpaio got into the pissing contest with the supervisors over their budgets and added a new county court building project into the mix and that’s where all the indictments and a Federal RICO lawsuit happened. Arpaio claimed that as a constitutional officer he wasn’t subject to control by the supervisors.
While all of that was turning into a big pile of poo Thomas resigned as county attorney in 2010 and ran for state attorney general (always a good stepping stone to higher office) but he never made it out of the GOP primary because the state supreme court had already appointed a special investigator to look into charges against him. Those charges resulted in his disbarment two years later in April 2012.
Bottom line: Andrew Thomas (affectionately known as “Candy Andy”) was a fool who thought the rules were for everyone else and managed to operate that way for a couple of years until he pushed things too far…..even for Arizona.
Carl Orcas
Arpaio claimed that as a constitutional officer he wasn’t subject to control by the supervisors.
We have a similar situation in my county, Carl Orcas. Our fairly recently elected sheriff told the BOS that he is a “Constitutional Sheriff” and he does not account for his budget to the BOS. But as I understand it, ONE member of the BOS is responsible for oversight of the sheriff’s budget. Then that same sheriff appointed his brother-in-law as deputy. Huh?
Then, very recently, 14 of 19 grand jurors walked out of the grand jury due to one of the members having a property interest with one of the BOS supposedly. It was explained away that 20 members are required to form a grand jury, not 19. Now we are without a grand jury, and no report, until the next grand jury convenes. This is a Republican county I live in.
What bugs me is that when higher ups, like the BOS, get falsely accused and persecuted by prosecutorial zealots like Thomas, then something gets done. But these persecutor/prosecutors falsely accuse and prosecute and persecute people who do not have the means to defend themelves on a daily basis.
Where do you live?
The grand jury situation sounds like Texas. I lived there in the early 70’s and local politics there were something to behold!
The whole thing about the Sheriff being the chief law enforcement officer and not subject to any control is just a bunch of hooey. Arpaio never pushed it beyond whining about his budget.
CarlOrcas April 2, 2013 at 9:05 pm (Quote) #
Deborah: We have a similar situation in my county,
Where do you live?
I live in Northern California- it would not be prudent to specify the county being that we are re-living the Inquisition.
OK.
She put a spell on ’em.
You dropped some kind of big clues there, Deborah… . 🙂 Turns out my daughter’s parents-in-law live in that county. We went on a rather enjoyable wine-tasting tour with them there not too long ago.
Just found this on Lisa Aubuchon- now challenging the ethics of the judge who disbarred her for unethical behavior.
http://sonoranalliance.com/2013/03/15/andrew-thomass-disbarred-prosecutor-looks-to-the-legislature-for-assistance-exposing-corruption-of-bar-disciplinary-judge/
As an aside, this is NOT the first time I have seen a group of law enforcement people kow tow to some viscous female prosecutor!!! It seems to be a pattern that there is some rotten individual in the bunch, sometimes the family, that everyone is afraid of and lets them abuse until a crisis ocurrs.
@justlw- I don’t really keep much of a private life because I am a political activist against family court- but I don’t need anymore problems. There is no path to remedy problems in that court. Yes, plenty of wine here. 🙂
Why do I get attacked for just asking questions? I haven’t taken a side on this thread.
Doc Conspiracy, consider this hypothetical:
There is some sort of question to the legitimacy of the original certificate as indicated by Abercrombie (it’s written in pencil and not official). Apparently you don’t think Arpaio et al can do anything about it, ultimately (directly), and I don’t disagree. Is there a way, however, through the States in your opinion for any action? Or do you claim the only action can come from Congress?
Just wondering.
Thanks
Maybe for your use of the term “your boy”? Some people might interpret that as you implying there is some sort of Grand Interconnected Obot Conspiracy. Which is true, of course, but still.
…uh, what?
Aubuchon is whistling past her own professional graveyard.
And, just for the record, she didn’t manipulate anyone. She was a willing participant in the whole the whole tawdry thing. If anyone manipulated anyone it was Arpaio who got all these folks to carry his water and then disappeared into the woodwork when it all fell apart.
In the scenario that there was genuine doubt about both the authenticity of the vault BC *and* the truthfulness of Alvin Onaka, the Hawaiian DA and law enforcement would have to take up the issue (up to and including confiscating the vault document(s)).
Of course, that would require more than “I think some officials made contradictory statements”, i.e. more than the bottom level of innuendo, blogosphere speculation etc.
(One example would be that someone could point to something on the LFBC PDF that is actually impossible to be correct, as birthers have tried with “Race: African” or the “smiley face” or the “Ukulele” signature or the “out of sequence number” theory or the different “kerning” arguments proffered by Paul Irey.)
Your confusion about “how the states would handle that situation” however would only make sense if it maintains the conspiracist view that “all of Hawaii” is “in on it” and Hawaiian DA/law enforcement would refuse (or just pretend) to prosecute in order to cover something up.
And that is genuinely outside any hypothetical scenario and entirely fantasyland.
Apart from that, it is of course possible Congress might subpoena documents from Hawaii.
But again, this would only work in the “infant birther theory” where Obama and half a dozen people conspired to hide his foreign birth and sneak a forged BC into the archives which will then be vouched for by one of those co-conspirators.
However, since that infant state, birtherism has been forced to expand to include everyone and his dog as “in on it” (see my point above about a Hawaiian investigation), so it doesn’t really make sense to talk about “what if”‘s unless we’re back to infant birtherism and a Hollywood movie script about that scenario.
AKA “The Manchurian Candidate meets The Da VInci Code” — you might not want to go that route, Palamas, unless you have $177,707 to drop. Cha-ching!
Thanks, Dr. C. I hadn’t seen that blog before, but I recognize the stupidity. I couldn’t resist leaving a little note for Pete (awaiting moderation, ahem), and not just because he insulted you.
If someone uses the word “who” where “whom” is needed, that’s forgivable, IMHO. But whenever you see “whom” where “who” will obviously do, that’s the tell-tale sign of a sciolist.
Using words like “sciolist” is another tell-tale sign…
Huh? What are you talking about? Governor Abercrombie has never said anything which casts doubt on the legitimacy of Obama’s birth certificate.
If it is “written down” and he stopped the investigation because “he couldn’t produce it” it raises (and in fact did) more questions. Especially after it took 4+ years and varying types of documents to try to legitimize the subject.
If that’s not doubt, you’re living in a bigger dream world than some of these “birthers.”
Irrelevant birther nonsense. Your assertion is nothing more than the same paranoid, asinine birther b.s. and a ridiculous attempt at spreading FUD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt).
“When birthers say that Abercrombie’s statement proves that Obama has no birth certificate, only something “written down,” they exhibit a fundamental misunderstanding of the scope of Abercrombie’s searches. As with most birther claims based on someone’s official statement, this one ignores the context and turns the statement into something other than what the speaker intended.”
Read:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/state-archives-v-department-of-health/
Note that Birthers always grasp onto this statement of Abercrombie yet discount his specific statement that he knew Obama was born in Hawaii because he knew the parents and was in Hawaii when Obama was born.
Unfortunately in the world of Birthers, no matter how any one says something they will find a way to misinterpret it- or failing that to claim that the person is liar or part of the conspiracy.
A rose by any other name……………………
Maybe he found out that there are limitations to what a governor can do, like releasing info which is precluded from being released by a Federal law.
That is exactly what happened. Except that it is State law, not Federal law that stopped him apparently.
I almost said that Abercrombie said what he said poorly, and inadvertantly contributed to the problem- but honestly- no normal rational person could predict how Birthers will twist anything.
I was referring to HIPAA, but there is also the state law.
Except Abercrombie wasn’t talking about the birth certificate. He was talking about other records which the Department of Health keeps, probably something along the lines of a ledger which lists the births and certificate numbers. He “couldn’t produce” those records because he was advised that it violate Hawaii law for him to do so.
And don’t forget that Republican Governor Linda Lingle, who was a staunch McCain supporter in 2008, confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii and that Hawaii has his original record of birth on file.
I am reminded of those Birthers who would proclaim- “Obama could make Hawaii release the original if he wanted;- while in the next breath complaining about Obama abusing his powers….
Birthers always believe in both some vast all encompassing conspiracy and that the conspiracy is so inept that it litters the landscape with clues that only Birthers can see.
Actually I could imagine a book based on the “infant birther theory” I mentioned. It might actually *make* $200K instead of costing them.
Taking this to court as “something that actually happened” is a different story of course. 🙂
I’m still planning to write a fiction novel with a totally different theory about 9/11. It would be right up there with “The Event” or “Flash Forward” (which unfortunately both were cancelled before getting to the juicy bits). But that doesn’t make me a truther since I don’t really believe there was a conspiracy.
Well, yes, unsettled as in untested, but it is hard to imagine that an *arrest* of a sitting president would ever fly. At the very least, hard to imagine anything would happen until a conviction. Even in the unanimous Clinton case, the judges couched their opinions in a consideration that merely answering some questions would not unduly burden the President, especially as that could be arranged around his schedule. Hard to imagine the disruption of an arrest being allowed.
Of course there are gradations, stopping points along the way. Crime from before taking office vs. crime while in office and/or alleged criminal activity as part of official duties vs. private actions. Not to mention who is doing the arresting, state vs. federal.
If there were a strong case with a lot of pressure, which probably would be the only such case to get off the ground, that in itself would likely spawn an impeachment hearing, which would either resolve the crisis or make it worse if the president remained in office.
From my reading, right now the balance seems to fall way over on the side of no arrest likely.
I have said this several times. Lingle is Jewish, and believed McCain/Palin would be better for Israel than Obama. If she could have found anything, the GOP would have used it with glee.
She publicly stated there isn’t anything.
I’ve been having these discussions since the early 70’s when I was a young lad working in the news business in Washington, DC.
The real question is how serious would the crime have to be before civil authorities could step in. Over beer and pizza we would have terribly serious discussions about which crimes might fit the bill. Clearly burglary wasn’t big enough. How about bribery? Nah, too political. Arson? Hmmm. That could be good.
The discussion always ended at murder. What would happen if the President killed someone – an obstreperous Senator for instance – in the Oval Office? Clearly you couldn’t ignore it until he left office so who would handle the arrest, etc.
Fortunately we didn’t have to consider those weighty questions once Gerald Ford moved into the White House.
The key I think is impeachment. In other words, it isn’t about waiting for the president to leave office. Nixon was forced out by the threat of an impeachment trial, and then only escaped criminal trial by way of Ford’s pardon. There indeed are some intriguing subtle scenarios, but in the case of a hypothetical extreme case, such as a murder, it is hard to imagine first of all that Congress wouldn’t jump in with an impeachment trial, after which, if convicted by the Senate, the then ex-president would be indicted and arrested.
I understand the sense that the presidents are not above the law. But impeachment is part of the law, not a loophole. If we have faith in a criminal trial in such an instance, there is no reason to not also have faith in the process of a political trial. If anything, it may be more likely that such a president gets impeached and kicked out of office, but nonetheless avoids conviction, either through a pardon or with the aid of an expensive defense team.
On the other hand, if anyone tried to arrest a president, barring *voluntary* compliance, it is easy to imagine that arrest going nowhere, with a president refusing to submit, and then the whole thing ending up with the Supreme Court.
Here is some of what I have been reading on the subject.
From Akhil Amar’s book, America’s Unwritten Constitution:
Shortly after the Constitution was ratified, a brief discussion took place in the Senate about whether a sitting president could be criminally prosecuted. Vice President John Adams and Senator Oliver Ellsworth agreed that “you could only impeach him [the president] and no other process whatever lay against him.” Otherwise, “you put it in the power of a common justice to exercise [coercive] authority over him and stop the whole machine of Government.” If, for example, the president were to commit murder in the streets, he would be promptly impeached and removed, and “when he is no longer President you can indict him.” Writing several years later, Thomas Jefferson—not usually an ally of Adams and Ellsworth—offered a similar analysis: “[W]ould the executive be independent of the judiciary, if he were subject to the commands of the latter, & to imprisonment for disobedience; if the several courts could bandy him from pillar to post, keep him constantly trudging from north to south & east to west, and withdraw him entirely from his constitutional duties?”
In 1833, Justice Joseph Story published a landmark treatise on American constitutional law, and he, too, offered a structural defense of presidential immunity: “There are…incidental powers, belonging to the executive department, which are necessarily implied from the nature of the functions, which are confided to it. Among these, must necessarily be the power to perform them, without any obstruction or impediment whatsoever. The president cannot, therefore, be liable to arrest, imprisonment, or detention, while he is in the discharge of his office.”