Controlling qualification for legal representation of Trump

An express agreement to deceive and lie more than Pinocchio

If you wish to represent Donald Trump, you must agree to deceive and lie on an industrial scale like Pinocchio.

Take attorney D. John Sauer, who argued in favor of Trump’s absolute constitutional immunity from criminal prosecution for any crimes perpetrated during his presidency before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Sauer disputed that Trump’s attorneys argued the opposite in Trump’s second impeachment trial in the Senate for insurrection, an argument some Senators relied upon to vote for acquittal (the final vote was 57-43 for conviction). Sauer maintained, while his nose figuratively grew 12 inches, that knowing whether Senators voted for acquittal with the understanding that Trump could still be criminally prosecuted as Trump’s lawyers conceded required “speculation” or “intuition.”

Really? Let the reader decide without an archeological expedition. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) explained his acquittal vote as follows: “We have a criminal justice system in this country . We have civil litigation. And former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one.” Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) explained his acquittal vote echoing McConnell: “Given that the Constitution makes legal offenses committed while in office subject to investigation and prosecution, as warranted, after a president is no longer in office, I believe that is the method of constitutional accountability—not impeachment.”

Mr. Sauer should be sanctioned by the U.S. Court of Appeals for deceit. Beware every time a Trump lawyer opens his mouth.