Trump & Kavanaugh’s Magic Legal Adventure: Pardon Me!

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

So, here we are, stewing in another dizzying round of “What the hell did he just say?” Thanks to none other than Justice Brett Kavanaugh. This time, Kavanaugh drops a real brain-buster while grappling with none other than former President Donald Trump’s legal predicaments.

Kavanaugh, seeking perhaps to sculpt his legacy as the Nostradamus of judicial confusion, mulls over whether the Nixon pardon precedent should inform Trump’s case. The argument dances around whether a president can self-pardon, a novelty even in the expansive universe of American political drama. Thank heavens, we have a nice, clear, totally-not-maddening explanation from Kavanaugh, said no sane person ever.

The Breakdown:

• Brett’s Blast from the Past: Kavanaugh thinks dusting off the Nixon pardon could be a neat party trick for Trump’s situation. Remember? President Ford’s “our long national nightmare is over” moment? Only this time, the nightmare has 280-character episodes and airs daily on all your social media feeds.
  
  
  • Detail: The article tears into Kavanaugh’s reasoning, highlighting the contortions needed to compare Nixon’s post-residency pardon with a self-pardon attempt. Legal scholars might need yoga after this stretch.
    
    
• The Self-Pardon Parade: Ever watch a dog chase its tail? Picture that, but less adorable and more constitutionally terrifying. Brett’s twist here is that a self-pardon could be dandy (for Trump, not legal precedent).
  
  
  • Detail: Kavanaugh’s musings dip into murky waters that even the U.S. Constitution doesn’t clearly navigate. It’s like using Google Maps in the Bermuda Triangle.
    
    
• Originalist or Opportunist?: Kavanaugh styles himself a bit of an originalist, except when original thinking is required, it seems. How far back are we originally talking? The Founding Fathers or last season’s finale of “Law & Order”?
  
  
  • Detail: The article slashes through the thin veneer of Kavanaugh’s originalist claims, suggesting that his interpretations conveniently align with prevailing winds (Trump-sized ones).
    
    
• Judicial Jugglings: Kavanaugh appears more like an amateur magician than a Supreme Court Justice, pulling out hazy legal precedents from his sleeves. The rabbit, however, is not so impressed.
  
  
  • Detail: By comparing potential self-pardons to Nixon’s scenario, Kavanaugh juggles different eras, contexts, and legal frameworks — none of which convincingly stack up.
    
    
• Head-scratching Conclusions: At the end of Kavanaugh’s commentary, you’ll need a massage for your brain. His argument circles back to itself like a Möbius strip designed by M.C. Escher.
  
  
  • Detail: Kavanaugh leaves more questions than answers, serving up a judicial plate of confusion garnished with a sprig of chaos.
    

The Counter:

• History or Hysteria?: Kavanaugh’s love affair with historical references might need a reality check. Just because something is old doesn’t make it gold.
  
  
  • Counterpoint: Arguing about the Nixon pardon in relation to Trump is like saying you understand smartphones because you once saw a rotary dial in a museum.
    
    
• Self-Pardon? More like Self-Parody!: The concept of self-pardon reads like a bad SNL skit. If you can pardon yourself, why even have courts? Let’s all go home, folks!
  
  
  • Counterpoint: Kavanaugh’s support for the self-pardon notion undercuts the very principle of accountability. It’s judicially endorsed catch-me-if-you-can.
    
    
• Flip-Flop Philosophy: Kavanaugh’s approach to the law swings like a pendulum on an espresso drip. Maybe consistency is also seeking a pardon?
  
  
  • Counterpoint: His shifting stances reveal more about judicial strategy than judicial philosophy.
    
    
• Magic Legal Thinking: Kavanaugh acts like a legal Houdini, but the escape tricks are getting old. Maybe try pulling solid legal arguments out of the hat next time?
  
  
  • Counterpoint: Kavanaugh’s reliance on shaky precedents leaves a lot to be desired and quite a bit to the legal imagination.
    
    
• Endless Loop Logic: His reasoning goes round and round, a carousel that even merry-go-round enthusiasts would shy away from.
  
  
  • Counterpoint: By the end, not only are the legal arguments dizzying, but they arguably undermine the legitimacy of the judiciary.
    

The Hot Take:

Welcome to the grand finale, where we solve everything with a sprinkle of liberal magic and a dash of common sense. First, maybe let’s decide some legal boundaries clearer than a foggy night in London. Self-pardons? How about self-awareness first! And judges like Kavanaugh need a reminder that the courtroom isn’t an episode of “Twilight Zone.”

Reform isn’t just needed; it’s desperately required. Like yesterday. Maybe by ensuring Supreme Court Justices know their historical reenactments belong in theaters and not in critical legal opinions, we could actually preserve the sanctity of the judiciary. And hey, if we can’t stop the parade of absurd self-pardon arguments, maybe we can at least sell tickets and get a good laugh out of it.

Source: ‘Dirty tricks’: Analyst shreds Brett Kavanaugh’s ‘Nixon pardon’ argument in Trump case