Enlightened Prisoner - The Truth and Irony in News

     On 2-26-25, the Washington Post penned an article that Trump had nominated his personal attorney D. John Sauer for the post of Solicitor General to the Supreme Court, and on that date the Enlightened Prisoner responded thus: 

There is a certain amount of kinship the SCOTUS wrote into their decision to install such power of decision-making immunity into the office of President. Judges usually assume their actions must have such authority of acceptance without question because their backgrounds result from such learned experience and an end result must be found. But what isn't taken into account in the case of Trump is there must be exceptions, and the Trump history of irrational behavior and evidence for unreasoned decision making does not lend itself to justification for total immunity. Absurd behavior for purely political self-serving reasons must have consequences. Would not that have been the consequences of a Nixon trial?

And one thing more, wouldn't Trump's nomination of his personal attorney D. John Sauer constitute a conflict of interest? And just the act of nominating Sauer would seem an absurd example of Trump's disregard for the ethical nature of governance for all the people, not just he who would rule.