Over the last decade, we have repeatedly heard the phrase, “No one is above the law.” There was a time when that phrase held significance.  As much as we would like to believe that’s still the case today, the history of what we’ve witnessed over the last decade with Trump has rendered that phrase null and void, although it still holds for everyone except Donald Trump.

Let’s start here with all the cases he walked away from with no accountability –

• Obstructing justice by trying to interfere with federal investigations into Russian interference in 2016. He used the Department of Justice (DOJ) as a tool, and Bill Barr was all too willing to support a would-be dictator by bending and breaking the rule of law for political reasons.
• Two impeachments. The first was for trying to extort Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, asking him to announce two investigations: one into President Biden and another regarding unverified claims of Ukraine’s interference in the 2016 presidential election.  The second impeachment was for inciting an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol that left some dead and many injured.  He was acquitted both times.
• Sued alongside his three eldest children by New York Attorney General Letitia James, he was found liable for real estate fraud and subsequently prohibited from operating any business within the state of New York. Additionally, he was subject to a fine exceeding $450 million (including interest).
• Found liable for sexual abuse against E.J. Carroll
• Indicted on 34 felony counts by the DA (Alvin Bragg) for falsifying business records to hide hush money payments paid to porn star Stormy Daniels
• Indicted a second time for his handling of classified documents, where he willfully held onto national defense information and conspired to obstruct a federal investigation.
• Indicted a third time for trying to overturn the 2020 election by inciting an insurrection at the Capitol to overthrow the government on January 6, 2021.
• Indicted a fourth time for attempting to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia. He and 18 other co-conspirators were charged with violating the state’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

Apart from being classified as a convicted felon, he walked away from all these cases scot-free.

And since resuming office, the numerous unlawful actions he has undertaken in 2025 are too many to list. He has disregarded judicial rulings and has vengefully targeted law firms and individuals who appropriately participated in investigations against him.

And I’ll add one other point: if illegally militarizing California is not enough, he has now entangled us in a conflict with Iran — a course of action that was unnecessary and unauthorized by Congress, but inevitable with Trump in office.

Despite his lies about being a peacemaker, it is possible that he has always aspired to be a wartime president.  Maybe I’m mistaken, but here we are.  I believe he intended this to happen.

Had he not withdrawn the United States from the Iran nuclear agreement during his initial term, we would not find ourselves in this situation where we’re bombing Iran for another lie told to us by Israel.  May George Bush be a reminder.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s decision to grant him unchecked authority reminiscent of a monarch has merely exacerbated the problem.

The concept of “presumptive immunity,” although not explicitly stated in the Constitution, implies that the President is protected from prosecution while in office.  This is similar to the “Temporary immunity” policy of the Department of Justice, which states that a sitting President cannot be prosecuted while in office.

In both cases, it diminishes accountability and introduces an added layer of protection for Trump, a point that he exploits to his advantage.

While it is asserted that the Department of Justice (DOJ) policy is not intended to “insulate a sitting president from criminal prosecution,” I contest this assertion.

I believe that is precisely the intent of the policy.

Stating that “no one is above the law” but then saying that a “sitting president cannot be prosecuted” for breaking the law contradicts the very idea that “no one is above the law.”

The Department of Justice’s assertion that criminal prosecution diminishes the President’s authority and responsibilities is irrational, as it overlooks the fact that committing crimes against the nation indeed undermines his authority and neglects his duty to the American people.

In my opinion, there’s no doubt that the policy was intended to provide insulation, as it appears to be largely irrelevant in the context of the presidency.  What applies to one criminal does not necessarily apply to another, as demonstrated by Trump’s ability to evade all accountability solely based on his status as “president.”

It is noteworthy that they did not even impose handcuffs when apprehending Trump, who was merely a candidate at the time. This exemplifies preferential treatment granted to an American citizen, who should not be indistinguishable from any other criminal.

There is nothing fair about this justice system, which brings the following question to mind –

What is the Point of “Presidential Succession” If It Cannot Be Used When a President Commits a Crime?

It’s a fundamental contradiction to say, “No one is above the law,” while simultaneously protecting a convicted felon who should be disqualified from running for the country’s highest office.

But I digress.

If a president commits a crime or multiple crimes, they should be held accountable and face prosecution like any other citizen, regardless of their position.  And if they can’t be prosecuted, it essentially means that they are “above the law” in every way.

The Department of Justice’s longstanding policy—that “a sitting president cannot be indicted”—is preposterous and unimportant.  It asserts that the president’s role is so crucial that legal proceedings against them could jeopardize the entire executive branch by impairing their capacity to perform their duties.

Please correct me if I am mistaken, but is it not the purpose of the presidential line of succession that, when the President is unable to fulfill their duties, the Vice President assumes the office and, if necessary, nominates a new Vice President to assume their previous responsibilities?

To clarify once more: if it is part of the Vice President’s (and Congress’s) duties to prevent interference that could weaken the presidency, then why does the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) within the Department of Justice oppose indicting and removing a profoundly corrupt person who abuses the presidency from their role?

Never mind the harm to the American public, who now have to rely on a person involved in nonstop illegal behavior and who desperately wants to become a dictator, to act in their best interests.

Some legal experts assert that impeachment is the exclusive process for holding a sitting president accountable for misconduct; this perspective is also problematic.  Hence, the two acquittals by Congress.

Furthermore, when a single party controls both chambers of Congress simultaneously, unless some members in the House of Representatives vote with the minority party to pass articles of impeachment, the passage may be obstructed by the majority.

Even if they are passed, the Senate retains the discretion to acquit.  In the same manner as above, the majority can undermine the prospect of meaningful accountability, particularly when they vote along party lines, which is a frequent occurrence.

Therefore, I respectfully inquire once more: What is the purpose of establishing a line of succession if it cannot be enacted during a time of crisis when a convicted felon in the White House is being supported and praised for abusing their power, breaking every law, and dismantling our government and legal system?

With all of this, it is why I believe –

Trump Will Never Face Accountability For His Crimes.

An excessive number of individuals are endorsing his destructive actions under the pretext of “making America great again.” They support the transformation of America into an autocratic state under Trump and take pride in aiding his effort to restore a period when many lacked rights, a voice to express their opinions, and when racism was more unrestrained than it is today.

When Donald Trump and his insurrectionists tried to overthrow the government, resulting in fatalities and severe injuries, Garland pursued less significant targets but was hindered by his “political bias” from acting against Trump promptly.

Make that make sense.

Furthermore, I suspect that after the 5-year statute of limitations (SOL) expires, and he is almost 83, no one will want to prosecute him.  If so, with every opportunity, he will use his delay tactics, adding more time to the case, which can easily put him at the age of 84, 85, and so on.

The question then becomes: Is it worthwhile to try to prosecute him now; does prison or a residence at “Alligator Alcatraz” even matter at that point?

Even now, despite the continuous dismantling of our legal system by him and his oligarchs, and his leadership in warfare under false pretenses, and the “Big Bullshit Bill” that Congress passed on his behalf, he is consequently being commended for his actions, thereby contributing to the perception that he will not be held legally accountable for any of this conduct.

Even now, many issues like uncounted ballots, bomb threats in remote areas, burning of ballot boxes, wrongful purging of millions from databases before the election, verified reports from voters about their ballots not being recorded, zero votes for the Democratic candidate in strong Democratic areas, problems with tabulators, and other concerns have all gone unchallenged.

This is mainly because people feel hesitant to speak out. As a result, he (and Musk) have avoided accountability and continue to act without consequence, undermining our nation’s democracy and its values.

Even now, while talented analytics and data science experts diligently investigate, conduct recounts and forensic audits, and file court cases to uncover the truth behind what we know happened (because there is evidence), Trump will remain untouched.

This narrative concludes that it is now too late to hold him accountable. He is above the law, and the authorities responsible for placing him in that position are diligently working to maintain his status. Consequently, his efforts to remain in office indefinitely, with their support, are apparent.

Considering all the reasons outlined above, along with other relevant factors, I do not anticipate that Donald Trump, a career criminal and convicted felon, will ever be subjected to imprisonment for his crimes against this nation.

Legally and officially, the Supreme Court’s ruling has further placed him “above the law.”

A Severely Compromised Legal System

Whether it pertains to a significantly antiquated legal system requiring extensive reform or a profoundly corrupt system that prioritizes its interests to safeguard itself, Trump is protected by the very people we are supposed to trust to uphold the law, not diminish it: right-wing Supreme Court justices, a blatantly corrupt and weaponized DOJ, crooked attorneys, a debased GOP and cabinet, and a host of oligarch billionaires who help buy elections.

Therefore, we can all be confident that every dismissed criminal case he avoided, and will continue to prevent, has effectively elevated him above the law. This pattern is evident each time he disregards the courts and persists in acting outside legal boundaries.

No individual or entity can hold this man accountable when he is supported and protected by like-minded individuals who are more than willing to do his unlawful bidding.

The only acknowledgment the American people have seen and will see for his crimes against this country is his being simply labeled a “convicted felon.”

Unfortunately, that’s all we’ll ever get.