Presidential Subpoenas

Dear Rudy Giuliani,

Please allow me to correct your knowledge of history and fact. You claim that the Constitution allows that the POTUS cannot be subpoenaed. You are wrong.

Three Presidents have been subpoenaed. Jefferson, Nixon, and Clinton. We know how it turned out for the last two. Hence, there is indeed precedent.

Where in the Constitution does it state that he can't be? Nowhere. You and your fellow Trump supporters keep forgetting that the Judiciary is a co-equal branch of the Government.

So, to the followers of the President and you, let me remind you that there are two types of subpoenas. (I won't attempt the Latin. I would get it wrong.) The first type compels you to provide testimony. The other requires you to provide physical evidence.

Jefferson was subpoenaed for both testimony and evidence in the Arron Burr treason trial. Nixon was required to turn over the tapes. And we all watched Bill Clinton give testimony.

Time for you to go back and re-read those text books from law school. It appears you have forgotten the basics. In your current position, try less spin and more law. Your client will thank you.

Signed,
An Informed Citizen.

Ex Post Facto

Dear Mr. President,

I read your tweets this weekend and I must say, you really need to talk to your lawyers or fire them all. They are doing you a great disservice. Please, let this Informed Citizen talk to you about the basics of a little thing called ex post facto.

Mr. President, this is in the Constitution. (Article I, Section 9, clause 3). It is a really good document, you should read it. Since it is obvious that not only have you not read the constitution and your latest lawyer (Rudy Giuliani) has not practiced law in over 20 years, let me tell what this is all about and how this pertains to you.

Ex post facto simplest conceptual interpretation is that a law cannot be passed that makes an act illegal (or punishment worse) retroactively. If I did something that was legal today, a law cannot be passed tomorrow that says I am guilty of said act. Only a change of status and a lessening of the punishment is allowed, ala the SCOTUS.

Now why does this matter in the case of your tweets this past weekend? Well, you claimed that former FBI Director James Comey leaked memos that were classified pertaining to conversations to you. You claimed that they were classified. Yet, you did not classify them. Sorry, but all conversations with you are not automatically classified. Only those pertaining to national security and there is a process for that.

Now let’s add some more to your education. Mr. Comey was the one who got to determine their classification, not you. He gave them to a friend for safe keeping. They were turned over to the Justice Department and the Special Counselor’s office as part of cooperating with a Federal probe. You know, that Law and Order thing that you campaigned on. The memos were leaked after they were handed over to Congress last week. Who could have possibly leaked them?

Now, you want to have Mr. Comey arrested and tried for the “leaked” memos that you claimed are now classified. This is a case of ex post facto. Yeah, that pesky Constitution keeps getting the way.

So, there you have it Mr. President. Another short lesson on a concept embedded deep in the Constitution. Like I said at the beginning, you really should read it. Knowing it would help with a number of problems you are having.

Signed,
An Informed Citizen

Presidential Rant

Dear President Trump,

Just saw your rant on FOX and Friends. Just a little correction for your comments about the so-called corruption in the top levels of the FBI. I wish to remind you that you appointed these people.

If they are as corrupt as you say, then what does it say about your administration's vetting process? You have final say. What does it say about your decision making ability? What does it say your respect for law and order? If they ate as bad as you say, then appoint your people with real experience.

Signed,
An Informed Citizen.

Cohen’s Other Client

Dear Mr. Hannity,

You can't have it both ways. You are either a client or you are not. Now here is the important part. If you are not a client, then there is no lawyer/client privilege. That is the way it works.

You now you do not have to pay a lawyer to be a client. That is the lawyer working for you pro bono. (That mean for free) But this is an important part, you will still be a client.

You claim that you are a journalist. Journalistic ethics require you to reveal any connections you might have with a person you are interviewing or reporting on. Your claim about needing and having a private life fall flat. Especially where a conflict arises where your job is involved.

You need to rethink your story. Come clean. Or America will make up their own story. And it won't be pretty.

Signed,
An Informed Citizen

Search Warrents

Dear Mr. President,

Once again, I feel I have to educate you on the workings of the United States Government.

First, when law enforcement (i.e. FBI) enter a building and take evidence per a court issued warrant, this not breaking into an office. A court issued warrant is perfectly legal and part of our system of government. I refer you to the U.S. Constitution.

Now before you keep shooting off your mouth, you might want to get your facts straight. It was not Mueller's office that asked the court for the warrant. It was the Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney. This was a person that you appointed. Granted, the Mueller team referred the warrant to them, but it was the U.S. Attorney that did it. (They could have declined.)

Now let's repeat it for your supporters. A person that you appointed was responsible for this search.

You definitely need to stop shooting off your before you get the facts. You are the President of the United States. It is not that hard for you get those facts. Ask the people around you.

Signed,
An Informed Citizen.

Administer Pruitt

Dear Administer Pruitt,

You are not the President. You do not need an armored vehicle. People are not looking to assassinate you. Yell terrible things at you? Yes, but that comes with the job.

You do not need a bulletproof reception desk for your office. You have a security detail along with building security. Learn the evacuation plans and you will be fine.

You do not need a 24 hour security detail. Your job is not an immediate national security or in the presidential line of succession. In fact, your job does not even require you to leave the country.

If you cannot deal with restrictions of government employment, then go find a job in the private sector. But here is some facts, they put restrictions in place too.

Signed,

An Informed Citizen

Secretary Mnuchin

Dear Secretary Mnuchin (Department of the Treasury),

I know that you are not the President. But as a member of the Cabinet, you should have a basic understanding of the Constitution. You can find it on line in less than 2 seconds. Heck, send an intern down to the federal archives (where they are displaying the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution) and have them buy one in the gift shop.

OK, you don't know all the ins and outs of constitutional law. That is fine, most people don't. But as the Secretary of the Treasury, I know you have a legal department. Talk to one of them.

But as a citizen let me help you here. In 1996, the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) ruled that the line item veto was unconstitutional. That means that the only way to change that is to amend the Constitution. There is no other way that Congress can change this. A quick look up on line will show you this. Google and Wikipedia are your friends.

Signed,
An Informed Citizen.