Other views: Justice Department vs. Trump’s rights

Alan M. Dershowitz, The Hill

“There is much speculation as to the significance of the search of the offices and hotel room of President Trump’s lawyer, Michael Cohen . ... We would have been hearing more from civil libertarians — the American Civil Liberties Union, attorney groups and privacy advocates — if the raid had been on Hillary Clinton’s lawyer. Many civil libertarians have remained silent about potential violations of Trump’s rights because they strongly disapprove of him and his policies. That is a serious mistake, because these violations establish precedents that lie around like loaded guns capable of being aimed at other targets . ... I have been widely attacked for defending the constitutional rights of a president I voted against. In our hyperpartisan age, everyone is expected to choose a side, either for or against Trump. But the essence of civil liberties is that they must be equally applicable to all.”

Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review

“Special counsel Robert Mueller did not need a cat’s paw: If he wanted to control the campaign-finance investigation, he could have done so by simply asking Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to expand his jurisdiction — similar to what Clinton independent counsel Kenneth Starr did when the Lewinsky scandal emerged in the midst of his unrelated Whitewater investigation . ... The Stormy Daniels scandal could be more perilous for Trump than the Russia investigation has been . ... The best argument in Trump’s favor is one that claims mitigation, not innocence . ... There’s one problem with a mitigation strategy, though. To carry it off requires a measure of genuine contrition . ... It was Trump’s conduct that caused this mess; it was the harebrained scheme to cover up the mess that brings us to this pass. Trump doesn’t do contrition.”