Fire, Fury, And The First Amendment

We have a new presidential biography on the market, called, Fire And Fury, by Michael Wolff. Donald Trump, styling himself as the forty-fifth president of the United States, has reportedly reacted badly to this book. At this point, Trump should know a few things about elected officials and publicly spoken and written words: primarily that after winning an election, the official is no longer a private person and therefore no longer protected by state and federal laws pertaining to libel and slander. Such an individual is still entitled to a certain amount of privacy, and making threats of violence against an elected official is unlawful in most cases, but satire and whistle blowing are fair game; more so than in the case of a private person. An elected official in northeast Kansas discovered this for herself in 2013. Satire and whistle blowing are still very acceptable under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Another very important aspect of the laws about libel and slander concerns specific losses that can be ascertained by the court. If one does not have those, one's case will generally be dismissed. Since we have laws about the types of income a United States president may rake in while in office, declaring a loss might be difficult for Mr. Trump. Using the White House for financial gain is legally defined as a conflict of interest for a president, and if published, written material impedes a president's ability to commit a civil tort, the president scarcely has legal recourse!

Donald Trump has been in office long enough to understand the legalities of satire and financial conflicts of interest involving elected officials, so it appears that he is only running his yap in an ongoing effort to distract the American public from matters that are more important that Fire And Fury. It is nice to see Americans take a renewed interest in reading books, though.

Abbie Hoffman Moment

This is Abbie Hoffman's answer in court, during the Chicago Seven trial, concerning why he introduced a pig as a presidential candidate during a protest. He might not even be able to distinguish between Donald Trump and the chosen mascot!

Addison Mikkelson Goes To Court

Addison Mikkelson, the seventeen year old Topeka youth who enjoys filming and recording police officers on duty, has begun his tour of the judicial system. A couple of days ago, he had his first hearing, wherein he entered a plea of not guilty to jaywalking and inattentive driving. Hopefully, Addison will insist upon a jury trial for the jaywalking charges. That should make a district judge's day! The police in Topeka are only posturing and attempting to ruin Addison's future, anyway. Appearing impromptu on camera adds up to accountability, and any police officer who cannot cope with accountability should find another line of work.

This is beginning to look a little like Abbie Hoffman's trial in 1968 for conspiring to incite a riot during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Abbie and his friends were demonstrating against the involvement of the United States in the Vietnam War, and got arrested, despite the fact that they had a permit. The trial began on September 24, 1969 and lasted until February 18, 1970; at which time Abbie Hoffman and his cohorts where found not guilty. Their demeanor on court dates during the trial, however; was a different matter. All seven of them, and a couple of their defense attorneys, were found guilty of contempt of court for their creative self expression at intervals during the whole process. One day, Hoffman and Rubin, a co-defendant, wore judge's robes to court. When Judge Hoffman (no relation to Abbie Hoffman) ordered them to remove their robes, they complied, revealing police uniforms under the robes. Throwing Abbie and et els in prison....yes, prison....for contempt of court may have merely been a means of saving face for a district court that had a problem with satire on the parts of the defendants while on trial and of those pesky "not guilty" verdicts on the part of the jury. Trying young Addison Mikkelson for jaywalking appears about as silly.

Isn't it grand to know that law enforcement in Topeka Kansas is protecting all of us from young, amateur photographers? Don't you feel safer, knowing that all those dangerous jaywalkers, or at least those who pose a threat to abusive police officers, will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? After all, Addison Mikkelson, pictured at the top of this post, looks like a very scary kid, doesn't he?

Hoffman and Rubin, dressed for court in judge's robes.