All checks, no balance: the dangerous education of Donald J. Trump

The progression of Special Counsel Mueller probe on President Trump's possible grounds for impeachment has unveiled new and troubling evidence with his personal lawyer's confession.

After months of campaigning publicly against the Special Counsel's "witch hunt", Trump has been rendered legally mute. Illegal conspiracy to hide evidence of unethical behavior that might have affected the election's results has been exposed. 

The most disturbing element of the new developments are not the accusations and probes but the fact that even those defending President Trump are assuming in fact that he has committed crimes such as to be impeached if his associates "turn on him" and reveal what they know. Or -to be more precise- what everybody already knows (conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and collusion with Russian agents) mostly because the same candidate Trump announced it during the campaign. 

This is not a horror but a suspense story. Spectators know who and how committed the crime, they just watch the unfolding events waiting for the next shoe to drop. Some with fear, other with joy. All carried away by two years of endless and mindless antagonistic and hyper-partisan politics fueled by the President that might end being victim of his own showmanship.  

As with chess, in constitutional law there are also "checks". Like in chess, constitutional checks -like a Special Council probe- announce impending doom for those who trespassed their consitutional limits and their office duties. 

As in chess, the next stop can be another check, a loss or the ending of the game.

The Constitution of the United States was specifically designed to check those in power and prevent them from abusing their offices. In 250 years, it has been tested by several former presidents and worked effectively.

James Madison wrote the famous Federalist 10 explaining that:

"No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.

With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time"

Madison warned that:

 When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.

And proposed institutions to check majorities (always circumstantial) and factions (always self-serving) from breaking or bending the law: 

To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. 

Those who think that social media and showmanship can trump (no pun intended) the Constitution have met their first check. There are evidently plenty more down this road. 

Madison had "obnoxious presidents" in his mind when he wrote: 

Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people.  

And conceived an intricate -yet not unassailable- set of rules written in the Federalist papers and then into our 1787 Constitution. The new form of government was not a democracy -democracy was already 2000 years old and had time and again turned presidents into Caesars- but a republic, a system with checks and balances between three separated powers.

Come November, the balance of power in Congress can -and probably will- swing to the opposition party, making more likely President Trump's impeachment. 

The next check can become a check mate.

We haven't had time yet to look at the consequences of a premature end of Donald Trump's presidency.

We should.