Irish Examiner view: Is Donald Trump above the law?     

One of the most significant stories about Donald Trump broke this week, based on investigations into whether Mr Trump tried to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election illegally. Picture: Evan Vucci/AP

The return of Donald Trump as US president is sure to produce a near-constant stream of news stories featuring his pronouncements and policies. Mr Trump’s inauguration, for instance, is due to take place next Monday and will no doubt provide plenty of headlines in and of itself as his term begins officially.

One of the most significant stories about Mr Trump broke this week, however, thanks to a report written by US Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith. The report is based on investigations into whether Mr Trump tried to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election illegally.

Mr Smith found, as stated in the report, that the evidence against Mr Trump was “sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial”.

The report went on to outline some of the ways Mr Trump obstructed the investigation, such as using social media to target witnesses, courts, and justice department employees.

However, Mr Smith acknowledged also that the US Constitution rules out the prosecution of a sitting president, and the case cannot therefore proceed.

Just days ago, Mr Smith resigned from the US justice department, which is no surprise. It is widely expected that when Mr Trump returns to power he will punish people he regards as his enemies and, given Mr Smith’s investigations, he would likely be a marked man in the eyes of the new administration.

That administration will be led by someone responsible for an “unprecedented criminal effort to overturn the legitimate results of the election in order to retain power”, as this report phrases it. This is a truly remarkable statement, one made all the more striking because it appears just a few days before its subject is inaugurated as president.

The implications for the US justice system are ominous. Many years ago, former US president Richard Nixon caused consternation when saying of illegal activities: “Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.”

Are we now to conclude that whatever Mr Trump does, as president or not, it is not illegal?

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

Stealing the limelight

On Monday, gardaí were called to Galway City Hall as a group of approximately 100 people protested over the closure of the Pálás Arthouse Cinema.

Last month, the cinema announced it would close at the end of February due to rising costs. The protestors at Galway City Hall called on the local authority to guarantee the continued existence of the cinema as a hub for creative and artistic endeavours in the city.

A vibrant arts community is a cornerstone of any successful city, and those involved in the arts in Galway deserve credit for mobilising in an effort to secure the future of the arthouse cinema. There are 13 employees in the three-screen cinema, nine of them full-time.

A closer look at the cinema’s history, however, shows that it has been a lightning rod for controversy for quite some time. First proposed back in 2004, the cinema took 12 years to complete because of various construction and financing issues. The project was backed by over €8m in public funding, but the organisation behind the initial project, Solas-Galway Picture Palace Teo, ended up going into liquidation in 2017.

Current owners Element Pictures took the cinema over in 2018, the same year the Public Accounts Committee looked into the funding of the facility. At that point, PAC member Marc MacSharry said it was “the most appalling waste and poor use of public funds”, pointing out that the facility was being run by a private company as a for-profit cinema.

Galway City Council now faces a classic dilemma. At the meeting last Monday, councillors stressed that they do not want to see the cinema close or become a derelict eyesore, which is understandable. Yet they have little wish to spend even more money on a facility which has already swallowed over €8m in public funds.

The decision was eventually taken to carry out an independent commercial appraisal of the cinema, but it is hard to see that appraisal improving on one councillor’s simple observation: That more people should have gone to the cinema when it was open.

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

Small mercies

There could hardly be a neater illustration of social media fame and virality than the Cherry Tomato Bridge, a craze which flared briefly online before disappearing this week.

In short, the picture of some cherry tomatoes on a bridge in Drumcondra, Dublin, somehow kindled into an online sensation.

People travelled to see the tomatoes and left their own tomatoes — and tomato-adjacent products such as packets of ketchup and tins of chopped tomatoes — behind in homage.

Dublin City Council had already signalled its intention to act, issuing a statement on the matter, but it is believed that at press time the tomatoes had already been scattered from the bridge in any case.

The online appreciation of the phenomenon — some observers said they went to Drumcondra to “worship” — may baffle readers who are not chronically online, but perhaps we should be grateful for small mercies.

The Cherry Tomato Bridge doesn’t appear to have been a cynical marketing ploy created to humanise some monolithic company, for instance, nor was it created to drive potential customers to some online shopping site. Thankfully, nobody appears to have monetised its appearance — or disappearance — either.

The spontaneity and brevity may have been the point. If there ever was a point.

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here