🔗 Share this article

In 1931, an exceptionally gifted young attorney named Hans Litten called Adolf Hitler to testify before the court. Litten was representing the injured parties of a brutal assault carried out by members of Hitler's Sturmabteilung at a dance hall patronized by political activists. When the violence concluded, three people lost their lives.

During the extensive cross-examination of the Nazi party leader, Litten achieved what few dared. The dictator anticipated fear, however found himself skillfully interrogated while sworn in, transformed into an angry, stumbling speaker. By trapping Hitler through inconsistencies while demonstrating his pattern of lying, Litten simultaneously revealed the Nazi goal of dismantling the Weimar Republic.

The dictator's retaliation came two years later, shortly after his rise to authority. Following the Reichstag fire while employing special powers allegedly for security, Hitler commanded the arrest and "protective custody" of numerous political enemies, including Litten. For the next period, as he moved through detention facilities, Litten faced repeated physical abuse and torture. In 1938, with no hope of freedom, he ended his life. The transgression: defending legal principles and democratic governance against an aspiring dictator.

Modern Parallels

America in 2025 differs from Germany in 1933. Nevertheless, the lawyer's ordeal has uncomfortable similarities. Recently, federal prosecutors in Virginia revealed that the ex-FBI chief James Comey faced charges for allegedly lying while sworn before Congress.

The case against Comey appear so flimsy that Erik Siebert, Trump's appointed legal official, declined filing charges. His professional evaluation predictably earned Trump's fury. "I want him out," Trump fumed, and so the prosecutor stepped down before dismissal, vacating his position after barely eight months.

The president hastily named a replacement: a personal lawyer, a member of Trump's inner circle now occupying influential roles within the justice system. Despite having no prior prosecutorial experience and overseeing complex national security cases, Halligan's main credential seemed willingness to follow presidential demands: satisfy presidential retaliation. The charges she filed targeting the former director, delivered just before the legal deadline, only confirmed Siebert's doubts.

Judicial Proceedings

Law students often learn the saying that a determined lawyer can get a reviewing panel "to charge any target." However, the new prosecutor apparently failed to: the grand jury declined charges on a single of three counts submitted.

The president welcomed the two-count indictment through announcing on social media: "AMERICAN JUSTICE!" – perhaps a fitting, though accidentally dystopian, description of present condition of the rule of law in our nation. The case concerns personal vengeance, but it's also much more alarming implications.

Assuming momentarily that the president faced biased investigation previously, nevertheless unacceptable for a sitting president to respond to perceived wrong with another.

The truth is that federal examination into Russian interference in the presidential race – the origin of Trump's campaign targeting the former director – represented no politically motivated "witch-hunt". Rather, it uncovered a "sweeping and systematic" campaign to disrupt the electoral process.

The Real Offense

The former director's genuine "crime" mirrors the German lawyer's. He dared to demonstrate loyalty to his position and the law, rather than the Great Leader. Not that the director faces sharing Litten's fate. By publicly declaring Comey "guilty as hell" and transparently interfering in judicial proceedings, Trump has provided the judge grounds to throw out charges as vindictive prosecution.

Should Comey go to trial, the prosecution's clear flaws might well result in dismissal. Even if Comey were convicted and sent to prison, America presently maintains no system of concentration camps where political opponents face systematic torture.

But that provides cold comfort. Reality persists that Comey is being persecuted, rather than properly charged, for placing national interest first above personal loyalty. Seemingly enacting an authoritarian playbook, Trump is making Comey pay his act of constitutional fidelity. What should alarm every citizen is the facility with which the president, assisted by compliant lawyers, has converted the traditionally autonomous legal system into an instrument of authoritarian consolidation.