Watch: Karlan: Trump ‘Can Name His Son Barron But He Cannot Make Him A Baron’

>>Follow Matzav On Whatsapp!<<

Prof. Pamela Karlan was asked to compare the fears of rule by a king and President Trump’s actions. She gave the example that “the president can name his son Barron but he cannot make him a baron.”


  1. It was a terribly inappropriate “joke” and completely wrong to make fun of an innocent kid’s name because of the (perceived) sins of his father. What made it much, much worse is that this wasn’t an off-the-cuff joke that she blurted out without thinking, but obviously a line she prepared beforehand with the intent of getting some laughs by mocking a 13-year-old’s name.
    What she did was disgusting – now let’ see if the has the guts and decency to offer a sincere apology.

  2. She should be stripped of her tenure! Additionally disgraceful that no QUOTE/UNQUOTE respectable panel members objected! This country is so divided. The pledge of allegiance should be reworded; One nation, under G-d, deeply divided, with liberty and justice for some!

  3. It was not a joke. She was making a point about presidents are not kings. People see it as a joke but it’s not.
    If you understand the context she was referring to. Because in England they have baron, baroness, princes princesses duke duchess and so on. If you are a king you give your children or others titles of nobility. On the other hand, if you are a president you cannot give your children or others title of nobility. That’s what she was getting at, but she was making a point about being a baron, as the names are synonyms. Don’t you people understand anything about monarchy. Well, since we’re not a monarchy we are a republic I guess you don’t read too much into monarchy. But a little common sense. And besides, she apologized although she didn’t intend it as a joke.

    Also, she articulates that if congress doesn’t impeach we cease to be a republic. And therefore, we will be under a dictatorship. Like an authoritarian state, a banana republic. Is that what you want, people? Think about it.

    • What a convoluted, disingenuous explanation. Whatever “point” she was trying to make, it was absolutely unnecessary to mock a 13-year-old kids name to make it. And twisting, turning and distorting doesn’t change that fact – she mentioned his name to get laughs and take a dig at President Trump. And your last four sentences are perfect examples of obfuscation and distortion because they have NOTHING to do with why people are outraged.

    • > “if congress doesn’t impeach we cease to be a republic. And therefore, we will be under a dictatorship.”

      So it is either Republic or dictatorship? I suspected all those Parliamentary Democracies are dictatorships by your definition?

      But more to the point, are you denying that, even if re-elected, Trump is out of office at the latest in 5 years (and at which point he can never serve again)? You hope the readers are so dumb as to fall for your implied scare-mongering that Trump will arrogate permanent and hereditary power (which is what the Baron remark was really meant to subliminally convey).

      And for that matter, just which administration has been shown to have weaponized such things as the IRS to help its own party and hurt its competitors? Could it be the Obama administration?

  4. A stupid joke. Is that worth getting angry about? Maybe let’s postpone that until we run out of serious reasons to get angry about. People say and do nasty things to people they don’t like. I recall photographers and journalists were hardly nice and respectful to Obama’s teenage daughters.

    By the way, not sure about USA, but some countries that are republics still have “knighthood” title, granted by the president.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here