Yates Goes On CNN To Declare That Russians Had “Real Leverage” Over Flynn

sally_q-_yatesI have previously been critical of the stance taken by former acting Attorney General Sally Yates.  I remained unconvinced that Yates had the ethical basis to order for the entire Justice Department to stand down and not to assist the president in the defense of his first executive order on immigration. I also questioned Yates’ decision to voluntarily testify before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.  She was testifying as someone who was recently in a prosecutorial position about subjects related to an ongoing investigation where no one has yet to be indicted.  Now those concerns have been magnified by Yates’ appearance in the media to talk about matters center to the ongoing investigation at the Justice Department and other related subjects.

In an interview with Anderson Cooper on CNN, Yates discussed how  former national security adviser Michael Flynn was in a “serious compromise situation, that the Russians had real leverage.” Such statements are unfair to someone like Flynn who is the target of a federal investigation but not indicted on any crime.  Ironically, many criticized Trump for allegedly asking former FBI Director James Comey about the pending investigation of Flynn.  Additionally, many criticized Comey for discussing the details of alleged violations by Hillary Clinton despite her not being indicted. Yates’ discussion of matters related to the investigation raise equal concerns.  This type of public commentary can also hurt Yates’ colleagues who are still working the case.  She can indicate the perceived strength or interpretation of evidence. That can affect the willingness of witnesses to cooperate with the investigators.  Finally, it can discourage targets from speaking with prosecutors if they fear that they can go public at any time and comment on their presumed guilt or vulnerability.

Yates also told Anderson that Flynn lied to Vice President Mike Pence and there was “certainly a criminal statute that was implicated by his conduct.” She added “Whether he is fired or not is a decision by the President of the United States to make, but it doesn’t seem like that’s a person who should be sitting in the national security adviser position.”

Relying on her knowledge from the open investigation, Yates declared on television that the Russian had “real leverage” over Flynn.

Once again, this is someone who is actively being investigated by Yates’ former colleagues but not indicted. I find the statements in public interview to be deeply troubling.
What do you think?

193 thoughts on “Yates Goes On CNN To Declare That Russians Had “Real Leverage” Over Flynn”

  1. I saw the allegedly “biased” Jonathan Turley interviewed on both Fox and MSNBC today. JT is as straight as they come when it comes to the law.

    1. I saw it, too, and I strongly disagree. What does Trump have to do to convince you that he’s unfit? I mean, honestly, how many lies does he have to tell, how many pu$$ygrabbing incidents does he have to admit to, how many comments, like Megyn Kelly must have been on the rag for confronting him about his misogynist comments, how many people who are investigating his wrongdoing does he have to fire, how many refusals to disclose his tax returns or divest from his businesses have to happen before you are convinced that the media aren’t biased? How many “reassure me that I’m loved” rallies does he have to hold before you figure out that he is emotionally insecure? How many “I had the biggest inauguration crowd in history”, or “I really won the popular vote, but there was widespread voter fraud” lies will it take to convince you that there’s something seriously wrong with this person? How many bragging about the size of his penis episodes will it take before you conclude he’s not Presidential, but rather, immature, insecure and not even a gentleman, much less Presidential material? Why are the only people he trusts his family members who depend on him for their livelihood? By age 70, why doesn’t he have any trusted business associates, friends, or even long-time attorneys he can rely on? How many “little people”, like craftsmen does he have to screw over before you see the light?

      Sally Yates advised Congress that he wouldn’t listen to serious evidence that Flynn was subject to being blackmailed by a foreign enemy. She made a special trip to the White House, to be sure that the message wouldn’t get lost or deflected by underlings. She’s not the problem–he is. A President who ignores valid advice from a career Justice Department lawyer that a prospective nominee for national security advisor is at serious risk for blackmail and proceeds with nominating him anyway is beyond stupid or even arrogant. He doesn’t seem to appreciate what it means to be President. He still lives in Trumpworld, where a woman can’t tell you what to do–she can’t ever be right. Attempting to pivot the discussion to Yates for telling the truth about the most-unqualified person ever to occupy the White House can only be the product of bias–not realty. Folks, this country is in serious danger, because this man cannot refrain from insulting people, trying to dominate others and insisting on being the center of attention. He’s immature, and he’s no patriot or even a diplomat. He should stay home because he can’t even stay on script and doesn’t know or care where to draw the line when showing off about how smart he thinks he is, as the meeting with the Russians proved. People who are knowledgeable about the danger he is causing are patriotic and correct to go to the media, which is similarly correct to report on it–otherwise, we’d never know.

      1. Natacha – Sally Yates is an unreliable narrator as we say in literature. Her version of events is not to be trusted.

    2. Nick,
      JT’s following comment was awesome!

      “Turley compared Trump critics suggesting that the U.S. may be nearing impeachment proceedings, despite the lack of evidence so far proving he did anything illegal, to traveling across the country with his family and them constantly asking “‘Are we there yet?’”

      “Everyone wants to reach that point and you say, ‘Well, I can still see our house,’” Turley said.”

      He shied away from citing a specific age that would be asking that question but I’m certain these ‘children’ heard what was implied. 🙂

      1. Let the impetuous “children” impeach and fail.

        Trump will have free rein then.

        Let’s get this party started.

  2. What do we think here? I think that you, Jonathan, are biased in favor of Trumplethinskin, and just like Fixed Non News, pivot blame anywhere and everywhere except where it belongs. Yeah, the real problem is the leakers. Yeah, the real problem is people like Sally Yates speaking out of turn before anyone is charged or prosecuted. Yeah, the media is the enemy. Yeah, the Democrats are on a witch hunt. That explains all of the negative stories about Trumplethinskin–right?

    This entire discussion about Flynn would be academic if Trumplethinskin had heeded Sally Yates’s warning. The big story here is that he won’t listen to anyone, especially those who know more than he does, which includes everyone in the Justice Department. People need to know that Trumplethinskin knew, in advance of nominating him, that Flynn was vulnerable to being blackmailed by the Russians, but wouldn’t listen. That’s important information. Why have smart lawyers on the payroll if the President won’t listen to their advice? Not only did he disregard her advice, he fired her and replaced her with J “Cracker” Sessions. This Presidency is a disaster of historical proportions, tainted from its inception by the involvement of the Russians. Trumplethinskin has serious emotional problems, he isn’t a patriot, he’s in way over his head, and he won’t listen to the voices of reason. He will be impeached, and it will be his own fault. The only question I have is; how long will it take for Republicans to put their country ahead of their party?

    1. Natacha,
      Once again you’ve offered a very objective analysis of the situation and every point you make is reasoned and well thought out.

      To be clear; that is everything up to and including the first question mark.

            1. In a comment, try typing the following: “this is <em>italics text</em> and this is <b>bold text</b>”

              Post the comment and see what you get. You should see: “this is italics text and this is bold text.”

              The less than and greater than symbols denote that the enclosed text is html “mark up” or format instructions. The “em” is for italics and the “/em” is to signal the end of the italics text. The “b” is obviously for bold, the “/b” to end the bold and so on. When ever you begin some formatting instruction, you must try to remember to end it with the </fi > where “fi” means “format instruction.” If you fail to end it, the rest of your comment will be italic or bold or whatever your last formatting instruction was.

              Hope that’s a little clearer than mud…

        1. Perfect!

          Let’s end the madness, incoherence and hysteria.

          Repeal the 19th Amendment.

  3. Will, today we study humans & reptile function disorder.

    Notice in this video that a Chameleon sees a reflection of itself in mirror & then attacks.
    Lawyers & doctors, answer the question? Are democrats behaving the same?

  4. Jill wrote, “I am asking people of good will who have documents to start/keep leaking. It all needs to be exposed. This corruption won’t end until it’s exposed.”

    She’s right.

  5. The similarity in the tactics used by the Left to attack opponents on free speech grounds is no different than what is currently being done to undermine this administration. Trump is absolutely unconventional and he certainly seems either unable or unwilling to play by the establishment’s rule book. I wouldn’t be surprised to find Trump’s entire strategy revolved around his (not the others) ability to beat Clinton in the election. With that accomplished, his bull-in-a-china-shop approach is exposing the corruption of the political establishment and their complicit media. Conservatives lose very little with impeachment proceedings and in fact they will gain as the entire corrupt bureaucracy will also go on trial. Pence will be waiting in the wings and his style of governance will make him appear like the second coming of George Washington compared with the last two Presidents.

    Replace “Free Speech” with “Constitutional Governance” in the following article and it all makes sense.

    “What is to be done? For starters, we need to be aware that this is happening, and that it is not random. The intimidation game is very real. It is the work of left-wing groups and politicians, it is coordinated, and it is well-honed. Many of the targets of intimidation who I interviewed for my recent book weren’t aware of what was happening to them, and that allowed the intimidation to go on for too long. Awareness is key.”


  6. “Ironically, many criticized Trump for allegedly asking former FBI Director James Comey about the pending investigation of Flynn.”

    There has been criticism of Trump asking Comey about an investigation into his (Trump’s) own activities and there has been criticism of Trump asking Comey to end an investigation into Flynn, because “he’s such a nice guy”. I hadn’t heard of Trump asking Comey about the status of the Flynn investigation.

    In her comments about the Russians having leverage over Flynn, it’s possible that Yates was referring to that which has already been made public that Flynn lied about – he was serving as a foreign agent without registering and in serving as a foreign agent without permission as a former military officer. It wasn’t just that he was a foreign agent, he was a foreign agent who lied about it. Not the best recommendation for a top NSC advisor.

    I agree that Yates should have limited her appearance to the House committee.

  7. Looks like the Comey memo doesn’t amount to much:

    A week ago Trump unceremoniously fired FBI boss James Comey:

    After six months of investigation the FBI had no evidence for any of the rumors about Russian interference [in the U.S.] that were thrown around. It should have closed the case with a clear recommendation not to prosecute the issue. That Comey kept the case open was political interference from his side. Hearings and public rumors about the case blocked the political calendar. Instead of following the facts, and deciding based upon them, he was himself running a political campaign.
    Comey had hoped that he would not be fired as long as the investigation was running. Since Trump kicked him out Comey tried to get a public hearing in Congress to spill the beans and get some revenge. The Republican majority leaders smelled the trap and did not invite him. Today he upped his game: Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation

    President Trump asked the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, to shut down the federal investigation into Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, in an Oval Office meeting in February, according to a memo Mr. Comey wrote shortly after the meeting.
    “I hope you can let this go,” the president told Mr. Comey, according to the memo.

    Comey leaked the memo to raise new allegations against Trump and to finally get his day in Congress. But Trump’s “I hope you can let this go” is not a clear interference in a judicial investigation. Trump just wished that the FBI would use its resources to look into other issues, like the extensive leaking of secret intelligence that occurred during recent months. Nothing nefarious can be constructed from that reasonable explanation. The investigation into Flynn, for violating the Foreign Agent Registration Act with relation to Turkey(!), continues. Trump has had no influence on it. If this talk has been so important as to possibly constitute a breach of law why did Comey wait months, until after he was fired, to leak it?

    1. It may not be clear to some that your entire comment is a quotation of the Moon of Alabama article you linked to at the beginning. Nothing wrong with such a quote, of course, but without quotation marks or some such indication, it can be mistaken for your comment rather than the Moon of Alabama’s post.

      The crux of MOA’s declaration that the Comey’s memo is bogus is as follows:

      But Trump’s “I hope you can let this go” is not a clear interference in a judicial investigation. Trump just wished that the FBI would use its resources to look into other issues, like the extensive leaking of secret intelligence that occurred during recent months. Nothing nefarious can be constructed from that reasonable explanation.

      I have no idea if there is any truth to this memo or not, and I often quote Moon of Alabama myself, but I do not find this particular exoneration compelling other than as B’s opinion (the author of M-O-A) which might or might not be accurate.

      Your assessment that the memo doesn’t amount to much is optimistic under the circumstances, even if correct.

    2. In support of your comment (the Comey memo amounts to nothing) , you might consider this interview by Paul Jay of The Real News with Robert English, a Professor of International Relations at the University of Southern California.


      This is probably the most complete and compelling explanation for what is going on in general (all the knives flying around) that I have heard. It’s explanation for the Comey memo and why it is indeed insignificant, is excellent.

      To summarize the beginning, the assumption that has been foisted on the public – that makes many of these fake scandals resonate – is that detente with Russia is a bad horrible thing. Which is, of course, nonsense. Neither Trump nor or any of his surrogates ever proposed any sort of dangerous or treacherous plot that would harm US interests. They were instead aimed quite simply at improving relations with Russia (likely for business dealings but that is not, in itself, a security threat). Even Flynn’s discussions with the Russian ambassador were perfectly normal and his report to Pence at most a harmless “fib” and not some nefarious lie. More importantly, almost every one of the “scandals” that are being aimed at Trump rely on this perception that Russia MUST always, by definition, be our arch enemy.

      The interview concludes with much what I was saying above, The knives are out and all for the wrong reasons – though Trump is hardly helping himself.

      However, they also point out that the overall effect of this trumped-up (no pun intended) impeachment effort is diverting our attention away from some of the more dangerous things Trump and his administration ARE doing or plan to do – though I imagine there would be some healthy disagreement regarding that subject on this site.

  8. Newsflash! Attorneys well-connected in the Democratic Party are unscrupulous lawfare artists who are unprofessional by default. They’re unfit for any position of public trust any time any place anywhere.

  9. The knives are out. There are so many accusations flying around, one can’t tell where there is just smoke or where there is actually a potential fire. But the optics are starting to sour for Trump no matter what’s fake or real. While the DNC is a good target to blame for everything, they represent only one faction, and probably a fairly small one at that, that is out to get Trump (besides Trump himself of course). The establishment, deep state, neoliberals and neoconservatives, however one wants to call them, seem to have decided – for whatever reasons – that helping Trump to help destroy himself is worth pursuing all the way.

    The latest one (I’m aware of) is Come’s alleged memo reported by the NYT that Trump tried to get Comey to lay off Flynn,

    “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” Trump told Comey, according to Comey’s record of the meeting, as reported by the Times. “He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

    -The Guardian


    If there is substance to this allegation, Trump may well be in serious trouble. If not, the optics bucket just gets bigger and bigger.

    Whether or not empathy for the little guy in the form of any government assistance is good or bad, I suspect when it comes to the rich and powerful, Pence is almost certainly practicing his empathy speech for the Trump pardon.

    1. 🙂

      One of the comments to that post sticks out, “I don’t like Trump. He is way too authoritarian for me. However, he hasn’t done anything impeachable while in office…yet. He will. They all do. But give him time and let him do it, first.” Emphasis mine.

  10. ” There is still no compelling evidence of an actual crime at the heart of the Russian investigation. Flynn is facing allegations of basic reporting or disclosure violations under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) which is rarely actually prosecuted. Indeed, there have been only seven prosecutions under FARA since 1966, when the law was revised.”

    Has the flavor of a witch hunt. Look up when former Labor Secy. Ray Donovan (indicted on some more serious charges) was acquitted and said, “Which office do I go to get my reputation back?

    And remember US Senator Ted Stevens?

    In February 2009, FBI agent Chad Joy filed a whistleblower affidavit, alleging that prosecutors and FBI agents conspired to withhold and conceal evidence that could have resulted in a verdict of “not guilty.”[104] In his affidavit, Joy alleged that prosecutors intentionally sent a key witness back to Alaska after the witness performed poorly during a mock cross examination. The witness, Rocky Williams, later notified the defense attorneys that his testimony would undercut the prosecution’s claim that his company had spent its own money renovating Sen. Stevens’s house. Joy further alleged that the prosecutors intentionally withheld Brady material including redacted prior statements of a witness, and a memo from Bill Allen stating that Sen. Stevens probably would have paid for the goods and services if asked. Joy further alleged that a female FBI agent had an inappropriate relationship with Allen, who also gave gifts to FBI agents and helped one agent’s relative get a job.

    As a result of Joy’s affidavit and claims by the defense that prosecutorial misconduct caused an unfair trial, Judge Sullivan ordered a hearing to be held on February 13, 2009, to determine whether a new trial should be ordered. At the February 13 hearing the judge held the prosecutors in contempt for failing to deliver documents to Stevens’s legal counsel.[105] Judge Sullivan called this conduct “outrageous.”

    Convictions voided and indictment dismissed[edit]
    On behalf of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Paul O’Brien submitted a “Motion of The United States To Set Aside The Verdict And Dismiss The Indictment With Prejudice” in connection with case No. 08-231 early on April 1, 2009. Federal judge Emmet G. Sullivan soon signed the order, and since it occurred prior to sentencing it had the effect of vacating Stevens’s conviction. During the trial, Sullivan expressed concern and anger regarding prosecutorial conduct and related issues. Holder, who had taken office only three months earlier, was reportedly very angry at the prosecutors’ apparent withholding of exculpatory evidence, and wanted to send a message that prosecutorial misconduct would not be tolerated under his watch. After Sullivan held the prosecutors in contempt, Holder replaced the entire trial team, including top officials in the public integrity section.

    The final straw for Holder, according to numerous reports, was the discovery of a previously undocumented interview with Bill Allen, the prosecution’s star witness, that raised the possibility prosecutors had knowingly allowed Allen to perjure himself on the stand. Allen stated that the fair market value of the repairs to Stevens’s house was around $80,000—far less than the $250,000 he said it cost at trial. More seriously, Allen said in the interview that he didn’t recall talking to Bob Persons, a friend of Stevens, regarding the repair bill for Stevens’s house. This directly contradicted Allen’s testimony at trial, in which he claimed Stevens asked him to give Persons a note Stevens sent him asking for a bill on the repair work. At trial, Allen said Persons had told him the note shouldn’t be taken seriously because “Ted’s just covering his ass.” Even without the notes, Stevens’s attorneys claimed that they thought Allen was lying about the conversation.[106]

    Later that day, Stevens’s attorney, Brendan Sullivan, said that Holder’s decision was forced by “extraordinary evidence of government corruption.” He also claimed that prosecutors not only withheld evidence, but “created false testimony that they gave us and actually presented false testimony in the courtroom”—two incidents that would have made it very likely that the convictions would have been overturned on appeal.[107]

    On April 7, 2009 federal judge Sullivan formally accepted Holder’s motion to set aside the verdict and throw out the indictment, declaring “There was never a judgment of conviction in this case. The jury’s verdict is being set aside and has no legal effect,” and calling it the worst case of prosecutorial misconduct he’d ever seen.[108] He also initiated a criminal contempt investigation of six members of the prosecution. Although an internal probe by the Office of Professional Responsibility was already underway, Sullivan said he was not willing to trust it due to the “shocking and disturbing” nature of the misconduct.[109]

    In 2012, the Special Counsel report on the case was released. It said,[110]

    The investigation and prosecution of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens were permeated by the systematic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence which would have independently corroborated Senator Stevens’s defense and his testimony, and seriously damaged the testimony and credibility of the government’s key witness.

    — Special Counsel Report

  11. Yates deserved to be fired from her job. However, Yates did the right thing in informing the WH Counsel about Flynn. What else could she do when she heard Pence speak a blatant falsehood because Flynn lied to him?

  12. This is the deep state. They keep throwing everything into chaos. The only way out of this nightmare is for people to leak actual documents. Not one of the powerful people in our country has the best interest of our nation in their hearts and minds. They are sowing chaos, just as their masters command them to. That includes Sally and Donald.

    I am asking people of good will who have documents to start/keep leaking. It all needs to be exposed. This corruption won’t end until it’s exposed.

  13. We are simply watching the beginning of the Sally Yates for US Senate campaign

  14. The congress came off an 11 day break and will have another 11 day break shortly. The Trump legislative agenda is moving at a slow pace. This is not hat was reported yesterday evening by the associated press (who I find the least partisan and most listen worthy (at times)). Like any wise teachrt or drill sergeant, those with president’s ear need to inform him HD is being “slow played”. These are distractions meant to distracts and hamper. The opposition press corp, bureaucracy, Obama holdovers, ,GOP establishment (who really serve globalist billionaires) – all have a hand in it.

    1. Autocorrect typos… not hat = what (This is what was reported yesterday)
      HD = that (…those with president’s ear need to inform him that he is being “slow-played”)

    2. Yup. Very important to check things out for one’s self. All media is a tabloid in the 21st century, and it is sad. People are in effect scaring themselves every day.

      1. Donald sent ‘rogue’ on the Billionaire’s consensus (globalism) with nationalism and populism. Personally, I would like the Syrian Civil war ended which is not a Saudi agenda.

        1. He campaigned that way and then turned around and staffed up with Goldman Sachers. He only cares aboutt he very very rich.

          1. You expected him to appoint employees of the Rapid City Trust and Savings Bank? Even if it were possible, I think they’d be over their heads.

          2. I will take the 380 million he got for the southern wall repair, no TPP
            Donald listen/cares. Bernie or Cruz wouldn’t of got elected. Hillary’s idea of jobs was a photo op with a silks screener with a couple of employees. Industry needs capital.

  15. FishWings, cherry-picking history might be your strong suit; history in general, not so much. You see a President with an agenda will share information with historical enemies for national security purposes. I’m not clear on what national security benefits we were to get from Cuba. Are they doing anything in the war on terror? I mean to combat it, not promote it?

    “The memorandum signed Monday commits the U.S. and Cuba to sharing information, carrying out joint investigations and possibly stationing law-enforcement officials in each other’s countries,” the Associated Press (AP) reported just days before Obama left office. The AP report characterized the agreement as a “pledge to share intelligence with Cuban state security.”


    1. Exactly. More Democratic situational ethic. “Some intel for you, lefties…. non for you, you, you mean Russians. Hmmmm.” They really need to just stick to whining about social justice issues–in this country. That’s pain-in-the-but enough. I usually like to make a more pragmatic discussion, but the credibility ship of the Democrats left port months ago.

      1. If the then FBI Director met with President Trump 3 months ago and then crafted a memo that he believed was indicative of obstruction of justice efforts by President Trump, why did he not turn that memo over to the AG, at that time? If that’s what he thought, and he didn’t, then isn’t Comey complicit in the obstruction of justice? If that’s not what he thought, then wouldn’t it make sense to not turn it over to the AG?

  16. Abandon all hope ye who enter here, discodonnie. Reason, truth and facts do not matter here. Der Trumpenfuehrer demands a oath of loyalty and while most on this site would be more than happy to make that pledge I seem to remember in history that it does not work out well.

    1. Fishwings – history is written by the winners and rewritten by the discontent.

      1. And just because history is ‘written by the winners’, that doesn’t mean it’s the truth…

        Can you imagine what history books would be like if the germans had won WW II?

        Try again…

        1. therepublicofstupidity – there is a niche market for historical speculative fiction and there have been a few books written with Germany willing WWII. You should check them out. 🙂

    2. There seems to be no end to the Democrats blood lust. The situational ethics of the Democrats is truly amazing. Squeeky posted a link to a great philosophical analysis of how the hollow argument of left will lead it to consume itself (and probably the rest of us at some point). Add to that a healthy dose of the “blind eye” syndrome and you can see the train wreck. I think most of us folks who are trying to work for a living would like to bind up the octopus that is DC and throw it in the ocean where it belongs. This crap is what the founding fathers knew would happen if government got too bloated. There is no end game here. Representatives from other governments sit in ours at work, so this is a total non-argument. Democrats should just stick with their Wall Street – approved social justice whining.

      1. Squeeky is a white supremacist who says deranged stuff like, “. . . before being assaulted by the black savage, she thought that black youths were like white youths and would respond reasonably. . .”

        Whatever impression she has of history or politics is tainted by her delusional assumptions on race. This “philosophical” essay she links only highlights her intellectual dishonesty. I could play stupid games, too, by generalizing Huckabee’s Biblical epistemology to unfairly discredit George Will (and plenty of dishonest lefties do so). But we can rise above that, if we want to.

        Or we can sink into the swamp of raging at hallucinations of racial boogeymen and deliberate ignorance. Nothing like imaginary enemies to distract a person from real problems.

      2. Riiiiiight…

        Like the endless hearings on Benghazi were somehow necessary, productive, or useful…

        Try again…

        1. Necessary? Four Americans were killed and the Administration lied about the events. So yes…necessary. Productive or useful…no one in the Administration has been held to account for lying to the American people. So not productive in that regard. Useful…the SoS at the time and heir apparent to the Presidency…lost miserably in the general election. So yes…necessary, productive and useful.

          Try again..

      1. So what? Obama got away scot free with things Nixon could not accomplish and he had 50% in his corner.

        The problem with progressives is that they have no moral or ethical principles. There are merely improvisations which serve the uses of the moment. They continue to think highly of themselves, though. Progressives born in 1920 were less pretentious, and did have some fixed principles.

    3. I’m presuming you believe Hillary’s Gulag was a desirable alternative? Thus far, the current administration has not acted outside of the boundaries of law, however ludicrous their behavior (and their ludicrous behavior is why we have checks and balances). Though you are certainly entitled to your personal beliefs, don’t imbue them with universality. Resorting to libel and invective actually shows the weakness of a position, not its strength. The true mark of maturity in a society is the desire and willingless to put energy into solutions for all instead of vengeance. Those consumed by rage are no longer in possession of the faculties required to attempt the charting of a course, for it is true (and universal): personal feelings are not facts.

Comments are closed.