Below is my column in the New York Post on the Trump indictment and why so many citizens have little interest in its content or charges. The reaction of many citizens vividly shows the costs of years of biased and inconsistent decisions involving Democratic and Republican figures. The result is what you now see. The Justice Department has lost the room.
Here is the column:
When Special Counsel Jack Smith walked before cameras on Friday after the release of the Trump 44-page indictment against former President Donald Trump, he started with arguably his most difficult case to make.
He declared “we have one set of laws in this country and they apply to everyone.”
After years of scandal and documented political bias by key Justice officials, the line likely left many skeptical, assuming many were even watching.
The indictment was clearly a pitch to the public that this is a prosecution entirely removed from recent history.
We’re also meant to not think about the fact that the Biden Administration is charging the leading candidate opposing him in the upcoming election.
This indictment has merit, but the Justice Department lost the right to expect trust from the citizens years ago — long before the damning Inspector General’s Report and the recent report of Special Counsel John Durham.
To make matters worse, the same suspects have surfaced to celebrate Trump’s expected demise — and remind the public of the perceived double standard in Washington.
Peter Strzok, the FBI special agent who was fired over his anti-Trump bias in the Russian collusion investigation, cheered the indictment by tweeting a photo of handcuffs with Trump’s image.
Strzok seems to think that it is a good thing for Smith to remind everyone of how he promised his colleague and lover Lisa Page that she did not have to worry about Trump being elected because they had an “insurance policy” to “stop it.”
Hillary Clinton went on social media to hawk her line of merchandize mocking the case against her for storing classified material on her personal server and then destroying tens of thousands of emails sought by the Congress.
She sent out a picture mocking Trump while wearing her “But Her Emails” hat.
With millions of Americans wondering why Trump is being charged but Clinton was given a pass, Clinton decided to do a victory lap.
And hey, why not: James Comey is back.
It was Comey who declined to prosecute Clinton despite finding that she violated federal rules and handled classified material “carelessly.” He then launched a Russian collusion investigation that Durham found lacked minimal support against Trump.
Former President Donald Trump has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges related to mishandling classified White House documents that were recovered at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.
Trump unlawfully kept hundreds of documents after leaving office — including papers detailing America’s conventional and nuclear weapons programs, potential weak points in US defenses, and plans to respond to a foreign attack, federal prosecutors charged Friday.
The 45th president stored boxes containing the documents throughout his estate, including “a ballroom, a bathroom and shower, an office space, his bedroom, and a storage room,” according to a 49-page indictment filed in Miami federal court Thursday.
The indictment against Trump was unsealed hours after the 76-year-old announced he had been charged by Jack Smith, the special counsel tapped in November to examine Trump’s retention of official documents at Mar-a-Lago.
The indictment is the former commander in chief’s second since leaving office and marks the first time in US history a former president has faced federal charges.
In April, Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg related to hush money payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels prior to the 2016 election.
Nevertheless, Comey chose this month to declare that, in the 2024 election, “it has to be Joe Biden.”
For critics, that is consistent with his views and actions before he was fired as FBI director.
After Trump was indicted in a raw political prosecution in New York, Comey also went public to declare it a “good day.”
So in the court of public opinion, past history and hypocrisy may mean that few are swayed about whether they back Trump or not. Which leaves the criminal court.
This indictment has some devastating elements, including an audiotape in which Trump tells two visitors about a highly classified attack plan on Iran while admitting that it remained classified.
That tape directly contradicts his past claims of declassification and suggests that Trump was using the document as a type of trophy.
There are also damaging statements from former staff and counsel alleging that Trump actively sought to conceal documents.
Smith is now left in a battle not with Trump but time.
There are a variety of challenges expected from the Trump team, including arguing that the government misused the civil statute of the Presidential Records Act to launch a criminal prosecution.
They are likely to cite a 2012 opinion that Bill Clinton could remove classified tapes with foreign leaders — even if the tapes are designated to be presidential records.
Amy Berman Jackson declared “the [Presidential Records Act] does not confer any mandatory or even discretional authority on the archivist. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the president.”
The Trump team is likely to litigate that and other questions.
While there are good-faith arguments to make in rebuttal, it will take time.
And if enough time passes, the ultimate judgment in the case will be the millions of jurors in the coming election.
Not only can Trump pardon himself, but fellow candidates like Vivek Ramaswamy have also suggested that they will also pardon him.
Smith’s case could end with a stroke of a pen.
It seems for both Comey and Smith, it has to be Biden in 2024.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
______________
“We will stop him.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page
___________________________________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
___________________________________
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before 40.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI parmour Lisa Page
_________________________________
“People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this [Trump] server.”
– Bill Priestap
___________
The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history. The co-conspirators are:
Kevin Clinesmith, Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann,
James Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Sally Yates,
James Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove,
Christopher Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper,
Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power,
Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama,
Joe Biden, James E. Boasberg, Emmet Sullivan, Gen. Milley, George Soros, John McCain,
Marc Elias, Igor Danchenko, Fiona Hill, Charles H. Dolan, Jake Sullivan, Strobe Talbot,
Cody Shear, Victoria Nuland, Ray “Red Hat” Epps, Don Berlin, Kathy Ruemmler, Rodney Joffe,
Paul Vixie, L. Jean Camp, Andrew Whitney et al.
Comey, talking about Clinton: “Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.
“In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.”
However, with Trump there is clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information and efforts to obstruct justice.
Heath Mayo:
Why is the Hillary situation different from the Trump situation and why is it *not* a double standard to charge Trump and not Hillary?
Hillary’s case concerned use of a private email server for official govt biz during her time as Sec of State & the content of those emails.
So, Difference #1: Hillary didn’t willfully handpick the most sensitive NatSec items to shove in boxes & take home. It was all her emails.
Now, of those emails (~30,000), the FBI conducted a full investigation, and Hillary turned over every single one of those emails as soon as she was asked.
Difference #2: Hillary never obstructed justice or tried to conceal emails from authorities. Trump did so multiple times.
Hillary said no emails had classified info. But the FBI found that 110 of the emails did have info that was classified when sent.
Not good. Irresponsible. But it presents Difference #3: There was no hard evidence Hillary *knew* she had classified info. Trump admitted it on tape.
There was no evidence Hillary sent her classified emails to any third parties who she knew lacked clearance. There was only the threat of hacking by foreign actors. Bad.
But Difference #4: Trump actively showed off his intel to reporters & third parties he knew weren’t cleared.
None of this excuses Hillary’s behavior. Her use of a private server was reckless and irresponsible and endangered US national security.
But Difference #5: Her conduct is not regularly prosecuted when done by others, whereas anyone who did what Trump did would be prosecuted.
One last point here, but an important one: each difference listed is not just a difference of degree (though Trump’s behavior was more damaging). Each difference is a *categorical* one that goes directly to the elements of the laws. Knowledge, intent, obstruction, discretion.
Thank you, Anonymous. What you cite are not opinions–they are facts. I just hope at least some of the disciples will read what you wrote.
A bit generous, particularly point #5, as others have not done what she did. That is from the State Department Inspector General’s report. So there isn’t anything to compare her recklessness with.
Also a bit generous as to whose behavior was more damaging, i.e. caused greater harm. The F.B.I. concluded the server was likely hacked. So classified documents, including S.A.P level were readily available for anyone to see. The Trump case involves hard copy on an estate.
So in terms of harm. Clinton was worse.
In terms of ineptitude as opposed to intent, Trump intentionally obstructed.
And prosecutors take a very dim view of those with intent.
Politically, I think voters would prefer to see someone other than Clinton, Biden, or Trump on the ballot in 2024. And we already know we don’t have to see Clinton’s name on there.
Difference #2: Hillary never obstructed justice or tried to conceal emails from authorities. Trump did so multiple times.”
False. Recall the Bleach Bit and the hammers to the devices. Selective memory there.
Hillary was NOT obstructing justice or concealing anything–she was trying to prevent unauthorized access after she was advised there was an issue. Trump’s actions were deliberate–he wasn’t going to go quietly away without some souvenir of the power he stole that he could use for bragging purposes, and/or to sell or leverage for money or other advantage. The fact that he discussed Koreas’ nuclear capabilities with Kid Rock and disclosed other highly-sensitive classified information to others proves his deliberateness, which is why he was indicted.
“Hillary was NOT obstructing justice or concealing anything–she was trying to prevent unauthorized access after she was advised there was an issue.”
The unauthorized access you are talking about was our Congress that asked for it. Are you daft?
It Wasn’t Comey’s Decision to Exonerate Hillary – It Was Obama’s
Andrew C. McCarthySeptember 2, 2017 4:33 PM
The thing to understand, what has always been the most important thing to understand, is that Jim Comey was out in front, but he was not calling the shots.
On the right, the commentariat is in full-throttle outrage over the revelation that former FBI Director Comey began drafting his statement exonerating Hillary Clinton in April 2016 – more than two months before he delivered the statement at his now famous July 5 press conference.
The news appears in a letter written to new FBI Director Christopher Wray by two senior Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans, Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senator Lindsey Graham. Pundits and the Trump administration are shrieking because this indicates the decision to give the Democrats’ nominee a pass was clearly made long before the investigation was over, and even long before key witnesses, including Clinton herself, were interviewed.
It shows, they cry, that the fix was in! …
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/not-comeys-decision-exonerate-hillary-obamas-decision/
National Review is an alt-right source of disinformation.
Peter, you may have a better career seeking the following job as opposed to what you do now.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1667999474684399616
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
Looking to hire a VP of Witchcraft & Propaganda
4:57 PM · Jun 11, 2023, 39.4M Views
Let’s think about what else was going on in April 2016. I’ve written about it a number of times over the last year-plus, such as in a column a few months back:
On April 10, 2016, President Obama publicly stated that Hillary Clinton had shown “carelessness” in using a private e-mail server to handle classified information, but he insisted that she had not intended to endanger national security (which is not an element of the [criminal statutes relevant to her e-mail scandal]). The president acknowledged that classified information had been transmitted via Secretary Clinton’s server, but he suggested that, in the greater scheme of things, its importance had been vastly overstated.
This is precisely the reasoning that Comey relied on in ultimately absolving Clinton, as I recounted in the same column:
On July 5, 2016, FBI director James Comey publicly stated that Clinton had been “extremely careless” in using a private email server to handle classified information, but he insisted that she had not intended to endanger national security (which is not an element of the relevant criminal statute). The director acknowledged that classified information had been transmitted via Secretary Clinton’s server, but he suggested that, in the greater scheme of things, it was just a small percentage of the emails involved.
Obama’s April statements are the significant ones. They told us how this was going to go. The rest is just details.
By using unapproved equipment to conduct official State Dept Business, she obstructed justice.
This is a lie.
Kid Rock is the enemy, WHAT???
Ignore this communist propaganda and indoctrination for the uninitiated.
You don’t think that Hillary Clinton’s conduct of a Cabinet level Office of the Executive Branch of the government of the United States from servers in her country home, rather than – you know – the use of secure U.S. government servers was intentional and willful? It was just a mistake that she set those servers up, and that an ample trove of sensitive material wound up on the laptop of sexy texter (of minors) Anthony Weiner?
The point is that the designation of any given document or material as classified etc. is one of the games being played here.
NEVER underestimate the incompetence and ineptitude of Hillary Clinton. She lost to a game show host. It is totally believable that she had no idea what she was doing.
The Professor is wrong on one point….There are a lot of folks like. me who voted for Trump because he was the Party Nominee and the Democrat’s nominee was just not ever going to be winning selection based upon comparative merits.
That the Democrats pulled a magical rabbit out the basement trick…and pulled every dirty trick known and some new ones to boot….is the only reason we are saddled with a geriatric dementia patient as the puppet of some very radical behind the screen string pullers.
I voted for Trump twice and said I was done with him. because of his inability to use social media to his advantage and that he did not grow into the. Office of President.
Then along came the New York case which is patently bogus followed up by the Florida case which clearly defined for us what Durham had to say about how utterly corrupt the FBI/DOJ/IRS/intelligence community have become.
There are many exactly like me that shall vote for Trump this time if for no other reason than to show the corrupt that the People do. have a role to play in the election process.
What the Professor failed to include is a detailed analysis on how the time line of this prosecution is going to go.
The Trump Defense Team shall use every opportunity to delay the progress of the prosecution (exactly what happens daily in Court Rooms all around the Country) and the November 2024 Election looms large.
That is a mere seventeen months away….and knowing how slowly this case shall proceed means in all likelihood Trump might very well be the President come January 2025.
If he is I want him to issue himself a full Pardon for any and all Federal Crimes and do so as the first official act of his new Term.
Then I want him to issue Pardons for every one of his staff, members of his administration, family, lawyers, and certain members of the US Military that got done dirty by the corrupt justice system….as the second act of his new term.
His third act should be tp fire the full complete Seventh Floor occupants of the FBI Building and change the name of the building to Donald. Trump Federal Building.
That is the kind of Revolution we need…..a house cleaning of corrupt government officials.
What say we remind them what failing to adhere to acceptable standards of ethics is all about and what the penalty shall be upon being found to be deficient in obeying one’s Oath of Office.
Good comment, Ralph. Only, I’d swap the ‘third’ with the ‘first’. Hire a new AG who will drop all current “Get Trump” cases. Would rather not see Trump set the precedent that any President can/will Pardon himself. Let the cabal types do it first to further show their true colors.
Ralph: when I read the sort of pathetic crap you wrote, I just shake my head and wonder how anyone could fall for the garbage you fell for. A few questions: Biden, who is a “geriatric dementia case”, won by “dirty tricks”? What “dirty tricks”? List them. If anyone tried to employ “dirty tricks” to win an election, it was Trump, who has always cheated his way through life to get what he wants. Why do you repeat the lies about Biden having “dementia”, when he has already been far more successful in 2 years’ time than Trump was in 4 years time? He got a consensus over the debt ceiling because of his talent for negotiation, and, unlike your hero, doesn’t go around bragging about being a “master dealmaker”, but Biden is one. He got several major pieces of legislation passed, including an infrastructure bill, debt ceiling bill, COVID relief bill, Inflation Reduction Act and Veterans Bill. The only legislation Trump got passed was a massive tax break mostly benefitting the very wealthy. In fact, the reason you, as an alt-right devotee, have been conditioned to dislike the IRS is because of Trump, who is a tax cheater.
You say the NY prosecution of Trump s “patently bogus”? How can this be when Michael Cohen when to prison for the same conduct, which he did on behalf of Trump, and when a grand jury found there was probable cause? You claim the Florida indictment proves the DOJ/FBI and IRS are “utterly corrupt”? What does the IRS have to do with the Florida charges against Trump? Did you read the indictment? Did you? What in that indictment shows “corruption” by anyone other than Trump? Conclusory statements that parrrot what you heard on alt-right media don’t count. I want you to cite factual proof–not the things you’ve been led to believe.
Tell me, do you actually want someone like Trump having access to our most-sensitive national secrets, when he’s massively in debt, when no banks in the US will loan him money because of 6 bankruptcies, when he has utter contempt for law enforcement, for our military, and when he just can’t stop lying? Do you not perceive how dangerous it is for classified information about the nuclear capabilities and vulnerabilities of the US, our allies and our enemies to be stored in a bathroom, on the stage in a ballroom, in a business center and in a storage room, all of which are easily accessible by anyone? And doesn’t it bother you WHY he took them, after being told he could not, and WHY he lied about returning them, moved them around, lied about them being declassified and just can’t seem to keep any lawyers? Assuming for the sake of argument the truth of the allegations in the indictment, is all of this OK with you?
Jonathan: Tomorrow Donald J. Trump will be arrested, booked and arraigned before a federal judge in Miami. Seems a familiar experience for the former president. What do we expect tomorrow? Trump is calling for his supporters to show up at the courthouse. In a message he said: “SEE YOU IN MIAMI ON TUESDAY”. In another statement Trump declared: “It’s a demented prosecution. Our enemies are desperate to stop us because they know that we are the ones who are going to be able to stop them…they cheated like a bunch of dogs”. Classic Trump. Sounds eerily familiar to his call to his supporters to show up on Jan. 6, 2021: “Big protest in DC on Jan. 6th. Be there, will be wild!”. And we know how that turned out.
Other MAGA supporters are also calling for people to show up tomorrow at the courthouse. In a keynote address at the Georgia GOP convention on Friday Kari Lake, the sore loser in Arizona’s election in 2020, told Trump supporters: “If you want to get President Trump [former president] , you’re going to have to go through me and you’re going to have to go through 75 million Americans just like me…Most of us are card carrying members of the NRA. That’s not a threat, that’s a public service announcement”. Pretty clear what Lake is calling for.
Meanwhile, outside DisneyWorld in Orlando people carrying Nazi flags were there supporting Gov. DeSantis’ war against Disney. No doubt these same people will show up at the courthouse in Miami tomorrow. Maybe along with the remnants of the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers–the ones not in prison? So it appears gun totters, neo-Nazis and anti-semites will all be there to defend Donald Trump when he is arraigned. With that kind of support you know it will be wild!
It may surprise you to learn that in the United States of America citizens are permitted to publicly and vociferously voice their displeasure with the conduct of the United States government. Miami appears to remain as of this date a constituent part of the Great State of Florida, which is one of the several United States. The District of Columbia, however, is in doubt.
The indictment didn’t mention the Presidential Records Act for a reason. These are not Presidential records. 44 U.S. Code § 2201 (2)(b) clearly states “The term “Presidential records” … does not include any documentary materials that are (i) official records of an agency (as defined in section 552(e) [1] of title 5, United States Code)…” These documents are all official agency records.
“Special Counsel Jack Smith ”
Any person who believes that he is an objective, *independent* prosecutor is either grossly ignorant about his professional history, or is the world’s biggest dupe.
There was going to be an indictment of Trump even before Jack Smith was appointed. There was never any question about this. It would take a truly independent and courageous prosecutor to have taken this charge from Merrick Garland and in turn declined to indict. We don’t have many men like that in the United States government.
This is why we need Ron DeSantis to get the nomination…Trump is an idiot. Trump got in trouble for speaking moronically on his “perfect” phone call to Zaleski. I don’t for a second think it was an impeachable offense, but it was dumb. Did Trump learn his lesson? No. He also got caught speaking to the GA Sec of State and asking to find enough votes for him to win. Could be a mistaken implication, but a good lawyer wouldn’t have been so dumb. Now he is ON TAPE AGAIN bragging about his secret confidential papers. He is a moron.
A good lawyer, like DeSantis wouldn’t give the Democrats so much material for them to go after him legally. Trump is a juvenile, a very spoiled brat and a narcissist to the nth degree. Would I vote for him over Biden? In a heartbeat. I will take juvenile, moronic, incurious and even rash over a leftist that has opened the border, ruined our energy platforms raised inflation, caused war in Europe with his fecklessness, said just yesterday that the gays in his audience are the bravest people he has seen…IN A WEEK THAT HE VISITED TWO MILITARY BASES, has completely adopted the radical TRANS movement and all of their insanity and abets crime in the cities due to the alliance with city and state Democrats. Yes, I would vote for Trump over Biden. But I would vote for DeSantis over Trump, Tim Scott over Trump, Vivek Ramaswamy over Trump, Rubio, Cruz, Cotton, Hawley and even Nikki Haley over Trump. Maybe even the fat guy from Jersey.
Is DeSantis a variation on “business as usual” coming from both parties? I don’t want to relegate social issues to irrelevancy. But this country has a pretty severe problem a half-century in the making.
As well as being quite a bit smaller and quite a bit less stable, the middle class, which used to garner 62% of the nation’s income, now garners 42% of the income. And which classes increased as the middle class shrunk? The lower class and the poor.
So you have an unstable situation that is going to remain unstable for quite some time. So I think you’re going to have political instability of which Trump is merely a symptom.
How else to explain an anti-vaccer in RFK Jr. who has done little else than announce, garnering 20% in the polls from the get go? How else to explain Bernie Sanders?
Well you explain by noting that Democratic voters are as sick of their party as Republican voters are of theirs.
I don’t know if a Ron DeSantis is the cure for that.
Yeah. Let’s vote for who the Rino’s want because they won’t hate us as bad as they do under Trump. Nope. Trump or let it burn.
When the apparatus of an oppressive, totalitarian government decides that you are its enemy, it does not matter whether you committed any criminal act, whether the government has evidence, or whether your prosecution will break long-standing norms of conduct under similar circumstances.
You are naive to believe that these same people wouldn’t ensnare DeSantis in ad hoc crimes under never before tested legal theories, or that roughly half the Country wouldn’t cheer his arrest, prosecution, and punishment for made up crimes even knowing that they were made up.
You have it exactly correct Alec. What has been on display over the last dozen years or more is an awakening (by those with power) to the weakness in our form of government, especially as it relates to our system of justice. On paper, it’s brilliant. The framers considered almost every area of potential danger. They were very strict in the design for who they considered “qualified” to participate in the franchise. Was it overly restrictive at the time of ratification? A better question is why was it so restrictive? Of course they needed to get it ratified, or else we couldn’t make the progress they envisioned for the union. But what was it about the character of those they considered qualified to vote that would best “ensure” the government would reasonably be checked from abusing their power? In our long march towards “perfection” we’ve lost attention towards the most destruction force to any form of government; human nature.
So here we are in the 21st century, contending with the very predictable outcome of a nation whose citizens lack civics literacy and who elect representation in government that mirrors their own degraded virtue and knowledge of history. The framers gave us so many warnings, from Franklin’s if you can keep it. to Henry’s Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. They could only warn us, they couldn’t mandate a particular character. The people built, by ignorance, this tyrannical regime and it will not give up their unconstitutional powers without a fight. Maybe we have one more election to begin to restore this thing but I’m not seeing anything that would make me confident that is likely.
I concur, Olly. After 2020, from the beginning to end of that year, there’s no reason to believe 2024 will end any differently than 2016 where The People sent a clear message to the cabal – their shenanigans would no longer be accepted – only to have that lesson thrown back in the electorate’s faces with a nastiness that had never happened before.
As in nature, burning the forest to the ground may be the only way to regenerate Liberty and keep her going forward for everyone, even those fools dreaming to be controlled by others.
Maybe we have one more election to begin to restore this thing but I’m not seeing anything that would make me confident that is likely.
Agreed, Olly and JAFO
Today’s second reading from the Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) was taken from a letter written by St Ignatius of Antioch to the Romans. It is doubtful most Catholics have any clue who he was. Ignatius of Antioch was one of the children that Jesus Christ blessed in the Gospel of Saint Mark 9:35, and was installed as Bishop of Antioch by Saint Peter. Ignatius was condemned to death by Roman Emperor, Trajan, 98-117 AD. Trajan considered the confession of Christianity as a crime worthy of death. Like Pontius Pilate and Jesus Christ, Trajan interviewed Ignatius and tried to get him to renounce his Faith in Christ, so as to plead allegiance to the Roman polytheism religion. Ignatius refused. Ignatius wrote his letter as he was being led by Roman soldiers by land and sea from Syria, to the Coliseum of Rome to be martyred by “wild beasts” (lions) before Trajan and thousands of Roman spectators. You may have been to Rome since you were in the USN and perhaps visited the Coliseum. I was overcome with sorrow when I went there.
From a letter to the Romans by Saint Ignatius of Antioch, bishop and martyr
(3,1-5,3; Funk 1, 215-219)
Let me not only be called a Christian, but prove to be one
Read the linked reading if you can.
The Fall of the Roman Empire, ~ 410 AD, according to Saint Augustine’s magnum opus, City of God, was blamed on the Christians. St Augustine replied in his work of 22 volumes that the Roman Empire fell before Christianity came to exist because the citizens abandoned justice, as formerly typified in the Roman empire. St Augustine further argued that without justice there was no concord and without concord there was no city and no empire. To Augustine the citizens of the Roman empire failed to uphold true justice, abandoned an honorable civic life, and reveled in immediate gratification as contrasted to the once famous Roman ethos of a virtuous living. The ancient Roman empire was managed far better than its successors, according to St Augustine. You know where I am going with this. Yet, St Ignatius, in the reading for today, never lamented his virtuous living, his disciplined life as a follower of Christ, and strove to live a life as perfectly as he knew how following the example of Jesus Christ.
As you know I have never liked Donald Trump, nor Hillary, Obama, Biden, Republicans nor the “conservative” vs “liberal” constructs. I recall when I was a child how my father held up Americans as a role model to us as Cuban refugees, because Americans did their best to live a disciplined life, embraced justice and practiced an honorable, virtuous living. This was to be contrasted with what Fidel Castro did to Cuba.
Like St Augustine, I observe America’s collapse and find myself at odds with the internet commentariat. The DOJ selective application of justice on Trump, but not on Hillary, Biden, ANTIFA BLM, etc, are all part of a long list of examples of how Americans have failed, like the citizens of the Roman empire, to uphold justice, virtuous civility and reveled in immediate gratification, as contrasted to the once famous American ethos of discipline, sacrifice and hard work.
Obesity, sedentary lifestyle, decline of marriage, extended family, nuclear family, birth rates, demanding government social welfare programs like Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, etc, while turning our backs on each other, and opting instead for living behind walled properties, texting, smart phones, apps, and living in mancaves,..these are not the fabric of virtuous living, of justice, of a life of an enduring civilization
Estovir and JAFO, we seem to have 3 different types of followers of this blog. We have of course trolls whose only purpose is to disrupt serious attention to the problems this country is facing. We have those discussing the technical legal and political aspects of those various problems. And we have those who contribute a more philosophical approach to analyzing our various problems. The 1st group is a product of JT’s commitment to free speech. The 2nd group is why I joined this blog. My civics education provided me a more philosophical understanding of our constitutional system of government. I can see the forest and identify where it’s flourishing, unhealthy or dead. However, it’s with the 2nd group where the battle is really being fought. They know how to navigate the complexities of the law, especially as to how those granted political power exploit its vulnerabilities. While I get annoyed at times that they will engage the trolls, I do recognize those skirmishes are both natural and necessary. I consider both of you and a few others as part of the 3rd group. I’m learning from you as well. You demonstrate an ability to see the forest, but have no problems mixing it up with the 2nd (and 3rd) group. Thank you for that.
Thank you for the kind words, Olly. Your observations of who’s who in these threads is spot on. I, too, appreciate the various perspectives published in the comment section and look forward to many contributors including yourself, Estovir, GEB, Mespo, JohnSay, UpstateFarmer, S.Meyer and other level-headed-for-the-most-part writers. Heck, even George, while repetitive, brings useful and necessary elements to the conversations. The trolls (they know who they are), well, it’s what they do, ‘troll’. They may come and go, and change their monikers (Natacha/Gigi), but regular readers know they’re here for only one purpose – to instigate, stir the pot, and ruffle feathers, usually all at once and at the same time. Admittedly, I’ve done that from time to time as well, but those posts get stale quickly so I keep them to a minimum. We’re a diverse group, for sure, though!
Estovir, it goes to show how history and human nature seem to never change for the better. Sometimes its difficult to see how the collective “we” have treated one another so contemptuously as we have over the centuries. I still wonder from time to time, “When will we ever learn?”.
Thanks again for your perspective and another good post.
JAFO, human nature is the constant of history. Every good and every evil that has happened throughout history is the result of that nature. History repeats itself because we falsely believe external advancements change human nature. Nice suits, Ivy League education, eloquent speeches, wealth, don’t change that nature. It’s the one thing that stands out for me about our founding fathers. They had a humility about their own nature that is largely unseen in todays political parties. They designed our system of government to be an adversary to our human nature. The Federalist Papers were written specifically to persuade the people that it was the best way they could conceive to protect the people’s rights from the government they elect. The constitution should have come with a warning label: Don’t Ever Trust Us!
“It’s the one thing that stands out for me about our founding fathers. They had a humility about their own nature that is largely unseen in todays political parties. … The constitution should have come with a warning label: Don’t Ever Trust Us!
YES! Indeed, Olly.
Perhaps Reagan’s, “Trust, but verify”, could be the next Amendment. 😊
Turley: “the Justice Department lost the right to expect trust from the citizens years ago”
+++
Yup. It turns out the feds are the bad guys. I believe nothing they say. It’s all spin and propaganda. I imagine a lot of federal jurors are coming to the same conclusion [except in DC where if you are to the right of Mao you are automatically guilty]. The feds either steal the work of local law enforcement and claim the credit or engineer ‘crimes’ they ‘solve’ like the Whitmer kidnapping fiasco.
I wonder why the only law enforcement organization that the Left/Communists don’t want to defund is the DOJ/FBI? Care to guess?
The ‘intelligence’ mafia also took a hit when they stupidly told us that the Hunter laptop was Russian Disinformation. Did they think we would never find out? Will you ever again believe anything they say? I imagine they are behind the ‘aliens have landed’ crap stories as well. Their style. Keeps Hunter and Joe out of the news to a degree.
The way Biden is falling for anything now he’s highly likely to have another major stoke that takes him out. At that point he won’t be able to pardon his entire family & all the extended associates.
Oky1,
Biden will be stuffed by a good taxidermist and rolled out as usual. We won’t be able to tell the difference. Live Biden and Stuffed Biden, same, same. But the media will still hail him as the best and most vigorous president ever. Probably won’t fall down as much.
Come to think of it his eyes, when they are open, look suspiciously glassy even now. Are we sure that….?
Young, Oky1,
Reports have it Jill Biden is headlining Joe’s campaign in NYC, San Fran, and LA.
Meanwhile, his handlers will keep him from real debates, press conferences, or taking pre-scripted Q&As from friendly MSM outlets.
Come to think of it DeSantis just got caught use AI to show Trump hugging Fauci multiple times.
That news show was pointing out how good AI has become & it be easier for people to fool use it.
Young, speaking of aliens, you may find this article by Michael Crichton interesting:
http://raconteurreport.blogspot.com/2017/06/aliens-cause-global-warming-by-michael.html?m=1
JAFO,
Thank you! That’s a great article. I like the way he tears into ‘consensus’ science and also the absurd obsession with models.
I do think there is life in other parts of the universe, maybe even in the solar system, but I don’t think they are coming here or sending us messages.
There are somewhere between 100 billion and 400 billion stars in our galaxy, the Milky Way. There are billions of galaxies, many with more stars.
It seems that most of those stars have planets, so there are a lot of planets that might sustain life.
That gives us a sense of the odds.
Then consider that life appeared on Earth almost as soon as it was cool enough not to kill it. It is found in boiling pools in Yellowstone, thousands of meters below the Earth’s surface, in the deepest part of the oceans feeding off volcanic vents, thousands of meters into the atmosphere and, I think, even found on the outside of the international space station. It is hardy and seems able to adjust to very harsh environments.
I think some meterorites bounced from Mars to Earth are suspected of having primitive fossils in them but I am not sure that issue has been decided.
https://www.space.com/33690-allen-hills-mars-meteorite-alien-life-20-years.html
It would not surprise me if we found primitive life forms on places like Enceladus. I suspect, but couldn’t possibly know, that some forms of life are very widespread in our own galaxy. I don’t think any of them are coming here though. God help us if some show up in a spaceship and say, “Take me to your leader.”
“God help us if some show up in a spaceship and say, “Take me to your leader.”
Or worse, 😊:
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/285345326377176839/
Funny. But I am not sure that would truly be worse.
Young, the funny was intended as a simile for two inepts meeting with their handlers, “Alien handler, meet Joe’s handler. Now let’s discuss the invasion of your planet.” Sometimes my range is misunderstood. I’m often serious, sarcastic, and/or see the ‘lighter’ side of life, all on the same thread.
A little more on this : https://www.businessinsider.com/nasa-scientist-microbial-life-hiding-on-moon-south-pole-2023-6
Today’s ‘scientists’ have one ongoing glaring problem: calling the use of computer model results, ‘evidence and proof’ of the future. They fail to report their own models are programmed by flawed people who have flawed personal and political biases. They also know, or at least they should know, the computer program can be manipulated in miniscule ways to make the result ‘match’ their hypothesis or theory. Like any recipe, the outcome is only as good as the cook and their ingredients being in the right proportions. I’m sure it’s not been lost on you that every Ice Age/Global warming/Acid rain/and now “Climate Change” computer prediction has failed, miserably, since the invention of the computer. And even though they see previous results of their predictions being soo wrong, soo often, they STILL double-down on their, “we’re all gonna die unless you give us and government more of YOUR money”, gloom and doomsday efforts. Ever notice they never use their own money or bother to ‘practice what they preach’? Yeah, me, too.
we knew the fix was in when HRC was not indicted for her email server, destruction of government emails and the physical destruction of several smartphones. The fix was further confirmed when the press and the deep state worked overtime to prevent the publication and spread of the Hunter Biden Laptop story. and now the MSM is quickly burying the Biden bribery allegations by not investigating it further.
and let us not forget that summer of 2020 when leftists rioted and attacked federal facilities, in some cases laying siege to federal buildings. No one was brought up on federal charges. Rep. Nadler claimed that antifa was a myth and didnt exist. Then Jan 6th happened and the full weight of the federal govt (DOJ/FBI/etc) was brought against people involved in that riot
the American public has lost faith in our federal judicial depts (DoJ, FBI, and others) to apply the law in an equitable manner
There is a history of negating convictions and charges when, historically, the enforcement of such laws did not occur.
Suddenly the laws are being enforced.
The laws under discussion involve Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Obama, Biden, and many others. They were not enforced, so why should they suddenly be enforced now, especially when Trump had a right to all the documents and the laws involving the documents seems not to be well understood?
For the most part, except of course for the puppets on liberal TV and radio, most of the democrat leaders are taking a “wait and see” attitude on the Trump indictment. That’s important because it reveals a level of uncertainty even in their minds of the appropriateness of this move by the government. They do not want to be caught zigging while they should be zagging. Many are lawyers who understand the fate of a disliked ham sandwich in the ham-fisted hands of a wicked or overly zealous prosecutor.
The excesses of the J6 debacle – sending innocent people to jail for years for walking in the Capitol and exonerating a cop for killing a woman who was unarmed and at worst was committing a misdemeanor violation of the law – taught everyone the power of the government when turned against its own citizens.
Last Friday, the DOJ issued one of its famous “talking indictments” made famous years ago by Rudy Giuliani in his Mafia smashing days. A talking indictment goes way beyond what’s necessary to accuse someone of wrongdoing. It fills in the gaps, gives unsolicited explanations for this or that, and, in general, reads more like a novel than a court filing. The purpose of a talking indictment is not to convince the court – that occurs in person at hearings and the like – but to convince the people and more importantly the media of the accused’s guilt. It works most of the time. The antidote to the talking indictment is the talking motion to dismiss because of prosecutorial misconduct. Here, the shoe gets switched to the other foot and it’s the defendant’s turn to tell the world what happened.
Aileen Cannon, the federal judge on this case, is not about to toss the case on the strength of Trump’s opening motion. That seems more like the job of an appellate court at a later date. I think she will find ways to dismiss some of the counts on the grounds they were improperly charged under the wrong statute. This is where we will see the practical differences between the Federal Records Act, the Presidential Records Act, and the Espionage Act. She will leave in most of the process charges – obstruction, lying to agents, etc.
While all this drama is occurring, Trump will be rallying the public. The bribery case against Biden and his family members will heat up and become center stage at the same time we hear that the Biden Crime Family wanted Trump out of the way just like Biden wanted that Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating Burisma for corruption out of the way and used a billion dollars of taxpayers’ money to make it happen. That tape of Biden looking at his watch and telling us how he threatened to withhold a billion dollars if the prosecutor wasn’t fired should be cited as evidence of Biden’s treachery. Trump’s lawyers may place Joe and Hunter Biden, as well as Barack Obama, on the witness list. That, alone, may cause the DOJ to consider withdrawing its indictment. How could a court – any court, district appellate or even the Supreme Court – block or refuse a former president under charges as serious as these the right to call witnesses in his defense?
The quintessential irony here is that the 2024 presidential election may come down to Trump, still under indictment for Espionage Act violations, campaigning on a platform that says, “elect me and I’ll put an end to the corruption in the White House, DOJ and the FBI!” Even more ironic is the fact that the people likely will buy this idea being told to them by a man facing possible life in prison. But, alas, it’s a case of Les Misérables and Trump is the ill-fated Jean Valjean being chased through the sewers of Paris by the evil and vindictive Inspector Javert who wants nothing more than to send Valjean to prison for life.
Since Trump’s defense may rest, among other things, on the charge of prosecutorial misconduct, he will be entitled to offer proof of this defense and what better proof would there be than the January 5th meeting in 2017 in the Oval Office among Biden, Obama, Yates, Brennan, Rice, Comey and several unnamed members of Biden’s national security council (those “unnamed” attendees always make great truthful witnesses because they usually are rank and file people, not policymakers or co-conspirators).
This was the infamous meeting where they plotted to nail General Flynn, flip him, and take down the Trumpster. Remember Susie’s clever by half email to herself on inauguartion day that said, “President Obama said he wants to be sure we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.” OK, Susie-Q, step up to the dock and tell us more about that email and why you sent it to yourself. And standby, Jimmy, you’re next, and then we’ll go to you, Johnny, and you can tell the jury how you lied under oath to the Senate about the CIA’s hacking into the computers of Senate staffers and how the agency’s OIG investigation proved you lied. Yes, you apologized for lying under oath but, and this is important here, you were never prosecuted for it.
People who tend to want to cover their tracks usually have something under those tracks that is important to cover. How could a court trying charges of espionage against a former president of the United States block his right to have these witnesses tell the story about how they plotted against him even before he took office? Even if this testimony were barred by the district court, an appellate court would likely rule in favor of Trump because of the compelling nature of what Durham learned about how the campaign to discredit Trump was hatched by the FBI before the election in 2016.
And don’t forget, while this meeting is going on at the Oval Office on January 5, 2017 – only two weeks before Obama and Biden leave office and Trump takes over – Comey and Brennan the CIA spook in the room, already knew that the Steele dossier likely was a fraud. In October 2016, just several months before the January 5th meeting, the FBI offered Steele one million dollars if he could prove the contents of his dossier. The money was not paid, according to FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten, because Steele was unable to corroborate his information.
Several months before the fateful January 5th meeting, Comey and then-DAG Yates approved the first of four FISA warrants issued to wiretap Carter Page. The OIG and then-FISA Court chief judge Rosemary M. Collyer later found this and another warrant to be false and incomplete. Trump can put all these people, including the FISA judge, on his witness list along with Obama, Biden, Yates, Comer, Brennan, and Rice and the unnamed national security council members present at the January 5th meeting in the Oval Office.
Stay tuned, ladies and gentlemen and children of all ages, the Greatest Show on Earth is about to open in Florida, America’s historical home of the circus. And one of the greatest showmen since PT Barnum is about to enter the main tent as our Ringmaster. It’s time to stock up on your popcorn and cotton candy!
JJC,
A very interesting comment.
Thank you for posting that.
Every FBI Director in history has been a Republican. Every one. And somehow the Orange criminal has convinced you that the FBI is biased against Republicans.
You don’t have to look far to find Republicans who are anti-Trump, anti-MAGA, anti-free speech, anti-election reform, pro-Wall Street, pro-Big Tech, pro-choice, pro-illegal immigration, and pro-Ukrainian war. Comey and Wray fall into that category of Republican.
One of the mistakes that leftists keep making is that Republicans are somehow like them–tribal, group-thinkers, who always act and speak in lockstep.
That is why they think that just because an FBI director is a Republican, he cannot be a card-carrying leftist like themselves.
The nomination of Trump in 2016 was a rejection of the Republican Party by Republican Party voters. The RNC did not support Trump. The general election was a rejection of both political parties by the voters. The DNC didn’t support him either.
So huge swaths of beltway Republicans and Democrats didn’t want him.
That is a topic studiously avoided by Washington media and career politicians to this day.
You must discriminate between something like crossfire hurricane, which cannot be tolerated, and something like this, which appears to be a legitimate indictment.
Sadly, Steve, *neither* Party has picked up on the fact they’ve lost nearly all of The People’s trust. Or worse (and far more likely), they simply don’t care.
“[S]omehow the Orange criminal has convinced you that the FBI is biased against Republicans.”
I’m genuinely curious. How in your mind do you make a statement like that, while ignoring this one from Comey? —
“[I]n the 2024 election, ‘it has to be Joe Biden.’”
Do you simply say to yourself: I’ll see only what I wish to see? Do you have a mental filter that sifts out any contrary evidence? Perhaps you have a habitual premise that amounts to: I start with a desire (to get Trump). Then I make my mind go through whatever mental contortions are necessary to satisfy that desire.
“A mind is a terrible thing to waste.”
Comey hasn’t worked for the FBI in years. Whatever he now believes does not tell us squat about the current FBI and its biases.
Dear ‘Anonymous’ Wrong Again. Comey is part of the Deep State.. those who have established themselves as inside players and run the show, regardless of whether they are actually ‘in uniform,’ or simply standing on the sidelines with the ‘coach..’ They are still involved in every game. ALSO.. ‘Nice Try’ when you try to back out of our careless inaccurate statements… but you are on record as having written them.. like your original statement re: The FBI searching for Joe’s Classified Docs.. when no such thing happened……… (ps it looks like ‘Svelaz’ put you in charge while they are away?.)
ATS, though you are ignorant of historical significance and comparisons most people on this blog are not. History tells us that the Comey attitude continues to permeate the FBI and it is getting worse.
When abuse is not met head on, the abusers become more abusive. Try learning and respecting history.
“Whatever he now believes” tells us everything about the corrupt culture he helped create.
Yet again, the Left ignores history and motivation — when doing so satisfies a desire.
You assume that there is a corrupt culture.
Now tell us about the Rinos in office that hate Trump and his supporters. If you think they are going to stop us, you can think again.
Dear Tucker.. obviously your understanding of how Washington works is lacking. The appointed ‘Heads’ of agencies are political figures… but the ‘Deep State’ establishment of insiders really runs the show & runs the ‘Heads..’
Trump needs a way out & diversion
He should check in at the nearest hospital ER & request a shot of 500ml of Thorazine.
RE :”He declared “we have one set of laws in this country and they apply to everyone.” et al…. Perhaps written by some lackluster twit in the DOJ speech writing pool and handed to him with instructions to read it and not balk in doing so. Had he written it himself even worse. In either case, the political overtones and shear idiocy of the statement in the light of what has become known and established fact regarding the moral and ethical turpitude exhibited by members of the FBI/DOJ already cited in the public record, is prima face evidence of his willingness to step to the administration’s drumbeat and not argue the wisdom of that part of the presentation as being counterproductive to their purpose.. After all, that’s precisely why he was handed the task.
The FBI is biased against career criminals.
Trump is a career criminal.
Hence, the FBI is biased against Trump.
Turley only sees the last part, and thinks it is somehow unjust.
@ Guest Commenter; What Turley sees is that the FBI is ONLY biased against Trump. Other ‘career criminals’ get a ‘Comey Pass” from the FBI/DOJ.
The FBI has been corrupt for many decades, spying on Americans such as Helen Keller, Jackie Robinson, Jack Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Steve Jobs. More recently, the FBI has been spying on local parishes of the Catholic Church and on parents who express disagreement with their local school boards. In 2022 and 2023, scores of FBI agents have been coming forward with testimony and documentation of ongoing corruption. The department’s day of reckoning is drawing nigh.
Hey Guess, any comment on Joe or Hunter Biden? Talk about career criminals!!
The FBI are career criminals and have been for many, many years… THERE, I fixed if for you.
My thoughts on the Trump indictment are at https://viewsonthenewsfromthecouch.buzzsprout.com/1963431/13023428-june-12-2023-views-on-the-news-from-the-couch
There is a very good chance this DOJ indictment of Trump will be cast aside by the courts—at the outset or, more likely, on appeal—due to the fact that the indictment is the culmination of a series of investigations, costing millions of dollars, conducted over seven years, during which the FBI frantically searched high and low for any crimes Trump may have committed. Targeting a man and then looking for any crimes he may have committed is not equal justice under the law as required by our Constitution.
I certainly feel the way you do about the Manhattan DA’s indictment. But reading this indictment, Trump did bad. Real bad. In my mind they gave him a chance to come clean and he kept doubling down on bad. Yes, Hillary Clinton should have been charged but that does not excuse Trump.
Come clean about what?.
There are lots of accusations.
My default setting is, they are all lies.
A criminal search warrant, concerning a civil documents dispute. No honest judge would consider such over reach.
National Defense Information. Any honest judge would have approved the warrant.
Then the FBI would have had no problem getting one which makes the FBI raid that much more abusive.
The Constitution does not allow prosecutors—individually or in a group—to target a person for investigation and then search up and down the East Coast for a crime the person may have committed. Any charges filed against Trump in Manhattan, DC, Atlanta, Miami, or anywhere else resulting from such an investigation should be thrown out of court. The Miami case may have to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court for that to happen, which would likely interfere with Trump’s campaign for the presidency. An outcome that would draw no complaints from the Trump-hating DOJ and FBI.
The fact that the DOJ and the FBI have been after Trump for seven years is further evidence that they first identified the man and then started a search for any crimes he may have committed.
I’m fascinated . . . what would be the legal grounds for dismissing these charges?
Ken,
Failure to make a prima facie case.
The defense doesn’t have to put on a case if the prosecution case is crap on the face of it.
Sooner if the government fails to charge an actual crime.
Sigh. Come on Jon. You have definitely read the indictment. You know the seriousness of this. You also are not a dumb man. You are falling into the Tucker Carlson realm with this piece. You know Trump will be indicted two more times before this is over. Once more by the DOJ and once more in GA. Yes, Trump would attempt to pardon himself. Wouldn’t that look great? And no, you know it’s not a given that he can do that. You teach constitutional law at GW. Can you say with a serious face that Trump cares even a little about constitutional norms? The document you teach enters serious jeopardy with his re-election. The most serious being the likelihood that he refuses to leave office, again, after his term is up. A serious possibility. These are all obvious observations. So one of two things is going on here. You are pandering to your own “base” to make money or you simply don’t care. I firmly believe you are better. I’ve read your work too long. Be better. Please.
Jeff, the issue isn’t the seriousness of Trump’s charges, it is the fact that Hilary wasn’t charged. Or are you implying that what Hilary did wasn’t “serious”.
Also, how about what joe Biden did with China, Ukraine, Romania and Russia? Not serious? The only thing not serious is you.
“Hillary’s policy violations were not bad enough to warrant charges.” _anonymous
Hillary destroyed evidence (the hard drive). How brain dead does a person have to be to realize that is a serious violation.
She destroyed the hard drive to keep it from being hacked. She wasn’t trying to “hide” anything. She was investigated and it was concluded that her actions are not criminally intentional, unllike Trump. Republicans can’t defend what he did, so they harp about her.
GIGI and AONYMOUS… Ok I get it.. you are professional comedians trying to learn about Real Politics….
Not dismissing her at all. I think she should have been charged as well. Additionally, Biden IS under investigation as well. Should it be shown he was also culpable then he needs held to account also. I am life long GOP. The party is an absolute mess. Read this indictment. I don’t see how he avoids prison unless he wins the next election, (he isn’t), and pardons himself. In a nation of 350M people, we set ourselves for the choice between Trump and Biden? Disgraceful.
hullbobby: Hillary wasn’t charged because she didn’t intentionally take classified materials, and when the issue was brought to her attention, she immediately cooperated. The issue isn’t whether she or Trump, or Pence or Biden had the classified materials in their possession–it’s what happened when they were asked to return them. Hillary, Pence and Biden cooperated. Trump helped pack classified materials into boxes, he took them after being told that he couldn’t, he refused polite requests to return them, returned a few, but kept a lot more, required the NARA to obtain a subpoena, returned a few more, and then required the NARA to obtain a search warrant. He recklessly stored the documents where all sorts of people could have gotten into them, and shared the contents of things like Korea’s nuclear capabilities with people like Kid Rock. He admitted, on tape, that at least one of the documents he was talking about was not declassified, so he’s been lying about the papers being declassified, and that they belong to him–they don’t. He’s a regular citizen just like the rest of us, and if any of us had done what he did, we’d already be cooling our heels in jail.
Whata did Joe Biden “do” with China, Ukraine, Romania and Russia? What are you talking about?
Jeff: thank you. I know Turley COULD do better, so why won’t he? Does he need the money so badly that he would use his credentials to prop up someone as unworthy as Trump? Turley can’t say the charges, if the underlying facts are proven, are bogus or not extremely serious, but he does everything else to undermine the indictment–but why? Would he really want a dangerous, lying and vindictive narcissist like Trump back in power, with all of the chaos that would ensue? Does Turley have ANY patriotism?
Sigh. Oh come on, Jeff. Why don’t YOU “be better?” Why don’t you start by framing your own disagreement with more professionalism and substance, i.e., “with all due respect, I disagree for the following reasons: 1, 2, 3, etc. Posting a personal meme with a photograph of you in a business suit (which many Kmart store managers also wear), along with your patronizing and sarcastic stance, does not show readers anything but a person who really does nothing to dispel arguments on the other side.
Two things, briefly, one regarding whataboutism, the other snippets of conversation and “evidence” out of context.
“Formal” justice consists in treating members of the same category equally, e.g., the law should treat all children in a similar manner, those in the military in a similar manner, and those in particular roles in a similar manner, so it is not at all whataboutism to ask why Clinton, Biden, and others have not been charged, nor is the claim that they ‘cooperated’ useful because it concerns the second point. In effect, the DOJ has chosen to pursue charges against Trump, and only Trump, for the ‘crime’ that others have committed as well. (There is also a strong whiff of hypocrisy, given that the Democrats and all good members of the “Left” have consistently condemned the Espionage Act since its creation.)
The second is the practice of selecting a quote or an action out of context. Chronology is crucial to understand any action or comment, as is the context in which the action was taken or the comment made. Narratives are essentially fictive if they are created for a purpose other than careful description, and wrenching quotes out of context is the stuff of gotcha journalism (and gotcha prosecution).
There are very detailed accounts of what occurred before and after the FBI raid at Trump’s Florida home, and the more detail, the less obvious claims of obstruction. Photos, of course, are always out of context, and while they may be equal to a thousand words, without knowing when they were taken and why the tableau they depict is arranged as it is, they can mislead as easily as a compulsive liar.
I am not impressed by the indictment, other than as a violation of the most basic tenet of formal justice, and, having waded through more than one indictment, I am only curious to see what the discovery phase reveals, e.g., who packed the boxes initially? Why did the government not seek Trump’s cooperation before the raid? And on and on . . .
For now, the question remains — when will the DOJ investigate and indict all of the other politicians who have acted similarly?
“Why did the government not seek Trump’s cooperation before the raid?”
—
“They did.” _Annonymous
Not really. The next step was to go before a judge. They chose a raid and they chose to bar Trump’s attorney from being an observer. That means we can’t trust that the FBI didn’t commit illegal acts while at MAL.
The left chooses to bend the laws to their advantage while making the right uphold actions that are not court sanctioned.
JT, it’s far less about the public’s DOJ Fatigue. The far more troubling aspect is DOJ’s, “We Don’t Care What People See or Think, We’re Going to Do What It Takes To Get Trump By The Ends Justify The Means Methodolgy, Even If we Have to Invent a New One”, syndrome. Is there a bigger bunch of soulless individuals than the ones “leading” the unjust Justice Department?