Below is my column in the New York Post on the news reports that outgoing Rep. Susan Wild (D. Pa.) was the person who violated the rules (and oath) of the House Ethics Committee and leaked information to the media this month. The information concerned the investigation into former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R., Fla.). Wild embodies the collapsing ethical foundation of the Democratic Party as members struggle to justify the Biden pardon.
Here is the slightly expanded column:
“You must be wary of those seeking to use their influence and their expertise to wrongful ends.” Those words were spoken at the George Washington Law School commencement ceremony two years ago by the recently defeated Rep. Susan Wild (D., Pa.).
This week, the words took on a new meaning after Wild was accused of leaking information from the House Ethics Committee. Wild embodies a party that is in an ethical and political free fall this month.
If news reports are accurate, Wild appears to have given our students a curious ethical lesson in how not to be a lawyer or legislator.
Wild was fighting to release the report of the investigation into former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R., Fla.). When Gaetz decided to withdraw from Congress, the report was not released. That is when details from the committee were leaked to the media, and the press reported that “two sources said Wild ultimately acknowledged to the panel that she had leaked information.”
Keep in mind that this is the House Ethics Committee, and she is a member. She is also a member of Congress who took an oath as part of the panel’s rules that “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will not disclose, to any person or entity outside the Committee on Ethics, any information received in the course of my service with the Committee, except as authorized by the Committee or in accordance with its rules.”
Wild herself has not publicly confirmed or denied the alleged leaking of the information.
If the reports are true, Wild knowingly violated an oath that she took not to release information from the Ethics Committee because she was unhappy with losing votes on the release of information.
Her office seems to have shrugged off media inquiries. As in the past controversy, Wild has avoided public comment on the report that she was the leaker.
This controversy speaks to more than one unethical former representative. This month, we have seen Democrats line up to support one of the most unethical and abusive uses of presidential pardon power in history. President Biden not only pardoned his son but pardoned him for any crimes over a decade, including some that many felt implicated President Biden himself.
The President issued the pardon after repeatedly lying to the public when he was a candidate that he would never do so. In the previous election, Biden lied to the public about not having met Hunter Biden’s clients or having knowledge of his dealings in the influence-peddling scandal.
Biden’s lack of ethics surprised no one. However, even today, the support that he received from Democratic leaders over the pardon has been shocking. Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate majority whip, even called it a “labor of love.”
Indeed, much of the corruption in Washington is a labor of love, from nepotism to influence peddling to corrupt pardons. Indeed, faced with overwhelming opposition of the public to the Biden pardon, Democratic members look like the comical choreography of “Prisoners of Love” from the movie The Producers. (“Oh, you can lock us up and lose the key; But hearts in love are always free!”).
The distorted view of ethics in the Democratic Party was vividly on display during an embarrassing moment recently at the White House when Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre claimed that a poll showed “64% of the American people agree with the pardon — 64% of the American people. So, we get a sense of where the American people are on this.”
That poll actually showed the majority of Americans opposed the pardon. Yet, it was 64 percent of Democrats who favored a president giving his own son a pardon.
It is all about the ends rather than the means in today’s politics of rage.
The 2022 words of Wild were particularly poignant because they were used as part of a false attack made by Wild at my own school. In a speech to the law students on living an ethical life as a lawyer, Wild accused me of testifying falsely in the Trump impeachment that only criminal acts are impeachable after saying the opposite in my testimony in the Clinton impeachment.
The only problem is that Wild’s statement was demonstrably and undeniably false. I testified in both the Clinton and Trump impeachments that an impeachable offense need not be an actual crime. Ironically, Wild’s own Democratic colleagues and later the House managers in the Senate Trump trial repeatedly cited my testimony on that very point.
None of this matters in the Wild world of Democratic ethics. It is very simple. Whatever Democrats are attempting cannot be “wrongful ends.” More importantly, it is the ends, not the means, that are the measure of ethics. Since they are only fighting for what is right, the ends justify the means from cleansing ballots of Republicans (including Trump) to supporting a massive censorship system to ignoring court decisions to count invalid votes.
It is the same sense of ethics that led someone at the Supreme Court to leak a draft of the Dobbs decision. Even though the leak shattered court ethical rules and traditions, the leaker was lionized by many on the left.
For years, the “by any means necessary” wing has dominated the Democratic Party. Ironically, the collapsing of the party’s credibility with the public has left little to show beyond a litany of unethical means used to achieve unrealized ends.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Dems long ago became the party of hypocrites! Most Americans realize Democrats have always followed the RULES FOR THEE BUT NOT FOR ME philosophy! Just chalk up two more notorious cases (Hunter and Girl Gone Wild) for the dump known as the Democrat Party! Only a wrecking ball and bonfire can fix that corrupt party!
Susan Wild, Merrick Garland, Juan Merchan, Letitia James, and Alvin Bragg operate under the facade of legality. In reality, they are nothing more than high paid legal whores for the Democratic party. Whores all.
There are two major types of Democrats in the complete collapse of that party, having nothing remaining in the way of any kind of ethics, morality, and standards.
One are the ones willing to abuse the office they have with a willingness to destroy peoples’ careers and lives by color of law in order to achieve political and personal objectives. They will go well beyond massive ethical violations and go so far as to commit felonies to achieve Democrat political objectives. We generally call it ‘lawfare’ as does Professor Turley. Much of the time it would be more accurate to call it “felonious”.
These are Democrat lawyers like Barack Obama, his Attorney Generals Loretta Lynch and Sally Yates, his FBI directors like Robert Mueller, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, etc. And of course, Democrat lawyers Joe Biden and the current Attorney General, Merrick Garland. Most are of that class of lawyers who are not only Democrats, but members of the Washington DC Bar Association. A brotherhood of similarly minded warriors for the cause. Not a single one of them is in compliance with their Bar Associations code of professional ethics for lawyer members.
The second class of Democrats instrumental in the ethical and moral collapse of the former DNC are those who stand on the sidelines, watching what their Democrat peers in politics and law are doing, and who say little to nothing in the way of condemning it. Reserving their professional criticism for minor players in their party who they call out for political violations.
The most obvious member of that group that comes to mind is Professor Turley. You will die if you hold your breath waiting for Professor Turley to do a Susan Wild level criticism of the friend he has repeatedly told us he admires, Attorney General Merrick Garland. Or any of his fellow members of the Washington DC Bar who have been instrumental in the lawfare and accompanying felonies America has watched them commit since before Trump even ran for president.
Silence is consent. And where his Washington DC Democrat legal colleagues in government public service like Merrick Garland, James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Robert Mueller are concerned, Professor Turley has chosen to be silent in the face of not just clear evidence of a total lack of ethics, but outright criminal behavior.
To be fair, there should be credit for publishing columns that will result in being attacked by other Democrats, even if he is being paid to write that criticism. I will give him credit for that.
But his double standards of calling out and criticism leave Professor Turley emblematic of Democrat hypocrisy and lack of ethics.
Please detail specific actions you have personally undertaken to help the groups you mention, and writing angry social media posts do not count. What actual work have you performed to help anyone?
A WAFLC dirtbagto the last. What the nation needs to know about the truth of the 2020 vote will be eventually revealed by political historians many decades from now.
Hold on, Turley is criticizing a politician who leaked information? They all do that. Even Republicans. It was a common occurrence when the impeachment inquiry was ongoing. They loved leaking tidbits of statements from closed-door depositions.
Turley should be concerned about why Republicans have gone to great lengths to shield Gaetz and the investigation’s results. According to the speaker, transparency was going to be a thing. It seems Turley is faux-raging again.
Same old “he said, she said” bull sh*t from you Leftards. Grow a pair, cretin, and stop trying to pass the buck. Accept what Dimunists unequivocally are: violent, thieving, cheating criminals! It is in your DNA—-along with Herr Fraudci’s Frankenshot mRNA that you so ignorantly shoved in your body.
@George “Hold on, Turley is criticizing a politician who leaked information? ”
Ah! George is here today to try wild Whataboutisms as he presents us with his daily Schiff Show.
Georgie… you’ve had FOUR YEARS to whine about Commissar Pelosi while controlling the House shielding Democrats and taxpayer funded hush money payments concerning sexual allegations against Democrats that ran into the MILLIONS.
You had the entire Schiff Impeachment Inquiry to sob and wring your hands about Schiff selectively leaking information – or flat out lying about what was said – in that Soviet style impeachment inquiry.
And suddenly… you think you have a Whataboutism that you think that can be like a pig sprouting wings – it will fly?
A child could do better, George, you cringeworthy Democrat pathological liar.
George – wild did more than just leak.
She did so in violation of an oath and the constitution,, further she leaked private information about allegations of private acts, NOT government conduct or misconduct.
Republicans has “sheild Gaetx” just as bu law and constitution EVERYONE subject to a criminal investigation is sheilded unless they are indicted – and even then the case is made in the court, not the press.
What congressmen are OBLIGATED to do is transparency in Governing. Not violating the constitutional rights of those investigated for unsubstantiated claims of private misconduct.
Ironically, the collapsing of the party’s credibility with the public has left little to show beyond a litany of unethical means used to achieve unrealized ends.
That statement captures it all. While it would be appreciated to see immediate negative consequences for these acts, I take solace in watching the progressive movement crumble under the weight of their combined failures.
OLLY,
Seems to me, we have seen an immediate consequence for these acts, Trump won, by a lot, and they lost by a lot. Even their own members have admitted woke leftist policies are toxic. They need to jettison the progressive movement and get back to traditional JFK like Democrat party. But here is the great thing, seems they are doubling or even tripling down on their failed policies with their so called “resistance.” That will further alienate their own party, divide them, weaken them and should give us good chances of winning in 2026 and 2028.
Trump won, by a lot, and they lost by a lot.
Upstate, the election results might appear to be an immediate consequence, but it took years of failed policies to get to that point. Leading up to this election, there was a lingering question as to whether things had gotten bad enough yet for the American people. We got our answer. This is only the beginning. The country is in no way out of the woods yet. We still have ideologues who will cling to policies that produce misery wherever they are tried. We still have the Deep State that views themselves as the true ruling “government” and they will not be “overthrown” without a fight.
Olly – I absolutely share your concern that it took the american people so long to grasp how badly the democratic party had jumped the shark.
Worse still – almost half the country would have given them more power anyway.
But I am encouraged because as difficult as coming to gasp with the dangers of the left has been the people who convince slowly, do not change their mind trivially.
I beleive and hope that it will take a long long time for the MSM the left, democrats to re-establish credibility.
I think the evidence so far shows that is the case.
Trump has not yet taken office – yet he is near defacto president in the eyes of the country and the world.
Further his pre-presidency is being viewed very favorably by significant majorities.
The last two months of Biden appear to be the most chaotic yet. At the same time there is a credible perception that peace is coming.
The mess in the mideast is looking like the last days of the 3rd Reich. Hamas, Hezbola, Iran have been utterly defeated.
There are even some indications that Lebanon which has been a basket case for most of my lifetime could well be restored to a more stable country.
It is difficult to say what will happen with Syria – EXCEPT that it will no longer be a proxy for Iran.
Regardless americans are hopeful regarding the mideast. Not that the lion will lay down with the lamb, but that the mideast is unlikely to require US blood.
People are justifiably hopeful for peace in Ukraine – personally I think that a win-win deal is possible that people do not expect.
The beginings of implimenting Trump’s agenda 47 are already occuring – even though Trump is not president.
Despite some of the attacks by the left most are happy with Trump’s appointments.
There is an optimism that we could see the end to “The deep state
that would could see the first real cuts in government spending in history.
I think optimism over both of those is overstated. But I hope to be proven wrong.
But I am encouraged because as difficult as coming to gasp with the dangers of the left has been the people who convince slowly, do not change their mind trivially.
I beleive and hope that it will take a long long time for the MSM the left, democrats to re-establish credibility.
John, those are two very good points that are rooted in the fact that ever since the 17th amendment greased the skids for the rise of the progressive movement, the American people had grown accustomed to the their status as sheep voting for their preferred pack of wolves. That was until Obama decided to fundamentally change that dynamic. Over the next 4 years the wolves that had infiltrated areas that impacted the lives of the sheep on a local level began to wake up the sheep to the danger their ignorance and apathy had created. Electing Trump in 2016 paused that progressive momentum, but with Trump’s loss in 2020, the wolves chose that moment to finish what the progressives started. What the wolves failed to understand is the sheep had been fundamentally transformed as well into something else altogether. A large majority of our population are no longer ignorant or apathetic to the wolves amongst us. We are still fundamentally self-reliant and constitutionally conservative. Democrats that recognize that are leaving the party. The rest of them are stuck in isolated ignorance of WTF just hit them, all thanks to the propaganda machine of their own making. That latter group dwindle the longer it takes them to figure it out.
“The mess in the mideast is looking like the last days of the 3rd Reich. Hamas, Hezbola, Iran have been utterly defeated.”
Defeated, yes, but utterly defeated no, unless Iran’s nuclear potential is eliminated either voluntarily or involuntarily. A big decision is required. Whose airforce needs to destroy the nuclear capabilities of Iran?
Congratulations, Rep. Susan Wild!!!!!!
Many struggle to leave the confines of socially defining groups. Few successfully seek and achieve membership in such groups. ‘White trash’ embraces you as a member and declares that you are no longer in need of the knowledge of such distinctions as ‘ethics’, ‘ethical behavior’, ‘criminal acts’, ‘criminal law’ and infractions related to those terms.
Little wonder, with people like Susan Wild in the legal profession, that the public holds lawyers in such low esteem. Strong work George Washington University Law School.
Ms. Wild, let me introduce to Ms. Bondi.
While I’m at it, Mr. Schiff, let me introduce to Ms. Bondi.
Surely you are not surprised by this development?
Professor Turley repeatedly emphasizes the idea that Democrats believe “the ends justify the means.” He does so because he knows this phrase is well understood as a communist nostrum. He’s basically implying that the Democrats are communists now–and he’s right. They would proudly admit themselves if it weren’t politically expedient to do otherwise.
I would add that communism and jihadism are remarkably similar in their political means. The only difference is that one is a religious ideology and the other is a secular religion.
The outcomes are also remarkably similar–tyranny and poverty. That’s how cults roll.
What did I tell you all for years and years and years???
Trying to explain “principles”, or “right vs. wrong”, or “rules”,
or “logical consistency” to a Democrat, is like trying to explain to a bad,
cheating, folding metal chair-using, pants-pulling-down, wrestler why he didn’t
win the WWF Belt fairly. He is not able to comprehend what you are going on about.
All he knows is, that he won the match and belt, and if his girl friend jumped into
the ring and whacked the good wrestler over the head with a metal chair while the
referee wasn’t looking- – -well, what difference does that make???
After all, he won! He has the championship belt! Isn’t that all that matters???
The Democrats are descending into carnival act territory.
James Carnival, just said it the “Democrats job to win elections.” He never used the word, Ethics.
Carville’s words would equally apply to 1930’s Germany: “National Socialists’ job is to win elections.”
How’d *that* turn out?
You touch on an important point. The Chinese Communist Party (much admired by the American left) has embraced nationalism, socialism, and capitalism as a buffet of policies they can choose from for the aggrandizement of The Party. This actually makes Chinese communism indistinguishable from old-fashioned fascism, but somehow that irony gets overlooked in America’s faculty lounges.
“Carville’s words would equally apply to 1930’s Germany”
And he would fit in perfectly with that mob. Probably a Goebbels disciple when alone.
Diogenes,
Are descending? I think they are long past that with all their failed woke policies. When you become the butt of Bill Maher’s jokes, you know it is bad.
True, Upstate 🙂
A little too cerebral.
Instead of looking at these “political means” via the categorical lenses of communism, jihadism, socialism, fascism, etc. or the outcomes of tyranny and poverty….just keep it simple. View the circumstances as the activities of hoods struggling for wealth and power. The observed outcomes then are as expected.
@Diogenes… any of the communist leaders and theologians that DIDN’T worship at the cult religion of atheism? Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro? How about the original one: Marx?
As an agnostic, I don’t see the atheist cult as much different than others. More annoying, probably. And clearly, far more dangerous.
I agree. There’s no basis for atheism. It’s always been a pose by narcissists for shock value.
🙂
“communism and jihadism are remarkably similar”
If given the power either one would turn on the other.
I agree, Alan, and they know it, too. I’ve yet to see a successful alliance between communists and jihadists. The statists like Hussein and the jihadists like the ayatollahs typically make bad neighbors.
As an incoming New Cadet at West Point, we were required to memorize “Worth’s Battalion Orders”: “But an officer on duty knows no one — to be partial is to dishonor both himself and the object of his ill-advised favor. What will be thought of him who exacts of his friends that which disgraces him? Look at him who winks at and overlooks offenses in one, which he causes to be punished in another, and contrast him with the inflexible soldier who does his duty faithfully, notwithstanding it occasionally wars with his private feelings. The conduct of one will be venerated and emulated, the other detested as a satire upon soldiership and honor.” Perhaps in addition to their oath (which some apparently don’t believe) members of all three branches of government ought to memorize this, or have it on a plaque on their desk.
It would not matter. Some Democrats (and not a few Republicans) would also violate that oath.
Yep. This surprises no one. Leftist Democrats are in lock step in their cult like thinking of “by any means necessary” to maintain power.
At that same GW graduation speech, Wild told the new lawyers to “do what you know is right and let the law catch up to you”. The question is how do you know what is right? Well of course, the Democrat Party will tell you, haha. The ends justify the means is a way of life for the Dems.
Democrats are bleeding all over the rug. Throw out the rug along with the Democrats.
Bidenflation persists to end as prices jump again in November
The rate increased 0.3% from the previous month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported.
The Consumer Price index, on which the U.S. gages its inflation, increase in November to an annualized rate of 2.7%, the federal government said Wednesday.
The rate increased 0.3% from the previous month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics also reported. The increase was in line with Economists expectations. JTN
The problem of inflation caused by the Democrats will remain in the next administration. Now the Democrats will try and toss the blame to someone else. Never trust a Democrat or a person who speaks for them.
S. Meyer,
I believe your assessment about Bidenflation continuing into Trump’s admin to be correct. As I have stated many times here on the good professor’s blog, many of Biden’s failed policies may take years if not a decade to correct. We must remember that.
Here is another Biden time bomb waiting for Trump, New Biden-Harris Medicare plan could cost taxpayers $20 billion in election-year giveaway, CBO warns https://justthenews.com/government/congress/new-biden-harris-medicare-plan-could-cost-taxpayers-20-billion-over-next-three
Inflation is a very difficult problem. Current inflation is a great improvement over nearly 10% 24 months ago – but 2.7% inflation is NOT a recipe for a strong economy.
The normal means to reduce inflation is to contract money supply which will case a recession.
But it is in theory possible to grow out of inflation – though it has never been done before. Further growth can itself increase inflation.
Regardless significant cuts in regulation will stimulate the economy and MAY reduce inflation – or atleast we can hope.
Those effects will likely be near immediate.
Conversely the DOGE efforts to reduce government spending have even greater long term positive potential.
The less government spends the less is borrows from the FED and the less money is shoveled into the economy.
I personally believe Trump and his appointments are going to fall far short of what they promised.
But I think that still may be enough.
In many ways this is 2016 all over again.
But several things are different.
Popular support is stronger.
The left has thrown everything including the kitchen sink at Trump and failed – there is nothing left.
There will be no Collusion Delusion redux – people will not beleive it, they will not beleive the MSM.
The “resistance” may thwart or delay some of Trump’s efforts – but they are highly unlikely to shift public views,
they are more likely to harm themselves.
Trump does not fully own the republican party – but it is his moment and republican politicians interfere at their peril.
Even democrats have far less ability to obstruct.
Contra claims of the left – Trump’s agenda is CLEAR that is what people voted for, that is what they want, and they will not treat kindly those who interfere.
Voters will tolerate democrats efforts to reign in Republican over reach, they will NOT tolerate out right obstruction.
There are likely to be a number of peices of major legislation shortly.
Democrats will be forgiven efforts to get SOME kind of protections for so called Dreamers in immigration bills.
But they will not be forgiven complete obstruction, they will not be forgiven a failure to secure the border and build the wall.
There are those claiming that Trump does not have a mandate – yet we KNOW that Trump’s agenda is more popular than He is.
John, there is no question that Trump left the economy with inflation controlled and growth ensured. Biden screwed up badly, and we will pay for it. This term, Trump will positively impact both metrics in several ways. You like to say, “Trump and his appointments are going to fall far short of what they promised.” What he promised is his distant goal that no one can achieve. When dealing with this type of work, one picks a goal outside of what can be done. That forces one to stretch to reach as far as they can get. Anything else leads to a less productive society, so don’t be so literal, and instead, accept he is shooting for the unknown and is one of the few capable of doing so.
Term limits seems a common theme.
That would require an ammendment and, as gun control advocates say, that’s too hard to do.
But the people have term limits for representatives and senators as an option since the beginning. They simply choose not to exercise that option.
There is an article V movement in the states. Look up term limits for us congress. Sign the petition for your state. http://www.termlimitsforuscongress.com.
“Sign the petition for your state.”
As Olly said, the voters already have the ability to limit the terms of Congresscritters. They largely decline to exercise that option, even though the corruption, deceit, and myriad other failings of those they are reelecting are in plain view. What makes you suppose that they would make any better selections if term limits were enacted? I concede that corrupt politicians would have less time to build their empires, but the cost would be that there would be less information available about their practices, and transparency would therefore be reduced, not increased. I confess that I do not know what the ultimate remedy (if one even exists) is to voters making poor choices to “represent” them, but all of the above suggests to me that formalizing term limits is not it…
Oops – gave Olly credit for a comment that should have gone to OldFish – sorry!
There HAS to be a solution. Your argument against is the same one used for any proposed solution. It embodies. “loss of corporate knowledge” or “the staffers would run the show” or myriad other similar. Serving in Congress was never intended to be a career. It embodied citizens doing their duty and returning to live with the consequences of their actions. As it stands right now Congress ALWAYS votes to exempt themselves from the effects of the laws they pass. That has to stop.
” Serving in Congress was never intended to be a career.”
Your statement embodies what I believe to be the only possible real solution, as unlikely as it is to come about. The power of the Federal government must be drastically reduced, to a scope no larger than the minimum required by the literal meaning of the powers enumerated for it in the Constitution. That should reduce most of the incentives of power and money that lure many to a career in politics, possibly to the point that those seeking to be in Congress are of a type similar to that envisioned by the Founders. The problem there is one of returning the jinni to its bottle, since this would almost certainly require the knowing cooperation of the current corrupt Congresscritters.
Well put Sir. I agree. That is why the Article V convention petition exists. Once sufficient states pass the petition Congress has no say in the matter. Many of those who argue against the petition drive worry that it can be hijacked by the traitors to rewrite the constitution. According to the writers that can’t happen. Go to the link and read it. You might be surprised.
@Jonathan Turley:
Wild embodies a party that is in an ethical and political free fall this month.
Just that party, nothing else? Professor Turley, Wild is the avatar of an elephant named Hypocrisy that regularly trundles around in your columns and your Bar Association. In the unlikely chance you actually read comments here, I wonder if you are one of those lawyers you described just over a week ago who make the wrong assumption that the public viewing from the sidelines are naive suckers who don’t notice what those lawyers are doing.
The 2022 words of Wild were particularly poignant because they were used as part of a false attack made by Wild at my own school. In a speech to the law students on living an ethical life as a lawyer, Wild accused me of testifying falsely in the Trump impeachment
How is her lie any different from the DOZENS of flat out lies your friend and colleague Attorney General Merrick Garland has made to the American public over the last four years? Lies to the American public he is allegedly serving from the office of the Attorney General. Some of those lies from Merrick Garland made while in the position of Attorney General were almost certainly felonies: perjury while under oath testifying to Congress.
What your fellow Democrat lawyer friends and colleagues are doing is now called ‘lawfare’. Much of it would properly be called ‘felonies’.
Merrick Garland has done far, FAR worse than a member of Congress dropping in for a day to give a speech to your Georgetown students and lying about you. Your friend that you have regularly told us you supported and admire so much has deliberately used the office of the Attorney General to lie about many people with the specific intent to destroy their lives through color of law that is the office of the Attorney General.
But you suffered the indignity of a lie from this woman who doesn’t have the power of the office of Attorney General while lying about you to destroy you and your career as Garland does? Oh dear, how terrible for you!
Your fellow Washington DC lawyer and friend Attorney General Merrick Garland has demonstrated he has a complete and total lack of legal ethics and morality as a kingpin of Biden lawfare.
Nor any regard whatsoever for the rule of law. Doing so as a prized component of his and your party the Democrats, as he joins them in that collapse of any ethical foundation your party has. One would think Merrick Garland and other Democrat lawyers like him serving in government in Washington DC have nothing to do with the Democrats’ ethical collapse if we relied on your legal and political analysis.
I point out to you that you NEVER publish equally severe criticism of any of your fellow Democrat lawyers and members of your DC Bar Association like Merrick Garland as they lie and commit felonies.
Like former Obama Attorney Generals Loretta Lynch and Sally Yates. Like former Obama FBI Directors James Comey, Robert Mueller, and Andrew McCabe. Like Obama prosecutors Jack Smith and now Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco.
Those colleagues of yours, Professor Turley, not only proved themselves to be absolutely devoid of anything resembling ethics as either a lawyer or in the execution of the public offices they held. They also clearly and repeatedly committed felonies while in the offices they held. They did so primarily in hopes of criminalizing Americans they had targeted for destruction and violated their civil rights through color of law.
The elephant in the room of your columns and your Bar Association is that you always give your fellow Democrat lawyers and Bar Association members a pass regarding their complete disregard for any ethical requirements as well as their criminality.
Meanwhile, you operate under a different set of standards while criticizing Trump for “ill-considered comments”. NOT the same as committing perjury in public office, Professor. Not. Even. Close.
The public and readers here have known for years that the DNC has pretty much gotten to the point they have no ethical foundation whatsoever. You’re not telling us anything new with this column and complaint about your fellow Democrat lawyer Susan Wild lying about you to your students.
Your vile fellow Democrat Washington DC lawyers and colleagues at the Washington DC Bar Association have been the base operatives leading DNC ethical collapse and willingness to engage in felonies while in office to achieve their political objectives.
And you for your part publish nothing to criticize them for that which is anything remotely close to your column today criticizing this defeated Democrat, Susan Wild for lying about you.
Say the names of your unethical and felonious Bar Association colleagues and friends in your columns as you do Susan Wild’s, Professor Turley:
Merrick Garland
Loretta Lynch
Sally Yates
Jack Smith
James Comey
Andrew McCabe
Lisa Monaco
Eric Holder
It’s a long list of your fellow Democrat Washington DC lawyers and Bar Association members abusing the offices they were given the honor of serving in. Your friends and colleagues committing felonies while in offices of public service.
Your hypocritical “ethics” are just as lacking in providing that cover for your lawyer colleagues and friends as Susan Wild is while leaking and lying to your students. While she may well need a refresher course in professional ethics as a lawyer in the public eye, you should be in that course right beside her.
Professor Turley, you are part of the Democrats’ ethics problem that is the entire country’s problem. Even if only by choosing to turn a blind eye to the crime and corruption of your colleagues. And many of us see that.
“Professor Turley, you are part of the Democrats’ ethics problem . . .”
Asserted about the man who is one of the very few *principled* legal scholars in the country.
Shameful.
@Sam Asserted about the man who is one of the very few *principled* legal scholars in the country.
Give us all a wake up call when that *principled* Democrat legal scholar writes a similar column as he did about this woman about the friend he has regularly wrote here that he admires, his friend and fellow Washington DC Democrat lawyer, Attorney General Merrick Garland.
Did it already happen and I missed it?
Or if that’s too painful to expect him to write about one of his mentors, a similar column about any of the other Democrat lawyer members of his Washington DC Bar Association who were engaged in regular serial felonies and outrageous violations of the Bar Associations rules of professional conduct. Here’s a few in the news he’s had years to choose from:
James Comey
Robert Mueller
Loretta Lynch
Sally Yates
What’s *principled* about refusing to write about the criminality and complete lack of personal, political, and Bar Association ethics of your Democrat lawyer buddies and colleagues?
Punting instead to calling out this nobody failed member of Congress for leaking and lying about him to his students?
Shameful is a good word to describing defending Professor Turley’s clear avoidance in writing about the criminals who are his colleagues and Bar Association buddies engaged in this lawfare.
Try to do better.
“Give us all a wake up call when that *principled* . . .”
A man’s stature is not determined by whether he criticizes people you don’t like. It’s determined by his body of work.
If you were motivated by the truth, rather than by a desire to smear JT, you’d focus on that body of work.
There are rules for Democrats, and there are rules for Republicans. Once people understand this, they will then know why the Democrats do what they do.
Time to yank Wild’s Federal pension. If she is not trustworthy enough to do her job, she is certainly not trustworthy to retire on the taxpayer’s dime.
With the onslaught of Lawyers, Judges, Elected Officials and Bureaucrats that began violating their Oath to protect and defend the Constitution and to uphold the Laws of….. It is time Congress took action on criminal penalties for those willful violation. The examples of these blatant violations seems to have exploded since 2016.
(Collapsing ethics)? How can you lose something that you never had?