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.”
I so love your columns so insightful and full of interesting topic true information. Glad I signed up for your emails and keep them coming. I look forward to everyday getting your insightful analysis on the current events that affect us all. Patricia in Arizona
Never mind.
Its clear that “Jay” is none other than Lawn Boy Elvis bug, once again hoping to be engaged because he has no life.
“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.”
*********************
I used to think that the Left were merely middle school girls upset by some slight and determined to get back at a reality they could never hope to control. Now I see them as a pack of demons unconstrained by any sense of propriety or even any boundaries on their conduct. However, like turn-of-the-century French sculptor, Camille Claudel, “I am in no mood to be deceived any longer by the crafty devil and false character whose greatest pleasure is to take advantage of everyone.”
Begone Satan! seems to be the sentiment of the day.
Wild embodies a party that is in an ethical and political free fall this month.
No comment on Donald Trump Jr cheating on his fiancée Kimberly Guilfoyle of 4 years with a Palm Beach socialite given his history of cheating on his ex-wife Vanessa with Kimberly “send in the clowns” Guilfoyle
But yeah, Democrats = ethical free fall
🤡
🎶I’m a man without conviction
I’m a man who doesn’t know
How to sell a contradiction
You come and go
You come and go
Karma Karma Karma Karma Karma Chameleon
You come and go
You come and go
Loving would be easy if your colors were like my dream
Red, gold and green
Red, gold and green🎶
Why should anyone be concerned with what Donald Trump Jr. does privately? Lots of people cheat, even the wives, so what is the big deal? To me it is a big waste of time and energy to have these concerns. I would rather put that energy into my family.
Doug knocked up the Nanny.
You’re pretty funny trying to make your leftist trash about morals.
And he knocked the sh*t out of a woman, as well. Typical Dim.
No comment on Donald Trump Jr cheating on his fiancée Kimberly Guilfoyle of 4 years with a Palm Beach socialite
Dear Whataboutism Moral Equivalency commie:
Why would you desperately deflect from Bribery Biden boning his own daughter during those teenage “inappropriate” incest showers? Biden is the leader of his party; Trump’s son isn’t the leader of that party.
But if you want to visit the sins of the son on the fathers… give us your best line for The First Felon Bagman Crackhead Kid boning his sister in law – and turning her into a crack whore.
Or the same Crackhead Kid turning his little sister into his pimp?
Any more comments regarding whataboutism moral equivalencies you want to make?
Mic drop, brother! Mic drop. Kaboom!
There is nothing more dangerous than a party that fashions itself good and the enemy evil. Such a construction is, at its root, morally and intellectual fallacious and easily tilts towards the justification of true evil.
Turley really ethics and Democrat should not be in the same place. The Democrats have not operated ethically for many many years in Congress or any branch of government.
Very true if one ascribes to the phrase “many years”, to include their ethics all the way back to the days of their slavery holdings, rebellion, segregation, and Jim Crow. That’d about cover it.
And, of course, you are woefully and extensively out of context. Slavery was legal by legislation passed by a constitutionally representative government. Southern states availed themselves of not prohibited and fully constitutional secession, which Lincoln illegally, illicitly, and unconstitutionally denied, erroneously describing secession as rebellion, as you have done, and unconstitutionally opposing a sovereign foreign nation with kinetic warfare.
Segregation is what the existing immigration law in the 1860s effectively required per the Naturalization Act of 1802, which was in full force and effect. One might note that Lincoln had no authority to issue a “proclamation” and certainly not one that amended the Constitution and overturned appropriately ratified legislation.
And, of course, you are woefully and extensively out of context. Slavery was legal by legislation passed by a constitutionally representative government.
And of course, Kluxxer George the racist Rebel constitutional scholar, is about to explain why he still feels deprived he can’t own black Americans born on American soil as his slaves.
George was on the wrong side in the Civil War. He was on the losing side again in the election last month – where his racist commie ass got kicked to the curb again.
I am going to attempt to engage in “wokespeak” and am asking for input from out s@@tlib colleagues.
What are ethics to a leftist?
Does it promote or hinder the entrance and settlement of “undocumented ” immigrants?
Does it promote or hinder the LGBQ agenda?
Does it weaken or strengthen parental rights?
Does it destroy or preserve a people’s traditional culture and mores?
Does it weaken or promote a people’s traditional religious beliefs?
Does it promote or hinder any other leftist cause of the day?
If it is the former in any of the above it’s ethical, good and should be commended. If the latter it should be opposed in any way possible, no holds barred.
How did I do s@@tlibs?
I do not want to understand, dialog or reconcile with these people, I want a divorce.
antonio
I don’t recommend taking an oath, but if you do, you should know that you are agreeing to silence the truth. When you swear an oath in court, you are actually agreeing to a lie because there is no way that the judge is going to allow you to tell the whole truth. Todays judges may not even allow you to tell part of the truth and they will silence you with court procedures.
* Isn’t that really the problem with women in high places? They revert back to their root stock of hen parties and gossip. It’s in their blood.
Shakespeare—> all the world’s a hen party and women just gossips.
A silent woman is worth more than rubies.
😂
SCOTUS leak was either a female or a gay man.
Later
Ms. Rice thought her oath and ethics ends when out of office. The oath did not include now and forever with inclusive dates.
Can Goetz file something or other for defamation or secured information release etc? He had an expectation of process?
** Ms. Wild
Not Ms. Rice
She’s not “Out” until January.
After January in that case.
A case of knowing shady characters and dogs and fleas. The Witness is a Mr. Greenburg serving 11 years for sex trafficking of minors andcwho is a known self admitting liar in another such case.
Scandal basket.
* What it says is Gaetz was careless about his career. On the otherhand it isn’t correct to judge a person by their kith and kin.
No one is perfect in all ways. It seems the adulterous vows and promises are often broken. A serious person understands that as careers are planned and closet is kept in order. That’s said for young people beginning a life. It’s just foolish not to know that.
As usual the witnesses are felons and ladies who knew not. Mr. Greenburg is a convicted felon by his testimony.
“Shakespeare—> all the world’s a hen party and women just gossips.” Excellent. True. And they are instigators and trouble makers—by birth. And we all know what is faster than a telegraph or telephone…..the answer being, “Tell a woman”.
Excellent article. Thank you, Jonathan. I used to believe that Democrats were honest, patriotic Americans who simply saw America through their (incorrect) “big government” worldview. The last eight years completely disaffected me of that notion. I have seen from them nothing but lies, lawlessness, moral perversions, tyranny, and hatred of America and all that’s good and right and just and proper. Hopefully, no real American will ever vote Democrat again, and the Party will descend into oblivion.
I have tried several times to give myself a name. I have subscribed and logged in. Yet I am still called “Anonymous”. Help! How do I give myself a name?
I see a lot of other people named “Anonymous” writing comments here. I suspect I’m not the only one having trouble getting properly logged in.
Anonymous — When you comment, there is a blue envelope icon below the comment. Click on that, and it opens up fields for you to type in a name and email address. You can do either one, or both, and the email address need not be real (e.g., abc@def.com will work – it’s what I’m using on this particular comment). The only purpose of the email address is to assign a unique pattern to the square next to your name.
Historically, you have obviously been “kool aid” drunk naive. Welcome to the party. Better late than never, I suppose.
Who is surprised? And worse, who on the modern left cares? Ethics left that party the day Hillary met George. Pfft. Let us be done with this trash for good going forward. That’s the kicker: a level of wealth does not actually define ignorant, stupid, or trash, and the modern dem party and their globalist circle j***ers might as well be living in very well-appointed trailers. You are not the erudite people you think you are. Probably haven’t ever been, with perhaps a few exceptions.
“[Rep. Susan Wild (D. Pa.)] embodies the collapsing ethical foundation of the Democratic Party…”
– Professor Turley
_____________________
And fellow travelers, Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln, threw out fundamental and statutory law, denied citizens their constitutional rights, illicitly commenced a war, imposed the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” imposed “martial law, suspended habeas corpus, ruled by edict and proclamation, confiscated private property, “fundamentally transformed the United States of America,” and set this nation on a course to progressively implement the principles of communism that hold dominion to this day.
American freedom persisted for a mere 71 years before the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) stole power and took control of once-free Americans and once-free America.
The “foundation” of America was demolished 164 years ago; Wild’s act is an inconsequential wisp compared to the wind that blew out the light of freedom in that era.
The USSR spy who defected, Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov, warned about American commies like George back when many of us were well into our work careers. That was before George was having his first Democrat wet dreams about his Democrat heroes like George Wallace and his best friend young Senator Joe Biden.
“And fellow travelers, Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln, threw out fundamental and statutory law””
@George, you vicious lying police state fascist Marxist thug: you hate Trump with the heat of a thousand burning suns and lie about him endlessly every day. You hate him almost (or perhaps more) than your inner racist Kluxxer hates Lincoln for not “deporting” black Americans born in America after your party could no longer own them as property, as slaves.
So weekly, you post that Lincoln was actually one of your fellow commies, like Marx and Stalin whose theology you worship at. And that Trump should follow the lead of Lenin and Stalin, the commies whose Pravda you style your apparatchik attempts on. You never make the same critiques of your DNC police state fascists like Joe Biden, Merrick Garland, and of course Jack Smith, Pelosi, Schumer, etc.
Bezmenov warned us about fraudulent “constitutionalist” commies like you, George. You are a contemptible cheap fake commie American.
At least sign an organ donor so we can hope you make some marginal contribution to this great country at some point in your otherwise meaningless failure of a life.
Yuri Bezmenov – A Brief Summary Of Communist Ideological Subversion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJnRmvqTdEQ
FULL INTERVIEW with Yuri Bezmenov: The Four Stages of Ideological Communist Subversion As Used By George
“It’s the [law], stupid!”
– James Carville
___________________
In fact:
– The Constitution does not prohibit secession
– Secession is and was fully constitutional
– Lincoln must have been impeached and convicted for denying the constitutional right to secession to Southern States and committing multiple other flagrant crimes of high office
– Lincoln had no authority to commence a war of aggression (i.e. not common defense) against a legitimate and sovereign foreign nation
– Lincoln had no authority to impose martial law
– Lincoln had no authority to suspend habeas corpus
– Lincoln had no authority to confiscate private property and to “take” private property for public use without just compensation
– Lincoln had no authority to issue a “proclamation”
– Lincoln committed an egregious crime of vote tampering and fraud when he “fixed” the election of 1864 which would have ended his “Reign of Terror” against the United States.
– Lincoln had a duty to support and enforce all legislation that was duly passed
– Lincoln had a duty and legal obligation to secure the border and enforce immigration law – then the Naturalization Act of 1802 which was in full force and effect
– All subsequent acts of Lincoln and his socialist-cum-communist successors must have been and must be struck down and corrected including, but not limited to, the “Reconstruction Amendments” engendered by Karl Marx
_____________________________________________
[The workingmen of Europe] consider…that it fell to…Abraham Lincoln…to lead his country through…the RECONSTRUCTION of a social world.”
– Karl Marx Letter to Abraham Lincoln, 1865
________________________________________________
“These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people.”
– Abraham Lincoln, from his first speech as an Illinois state legislator, 1837
_________________________________________________________________________________
“Everyone now is more or less a Socialist.”
– Charles Dana, managing editor of the New York Tribune, and Lincoln’s assistant secretary of war, 1848
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“The goal of Socialism is Communism.”
– Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
_________________________
“It’s the [law], stupid!”
– James Carville
Winner winner chicken dinner. Lincoln was a traitor and got exactly what he deserved.
In fact, George’s well earned reputation as a Democrat pathological liar pretty much knocks on the door when George’s cut ‘n past commie screeds are posted.
Video looks like propaganda
Far from being un-ethical, what Rep. Wild did was ur-ethical! Plus, it was stunning and brave! Look, anyone can simply follow orders, and do as they are told. That is what many Nazi officials did during WWII – they obeyed the rules. But then you also had the Oskar Schlinders, who broke their oaths to the Third Reich, and simply did the right thing. Ask yourself here, what did Rep. Wild do that was so horrible? Allegedly, she released the details of an ethic’s investigation into a fellow representative, one accused of violating the Mann Act. (BTW shouldn’t it be the Woman Act or the Teenage Girl Act???)
But don’t Americans have the right to know these things? Rep. Wild refused to play the game under the rules established by the Old Boys Club, and for that, she should be praised, not masticated!
Very often, women speak when they should be silent and they are silent when they should speak. Granted, this particular woman was a Democrat, so it’s not likely that she is any great bastion of morality or virtue, but I agree with you in that there are times when the inability of a woman to stay silent can back stab the leftists who placed her where she is.
Sorry, that should be “castigated”, not “masticated.” I suppose that I am still upset, and reeling over the unjustified hunting down and slaying of a talented and aspiring street artist by a white stormtrooper, or former stormtrooper. That, and the apparent forthcoming abandonment of our Trans Kids by SCOTUS. Then, there is J6 Redux coming up, and Thump will be set up for his crown a few weeks later. These are difficult times for an educated person, such as myself, who cares so much for the marginalized members of our society, including, but not limited to women, blacks, Hispanics, gay people, lesbian people, bisexual people, non-binary people, trans people, Native Americans, immigrants, the poor, etc.
If you are not a troll you re an incredible idiot whose stupid remarks do far more damage to the causes you espouse than any opponents ever could.
There are no such things as “causes” in the world of Realpolitik. There are only voters, and their votes. That is all that matters.
You misspeak. There are only ballots and countering ballots. That is all that matters.
ROFL.
If you are not going to take an oath seriously – then do not take that oath. Rep. Wild was not obligated to be on the ethics committee.
Oscar Schindler was Not a Nazi Official he was a private war profiteer.
As to Wild – you correctly note that she released information on ALLEGATIONS.
Allegations that the DOJ found to be unprosecutable. Allegations that are likely either partly are fully false.
No Americans do NOT have the right to KNOW that our government investigated someone for something.
Participants in our legal system are protected from claims of defamation BECAUSE they are bound to obligations respecting privacy until such time as an allegaction becomes an indictment, and even after that legal ethics requires that they speak through courts – not the press.
Rep. Wild did not just refuse to be bound by the old boys club – she behaved with just about the worst hypocrisy possible – behaving unethically on the ethics committee.
Ethics committee? Why would we need an ethics committee for a government that has no ethics? Yeh, I know. To keep em honest, right? And how well is that working. It’s not worth criminalizing free speech over it. So these ethics committees are more ethical people than the rest of America?
Oskar Schindler was an Abwehr agent. Think of them like The CIA of Nazi Germany. The CIA is also known as, The Company, in part because they use a network of companies to disguise their activities. Schindler would have had to swear an oath of fealty and allegiance to Hitler, and the NAZI party. But enough on that point. Simply ask yourself what would have become of Oskar Schindler had his true motives been found out, or his funneling of money to the Jewish Underground? Now, as to your other points –
First, carefully read what Turley wrote above –
“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,”
Then, actually READ said rules where you find –
Now, These rules are intended to provide a fair procedural framework for the conduct of the Committee’s activities and to HELP ENSURE THAT THE COMMITTEE SERVES THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, the House of Representatives, and the Members, officers, and employees of the House of Representatives.
https://ethics.house.gov/about/committee-rules
The question then becomes, did Rep. Wild serve the interests of the people by alerting them to the potential danger of Gaetz? I submit that the answer is YES! The people deserve to know what is going on behind closed doors in Congress. That is also known as transparency.
Gaetz was investigated by the DOJ and was not prosecuted.
In court, the Judge will throw out certain evidence because of specific problems. The jury hears all the evidence presented, not just the expert witness summary. I feel secure that the pertinent details evaluated by Congress made it to the DOJ.
The release of Congressional records doesn’t add to a jury’s knowledge. The weight of that evidence overrides the way we perceive evidence. From Congress, we will hear conclusions not evidence. Therefore, the records and conclusions that cannot be officially challenged and the committee persons making inappropriate statements cannot be contained through threat of suit. The process you agree with is unfair to anyone in Gaetz’s position. The committee can make him appear guilty even though the DOJ found prosecution not advisable.
* There are people who refuse to take oaths, vows, and promises not knowing what tomorrow may bring and those oaths, vows and promises broken. These are serious matters. Disgraced Wild.
But don’t Americans have the right to know these things? Rep. Wild refused to play the game under the rules established by the Old Boys Club, and for that, she should be praised, not masticated!
Well Hitman, an Old Boys Club created this system of government. To equate following “orders” to exterminate Jews to honoring an oath that would require one to follow the rules of constitutional order is imbecilic. An ethics “investigation” is just that, an investigation. The American people knew that was taking place. The established rules Wild allegedly violated are there to protect all the members right to a presumption of innocence. The unethical leaking of findings was neither brave nor praiseworthy. The intent was not to save humans from extinction nor preserve our republic. It was a nihilistic Karen power move that defines the modern Democratic party.
So I take it you were also thrilled when the UHC CEO got assassinated? I mean didn’t the ends justify the means in your world?
So who invented this new crime of leaking information that we use to call freedom of speech or good old fashion whistle blowing? If the government can keep a secret, fine. But if somebody finds out and tells the world, then they might just be saving us all from the latest genocide plans perpetrated by the Mafia mob that has taken over our government. Restricting free speech by calling it a crime of leaking information is a fast, slippery slope to hell. If the administration wants to fire somebody for betraying its interests, nothing wrong with that at all. But making free speech a crime is deadly dangerous and it happens fast across the board.
Jay, when did abject lying and inventing a new truth become “good old fashioned whistle blowing”? During the whistle blowing that the FBI had an entire dossier of verified evidence that Trump was a traitor working with Putin to steal the presidential election. Leaking that the illegal and fraudulent Obama/Clinton/Biden/DNC ‘Trump Russia Dossier’ was verified government evidence of Trump being a traitor was whistleblowing?
How about that military officer of impeccable moral courage, Vindman, using a surrogate Democrat from Chuck Schumer’s office to “whistleblow” that Trump was engaged in a political quid pro quo regarding Trump’s false claims there was evidence of Biden criminality during his tenure as Vice President with Ukraine.
Jay… do you believe you actually know what “good old fashioned whistle blowing” actually looks like?
You believe that the years that false ‘Russia Dossier’ and quid pro quo impeachment crippled the Trump presidency and left his hands mostly tied qualify as saving us from the Mafia mob you claim has taken over our government?
When the plotted time is right, Trump will take your freedoms away so fast, you won’t know what hit you. He already locked America down once and you didn’t even notice and you don’t know what Trumps relationship is to Russia or anybody else either.
Jay, that’s a pretty feeble blend of Whataboutism and moral equivalencies son. No difference between Obama, Biden, and Trump?
Every single one of them will have Democrat lawyers running the DoJ and FBI to steal your rights under color of law and put their opponents in jail as soon as they’re in the White House! All waging lawfare, every single one of them!
And Russia again! Tell everybody once again how Trump actually colluded with his good friend Putin to steal the 2016 election!
You my be correct. Trump may be the american Hitler. But the left warned us all of that over and over, and in November we decided that they were lying.
Governors locked down the country – presidents do not have that power. But Trump briefly encouraged that. A mistake. A mistake that most democrats think should have been done on a far grander scale. It is hard to see the one who sinned once and deeply regrets it as the greater threat than those who chastize him for not committing that sin on a far grander scale.
Trump has got to be the most investigated person in the US today. Possibly ever. If Trump has managed to hide something about Russia or anyone else that would require a miracle.
Given the available evidence the risk that Trump will take freedom rather than expend it is low – far lower than with any democrat.
That is the assessment voters just made.
Most investigated person in U.S. history? Yow right, but investigated by who. Trump is the one who appointed Christopher Wray, head of the FBI who is stepping down today. Can’t you people see when you are being set up? When you control the very people who investigate your actions, you can make the public believe anything they are stupid enough to swallow. You can walk out of courtroom after courtroom and get on your private 757 and just fly away like nothing ever happened. You can fake a bullet to the ear and then get up and walk away chanting “fight, fight, fight.” And dumb dumbs will worship you for it. It’s called gaining power by the hour. They don’t call him Trump for no reason at all.
Most investigated person in U.S. history? Yow right, but investigated by who. Trump is the one who appointed Christopher Wray, head of the FBI who is stepping down today. Can’t you people see when you are being set up?
Can’t you bleating conspiracy theory useful idiots at least get your timelines straight. Trump was investigated by Obama’s Attorney Generals and FBI Director Comey during Crossfire Hurricane. And Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe.
And Wray isn’t the one who appointed Robert Mueller – Obama’s former FBI Director – to be the Special Counsel investigating the ‘Trump Russia Dossier’
Don’t go full auto belt fed retard… we already have Dennis, Gigi, and George here to fulfill that role.
But if you must, the short bus for Jerry’s Kids stops here every day to pick up Dennis and the rest; they probably have an empty seat for you to fill.
* Question: From what did Judas Iscariot think he was doing in his betrayal of the location and identity of Christ ?
Judas loved silver. Trump loves gold. Take your pick.
Government investigations are confidential – that is even in the constitution as reflected in several amendments in the bill of rights – such as the right to be secure in your home, your person, your papers, your property
There are circumstances that allow Government to violate those rights – such as when a court issues a warrant based on probable cause of a crime.
But a government investigation – even a warrant does not destroy your right to privacy entirely. derogatory information and allegations in an investigation are required to be kept private unless the results of that investigation satisfy the requirements to prosecute, and even then government speaks through the courts.
Rep. Wild not only violated her oath she violated the constitutional rights of Gaetz
Rights such as free speech belong to individuals – NOT Government.
Speech can be a crime. If you direct someone to murder another – that is a crime. Mafia dons can not claim free speech protection for their orders to capo’s
Nor is Wild a “whistle blower”. She obtained information on the entirely private conduct of someone – not their government conduct.
She did not blow the whistle on public corruption.
If Susan Wild put on a blindfold, held her breath and threw a dart in the air, anything she said about anybody in Washington DC would likely be exposing corruption. I say let her talk.
Goetz due process…
Due process is not letting bad judges silence all the witnesses and hide all the evidence. Due process, especially for a public servant means exposing all witnesses and all facts to the public. When the government silences witnesses, jurors, committee members and anyone else who wants to comment instead of publicly cross examining them, that is called tyranny. Anytime someone tries to make you stay silent about something and swears you secrecy, you can be sure that they are involved in criminal activity themselves.
‘Due process is not letting bad judges silence all the witnesses and hide all the evidence.’
Obviously, Jay got whacked in court. And like Hillary Clinton, sees themselves as the victim of a vast conspiracy.
This criminal act of betrayal by Rep. Susan Wild (D. Pa.) against the United States and its people is a breech and violation of the public trust as egregious as high treason.
In recent centuries in England, the penalty imposed for high treason was for the perpetrator to be Drawn and Quartered.
“High Treason.” Yes, I believe that was what the British accused the American Colonists of when they fought for American Independence. As I recall, the penalty was either hanging, or drawing and quartering, assuming that they got past the Red Coat firing squads. Let’s see now, what would be the difference between “High Treason” and just plain old treason treason? My guess? Probably the standing of the official with the tall hairdo or wig and how insulted the king felt that day about the whole matter of questioning his authority. And it sets a great precedent to silence anyone else who might decide they like their freedoms. Is that what you support? Loss of freedom of speech?
I can only imagine, perhaps you can clarify whether committee information is to be made public and whether publication of what is apparently the proprietary information of Congress is a crime. Oh, and enlighten us as to the penalty for betrayal of or “low treason” against the high legislative chamber, Congress.
Already covered that. If the government can hide top secret stuff from the public, fine. But freedom of speech is still the law of the land. Suppose the government had a top secret weapon, say, a vaccine that it was planning to use to kill off the population and someone who had been sworn to a secret committee decided to make a detail known to the public from some investigation that would eventually alert the people to what was about to happen. By your goofy reasoning, she should just sit quiet because she swore an oath to the committee. You’re setting a really bad precedent for freedom when you criminal free speech and it won’t take long before all free speech is criminalized.
If the committee wants to drop her, that’s fine. But you are arguing to have everyone’s freedom of speech criminalized.
One can look to NY to verify that the left wing notion that the ends justify the means has drastic consequences. Luigi Mangione is accused of executing an insurance company executive in the streets because he disagreed with the carrier’s claims practices. Left wing logic is vividly on display in that tragedy and the radical left is dutifully rallying behind the executioner.
.
Sometimes a woman with a loud mouth can expose the tip of the iceberg so we can see the rest of the criminal behavior of the crooks who have a stranglehold on our government.
“Sometimes a woman with a loud mouth can expose the tip of the iceberg so we can see the rest of the criminal behavior of the crooks”
Jay, you and Gigi need to arrange some hot Tinder dates. She’s looking for a man who believes in her and what she throws around in the way of accusations every day.
You would seem to be the answer to her dreams.
I refuse to believe that politician is completely innocent of violating some ethical rule. Even Trump has issued pardons to family and appointed family and friends to high level positions. However, where Biden really pooped it up was covering the whole Barisma timeframe. This was clearly an umbrella for himself more than Hunter.
President Trump, as far as anyone knows, pardoned only one “family” member. It is widely seen as justified. However, what is not being discussed is the real reason that Hunter did not stand trial on the tax charge and Sleepy Joe was given a pass by DOJ. Testimony in either case would have exposed Obama. The dealings of the Biden crime family were sanctioned by Obama and his handlers. Biden must be shielded or he’ll disclose everything he knows about Obama’s crimes. What’s a little blackmail among thieves? I’m sure Biden was even threatened. You must understand. Obama’s legacy must be preserved at all costs. Why do you think Hillary was protected and placed at the head of the line in 2016?
Because the politicians are all working together toward the same goals and any apparent conflicts are staged theatrics for people like you who either can’t see through it, or are in on it themselves.
Jay – if what we are seeing is politicians working together – I would hate to see what it would look like if they actually went after each other.
If the collusion delusion, the hunter biden laptop, the lawfare are all staged theatrics we are doomed.
Now you’re beginning to catch on.
Really well stated and summarized. It’s good to see you taking a more aggressive approach to calling things out as you see them. It sometimes feels that you are more concerned with not appearing to have a strong view than to simply express it. The ‘rules for thee, but not for me’ are being used against us, and the term ‘nice guys finish last’ comes to mind. You have said nothing wrong, you said what needed to be said in clear terms. 👏🏼
It sometimes feels that you are more concerned with not appearing to have a strong view than to simply express it.
I agree with that observation Joe. I believe the good Professor walked the fine line for years between Republican and Democratic party policies as long as he could, but this modern version of the Democratic party broke him out of that somewhat passive comfort zone. He’s always been a constitutionalist and as long as both parties danced around the edges, he could provide his critique of their actions without favor. These last 8 years however gave him little to work with in favor of the Democratic party. Once his prized 1st amendment went on life support, he seemed to shed his tweed suit for armor to demonstrably defend our republic in a way that a principled, constitutional scholar can. Bravo indeed.
@Olly: I’ll agree with your defense of the Professor allegedly now demonstrably defending our republic as a principled, constitutional scholar when he starts going after the worst of the Democrats political lawyers in office when it comes to violations of ethics and oaths of office like his good friend and fellow member of the Washington DC Bar Association, Merrick Garland.
Four years of the most vicious police state fascist lawfare with Attorney General Merrick Garland at the head of it, towards not just Trump but also normal American citizens. And about all that Professor Turley has changed from being an ardent admirer and supporter of Merrick Garland as Attorney General is the occasional “How could he make such a grave mistake????”
Sometimes you just drag a skunk around and see who follows it…
Context and nuance are critical if you are expecting or delivering rational adult discussions or debate. Anything less and you have echo chambers and/or fishing clickbait while being paid to produce columns or a blog.
In Professor Turley’s “wild world of Democrat ethics”, Susan Wild’s lies about Professor Turley and her leaking don’t even make the smallest notch on the meter in comparison to the lies and leaking from Washington DC Democrat lawyers still allegedly serving the American public like Attorney General Merrick Garland.
No leak about the Gaetz investigation is anywhere near the scope and magnitude of leaking from Merrick Garland’s office. The Garland DoJ and it’s FBI can track down every J6 backwoods Grannie in Texas, thousands of miles away from Washington DC who trespassed on the Senate lawn to take a selfie. But Garland has yet to track down a single leaker among his prosecutors, lawyers, and staff – most of them also Washington DC lawyers leaking also privileged information. But unlike Wild, AG Garland and his staff are deliberately leaking to achieve DNC party political objectives.
No lie about Professor Turley from Susan Wild is anywhere near the lies from Attorney General Merrick Garland about other Americans, to both the American public and Congress, while he abuses the power of the Attorney General’s office to deprive Americans of their rights by color of law by using his office.
Ethics is the subject today? AG Merrick Garland is supposed to be impartially delivering equal justice for all Americans, without fear or favor. Instead he is delivering amoral and completely unethical lawfare (sometimes illegal lawfare) to achieve DNC party objectives. Much of that concerns taking out anyone that is a problem to the party narrative and objectives. Some impartiality…
There are massive magnitudes of difference between Susan Wild’s lack of political, professional, and personal ethics and the demonstrated complete lack of any of those ethics by Attorney General Merrick Garland.
The same could be said about other Washington DC lawyers, also members of the Washington DC Bar Association: James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, Robert Mueller, etc.
A complete lack of legal, public service, and political ethics after having sworn an oath of office. As well, a complete lack of the professional code of conduct for Washington DC lawyers as set out by their Bar Association.
If writing critical columns about a two bit small time player like Democrat lawyer Susan Wild is helpful in informing the public of ethical lapses, violations of oaths of office, etc on the part of Democrats… why in the last four years have there not been far more critical analysis of major Washington DC lawyers who are major players in depriving Americans of their civil rights like Attorney General Garland?
There must be a rational justification that AG Garland and others don’t even rate a criticism from Professor Turley like “ill-considered comments” (as Trump got a few days ago) regarding many of the comments his Democrat legal colleagues in federal public service in Washington DC have made over the last eight years?
Criticize the lawfare – but don’t specifically name the Washington DC Democrat lawyers who are guilty of that lawfare while in federal public office?
When you refuse to address the problem and call it out after you’ve willingly taken up the position of paid professional legal and Constitutional analyst for all of the American people, you are part of the problem.
And for all the insight he provides here without cost, Professor Turley is part of the Soviet Democrats’ ethical and criminal problems. Meaning, problems for ALL Americans – not just Democrats.
“Nothing to see here, you naive peons” is increasingly a failed strategy for hiding Democrat lawyers lawlessness and criminality.
POTUS Obama twice committed felony first degree murder (as did everyone downstream who fulfilled Obama’s orders like the good little Nazis they all are) when Obama ordered to assassinate via drone strikes two American citizens in Yemen, son and father both named Anwar Al-Awlaki, the son being an age 16 minor. To Rober Mueller’s eternal shame, he was the FBI Chief at the time and told Obama he could rinse-repeat those murders on US soil.
Few things would warm some person’s heart as much as seeing Obama arrested, charged, tried, convicted, given a death sentence and said sentence fulfilled.
One particular lying human filth/scum bag posted here that Obama’s orders were legal because the Awlakis were not on US soil as required for Constitutional protection, one of the biggest and fattest lies ever posted here.
“[T]he ends justify the means . . .”
On that theme:
The means (this time): Leftist media running countless stories (complete with appeals to pity) of average people denied medical coverage by insurance companies.
The Left’s ends: Make you feel sympathy for one of its monsters.