I keep hearing questions about why people in Trump’s administration are getting locked up, while the people Republicans are accusing of corruption do not. Is this proof that Democrats follow the law, and Republicans do not?
Actually, it is proof of the opposite.
Take the example of McCabe. McCabe lied to federal investigators, and Congress, at least four times. General Flynn lied once. McCabe’s lies were far more egregious as well. Flynn ‘lied’ by giving two separate dates for the same meeting to investigators, when grilled over an extended period of time. One of the answers was clearly not correct, hence he was charged with lying – but there was no reason to believe he did not just get confused during the questioning and give different dates for the same meeting by mistake. McCabe lied about whether or not he was offered a promotion into a position where he could kill investigations into Hillary Clinton, on the condition that if promoted into that position, he would kill those investigations. McCabe also lied about killing those investigations.
There is a kind of gentleman’s agreement in prosecutorial channels that process crimes should not be prosecuted unless they are committed in relation to an underlying crime, as if all someone is guilty of are process crime, it smells like entrapment…
Lying to investigators, or to Congress, is a process crime, and Republicans, believing in justice, are not apt to charge someone with a process crime unless there is an underlying crime associated with it.
Democrats are not concerned with justice so much as power, and as a result, when Democrats decide to go after someone within Trump’s circle, they are not looking for criminal activity so much as leverage. If Democrats can get someone to fall into a perjury trap, such as happened with General Flynn, Democrats can then blackmail that person to give up (or make up) information on other people.
In the case of Roger Stone, the Democrats piled up six process crimes, and told Stone that unless he gave them dirt on Trump, they would recommend the maximum sentence for each, for a total of nine years in prison. Roger Stone did not make a deal, so the prosecutors decided to make an example out of him, to ensure that others would see just what happens to those who don’t give the Democrats what they want.
Republicans would not have charged Roger Stone at all, without an underlying crime.
The prosecutors in the Stone case lied to their superiors about what they were going to recommend (it should have been between nine months and two years), and then at the last minute they leaked to the press that they were recommending nine years. Those prosecutors had to know that the Attorney General, whose job it is to oversee them, would intervene, and they may have hoped that Trump’s temperament would lead to a tweet as well.
Well – they got their wish, and now we have a whole new supposed scandal in which nobody has done anything wrong (other than those four prosecutors), but in which Democrats can now conduct more investigations, to create more process crimes, that can be used to blackmail ever more people.
Somehow, 40% of the public thinks that what the Democrats are doing is OK, in spite of the fact that it is a complete perversion of justice.
The Democrats have another trick up their sleeve that is just as egregious. Typically, prosecution starts with the committal of a crime. Investigators and prosecutors work to see who may be guilty of that crime. The kind of power-based ‘justice’ Democrats are using in the era of Trump puts that normal chain of events on its head – they start with a person, and then work backward to see what crimes that person can be accused of.
Democrats are starting with the person they want to take down (Trump), and are then using a veritable army of lawyers to strain every imaginable law to it’s logical breaking point, looking for any way any law can be interpreted or construed, such that Trump can be accused of having broken it.
Just as one example.. If Trump takes information from a foreign power, and that information could in any way be construed as helpful to his campaign, suddenly Democrats claim that the information ‘has value,’ and is an ‘illegal campaign contribution.’
Laws against foreign campaign contributions were never designed to prevent the relay of relevant information between countries, but that is exactly how Democrats are using campaign finance laws in the age of Trump.
The Democrats don’t stop with Trump here either. Anyone who can potentially be blackmailed into giving up information on Trump is investigated in the same light.
And the media helps, both by spreading the falsehoods that the interpretations of law the Democrats are selling are somehow legitimate, as well as by looking at everything Trump says using the same kinds of twisted interpretations. Have you ever wondered how it is even possible for Trump to lie as often as he does? It’s because an army of journalists pour over everything Trump says, looking for anything that in any way can be construed as misleading. If Trump says the sky is blue, some fact checker somewhere will point out that the sky only looks blue because of the way the light reflects through it – and will call the statement a lie.
In the age of Trump, Democrats have normalized the investigation of people rather than the investigation of crimes, whereas Republicans tend to shy away from that kind of miscarriage of justice.
John Adams, our Second President made a prediction: “should the People of America, once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another and towards foreign nations, which assumes the Language of Justice and moderation while it is practicing Inequity and Extravagance; and displays in the most captivating manner the charming Pictures of Candour frankness & sincerity while it is rioting in rapine and Insolence: this Country will be the most miserable Habitation in the World” (emphasis mine).
In the age of Trump, Democrats have created a simulation that uses the language of justice, while practicing inequity and extravagance as a perversion of the same. The word ‘justice’ has been weaponized in ways that are not the least bit just, and if John Adams is correct, they are working to make our country the most miserable habitation in the world.
At the end of the day, how justice is applied is a simple question, based on what it is someone is looking for. Those who look for ‘justice’ follow a set of rules designed to provide it, whereas those who look for ‘power’ follow a set of rules designed to destroy their opponents through the perversion of ‘justice’.
And once again, 40% of the public has such animosity for Trump that they do not care. To 40% of the public, anything that hurts Trump in any way is justified, simply because it hurts Trump. Justice be damned.
The other 60% of the country has a decision to make. Do we want the “the most miserable habitation in the world” Democrats are promising, or do we want President Trump to get four more years?
That should be an easy question to answer…