The raid
As taken from Infidel753‘s Blog, Infidel, “The raid.” Written not even two weeks ago and accurate as to what took place leading up to the raid, reactions by “wingnuts,” and the blogosphere perspective on what they call an illegal raid. Republicans deceiving themselves is still on going since January 6.
Rather than aligning themselves with the rule of law, Repubs are off on another journey of denial. They missed their chance to call it quits and are stoically taking their lumps while in denial. Story to be continued.
~~~~~~~~
It’s much too early yet to assess the real significance of yesterday’s raid on Merde-a-Logo, but a couple of thoughts do occur to me.
First, something of such magnitude would not have happened unless there were serious plans in the works to pursue a case against Trump. For over a year the blogosphere has been full of bleatings that Garland needed to hurry up, that Trump was getting off scot-free — forgetting that the prosecution of an ex-president would inevitably be a complex and sensitive matter and that it would take time to get things right and make sure the case against Trump wasn’t bungled in some way, which actually would let him get off scot-free. These cries of impatience always sounded to me like the kid in the back seat whining “Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?” at the adult driver. Well, it looks like we’re almost there. Be glad the adults took the time to get everything right.
Second, the emerging narrative on the wingnut internet seems to be that the raid shows the US is being reduced to banana-republic status, because the Justice Department and the FBI are being used to harass a political opponent. This is, of course, nonsense. The rule of law means that no one, even the highest, is above the law. If Trump’s cult-figure status and former position of power made him immune to facing the same prosecution anyone else would face for the same crimes, that would make the US a banana republic, with one law for the common man and a different law for the high and mighty. If Trump is arrested and charged, he will get a proper trial, with lawyers and a jury and the presumption of innocence, just like anyone else. That’s as it should be.
The wingnut blogosphere is predictably outraged. There may even be violence, especially if and when Trump is arrested. But the course of justice cannot allow itself to be swayed by that, either. If the decision whether to prosecute Trump is influenced at all by the threat of mob violence (or threats from elected officials), then the rule of law really is dead, replaced by de facto mob rule.
But so far, it looks like the system is working — and the rule of law remains supreme.
Infidel753 Blog “The raid“
I think the content of the documents seized is going to determine the viability of a prosecution. A “technical” case will not have widespread support or credibility.
Of all the crimes the former guy committed both before and after his 2016 victory, absconding with government documents seems like small potatoes. The beauty of it is that it is a pretty simple crime to prove as opposed to money laundering for Russian oligarchs and it occurred when he was no longer president as opposed to refusing to allow a peaceful transition of power or extorting a foreign leader for political gain. (I continue to believe the Ukrainian gambit was Putin’s idea). Nevertheless, I agree with Jackd— the documents must be more sensitive than the grain production forecasts for Kurdistan.
I think the Georgia investigation of Trump’s vote count communications is a more likely indictment with a substantial chance of success although keeping a Trumper or two off the jury will be difficult.
It depends on the nature of the documents, and what he did with them. Furnishing classified information about nuclear weapons to a foreign government is a death-penalty offense (remember Julius and Ethel Rosenberg), and there are many other cases where having such documents outside a properly secure government facility is a potential national-security problem. Or it could endanger people in other countries who are working as agents for the US, or could increase the level of US military casualties in a hypothetical future war. Classified information is classified for a reason.
It remains to be seen but my guess is he had not yet done anything with them and ferreting out his intentions, whatever they were, will be very difficult.
Trump Had More Than 300 Classified Documents at Mar-a-Lago
NY Times – August 22
18 U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
(a)
Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both. …
i agree with the author of the post.
but i worry about going all “rule of law” over this. “the law” is often evil. they have made Julian Assange’s life hell under color of law. and they had to invent new laws and twisted meanings to imprison people on Guantanamo for essentially defending their own country against an American invasion.
and, I have to consider that a day might come when it is the good guys trying to stage a coup against what has become the government.
but it is funny that the magazine-hats have discovered the “banana republic” meme. That’s what our side was calling the Trump era.
Many laws are evil, but we cannot do without laws at all, and the need to enforce them. Governments need the ability to keep certain information restricted. The only alternative to the rule of law is the arbitrary rule of power, in which those who have power can get away with doing anything they want, to anybody they want. For most people, that would be a far worse form of tyranny than almost any government.
If “a day might come when it is the good guys trying to stage a coup against what has become the government”, then even if we let Trump get away with his crimes now, a future evil government is not going to restrain itself from crushing its enemies just because we did that. Letting Trump get away with it now would increase the risk of a future illegitimate government, by showing those who want to attack the present legitimate government that they have nothing to fear when doing so.
Julian Assange is an unspeakably evil monster who deliberately and knowingly put numerous innocent people at risk of horrible death. If he fell into a vat of sulphuric acid it would be far too good for him.
Coberly,
In a general sense then I must mostly agree with Infidel, but both of you are overlooking the rather obvious reality that beneath the veneer of civilization and the rule of law, then human beings are always subject to the arbitrary rule of power. What differs from time to time is what consortium holds that controlling power. How that power is secured is historical, whether our own Revolutionary War, or the communist revolutions of Castro, Linen’s boy Stalin (or was that the other way around), or Mao. Just ask any Trail of Tears “who’s the boss?” One cannot buy a slave without the rule of law. However, the profits from murder and cruelty can only be realized by bringing order out of the chaos that disrupted the prior order of things. So, in this respect, then the pen is mightier than the sword.
IOW, dead men tell no lies, but only dead men.
One may say that what Assange & others did was civil disobedience.
Those who exercise that right must expect punishment, although they also get to complain about it.
In this case, those of us who participated in ‘national defense’ tend to have problems with those who have knowingly endangered it and our compatriots.
Ron
No I am not forgetting. Infidel started out being reasonable, for which there was a reasonable answer. But then he gave himself away.
The answer is that yes, we need laws, but we also need a spirit of mercy. And we need to be aware that when we pursue “justice” we open OURSELVES up to the same crimes and punishments and horrors that we accuse our enemies of.
It is a man’s place to distinguish between necessary laws and the spirit of retribution.
My “argument” toward (not against) Run was that by ensrining “rule of law” as though it were a rule of “god” (in whom we need not believe…if we believe in mercy and endeavor to tell the difference between a coup to establish tyranny and a coup to dis-establish tyranny) we open ourselves …it never hurts to say it again…up to committing the same crimes and injustice, and being “punished” unjustly…that we accuse our enemies of.
America was founded by treason against the established law. America was preserved, and the slaves were freed by a war against those who thought they were fighting for their own freedom.
And we don’t need to martyr ourselves to “the law” when we commit civil disobedience against unjust laws. That is the morality of slavery.
If you will forgive my allusion to an old story that inspired a great improvement in the “rights” we extend to each other: Jesus did not sacrifice himself TO” the law.
He sacrificed himself as an example of what what horrors we are willing to commit in the name of law. And the fact that “religion” has itself been used since that time to commit the same crimes is not evidence against “religion” but evidence against the abuse of “religion.”…insane belief in our “right” to punish people we don’t like.
if we can’t figure this out we are condemned to repeat the same cycle of injustice…crimes against people in the name of “law” that we have condemned ourselves to since the beginning of time. it’s not that Darwin was wrong (or Anaximander), about the role of “competition” in survival of species, but that as humans, we have the power and duty and need to mitigate that “law of nature” {aka law of the jungle) if not overcome it entirely…and make life better for ourselves as well as those who need our mercy.
Dobbs
the problen is you (and I) cannot tell the difference between those who “knowlingly endanger” ourselves and those who fought to save us from the real enemy. And it is our “moral certainty” that we can so tell and have a right to horribly punish those we “know for sure” endanger us…that make us guilty of the same crimes we think we are punishing.
a possible example…we executed the Rosenbergs who gave atomic secrets to the Russians at a time when Americans in high places were arguing that we should bomb the Russians before they got their own bomb…and very likely saved us from committing crimes on a scale worse than the Nazis or the Communists. Crimes that would have been punished “in retribution according to the order of time.”
Coberly,
I believe that we sort of agree, but I am not sure as we come at this from very different lives and experiences. So, I will simplify.
I am not Jesus Christ. He was a great guy. I am an effective survivor. He did less well than me on that.
There is nothing more conducive to charitable fellowship among mankind than general overall prosperity, although when poor people band together for their own common defense, then that can be as effective within some limits (i.e., the low budget version of liberty, equality, and fraternity). Neither poverty nor terror bring out the best in mankind. Recall that the Third Reich was built on a foundation of the Great Depression topping off the austerity imposed upon the German people by the Treaty of Versailles rather than a midget with a mustache who was as much of a stage prop for Prussian nationalism as he was a leader. In any case, there will always be evil for no reason other than the freedom to get away with it. It is that latter case for which extreme response might offer some deterrence, although it is important to insure that one has the much bigger stick in hand before they start swinging.
Neither mercy nor justice enter in to my calculus of making a better life. Life comes first, then if possible without risking more than can be gained a better life can ensue.
If you’ve been through the process of getting a security clearance you pay special attention to the penalties for disobeying the rules, which are carefully explained to you.
Or, just call it loyalty to colleagues if not country.
Ron
I am not Jesus hrist either. I was just surprised fairly late in life that he was saying some of the things I have been saying, and not the things the “religious right” says. Or even things “the church” did over the ages.
I am all right with the big stick. Nice work if you can get it. But a lot of people are weak and some of them are not very smart. They need, we need, to realize that by endorsing, and as much as we can, realizing, a little self control in the matter of punishing others, we can at least help prevent others from punising us. two things: none of us has to be Jesus to accomplish this, or progress toward this. and “punishing” is not the same as “preventing.” I am all for, and have a history of, rushing into the middle of an assault, but I have never felt very good about long prison sentences or death penalty. Mostly because judges and juries are stupid, prosecutors are dishonest, and some people are innocent, if not of the fact, at least of “guilt.” But it comes down to a matter of taste…and maybe a little of do unto others.
“Or, just call it loyalty to colleagues if not country.”
and who are my colleagues?
“he, seeking to justify himself, asked, “who is my neighbor?””
[for those who don’t know, the last quote is from the Bible, after Jesus answered what is the greatest commandment? “Love god with all your heart…and which is the same, “love your neighbor as yourself.” oddly enough there is nothing in the New Testament about punishing abortion or gay sex
Coberly,
We are not that far apart where it comes to ordinary crime and punishment. I also get the danger of making martyrs, but that did not help much when we lost MLK and RFK. They were much better as living leaders than they were as symbols to be hoisted by charlatans.
In any case, what is said on AB will not effect outcomes. So, I have no problem with ranting Infidels whether they are right or wrong. OTOH, in either case we are far from root cause analysis whatever we believe should be done with Trump. When a commercial real estate developer can be elected POTUS, then US politics is in the tank. Actually, I do not recall an adequate candidate for the post from either party during my life time, but in 2016 we hit a new low. However, throughout my lifetime, then the Democratic Party has remained the less evil US political party, not the New Deal party of my parents, but still not quite so inappropriate for responsible governance as the anti-government Republican Party, a contradiction of reality as well as a contradiction in terms.
However, I expect no quid pro quo on fairness from conservatives. They will view our fairness as weakness, and their upper hand in matters as their just desserts.
Ron
I think where you think you disagree with me that you are overreading what i said. I was responding only to the embrace of “rule of law” by those who otherwise agree with me that Trump is a threat to the idea that the President is above the law. My reasons for objecting to that embrace is that the “rule of law” has often been an excuse to do terrible things to people. We can’t do without “law” but we can do without zeal for enforcing “the law” to punish people .
Even Trump, who certainly must be stopped, and who in my mind “deserves” to be punished, does not create in me feelings that would justify “punishment” beyond getting rid of him as a political force, distributing his ill got gaines to people he has cheated…etc, etc
but as for the rest of what you say here, i agree with you, always agreed
i think i said we don’t need to make martyrs of ourselves…or anyone else. I wasn’t thinking about “the dangers of making martyrs.” i was thinking about the dangers of endorsing attitudes toward punishment that will make it easier for the next group of punishers to punish us for whatever evil they imagine we have done or threaten to do….because i think that might be the best we can accomplish…well short of overcoming the instinct to punish that lurks in our own hearts…or primitive brains.
Okey dokey, then. Burning daylight now and we have kicked the stuffings out of this stuff.
Ron
yep. i was about to say it may be not so much you ocerreading as me overwriting. i was also going to say i think we could straighten it out but i am too tired to write any more.
HD Thoreau’s friend RW Emerson was horrified to find HD behind bars for protesting the Mexican War. ‘What are you doing there?’ he asked. Says HD: ‘What are you doing THERE?’
Trump persists in believing (or wants us to believe he believes) that the classified materials he removed from the White House belong to him and are not US guv’mint property. He wants them back.
Trump seeks special master to review Mar-a-Lago documents
Boston Globe – August 22
Trump Kept More Than 700 Pages of Classified Documents, Letter From National Archives Says
NY Times – Aug 23