According to Barnes' analysis (I haven't read the indictment itself, so I'm only going by the piece at the link), ...three novel arguments: first, that speaking out about American politics requires a foreign citizen to [do several things], so can PM T May and her foreign secretary B Johnson be indicted--they're foreign nationals who commented on the election and who had to know their commentary might have an impact on its outcome.
He's a bit facile.
Second, even if Clinton were legitimately indictable, I think Trump took the right step (never mind his tweeting; I'm interested in action, not words) in deciding not to pursue prosecution. It's the same move that Ford took vis-a-vis Nixon, and it's the right move both times. Clinton should be held accountable for her miscreancies, but let the private citizens harmed hale her into civil court. They'll likely have more success today, too, than did the women abused by Bill who tried court.
Clinton also is already being held to account through the humiliation and opprobrium she endures every time she opens her mouth to whine about having lost.
Trump made a generous offer, I would say, to forgo prosecution in favor of everyone letting bygones be bygones. The Clinton faction responded by ginning up a prosecution effort aimed at the incoming administration, and forced the incoming NSA out of office and into a guilty plea.
At some point, if these are the rules they want, they’re going to find out what it’s like to get played by those rules.
Let it be done civilly, I say, and civilly. There's no need for our side, or any of the facets of our side, to stoop to the Left's level. If we do have to defend ourselves, though, it must be full-on, with no disengagement and no settlement agreements, just the complete destruction of the attacker.
One of the guys at Powerline (John Hindraker I think) posted some commentary on the indictment and got into a conversation with an election law expert. The upshot of their analysis was that 52 USC 30212 (if I remember the section correctly) doesn't really criminalize anything in relation to foreign influence in elections. Non US citizens can do both paid and unpaid work for US election campaigns. The only thing that appears to be prohibited is funding.
5 comments:
Silly Tex, don't you know that laws are for the little people?
According to Barnes' analysis (I haven't read the indictment itself, so I'm only going by the piece at the link), ...three novel arguments: first, that speaking out about American politics requires a foreign citizen to [do several things], so can PM T May and her foreign secretary B Johnson be indicted--they're foreign nationals who commented on the election and who had to know their commentary might have an impact on its outcome.
He's a bit facile.
Second, even if Clinton were legitimately indictable, I think Trump took the right step (never mind his tweeting; I'm interested in action, not words) in deciding not to pursue prosecution. It's the same move that Ford took vis-a-vis Nixon, and it's the right move both times. Clinton should be held accountable for her miscreancies, but let the private citizens harmed hale her into civil court. They'll likely have more success today, too, than did the women abused by Bill who tried court.
Clinton also is already being held to account through the humiliation and opprobrium she endures every time she opens her mouth to whine about having lost.
Eric Hines
Trump made a generous offer, I would say, to forgo prosecution in favor of everyone letting bygones be bygones. The Clinton faction responded by ginning up a prosecution effort aimed at the incoming administration, and forced the incoming NSA out of office and into a guilty plea.
At some point, if these are the rules they want, they’re going to find out what it’s like to get played by those rules.
Let it be done civilly, I say, and civilly. There's no need for our side, or any of the facets of our side, to stoop to the Left's level. If we do have to defend ourselves, though, it must be full-on, with no disengagement and no settlement agreements, just the complete destruction of the attacker.
Eric Hines
One of the guys at Powerline (John Hindraker I think) posted some commentary on the indictment and got into a conversation with an election law expert. The upshot of their analysis was that 52 USC 30212 (if I remember the section correctly) doesn't really criminalize anything in relation to foreign influence in elections. Non US citizens can do both paid and unpaid work for US election campaigns. The only thing that appears to be prohibited is funding.
Post a Comment