Oh

I don’t want to spend my time blogging about Trump, but it’s really important to say something about this level of corruption. If we don’t, who will?
Cannon unsealed a trove of new documents in the case that also revealed that an FBI agent had testified that the General Services Administration (GSA) was in possession of Trump's boxes in Virginia before ordering Trump's team to come get them. The same boxes that the GSA had been holding and ordered Trump’s team to retrieve ended up being the boxes that contained classified markings, raising questions about whether the Biden administration had set up Trump.

"So an entire pallet full of boxes that had been held by GSA somewhere outside of DC is dumped at Mar-a-Lago," independent journalist Julie Kelly noted. "Apparently these are the boxes that ended up containing papers with 'classified markings.'"

Its like the J6 cases. Republicans like law and order as a rule. They’d have let those people go down without complaint, if only the prosecution had been evenhanded and applied the ordinary law. Instead, we’ve seen novel theories of law applied to them at the same time that administration-friendly protesters have been let to walk free. 

So the FBI maybe seeded the residence with classified documents, then leaked its raid to the press, to whom it announced having found classified documents. Trial was scheduled for the height of the Presidential election campaign season. One of several. 

Don’t think we don’t see what you’re doing with the rule of law. Do fear the consequences of convincing ordinary people that the laws are corrupt. 

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I wonder if part of the increase in minor legal infractions that I see daily (traffic laws being among them) stems in part from so many people seeing the federal and some state governments allowing some people to break or bend rules with impunity? "If the law doesn't apply to them, why should it apply to me?"

LittleRed1

Grim said...

It very well could. Aristotle said that justice was lawfulness and fairness; this is an attack on both of those concepts. Aristotle meant 'lawfulness' in a specific sense of having good laws that compel people to act as if they were virtuous; but those laws had to be fairly applied to everyone equally.

Unfairness can thus threaten both justice as a whole, and the other component of lawfulness. And if lawfulness is itself under attack, because the enforcers and courts don't behave lawfully themselves, the effect on justice is fatal.

So the society isn't just, and the law loses the respect even of good people. Lacking respected laws to hold them to the path when they can't do it themselves, they have no other guide than to seek fairness -- and as you say, what would be strictly fair is to apply the law evenly to no one, since it is already not being applied against the favored.