I’ve been reflecting on something I wrote the other day about how I didn’t think mutually assured destruction works when one party is completely nuts, completely lacking in restraint or empathy, and literally willing to do anything. I premised that on the thought that this “tit for tat” process ended with the complete destruction of everything.
But something has been bothering me and that thing is how little the charged levied against President Trump and his associates are bothering me. Hmmm – bothered about not being bothered is not really a new experience for me. When things don’t fit, I get bothered until I find the puzzle piece that fits.
One would assume that when a former president is brought up on charges, especially charges that are the result of stretching law to the breaking point, that should generate some degree of bother, but I’ve been uncharacteristically sanguine about it. In truth, every charge, every “the walls are closing in” moment, and every “we got him this time” results in less concern rather than more. The more they pile on, the more ridiculous and absurd it seems.
It isn’t because I don’t think the charges are serious, because the consequences of them are of the parties are found guilty. It is because I believe they are total manufactured bullshit and a complete perversion of the law that will become evident when people come to their senses.
But what if they don’t?
Come to their senses, that is.
What if MAD won’t work because breaking our impartial and adversarial system of justice is like breaking a Fabergé egg or one of those super-delicate, gauzy glass sculptures, once broken, it will stay broken in the minds of people because no matter how well some artist puts it back together, everybody will know it once was broken and its value would decline accordingly, perhaps to zero.
What if what the Democrats have done to Donald Trump over the past five years is impossible to repair? What if deeds have already been done that cannot ever be undone?
Again, it seems folly to assume that because I believe the charges to be like Monopoly money – only having worth inside the game, that others will see it that way or understand how deeply these cuts go. Alvin Bragg, Jack Smith, and Fani Willis are cutting dangerously close to America’s brachial artery. Cut that one and the American justice system bleeds out in a little over two minutes.
But again, what if they don’t come to their senses?
What they are destroying isn’t just limited to President Trump’s situation, it will likely split the system into at least three factions, two that will never accept any charge or decision rendered by someone they perceive plays for the other team and about a third who will not accept anything from either side. Two thirds of Americans not trusting the judicial system is too much. It will eventually collapse.
Ten years ago, a Rasmussen poll showed that 24% of Americans did not trust government to do the right thing. A poll taken this year by the Partnership for Public Service asked virtually the same question Rasmussen asked and the number not trusting government almost doubled to 56%, pretty close to my intuited two thirds. Maybe we are already past the point of no return.
About a decade ago, I was asked the question, “After what you have heard and seen over the past couple of years, do you still trust the American public?”
My answer then was yes, but not today. There has always been a tinge of partisanship in inside the Beltway “justice”, but the covert went overt on July 5th, 2016, when FBI Director James Comey loudly and publicly announced that he would not recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton because he didn’t believe Hillary had “intent”. That was laughable and as Andrew McCarthy wrote at National Review, the FBI had to unilaterally rewrite standing law to make that assertion:
“In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.”
If the destruction of over 17,000 emails Clinton was ordered to turn over and didn’t wasn’t intent, I do not know what was. If beating Blackberrys to death doesn’t qualify and the wanton destruction of emails only AFTER she was told not to destroy them (and their existence was made public) does not demonstrate criminal intent, then intent can never be proven in any case. It strains credulity to believe less.
And now Hillary goes on TV to taunt and laugh about how they didn’t get her.
To save members of the elite progressive political class, those trusted with ensuring justice have failed. They have chosen to kill Lady Justice so people like Hillary and Hunter could survive. The smart people in Washington, our purported betters, have traded blind justice to protect a brain damaged progressive ideologue they put into office.
It wasn’t a good trade.
Lol 😂 “No.” I agree 💯
I stopped trusting "the people" at large in the summer of 2020. The insanity had taken hold and where I was at least had abated; then at the end of June, our governor, who ended up complicit in election theft as far as I'm concerned, announced that because cases, everyone has to wear a sock on their head. I watched people carry on with that idiocy until early this year. They need their paychecks and their pensions, and will not -- no matter what -- risk these things, and will make no effort whatsoever to unify to restore sanity.