Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
GOP Candidates Should Come Out Against Abuses of the Legal System
It is quite clear to anyone with sense that the Democrats are breaking precedents left and right to go after Trump. I have seen some on the right say it is to get the Republicans to select Trump. Maybe so, but then again, I am no mind reader. It seems strange Democrats would also look at the 14th Amendment to take him off ballots if this was their plan, but I am not into any 4-D Chess arguments. Did not buy them with Trump and I don’t buy them with Democrats.
And it does not matter.
Democrats started to use the FBI and DOJ to go after the head of the other party in 2016. This is proven to have happened. The Russia hoax was started and paid for by the Clinton campaign and picked up by the Obama administration. We also already have proof the IRS was weaponized against conservative groups four years before that. The Democrats have clearly been using the power of government to stop their opponents. Now, we have seen one unprecedented indictment after another, including applying RICO statutes to a re-election campaign. I have heard people like John Yoo and Richard Epstein (not Trump lovers) decry this use of judicial actions. It is all clearly wrong.
And yet, the candidates, save Vivek Ramaswamy, have been far less than full-throated in their denouncement of these actions. Their silence is deafening. Some even tacitly seem to be signing on to it.
People may not like Trump. I sure get it, and there is lot about Trump I don’t like. And what is being done is wrong. It is a destruction of norms far beyond anything Trump stood accused of. Never in the history of America have we seen this sort of behavior.
It seems to me that many on the right think that this is Trump-specific. This will be a one-time thing, Trump will be gone, and we will get back to business as usual. When, in the past 50 years have the Democrats ever destroyed norms and then gone back to business as usual? I can’t think of it. This is a hill to die on. This is a reason to fight back if there ever was one. This is nothing about irregularities in the 2020 election. This is about abuse of legal power to inhibit and destroy a candidate. Even if you think this is all 4-D chess to provoke Trump into being the nominee, it is still wrong.
I won’t support any candidate in the primary who does not say so.
Published in General
Not only the silence of the candidates, but that of the members of the legal profession is also worrisome, as the courts become ever more politicized and attorneys on the “wrong” side become pariahs who are targeted for disbarment (see Prof. John Eastman, e.g.).
One would expect lawyers of all professions would be most vocal in opposing such abuses and the accelerating erosion of Americans’ rights. That they are not indicates growing fears of being cancelled and losing their livelihood. Not a good sign.
Very good point.
Sort of like seeing how the media is pro censorship these days.
Maybe it has been posted before, but the current situation in the indictments brings this quote to mind:
“William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”
Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”
William Roper: “Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!”
Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”
― Robert Bolt, A Man for All Season
Not just every candidate but everyone who calls himself a Republican needs to forcefully oppose the legal abuses against the former President. Every elected Republican. Those who will not might as well just flip over their tags to the hidden “D” side.
Their refusal out of fear of being cancelled reveals their cowardice. We must all hang together or we will all hang separately.
Indeed. Perfect sentiment.
I don’t think I could support a candidate who does not speak out against that behavior, either, just as I don’t think I could support a candidate who does not support U.S. military aid to Ukraine in its efforts to fend off an invader that operates in the same lawless manner as the Biden regime.
I suppose we can prosecute a bunch of bureaucrats, and fire a bunch more.
My personal preference is to build a pyramid of human skulls, but I’m prepared to compromise.
A little.
As a lawyer myself I am bothered by the acquiescence and even encouragement from lawyers and lawyers’ “professional” organizations to criminalize and otherwise punish (such as by disbarment) lawyers who represent the “wrong” clients or advocate for the “wrong” positions.
It would seem obvious. . .
Perhaps if he gets the nomination, the other candidates should rally around Trump, but until then they should focus on their own campaigns. and make the case for their own nomination.
So they should ignore the injustice?
How many elected Republicans have spoken out in favor of Trump and against the vile and unconstitutional onslaught he is undergoing? How many have specifically, by name, called out the despicable moron in Atlanta who the people there, in all their wisdom, elected their DA? Or Jack Smith? Or Alvin Bragg? None that I know of although I sure would not mind being shown the error of my ways on this if I am wrong. A sickening display of sheer unadulterated cowardice; disgusting.
Remember that “Republicans for the Rule of Law” group that Bill Kristol organized as yet another way to suck in cash from the donor class. It was clear then that it was really “Republicans against Trump.”
But hey, now the rule of law is under attack and we could use some of those “Republicans for the Rule of Law.” Where are you, Cap’n Billy?
Oh, counting your ill-gotten gains, I see.
The injustice is a reasonable focus for Congress, the Senate, and Conservative friendly law firms. Competing campaigns should focus on winning the nomination.
Primary Debate Question: “For all the candidates, raise your hand if you support the current prosecutions of Donald Trump.”
I would love that. Better yet, as for their opinion on them and let them babble a bit. It would be even more revealing.
But that’s not going to happen, and we all know it.
It speaks to their cowardice and poor character if they do not speak against injustice. . . even if it’s committed against Trump. Their silence hurts their campaigns with me.
I am researching right now in preparation for a post on the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment which the Judges in the Federal District Court in DC seem to have taken it upon themselves to simply repeal without authority, obviously. The more I read about the conduct of “Judge” Tanya Chuktan and her glaringly open and obvious hatred, there is no other word for it, of President Trump, as evidenced by statements in Open Court, on the record, the more surreal it becomes that she apparently is going to be allowed to remain presiding over his case. As one who spent most of his life at the Bar, I do not have the words to describe the revulsion I feel toward this [ ] as well as several of her colleagues and what they represent. Unlimited power run amok, indeed. In a (way too) long career as a trial lawyer, I dealt with some Judges, both State and Federal, who were at times extremely autocratic and dictatorial. None of them came even slightly close to what these Judges are doing to the Jan. 6 defendants-not even close.
One of my favorite passages and precisely on point here.
Same. Because we know if they can do it to Trump, how much easier they can do it to Joe P. Citizen. And we know they will. We’ve watched them do it for the past few years. Look at what they did to Douglass Mackey for the “crime” of posting memes.
Dean John Eastman is one of the most highly respected scholars of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in America; I have attended televised seminars where he has lectured and to say that he is brilliant would be to understate the matter. He has been indicted for representing a client and zealously putting forth arguments in his client’s behalf which he, a nationally recognized expert in the field, believed were good faith arguments. He is being pursued by a radical ingnoramus who should never have been licensed to practice law or graduate from Law School. And here we are with this situation facing us– nationally recognized scholar and expert vs. a radical, probably Marxist, moron and we are not supposed to be able to even talk about how she actually got through Law School. Only one word fits to describe this tragic situation: surreal.
Not sure ineffective posturing is bravery or good character either. If you want Trump to be the nominee, fine. Encourage the other candidates to drop out of the race to support Trump. However, there is not much the other candidates can actually DO to influence the treatment of Trump. It it not like the democrats listen to the Non-Trump republicans either. The only way any candidate can influence the justice system is by getting elected. I don’t want Trump to be the nominee. I will reject any candate that rallies around Trump before the nomination is decided
Yea, however I’m not sure I wish to ally with these people, or this type of person.
And we will definitely( if we lose) hang separately. It will be us first, and they are kinda okay with that…
Or they are just ignorant and blind to history.
They are very difficult to educate. I try to have pat, but…
These Republicans have been bambozelled by their information intake choices. Even in their rebellion, they are accepting premises and assumptions, relying on the legacy inertia of brand name institutions. They are unable to accept, or mentality and psychologically process, change. The rug has been pulled out from under us and they are entirely unaware.
They are, and I’m susceptible myself, hypnotized by the zeitgeist. They live in their sandbox and accept it willingly, and often desperately, as the only worldview that exists or should exist.
I don’t want to hang with these people.
What’s really hilarious is how they hold the conceit we are obligated to them to be loyal to, for example ,whomever is the eventual nominee in this or past elections.
With this, and several other important things supporting , this alone is grounds for divorce.
We all saw this coming.
Great post Bryan
I had assumed that the candidates could walk and chew gum at the same time, but maybe I was wrong. How long would it take to issue a statement condemning the persecution of Trump? That shouldn’t distract them from the task of campaigning. If it does, they aren’t up to the job.
One of my favorite passages.
That settles it. I guess we’ll have a Democrat elected in 2024, because I will “reject” any candidate who doesn’t.
I can think of a few more. “Cultural Revolution,” or “Struggle Session,” or . . . “Communist Nightmare come to America.” (And approved of by so-called “conservatives.”)
I know what’s neither brave nor good character: sweeping it all under the rug or looking the other way while injustice happens.
This is another way Trump was a gift to Democrats. They know that the GOP hates him, too, and that they can get away with ANYTHING to take him out, because “Republicans” will sit by and just let it happen. And by that, the Democrats sink their poison talons deeper into the body politic.