But can we admit it's just a little bananas that Trump is considering someone who FBI Director Comey explained has violated the rules regarding handling classified information way worse than anything Hillary Clinton ever did?
Because I think this would be important. Hillary Clinton was the subject of chants to "lock her up", and calls from the RNC Convention demonizing her and making a case against her because of her email server, from people like Rudolph Giuliani and NJ Governor Chris Christie. But what Petraeus did is okay in Trumplandia--he is still fine for a sensitive cabinet role. And Gen. Michael Flynn, who was tapped for National Security Adviser, was also reckless as heck regarding "forbidden" communications. He's fine, too.
I bring this up because even though Donald Trump was, as some might term it, "gracious" about not prosecuting Hillary Clinton over her emails anymore (like this would actually be up to him?) it's still being held over her head as if he might take an interest. Call it the "potato peeler of Damocles", perhaps. At anytime, if he finds her dangerous, he'll consider using the Department of Justice to just skin her. (Which, I don't hesitate to add, isn't how a Chief Executive should be using the Justice Dept. at all!)
Is it because they are military men that they get the pass? Conservatives? Is it because there's just this something about HRC that makes what might be considered "bucking the rules" or "making mistakes" for Flynn and Petraeus, a federal case about shadiness when it pertains to Hillary Clinton?
I don't know--it just looks like one hell of a double standard.
1 comment:
Of course it's a double standard. Welcome to Donald Trump's democracy 2.0.
In the meantime, let's be clear - Trump can't 'prosecute' anyone. I'm certain that Jeff Sessions will push to empanel a grand jury, and if he does they will famously indict 'a ham sandwich'. But no professional DoJ prosecutor will want the case, so it might get kind of weird on them - or, alternatively, the DoJ staff might actually talk Sessions out of the whole thing due to that whole pesky no evidence problem.
Also, too, if I'm going to watch the destruction of the American experiment in democracy, I want maximum comedic value, so I'm holding out for Rudy as SecState...
Post a Comment