What's Next?

Democrats are playing a dangerous game in two ways.

I’m torn.

Democrats are playing a dangerous game in two ways.

They just did the worst thing they could possibly do going into November: they reframed the election as being Trump vs the system rather than Trump vs Biden.

Regardless where you stand on Trump, the verdict, as I have explained on my program, is ridiculous because the case was ridiculous. Elevating an expired, potential misdemeanor to a felony by way of claiming it was in commission of another unnamed crime that the jury was prohibited from incorporating into the decision-making process isn’t legal precedent, it’s new, untested theory used specifically because of the defendant’s ID. As I said on air today, if allegedly paying a side piece for silence is illegal then Bill Clinton would be in jail (that’s Paula Jones waving her check, in case you wondered).

Either you dislike having the law unjustly used against you and others or you do not. Your opinion of Trump is irrelevant to this issue.

Most people have a major distrust of government, government institutions, and the two-tiered system of justice on display these past eight years. They’re not going to look at this as two boomers fighting it out, they will look at it as one old, establishment Democrat crone vs. the outsider. Sure, Trump was in the White House previously for four years, but Biden was in the White House as VP and now President for eight, plus his eleventy frillion years in the Senate.

The donation page on Trump’s website crashed, if that’s any indication.

The second way is where I’m torn.

I want to see every Republican attorney general across the country drag — and I mean drag — every Democrat official into such lawfare that these bastards have to sell their homes, bodies, and birth certificates to help finance their defense. I wan full prison cells. I want a new Thermidorian Reaction.

But I also realize that the only thing preventing this republic from sliding into the practice of full-scale third world politics is our caution in weaponizing law and government, a caution born out of respect for our founding republican principles. Our adherence to rule of law all this time is the only thing that has kept it intact. Democrats benefit from it in both treatment and optics alone. They use our efforts at preservation as a veneer for their abridgment of rule of law. Our government still somewhat functions because at least one ideology in this country has upheld their commitment to the grand experiment. We need to elect new officials. We need to wait for the appeals process.

But why should we be cautious with reaction to an absolute kangaroo court? Demonstrating caution confers a respect on this court’s actions that it doesn’t merit. I refuse to recognize the authority of a prosecutor who Rube-Goldberg’d a bassackwards justification for a felony indictment on a nonexistent crime.

We may have crossed the rubicon. That I say “may,” is important, and I say this as a confrontational person with a brawling sort-of history: certain fights must be engaged full-bore with no looking back. Being careful with such commitments is a sign if wisdom and those who’ve never felt the fire are typically the most eager to make them. So think on this.

So back to my original thought: which way is right? I’m still processing all of this and maybe I’ll have an answer by tomorrow’s show.

We need a John Adams right now. And Jesus.

---