The one question that can no longer be ignored:

[kentuck]

Is no one above the law?

We have had that pounded into our heads for our entire lives. In America, no one is above the law. In our democracy, every person that is charged with a crime is guaranteed a trial by their peers.

But now, we have come to a time where we must confront that very question.

If we cannot confront that existential question, then what is the future of American democracy?

America was shocked to its core when it was attacked on January 6th, 2021. It grew even worse when it was discovered that there was a conspiracy to overthrow our government and the will of the voters of this country.

It was obvious to many from the beginning that the act of sedition and conspiracy was the evil creation of none other than the former president and his criminal cohorts. His insatiable desire to hold onto power and his dangerous ego was unprecedented in its scope.

Now, our democracy must decide. Can we remove the cornerstone of our legal system and expect our democracy to still survive?

[ananda]

1. in a corporate oligarchy that owns both courts

and a whole political party, lots of people
are above the law.

[kentuck]

2. If that is true, how relevant is the Democratic Party?

The Party of Democracy.

[Farmer-Rick]

10. So true

In some respects, the US has always had some people who were above the law. It just wasn't acknowledged and it depends on who they abused and commit the crime against.

I mean is a slave master not committing a crime when he beats his slave? Is a parent committing a crime when he hits his child?

[kentuck]

12. But we must keep "crimes" in perspective.

Whatever Bernie Madoff may have done, it was not a threat to our democracy or a threat to overthrow our government.

[gab13by13]

17. Bernie was convicted because he stole money from rich people,

When I was in college back in the 60's my professor told us there were 2 systems of justice, one for the rich, one for the poor.

If a poor person is caught stealing he is a shoplifter, a rich person is a kleptomaniac, and so on.

[DENVERPOPS]

52. Bernie's crime was he stole money

from the rich. If he had stole money from the average common people he would have been cheered by the Rich for his ingenuity.

Same with Michael Wise here in Denver. He cost the taxpayers zillions of dollars for his fraud in the Silverado Bank S & L crisis and got off scott free.

He then went to Aspen and defrauded seven rich guys, and got sent to Leavenworth.......

[BlueJac]

3. It doesn't look good for this country...

Where rich privileged people can thumb their nose at the justice system and not ever be held accountable! If you are a minority or just poor with no name recognition you are screwed to no end! I suspect we have been misled our entire lives! It's a shame or a sham.

[Rhiannon12866]

4. That's the most important question that needs to be answered, the future of the country depends on it

[HAB911]

5. I am not optimistic

[LuckyCharms]

6. Unfortunately in America, there are several people who are either

Last edited Wed Apr 6, 2022, 11:00 PM - Edit history (6)

effectively above the law, or are able to just barely skirt existing laws enough to stay out of prison.

I'll try to give an example of what I am trying to say.

There have been relatively few individuals in the financial world who have been sent to prison for breaking financially related laws. Most people have only heard of Bernie Madoff, who was involved in a blatant and clearly unlawful Ponzi scheme, and Martha Stewart, who was sentenced for comparatively minor insider trading. But when looking at the big picture, only a very small amount of people go to prison for financially related crimes.

There are organizations called short hedge funds, who by all appearances, manage to operate within the law, but actually perform misdeeds. What they do is to short stocks to make a profit. Shorting a stock is borrowing a share(s) of stock from someone who owns the share, then they sell it, hoping that the share price will drop. When the price drops, they buy the stock back at a lower price, and return the stock to the person they borrowed it from. So they sell a stock at a high price and receive that cash, buy it back at a lower price and pay out a lower amount of cash to buy it back, and return the stock and record a profit.

Short selling is a perfectly legal, and it is said to create healthy liquidity in the market.

But here's the thing, things do not frequently work in the manner that I described above. What frequently happens is this...greed.

Many short hedge funds perform what is called "preditory shorting". This is when they short sell a stock, and then use hundreds of different tactics to purposely drive the price of a company's stock down so that they can profit. There's many tactics that they can use. Some are legal, some are arguably legal, some are illegal, some are arguably illegal, and some are merely shady and wrong. To explain all the tactics that can be used would require a post the length of a novel, so I won't address the tactics, but in summary, they short sell a stock and purposely try to drive companies into bankruptcy, get them de-listed from the stock exchange, and force the price of the stock to $0. This maximizes their profit, with the added benefit of them having to pay $0 taxes on that profit if the company does indeed go bankrupt.

They have performed this action with legitimate and valuable cancer research companies. They have performed this action by attacking companies who may momentarily be struggling, so they take advantage of that and try to drive them to bankruptcy.

Are these actions illegal? Sometimes yes, they are. If so, can these actions be proven in court? Yes they can. Is the SEC aware of these actions? Yes. Does the SEC have the manpower to recommend prosecution to the DOJ for all of these cases? No, they don't. Does the DOJ have other priorities? Most likely.

I think that in the legal world on the national level especially, everything boils down to this: There is so much fuckery and illegal or possibly illegal action being performed in every sector of this country, that on a national level with the DOJ, it boils down to which cases they decide to pursue. Manpower is limited, complex cases are hard to prove and require a lot of work. Even though a case is bad, the DOJ may choose to focus on a case that is worse.

Because of this, then yes, some people become *effectively* above the law. Actually they are not above the law, but effectively, they are. The end result is the same...no prosecution.

However, there is probably nothing worse than what Trump and his cronies have created. My current belief is that the DOJ is aggressively pursuing every person involved in this whole thing, including Trump himself. I pray this statement proves to be correct. The more people involved, the more complex the cases are when taken as a whole, and the more time they take to prove. Also, the DOJ cannot come out and announce that they are building a case until evidence gathering is completed. If they announce too early, then that hampers their ability to gather valid evidence. Essentially, it gives the people who they are looking to prosecute a "heads up", a warning that they are being looked at, and how they are being looked at. Hence, the standard line "we cannot comment on any potential ongoing investigations".

[dixiechiken1]

18. Good post. I learned something new today.

And I hope you're right about TFG et al. I won't really believe it until I see it but I hope with everything that I am that you are right. I don't see how we survive as a country if you're not.

[LuckyCharms]

22. Thanks, dixiechiken1 and

I agree with you.

Is your screen name in reference to the song by the band Little Feat?

[dixiechiken1]

24. Yup, luv me some Little Feat! 👍😊

[LuckyCharms]

27. Me too! Especially when Lowell George was alive.

Waiting For Columbus is one of my favorite albums.

[jaxexpat]

31. Shorting the market is a legitimate investment strategy.

Performing an illegal act to cause the downfall of a corporation is a different matter altogether. It's a crime, white-collar though it may be.

The day when it's a universal expectation of prosecution with speedy trial and appropriate sentencing for all white-collar crimes is when we begin to get our democracy back.

Here's some of my "favorite" white-collar crimes, not in any particular order. Which is your favorite? Did I miss yours?

money laundering
price fixing
insider trading
opaque government contract award
military recruiting
student loans
tax evasion
tax sheltering
bribery
extortion
gerrymandering
public lottery skimming
political campaign lying
broadcast news/opinion lying
broadcast opinion labeled as news
ignoring and/or violating OSHA regulated statutes
frivolous lawsuits
monopoly of any kind (except the game)
first amendment misinterpretation
second amendment misinterpretation
televangelism
tax free status for churches of any faith, even atheism
the book of revelations

[LuckyCharms]

42. Yes, that's the point I was attempting to convey about shorting...

Last edited Wed Apr 6, 2022, 10:32 PM - Edit history (3)

It's legal, people do it, hedge funds do it, but once you start trying to influence the price because you shorted the stock...that's not legal. For the same reasons that CEOs are required to have a quiet period for a certain time period before earnings announcements. For the same reason that in a non-family business, you should not have a father as a CEO, and his daughter as the CFO.

Once you start influencing a stock price to further your own interests, you inhibit organic price discovery, affect the proper valuation of a company, and hurt other investors of that company. You start messing with people's 401k's, messing with people's company pension plans that have stock investments.

You probably will not agree, but I've always been of the mind that shorting should not exist. Don't like the company, think they suck and that the price will go down? Then instead of having the ability to short their stock, why not just go long on their direct competitor's stock (buy their competitor's stock), and buy their competitor's product? That will make the company's stock that you don't like go down organically, with actual and proper price discovery. And then instead of profiting from shorting, you profit by going long since you apply buying pressure to the stock of the company you like and aid their bottom line by purchasing their products.

I don't buy the theory that shorts aid the market by weeding out bad companies. Bad companies weed themselves out naturally because they do bad business. I'll even go a few steps further. There is a notion that shorts provide liquidity to the market, so they are beneficial. I'm sure you have watched plenty of Level two data and time and sales tickers. That's not "liquidity". That's simply increasing trading volume by slapping huge lots of bid and ask prices that make the stock price do whatever it is they want it to do that particular day. How does that help the discovery of a company's market cap?

It's like anything else. Create something, anything, that has the potential to be abused, and humans will take full advantage of that opportunity. I'm not talking about retail investors who have a margin account. I'm talking about how these hedge funds have resources to slam down a stock for years. If only buying long existed, you either go long, or you don't. Simple. Bring shorting in? Get a huge hedge fund slamming the shit out of a stock every Friday so it will hit the weekly options expiration maximum pain strike price. Nothing organic about that.

Off my soap box: your list is excellent.

How about this one too?

Market makers routing 90% of buy orders through dark pools, and 100% of sell orders through lit markets? The SEC publicly admitted that this happens every day with retail investor orders, so it must be legal, but it shouldn't be.

[jaxexpat]

43. The SEC is a family of foxes guarding the family henhouse.

Regulation agencies are, to an untenable degree, "in on" the corruption, especially since the Trump mayhem. The best of them only try to keep the felonious theft to a minimum and, barring that, at least capping them to what the status quo can tolerate or deferring prosecution.

[LuckyCharms]

44. I agree with everything you said here.

It's disheartening.

I basically just assume now that everything of any significant size in terms of money is corrupt.

Regulations? There are no regulations. It only looks like there are.

[dwayneb]

59. Praying with you

I've been believing the same thing about the DOJ but in recent days I have been beginning to wonder.

Honestly, this DOJ under Biden may be the last chance we have to stave off the destruction of the rule of law here in the USA. If a Republican like Trump or DeSantis gets into office in 2024 I'm afraid they will finish the job that Trump started in 2016. He won't make the same mistakes he did the first time.

[llmart]

7. Yes, it's an important question.

However, those of us who have been alive for many decades have seen time and time again that certain people - the wealthy, the connected, mostly white men have the means to sidestep the law over and over again. If that weren't true, we wouldn't have ended up with trump to start with. He's been a crook all his life. Nixon got away with his crimes because of the power of the pardon. Every day in this country, certain people get away with crimes, or they're found guilty but given a slap on the wrist as punishment.

I have no delusions regarding our particular form of "democracy". Capitalism trumps democracy in the US.

[slightlv]

29. I agree with you llmart,

especially your last sentence. But here's one issue I've wondered about for many decades. First, I'm not completely against capitalism as long as it's regulated, and the regulations are enforced. In years past, we at least had a modicum of that being true, tho I have no doubt regulations were enforced more against smaller companies than against conglomerates. But back then, the conglomerates weren't as large as what we've allowed them to grow into these days. And the pay ratio between execs and workers was a lot less than it is nowdays.

But... when we talk about liquidity, etc., we're usually talking about the stock market. That seems to be all that our economy is based on these days, and has been since Saint Ronnie came into power. But what is the stock market? For the life of me, I can't see it as anything but gambling. And so, at the heart of it, our country, it's economy, and all our lives are based on the evil of gambling.

I'm a witch; not a Christian, but I do believe in the old piece of scripture that says love of money is the root of all evil. Love of money drives gambling. So how can we be "the shining city on the hill" when our entire existence is based on the evils of gambling? Don't we have 12-step programs for that particular addiction? And yet, our country would collapse if we outlawed gambling and enforced it. But here I've mixed law and morality, and one does not equal the other, I'm aware.

But how can something based in immorality be moral and good? I see it almost as an existential question for the country. And yet, I don't see any other monetary system that could replace it and be any more moral. Maybe it's just because I've never lost my sense of being a flowerchild, and have always seen the immaterial as so much more important. It's probably damned sure why I've always been poor, money-wise!

I go round in circles with this stock market/gambling question. And I'm probably rambling about it even now, cause it's so hard to put down in words what and how I feel towards it.

Again, I know it's mixing law and morality, but that sure seems to be a "thing" these days... at least on the right. Funny, how they've never suffered from this particular conundrum.

[llmart]

45. Great and thought filled post.

I agree with your first paragraph. I should have written "unfettered capitalism" because capitalism isn't all evil. It's the unregulated capitalism at the expense of the middle class and poor that bothers me. My grandfather was a raging socialist and I grew up listening to his rants about capitalism. As I got older I realized he was partially right about his beliefs and partially wrong. And yes, the deregulation that Reagan and his cronies touted and their union busting is what led us to the wage gaps between the haves and the have nots.

I believe that some of the unrest we see between citizens is actually due to the disparities between the classes, but what I don't understand is how the ones struggling the most think it's the party of Reagan that's going to help make their lives better. There is no logic to their thought process, if they even have one.

With regard to the stock market and gambling, well, in my area there is an ad on TV every half hour for on-line gambling. Can't go to the casinos because of Covid? Well, don't let that stop you. You can feel just like you're there if only you sign up for this online gambling! Funding our schools with lotteries? How moral is that? Shouldn't a populace that believes in education be willing to collectively fund schools? Nope. Reagan touted how IRA's instead of defined pensions were going to be the middle class's path to a million dollars by the time they retired. I wonder how many retirees have a million dollars? I remember when 401K's began and some of the people I worked with were just downright giddy about being able to gamble their hard earned money in the stock market even though they had no clue how the stock market worked.

Well, now I'm rambling. Thank you for your thoughtful post. I like how you say you're a witch. I have no trouble telling people I'm an atheist.

[liberalgunwilltravel]

8. It's too bad

It's too bad the assets of the American oligarchs that are destroying our republic can't be seized. The Koch, Murdochs, Mercers, et al. deserve as much or more than Putin's cronies.

[kentuck]

11. The only legal way to do it is with the US Tax Code...

That is the only way to protect our democracy at this time, in my opinion. The recent massive wealth accumulations has strengthened the autocrats around the world.

[gab13by13]

19. A wise man who is routinely bashed here,

stated what we need to do to save our democracy, we must tax the rich. He stated that back in Reagan's time (who is the culprit) we had 1 billionaire in the US, today we have 400. Those American oligarchs own the MSM, own politicians, select judges and justices. The goal of the American oligarchs is not pay taxes and to gut regulations, whether that be done through crony democracy or an autocracy doesn't matter.

That man was Thom Hartmann, he blames Ronal Reagan for the beginning of the downfall of our democracy.

[The Wizard]

51. They are indeed

the bribing class.

[Grasswire2]

65. also Bernie.

It's his message, too.

[betsuni]

69. He always says Bill Clinton and Democrats are neoliberal without mentioning that

Republicans controlled Congress for six years of both Clinton's and Obama's administration. Both sides both sides both sides bullshit.

[The Wizard]

49. Don't assume they're not

Putin cronies. Murdoch has Ku Klux Karlson broadcast in Russia. How much does Putin pay Murdoch for Pox propaganda broadcasts?

[gibraltar72]

9. Over forty years ago I asked myself that question.

I decided I would no longer recite the pledge of allegiance and witness a lie. I thought in my lifetime it might change. I was wrong I I have witnessed unequal justice all my life. We in effect have no justice, if it is not meted out equally.

[Paladin]

13. I see depressingly little evidence to the contrary.

Seems like trump could commit the NYC murder he once publicly bragged about, and walk away free.

I sure am getting tired of my political party being unequal to the task of prosecuting the worst, degenerate, scofflaw president in this poor country's history.

[area51]

57. +1 n/t

[Mr. Ected]

14. The answer is, the rich and powerful have always been above the law

The rest of us accept the justice that we are delivered and moan and groan that it doesn't apply to the upper strata of our society. We observe the inequity, but shrug our shoulders and go back to work.

Does this give rise to a slowly deteriorating system wherein the powerful break the law wilfully and without fear of retribution? Yes. Will that embolden them to be even more brash with each passing unpunished crime? Yes. Will they then take away our democracy and substitute a system that essentially codifies this entire arrangement? Yes.

If we don't or can't stop the deterioration of equal justice under the law, it will all come crashing down on us eventually. I believe we stand at the precipice and have been given one last opportunity to prove that justice matters. If J6 and the 4 years that preceded it don't give rise to an ex-President behind bars, we will look back and say that we sacrificed democracy by applying democracy without common sense.

[KS Toronado]

15. I'm gonna start using that question when talking to Rs

"Is no one above the law?" and go to "Why are Rs saying they'll shut down the Jan 6th investigation
if they win the midterms?" to "This the type of government you want to live under?" And if they are
OK with no Jan 6th investigation, "Don't you want to punish Antifa for injuring over 100 police?"
Thanks for the idea kentuck!

[jaxexpat]

32. Those are exquisite questions.

The MAGA's should tremble at their power but they'll probably just get huffy and stalk off (or shoot).

[KS Toronado]

35. LOL, No they won't get huffy and stalk off

The dozen or so Rs I've known for over 10 years in my red town's VFW enjoy talking politics, plus we
respect each other. I'm training them hopefully to vote Democrat in the midterms. Wish me luck, and
thank you for your comment.

[The Wizard]

50. I asked a Trump jihadist

if he'd rather be ruled by Putin or governed by any Democrat. His refusal to answer told me all I needed to know. Pox News brain poisoning has undermined our democracy.

[dwayneb]

60. Never understimate the power of propaganda (nt)

[Wednesdays]

16. That was the premise of the Magna Carta

The god damned year 1215!

[Ferrets are Cool]

20. Until proven otherwise

I will continue to believe that the ultra rich and powerful are above the law.
How tfg fits that criteria boggles my brain.

[The Jungle 1]

21. It is just not true and has not been true for a long time.

Money buys power. Our jails are not full of rich people!

[kairos12]

23. In this country...

you are innocent until proven broke.

That's why no one will ever get Chump.

[Magoo48]

25. I have observed in my 73 years here there are two solids:

We live under a two tiered system of laws and justice, and tier one is corrupt, brutal and unjust for the poor, minorities, working and middle class people.
While tier two, for the rich and powerful, is corrupt, for sale, and forgiving, also, preferential to white people while flaunting itself in our faces.

[dwayneb]

61. All true

You have a few years on me but I have observed the same thing.

With that being said, up until 2016 the USA was still one of the best places to live in the world. That is rapidly changing.

If my children decide to leave the USA I could not blame them, and in fact I'd encourage it. While Fascism is rearing it's head all over the world, it is getting a head start here in America thanks to Donald Trump.

[SoonerPride]

26. The rich and powerful have always been immune to our laws

Anyone paying attention knows that.

[Silent3]

28. Not totally immune. When the rich and powerful piss off enough of their fellow...

...rich and powerful people, they can get thrown under the bus. But that doesn't happen nearly often enough.

[IronLionZion]

30. The "law and order" party is above the law

the "back the blue" party violently assaults and kills police officers.

the "voter fraud" party is repeatedly caught committing voter fraud.

There seems to be a pattern here

[SYFROYH]

33. Is the question about theory or practice?

[kentuck]

34. As some have noted, it has always been theoretical..

But, the system has been able to maintain some credibility in the premise. No one up to this point has been so blatantly lawless, to outright challenge the rule of law, and the order that had been established.

Even though many realized that there was a two-tiered system of justice, there was a balance that the majority could live with, however unfair with many in the lower strata of our democracy.

But that order is now being challenged.

[Caliman73]

36. That question has been answered in large part, over the years.

No one is necessarily above the law, but justice is certainly not blind. Justice appears to be more of a commodity that can be purchased in varying degrees.

If you can afford the kind of legal representation that rich people can afford, then you are much less likely to experience "punishment" or if you do, the punishment will be far less than what a person who cannot afford that type of legal representation.

Trump has used the gaps in the legal system to delay or avoid altogether, the consequences of his numerous criminal acts over the years. He is likely just trying to run out the clock and die in his home rather than be behind bars as he should be.

As far as democracy, the problem is also money and power. People like the Koch Brothers, the Mercers, the Adelson's of the world have the money to purchase that too. I don't know how to fix it, but a major part of the solution is to stop equating money with speech.

[Ohio Joe]

37. True... The rich and powerful have always been above the law...

In regard to TFG, 1/6 and Garland... I have some hope here and I have a bit of a hard time understanding why so many have completely given up. I've put this out before and not gotten a real answer. I get the feeling I'm thought of as delusional or overly hopeful... Sometimes worse. I like to think I'm looking at the facts of what has happened and what is happening... Let review.

Garland could have spent four years going after the low level thugs at the Capitol, had a bunch of show trials and called it a career. This was what I feared most at first.

But... He did not stop there.

He went after and caught the next level up and now has 12, including 2 not at the Capitol, charged with seditious conspiracy. Again, he could have stopped there... Had the trials and called it a career. At this point, he probably would have even been made to look as if he had gone above and beyond. A lot of people never expected the investigation to go that far.

But... Again, he did not stop there.

He flipped at least one of the seditious conspirators (that we know of) and in the agreement said he plans to use him in the Grand Jury (we'll get to that). He could have stopped there, not wanted him in a Grand Jury, and had the show trials doubly nailing the 12 in even bigger fashion and bigger TV clip drama with one of them on the stand pointing the finger.

But... Still he did not stop there.

He convened a Grand Jury. You do not do that unless you plan to go higher... And any higher is TFG's inner circle, in this case (with the flipper being Josua James) that mean Roger Stone. The same Roger Stone that currently is having a fairly public falling out with maga world. We also know that at this point there are at least eight of TFG's inner circle under investigation... They are:

TOM BARRACK
RUDY GIULIANI
ROBERT COSTELLO
SIDNEY POWELL
MARK MEADOWS
ALEX JONES
ROGER STONE
ERIK PRINCE

We also know what is needed... What is nice to have... What is known to be had... What is still needed... And how what is needed might be gotten to go directly after TFG, see this previous post of mine:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216561245

So... Where and when do you think Garland stops? Does he throw the Grand Jury to let them off? What if they indict? My suspicion is that this Grand Jury is just to go after the inner circle and not TFG yet... I think that for a reason... He has gone after this from day 1 as though it were a mob case, it certainly appears to me to be a text book mob case. Once he has indictments against the inner circle, you have a different set of defendants than any before... Older men who tried for a coup and failed... Older men now facing dying in jail going up against someone they know has them nailed.

I've heard some think that these guys will stay loyal and take the fall with the hopes of getting a pardon once TFG (or some other repug) takes office. I don't believe this... The reason I don't believe it is that they know much evidence will come out before mid-terms. Not in the dry manner of the Mueller report (though there will be a written report of everything) but the 1/4 committee also plans lots of nice ready for prime time viewing video clips to go along with the report... A wicked smart move. I am also very hopeful of indictments of at least some of the inner circle before the mid-terms... Together, I think this allows us to keep both houses... Perhaps even get some gains if the batshit crazy wing of the repugs keeps getting crazier. I fully expect some of this inner circle will see the writing on the wall and realize that there will be no pardons coming there way and that many of them will want to flip... Though I hope few are given the opportunity to leave jail alive.

The last two paragraphs are speculation on my part but I base it on what has happened, what we know and where we are today. I get the frustration of wanting TFG in cuffs already because we all know what the fuck he did... But knowing and proving things in a court of law are two different things and I sincerely believe that going for the biggest fish before the solid foundation of the mob case is built would only lead to him getting off... And that would certainly spell disaster... IMO a far bigger disaster then if the investigation does not convict him.

I respect you Kentuck, you certainly stand as one of the best at DU. I also share the frustration you are expressing here... I also hope this post gives you some hope that the good guys are not just sitting back and letting that little shit get away just because he is rich and powerful... That they are doing their best to give him the justice he so richly deserves.

[kentuck]

38. Ohio Joe...Great post!

You are one of DU's best thinkers.

You express one of my hopes and wishes:

"Together, I think this allows us to keep both houses... Perhaps even get some gains if the batshit crazy wing of the repugs keeps getting crazier. I fully expect some of this inner circle will see the writing on the wall and realize that there will be no pardons coming there way and that many of them will want to flip..."

[SmallFry]

41. Thanks for the post. NT

[True Blue American]

68. Thank you for all that info.

It bring everything together nicely.

[inthewind21]

39. Clearly LOTS

Are above the law. It happens all day every day and has been for years. This myth of "the best Judicial system on the planet" is just that. Sadly it took an insurrection for most to FINALLY see it.

[SmallFry]

40. I would put forward the thought that we have been arguing this question non-stop for generations.

"Can we remove the cornerstone of our legal system and expect our democracy to still survive?"

I think the question is "do we need to adhere to that cornerstone of our legal system or should we continue down the path of multiple justice systems?"

The justice system is different for me than even others in my own community.

Confronting this question has been a cornerstone of my political activism for close to two decades.

Not arresting Trump if he committed crimes would be a continuation of the status quo, not a transition away from the norm.

[kentuck]

46. Interesting comment.

"Not arresting Trump if he committed crimes would be a continuation of the status quo, not a transition away from the norm."

Although mostly true, it is not the "norm" for such blatant arrogance in total disregard for the law, and abject indifference to the question, of whether or not the American experiment of democracy is to continue.

[SmallFry]

47. The experiment will continue.

Might not look the same but it will continue.

"Although mostly true, it is not the "norm" for such blatant arrogance in total disregard for the law, and abject indifference to the question, of whether or not the American experiment of democracy is to continue."

Unequal justice is the norm. Every single day justice is served in an unequal manner.

This unequal justice is not tied to any blatant disregard for the law or abject indifference to the question. I actually can't quite make sense of your last paragraph so I will leave my comment on it there. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer. I do know I've been served well by the justice system. Far better than most I know. Pretty shitty if you ask me.

[kentuck]

48. I wish I were certain...

That "the experiment will continue".

[dwayneb]

62. That is hopeful thinking

Just because the experiment has continued for a mere 250 years, a blip in modern history - does not mean that there is any guarantee that it will continue.

There are any number of wild cards that may make that statement untrue - particularly modern communication technology. The Internet is the most powerful weapon ever available to the Fascists, and those that lust for power understand well how to use it.

The founders never imagined a world like the one we have today.

[kentuck]

67. There is no guarantee.

Obama was right, with his comments about democracy.

[CaptainTruth]

53. The Bush/Cheney regime answered that question for me.

To me, they showed that yes, some people are above the law.

[grantcart]

54. +1 important question

However I suggest that it should be framed

"Is anyone above the law?"

Or "Can democratic principles be maintained if anyone is above the law?"


But that is just me.

[qwlauren35]

55. Lots of people are above the law.

White people, especially wealthy white people, and especially wealthy white males, get away with crimes every day.

Drunk people get to drive home.
Shoplifters get to go home.
Speeders get out of tickets.

It happens every day. Where have you been?

[moniss]

58. I have two words that describe our mess

and they both suck. Those words are Alvin and Bragg.

[onecaliberal]

63. Clearly many people are above the law.

[yonder]

64. What an excellent thread! Thanks to all.

[Grasswire2]

66. what part has the strategy "Look forward, not back" played in this mess?

A great deal, I believe.

Too many times, Republicans have not been held accountable for crimes.

[Emile]

70. Laws are for people with no money!