Here’s Robert Reich, writing for The American Prospect in November 2018: “The second principle of the rule of law is that a president cannot prosecute political opponents or critics. Decisions about whom to prosecute for alleged criminal wrongdoing must be made by prosecutors who are independent of politics. Yet Trump has repeatedly pushed the Justice Department to bring charges against Hillary Clinton, his 2016 rival, for using a private email server when she was Secretary of State, in alleged violation of the Presidential Records Act.”
Here’s Jack Holmes, writing for Esquire last month: “When Trump suggests his attorney general is going to take a look at throwing his political opponents and disloyal law enforcement in jail, he does not mean Barr will just be looking. And the Red Hats respond by chanting for the Enemies to be Locked Up. There is no longer any need to imagine what American Authoritarianism might look like. It is here. The president is a would-be autocrat.”
How about Professor Claire Finkelstein, in an interview with NBC News: “This is really a feature of petty dictators, where you see the power of investigative abilities being used as a political tool against enemies.”
To belabor the point, a headline from DC Report from last November reads, Prosecuting political opponents: The stuff of dictators – Trump doesn’t understand that presidents don’t turn whims into criminal prosecutions
You get the idea. For at least three years, Democrats and their media allies have been telling us that Trump is a dictator-in-the-making, and the greatest proof of that is his willingness to prosecute his political enemies. And never mind whether or not those enemies are actually guilty of crimes. Apparently, all you have to do to escape prosecution is make a political enemy out of the president. Somebody should really shore up that loophole.
Strangely, we haven’t heard any of these bleeding-hearts express a peep of concern for what 2020 presidential hopeful Kamala Harris said on MSNBC this week. Asked if she would pursue legal action against Donald Trump if she were to become president, Harris said, “Absolutely.”
“You know, I’ve read the Mueller report, and they outline in that report — and it was a team of some of the best career people in the Department of Justice who were a part of that — career people who had been in the Department of Justice,” Harris said. “There are at least ten separate instances of obstruction of justice. I am also clear from reading what he wrote in that report that the only reason they did not return an indictment against this president on obstruction of justice is because of an opinion from the Department of Justice that suggests that you cannot indict a sitting president. But there is no question that the evidence supports a prosecution of that case.”
But where is the outrage? Where is all the hysteria? Where are the people telling us that Harris wants to turn America into a banana republic?
Oh right, she’s a Democrat, so it’s okay.