Angie Wong – The Left’s never-ending attempts to vilify everyone in Donald Trump’s orbit never cease to amaze. From top advisors to future cabinet members, they are taking down anyone who merely agrees with the former president. Even the waitstaff at Mar-a-Lago are not immune.
Are Democrats so intolerant that they cannot entertain an opposing thought without massive, overreaching destruction? Does a challenge to a socialist’s core threaten them so much that there are no barricades to stop the crossing of the Rubicon and into unconstitutional realms? If the Left’s anti-Trump witch-hunt is indeed about obtaining power, then there is no longer any schoolhouse rock in Washington, D.C. There used to be off-limits zones, but that went away with Trump’s first presidency.
In the case of the “Georgia 19,” the defendants must endure rounds of overcharging by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. Defendants must live through the nightmare of Willis’ dream of destroying Trump’s most-trusted inner circle before Election 2024 goes into full swing, so that any campaign foothold in Georgia will be met with pain for the former president, should he even get on the state’s ballot.
Yes, that’s right: The Republican Party’s 2024 frontrunner is being challenged in four states as to whether or not he may even be eligible to run, using a Civil War-era provision of the 14th Amendment. The obvious flaw: Trump was acquitted by the Senate over charges that he incited an insurrection, and should have been the end of the matter. But who cares about facts — or laws — for that matter?
In rehashed lawsuits, such as Jean Caroll v. Donald Trump, new laws were written to accommodate a lawsuit to take down Trump. Although the statute of limitation had long run out, New York governor Kathy Hochul is coming to the rescue with a one-time window allowing anyone with a bone to pick to skirt state laws and file for a sexual-assault lawsuit.
How many people used this once-in-a-lifetime loophole? Just one: Jean Carroll, to hit Trump where it hurts.
That’s what Americans get when political persecution masquerades as some high-minded form of legal accountability. Another victim of the witch-hunt is former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark. Being cast as some rogue operator with no respect for the rule of law, Clark has repeatedly been accused of working to “overturn the 2020 election results” in defiance of democracy.
But, strip away the partisan rhetoric, and you come to find that Clark is one of America’s most accomplished attorneys and dedicated public servants, having served the George W. Bush administration as deputy assistant attorney general for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Justice Department and, under Trump, as assistant attorney general for the Environment and Natural Resources Division, eventually overseeing the DoJ’s civil division as well.
By investigating allegations of voter fraud in Georgia, Clark did not actually commit a crime. He drafted and advocated for sending a letter to top Georgia officials that expressed doubts about the legitimacy of Georgia’s 2020 election results, which fully deserved to be investigated. In a state with a long history of election fraud cases, why wouldn’t a political candidate investigate if smoke meant fire?
Al Gore certainly did, when he rescinded his concession call to Bush in 2000, and then proceeded to ask for a hand recount in Florida, only for the U.S. Supreme Court to become involved and finally shut down Gore’s claims. Was Gore an “election-denier” then? Was he trying to “overturn” those election results?
Was Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) in 2005, when he and 30 other House Democrats refused to accept Bush’s re-election victory and fought to unilaterally switch Ohio from red to blue? Were their claims of voter fraud magically legitimate?
What about Hillary Clinton, who claimed that Trump is an “illegitimate president” in 2019? Did the liberal media brand her as a clear and present danger to democracy in headline after scathing headline? Of course not, despite the Clinton machine’s perpetration of a “Russian collusion” hoax based on the infamous Steele dossier, paid for by her campaign.
If recent history is any indication, Trump was entirely justified in second-guessing the 2020 election results. He was wise to enlist Clark and other leading attorneys to investigate an unprecedented election cycle that took place in the middle of a never-before-seen pandemic, which brought irregular voting practices into the fold. Dating back to 2000 (and before), it has been par for the course to express a healthy dose of skepticism about vote counts in hotly contested races, and Clark is no different.
Now, Democrats are asking Americans to implicitly trust them on the Georgia case, just like they did with the “Russian collusion” witch-hunt that produced no actual evidence after years of clickbait CNN headlines. Willis, a Democrat whose father was an anti-cop Black Panther, expects the American people to just take her word for it, as if she is really interested in discovering the God’s honest truth, and not just sticking it to a political adversary.
Color me skeptical. Voters need to ask themselves one question: Do you trust Democrats and their media allies to treat Trump, Clark, and other Republicans fairly? There is only one answer: No.
SF Source American Thinker Nov 2023