Two-Tiered (In)Justice

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of the two-tiered justice system in this country. Why is it that Democrats like Chuck Schumer are allowed to apologize and present specious excuses for their potential crimes and then get out of jail free, while Republicans like President Donald J. Trump are held to the letter (and imaginary spirit) of laws and the Constitution?

President Trump has been persecuted for the past 3+ years by unfounded investigations.

First we saw Special Counsel Robert Mueller spend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars looking into bogus allegations that President Trump colluded with Russia and obstructed justice by firing James Comey and thus interfered in a national security investigation.

Next, we had the House of Representatives investigate and impeach President Trump on similarly bogus allegations that he engaged in an illegal quid pro quo by illegally threatening the leader of Ukraine to begin an investigation into Hunter Biden’s activities in that country while Biden’s father was Vice-President.

Trump, of course, was cleared of all these charges because they were specious in the first place. President Trump is the head of the executive branch. As such, he can fire anybody in the executive branch for any reason or for no reason. In addition, like Obama, President Trump can enquire into, be briefed upon, or provide direction in any of the DOJ’s activities.

On the issue of Ukraine, not only was it legal for the President to ask for Ukraine’s help in investigating potential crimes, but it was also a duty placed upon him by the law and the Constitution.

Despite all that, the President has nevertheless been hounded by Dept. of Justice investigations for almost his entire term and by the Democrats in the House of Representatives during the recent impeachment farce.

Now we have the same Democrats in Congress investigating President Trump for the bogus “crime” of potentially interfering in the Roger Stone case, simply because Trump’s Attorney General, William Barr, decided that federal prosecutors, in defiance of a previously decided upon course of action, recommended an outrageous punishment for Stone.

Once again, the President is accused of interfering in the activities of the Justice Dept. and, one assumes, obstructing justice, something that as the chief law enforcement officer in the U.S. it is impossible for President Trump to do.

Now comes the case of Senator Chuck Schumer, who yesterday infamously and publicly threatened two judges on the U.S. Supreme Court. Schumer said at a rally in front of the Supreme Court Building: [emphasis added to quotes]

want to tell you. Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.

Prompting the President to respond, correctly:

This is a direct & dangerous threat to the U.S. Supreme Court by Schumer. If a Republican did this, he or she would be arrested, or impeached. Serious action MUST be taken NOW!

Supreme Court Justice Roberts also responded:

Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.

And because they are dangerous, such threats are not only inappropriate, they are also potentially criminal. There is a federal statute that

protects federal judges from … threats. So does the federal Obstruction of Justice statute, which defines “obstruction of justice” as an act that “by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice

The statute referenced above is found at this link.

Notably, this is the exact statute that it was claimed President Trump had violated:

The statutory language is broad: it covers any attempt, even unsuccessful, to “influence, obstruct, or impede” the administration of the law in a pending proceeding. As the Department of Justice U.S. Attorneys’ Manual explains, the crime is found on proof of three elements: “(1) there was a proceeding pending before a department or agency of the United States; (2) the defendant knew of or had a reasonably founded belief that the proceeding was pending; and (3) the defendant corruptly endeavored to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which the proceeding was pending.

Senator Schumer, standing outside the Supreme Court building as the case was being heard, most obviously knew that the case was “pending.”

Arguably, by his own statements threatening a “price” to be paid by two specific judges if they “go forward with these awful decisions”–meaning if they uphold the Louisiana law–Schumer seemed to be corruptly trying to at least “influence” the court’s decision.

As the author of this article explains, with regard to Schumer:

Is there any way to interpret these astounding remarks other than as an endeavor to influence a judicial proceeding?

Schumer may have been threatening Gorsuch and Kavanaugh with impeachment. But for purposes of establishing criminal liability that is irrelevant. Under the statute, a threat of any kind made to influence their decisions in an ongoing case is prima facie proof of obstruction of justice. No threat of violence is required.

The senator’s actions warrant either an arrest or, at the very least, a formal investigation for endeavoring to obstruct justice.

They could also warrant similar treatment for threatening to assault the justices, since on its face Schumer’s remark regarding “what hit you” could also be understood as a threat of violence or as an incitement to the crazies who infest our bitterly divided society to take action.

In light of the fact that Schumer has been vocal in accusing President Trump of obstruction of justice, it’s not hard to understand why Schumer suddenly decided to “apologize” and to proffer very lame excuses for his supposedly unintended words:

“Now, I should not have used the words I used yesterday. They didn’t come out the way I intended to,” Schumer said Thursday morning. “My point was that there would be political consequences, political consequences for President (Donald) Trump and Senate Republicans if the Supreme Court, with the newly confirmed justices, stripped away a woman’s right to choose. …

“Of course I didn’t intend to suggest anything other than political and public opinion consequences for the Supreme Court, and it is a gross distortion to imply otherwise. I’m from Brooklyn. We speak in strong language. I shouldn’t have used the words I did, but in no way was I making a threat. I never, never would do such a thing. …

Even in his apology, Schumer, arguably, continued his threats by emphasizing the “political and public opinion consequences for the Supreme Court.”

He was not talking about Trump or Senate Republicans yesterday, and this fact becomes obvious by his clear statement today that the Supreme Court will face “political and public opinion consequences” if they don’t rule as Schumer prefers.

Putting aside that Supreme Court justices are supposed to be independent, “politically” non-partisan, and above taking into consideration “public opinion” when they impartially apply the law and the Constitution, citing those as potential consequences for the Supreme Court seems like an attempt by Schumer to corruptly influence how the justices decide this pending case.

Returning to the issue of the two-tiered system of justice in this country, so far the only consequence redounding to Schumer may be censure:

On Thursday Senator Hawley and 14 GOP Senators introduced a resolution to censure Chuck Schumer. …

The resolution reads: Whereas Senator Schumer has acknowledged that threatening statements can increase the dangers of violence against government officials when he stated on June 15, 2017, following the attempted murder of several elected Members of Congress, ‘‘We would all be wise to reflect on the importance of civility in our [N]ation’s politics’’ and that ‘‘the level of nastiness, vitriol, and hate that has seeped into our politics must be excised’’:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate censures and condemns in the strongest possible terms the Senator from New York, Mr. Schumer, for his threatening statements against Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch and Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh; and calls on all members of the Senate to respect the independence of the Federal judiciary.

Believe it or not, there are Senators, including Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who oppose even censure for Schumer.

Why not attempt to expel (impeach and remove) Schumer from office for his outrageous behavior that even liberal Harvard Law School professor Laurence Tribe and The American Bar Association rightfully criticized?

Where is a call for an FBI investigation into his motives?

Where is a call for a special counsel to look into Schumer’s motives in making this incendiary speech, in which he seems to have attempted to corruptly influence a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court?

Where are the calls for Schumer to resign in disgrace, as he should?

Why do only Democrats get second chances?

Why is it that whenever progressives, Democrats, or liberals potentially break laws, they’re allowed to “apologize” or claim no intention to offend, and all is forgiven, no consequences, sometimes not even an investigation?

Why is it that whenever progressives, Democrats, or liberals perjure themselves or lie to the FBI, Congress, or other law enforcement officers, they aren’t even investigated, much less charged, prosecuted, and punished, as compared to what happened to President Trump’s associates Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, General Michael Flynn, and Roger Stone?

I’m sick of this double standard. I’m also sick and tired of Republicans playing “Mr. Nice Guy.” When will they fight for justice?

Effing wimps.

When will We the People see an end to the two-tiered system of justice in this country: one incredibly lenient system for progressives and their allies and another letter-of-the-law strict system for everybody else, but especially conservatives?

Whenever will this country return to the standard of equal justice under the law for every citizen?

Can you answer that question for us, Attorney General Barr?


92 responses to “Two-Tiered (In)Justice

  1. GOT IT …..OK!

    This Chinese expert stated that half of the people who get seriously sick and pass away from COVID 19, have high blood pressure. So, that clicked, that explained why more men pass away from the disease, why children do not get sick, but the risk increases with age. It all became clear.

    • This seems too simple to me. Do they mean uncontrolled hypertension? Or do they mean people on medication for high blood pressure? Hypertension goes along with so many other bad outcomes, if uncontrolled. KIDNEY function is impaired, for example. So do they mean people with uncontrolled hypertension and all the physical problems that come along with it such as kidney disease and heart problems? I read that 60% of Chinese men smoke and have done so most of their lives. Think of the COPD in that population! Emphysema. Get pneumonia with that and the outlook is not good. Combine that with the worst air pollution in the world. Asthma, too. Children DO get sick. They just don’t get AS sick. They still get it and worse, spread it. It’s not just blood pressure. You can have medication for that and voila! No more high blood pressure. It’s the combined effect of people walking around with it for years and not knowing it and not controlling it. But her point is good: Everybody should monitor their blood pressure, either at home or make sure it’s checked regularly at the doctor’s office.

  2. have a Snicker …to laugh in a half-suppressed, indecorous or disrespectful manner … that’s about ALL WTP …can DO ….WHAT SICK TIMES IT IS!

    • HA! With regard to “have a Snicker,” it occurs to me that since we’re in such danger these days maybe we SHOULD have a Snickers. Why diet NOW? Eat ’em up! Stimulate the economy while you’re doing it, too.

  3. HOW IT HAPPENED??? … BAR CODE is BATTY… who what when?
    happen Every YEAR ? be SEASONAL ? yikes … go away …

    Young people capitalize on cheap coronavirus flights: ‘If I die, I die’
    If coronavirus gets really dangerous, “I might as well be somewhere having fun,” one California college student said.

  4. Tom Hanks & Rita Wilson Test Positive 4 Coronavirus….OK! RED ALERT

    “the HANKS are in Australia, & has tested Positive for COVID-19 (coronavirus).

    We are working closely with Australian health agencies to identify & contact anyone who May have come in direct contact with the individual.

    The individual who tested Positive for COVID-19 is currently receiving treatment.”

    ~ Anonymous says….
    According to the Media, he’s DOOOOOMED.

    • Yep. So how’s Tom (elderly Tom) doing? His wife? How about those basketball players? All in ICU and at death’s door? I’m not downplaying the possibility, God forbid, that they end up very ill but tell me, why no updates on their condition? Why is Trudeau’s wife positive with “mild symptoms?” If everybody we know of except for the very sick, poor people in the nursing home (who are there for a reason, after all, like very ill already) have MILD SYMPTOMS then why is the country being shut down?


  6. DON’T “BUG” ME! ….
    Since When Are Viruses Racist?
    In the identity politics world of the progressive left, everything is racist.

    • Exactly. Did they call off the NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL because of any of that under Obama? Hockey players have flu all the time, every season. Our team just had a bout of it and now I wonder: was it really flu? Only if they test them will they know.

      As for the NBA players: We hear they cancelled the games. We hear two guys (at the moment) are positive for coronavirus. What we don’t hear (or I didn’t hear): ARE THEY SICK? Are they NOT sick? Why were they tested if they weren’t sick when others have to be sick in order to get tested? If they’re sick, then HOW ARE THEY DOING? They want to report positive tests but they don’t talk about the outcomes, which I suspect are uniformly good.

      They don’t talk about the outcomes because they want to further the panic. Here’s my prediction for the DemoncRATS next ploy: ONLINE VOTING for the 2020 election, so as to ensure participation and that nobody gets disenfranchised because they fear contagion. Then, once they have online voting, it will be SO EASY (as with the census, btw) to RIG THE RESULTS.

      No paper trail! Halleluia! Secret ballot REQUIRES no ability to match the vote back to the voter so there will be NO WAY to prove rigging (HACKING) the election. The DemoncRATS will fire up all their pals in Silicon Valley to be sure to cast votes for all the dead people, the dogs, the illegal aliens, the felons, the doubly registered students, etc. ALL FOR BIDEN. Wait for it. It’s coming.

      Do you think they’d go along with an alternative, such as DELAYING THE ELECTION, like they’ve delayed everything else? Not bloody likely.

    • It makes sense when you consider the recent comments by Chinese authorities, where they turn around and try to suggest it was the CIA that planted the germ in China and now they’re crying “racism” and threatening to withhold medicines like penicillin (not made here for 16 years!) and ingredients needed for key medications that are only made over there. It’s possible that it was a mistaken release but it’s also possible it was deliberate in an attempt, perhaps, to persuade the world to lean on Trump to go back on the tariffs, out of “mercy” for the suffering Chinese. They DID try that ploy. The DemoncRATS and the Red Chinese are a lot alike. What they do is what they accuse you of doing.

    • Thinking about the suggestions that this was a manufactured virus and Trump knows it, which is why he began calling this the Chinese virus, the foreign virus, it’s interesting to recall that the French are partners with the Chinese in that lab in Wuhan and now Trump is stopping travel from Europe, but for the UK and IR, which are no longer part of Europe and which make sure there are STAMPS on passports that indicate where someone has been recently. So all of Europe is going to pay the price for Italy’s outbreak and (perhaps) French involvement in the creation of the virus?

    • Click to access ostp_coronavirus_request_to_nasem_02.06.2020.pdf

      A reasonable request and ENQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW.

  7. I don’t know about you all but this daylight savings switch has me all screwed up. Time gets away every day and I end up with little time for the blog. I will catch y’all tomorrow!

  8. Oh, my. “The next Obama.” I do see similarities:

    “Gillum, who came close to beating former Congressman Ron DeSantis in 2018 for governor, was apparently involved in quite the party. Paramedics were called to the room before police arrived to treat another man who was allegedly overdosing from what was described as crystal meth.

    According to one of the men involved in the “party”, he entered the hotel room to find Andrew Gillum and the other man under the influence of an “unknown” substance. Gillum then collapsed on the bed in a prone position before entering the bathroom to vomit. When police were taking statements from the men, Gillum was so drunk that he was unable to speak coherently. He was allowed to return to another hotel room without being arrested, according to The Capitolist. …”

    And that fits perfectly with the subject of this post. Can you imagine DeSantis getting the same soft-gloved treatment?

    • Whoops! As I said, similar to Barry:

      “National Review is now reporting that Travis Dyson, one of the men involved in the crystal meth fueled party that paramedics responded to in Miami Beach last night, is allegedly a well-known male escort. Dyson also told the Miami New Times that he was not aware that Gillum was in town for a friends wedding, contradicting statements from Gillum about the reason for his being in the area. Mr. Dyson claimed that he “had known” Gillum for several years. …”

      There are no charges being filed, according to reports. I’m sure, in any case, that he would say it’s not “his” meth. I suppose this also means that nobody tested him for drugs. If this were an ordinary group of guys, say on Live PD, and there was meth in a car, three guys in it, and one OD’d, would everybody but the guy who OD’d get to just go home? How did they determine whose drugs they were and who supplied them?


    ROFLMAO! The “genius” of this guy. I love how he says “we” AS IF HE’S A LEADER IN THE WORLD. Sorry, Prince. You abdicated, in effect. No longer a “royal.”

    Gotta love these hoaxers.

    This “prince” who’s never accomplished anything except to be a privileged figurehead thinks HE can “outsmart” President Trump. This inbred low-IQ privileged ginger believes he can outsmart THE DONALD. Think about it. Typical liberal prig.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s