Trump Wants To Be Treated Like Hillary?
By all means. Fairness requires that he be held to that same standard.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/08/30/trump-hillary-clinton-classified-documents-equal-treatment/
Donald Trump and his MAGA mouthpieces say the former president should be treated the same way Hillary Clinton was — and they’re right!
Ever since the FBI found boxes upon boxes of government secrets hoarded at his resort residence, Trump has complained that he’s being held to a different standard from the one applied to Clinton during the probe of her private email server in 2016. “Absolutely nothing has happened to hold her accountable,” Trump claimed when he confirmed the search of Mar-a-Lago.
The editorial board of the Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal argued this week that there is a “Clinton Standard for treating a prominent politician who mishandles classified documents” and that there shouldn’t be “a different standard for Mr. Trump.”
On Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) predicted — and justified — violence over the imagined double standard. “If they tried to prosecute President Trump for mishandling classified information after Hillary Clinton set up a server in her basement, there literally will be riots in the street,” Graham told former congressman Trey Gowdy (R-Benghazi) on Fox News.
Trump promptly posted Graham’s violent fantasy (the latest of several from GOP officials claiming a Clinton double standard) on his Truth Social platform.
For months, voters have been telling Republicans they are tired of hearing Trump and his allies relitigating the 2020 election. Finally, Republicans are moving on. They are now relitigating 2016. Seven and a half years after the world learned of Clinton’s private server, GOP leaders cry anew: But her emails!
So, by all means, let’s relitigate. In fact, Trump should be treated exactly the way Clinton was:
The FBI should undertake a sprawling, multiyear investigation into Trump’s conduct, grilling him and his staff, running extensive forensics, and examining whether his actions allowed hostile actors to compromise U.S. security. The FBI should continue to keep him under investigation while he runs for president in 2024.
In July 2024, after Trump secures the GOP nomination, the head of the FBI should break with long-standing Justice Department protocols and publicly announce that while he doesn’t recommend prosecuting Trump, Trump was “extremely careless” with classified information, that “any reasonable person” in Trump’s position would have known their actions were inappropriate, that “it is possible that hostile actors gained access” to government secrets, and that “there is evidence of potential violations” of law.
Then, 13 days before the 2024 election, a top official with the Democratic nominee’s campaign should announce that he has heard via leaks by “active” FBI agents of a coming “surprise” related to the Trump investigation.
Eleven days before the election, the FBI director, in another breach of protocol, should send a public letter to Congress announcing that he has reopened the investigation into Trump because of new, “pertinent” information.
Two days before the election, the FBI director should say the new information announced in his previous bombshell amounted to nothing. But by then it is too late: The news of the reopened probe will dominate coverage in the closing days of the campaign, and, analyses will show, cause Trump to lose an election he otherwise would have won.
That is precisely what happened to Clinton in 2016. And Trump wants to be held to the same standard? Well, fair is fair.
MAGA Republicans should be careful what they wish for as they respond to every development in Trump’s legal saga with fits of whataboutism: What about Clinton? What about Hunter Biden? Trump lawyer Alan Dershowitz even penned “A Defense of ‘Whataboutism’ ” for the Wall Street Journal.
If they really want Trump to be treated the way Clinton was in 2016, they’ll also have to arrange for him to be the subject of “lock him up” chants at Democratic rallies and for the Democratic nominee’s advisers and prominent backers to assert that Trump should be “executed,” “shot” and hanged.
Preliminarily, Trump’s case appears much more serious than Clinton’s. Clinton mishandled a small amount of classified information. (Of tens of thousands of emails, three were marked classified and about 100 had unmarked classified material.) Trump apparently made off with boxes containing more than 700 pages of classified material, including some of the most sensitive types of intelligence, and refused to give it back — even under subpoena. Still to be determined: Trump’s motive and the damage to national security.
The Clinton “standard” wasn’t ever any guarantee not to prosecute her. It was what FBI Director James B. Comey outlined in July 2016:
“All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice.”
In Clinton’s case, Comey concluded, “We do not see those things.” And Trump? Fairness requires that he be held to that same standard.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/08/30/trump-hillary-clinton-classified-documents-equal-treatment/
Donald Trump and his MAGA mouthpieces say the former president should be treated the same way Hillary Clinton was — and they’re right!
Ever since the FBI found boxes upon boxes of government secrets hoarded at his resort residence, Trump has complained that he’s being held to a different standard from the one applied to Clinton during the probe of her private email server in 2016. “Absolutely nothing has happened to hold her accountable,” Trump claimed when he confirmed the search of Mar-a-Lago.
The editorial board of the Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal argued this week that there is a “Clinton Standard for treating a prominent politician who mishandles classified documents” and that there shouldn’t be “a different standard for Mr. Trump.”
On Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) predicted — and justified — violence over the imagined double standard. “If they tried to prosecute President Trump for mishandling classified information after Hillary Clinton set up a server in her basement, there literally will be riots in the street,” Graham told former congressman Trey Gowdy (R-Benghazi) on Fox News.
Trump promptly posted Graham’s violent fantasy (the latest of several from GOP officials claiming a Clinton double standard) on his Truth Social platform.
For months, voters have been telling Republicans they are tired of hearing Trump and his allies relitigating the 2020 election. Finally, Republicans are moving on. They are now relitigating 2016. Seven and a half years after the world learned of Clinton’s private server, GOP leaders cry anew: But her emails!
So, by all means, let’s relitigate. In fact, Trump should be treated exactly the way Clinton was:
The FBI should undertake a sprawling, multiyear investigation into Trump’s conduct, grilling him and his staff, running extensive forensics, and examining whether his actions allowed hostile actors to compromise U.S. security. The FBI should continue to keep him under investigation while he runs for president in 2024.
In July 2024, after Trump secures the GOP nomination, the head of the FBI should break with long-standing Justice Department protocols and publicly announce that while he doesn’t recommend prosecuting Trump, Trump was “extremely careless” with classified information, that “any reasonable person” in Trump’s position would have known their actions were inappropriate, that “it is possible that hostile actors gained access” to government secrets, and that “there is evidence of potential violations” of law.
Then, 13 days before the 2024 election, a top official with the Democratic nominee’s campaign should announce that he has heard via leaks by “active” FBI agents of a coming “surprise” related to the Trump investigation.
Eleven days before the election, the FBI director, in another breach of protocol, should send a public letter to Congress announcing that he has reopened the investigation into Trump because of new, “pertinent” information.
Two days before the election, the FBI director should say the new information announced in his previous bombshell amounted to nothing. But by then it is too late: The news of the reopened probe will dominate coverage in the closing days of the campaign, and, analyses will show, cause Trump to lose an election he otherwise would have won.
That is precisely what happened to Clinton in 2016. And Trump wants to be held to the same standard? Well, fair is fair.
MAGA Republicans should be careful what they wish for as they respond to every development in Trump’s legal saga with fits of whataboutism: What about Clinton? What about Hunter Biden? Trump lawyer Alan Dershowitz even penned “A Defense of ‘Whataboutism’ ” for the Wall Street Journal.
If they really want Trump to be treated the way Clinton was in 2016, they’ll also have to arrange for him to be the subject of “lock him up” chants at Democratic rallies and for the Democratic nominee’s advisers and prominent backers to assert that Trump should be “executed,” “shot” and hanged.
Preliminarily, Trump’s case appears much more serious than Clinton’s. Clinton mishandled a small amount of classified information. (Of tens of thousands of emails, three were marked classified and about 100 had unmarked classified material.) Trump apparently made off with boxes containing more than 700 pages of classified material, including some of the most sensitive types of intelligence, and refused to give it back — even under subpoena. Still to be determined: Trump’s motive and the damage to national security.
The Clinton “standard” wasn’t ever any guarantee not to prosecute her. It was what FBI Director James B. Comey outlined in July 2016:
“All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice.”
In Clinton’s case, Comey concluded, “We do not see those things.” And Trump? Fairness requires that he be held to that same standard.
