An elite team of opposition researchers scour their political targets’ backgrounds for evidence of prosecutable crimes.
CSI: Lawfare
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
4 Comments. Leave new
When I consider all the things Hunter Biden and his family could/should be prosecuted for, that one looks more like “fifty lashes with a wet noodle” than “gotcha” to me. What Trump is being prosecuted for, on the other hand, is definitely “gotcha lawfare.” IMHO, most extremely wealthy people have lawyers not so that they won’t break the law, but so they know what they can reasonably expect to get away with. I would guess that a case could be built against pretty much any member of the US elite, but won’t be, unless they fall out of favor. It probably helps keep them in line.
Look at Watergate. Liddy served 4.5 years. Some of the conspirators got under 2 years. Some got under six months.
Watergate was in 1972. Iran-Contra started in 1981. Only one person actually served time in prison for that (16 months). All the others involved were pardoned by George H. W. Bush.
With very few exceptions, no one pays for their crimes once they get high enough in the food chain in D.C. Joe Biden’s already said he won’t pardon Hunter if he is sentenced to prison. That’s a Joe Biden regular. He says something about something that won’t happen. In this case, he gets to look like he’s playing fair and square. The democrats get to choke up with pride. “See? Joe Biden respects that no one is above the law.” The reality is that Hunter is not going to get prison. If he does, it will almost certainly be a token sentence of a couple months (he’ll spend the time doing artwork that will sell for six figures — and don’t worry. NO ONE knows he drew it).
If Hunter drew a really long sentence? Joe won’t pardon him. He’ll commute the sentence. “See?” the democrats will say, choking up with pride. “Joe said he wouldn’t pardon Hunter, and he didn’t. He commuted the sentence so Hunter could walk out of prison today. It’s totally different than a pardon.”
Well said, Alex! There’s another aspect of “lawfare” that Ted didn’t mention here–the Dems are preparing to spend millions trying to kick the Greens off the ballot “so they don’t spoil the election”–even though the percentage of people who vote Green (so far) is a tiny fraction of the percentage of people who don’t vote at all because they know that neither the D’s nor the R’s will do anything to help them.
Trump has been prosecuted many times over the last decades. It’s not “lawfare,” it is the price of doing business they way he does, at the hairy edge of legality. Until recently, each time he has taken his lumps (paid a fine) and moved on. The recent change in behavior is not that suddenly he’s being prosecuted for cooking the books — that’s old hat — it’s that he isn’t paying his fine and moving on. It has instead become theater because that is what Trump wants.
In contrast, Hunter Biden tried what Trump had always done until recently … tried to plea bargain a fine so that he could move on. We are free to argue that it is about time that these well-connected people of privilege are substantially punished for their crimes and that Hunter Biden is an early case of this new approach — but that’s pretty much the opposite of saying that he’s a prime example of the same-old favoritism that has been around for millennia.