GOVEROTRAGEOUS: Why do we stand for this?


The Department of Political Justice
By Andrew P. Napolitano
July 7, 2016

*** begin quote ***

Comey has argued that somehow there is such a legal chasm between extreme carelessness and gross negligence that the feds cannot bridge it. That is not an argument for him to make. That is for a jury to decide after a judge instructs the jury about what Comey fails to understand: There is not a dime’s worth of difference between these two standards. Extreme carelessness is gross negligence.

Unless, of course, one is willing to pervert the rule of law yet again to insulate a Clinton yet again from the law enforcement machinery that everyone else who fails to secure state secrets should expect.

Why do we stand for this?

*** end quote ***

We have long known that there was one set of rules for the rich and rest of us.

This just proves it.

I’m so frustrated with this I can’t even think how I can “not stand for it”!

What does the Judge propose?

All I can think of is “Anybody but Hillary”.

Hence, I’ll support choice.

The American system only allows two “parties” — effectively.

We saw Bill Clinton get elected when Ross Perot — a Democrat in Republican Conservative garb — split the vote.

So, unfortunately, I’ll support and vote for Trump — the prettiest horse in the glue factory coral. 

# – # – # – # – #