The New York Times published a scathing editorial about Donald Trump with glee. Even the title of the article, “The Law Is Coming, Mr. Trump” is telling. When a distinguished newspaper is ecstatic about the travails of a sitting president, you have to scratch your head and ask what the hell is going on with the liberal press.
The paper is expressing its opinion, so there’s nothing unethical about their childish essay. Many Americans dislike Donald Trump, but they don’t revel in the problems of their leader and most powerful man in the world.
The editorial suggests that this president having legal problems is a unique moment in history. There are countless similar situations in recent history. Bill Clinton lied under oath about a tawdry affair with an intern, a capital offense that completely undermines the basis of our judicial system, and obstructed of justice. Sound familiar? He was actually impeached by the House of Representatives and let off the hook by a Senate controlled by Republicans that wanted to avoid a constitutional storm.
Hillary Clinton destroyed evidence relating to her personal servers, and with her husband has been investigated for a number of crimes and corruption over the years that included taking money (for their foundation) for favors, sham investments and so much more.
After being encouraged by Robert Mueller, the Special Counsel, the FBI raided the offices of Michael Cohen, Trump’s personal attorney, and the individual that gave a pornographic actress $130,000 to sign a non-disclosure agreement about a consensual affair with Trump long before the election. Somehow this has mushroomed into a potential illegal campaign donation. Really? Does this even compare to Bill Clinton who had an affair while president in the anteroom off of the Oval Office?
The FBI raid was a bold legal move that has been used infrequently because it’s fraught with so many issues and problems. Seldom are attorneys’ files confiscated because of attorney/client confidentiality.
The information must be carefully vetted, lest a judge not allow it to be used in court, and it must prove the attorney was involved in the crimes of the accused. Given that the issue at hand is a payment to an actress to keep her mouth shut, the FBI lawyers will be fortunate if the judge doesn’t laugh them out of court. Messing with such important constitutional issues for such a minor offense is indicative of the bias against the president existing in the Special Counsel’s office and the FBI.
Trump vehemently objected to the FBI actions and could fire some of the top people in the Justice Department who signed off on the raid. Many politicians on both sides of the aisle are advising the president not to do so.
The Times editorial also went into a long diatribe about all of Trump’s shady acquaintances, his management style, etc. All these things are already well-documented and not new information. The editors seemed to feel that there were enormous revelations in the piece, and there weren’t any.
The following is an excerpt from the Times editorial that showcases the Times’ venom for the president.
Mr. Trump has spent his career in the company of developers and celebrities, and also grifters, cons, sharks, goons and crooks. [the editors exhausted synonyms for ‘bad dudes’] He cuts corners, he lies, he cheats, he brags about it, and for the most part, he’s gotten away with it, protected by threats of litigation, hush money and his own bravado.
[Editors, why don’t you tell us how you really feel.]
Come on Times editorial people. Give us something new and prove it, if you can. Don’t criticize politicians for being underhanded, bragging and being involved with celebrities. The schoolyard taunting should end now.