Although “justice” is often an elusively subjective term, let’s apply a rather simple “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” test to contrast with what we’re witnessing in today’s America.
In a fair society, a logical corollary would be for bad gooses and ganders to be treated with the same consequences, regardless of the flocks they choose to fly with.
In this regard, it appears that we’re witnessing a political dichotomy regarding whose flock is getting goosed by some truly bad ones.
Compare the Liberal Left’s media and legal justice treatments of Donald Trump with just two spectacularly hypocritical examples:
Abuses of Position in Office
Former President Trump’s first impeachment ordeal stemmed from a 2019 telephone conversation during which he asked Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to look into former Vice President Biden’s role in the firing of Ukraine’s top prosecutor, Victor Shokin.
Shokin had been investigating corruption charges against Burisma Holdings, a major energy company which was paying Joe’s son Hunter $50,000 per month for a no-show board seat at a time when he was acting as President Obama’s top Ukraine and China representative.
Hunter was serving on Burisma’s board when the company’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, allegedly paid a $7 million bribe to officials serving under Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Vitaly Yarema, to "shut the case against Zlochevskiy."
Trump had legitimate national security reasons to be interested in Biden’s threat to withhold funds. Flashback to an earlier 2018 televised interview at a Council on Foreign Affairs meeting where Joe said:
And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev. And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t.
So they said they had — they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to — or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said — I said, call him.
I said, “I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars … I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’"
Well, son of a b**** — he got fired.
President Trump wasn’t the first to question U.S. national security threats posed by Hunter’s foreign business dealings.
A year-long GOP-led Senate Homeland and Government Affairs and Senate Finance Committee investigation had flagged foreign extortion risks in an 87-page report which revealed that in early 2015, former Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, George Kent, raised concerns to officials in Vice President Joe Biden’s office about perceived conflicts of interest.
Receiving no response, Kent sent a Sept. 2016 email to colleagues stating: "Furthermore, the presence of Hunter Biden on the Burisma board was very awkward for all U.S. officials pushing an anticorruption agenda in Ukraine."
(Yet note that Joe Biden has repeatedly denied knowing anything about his son’s business enterprises although Hunter’s "laptop from hell" evidence indicates otherwise.)
In October 2015, senior State Department official Amos Hochstein also raised concerns with Vice President Biden that Hunter’s position on Burisma’s board enabled Russian disinformation efforts and risked undermining U.S. Ukraine policy.
Mishandling of Secret Information
A historically unprecedented Aug. 8 pre-dawn raid ordered by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland on former President Donald Trump’s private residence guarded with Secret Service protection at Mar-a-Lago by about 30 FBI agents broke into a safe, searched Melania’s wardrobe closet and 16-year-old son Barron’s room, and indiscriminately confiscated boxes of documents and personal items without any prior notification or attorneys present.
In all, 18 documents were reportedly found to be marked “TOP SECRET,” 54 “SECRET,” 31 “CONFIDENTIAL,” and 11,179 government documents and photographs seized bore no classifications at all.
Again, let’s flashback to an earlier time, namely July 2016, when a different U.S. Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, along with then-FBI Director James Comey gave former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton a pass for unauthorized secret government documents in her possession, and destroying about 30,000 others she claimed were personal without external validation.
Of about 30,000 emails Clinton finally handed over to the State Department, 110 contained information that was classified at the time she sent or received them, a finding at odds with her repeated assertions that none of the emails were classified at those times.
In addition, “several thousand” of the original trove of work-related emails not turned over by Clinton, three were later determined to contain classified information.
While serving as Secretary of State, Hillary had used multiple private servers for her personal and government business, not just a single server at her home in New York that had been the focus of media reporting. In the words of FBI Director Comey, this made the agency’s job of putting information together enormously complicated, a jigsaw puzzle with “millions of email fragments” in it.
Standing in for AG Lynch, Comey recommended that Hillary not be criminally indicted for what he described as being “extremely careless” in using a private email address and server, even stating it was possible that sophisticated hostile foreign governments had gained access to her account while she held office.
Nevertheless, arguing that there was no evidence that Clinton “intentionally transmitted or willfully mishandled classified information,” he concluded “our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
Amid a storm of criticism regarding a previous “impromptu meeting” between AG Lynch and former President Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac in Phoenix, she agreed to accept Comey’s recommendation.
Stark contrasts between legal standards applied to Trump versus Biden and Clinton indicate a justice system where geese of political blue or red feathers are treated very differently.
Let’s end that blatant fowl play in November.
Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture and the graduate space architecture program. His latest of 12 books is "Architectures Beyond Boxes and Boundaries: My Life By Design" (2022). Read Larry Bell's Reports — More Here.
© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.