Last week wasn’t a great week in courts for those on the right. Trump confidant and GOP operative Roger Stone could face decades in prison after being convicted in a DC court on seven counts of obstruction, witness tampering and making false statements to Congress, related to the Mueller investigation. Details at the link.
I’m not going to make a personal case for Mr. Stone’s character, but it does seem awfully harsh, considering the number of liars, leakers and evidence bleachers on the Democratic side who were allowed to skate away to lucrative book and cable TV deals, just as President Trump fumed. As with Lt. Gen. Flynn, I think the final story on Stone will rest with an appeals court.
A court also rejected President Trump’s attempts to keep New York prosecutors from obtaining his tax records. That will also be appealed to the Supreme Court. Those who argue that this is the correct decision seem fixated on idea that the President is claiming he’s immune from any prosecution.
But it seems to me that the real issue nobody’s discussing is prosecutorial overreach and misconduct. You can’t be charged with hiding “evidence” of a crime if there is no charge of a crime. They just want to be able to rifle through eight years’ worth of his private tax returns, looking for something to charge him with. I might actually side with them if they’d gone to the trouble of naming something he did wrong first, but I’m frankly weary of the endless fishing expeditions. If you want to subpoena someone’s personal financial records, come up with a legitimate reason first. Until then, you’re not upholding the law, you’re just pawing through someone’s trash, like tabloid reporters or raccoons.
Also, a jury in San Francisco ordered the undercover journalists who exposed Planned Parenthood to pay the pro-abortion group over a million dollars in damages for committing journalism against them. It’s a case that should have the media up in arms, since it basically criminalizes undercover exposes. But protecting abortion seems to be more important to many “news” outlets than protecting their own First Amendment rights. Throughout the trial, the judge wouldn’t even let the jury see the videos that they were supposedly ruling on. This will also be appealed.
For those who need a little optimism that the appeals courts might be less partisan, here is some good news to consider: