Respectable position, and I’d say you make valid points, particularly when you say it’s not a crime to “non-violently” overthrow the government.
I would levy an argument to your point, however, and advocate that had the situation been reversed - that say Obama had won an election and a Bush official had leaked information to the press, that there would have been a full blitzkrieg media campaign to ensure that individual was charged to the full extent of the law.
This is where I have a serious problem with this outcome, because deep down in my gut I believe anyone that wasn’t DNC/Globalist affiliated would have been swinging for a tree.
What are your thoughts?
Indeed, and even if there was no crime, see framing Trump for "Russian collusion" whatever that is.
Our press is fundamentally dishonest too. In bed with the power players, drunk on their own sense of self-importance hob knobbing with government officials and so on. This is a fantasic gravy train, and most of them are fellow travelers.
I don't have a problem with the outcome of "leaking presidential conversations is not a crime." The problem I have is that the public is being led into a false dichotomy, that if something is not criminal, it is justified.
Same idea of not having a problem that a lying press is not criminal. The problem is that people credit the press with honesty (or not), and few people bother to figure out what the truth actually is. Lord knows the press has a mission to inhibit this. The press and academia want to gatekeep and control the public's view of the world. They cannot be trusted.