It works for this article.
Posted on 06/04/2024 11:39:59 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
How dare Mitt Romney. And Sens. Susan Collins and Mitch McConnell. The anti-Trump press corps is dismayed that Republicans of all stripes, even those who aren’t fond of Donald Trump, have criticized the Manhattan prosecution and guilty verdict.
The media coverage after the verdict has followed the usual Trump-era pattern. Democrats pursue some anti-Trump operation—impeachment, a Russia collusion probe, a prosecution. The press then descends as one to chide Republicans, with the unsubtle implication that they must be unethical sellouts if they oppose what Democrats are doing.
There’s rarely a fair-minded media accounting on the legal or substantive merits. But note that the critics of Alvin Bragg’s case aren’t merely J.D. Vance, Marco Rubio and other campaigners for Vice President. This time the critics include Sens. Romney and McConnell and Collins, as well as those of us in the media who are often critical of Mr. Trump.
Maybe they see the case as the egregious misuse of the law that it is. And maybe they worry about the consequences for public confidence in the rule of law when a misdemeanor whose statute of limitations has expired is twisted into a convoluted felony.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
It works for this article.
“Maybe they see the case as the egregious misuse of the law that it is.”
No maybe about it in my mind. It is indeed an egregious misuse of the law.
Because the verdict was meted out by a corrupt judge issuing thoroughly one-sided trial rulings, a corrupt DA and a biased, unfair jury.
Thanks WSJ for explaining my own beliefs to me. Don’t know how I survied 60 years without it.
Arrogance and ignorance is a deadly combination.
The same “justus” system that convicted Trump when he became a thorn in the side of the Deep State convicted Ritter when he bacame a thorn in their side.
Neither prosecution would have occurred otherwise.
Railroading your political opponents on contrived charges is the exact opposite of law and order.
So yes, the GOP is standing up for law and order by nominating PDJT
And the court fully allowed it, despite multiple grounds for directed verdicts, even after the case should have been kicked back.
If the trial had been honest and had proven its case that Trump was unfit to be president—I would agree. But, they did not, this mix of charges, politically motivated, smells like corruption. This was no trial in any legal sense. The Supreme Court should interpose and reverse the ruling for the good of the nation—but they will not.
Yah, it’s just us Republicans that hate it. I mean, it was a normal everyday kangaroo Court and we shouldn’t let our “partisanship” of being “Republican” cause us to question the Sovietozation of our Country.
WSJ- nice try.
Well actually, ash holes. it’s every American that cherishes our constitutional right but you write what the America hating scumbags that own the WSJ tell you to write.
The Editorial Page is Center-Right politically, but has supported Open Borders immigration policy since the 1980s.
The News Division - which writes the Front Page - has been Left-Hard Left for decades.
The WSG Front Page was belligerently anti-Trump during the entire Non-Disclosure Agreement trial.
During the 1970-1995 period, the WSJ Editorial Page was one of the most creative and influential Conservative publications in the world.
By the late 1990s, their Open Borders mania infected the entire editorial philosophy, and I stopped reading their editorial pages almost 30 years ago.
Great tip, thanks.
My problem, as I’m sure it is with others, is that we watch the likes of the Clinton’s and other Democrats committing all sorts of crimes while Republicans, like Trump and Nixon, get charged and suffer consequences while the others walk away.
Yep.
Linda Graham too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.