Alan J. Russo opened the “Conclusions” section of his extraordinary (extraordinarily fine) 1970 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review article, “Equal Protection from the Law: The Substantive Requirements for a Showing of Discriminatory Law Enforcement,” by saying:
In order to be acquitted in a penal proceeding on grounds of discriminatory enforcement, a defendant generally has been required to show that enforcement authorities have purposefully singled him out, while not acting against others for similar violations. The mere fact that an impartial law has been applied unequally does not establish a denial of fourteenth amendment rights. This requirement of purposeful discrimination is justified as to most penal laws insofar as universal enforcement is a practical impossibility.
Rarely have such clear exemplars of discriminatory law enforcement been provided as Barack Obama’s decision not to prosecute his Secretary of State and chosen successor Hillary Clinton versus Joe Biden’s decision to prosecute his chief political competitor Donald Trump.
The Biden indictment of Trump, by Biden’s agent Merrick Garland (who as President Biden’s agent, possesses the full Constitutional and legal authority and power to fire, at will), includes 8 charges, of which the majority, 5, were at least as applicable to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, but which Obama (through his agent James Comey) refused to even present to a grand jury for an indictment against her.
This is not to say that these 5 federal U.S. criminal statutes don’t clearly describe what Trump did or what Clinton did — they clearly do, in both cases — but it is to say that either they are being discriminatorily applied against Trump, or else they were discriminatorily not applied against Clinton, or that in both instances the law was being discriminatorily applied or not applied (and for blatantly clear motivations, in each of the two cases); and, so, the U.S. federal Government is being displayed here to be a dictatorship, not a democracy — it is not a “government of laws and not of men,” but is instead a government of men and not of laws.
The 5 criminal-law statutes that apply to both Clinton and Trump but were cited ONLY against Trump, are (as I first detailed them on 5 July 2016 regarding Clinton):
the following six [which include five of the eight that now are charged against Trump] U.S. criminal laws, each of which undeniably describes very well what she [and he] did:
18 U.S. Code § 1512 — Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant
(c) Whoever corruptly
(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or
(2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy
Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
18 U.S. Code § 793 — Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information …
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer —
Shall be fined not more than $10, 000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy, shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.
Those laws are consequently null and void, by Executive action.
Specifically with regard to the Trump case, the alleged crimes are violations of:
18 U.S.C. 793(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it
18 U.S.C. 1512(k) Whoever conspires to commit any offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.
18 U.S.C. 1512(b)(2)(A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding
18 U.S.C. 1512 (c)(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding;
18 U.S.C. 1519 Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy. Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
Meanwhile, Biden’s agent Merrick Garland has not yet decided whether or not to bring to a grand jury the similar charges that have been discussed in the ‘news’ media regarding his boss, Joe Biden himself.
The Democratic Party newspaper Washington Post headlined on June 8 “Trump indictment: A moment of reckoning for the former president,” and reported,
The decision to indict also carries some risks for Justice Department and the administration of President Biden, given that the defendant is the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination. Special counsel Jack Smith, who led the investigation, and Attorney General Merrick Garland, who allowed the indictment to go forward, had to weigh the rule of law against the potential political backlash from Trump’s allies, but it was Trump himself who helped force the prosecutor’s hand.
Donald Trump has been charged in the classified documents case, the second time he’s been indicted since March. Get live updates.
Donald Trump is facing historic legal scrutiny for a former president, under investigation by the Justice Department, district attorneys in Manhattan and Fulton County, Ga., and a state attorney general. He denies wrongdoing.
If ever the very concept of equal protection of the laws (and its corollary of equal application of the laws) has ever applied to anything, then this is the case, and it then must be compared with the way that these laws are and have been applied — or not — to not ONLY Trump, and Clinton, and Biden, but to all other individuals who have been alleged to (and especially to those who have convicted to) have mishandled confidential U.S. Government documents. The more that this is done, the more that injustice will be found to be routine in the U.S. Government. And this is why I don’t expect it ever to be done.
Biden has thus opened here a can of worms, if only the U.S. press will look inside this can (which I have no expectation that any of America’s ‘news’-media will do). If all of them will not do it, then will that be proof-positive that the U.S. regime is, itself, totalitarian? What other conclusion could one then come to?
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
