Two Sets of Laws for Two Americas

Two sets of laws now operate in an increasingly unrecognizable America.

Consider the matter of unlawfully removing and storing classified papers.

Donald Trump may go to prison for removing contested White House files to his home.

So far Joe Biden seems exempt from just such legal jeopardy.

But as a senator and Vice President with no right, as does a president, to declassify files, Biden removed and, as a private citizen kept for years classified files in unsecure locations.

Biden’s team strangely revealed the unlawful removals after years of silence.

It did so because the Biden administration found itself in the untenable position of prosecuting the former president for “crimes” that the current president committed as well—albeit far earlier and longer.

Impeachable phone calls?

Donald Trump was impeached by a Democratic House for delaying foreign aid until the Ukrainian government guaranteed that Hunter Biden and his family were no longer engaged in corrupt influence peddling in Kyiv.

In addition, the Left charged that Trump was targeting Joe Biden, his possible 2020 rival.

Yet Biden, with impunity, bragged that he had fired a Ukrainian prosecutor looking into his own son’s schemes by promising to cancel outright American foreign aid.

And the Biden administration’s Justice Department is now targeting Trump, currently the frontrunning challenger to Biden in 2024.

Election denialism?

Trump was indicted by Special Counsel Jack Smith, in part for supposedly conspiratorially “unlawfully discounting legitimate votes.”

Will Smith then also indict Stacey Abrams? For years Abrams falsely claimed that she was the real governor of Georgia. She toured the country in hopes of “discounting” the state vote count.

Or maybe Smith was referring to the conspiracist and former president Jimmy Carter.

He alleged that Trump in 2016 “lost the election, and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf.”

Will Smith charge Hillary Clinton?

She serially libeled Trump as an “illegitimate” president.

Clinton hatched the Russian collusion hoax, and bragged she joined the “Resistance” to continue her attacks on an elected president.

Or maybe Smith meant the Hollywood crowd.

Lots of actors cut commercials after the 2016 election—begging viewers to pressure the electors to ignore their constitutional duties to honor their states’ popular vote and instead swing their ballots to Hillary Clinton?

Was not that “insurrectionary?”

Or was Smith thinking of January 2005?

Then 32 Democratic House members and Sen. Barbara Boxer tried to nullify the legally certified vote in Ohio—to thereby elect the loser John Kerry.

How about destroying evidence?

Trump was also indicted for allegedly attempting to erase video material from his own cameras in his own house.

Yet Hillary Clinton with impunity eliminated subpoenaed communication devices and thousands of emails.

Violations of security? Trump was indicted for supposedly loosely talking about classified material to visitors at his home.

So will prosecutor Smith’s indictments also extend to Hillary Clinton? She sent classified documents illegally over her unsecure private server.

FBI Director James Comey memorialized a confidential president conversation.

Then he deliberately leaked what properly was a classified document to the media. It was all part of Comey’s Machiavellian gambit to prompt the appointment of a favorable special prosecutor.

What about subversion of the electoral process?

Donald Trump was indicted for supposedly undermining the election of 2020 by questioning the integrity of the balloting.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton’s campaign illegally hired two foreign nationals Christopher Steele and Igor Danchenko to compile falsehoods about her opponent Trump.

Clinton hid her payments behind three paywalls.

Her team, along with the FBI, helped leak the counterfeit dossier to the media and high officials to undermine her opponent—and thus subvert the election itself.

Lying and perjury?

Two Trump aides and Trump himself are indicted for supposedly stonewalling federal investigators by claiming either amnesia or ignorance.

That tact is exactly what James Comey did 245 times while under oath before Congress.

What do former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former Director of the CIA John Brennan, and former interim FBI Director Andrew McCabe all have in common?

All three admitted they flagrantly lied either under oath to Congress or to federal investigators.

The three were never indicted for their false and perjurious testimonies.

We have now serially devolved from the 2016 election “Russian collusion” hoax, to the 2020 election “Russian disinformation” laptop hoax, and down to the 2024 election weaponized indictments.

Out of pathological hatred or fear of Donald Trump, the Left has crafted one set of laws for themselves, and another for all other Americans.

They smugly believe their own moral superiority grants them such a right to apply laws unequally—or to ignore them altogether.

To retain power at all cost, and to destroy a political rival, leftwing Democrats are systematically dismantling the constitutional foundations of the United States as we once knew them.

Get the news corporate media won't tell you.

Get caught up on today's must read stores!

By submitting your information, you agree to receive exclusive AG+ content, including special promotions, and agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms. By providing your phone number and checking the box to opt in, you are consenting to receive recurring SMS/MMS messages, including automated texts, to that number from my short code. Msg & data rates may apply. Reply HELP for help, STOP to end. SMS opt-in will not be sold, rented, or shared.

About Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He is an American military historian, columnist, a former classics professor, and scholar of ancient warfare. He has been a visiting professor at Hillsdale College since 2004, and is the 2023 Giles O'Malley Distinguished Visiting Professor at the School of Public Policy, Pepperdine University. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007 by President George W. Bush, and the Bradley Prize in 2008. Hanson is also a farmer (growing almonds on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author of the just released New York Times best seller, The End of Everything: How Wars Descend into Annihilation, published by Basic Books on May 7, 2024, as well as the recent  The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won, The Case for Trump, and The Dying Citizen.

Photo: Special counsel Jack Smith speaks to members of the media at the US Department of Justice building in Washington, DC, on August 1, 2023. In a major development in the documents probe on July 27, 2023, Special Counsel Jack Smith alleged that Trump, who is scheduled to go on trial at the height of the campaign in March and May next year, asked a worker at his beachfront estate in Florida to delete surveillance footage to obstruct investigators. (Photo by SAUL LOEB / AFP) (Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)

Notable Replies

  1. To retain power at all cost, and to destroy a political rival, leftwing Democrats are systematically dismantling the constitutional foundations of the United States as we once knew them.

    Yup, and they will not stop until they are stopped. Sadly, I see nothing or no one willing to do so.

  2. Following the latest indictment of Donald Trump by Jack Smith, three legal minds----Jonathon Turley, Alan Dershowitz, and Andrew McCarthy—are all of the opinion that the indictments amount to criminalizing the First Amendment—that the holding (and speaking) of a contrary opinion might now become a criminal act. Bill Barr, on the other hand, states that “As a legal matter, I don’t see a problem with the indictment,” he said. “I think that it’s not an abuse. The Department of Justice is not acting to weaponize the department by proceeding against the president for a conspiracy to subvert the electoral process.”

    Who of the four is one to believe? Prior to this latest round of lawfare one would be free to believe either side. One had the RIGHT to that belief. No longer. This latest move is yet another step in the long process by the federal government to undermine and curtail every formerly established right of free thought and expression. It is more than Donald Trump at risk now. It is all of us.

    How many stories do we need to read about high school students being expelled for expressing the belief that there are two, and only two, sexes? That men do not have the right to enter a girl’s locker room? That children do not have the capacity to determine long term medical interventions? That teachers and administrative staff do not have ultimate authority over children in the education system?

    There was a time that actions, and only actions, could be criminalized, but no longer. Under new-speak, thought is now a criminal act. And belief is grounds for detainment and prosecution.

    Hanson has delineated the case for two different judicial systems based upon Party Affiliation----which, though true, only paints the problematic system in Olympian terms. Donald Trump stated it best when he warned that it was us, the people, who are the true targets, and that he merely was in the way.

    That is the truer danger of what Jack Smith, the entirety of the federal bureaucratic system, and the Left is trying to do.

    Edited: While posting this I had only heard short form interviews from Dershowitz, McCarthy, and Turley on the day the indictment was released. A few minutes ago I came across this long form analysis by Dershowitz----and it touches more closely on my fear we are losing First Amendment protections. At 31 minutes, it is well worth the watch----

  3. That the case is flawed, flimsy, unconstitutional, and a clear double standard is clear. While we point that out, they are laughing and moving on to the next phase. The lie is the point. The troll is the objective. The merits of the case are nonexistent, but that hardly matters with this indictment. They finally have a way to get him in front of the DC Star Chamber. This Obama appointed judge has sentenced every J-6er to longer sentences than even the Garland Justice Department has requested. I know you guys don’t like my point-of-view and hold my opinions in low regard, but you do respect Julie Kelly who has done yeoman’s, heroic work on this matter and knows this judge and her horrendous track record and the juries DC produce. Her assessment yesterday? “Trump is Doomed”.

    The repercussions are difficult to fathom. How many donkey secretaries-of-state are going to move to preclude him from having rallies in their state? How many will move to have him kept off the ballot?

    As difficult as it is to believe, he’s down to three possibilities for avoiding some sort of prison or confinement/probation for the rest of his life:

    1. A presidential pardon from a president inaugurated in 2025 . 2) John Roberts bucking the system and defending Trump the way Rehnquist did for Bush in 2000 (assuming Kavanaugh and Barrett don’t bite the hand that fed them) 3) He cuts a deal the DOJ.

    I hope he gets how serious this is, and I hope our voters do as well. I have no confidence in Roberts, Kavanaugh, and/or Barrett. Who would? (The circuit/appeals court is no better.) We have got to keep our powder dry and our options open. If you love Trump, and believe he won’t pull the trigger on option #3 if it comes to that, you’re left with option #1. If you really believe, as I do, that we’re in the middle of a cold civil war against people who thus far have proven to be way more committed than are we to the fight, we have got to get a president elected who will go to war with the DOJ and pardon Trump.

  4. Avatar for task task says:

    Today on Julie Kelly’s substack I wrote, regarding Trump’s arrest, and the likelihood of him being incarcerated:" It’s far more likely that Judge Howell will shy away from doing anything that brings powerhouse attorneys into the appellate courts and SCOTUS. It threatens everything she has already done and continues to do. Trump has a lot of exceptional attorneys who are making sure J6 is attacked via the Bill of Rights."

  5. Avatar for task task says:

    The attorneys you speak of have the same opinion as Mark Levin, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The First Amendment is what America is about. And the Separation of Powers insures that Government will be polite and respectful and cherish the Bill of Rights. When that fails to work the Second Amendment comes into play. Jefferson referenced the solution in the Declaration of Independence, which was signed by many Founders, when he wrote: “…whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”

    Barr is a Federal employee and part of the problem.

Continue the discussion at community.amgreatness.com

21 more replies


Avatar for Travis Avatar for Maximus-Cassius Avatar for williamgrulkey Avatar for Ermengarde Avatar for Simplecarpenter Avatar for task Avatar for Marsha_A_Balko Avatar for Everett_Brunson Avatar for system