Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
That's crap. When you take a prominent role in national politics, you sign up for more scrutiny than you would otherwise get. That goes with the turf. No one forced Manafort to take the job of being Trump's campaign manager, but it is hardly a surprise that his business dealings then got a lot more attention. He committed a bunch of crimes to which he had no defense.
That's just nonsense. If you think that a sleaze like Manafort should be able to defraud people and get away with it, you should say so. Because that's what you're suggesting.
|
I’m fine with writing Manafort off on a caveat emptor basis. Man has terrible risk avoidance instinct. Foolish.
But that’s an analysis based on a notion that right and wrong are concepts for plebes, and the real rule of life is one must be shrewd with his cost/benefit analyses. You suggested earlier that Manafort did something bad and so deserved what gets. These aren’t mutually exclusive standards, but if he is where he is because he wasn’t shrewd enough to stay out of the spotlight, you’re kind of proving my point that we don’t have a “justice” system so much as a nihilistic property protection system, and Manafort walked afoul of some very powerful political forces who’d have never looked* at him but for his throwing himself into the spotlight and being aligned with a President who pissed off these powerful people. You’re acknowledging the prosecution of him is political.
I believe all politically motivated prosecutions are invalid. And the public agrees. People who go down get second chances because if “it was a political thing,” it’s considered tainted. Clinton proved this. His perjury was a technical crime only, excused as a product of a vile political prosecution.
ETA: * Looked at him further. Recall, an earlier investigation of him was closed in 2011. It was only revived because he became a target for Mueller.
