The ridiculous weaponization against Trump and Musk

 Breitbart:

Businessman Joe Lonsdale said Saturday on CNN’s “Smerconish” that he believed there is “clearly weaponization” of  the Justice Department against former President Donald Trump and Elon Musk.

Anchor Michael Smerconish said, “My next guest co-authored this Wall Street Journal op-ed with Jeb Bush under the heading, Elon Musk and Donald Trump Cases Imperil the Rule of Law.”

He asked, “I’m curious your co-author, Jeb Bush is no fan of Donald Trump. Why did he feel compelled to weigh in on this?”

Lonsdale said, “I’ve never given Donald Trump a cent either. I love America. I’ve been a lot of businesses in this country. I love building, love investing here. And this is very scary. I see the government weaponized against my friend Elon Musk. Listen, I don’t love Donald Trump, but I was just with a bunch of my business friends who don’t love them either. All of them thanked me for writing this.”

He continued, “I don’t think Trump necessarily handled this perfectly. It’s not a $400,000,000 fine. It’s like basically what happens in these countries when you have a regime takeover that’s going after its enemies, as you weaponize it and you penalize people in ridiculous ways. This is an obvious example of that. This is why it’s scary to my friends who do business, who don’t even like Trump because it’s a $400,000,000 fine for something where there’s no victims is obviously a weaponization of government and everyone knows on its face. ”

...

The attacks on Trump and Musk make no sense to me.  The fine against Trump is ridiculous.   

See also:

The 8th Amendment comes out in favor of Trump

...

 The media reporting on the court’s decision has been massive since the decision was rendered.  However, little or no reporting focused on the constitutionality of the fines under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  President Trump and his co-defendants all have substantial 8th Amendment “excessive fine” challenges to raise.  In fact, a review of the facts and applicable law reveal that this decision is simply more election interference.

...

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more