I think you’re misusing the concept of whataboutism

More importantly, you seem to be assuming that criminal cases either can’t or shouldn’t be assessed on their individual merits

You are obviously free to form your own opinion of the case. I’m just offering my analysis

The Comey case looks like a political prosecution in part because of the ridiculous installation of Halligan as the US Atty in the EDVa

The Bolton case comes out of DMd, which as I said, is being run by a career prosecutor.

Also the FBI investigation of Bolton predates the Trump presidency

Yes. Exactly. Which is presumably why criminal charges were filed against Trump

You mean the judge whom I literally referred to by name in the previous post?

Trump was charged, but not convicted

So I’m not sure I’d say he got away with it

But I certainly understand being dissatisfied with how that case was handled by Judge Cannon

And the indictment itself is here: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

I recommend this NBC article for more background: www.nbcnews.com/politics/jus...

To be clear—the fact that Trump has called for Bolton to be charged is highly inappropriate. It undermines the public legitimacy of the charges.

But that doesn’t mean the charges should not have been brought.

To the contrary, there are good reasons to think the charges are warranted

I mean the Daniels case. And we will have to agree to disagree about the business records charges in that case.

But at least some of the criticisms of the Comey indictment can be made about the NYS prosecution of Trump for the Stormy Daniels payments.
There were clear political reasons to bring that case, the underlying actions were far from egregious, and reports from the Manhattan DAs office were troubling

It's tempting to focus only on Trump's public statements to Bondi and others, directing them to indict Comey and the public reports about how career prosecutors warned against bringing the charges against Comey.

These facts all look really horrible, and there are many reasons to criticize this case

I’m writing a book & it’s keeping me busy!

Thanks, Jane!

Yup. I think we write symposium papers more quickly, and sometimes include summaries of prior work. Because they're written quickly, I think the summaries tend to be less carefully caveated than our primary work.

I’ve been wondering whether we could check professors’ symposium pieces to see a) what their priors are and b) how they perceive the core of their arguments when stripped bare of our ordinary hedging and careful language