Enlil said:

I have never heard of anyone chanting "lock him up" in reference to a homeless crackhead.  I think you made that up.  I realize that Americans in general are prone to want other people locked up, but that doesn't make it right.

---

Enlil said:

He has done incredible harm to the nation.  Most likely harm that will last for the remainder of my lifetime.  No one said he was harmless.  A prosecution of him, however, will do further harm to the nation.  Balancing that with whatever benefits may or may not arise out of "justice" is the key here, and I just don't see the upside of a prosecution at this point.

---

Enlil said:

Damaging the nation to prosecute someone for damaging the nation is like burning down your house because someone vandalized it.

---

rxb said:

Enlil said:

Damaging the nation to prosecute someone for damaging the nation is like burning down your house because someone vandalized it.

---

if there is no punishment for trump for doing those things there should be no punishment for anyone...

---

Enlil said:

Damaging the nation to prosecute someone for damaging the nation is like burning down your house because someone vandalized it.

---

Enlil said:

Yup.  Predicting the future is always dicey.  If prosecuting a vandal would cause more harm than good, she shouldn't be prosecuted.  The tricky part is always figuring out the likely harm and good.  With Trump, I'm not sure I can see a whole lot of potential good that would come out of a prosecution, but I can certainly see a lot of potential harm.

---

Enlil said:

He has done incredible harm to the nation.  Most likely harm that will last for the remainder of my lifetime.  No one said he was harmless.  A prosecution of him, however, will do further harm to the nation.  Balancing that with whatever benefits may or may not arise out of "justice" is the key here, and I just don't see the upside of a prosecution at this point.

---

Warrk said:

Enlil said:

He has done incredible harm to the nation.  Most likely harm that will last for the remainder of my lifetime.  No one said he was harmless.  A prosecution of him, however, will do further harm to the nation.  Balancing that with whatever benefits may or may not arise out of "justice" is the key here, and I just don't see the upside of a prosecution at this point.

---

When does prosecution have to consider the likely harm to a nation? It should be real simple: whether the charged person is guilty or not. Isn't that how the law is supposed to operate, without political interference? Separation of powers and all that?

---

Kryptos said:

No, you see, if a criminal threatens to do more crime in retaliation for prosecution, then in the interests of preventing more crime, we should avoid prosecution. Pretty simple, right?

To clean up Enlil's analogy: A vandal shows up to your house and vandalizes it. They are caught, but they say that if you try to prosecute them for the damage they did, they'll call their buddies and have them burn down your house in retaliation. The obvious course of action is to prevent further harm to your house by letting the vandal on their way, preferably with an apology and maybe a few million dollars in apology money.

---

you did way better at this than i did... thank you

koods said:

He’s a defense lawyer.

---