Crossing the Rubicon

Victor Davis Hanson’s recent article, “Hillary’s ‘Sure’ Victory Explains Most Everything,” makes some very interesting points, perhaps more than he realized. Hanson posits that had Hillary Clinton won, all those involved in the lax and almost farcical investigation into her alleged crimes, would have most likely received rewards:

President Hillary Clinton would be “exempt from all further criminal exposure.” AG Loretta Lynch, was going to continue as Clinton’s attorney general. Andrew McCabe’s, “not loaded for bear” investigation was “a good argument for promotion.” DOJ Bruce Ohr, “assumed empowering the Clinton-funded dossier would pay dividends.” FBI investigator Peter Strzok’s “election-cycle machinations” were “good investments.” Samantha Power, Susan Rice, and others who unmasked names were playing “careerist odds.” FBI Director James Comey, a “tragic farce,” might have been appointed CIA director. Barack Obama lied on national TV very carelessly and publicly. Hanson might not realize there is another side of the coin. Trump won, the investigation into what these people may have done has begun. There is no turning back. We have crossed the Rubicon. The battle lines have been drawn. If the Republicans back down and “play nice” as has happened so many times in the past, their party is over. So, they must take their investigations as far and as hard as they can go, including serious jail time for any and all wrongdoers. No one can be exempt. The “rule of law” must be safeguarded. If the Republicans do engage in battle, the Democrats can do one of two things. If the alleged crimes are true, they can side with the Republicans, sacrifice a few bad apples, and live to fight another day. But if past performance is any indication of future action, they will play dirty, no holds barred, hard ball. If they go down defending the indefensible, their party might be over. Elections have consequences, but I’m not sure anybody saw what was looming on the horizon that first Tuesday of November 2016.