On tonight's episode of the Ezra Levant Show, Ezra asks what would be the point of arresting Donald Trump? In many countries, sitting politicians are immune from prosecution, and for good reason.
This logic works for banana republics where political leaders are charged with trumped-up crimes to gain political advantage. Unfortunately, this is exactly what seems to be happening with the potential arrest of former U.S. president Donald Trump.
Trump's personal police detachment, armed and on 24-hour duty, protects him from anything and everything, including terrorism, kidnapping, revenge, and even ordinary crimes. With such a police force, how does the police arrest a man being protected by the police? And for what?
Some may argue that Trump's supposed crimes are the reason for his potential arrest. But what about the crimes committed by other politicians, such as Hillary Clinton or Hunter and Joe Biden? Why is it only Trump who is being targeted?
So what is the purpose of arresting Trump? Easier and cheaper than beating him in 2016 or 2024, it could divide America and demoralize the country, making conservatives hate law and order, police, and the rule of law. This would be a win for those behind the arrest, but it would not be justice.
Moreover, the potential arrest of Trump may be nothing more than a circus distraction from more significant issues, such as the actions of Xi and Putin, bank failures, the Ukraine money scandal, and the domestic drug crisis. While everyone is focused on Trump, what else is happening?
While there may be some who support such a move, it would only serve to divide the country further and undermine the rule of law. It's time to focus on real issues, not political games.
Also in this episode, Ezra catches up with Jenin Younes, civil liberties attorney and writer. Younes went to court to prove that the government was co-opting private industry, including social media companies, to censor the voices of Americans on various topics ranging from Covid-19 to the elections.
The judge granted discovery, and Younes obtained a lot of information from the companies, demonstrating that the government has been coercing and pressuring them to censor according to its own views.
Private companies have strong arguments for censoring on their own, but when the government is threatening, cajoling, and pushing companies, they become agents.
When the private company does the bidding of the federal government, it becomes a de facto bureaucrat, regardless of whether or not it's sympathetic. There is an implied coercion when the president of the United States or senior officials ask a company to do something because they have the power to hurt the company.
GUEST: NCLA's Jenin Younes.
