Taking care of what we should, shouldn't care about

I don’t care if it’s traditional. It’s a “courtesy,” not a law.

The fact that a party’s nominees for president have been read in to national security briefings doesn’t mean Donald Trump should be. Not unless he, gods forbid, becomes “president” again,” in which case it won’t matter. It’d be game over for the U.S. and jubilee for Putin, Xi, Kim, Orbán, and MBS. It’d all be for sale. We might never know the price, but by then it’d be moot.

We’ve seen the carelessness with which he handles America’s secrets, and not just where he stores them after illegally retaining them. With enemy sources (NPR: tinyurl.com/oval4russia) and fans alike (Guardian: tinyurl.com/2share4u), he shared them like a teenager sexting to impress. Bad analogy, maybe, if what Stormy Daniels described is accurate. In any case, entrusting Trump with state secrets would hand him trading cards for Putin’s help. Again.

I don’t care what the judge had to say: Fani Willis’ affair with her lead prosecutor should never have led to court hearings, fancy vacations notwithstanding. Where’s the conflict of interest when they’re on the same case, working in the same direction? Granted, it was poor judgment, handled poorly. But in what way was the prosecution compromised? One certain thing, though, given the credible death threats she receives, enough that the FBI initiated extraordinary methods to ensure her safety, is that she’s very brave (RawStory; tinyurl.com/2protecther).

https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/schwab-taking-care-of-what-we-should-shouldnt-care-about/