Recently on the Liberty Report, Ron Paul and Daniel McAdams discussed the horrific Executive Order signed by President Trump that would allow the US government to freeze the US assets of individuals or corporations worldwide who have allegedly (without trial) violated "human rights" or have engaged in corruption.
Immediately some Trump supporters argued that the EO would be a way to go after Hillary and prosecute her. But as Dr. Paul and McAdams point out, if the Trump administration really wanted to go after Hillary, there are plenty of current laws she has likely broken that she could be prosecuted for without this new EO.
The new EO simply introduces a major new weapon the government can use against its enemies at any time--- any enemies. It is a dangerous expansion of government. Still, some attacked Ron Paul as being a purist because he objected to the evil EO.
They want to get Hillary that badly.
But why should we be against Hillary? It is because she was willing to expand and use government tools for abuse. Why would we want to create more tools for the next Hillary?
Hillary is a has been, as bad as she was, she is basically through. She is not going to run for office again. As things look, she is going to have trouble standing up for extended periods of time. She is now a nothing, perhaps a short-term footnote in history books but 10-years out maybe not even that.
She has no intellectual depth, there is not a chance she is going to motivate a new generation the way Ron Paul is with his Liberty Report. She is at this point nothing more than a crazy lady neighbor for those who live next to her.
Don't get me wrong. I would like to see Hillary tried convicted and put into a super-max. But I would also like to see that happen to Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan and Janet Yellen.
And these guys:
But I am not obsessing over past threats. Present threats are my top priority. President Trump is running a horrific foreign policy and he just nominated to the Fed an individual, Marvin Goodfriend, who is in a favor of negative interest rates.
But still, if I put up a negative tweet about has-been Hillary, it will get three to five times more views than a negative piece on Trump foreign policy. There is something wrong with this. There seems to be a pathological obsession with Hillary haters.
As I say, I am all for prosecuting her--but not if it means expanding government power. Let's keep our priorities straight.
Ron Paul is correct, the expansion of government is a dangerous threat, including the executive order.
But lets, not get obsessed with a has been. If she is tried and convicted, great, but I am not giving her much thought compared to clear and present dangers.
Reprinted with permission from Target Liberty.