This, from Eli Lake, on Mike Flynn’s departure is really a must read and raises some disturbing questions partisans might not want to consider.
In normal times, the idea that U.S. officials entrusted with our most sensitive secrets would selectively disclose them to undermine the White House would alarm those worried about creeping authoritarianism. Imagine if intercepts of a call between Obama’s incoming national security adviser and Iran’s foreign minister leaked to the press before the nuclear negotiations began? The howls of indignation would be deafening.
I have noticed this pattern too. Take, for example, the Ninth Circuit decision. People are cheering on the decision without considering the basis for it. It is actually a disturbing thing that a court would issue an injunction without an appeal to statutory authority while making its foundations an unelected candidate’s campaign promises.
There are a lot of people taking advantage of the huge partisan divide to do things now knowing they’ll be cheered on because of outcomes when the process matters and precedents are being set.