Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

There are different rules for different folks

Classified documents found in Mar-a-Lago

Classifed documents were found in multiple locations in Mar-a-Lago, former President Donald Trump's home in Florida.

Justice Department

Nelson is a retired attorney and served as an associate justice of the Montana Supreme Court from 1993 through 2012.

An article caught my eye, and at first I read it as a simple news item, probably of not much interest to most people.

That is, until the irony hit me.

Here’s the story, as reported by CNN on Jan. 29:


The man who stole and leaked former President Donald Trump and thousands of others’ tax records has been sentenced to five years in prison.
[The 38-year-old defendant] pleaded guilty to one count of unauthorized disclosures of income tax returns. According to his plea agreement, he stole Trump’s tax returns along with the tax data of “thousands of the nation’s wealthiest people,” while working for a consulting firm with contracts with the Internal Revenue Service. ...
Judge Ana Reyes highlighted the gravity of the crime, saying multiple times that it amounted to an attack against the US and its legal foundation.
“What you did in attacking the sitting president of the United States was an attack on our constitutional democracy,” Reyes said. “We’re talking about someone who ... pulled off the biggest heist in IRS history.”

The judge compared the defendant’s actions to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, saying, “your actions were also a threat to our democracy.”

The defendant, Charles Littlejohn, accepted responsibility: “My actions undermine the fragile faith” in the government.

So, the defendant committed a crime (and tried to cover it up), was caught, accepted responsibility for his conduct, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to serve five years in prison.

Yes, justice was served. But here’s the irony.

As reported in various media, Donald Trump purloined and willfully retained hundreds of classified documents from the federal government when he left office in 2021, and then conspired to prevent their return to U.S. officials. These records contained national defense information, including a “plan of attack” prepared by the Pentagon that he shared with a publisher and writer. A month or so later at his Bedminster golf club, Trump showed a representative of a political action committee “a classified map related to a military operation.”

Trump was charged with over 30 felony counts of willful retention of national defense information, a violation of the Espionage Act. The charges are based on documents that the government says contain classified information ranging from top secret to secret, the two highest classification levels for national security information. Also charged was Trump’s valet, Walter Nauta, who faces several of the same charges as his boss, with whom he allegedly conspired to keep classified records and hide them from a federal grand jury.

Trump (who has been accused of instigating the Jan. 6 insurrection) has called the charges a “witch hunt.” He has never accepted responsibility for his conduct — the same sort of conduct that has landed military personnel and civilians in prison. And the judge in charge of Trump’s case (whom he appointed to the bench) has seemingly done everything possible to delay the trial and favor Trump over the government prosecutors.

The rule of law should apply equally to all who violate it. But, obviously, it doesn’t. Steal from the wealthy, you get nailed; if you’re wealthy and steal, well, that’s a witch hunt.

Abraham Lincoln believed that unpunished willful and repeated violations of the rule of law would destroy democracy. To protect the rule of law and support the Constitution was a sacred obligation of every citizen.

Indeed, Lincoln called for Americans to exercise “general intelligence, sound morality, and in particular, a reverence for the constitution and laws.”

He added” “Let reverence for the laws ... become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its altars.”

In other words, no different rules for different folks.


Read More

Man wearing Trump hat watches Trump on TV

Trump’s 10-to-1 rule aims to cut red tape, but fewer regulations can mean weaker food safety, Head Start services, and checks on presidential power.

Wu Xiaoling/Xinhua via Getty Images

Trump’s 10-to-1 Rule Gives the Presidency Too Much Power

We only think about the plumbing in our homes when something goes wrong. The same is true for government bureaucracy. Rules, procedures, and bureaucrats operate largely out of sight, making sure food is safe, Social Security checks arrive, workplaces are safe, and children with disabilities receive the services promised to them by law. Yes, there is plenty of red tape in government, just as an old house can accumulate pipes that no longer serve much purpose. But ripping out pipes simply because there are too many of them is not much of a plumbing strategy. Yet the Trump administration has made the number of federal regulations it eliminates a measure of success. That raises a more important question: When does cutting bureaucracy stop making government more efficient and start making it less capable?

1. The Case for Cutting Red Tape

Keep ReadingShow less
​Herbert Hoover  listening to a one valve radio set.

Herbert Hoover (1874 - 1964), Republican Party candidate for the Presidency of the United States of America, listening to a one valve radio set.

Topical Press Agency/Getty Images

A Second Axial Age Demands Global Leadership Rooted in Hoover’s Ideals

The time has come when we must take an enlarged vision of the future. (Herbert Hoover)

Our 31st President, Herbert Hoover, said this in 1926. Although one hundred years have passed since — and it is always time to take a larger view of the future — his proclamation rings truer now than ever.

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. President Donald Trump

U.S. President Donald Trump on October 16, 2026 in Palm Beach, Florida.

(Photo by Eric Lee/Getty Images)

Trump — President by Law, Not by Constitutional Duty

A president can win an election and still fail the test of leadership. The presidency is a public trust, not a personal platform, family enterprise, or license to demean people and disregard the law. Donald Trump holds the office legally. Yet his conduct raises a fundamental question: is he fulfilling the constitutional duties that give the presidency its meaning? The answer, visible in his behavior, is no. He performs the role of president the way a showman performs a part — loudly, aggressively, and without the substance the office requires.

Leadership is not conferred by a title; it is demonstrated through conduct. Ethical leadership requires integrity, honesty, sound judgment, and accountability. Moral leadership demands empathy, fairness, humility, and the courage to do what is right even when doing so carries a personal or political cost. When a president repeatedly demeans people, disregards established norms, and places personal interests above public duty, citizens have every reason to question his leadership — or whether he is leading at all.

Keep ReadingShow less