Summary

These five names represent people who have been much in the news, in part due to alleged crimes. Unless you count OJ’s conviction for stealing sports memorabilia, none were convicted in criminal court.

They also represent the sad state of affairs in American politics, and gross imbalances in our vaunted system of justice and highly touted national meritocracy.

For the next 10 minutes, we will talk about imbalances in our politics, justice system and merit system.

Continuing

Let’s start this conversation with what our roles are in all of these instances. Yes, everyone knows that both OJ and Jussie are guilty. There is abundant evidence, including eyewitnesses and mounds of corroborating testimony and other evidence to remove any rational doubt. OJ was let off after committing two murders by a clearly biased jury. But we, all of us, including the jury, know that OJ is an unconvicted double murderer. After the trial, Johnny Cochrane, OJ’s defense attorney, was asked if justice was black or white, referring to race, not clarity. His answer, “Justice has a color, and it is green.”

Jussie was let off after being charged with 16 felonies by an apparently rogue Chicago prosecutor. As I write this podcast, an enraged Chicago Major and Police Superintendent are both calling Jussie a liar. Both are furious that Jussie continues to throw the Chicago Police Department under the bus by continuing to maintain his innocence.

And we also know that Brett (Kavanaugh, in case you forgot) was defending himself against an uncorroborated accusation. There was even testimony that conflicted with his accuser’s claims. Yet one side of the political aisle wanted his head.

Donald was investigated for the better part of two years, with the Special Counsel using every tool available to his powerful office. The result, as summarized by the US Attorney General, was that Donald did not collude with a foreign power to tilt a Presidential election, and there was no conclusion on obstructing justice. Has Donald, The Donald, done other things outside of what he was investigated for that could be worthy of criticism? Yes, but my guess is that so have all the others on today’s list, including Hillary. But let’s stick to what we know.

Oh, yes, Hillary. We all know that she spent considerable time and expense to be able to have her own local server, instead of having the State Department’s IT folks take care of her. And as the head of the State Department, she would have been well taken care of; likely better and faster than handling it on her own. With 24/7 online help and IT people who would have been more than happy to show up in person at any time. And we all know that Hillary erased tens of thousands of emails, using specialized techniques to insure they could not be recovered as is usually the case with computer erasures. Isn’t it clear to all of us that the only reason anyone would bother with the cost and inconvenience of having one’s own server, rather than using the one at work where you are the boss, would be to maintain privacy, including being able to permanently erase information?

In each case, all five names, it is easy to see money and influence raising its ugly head, unfairly affecting the outcomes. Money and influence got OJ and Jussie off the hook, and seems to be protecting Hillary. Money and influence almost derailed, Brett. And I see it on both sides of Donald’s investigation by the Special Counsel.

Today’s Key Point: As important as it is, today’s key point is not the massive and unfair advantage conferred by money and influence; it is our role in all of these examples--and our role in how we allow ourselves to be governed. We, you and I, are responsible for whatever negatives are represented in Donald’s investigation, Jussie and OJ going scot free,