Here’s a question for GOP senators

A federal jury has convicted a Maine woman upset by Sen. Susan Collins’ vote for the Kavanaugh nomination for mailing a threatening letter to Collins containing a white power the letter claimed was anthrax (which actually was harmless starch). Collins never saw the letter because postal screeners intercepted it and turned it over it to the FBI. (Read story here.)

Here’s the question for the senators: Should the perpetrator get off with a light sentence or no sentence because her attempt to terrorize their colleague didn’t succeed?

With Democrats building an airtight case that Trump sought to bribe the Ukraine government to interfere in the 2020 election by withholding military aid, and Republicans’ process arguments falling apart, it’s becoming increasingly likely that Republican senators will argue that his conduct doesn’t justify removal from office because he didn’t get away with it. No harm, no foul, they’ll probably say.

But I’ll bet if you ask them what sentence this woman should get, they’ll say, “The max!!!” (And I wouldn’t necessarily disagree.)

If there’s one thing we’ve learned about Republicans, it’s they’re not consistent. A stark reminder of this is video of what staunch Trump defender Lindsey Graham said on the Senate floor when Bill Clinton was impeached (view it here).

Republicans are shameless hypocrites, and will continue to be so.

Photo: Sen. Collins was target of threatening letter 

2 Comments Add Yours ↓

  1. Mark Adams #

    She should get the same sentence she would get had she threatened a Democratic Senator. She can get up to 10 years and a $250,000 fine. What is the Prosecutor asking for? She did not plead out and many Federal judges tend to hand down heavier sentences when Defendants don’t roll over. Seems the Prosecutor had an airtight case, unless the appeals court has a sense of humor or feels the judge gives her an improper sentence.
    Representatives have yet to write up any articles of impeachment and have yet to state any Federal statute has been broken. The democrats are not going to be able to build an airtight case. Quid Pro Quo is the lifeblood of foreign policy. There is Biden doing the same thing the Democrats are accusing Trump of and in neither case is it going to be possible to determine that the sole reason for either the VP or Presidents actions is purely an improper act. In fact it is totally possible that motive does not matter, and the President can do what Trump did. At least when the Republicans impeached Andy Johnson they used an actual statute that the President knowingly and willfully broke. Only Republican Senators who disagreed with the impeachment saved the President and ended their own political careers believing the impeachment would have permanently damaged the office of President and made the President subservient to Congress, something the founders did not want. We are faced with the same situation should the House continue on the path they are on.
    And that part about bribes in the constitution is about receiving bribes. The President can make bribes, and the founders knew that getting other nations to do what we want the President may have to give inducements or hold up inducements. All part of the Presidents job. Though Washington preferred the White House on the hill he did of course use bribes when dealing with getting treaties with various Indian tribes and other nations.
    I think most Republicans (and Democratic) Senators would leave it up to the trial judge. Of course most of the 17 impeachments have been Federal Judges so the judge better not accept a bribe in this case.

  2. Roger Rabbit #

    You missed my point, Mark.

Your Comment