What Gene Rossi, a former federal prosecutor, is doing is essentially conceding the facts of the case (that Dugan did what she's alleged to have done) while trying to argue that it was improper for the Trump administration to arrest her because of the "spectacle."

Did Rossi ever make that case about any of the people around President Donald Trump who were frogmarched out of their homes by the Biden administration? Or what about Trump himself? If you're going to argue that judges deserve deference, didn't a then-former president deserve deference? Only now are these CNN flacks acting as if using measure exists, and that's a patently political complaint. //

JENNINGS: Let me tell you my view. The spectacle is important because the message has to be sent to everybody else, "We are not going to put up...you have been elected by people to uphold the law, and some of the laws that have been most flagrantly violated in his country are immigraiton laws. You've got to get on board with upholding all the laws. //

Yes, if the facts of this case are proven true, this judge committed a crime, but sending her to jail is only part of the equation. The other part is using her as an example and showing other judges and officials around the country that they will be treated just like every other alleged criminal if they break the law. There will be no special treatment. There will be no summons orders to avoid the cameras. //

Fishin'withFredo
2 hours ago
"Spectacle"? Let's not forget that this same network was CALLED and positioned by the feds to broadcast Roger Stone and his wife marched out of their home in cuffs at 0400.