Conservative commentator JD Rucker recently criticized the conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 felony counts related to campaign finance violations, drawing parallels with Hillary Clinton’s actions in 2016. Rucker questioned the legitimacy of the charges against Trump and highlighted the double standards in how similar cases have been handled.
“For those who have been living under a rock, President Donald J. Trump has been convicted,” Rucker began. “There’s a big debate between the left and the right, Democrats and Republicans, talking heads on both sides. Is this legit? Is it real? Will he go to jail? What’s going to happen during the sentencing hearing? It’s all happening four days before the Republican National Convention, adding to the drama.”
Rucker noted that mainstream media and left-leaning commentators are uniform in their critique of Trump. “But when you listen to the Democrats, whether it’s not just Democrats, anybody in corporate media, anybody on the left in corporate media, they’re saying the same things all the panelists and guests, they’re saying the same things. They’re all saying one thing in particular. Okay, they’re all saying it’s, you know, because everybody’s asking, what’s the crime?”
Rucker pointed out the similarity between Trump’s case and Hillary Clinton’s actions in 2016. “You know, this is unprecedented, and nobody’s ever done that before. You know, take money and then the big thing, the thing that really they latch onto is that he labeled it as a legal expense, and that’s a lie. That’s a lie. Well, folks, if we really want to look at somebody who took something that was for their campaign and labeled it as a legal expense. We don’t have to go very far back. We can go well, 2016 and crooked, Hillary Clinton doing her thing. This is an article from the Associated Press. I’m not pulling this from Gateway Pundit or America First Report or anything like that. We’re pulling this from the Associated Press. ”
Rucker explained the hypocrisy in the treatment of Trump versus Clinton. “You might be thinking, well, that’s that sounds very familiar. As a matter of fact, that sounds so similar to what they’re accusing Trump of doing. But there’s a difference. What Trump was doing is something that he could have done, and probably would have done, regardless of whether he was running for office or not… Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, she was paying for the Steele dossier. The Steele dossier is not something that she would have gotten if she wasn’t running against President Trump. That was a direct, a direct attack on her political opponent that was super relevant. Where are the felony charges?”
Rucker highlighted how Clinton’s campaign classified the Steele dossier spending as legal services, the same label that Trump used for his payments. “According to this article, the Clinton campaign classified the spending as, wait for it, legal services, isn’t that? Is that why they’re trying to put Trump in jail? Because he paid his lawyer, paid, paid his lawyer, and labeled it as legal services.”
Rucker expressed frustration at the perceived double standard. “We do live in a clown world in many ways, and you don’t hear the people that are saying that Trump should go to jail, you know, because of these, these alleged felonies, these are the same people that would say that Hillary Clinton should not have gone to jail, and she did not and that her penalty may maybe they’ll even say that her penalty was too harsh. Oh, oh, she had to pay. All she was trying to do was save the country from Trump.”
Watch the full episode: