Montana's Attorney General, Austin Knudsen, is currently under indictment for 41 counts of professional misconduct. The initiators of the lawsuit would have us believe that the timing, during his reelection campaign, is purely coincidental. Just like filing charges against Donald Trump, while he was a leading candidate for president, was coincidental. Either I am privileged to live in a time of amazing coincidences, or somebody is lying. Since I am also privileged not to be personally acquainted with many lawyers, I cannot speak to the legitimacy of the charges against Knudsen, but based on the original recommendation of punishment by a letter of censure, they are probably charges that could be pressed against any practicing attorney who strayed into the wrong political crosshairs.
But I do believe Knudsen is guilty of two crimes--1. He questioned the impartiality of the Montana Supreme Court, which was totally inappropriate because of his position as Attorney General; and completely unnecessary because most Montanans already knew they were not impartial. 2. His other crime is being a conservative in liberal occupied territory. Montana is blessed right now to enjoy leadership of Christian conservatives, Gov. Greg Gianforte and Sen. Steve Daines, but if Helena's capitol building leaned as far left as the officials inside it, it would have toppled over decades ago.
The kitchen sink assortment of charges against Knudsen is our local rendition of what has been happening to Donald Trump for months now. Trump's opponents have vilified and/or ridiculed him for describing the prosecution against him a witch hunt, but it's too late to obfuscate, too many of us know a witch hunt when we see one.
How to Spot a Witch Hunt
Are there over 6 charges?
Murderers typically have 3-4 charges against them. Mass murderers will have many counts against them, but the same few charges. Filing dozens of charges is not prosecutable, reeks of desperation, and uses the courts not only as a weapon, but as a sawed off shotgun.
Is the person being charged running for office?
Those running for office are in the prime hunting grounds for a witch hunt.
Can these unproven charges be used in future smear campaigns?
Definitely. For instance, although it certainly looks suspicious that Zinke acquired 18 charges against him while in office, it also looks suspicious that none of them were pursued. Proof, who knew?
Have some of the charges already been disqualified for prosecution?
Most attorneys might consider having the Supreme Court disqualify some of their charges a clue that it is time to take a long recess, but not Jack Smith. Speaking of tenacity, months ago the Attorneys General (yes, I know it looks awkward, but that is the correct grammar) from several Blue states attempted to remove Trump from their state ballots because he had committed insurrection. Apparently, none of these lawyers were briefed by their staff, barber, or parking lot attendant that not only was Trump not found guilty of insurrection, he was never charged with it.
Is the individual bringing the charges staking their entire political future on a guilty verdict?
Desperation is the shortcut to dishonesty.
Are the prosecutor and judge related to one another by blood, marriage, money or lust?
If you followed the news at all in the past few months, you know this is not a theoretical question.
Halloween will soon be upon us. Witch costumes will be in demand. But if people want an outfit that is really scary, they should put on their best suit, carry a briefcase, and go as a witch hunter.