With Weiner and Huma, Democrats finally find a use for marriage

After decades of undermining the institution of marriage, have Democratic politicians finally found something they can like about it?

The idea springs to mind in the wake of the odd divorce of Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin, which was called off just as it appeared that Huma might be facing the long arm of the law for her role in transmitting classified information onto the computer of her pervy husband.  Sure, they say it's about the chilllllldren, but the marriage doesn't seem to be about love or anything – just keeping Huma out of the slammer.

According to the New York Post:

"He easily could be called in by a grand jury to testify against her so by dropping the lawsuit he can exercise the marital privilege," matrimonial lawyer Suzanne Bracker told The Post.

"When you're married to someone you cannot be compelled to testify against [him]."

A third attorney, Bonnie Rabin, said the "spousal privilege issue is out there considering the investigations."

Pretty interesting that they found three attorneys saying the exact same thing, and New York is not a city famous for its rock-ribbed Republicans.

The case is interesting because the same accusation has been leveled against Bill and Hillary Clinton, whose marriage seems to be a legal convenience as well.  In that case, both spouses were also facing legal sanction on corruption allegations, just as Abedin and Weiner have been.  And it's likely they share the same lawyers.

Now they're all together: Hillary, Bill, the mistresses, and maybe Huma.  Weiner and Abedin are together, too: Huma, Anthony, the sexting partners, and who knows?  Maybe Hillary.

What a splendid picture of family values these two pairs of Democratic beacons make for themselves.  They like marriage for the reason that it keeps them from testifying against each other in courts of law, keeping them out of jail.  The only thing left for them now is to sell it to the public, which must be laughing at the idea of these people either having to live with each other or else convince us that there's anything recognizably romantic in their marriages kept intact as legal hedges.

After decades of undermining the institution of marriage, have Democratic politicians finally found something they can like about it?

The idea springs to mind in the wake of the odd divorce of Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin, which was called off just as it appeared that Huma might be facing the long arm of the law for her role in transmitting classified information onto the computer of her pervy husband.  Sure, they say it's about the chilllllldren, but the marriage doesn't seem to be about love or anything – just keeping Huma out of the slammer.

According to the New York Post:

"He easily could be called in by a grand jury to testify against her so by dropping the lawsuit he can exercise the marital privilege," matrimonial lawyer Suzanne Bracker told The Post.

"When you're married to someone you cannot be compelled to testify against [him]."

A third attorney, Bonnie Rabin, said the "spousal privilege issue is out there considering the investigations."

Pretty interesting that they found three attorneys saying the exact same thing, and New York is not a city famous for its rock-ribbed Republicans.

The case is interesting because the same accusation has been leveled against Bill and Hillary Clinton, whose marriage seems to be a legal convenience as well.  In that case, both spouses were also facing legal sanction on corruption allegations, just as Abedin and Weiner have been.  And it's likely they share the same lawyers.

Now they're all together: Hillary, Bill, the mistresses, and maybe Huma.  Weiner and Abedin are together, too: Huma, Anthony, the sexting partners, and who knows?  Maybe Hillary.

What a splendid picture of family values these two pairs of Democratic beacons make for themselves.  They like marriage for the reason that it keeps them from testifying against each other in courts of law, keeping them out of jail.  The only thing left for them now is to sell it to the public, which must be laughing at the idea of these people either having to live with each other or else convince us that there's anything recognizably romantic in their marriages kept intact as legal hedges.