That, however, is not what we’re talking about. Here, we are talking about a very peculiar situation: The law in question — seditious conspiracy — requires prosecutors to establish a particular purpose of hostility toward the government; yet in this instance, the top official of the government convinced the people who used force that resistance was needed against elected officials and political operatives who were trying to destroy the government. Clearly, the incumbent Democratic administration wants for political purposes to portray what happened as “sedition,” but why — when there are plenty of serious, straightforward offenses to charge — would prosecutors complicate matters by charging sedition against people who can legitimately say they were trying to protect the government at the president’s behest?

The best option would be to avoid that charge. Instead, the Justice Department seems to think it can square the circle by pretending, as its press release announcing James’s guilty plea does, that President Trump’s conduct was irrelevant. You know: If we don’t mention him, maybe the problem will go away.

That and, of course, they’ve now got a guilty plea.