Who is “Below the Law?”

“I don’t know who needs to hear this, but the president is not above the law.”

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) June 3, 2019

The Law

“Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—

  1. concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
  2. concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
  3. concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
  4. obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”
That’s the law — 18 U.S. Code § 798 — regarding the handling of classified information: the Law. By any understanding of that law and the penalty for breaking the law, when someone does so, their doing so is a heinous act against the U.S. Government that in doing so allows someone — anyone — to access potentially serious national information that could be damaging to the United States in any number of ways.

“Anyone:” Then there’s former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

(Follow along very carefully these next sentences:)

  • According to documents, Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy pressured a senior FBI official into de-classifying emails sent from Hillary Clinton’s illegal private server. The FBI official notes that Kennedy contacted the organization to ask for the change in classification in “exchange for a ‘quid pro quo.’ More specifically, “State would reciprocate by allowing the FBI to place more agents in countries where they are presently forbidden,” according to a conversation relayed by The Weekly Standard‘s Stephen Hayes. The FBI did not take Kennedy up on his offer.
  • Despite initial denials from the State Department, this exchange is entirely plausible. For one, State had plenty of expertise in the deployment of quid pro quo during Hillary’s years of enriching her family foundation by trading government access. Moreover, a senior FBI official has a lot less reason to fabricate a conversation about favor trading than a Clinton functionary has to pressure a senior FBI official into saving Hillary from criminal prosecution.
  • “Classification is an art, not a science, and individuals with classification authority sometimes have different views,” a State Department spokesperson said. No doubt this is true. So why did Kennedy wait until a criminal investigation was well underway to ask law enforcement to scrutinize that particular document at that particular time? Is it customary for undersecretaries of State to ask the FBI to alter the classifications of documents that just happen to protect political candidates at the center of a politically explosive investigation? Did Kennedy — a man who owes his high position to the Clintons — engage in this conversation on his own? Was he asked to do it? For months, law enforcement had attempted to contact him, and he ignored their inquiries. Why, according to FBI documents, did Kennedy only reach out to make this request?
  • What’s even more curious is that FBI Director James Comey didn’t consider this event — or, for that matter, the litany of other actions Clinton’s lackeys took to protect her — as a sign that there was, at the very least, an intent to influence the investigation. This is, of course, was just one revelation in the Hillary email scandal. It’s worth remembering that the illegal email setup was only inadvertently discovered through a congressional investigation into Benghazi. The server itself existed to evade transparency.
  • When caught, Hillary alleged that she “never sent any classified material nor received any marked classified.” This turned out to be a lie. Hillary claimed before becoming secretary she had merely wanted only one device “for convenience.” This turned out to be a lie. The FBI found that Clinton “used numerous mobile devices,” not to mention servers. Clinton — the most competent person to ever run for president, according to Barack Obama — claimed she didn’t understand how classified markings work. This was also a lie.
  • According to the FBI, Hillary sent 110 emails containing clearly marked classified information. Thirty-six of these emails contained secret information. Eight of those email chains contained “top secret” information. “We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account,” Comey said at his press conference in July of 2016. He acknowledged this could have happened because Hillary and her staff were “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” He also admitted that no competent foreign power would have left behind evidence of this hack.

Yet, for some reason, Comey would not admit that this is why U.S. Code makes mishandling information — not the intent of those mishandling it — illegal.

Those who ran Clinton’s server attempted to destroy evidence — government documents — after The New York Times reported on her wrongdoing. Probably another coincidence. Not that intent mattered to Comey, either. Before the FBI even cracked open their laptops, the Justice Department proactively gave immunity to the five people who could have testified that Hillary was lying. (One of these people, Cheryl Mills, later acted as Hillary’s lawyer.) The two Clinton aides with the most intimate knowledge about her email conniving were also given side deals.

Does anyone besides me see any conflict in the happenings detailed above and what Ms. Clinton said in her speech on Monday of this week and in her tweet: “…the president is not above the law?”

Then There’s Congress

Everyone knows that it takes an impeachment proceeding initiated from the House Judiciary Committee in the House of Representatives, then with that committee’s referral to the floor of the House followed by a successful House vote to impeach to start that process. If and when that occurs, the matter is turned over to the Senate for an actual trial on the merits. Obviously, much debate ensues during an actual trial. At the conclusion, the Senate votes on the charges. If two-thirds of the Senators vote to confirm the House resolution for impeachment, the President is convicted and removed from office.

We want to note here: there’s a process — a Constitutional process. That process requires charges, evidence of violation by the President of U.S. Constitutional mandate that states in Article II, Section 4: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

There’s a Constitutional process for impeaching the President, Vice President, and other “civil officers of the United States.” Certainly, Americans support everything within the Constitution, right? But let’s see what longtime Democrat and Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz has to say about what is being threatened by House Democrats right now:

“The mantra invoked by those Democrats who are seeking to impeach President Trump is that ‘no one is above the law.’ That, of course, is true, but it is as applicable to Congress as it is to the president. Those members of Congress who are seeking to impeach the president, even though he has not committed any of the specified impeachable offenses set out in the Constitution, are themselves seeking to go above the law.

All branches of government are bound by the law. Members of Congress, presidents, justices and judges must all operate within the law. All take an oath to support the Constitution, not to rewrite it for partisan advantage.

It is the law that exempts presidents from being prosecuted or impeached for carrying out their constitutional authority under Article 2. The same Constitution precludes members of Congress from being prosecuted for most actions taken while on the floor of the House and Senate or on the way to performing their functions. The Constitution, which is the governing law, precludes Congress from impeaching a president for mere “dereliction” of duty or even alleged ‘corruption.’ Under the text of the Constitution, a president’s actions to be impeachable must consist of treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Consider Rep. Maxine Waters, (D-CA), who has said the following:

Congressman Waters said this the other day: “Impeachment is about whatever the Congress says it is. There is no law that dictates impeachment.”

It is she, and other like-minded members of Congress, who are claiming the right to be above the law. That is a dangerous claim whether made by a president or by a member of Congress.

So Hillary, members of Congress, and most in the Mainstream Media are claiming they are above the Law, who then would be considered to be below the law?

The answer to that is simple: anyone who disagrees with anything any member of the Democrat ruling “Elitist-ocracy” is certainly below the Law and obviously unworthy of the consideration of “Equal justice under the Law.” Who throughout history are some of those “folks?”

  • All those who fled the repression of European elitist members of the Ruling Class who considered anyone not deemed to be eligible for membership in their groups to be less than worthy of “Equal justice under the Law;”
  • African-American men, women, and children who were taken by slave traders in Northern Africa and sold in America had no rights and were certainly less than worthy of “Equal justice under the Law;”
  • Today’s working-class Americans who don’t live and work in Coastal American states or those several interior states comprised of like-minded elites who have garnered favor from the political elite “Overclass” are less than worthy of “Equal justice under the Law;”
  • According to Hillary and other Dems, everyone who did NOT vote for Hillary in 2016 but chose Mr. Trump instead is not only ineligible for “Equal Justice under the Law,” but are reprehensible human beings and deserve no consideration of the benefits of simply being Americans.

Summary

I know this may seem harsh today. But it is time for Americans to wake up and realize liberty and justice for all is about to be “liberty and justice for only an elite few.” And regardless of what the pundits on the Left want all to believe, those elites are NOT the current inhabitants of the White House. They are led by the defeated 2016 presidential candidate and all those who had surreptitiously created, implemented, and maintained her path to the White House so as to cover-up all the wrongdoing committed by her team and others comprised by a large number of very important government officials.

Even in the aftermath of two years of an exhaustive investigation into ridiculous allegations against this president, his staff, family, and many friends, those Elitists still shout in anger threats against all of those who are “below the Law” that support the duly elected president and the Rule of Law.

I never in my wildest dream we would ever see a day like this today. But it’s true: for at least the eight years of the Obama Administration, evil and deviousness ran rampant through the Capital and the Department of Justice in D.C. And the U.S. government was nothing more than a piggy bank for Elitists to tap for their evildoing. Taxpayers paid every dime for what they did. And our children will continue to pay that bill.

Play

Criminal Justice Inequities

The United States has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world. At the end of 2015, around 6.7 million individuals were under the supervision of U.S. adult correctional systems. While this number is lower than past years, prisoners in the United States still make up around 22 percent of the world’s prisoners, despite the country making up only 5 percent of the world’s population.

Why the big difference? One reason is that private prisons are big business in the United States. Although the Department of Justice has recently been in favor of reducing or eliminating dependence on prison contractors, private prisons continue to win new contracts due to the increased emphasis on incarceration that comes from initiatives like the war on drugs or the recent crackdown on undocumented immigration.

This increased emphasis on incarceration in the criminal justice system targets poor and non-white populations, creating a kind of social class structure where certain population groups are much more likely to be incarcerated. Let’s call this process “Social Stratification.”

What Is Social Stratification?

Social stratification exists in every society to some degree or another. Simply put, social stratification is the arrangement of different population groups into social tiers that create dominant and sub-dominant groups within a society. “Its basis consists of an unequal distribution of rights and privileges, duties and responsibilities, social values, social power and influences among the members of society,” according to Sociology Guide.

Within a stratified society, dominant social groups share increased advantages and privileges that sub-dominant social groups do not. This often means that sub-dominant groups experience hardship and inequality that more dominant groups do not because of their higher status on the social ladder.

Income Insecurity and Social Mobility

According to the Stanford Center on Poverty & Inequality, income inequality both contributes to and results from social inequality in many different ways.

  • CEOs were paid 185 times more money than the average production worker in 2009, a disparity that has grown more pronounced over time.
  • More than 750,000 Americans are homeless. African-Americans, people with disabilities and veterans make up a disproportionately high percentage of this number.
  • Women earn about 80 percent of what men earn for the same job, and many of the highest-paying jobs in the United States go primarily to men.
  • As of 2007, 73.1 percent of the wealth in the United States was concentrated among the top 10 percent of the population, and the bottom 60 percent held only 4.2 percent of the nation’s wealth.

These stark contrasts have increased over time, making it much more difficult for disadvantaged groups to gain ground. In 1980, the top-earning 1 percent of the U.S. population earned, on average, $428,000 per year; in 2016, that number was closer to $1.3 million. The poorest 50 percent of the population earned, on average, $16,000 per year in 1980; this hasn’t changed since then.

When combined with the cost of living, the growing economic inequality reinforces social stratification and makes increasing social and economic status extremely difficult for disadvantaged people. According to a study by the Economic Policy Institute, the average working family needs an annual income of $48,778 to meet its budget, which primarily consists of basic living expenses like housing, food, child care, transportation, healthcare and so on. Around 30 percent of families do not earn enough money to be above the average budget line. Of these families, the majority are made up of “young families, larger families, urban families, families headed by a non-college-educated person, and minority families,” the study found. More than 50 percent of African-American and Hispanic families fall below the budget line.

The Criminal Justice System and Social Stratification

This is where the American Criminal Justice System gets dicey. Because certain populations are forced into positions of social inequality, crime becomes more common within those populations. “Most inmates are minority men under age 40 ‘whose economic opportunities have suffered the most over the last 30 or 40 years. Incarceration in the United States is socially concentrated among very disadvantaged people,’” says U.S. News & World Report. In the United States, the people most likely to commit crimes are “people without education, jobs, housing, or hope,” U.S. News explains. This is further complicated by the fact that people from disadvantaged populations are frequently given harsher sentences than those from dominant populations for the same crimes.

Think about this: Retainers for felony crime cases start around $5,000-$10,000 but can be $25,000 or more for serious cases. Private criminal legal representation is literally out of reach and unattainable for most who fall into an average working family category or below. Because of the high cost of securing “better” or “best” legal representation in such cases, public defense is most often the only option.

Public defense is not in itself necessarily bad or of poor quality. But many who serve in this capacity are just beginning a criminal defense career or are assigned a certain percentage of indigent cases they are required to work. The volume of cases and low public defense budgets obviously water down capabilities of providing “better” or “best” defense for those charged who lack sufficient financial resources to obtain private representation.

Current examples are what occurred in Washington in the Mueller investigation of Russian collusion during the 2016 election. Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was literally forced to plead guilty to one federal charge against him because he could not afford continually mounting legal bills to continue his defense. His legal costs? Estimated $500,000.

Former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe although not charged in the case used a GoFundMe campaign to raise funds for his almost-certain criminal defense if/when he is charged. By no means is McCabe poor are indigent. But estimates for his defense are from $500,000 to $750,000.

These are unusual examples of political and very public criminal cases either underway or pending and are not typical of what everyday Americans face in the criminal justice system. But it is not uncommon for a criminal case in which a defendant who has a criminal record and who is subsequently charged with one or more felonies to face a $100,000 defense bill if able to retain a private criminal attorney. There is very little hope for a person of average or below income to find defense other than through public defender representation.

Multiple offenders — no matter the seriousness of previous crimes — suffer disproportionately in the criminal justice system, simply because of their past brushes with the Law. Inmates and ex-convicts are themselves, a disadvantaged population. Once a person has a criminal record, it’s easy for potential employers to access that information on the internet and deny jobs because of it. This makes it difficult for those who have criminal records to find jobs that pay enough.

What Can We Do?

Correcting this social stratification effect in the criminal justice system is no easy task. Those without enough money to meet their basic needs are often likely to have inadequate healthcare, little access to quality education and limited access to jobs that pay well. Simply put, disadvantaged populations frequently don’t have access to the tools necessary to reduce or eliminate that disadvantage, and many of them become involved in the criminal justice system as a result.

Prior to President Lyndon Johnson’s term in the White House, “many federal programs had emphasized crime prevention,” according to U.S. News. Urban recreational centers, social workers and probation officers were all emphasized as ways to reduce crime. As these programs were gradually defunded, policy turned more toward incarceration, and profit-driven private prisons capitalized on that decision.

Many solutions have been proposed, and it’s possible that, with a concerted effort to correct the societal problems that contribute to social stratification, the United States can reduce its reliance on incarceration in the criminal justice system.

The “New” Crime Bill: A Good Start

Donald Trump in December of 2018 signed into law the First Step Act prison and sentencing reform bill with strong bipartisan support.

“The First Step Act will make communities SAFER and SAVE tremendous taxpayers dollars,” the president said in a statement. “It brings much-needed hope to many families during the holiday season.”

The result of coalition-building in a partisan political climate, First Step earned support from politicians as diverse as senators Kamala Harris and Ted Cruz, and from advocacy groups including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Fraternal Order of Police.

Trump’s strong support was largely seen as a result of the involvement of his son-in-law and top adviser Jared Kushner. At the signing ceremony, he thanked Kushner personally.

Of prisoners who could not advocate for themselves from behind bars, Kushner said: “We were their lobbyists.”

The act expands rehab opportunities, increases “good time”-served credits for most federal prisoners, reduces mandatory minimum sentences for a number of drug-related crimes and formally bans some correctional practices including the shackling of pregnant women.

“This bill could have died a dozen different deaths,” said Van Jones, co-founder of advocacy group #cut50, which was integral in the bill’s design. “But the broad coalition that came together to pass it refused to give up.”

Jones, a frequent outspoken critic of Trump on his CNN show, added: “Many have seen their loved ones sent to prison or were incarcerated themselves. For all of us, this fight was deeply personal.”

Early critics of the bill, such as New Jersey senator Corey Booker and the ACLU, who felt that the legislation did not go far enough, came around in large part due to major additions to the House version of the bill by the Senate, which added language on sentencing reform. The first House version only contained reforms on the way inmates are treated in prison.

In exchange, progressive reformers had to accept a number of changes to which prisoners will be eligible for benefits under the act, based on the crime for which they were convicted. The sentencing reforms were also mostly not made retroactive, meaning they do not apply to inmates already sentenced.

“The First Step Act is by no means perfect,” said Jesselyn McCurdy, deputy director of the Washington legislative office at the ACLU. “But we are in the midst of a mass incarceration crisis, and the time to act is now. We applaud the bipartisan group of senators who were willing to listen to advocates.”

Summary

On a personal note: My son was incarcerated twice in his late teens — not as one would suspect for drug offenses, but for making some crazy financial decisions. His second time, we refrained from retaining private representation for him, forcing him to use a public defender. The experience was horrifying. It almost goes without saying that his public defender had a case log that was far too large to allow effective and thorough representation for most of his clients. And most of those clients were charged with far more serious things than simple forgery as was our son.

I will never forget the day in court when my wife and I walked in for his sentencing. The judge was an old family friend and knew us and our son. We anxiously sat as several other convicted individuals stood for their sentencing. The case immediately before our son’s was that of a 3-time drug offender who had been caught with 2 pounds of heroin in his car. In Louisiana, there is a “3 strikes and your out” law that meant this convicted offender would receive a life sentence. To our surprise, the judge sentenced him to a $3000 fine and time served. (he had been in jail for 90 days) Our son who had to plead guilty to two counts of forgery (he had stolen my mother’s personal checks and cashed them with forged information on them) was sentenced to 3 years in prison! Why did the drug trafficker receive such a light sentence and our son the most severe? The drug offender was offered a deal: he would NOT serve time, this his 3rd felony would be expunged from his record if he would give investigators the names of all those who he worked for, who were REAL drug traffickers!

We feel that — certainly in Louisiana — the criminal justice system is broken.

The First Step Act is a good start on repairing a long-broken system: criminal justice. For far too long, social stratification explained above has devastated American families who are most prone to be targeted in the criminal justice system. This bill signed into law must be just the beginning. Those caught up in the “System” have for decades watched as they become victims of a process that is supposed to guarantee “equal justice under the law.” But it has been anything but that.

Where do we go next? Is there enough support to take on the fight to see The First Step Act as just the “first step” towards righting the ship of Equal Justice in America? Only time will answer those questions. But one thing is already clear: Donald Trump really is able to find consensus among opposing party members and achieve realistic objectives that really do make sense and are bi-partisan. Being able to do that in this highly charged partisan atmosphere in Washington is a miracle. But it needs to be nothing more than the “first step.” We’ll declare victory in the war on crime in the U.S. when we find ourselves researching The Tenth or Fifteenth Step Act.

Play

Mueller: “I Will Take President Trump Down!”

It’s on. Clearly, in the aftermath of the Friday release of Mueller’s reports of at least his partial finding against Paul Manafort and the President’s former attorney Michael Cohen, it is now clear: Special Counsel Robert Mueller has one and only one person in his sights: President Donald Trump.

Today instead of getting down in the dirt with nitty-gritty details contained in those reports and what they mean, we’ll “bullet point” details of those documents and will — in the Summary — give you our observations. Let’s get right to it:

Robert Mueller

  • Mueller has now made it clear to all, his target is the President himself. Many wondered why he so viciously attacked Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort in the investigation and with the serious charges made against both that could put Manafort in jail for the rest of his life and Cohen for quite a few years. Mueller in Friday’s releases did, however, through a heavily redacted portion of the Cohen report, make it clear that he is looking for more from Cohen. The redactions of specific information could be for one thing and one thing only: Mueller did NOT want Cohen to see what the Mueller team has on him that they have not yet used. That means they still have those at their disposal to get more from Cohen to allow them to hit the bullseye: the President.
  • Russian Collusion? It looks like there is “no there-there.” Although Mueller is still pressuring Manafort and Cohen for facts about Trump team members to tie the President and/or his campaign to the Russians, the fact that nothing about that was included in the reports leads me to believe he has not put anything together implicating the Trump Organization in Russian collusion. However, he left that door open.
  • I would be remiss if I did not point out the obvious conflicts of interest held by Mueller in this entire case. The day before accepting appointment by President Trump to be the Special Counsel, Mueller along with Rod Rosenstein sat in the Oval Office purportedly to interview with the President for fired FBI Director James Comey’s job. But the most obvious Mueller conflicts that (according to the Special Counsel statute) disqualify him from service in any government investigative capacity are the multiple personal relationships with those either acting as witnesses or active participants in the investigation — like James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, and many others.

Rod Rosenstein

  • Rosenstein drafted and sent a letter to the President and to Attorney General Jeff Sessions recommending the firing of James Comey for a multitude of infractions committed while FBI Director. There are numerous questions that Rosenstein’s actions bring to this discussion: Why would Rosenstein join Mueller to petition the President to hire Mueller? Mueller had already termed-out as FBI Director and was ineligible. And then why would he a day later appoint Mueller to serve as Special Counsel? Why hasn’t Rosenstein recused himself for conflicts he certainly holds?
  • Talk about conflict of interest: Conflicts? Rosenstein — because of conflicts — should not have even appointed Mueller. Why? Rosenstein is Mueller’s boss in this entire thing. And Rosenstein previously worked for Mueller AND Comey! Rosenstein certainly should have immediately recused himself from the Deputy Attorney General post and should not have even considered the Mueller appointment because of conflict. Think of all the witnesses that the Mueller team has used in this proge. Almost all worked with or for Rosenstein at some point. And he’s the one who wrote the letter advising the President to fire Comey in which he in detail listed the reasons for Comey’s termination.
  • Remember Rosenstein’s letter sent to Mueller with the terms of his role and what he should and was allowed to do as Special Counsel? It was specifically to investigate alleged collusion between the Russians and the Trump Campaign for the specific purpose to impact the results of the 2016 election for Trump’s benefit. But — with no fanfare, press release, or public notice and after Mueller launched his probe into Trump obstruction of justice — that letter from Rosenstein to Mueller was amended. The “new” version includes the phrase to include authorization for Mueller to investigate any possible illegal actions which were discovered in the collusion investigation. If court tested, much of the Mueller investigation will probably be thrown out because it was initiated BEFORE authorization from the DOJ was given. (We’ll watch that closely)

Paul Manaforte

  • Manafort cut several deals with the Mueller team to get a better deal. But consistently Mueller has piled on charge after charge, stiffening Manafort’s recommended sentences for lack of cooperation and even taking action for Manafort to be held in jail without bail during this entire mess. Why is that?

     Paul Manafort
  • Mueller — even though cutting deals with Manafort — is apparently angry that Manafort has not given Mueller what he wants. There is something else Mueller is looking for, and he’s certain Manafort has it but is holding it back. That’s why Mueller has added more and more in the way of charges, trying to ratchet up pressure on the former campaign manager.
  • Mueller feels strongly whatever the missing piece or pieces in the puzzle to unmask Trump wrongdoing is in the possession of Paul Manafort. Mueller still has the door open for Manafort, which means there’s something else he wants or needs and will continue to work on Manafort until he gets it from him. Stay tuned for that.
  • Mueller also knows that Manafort is at the front of the line for a presidential pardon. Recently, President Trump when asked by reporters said a Manafort pardon is “still on the table.” That may have been stated by the President as a message to Manafort being dangled like an apple: a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Michael Cohen

  • Ever wonder why Mueller turned over his case for prosecution of Michael Cohen to the prosecutors in the Southern District of New York? His reasoning is now crystal clear. Mueller messed up with Manafort. All of the actions the Mueller team has taken and will take against Paul Manafort have and will be made at the federal level. Cohen’s are too, but the criminal actions allegedly committed by Cohen happened in New York state and broke identical or similar New York state laws. Though state charges have not been filed, it is clear that should President Trump pardon Cohen, such a pardon would apply only to the federal crimes to which Cohen has pleaded. After such a pardon, it is likely that New York state’s attorney general would then file state charges for the infractions already admitted to by Cohen. No presidential pardon would be available regarding any state charges.
  • It seems that the Mueller case against Cohen is incomplete. Yet Mueller keeps cranking on Cohen, apparently trying to obtain more evidence of Trump wrongdoing. If that was not true, why would the court categorically deny Cohen’s plea for his sentencing to include no jail time? What could that “evidence” be Mueller is looking for? In the report released on Friday, Mueller accused Cohen of being a “non-cooperative” witness, even though Cohen has provided a multitude of information to the Mueller team. What’s left that Cohen could provide? The Mueller team needs Cohen to validate their belief that President Trump aggressively pursued obstruction of justice. Think about it: the Friday report stated Cohen alleged the President not only knew about the payoff Cohen made to the two porn stars who claimed they had affairs with Donald Trump, Cohen claimed the President asked him to hide the fact that he knew. If that Cohen claim is valid, it could possibly implicate the President for obstruction of justice.
  • Cohen is a liar. Mueller and his team have caught Cohen in numerous lies retracted later when confronted with facts. How will that factor into this entire case? (See details in the Summary below)

Summary

Where is this investigation going? What will be the end result? Who is “in the weeds” driving this attack on President Trump? Why hasn’t Congress stepped in to impact this charade underway at the expense of the American people?

If it is true that the Department of Justice and everyone in that department who work in the Executive Branch — one of the three branches of U.S. government authorized in the Constitution — doesn’t the Deputy Attorney General (Rod Rosenstein) and the Special Counsel (Robert Mueller) work for the DOJ and therefore work at the behest of the head of the Executive Branch? Who is the head of the Executive Branch? President Donald Trump.

If it is true that all departments in the government created by the Constitution are required to divulge details of all of their operations to the U.S. Congress, why has Congress not stepped in to control this runaway Special Counsel investigation that is full of conflicts of interest, illegal activities by employees, and multiple examples of obstruction of justice?

There is much to still be learned about what Mueller is doing and why. But it is becoming crystal clear: Mueller’s target is President Trump. But who would want to take down this President with the amazing accomplishments the nation has witnessed during just the first year plus of his administration? Economically the country is zooming forward, employment, new corporate investment, the greatest tax revenue in U.S. history even AFTER the middle class tax cuts, foreign leaders standing in line to meet with and negotiate international trade deals with our president, and the first legitimate presidential push to secure our nation’s borders to keep terrorists out and also those who want to enter the country illegally strictly for government assistance for life. How is any of that worthy to open a door for kicking Mr. Trump out of the White House?

Let’s be clear: none of this has anything to do with Donald Trump! He just happens to, unfortunately, be the guy who beat “THEIR” candidate for president — Hillary Rodham Clinton. The fact is that there really is a Deep State comprised of foreigners, American politicians, political contributors, lobbyists, and others who have created and perpetrated their operations for decades to control every aspect of American life. And President Trump is a “fly in their ointment.” He spoiled their party. They are committed to doing ANYTHING to regain the control they lost with the Trump presidency.

You see, he is independent of the special interests that have run the government for decades. He is politically obligated to no one. They are in a frenzy.

How to get rid of him? Find or create dirt sufficient to run him out of office.

They are wailing and gnashing their teeth in the realization that THERE’S NO LEGITIMATE DIRT ON PRESIDENT TRUMP! So what do they do? Create something — anything — to use to justify sending him packing.

Enter Robert Mueller.

I will not waste your time listing the people formerly in government, currently, in government, those fired or forced to retire, titans in industry and corporate giants who are implicated as part of this now front-and-center task to rid themselves of this president who refuses to become a pawn of the Deep State.

So here’s how this will all play out in coming days:

  1. Mueller will probably sometime in January 2019 issue his “official” report to the Attorney General and to Congress, detailing the first part of his findings in this probe. In spite of what many have said, I believe strongly the Mueller probe will continue for some time after that. Mueller will exhaust every resource given to him by the American people in this probe — unlimited dollars — to find or create sufficient “evidence” to destroy President Trump.
  2. Mueller and his team will continue to increase their pressure on Cohen and Manafort to push them to provide either actual facts against Trump or even create some. It is so ridiculous how rabid Mueller is at this point, it is believable that he can and will force Cohen and Manafort to actually create fake evidence sufficient to implicate the President, members of his campaign, but especially his family members. Mueller has already shown it matters not whose life is destroyed in his quest. He has already ruined the life of a 30-year military servant and General — Michael Flynn — who had to sell his home just to pay his legal bills. That purportedly occurred after Mueller offered Flynn an “either-or” deal, threatening action against Flynn’s son if Flynn did not plead guilty.
  3. When the new House of Representatives takes control in January, Democrats then in the majority have already promised to launch a massive offensive against the White House and the President. Their goal? Impeach President Trump. They will NOT relent on that path and will settle for nothing less than driving the President out of office. They will bury the White House legal office with subpoenas for documents, other evidence, and testimony before various committees and the full House regarding matters in the Mueller probe.
  4. On Friday, James Comey showed just how powerful the Deep State is by (in a classified session not open to the public) refuse to answer questions regarding his previous actions and testimony at the instructions of attorneys from the Department of Justice! Think about that: the DOJ and its attorneys work for the President yet still advised Comey to obstruct. Don’t forget: Comey has been proven to lie under oath, to commit felonies by mishandling classified information, by illegally giving classified documents to the media, and NOTHING has happened to him. That all comes because of the power of the Deep State.
  5. Rod Rosenstein, James Comey, former AG’s Eric Holder, and Loretta Lynch, Mueller himself, and many others have all been implicated in the same ways. It is likely NONE will pay any price for their illegal activities. Why? Again, the Deep State.
  6. What about the Clintons? Americans will be happy to know that the Jim Huber investigation (using 470 DOJ investigators that answer only to him) has started letting the subpoenas fly in the investigation of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Thursday a bank that had been accused of laundering money for the Foundation was subpoenaed. And that is just a start. 2019 will certainly be a bad year for the Clintons as their wrongdoing will be finally front and center.

What about impeachment? Here’s how that process works: the House can file articles of impeachment. With a Democrat majority in the House, they can probably garner enough votes to take that action. The Senate would then take the evidence from the House, investigate and literally conduct a trial based on the purported wrongdoing of the President that rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors” — what the Constitution requires for impeachment. The GOP actually in the 2018 election created a larger majority in the Senate. Unless something really shocking is found by Mueller, it is doubtful a two-thirds majority in the Senate would vote that the President is guilty. At that point, Democrats hope President Trump will have tired of the fight and simply resigned, or we will be approaching the 2020 election and they will be able to run Trump out of Washington.

My prediction: the House will probably impeach President Trump. The Senate will not convict him.

Then what?

Americans need to go to their knees. It’s anyone’s guess as what path Americans will choose to allow the country to go down. here’s the problem: there is a generation of 30-year-olds who came through this socialist-driven education system that have been convinced Socialism is viable, is attractive, and is necessary. My fear is that those of this generation who have been raised on the internet, who get their news via the net in soundbites and rely only on the news sources to which their educators referred them, will continue to NOT think for themselves. Instead, they rely on that news — almost 100% Leftist inspired — to make their political decisions. God help the U.S. if that happens. The only path for us is the one toward full-blown Socialism with a hint of Totalitarianism added.

The problem with that that this generation does not see: in that political scenario, Capitalism dies, entrepreneurship dies, and all those who are wealthy who are tagged to pay for all of this walk away from doing so and the nation collapses.

“That can’t happen to the United State,” you say. Well, it happened in Venezuela. It happened in Cuba. It is happening in Brazil. And it surely is happening in France.

TruthNewsNet is watching closely. Stay close: we’ll have almost daily if NOT daily updates on this. And this is the most important political process in your lifetime. Make certain you stay tuned in to hear and read the Truth.

 

Play

Bill, Hillary and the Clinton Foundation “Pay For Play” was Real: Evidence

(Make certain you read or listen to this entire release, and certainly thoroughly read or listen to the Summary today. There is VERY important information for you in today’s Summary.)

Bill and Hillary

Have you as most grown weary of hearing about Bill and Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, (even Chelsea) and all the Clinton scandals? Are you like most astonished at the fact that with all the exposed corruption, unethical actions that have been sometimes illegal actions, misuse of government information, quid pro quo with donors from all over the World — campaign donors AND “donors” to the Clinton Foundation for “worthy” causes — and “Pay to Play” schemes, stupid operating decisions regarding the United States classified information, Bill is the only one who has paid a price for any of this? And even then, he was impeached as a direct result of not any wrongdoing as President or the governor of Arkansas, but for lying under oath in a civil trial!

I think it is safe (and accurate) to say that the Clintons for everything they have done publicly have been “bulletproof.” But it actually looks like the Paymaster may be about to call on the Clintons for “Payback.”

Before we get into what the “payback” may look like or its details, let’s just refresh your memory about just a few of the Clinton faux pas of the past. These are just a few reminders of some of their chicaneries:

1. Monica Lewinsky: Led to only the second president in American history to be impeached.

2. Benghazi: Four Americans killed, an entire system of weak diplomatic security uncloaked, and the credibility of a president and his secretary- of-state damaged.

3. Asia fundraising scandal: More than four dozen convicted in a scandal that made the Lincoln bedroom, White House donor coffees and Buddhist monks infamous.

4. Hillary’s private emails: Hundreds of national secrets already leaked through private email and the specter of a criminal probe looming large.

5. Whitewater: A large S&L failed and several people went to prison.

6. Travel-Gate: The firing of the career travel office was the very first crony capitalism scandal of the Clinton era.

7. Huma-Gate: An aide’s sweetheart job arrangement.

8. Pardon-Gate: The first time donations were ever connected as possible motives for presidential pardons.

9. Foundation favors: Revealing evidence that the Clinton Foundation was a pay-to-play back door to the State Department, and an open checkbook for foreigners to curry favor.

10. Mysterious files: The disappearance and re-discovery of Hillary’s Rose Law Firm records.

11. File-Gate: The Clinton use of FBI files to dig for dirt on their enemies.

12. Hubble trouble: The resignation and imprisonment of Hillary law partner Web Hubbell.

13. The Waco tragedy: One of the most lethal exercises of police power in American history.

14. The Clinton’s Swedish slush fund: $26 million collected overseas with little accountability and lots of questions about whether contributors got a pass on Iran sanctions.

15. Trooper-Gate: From the good old days, did Arkansas state troopers facilitate Bill Clinton’s philandering?

16. Gennifer Flowers: The tale that catapulted a supermarket tabloid into the big time.

17. Bill’s Golden Tongue: His and her speech fees shocked the American public.

18. Boeing Bucks: Boeing contributed big-time to Bill; Hillary helped the company obtain a profitable Russian contract.

19. Larry Lawrence: How did a fat cat donor get buried in Arlington National Cemetery without war experience?

20. The cattle futures: Hillary as commodity trader extraordinaire.

21. China-Gate: Nuclear secrets go to China on her husband’s watch.

Pending Clinton Legal Actions

Two separate sources with intimate knowledge of the FBI investigations into the Clinton emails and the Clinton Foundation tell report the following:

The investigation looking into the possible pay-for-play interaction between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Foundation has been going on for more than a year. Led by the white collar crime division, public corruption branch of the criminal investigative division of the FBI. The Clinton Foundation investigation is a, quote, “very high priority.” Agents have interviewed and re-interviewed multiple people about the Foundation case, and even before the WikiLeaks dumps, agents say they have collected a great deal of evidence. Pressed on that, one source said, quote, “a lot of it,” and “there is an avalanche of new information coming every day.” Some of it from WikiLeaks, some of it from new emails. The agents are actively and aggressively pursuing this case. They will be going back to interview the same people again, some for the third time.

As a result of the limited immunity deals to top aides, including Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, the Justice Department had tentatively agreed that the FBI would destroy those laptops after a narrow review. Word is “definitively,” that has NOT happened. Those devices are currently in the FBI field office in Washington, D.C. and are being forensically examined.

The source points out that any immunity deal is null and void if any subject lied at any point in the investigation.

Meantime, the classified e-mail investigation is being run by the National Security Division of the FBI. They are currently combing through former Democratic Congressman Anthony Wiener’s laptop and have found e-mails that they believe came from Hillary Clinton’s server that appear to be new, as in not duplicates.

Whether they contain classified material or not is not yet known. But apparently, it will likely be known soon.

Summary

So why is it that those in the political and American Justice Systems have given the Clintons pass after pass for their wrongdoing through the years? The answer can be only one of — or maybe both of — these two reasons: the Clintons have a “retribution machine” they have effectively used through their decades in power in Arkansas and D.C. to discourage anyone from going against them in any way. That could explain how and why they seem to be made of Teflon: nothing sticks. Knowing which closets of one’s enemies hold skeletons can be a very valuable tool to use to demand and hold the loyalties of political insiders. Having that information works well to tamp-down the temptation for payback. The second could be that Leftist politicals in the U.S. seem to thrive on partial truths and good sounding stories instead of demanding “the rest of the story.” To that end, one can see and understand how the Media seem to bow at the altar of Clintonism, jealously protecting their hero and heroine from the screams from underling Americans who are unworthy to breathe the same air as Bill and Hillary. How dare the American public want to know all there is to the Lewinsky scandal that resulted in Bill’s impeachment, what really happened in Benghazi, the Whitewater affair in Arkansas, Hillary’s commodity trading financial windfall, the deaths of approximately 60 Clinton underlings who died through the years under extremely suspicious circumstances during or after voicing a desire to press the Clintons on certain matters? Both Clintons will probably go to their graves having lived the words “Payback is Hell” brutally executed on their foes more than any other political power players in U.S. history.

And it’s worked….so far.

It seems to this writer that even when obvious facts are thrust into the eyes and ears for all Americans to consume, Democrats assume that just because (in this case) the Clintons wield so much power and have so many obligated “friends” in high places everyone must and will bow to the whims of the royal couple. And that theory has reaped dramatic political results for the Clinton duo throughout the last 3.5 decades. We listed only the names of the 21 scandals of the Clintons that everyone knows about to jog your memory. There are dozens of others, many of which are worse. Mention any of those publicly to initiate an explanation always results in a Democrat somewhere responding with, “That’s just a rumor. There’s no evidence that really happened.” Maybe the current confirmed investigation that is part of the “old” Clinton investigation will unearth and share with the world some of the unearthed evidence.

There have been non-stop scandal investigations throughout American politics since the birth of the nation. Those are not rare. But it IS rare for so many scandals involving so many individuals, foreign countries, and corporations to be so closely guarded by those who fawn over Bill and Hillary — especially the Leftist Mainstream Media. But they’re smart: the Clintons know and understand better than most other Americans that when one has the ability to coax the MSM into what to cover and what not to cover using something or some “things” to elicit their cooperation, one can easily control and edit the media narrative one desires to impact what the American public learns about any specific topic. Come to think of it: the Clintons aren’t the only political leaders to so effectively do that. Hitler was surprisingly effective at literally controlling the media narrative — by force when necessary — to promote the Nazi agenda throughout Germany and the rest of Europe, purposely hiding the facts of scandal and travesty that occurred daily, while Hitler literally slaughtered millions of people.

So what do you think this ongoing investigation into Clinton wrongdoing that certainly involve Hillary’s private email server and irregularities in the Clinton Foundation is going to reveal? To be honest, I think that will be determined not necessarily by facts, but by what skeletons the Clinton Group know of that belong to whoever is conducting this investigation!

Remember this: in American politics, facts don’t really matter — no matter what any of us think. “Perception is reality.” And that’s how the Clintons have kept the truth captive so effectively for many years. Tell a pig enough times he’s a dog and he’ll eventually start barking. I’m not saying we are pigs or dogs, but we have seen many Americans swallow the Clinton narrative for so long without even asking questions. Why? Because Bill and Hillary (and now Chelsea) are so wily at spinning stories to a fawning populace, they have not only repeated the effective process over and over, Americans have bought it hook, line, and sinker.

Will the merry-go-round ever stop? I don’t know. But maybe with the unsealing of some of those 63,233 sealed federal indictments, some from every one of the 50 states, several may be for William Jefferson, Hillary Rodham, and Chelsea. Oh, and for a point of clarification: that 63,233 number is 30 times more than have been issued during the same time frame at any time in American history. I don’t think that’s an accident. Remember: Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced in a 2018 letter to Congress that he had appointed federal prosecutor Jim Huber of Utah to continue investigations with unfettered cooperation from the 477 Justice Department investigators that were already being used by Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

When you do that math, that means each investigator was responsible for just 132 of the indictments during the last 12 months.

That’s doable!

 

 

Play

How Can We Stop this Sexual-Domestic Assault Horror?

Millions of Americans watched as Dr. Christine Blasey Ford gave testimony in the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing regarding the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. Dr. Ford provided testimony of the attempted sexual assault allegedly attempted by a high school student — Brett Kavanaugh — in suburban Maryland 35 years ago.

While most take sides on the belief of her allegations based on presented evidence (or lack thereof), I’m certain a consensus is that Dr. Ford experienced a sexual horror perpetrated by someone at some time that changed her life forever — initiated if not by Kavanaugh, by someone else.

Sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape, Domestic abuse, intimidation or any other oppressive sexual act even just attempted against anyone — child or adult — almost always totally or in part destroys a person’s life. And these abusive occurrences have been and still are sewn deep into the cloth that constitutes the fabric of our country.

It absolutely is one of the greatest tragedies in U.S. history. Women and children are the principal targets of sexual and abusive predators and have been for centuries. Many in our nation together created — and have perpetuated a climate — at best unfriendly, at worst antagonistic — towards those who wish to come forward with the stories of their abuses and attacks.

It is inhumane for such things to be experienced by the most vulnerable among us. But it is incomprehensible that Americans have allowed that climate of secrecy — the secrecy that has allowed and maintained continued existence — is one of the greatest scourges of this generation. IT MUST BE STOPPED!

What?

Let’s begin by looking at a segment from a post first published here November 20, 2017:

How Can Sexual and Domestic abuse be Stopped?

It MUST be stopped. No doubt there is no easy answer, but we must find one. Here are my thoughts:

This “environment” that has actually fostered these acts and their proliferation in numbers throughout all of America was created by Americans. And the acceptance of it as simply a part of life in the USA has become almost universal. In doing so, thousands if not millions of young men and women have been at least direly and permanently impacted by their abuses, and some scarred irreparably for life. Just as is the case with our children and even adults in our lives, recognizing there IS a real problem does not fix the problem. But seeing the problem as a problem is necessary to allow change. But it’s just a start.

For any changes to be created and implemented, the mental and emotional state of the Nation that even allows sexual and domestic abuse must be obliterated. That is a tall order. At least an entire generation riddled with this unacceptable behavior must make a 180-degree change. Personally, I think that is unlikely. So what’s an alternative?

We did not get here quickly. It has taken generations of compromise, benign acceptance — both in a vacuum of ignoring these practices — to get us to this moment in history. We cannot get it right overnight. And there will be a price to pay.

Fortunately, in this electronic, hi-tech world of satellite and internet instantaneous information worldwide distribution, we now have a tool that can make time fly. With the right leadership and developed plan combined with a mass American will to rid our world of sexual and domestic abuses of every kind, we can certainly see it happen during the next decade.”

Who?

Who can make it go away? It will take a partnership: a really large and encompassing number of people who are committed to find and achieve a solution. But any successful solution MUST be built on a foundation that is sound, far-reaching, and unavoidable by perpetrators. That foundation must be fundamentally based on law: Congress must act!

Here are the elements that must be included in any laws implemented by Congress and the President:

  • Law Enforcement Infrastructure. Laws are never effective when enforcement resources necessary for the success of their implementation are not made available. Those resources cost. But just like anything else in our lives, “You get what you pay for.” This administration must be totally committed financially to whatever processes and applicable laws are created. That will include federal law enforcement operations which cooperate with state and local law enforcement agencies. Human resources must be comprised of thoroughly vetted and qualified people to fill each identified and created position. Budgets must include the cost of outside necessary expert inclusion from the Mental Health community. This should NOT be another federal bureaucracy, but needs to be autonomous in its investigatory processes, but must be supervised by the Department of Justice. Members of the entity for this operation must be accountable in every way — and not just for funding — to the U.S. Congress.
  • Operational Laws. Laws for authorization and operation in this system must be carefully crafted in conjunction with Congressional identified experts who deal with sexual and domestic abuse all the time. Laws must be significant with severe penalties for those who violate them. Laws need to create a process whereby those who are violated by perpetrators have instant access to legal recourse with total confidentiality while investigations are performed, perpetrators are indicted by grand juries, and during trials to their conclusions.
  • Legal Representation. Built into these federal laws should be the creation of an environment in which victims have a freedom to report abuse directly to law enforcement without intrusion by attorneys who “shop” for sexual and domestic abuse clients. Fear of litigation and the significant costs of litigation in these cases need to be minimized as much as possible. Lawyers who troll for abuse clients need to be dissuaded from “shopping for dollars.” Punitive damages should be disallowed in abuse litigation. Damages need to be for actual damages only. Why? Americans will be much better served by including an environment of fairness so that all parties understand it’s not about making anyone rich, but about giving every wronged person recourse against those who attack them. It’s not just about making attorneys a lot of money.
  • Protection. There MUST be a method to stop the political tsunami of politization that is driving much of the current “enlightenment” in sexual and domestic abuse. Example: in the current Kavanaugh investigation, there is NO presumption of innocence for the accused and DEMANDS for all to take the word of accusers at face value. Those who make these demands demonize all who ask for and expect the American fundamental of “innocent until proven guilty” to be applied. There is no doubt the trauma of actual abuse most often keeps victims from stepping forward for fear of disbelief, rejection, shame, and retribution for doing so. Those elements of reporting abuse must be removed!
  • A two-way Street. As horrible to victims abuse always is, so it is for the accused in the cases in which their innocence until proven guilty is absent. Regardless of the outcome of the 7th Kavanaugh FBI investigation, his personal and professional life if not ruined, will never be the same. If he committed any of these travesties, he SHOULD lose the vestiges of jurisprudence that he maintains now. But if he is NOT proven guilty, how can he ever recover his integrity, professional and self-esteem, and the trust of many that he has garnered through years of working with him in professional and personal capacities? The answer to that is simple: it almost always is lost forever. No person who is innocent deserves that. For the “Protection” details listed above and the consideration of innocence as the default until guilt is proven, there MUST be an environment that maintains that innocence until guilt is confirmed. How do we do that? Such a process must be devised, implemented and maintained to protect ALL the innocents while assuring the guilty will be identified and prosecuted.
  • Prosecution. Sadly today in the criminal justice system, far too many who are guilty of of even serious crimes are not prosecuted orand sentenced appropriately. Why? There are far too many criminals who when convicted escape full sentences because of crowded jails and prisons. I could detail personal examples I have witnessed throughout my life in which too harsh sentences are handed down to some while in others, perpetrators either walk free after sentencing, sometimes sentenced to only to “timed served” while others have the book thrown at them for political or personal reasons. Punishment MUST be severe. Sentences MUST be served.

Congress

The linchpins in this process are Congress and Congressional action. The answer to the question “Why has the government not done anything to stop this?” has never been given. And, quite honestly, at this point asking and answering that question is worthless. CONGRESS NEEDS TO ACT!

The House and Senate together need to craft, pass, and send those bills to the White House for presidential signature that will do just that. These laws, besides addressing the assault perpetrators and stopping their criminal actions, need to protect those wrongly accused. Within the laws that are written, responsibility for truth underpinned by facts in evidence must be included.

“That will discourage victims from coming forward,” many will say. Think about this: if when this process is created and implemented, it is publicized in every way possible to the American public, and the built-in protections against abuse by accusers AND perpetrators are well understood by all, the process will ultimately prevent abuse.

  • Confidentiality must be a legal requirement in the system to protect the innocent;
  • Use of the process and those who are caught up in it must be off-limits to the political system. Use in any way of any part of this process in campaigning must carry significant criminal penalties. Politicians who abuse this system must be punished for doing so.
  • Statutes must clearly detail rights and obligations of accused and accusers and must limit the all-too aggressive methods used by attorneys to attract clients. Penalties must be clearly detailed;
  • Stiff penalties for those who are found to be untruthful (as defined by law) in these cases must be included;
  • Members of the Media must NOT be allowed in any way to have access to any information about any details of these cases (including the very existence of cases) before and during an investigation and when prosecutions are occurring. There MUST be serious PERSONAL criminal sentences for every media member, entity, or even non-media “leaker” for breach of confidentiality. Those innocent must at all costs be protected, and every precaution must be taken.

Summary

Unfortunately, in whatever the final process looks like, there will be casualties. Not every victim will receive immediate results of coming forward — at least in the beginning. How so?

We are caught in a catch-22. We have no way of knowing how many and who have already been victimized by sexual and domestic wrongdoing at the hands of others. While the process of ridding the nation of all the elements of this, some of these people will necessarily become sacrificial lambs. IF as we do in criminal law, we adopt for these cases “innocent until proven guilty,” those that have already been abused — without hard proof of the abuses — will likely not see a good conclusion for some of their stories. And some of their abusers without proof of their wrongdoing will walk free. I see no other way to quickly change a socially embedded process that for so long has been a scourge to our nation. It’s a process, it will be hard, and it will take time. It must be soon, it must be thorough, it must be fair, but it MUST be done.

 

Play

Obama’s Department of Justice: Corruption at its Worst

Notice the total absence of those former arguments about the “alleged” corruption in the Obama Department of Justice? I honestly believe there may be two reasons for the current lack of anger about those: people grew tired of the repetitious news coverage of pieces of evidence of corruption and just “turned off;” and/or the Media has purposely ratcheted up their already deafening attacks on President Trump in an effort to make Americans forget.

But with the daily revelations of MORE Obama DOJ corruption, it seems to be appropriate for us to simply remind everyone of just a few of instances of Obama Department of Justice corruption as it appears to have been even deeper and more widespread than first thought:

Obama Era DOJ Corruption Before Trump

  • Eric Holder was the first attorney general in history to be held in contempt of Congress when he stonewalled committee probes of the Fast and Furious investigation. Fast and Furious itself was a scandal, involving the government’s reckless abuse of investigative powers for the purpose of fabricating an anti-gun narrative. Instead, its “gun walking” resulted in the killing of a federal agent, among other violent crimes.
  • Attorney General Holder made misleading representations about both Fast and Furious and the investigation of Fox News journalist James Rosen.
  • The IRS’s intimidation and abuse of President Obama’s political opponents, and the cover-up thereof resulted in no charges and little apparent investigation.
  • There were politicized prosecutions against Dinesh D’Souza (an Obama critic whose minor campaign-finance infraction was treated as a major felony when more-serious violations are typically disposed of by administrative fine), and Nakoula Basseley Nakoula (the anti-Muslim video producer scapegoated by the Obama administration for the Benghazi massacre).
  • Recall the misrepresentations by Justice Department lawyers to a federal court in the litigation over Obama’s lawless immigration non-enforcement programs (DACA and DAPA) — lies the judge found to be “intentional, serious and material.”
  • The Department of Justice reportedly refused to impanel a grand jury in either the e-mail case or in connection with the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play allegations. “The problem here is this investigation was never a real investigation,” former assistant FBI director James Kallstrom said. “That’s the problem. They never had a grand jury impaneled, and the reason they never had a grand jury impaneled, I’m sure, is Loretta Lynch would not go along with that.” Further, the Department of Justice reportedly refused to allow the FBI to issue subpoenas to gather more evidence in connection with its investigation of the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play allegations.
  • Then there were the Justice Department’s outrageous misconduct and serial lies in a prosecution of New Orleans police, which a federal judge variously described as “bizarre,” “appalling,” and “grotesque” — conclusions upheld by the Fifth Circuit appeals court.
  • And, of course, the Clinton e-mails investigation, featuring: Justice Department collusion with Clinton-camp lawyers; inexplicable immunity deals; suspects who received immunity permitted to appear as lawyers for other suspects; no prosecutions despite significant evidence, several immunity grants, and patently misleading statements during FBI interviews; a furtive tarmac tête-à-tête between the attorney general and the main suspect’s husband (the former U.S. president who just happened to have launched the attorney general into public prominence, and who was positioned to influence whether the attorney general got to keep her job in an anticipated Hillary Clinton administration) just days before it was announced — surprise! — that there would be no indictment of Hillary Clinton; and startling public commentary by the FBI regarding an uncharged case that bore heavily on a presidential election.
  • Subsequent to that “chat” aboard Clinton’s jet in Arizona, it was learned that Attorney General Lynch was conducting official DOJ business via an alias name and email address: “Elizabeth Carlisle, ecarlisle@jmd.usdoj.gov.” Why would an Attorney General use an alias and communicate via a secret email address other than to hide from the public certain actions taken if those actions were legal and above-board?

Obama Era DOJ Corruption Carryover to Trump Administration

How many and who in the DOJ that were Obama “carryovers” have resigned, retired, been demoted, or fired since the Obama Administration? (We formerly shared from this list, but the names have been added to)

Department of Justice (Non-FBI):

  • John Carlin, Assistant Attorney General – Head of DOJ’s National Security Division – announced resignation on September 27, 2016, after filing the Government’s proposed 2016 Section 702 certifications on September 26, 2016. The filing does not disclose known FISA Abuses. Carlin is aware NSA Rogers is conducting a compliance review which will uncover the FISA Abuse. Trump surveillance originated under Carlin’s tenure.
  • Sally Yates, Deputy Attorney General & Acting Attorney General (replacing Loretta Lynch – 10 days) – fired January 30, 2017. Complicit in Flynn Surveillance and surveillance of Trump Campaign.
  • Mary McCord, Acting Assistant Attorney General – Acting Head of DOJ’s National Security Division (replacing John Carlin) – announced resignation on April 17, 2017 – Left on May 11, 2017. Complicit in Flynn Surveillance and surveillance of Trump Campaign.
  • Bruce Ohr – Associate Deputy Attorney General – demoted twice. Stripped of Associate Deputy Attorney General title on December 6, 2017. Removed as head of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force January 8, 2018. Unofficial liaison between Fusion GPS and FBI/DOJ. Wife worked at Fusion. Long-standing ties to both Christopher Steele and Glenn Simpson/Fusion GPS.
  • David Laufman, DOJ National Security Division, Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence – resigned on February 7, 2018. Laufman “played a leading role in the Clinton email server and Russian hacking investigations.”
  • Rachel Brand, Associate Attorney General – number three official behind Deputy AG Rosenstein – resigned February 9, 2018. Takes top legal position at Walmart. Brand “played a critical role in Congress’ re-authorization” of section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
  • Trisha Beth Anderson, the office of legal counsel for FBI (demoted or reassigned)
  • Peter Kadzik, assistant attorney general, congressional liaison (resigned)
  • Matthew Axelrod, principal assistant to deputy attorney general (resigned)
  • Preet Bharara, U.S. attorney, SDNY (fired along with 45 other U.S. attorneys)
  • Sharon McGowan, civil rights division (resigned)
  • Diana Flynn, litigation director for LGBTQ civil rights (resigned)
  • Vanita Gupta, civil rights division (resigned)
  • Joel McElvain, assistant branch director of the civil division (resigned)

FBI:

  • James Comey, FBI Director – fired May 9, 2017. Oversaw all FBI operations – including exoneration of Clinton and Trump-Russia Investigation. Reported to AG Lynch.
  • Peter Strzok, Deputy Assistant Director of FBI’s Counterintelligence – forced off Mueller’s team – demoted August 16, 2017, to FBI’s Human Resources. IG Horowitz discovered texts July 27, 2017. Strzok involved in all facets of Clinton exoneration. Working member of “Insurance Policy” group. Strozk was fired August 13, 2018.
  • Lisa Page, FBI/DOJ Lawyer – forced off Mueller’s team – demoted August 16, 2017, to parts unknown. IG Horowitz discovered texts July 27, 2017. Working member of “Insurance Policy” group. Resigned May 4, 2018.
  • James Baker, FBI General Counsel – demoted and reassigned on December 20, 2017. Working member of “Insurance Policy” group. Senior-most legal counsel at FBI. Resigned May 4, 2018.
  • James Rybicki, Chief of Staff to FBI Director James Comey & successor Chris Wray – resigned/forced out January 23, 2018. Working member of “Insurance Policy” group.
  • Andrew McCabe, Deputy FBI Director – on December 23, 2017, announced retirement effective March 22, 2018. Forced to resign on January 29, 2018. Involved in all aspects. Reported to Comey.
  • Josh Campbell – Special Assistant to James Comey – resigned on February 2, 2018. Writes an op-ed in New York Times on why he is leaving but does not disclose in the op-ed that he was Special Assistant to Comey – or that he had been offered lucrative CNN job. Takes a job with CNN on February 5, 2018.
  • Michael Kortan, FBI Asst. Director of Public Affairs – resigned on February 8, 2018 – effective February 15, 2018. Kortan served as assistant director for public affairs, an influential job that controlled media access.
  • Bill Priestap, Assistant Director – Head of FBI Counterintelligence – Holds the same position. Strzok’s former boss – reported directly to McCabe.
  • Greg Bower, assistant director for the office of congressional affairs (resigned)
  • Michael Steinbach, executive assistant director (resigned)
  • John Giacalone, executive assistant director (resigned)
  • James Turgal, executive assistant director (resigned)

There are others that unofficially are being “watched” regarding the continuation of their employment with the DOJ.

Summary

We could spend the day discussing in detail all of the “known” investigations underway that include those above and others. But most of them and the details of their alleged wrongdoing are on already public knowledge. What remains unknown is just how deep and wide are the methods and the people who have been (and are) part of a concerted plan to destroy President Donald Trump and his administration, his implemented and pending policies, and to stall his appointments — including that of Judge Brett Kavanaugh who is almost surely a shoo-in as the replacement on the U.S. Supreme Court for Justice Anthony Kennedy.

What is amazing to me is that everyone who plays any role in this coordinated effort to end the Trump White House actually felt that any and all of the illegal, unethical, and immoral acts they committed — and in some cases are still being committed — were/are justified because of the worthy goal of ridding the nation of President Trump.

What is MORE amazing to me is that everyone who played these roles honestly felt they were going to be successful in their quest to unseat a duly elected president and do it without the American public knowing about it! If any American is not incensed at the fact that appointed and hired individuals who work for the American people would participate in this “political coup,” you have no loyalty to your country.

You know what’s almost humorous? All those on the Left led by their media mouthpieces — those who have invented, implemented, and have maintained the bogus Russia collusion case — are actually guilty of the same crimes they invented and alleged perpetrated by the Trump Campaign. They were confident they would be successful getting rid of Donald Trump. There IS no Russia collusion. But there IS collusion. Let me explain:

The American public has yet to be shown the evidence that Intelligence Community individuals and several in Congress claim that verifies Russian attempted hacking of the 2016 election. Even if it does really exist, (and I have my doubts) there obviously was no involvement with the Trump Campaign. But there is verified collusion between the “other” campaign and the Russians: the Hillary Clinton Campaign. Hillary’s campaign funded the Steele Dossier knowing it was full of false information, had it promoted by James Clapper and James Comey to instigate the fake Russia collusion story and subsequent investigation of Donald Trump.

Further, more and more information leaks out daily showing just how “in the tank” members of senior FBI management were in the action to derail the Trump presidency. Peter Strozk and Lisa Page as more of their private texts and emails are revealed show there were intense actions initiated and managed by upper-level management members of both the FBI and DOJ to accomplish that objective.

What is going to happen and when? I have no idea. I have my suspicions, and they involved execution of a bunch of those 50,000+ sealed federal indictments on stand-by in federal district courts around the nation. I suspect Fall of 2018 is going to initiate the peeling of the onion of corruption that obviously dwarfs that ever witnessed in the United States government.

In the meantime: Donald Trump caused the hurricane headed for the Carolinas, Trump put those illegal immigrant children (in that picture that actually was taken during the Obama’s presidency), he single-handedly created global warming that will destroy Earth if he is not immediately kicked out of the Oval Office. To summarize it: EVERYTHING that is bad in the United States — and the World, for that matter — is the direct responsibility of President Trump.

Oh, one more thing: all of the good economic news in America is proof of the amazing accomplishments of Barack Obama. After all, nothing good could ever happen in America that wasn’t directly attributable to his knowledge, understanding, likability, and compassion!

What’s next?

STAY TUNED!

Play

Justice for All: But Two Versions

Who can honestly maintain that currently in the United States there is “Liberty and Justice for All?” If there is, it’s meted out differently for different folks. The “rule of law” has been attacked, amended, and re-defined by so many that no one any longer knows exactly what it is, what it means, and how it should function.

The U.S. was established by a bunch of vagabonds who had for generations experienced the horrors and oppression of multi-layered justice in Europe that was never fair, never consistent, and certainly never equal. That ‘injustice” resulted in the establishment of a set of laws in this New World that would obliterate the evil system of justice that always favored one group over another, put one person ahead of someone else, and was always determined by those “other” than rank-and-file citizens who were not quite worthy of the same justice. Equal justice was in no way equal.

We are seeing the evil of that system creep back into this New World. It is tearing at the very fabric of our country. Americans are in large part ignoring its power to quickly obliterate the founding principles that gave early Americans promise of equality under the Law. Many do not even acknowledge this “New” justice system’s existence. Generations of American patriots fought and died to protect and preserve the founders Justice System. Yet today it is in danger of destruction — not by foreign tyrants or evil nations, but by its own leaders.

Criminal Justice

In Europe, class warfare was not even real warfare. Commoners only value was for their service to the ruling class. Laws existed at the whims of elitists. There was NO justice.

In the U.S., 2.5 centuries after becoming a nation whose cornerstone is the guarantee of “liberty and justice for all,” we watch as a ruling class has evolved into the American elitists moving to replicate European justice which American settlers fled. In the U.S., criminal justice has become a  from top to bottom a system that favors those with social, economic, and political status, while punishing those who find themselves (most often by their own illegal actions) caught in a ever-growing whirlwind of “social” justice — a justice process/system eerily similar to that of 1600’s Europe.

Because certain populations are forced into positions of social inequality just like those Americans lived through in Europe, crime becomes more common within those populations. “Most inmates are minority men under age 40 ‘whose economic opportunities have suffered the most over the last 30 or 40 years. Incarceration in the United States is socially concentrated among very disadvantaged people,’” says U.S. News & World Report. In the United States, the people most likely to commit crimes are “people without education, jobs, housing, or hope,” U.S. News explains. This is further complicated by the fact that people from disadvantaged populations are frequently given harsher sentences than those from dominant populations for the same crimes.

Think about this: Retainers for felony crime cases start around $5,000-$10,000 but can be $25,000 or more for serious cases. Private criminal legal representation is literally out of reach and unattainable for most who fall into average working family category or below. Because of the high cost of securing “better” or “best” legal representation in such cases, public defense is most often the only option.

Public defense is not in itself necessarily bad or of poor quality. But many who serve in this capacity are just beginning a criminal defense career or are assigned a certain percentage of indigent cases they are required to work. Volume of cases and low public defense budgets obviously waters down capabilities of providing “better” or “best” defense for those charged who lack sufficient financial resources to obtain private representation.

It is not uncommon for a criminal case in which a defendant who has a criminal record and who is subsequently charged with one or more felonies to face a $100,000 defense bill if able to retain a private criminal attorney. There is very little hope for a person of average or below income to find defense other than through public defender representation.

Multiple offenders — no matter the seriousness of previous crimes — suffer disproportionately in the criminal justice system, simply because of their past brushes with the Law. Inmates and ex-convicts are, themselves, a disadvantaged population. Once a person has a criminal record, it’s easy for potential employers to access that information on the internet and deny jobs because of it, says U.S. News. This makes it difficult for those who have criminal records to find jobs that pay enough.

Seldom does the American media highlight criminal cases of those Americans caught-up in the justice system that because they are at social and economic disadvantage are forced into the Public defense system where they often get lost and certainly struggle for fairness. To the media, high profile cases that involve well-known public figures are “Newsworthy” and therefore capture newspaper and television coverage. Hollywood actors and directors, sports superstars, and music industry popstars have all the money necessary to assure great criminal defense while most members of minority communities who find themselves on the wrong side of the law get lost in the system where their stories seldom get told.

Political Justice

Yes, a new segment of the Justice System has evovled. It is for those who are members of the United States Political System. Even though constitutionally all those in this system were chosen from among their fellow citizens to be public servants, those within that system have turned it into a “super” class of Americans that in many cases have been — and are — above the Law. Sadly, we Americans are the ones who allowed members of this class to create and perpetrate its existence.

It’s not fair: nothing in it was envisioned by the nation’s founders. It is exactly what they hated and is exactly why in large part they fled Europe. Early Americans knew that no nation that is NOT fair to all its people without regard to race, religion, or place of origin can ever last. And no such nation can guarantee its citizens true freedom under the law. Why?

Those in that political class were authorized by the Constitution to craft laws to govern our lives. Founders knew times would change and those changes would demand adjustments in those laws. But they knew the basics of liberty and justice for all, the rule of law, one person-one vote, fair taxation, and private property rights were and would always be essential for the preservation of the U.S. Justice System. The American political class has stood watch while much of those tenets of Freedom have been purposely eroded, only to be replaced by Political Justice.

Here’s the rub about this new segment of the American justice system: everyday Americans do not determine who is part of that system and who makes the rules about which laws to keep, which to abolish, and which new laws to implement. The elitists do that for all Americans.

Consitutionally, that is to be decided by American voters who choose through elections 535 representatives to serve in Congress along with a President and Vice President who — with the advice and consent of Congress — implement and enforce the laws passed by Congress. But that process exists no more.

We watch as mayors, governors, members of the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate, and even former Presidents thumb their noses at duly passed laws and simply do not enforce those laws with which they personally disagree. Examples: federal drug laws, U.S. voting laws, and U.S. immigration laws.

And then these same political elitists installed a system WITHIN the Constitutional system that allows NEW policies (which often circumvent old laws) that are implemented with the stroke of the pen of a governor or the President of the United States. These are called “executive orders.”

Corruption

Of course such a system operated by a chosen few was destined to become corrupt. It creates two different classes of people. It favors one class over another: the very definition of political corruption.

Examples of this corruption abound, and we will not even begin to list them all. But there are several current examples that vividly illustrate the class disparity within this system that beg for discussion. We have discussed them in detail previously. Look at some of these in bullet point format:

  • James Comey when fired released FBI memos to the press through a friend. Those memos were classified. Comey’s release of them was a felony;
  • Comey lied several times before Congress. While doing so is NOT a felony, it is a type of Obstruction of Justice which could be classified as a felony;
  • Hillary Clinton authorized destruction of at least 30,000 emails which some of contained classified information, but ALL of were under subpoena by Congress;
  • The Clinton email server was never approved as secure by federal authorities. Use of that server for transmission of documents and communication — much of which was classified — is a felony;
  • President Obama with a private gmail address communicated with Hillary via that unsecure server for years. Doing so was a felony violation for both Clinton and Obama, for ALL communications by any U.S. president are “classified;”
  • President Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manaforte was tried for 13 year-old tax violations in an effort to coerce his flipping to Mueller about Trump wrongdoing. Manafort DID break the law. But the DOJ had (under Rosenstein) looked at those violations by Manaforte years earlier and declined to prosecute. Mueller’s prosecution was for purely political purposes;
  • Mueller appears to be trying to tie Trump’s payoffs to two women to campaign finance lawbreaking — efforts by Trump to impede the 2016 election results in his favor, which IS\\would be a violation. Campaign laws allow personal expense for personal reasons by candidates which are not for campaign reasons. However, Hillary’s campaign paid (through a law firm, which in itself could be ruled money laundering) for the Steele Dossier that was fabricated and had no factual basis. Her campaign obviously funded that for the express purpose of impacting the election against her opponent. Unlike Trump, there is NO possible personal reason Hillary could give for her doing so. No action pending against the Clinton Campaign for doing so.

Summary

We could list hundreds of examples of this two-tiered political justice system now raging in America. We could list hundreds of examples of this two-tiered criminal justice system in America as well. I will not bore you or insult your integrity by doing so. Americans see it and understand it. But here’s the problem:

“IF” Americans see and understand these two systems are in place; and “IF” Americans knowing they exist, who crafted and implemented both and why they were put in place; and “IF” Americans knowing all this allow these travesties to continue, the American Justice System is doomed. In fact, it may be too late for America to stop these two systems or change their paths of operation. Too many people have garnered too much power and authority through these systems. And all of that power and authority that will allow their existence is now controlled by a small group of individuals who have the power to perpetuate the status quo.

What can we do?

  • Speak out against criminal injustice every time you see it. Write emails, call lawmakers, get active in elections, and involve yourself in the process;
  • Vote in every election in which you are eligible. Sadly about 25% of all those eligible to vote determine who represents us at local, state, and federal levels. Why? 75% of Americans simply don’t vote!
  • Objectively research laws that govern where you live and U.S. laws. Ignorance of laws does not mean one is stupid. Ignorance of laws and not getting understanding of those laws is stupid;
  • Vote with your hands, feet, and wallets. Don’t support those who support the two-justice system: don’t go to movies, concerts, stores, purchase products, watch televisions shows, etc., supported by those who do support the two-justice system. And support those who support the rule of law;
  • Consider running for office. You may feel unqualified. But qualification for office does not entail dollars and cents, social status, or wardrobe. Those may make it easier to get attention. But door-to-door and person-to-person is a great way to get involved with lawmaking. Don’t disqualify yourself without consideration!

This is NOT a country founded to be like this. And this country does NOT belong to a group of elitists who have all power and authority to do anything they desire at the cost of the American people. But if Americans sit idly by oblivious to what is happening around them, doing that is support — albeit benign support — of the very evil this discussion is about.

None of us like being disliked or despised. Those might result from taking action. But what is certain is that all who ignore real disatrious historical events are doomed to see them occur again.

We must never give-in to those already strong and already moving to do away with “Liberty and Justice for all.”

 

Play

Murdered by a Stranger

In Iowa, it was Mollie Tibbets. In San Francisco, it was Kate Steinle. Who’s next? Where will the next such murder happen?

“Illegal Alien/Immigrant:” a foreign person who is living in a country without having official permission to live there.

Why?

Why is our nation covered with illegals? Why is it no longer politically correct to call those here illegally “illegals?” Who decided in the last few years to change the moniker for such people from illegal “alien” to illegal “immigrant?” What’s the difference?

Answers: Politically correct Leftists self-appointed to right the “rules” of illegal immigration apparently coined the new terms. Oh, and it’s no longer politically correct to use the term “illegal.” Last night I watched an immigration attorney on a talk show correct the host who used the term “illegal immigrant.” According to that attorney, they now are to be called “undocumented immigrants.” Hmmm… I’m pretty sure the families of Mollie Tibbets and Kate Steinle would argue with even the hint of political correctness in illegals’ naming correctness. Kate and Mollie are dead. That’s all that matters.

Every time a highly visible murder of an American at the hands of an illegal, the argument about this open-border policy begins anew. And make no mistake about it: America’s southern border is wide open. And regarding illegals entering the nation, Leftists are certainly open-border advocates. And most on the Right in Congress speak out against this practice while winking at the continued flow of “new” illegals crossing the border while sitting on their hands regarding repairing U.S. immigration law. Apparently, even Republicans in Congress (on the most part) must be for open-borders, too.

Meanwhile, Kate and Mollie are gone.

For the sake of this conversation today, and in honor of Kate and Mollie, we will refer to those in the United States without authorization or legal status as “illegal aliens.” If that offends you, please give us some leeway today in honor of those two young women. Humor us, please.

Dead at the Hands of Illegals

How many U.S. citizens are murdered by illegal aliens?

President Trump in a speech stated that 63,000 Americans had been murdered by illegal aliens. The 63,000 number we are unable to document. However, a 2011 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report said that a study population of 249,000 criminal aliens had been arrested for 25,064 homicides.

According to a recent Associated Press article, “multiple studies have concluded that immigrants are less likely to commit crime than native-born U.S. citizens.” But the issue isn’t non-citizens who are in this country legally, and who must abide by the law to avoid having their visas revoked or their application for citizenship refused. The real issue is the crimes committed by illegal aliens. And in that context, the claim is quite misleading, because the “multiple studies” on crimes committed by “immigrants” —  including a 2014 study by a professor from the University of Massachusetts, which is the only one cited in the article —  combine the crime rates of both citizens and non-citizens, legal and illegal.

That isn’t the only problem with the study. Instead of using official crime data, it uses “self-reported criminal offending and country of birth information.” For obvious reasons, there is little incentive for anyone, let alone criminal aliens, to self-report “delinquent and criminal involvement.” When it comes to self-reporting criminal activity, some surveyed will, no doubt, exaggerate. Others will flat out lie. Furthermore, many that are questioned will likely not disclose if they are a non-citizen out of fear of discovery and deportation.

These claims overlook disturbing actual data on crimes committed by criminal aliens. For example, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released two unsettling reports in 2005 on criminal aliens who are in prison for committing crimes in the United States and issued an updated report in 2011.

The first report (GAO-05-337R) found that criminal aliens (both legal and illegal) make up 27 percent of all federal prisoners. Yet according to the Center for Immigration Studies, non-citizens are only about nine percent of the nation’s adult population. Thus, judging by the numbers in federal prisons alone, non-citizens commit federal crimes at three times the rate of citizens.

The findings in the second report (GAO-05-646R) are even more disturbing. This report looked at the criminal histories of 55,322 aliens that “entered the country illegally and were still illegal in the country at the time of their incarceration in federal or state prison or local jail during the fiscal year 2003.” Those 55,322 illegal aliens had been arrested 459,614 times, an average of 8.3 arrests per illegal alien, and had committed almost 700,000 criminal offenses, an average of roughly 12.7 offenses per illegal alien. Out of all of the arrests, 12 percent were for violent crimes such as murder, robbery, assault and sex-related crimes; 15 percent were for burglary, larceny, theft, and property damage; 24 percent were for drug offenses; and the remaining offenses were for DUI, fraud, forgery, counterfeiting, weapons, immigration, and obstruction of justice.

The 2011 GAO report wasn’t much different. It looked at 251,000 criminal aliens in federal, state, and local prisons and jails. Those aliens were arrested nearly 1.7 million times for close to three million criminal offenses. Sixty-eight percent of those in federal prison and 66 percent of those in state prisons were from Mexico. Their offenses ranged from homicide and kidnapping to drugs, burglary, and larceny. Once again, these statistics are not fully representative of crimes committed by illegal aliens: This report only reflects the criminal histories of aliens who were in prison. If there were a way to include all crimes committed by criminal aliens, the numbers would likely be higher because prosecutors often will agree to drop criminal charges against an illegal alien if they are assured that immigration authorities will deport the alien.

The GAO reports also highlight another important flaw in the study referenced by the Associated Press. It uses survey data from a nationally representative sample of people living in the United States. Thus, the study does not take into account some potentially key factors highlighted in the GAO reports: that criminal aliens from Mexico disproportionately make up incarcerations (GAO-05-337R) and that most arrests are made in the three border states of California, Texas, and Arizona (GAO-05-646R and GAO-11-187). Let’s look at just one of those three border states who has provided the public actual statistics of crimes committed by illegal aliens.

Just Texas

According to DHS status indicators, over 261,000 criminal aliens have been booked into local Texas jails between June 1, 2011, and July 31, 2018, of which over 175,000 were classified as “illegal aliens.”

Between June 1, 2011 and July 31, 2018, these 175,000 illegal aliens were charged with more than 273,000 criminal offenses which included arrests for 505 homicide charges; 30,408 assault charges; 5,396 burglary charges; 34,555 drug charges; 365 kidnapping charges; 15,100 theft charges; 22,213 obstructing police charges; 1,569 robbery charges; 3,212 sexual assault charges; 2,022 sexual offense charges; and 2,754 weapon charges. DPS criminal history records reflect those criminal charges have thus far resulted in over 112,000 convictions including 225 homicide convictions; 12,540 assault convictions; 2,967 burglary convictions; 16,762 drug convictions; 152 kidnapping convictions; 6,741 theft convictions; 10,720 obstructing police convictions; 950 robbery convictions; 1,567 sexual assault convictions; 1,076 sexual offense convictions; and 1,194 weapon convictions.

Exasperation

What is most exasperating to most Americans (other than federal politicians) is that there really is NO need for these senseless crimes to happen. What further heightens Americans’ frustration and anger about this problem is that Congress — who is the only agency that can make or change federal law — continues to bicker about certain parts of proposed immigration reform legislation while ignoring the most obvious and most critical reason for not just making those changes, but making those changes immediately!

How many times and how many studies have we seen that poll Americans who overwhelmingly state immigration reform MUST begin by sealing our southern border? If Americans — “legal” Americans — want their representatives in Washington to enact legislation to protect our babies against illegal alien crimes against them, why doesn’t Congress act?

Can’t members of Congress agree that trying to do anything regarding new or revised immigration law is sheer lunacy if it does not FIRST stop any continued influx of illegals?

It is virtually impossible that 535 men and women who are professionals that come to Congress from varied legal, business, medical, and other professional backgrounds cannot agree on a path to fix this problem — ANY PROBLEM — “IF” they really want to.” And that’s the key: Congress proposes, debates, amends, votes, and passes EVERY bill THEY want to see become law.

CONGRESS DOES NOT WANT TO PASS COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM!

Why is that?

To this journalist, the only plausible explanation for this is that more than half of those 535 men and women want to maintain the status quo. And the reason for that can be just one thing: votes. They not only want to allow the free flow of immigrants across the border, they have every intention of finding a way to make it legal for those illegals to vote in federal elections.

“What would that do?” you ask. Those Congressional members think that whoever/whichever political party initiates the steps and process for such legalization will be the party those illegals will support, forever indebted for that legalization. Would that work? It has worked for decades already. Democrats as a whole convinced African Americans that Dems were the saviors of Blacks. In almost every legislation at the federal level, Democrats have the votes of Black Americans locked up, simply because of that obligation Dems have sold them.

And Democrats are NOT the party that has made American life any better for those in the Black community. (We’ll save that conversation for another day)

Summary

Unless and until Congress passes a comprehensive immigration law that first closes our borders to illegal aliens, America is doomed for the repeat and repeat and repeat of stories like that of Mollie Tibbets and Kate Steinle who had their lives snuffed out at the hands of illegal aliens. I suggest you don’t ever let an open-borders advocate sell you the lie that illegal aliens commit crimes at a lesser rate than either native-born or naturalized American citizens. In fact, existing data seems to show that the opposite is likely true.

Get the truth out there in your circles of influence. Every chance you get, push your federal legislators to initiate and support comprehensive immigration legislation that begins with slamming the door on the southern border to stop illegals from entering the U.S.

But we do know one thing for sure. Every crime committed by an illegal alien is one that would not have occurred if that alien wasn’t in the United States in the first place. That includes the hundreds of thousands of crimes committed by the 55,322 illegal aliens in the GAO study who victimized countless numbers of Americans. And that includes the 273,000 criminal offenses committed against Texas citizens alone.

Remember this: Kate Steinle with her father was innocently at Fisherman’s Wharf enjoying just being together. Mollie Tibbetts was jogging in a very small rural town in Iowa. With no apparent plan or forethought, two illegal aliens ended the lives of those young women and changed the course of human history for their families.

The next such loss of a young man or young woman could be YOUR child.

Murder by a Stranger

Play

Mueller’s Evil is Not Exclusive

By now you know a lot about Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his past. You have watched with me as the Trump-Russia investigation has virtually gone nowhere in 20 months. Yes, there have been indictments — but NOT of anyone or anything related to 2016 election-tampering collusion between Russians and members of the Trump Campaign. But Mueller does not give up. And he has a lapdog that owns a past in legal prosecutions that is more vicious and dogged than that of Mueller: Andrew Weissmann. Let’s meet Mr. Weissman.

Who is Andrew Weissmann?

       Andrew Weissmann

FBI Director Christopher Wray was an assistant attorney general in 2004 when he heaped praise on an ambitious Mafia-tested prosecutor while promoting him to the top of the Justice Department’s high-profile Enron task force. Wray specifically praised Andrew Weissmann for getting convictions against two Enron clients: accounting giant Arthur Andersen and executives at banking dynamo Merrill Lynch.

Andersen was finished as a company; four Merrill executives went to prison. Today, Weissmann stands as special counsel Robert Mueller’s top gun in a squadron of nearly 20 prosecutors and scores of FBI agents delving into Trump-Russia. Mr. Weissmann is leading the probe into the biggest target to date, Paul Manafort, President Trump’s onetime campaign manager. How Weissmann operated over a decade ago offers possible glimpses at how he carries out orders today from his longtime mentor, Robert Mueller.

He went to Texas from New York City in 2002 fresh from putting a number of Mafiosos in prison. By the time he left in 2005, he had rung up some impressive numbers, such as 22 guilty pleas and millions of dollars in restitution. But he also suffered historic courtroom losses. And how he won and how he lost is still the subject of bitter comments from his adversaries in Houston.

“Do not misunderstand my disdain for him with ineffectiveness or something not to be concerned with,” said Dan Cogdell, who represented three Enron defendants. “He’s a formable prosecutor. If I’m Donald Trump and I know the backstory of Andrew Weissmann, it’s going to concern me. There is no question about it.”

The backstory: Defense attorneys say Weissmann bent or broke the rules. As proof, they point to appeals court decisions, exhibits and witness statements.

They say he intimidated witnesses by threatening indictments, created crimes that did not exist and, in one case, withheld evidence that could have aided the accused. At one hearing, an incredulous district court judge looked down at an Enron defendant and told him he was pleading guilty to a wire fraud crime that did not exist. “Weissmann seemed more interested in obtaining convictions than in promoting justice,” said Tom Kirkendall, a Houston lawyer who represented an Enron executive.

Those convictions for which FBI Director Wray offered praise in 2004? Weissmann’s cases against Andersen and Merrill Lynch lay in shambles just a few years later.

The Supreme Court, in a 9-0 vote, overturned the Andersen conviction. A year later, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals erased all the fraud convictions against four Merrill Lynch managers. The jury had acquitted another defendant. “People went off to prison for a completely phantom of a case,” said Kirkendall.

Kirkendall became sort of an unofficial Enron historian. He observed goings-on at the Houston federal courthouse and blogged about what he considered a systematic miscarriage of justice. The task force, which ultimately would catapult prosecutors to lucrative careers, wanted to win as many convictions as possible. They were prosecuting players in one of the nation’s biggest corporate scandals. Enron bosses falsified balance sheets, inflated earnings and traded stocks with insider knowledge. By 2001, the mega-company went bankrupt. Its stock was worthless.

The Justice Department task force mobilized in 2002 and quickly won convictions. But there were dark sides. That’s where Sidney Powell enters the picture. The Dallas lawyer took the appeal of a Merrill Lynch figure. She obtained from Justice a batch of task force documents that should have been disclosed to trial attorneys years earlier. Justice prosecutors not connected to the Enron task force deliberately withheld evidence favorable to Stevens. A judge threw out his conviction.

Powell wrote a 2014 book about the scandals, “Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice.” “All of the cases Weissmann pushed to trial were reversed in whole or in part due to some form of his overreaching and abuses,” Powell said. “The most polite thing the Houston bar said about Weissmann was that he was a madman.”

It probably will come as no surprise that the special counsel’s office declined to comment about Weissmann’s track record. However, the Justice Department in 2012 and 2013 defended him against ethics complaints and concluded he did not violate the rules.

His hardball tactics seem intact today. Within weeks of his arrival in June, the FBI executed a no-knock, predawn raid on Mr. Manafort’s condo. Agents stayed for hours after waking up the target and his wife. Then a leak appeared in The New York Times. Mueller had informed Manafort that he would be indicted. It’s an old Enron tactic: Scare people into talking.

Arthur Anderson

With over 20,000 employees, Andersen stood as one of the country’s most prominent corporate auditors. The Securities and Exchange Commission began investigating Enron, an Andersen client. Auditors started destroying documents. Weissmann took the lead in prosecuting Andersen for obstruction of justice in 2002. Andersen’s defense: It followed company policy on when to destroy the confidential material.

Convicted at trial, a fatally damaged Andersen appealed. The Supreme Court eventually took the case. In 2005, the nation’s highest court overturned the conviction in a 9-0 opinion, a devastating judgment that shattered Weissmann’s showcase. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion, solo — a message of how seriously the high court took the breach. In essence, Rehnquist said the prosecutor sold the presiding judge on jury instructions that assured a conviction. “Indeed, it is striking how little culpability the instructions required,” Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote. “For example, the jury was told that, even if [Andersen] honestly and sincerely believed that its conduct was lawful, you may find [Andersen] guilty. The instructions also diluted the meaning of ‘corruptly’ so that it covered innocent conduct.”

Rehnquist wrote that the government (Weissmann) insisted, over defense objections, that the word “dishonestly” be excluded from the instructions and that the word “impede” be added. The chief justice went to the dictionary, read the meaning of “impede” and concluded it was “such innocent conduct” for someone to “impede” the government.

According to Attorney Powell, “Weissmann indicted them for conduct that was not criminal, and he took criminal intent out of the jury instructions that he then persuaded the judge to give.”

With a lack of sustaining clients, a mortally wounded Andersen put out a statement. “We are very pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision, which acknowledges the fundamental injustice that has been done to Arthur Andersen and its former personnel and retirees,” it said. In the end, the George W. Bush Justice Department put out of business a thriving accounting firm whose actions could have been handled in other ways short of felony charges. The pain? 10,000 Arthur Andersen employees were put on the street without jobs by an over-aggressive prosecutor.

Merrill Lynch

It became known as the Nigerian barge case. Weissmann induced indictments in 2003 against four Merrill Lynch executives, an Enron vice president, and an Enron accountant. He contended that Merrill and Enron entered into a sham transaction in 1999. The banker would buy three Enron barge-mounted power generators for $7 million purely to boost the Houston company’s balance sheet — and then Enron would buy them back at a profit. They were charged under a federal statute that normally requires proof that someone paid a bribe or received kickbacks that denigrated the business practices of “honest services.” There were no bribes or kickbacks. Five were convicted. The accountant — represented by Cogdell — heard the jury say, “Not guilty.”

Four of them appealed while serving time in prison. In 2006, the 5th Circuit reversed all the fraud charges, leaving just a perjury conviction against one executive, whom Powell came to represent on appeal. Again, the problem for Weissmann was his definition of a crime that greatly relaxed the standard for convictions. “We reverse the conspiracy and wire fraud convictions of each of the defendants on the legal ground that the government’s [Weissmann task force] theory of fraud relating to the deprivation of honest services is flawed,” the appeals court said. The opinion said the scheme may have been unethical but did not violate federal fraud laws. The court said that not all corporate fiduciary lapses are tantamount to crimes.

Attorney Kirkendall said the Enron trials in Houston were held “in a highly inflamed environment.” “The task force took advantage of that and convicted these men,” he said. “What it caused them and their families, you can just imagine.”

The government did not retry the five on fraud charges.

Concealed evidence

What the Merrill defense attorneys did not know during the trial was this: There were favorable witness statements that the prosecution withheld. In 2010, Justice began releasing confidential Enron task force documents. They showed that Weissmann’s team provided misleading summaries at the trial of raw witness statements to the FBI and to the grand jury. The disconnect became an issue in the appeal of Attorney Powell’s client, Merrill executive James A. Brown, in the Nigerian barge case. Although his fraud conviction went away, his perjury guilt stuck.

Powell was particularly struck by this: The government’s summary said a witness, Enron’s Jeffrey McMahon, “does not recall” a barge buyback agreement. In his actual interview, he said there was no deal. The prosecution badly distorted what he had said, depriving trial attorneys of information that could persuade a jury to acquit. Mr. McMahon was under threat of indictment and did not testify. The 5th Circuit agreed — to a point. “Favorable information was plainly suppressed from McMahon’s notes,” the court wrote. “The McMahon notes contain numerous passages that unequivocally state that it was McMahon’s understanding that there was only a ‘best efforts’ agreement and no ‘promise,’ whereas the government’s disclosure letter says only that McMahon ‘does not recall’ a guaranteed buyback.”

Even worse, the documents showed that Weissmann’s team yellow-highlighted favorable information that it deliberately withheld from its summaries presented in court. Yet the appeals court did not throw out the perjury conviction. It said the prosecution “flaw” was not material.

Chilling witnesses

When the task force brought indictments in July 2004 against the big cheese in the Enron saga — Kenneth L. Lay, Jeffrey Skilling, and Richard Cause — defense attorneys learned that Weissmann had done something even more far-reaching. In a sealed court document, he named 114 unindicted co-conspirators. Defense attorney Kirkendall did some research. He found that it was by far the largest number of such targeted people in the history of federally prosecuted white-collar crime.

Defendants at trial hoped that some Enron executives would testify on their behalf. But those hopes collapsed on the list of 114.

“Chilling effect, my ass,” said attorney Cogdell. “It was Ice Station Zebra. No one in their right mind would do anything that would upset the task force, specifically Weissmann.” It was evident Weissmann made the list for that exact reason: to scare potential witnesses.

Summary

Justice Department press releases in the 2000s would tout the number 30 as in over 30 people charged in the Enron saga. But final conviction count is short that number given that appeals courts eviscerated two major cases — Merrill Lynch and Arthur Andersen — while juries acquitted two people and partially acquitted others and two were allowed to withdraw guilty pleas. In all, 22 pleaded guilty and four trial convictions stuck.

Afterward, some task force prosecutors rose to significant government posts.

Weissmann joined Robert Mueller at the FBI and then arrived at a powerhouse New York law firm as a white-collar-crime defense specialist. He returned to the FBI as Mr. Mueller’s general counsel and, later, was appointed by the Obama administration as chief of Justice’s fraud unit in Washington.

FBI Director Christopher Wray, the Justice Department assistant attorney general who named him task force chief a decade ago, is now supplying Weissmann with the FBI manpower he needs to pursue Trump-Russia.

Kathryn Ruemmler prosecuted both the Merrill defendants and Lay-Skilling. Years later, she emerged in the prestigious post of White House counsel to President Obama.

Lisa Monaco, another task force prosecutor, stayed at Justice, was Mueller’s chief of staff and then went to the Obama White House as the president’s top counterterrorism adviser. She joined CNN as an analyst this year.

Weissmann has become Mueller’s bulldog in the Trump-Russia investigation. He is arrogant, forceful, demanding, and almost cruel. He spearheaded the pre-dawn raid of Mannafort’s home. Agents broke through the front door with no notice, startled Mannafort and his wife in bed, and ransacked their house damaging much in the way of furniture and fixtures. These tactics are NEVER used by law enforcement in white-collar crime cases. As is his norm, Weissmann by taking this approach sent messages to all those surrounding President Trump that this investigation was and is brutal, far-reaching, and that Weissmann has carte blanche to use whatever tactics in this investigation he chooses to use.
Plain and simple: Weissmann is an evil guy who thrives on power over others. Even though he is sworn to uphold the laws of the United States, he does almost anything and everything he needs to prevail in every case in which he is involved. And he does so with total disregard for the law or the fact that his perverting the law for his purposes has in the past destroyed the lives of innocent Americans. Yes, he has sent guilty people to jail. But his actions in the Enron and Merril Lynch and Arthur Andersen matters destroyed the lives of thousands of Americans. Even though those cases were overturned respectively by the U.S. Supreme Court and the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, people had already served time in prison, lost jobs, Arthur Andersen went out of business costing thousands of people millions of dollars. You cannot put the genie back in the bottle!
The question of the day regarding the current Trump-Russia investigation pertaining to the actions of Weissmann is: to what lengths is Weissmann willing to go to “get” the President? Is Weissmann so bent on prevailing in action against the President that he is willing to employ the same or similar tactics as he employed in Houston? Only time will tell.

 

Play

The “Truth” Part III: The Three Amigos

Mueller, Rosenstein, and Comey: three people from the Intelligence Community that play really important roles in the current U.S. political system. We know them all by name and title. But do we really KNOW them, or do we just know ABOUT them? Let’s look at their individual roles in current political matters and examine how they got to their current “positions.”

James Comey

Comey was a minor assistant US attorney in the late 90’s. He gained power and money by being the DOJ official who “investigated” and cleared Bill Clinton of any wrong-doing in Clinton’s pardon of criminal financier Marc Rich as Clinton was leaving the Presidency.  Many feel this was the beginning of a career for Comey in which he used his position and power to assist political folks in ways that only an incredibly connected D.C. lawyer could.  Comey reportedly provided “cover” for the Clintons in their gaining power and wealth after leaving office through pardoning a billionaire money-launderer, arms dealer, and criminal.  Comey was a key piece in how the Clintons gained incredible wealth through their foundation after leaving the White House.  A huge piece of that puzzle was giving Marc Rich a free pass when he should have spent life in prison.  This started a new “politicratic” life for Comey, making him powerful and wealthy.

That’s how Comey got his start to judicial system “Stardom.” He has far more than this in his past. Rather than a lengthy essay on his legal travels, follow these two links to stories posted previously on our website that detail the professional history of the former FBI Director:

http://truthnewsnet.org/who-is-james-comey-part-i/

http://truthnewsnet.org/who-is-james-comey-part-ii/

Rod Rosenstein

The Deputy Attorney General has lived a quiet life when compared to most in D.C. He grew-up in a Philadelphia suburb, graduated from Penn and Harvard. In 1995, Rosenstein joined the team of lawyers investigating the Whitewater scandal, which involved allegations of illegal real estate dealings by the Clintons. Rosenstein headed one of the few successful Whitewater prosecutions, which led to the conviction of former Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker and Clinton associates James and Susan McDougal.

Before ascending to the deputy attorney general post, Rosenstein spent more than a decade serving as a US attorney in Maryland. He is politically conservative and was appointed by President George W. Bush. But when Barack Obama took office, Rosenstein was one of only three US attorneys among 93 to be kept on the job by the new president.

As US attorney, Rosenstein led successful prosecutions for leaks of classified information, corruption, murders, and burglaries. But he is best known after being confirmed 94-6 by the U.S. Senate as Deputy Attorney General for writing a damning 1000 word letter to President Trump in which he excoriated James Comey’s action in the Clinton email investigation. Trump after receiving Rosenstein’s letter famously fired FBI Director Comey.

All know Rosenstein appointed Muller as Special Counsel in the Russian collusion investigation of the Trump Campaign. Since that appointment, Rosenstein has lived in constant turmoil as his actions in that case and others receive political assaults from both Houses of Congress for various reasons. The normal even-tempered deputy attorney general has blustered in Congressional hearings at the seemingly non-stop partisan drilling he has received from committee members. There have been many partisan calls for his impeachment for various reasons that have so far resulted in no action. (more about Rosenstein in our Summary below)

Robert Mueller

Mueller like Comey has a long, documented professional history. We have documented in several previous stories various chapters of his “speckled” past. Rather than repeat that here, please follow these links to get the “rest of the story” on Mueller. Then we will bring this all together with the shocking truth of where America stands with these three guys: the “Three Amigos.”

http://truthnewsnet.org/robert-mueller-who-is-he/

The “Three Amigos”

There is a longtime relationship between the Amigos who have been tasked with investigating President Trump, under the narrative of enforcing the law. James Comey worked in the DOJ directly under Mueller until 2005. Rod Rosenstein and Mueller go even further back.

James Comey wasn’t just an associate of Mueller back then, but rather his protégé. Under the George W. Bush presidency, when Comey was serving as Deputy Attorney General under John Ashcroft, Robert Mueller was Comey’s go-to guy when he needed help. The two men, as it came to light years later, together disobeyed potential White House orders to leave Ashcroft alone when he was incapacitated in March of 2004.

Rod Rosenstein, current Deputy Attorney General under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is also a member of the Mueller Gang, having worked directly under Robert Mueller at the Department of Justice as far back as 1990. When Comey was still working as the Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division for the U.S. Attorney’s office in New York, Mueller and Rosenstein became close.

We look back at Rosenstein’s loyal work for Hillary Clinton when he became a clean-up man for the Clinton Administration as an Associate Independent Counsel from 1995 until 1997. He supervised the investigation that found no basis for criminal prosecution of White House officials who had obtained classified FBI background reports. He allegedly covered for the Team Bill Clinton, including for Hillary, as she was one of the people who had access to the reports, and may have even requested them. Not surprisingly, no indictments were filed.

Rosenstein was appointed to work in the U.S. Office of the Independent Counsel under Ken Starr on the Whitewater Investigation into then-President Bill Clinton. The Clintons escaped culpability once again. Rosenstein had help from his co-worker James Comey, who worked to see the Clintons were exonerated during the Whitewater affair.

Mueller seemed to be shepherding Rosenstein and Comey, leading them in careers along the way. Knowing the close personal and legal relationships between these three, it should come as no surprise that once Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russia Collusion Conspiracy investigation and turned it over to his deputy Rod Rosenstein, that Rosenstein would reach out to his old mentor for help. And it should have surprised no one when three of the top federal attorneys from the past find themselves together in a questionable quest to find wrongdoing by President Trump. But it surprised many.

Enter Lisa Barsoomian, wife of Rod Rosenstein. Lisa is a high-powered attorney in Washington, DC, who specializes in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the Intelligence Communities. She works for R. Craig Lawrence, an attorney who has represented Robert Mueller three times, James Comey five times, Barack Obama forty-five times, Kathleen Sebelius fifty-six times, Bill Clinton forty times, and Hillary Clinton seventeen times between 1991 and 2017.

Barsoomian participated in some of this work personally and has herself represented the FBI at least five separate times. It would be great to research the specifics of the cases she worked in, but many of the documents from the Court Dockets relating to these cases have been removed from the D.C. District and Appeals Court, including records of her representation for Clinton in 1998’s case Hamburg. V. Clinton.

The “Three Amigos” have surprisingly obvious conflicts of interest in their past and current investigatory responsibilities. Mueller even acted as a delivery boy for Hillary’s State Department, hand transporting ten grams of highly enriched uranium under the auspices of counter-terror. Was it a coincidence that this happened at the same time as Hillary and her associate John Podesta were nurturing the Uranium One deal that would see Russia take control over 20% of America’s proven uranium reserves? Shortly after the Russia uranium deal closed, the Clinton Foundation was showered with many millions of dollars from Russian donors.

Comey, Rosenstein, and Mueller are truly the “Three Amigos” of the Deep State. Only time will show us what their true intentions were in the FBI investigation of the Clinton email server and the current investigation of the Trump Campaign. But from historical interactions between the three, it is almost certain the three are working in tandem for whatever their objectives in these investigations may be.

Summary

Here’s the Grand Finale of all this: Robert Mueller’s appointment by Rod Rosenstein as Special Counsel violates the law!

Here is the Special Counsel law used to appoint Mueller:

§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and –

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

There are multiple sleazy actions taken by the Mueller team — obviously with the approval of Rosenstein — in this action.
  • There was no criminal investigation underway by the FBI and no evidence of criminal activity;
  • Rosenstein’s appointment of Mueller stated the following:

“The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James 8. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including: any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a). If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.”

Here’s the problem with this: according to the law shown above, a Special Counsel can be appointed when “he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted.” A criminal matter worth investigating was NOT the predicate for Mueller’s appointment!

And it gets even deeper. Remember that Rosenstein wrote another memo later that was hidden from public view for a long time? That memo was to amend the first appointment memo quoted above to allow Mueller to investigate things that were not shown to be criminal. The problem is that the Special Counsel law was passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. No member of the Justice Department or any agency of the Government has authority to change any duly passed law or even amend its stated purpose without Congressional approval.

Rosenstein had NO authority to appoint Mueller in the first place. Why? The FBI investigation under Comey had unearthed NOTHING that could be considered a criminal action. And Rosenstein’s second memo written to Mueller to try and justify his illegal initial appointment further proved the wrongdoing.

What will this mean in the long run?

This is my opinion only, but I think the facts of this illegal appointment will result in the entire Mueller investigation, its indictments of those Russians, the guilty pleas of Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos will be thrown out. And further, I believe that any of the actions taken by Mueller against Paul Manafort that may result in a conviction will be ruled void. Why? “The fruit of the poison tree.” The very foundation of the Mueller Investigation was invalid, illegal, and uncalled for.

There are several sad things about this debacle: General Michael Flynn was virtually blackmailed into his guilty plea. He was interviewed by Peter Strozk but was not represented by his attorney during the interview and was not under oath. He pled guilty to keep his son from being charged. FBI agents later said they did not feel he told any untruth during that interview!

Papadopoulos was pretty much trapped in a similar scenario. And Paul Manafort is being nailed to a tree for actions taken a decade ago regarding financial matters that Rosenstein and others at the time these were discovered decided they were not worth charging Manafort back then!

What are all these people actually guilty of? Supporting Donald Trump, and nothing more.

The “Three Amigos” are leaving a black mark on the history of the greatest law enforcement department in the World by bending the law and railroading good people. No matter the outcome, we are seeing the Deep State attacking the fabric of the American Justice System like happens only in third-world countries.

How will this end?

Play
WP2FB Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com