Posted on 06/04/2019 6:02:01 AM PDT by Kaslin
It's a familiar quote from Charles Dickens' classic "Oliver Twist," but with special contemporary relevance in light of a statement last week by Special Counsel Robert Mueller: "'If the law supposes that,' said Mr. Bumble... 'the law is a ass -- a idiot.'"
But it isn't so much that the law is fractured, rather it is practitioners who sometimes do it an injustice.
In a statement at the Justice Department during which he resigned and announced the closing of his office, Mueller said this about indicted Russian hackers who attempted to influence the outcome of the 2016 election: "These indictments contain allegations and we are not commenting on the guilt or the innocence of any specific defendant. Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty."
Moments later, Mueller said about President Trump and allegations (mostly by Democrats and the media) that he obstructed justice: "...if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime."
So it's innocent until proven guilty for the Russians, who are never going to be tried in the United States, and an insinuation of guilt until he proves himself innocent for the president of the United States? This is standing justice on its head.
In an interview with CBS News, Attorney General William Barr said he believes Mueller could have come to a conclusion as to whether the president obstructed justice. When he didn't, Barr said he concluded he did not, based on the evidence.
That Mueller had nothing to say about what Trump dismisses as the "phony" Steele Dossier, which led to a FISA warrant allowing the FBI to spy (Barr's word) on the Trump campaign, or the role of Hillary Clinton and Democratic Party in paying for the dossier, further corrupts the law and establishes a double standard as the only standard by which some politicians and members of the Establishment live.
It should also be remembered that, though Mueller himself is a registered Republican, most of the attorneys on his team were registered Democrats. A handful donated money to Clinton's 2016 campaign. Just how much confidence should be placed in a report put together by such people can be answered by asking about the confidence one might place in a report about a Democratic president and a team of Republican lawyers.
Thankfully, the Justice Department's inspector general, Michael Horowitz, may offer more information as soon as this week, which could incriminate the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party for alleged corrupt activities in the last election. Additional information is likely to be forthcoming from U.S. Attorney John Durham, named by Barr to investigate the origins of surveillance of the Trump campaign.
This is likely what the left and the media fear most. While they are unable to counter the good economic news, their only hope to keep Trump from being re-elected is to remove him from office on charges of obstruction and corruption, or drive down his approval numbers in hopes of defeating him. Some polls show that strategy isn't working.
In his farewell remarks, Mueller said his more than 400-page report is the last word. Some in Congress from both parties want him to testify. Mueller said he has nothing to add to the report, but there is more to say and Mueller should be required to say it.
House Democrats may not want to have Mueller appear because Republicans will ask tough questions. Could this be why they are desperately trying to change the subject by seeking Trump's taxes and bank records dating back to before he became president?
At some point, many voters are going to look at this as persecution of the president, which can only add to his prospects in 2020.
A DeeCee cesspool reptile in the system of (not injustice), but ANTI-Justice!!!
That would be nice but on what basis? Do you have information about an investigation or pending charges against Mueller?
Or are you just expressing wishful thinking?
I have come to the conclusion that Meuller was totally a bad guy. At some point he flipped. What if he set up the 16 Dems on the SC Team. That could be his buy out of some significance. Meuller was caught early and placed on the SC because he could control AW, PS, LP, JR and others. Now we are hearing about transcripts(Dowd) being changed/edited. Meuller would not have done this personally. He is fully aware. He is fully culpable of treason and is trying to buy his way out.
Don’t let the GOP tell you that Mueller is a good guy.
The Mueller Report is quickly turning to dust.
The first half of the Mueller Report is easily summed up as “no collusion.” And even that gives it too much credit, because it claims that suspicion of Trump-Russia collusion started with Popodoplous. No, that was the cover story - the whole slimey Clinton (not to be repetitive) operation against Trump was started by Hillary Clinton and her minions, and the (two-year!) “investigation” never turned up anything other than Clinton slime against Trump.The second half of the Mueller Report is easily summed up as character assassination of Mr. Trump. "...if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so” is easily deflated by noting that “If I had confidence that Robert Mueller was not a low-down snake in the grass, I would say so now.” Pure sleaze.
Or are you just expressing wishful thinking?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes, the Mueller Investigation Has Obstructed Justice;
Did Hillary work a deal with Britain to have Americans
stay in Benghazi to protect Brit equipment left behind?
Janitor's view ^ | 05/30/19 | Reasonmclucus / FR Posted by kathsua
The people who talk about obstruction of justice in Robert Mueller's investigation appear unaware that in the United States the prosecution can be guilty of obstruction of justice. Most people don't understand that the Bill of Rights provisions regulating law enforcement were added to the Constitution to prevent corrupt law enforcement agencies from misusing the criminal justice system to harass political activists. One of the worst abuses in British legal history was the "Star Chamber" proceeding which allowed the use of secret unsubstantiated allegations against the accused, especially political activists.
The involvement of British intelligence agent Christopher Steele in the investigation in effect makes it a form of Star Chamber proceeding. I know he says he's retired, but think about it. Obviously, if he's on a "secret mission" for the British government, he's not going to say "I'm on a secret mission to discredit Donald Trump." He's going to say "I'm retired." I have enough respect for Britain's MI6 to believe that it can arrange for agents on secret assignments to appear to have "jobs" that have no connection to the British government.
American courts need to know how information is obtained, Agents like Steele need to keep some information and sources of information secret. Courts need to know the truth. Agents must be able to lie convincingly such as when the British overstated the status of Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction. Regardless of whether or not Steele prepared the Trump dossier on assignment for his government, the dossier appears to be the type of propaganda piece an agent might prepare for his government. It's not important whether Steele's document caused the Mueller investigation or merely encouraged it. What is important is that allowing a foreign agent to encourage a criminal investigation of an American politician allows other countries to meddle in our politics by providing evidence to destroy politicians they don't like.
Consider a hypothetical situation that could have occurred before the 2016 election. A country wishing to hurt Hillary Clinton might have secretly provided incriminating emails to Wikileaks. Any country that has Hillary emails won't want our government to know it has emails with information about American procedures, personnel and goals so emails would have to be distributed secretly.
What if such emails indicated Hillary had worked out a deal with Britain to have Americans stay in Benghazi to protect equipment the British left behind when a terrorist attack caused them to evacuate the area in exchange for something like a contribution to the Clinton Foundation or unspecified help if Hillary ran for president? The emails could not have been used to start a criminal investigation because government could not have verified that the documents were authentic unaltered emails which had been obtained in accordance with American laws.......if Russia had been really anxious to elect Trump wouldn't it have tried to secretly distribute real or fake Clinton emails?
=======================================
(HAT TIP CHRIS STIGALL)
Self-serving cronies Mueller and Comey pulling the same tricks:
<><> abusing their govt positions
<><> undermining our institutions
<><> in it for their own vanity and partisan wishes
<><> saving (Hillary); tarnishing (Trump)
<><> pumping themselves as straight-shooting paragons of virtue.
In sum:
Deep State Clinton investigation: “We have conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, but we don’t believe she intended to."
Deep State Trump investigation: “We can’t find any conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, but we’re certain he intended to.”
20 posted on 6/5/2019, 10:25:34 AM by Liz ( Our side has 8 trillion bullets; the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.)
It's going to need some polishing up around the edges some. A little tightening up here and there.
Besides the speculation you present, I see no evidence or investigation that could result in charges against Mueller for prosecutorial obstruction of justice.
I see how you threw that red herring out there about British equipment in Benghazi, Star Chambers and fake emails in the middle of this question about evidence of Mueller obstructing justice. Since you have no evidence, I understand.
But until you've got evidence and a prosecutor to present it to a grand jury, Mueller will walk without a crime.
Such is life in the USofA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.