collusion, Gerald Nadler, Hillary Clinton, justice system, obstruction of justice, overcriminalization, President tTrump, probable cause, socialist worker's paradise, socialists, unscrupulous political federal prosecutors, witch hunt
As I’m sure you know by now, gentle readers, Congressional Democrat/socialists are going all out on a Trump fishing expedition. “Fishing expedition” because there is no evidence of any crime Mr. Trump may have committed, certainly not as president. There is no reason to believe he has committed a crime, but Democrats, afflicted with self-induced Trump Derangement Syndrome, driven by debilitating hatred and a self-righteous determination to overturn the will of the American people for daring to vote for the wrong person, just know Mr. Trump is guilty of something, and they’re going to move heaven and earth to find it. If they can’t, they’ll just make something up, and the Media, their propaganda arm, will gladly help. Scott Morefield writes at Townhall.com:
I am an innocent man being persecuted by some very bad, conflicted people in a Witch Hunt that is illegal & should never have been allowed to start,’ President Donald Trump tweeted on Sunday in yet another understandable expression of frustration at the fact that the investigatory wheels now seem to be churning into every aspect of his private, public, and business life.
Former Trump attorney and ‘fixer’ Michael Cohen unwittingly made some of Trump’s case for him during last week’s testimony, stating for the nation to hear that, while he did not believe Trump colluded with the Russians – the entire basis upon which the Mueller investigation was founded – he was sure that Trump has, at some point in his life, committed ‘illegal acts.
In other words, “so we don’t have any evidence of a crime, ever, but so what? We have subpoena powers, and we’re going to dig and dig and dig and find something, anything, because we just know Trump’s guilty, guilty, guilty!”
What those ‘illegal acts’ actually are, however, are anyone’s guess. Do they involve the super-serious ‘crime’ of Trump using his own money (instead of campaign funds, which would presumably have been totally OK to use) to pay off alleged mistresses? Do they involve the Trump Foundation, improper expenditures by Trump’s inaugural committee, some aspect of the Trump Organization’s business dealings over the past decades, or whether or not Trump himself paid the proper taxes on profits from a lemonade stand he may or may not have operated when he was eleven?
Who knows? But what we do know is what many of us guessed when Robert Mueller was first appointed in 2017 – that his investigation inevitably would expand far beyond its original intent, that the whole ‘Russia’ nonsense was nothing more than a pretext to perfectly place a duly-elected president into the crosshairs of America’s ever-churning ‘justice’ system, where if one looks hard and far back enough one can almost certainly find at least one violation of our nation’s thousands of criminal laws and criminally-punishable regulations.
Fishing expeditions are always improper, and always dangerous to the survival of our constitutional republic. But because socialists honor the Constitution only when it’s convenient for their political/social goals, and otherwise treat it as an irrelevant impediment, they have no concern for the survival of the republic they want to “fundamentally transform” into a socialist worker’s paradise.
When it works properly, which is thankfully most of the time, our criminal justice system is a bulwark of our liberties. Police officers have very limited time and resources. There are very few of them—most people would be stunned to know just how few—and so very many of us. They focus their attention on actual criminals, normally discovered as a result of investigating crimes already committed. Officers occasionally stumble on a crime in progress, but that’s not the norm.
Police officers discover a crime, or at the least, the high likelihood a crime has been committed, and they work forward, finding evidence to prove not only that a specific crime has occurred, but that a specific person committed it. This finding is known as “probable cause,” a term directly from the 4thAmendment. It means facts and circumstances that would convince a reasonable police officer a crime has been committed and a specific person has committed it. In this pursuit, they use narrowly drawn statutes the average citizen can understand. Competent officers do not make arrests based on vague or confusing statutes; it’s not fair.
Honest prosecutors review the officer’s reports to ensure they had sufficient probable cause for arrest. It is then their duty to determine if they can prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, each and every offense in court. Sometimes, even though an officer had more than sufficient probable cause for arrest, a prosecutor might determine witnesses required to make the case have such severe credibility problems, they can’t prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and drop the charges. There are other legal issues that might also cause them to decline to prosecute, even though an officer did their job appropriately.
It’s not common, but judges presented an insufficient case, can dismiss it before it ever gets to trial, or at any point during a trial.
These are significant safeguards, but they all rest on the proper progression of the resources of the system. There is a crime, and an investigation identifies the criminal and develops sufficient evidence for arrest and trial. When the resources of the state are used to first identify someone corrupt officials would like to destroy, and the system works backward to try to manufacture crimes and evidence, everyone’s liberties are at risk. Americans have to be able to trust the justice system, a trust that doesn’t come easily these days, thanks to Socialists.
Traditionally, federal criminal law focused on inherently wrongful conduct: treason, murder, bank robbery, theft, counterfeiting, and the like,’ writes the Heritage Foundation. ‘Today, the federal criminal code reaches an unimaginably broad range of conduct. The number of criminal offenses in the U.S. Code increased from 3,000 in the early 1980s to 4,000 by 2000 and more than 4,450 by 2008. There are countless more criminal laws and regulations at the state and local levels.
Why are there so many federal crimes? Because politicians have a political need to be seen to be “doing something!” about issues, real or imagined. It’s the worst form of virtue signaling. Federal crimes should be limited to only crimes against the United States, not crimes universally prosecuted by the individual states. Making everything a crime, duplicating conduct that is criminal in every state, is a terrible use of federal law enforcement assets. Generally speaking, federal prosecutors understand this, and leave most such prosecutions to the states.
Unfortunately, unscrupulous, political federal prosecutors—and no one can any longer reasonably deny they exist—initiate political prosecutions. This is much more likely—on the state and local levels—to be done in democrat ruled states and cities, and on the federal level nationwide.
In his 2009 book ‘Overcriminalization: The Limits of the Criminal Law,’ legal scholar Douglas Husak contends that even a citizen who desires to abide by law cannot possibly know what those laws are, much less how to follow them to the letter.
‘Husak cites estimates that more than 70 percent of American adults have committed a crime that could lead to imprisonment,’ writes Stephen Carter of The Chicago Tribune. ‘He quotes the legal scholar William Stuntz to the effect that we are moving toward ‘a world in which the law on the books makes everyone a felon.
By all means, take the link and read the whole article. Federal statues are so voluminous, hidden in unrelated legislation, and often so vague and confusing, it’s impossible for the man or woman of reasonable intelligence to know what is or is not unlawful conduct. Prosecutors can easily twist, or ignore, whatever they wish, as in the case of Hillary Clinton’s criminal exposure of our nation’s secrets. The execrable James Comey, assuming the role of Attorney General, decided the relevant statutes required actual criminal intent. They did and do not, and other Americans have been jailed for far less serious and inadvertent violations of the same laws. Clinton’s were knowing and willful. The fact is, if a federal prosecutor wants to put someone in prison, they have the full resources of the federal government to expend, and a blinding blizzard of vague, even obscure, statutes to employ. That’s why it’s so important to begin with a real crime and seek a suspect, rather than beginning with a political enemy and seeking a crime.
‘how Me The Man, And I’ll Show You The Crime”’- former Soviet NKVD chief Lavrentiy Beria
Liberal Harvard professor and attorney Alan Dershowitz wrote in the New York Times of the ‘bulwark’ against the jailing of political enemies that has ever-so-steadily ‘eroded’ thanks to the “use of politically neutral but overly malleable laws on obstruction of justice, corruption and conspiracy that can be used to prosecute the ethically questionable, but not necessarily criminal, activities of political rivals.
And this is where Donald Trump comes in. Is it possible he has violated some federal law at some time in the past? If so, what does that have to do with his tenure as president? The American people elected him knowing he’s not in the running for sainthood. In fact, by the standards socialists are employing, there is no American safe from political prosecution, which is the current danger.
We now have the bizarre spectacle of a President Of The United States forced to declare himself innocent of no offense whatever, but every possible offense Socialists might be able to dig up, or more likely, spin and infer, from his distant past, events having nothing whatever to do with his campaign and even less to do with his presidency.
Federal prosecutors, the special counsel, and congressional socialists are not investigating known crimes, they’re looking for crimes to hang around Donald Trump’s neck because he’s Donald Trump and not Hillary Clinton. It is not the function of the Congress to investigate crimes–that’s the role of the executive branch–and it is surely not their function to try to manufacture them. Cries of “we’re exercising oversight,” are nonsense on stilts. President Trump, and everyone the socialists try to involve in the pursuit of Mr. Trump, should refuse to cooperate. There is no probable cause to be found. President Trump is right: this is a political witch hunt meant to punish Mr. Trump, and anyone associated in any way with him, for daring to lawfully beat Hillary Clinton.
The socialists don’t love Hillary Clinton, but they knew they could manipulate her, and use her to further their long-term goals. Trump has interfered in the inevitable bending of the arc of history toward social justice. They want to destroy him, and in so doing, warn everyone not to interfere with them in the future. They want to put normal Americans, the God and gun clingers, the deplorabies, the pickup truck driving, WalMart stinking, toothless, cousin marrying, irredeemables who live their meaningless, stupid and pointless little lives in the vast, unsophisticated wasteland of flyover country in their place, once and for all. They want to explain to them: “shut up!”
The destruction of Donald Trump is just the first step—into a fractured country beyond redemption.