All the leaks coming out about the Russia-Trump probe point to Robert Mueller moving towards an obstruction charge which will cause a constitutional crisis according to several prominent attorneys.
Robert Mueller appears to be going for a thought crime and is exploring President Trump’s motives if the media accounts are true.
President Trump is accused of attempting to fire Robert Mueller in June, one month after he fired James Comey. The Times story has four anonymous sources and the White House has refused comment.
President Trump was asked about it at Davos18 and he called it “fake news”. When asked directly, he replied, “fake news, folks, fake news. Typical New York Times fake stories.”
It’s not a new story but it has been reconstituted to show “intent”. It looks like the media thinks Mueller is exploring Trump’s motives in firing Jim Comey which has been somewhat obvious since the beginning.
This story of Trump wanting to fire Comey was out last June and the timing of it coming out now is highly suspicious. It comes out as The Memo is being discussed and about to be released. It also taking attention from the President who is having another successful overseas trip as he talks to other businessmen, the wealthiest and most influential in the world. It comes out as the President’s successful economic agenda is being lauded.
The Times Story Is A Reconstituted Old Story
On June 12, 2017, the President’s longtime friend Chris Ruddy said in part to Judy Woodruff on PBS News Hour that the President was considering firing Mueller for several conflicts of interest but “it would be a significant mistake”.
Ruddy mentioned two of the three reasons the Times listed for Trump wanting to fire Mueller on the basis of conflicts of interest: the fact that Mueller had represented the Trump family and the fact he interviewed for a job with the administration.
The other reason the New York Times mentioned but Mr. Ruddy didn’t is: Mr Mueller abandoned his membership of the Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Virginia in 2011, over a fee dispute.
None of those reasons would fly and the idea seemed to drop. What is new, but which was rumored about, is that the White House Counsel was “ordered” to fire Mueller and threatened to quit.
That goes to “intent.”
It might not be what Mueller is looking into but the Times is suggesting it.
The fact is Trump didn’t do it and when the Democrats railed in December that Trump was going to fire Mueller, it was not true at that time
According to the story, White House counsel Donald McGahn said the sacking would have a “catastrophic effect” on the presidency, the New York Times reported. McGahn also allegedly said that Trump never had any intention of doing it alone.
Why Should We Believe It?
Every single time the President has traveled abroad, a story like this leaks. It looks planned.
The media has been 90% against the President and many “news” stories have been debunked along the way. The ad hominem attacks come daily and they are not legitimate news stories.
Any issue that points to collusion by Hillary Clinton or the Podestas or even the FBI is immediately debunked or ignored by mainstream media. The media is corrupt.
The media also defuses any impact the Page-Strzok texts might have and the big three barely report on them. The texts are damning, but, to be fair, Mueller did remove Peter Strzok when he found out. On the same token, he hired some very biased people to serve on his team.
The Strzok-Page investigation is a real one although Attorney General Jeff Sessions does not see the need for a Special Counsel.
Also of concern is the dossier which was used in part to obtain the FISA warrant. It looks to some that FBI agents were used by the Hillary campaign to abuse FISA law, and the Obama DOJ and FISC signed off on the abuses.
Trump’s thoughts are being explored but Hillary was exonerated and given very special treatment. Guilty parties were given immunity, the exoneration letter was altered and written before key witnesses and Hillary testified. The investigation of Hillary’s server was a bad joke.
Hillary was exonerated when there was undeniable proof of guilt, but Mueller might be going after Trump for his “intent”, his “motives”. Does any special prosecutor have the right to go after the President’s thoughts? Do we convict people for thought crimes? That will bring us to a constitutional crisis.
The October spying FISA warrant was based in part on the unverified dossier. As it happens, Steele appears to have never even set foot in Russia to compile the document, according to Paul Sperry at the NY Post. He hadn’t been in Russia for 17 years. The is according to newly released transcripts of Steele testimony. Steele has been referred criminally for lying about the dissemination of the dossier.
Sperry believes Steele relied on an ex-journalist-turned-p.r. consultant to do much of his investigating in Russia. In fact, this non-intelligence figure may be his main “Russian source” of information. He is a man who also hates Trump — Edward Baumgartner.
Steele used a network of subsources and one of those who contributed the key material worked not for Steele but for Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson who was at the time working for the Clinton campaign and the DNC while talking with the FBI. Simpson also hired the wife of the top FBI figure Bruce Ohr.
Sperry makes the point that Steele has been touted as the author with the sterling reputation but he relied on others less ‘sterling’ to author it.
In the interest of giving a complete picture, it is important to note that the FISA warrant did include other information as a basis for the spying on Trump’s campaign and it might have included intel from the Dutch.
Dutch Spies Tipped Off the FBI
There are other reasons for the FISA warrant which might make the dossier less relevant. A Dutch newspaper and television show reported that The Netherlands spy service broke into computers used by Russian hackers Cozy Bear and caught them hacking the DNC. There were videos purportedly. The Dutch are said to have tipped off the FBI, but we don’t know for sure.
The Dutch General Intelligence and Security Service penetrated the network used by the Russian cyberspies in mid-2014 and watched them for at least a year, even managing to catch the hackers on camera.
This is the group that CrowdStrike said hacked the DNC servers. Dutch intelligence has refused to comment.
We need to know more about the Dutch spies. If the Dutch tipped off the FBI, it was likely used in the FISA warrant, giving more legal grounds for it. However, then-NSD chief John Carlin went to the FISA court and admitted wronging in obtaining FISA warrants. That suggests wrongdoing in the unmasking and spying on the Trump campaign.
‘The Memo’ about DoJ/FBI corruption authored by Devin Nunes and other Republicans is being dismissed as talking points and delegitimized with Russian troll stories.
Devin Nunes is a serious congressman and if he believes there is “shocking” intelligence showing corruption at the DoJ/FBI, why won’t the Democrats let it be released so Americans can decide for themselves? Oh, right, Adam Schiff thinks we’re too stupid, we won’t “understand” it.
Paul Sperry of the New York Post has sources who tell him Christopher Steele and Glenn Simpson will be “in a world of hurt when this 4-pp memo + the underlying docs hit the fan.”
The Constitutional Crisis
That being said, it looks like Mueller was originally going after Russia-Trump collusion which is not a crime in of itself unless Trump’s team acted illegally in some way. More concerning is that he also appears to be going after an obstruction case for which he is trying to prove “intent”.
Can Trump be tried and impeached?
President Trump fired Jim Comey, who, by the way, deserved to be fired, but was his ‘intent’ in the firing to end the Russia investigation? He publicly suggested it was one of his reasons. Mueller is looking into Trump’s mind and motives to see if he can get him on the thought crime of intent.
A month later, Trump allegedly ordered Robert Mueller fired, according to the NY Times, but his chief counsel said he would quit. The Times makes it appear as if Trump only backed off because he didn’t have support, not because it’s wrong. At the time, the President was being told by many of his supporters, including Newt Gingrich, to fire Mueller because there appears to be no legal basis for the probe and Mueller hired Clinton donors. Perhaps out of inexperience, and not the nefarious reasons cited by MSM, Trump did want to fire Mueller in June based on the encouragement of his allies. In other words, who gets to decide Trump’s motives? Mueller thinks it’s him.
If Mueller thinks he can prove Trump intended to obstruct justice, that brings us closer to a case of obstruction.
Comey said Trump asked him for a loyalty oath which Trump denies. He also said that Trump suggested he go easy on Lt. Gen. Flynn. “I hope you can let this go,” Comey quoted Trump as saying. Comey suspected obstruction but did not take action.
If Mueller brings charges, he will say Trump engaged in unwarranted firings and willingly lied about it. There is little doubt that an interview of Trump by Mueller puts him in danger of being caught in a process crime like lying. The FBI can ensnare almost anyone and Trump is imprecise and shoots from the hip when he speaks. We also don’t know if a financial case is being built against Trump or his family.
If an obstruction case is presented, it will also be sent to the House for possible impeachment.
On one side of the Trump assault are hysterical Democrats who launched into impeachment tirades before Trump was even inaugurated. Their team includes almost every media outlet, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, social media, and a slew of wealthy leftists like George Soros and Tom Steyer. The hate coming from the media and the left is visceral. If anyone says a positive word about the President or just mentions a fact that supports his case, they are eviscerated.
On the other side are loyalists to the Republic who don’t want to see a Socialist USA and view Trump as the only one able and willing to fight for it. At the same time, Robert Mueller appears to be close to moving in on an obstruction of justice charge.
We are headed for a constitutional crisis. Prominent attorney and former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said a special prosecutor has no right to probe someone’s mind to determine his motives. That issue can be taken to the Supreme Court. Famed law professor Jonathan Turley has said much the same. Listen to Mr. Dershowitz explain:
Former president Obama flouted the Constitution and the rule of law continuously. He did it with DACA and DAPA. He believed the Constitution needed to be reformed by him. Obama legislated from the White House. Going after someone for intent, should it come to pass, is an attack on our rule of law.