Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Trump Is Not a Second-Class President
There is a lot of breathless pearl-clutching going on because Trump just ordered an investigation into the allegedly bogus surveillance of his campaign allegedly for national security reasons (but possibly for political reasons).
They say that Trump is interfering with an investigation by targeting those who started the investigation. But all prosecutions are subject to scrutiny. We do not allow prosecutors in this country to act with impunity – they are constrained by the law and must operate under appropriate oversight.
But, but … Trump is interfering in an investigation in which he is a target. No. He is not the target of a criminal investigation. The initial investigation (which might have been an inappropriate abuse of gov’t power to aid Hillary and stop Trump) was a counter-intelligence investigation. The subsequent Mueller probe was also started as a counter-intelligence probe. Now that it has morphed into a criminal investigation, Trump is still not the target.
But, but … Trump does not have the right to interfere in an ongoing investigation. Wrong. Trump is not a second-class President, stricken of his Article II powers under the Constitution. He can order an investigation of anyone. Presidents do that. There just has to be probable cause. The NY Times published the evidence of probable cause this week.
But, but … he is demanding that the FBI expose classified information to Congress. Yeah, and that is something all Presidents can do. He can classify or declassify any document and he can direct who sees any document.
Moreover, even if Trump were a defendant in a criminal case (and he is not), we allow defendants to see all evidence against them and, more importantly, they can see exculpatory evidence that a prosecutor would like to keep secret. The exception to that rule is national security – but again Trump is President. He can determine who sees what as far as national security is concerned. The FBI is not allowed to keep secrets from the President.
But, but … he is subjecting the sacred FBI to a criminal investigation. No, he has asked the Office of the Inspector General to look into this. They do not have prosecutorial power. They may find crimes and refer people for later prosecution, but they cannot compel non-employees to testify (as I understand it). They gather facts. This investigation is gathering facts — not prosecuting anybody.
Only if the Obama administration illegally surveilled his political opposition (which is not a big stretch of the imagination, given what his IRS did to the Tea Party groups who opposed him in 2012) will anyone be prosecuted.
And if that happens, only selected individuals will be prosecuted and only if there is sufficient evidence to support a prosecution. They are not investigating all 10,000 employees of the FBI. Some people should avail themselves of a dictionary and learn about synecdoche. Sometimes we refer to a group to mean selected members of that group. When we say “the FBI is under investigation now” we mean Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Weissman and Lisa Page. Maybe more, but we’ll start there. They ran a very curious investigation that began without much if any, judicial oversight — one that seems particularly political in nature.
And they reported back to their boss, Obama.
Published in Politics
Wow, I like every word of this.
Somebody is guilty of crimes here, or at least it certainly seems so. If someone is interested in justice, why wouldn’t they support the investigation of anyone involved here if the facts indicated further examination. Why is it only Trump?
Ironically, Trump seems to be the only one here who hasn’t broken the law.
The NYT put 25 reporters on Trump in 2015. If he had ever jay walked, we would know it.
”synecdoche “, there’s a word I did not know until a minute ago. I think I’ll use it on my wife tonight.
It’s fun to say, too. Sounds like a city in upstate New York.
Or of course a great movie by Charlie Kaufman.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0383028/
Reminds me of what the press did with Sarah Palin. Didn’t find anything there either. Didn’t matter . . . .
Wow. Great cast.
Posted in in the other thread a few minutes earlier but it actually fits here better:
Marshals to the front.
An interesting option for Trump and Kelly would be to have the AG task his direct report, the U.S. Marshal Service with special security and enforcement services, i.e. secure data and enforce its procurement from other, uncooperative agencies within the DOJ. The DAG must not be involved or reported to in this matter given the obvious conflict of interest.
As a move it circumvents procedural matters, focuses the public and the organisations, brings the right, enforcement capable and oldest and rather trusted federal law enforcement agency to the forefront and ensures swift and relentless action. Notably, the investigative capacity of the USMS should not be underestimated. If any of the related agencies resist the Marshals can always use their SOG teams.
The service of Wyatt Earp and deputies against the Obama regime holdovers and the legacy of Comey, Clapper, Brennan. My money is on Earp.
Be careful Doc. Words like that can sometimes lead to a bigger family.
No one ever mentions John Huber. He was appointed by Sessions several months ago to investigate the FBI and DOJ. He has the power to investigate and prosecute. He can and maybe already has called a secret grand jury. He is in Utah, away from the swamp, and nobody is paying any attention to him. Sessions has linked the IG to Huber. There may be a lot going on that we are not hearing about.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/sessions-assigned-a-federal-prosecutor-and-thats-better-for-trump-than-a-2nd-special-counsel_2483844.html
Rather than list them all, here is a google search page containing many articles concerning Sessions/Huber/IG:
https://www.google.com/search?q=does+john+huber+have+an+impannelled+grand+jury&oq=does+john+huber+have+an+impannelled+grand+jury&aqs=chrome..69i57.21462j1j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Agreed on the prosecutor, his capacity and report with the IG. The Marshalls would be complementary to the prosecutor’s investigation and a tool to actually secure, obtain and relay materials, especially at a time when the other federal agency is seen to be in convulsion about some key members of its past and current senior level staff.
This seems highly likely.
Trump just cancelled the North Korea Summit. Mike Pompeo just read the letter that Trump sent to the NK leader – I had chills hearing it – but they said, it was not unexpected given the blustering that Kim had to make beforehand to show ‘he was in charge’. Trump left the door open and was cordial – it was the right thing to do.
That tickles my funny bone. I never imagined the special counsel, and attendant legal squabbling would dredge up so much muck from the bottom of the swamp.
[Citation needed.]
James Clapper thinks Trump should be grateful that the FBI spied on his campaign.
It took 48 months for Joe McCarthy to finally fall in 1954, and when challenged by Maine Publican Margaret Chase Smith in 1950, there were only six Senators aligned with her against McCarthy.
It took 26 months of Watergate for Nixon to fall, and in the meanwhile he won 49 states. The coup de grace was on August 7, 1974 when Senators Hugh Scott (R-PA) and Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) and Represntative John Rhodes (R-AZ) visited Nixon in the White House.
John Rhodes retired in 1982. A young John McCain won his seat. Barry Goldwater retired in 1986. A still young John McCain won his seat.
Right now only Arizona Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake are standing up to Trump.
My money is that Trump will not complete his current term of office, but will resign or be removed.
This kind of sentiment from a self proclaimed “Republican” is exactly why many of us find ourselves with no party to support.
Masterful summary. (Tips hat)
Leaving aside that there is no magical power bestowed upon legislators from Arizona, both Flake and McCain are unlikely to stay in the Senate much longer and Trump will almost certainly outlast them.
I agree that Trump will resign and be removed from office, probably at noon on the day his last term expires, as have most of his predecessors in the office.
We shall see. The Mueller Probe is certainly moving much faster than Watergate and Whitewater. Next up is the criminal trial of Paul Manafort, Trump’s former Campaign Manager.
If Trump wants to get the Mueller Probe over, he should stop stalling on his interview. Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie told Trump that while he couldn’t hurry up the Mueller Probe, he could certainly delay it, which Trump is doing by not sitting for his interview. The Supreme Court forced Clinton to sit for an interview, clearly Trump will be forced to submit to an interview. Either Trump will testify, or we will be faced with him pleading the Fifth Amendment, which Trump himself said was tantamount to an admission of guilt.
Your apparent glee at this (false) gotcha says a lot.
We shall see if this is some sort of “false” gotcha. Time will tell.
I like how he adds that line about Trump saying pleading the 5th is an admission of guilt, as if that means pleading the 5th would mean Trump is actually guilty. Or as if Trump would hesitate to do something that contradicts what he’s said in the past.
I also like how Trump’s testifying is supposed to mean that Trump admits some illegal activity – despite the apparent failure to find any actionable dirt on the man, by his many highly-placed enemies, and his years in the public spotlight.
Trump himself said that pleading the 5th Amendment was tantamount to admission of guilt.
Um, the circle tightening. It took 26 months to take Nixon down.
It may not hit 100 degrees next week in Phoenix, but I doubt it.
Harvey Weinstein was flying high a year ago. He just did the perp walk in NYC.
Since we’re going in circles now, I’ll post the same response: I like how he adds that line about Trump saying pleading the 5th is an admission of guilt, as if that means pleading the 5th would mean Trump is actually guilty. Or as if Trump would hesitate to do something that contradicts what he’s said in the past.
Was it because Harvey pleaded the fifth? Is that the evidence they charged him on?
Presidents Reagan, Clinton and Bush never pled the Fifth Amendment. I am unaware of any President at any time who pled the Fifth Amendment.
Nope.
Yes. I would remind you that the Whitewater, Watergate, and Iran-Contra probes went on for years. Ask me about the Mueller Probe in a couple of years.
538 reports:
“Thirty-eight percent of Republicans believe President Trump should face a GOP primary challenger in the 2020 election, according to a Morning Consult/Politico poll released this week. Fifty percent said he should not; the other 12 percent did not express an opinion.”
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/when-trump-should-start-worrying-about-a-2020-primary-challenger/
Imagine what the percentages will be if Trump refuses to be interviewed or pleads the Fifth Amendment!
Your gift for irrelevancies is noted. Also, as a lawyer, it may help you to know the word is “pleaded,” not pled.
Stay on track, Gary. Weinstein was indicted because of something called evidence. Hillary Clinton was not indicted, despite very strong evidence of specific crimes. Trump – where’s the evidence? What crime?
Google the word “pled.” Shazam, it is the past tense of plead!
I would remind you that Whitewater, Watergate, and Iran-Contra probes went on for years. Ask me about the Mueller Probe in a couple of years.
This may become known as the “Obama intelligence Gaslighting scandal”