Mueller Investigation: Ending the Probe that Never Should have Started in the First Place

By Lynn Matthews & Tim Walsh

Its been over a year since the Mueller investigation began looking into allegations of collusion or any kind of Russian interference in the 2016 election of President Trump.  So far the special counsel has indicted, charged, and brokered plea deals with several Trump associates for process crimes such as tax-evasion or lying to the FBI, charges that have nothing to do with anyone attempting to work with any Russians to interfere with, or change the outcome of the 2016 election results.

Robert Mueller even went into examining the tax records of Paul Manafort, a former campaign manager for President Trump; in an attempt to “flip”, or bully him into testifying against the president.  Having the FBI arrest him in an early morning home raid using SWAT team tactics that can be described as those they would use for a serial killer or foreign terrorist.  They did not have the proper warrant to do so until after the fact.

The Mueller Investigation went to investigating Michael Flynn, a United States Army Lieutenant General who served this country for more than 33 years. Mueller had the FBI place Flynn under arrest for allegedly Lying the the FBI.  Flynn was later cleared.

The most troubling issue, despite all the media hype, is the fact that Mueller is looking for a man to fit a crime that has yet to be discovered.  The firing of James Comey was used in an attempt to decry that President Trump fired Comey to obstruct justice.  Many on both sides of the political aisle called for his firing, some blamed him for Hillary’s elections loss.  It was James Comey who lied to congress with respect to denying leaking of documents, then later he admitted to leaking of documents to compel the creation of a special counsel.  An absolute double standard of the law.

Another significant consideration with respect to obstruction is that Rod Rosenstein wrote the letter to President Trump referring him to fire James Comey.  Then turns around and appoints a special counsel to investigate the firing of  James Comey as potential obstruction.  Because Rod Rosenstein wrote that letter, that makes him a fact witness in “the incident” of firing James Comey.  For him to oversee the investigation of firing Comey as potential obstruction is a severe conflict of interest.  One can easily argue its the textbook definition of conflict of interest.

While looking for a man to fit the crime, Mueller has went after Dr.  Jerome Corsi, author and Trump supporter for alleged ties with Wikileaks that he may or may not have had.  He has threatened Dr. Corsi with prosecution because Dr. Corsi forwarded an email to someone looking for a contact with Wikileaks editor Julian Assange.  When Dr. Corsi was allowed to amend his statement to the FBI due to his memory, they accused him of lying to the FBI.  Incidentally, one of the lawyers prosecuting Dr. Corsi is Jeannie Rhee, who was a member of the legal team defending Clinton illegal use of a private server.

Dr. Corsi believes that he has been ensnared in a perjury trap at the behest of the special council investigating him, and has filed a wrongful prosecution against Mueller.  Jeannie Rhee, Aaron Zelinsky, and Andrew Goldstein are the lawyers representing Mueller in the special investigation against Dr. Corsi.

Mr.  Zelinsky is no stranger for advocating for political hardball when it comes to the Democrat party.  His prior blog history which is no longer available is proof of his strong political bias when it comes to the Democratic party, and as the Daily Caller wrote, “he encouraged Obama to emulate the strong-arm tactics of former President Lyndon Johnson. “He wasn’t afraid to get down and dirty with the legislative branch, arm twisting, cajoling, and sometimes bullying senators to vote his way,” Zelinsky said of Johnson.”

Andrew Goldstein, who worked for Preet Bharara, the former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, was fired by Trump.  His twitter account shows a particular bias as seen by his profile description.

preet-e1543611320394.jpg

Most importantly in the Mueller investigation is the legality of the appointment.  According to Todd Young, in an article published by Newsmax, “Robert Mueller and his band of erstwhile “Special Assistant United States Attorneys” have power to which they are not entitled — in violation of the checks and balances and separation of powers spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, full stop.

Mark Levin, radio host, and constitutional scholar called the appointment of Mueller unconstitutional and he even referred to it as a violation of the law. He pointed out that not only was the special counsel’s appointment not done in accordance with Article 2 Section 2 of the Constitution, but not in accordance with the Special counsel statute that lapsed in 1999, or even the DOJ Internal regulation appropriating a special counsel.

In many ways, with no initial crime to investigate, Robert Mueller should have never been appointed in the first place.

Should Congress shut down Mueller?  We report you decide.  Let us know what you think.

 

 

 

Advertisements

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑