Here we go ladies and gentlemen, Special Counsel Robert Mueller is going to charge President Trump with obstruction of justice and create a constitutional crisis, according to Bloomberg. The Special Counsel wants to complete the last few portions of his investigation first.
Of course the Special Counsel does not have the legal authority to arrest the President of the United States under the Constitution, as the only legal method proscribed is impeachment through the House of Representatives and then conviction by the Senate. However, the Mueller and Attorney General Rod Rosenstein — since Attorney General Jeff Sessions has recused himself from doing his job — have also violated Department of Justice regulations by establishing an open ended investigation.
In addition, Rod Rosenstein along with Jeff Sessions and his associates are participating in a scheme with Robert Mueller to block Congress from their oversight capabilities. Given what we know with Robert Mueller’s history of malfeasance and horrible behavior, who can believe that the man will stay within the law?
History of Robert Mueller’s Corruption, Malfeasance, and Horrible Ethics
Mueller’s complete disregard for ethical behavior in favor of convictions has been a longstanding issue. Criminal defense attorney Harvey Silverglate highlighted in an opinion piece accusing Mueller of trying to entrap him while Mueller was acting U.S. Attorney in Boston, Massachusetts in the 1980s.
“I have known Mueller during key moments of his career as a federal prosecutor,” Silverglate wrote. “My experience has taught me to approach whatever he does in the Trump investigation with a requisite degree of skepticism or, at the very least, extreme caution.”
Mueller sent someone into Silverglate’s office offering to give false testimony for a client, according to Silverglate. He turned down the offer and noticed the man was wearing a wire.
“Years later I ran into Mueller, and I told him of my disappointment in being the target of a sting where there was no reason to think that I would knowingly present perjured evidence to a court,” Silverglate added. “Mueller, half-apologetically, told me that he never really thought that I would suborn perjury, but that he had a duty to pursue the lead given to him.”
It does not end there, Mueller has a history of attacking innocent people with the full power of his office and bungling the 2001 anthrax case so badly that it got an innocent man put into prison based on criminally dubious evidence. Former FBI Director James Comey, who was fired by President Trump last year, also worked with him on this case.
The FBI ignored a 2002 tip from a scientific colleague of the actual anthrax killer, who turned out to be a Fort Detrick scientist named Bruce Edwards Ivins; the reason is that they had quickly obsessed on an innocent man named Steven Hatfill; the bureau was bullied into focusing on the government scientist by Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy (whose office, along with that of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, was targeted by an anthrax-laced letter) and was duped into focusing on Hatfill by two sources — a conspiracy-minded college professor with a political agenda who’d never met Hatfill and by Nicholas Kristof, who put her conspiracy theories in the paper while mocking the FBI for not arresting Hatfill.
In truth, Hatfill was an implausible suspect from the outset. He was a virologist who never handled anthrax, which is a bacterium. (Ivins, by contrast, shared ownership of anthrax patents, was diagnosed as having paranoid personality disorder, and had a habit of stalking and threatening people with anonymous letters — including the woman who provided the long-ignored tip to the FBI).
So what evidence did the FBI have against Hatfill? There was none, so the agency did a Hail Mary, importing two bloodhounds from California whose handlers claimed could sniff the scent of the killer on the anthrax-tainted letters.
Mueller hired handlers based on their claims alone. After one meeting with Hatfill, the FBI concluded they “had their man.”
These dogs were shown to Hatfill, who promptly petted them. When the dogs responded favorably, their handlers told the FBI that they’d “alerted” on Hatfill and that he must be the killer.
Evidence that would have been laughed off by any normal investigator doing their due diligence was instead taken as gospel truth by Robert Mueller. He assured President George Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft that the case was ironclad and that they “had their man.”
Instead, Mueller, who micromanaged the anthrax case and fell in love with the dubious dog evidence, personally assured Ashcroft and presumably George W. Bush that in Steven Hatfill the bureau had its man. Comey, in turn, was asked by a skeptical Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz if Hatfill was another Richard Jewell — the security guard wrongly accused of the Atlanta Olympics bombing. Comey replied that he was “absolutely certain” they weren’t making a mistake.
Such certitude seems to be Comey’s default position in his professional life. Mueller didn’t exactly distinguish himself with contrition, either. In 2008, after Ivins committed suicide as he was about to be apprehended for his crimes, and the Justice Department had formally exonerated Hatfill — and paid him $5.82 million in a legal settlement — Mueller could not be bothered to walk across the street to attend the press conference announcing the case’s resolution.
And when reporters asked Robert Muller about the case, Mueller could not be bothered to apologize or acknowledge how horribly he and Comey bungled the case.
“I do not apologize for any aspect of the investigation,” he said, and added that it would be wrong “to say there were mistakes.”
This continued into another case where Mueller’s FBI failed to act with actionable intelligence against Tsarnaev brothers in the Boston Marathon bombing case.
Had Mueller SHUT DOWN the Islamic Society of Boston OR LISTENED 2 Russia, the #BostonMarathon bombing could have been prevented!
Grand Jury pic.twitter.com/tIi964XQr8
— Amy Mek (@AmyMek) August 3, 2017
Fast forward to the current Special Counsel investigation under Mueller’s tutelage. The former FBI head is attempting to bankrupt Trump associates in order to get them to talk. The Mueller team also has been attempting to threaten the families of the suspects they were investigating, in order to “get into their heads.”
Flynn and Manafort — who have both been indicted and arrested, are in the process of suing Mueller and the U.S. government to stop his investigation.
He is well outside the bounds of the original “Russian” investigation in every sense of the phrase. but since when has little things like regulations, laws, good sense, or ethics ever got in the way of a good conviction for Mueller and friends?
So What is Mueller Waiting For?
Bloomberg states that Mueller believes that any clear outcome of the obstruction inquiry could be used against Mueller. Filing charges against Trump or his family could prompt the president to take action to fire him. Publicly clearing Trump of obstruction charges — as the president’s lawyers have requested — could be used by his allies to build pressure for the broader investigation to be shut down.
Mueller is alleged to be wanting to complete several key outstanding interviews, including with the president and his son, Donald Trump Jr before he makes any move to indict Trump. President Trump’s lawyers have been negotiating since late last year to set up an interview with Mueller’s team.
The Washington Post reported that Mueller is inquiring into several Russia-related incidents involving longtime Trump lawyer Michael Cohen. This includes his role in trying to help the Trump Organization build a tower in Moscow in 2015.
Mueller is said to be focused on three main episodes for his case establishing Trump’s alleged obstruction of justice:
- Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey last May;
- The drafting of a misleading statement about the purpose of a June 2016 meeting between Don Jr., Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and a group of Russians at Trump Tower;
- The disclosure that Trump considered firing Mueller last June.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team of FBI agents and prosecutors has already interviewed people who could provide firsthand knowledge of possible obstruction of justice, including Comey, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers.
Even if there is no actual charges, this is not going to stop the Democrats from attempting to run on the Special Counsel witch hunt as an issue for the November elections.
I am expecting Robert Mueller to come forward with charges though. Conservatives and Republicans should expect for Robert Mueller to work closely with Democrats to find a time for maximum damage to the President.
I’m expecting a September or October trial by public opinion where Robert Mueller likely states that President Trump will be an “un-indicted co-conspirator” to give the Democrats a huge talking point to run ads against their Republican opponents.
Of course, Mueller could go all the way and indict President Trump and attempt an overthrow of the President. He knows — as does everyone else in the political establishment — that it would be a very risky and ultimately messy move, one that would likely see either victorious party becoming full fledged dictators to keep the peace in the aftermath.
At that point, the choice will be to either keep the Republicans in power and shut the investigation that has gone off the rails down or elect the Democrats who will then promptly file impeachment charges against President Donald Trump for “obstruction of justice” in the House of Representatives. After the vote predictably passes, the Democrats will then subsequently attempt to convict him in the Senate.
Is this the scenario the president wants to play out? A ploy to get the oft reported lagging and lazy republicans to turn out for the midterm elections?
Is this a president who is paralyzed with fear to fire another government official after the Comey firing?
Is President Trump allowing his White House lawyers and insiders to give him bad advice on how to handle this all inclusive “investigation” into himself, his associates, and his family?
Americans will find out soon, which is the case.
The article has been updated