Tag: Alan M. Dershowitz

Mueller Expands Investigation Into Trump Family Finances. Trump Says That Would Be a “Breach”.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Mueller-Traps-600-LA

“This seems more like an effort to prosecute Donald Trump.”
“What the hell are we investigating?” “Why are we going through with this charade?” –  U.S. Representative Sean Duffy (R-Wis.)

Foxnews.com reports that

The morning after President Trump publicly warned Special Counsel Robert Mueller to stick to Russia and avoid probing his family finances outside that scope, a new report quoting a single, anonymous source has struck the White House like a bomb.

The report, by Bloomberg News, says Mueller’s investigation has indeed expanded to examine a range of business transactions by the president and his associates.

The transactions in question largely involve Russian interests, and it’s unclear from the report whether the investigation might eye non-Russian dealings – which Trump warned in an interview with The New York Times would be crossing a red line.

Asked whether an examination of his family finances unrelated to Russia would be a breach, Trump said, “I would say yes.”

But the Bloomberg report portrays an investigation that continues to expand and evolve, as the president openly voices frustration with its scope. 

According to the report, investigators are looking at Trump’s involvement with Russian associates on a development in the U.S.; the Russian purchase of apartments in his buildings; Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch and even the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow. Bloomberg’s source reportedly said this aspect of the probe is rooted in an investigation launched by former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, among dozens of federal prosecutors canned by the Trump administration earlier this year.

In the Times interview, Trump complained about multiple aspects of the Russia controversy and case, including that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had recused himself from the investigation.

He turned his attention to Mueller as he griped that the special counsel was hiring lawyers who donated to his general election rival Hillary Clinton. 

The president also called him out for having interviewed for the job to replace ex-FBI Director James Comey just before his appointment and warned he could start discussing the special counsel’s “conflicts” on the job.

Trump said after Mueller was named, he said to himself, “’What the hell is this all about?’ Talk about conflicts. But he was interviewing for the job. There were many other conflicts that I haven’t said, but I will at some point.”

The Times interview eventually delved into what Trump might do if Mueller went too far beyond the Russia lane in looking at his and his family’s financial transactions.

“I think that’s a violation,” Trump responded. “Look, this is about Russia.”

Trump would not say whether he’d consider seeking Mueller’s ouster in that scenario but defended his transactions.  

“So I think if he wants to go, my finances are extremely good, my company is an unbelievably successful company,” he told the Times, according to the transcript. “I don’t do business with Russia.” 

White House Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was asked at Thursday’s press briefing whether Trump has plans to fire him, but said, “although he has the authority to do so, he doesn’t intend to do so.”

Back on June 13th, I wrote a post titled: “Special Counsel Mueller Hires Dem Donors. Is This an Investigative Staff or a “Firing Squad”?” concerning the hiring of Democrats to be a part of the investigative team looking into whether President Trump “colluded” with Russia.

In that post I set up and asked the following pertinent question…

…The thing is Muller was appointed FBI Director by George W. Bush whom he served under for 10 years.

When Barack Hussein Obama became President, Mueller served under him for 2 more years.

His past, plus his present staff activity has lead me and others to throw up a red flag about this guy, fearing that he may be another Establishment Political Weasel like James Comey, who followed Mueller as Director of the FBI.

Why would a Special Counsel hire so many financial supporters of the Democratic Party to assist in investigating a matter which the Democratic Party has erroneously linked to a President?

Is Professional Bureaucrat Mueller putting together an Investigative Staff or a Firing Squad?

Well, boys and girls, I think that we now know the answer to my question.

The moment that it was announced that a “Special Counsel” had been named and it was announced who it was, the little hairs on the back of my neck stood straight up.

Make no mistake. Mueller is a part of the Washington Establishment.

While it is true that he served under both a Democratic and Republican President, he is still quite partisan. His loyalties are to the Washingtonian Status Quo.

That is why he is expanding his investigation into the business dealings of a then-private citizen.

What boggles the mind is the fact that Donald J. Trump and Donald Trump, Jr. have committed no crime.

Even the Liberal Professor Emeritus from Harvard, Renown Legal Scholar Alan Dershowitz has written in op eds that no crime has been committed.

On, the night of the 2016 Presidential Election, Hillary and her henchman, Podesta came up with this cockamamie Russian Collusion Fairy Tale, which the Libs have been harping on, repeating lies as being facts, as if they graduated from the Dan Rather School of Broadcast Journalism.

As I have written before, the frenzy which they have built themselves into as a group resembles the mentality of an old West Lynch Mob.

They want a hanging, and by gum, there WILL be a “hanging”, even though, as Professor Dershowitz has written, there is no proof whatsoever that the President did anything wrong.

Being the minority Political Ideology in America has never stopped Modern American Liberals from trying to enforce their will upon the American people.

On November 8th, the Electoral College, put in place by our Founding Fathers, stopped them.

And, the Russia-Trump Collusion Fairy Tale is their attempt to circumvent our Constitution.

And now, it is apparent that Mueller is a part of “The Resistance”.

It appears to this average American that Mueller, being well-connected in the Washington Establishment, is cut from the same cloth as Former FBI Director James Comey.

Mueller is turning out to be a political weasel, a professional bureaucrat who views himself to be more important than he actually is, just like Comey.

President Trump needs to go ahead and fire Mueller.

…before he and the rest of “The Resistance” usurp the will of the American People.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

The Trump/Russia Collusion Fake News Fairy Tale: Why Liberals Redefine the Meaning of Words

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

Mirage-600-LI

The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so. – Ronald Reagan

FoxNews.com reports that on Martha McCallum’s program…

Professor Jonathan Turley said the president’s critics are so eager to “bag a Trump” that their hunt extends the definition of a crime “well beyond its legal moorings.”

Martha MacCallum reported the latest source of Trump criticism is a previously undisclosed meeting between the president and Vladimir Putin at a German dinner.

However, the White House responded by saying Trump got up from his seat to approach his wife who was assigned a seat next to Putin and his translator.

Trump apparently spoke with the trio for some time.

Turley, of George Washington University in Foggy Bottom, D.C., said Trump critics “reflect a level of hyperventilation we have in Washington now.”

He said that collusion on its own is not a crime, but that any conspiracy involved might be.

Turley said that people will not like a world where “treason” is more broadly defined in that way.

He said that Trump has been accused of committing crimes, despite his alleged actions falling well short of what separates a crime from a political faux pais.

“People are so eager to bag a Trump that they are willing to take these crimes and take them well beyond their legal moorings,” he said.

On July 11th, Alan M. Dershowitz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus and author of Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law and Electile Dysfunction, wrote the following op ed for foxnews.com…

Special Counsel Robert Mueller will surely be looking into the meeting between Donald Trump, Jr., and a Russian lawyer named Natalia Veselnitskaya.  Part of the meeting was also attended by Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, and Paul Manafort, who at the time was running Trump’s campaign.  It now seems clear from the emails that the Trump people went to the meeting expecting to be given dirt on Hillary Clinton from the Russian government.  The question remains, if this is all true, is it criminal?

The first issue that must be addressed by Mueller is whether any existing criminal statutes would be violated by collusion between a campaign and a foreign government, if such collusion were to be proved? Unless there is a clear violation of an existing criminal statute, there would be no crime.

Obviously if anyone conspired in advance with another to commit a crime – such as hacking the DNC – that would be criminal. But merely seeking to obtain the work product of a prior hack would be no more criminal than a newspaper publishing the work product of thefts such as the Pentagon Papers and the material stolen by Snowden and Manning.   Moreover, the emails sent to Trump Jr. say that the dirt peddled by Veselnitskaya came from “official documents.”  No mention is made of hacking or other illegal activities. So it is unlikely that attendance at the meeting violated any criminal statute.

Perhaps mere collusion by a campaign with a foreign government should be made a crime, so as to prevent future contamination of our elections. But it is not currently a crime.

Whether or not such collusion, if it occurred, is a crime, it is clear that the American people have the right to know whether any sort of collusion –legal or illegal – took place.  And, if so, what was its nature.

The Mueller investigation is limited to possible criminal activity.  Probing the moral, political or other non-criminal implications of collusion with, or interference by, Russia is beyond the jurisdiction of the special counsel.  It is the role of Congress, not the Criminal Division of the Justice Department, to make changes in existing laws.  Perhaps mere collusion by a campaign with a foreign government should be made a crime, so as to prevent future contamination of our elections.  But it is not currently a crime. 

Nor will it be easy to draft a criminal statute prohibiting a campaign from using material provided by a foreign power, without trenching on the constitutional rights of candidates.  But this is all up to Congress and the courts, not the special counsel, with his limited jurisdiction.

That is why the entire issue of alleged collusion with, and interference by, the Russians should be investigated openly by an independent nonpartisan commission, rather than by a prosecutor behind the closed doors of a grand jury. 

The end result of a secret grand jury investigation will be an up or down determination whether to indict or not to indict.  If there are no indictments, that will end the matter. The special counsel may issue a report summarizing the results of his investigation, but many experts believe that such reports are improper, since the subjects of the investigation do not have the right to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury, which typically hears only one side of the case. Beyond any report, there will also be selective leaks, such as the many that have already occurred.  Leaks, too, tend to be one-sided and agenda driven.

A public non-partisan commission investigation, or even one conducted by partisans in Congress, would be open for the most part.  They would hear all sides of the story, and the public would be able to judge for itself whether there was improper collusion.  A commission or Congressional committee could also recommend changes in the law for the future.

The American people need to know precisely what the Russians tried to do and did – and what, if anything, the Trump campaign knew and did.  These issues go beyond a cops-and-robber whodunit. They involve the very essence of our democracy.

It is quite refreshing to read the writings of a level-headed Liberal for a change.

All average Americans, like you and me, see on Liberal-produced television newscasts or read in Liberal-written newspapers or magazines, are attacks on President Trump, which feature all of the common sense and objective level-headedness of Bobcat Goldthwait.

As I have noted numerous times in the last seven months, Modern American Liberals are throwing an unending National Temper Tantrum over the loss of Hillary Clinton to American Businessman and Entrepreneur Donald J. Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election.

The other factor, besides this ongoing temper tantrum, which has led to the Liberals proclaiming criminal activity on behalf of President Trump and his son when there is none, is the fact that Liberals lead their lives in a state of perpetual confusion.

Liberals believe that

Rachel Dozeal is black….

Elizabeth Warren is an American Indian.

Al Sharpton is a Reverend.

Al Gore is a scientist.

George Stephanopoulos is a journalist.

Bernie Sanders is presidential.

Barack Hussein Obama is honest.

And, somehow, someway, if they could get rid of Trump, Hillary Clinton would be given the Presidency.

Heck. Hillary’s husband, Bubba, doesn’t even know what the definition of “is”, is.

The good news is that while the Democrat Party, their Propaganda Arm, the MSM, and their Social Media Operatives continue to sound like Jan Brady, screaming

Russia! Russia! Russia!

…their whining is falling on deaf ears.

Per Hannity.com…

A new poll released by left-leaning Bloomberg proves what most Americans have been saying for months; the nation is facing some big problems, and the Russia-Trump conspiracy theory isn’t one of them.

The survey, conducted last week and released on Tuesday, shows that just 6% of American voters think allegations of Russian collusion in the 2016 general election is a major issue facing the nation.

Individuals were asked “Which of the following do you see as the most important issue facing the nation right now?” Healthcare reform was at the top of the list with 35% of Americans seeing at is the largest problem in the US, followed by unemployment at 13%; terrorism at 11%; and immigration at 10%.

Near the bottom was the “Relationship with Russia” with just 6%.

The poll flies in the face of non-stop media coverage of the Russian-Trump witch hunt that has dominated headlines for over a year.

The survey also highlighted other positive development for the Trump administration, mostly regarding the President’s performance on jobs and the economy.

“The latest Bloomberg National Poll shows 58 percent of Americans believe they’re moving closer to realizing their own career and financial aspirations, tied for the highest recorded in the poll since the question was first asked in February 2013,” said the report.

Just like adults engaging in a conversation tune out a loud, bratty child who keeps trying to interrupt them to call attention to themselves, so are average Americans tuning out those intent on pushing the “Trump/Russia Collusion Fake News Fairy Tale”.

Average Americans are more concerned about adult matters, like feeding our families, keeping or finding jobs, the future of our children and grandchildren…

and MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Comey, Trump, and the Liberal Lynch Mob (A KJ Analysis)

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

toon170608

Alan M. Dershowitz is an American lawyer, jurist, and author. He is a prominent scholar on United States constitutional law and criminal law, and a leading defender of civil liberties. He spent most of his career at Harvard Law School where he holds the title of Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus.

Yesterday, he posted on op ed on Foxnews.com, which I would like to share with you…

Former FBI Director James Comey’s written statement, which was released in advance of his Thursday testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, does not provide evidence that President Trump committed obstruction of justice or any other crime. Indeed it strongly suggests that even under the broadest reasonable definition of obstruction, no such crime was committed.

The crucial conversation occurred in the Oval Office on February 14 between the president and the then director. According to Comey’s contemporaneous memo, the president expressed his opinion that General Flynn “is a good guy.” Comey replied: “He is a good guy.”

The president said the following: “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this thing go.”

Comey understood that to be a reference only to the Flynn investigation and not “the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to the campaign”

Comey had already told the president that “we were not investigating him personally.”

Comey understood “the president to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December.”

Comey did not say he would “let this go,” and indeed he did not grant the president’s request to do so. Nor did Comey report this conversation to the attorney general or any other prosecutor.  He was troubled by what he regarded as a breach of recent traditions of FBI independence from the White House, though he recognized that “throughout history, some presidents have decided that because ‘problems’ come from the Department of Justice, they should try to hold the Department close.”

That is an understatement.

Throughout American history — from Adams to Jefferson to Lincoln to Roosevelt to Kennedy to Obama — presidents have directed (not merely requested) the Justice Department to investigate, prosecute (or not prosecute) specific individuals or categories of individuals.

It is only recently that the tradition of an independent Justice Department and FBI has emerged. But traditions, even salutary ones, cannot form the basis of a criminal charge.

It would be far better if our constitution provided for prosecutors who were not part of the executive branch which is under the direction of the president.

In Great Britain, Israel and other democracies that respect the rule of law, the Director of Public Prosecution or the attorney general are law enforcement officials who, by law, are independent of the Prime Minister.

But our constitution makes the attorney general both the chief prosecutor and the chief political adviser to the present on matters of justice and law enforcement.

The president can, as a matter of constitutional law, direct the attorney general, and his subordinate, the Director of the FBI, tell them what to do, whom to prosecute and whom not to prosecute.  Indeed, the president has the constitutional authority to stop the investigation of any person by simply pardoning that person.

Assume, for argument’s sake, that the president had said the following to Comey: quot;You are no longer authorized to investigate Flynn because I have decided to pardon him.” Would that exercise of the president’s constitutional power to pardon constitute a criminal obstruction of justice? Of course not. presidents do that all the time.

The first President Bush pardoned Casper Weinberger, his Secretary of Defense, in the middle of an investigation that could have incriminated Bush. That was not an obstruction and neither would a pardon of Flynn have been a crime. A president cannot be charged with a crime for properly exercising his constitutional authority 

For the same reason President Trump cannot be charged with obstruction for firing Comey, which he had the constitutional authority to do.

The Comey statement suggests that one reason the president fired him was because of his refusal or failure to publicly announce that the FBI was not investigating Trump personally. Trump “repeatedly” told Comey to “get that fact out,” and he did not.

If that is true, it is certainly not an obstruction of justice.

Nor is it an obstruction of justice to ask for loyalty from the director of the FBI, who responded “you will get that (‘honest loyalty’) from me.”

Comey understood that he and the president may have understood that vague phrase — “honest loyalty” — “differently.”  But no reasonable interpretation of those ambiguous words would give rise to a crime. 

Many Trump opponents were hoping that the Comey statement would provide smoking guns.

It has not.

Instead it has weakened an already weak case for obstruction of justice.   

The statement may provide political ammunition to Trump opponents, but unless they are willing to stretch Comey’s words and take Trump’s out of context and unless they are prepared to abandon important constitutional principles and civil liberties that protect us all, they should not be searching for ways to expand already elastic criminal statutes and shrink enduring constitutional safeguard in a dangerous and futile effort to criminalize political disagreements.

As I sit down to write this post, my bride is in the living room watching “The Virginian” on INSP. For those of you millennials who do not know who or what “The Virginian” is, it is a Western which ran on NBC from 1962-1971 centering around a Civil War Veteran who works as the Foreman on the Shiloh Ranch in Wyoming. The Virginian’s given name was never revealed during the entire run of the show.

So, what does this have to do with Professor Dershowitz’s op ed?

I’m glad you asked.

This whole attack by the never-ending temper tantrum-throwing Modern American Liberals, including their bought-off politicians and paid and unpaid Internet Trolls, reminds of a Lynch Mob in an old Western.

Just like a Lynch Mob, the Liberals Gang Mentality, fueled by their pre-conditioned Hive Mind, will not allow them to accept the fact that Hillary Clinton was beaten fair and square on November 8th, 2016.

Trump just HAS to have cheated…SOMEHOW.

So, the night of the election, Hillary and her henchman, Podesta came up with this cockamamie Russian Collusion Fairy Tale, which the Libs have been harping on and lusting after like a teenage boy with a vintage Playboy Magazine under his mattress.

The frenzy which they have built themselves into as a group resembles the same mentality of an old West Lynch Mob.

They want a hanging, and by gum, there WILL be a “hanging”, even though, as Professor Dershowitz wrote, there is no proof whatsoever that the President did anything wrong.

Being the minority Political Ideology in America has never stopped Modern American Liberals from trying to enforce their will upon the American people.

On November 8th, the Electoral College, put in place by our Founding Fathers, stopped them.

Today, the Constitution will stop the Lynch Mob.

Instead of Roy Rogers, Gene Autry and Randolph Scott stopping an innocent man from a Lynch Mob, today’s heroes will be Jefferson, Franklin, and Madison.

So, saddle up, Pards. Today should be some kind of fandango.

Until He Comes,

KJ