If someone accused me/you of murder and the investigating detective concluded we were not involved should we not expect he/she would seek out the basis for the accusation?
This is the point Kim made in her latest op ed I posted. Why did Mueller not pursue the genesis of the charge of Russian Collusion? Why did Mueller not pursue the investigation of the Steele Dossier,who financed it, how it was financed and, most importantly, why was there such a dossier in the first place.
Because Mueller had been head of The FBI and was intimately linked to Comey one would think Mueller would have queried Comey and learned everything Comey and his crowd of senior gum shoes knew but he either did not or chose to disregard and/or pursue what he learned. Is that not strange? Is that not worth understanding?
We know Obama's then Atty. General met with Hillary's husband and subsequently allowed Comey to take over and decide for her regarding Hillary's questionable behaviour and suggested he change the language when he pronounced his verdict thereby, holding her to a lesser standard in order to avoid the inevitable conclusion.
We also know several other senior FBI officials were engaged in seeking FISA Warrants based on withheld information while they were contemporaneously engaged in crafting an insurance policy should Trump win and during the campaign sought to infiltrate and spy.
In addition we know two of the top members of various intelligence agencies were actively engaged in working with Comey and against the Trump campaign and have continuously and publicly expressed themselves in an accusative manner suggesting Trump's behaviour was treasonous.
Yet, when it came to all of this what Republican's Nunes , Jordan and Graham brought to Mueller's attention evoked no action and/or inquiry. Why?
Finally, we know Mueller exonerated Trump of Collusion after an expenditure of $30 plus million over a period of two years when, he already knew, there was no there, there. Why would Mueller allow this sword to hang over an otherwise innocent president? Was Mueller so imbued with his mission he lost sight of it's impact on the operation of The Oval Office. Did he not consider the negative cloud his continued and unnecessary investigation had on Trump's ability to perform. Did Mueller put partisan bias above nation?
If one looks objectively at the above and what Trump has accomplished during the first two plus years of his term in office it is rather amazing and I have yet to discuss the obstructive behaviour of the Democrats during this time because the mass media were hell bent on perpetuating negativism regarding his unorthodox style of governance.
Finally, we get to the matter of Mueller's inability to conclude, since there was no collusion, why he could not pronounce Trump also did not obstruct. Instead hMuellerlaid out a ying, yang case Trump might have but then again Trump might not have. So Mueller threw the ball to Barr who ruled, based on Justice Department Guidelines, Trump did not obstruct an illegal act that never occurred nor was "any" American involved although it was evident Russia did interfere in our election as Obama had done in Israel's against Bibi
Mueller, by taking this route accomplished two goals, intended or otherwise.
First he allowed blood thirsty Trump Haters an opportunity to impugn Barr and second he provided information for the same crowd of Democrats to proceed to construct a political case for impeachment so the "witch hunt" could continue. This is where Mueller has left us.
Soon the investigative report of the FBI and office of The Atty. General will be released by the department's internal authority and we will finally have another layer of this sordid episode laid bare and, as I have said , the music will begin and I suspect the notes will find their way both up and down the halls of The White House and beyond.
Stay tuned and I always welcome challenges to what I have written.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment