Personnel is policy. Whoever reaches decision-making levels in business or government comes to the task with experiences and ideological inclinations that inform the decisions before them.
Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) had some work done on his home in Alaska. The decision-makers at the Department of Justice “assumed” that the renovations cost more than was paid and he was convicted for not reporting the “gift” on his financial disclosure. That conviction was thrown out due to prosecutorial misconduct.
Representative Charlie Rangel (D-NY) failed to disclose a condo he owned in the Dominican Republic and $500,000 in a savings account. The decision-makers in the DoJ “assumed” that it was just forgetfulness. He wasn’t indicted. He wasn’t even investigated.
Decision-makers in the DoJ were ideologically inclined to “assume” that Democrats were forgetful and Republicans were malevolent. There is a reason for that. When you get down below a couple of presidential appointees in any agency the decision-makers are all Democrats.
Republicans go to Washington too, but they generally conclude that the way to change the world is through the private sector. They leave. Democrats’ natural milieu is government and they stay. Forever. They populate what has been called the Deep State.
The FBI admits that Hodgkinson, among other things:
- vociferously raged against Republicans in online forums,
- had a piece of paper bearing the names of six Republican members of Congress,
- took multiple photos of the baseball field he would shoot up three days after the New York Timesmentioned that Republicans practiced baseball at an Alexandria baseball field with little security, and
- asked “Is this the Republican or Democrat baseball team?” before firing on the Republicans.
The FBI concluded that the shooter had no target in mind and that:
- The gunman “had no concrete plan to inflict violence” against Republicans.
- He had not yet clarified who, if anyone, he planned to target, or why.
- He may have just “happened upon” the baseball game the morning of June 14, and that the attack appeared “spontaneous.”
- They are unclear on the “context” of Hodgkinson’s note with six names of members of Congress.
- They do not believe that photographs of the baseball field or other sites “represented surveillance of intended targets.”
In those five conclusions the decision-makers at the FBI made five assumptions, all of which softened the blame for Democrats regarding the attempted assassination of Republicans. They just couldn’t bring themselves to believe otherwise.
Which brings us to Robert Mueller III.
Mueller was appointed Special Counsel to investigate whether the Trump campaign “colluded” with the Russians in their effort to influence the last presidential election. There is no law against a campaign colluding with anyone at all to help their election so it isn’t clear what Mueller will do if he finds it, but he is assembling a crackerjack team of attorneys to find … something. And they will.
Mueller’s first 13 hires comprise decades of experience in the bowels of government. Among them they have extensive experience in public corruption, fraud, organized crime, money laundering and flipping suspects. One has argued before the Supreme Court for the expansion of obstruction of justice. Aren’t those interesting picks?
Several of Mueller’s team contributed to Democrat campaigns and one represented the Clinton Foundation. Care to guess which side they will fall on in the many assumptions they will have to make? This is a stacked deck!
The FBI has been investigating the charge against the Trump campaign for 11 months and found no evidence to support it. Trust me. If there were a shred of evidence it would have leaked by now.
It has been leaked – a crime – that Mueller is looking into whether the president obstructed justice when he asked former FBI Director Jim Comey to “go easy” on Mike Flynn.
Think about that. The president has the constitutional authority to stop the investigation, fire the investigator, or pardon Flynn and they are looking into whether he committed the crime of obstruction for asking Comey to go easy. Do you doubt what these decision-makers will assume?
It has also been leaked – a crime – that Mueller will investigate whether the president had financial dealings with Russians in his businesses. Do not be surprised if they attempt to make a case on money laundering or organized crime since, as luck would have it, Mueller hired experts in those very areas.
We have a very fragile republic. We need to take a deep breath and try to find some neutral ground. If Mueller uses the bogus charge of collusion to expand an investigation into an entirely unrelated area in order to remove or even damage the president he will be throwing gasoline on a smoldering fire.
He will also cement the belief that the Deep State is alive and well and an enemy of the people of the United States of America. That could be more dangerous than anything the Russians may have done.
If you would like to be added to John Linder’s distribution list please send your email address to: firstname.lastname@example.org or follow on Twitter: @linderje