The results are in: for the past two years the president has been investigated for a crime that never happened.
That’s the conclusion the special counsel came to after an investigation that lasted two years, spent over $25 million, deployed 59 lawyers and investigators, issued 2,800 subpoenas, interviewed 500 witnesses, and executed 500 search warrants and wiretaps.
Here’s the obvious question: If such a thorough investigation found no evidence, what was the basis for the FBI launching its investigation in the first place?
President Trump rightfully calls the debunked Russia collusion story an “illegal takedown that failed.”
Those responsible must be held accountable. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler insists he must continue investigating in order to protect the rule of law and “the institutions we depend on for our democratic form of government.”
If Chairman Nadler is serious about protecting American rule of law, there’s plenty for him to investigate.
He should start by looking into the birth of the “Russia collusion” ghost story that has done incalculable harm to our country, “the institutions we depend on for our democratic form of government” and to the Americans caught up in the investigations.
Jerry Nadler should investigate why the Obama Justice Department, FBI and intelligence agencies were spying on the administration’s political opponents in the first place.
He should ask who first ordered the investigation, who approved it, and why the FBI had an undercover informant contact Trump campaign personnel.
We need to know why the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court, vested with unprecedented powers to hunt down terrorists, would use unverified, third-hand information as a pretext to spy on Americans during an election campaign.
He needs to get to bottom of the many serious and credible reports of high level federal officials using and abusing government power. He should determine if National Security Adviser Susan Rice, United Nations Ambassador Samantha Powers — or others whose names we don’t know — revealed the identities (“unmasked”) of innocent Americans caught on routine foreign surveillance wiretaps and leaked their names to the media.
He should determine if anyone in our intelligence agencies was running a media influence operation targeting the American public. Such an operation would violate Executive Order 12,333 Section 2.13 and 50 U.S. Code § 3093 which prohibit U.S. intelligence agencies from undertaking any covert action “which is intended to influence United States political processes, public opinion, policies, or media.” [emphasis added]
He should determine if James Comey was in violation of those acts when as director of the FBI he leaked a classified memo “because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel,” as he testified.
He should ask if President Obama knew the FBI was conducting surveillance on a presidential campaign as part of a counterintelligence investigation. If he knew, when did he know it? If not, why not? Wouldn’t a sitting president be told a campaign is suspected of working with a hostile foreign power and under surveillance?
Democrats used to care about the government covertly influencing domestic politics.
Civil libertarians warned secret machinations of the FBI threatened our democracy. For decades, J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI harassed Martin Luther King, civil rights activists and antiwar leaders. Hoover gathered dossiers of dirt on politicians and others to blackmail them.
In the 1970s, the U.S. Senate Church Committee discovered intelligence agencies spied on Americans, kept files on tens of thousands including senators, and were spreading disinformation through the American news media.
Such abuses led Congress to set up the Senate and House Intelligence Committees to protect us from our protectors.
Jerry Nadler used to care about these things, too.
In 2007, he held hearings on the FISA court and its secret surveillance of Americans, saying, “The shroud of secrecy thrown over these activities has less to do with protecting us from terrorism and more to do with protecting the Administration from having its lawbreaking exposed.”
Back then, Nadler didn’t think demanding answers was an “attack on law enforcement” or “obstruction of justice,” as he now cynically claims.
Today, we are confronted with the very real possibility unelected operatives at the highest levels of our government conspired to override the will of the American people and overthrow the elected president.
These are the charges Nadler needs to investigate.
If he doesn’t, he’s guilty of “protecting the [previous] Administration from having its lawbreaking exposed” — a coverup.
If Jerry Nadler won’t investigate these charges, someone must.
Those responsible for misleading our country need to be held accountable.
Kimberly Guilfoyle (@KimGuilfoyle) is vice chairwoman of America First Policies, a nonprofit organization supporting key policy initiatives that will work for all citizens in our country and put America first.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller.