Legal Insurrection has the troubling developments here.
The New York Post has revealed that the fake allegations included in the Dossier that made several libelous allegations against Trump has strong ties to the Democrat party and other operatives, including Hillary Clinton. We should not be surprised that the corruption of the administrative state by the Democrats includes the FBI:
Senate investigators are demanding to see records of communications between Fusion GPS and the FBI and the Justice Department, including any contacts with former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, now under congressional investigation for possibly obstructing the Hillary Clinton email probe, and deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, who is under investigation by the Senate and the Justice inspector general for failing to recuse himself despite financial and political connections to the Clinton campaign through his Democratic activist wife. Senate investigators have singled out McCabe as the FBI official who negotiated with Steele.
Keep the name McCabe in mind. He will likely be central to any felonious activity from the FBI.
I think the author of this piece is saying yes.
In the Trump case, on the other hand, there has never been evidence of any crime. But unlike with the Clinton “matter”—that special Clinton campaign talking point word that the FBI Director was directed to use when describing the Clinton investigation—a special prosecutor nevertheless has been appointed. The special counsel will not to track down the details of a crime known to have been committed and determine “who dunnit,” but will scour the personal and business affairs of a select group of people—the President of the United States, members of his family, his business associates, and members of his presidential campaign and transition teams—to see if any crime can be found (or worse, manufactured by luring someone into making a conflicting statement at some point). This is not a proper use of prosecutorial power, but a “witch hunt,” as President Trump himself correctly observed. Or, to put it more in terms of legalese, this special prosecutor has effectively been given a “writ of assistance” and the power to exercise a “general warrant” against this select group of people, including the President of the United States, recently elected by a fairly wide margin of the electoral vote.
That is the very kind of thing our Fourth Amendment was adopted to prevent. Indeed, the issuance of general warrants and writs of assistance is quite arguably the spark that ignited America’s war for independence.
It is the corruptible power of the special prosecutor to find something against anyone they deem deserves punishment. Is that justice? Doesn’t it smack of lawlessness?
We can still impeach and remove our elected officials without the use and abuse of the special prosecutor. Like other things related to government corruption, the determination of wrongdoing is in the hands of the people.
It is remarkable that none of the Republicans have asked questions like, “why don’t you think Lynch obstructed justice as she directed you while with Trump you are assuming without a direct order?”
He looked weak and incriminated himself to a criminal investigation.
The WaPo goes to pains to allude there was collusion, but there wasn’t (FISA warrants are usually granted not because there is a suspicion of something factual). So what does this piece demonstrate? Obama purposely spied on Trump in order to try to find some dirt him. Further, it appears from this story, the spying was vast–as it now has wrapped up yet another member of his team.
In other words, Trump was right again. His tweet was spot on that he was spied on. This is a huge scandal for the breadth of the illegal activity.
Jeffrey Lord at American Spectator notes Lincoln:
At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.
As nicely explained by Legal Insurrection:
The issue is not whether the Executive Order is wise, it’s over who gets to make the decision on what constitutes necessary security procedures with regard to foreigners wanting to enter the U.S. That decision in the past always has been reserved to the executive branch.