Lebanon man may be on run, as trial to start

OPINION

Jerry Shenk | Lebanon Daily News

Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller testified to Congress that his investigation into “Russian collusion,” a charge his exhaustive, two-year report repudiated, was not hindered in any way by the Trump White House or related interests. Nonetheless, House Democrats still claim, irrationally, that President Donald Trump somehow “obstructed justice.”

Declaring “no one is above the law, including the president of the United States,” Democrats have fixated on Mueller’s statement in testimony that, while a sitting president cannot be indicted, an ex-president can be. Democrats have sworn to hold Donald Trump “criminally liable” after he leaves office – for an imaginary crime.

Therein lies an intriguing set of potential circumstances. If Democrats are determined to prosecute imaginary crimes, how will they deal with genuine ones?

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz is investigating alleged government Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) abuse and the curious law enforcement decisions/conclusions during and following the 2016 Hillary Clinton email “investigation.” Separately, at Attorney General William Barr’s direction, U.S. Attorney John Durham is conducting an investigation (reportedly criminal, with an empaneled grand jury) into the discredited “Russia dossier” and related activities that were foundational to Mueller’s probe.

The investigations are focused on an apparent contemporaneous, interactive nexus between and among the FBI/Justice Department, federal intelligence agencies, FISA courts, the State Department, Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and, allegedly, the Obama White House.

{{props.notification}} {{props.tag}} {{props.expression}} {{props.linkSubscribe.text}} {{#modules.acquisition.inline}}{{/modules.acquisition.inline}} ... Our reporting. Your stories. Get unlimited digital access to exclusive content. Subscribe Now

According to reports, investigators are looking into potential malfeasance by former FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and subordinates who may have played conspiratorial roles to take down a duly-elected president.

The Inspector General’s Russia case investigation will certainly reveal previously undisclosed information, and possibly bring indictments. The president’s decision to authorize AG Barr to declassify documents, along with U.S. Attorney Durham’s disclosures, will make more information public

By now, federal investigators have most likely interviewed former British spy Christopher Steele whose discredited Hillary Clinton campaign/DNC-funded dossier was instrumental in launching the Russia collusion witch hunt. Steele’s testimony alone could reveal official corruption surrounding an attempted administrative coup against President Trump.

Former Federal Prosecutor Joseph diGenova predicts that, if Steele rats out his handlers, the prosecutions of former high-level federal officials will make Watergate seem trivial by comparison. And, if Steele exposes fraudulent behavior by Hillary Clinton and the DNC, Donald Trump will be assured a second term.

Now, let’s return to that “no one is above the law, including the president…” sentiment, and reconsider Democrats’ determination to prosecute Donald Trump, post-presidency, for a non-crime when Democrats and their operatives may have committed criminal acts.

It’s almost unimaginable that senior administration officials would be foolish enough to act without White House awareness/authorization. If, as it appears increasingly likely, former Obama administration officials are charged with wrongdoing and, especially, facing prison time, some may accept plea deals implicating their boss.

Barack Obama is not a modest man. Might guilt and his fellow Democrats’ sudden enthusiasm for post-presidency prosecutions explain Mr. Obama’s current uncharacteristically-low profile?