If Jeff Sessions’ relationship to Trump tainted him, why didn’t Robert Mueller recuse himself because of his relationship to the FBI?
It demonstrates the hypnotic power of the mainstream media that questions were only asked about the impartiality of Jeff Sessions but no one suggested Robert Mueller recuse himself.
That point was made, almost incidentally, in a recent editorial and I’m amazed I never considered it before. The whole idea of Russian collusion was created by a FISA-abusing FBI. What chance is there that Mueller will admit that his friends and political allies manufactured a false charge?
So Mueller has every reason to continue hunting the Russian collusion ghost story. He’s unfit to investigate the issue.
Carl Cannon at Real Clear Politics writes, “Special Prosecutorial Abuse.”
Russian interference in the 2016 election became the story line immediately after the votes were counted. Then, at his Senate confirmation hearing, Jeff Sessions was asked by Minnesota Sen. Al Franken whether as attorney general Sessions would act forcefully if confronted with evidence of Russian adventurism in U.S. campaigns. Yes, Sessions said, he would. He then volunteered that he’d never met with any Russians. When it turned out that Sessions had met at least once with the Russian ambassador to the U.S., he recused himself from the whole mess.
Yet, FBI Director James Comey was pressing ahead with his own investigation – right until he was fired by Trump. This led to Comey’s own conspiracy. He leaked FBI documents to a pal who gave them to the New York Times, all with the goal of getting a special prosecutor appointed. Comey subsequently bragged about these machinations, although it’s never been explained how Mueller, a former FBI director and political ally of Comey’s, was given that appointment. Mueller’s conflict of interest seemed more obvious than Jeff Sessions’ did. In any event, Mueller then did what many previous special prosecutors have done: He quickly took the probe far afield from his original mandate.[…]
According to news leaks that apparently come from Mueller’s hand-picked prosecutorial staff, which is stacked with Democrat Party donors, the records seized in the FBI raid of Michael Cohen concern the payoffs made to porn film performer Stormy Daniels and Playboy centerfield Karen McDougal.[…]
The Justice Department reportedly seized Cohen’s files on the grounds that paying these women off in 2016 was some sort of election finance violation. That’s a legal theory so pedantic, so goofy, really, that one would think it came from Twitter — or whatever online listserv replaced the notorious “journo-list” chatroom where liberal members of the media and Democratic Party operatives exchanged talking points.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com