Just what did your government do?

Senator Grassley appears to be preparing to bust the frame-up of General Flynn by Thomas Lifson – “The killer bombshell is the final paragraph, in which Grassley at long last reveals the name of the other FBI agent present when Peter Strzok interviewed General Flynn about his conversation with Russian ambassador Kislyak and requests an interview with him by committee staff members

Did the FBI Have a Spy in the Trump Campaign? By Andrew C. McCarthy – “The Steele-dossier author told Fusion GPS’s Glenn Simpson about a ‘human source.’”

“Unable to get voluntary cooperation, committee chairman Devin Nunes (R., Calif.) issued a subpoena demanding that the Justice Department disclose information about a top-secret intelligence source who is said to have assisted the Russia investigation. That investigation is now being run by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. But more interesting is how it got started.

On that question, officials have been suspiciously fuzzy in their explanations, and hilariously inconsistent in their leaks: initially settling on an origination story that hinged on the Steele dossier and a trip to Moscow by the obscure Trump-campaign adviser Carter Page; later pivoting to a tale of boozy blathering by an even more obscure Trump-campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, when the first story proved embarrassing — the dossier allegations having been unverified when the Justice Department included them in warrant applications to the FISA court.

the Justice Department’s response was not “No, you’re wrong, there was no spying.” It was first to bloviate that the department would not be “extorted” (Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s unusual understanding of what is more commonly known as congressional oversight) and then to claim that providing the information sought by the committee would risk “potential loss of human lives, damage to relationships with valued international partners, compromise of ongoing criminal investigations, and interference with intelligence activities.”

By now, Nunes has learned that if he is catching flak, he is over the target.

The rationalizations assert that, of course, there are always spies in campaign staffs. That is an evasion from the point that the issue is government intervention by federal law enforcement agencies acting without proper authorization.

NBC: Congress working up “Plan B” for Mueller defense by Ed Morrissey – “Not only will Trump not sign it, McConnell argues, the House won’t bother to vote on it, much less pass it, and it’s unconstitutional to boot.”

“However, this still dances all around the core problem, which is that Mueller’s doing the job that Congress should have been doing all along. The special counsel was unnecessary in two different ways. First, there was not a specific crime alleged, and even if a conflict existed in pursuing an investigation of a crime, there shouldn’t have been a special counsel appointed until a specific crime could be established — and not just a process crime, such as obstruction due to false statements by peripheral characters. Second, Congress has the constitutional authority and duty to provide oversight over the executive, and the proper remedy to high crimes and misdemeanors uncovered in those probes is either impeachment and removal or censure — not a grand jury.

If Congress wants to move the probe outside of Trump’s purview, then they should do their jobs rather than demand that the DoJ outsource it to unaccountable roving prosecutors.

All that’s wrong with the left in one Politico article by Paul Mirengoff – “There’s nothing wrong with “harshly critiqu[ing]” Dershowitz for his legal analysis of the persecution of President Trump, provided the criticism is of his arguments, not the man. But “shunning” and refusing to “tolerat[e]” are another matter.”

“Dershowitz just doesn’t want to see the criminal law abused, and civil libertarian principles violated, in the left’s quest to destroy Trump. That’s enough to make him a pariah.

Politico’s Mandery appears sympathetic to this line. “[P]erhaps the democratic project is under existential threat—and history, if it survives as an independent academic enterprise, will look back pityingly upon civil libertarians who coddled power with their concerns about prosecutorial overreach while a fundamentally corrupt president undermined the great American project,” he proclaims.

But missing from Mandery’s article is any evidence or serious example that would remotely support this alarmist rhetoric.

Authoritarians typically argue that they need to trample on civil liberties to protect true democracy, or some other “great project.” The American left is no different. It always has an excuse to erode our liberties.

If the left wants to argue that Trump is an “existential threat” to the “great American project,” and, indeed, to the “independent academic enterprise” of history, make the case. But don’t shun Alan Dershowitz because he refuses to abandon long-held principles of civil liberties in the name of these absurdities.

And the former FBI director is in Canada proclaiming the President is a “mafia boss” in public speeches …

Comments are closed.