LOADING CLOSE

070318 Does this LOOK like equal protection of the law?

070318 Does this LOOK like equal protection of the law?

Some things are worth repeating.  We’ve pointed out many examples of how the conduct of the FBI, DOJ, et. al., did not provide equal protection of the law to Mr. Trump.  Investigators gave Democrats a free pass, while dropping the hammer on Republicans.  Repeatedly.

Just to be clear, though, before we illustrate today’s example, let’s repeat that we support investigating “grave threats to national security” … we just think that all such matters should be investigated.  If it is a “grave threat to national security” to have someone advising a President when that someone has previously been paid by the Russians for a speech … then investigate all the Presidential candidates who are advised by someone previously paid by the Russians!

Okay, now for today’s example.  It’s one we haven’t really focused on before, but it’s right there at the beginning of the whole exercise.  We have two Presidential campaigns who are known or suspected to have gotten information about their opponent from Russian government sources.

Candidate A (Clinton) is known to have done so.  Her campaign paid people who obtained information about Trump from what they claimed were Russian government sources.  But this activity, when conducted by Candidate A, is termed “Oh, that’s just opposition research!” and dismissed as of no concern to investigators.

Candidate B (Trump) is only suspected (by some) of having done so.  And those suspicions were initiated by the campaign of Candidate A (DNC), with no independent corroboration!  Yet this activity, when alleged to have been conducted by Candidate B, is termed a “grave threat to national security” and investigated by SEVENTEEN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES!!!, plus a special counsel.  Plus battalions of media; maybe even hordes of media; perhaps even scads of media; maybe even an entire butt-load of media; who knows how vast the number is!

Does that  LOOK  like equal protection of the law to any honest observer?  Two candidates are thought to have obtained information about their opponent from Russian government sources.  Same campaign for the same office, same alleged offense, same potential influence on our President, and thus same concern over national security.

Yet one candidate is not investigated at all, the activity simply dismissed as normal campaign effort to do “opposition research.”  While the other candidate is investigated out the wazoo, the activity termed a “grave threat to national security.”

Again, does that  LOOK  like equal protection of the law to any honest observer?  If obtaining information about the other candidate from Russian government sources is just normal campaign effort to do “opposition research,” then why isn’t that activity classified that way when the Trump campaign is suspected of doing it?

And, conversely, if obtaining information about the other candidate from Russian government sources is a “grave threat to national security,” then why isn’t that activity classified that way when the Clinton campaign is known to have done it?

We don’t mind Trump being investigated, if the same rules are applied to all candidates.  Just treat them all the same way, no double standard.  It’s either normal “opposition research” … for both candidates, or it’s a “grave threat to national security” … for both candidates.

Whatever it is, though, whichever call the FBI makes, apply the same rules to both candidates.  Of course, that would have to be done by some future FBI, who has re-earned our trust by demonstrating for a sustained period of time that they do provide equal protection under the law.

The FBI we have today cannot be trusted with such an assignment, having amply demonstrated that they have no inkling about their duty to provide equal protection.  So for now, the investigations need to be dropped.  Once we have a re-constituted and re-trained FBI whom we trust to provide equal protection, then that FBI can conduct these investigations if the activity is still felt to be a “grave threat to national security.”

I’ve got a cousin who worked for the FBI for many years, and our whole family holds him in high regard, proud that he was selected for such a premier job.  But today’s FBI?  Not so much.  That’s a sad reality of the corruption which has tainted the entire agency.  And I disagree with those who say that the problem is only at the top, amongst the political leadership of the bureau, while the rank and file are not to blame.

There is a portion of the responsibility for the corruption which the rank and file must bear.  To wit, not enough of them refused to carry out unlawful orders, and not enough of them were willing to blow the whistle.  I agree that many (most?) of the rank and file are wonderful law enforcement officers like my cousin.  However, the FBI culture is abominably corrupt, and the rank and file bear some responsibility for letting that condition develop.  The rank and file need to step up and vigorously help clean house, or else be branded as a willing part of the problem.

 

ERpundit  –  07/03/18

Comments are closed.