What I see every day in the criminal courts bears no resemblance whatsoever to the kid-gloves treatment Donald Trump just got from Robert Mueller.
I’ve watched someone in a district court have their arm figuratively torn from its socket to force them to plead guilty to conspiracy lest they risk losing their apartment and their family. The level of evidence available to the government in that case was a joke compared to the endless bizarre meetings with Russian spies and bizarre goings-on we all witnessed with Russians during our last election, as listed via the link below.
I’m not going to be lectured by pundits who want us to ignore the evidence we’ve seen in broad daylight from 2015 through today of this ‘president’s’ weird ties to Russian government spy agencies and Putin’s various mafia arms. See Greg Olear’s unparalleled devastating fast and dirty compendium of now-confirmed Trump-Russia collusion ties.
If you are wealthy and powerful in this country, you get a gentler form of justice imposed on you by our government than if you are an ordinary person.
The motto over the United States Supreme Court building is “Equal Justice Under Law”.
What we are witnessing with the obviously biased Attorney General of the United States shamelessly covering up for this president, demonstrates yet again how very far we are from living up to that creed.
As I detail below, Mueller’s final referral decision is a perfect example of how when you are rich in America, different standards of legal proof apply to you.
Heretofore an American hero or not, Mueller’s refusal to recommend prosecution of these people for conspiracy to collude with a foreign power is utterly disgusting when put in the context of what ordinary poor people face every day in our courts.
Mueller had three essential tasks:
A. Conduct a counter intelligence investigation to determine what happened,
B. Decide whether any criminal prosecutions should result, and
C. Provide a clear accounting of what happened so that policymakers, from Congress to the executive branch, can take steps to keep these things from happening again.
With regard to the task of determining whether criminal cases should result from his investigation, as in all criminal prosecutions there are three levels of proof that play into this inquiry:
1. PROBABLE CAUSE
This is the legal standard that is lowest and easiest to meet. This standard is used to decide whether an indictment or criminal complaint can issue. Roughly speaking, and in lay terms, it means
IT IS MORE LIKELY THAN NOT (50%+) that a defendant committed acts that meet the elements of a crime. Considering what is a matter of public knowledge alone about collusion, including endless lies from Trump and his minions regarding Russia contacts, other guilty pleas, convictions, and other obviously non-coincidental contacts with Russians tied to Russian spy agencies and Putin, this standard was almost certainly met here.
2. CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
“Clear and convincing” evidence is an intermediate standard that is used, for example, in certain probation violations. This standard means that there is a roughly 70% likelihood that something occurred. We will find out (if we ever get the report) whether that standard was met.
3. PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT
This is the standard Mueller relied on here, according to reports. Beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard for determining guilt at an actual criminal trial in this country. It is difficult to put a number to it (and, in fact, courts do not put a number to it), but in lay terms it probably means upwards of a 95% likelihood that something occurred.
Please understand. Every day in the criminal courts of our country, cases are pursued where the prosecutors know damned well that they are unlikely to be ultimately able to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
But they let people languish and suffer mentally for the duration of cases – only dismissing many cases on the day of trial. (In some cases the prosecutors are waiting in good faith to see if the evidence materializes.)
The fraud sitting in the White House will not have to endure that hell because of this special treatment he’s getting in his conspiracy investigation. He faces no such clinging to the probable cause standard by HIS prosectors. No indictments recommended.
That’s right. Despite Individual #1 being an unindicted co-conspirator with Michael Cohen, despite all the contacts with Russians having intelligence agency ties, despite the endless lies about the topic, unlike what happens every single day in the district courts of America, here there was no such reliance on the probable cause guard rail to pursue a conspiracy case against Individual #1.
And what about an obstruction of justice case against Trump? Did The prosecutor in this matter make a clear decision to recommend that Trump be held accountable?
No. Far from it.
What happened in Individual #1’s obstruction case instead? For this particular target, Trump – and apparently his children as well – his case has been thrown back by Mueller to an explicitly biased party, Attorney General Barr, to make the call on whether to pursue an obstruction case.
Barr, who deep-sixed a problem for H.W. Bush years ago, and who even wrote an article recently saying that presidents should not be charged with obstruction of justice, is clearly not a neutral arbiter. Yet Mueller unwisely and inexcusably, passed the buck to this man. I do not call that “Mueller doing his duty” to pursue equal justice under law.
I call it a disgrace.
AS FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR JOYCE ALENE REMINDS US, THE WHOLE POINT OF APPOINTING THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IN THE CRIMINAL CONTEXT IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS TO DISTANCE THAT DECISION FROM THE PRESIDENT.
As for obstruction and myriad other crimes of financial fraud, we will have to see how they play out in the state courts, where – so far, a president has no power to pardon.
I’ve been hearing that the DOJ tends to be risk-averse when deciding what can be prosecutable. It’s now for Congress to make of his evidence what they will. If you were hoping for a bombshell indictment of anyone named Trump I submit you were setting yourself up for disappointment.
Thank you, Christopher, for making Terry McGinty’s point for him Why should we not have expected an indictment of a Trump child if they broke the law?
Because it’s a very tough case to make and like I said, DOJ tends not to indict unless they have a slam dunk. Note that all the indictments Mueller did make have resulted in guilty pleas or verdicts. Neither one of us is a lawyer. I think the Trumps did some pretty shady things, but I don’t know how technically illegal. Also keep in mind Mueller’s mandate was very narrow. Just because Trump’s children did not engage in provable conspiracy against the United States doesn’t mean they didn’t break the law in other ways, but that is for others to determine.
This is administration is as flagrantly corrupt, treasonous, and criminal as we are likely to see. If the behavior of this administration doesn’t rise to the level needed to forcibly remove it, then we should admit that there is no mechanism.
An ejection seat that cannot be triggered is useless. It is worse than useless, because of the false sense of security it creates.
I don’t care nearly as much about Mr. Trump’s children as about Mr. Trump himself and the deplorable thugs who support and enable him.
Representative democracy in America is dead. Majority rule in America is dead. The wealthy thugs who control us are literally indistinguishable from Russian oligarchs and organized crime figures — and we have proven ourselves unable or unwilling to do anything AT ALL about it.
Little pessimistic aren’t we? I don’t see any signs that the Democratic House is backing off.
I don’t see any signs that the Democratic House has the ability to make even the slightest change in our trajectory.
So far as I can tell, the only thing the Democratic House cares about is collecting contributions to keep the members of the Democratic House in office.
Let’s see where this goes with the House, first and foremost with their ability to force the release of the Mueller Report. The jury is still out.
The House is unlikely to force that release. The reaction of Ms. Warren on the other thread exemplifies why it won’t happen — this is the same bobbing and weaving that caused us to ignore the war crimes committed by the administration of George W. Bush (and, for that matter, the other crimes committed by George H. Bush et al in the Iran-Contra scandal).
Here’s how it will play out:
1. There will be lots of grandstanding, table-pounding, and speechifying
2. Maybe more subpoenas will be delivered
3. The subpoenas will be ignored
4. The 2020 campaign season will cause the House to “move on”.
Nothing will happen. If the specifics of the Mueller report are ever released, it will happen decades from now.
How about if subpoenas are ignored the Capitol police get deputized to start arresting people for contempt of Congress? I don’t think the big six Dem House chairs are playing around.
In what Court will those “contempt of Congress” complaints be heard? By what judges?
The Supreme Court is already part of the Trumpist regime.
As of today, you are right, except for this: the results of the Nov. 2018 election for Congress.
It remains to be seen whether we will face a constitutional crisis in which the military or federal police officials have to decide whether to back the rule of law. If that happens, I still believe that the military will back the courts. But am I confident of that? I am sorry to say that I am not.
The courts will back whatever Mr. Trump tells them to decide.
The fix is in. The Trumpists have completed their hostile takeover of America.
“Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit.” Alexander Hamilton
I wonder why millions of Americans aren’t taking to the streets to demand the removal of these blatant criminals from power.
Where are the nationwide strikes? Where are the huge crowds surging through the streets of Washington DC?
A powerful minority continues to rule the American majority. It appears to me that that majority is too busy entertaining itself with cellphones, selfies, and cheering on their local sports teams do squat.
Americans tend to wait for elections rather than running to the barricades. It’s just part of the national character.
If that’s the case, then our children and grandchildren will have a very bloody future.
The Vietnam war ended because my generation made it politically unsustainable to continue it. The voters of today, by all accounts, can’t be bothered to even pay attention.
The result will be that nothing will happen until violent revolution is the only way to bring down the government. That is the more common historical arc.
It appears to me that the era of successful American democracy is over. America reached its zenith in the immediate aftermath of WWII. I would argue that the Marshall Plan in Europe and its counterpart in Japan created the several decades of worldwide peace and prosperity that followed.
By the time the Iron Curtain fell, America was so corrupt that we were unable to manage or influence ourselves — never mind anyone else. We saw this in the aftermath of 9/11, when we used that tragedy as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, then ignored the war crimes we committed in each theater. It is much the same way that we ignore the violence that our police commit against American blacks every day.
America of 2020 is a corrupt shell, rotting from the inside.
Obviously I hope you’re wrong, but current events, other than that election of Nov. 2018, which I continue to maintain will prove to be incredibly important, sure support your pessimism.
We have no idea whether the Special Counsel did his duty. His principal duty was to make the decision as to how to deal with potential criminal charges, so that this decision would be distanced from the Chief Executive’s political appointees. That is the principal reason for the statute and its regulations. Don’t believe me. Ask Neal Katyal, who drafted them.
He punted – to A.G. Barr – an Attorney General with explicitly stated extremist views of virtually limitless presidential criminal immunity for presidential acts.
We want to blame Barr. I certainly don’t. He told us who he was.
Unfortunately, it is possible we may not know for years whether Mueller did his duty. It is possible that he did.
But we do not know that as of today, because we know neither what his assessment of the evidence was, nor his reasons for deciding not to make a call.
Incidentally, all we actually know from the Mueller quotations contained within the Barr Report is that Mueller decided he WOULD not recommend charges at this time, and that Trump was not exonerated. I do not see any quotes saying that there was not substantial evidence (probable cause at a minimum) of both obstruction AND conspiracy.
Impeachment is, by design, a political process.
I think Mr. Mueller properly recognized that and refused to be the fall-guy in the scenario that our Democratic politicians envision.
The impeachment hearings of Watergate began well before the special prosecutor’s report was issued. The House leadership at that time had political courage and integrity that today’s Democratic members of the House lack.
We should be having impeachment proceedings right now. They should have started within days or weeks of Ms. Pelosi taking the gavel. They did not.
I don’t understand why your fire is aimed at Democrats. They are dealing with the overall political situation they have.
Shouldn’t the focus be on defeating brave Americans like Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins, and Mitch McConnell?
Why did the Republicans vote time and time again to repeal the ACA when they knew the “overall political situation” they had made it impossible? Maybe they wanted to show outright commitment to a cause?
The “overall political situation they have” is that impeachment hearings begin on the day Ms. Pelosi says they will begin. That’s what being in the majority means.
The evidence for (or against) contemplated impeachment is gathered in those hearings. It is not the job of Mr. Mueller to provide that evidence, just as it was not the job Mr. Cox or Mr. Jaworski to gather the Watergate evidence. It was it was in the impeachment hearings (the Senate Watergate committee) that the news of the White House tapes was broken by Mr. Butterfield.
Ms. Pelosi and the Democratic Majority are neglecting their constitutional duty to pursue this impeachment. I note that Ms. Pelosi was also Speaker of the House in 2006, when the same Democratic majority could have and should have pursued hearings to investigate the war crimes of George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, and others. The same Ms. Pelosi chose to do nothing then as well.
This stands in stark contrast to the approach taken by Carl Albert, Speaker of the House in 1971 when the full scope of Mr. Nixon’s abuses began to emerge.
No elected politician can be expected to support the removal of a sitting President without compelling evidence of wrong-doing. Impeachment hearings are the mechanism where that evidence is gathered. That’s why impeachment hearings are needed RIGHT NOW.
The focus should be on eradicating the cancer of a criminally corrupt Russian puppet from the Oval Office.
Important Update:
From @ProudResister:
March 27, 2019 3:00 P.M.
“BREAKING: Federal prosecutors just revealed in a DC district court that the Mueller grand jury that investigated Russian collusion is “continuing robustly.'”
“TRANSLATION: Mueller farmed out ongoing investigations to U.S. attorneys and Trump and the GOP celebrated way too early!”
By the way, in the obstruction case to which I referred above, there was no underlying offense! The defendant, an immigrant with limited English, hesitated, just HESITATED in opening the door to his apartment when the police were banging on his door looking for his roommate.
(My client was totally unaware of any of his roommate’s business. He was a person with no record who had the bad luck of choosing a dicey subletter.)