BY T.F. STERN
There’s an Associated Press story that stirs the pot one more time as those who can’t stand Donald Trump being the President of the United States continue to spin their disgust at having someone other than Hillary Clinton in the White House.
That’s not exactly how the article by Eric Tucker and Michael Balsamo, explained Mueller’s comments; but since when did facts become important to the liberal news media?
Reading from the opening paragraph of the AP article, “Special council Robert Mueller said Wednesday he believed he was constitutionally barred from charging President Donald Trump but pointedly emphasized that his report did not exonerate the president”.
Mueller went on to say, “If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mueller said, “We did not however make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”
I want you to read that last line once again, “We did not however make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”
Mueller spent about 2 years trying to figure out if Donald Trump committed a crime which begs the question, If Mueller didn’t have a specific crime to investigate then by what authority did the investigation proceed? The answer is, none. For a special council to be called in to investigate there has to be a specific crime listed as the basis for that investigation. The entire investigation was nothing more than a witch hunt; a political hatchet job to discredit the Trump presidency.
On a much smaller scale, and many years ago when I was a night shift police officer for the Houston Police Department, a formal Internal Affairs complaint was lodged against me claiming I used my skills as a locksmith to break into a private business in order to help a former part owner obtain property.
The only item linking me to this business was a police report that I had filled out after having been dispatched to a burglary of a business. In my report it was shown that no sign of force appeared to have been used to gain entry.
From that information alone, the folks who made the report jumped to the obvious conclusion that since I was also a locksmith, and that I had made the police report; clearly I was covering up for an illegal act, that I had used my skills to pick the door of the business open for the former partner and helped him steal from the business.
Internal Affairs was unable to find any evidence that I had done anything wrong, committed any crime or even knew any of the individuals; however, upon completion of their investigation they did not exonerate me. Instead they simply recorded that it was not sustained.
Such a finding left a dark cloud over my standing as a police officer and as a locksmith as far as I was concerned. There was no evidence, nothing other than a wild accusation that sprang out of nowhere by an unhappy citizen; but that was enough to leave a mark on my folder.
So, yes, I really do understand what it means for the President of the United States not to be exonerated. It means those who made the accusation had no evidence and couldn’t win in a court of law; but were and are willing to destroy him simply because they are unhappy.
We as a society have long since discarded civility along with the antique idea that individuals are innocent until proven guilty. Now we have something better, something that effectively destroys anyone at the drop of a hat; it’s called Trial by Media, and that my friends is how you spend 2 years investigating an unidentified crime that may or may not have ever happened.
Self-Educated American, Senior Editor, T.F. Stern is both a retired City of Houston police officer and, most recently, a retired self-employed locksmith (after serving that industry for 40 plus years). He is also a gifted political and social commentator. His popular and insightful blog, T.F. Sterns Rantings, has been up and at it since January of 2005.