It's Mueller Time

Another week, another rash of stories in which politicians, particularly American politicians, are brazenly and unabashedly illustrating their continued assault on democracy.

As you might expect, it's Meuller time! What TF happened there? Sometime about a month ago when I heard he was now looking into possible Russian leverage on Trump through his inexplicably obtained loan from Deutchebank, I knew things had taken a turn for the worse. Either somebody had gotten to him or he'd given up. August 12, 2017 I posted this. These are the things I was thinking about almost 7 months ago. Including this Deutchebank story. (not to mention Venezuela!)

I sometimes predict things in this blog that don't happen (or at least haven't happened yet) but I like having some things on record here for the "I-told-ya-so" effect. On this occasion I just didn't feel any thrill. What I felt was outrage. It instantly occurred to me that Meuller was done. Not just done, but after two long years, his report was going to be a huge disappointment. A few people cajoled me and said to be patient, he's a good man and all that, but I saw the dump truck in the sky. And sure enough about a month later he DOESN'T release his report, he gives it to the absolute LAST person he should give it to and says, "Here ya go, William Barr. YOU tell the world what's in my report." What the fucking frigging fornicating FUCK?!?!

Here's what I wrote back then based on something someone else had written well before then: "How much of a stretch is it to imagine Vlad seeing Trump holding out his small hand for a loan and thinking, "He's not gonna pay this back, but if we could make him president and have him in our debt... hmmmmmm..." I've heard unconfirmed estimates that Trump, through Deutschebank, borrowed 4 billion from Vlad the Enabler. Or one of the various banks and businesses he rules with an iron fist. With what we know about Humpty Trumpty, when he falls off his little wall and all of his shady dealings are exposed and he finally gets the real estate he has earned, (a jail cell), he'll be yelling through the bars, "I'm a great man! You can't put me in here! I wasn't afraid of the banks! Fuck them! I wasn't even afraid of Vladimir Putin! You think I'm afraid of jail time?""

Back then I still believed his shady dealings would be exposed. But a month ago, the idea that I could be THAT far ahead of the Meuller investigation made me realize it would soon be over and it wasn't going to be a success. If he's just now looking into this issue it had to be a last straw. And it appears that it was.

But why did he give his report to this William Barr character and who is he? I believe the answer to both questions is the same. Let's do some history: First of all, why did Trump's first attorney general, Jeff Sessions recuse himself from the whole Russian collusion investigation? The rule that Sessions cited — 28 CFR 45.2— states that DOJ employees may not "participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution, or who would be directly affected by the outcome." This is one of those little rules that guilty people add to political protocol that allow other guilty people to get away with what they're guilty of. That's all. "You can't add your guilty testimony that will make the investigation a slam dunk to the investigation because it will make it a slam dunk and you will be found guilty." That's 28 CFR 45.2 without the legal ambiguity. This and many other little gems like it are the very fucking core of modern politics because banks and big business need dirty people to protect their dirty business.

Anyway, Sessions had had two conversations with Russian ambassador to the US, Sergey Kislyak, denied having had dealings with the Russians before being sworn in as attorney general, then after the truth was revealed, assured us all that they weren't talking about anything naughty. And why wouldn't we believe him? Well, because (as a possible audition for the position) he was lying. Now let's not forget, let's not fucking forget, that this doctor of douchebaggery fired James Comey, the FBI director who was the first to start investigating Donald Trump's collusion with Russia to fix the 2016 election. What's that called, children? That's right! Repeat after me: "obstruction of justice." Goood!

I'm getting ahead of myself. So the Mueller investigation started in response to the firing of James Comey because it was obvious that Trump didn't want anyone investigating his collusion with the Russians. Once again, he wanted to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE. He didn't want anyone finding out about his withdrawals from the Bank of Putin. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

Then after Sessions recused himself, making it impossible for him to fire the NEW investigator into Trump's Russian collusion, he was, for that reason, bullied and belittled into resignation. Well good riddance on the one hand but on the other hand, who was his replacement? Matt Whitaker. And why? Give THIS a gander:

I like the word that one guy uses: preposterous. But par for the course (sorry bad Trump pun) for the anti-democracy Trump administration. Whitaker was a Trump flunkey and Trump loved his plan to starve the Mueller investigation of funding. So welcome to the team new attorney general and hot tub scamster! You're just the kind of guy Trump is looking for! A guy who (and I'm not sure this is true but it's out there) once promoted toilets that are deeper so as to allow well-endowed men to take a leak without their penis touching the water or porcelain. Not sure how much this contributed to the Trump/Whitaker bromance but... moving on...

And in keeping with bromance, I guess Whitaker fell out of favour with Trump for not being able to halt the Mueller investigation or for some other gross overestimations. This guy's name is very close to "Whanker."

But on February 14th, Valentine's Day 2019, William Barr was appointed as Trump's newest sellsword to triumphantly behead the Mueller monster that was threatening the kingdom. Why did he get the appointment? Well it probably had something to do with his 19-page article about how Mueller has no right to investigate Trump, or how Barr worded it, "submit the president to interrogation," on Russian collusion. Folks, I read this thing and there is a lot of legal jargon that would impress some weak-minded people, but there are also grammar mistakes in practically every paragraph. This guy is citing laws like he understands them but clearly exhibits difficulty with the language in which they are printed. In paragraph 4 he says "designed subvert" instead of designed to subvert then goes on to explain (rather coherently) how obstruction laws are designed to prohibit "bad acts." Acts like witness/jury tampering, destruction/alteration/falsification of evidence, or anything depriving the proceeding of honesty.

He goes on to say that unlike Clinton and Nixon, Trump's actions cannot be defined as obstruction of justice. He then contradicts paragraph 4 a mere 3 paragraphs later with the following flimsy reasoning: He says that public officials exercising constitutional (that's debatable) discretionary powers in a lawful way, like removing an official (James Comey), giving direction on a case (like suggesting the Mueller investigation be cancelled), or using pardoning power (which Trump suggested he may use for Michael Flynn), is NOT obstruction of justice and the perception of this as a crime means the president can be accused of a breaking the law based on a subjective reading of his state of mind.

Presumably because of their positions as public officials and some perceived constitutional endowment of super-human morality, William Barr is suggesting that determination of public officials' actions such as the above as "bad actions" is too subjective to allow even though it is, as he admitted, what obstruction laws are designed to do. Did Trump fire James Comey because he was investigating Russian collusion? According to Bill Barr, why, that's just too subjective a call for normal human beings like us to make about a president. Even though he admits it, and even though it absolutely would be depriving the proceeding of honesty. You can't really have an honest investigation if you fire the investigator. I don't see any subjectivity in that call. The exact same can be said of cancelling or starving the Mueller investigation of funds. Obviously, and totally objectively "bad acts."

So just like the little rule of law Jeff Sessions used to recuse himself lest his guilt cause him to be found guilty, Bill Barr is promoting the exact same defence for Donald Trump in his 19-page manifesto. And this is what got him hired. This and his past performance of keeping bad people committing "bad acts" out of prison that goes way back to the Reagan administration and the Iran/Nicaragua/Contra scandal. He was in on the George Dubyuh Iraq WMD debacle too.

So now you get an idea of why it might not be the smartest thing to trust this wizard of wankery's summary of the almost two year investigation that Mueller compiled. And where these came from:

However! Adam Schiff and Maxine Waters have been probing this whole Deutsche Bank thing and they are convinced of collusion and obstruction of justice. I submit to you they exist, it's just decades of these little legal rules that are designed to allow the guilty freedom from prosecution for their crimes that are hampering the whole investigation. Here's a guy who basically says that:

And now, guess what? ADAM SCHIFF NEEDS TO BE FIRED! How long before reasonable doubt is gone? It's no longer there. People just want it to be. Bad people. Who do bad acts.

But wait, that's not all! What about THIS douchebag?

I specifically chose a pic that has the stupidest thing in all of politics: the presumption of honourability amongst our thieving politicians. The only honour amongst these thieves is right there. That antiquated thoroughly unwarranted and I'm going to use that great word again, preposterous title these people get when they cheat, lie and steal their ways to the top of the political food chain.

This abortive rooting hog? All she did this week was take funding away from blind kids, deaf kids and the Special Olympics. "We had to make some HAAARD choices," said this lump of foul deformity. Only thing hard is your heart Betsy. If you were the philanthropist you pretend to be, you'd cover the cuts you claim were so hard to make. You can easily afford it.

But her mission (from God?) is to separate the highly fed and lowly taught from the refuse of society. And they ARE lowly taught because private schools suck. In fact they lead directly to the presence of rich people who don't understand, trust, or tolerate regular people in positions of power and leadership in politics and industry. And this whole post is the tangled web of deceit they weave.