Our overly litigious society takes its cue from the top. On Wednesday, the Justice Department appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to oversee the multiple Russia probes and “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.”
Donald Trump has been an ambitious optimist during his first few months in office, trying to drive a complex domestic agenda despite significant distractions from dishonest Democrats, spineless establishment Republicans, and the biased mainstream media, not to mention the thousands of career bureaucrats that have very little accountability to anyone. Special Counsel Mueller will presumably take some of the heat off the young administration, as the alleged crimes (that no one can seem to articulate) will no longer be tried during the 24-hour news cycle or in the halls of congress.
So now we must exercise patience as we wait for the results of the investigation. And while patience is a lacking virtue for our immediate gratification society, only time will allow us to discover the truth about what impact, if any, Russia really had on our election and if the Trump campaign colluded to bring that unknown impact about.
Yet there is another story here that no news organization seems inclined to report: The fundamental principles guiding the behavior of many in Washington. That is, “We might not have any power…but we can certainly cause you pain.”
For years, we’ve heard politicians on both sides of the aisle talk about Tort Reform, or reform to the “set of laws that provides remedies to individuals who have suffered harm by the unreasonable acts of another.” In other words, we need to reform the laws that are driving our society to sue over every real or perceived slight. According to the US Court’s Website, in 2015 there were 281,608 civil filings in the US district courts which does not include criminal, property or bankruptcy filings.
People like to engage the courts to resolve their issues with neighbors, co-workers and strangers. As a society, we no longer engage each other in debate or even just talk to each other to resolve our issues. Instead, we drag you to court, bury you in paperwork, waste your time and drain your financial resources. It’s just more fun that way.
While this is nothing new, the surprise here is that politicians, while crying out for We the People to drop our cases, are setting the standard for engaging in frivolous legal activity in an effort to cause pain. The #resist movement is the perfect example. During the 2016 election, Democrats lost the presidency and now face Republican majorities in the House and Senate, not to mention losing hundreds of state congressional seats and governorships around the country. In essence, they ended up with no actual political power.
Republicans, on the other hand, ended up with a President that they cannot control, despite the fact that there is an R next to his name. The GOP establishment never wanted Trump and are incensed that his win limits their ability to control both the agenda and the narrative.
So what does this mean? It means that the GOP is in a similar position as the Dems were when they forced through the Affordable Care Act (AKA ObamaCare) back in 2010. They have the ability to govern and to deliver President Trump’s agenda — which undoubtedly got them all elected in November. And the Dems have very little ability to stop them.
But instead, we are seeing very few big ticket items come to vote on the floors of the House and Senate, much less pass across the President’s desk to be signed into law. Why? Because the Democrats, and now many establishment Republicans, have decided to allow one guiding principle to drive their behavior: I’ll see you in court.
The answer to just about every Executive Order or legislative priority is, “We will drag you to court, bury you in paperwork, waste your time and drain your financial resources.” And unfortunately the time and resources being wasted belong to the American People.
Let’s take the call for Special Counsel. The most recent calls for Mueller’s appointment have come in response to the New York Times article referencing a memo (read: personal notetaking) James Comey supposedly wrote up after the President allegedly asked him to “move on” from the Michael Flynn investigation. The mainstream media responded in outrage (again), crying “obstruction of justice” and “fascism.” The resisters in congress are giddy. Most notably with Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA) escalating her calls to “Impeach 45!”
They want you to forget about the fact that no one has actually seen the memo that the NYT supposedly had read to them over the phone from their anonymous source. And forget about the fact that every one of these “damning” articles has included only anonymous sources with absolutely no proof, or even allegations, on the record. And don’t even consider the May 3, 2017 open testimony from Comey, under oath, where he said such obstruction had never happened.
“So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?” Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) asked.
“In theory yes,” Comey answered.
“Has it happened? Hirono asked.
“Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that — without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don’t see a case there, and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I’m talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It’s not happened in my experience,” Comey said.
It’s not happened in my experience. And yet, we’ve had 72 hours of relentless news coverage from every major outlet that it did happen. That it’s a major crime. That Trump will be impeached because of it.
And it’s all bogus based on the testimony of Comey — under oath — earlier this month. Comey, if he truly felt he was being pressured by the President to stop the investigation, would have reported it. He is required by law to report it. He never did, which tells me that it never happened. He can write whatever personal notes he wants but his action, or inaction in this case, speaks louder than his memo.
Still, lawmakers continue to the push this dishonest narrative, and the dishonest, liberal lapdog media are happy to comply. These are our country’s top lawyers — they set the standard for the rest of the country. And their behavior speaks volumes about why our country is so quick to rush into court. That is, I might not have the power to stop you, but I can drag you into court, distract the country from your agenda, and cause you lots of pain. All because they are sore losers and don’t like this president.
Remember, there is absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing from anyone on the Trump campaign. And it is unprecedented to appoint a Special Counsel without evidence of a crime. But we did, to appease the fake outrage and false narratives. The only actual crime we know about is the leaking of classified information, and it is uncertain if that will be in scope for Mueller’s investigation.
This is a distraction. And what is most frustrating to me is that all of this noise — and that is what it is: noise — is unbelievably wasteful. We have been pouring money into these investigations for months, and the price tag just got a lot bigger. Not to mention the fact that while lawmakers are spending all their time on this, they are not doing the People’s work. And that should create real outrage among all Americans. After all, we are still paying their salaries despite the fact that they are not doing what we hired them to do. Where else in society does that business model succeed?
Special Counsel has basically unlimited power, resources and budget. From all reporting so far, Mueller appears to be a man of high integrity with unimpeachable credentials who will conduct the investigate fairly, in search of the truth. So despite the fact that there is really no precedent for bringing in Special Counsel when there is no evidence of wrongdoing, Mueller appears to be a choice that both sides can get behind.
Of course the $64,000 question is this: will Congress and the media accept the results his investigation if they don’t fit into their pre-established narrative? I, for one, am not holding my breath.
