In May of 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions removed himself from handling any matters relating to the Russia investigation headed up by Robert Mueller. As you know, this investigation is a complete fishing expedition with the sole purpose of placing a cloud over Donald Trump’s presidency. In legal jargon, a fishing expedition is an investigation into no crime. During a fishing expedition, investigators go out looking for crimes rather than investigating real crimes that have already occurred. According to long-standing legal framework, in order to open an investigation, there must be an identifiable crime. No police department opens an investigation into the potential robbing of a bank. No, either the bank was robbed or it wasn’t. If it was, then you open an investigation.
The purpose of placing a cloud over Trump’s presidency has largely been successful. President Trump’s detractors can’t go a day without citing the investigation and claiming that the president “colluded” with the Russians to win the election in 2016.
Fair-minded people can clearly see that no evidence has been revealed to implicate President Trump in anything illegal. A fishing expedition that has come up with nothing does, however, beg the question, “Why did Jeff Sessions remove himself from arguably the most important case before his own department?” There isn’t a clear answer but according to reports, the Attorney General received counsel from Department of Justice officials prior to making this decision. It is highly likely that the officials counseling Sessions were Obama holdovers, officials who were hired by and worked for President Obama.
Was the recusal appropriate? Not if Sessions was getting his advice from people loyal to Obama. As we have since discovered, integrity was not paramount in the Obama DOJ. If Sessions based his recusal on the advice of those who despised the new president (and by association, himself) he made a huge mistake.
From all of the information that I have gathered, at the time of his recusal, there was no verifiable evidence that the Trump campaign coordinated with a foreign government to win the election. Furthermore, it was known within the Department of Justice and FBI that many biased agents who didn’t like president Trump, were in charge of the investigation. Men such as James Comey, Andrew McCabe, and Peter Strzok. The DOJ Inspector General report concluded as much. Are we to believe that Jeff Sessions actually thought that if he recused himself from the investigation that it would still be handled with integrity despite the handwriting on the wall? Those inside the DOJ, including the boss (Jeff Sessions), had to have known that the Russia investigation was rotten at its core. Yet he still recused himself.
This brings us to the question, “What should happen now?” Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein should have ended the Mueller probe and published a report on his findings. But, understanding that Rosenstein is the one who extended this fishing expedition by hiring Robert Mueller to lead a special counsel into the matter, it is unlikely he will reel in the Mueller team anytime soon. The special counsel has an almost unlimited budget with dozens of attorneys and staff members devoted to it. Over one year into the Mueller-led probe and $20 million taxpayers’ dollars spent; there isn’t one iota of evidence to suggest that the Trump campaign colluded with a foreign government to win the election.
Because Rosenstein is apparently unwilling to reel in a corrupt and biased investigation, the only option left is for President Trump to fire Robert Mueller via his executive authority. If Mueller is allowed to continue, he will likely carry this phony investigation into 2019 and beyond. After all, this investigation was begun (by corrupt Obama officials) to bring down the Trump presidency. Why would they voluntarily stop prior to completing their objective? They won’t.
