By Jerome R. Corsi
WASHINGTON, D.C. – As Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation drifts into its second calendar year, President Trump has mockingly characterized his operation as a “witch hunt.”
After Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from any FBI investigations regarding the Trump presidential campaign, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, an Obama appointee, empowered Mueller with a broad mandate that allows an ever-expanding scope of the investigation, with no limits set to the amount of time or taxpayer funds Mueller can spend chasing after indictments.
On May 17, 2017, Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel, charged with investigating “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of Donald J. Trump.” Rosenstein’s letter was so broad as to include in Mueller’s scope the investigation of “any matter” arising from the Russian collusion investigation.
Yes, it could happen here
A close examination of Mueller’s first year of operations has led critics to resurface fears that Mueller’s endeavor could transform into a national police force, with Gestapo-like authority used to identify and prosecute political opponents.
Contrary to popular belief, a national police force typically derives from totalitarian states on the political Left, as exemplified by the Gestapo under the Nazis, or the NKVD in Stalinist Russia. Secret police typically operate nationally, endowed with a broad mandate that supersedes all other police authority to investigate, arrest, and even judge criminal suspects in clandestine procedures accountable only to the executive branch of the government. In their full development, secret police forces exercise summary justice, targeting ideological opponents of the state who dare to speak out in dissent.
As we learn more about how President Obama politicized the FBI and the Department of Justice, those of us committed to the Constitution and the principles of limited government are concerned that the Obama administration protected political allies, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, from prosecution.
At the same time, the DOJ under Attorney General Loretta Lynch accepted from the White House a list of political enemies, typified by Donald Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign. These potential “enemies of the state” were placed under Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) with the executive branch unmasking their names and releasing confidential information to a lapdog mainstream media.
For those who doubt a secret police force like the Gestapo or the NKVD could happen here in the United States, understand that in the 2016 presidential campaign, the Democrats in charge of the White House had the opposition (the GOP presidential campaign) placed under secret surveillance.
Even after losing the election, holdover Obama appointees within the DOJ, as exemplified by Rod Rosenstein, have proceeded to place President Trump under potentially criminal investigation, despite producing no evidence of any campaign collusion with Russia.
The Obama plan to transform FBI and DOJ into national secret police
On September 26, 2016, the Obama administration made a shocking admission to the FISA court; Under the directives of Attorneys General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, the National Security Division of the DOJ had illegally been using FISA court applications to spy on political opponents and unmask conversations to discover content for six years prior to the previously undisclosed July 2016 joint FBI/DOJ “Trump Operation.”
That the Obama administration allowed the FBI and the DOJ to manipulate the FISA court into issuing warrants authorizing “widespread” illegal searches to be conducted by the NSA was not publicly known until May 2017, when the FISA court issued a 99-page report condemning these practices. These FISA court abuses originated in the National Security Division of the DOJ, a highly secretive unit similar to the Counterintelligence Division within the FBI.
To make sure the National Security Division of the DOJ would remain shrouded in mystery, the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel prepared for then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates a 58-page memorandum dated July 20, 2015, which prohibited the Inspector General from investigating anything that happened within the DOJ’s National Security Division. This effectively prohibited the investigation the DOJ’s current Inspector General Michael Horowitz opened in January 2017 to investigate the Obama administration’s politicization of the FBI and DOJ. On January 31, 2017, President Trump fired then-Acting Attorney General Sally Yates after she refused to implement his executive order on immigration.
What we now know is that the National Security Division had weaponized the DOJ to conduct politically motivated electronic surveillance that resulted in the unmasking and leaking to the mainstream media information the NSA collected on then-GOP presidential candidate and subsequently President-elect Donald Trump and his close campaign/transition team officials.
This, the mobilization of a national police force to conduct clandestine surveillance on political opponents, is perhaps the quintessential first step a totalitarian government must take in developing a Gestapo and NKVD-like national police force. From the available evidence, President Obama crossed this line with the FBI and DOJ under directions given by his minion political operatives, Attorneys General Holder and Lynch.
A politically partisan Justice Department under Obama
In 2016, Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice, undertook to determine if pre-election bias among top officials in the Department of Justice caused top FBI and DOJ officials to make decisions favoring Hillary Clinton and prejudicial to Donald Trump.
As a result of Horowitz’s investigation, evidence of political bias within the highest levels of the Justice Department surfaced in some 10,000 text messages exchanged by FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page, a senior FBI attorney with expertise in organized crime cases, who it turns out was involved with Strzok in an extra marital love affair.
When made public, the text-message exchange Strzok and Page shared on DOJ-provided electronic devices made clear they had disparaged Trump throughout the campaign, with an animosity that spilled over into their plans to implement policy at the highest levels of the Justice Department.
In August 2015, Page wrote to Strzok, “I just saw my first Bernie Sander (sic) bumper sticker. Made me want to key the car.” Strzok replied, “He’s an idiot like Trump. Figure they cancel each other out.”
In March 2016, Strzok wondered whether Trump would be a worse president that Sen. Ted Cruz. Page answered, “Trump? Yes, I think so.” Strzok then added that Trump is “awful” and “an idiot.” Strzok called the Republican National Convention in Cleveland “pathetic.”
In a longer message, Strzok complained, “He [Trump] appears to have no ability to experience reverence which I (sic) the foundation for any capacity to admire or serve anything bigger than self to want to learn about anything beyond self, to want to know and deeply honor the people around you.” Page wrote back, “He’s not ever going to become president, right? Right?”
On Election Day, Strzok saw an election map on television that showed Trump winning, which prompted him to express his horror, calling the map “[expletive deleted] terrifying.”
In a text message dated August 15, 2016, Strzok told Page, “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office, that there’s no way he [Trump] gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It is like an insurance policy in the likely event you die before you’re 40.”
Page does not appear to have responded. But the reference to “Andy” is to then-Associate Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, a controversial figure in the FBI investigation into Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email probe.
What Strzok’s email makes clear is that Page and Strzok, in the presence of then-FBI Deputy Director McCabe, had laid out an “insurance policy” plan to make sure Trump never served his term as president, even if Trump pulled off a miracle to win the election and beat Strzok and Page’s clear favorite, Hillary Clinton.
Soon it developed that the “insurance policy” involved the Russian collusion evidence the FBI had been quietly accumulating against the Trump campaign. The frightening prospect conveyed by Strzok’s text message dated August 15, 2016, was that a small group of politically biased FBI officials were determined to make sure Hillary was never indicted or prosecuted, and to make sure evidence believed sufficient enough to impeach Trump was available in the unlikely circumstance he should be elected president.
Law-abiding Americans reading these text messages were shocked, realizing they could no longer assume the federal government could be relied upon to dispense justice in an impartial, unbiased manner.
What if Hillary had won the 2016 presidential election?
At a fundraising event on Friday, September 7, 2016, Hillary Clinton was recorded on video making one of the clearly most defining statements of the presidential campaign. The remark was part of her prepared speech to the “LGBT for Hillary Gala” fundraiser in New York City.
“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” she said to what the New York Times reported was a combination of applause and laughter. “The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately, there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”
Conceivably, a Hillary Clinton presidential administration could declare that a bakery refusing to sell an LGBT couple a wedding cake was a hate crime, or impose fines and possibly even criminal penalties on persons defined as “climate deniers” because they insist the political Left’s ideology of global warming is simply a subterfuge based on hoax science designed to justify the United Nations imposing a carbon tax worldwide in order to redistribute income internationally.
The point is that by extending the Left’s identity politics into the federal criminal code, had Hillary Clinton been elected president, the FBI and DOJ could have been tasked with enforcing hate crime criminal penalties on a national basis.
The possibility is not outlandish when we consider the steps the Obama administration took to unleash the FBI and DOJ to impose a range of sanctions on state and local police departments considered to be utilizing policies that discriminated against the rights of Hispanics, African-Americans, and other minorities.
For those who think a Democratic Party president such as Hillary Clinton would hesitate to use the FBI and the DOJ as a national police force tasked with enforcing a hard-left political agenda, please consider the case of Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona.
Legal proceedings against Arpaio began with the 2007 traffic stop that resulted in the arrest of Ortega Melendres, a Mexican tourist who was a passenger in an automobile stopped in Cave Creek, Maricopa County.
The case developed into a class-action lawsuit that caught the attention of Tom Perez in the Civil Rights Division of the Obama Justice Department. Perez, a former La Raza political activist, charged Arpaio with implementing a “systematic policy” that was intentionally discriminatory to the rights of Hispanics.
The Obama DOJ pursued Arpaio with a vengeance, with Obama holdovers in the DOJ not satisfied until July 31, 2017, when a U.S. District Judge in Phoenix ruled that Arpaio, then 85 yearsold with a three-decade long career in law enforcement at both the federal and state level, was found guilty of a criminal misdemeanor for his failure to abide by the court-ordered federal monitoring of car-stop procedures the DOJ deemed to be discriminatory to Hispanics.
On August 25, 2017, President Trump pardoned Sheriff Arpaio, noting that his service to the United States began at age 18, when Arpaio enlisted in the military after the outbreak of the Korean War, after which he became a police officer in Washington, D.C., and Las Vegas. He later served as a special agent for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) of the Bureau of Narcotics.
In conclusion, we must take seriously that Special Counselor Mueller is leading an ideologically-charged criminal investigation with a broad, almost limitless mandate. In the context of what we know about the Left’s proclivity to impose ideologically-driven definitions of law enforcement responsibilities upon state and local police, Mueller’s Special Counselor investigation is cause for concern.
The Obama administration DOJ prosecuted Sheriff Arpaio on a criminal misdemeanor because he did not comply sufficiently with the car-stop discrimination mandates the federal government imposed on the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.
With Tom Perez heading the Democratic Party, we must face the possibility that should a Democrat be elected president in 2020, national dictates emanating from the DOJ would resurface in the form of community policing programs and court-imposed consent decrees to transform state and local police from a primary mission of law enforcement to a primary mission of “social justice” as defined by the hard Left