[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.

Tenn. AG reveals ICE released thousands of ‘murderers and rapists’ from detention centers into US streets

Kamala Harris Touts Mass Amnesty Offering Fast-Tracked Citizenship to Nearly Every Illegal Alien in U.S.

Migration Crisis Fueled Rise in Tuberculosis Cases Study Finds

"They’re Going to Try to Kill Trump Again"

"Dems' Attempts at Power Grab Losing Their Grip"

"Restoring a ‘Great Moderation’ in Fiscal Policy"

"As attacks intensify, Trump becomes more popular"

Posting Articles Now Working Here

Another Test

Testing

Kamala Harris, reparations, and guaranteed income

Did Mudboy Slim finally kill this place?

"Why Young Americans Are Not Taught about Evil"

"New Rules For Radicals — How To Reinvent Kamala Harris"

"Harris’ problem: She’s a complete phony"

Hurricane Beryl strikes Bay City (TX)

Who Is ‘Destroying Democracy In Darkness?’

‘Kamalanomics’ is just ‘Bidenomics’ but dumber

Even The Washington Post Says Kamala's 'Price Control' Plan is 'Communist'

Arthur Ray Hines, "Sneakypete", has passed away.

No righT ... for me To hear --- whaT you say !

"Walz’s Fellow Guardsmen Set the Record Straight on Veep Candidate’s Military Career: ‘He Bailed Out’ "

"Kamala Harris Selects Progressive Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as Running Mate"

"The Teleprompter Campaign"

Good Riddance to Ismail Haniyeh

"Pagans in Paris"

"Liberal groupthink makes American life creepy and could cost Democrats the election".


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Gregg Jarrett: What is Robert Mueller investigating (since collusion is not a crime)?
Source: Fox News
URL Source: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017 ... ce-collusion-is-not-crime.html
Published: May 23, 2017
Author: Gregg Jarrett
Post Date: 2017-05-23 21:51:28 by nolu chan
Keywords: None
Views: 1031
Comments: 6

Gregg Jarrett: What is Robert Mueller investigating (since collusion is not a crime)?

By Gregg Jarrett
Published May 23, 2017
Fox News

Robert Mueller is tasked with finding a crime that does not exist in the law. It is a legal impossibility.

As special counsel, Mueller can engage in all manner of spectacular jurisprudential gymnastics. However, it will not change the fact that colluding with Russia is not, under America’s criminal codes, a crime. It’s just not there.

Maybe it should be. Perhaps someday Congress will pass a law criminalizing such conduct in political campaigns. But for now, there is not a single statute outlawing collaboration with a foreign government in a U.S. presidential election. Or any election, for that matter.

Why, then, are so many people who are following the Trump-Russia saga under the mistaken impression that collusion is a crime? Principally, because it is a loaded word with an historic criminal connotation.

“Collusion” became a prominent part of the legal lexicon when Benjamin Harrison occupied the White House and Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890 outlawing collusion in some business practices. Specifically, price fixing and other anticompetitive activities became a criminal offense under Section 1 of the Act. Almost overnight, the word “collusion” was converted into a legal pejorative.

But collusion is only criminal in an antitrust setting. It has nothing whatsoever to do with elections. Yet that has not stopped politicians, pundits and journalists from either misunderstanding the concept and/or misconstruing its application to the Trump-Russia hysteria that has reached a deafening pitch.

Both the Department of Justice and the FBI seem equally oblivious.

Mueller’s Marching Orders

Under the law granting him legal authority (28 CFR 600), a special counsel is charged with investigating crimes. Only crimes. Nothing else. He has limited jurisdiction. Any other wrongdoing uncovered in the investigation which does not rise to the level of a criminal offense cannot even be made public by the special counsel. That is the law.

So what crime is Mueller instructed to investigate? Let take a look.

In his order appointing Mueller as special counsel (Order No. 3915-2017), Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein directed him to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump”.

But wait. If Mueller is supposed to look for evidence of a crime that is not, by legal definition, a crime…then isn’t the special counsel being asked to do something that is manifestly unattainable? Doesn’t the impossibility of his assignment render the exercise futile? The answer is yes.

The only conceivable crime is a tangential one. If it could somehow be shown that someone in the Trump campaign aided and abetted the hacking of the Democratic National Committee or the campaign of Hillary Clinton, then perhaps a criminal charge might be made. But as Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz told Fox News, “I’m sure that didn’t happen”.

How can he be so sure? Common sense. There is no evidence the Trump campaign had the technical expertise to hack anything. Knowing about a computer theft or even verbally encouraging it is not enough under the law. It requires an overt act that assists in the commission of the crime. It appears that no one, including the Trump campaign, even knew about Russia’s hacking efforts until after they were accomplished and made public.

Any Related Matters

Rosenstein’s order to the special counsel authorizes him to investigate any other matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” This is the usual all-encompassing phrase which allows a special counsel to run rampant in an almost limitless direction to dig up dirt on potential targets.

As I pointed out in a recent column, Mueller’s probe will inevitably morph into an investigation of President Trump’s meeting with James Comey and his subsequent firing of the FBI Director. Amid partisan accusations of obstruction of justice, the special counsel will surely examine whether the president corruptly attempted to influence, obstruct, or impede the due administration of the law, as the law defines it. (18 USC 1501)

If the president told Comey he hopes former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn can be cleared because “he’s a good guy,” it is not enough to sustain an obstruction charge. Hoping or wishing for an outcome is not the same as influencing, obstructing or impeding. Nor is firing the FBI Director. As Comey himself admitted, the president has the constitutional authority to fire him for any reason or no reason at all.

Furthermore, the term “corruptly” is specifically defined under18 USC 1515(b) as “acting with an improper purpose, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information.” The president’s actions do not come close to satisfying the requirements of acting corruptly.

The most recent accusation is that President Trump asked two of his top intelligence officials, Daniel Coats and Adm. Michael Rogers, to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election. If Rogers and Coats had no such evidence of collusion, then asking them to tell the truth is not illegal. But at this point, we do not know what exactly occurred during those alleged conversations.

What we do know is that collusion in a political campaign is not, by itself, a crime.

How, then, is it possible to obstruct the investigation of a crime… which is not a crime?

Gregg Jarrett is a Fox News Anchor and former defense attorney.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: nolu chan (#0)

Excellent post, thanks.

BobCeleste  posted on  2017-05-24   10:43:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: nolu chan (#0)

Treason.

Willie Green  posted on  2017-05-24   11:26:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: wankerWillie gangGreen, fredbot, hondope, zulu, mau mau, hutus, lice, druids, morloks, 666ers (#2)

for beaTing The Bolsheviks

love
boris

If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !

BorisY  posted on  2017-05-24   12:39:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Willie Green (#2) (Edited)

Treason.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

U.S. Constitution, Article 3, Section 3:

Section 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

Do you allege that attorney Jarrett committed an act of war against the United States?

Do you allege that attorney Jarrett adhered to some enemy of the United States?

Do you allege that attorney Jarrett gave aid and comfort to said enemy of the United States?

Nota bene:

Constructive treason. Treason imputed to a person by law from his conduct or course of actions, though his deeds taken severally do not amount to actual treason. This doctrine is not known in the United States.

Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.

nolu chan  posted on  2017-05-24   16:07:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Willie Green (#2)

http://www.mediaite.com/online/what-is-the-crime-dershowitz-goes-on-wild-rant-says-muellers-powers-limited/

‘What Is the Crime?!’ Dershowitz Goes on Wild Rant, Says Mueller’s Powers Limited

by Justin Baragona | 10:10 pm, May 18th, 2017

Earlier today, President Donald Trump reiterated his long-held stance that there was no collusion between him and Russia when it comes to election interference. At the same time, he added a little caveat, stating that he could only speak for himself, perhaps throwing his associates and campaign members under the bus. Of course, this was all in relation to the announcement of ex-FBI Director Robert Mueller a special counsel in the Russia probe.

Well, during a pretty wild little segment on CNN, famed lawyer Alan Dershowitz let it be known that he doesn’t think Mueller has any jurisdiction when it comes to investigating potential collusion between Trump and the Russians over election interference. Why? Because Dershowitz doesn’t think that is a criminal act.

“Let’s assume that’s true,” he exclaimed. “Show me the criminal statute. I still sit here as a civil libertarian. I don’t want us ever to become what Stalinist Russia became when Stalin was saying, show me the man I’ll find you the crime. What is the crime?!”

When anchor Anderson Cooper brought up there is a difference when it comes to illegal collusion, Dershowitz agreed but said that is all in the purview of politics.

“That’s a political issue,” the lawyer said. “That doesn’t give Mueller jurisdiction. Mueller has no jurisdiction to explore whether he made political mistakes, did terrible things, engaged in wrongdoing. Only criminal conduct!”

After Carl Bernstein jumped in, stating that this was “an extraordinary situation that we need to know about,” Dershowitz shot back.

“We will never find it out,” he noted. “It will always be done in secret. It should be a special investigative committee in which everything is done in the open.”

You can watch the exchange above, via CNN.

[Video at link]

- - - - - - - - - -

nolu chan  posted on  2017-05-25   0:37:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Willie Green (#2)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aypl2aFlT8w

Tucker Carlson Tonight vs Alan Dershowitz 5/19/17

nolu chan  posted on  2017-05-25   2:07:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com