Star Chamber Revisited

“This is a hearing.  I thought I was the one who was supposed to be heard.”

These words were spoken by Attorney General Barr several hours into his “testimony” at today’s House Judiciary Oversight Committee hearing where he was an invited and voluntary witness.  Nearly every Democrat, after making a statement or accusing AG Barr of a litany of bad acts, “reclaimed their time” and refused to allow him to answer or even comment.  Rather, they used their full time for their own speeches.

Such hearings are usually at least described as an opportunity for the committee members to gain information from their witness.  Hearings these days are often contentious, but the witness is usually allowed to answer questions and accusations.  Congress people have a limited time (usually 5 minutes) to question the witness and the witness is allowed to answer.  If a question is posed at the end of the allotted time, the Chair allows the witness to answer.

Not today.  Chairman Nadler even initially denied the witness’s request for a 5 minute break.  I felt like I was watching not the United States Government in action, but a hearing in the Star Chamber.  And it made me feel sickened and nauseous to see this behavior in the Congress of the United States of America.

One of my first published law review articles dealt with the First Amendment and specifically the free and open exchange of speech and press.  As part of the history leading up to the issues addressed, I researched the British Star Chamber, including looking at antique books containing English texts from the 13^th century.

Beginning with the Magna Carta in 1215, there was an increasingly intensified struggle in England for recognition by the crown of the fundamental freedoms of speech and press.  In 1275 a statute was enacted in England that provided for the imprisonment of anyone disseminating false “tales” resulting in discord between the king and the people.  The statute was rewritten several times through the 16^th century with re-enactments broadening the offense.  The Court of Star Chamber was created to administer the statute.

Star Chamber was a royal court and as such was not hampered by things such as rules of evidence or procedural safeguards. While originally designed to enforce law, it became synonymous with social and political oppression through the arbitrary use and abuse of the power it wielded. Amongst other things, the Star Chamber could inflict any punishment short of death.  It summoned juries before it when they rendered verdicts disagreeable to the government, and fined and imprisoned them. It spread terrorism among those who were called to do constitutional acts.  The Star Chamber’s tyranny was ultimately abolished in 1641. 

Honestly, as I watched the Democrats’ verbal tirades against Attorney General Barr, as I watched them refuse to let him speak, as I watched them use their time designed for questioning a witness to instead berate the entire Trump administration, often using a multitude of false statements, I couldn’t help but see a Star Chamber performing before my very eyes in 2020 America.

I really think every American should watch this performance.  Not because it is pleasant, but because you will see how the Democrats actually behave, despite their words to the contrary.  You will see them make or assert incorrect facts, use them to accuse the Attorney General of something, then refuse to let the AG speak.  You will see Chairman Nadler not allow the AG to finish an answer, a courtesy that most committee chairs afford to witnesses.  You will see the chairman refuse to take points of order about this.  You will see on the few occasions when the AG is allowed to answer and says something like “I will follow the law” that the Democrats assert that is not an “appropriate” answer and hence accuse him of failing to answer. 

Yes, this is America, but in this Democrat majority hearing it is apparently wrong for the Attorney General of the United States to say that he will follow the law.  Similarly, he is attacked for following the principles of federalism that govern our country and which place him in charge of enforcing federal law but leave Governors to address laws and issues of their individual states. 

Attorney General Barr was not really summoned to provide information.  The Democrats did not want to hear from him.  They summoned him because they do not like his policies – policies that are perfectly legitimate.  They summoned him because they do not like the President for whom he serves as AG.  They summoned him so they could have someone to throw their hateful campaign rhetoric at. 

Like the Star Chamber summoning juries whose verdicts they found disagreeable, AG Barr was summoned because his actions are to the Democrats disagreeable.  Actions like protecting federal property, enforcing federal law, calling violent riots out for what they are – not the peaceful protests that the Democrats would have us see. 

The Star Chamber fined and imprisoned those who disagreed with them.  I am sure that the Democrats would do that to Barr and many other Republicans if they could (and, indeed we have far too many instances of them using false information to go after and even imprison political rivals).  Today they did what they could in an effort to silence any dissent from their views and their agenda – they spent nearly 5 hours verbally attacking a good public servant.

Honestly, I have watched many Congressional hearings over the years beginning with Watergate.  They are often contentious.  But NEVER have I seen anything as appalling as this.  But this is what the Democrats have become.  They are not interested in hearing any view, any fact, any law, any statement whatsoever that contradicts their narrative and their agenda.  This is not an American approach to governing; it is that of an authoritarian dictatorship. 

The behavior of the Democrats should sicken every American.  I hope that many will watch this spectacle in its entirety.  I hope that before the November election that everyone gives serious thought to what giving the Democrats any more power would mean for this country. 

Here is the link to video of today’s hearing.   LINK

 

The Court of the Star Chamber by Cecil Doughty

Can We At Least Try to Approach the Mueller Report With Some Common Sense?

Just drop all the political posturing for a moment and use basic common sense:

               Imagine you are hired for a job, a job for which both you and the people who hired you believe  that you are someone who can accomplish great things and turn around what you and those who hired you saw as a movement in a wrong direction.  The day you begin you are told that you are being accused of a terrible crime that will not only affect your reputation but also interfere with your ability to perform your job duties. You know you did not commit this crime, yet you are under daily attack by those who wanted someone else to get your job.  Your friends and family are slandered.  The investigation of you for something you know you are not guilty of heats up more and more every day.  

               Wouldn’t you be both frustrated and angry with this daily barrage of interference with your ability to perform the job you were hired to do?  Wouldn’t you wish and then verbalize your desires that the investigation stop so you could just do your job?  Wouldn’t you even perhaps think about actually stopping it? 

So, in the above scenario, are you nonetheless guilty of obstructing the investigation when, while you wished and verbalized desires to do so, in the end you did not actually obstruct the investigation?  The Democrats think so.  Not because it makes sense, common or otherwise, but because they must condemn the President.  That seems to be the only thing for which they live – not to do their jobs as elected officials, not to work for the good of the country, not to support our system of government, not for any other reason than to destroy Donald Trump and hopes and dreams of all those who believe in him, in our country, and in a strong and proud America.

I have now read the Mueller report, though in reality it will take more than one reading to fully understand all of it.  But here are some comments on the obstruction issues (Volume 2 of the report).

First, one must understand that Mueller is a Prosecutor who was charged with developing a case against Donald Trump.  His job is to look at evidence and develop the strongest case that he can against the subject of his investigation.  So, here is what he does:  He looks at the law and what he must prove to make a case against Trump under that law.   If the law is ambiguous, he develops the best argument he can for an interpretation of the law that is favorable to his position.  That argument/interpretation might or might not prevail in court.   Then he looks at the evidence in the light most favorable to him (and most unfavorable to Trump) and develops the best possible argument against Trump that the evidence can support. Again, that might or might not be an argument that would be successful in court.   He then determines whether this best prosecutorial case is actually strong enough to indict.

So, what we see in Volume 2 are a lawyer’s presentation of the argument that could be made against Trump on 10 specific allegations of obstruction.  This is a one-sided presentation – the strongest view that the prosecution can come up with.  One must remember that there is also a view and arguments that can be made in favor of the other side.  Law is an adversarial profession; lawyers represent one side or the other and make the best argument they can for their client.  Lawyers are not the judge or the jury.

Mueller and his team are good lawyers and they write arguments that sound convincing.  But, remember, there can be even more convincing arguments written for the other side.  And that is likely why Mueller was unwilling to make an up or down call on obstruction.  He did the investigation and left it to his superior to take a more objective look and make the final call.  As was appropriate under the law, his superior, the Attorney General, did so.  (And, as the Attorney General noted, it was for him and not for Congress – we don’t use our law enforcement and intelligence agencies to go on investigatory (and sometimes witch) hunts to gather information that Congress can use for political purposes).

Everyone will have their own reaction (largely based on their political leanings) to the evidence set forth in the Mueller report.  The main thing I see in Volume 2 (the obstruction portion of the investigation) is that Donald Trump was very human in his anger and frustration of being wrongfully accused of collusion.  He was angry and frustrated that the political climate allowed the investigation to become so overtly hateful of him, his policies, and his supporters.  He was angry and frustrated that this was all interfering with his ability to focus fully on his job as President of the United States.  And, he was not a political operative and was less savvy in handling this political witch hunt than would be a seasoned politician.

I think it is time for everyone to let this go.  As did the Attorney General, look at the evidence objectively and in context.  Put the evidence into the larger context of the collusion investigation which it is clear that Trump felt, and rightfully so, was a witch hunt.  So, the President did some things, made some statements, that may be interpreted negatively; he was not perfect in the face of the false allegations against him.  But, that does not amount to obstruction.  And, the greatest argument that there was no obstruction is that the investigation went forward to its end, Trump gave unprecedented access to the investigators, and at no time claimed executive privilege.

While I, and most others who care about this country, may think that it is time to let this go, sadly, the Democrats and the Left-biased media do not.  Instead, they double down on their attacks against the President and now, also, the Attorney General, and even Mueller (their yesterday hero when they thought he was the one who would “get Trump”).  Some now see the Mueller report as presenting a plan for their impeachment of the president.  They want to unveil grand jury testimony, something protected by law (protected so that people will not fear testifying in the future).  They are issuing subpoenas against any and all who might give them some scrap that they can chew into some sort of allegation.  Meanwhile, the rest of the country’s business that they should be attending to goes unattended.

Above I explained my overall reaction to the Mueller report.  My overall reaction to the Democrats' responses is that they do not have any understanding whatsoever of the law, of our country and its government, of their role as elected representatives of the people, or of human nature in general.  They would rather continue their campaign of hate and anger against the President who, even despite their daily attacks against him, is accomplishing more for this country than they have been able to do in many years.  Perhaps they might look, instead of at how next to attack the president, at how they can applaud the low unemployment and growing economy, the improved international respect that we see.  Perhaps they could try to support instead of interfering with Trump’s efforts around the world and within America.  Hey, maybe they could even try to solve the immigration crisis instead of denying its existence.  (But, sadly, for many Democrats the only crisis is that Donald Trump and not they are in power; that Donald Trump and not they are getting things done.)

As I watch the Democrats react to the Mueller report my (diminishing) hope is that they might at some point come to their senses.  They are destroying themselves with their overwhelming and irrational hatred.  The danger is that they will take this country with them in their destruction.  I pray that, even if their leaders do not, the rank and file Democrats will come to their senses and demand more than hatred from their party.

Investigating the Investigators

Have you ever seen such monomaniacal focus and hate?

The Democrats have demanded and continue to demand every possible investigation of Donald Trump, regardless of whether there is any credible evidence to support the charge, let alone the investigation.

But, now, upon quite credible evidence, the Attorney General states that “spying did occur” against the Trump campaign and is going to review the role of a key informant.  In addition to assembling a team to investigate the origins of the FBI’s counterintelligence campaign against Trump, the AG stated, “More generally, I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all of the aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that was conducted in the summer of 2016.”

AG Barr further noted that "spying on a political campaign is a big deal."  He stated that “Congress is usually very concerned with intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies staying in their proper lane." 

Yes, Mr. Barr, usually.  But not when they are out to get President Trump.  Then it is all out warfare and anything goes.  The ends justify the means and the end which the Democrats seek is to not only remove the President from office but to completely destroy him.

So, now the Democrats are raging against the Attorney General.  How dare he investigate.  They accuse him of acting in collusion with the President and only on his behalf.  But here is what Barr also stated about his investigation:  "I am not saying that improper surveillance occurred; I’m saying that I am concerned about it and looking into it, that’s all.”

And, every American should also be concerned about it.  Even the possibility that our intelligence and law enforcement agencies were weaponized for political gain is troubling in the least and indicative of treason at the worst.  We do not want foreign countries interfering in our elections, but neither should we tolerate one political party using its power and governmental agencies to interfere in those same elections for their own power and political gain.

If the Democrats had even one iota of common sense or care about this country and its people left within them, then they would be cheering on this investigation as they did the investigation for Russian collusion, and let the chips fall where they may.  That they are instead attacking the Attorney General for being concerned and doing his due diligence and investigating says all that needs to be said about who the Democrats are and whom they care about (and it is most certainly not the American people!).