Understanding The Will of The People

When people like FBI Strzok and his fellow anti-Trump conspirators think that it is their job to obviate the will of the people, it shows their lack of understanding of our democracy.

To recap:  Peter Strzok is the highly placed FBI agent who was a key player in both the Clinton investigation and Mueller’s investigation of alleged collusion between Trump and Russia until he was removed after emails surfaced between him and his then mistress and fellow FBI anti-Trumper.  Those emails suggested not only his bias in favor of Clinton and against Trump in his use of the now debunked dossier against Trump, but also emails suggesting his desire to undermine and even unseat a Trump presidency.  His emails indicate that he believed that “we can’t afford to leave this in we the people’s hands.”  This from a well-placed member of the intelligence community who is sworn to protect, not subvert our democracy.

This is truly frightening. This sort of thinking, that one knows better than the full voting public what the outcome of an election should be, is a danger to our democracy.  This is the thinking that allows a dictator to “win” by unanimous vote following a show election.  This is the thinking that denies power to the people and places it in the hands of a select few, a group whose interests may or may not include the best interests of the people.  To ignore the implications of this thinking is to ignore the fragility of our democratic Republic and sow the seeds of its demise.

Now, I will be the first to admit that there are times when I wonder how the voting public can be so uninformed, how they can fail to think or to understand the full implications of a particular policy decision. I have often over many years wondered how the people could possibly have elected this or that candidate.   And when it looks completely hopeless I have momentarily thought that perhaps we would be better with a benevolent dictator.  But no, we would not!

My parents’ generation were fond of saying that the “country is going to hell in a handbasket.”  Generations before them had similar phrases.  Yet here we are.  Somehow, at the darkest moments the people come through, they do what is right and good, and the country continues and moves forward.  Sometimes what we thought was a good choice was not, or what we thought was a bad choice turns out in the end to be quite good.  We learn, and we grow.  And that is the beauty of our form of democracy. 

We are not subservient to the mind or the will or the limitations or the whims of a dictator or other elite class who believes that they know what is best for all.  We are not subservient because we are, through our elected representatives, our own government.  We have the freedom to select and direct our government, rather than submissively complying with an authoritarian regime.

Those who would negate our democratic process to implant their views, policies, and candidates are not working for the good of the country.  Their actions would destroy it and replace it with an oppressive regime, for any dictatorship, even a seemingly benevolent one, reflects a disdain for the people and their voice.  

In this country we the people speak, and we are governed according to our own voice.   Our voice is not unanimous and those whose voices were not as loud must understand that when another view prevails their voice continues to have the opportunity to be heard.  They must have patience, and if their views are truly better, the people will eventually hear and recognize that. But speaking and being heard in a democracy does not include overthrowing the will of the people in order to immediately foist one’s own views upon them.

Since Donald Trump became the Republican candidate for president, the Democrats, their supporters, and other anti-Trumpers have been trying to insert their will for that of the people.  Hence, we had the apparent plots to destroy his candidacy.  One might chalk that up to hardball campaigning, but once Mr. Trump became President Trump, elected by the will of the people according to our Constitution, it was everyone’s duty as good citizens to support that president and in so doing to support the will of the people.  Yet, what many have done since the first day of his presidency is try to invalidate and delegitimize that presidency.  Shame on the Democrats for thinking that their will should supplant that of the people. 

Sadly, it seems that the Democrats have forgotten that the people are the government and that the government only exists through the will of the people.  We see this in their words about the tax bill that just passed – things like the bill is “stealing from the government” or that the people are “looting the federal treasury.”  Do they not understand that the government is the people, that its money came from those very people who they claim are stealing it? Any money that the government has, the funding of its services and programs, all comes from the people.  If the people choose to fund fewer government bureaucracies, then they are simply retaining their own funds, they are not stealing or looting their own treasury.  Yet, the Democrats seem to believe that the people are subservient to their own government, a government which the Democrats seem to believe only they and their ideas should control.

One who actually understands our democracy does not go about conspiring to reverse the will of the people.   To do so is horribly arrogant in its complete disrespect for the people and the government that they elect.  If we let it, our democracy works.  Yes, sometimes it makes mistakes, but it is also able to correct itself and to move forward.  A true American supports our democracy rather than trying to subvert it, regardless of who is currently in office.  

The Democrats need to accept the will of the people, understand that there may actually be some good in it, and that we the people may very well know what we are doing.  In the words of Keith Richards and Mick Jagger: “You can’t always get what you want but if you try sometimes you just might find you get what you need!”

Where is the Non-partisan Outrage?

Interestingly, the following facts are barely reported in the main stream media; I have culled them from some less popular news sources as well as from some right leaning news sources.  I do not understand why the following is not being fully reported by sources such as ABC, NBC, CBS.  Nonetheless, here is a summary of recent facts revealing potential bias within the FBI and the Mueller investigation:

            During the campaign an FBI agent Peter Strzok was given wide authority to investigate Hillary’s use of a private server for classified information and then to investigate possible collusion between Trump and the Russians to affect the 2016 election.  In the Hillary investigation he let pass statements by Huma Abedin, and Cheryl Mills that were contradicted by their own emails.   It turns out that Strzok is the one who changed the description of Hillary’s actions from “gross negligence” (a legal term of art with criminal implications) to the less significant “extremely careless.”  Then, days after closing the Clinton email case, Strzok signed the document opening the investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.  The authorization of FISA secret surveillance monitoring of the communications of Trump advisers were based at least in part on the anti-Trump and now discredited dossier that was produced for and underwritten by the Clinton campaign; there is strong evidence that Strzok was aware of the dossier and likely involved in the requests for FISA warrants based on the dossier. An informant has charged Strzok with obstructing a probe into the dossier.  Strzok was also one of two agents who interviewed then National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and received the statement that resulted in the charge of lying.

In August Strzok was removed from the Mueller investigation, but only in the past few days has it come to light that during the investigations he sent numerous anti-Trump texts and that there is other evidence showing his ongoing bias in favor of Clinton and against Trump.   The DOJ is now going through 10,000 texts between Strzok and Lisa Page, with whom Strzok was having an affair and with whom he apparently shared a strong anti-Trump and pro-Hillary sentiment.  Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer, participated in meetings about both the Hillary and the Trump investigations.  

It has also been revealed that Andrew Weissmann, a deputy for Mueller in the Russia probe, wrote an email in which he praised then DOJ official Sally Yates for refusing to enforce a legitimate presidential order with which she and many anti-Trumpers disagreed.  Yet another DOJ lawyer, Bruce Ohr, has been demoted due to contacts with the anti-Trump dossier firm.

Mueller did not inform the congressional oversight committee about the Strzok texts or about his reason for removing Strzok.  The Senate Judiciary Committee had to demand that the FBI turn over documents related to the removal of Strzok, noting that “Strzok, the deputy assistant director in the FBI’s counterterrorism division, was removed both from that position and the Mueller team over the summer, and reassigned to the human resources division, after it was reported that he ‘engaged in communications demonstrating political bias while handling matters in two sensitive, high-profile investigations’”.

The above should disturb each and every American!  Here is seemingly obvious and ongoing bias staring us in the face.  Of course, the Right presents the above information fully, perhaps making it seem even more important than it is or making assumptions of even further bias beyond that for which there is evidence.  Meanwhile, the Left tries to ignore it or put a good spin on it (what a great man Mueller is because he removed Strzok in August). 

Each and every one of us, regardless of our political views, should be saying this sort of activity and bias by the FBI is simply not acceptable.   Are we really willing to overlook such obvious bias when it leads to decisions with which we happen to agree (ending Hillary investigation; continuing search for evidence against Trump costing taxpayers millions).  To me, the fact that there is not universal disgust and outrage about the apparently out of control and biased FBI is what is really troubling.  Have we completely lost our sense of justice and fairness?  And, how can anyone be satisfied with, let alone trust the accuracy of any conclusions reached by these investigations?

Let’s consider the two key pieces.  First, an investigation of Hillary Clinton, the Democrat presidential candidate, by Left-leaning members of the FBI.  The investigation ends with no charges.  Then an investigation by the same Left-leaning members of the FBI against the Republican president whose election horrified the opposition.  That investigation has gone well beyond its charge, yet after a year has still found no evidence of collusion by the Trump campaign with the Russians.  Yet, we encourage the fishing expedition to continue, at great taxpayer expense. 

I certainly don’t feel comfortable accepting the final conclusions of either of these investigations and their many off-shoots.  To me they seem more like something I would expect from a banana republic than the democratic government of one of the greatest nations in the world.  To others these seem like the actions of the feared and nebulous web of the deep state, or evidence of a sitting political party using its resources against the opposition.  Yet others who like the results because they further their own political agendas find nothing wrong here and fully support these questionable investigations.

This is appalling, yet it fully reflects the low to which we have sunk.  It reflects our inability to be objective, to think rather than be driven only by group politics and emotion.  Left approves, Right does not.  What more do you need to know?  How about objectivity and fairness, not to mention justice?  No one seems to consider the danger of allowing if not applauding such an apparently biased investigatory force to continue.  Are we ready to allow our FBI to determine whom to acquit and whom to go after based upon prevailing political views within the agency?  How will you feel when your party is on the losing side?  Allowing these so clearly flawed investigations without question sets a very dangerous precedent for future use of state-sponsored intimidation that is a direct assault on a fair and democratic justice and governmental system.

Everyone, regardless of party or political views or like or dislike of President Trump or his policies should stand together and demand better.  We should all be outraged and demand that the FBI give us the fair and objective service to which we are entitled.  We must understand that even apparent bias weakens our democracy while true objectivity strengthens it.  Instead of taking to our respective partisan sides we should all be standing together in non-partisan anger as we demand the fairness that our democracy promises.