Jan 11, 2023Liked by John A. Daly

Hopefully Trump loses in the primary's. If not, Trump vs. Biden the sequel? I won't go to that movie.

Expand full comment

“Political optics shouldn’t play a role in such serious legal matters, but we all know they do.”

How do we all know they do? Where’s the evidence that federal crimes are not pursued without “fear or favor”?

I recommend you read James Stewart’s book “Deep State.” Stewart is an investigative journalist who also has a JD. He does not have an axe to grind.

In Deep State, Stewart pulls back the curtain of the FBI and DOJ. Among his topics is the investigation into Hillary’s e-mail scandal, including her mishandling of classified documents. He recounts the discussions within the FBI as to whether to prosecute Hillary. He also recounts the legal analysis that the FBI based its decision on., including the pertinent case law. It wasn’t even close. As I recall, the entire team of lawyers working on the case agreed that no prosecution was warranted.

Stewart is a straight shooter. He unearths the pertinent facts. His analysis is comprehensive and fact-based. BTW, he also wrote a book - “Blood Sport” - that revealed facts making both Bill and Hillary Clinton look very bad.

I read what David French said about this. Although I generally respect him, that article was irresponsible. His remarks were hardly analysis. He made off-handed, conclusory remarks, probably dumbing down for hoi polloi. To say that the FBI is politicized is a VERY serious charge. Anyone making it should back it up with specifics facts - and not selective facts.

A crime or crimes were probably committed in the case of the government documents at Mar-a-Lago. A major question is who in the Trump camp are criminally liable. Another question is always whether the DOJ has sufficient admissible evidence to convince 12 jurors of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Hint: probability is not beyond a reasonable doubt.

I don’t know if having government documents - whether classified or not - is necessarily a crime. In the case of the Trump camp, the only crime might possibly be in how they dealt with the national archivist requesting the return of the documents. In the case of President Biden, the AG's decision to appoint an independent counsel was wise. At a minimum, there would be an appearance of a conflict of interest if he didn't do so. (that's a legal category).

Reading statutes is only the first step in legal analysis. As I’ve said many times before, talk is cheap - real cheap - until you enter a courtroom. Those on the DOJ and FBI legal teams know this only too well. The problem is that there's too many self-anointed lawyers and too many news media whores.

Perhaps at the state level, popular sentiment or “political optics” might play somewhat of a role in who is and who is not prosecuted, especially in states where the prosecutor is elected. Maybe. But we must assume otherwise, until facts reveal corruption. As I've said before, corruption is prone to happen if there aren't' public and private entities performing real oversight and watchdog functions.

Expand full comment