Article by Chris Farrell in "The Daily Caller"
One is supposed to believe that Attorney
General William Barr is in charge of the Department of Justice and that
on May 14, 2019, he appointed John Durham, the U.S. attorney in
Connecticut, to conduct the inquiry to examine the origins of the
“Trump/Russia investigation” and determine if intelligence collection
involving the Trump campaign was “lawful and appropriate” (Obamagate).
To date, there is nothing to show from the Barr/Durham effort.
Judicial
Watch has uncovered and published reams of material through litigation
and use of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). That work has been a
years-long effort – often fighting the Trump/Barr Justice Department to
release records the American public is owed by statute. Members of Congress have released documents and reports. Most recently, Senator Lindsey Graham has finally produced something for the public’s consumption after years of talking about accountability and holding hearings. Acting ODNI Richard Grenell released dozens of Russia probe records.
Again – these releases are practically “historical” in nature. They
come years after the subject events. That is quite unlike the
lightening-fast Intelligence Community Inspector General (phony)
complaint over Ukraine that saw President Trump impeached by the House
of Representatives in roughly two months. It seems like there are
differing standards and timelines for “justice” in official Washington,
DC.
Seasoned investigators and
attorneys can take the publicly available records and assemble
sufficient facts, documentation and evidence to meet the legal threshold
(“probable cause”) for successfully presenting a bill of indictment to a
grand jury. Like most discretionary decisions and exercises of
governmental power, it really comes down to political will. Do Barr
and/or Durham have the stomach to seek the indictment of people like
James Comey, John Brennan, Andy McCabe and (many) others?
Indictments
have a way of getting a target’s attention. They focus the mind.
Perhaps the indictment of certain key persons would result in a sudden
and compelling desire for them to be forthright and cooperative with
prosecutors? Various former government officials may wish to explain
what really happened and who really knew what and when. Lesser
characters on the DC stage may seek greater billing or not be happy with
their role as a patsy. No doubt others would resort to having “no
specific recollection at this time.” That’s OK. Prosecutors can still
get to proof beyond a reasonable doubt, even with faulty memories.
So-called
“journalists” may wish to return to their lost arts and pursue stories
previously dropped down the Memory Hole. There might just be a rush to
set the record straight and expel the miasma of deception,
disinformation, and distraction.
Ask
yourself why AG Barr fights Judicial Watch in virtually every FOIA
lawsuit seeking records over the Obamagate coup plot. Why does he permit
the FBI to claim in court that their agents’ text messages on their
government phones are not government records? That’s insultingly
preposterous – but it is the Justice Department’s position. Your tax
dollars in action.
One
thing is for certain: Should Barr/Durham not bring indictments and go
to trial against the officials who organized the coup against President
Trump, then the United States will become a “failed state.” The
compromised justice system would be held in contempt by the people it
was designed to protect.
