ICHEOKU says no group of people have been as shamelessly dishonorable as the extreme far left wing of the Democratic Party. A people who have refused to MOVE-ON from the November 8, 2016 presidential election, which their Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton lost, fair and square, despite it being hers for the grab. A group of maniacally dysfunctional nut jobs, who have refused to accept the result of an election, which they once cried wolf that the then candidate Donald John Trump was threatening America's democracy by saying that he will not "accept" the result of the election, if it is not fair. But now, they are the ones still holding out, nearly three years after, and have been inventing all manners of indescribables just to continue to protest the result of an election which their very incompetent and much loathed candidate lost.
It is also incredible to note that it was the same people who formed the MOVEON.ORG back in the 1998 to urge Americans to move on from the then President Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. But they will not themselves and have refused to now MOVE-ON, in a like manner, from a non existent Russian Collusion and Obstruction of Justice allegation against President Donald John Trump, which the Robert S. Mueller's investigation has conclusively ruled did not occur. What an irony. A case of the hypocritical Pharisee who preaches "do what I say, but not what I do", as leadership by example is not their strongest suit; otherwise why won't they concede that an election was held and that they lost it. That there is a duly elected president of the United States of America and that his name is Donald John Trump and not Hillary Clinton.
They cried foul when then candidate Donald John Trump conditioned his acceptance of the election result on it being fair; with their former President Barack Obama chiding Donald John Trump for saying that he will not accept the election result if rigged. It is on record that then President Barack Hussein Obama assured Americans that American presidential election is rig-proof and cannot be rigged by anyone, including the Russians, due to the staggered nature of the election which is primarily controlled by individual States respectively. Following which, every manner of curve balls were thrown on the path of Donald John Trump to derail his campaign and make him unelectable. His campaign was spied on, with findings possibly being fed to the Hillary Clinton's campaign. Bill Clinton was also caught meeting with the Attorney General Lauretta Lynch in Arizona and against all acceptable practice standards, while his wife and then Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton was being investigated by the FBI for deleting and bleach washing 33,000 thousand emails.
The world media led by American media piled on candidate Donald John Trump, alongside the Democratic Party, a sitting president and his government, the Never Trumpers wing of the Republican Party led by the Bush family, some world leaders including then president of France and even the pope, in their collective bid to stop Donald John Trump from the White House and save their new world order. But against all odds, his message percolated and resonated among real American people and they rose up in unison to usher him into their White House and saved America from an erosion which threatened its foundational existence. Defeated and ashamed, and without any meaningful explanation for their humiliating defeat, they had to shamelessly invent a narrative that the Russians helped Donald John Trump win the election; and without any evidence, went ahead to set up the Robert S. Mueller investigation to find a Russian Collusion nonsense which never existed.
After nearly two years of uninhibited access to whoever witness and whatever documents they desired and wanted, including reviewing over one million documents from the president's White House, his campaign and the Trump Organization, they came up empty, because there was nothing there to find. But to every decent human being's chagrin, the same Mueller that conclusively determined that there was no Collusion with the Russians, refused to rule decisively on whether there was Obstruction of Justice by the President. A matter which he further complicated by adding that his investigation could not exonerate President Donald John Trump either, leading to the question, when did a criminal investigation in America become an exonerating of the accused exercise?
The world media led by American media piled on candidate Donald John Trump, alongside the Democratic Party, a sitting president and his government, the Never Trumpers wing of the Republican Party led by the Bush family, some world leaders including then president of France and even the pope, in their collective bid to stop Donald John Trump from the White House and save their new world order. But against all odds, his message percolated and resonated among real American people and they rose up in unison to usher him into their White House and saved America from an erosion which threatened its foundational existence. Defeated and ashamed, and without any meaningful explanation for their humiliating defeat, they had to shamelessly invent a narrative that the Russians helped Donald John Trump win the election; and without any evidence, went ahead to set up the Robert S. Mueller investigation to find a Russian Collusion nonsense which never existed.
After nearly two years of uninhibited access to whoever witness and whatever documents they desired and wanted, including reviewing over one million documents from the president's White House, his campaign and the Trump Organization, they came up empty, because there was nothing there to find. But to every decent human being's chagrin, the same Mueller that conclusively determined that there was no Collusion with the Russians, refused to rule decisively on whether there was Obstruction of Justice by the President. A matter which he further complicated by adding that his investigation could not exonerate President Donald John Trump either, leading to the question, when did a criminal investigation in America become an exonerating of the accused exercise?
ICHEOKU says America's Criminal Justice system is designed to prove a crime beyond reasonable doubt; hence any investigation leading up to a charge must establish and collect evidence with which this threshold will be met in a court of law. This is the reason an accused person is presumed innocent until proved guilty and for a conviction, the guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, once the accused is not proved guilt as required, beyond reasonable doubt, regardless of whether or not the accused might have committed the crime, the accused walks. The accused is not deemed guilty until proved innocent nor is he or she required to prove his or her innocence before they can be set free. That will be an inquisition and America does not practice that; rather America prosecutes, based on evidence, aided by fair hearing, before an accused can be found guilty.
So, ICHEOKU says which offense or "sin" was Robert S Mueller unable to exonerate the president from; or did Mueller already conclude that the president was guilty of something, before setting forth to find the evidence to support it; and failing which, he was still possessed of the mindset that the president was guilty of something, only that he could not find the evidence of it. Such arbitrariness is exactly what inquisitions are made of and such wandering off the justice system straight and narrow path by the Robert Mueller investigation team should give every good human being a cause to be wary. If it is President Donald John Trump today, for who will the bell toll tomorrow and may be a person or even another president who might not have the strength to fight back as President Trump successfully did.
Such an abuse of prosecutorial powers should not be treated so cavalierly or dismissed as no big deal because it is. It should also not be addressed as a partisan issue because what goes around comes around and the table could turn tomorrow. It could be a Democratic president that will be sitting at the firing range of such a biased inquisition by a set of angry Republicans investigators. This is the reason, what happened with the Mueller's report, especially its veering off the prosecutorial track should be reined in immediately. By the prosecutor exonerating or not exonerating a person, it presupposes that the person was presumed guilty at the onset of the investigation from which he was finally exonerated, which unfortunately, is not the way our criminal justice system operates. The reaching of a verdict of guilty or not guilty and not "exoneration" is reserved for the courts, either the judge or the jury. It is the court and not the prosecutor that determines the accused's culpability, either guilty or not guilty; but cannot exonerate or not exonerate them because they are primarily innocent, until the verdict says otherwise.
But regrettably, Robert S. Mueller and his team of Democrat investigators wanted to change the standard rule just because it is President Donald John Trump that is involved, without regards to the fundamental criminal prosecution standards governing America. They tried for nearly two years, spent more than $35 million of taxpayers money, had access to every documents and witnesses they demanded and asked for; no executive privilege was ever invoked to stop their prying eyes and members of the investigating team were largely Democrats, people who with beef to grind with President Donald John Trump. But at the end they could not find any evidence of Collusion with the Russians by the Trump's campaign or Organization. If there was something to find, they would have found it; but did not find because there was nothing there to find. So, without the foundational crime of Collusion, every other thing built on it automatically collapses, but they had to put the suspense of "couldn't exonerate" the president just to continue the narrative.
They could not find that the president obstructed the investigation because Mueller was generously uninhibited in doing his assigned job; and the investigation of a crime which never generally existed cannot be obstructed. Collusion was the alleged crime and for obstruction to be present, there has to be a real crime under investigation, which was not the case here. Nobody can obstruct an investigation of a crime which did not exist. But rather than so stating and calling off the hound dogs, the Robert S. Mueller Report went rogue to add that they could not "exonerate" Trump from the "obstruction of justice" crime. ICHEOKU says if Mueller could not exonerate the president, why did he not incriminate him; since criminal prosecution is a black and white and/or situation, as opposed to the equivocated sitting on the fence conclusion by the Mueller team. Their mandate was to find evidence of the crime of obstruction and recommend prosecution accordingly, but not to act as a judge or jury or even an "exonerator."
It was definitely a too far gone frolic by the Mueller squad and every right thinking American, regardless of party affiliation, should be afraid that some people are heralding such an overreach, as worthy of a second look. If they couldn't reach a decision on the crime, it means that they did not find evidence of the crime; therefore the criminal investigation was unsuccessful in finding evidence of the alleged crime and should have ended the process pronto. But the wandering off the reservation of what is allowable leeway of the the criminal justice system by offering opinion of equivocation is what is troubling to ICHEOKU and is condemnable; and is hereby condemned as an overreach. It is not good for our criminal justice system.
So, ICHEOKU says which offense or "sin" was Robert S Mueller unable to exonerate the president from; or did Mueller already conclude that the president was guilty of something, before setting forth to find the evidence to support it; and failing which, he was still possessed of the mindset that the president was guilty of something, only that he could not find the evidence of it. Such arbitrariness is exactly what inquisitions are made of and such wandering off the justice system straight and narrow path by the Robert Mueller investigation team should give every good human being a cause to be wary. If it is President Donald John Trump today, for who will the bell toll tomorrow and may be a person or even another president who might not have the strength to fight back as President Trump successfully did.
Such an abuse of prosecutorial powers should not be treated so cavalierly or dismissed as no big deal because it is. It should also not be addressed as a partisan issue because what goes around comes around and the table could turn tomorrow. It could be a Democratic president that will be sitting at the firing range of such a biased inquisition by a set of angry Republicans investigators. This is the reason, what happened with the Mueller's report, especially its veering off the prosecutorial track should be reined in immediately. By the prosecutor exonerating or not exonerating a person, it presupposes that the person was presumed guilty at the onset of the investigation from which he was finally exonerated, which unfortunately, is not the way our criminal justice system operates. The reaching of a verdict of guilty or not guilty and not "exoneration" is reserved for the courts, either the judge or the jury. It is the court and not the prosecutor that determines the accused's culpability, either guilty or not guilty; but cannot exonerate or not exonerate them because they are primarily innocent, until the verdict says otherwise.
But regrettably, Robert S. Mueller and his team of Democrat investigators wanted to change the standard rule just because it is President Donald John Trump that is involved, without regards to the fundamental criminal prosecution standards governing America. They tried for nearly two years, spent more than $35 million of taxpayers money, had access to every documents and witnesses they demanded and asked for; no executive privilege was ever invoked to stop their prying eyes and members of the investigating team were largely Democrats, people who with beef to grind with President Donald John Trump. But at the end they could not find any evidence of Collusion with the Russians by the Trump's campaign or Organization. If there was something to find, they would have found it; but did not find because there was nothing there to find. So, without the foundational crime of Collusion, every other thing built on it automatically collapses, but they had to put the suspense of "couldn't exonerate" the president just to continue the narrative.
They could not find that the president obstructed the investigation because Mueller was generously uninhibited in doing his assigned job; and the investigation of a crime which never generally existed cannot be obstructed. Collusion was the alleged crime and for obstruction to be present, there has to be a real crime under investigation, which was not the case here. Nobody can obstruct an investigation of a crime which did not exist. But rather than so stating and calling off the hound dogs, the Robert S. Mueller Report went rogue to add that they could not "exonerate" Trump from the "obstruction of justice" crime. ICHEOKU says if Mueller could not exonerate the president, why did he not incriminate him; since criminal prosecution is a black and white and/or situation, as opposed to the equivocated sitting on the fence conclusion by the Mueller team. Their mandate was to find evidence of the crime of obstruction and recommend prosecution accordingly, but not to act as a judge or jury or even an "exonerator."
It was definitely a too far gone frolic by the Mueller squad and every right thinking American, regardless of party affiliation, should be afraid that some people are heralding such an overreach, as worthy of a second look. If they couldn't reach a decision on the crime, it means that they did not find evidence of the crime; therefore the criminal investigation was unsuccessful in finding evidence of the alleged crime and should have ended the process pronto. But the wandering off the reservation of what is allowable leeway of the the criminal justice system by offering opinion of equivocation is what is troubling to ICHEOKU and is condemnable; and is hereby condemned as an overreach. It is not good for our criminal justice system.
No comments:
Post a Comment