In Light of Comey Testimony, Special Counsel Should Be Dissolved

When liberal law professors are likening the Special Counsel investigation to Stalin’s secret police, fair-minded Americans should still be able to agree: Enough is enough.

In light of James Comey’s testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein should immediately revoke the mandate given to Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Our patience to entertain conspiracy theories has expired. The charge President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election has completely collapsed. After months of selectively disclosing information to the public that benefits him politically, Mr. Comey finally admitted what we have been reporting for months–President Trump was never under investigation.

As People’s Pundit Daily has repeatedly reported, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) before Mr. Mueller was appointed Special Counsel was focused on Michael Flynn, not President Trump.

Investigators were digging into the relationship between Lt. Gen. Flynn and a Turkish businessman to determine whether it played any role in his decision-making during the brief time he served as President Trump’s national security advisor. The FBI is quite capable of handling that case and other potential acts of wrongdoing that may arise in the process of the investigation.

What Americans don’t need is the fired former FBI director’s friend and mentor, honest or not, leading an investigation that Mr. Comey himself admitted was his motive for leaking government documents to the media.

America, that is a crime.

“The problem is that Comey’s description of his use of an FBI computer to create memoranda to file suggests that these are arguably government documents,” liberal law Professor Jonathan Turley noted. “Assuming that the memos were not classified, there is 18 U.S.C. § 641 which makes it a crime to steal, sell, or convey ‘any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof.’”

Astonishingly, Mr. Comey claimed under oath that he decided to leak to the media after President Trump sent out a tweet insinuating that he had tapes of the director assuring him that he was not under investigation. Worth noting, “friends” of Comey cited in reports disputed that he ever did or would ever do such a thing.

Mr. Comey is a liar.

President Trump’s tweet was sent out on May 12, but the New York Times article containing the content of the so-called obstruction-proving memo was published on May 11. Further, another story citing “friends” of Comey claimed President Trump asked for a loyalty pledge. It was published on May 9.

Are we really to believe Mr. Mueller will hold his buddy and prodigy accountable? The former FBI directors’ closeness gives more than just the appearance of bias, it flat-out stinks.

Special Counsel investigations historically take on a mind of their own, something liberal Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz said “raises great concerns about civil liberties.” We agree with Mr. Dershowitz’s assessments and share his concerns.

From the beginning, the Russia probe was “being done backwards” and it’s accurate to liken it to Stalin’s secret police, as Professor Dershowitz has done.

“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime,” Stalin’s secret police chief, Lavrentiy Beria once said.

This is not an outrageous characterization of this so-called investigation.

“Usually, you can point to a statute and say, ‘We’re investigating crime under this statute,’” Professor Dershowitz told a hysteric Anderson Cooper on CNN (Conspiracy News Network). “What Mueller seems to be doing is saying: ‘We don’t like what happened. Maybe there was some collaboration.”

“But I can’t figure out what statute was being violated.”

It has been well over 200 days since we first began to ask politicians on both sides of the aisle and law enforcement officials what law exactly, which statute, does “collusion” fall under. We’ve yet to receive a credible legal response. In truth, we’ve yet to receive any real response.

Let’s not forget how all of this started.

First, we were told the Lt. Gen. Flynn violated the Logan Act, something this outfit pointed out using analysis from legal experts, was a fraud. At best, it was meant to trump up fears a duly elected President colluded with Russia and, at worst, was a puppet of Vladimir Putin.

But the goal post just kept moving.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions failed to disclose (what does that even mean?) a meeting with a Russian ambassador at his office, and Democrats demanded he recuse himself. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, took to Twitter before realizing she herself had forgotten she took the same meeting.

Fast-forward passed numerous hysterical claims made from one day to another and now we have moved onto a bogus “obstruction” allegation, which legal experts are now mocking, too. The only hint of obstruction revealed by Thursday’s testimony was on behalf of former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who sought to de-criminalize the actions of Hillary Clinton.

It also confirmed our reporting that Mr. Comey tanked the Clinton email investigation, intentionally.

As Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., pointed out during his questioning of Mr. Comey, the only piece of information that wasn’t leaked also happened to be the most important. President Trump was never under investigation for alleged collusion with Russia.

Not a counter-intelligence investigation. Not a criminal investigation.

It’s time to end this charade and call it out for what it is–an effort to stop the Trump agenda. It was hatched by Democrats, fueled by corrupt bureaucrats in the permanent government, pushed by ignorant and bias journalists, and enabled by the cowardly leadership of the Republican Party.

We will no longer participate in this taxpayer-funded sham, America. And whether you agree with the Trump agenda or not, neither should you. He was elected by the American people–the sovereign–to drain the D.C. cesspool largely because he was unaccountable to the swamp. But the swamp has engaged in a non-violent coup led by those who have forgotten that We the People are the sovereign, not them.

If they win, we all lose–Republicans, Democrats, independents. It’s that simple.

If you have ideological disagreements with the President, then keep them. Fight him on the issues and back up your arguments with accurate, reliable and persuasive facts. But do not allow yourself to be the stooge any longer.

If you loathe the President, you’ll have to decide which is more important–your hate or our freedom. But understand that this is a choice between policy disagreements and the preservation of our very system of self-governance.

[brid video=”145080″ player=”2077″ title=”Comey Admits He Leaked Info About Trump To Media”]