Mr. Mueller also did not find the president guilty of obstructing justice. Oh, he listed ten or eleven instances that in the minds of his investigators could have possibly been considered to have been construed as some form of obstruction, but, again – Mr. Mueller did not so charge nor did he recommend that such charges be made. He had his chance, and he did not charge, he did not indict, he did not arrest. Under our justice system, one can’t be found guilty without a trial, and one can’t be tried without a charge, and if one isn’t charged. . .well, you get the idea. While Mr. Trump might not have been “exonerated” by the investigation, he also was not “convicted” by it. Mr. Mueller left that part out.
BY JOHN SHAFFER The Mueller report has been released, and what were the conclusions of the Special Counsel on his investigation of the possible relationship between the Trump campaign and the Russians who sought to interfere with the 2016 election? Let us begin with this quote: “. . .the investigation did not establish that the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Although the report explains the reason it does not use the term “collusion,” that is the word that the Democrats, the news media and the never-Trump Republicans have been using for more than two years to describe Mr. Trump’s supposed offenses; the report makes crystal clear that there was no coordination, and there was no “collusion.” The actual words of the report can be (and are being) parsed for various nuances to bolster or to undercut various contentions that have been made by various people since late 2016 – but here is the most important point: Special Counsel Mueller did not charge or indict Donald Trump or any of his associates for “collusion” to interfere with the 2016 election. If Mr. Mueller had believed he could have made such a case, he would have made it. And let us also remember that under our system of justice, accused persons are considered innocent until proven guilty, no matter how much Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, and Chuck Schumer may believe that President Trump has to prove himself innocent.
Mr. Mueller also did not find the president guilty of obstructing justice. Oh, he listed ten or eleven instances that in the minds of his investigators could have possibly been considered to have been construed as some form of obstruction, but, again – Mr. Mueller did not so charge nor did he recommend that such charges be made. He had his chance, and he did not charge, he did not indict, he did not arrest. Under our justice system, one can’t be found guilty without a trial, and one can’t be tried without a charge, and if one isn’t charged. . .well, you get the idea. While Mr. Trump might not have been “exonerated” by the investigation, he also was not “convicted” by it. Mr. Mueller left that part out. BY JOHN SHAFFER Last week we referred to a few of the ideas that the Democrat candidates for president have been floating to outbid their fellow candidates. These include "free" everything it seems, from health care, child care, day care and college to guaranteed parental leave, vacations, jobs, and don't worry, whatever else one of them comes up with to pander to this or or that group, another of them will top it with an even wilder proposal.
The peculiar thing about all of that is that none of the candidates, including those who held office for decades, have objected to much of it. One would think that the best way to differentiate oneself from the pack would be to espouse or emphasize something that would highlight the differences, but they all seem determined to do what college kids did 100 years ago, 50 years ago, 20 years ago, and today: that is, prove their non-conformity by conforming to those around them. It is beyond us why one of the candidates hasn't been wise enough to call out the enormously expensive, economically foolish, counter-productive, and just plain harmful proposals, and to stand up for the policies, attitudes, and values that made America the great country it is. Candidates have always managed to find things wrong with current policies without chucking the whole structure away, but the current crop seems intent on radical transformation that would leave us with a completely different system, and would guarantee everything. Too bad not even one of those Democrats has the good sense to ask where the money comes from when our tax rates hit 70% and employers have to pay $15 an hour and grant multiple other goodies, and the government somehow makes up the difference; and we still have to maintain an Army, Navy, and Air Force, highways, parks, a court system, and all those other things government does. As Margaret Thatcher is supposed to have said, socialism works until one runs out of other people's money. And while a lot of these proposals might not be "pure socialism," they definitely trend in that direction, and enlarge the public sector by shrinking the private sector. We are hopeful that at least one will tell the others that all of those wish lists are impossible, but so far our hopes have been unrealized. BY JOHN SHAFFER "Tradition" is a fine old Broadway song, but to the modern progressive, its disqualifying word would be "old." And they pretty much have the same complaint about some key parts of our system of government --they're just so OLD!
Examples abound, but just as the candidates for the Democratic party's nomination for president are scrambling to outflank each other by proposing more and more giveaways and free stuff (including, but not limited to, health care, child care, day care, college, vacations, parental leave, abortion, guaranteed employment, no border walls - including the removal of the onesie already have), they also are outdoing each other on which Constitutional provision they would eliminate first. This reminds us of another Broadway song, "Anything You Can Do I Can Do Better." The various candidates want to eliminate the Electoral College; recast the Senate to reflect population; modify the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, and various other parts of the Bill of Rights; and probably a lot more. All this because their chosen candidate didn't win in 2016. |
Local ColumnistsFind articles by date or topic through quick links below. Categories
All
Archives
March 2020
|