Ask yourself one simple question: Who has been claiming over and over again that the president is mere days away from firing Special Counsel Robert Mueller in order to end the “Russiagate” investigation? From what I’ve seen it’s coming entirely from democrats, obvious social media shills, and of course the liberal media. Interestingly you’re not seeing this coming from Trump. Let’s hypothesise as to why…
There have been pushes by some in the GOP to stop the probe, but if you pay attention to WHO is pushing this you’ll notice that they’re all from the McCain/Graham sect of the party (yes Christie has been involved, but if you look into his history he has always been tight with McCain, Trump’s behaviour towards him on the campaign trail actually makes a lot more sense once you work out that he knew full well he was a plant). What do all of these people have in common? They have been very clear on the fact that they want Trump to fail.
Let’s say Trump fires Mueller tomorrow. The investigation would grind to a halt and Trump would be “safe”. Here’s the thing though, why would an innocent man need to take such action? Sounds like pretty good grounds for impeachment…There’s a reason the phrase “obstruction of justice” keeps getting thrown around. By enforcing it in the communal consciousness they are laying the foundations for a believable impeachment case, which hinges on Trump firing Mueller.
This is why Pelosi, Schumer and other senior democrats aren’t supporting calls for impeachment from the likes of Al Green and Maxine Waters. If they impeach without a damn good reason it will result in the kind of civil unrest America has never seen before. They know full well the Russia probe will go precisely nowhere, so they’re trying to hector the President into making a mistake. But I shall say it again…Why would an innocent man need to take such an action?
I personally do not believe Trump is guilty of collusion/conspiracy with the Russians to hijack the US election, but that’s the difference between this writer’s opinion and actual guilt/innocence. It’s one person’s view based on limited evidence and gut feeling. It’s the result of a combination of infinite intersecting biases. I’ve always leaned right. As an irrational, emotional human it’s part of my tribal nature to favour the testimony of those who most closely reflect my worldview over those who don’t. I’m flawed, I’m influenced by confirmation bias, I sometimes hit share before actually reading the article! But then, so are you. People are flawed, they are easily drawn into mob thinking and that’s why we have laws.
The Judiciary should stand for order and non-partisan protection of the rights of a nation’s people. It should adhere to the letter of the law, demand a minimum standard of evidence and above all, divorce emotion from any deliberations over guilt or innocence. We expect those who enforce these laws do so with an even hand. Unfortunately, however, over time the rise of “activist judges” who are able to create law on a whim has diluted people’s confidence in these institutions. This matters, it effects the fabric of society when the rule of law is no longer respected. You will see many reactions but each is a tear and they are growing, and converging, by the day.
We see rampant “progressive” pushes by said Judges and in doing so they weaken the societal contract. We see the right outraged by such partisan rulings while the centre to far left celebrate it, but what are they also celebrating? We saw Black Lives Matter burn down cities. Looting and beating people for the crime of being white in the wrong city, on the wrong night. We have seen the rise of “Antifa” leaving a trail of broken shop windows and battered trash cans. We have seen respected pundits and intellectuals pontificating on the morality of punching someone based on personally offensive political beliefs.
We have seen this dressed up as “valid” because these people are “Nazis” but at the same time we see the word thrown around to describe anyone with subjectively distasteful beliefs. We have seen the return of the town square stocks as those who express wrong-think are publicly shamed and ostracised. We see politicians and media personalities being assumed guilty of sexual assault based on decades old allegations at a time where the term “sexual misconduct” is becoming an ever-looser definition. This is dangerous, it is open to manipulation & America has been here before. The really scary part though, is the way the media is fanning the flames.
Sex and violence get ratings, this is inescapable. Any business that is advertising funded will always choose to provide the content that guarantees the highest rate of return. Progressives may believe that the “liberal media” supports their agenda because it is comprised of so many social Justice focussed people, but they are just the mouthpieces. These networks are businesses, just like any other, they want to make money. Advertisers get spooked by mass protests and, aside from the tea party, protesting has not been in the toolset of the right for a long time. As a result, the media naturally leans left.
The problem is the media control most people’s access to information on world events. More often these days we are seeing over-reach as they seek to try and convict perceived bad actors in the court of public opinion. We see lives ruined and reputations destroyed on the testimony of “anonymous sources” without context or verification. We are told to listen and believe. The motivations behind these journalist’s actions may be pure, but when dealing with historical malfeasance eye witness accounts are often coloured by emotion, and blurred by failing memories. This is why the reliability of a witness must always be questioned, no matter how repulsive it may feel do so. This is why we require physical evidence rather than simple isolated testimony.
This is the rule of law. Sometimes the guilty will go free, but there is no greater tragedy than the imprisonment of an innocent man (or woman). Arguably it was republicans who made the first strike against the rule of law in this current wave. The patriot act tore down basic freedoms in a trade-off for perceived security. It violated the constitution, the bill of rights and ultimately made a mockery of the rule of law. It took a finite set or rules and guarantees and jettisoned them at will to serve a wider agenda. As Obama took power we were told these abuses would end, that Guantanamo Bay would be closed and that we were entering a new era of hope. But all Obama did was tear that wound open ever further with each passing year.
We saw the mass collection of data on citizens not only in the US, but around the world. We saw executive orders rolled out as all purpose policy implementation rather than an emergency power to enact necessary short-term corrections. We saw immigration law ignored and politicians raking in PR points by enabling those who sought to circumvent it. We saw the erosion of agreed societal standards time and time again. This is why we see younger people having such contempt for the nation state today. A country is not just it’s landmass, it is not just it’s people, it is both of these things combined with an agreed societal contract implemented through the rule of law. Knock out any one leg of that Tripod and the whole thing comes crashing down.
Every day we see the concept of borders being pushed as some kind of taboo to be ashamed of, this is a clear attempt to knock out leg number one. A country cannot define it’s landmass without a border, and if it cannot define it’s landmass it cannot lay claim to it with any sense of conviction or validity. By eroding the borders you erode any sense of national identity or pride in your country. You lose the very thing every single American has in common. Whether large or small every single citizen is a shareholder in America PLC. Every man woman and child shares that one common thread, until it begins to unravel. This leads us to leg number two.
The vilification of borders, and flagrant disregard shown to immigration law, by both the progressive media and previous administration is designed to devalue citizenship on a fundamental level. It’s not about race, it’s about cohesion. About being part of a club, and the value of a club is always defined by those it would permit entrance to. As movements grow they initially gain strength, but when growth becomes the sole goal, standards slip. Ideologies meet impasses, the sense of common purpose disappears and factions form as the whole thing tears itself apart from within. Eventually all that’s left are tattered fragments of a once clear purpose.
Leg number three we have of course already discussed at length, but how does a person repair a tripod with cracked legs before the whole thing collapses? With will and vision. Trump ran on very specific set of policies. He’s going to build a wall, to create a physical manifestation of the border. The impact of this is as much psychological as it is physical. It will keep people out, but it will also reinforce the idea of the nation unto itself. The right sees it as keeping people out, the left sees it as being trapped in, either way it forces you into a position where you have to start learning to get on with your fellow citizens to a greater degree.
Immigration and the economy are both vectors intended to increase the value of citizenship by increasing its scarcity, as well as the nominal value of earning higher wages in a flourishing market. Rather than scaring away “top talent” you give your own people something to strive for. You increase the value to them of working hard and helping to build a stronger more productive economy. Many will argue that these policies will scare away “top talent from around the world” but they won’t, contractors work for whoever offers them the most money ultimately.
People flock to America for economic opportunity. The tax breaks add even more incentive to top tier talent, both domestically developed and from abroad, as it makes working in the US a more profitable enterprise. A gradual cutback on welfare can be offset by growth of real jobs, with genuine earning potential, rather than part time roles for wages artificially lowered by excess supply. This WILL discourage low skilled immigration in favour of domestic labour. Mechanisation (government subsidised initially) plugging any remaining gaps.
But the final leg is the trickiest. How do you return a people’s faith and adherence to the rule of law? Some would say lead by example, and it’s a valid method certainly, but it takes time. Rebuilding trust is a slow process and the hysteria whipped up by the democrats in the pre-election has resulted in a trance overtaking a significant portion of the population. The deck Is very much stacked and it’s pretty clear from the policies Trump is pushing that he’s looking to get all three jobs done in one term. So how do you convince a people that have strayed so far from the rule of law (not all through action, most merely enabled it through inaction)? You give them a short sharp shock and hope it’s enough to force a reset. You lay yourself open to investigation, all the while playing along with media’s hysteria. You let your opposition push a lie to it’s extremes, and in doing so, give them enough rope to hang themselves.
All the while, you know that you are innocent, you know that the claims are false but you have to let the panic reach fever pitch. You have to let these ideologues go all in. Then at the peak of this mass hysteria a verdict of innocence comes down. The lie is exposed, and with the liars. If Trump lets the investigation run it’s course damn near every Democrat in congress will be exposed either as a liar or a fool. Every mainstream media outlet that has spent the last year harping on in terms of absolute certainty about this great conspiracy will watch its credibility vaporised by a single document. Mueller’s investigation is about so much more than Russia though.
The little teases of Manafort and Flynn being indicted for completely unrelated crimes proves that the progressive mob doesn’t care if it’s Russia or any crime, they just want “Orange Hitler” out of office at any cost. But what if Mueller really has poured over Trump’s entire history and still turns up nothing? Sure, the far left will never accept the outcome, but the centre might just be shaken awake from this manufactured nightmare. As the report is dissected people will see where editorialising and political grandstanding were passed off as truth without a shred of evidence to back it up. They will see that for all of the DNC’s screeching about the evils of Trump, he has nothing significantly bad in his past that hasn’t already come out. It would bury the democratic party, along with credibility of so called “journalists” just in time for the 2018 elections.
But in order for this to work the investigation must be allowed to proceed to it’s logical conclusion. The return of the rule of law begins with an investigation of a President, the swamp will be forced to do the same after Trump leads by example. He’s trapping them, and very few of them see this. In context, this would probably go some way to explaining senator Hatch’s recent 180 on Trump, he may have put the pieces together, just a theory…
So why did Trump fire Comey if he was innocent? Simple, Comey lacks the gravitas to deliver a convincing verdict. At various points during the election he was the darling of both Republicans AND Democrats depending on which side his actions are helping at the time. Once this report is released to the public it’s credibility will be tested. Comey loves the limelight a little too much, with his constant announcements he swung back in forth in favour between the right and the left. Mueller is focussed, process driven, and the nature of an investigation by a special prosecutor ensures less leakage. The left saw Mueller as building some gargantuan case (albeit through the partisan lens of hoping for a takedown on Trump) while the right kept hammering on about over-reach. Neither is, in my opinion right, he’s just being thorough.
The key to this plan that Dems and the MSM have never once wavered in their support of Mueller. This will make it a much harder sell to suddenly flip and call him a fraud after a year of solid cheerleading. They will be exposed, and Trump will win by a landslide in 2020. But only if the case is allowed to reach it’s logical conclusion. Why do you think Dem’s have projected their own partisan agenda onto a republican prosecutor? Why do you think they keep pushing this notion that Trump will fire Muller? They’re playing chicken with a man of sheer will, and they’re running out of road.
This was never about Russia, or obstruction of justice. It wasn’t about “sexual misconduct”. It’s about one man’s mission to return the rule of law to America, and bring it back from the cliff edge where it currently resides. Let Mueller do his job, you’ll thank me later.