In its Russia investigation, the government behaved like a bully

By Kevin R. Brock, opinion contributor — 06/03/19 09:30 

Into the hands of certain fellow citizens we place a special trust to act on
our behalf as government and elected officials. We trust them not to trample
upon our basic freedoms and our inalienable rights — but trust can never be
naive, and so the Founders of this country wisely placed important
constraints on government actors.

These constraints are concentrated in the Bill of Rights, the first 10
amendments to the U.S. Constitution. They are history’s greatest aggregation
of words written to protect the weak from the strong.   

Within the Bill of Rights, the
<https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment> Fourth,
<https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment> Fifth and
<https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/sixth_amendment> Sixth Amendments
place particular restrictions on the government’s ability to investigate an
individual and charge a crime. They were designed to remove the temptation
to use the power of government out of curiosity, or differing ideologies, or
revenge, or some other caprice.   

In other words, the government has no hunting license. It may not proceed
with all of its power just to see what it can find. These amendments demand
an articulation of just cause, based on established law, before the
government can investigate and charge, arrest, seize, convict and imprison.


In addition, implicit in these amendments is that when the government cannot
meet the thresholds required in order to take action, it must remain silent.
The reasoning is sound: Mere suspicion should not lead to reputational
damage if the government cannot clear the high bar needed to charge
wrongdoing. This is why the FBI habitually
<https://www.justice.gov/oip/blog/foia-update-oip-guidance-privacy-glomariza
tion> does not confirm or deny the existence of any investigation until
public charges are filed. It is to protect the potentially innocent from
unjust stigma.

When the government is not able to use its powers legally, it cannot then
become a bully, out of seeming frustration, to intimidate the uncharged or
to sway public opinion. Sadly, we’re seeing increasing examples of such
tactics.

On July 5, 2016, then-FBI Director  <https://thehill.com/people/james-comey>
James Comey he did not possess and held a press conference to publicly
decline the charging and prosecution of presidential candidate Hillary
Clinton for mishandling classified information.  

But he didn’t stop there. He then recited a litany of things he believed she
had done wrong. Without charging her, Comey had no right — while acting in
his official capacity — to publicly disparage her, whether what he was
saying was true or not. It was government abuse of an American citizen. 

On March 20, 2017, continuing his inability to remain appropriately silent,
Comey took the unprecedented step of
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/03/20/full-transc
ript-fbi-director-james-comey-testifies-on-russian-interference-in-2016-elec
tion/?utm_term=.9ba1455c10ba> publicly disclosing, during congressional
testimony, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation of
<https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump> Donald Trump’s presidential
campaign.

Never before had an FBI director taken such a step to endanger the
reputations of American citizens who, at that point, were merely under
suspicion and, by Comey’s own admission, weak suspicion at that. He claimed
an exception to FBI policy because of his imagined right of the American
people to know.  

In fact, his action was inimical to the constitutional interests and
protections of the American people. It was an abuse of government authority
and a cynical attempt to strong-arm a sitting president into not firing him
lest the president look like he was obstructing a now publicly disclosed
investigation into his activities.

Comey
<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/us/politics/james-comey-fired-fbi.html>
was fired anyway — appropriately so, for his recklessness — but not before
smearing many on suspicions of conspiratorial activities for which the
subsequent  <https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf> Mueller report
found no evidence.  

When his original strategy failed, Comey broke his oath of office and
<https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/435675-mueller-has-exposed-james-come
y> leaked FBI records to the press in order to, as he admitted, create a
need for a special counsel investigation. 

And so we had a special counsel appointed, prompted by the illicit act of a
government official and armed with marching orders in an
<https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download> authorizing
memo to look for “links and coordination” between the Trump campaign and the
Russian government.  

This, on its face, did not meet the constitutional prerequisites for a
government investigation into American citizens. There was no articulation
of reasonable factors that U.S. citizens were acting on behalf of a foreign
power. Special counsel  <https://thehill.com/people/robert-mueller> Robert
Mueller seemingly was empowered to hunt for possible national security
dangers or criminal violations without adequate reason to do so.

The hunt, predictably, came up empty. Some Americans were
<http://time.com/5556331/mueller-investigation-indictments-guilty-pleas/>
criminally charged for unrelated violations or process violations that
sprang as fruit from a provably dead tree. The special counsel report and
Mueller’s curious
<https://www.politico.com/video/2019/05/29/robert-mueller-statement-russia-i
nvestigation-full-video-068191> press conference last week did nothing to
diminish concerns of government overreach. In fact, it brought to mind the
ill-advised Comey press conference of nearly three years ago.  

The report raised concerns about possible obstruction of the FBI and special
counsel’s efforts by the president. Mueller offered an ultra-lawyerly
explanation of his non-action — but the bottom line, familiar to all federal
investigators, was that the prosecutor declined to prosecute on obstruction
of justice.

Had the report stopped upon that conclusion, all would be fine. Instead, it
enumerated words and actions by the president or his surrogates that the
special counsel’s office thought were suspicious. But if the special counsel
was unwilling to “determine whether the President did commit a crime,” and
charge him, then silence is in order. Proceeding to publicly identify the
uncharged activities is little more than gossip. We do not have a Department
of Gossip in the U.S. government.  

Nor is it appropriate to list those uncharged activities as a means to
telegraph to Congress possible impeachment grounds, as Mueller
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/an-invitation-to-impeach-in-mueller
-ese/2019/05/29/5ba07690-8244-11e9-bce7-40b4105f7ca0_story.html?utm_term=.64
69aad7b33c> seemed to imply. The
<https://www.cbsnews.com/news/william-barr-interview-full-transcript-cbs-thi
s-morning-jan-crawford-exclusive-2019-05-31/> attorney general rightly has
pointed out that it is not the duty or right of the Department of Justice
(DOJ), as a separate branch of government, to act as an adjunct to or
extension of Congress’s oversight responsibilities. 

And so, it is not the prerogative of the FBI, or the special counsel, or the
DOJ to promulgate information damaging to someone’s reputation because they
are frustrated that they cannot charge a crime. This applies whether it’s
Mr. Trump, or Mrs. Clinton, or Harry your odd neighbor.    

We should strive to hold dear the values and protections wisely codified by
our nation’s founders. The past three years have seen an intensive attack on
those values for nakedly partisan political considerations. When political
drivers overwhelm the law, then the government turns into a bully. And a
bully can turn around on anyone.

Kevin R. Brock, former assistant director of intelligence for the FBI, was
an FBI special agent for 24 years and principal deputy director of the
<https://www.dni.gov/index.php/nctc-home> National Counterterrorism Center
(NCTC). He is a founder and principal of  <http://www.newstreetgs.com/>
NewStreet Global Solutions, LLC. 

EM         -> { Trump for 2020 }

On the 49th Parallel          

                 Thé Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja and Dr. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda is in
anarchy"
                    Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi
"Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja na Dk. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda ni
katika machafuko" 

 

_______________________________________________
Ugandanet mailing list
Ugandanet@kym.net
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet

UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/

All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/ugandanet@kym.net/

The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including 
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------

Reply via email to