Democrats are over­reach­ing

The Charlotte Observer (Sunday) - - Opinion - BY JAY AMBROSE

Any stu­pid­ity will do. If it de­means Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump, rips him apart, stymies even his most pos­i­tive ob­jec­tives, pos­si­bly helps im­peach him, it is per­mis­si­ble to slap the face of democracy through any de­cep­tions, ir­ra­tional­i­ties, il­le­gal­i­ties or other du­bi­ous tac­tics avail­able. So goes the left­ist, Demo­cratic men­tal­ity and sel­dom has it breached logic to the ex­tent it is now in at­tack­ing his plans to uncover the truth about the Mueller probe.

This project must be scary stuff for at least a few of Trump’s most ded­i­cated en­e­mies be­cause they could then be in trou­ble. There’s rep­u­ta­tion to worry about, plus the de­mo­li­tion of their tall tales and some­thing else: their sta­tus as of­fi­cials who abided by the law. The good side for the rest of us could be find­ing out how it got started, this un­prece­dented, two-year in­ves­ti­ga­tion that dis­rupted gov­er­nance and could have il­le­git­i­mately un­done the re­sults of a le­git­i­mate elec­tion.

From the be­gin­ning, there seemed to be no ev­i­dence of the dom­i­nat­ing, pro­nounced spec­u­la­tion that the Trump cam­paign had some­how worked with Rus­sians to hack emails of his elec­tion op­po­nent, Hil­lary Clin­ton. If a probe be­gins with a sus­pi­cious the­sis, that’s a dan­ger – why, then, couldn’t the FBI in­ves­ti­gate any­body it wanted to for po­lit­i­cal rea­sons?

Please also know that var­ied dis­clo­sures point to use of a phony dossier paid for by the Clin­ton cam­paign to fur­ther spy­ing that Democrats say was not spy­ing mainly be­cause they may not know how to use dic­tio­nar­ies. It seems to some this probe was ra­tio­nal­ized more through highup fret­ting than down-toearth realities. De­clas­si­fy­ing clas­si­fied ma­te­rial could give us an an­swer one way or the other, and that’s what Trump fig­ures on do­ing through the able, hon­or­able At­tor­ney Gen­eral Wil­liam Barr.

Even though Democrats have ac­cused Trump of a cover-up, they want a cover-up. Even though they fought fiercely for Barr to break the law by giv­ing them point­less grand jury rev­e­la­tions, they can’t stand the thought of Trump abid­ing by the law in con­duct­ing this search.

As the na­tion knows, the Mueller probe drenched it­self with blood, sweat and tears and still found in­suf­fi­cient rea­son to con­tend the Trump team con­spired or co­or­di­nated with Rus­sia or ob­structed jus­tice. Mueller re­cently said again that the re­port does not ex­on­er­ate Trump on the ob­struc­tion ques­tion, but that was not this self-ap­pointed god’s job. Con­cern­ing ob­struc­tion, his re­port did say it “does not con­clude that the Pres­i­dent com­mit­ted a crime.”

It’s true that Trump is in many ways an abom­i­na­tion, but that does not ex­cuse dis­rup­tion over con­sti­tu­tional du­ties and it cer­tainly is not a case for say­ing Trump is now en­gag­ing in an au­to­cratic witch hunt.

Please un­der­stand that, dur­ing the Trump years, we have had a thun­der­storm of anti-Trump clas­si­fied leaks ei­ther be­cause in­tel­li­gence agency lead­ers are not in­tel­li­gent enough to stop them or have been com­plicit in the de­vi­ous­ness. There are all kinds of ex­ec­u­tive rules about what can be re­leased and un­der what cir­cum­stances, and boy, are they ig­nored. There is also the Es­pi­onage Act un­der which leak­ers of highly sensitive, top-se­cret info can con­sider their mis­takes dur­ing years in prison.

And so now Democrats are com­plain­ing about Trump us­ing his clearly des­ig­nated right to de­clas­sify ma­te­ri­als that just may ver­ify one of the worst scan­dals in Amer­i­can his­tory and help pre­vent fu­ture episodes?

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.