The Coltons Point Times: Observations from the Swamp #2 – May Wrap up

Report for May

The month of May ended in a tumultuous avalanche of opinions on the secret meaning of the Mueller report, which was aggravated when Special Prosecutor Mueller came out of his den for the first time in over two years to deliver his own strange public statement on his report.

Yes, there really is a Mueller and we found him indeed alive though a bit worn.

After his nearly ten-minute address in which he said everything he wanted to say was in his original report already released by Attorney General Barr, and everyone should read the 400 plus page document, we were left with our heads spinning.

Seriously, read over 400 pages of legalese that draws no conclusions, no further indictments, and yes, no Russia collusion. I do not think Americas are that hungry for such an inconclusive document.

Nothing new, so why would we read it?

To those who ignore the report, here is a summary. There are four competing versions of the report depending on your bias.

Mueller’s version

He said he could not find the president innocent of conspiracy to obstruct justice. Whoa! Here I thought our criminal justice system guaranteed we were innocent until proven guilty. Of course, he did not say the president was guilty either. Just what is he saying?

So, he then makes the statement that the criminal justice system has no way to solve this conundrum, but there are constitutional means to do this. This from a prosecutor in the criminal justice system, who works for the criminal enforcement arm of the government, the Justice Department, the heart of the Executive branch of government?

The news media says that means he told the Congress to investigate which is not what he said. He referred to other Constitutional means. How in the world could a member of the executive branch make referrals to another independent branch of government, the legislative branch of congress?

It would seem that violates the very principle of the separation and independence of the three branches of government. Nowhere does any law say the congress has the right to determine guilt or innocence under criminal statutes. That would be an infringement of the congress, legislative branch, on the executive branch powers.

Democrat version

The second version of the analysis came from the Democrats in the House who are straining to keep from self-destructing. The leadership, including the six committee chairmen whose committees are investigating the president, seem determined to investigate every single thread mentioning Trump, his kids, his parents, and everything that happened in his life that might reflect on what he is doing as president.

This has the makings of the biggest fishing expedition in the history of our country to find a legitimate cause for impeachment. Which clearly means after two and a half years and tens of millions of dollars of investigations, they still cannot figure out how to get rid of Trump.

Under the orchestration of Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her pit bull chairmen, their intent seems to use every trick in the book to paralyze the president, cripple his presidency, and send him into oblivion in the next election.

Thus, nothing has changed.

Republican version

Not to be left out in the cold, the Republicans have their own version of what the report means. Most largely remain silent figuring enough politicians are making fools of themselves, why risk a career just to jump on the credibility of the strange report. That has not stopped President Trump, target of all the investigations, from commenting.

He is a very mad person about what is taking place. Perhaps he should be since every member of the Democratic leadership has ignored the innocent until proven guilty criminal justice principle. Before any investigative committee held their first hearings the Democrats already declared him guilty of something and/or everything.

In the meantime…

The Democrats seem to be single-handedly continuing to undermine our criminal justice system which began with the Clinton presidency and his Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, HR 3355.

The largest crime bill in the history of the United States was originally written by one Senator Joe Biden, consisted of 356 pages, and provided for 100,000 new police officers, $9.7 billion in funding for prisons and $6.1 billion in funding for prevention programs. President Bill Clinton signed it into law.

The Center for American Progress says the following about the Clinton/Biden law.

Many consider the crime bill to be one of the cornerstone statutes that accelerated mass incarceration of minorities. But the law’s negative effects did not end there. States and localities were incentivized through a massive infusion of federal funding to build more jails and prisons and to pass so-called truth-in-sentencing laws and other punitive measures that simultaneously increased the number and length of prison sentences while reducing the possibility of early release for those incarcerated.

It has been well-documented that these policies were failures. Their cost to society came not only from the staggering amount of taxpayer dollars that were invested in enforcement, but also from the disproportionate incarceration of a generation of African American men in the name of public safety. Moreover, tough-on-crime measures—specifically longer incarceration sentences—have had at best a marginal effect on improving public safety.

If the presumption of innocence standard and the right to defend oneself against criminal charges are ignore by the Democrats, thus undermining our criminal justice system, we all should be concerned about the future because no one will be safe anymore.

News Media version

Last of the four versions of analysis is the News Media version. Here the track record of reckless reporting, fake news, intense Trump hatred, and total disregard for professional journalistic principles and ethics were tossed out when Trump first became a threat to the darling of the news media, Hillary Clinton, in the 2016 campaign.

When it comes to Trump, the media long ago tossed out protections like presumption of innocence, right to fair defense, or anything that might leave the impression he is good in any way. The good news is the media bias is well known to most Americans who know fair, balanced, honest, just or objective reporting is pretty much a thing of the past.

Few people really care what the media says, reports or claims, for their association with the swamp has long ago been established. As for Trump, Washington insiders, also known as the Establishment, see him as the greatest threat to their power, ability to influence people, and efforts to control people. When Trump says drain the swamp the media is in his crosshairs.

The Future

Washington, D.C.

Democrat Presidential