ALAN DERSHOWITZ WEIGHS IN

Many traditional civil libertarians have allowed their intense hatred of President Trump to erase their longstanding commitment to neutral civil liberties and equal justice for all – a dangerous move that threatens the rights of us all.

The anti-Trump forces are now so desperate to get the president convicted of a crime or impeached that they are prepared to compromise the most basic due process rights of the president and people associated with him who are caught up in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s ever-widening Russia probe and a related investigation of the president’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen.

The Trump opponents forget an important lesson of history: compromises that weaken the legal protections of our enemies are often used as precedents to weaken the legal protections of our friends – or of ourselves. Some of President Trump’s most vocal opponents might themselves be harmed in the future by the erosion of legal protections they are advocating for the president and his associates today.

Too often, today’s fair weather civil libertarians are unwilling to give President Trump – who they regard as the devil – the same legal rights that all Americans are entitled to.

Consider the issue of criticizing Mueller. Trump opponents view any criticism or even skepticism regarding Mueller’s past conduct as illegitimate – grounded not in fact, but simply motivated by a desire to help the president stave off allegations of collusion with the Russians to win election and allegations of obstruction of justice.

But no one – including Mueller – has the right to immunity from criticism or examination of his or her past record.

Mueller has a long record. He was an assistant U.S. attorney in Boston and the head of that office’s criminal division. He was later the head of the criminal division for the Justice Department and director of the FBI. His tenure in law enforcement paralleled the most scandalous miscarriage of justice in the modern history of the Boston FBI.

While Mueller was in positions of responsibility, four innocent people were framed by the FBI in order to protect mass-murdering gangsters who were working as FBI informers while they were killing innocent people. An FBI agent who is now in prison was tipping off organized crime boss Whitey Bulger as to who might testify against him, so that these individuals could be killed. The FBI agent also tipped off Bulger about his impending arrest, allowing him to escape and remain on the lam for 16 years.

What responsibility, if any, did Robert Mueller – who was in key positions of authority and capable of preventing these horrible miscarriages of justice – have in this sordid incident? Only a thorough and objective investigation will uncover the truth.

A former member of the Massachusetts Parole Board – a liberal Democrat who also served as mayor of Springfield, Massachusetts – swears that he saw a letter from Mueller urging the denial of release for at least one of these wrongfully convicted defendants. When he went back to retrieve the letter, it was not in the file, he says.

I see no reason to doubt his credibility.

This vanishing letter – if it existed – should surprise no one, since Judge Mark Wolf (himself a former prosecutor), who conducted extensive hearings about this entire mess, found there had been “recurring irregularities” in FBI record-keeping conduct involving Bulger, including possible “FBI misconduct.” And the judge made a finding that directly references Mueller’s state of knowledge regarding the “history.”

It is therefore not beyond the realm of possibility that Mueller wrote a letter to the Parole Board that kept one or more innocent men in prison – even if such a letter is no longer in the files. If Mueller wrote such a letter without thoroughly investigating the circumstances, he surely bears some responsibility.

Moreover, it is widely believed among Boston law enforcement observers that the FBI was not really looking for Whitey Bulger during the years that Mueller was its director. It is believed that the FBI was fearful about what Bulger would disclose about his relationship with FBI agents and other law enforcement officers over the years. It took a member of the U.S. Marshals Service to find Bulger, who was hiding in plain view in Santa Monica, California.

Recently a former federal judge, who used to be a civil libertarian, rushed to Mueller’s defense, declaring “without equivocation” that Mueller “had no involvement” in the massive miscarriage of justice. Her evidence is the lack of evidence in the files.

But absence of evidence is not conclusive evidence of absence, especially in this case.

No civil libertarians should place such great trust in government files, especially in light of Judge Wolf’s findings. They should join my call for an objective investigation by the inspector general of the Justice Department before they assure the public “without equivocation” that Mueller had absolutely “no involvement.”

But these “Get Trump At Any Cost” partisans have rejected my call for an investigation, out of fear that it may turn up information that might tarnish the image of the Muller and weaken his investigation of President Trump. Instead, they criticize those of us who point out that Mueller was at the center of the Justice Department and FBI, while this miscarriage of justice involving the four wrongfully convicted men occurred.

All civil libertarians should want the truth about this sordid episode – and Mueller’s possible role in it – regardless of its impact, if any, on the Trump investigation. Mueller also should welcome an objective investigation, which might eliminate any doubt about his role in this travesty. But too many former civil libertarians are prepared to sacrifice civil liberties and the quest for truth on the altar of “Get Trump.”

This is all too typical of the about-face many civil libertarians have taken since Donald Trump became president. I have previously written about the ACLU’s abdication of its traditional role in challenging governmental overreaching. For the new ACLU, getting Trump trumps civil liberties.

It is ironic to see many right-wingers being the ones to criticize overreach by law enforcement, while many left-wingers now defend such overreaching. Hypocrisy and selective outrage abound, as neutral principles take a back seat.

Conservatives used to say that “a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.” I would respond that “a liberal is a conservative who is being audited or whose kid was busted for pot.” Today a civil libertarian is a conservative whose candidate is being investigated, while a law-and-order type is a liberal who wants to see President Trump charged with a crime or impeached.

I am a liberal who did not vote for Trump, but who insists that the president’s civil liberties must be respected to protect the civil liberties of us all. Just as the first casualty of war is truth, so, too, the first casualty of hyper-partisan politics is civil liberties.

Alan M. Dershowitz is Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard Law School and author of, “Trumped Up! How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy,” which is now available. Follow Alan Dershowitz on Twitter: @AlanDersh Facebook: @AlanMDershowitz.

MUELLER BRANCHING OUT

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team is now purportedly looking into whether the United Arab Emirates, with perhaps help from a top adviser, tried to gain political influence by putting money into Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign — a tack that would indicate Mueller’s investigation continues to expand beyond whether campaign officials colluded with Russia.

Mueller’s investigators in recent weeks have questioned the adviser, Lebanese-American businessman George Nader, and asked witnesses for information about whether the UAE tried to buy political influence by giving money to the Trump campaign, according to The New York Times.

Nader has been a frequent visitor to the Trump White House. And the president has praised the UAE for the Persian Gulf nation’s efforts to work with the United States on economic issues and squashing terrorism in the region, thanking Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed for his efforts just last week, according to the White House.

Nader has purportedly been an adviser to the crown prince. Axios first reported that Mueller investigators were talking to Nader.

Mueller took over the Justice Department investigation in May 2017. And in recent weeks, he has made several moves that suggest his probe has expanded beyond possible collusion, including charging former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort with alleged tax and bank fraud and indicting 13 Russians in connection with trying to sow political discord during the 2016 elections.

Nader was purportedly close to top Trump political strategist Steve Bannon, who in in August 2017 was forced from the White House.

In this Feb. 28, 2018 photo, President Donald Trump pauses during a meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House, in Washington, with members of congress to discuss school and community safety. A White House official says President Donald Trump plans to announce Thursday whether he'll impose tariffs or quotas on steel and aluminum imports. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

 (Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.)

The Times story also states Mueller’s team is interested in how much influence Nader might have — or had — on White House policymaking and whether foreign money has recently flowed into the U.S. to impact Washington policy.

The Times also reports that it has a copy of a memo that Nader received about a private Oval Office meeting between Trump and Elliott Broidy, who purportedly has millions worth of private-security contracts with the UAE.

ILLEGAL TAKEOVER BY THE DEEP STATE PLAN GONE WRONG – HEADS START TO ROLL

Not one Democrat has been charged, not even a parking ticket written. Hillary Clinton still foaming with the mouth. Huma Abedin violates United States law and not even a parking ticket. Her perv husband doing time for sexting, but no charges for federal violations. Susan Rice illegally targeted Americans through FISA. Wasserman-Schultz stamped “FIX” on Hillary takeover of the DNC. Laws broken, no charges. And the list goes on and on.

But don’t despair because one kingpin has announced his resignation from the FBI.  Andrew McCabe, who is abruptly stepping down today as the FBI’s deputy director, has been the target of criticism by President Trump. But he was also involved in an incident with the White House early last year that raised questions about whether he and the bureau were trying to damage the president.

Strzok and Page, both of whom are under scrutiny after it was revealed that the former members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team exchanged anti-Trump texts during the 2016 presidential campaign. 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election has been clouded by revelations that two former members of his team sent negative text messages about President Trump.

In the messages, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who were romantically involved, bash Trump and discuss concerns about being too tough on Hillary Clinton during an investigation into the use of her private email server. The pair exchanged some 50,000 text messages throughout the presidential election and first year of the Trump administration, many of them with anti-Trump sentiments.

Here’s a look at who exchanged the text messages, and who will leave the FBI.

Peter Strzok is a veteran counterintelligence agent who was assigned to both the investigation into Clinton’s personal email server and Muller’s probe into possible collusion between Trump officials and Russians during the election.

Strzok was removed from the Russia investigation after it was revealed that he exchanged anti-Trump text messages with Page, a senior FBI lawyer.

ABC first reported that Strzok left the probe and was reassigned to the human resources division in August 2017.

According to the text messages, Strzok was hesitant to join Mueller’s investigation because of his “gut sense” that there was “no big there there.”

Strzok, a former Army ranger, also oversaw the FBI’s interviews with former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. He previously worked on investigations pertaining to Chinese and Russian espionage, according to The New York Times.

Lisa Page

A lawyer for the FBI, Lisa Page was only temporarily on Mueller’s team, but she discussed the investigation with Strzok.

Page warned Strzok via text about the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state, saying in February 2016 that she “might be our next president.”

“The last thing you need [is] going in there loaded for bear,” Page continued. “You think she’s going to remember or care that it was more [DOJ] than [FBI]?”

Page, who has “deep experience [in] money laundering and organized crime cases,” was removed from the investigation in September 2017.

Andrew McCabe

Acting FBI director Andrew McCabe announced plans to retire in 2018. He has been heavily criticized by President Trump but who is he?

A controversial figure at the FBI, deputy director Andrew McCabe was seemingly referenced by Page and Strzok in their text messages.

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office – that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Strzok texted on Aug. 15, 2016. “It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

Some lawmakers believed “Andy” to be a reference to McCabe.

McCabe, whose wife ran as a Democrat for a Virginia Senate seat with financial assistance from a group tied to Clinton, was a controversial figure in the bureau. He repeatedly faced criticism from Trump.

“How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin’ James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 for wife’s campaign by Clinton Puppets during investigation?” Trump asked in a Dec. 2017 tweet.

On Jan. 29, McCabe was “removed” from his post, taking “terminal leave” until his planned retirement, Fox News reported.

Republican lawmakers ignited a firestorm late on Thursday(2/24) after  they received a classified memo that documented extensive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act click (FISA) abuse that officials described as “explosive” and “absolutely shocking.”

Sources who viewed the FISA memo told journalist Sara A. Carter that “they would not be surprised if it leads to the end of Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation into President Trump and his associates.” The sources predicted that it most likely will lead to senior-level government officials at the FBI and DOJ being removed from their positions.

A senior government official who viewed the document and could only speak on the condition of anonymity, since the document is classified, told Carter:

The document shows a troubling course of conduct and we need to make the document available, so the public can see it. Once the public sees it, we can hold the people involved accountable in a number of ways … some of these people should no longer be in the government.

Another official, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that they will “get this stuff released by the end of the month.”

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), who viewed the FISA memo, told Fox News that he thinks government officials are headed to prison based on the information contained in the document.

“I think that this will not end just with firings,” Gaetz said. “I believe there are people who will go to jail. You don’t get to try to undermine our country, undermine our elections, and then simply get fired.”

THE POLITICALIZATION OF THE FBI – AN INSIDE JOB

The initiated comprehend the ramifications of a special prosecutor due to the politicalization of the Deep State; including the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The pass given to Hillary (LOCK HER UP) Clinton was the icing on the cake. Caught in lie after lie she still has not been brought to justice. And the same goes for Loretta Lynch, breaking bread in a collusive tarmac meeting with Slick Willie. Of course this was planned in advance, no coincidence on this one.

And James Comey, what needs to be said about him; a political hack who lacked the independence we would expect from the Bureau. Again we must emphasize the DEEP STATE is filled with Democrat lackeys who do the bidding for the progressive-liberals who appointed them.

But the icing on the cake is the revelation of a department employee who messaged anti-Trump remarks to a colleague. Two senior Justice Department officials have confirmed to Fox News that the department’s Office of Inspector General is reviewing the role played in the Hillary Clinton email investigation by Peter Strzok, a former deputy director for counterintelligence at the FBI who was removed from the staff of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III earlier this year, after (CLICK-IMPORTANT READ)Mueller learned that Strzok had exchanged anti-Trump texts with a colleague.

The swamp is deeper than anyone every envisioned; it is a quagmire of political appointees knee deep in corruption and cloak and dagger.

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST OF THE CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION AKA FBI

President Trump suggested Sunday that news reports about an FBI agent on the agency’s Hillary Clinton email investigation who also opposed Trump explains why the Clinton case was closed without criminal charges.

“Report: ‘ANTI-TRUMP FBI AGENT LED CLINTON EMAIL PROBE’ Now it all starts to make sense!” Trump said in one of three tweets Sunday on the issue.

The office of Special Counsel Robert Mueller confirmed with Fox News on Saturday that agent Peter Strzok had been removed from Mueller’s investigation into Russia collusion after the Justice Department’s inspector general started examining Strzok’s electronic messages with a colleague, which reportedly included ones that were anti-Trump and pro-Hillary Clinton.

MUELLER’S GOOSE CHASE

In the world of criminals laws are broken with impunity, offenses committed before a forensic team is dispatched; that charge is to gather evidence in support of an arrest. This does not hold true for Donald Trump. He “breathes” therefore he is guilty as charged. By whom?

We know full well that the alt-Left was gunning for him the night of November 8, 2017. His election wasn’t a third world ‘stuff the ballot’ type with irregularities and intimidation. This was not Chicago, this was not Russia, this was not Cuba, this was not Venezuela, this was America. The election was free and credible without any outside interference. Remember Obama was at the helm. Don’t you think he would have been on this like a cheap suit?  

So what is Mueller and the alt-Left investigating?  What else – RUMORS. Can you believe this, in today’s day and age they are investigating FAKE NEWS. And fake news at that, spread by the alt-Left media.

Some how amnesia sets in when the real culprits are Democrat thugs – we are talking about Slick Willie, Hillary (lock her up) Clinton, Donna Mills, Susan Rice, John Podesta, Wasserman-Schultz, Susan Power, Lois Lerner, IRS chief Koskinen.