tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8054521671768779399.post8902677137749226449..comments2023-10-30T12:22:17.806-04:00Comments on Liberty Takes Effort: Trump exonerated - stop the resistance! It's futileLiberty Takes Efforthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13398225334133635697noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8054521671768779399.post-27151657505214925802019-03-25T06:44:39.017-04:002019-03-25T06:44:39.017-04:00DISAPPOINTMENT OF THE LEFT
The President of the U...DISAPPOINTMENT OF THE LEFT<br /><br />The President of the United States was accused of having colluded with a foreign power to corrupt the electoral process. Is there any higher crime? A rigorous and fair investigation reports such is not the case. The republic is secure. The electoral process intact. Thank God. <br /><br /> Is this not reason for the entire country to celebrate? <br /><br />To view this report as anything other than a victory for our republic reveals one is more interested in settling a score over a lost election rather than protecting the sanctity of our electoral processes. It is warped and unhealthy and I hope my friends on the left will soon see this and release their emotion of disappointment and hatred to follow more healthy activities, such as productive debate of policy.<br /><br />My friends on the left were disappointed in Hillary Clinton’s loss of the 2016 presidential election and horrified that Donald Trump beat her. I understand that. We have all been disappointed in election outcomes. <br /><br />But this time the response was different. RESISTANCE was established as the strategy. Anything the new president proposed would be opposed regardless of its efficacy. He and his presidency would be delegitimized in any way. All effort would be focused on removing the President from office by any means (e.g. 25th Amendment, Special Counsel, Impeachment, belittling and intimidating those who voted for Trump, etc.). The means justify the end. The main stream media was fully on board to support this effort.<br /><br />Could this be any clearer? An emotional response to the loss of an election and the hatred, yes hatred, of the winning candidate has been driving the left and the media for two years. They want the result they wanted and expected. They want reality changed. They want revenge and retribution. It must be exhausting. And it is not healthy. Let it go. <br />Liberty Takes Efforthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13398225334133635697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8054521671768779399.post-90989153532264980062019-03-25T06:42:13.306-04:002019-03-25T06:42:13.306-04:00My use of the word EXONERATED in the title of this...My use of the word EXONERATED in the title of this blog post got some back channel criticism. Some in politics and the press are quoting Special Counsel Robert Mueller in saying with regard to the obstruction of justice question, “While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”<br /><br />Headlines are meant to spark interest, so I take some license in coming up with titles for my blog posts. But I also believe that words have meanings and one should be careful to choose them carefully. <br /><br />I specifically chose “exonerate” to spark interest from both sides of the political spectrum. I also looked up its definition: (especially of an official body) absolve (someone) from blame for a fault or wrongdoing, especially after due consideration of the case.<br /><br />The Special Counsel clearly stated in his report regarding collusion with Russia, “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” So, on question one, collusion, an official body absolved someone of wrongdoing. Exonerated.<br /><br />On the second question of obstruction of justice the Special Prosecutor did not use such clear language. The Special Counsel decided to not make a prosecutorial judgement stating, while this report does not conclude the President a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” <br /><br />There is much to criticize in the Special Prosecutor making such a statement. It is very similar to what former FBI Director James Comey did in 2016 by saying of Hillary Clinton, there is not evidence to recommend a prosecution, but I am going to lay out how horrible she is. Is this any different than you local police chief investigating you or someone in your family and holding a press conference to say, “there was inadequate evidence to even recommend a prosecution to the District Attorney, but this is person is guilty.” It is contrary to all procedure and morally wrong.<br /><br />The fact is that an official body (the Special Counsel) chose to not prosecute a crime against someone (President Trump) of wrongdoing. But instead of stating that clearly he leaves open some question. The Special Counsel having chosen to not make a judgement, the Attorney General and the Assistant Attorney General did, stating that the evidence, “is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction of justice offense.” Again, an official body (DoJ), absolved someone (Trump) of wrongdoing. Exonerated.<br /><br />It is important to also define absolve here: set or declare (someone) free from blame, guilt, or responsibility. This word incorrectly creates a more subjective criteria in the minds of those who seek to see the president removed from office. The criteria for exoneration is really very straight forward in this case. It is not the difficult criteria of proving guilt. It is simply the confidence of a prosecutor that the evidence collected is sufficient to convince a Grand Jury to indict. That low bar was not met. Exonerated. <br /><br />I feel comfortable using the word in the title, but wanted to revisit my thinking after it was questioned by a reader and I take all of their concerns seriously.<br />Liberty Takes Efforthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13398225334133635697noreply@blogger.com