Body Language – Trey Gowdy On Trump Campaign Spying And Mueller Investigation

FACT: Bob Mueller’s directive , according to the U.S. Attorney General was: ” to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian governments efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election”. Key wording here folks: “Russian government’s efforts”. It doesn’t say “U.S. citizen’s efforts working on behalf of Russian governments…”

FICTION: If you listen to what Gowdy says his directive is: Bob Mueller was “told to do a counterintelligence investigation into what Russia did”. To me, this sounds like some sneaky and nuanced effort to distort the facts. Or maybe, as Mandy says, it simply allows Gowdy to maintain his belief system. Either way, it is dubious rhetoric that should be considered carefully.

Gowdy’s main point #2: Trump is simply asking the DOJ do their job. Remember folks, we already have laws that punish U.S. Citizens that work with foreign governments to the detriment of our own (Just ask John A. Walker if you don’t think so). To allow that a special counsel appointment is necessary in order for the DOJ to do their job in the case of the election is ludicrous. Consider Gowdy’s main point #1: “no one knows whether this is a criminal investigation”. What??? The AG directive confirms that “the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.” The operative word there is “crimes” folks; not punitive damages awarded in a civil suit. If that is not begging the question of whether this is being investigated as criminal matter, than I can’t imagine what else could confirm such a position.

Also, bear in mind that the AG directive doesn’t mention the term “counterintelligence” at all…and it is not as opened ended in scope as Gowdy’s “what Russia did” paraphrasing leads us to believe. In my opinion, the term counterintelligence has connotations that involve the CIA & NSA (and perhaps a myriad of other departments like Homeland Security, etc.) responsibilities that may not mesh well with DOJ’s oversight or ability to prosecute. Also, Bob Mueller was not appointed to do what regular CIA and NSA operatives do for a living everyday. If he was, then we’re overpaying handsomely for it.

Investigating “what Russia did” is also problematic from the stand point that DOJ does not have access to Russian intelligence departments— or documents— or the power to subpoena foreign nationals to get those documents. To top that off, they certainly do not have the ability to hold foreign nationals accountable under our federal laws even if they were to stumble upon incriminating evidence. But this is what the AG directive specifically asks for. Essentially, the directive set up the condition for the tail biting we’re continuing to see take place. So, even if they are looking for any of our own nationals that may (or may not) have had part in “what the Russians did”, they will only be able to compile a small fragment of the any possible criminal picture with the evidence they are legally able to obtain. I’m not attorney, but I don’t see how that could possible make for a case in criminal court. No; rather, this directive was set up (IMO) specifically with the nebulous intent to foster accusations and recriminations meant to be considered in the court of public opinion which I find unproductive…and possibly illegal (as Gullioni infers with his “spygate” comment).

To me, this is why this investigation is a fruitless endeavor, a complete waste of taxpayer resources, and a red herring simply meant to distract from the fact that our Congress is incapable of actually working on the behalf of the American people as they were elected to do.