Claims by President Trump and his supporters that Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team are prejudiced against him brings to mind an old saying among prosecutors and defense lawyers:
“When the defense has the facts, they argue the facts; when they don’t have the facts, they argue the law; and when they have neither the facts, nor the law, they attack the proceedings.”
It provides an insight into what the criticism of Mueller tells us about the critics’ expectations as to the outcome of his investigation into Russian interference in our election.
It also reveals their own inability to comprehend the notion that highly disciplined professionals exist who are able to put aside any personal feelings they may have in the performance of their duties. Who remain objective and true to their oaths to uphold and protect the constitution. Characteristics that are foreign to them.
Special Counsel Mueller’s 12 years as FBI Director was preceded by service in several positions at the Department of Justice, including as Acting Deputy Attorney General. In these roles he has been scrutinized globally, inside and out. And he has come away with a sterling reputation for competence and probity.
Mueller would be the first choice of the innocent to be their investigator. And the last choice of the guilty.
[contact-form][contact-field label=”Name” type=”name” required=”true” /][contact-field label=”Email” type=”email” required=”true” /][contact-field label=”Website” type=”url” /][contact-field label=”Message” type=”textarea” /][/contact-form]