If Trump is so honest and above corruption, why does he ban everyone whoever worked for his administration from testifying before congress, claims executive privilege routinely, and refused to sit for Mueller? What is he hiding and how long does he think he can get away with the endless corruption and scandals he and his administration are plagued with. You have to bunch the scandals by the week because it is impossible to keep track of them all. Any one of these scandals would have had any previous administration paralyzed with investigations and Trump just keeps creating new ones.
Because everything he or his aids say will be used against him because the Democrats have judged him guilty before they had any evidence. They were ready to impeach him the day after Election Day. Look at the Kavanaugh situation. The New York Times reports a story where the so-called victim can’t remember anything about what happened and refused to come forward for that reason. A bunch of Democrats, who are running for president and in Congress, immediately called for Kavanaugh’s impeachment. This is the standard operating procedure for the radical Democrats. Instead of discussing the issues of the day, they attack those, who disagree with them with threats of legal action.
The Democrats can only use it against them if they are guilty, so yes, the solution they have come up with to hide their guilt is to stonewall any and all investigations. That's what Nixon did. Nobody gets to be judged guilty unless the evidence is there. Have you ever tallied the number of people in the Trump sphere that have plead guilty, gone to jail, or are being investigated? It is an amazing list for only 2 1/2 years in office. "Standard operating procedure" is 9 investigations of Hillary Clinton. I guess the Repukes made it standard operating procedure and it's time they suffer the consequences of their own tactics. And after 9 investigations costing millions, no convictions for anything. So, live by the sword, die by the sword. All the whining in the world won't save the Trump GOP from getting their just desserts. It's coming.
As I have explained to you in the past that the government, with its infinite resources, can prosecute people to the hilt until their resources are gone. The choice the defendants have is to confess to something to make the prosecution happy, say what the prosecution wants to hear, or go broke trying to defend themselves. When you have a wife and family, the choice is to often to confess or “turn state’s evidence”. This is the new Democratic tactic, and if the Republicans were to do the same thing it would hurt your people as much as it has hurt mine. These are the earmarks of a totalitarian state. The IRS has done this to people many times. They accuse you of something, and you must either admit guilt or spend large sums of money to defend yourself. If you succeed in defending yourself, all the IRS will do is say, “Well I guess we were wrong.” You are out the money, and they will never reimburse you. Back during the Nixon era, Nixon used the IRS to punish his enemies. I remember Lawrence O’Donnell, who was Democratic Party National Chairman, was harassed in that way. He complained bitterly about the way the IRS treated him, and he was absolutely justified in making those statements. There were others. This is a problem of democracy and government, and people on both sides should recognize it as a threat to liberty. This is not a partisan issue. Thoughtful citizens of both parties should think long and hard before they give blank checks to the people they support to conduct public policy in this manner.
That is a poor, poor rationalization/excuse for the mountain of corruption this Administration has unleashed on this country in the past 2 1/2 years. Anytime, you are wrongfully accused by even the U.S. government, you are entitled to seek damages. That's the law. Me thinks that you simply defend the corruption when Repukes are in office and cheer on the investigations when Dems are in office. Admit it.
There are three elements involved in bringing suit to recover damages from a wrongful prosecution. There was malicious intent when the suit was brought. There no probable cause to bring the suit. And, of course, the defendant was found not guilty. Generally, the courts have not been predisposed to rule in favor of the defendants in these cases. A further element is that the prosecuting attorneys and the judges are not civilly liable under the tort provisions of the law. That means they can pursue these cases without fear of losing assets if their cases were without merit. All of this shows that the contention that we are protected from politically motivated prosecutions by the wrongful suit provisions of the law are too weak to protect us from abuse. Furthermore, what do you do if the government has bled you dry, and you have no money left? You would have to find an attorney would take the case on contingency. Good luck with that given the difficult nature of these kinds of suits.
