HOW MUCH OF A “STRAIGHT SHOOTER” CAN HE BE?
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jun. 15, 2019) — In a 48-page essay written from his observations and interactions with now-former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX1) contended that the former FBI director “lacks the judgment and credibility to lead the prosecution of anyone.”
Written a number of months ago when Mueller was still actively pursuing the Trump-Russia “collusion” allegation and the extent to which Russia interfered in the 2016 election, Gohmert set forth more than a dozen examples of Mueller’s misconduct, politically-correct decision-making and penchant for “framing” innocent individuals, as Gohmert sees it, beginning in the 1980s with the Whitey Bulger case to the Russia investigation.
The essay, which contains frequent media citations along with Gohmert’s recounting of Mueller’s performance before, during and after he became FBI director under President George W. Bush, is unquestionably a scathing and non-neutral summary of Mueller’s public service.
At the time of his appointment as Special Counsel by then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Mueller was heartily lauded by many in Congress on both sides of the political aisle.
Mueller served as FBI director between September 2001 and September 2013. By congressional statute, the FBI director serves a ten-year term. In 2011, Obama requested of and received from Congress a two-year extension on Mueller’s service.
In September 2013, former U.S. Attorney and Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey was confirmed as Mueller’s successor. Comey and Mueller had worked closely together, Gohmert wrote, with Mueller acting as a “mentor” to Comey as their careers crossed paths over the years.
Among Mueller’s transgressions, Gohmert said, are the 2008 prosecution of the late U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens; FBI raids on congressional offices and the daughter of former U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon; the FBI’s failure to prevent the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing despite warning signs; its false identification of Dr. Steven Hatfill as the sender of envelopes laced with anthrax in the wake of the 9/11 attacks; and the purging of terms from FBI training manuals which Muslim groups in the U.S. found offensive during the Obama years.
“The framing of Scooter Libby,” a “cultivated atmosphere of Mueller’s FBI” regarding its “outreach efforts” to radical Islamic organizations, and “the Five-Year-Up-or-Out program” which ousted FBI agents not promoted within five years are three more examples of what Gohmert found to have led to ” the kind of abuses and corruption being unearthed right now that occurred during the Obama administration” (p. 16), referring to the Russia investigation.
On June 12, Gohmert spoke about his research and observations to Judicial Watch’s public affairs coordinator, Bruce Schlesman, as well as the crisis at the Mexico-U.S. border in the form of hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens seeking entry to the U.S. since last October.
As The Post & Email reported extensively between 2010 and 2015, Mueller presided over the arrest, prosecution, conviction and imprisonment for more than three years of Darren Wesley Huff, who committed no crime when on April 20, 2010 he drove from Georgia to Madisonville, TN to attend a hearing for LCDR Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III (Ret). Contrary to FBI Special Agent Mark Van Balen’s affidavit, there was no plot to carry out an assault on the courthouse, nor did Fitzpatrick and Huff confer about Huff’s plans to attend.
Mueller’s FBI nevertheless deployed dozens of agents into the small town that morning, along with bomb-sniffing dogs and a large showing of local and state law enforcement on Huff’s travel route. Once apprehended by the Tennessee Highway Patrol for allegedly failing to observe a stop sign, Huff was permitted to continue on his way to Madisonville. Prior to doing so, Huff locked his legally-owned-and-transported firearms in the toolbox attached to the bed of his truck and, according to an eyewitness who spent the day with him, did not remove them while in town.
Like many other would-be attendees that day, Huff was not allowed entry to the courtroom. As was observed by local law enforcers at the time, an unarmed Huff patronized a nearby restaurant as Fitzpatrick’s hearing proceeded and left Madisonville without incident later that day.
Ten days later, he was arrested for allegedly “transporting a firearm in commerce with the intent that it be used unlawfully in furtherance of a civil disorder” and another charge, the latter of which he was acquitted by the jury.
In an interview prior to his trial, Huff told this writer that he suspected his arrest stemmed from an inaccurate statement from an alleged witness to something he said or “it’s a flat-out fabrication from the FBI.”
During an appeal hearing, DOJ prosecutor Luke McLaurin fabricated evidence when he claimed that Fitzpatrick and Huff exchanged text messages prior to the April 20 hearing and presented nothing to substantiate his statement.
As admitted to in closed-door testimony to members of Congress last August by former FBI Deputy General Counsel Trisha B. Anderson, in 2002 Mueller was summoned to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) over the failure of some of his agents to adhere to strict rules concerning the submission of evidence for surveillance warrants (p. 191 of transcript). According to Anderson, Mueller took the complaint seriously.
Emerging information indicates, however, that beginning in 2016, FBI and Justice Department personnel applied for and obtained four surveillance warrants on former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page using unverified and politically-sourced material without disclosing that fact to the FISC.
The year-long surveillance of Page, who was never charged with a crime, reportedly is a focal point in an upcoming DOJ Inspector General’s report and was an item discussed in Mueller’s “Russia” report turned into the attorney general in March. In that report, Mueller’s team concluded that “no American,” let alone anyone from the Trump campaign, conspired with the Kremlin to affect the outcome of the 2016 election despite the FBI’s alleged suspicions that the campaign was heavily-influenced by Russia.
During his confirmation hearings in January, Attorney General William Barr, who has launched an “investigation of the investigators” in the Russia probe, told Congress that Mueller is a “straight shooter,” although of late he has been mildly critical of Mueller’s Russia report.
Some are now asking when Mueller determined that no “collusion” took place and why he nevertheless continued the investigation.
Mueller has also been criticized, in some cases by career prosecutors, for overstepping his role in declaring that he could neither conclude that Trump obstructed justice nor “exonerate him.” Further, some commented that Mueller’s unexpected May 29 press conference during which he reiterated the report’s findings, announced his resignation as Special Counsel, and refused to testify to Congress was the equivalent of Comey’s July 5, 2016 unprecedented appearance when he enumerated a litany of transgressions reportedly committed by the then-2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State but declined to recommend her to the Justice Department for prosecution.
Notably, Mueller presided over the FBI when a forgery purported to represent the “long-form” birth certificate of “Barack Hussein Obama II” was uploaded to the White House website “with the intent to deceive,” according to the lead investigator of a 5+-year probe into the image concluding that it is undoubtedly fraudulent.
On July 18, 2012, following what would become the second of three press conferences stemming from the birth-certificate investigation, a media spokesperson from Mueller’s FBI told this writer that he not only was aware of the forgery findings, but that he also watched the presser in its entirety. In regard to our question as to what might be done, the spokesman said that if members of the public believed a crime was committed, they should contact their congressional representatives.
At the initial press conference on March 1, 2012, Zullo revealed that not only was the birth certificate image found to be fraudulent, but also Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form. Soon thereafter, the Selective Service System refused to permit Zullo or then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio, who authorized the investigation, to view the original or a certified copy of Obama’s military registration form.
According to lead investigator Mike Zullo, members of the U.S. intelligence community and “Washington, DC” at large are aware that Obama was not constitutionally eligible to serve as President of the United States in violation of Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution, which states that, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
Last August, Zullo said on the same show that two U.S. intelligence agents informed him that it is “an open secret” in Washington that Obama was not born in the United States.
The birth certificate forgery, Zullo has said, is the “foundational lie of the presidency of the United States under Barack Obama.”
In 2009, an FBI agent responded to a citizen complaint about Obama eligibility, “You do realize that since he was born in Hawaii that makes him a U.S. citizen no matter what nationality his father was at the time. He was born in 1961, 2 yrs after Hawaii was made the 50th state in the country. There is nothing illegal about his presidency, he has not utilized 30 different social security numbers either.”
In recent months, Zullo has spoken extensively about evidence he obtained from a former NSA/CIA contractor, Dennis Montgomery, regarding widespread government surveillance of Americans without a warrant. On the “Freedom Friday” radio show last July, Zullo remarked to host Carl Gallups that those who “will lie to Americans about a presidential candidate’s eligibility” are “capable of doing anything.”