Frank Zappa was essentially unlistenable other than a few good ditties. Here’s one: “Well I’m about to get sick, from watchin’ my TV, been checkin’ out the news, until my eyeballs fail to see. I mean to say that every day, is just another rotten mess. And when it’s gonna change, my friend, is anybody’s guess.” Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention, “Trouble Every Day.”
Imagine this: A presidential campaign manager for one of the two major political parties formulates a plan to leak disparaging, albeit known to be untrue, claims against the other party’s candidate. Normal political dirty tricks, right? The campaign manager runs it by his candidate, who approves the plan. Normal, although untoward, right? The campaign’s lawyer is briefed on the plan and, using his ties to the FBI from his days at the Department of Justice (I know, an oxymoron), arranges a meeting with the FBI’s top lawyer to discuss the information. Not normal, right? The campaign weaponized the FBI! The FBI launches a huge investigation into the other party’s campaign that follows the campaign and the subsequent administration for more than a year, resulting in a special prosecution that spends at least $32 million in wasted costs and more importantly, valuable FBI agency time chasing down a known falsehood.
Would the mainstream media (MSM) propagate that dubious political hack job? Yes, they do, because their interests collide. The MSM overwhelmingly donates to and votes for the culpable party. As Ballotpedia found, four studies showed MSM giving to the lying cohorts an average of 86%. (97%, 94%, 87% and 65%). So, the media either operated with blinders on, or with intention in pursuing the story because it benefitted their candidate and their story.
Why would the FBI have been so easily duped by someone known to be a campaign lawyer who came to them as a “private citizen” acting on his own to help the agency? Interestingly, the FBI (coupled with the CIA and ODNI — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence) giving to the culpable party is double, even triple, that of the victimized party. However, political giving is problematic for such highly appointed people, as they often hide their employer on contribution forms or have family members make the donations, so it is hard to track. But KNOWN contributions since 2016 have been double and triple to the culpable party. Would that be a major influence on the FBI opening the investigation? Could that be why the FBI acted on what any outsider would say is highly questionable material?
To be fair, the campaign lawyer is on trial for lying to the FBI about his role. Likewise, to be fair, the FBI is composed of some high-ranking liars. See Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, et al. The campaign lawyer billed all of his hours of being a “private citizen/Good Samaritan” to the culpable party campaign committee. So, the campaign knew and the candidate knew that the FBI had been misled. The campaign lawyer is on trial, and his lawyer says his client didn’t mislead the FBI, but the trial isn’t finished.
Interesting side story, a fellow delivered a suspect campaign derogatory report to that same culpable party, and it was also taken to the FBI, which publicly investigated the dossier, even possibly trying to blackmail the presidential campaign opponent by going over its allegations, but not its debunking, before eventually debunking it but taking no action against those who duped them. The culpable party screamed that by publicly debunking the dossier, the FBI impacted the election! Now that’s funny. How about not trying to weaponize the FBI?
That dossier, funded by a vendor to the culpable party, was also supported by reams of pages emailed to an assistant FBI director and three U.S. prosecutors, by the vendor’s research contractor, who just happened to be the wife of the assistant FBI director. None of that was mentioned to the FISA Court judges when warrants were sought. Yet only one lawyer has been prosecuted and none have been disbarred. Oh, but they were chastised by the Court when their skullduggery was discovered.
I could go on, but why? Democrats, who once feared and questioned the FBI’s integrity, now overwhelmingly trust the Feds. Republicans, being law & order types, once admired the FBI but now distrust them overwhelmingly. The FBI was supposed to be the paragon of truth, but instead is now seen as political goons. I hate any impact it has had on the good work that local FBI agents do every day.
Yet it is hard to not recall NYPD Frank Serpico’s claim back in the ‘70s about cops, which became a blockbuster movie, “Serpico.” Serpico said “that 10% of police officers are honest, another 10% are corrupt, and the other 80% WANT to be honest.” His revelations led to the Knapp Commission report that held “even those who themselves engage in no corrupt activities are involved in corruption in the sense that they take no steps to prevent what they know or suspect to be going on about them.”
Is there a Frank Serpico in the FBI today? I fear not. As Serpico said at the end of the above quote, “But it’s tough because the 10 percent of corrupt officers terrorize whoever wants to do good.”
“Call out the instigators, because there’s something in the air. We’ve got to get together sooner or later, because the revolution’s here.” Thunderclap Newman, “Something In The Air,” 1969. A true one hit wonder.
Kelly Burke, attorney, former district attorney and magistrate judge, writes about the law, rock’n’roll, and politics or anything that strikes him. Contact Kelly at dakellyburke@gmail.com to comment on this article or suggest articles that you’d like to see, and visit his website at www.kellyrburke.com to view prior columns.
HHJ News
