Still Free

Yeah, Mr. Smiley. Made it through the entire Trump presidency without being enslaved. Imagine that.

Friday, January 25, 2019

"I Do Not Know..."

I'll keep this one brief. I don't say much about the Mueller witch hunt investigation because I'm old enough to remember the Ken Star witch hunt investigation. Ken Star was appointed to find out about the Clinton's involvement in the Whitewater affair. However; all he got was Clinton lying about getting head from Monica Lewinski. There was a whole circus around this. Essentially These "special prosecutors" end up indicting people for activities related to the actual "investigation" rather than the alleged wrongdoing they were appointed to find.

The Mueller witch hunt investigation is the same thing but on super duper steroids fake weights and an electric motor in the crankshaft. Because if this was actually an investigation of "collusion", then the Clinton camp would be indicted already because it is already known that they actually "colluded" with a foreign agent, created a fake document which was then used to get the FISA court to approve an investigation of a candidate running for president, Person 1. Presenting false information to a court is a crime. We also have Clinton destroying evidence vis-a-vis her destroyed server and deleted e-mails, which is a crime called "obstruction of justice". That these activities go unindicted and untried is all we need to know about the nature of this witch hunt investigation. And really you don't need to be a Trump fan to see this. If you or I presented a court with a fake document in order to further our own cases, we'd be tossed in jail (or at least fined heavily). Why should those involved with the "pee dossier" get away with that? If you or I destroyed evidence while we were being investigated for a crime, we would be arrested. Why should Clinton receive different treatment? But that's another discussion for another day. Roger Stone is in a cell, or at least a holding area (assuming no bail has been made as of this writing) in part because he apparently told a witness to say "I don't know" while being questioned by Congress.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if this is true, then Stone did in fact cross a line and should be prosecuted for it. What I don't get is why he instructed anyone to tell THAT particular lie. When you say "I don't know" you are making a declarative statement that you "have no knowledge". Anyone with a relatively high IQ knows that the statement you make when you do not wish to disclose your knowledge of a particular thing is:

I do not recall.

See, no one can say whether you recall or not. It is something that cannot be proven at the time you said it or at any time after. You can "not recall" something one minute and "recall" it the next. Until our courts are set up with real-time brain reading devices, such a statement cannot be proven false. However; once you say "I don't know" or in the case of the referenced character, "I don't know any godfather." then you're making statements that can be proven to be false or contradictory to previous statements

Advice for those in Trump's circle, less movies, more law.