• Home
  • Is RIP USA an Over-exaggeration of the Trump Guilty Verdict?

Is RIP USA an Over-exaggeration of the Trump Guilty Verdict?

William L. Kovacs

June 2024

Is RIP USA an Over-exaggeration of the Trump Guilty Verdict?

The great writer Hunter Thompson wrote, “Luck is a very thin wire between survival and disaster, and not many people can keep their balance on it.” The same is true for nations. While the very long list of political attacks on Trump will be the stuff of many history books, the Democrat government officials (Democrats) launching these attacks must ask themselves if they are prepared to govern a country that has fallen off that very thin wire into disaster.

In the 2024 election season, a group of Democrats aggressively schemed to prevent Donald Trump from being on the national election ballot in seventeen states, indicted him in four jurisdictions on charges that were never charged against other politicians or citizens, issued orders that the DOJ/FBI raid on Mara Lago be done in plain cloths rather than police uniforms and backed it up with an order to use deadly force in the raid if the agent’s encountered resistance. Justified assassination or standard protocol? The answer depends on who has control of the government, media, voting rolls, and weapons.

The Democrats’ actions are euphemistically called “lawfare,” “legal action undertaken as part of a hostile campaign against a country or group,” deemed its enemies. The Democrats wear nice clothing and use doublespeak so they look and sound less threatening than a terrorist. Unfortunately, the Democrats using lawfare likely believe they are saving the U.S. for “democracy.” They think it is their right to rule the nation, unencumbered by an election, the rule of law, or differences of opinion. But their reign of terror on democracy is far more lethal than a terrorist attack, which is usually of limited geographic scope.

The Democrats’ actions lead to an existential question – what happens when nations fall off that very thin wire? History is replete with deadly and costly wars and insurrections starting over insignificant matters, such as a severed ear, dog poop, slaughtered swine, chariot racing, and runaway dogs.

The political class in the U.S. is very proficient at starting wars by deceit. President Johnson lied to Congress about navy ships being attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin. This deceit started the Vietnam War, which resulted in a decade of human carnage, 58,000 dead Americans and 3 million Vietnamese and 150,000 seriously injured American soldiers, and millions more were the victims of the use of Agent Orange.

There is also “Remember the Maine, to hell with Spain!” President McKinley and the unscrupulous press accused Spain of blowing up the USS Maine with a torpedo. It was later discovered that a coal-fired boiler on the ship exploded. Nevertheless, it allowed the U.S. to declare war against Spain and take control of Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Guam.

More recently, there was President George W. Bush, who lied to the American people that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and that he was involved in the 9/11 attacks. This justified the U.S. invading Iraq. This lie sank the U.S. into a decade of war, costing tens of thousands of lives and untold trillions of dollars.

There are dozens of other examples of governments using deceit to attack believed enemies. Some of the more colorful examples include Sweden’s King renting Russian uniforms from an opera house to stage an invasion of his country. This deceit started a two-year war. Another is Russia attacking a town of Russian residents and blaming it on Finland. This false flag operation gave Russia the pretense to invade Finland. The examples of insignificant events and government deceit causing large-scale harm to citizens are almost endless.

When a corrupt government wants to prevail over its opponents, nothing is off the table. Today, the Democrats have launched a war against democracy over bookkeeping entries as a front for deceit and a desire to destroy a former president who challenges their control of the nation. It’s likely the Republicans will fight back. Joe Biden’s questionable financial dealings are more easily provable than a bookkeeping entry that retroactively interfered with a past election. Then there are the fifty-one intelligence officials asserting the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian misinformation. All lies made to interfere with the 2020 and 2024 elections and elect Biden.

How far are the Democrats willing to take their assault on democracy? If they take down Trump, who will be next? They have already jailed Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon, and hundreds of January 6th protesters. Many of Trump’s election lawyers are indicted and facing disbarment proceedings. The United States has more prisoners than any country on earth, including China and Russia. What are a few more prisoners to save “democracy”?

Where does the Democrats’ war on democracy stop? Do they walk away from their Trump Derangement Syndrome, or are we viewing an American version of the 1917 Russian Revolution, which toppled the monarchy and installed communism? Or is the Democrats’ effort similar to Mao’s Cultural Revolution, which was used to purge the bourgeoisie of its old ideas, customs, culture, and habits? Today, the people to be purged are the conservatives.

If the Democrats truly want to make America the strongest, most moral, and financially strong nation in the world, they should abandon their war on Trump and conservatives. Their goal should be to win at the ballot box, not the jury box. Otherwise, Democrats risk placing the United States on a path of destruction—a path that will create a “Brave New World” in which Democrats will rule over the inhabitants through lawfare, deceit, and perhaps brutal military might, not electoral strength.

At this point, only the Democrats can move America off the path of destruction they have set it on.

 

William L. Kovacs, author of Devolution of Power: Rolling Back the Federal State to Preserve the Republic. Received 5 stars from Readers’ Favorite. His previous book, Reform the Kakistocracy, received the 2021 Independent Press Award for Political/Social Change. He served as senior vice president for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and chief counsel to a congressional committee. He can be contacted at [email protected]

 

 

 

 

  • Home
  • The Saturday Night Massacre, DOJ’s Last Profile in Courage

The Saturday Night Massacre, DOJ’s Last Profile in Courage

February 2024

The Saturday Night Massacre, DOJ’s Last Profile in Courage

The stunning indictment of Mr. Smirnov for lying (he was a long-time FBI confidential informant on many matters, including Biden family corruption), a federal judge releasing him from custody, an immediate second indictment on the same charges, and arrest at his lawyer’s office begs the question – what the hell is going on at the Department of Justice (“DOJ”)? If the DOJ has real evidence of Smirnov’s lies, it should immediately give it to several House committees investigating the president and his son. Or, is this another DOJ ruse to justify pardoning Hunter Biden and hide the president’s criminal activities?                        

Looking back at the DOJ over the last half-century, it is difficult to find many shining examples of its integrity. The last serious bout of DOJ integrity occurred on  October 20, 1973, the night history refers to as the Saturday Night Massacre.

Since then, the federal government has lost the American people’s trust. Only 16% of Americans trust it. A majority of Americans believe the federal government is corrupt. Worse, a University of Chicago poll finds nearly one in three Americans believe it may soon be necessary to take up arms against the government.

The federal government teeters on the “Eve of Destruction.”  It is destroying the United States with its corruption, and the DOJ is its architect. The DOJ was created to uphold the rule of law and keep citizens safe. Unfortunately, it has created a lawless two-tier system of justice that puts all Americans at risk.

How did the DOJ lose its integrity?

On May 26, 1973, Archibald Cox, a bow tie-wearing, preppie-looking, strong-willed man of immense integrity, was appointed by the DOJ as the Special Counsel to investigate the criminal activities of the Nixon White House.

On October 20, 1973, Cox was fired for issuing a subpoena requesting the president to turn over secret tape recordings. Nixon refused. Instead, he ordered Richardson to fire the Special Counsel. The Attorney General resigned, stating he promised Cox and Congress that the investigation would be independent of politics. Next, Nixon ordered Deputy Attorney General Ruckelshaus to fire Cox. He also resigned.

Next in line was the Solicitor General Robert Bork, who by statute became the acting Attorney General. Bork obeyed Nixon’s orders and fired Archibald Cox after he refused to obey the president’s order to accept a summary of the tapes and cease all attempts to subpoena them.

Nixon then abolished the Office of Special Counsel and transferred its functions to DOJ.  An aggravated Congress almost immediately initiated impeachment proceedings.

After his firing, Cox noted: “Whether ours [government] shall continue to be a government of laws and not of men is now for Congress and ultimately the American people.”

For carrying out Nixon’s orders, Bork believed he was promised the next seat on the Supreme Court.

The contrast between Cox and his refusal to abandon the rule of law and Bork’s willingness to do whatever the President wanted to maintain a high position in government can be viewed as DOJ’s transition from profiles in courage to profiles in corruption.

Since 1973, there have been too many examples of DOJ corruption to put in a single article. A few examples sufficiently illustrate its corruption.

A typical example of the DOJ’s misconduct is its regular refusal to provide information to Congress when conducting investigations of its activities, as illustrated by its false filings to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The DOJ refused to provide Congress with the documents to prevent Congress from uncovering its criminal activity. By declining to provide such information, the constitutional powers of Congress and the courts were rendered worthless.

The DOJ and its FBI aggressively force private companies to act illegally. The FBI regularly demanded Twitter, a private company, ban what it deemed misinformation about the President’s son (the Hunter Biden laptop), although it knew the information about the President’s son was truthful. While these actions violate citizens’ First Amendment rights, they were also direct election interference to help Biden win the 2020 election.

The DOJ refused to acknowledge Hunter Biden’s crimes. When the crimes were proven by Congress, i.e., tax evasion, fraud, failure to register as a foreign agent, money laundering, and cocaine, the DOJ attempted to grant Hunter Biden immunity from all crimes, even future crimes. Fortunately, an honest federal judge blocked the immunity agreement. Now, however, after the DOJ’s indictment of Smirnov, the DOJ will likely drop the criminal cases against Hunter Biden.

President Biden is personally compromised based on his son’s laptop information. Moreover, several IRS whistleblowers testified that the DOJ prevented them from reviewing significant evidence incriminating Biden.

The federal government is a tyrant to average citizens without political connections. A Navy officer took photographs of a nuclear submarine he worked on and was imprisoned for improperly handling national security secrets. During the same period, a presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, of the same party as the sitting President, destroyed, using bleach bit, significant amounts of national security materials on her unauthorized home computer. She also destroyed similar information on her cell phone by using a hammer. DOJ never prosecuted Clinton.

The most recent illustration of the DOJ’s corruption is implementing a two-tier justice system. For the first time in American history, the DOJ launched several prosecutions of a presidential candidate during an election. DOJ aims to both put Trump in jail and remove him from the presidential ballot, actions only taken by corrupt autocrats.

Concurrently with the Trump prosecutions are the DOJ’s prosecutions of the Trump supporters involved in the January 6th riots. While the riots only lasted several hours, the DOJ launched the most extensive nationwide dragnet in its history to capture every protester. The dragnet was even more extensive than the combined investigations of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack that killed over 3000 Americans and all the mass shootings in the U.S. The DOJ seeks to punish everyone who even strolled peacefully into the Capitol on that day. Yet, Black Lives Matter and other domestic terrorist groups loyal to the Biden administration burned down several cities and attacked federal buildings for over five months. All remain free.

DOJ was established as the primary American institution to protect the rule of law. Attorneys General like Richardson and Ruckelshaus, who radiated integrity, are long gone. DOJ is now led by men like Merrick Garland, who, like Bork, follow orders without concern for the rule of law, the Constitution, or the citizens who pay his salary.  The Garland’s and Bork’s are the perfect examples of “Profiles in Corruption.”  Their desire to hold “power” as individuals, not as trustees of the Constitution, tears the Republic apart.

The Saturday Night Massacre was the DOJ’s last act of courage to preserve the rule of law.  Election day, November 5, 2024, maybe the people’s last chance to save the Republic by removing those government officials who exemplify “Profiles in Corruption.”

William L. Kovacs has served as senior vice president for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, chief counsel to a congressional committee, chairman of a state environmental board, and a partner in law D.C. law firms. His book Reform the Kakistocracy won the 2021 Independent Press Award for Political/Social Change. He can be contacted at [email protected]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Home
  • R.I.P. Rule of Law, How Bad Can It Get?

R.I.P. Rule of Law, How Bad Can It Get?

William L. Kovacs

August 2023

R.I.P. Rule of Law, How Bad Can It Get?

With the exception of the Civil War, the people of the United States have generally lived in a rule-of-law society, one in which all persons are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced, and independently adjudicated. Regrettably, by living so long in good fortune, the people of the U.S. have not put serious thought into what happens when the rule of law dies. The Biden administration’s recent creation of a two-tier system of justice bluntly informs us that while the nation has been blessed with a civil society for 247 years, we are not protected from a bad ending. The theory of the rule of law may be eternal, but its application in the U.S. now appears transient.

Why are the actions of the federal government today more harmful to democracy than in the past?

While there has always been corruption in the federal government, it has never been systemic until the Biden administration. The House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Accountability sets out the timeframe of corruption from 2013 to 2023. It includes Biden’s corrupt dealings with China, Ukraine, Romania, and Kazakhstan. Biden’s Department of Justice and its surrogate investigative arm, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“DOJ”), have indicted and are attempting to imprison former president Trump, Biden’s primary rival in the 2024 election. This all follows four years of the Trump presidency, during which the DOJ lied to the FISA courts about the Trump administration and concocted the false Russian collusion narrative that led to the sham impeachment of Trump.

The most horrifying conduct of Biden’s special counsel is his effort to criminalize Trump’s right to speak, think and have confidentiality in his discussions with lawyers. This conduct is an attempt to criminalize all speech that is different from the government’s sanctioned speech.

There is also the DOJ’s attempt to give a sweetheart, no jail time, deal to Hunter Biden by ignoring his conduct as a tax cheat, drug addict, money launderer, and unregistered foreign agent. Even the day before Devon Archer was to give testimony before the House Oversight Committee, DOJ informed him to report to prison before giving testimony. This was an overt attempt at witness intimidation. While the list of crimes by the Biden administration will fill volumes in the history books, the existential question is – how much harm can the Biden administration do to the nation if its conduct continues?

How bad can Biden’s corruption get? Really bad!

Keep in mind the federal government has sovereign immunity. It cannot be sued without its consent. It will not prosecute itself for criminal conduct. Yes, corrupt officials can be prosecuted but only if the DOJ seeks to prosecute them. The Hunter Biden saga illustrates the power DOJ to destroy the rule of law in the United States. DOJ intentionally delayed prosecuting Hunter Biden for almost a decade, thereby allowing the statute of limitations to expire on the most serious tax evasion charges. And, finally, when a Republican House of Representatives pushed the DOJ into prosecuting Hunter Biden, DOJ indicted him on misdemeanor charges and, in a faux plea agreement, sought no jail time. It also attempted to give him complete immunity for all other crimes.  Fortunately for the nation, judge Noreika uncovered DOJ’s deception and refused to accept the sham plea deal.

The significant point in DOJ’s coverup is that it has the sole power to determine who will be prosecuted and what laws will be enforced. Congress can investigate DOJ actions, but it cannot force it to act in accordance with the law or to apply our laws equally. The courts can only hear matters before them. Nothing requires the federal government to prosecute any specific crime. The president can fire corrupt DOJ officials, but what if those officials are carrying out the president’s orders? Yes, the House of Representatives can impeach the president for treason, bribery, and other High crimes and misdemeanors, but if the Senate refuses to convict the president, all his corruption continues.

What does this mean?

President John Adams described our Republic as “A government of laws, not of men.” In the 21t c. those words are pure poppycock. The United States is a government of individuals holding personal power, wealth, and privilege. These individuals will undertake any action, including criminal conduct, to protect themselves the country be damned.

While the proper role of a government official should be as a trustee to the Constitution and a fiduciary to the institution in which they serve, few officials follow that path. Most hold power as politicians that give loyalty only to those helping them maintain their office. It is this loyalty to party and donors that undercuts the principle of separation of powers in the Constitution. There are no checks on power; there is only the Republicans checking the power of Democrats and Democrats checking the power of Republicans.

How can the power of the Executive branch be controlled?

The most effective mechanism for ensuring limited government, but the least likely to be acted upon by our officials, would be for each branch of government to constantly check the power of the other branches, notwithstanding political party affiliation. Absent an effective check on power, there are a few options for restraining corruption:

1.  The most practical approach to controlling corruption in the Executive branch is if one House of Congress is controlled by a party in opposition to the president. That House of Congress can refuse to fund a corrupt government, notwithstanding the fact that part of the government will shut down. The House of Representatives has a clear choice, to fund corruption or to shut down the corrupt agency.

To appropriate money, the House of Representatives and the Senate must agree on the amount of money the government needs, and the president must sign the appropriations into law. But if one House of Congress refuses to appropriate any money to fund a part of the government, that part of the government will be discontinued without passing a new law. This crude process is the only way to control a corrupt government.

2. Congress should grant Use Immunity to those with knowledge of corruption in the Executive branch. By granting use immunity to corrupt officials, corrupt officials can be forced to testify without fear of future punishment for the new information they provide. Securing the truth may be the only mechanism to make the federal government honest and eventually workable.

3. The only real power “We the people” have to control government is our power to vote for members of Congress. We do not vote for the President; that is done by the electoral college and a convoluted quilt of state voting laws, state Secretaries of State, and judicial proceedings. The Supreme Court is appointed, as are the millions of nameless bureaucrats that make laws daily by regulating almost every aspect of society.

Our right to vote for members of Congress is extraordinarily powerful. It is a legal mechanism for a peaceful revolution. With our votes, we can vote out all members of Congress every two years and elect a Congress that is a trustee of the Constitution and a fiduciary to the institution in which they serve. Only by electing a Congress willing to constantly check the powers of the other branches of government can citizens ensure that at least one branch of government, Congress, functions as the Constitution intends.

Electing a Congress that obeys the Constitution is the only failsafe mechanism given to the people to ensure we remain a Republic. If the people of the U.S. continue to elect a Congress that gives it loyalty to politics rather than the Constitution, the nation dies.

So how bad can a corrupt government be?

In the final analysis, John Adams was wrong. We are not a government of laws. The Biden administration and its DOJ have transitioned the United States into a government of men. Rather Thomas Jefferson, Adams’ nemesis, had it correct when he stated, “The government you elect is the government you deserve.” There is little in our Constitution to control a government that is willing to corrupt our constitutional system for personal benefit. So, we must all recognize as citizens the government we elect only functions as well as the individuals we elect.

So how bad can it (the federal government) get without the rule of law? Pick your worst nightmare, and don’t leave any possibility out for being too terrifying. As a nation of men, not laws, we are all subject to the power of narcissists exercised for personal political advantage. History has proven such insanity can result in inhuman outcomes.

William L. Kovacs has served as senior vice president for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, chief counsel to a congressional committee, and a partner in law D.C. law firms. His book Reform the Kakistocracy is the winner of the 2021 Independent Press Award for Political/Social Change. He can be contacted at [email protected]

 

 

 

 

  • Home
  • The Big Lie: I Can’t Answer, the Matter Is Under Investigation

The Big Lie: I Can’t Answer, the Matter Is Under Investigation

William L. Kovacs

July 2023

The Big Lie: I Can’t Answer, the Matter Is Under Investigation

The eight most disingenuous words used by federal agencies to hide their criminal activity are “I can’t answer, the matter is under investigation.” These words are used to obstruct, mislead, delay, and discourage congressional investigations into the legality of Executive branch activity.

Unfortunately, this simple statement often achieves its goal of obstructing efforts by Congress to obtain information. While Congress may be upset with the response, many times, it is cowed into accepting presidents can protect their people from being investigated for criminal conduct. Fortunes, however, can be reversed. If Republicans win the White House with a presidential candidate who sincerely wants to uphold the rule of law, restore justice to the legal system and hold the “Deep State” accountable, that president can make it happen.

The leading Presidential candidates for the Republican nomination have promised to fire the FBI director and clean house at the Department of Justice. If a Republican wins the presidency in November 2024, FBI Director Wary and AG Garland will resign long before they can be fired. So, candidates, please, stop pandering. No one will be fired. All pablum, worthless and oversimplified promises.

Suppose a new president truly wants to clean up the deep, dark, corrupt state at the DOJ and FBI. In that case, the Republican president need only waive Executive Privilege and issue an Executive Order declassifying all investigatory materials sought by the current Republican House of Representatives. Let Congress bleed the truth out of those subverting the Constitution.

Executive compliance is simple. When Congress requests documents, the Executive should order them produced. When testimony is sought, provide it without asserting objections. Cooperate with the Republican House to find the truth.

Since the Nixon administration, presidents have asserted Executive Privileges thirty times to block congressional investigations. Presidential assertions included protecting the president’s brother (Billy Carter), girlfriends (Monica Lewinsky), mismanagement of funds (Solyndra), foreign affairs (Benghazi), gun running (fast and furious), and the Watergate tapes. Democrat and Republican administrations act as if providing Congress with requested information concerning an investigation will somehow diminish their manhood.

Finding and eliminating corruption is for the benefit of the nation. Hiding corruption does not assist the president in the faithful execution of the law. The DOJ/FBI’s long-running minuet of never sharing information with congressional committees is a mechanism of deceit, not of protecting the independence and effectiveness of law enforcement, the identities of informants, avoiding pre-trial publicity, or interfering with prosecutorial discretion. The Supreme Court has long recognized the “…implied power [of Congress] to investigate and to compel the production of information” from the Executive branch.

“Executive Privilege for presidential communications is limited to the quintessential power and nondelegation of Presidential power, and those are the core functions in the Constitution.” It should only be asserted to preserve those core constitutional functions. Claiming it beyond the core constitutional functions is a delaying tactic that often allows illegal conduct to continue.

As to declassifying all documents related to alleged criminal activity in the Executive branch, no president should ever be intentionally or unintentionally covering it up. The American Bar Association writes, “Under the U.S. Constitution, the president as commander in chief is given broad powers to classify and declassify such information, often through executive orders.” While there are procedures for declassifying the materials, a president, except for certain materials such as nuclear secrets, has almost total control to declassify records by Executive Order. Presidents at all times have the power to put sunlight on government corruption. When they choose not to expose corruption, it is an intentional coverup.

Unfortunately, since the Nixon administration in the early 1970s, the Executive branch has forced Congress to issue subpoenas to secure requested documents. Presidents achieve their goal of protecting corruption by requiring years of legal battles to enforce the subpoena.

Hopefully, there will be a Republican Congress, or at least a Republican House sworn in on January 3, 2025, and on January 20, 2025, a Republican president. Between January 3, 2025, and January 20, 2025, the Republican Congress can prepare the appropriate investigative letters to the incoming president requesting the information needed to root out corruption in the DOJ/FBI. On January 20, when the Republican president enters the White House, his first order of business should be to issue an Executive Order waiving Executive privilege and formally declassifying the documents relating to all congressional investigations. These waivers should encompass all alleged DOJ/FBI corruption as described in the Durham Report, Mueller and Horowitz Reports, payments received by Joe and Hunter Biden from foreign countries, all matters associated with the development of a two-tier system of justice, efforts by the federal government to force social media companies to manipulate information distributed to the public and all other matters of high-level DOJ and FBI corruption.

By taking this approach, the president will tremendously assist the congressional investigation of the DOJ/FBI misconduct without investigating the departments he leads. If Congress finds evidence of criminal activity, it will refer the evidence to new appointees at a  DOJ for appropriate prosecution.

Suppose Executive branch personnel refuse to testify or take the Fifth to protect their constitutional rights. In that case, Congress can grant the Use Immunity, which compels their testimony but provides immunity to the witness for the new information provided. A witness that refuses to testify after being given Use Immunity can be cited for contempt of Congress and imprisoned.

It’s time the federal government gets serious about corruption in government. More intriguing would be if a president followed this advice. The nation might uncover who is running the Deep State

William L. Kovacs has served as senior vice president for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, chief counsel to a congressional committee, and a partner in law D.C. law firms. His book Reform the Kakistocracy is the winner of the 2021 Independent Press Award for Political/Social Change. He can be contacted at [email protected]

This article was first published in The Thinking Conservative.