Truthful News

“I Hope That People Who Made It Up Are Held Accountable.” Latest Updates On The Mueller’s Report

Interview with a California lawyer Harmeet Dhillon. By Mark Jackson.

0 175

Special counsel Robert Mueller concluded his nearly two-year-long investigation last Friday. Although Mueller cleared President Trump of Russia collusion, he left it to the Attorney General William Pelham Barr to decide whether or not President Trump obstructed justice. Barr concluded that Trump did not obstruct justice, thus completely exonerating the president.

“As an American citizen, I’m angry that our government was hijacked for two years, by this completely manufactured false claim against the President. I hope that people who made it up are held accountable,” Harmeet Dhillon, an American lawyer and Republican party official. She is the former vice chairwoman of the California Republican Party, and the National Committeewoman of the Republican National Committee for California.

Now, serious questions are being raised about the origins of the FBI’s investigation. The bureau used politicized and unverified information to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Last week the Justice Department confirmed they’re still investigating potential FISA abuse by the FBI and DOJ.

The mainstream media is also under scrutiny for its coverage of the investigation. Much of it insinuated that the president or his associates colluded with Russia. Even after the House Intelligence Committee concluded there was no evidence of collusion over a year ago, many media outlets continued the collusion narrative.


Mueller report’s impact going forward

I spoke to Harmeet Dhillon about the Mueller report’s findings and how they will impact us going forward. Dhillon is a California lawyer and Republican Party official. She volunteered for the 2016 Trump campaign and was a delegate to the national convention for Donald Trump.


Harmeet-Dhillon-Law-Attorney--America Daily
Harmeet Dhillon, Law Attorney. America Daily



Mark Jackson: What do you make of the report?

Harmeet Dhillon: Well, I knew that President Trump was not guilty of collusion all along. I was involved in the campaign and he did not need to collude with a foreign power to win this election because the American people really wanted him to win. So from that point of view, I was glad that this cloud has been lifted. As an American citizen, I’m angry that our government was hijacked for two years by this completely manufactured false claim against the president. And so I hope that the people who made it up are held accountable.

Now in terms of the report being released, which is now what the Democrats are really focusing on, the Congress voted for 20 to nothing to release the report. The president has said he wants the report released and I, and other Republican officials have said we should release the report to the maximum extent possible. So that means releasing the report, other than what’s personal or private, information that his grand jury testimony, national security information and certain classified or raw reports that are done by law enforcement officials. So if it’s legal to release it, I think it should be released.


Mark Jackson: President Trump said he’s exonerated, but some Democrats are saying he isn’t. Is he or isn’t he?

Harmeet Dhillon: The job of a prosecutor is to investigate and weight the evidence and determine whether to bring a prosecution or not. And if the prosecutor investigates you for two years and then says there’s not enough evidence to bring a prosecution you were exonerated from that point of view. From the legal point of view of somebody being exonerated in a courtroom, that’s never going to happen because there’s no prosecution. We’re not even going into a court. So Mr. Mueller is not a judge and he can not declare somebody innocent or not. All he can do is determine whether there’s enough evidence.

Given the bias nature of this prosecution and the witch hunt that occurred against this president I can guarantee you that if there were any evidence there, there will be a prosecution. They couldn’t find anything. After two years, hundreds of subpoenas, $25 million spent and dragging the name of our president through the mud. And so there’s nothing there.


Mark Jackson: Mueller’s report said that the presidents did not commit a crime. He wrote that Trump was also not exonerated. Was it appropriate for Mueller to say that?

Harmeet Dhillon: It’s a great question. I think it was appropriate and proper for him to say that there was not enough evidence on the collusion front and he said that. For him to then punt and kick it over to the attorney general on the obstruction front was inappropriate.

He was hired to determine whether those things happened or not and he didn’t do his job. So I think it was inappropriate. It was kind of a backhanded slap against the president to say that he wasn’t going to draw a conclusion because that gives the Democrats something to continue to speculate over. But the attorney general did the correct thing by lifting this cloud: Looking at the evidence and saying there’s not enough evidence here. And he did that in conjunction with Rod Rosenstein, who started the whole thing off. So I think that is also quite a clear record. And now Democrats are stamping their feet, and screaming, and asking for more hearings. Okay. But I think the American people are actually pretty sick of this issue. They don’t want to see their government tied up in knots in a partisan witch hunt. They’d rather see their legislators actually passing laws or enforcing our laws to make Americans more successful, safer, stronger, and have a better future.


Mark Jackson: People might suspect that president Trump did something wrong that’s unrelated to Russia collusion or obstruction of justice. Should the report be released to the public for full transparency?

Harmeet Dhillon: Well, I don’t know. I don’t know what’s in the report. I would just be speculating, but the Department of Justice policy is that they’re not supposed to go out and smear people who are not indicted for something by releasing information about them. Now, this is a unique case with the president. President himself has said he wants there to be transparency. So, look as anybody in their seventies and a successful business person, they’re going to be allegations against them on different issues. Those allegations are out there.

We’ve seen a Democrats now pinning their hopes on the southern district of New York prosecuting the president for some fictitious crimes, some stuff that has nothing to do with him being the president. You know, I think the two can play that game. Historically in our country, we have not tried to politicize, criminalize political differences like that. I mean, Hillary Clinton for example, did a lot of bad things with her foundation, the Clinton Foundation and other transactions she’s done over the years as a lawyer. And you know, she’s walking around as a free woman because we generally don’t criminalize political disputes in this country. And so the people who are hoping that the southern district of New York will prosecute this president should remember that the southern district of New York answers to the attorney general. And in our system of government, the attorney general would have to approve anything like that. So I seriously doubt that unless there’s some kind of smoking gun crime that’s very black and white that we’re going to see any further prosecutions on this.


Mark Jackson: So if it has nothing to do with the special counsel, should it or shouldn’t it be released?

Harmeet Dhillon: I don’t know. I mean, as I mentioned that there are some legal requirements that certain things cannot be released. Grand jury testimony, national security information, private information of people who are not being charged with a crime. And then if the president wants to assert executive privilege over certain aspects of it, those parts are legally not supposed to be released. But I would anticipate that the majority of this report is going to be released.

Executive privilege typically relates to executive deliberations and decision making of the president in conjunction with his top staff. So with his lawyers or cabinet, or people like that, or even certain lower level when it comes to decision making or implementation of policies. Now a lot of the focus of this investigation was what happened prior to the president becoming the president. So executive privilege would not apply to that.

And as the Barr’s report pointed out, a lot of the allegations about obstruction against the president are the things that he did publicly. He was accused to have been criticizing sessions or criticizing Muller on Twitter was alleged to be obstruction of justice. Well, we all know about that. There’s nothing secret about it. It’s all out there. And so Barr has already said most of that stuff is already in the public domain. So I’m not sure. And I question whether the White House is going to ultimately exert executive privilege? They seem to want transparency here as well.


Mark Jackson: Despite Mueller‘s conclusion that president Trump did not collude with Russia, some democrats are still doubling down. On March 24th, California Congressman Adam Schiff still told ABC that, “significant evidence of collusion exists.” And suggested that although the investigation is over, the fight isn’t over. California Representative Devin Nunez said there needs to be an investigation into the FBI and DOJ because they’ve lost the public’s trust. What do you think?

Harmeet Dhillon: That’s absolutely true! What we found through this entire investigation and process is that there are a number of dirty cops, the FBI and they were assisted by dirty lawyers in the department of justice, and dirty people in the White House who helped frame the president. National security apparatus was used against American citizens to unmask people like General Flynn. False statements were made to the FISA court, which is a national security court, so they were misleading the court.

Some of those people have been found out, but I suspect we only had the tip of the iceberg. There are probably many people who participated in this conspiracy to try to basically have a coup against president Trump, are still in the White House in some ways. Around the president there are maybe even people like that. They are still in the Department of Justice and there are still people like that in the FBI and I think it is correct that unless we have a complete cleaning of house, of those agencies, we are not going to see justice in this case. And like I mentioned, the Obama White House, it had to be pretty high up in the Obama administration for there to be unmasking of a former general, somebody who’s active in a political campaign. It might have gone all the way up to the president himself. So we really need to get to the bottom of that.


Mark Jackson: How hard will the Republican’s pursue it?

Harmeet Dhillon: I think different Republicans are going to have different approaches. There are some, and I agree on this issue, we need to have a reckoning. I think there are some others who want to just sort of move on and focus on the 2020 election. But I don’t think you can do one without the other. We can not have a system of government, whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, where are you have the apparatus of our government being weaponized against political opponents. That’s un-American, it’s fascism. It cannot stand. So we need to get to the bottom of it.


Mark Jackson: How are the Democrats spinning the result of the motor report?

Harmeet Dhillon: Well, they’re spitting it by saying that the president was not exonerated. I think that’s pretty weak and we’ve already covered that. They’re going to say, well, they think they still have some evidence that he’s colluded with Russia. That’s nonsense. And then they’re going to focus on other issues. They’re going to focus on his businesses. They’re going to focus on his inaugural committee, etc. Michael Cohen false statements about him. They’re grasping at straws is how I would put it.

Click Play button above to listen to the FREE Full version of this podcast.



News Headlines Friday, March 29,2019


Trump Will Declassify Documents on Surveillance of His Campaign 

In an exclusive interview with Fox News on March 27, the President revealed his intentions to declassify and release documents related to the surveillance of his presidential election campaign by the Obama administration. Robert Mueller finished his 22-month investigation last week, concluding that there is no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Here are a few comments the President made during his interview with Fox News.



A California County Announces It Will Stop Holding ICE Detainees In  Jails (ET)

In order to free up space demands for mental health services, a Sheriff’s department in Orange County, California is ending its agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Since 2010 the department has been leasing bed spaces to ICE detainees at their jails. The contract between the two departments ends in July 2020 and allows for early termination of contract. After the contract has ended ICE will have 120 days to relocate their detainees to other facilities.

Sheriff Don Barnes said, “ I want to make it clear that the decision to end the ICE agreement is not a result of the recent political rhetoric surrounding immigration.” He went on to say. “ Our 9-year leasing agreement has been mutually beneficial and a benefit to Orange County taxpayers.”

ICE and Border Patrol is currently facing major issues with overcrowding at their detention facilities. In a comment by Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen earlier this month she said, “Illegal immigration is simply spiraling  out of control and threatening public safety and national security.”

Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said in a media conference held March 27, “ For the first time in over a decade CBP is performing direct releases of migrants”. McAleenan went on to say this would only encourage more migrants to cross the U.S.border illegally and claim asylum. He then said. “But it is the only current option that we have from a life and safety perspective to try to reduce the overcrowding in our facilities.”


Adam Schiff Urged to Resign as Chairman by House Intelligence Committee Republicans (Fox News)

Republicans confronted Rep.. Adam Schiff at a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Thursday and demanded he step down as chairman. This is over the California Democrat’s repeated claims to have evidence of a Trump-Russia collusion.

Fox News obtained a letter that was signed by every Republican on the committee. The letter stated,”Your actions both past and present are incompatible with your duty as Chairman of this Committee. We have no faith in your ability to discharge your duties in a manner consistent with your Constitutional responsibility and urge your immediate resignation as Chairman of this Committee.”

President Trump also Tweeted, “ Congressman Adam Schiff, who spent two years knowingly and unlawfully lying and leaking, should be forced to resign from Congress!”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said earlier this week that the calls to remove Schiff were “absolutely ridiculous”. Spokeswoman Ashley Etienne said, “ Democrats aren’t going to be intimidated by the White House Congressional Republicans. We’re not going to be distracted from securing the release of the full Mueller report and the underlying evidence, and we will continue to pursue legitimate oversight because that’s what the Constitution requires.”




Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.