Famous Democratic Law Professor: Maybe Robert Mueller Should Be Investigated

Kirsters Baish| It’s becoming more and more evident that the Mueller investigation will be coming to a close soon, as they have gathered no evidence of any substance supporting the claim that Trump colluded with Russia in the 2016 presidential election. Mueller has resorted to investigating things that don’t have anything to do with Trump in the first place.

Famous far-left law professor Alan Dershowitz wrote a piece about Mueller recently for the Washington Examiner.

The Washington Examiner reports that Dershowitz stated:

“Consider the issue of criticizing Robert Mueller, the special counsel. Any criticism or even skepticism regarding Mueller’s history is seen as motivated by a desire to help Trump. Mueller was an assistant U.S. attorney in Boston, the head of its criminal division, the head of the criminal division in Main Justice, and the director of the FBI during the most scandalous miscarriage of justice in the modern history of the FBI. Four innocent people were framed by the FBI to protect mass murdering gangsters who were working as FBI informers while they were killing innocent people. An FBI agent, who is now in prison, was tipping off Whitey Bulger as to who might testify against him so that these individuals could be killed. He also tipped off Bulger, allowing him to escape and remain on the lam for 16 years.”

Dershowitz is questioning what kind of responsibility the head of the special counsel should endure for the mistakes he made during the Bulgar case. He is concerned about the kind of standard this is setting.

The law professor went on, “It is ironic to see many right-wingers being the ones to criticize overreach by law enforcement, while many left-wingers now defend such overreaching. Hypocrisy and selective outrage abounds, as neutral principles take a back seat. Conservatives used to say ‘a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.’ I would respond that ‘a liberal is a conservative who is being audited or whose kid was busted for pot.’ Today a civil libertarian is a conservative whose candidate is being investigated, while a law-and-order type is a liberal who wants to see Trump charged or impeached. I am a liberal who voted against Trump, but who insists that his civil liberties must be respected for all of our sake.”

The liberal law professor has been watching this issue very carefully. The Hill also published a piece by Dershowitz.

The Hill published Dershowitz’s piece which read, “Civil libertarians should be concerned whenever the government interferes with the lawyer-client relationship. Clients should be able to rely on confidentiality when they disclose their most intimate secrets in an effort to secure their legal rights. A highly publicized raid on the president’s lawyer will surely shake the confidence of many clients in promises of confidentiality by their lawyers. They will not necessarily understand the nuances of the confidentiality rules and their exceptions. They will see a lawyer’s office being raided and all his files seized. I believe we would have been hearing more from civil libertarians — the American Civil Liberties Union, attorney groups and privacy advocates — if the raid had been on Hillary Clinton’s lawyer. Many civil libertarians have remained silent about potential violations of President Trump’s rights because they strongly disapprove of him and his policies. That is a serious mistake, because these violations establish precedents that lie around like loaded guns capable of being aimed at other targets.”

This isn’t the first time that Dershowitz changed his tune when it came down to discussing the Mueller probe into Trump. Earlier in the month, the Harvard Law Professor offered his reaction to the reports that came out which explained that Special Counsel Robert Mueller was looking into President Trump for possible collusion. The reports also explained that Trump was NOT considered to be a criminal target in the investigation at the time.

Dershowitz has been a Democrat for years and openly supported Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, however he stated that Mueller would be “inventing a crime” if he were to charge President Trump in this case.

“There’s no such crime as ‘collusion’ in the federal statute,” he claimed.

If a liberal law professor feels that Mueller should be investigated, you know something is up. Allowing a pass for Mueller means that the precedent that is being set by our government is biased. Would a conservative be getting the same preferential treatment? Me thinks not.