Robert Mueller is desperate to take down somebody close to Trump.
He hasn’t been able to find anything linking Trump himself to collusion, so he is instead going after his allies for unrelated crimes.
And Mueller just did one shady thing that could easily doom one of Donald Trump’s closest allies.
Anybody who has followed Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia collusion during the 2016 election knows it’s a witch hunt.
President Trump has said as much himself.
It is clear that Mueller, along with his Democrat-stacked legal team care more about hurting President Trump than they do pursuing justice.
So when they began indicting members of President Trump’s administration, major red flags were raised.
If you watched any left-leaning news station, you would think that Mueller proved there was collusion with these indictments.
But the truth is that none of them have anything do with Donald Trump, either as a candidate, a president, or as a private citizen.
They are instead for alleged crimes that were committed long ago.
In former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s case, he was charged with bank fraud and money laundering.
Manafort was initially put on house arrest, but was later sent to jail after Mueller alleged he attempted to engage in “witness tampering.”
But despite that, Robert Mueller can claim Manafort being in jail proves that his year-long investigation accomplished something.
And with Mueller’s latest move, it is clear that just jailing Manafort isn’t enough, he is dead-set on convicting him.
With Manafort’s trial set to begin in September, the narrative set by the media will be that it has something to do with President Trump.
That is something that Mueller and his team almost certainly want the public to think.
But while they want the public to think it has something to do with Trump, they do not want the jury to think the same thing.
A legal maneuver that is rarely used, but relevant in certain cases is use of the “selective prosecution” argument.
Selective prosecution is an argument used by a defendant’s legal team that their client is being unfairly discriminated against, and that the case should be thrown out, even if their client is indeed guilty.
In Paul Manafort’s case, it seems that this argument could hold a lot of weight, for multiple reasons.
First, and most convincing, is that Manafort is closely connected to President Trump, who is somebody that Robert Mueller has been trying to get to for over a year.
It has been his life mission to prove that Trump, or somebody close to him colluded with Russia.
Assumedly the main goal is to prosecute, and remove President Trump, which is something almost any FBI agent would likely be happy to do.
But, even if that goal is impossible, it seems obvious that Mueller and his team made up of Democrats at least want to harm Trump in the eyes of the public.
His former campaign chairman being prosecuted by Robert Mueller, even for a crime unrelated to collusion, would result in the media having a field day of anti-Trump attacks.
Those reasons make a very clear case of potential selective prosecution.
Do you think Paul Manafort was unfairly targeted due to his close connection to President Trump?
Let us know your thoughts in the comments section below.
