Asking a purported ally for help (Ukraine) is different from asking our number one geopolitical foe for help.
Why? It's a common practice. The US and China have worked together on criminal cases that involved both countries.
Good points. I would just add that China is both a friend/pretend-friend and a foe/enemy. They can cooperate on things that win them favor with us and cost them nothing right while they oppose us on something else for no good reason and steal form us, arm and prepare for war against us. The relationship is way more complicated than seeing them as either a friend or a foe.
https://nypost.com/2019/10/04/sorry-dems-its-ok-to-ask-for-foreign-help-in-a-criminal-justice-investigation/Sorry, Dems: It’s OK to ask for foreign help in a criminal justice investigation
By Marc Thiessen October 4, 2019 | 7:58pm | Updated
Enlarge Image
President Donald Trump
President Donald Trump Getty Images
MORE ON:
DONALD TRUMP
'I’m not gonna respond to that': Biden snaps at reporter
AOC dubs Trump an anti-Semite for attacks on Schiff
Family pleads with Trump to return US diplomat's wife after fatal crash
Trump orders new national security adviser to cut staff: report
President Trump’s critics are now complaining that he asked the Australian prime minister to cooperate with the Justice Department’s investigation into the origins of the Mueller probe and that Attorney General William Barr has traveled overseas to ask foreign intelligence officials to cooperate with that investigation. The New York Times called it another example of “the president using high-level diplomacy to advance his personal political interests.”
No, it’s not. The president’s critics are conflating two different things: the investigation by Trump’s private lawyer, Rudolph Giuliani, into Hunter Biden’s business dealings, and the inquiry by US Attorney John Durham into the counterintelligence investigation directed at the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. The former is opposition research activity; the latter is a criminal justice matter.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking foreign heads of state or intelligence officials to cooperate with an official Justice Department investigation.
As George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley explains, “It is not uncommon for an attorney general, or even a president, to ask foreign leaders to assist with ongoing investigations. Such calls can shortcut bureaucratic red tape, particularly if the evidence is held, as in this case, by national security or justice officials.”
Americans support the Durham probe. For two years, they were told by Trump’s opponents that the president was “working on behalf of the Russians” and had committed “treasonous” acts that were of “a size and scope probably beyond Watergate.” Those were serious accusations, and Americans took them seriously. They waited for special counsel Robert Mueller to tell them whether the president had indeed betrayed the country.
Then Mueller issued his report, and they found out that none of it was true. They understandably wanted answers. How did it come to pass that our government was paralyzed for two years and spent tens of millions of their tax dollars, chasing a Trump-Russia collusion-conspiracy theory?
A Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll following the Mueller report’s release found that 53% of Americans said that “bias against President Trump in the FBI played a role in launching investigations against him,” and 62% supported appointing a special counsel to investigate the investigation of Trump.
SEE ALSO
Dems, media aim to squash Barr’s probe of Russia collusion hoax
Instead of a special counsel, Barr appointed Durham, a career prosecutor, to lead the investigation. Durham is a man of unimpeachable character who was appointed by Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the CIA’s terrorist-interrogation program. At the conclusion of that probe, Holder praised Durham for working “tirelessly.”
Now Barr has asked Durham to bring the same tireless professionalism to his investigation into the origins of the Mueller probe. But suddenly, all those who were so eager to find out what happened in 2016 when they thought Mueller would reveal that Trump conspired with the Russians have lost interest.
The same people who were outraged at Trump’s efforts to discredit the Mueller probe are now doing the exact same thing to the Durham probe.
Back then, Democrats insisted Trump stop criticizing the investigation and “let Mueller follow the facts wherever they lead.” Now they need to heed their own advice: Stop criticizing the investigation. Let Durham follow the facts wherever they lead. If there was no wrongdoing, then there is nothing to worry about.
To be sure, Trump bears some responsibility for helping Democrats lump together Durham’s official investigation with Giuliani’s partisan activities by mentioning them both on the call with Ukraine’s president. There should be a firewall between the two inquiries.
But keep in mind, it was the Democrats who told us there is nothing wrong or illegal with a presidential candidate hiring a private lawyer to conduct opposition research in a foreign country on their political opponents. After it emerged that the Clinton campaign and the DNC had paid Christopher Steele to dig up dirt in Russia on Trump, the Democrats’ defense was: That’s just opposition research. Everyone does it.
Durham is no partisan actor. Despite political pressure, he cleared the CIA of wrongdoing during the Obama administration. Like Mueller, he will follow the facts wherever they lead. Maybe that is why so many Democrats are up in arms.
