This narrative is a revision of an adapted excerpt and Mike’s acerbic commentary offered at the Republican National Convention the day freedom greeted him, emerging from the unjust chains of prison. Within these remarks resonated a somber forewarning about the new era saturated with lawfare and the misuse of justice for exploitation. If their ruthless tactics can target me, the President, and various other allies, it means no one remains safe from their grasp. Unfortunate realities expose a pattern that can be perceived as bias: every individual who played a part in my unjust incarceration aligned themselves with a certain political party – the Majority leveraging power in the Department of Justice, biased judges, and a seemingly partisan jury.
In my case, partisan interests manufactured a cruel version of ‘lawfare’, resulting in a staggering legal bill, exceeding one million dollars, and sabotaging four crucial months of my life. This intense retribution was solely due to my unwavering respect for the Presidential office and the honorable duty to preserve executive privilege. This saga commenced with a subpoena I was served by an imposing Committee; a Committee that could only be understood as an unauthorized entity, haphazardly formed by the Speaker who wielded the power to reject two nominees of the House Minority Leader.
The Minority Leader, in light of this, extracted the remaining appointees granting the Speaker exclusive control to manipulate the Committee’s structure. Given my high-ranking position as a White House advisor, I was well-aware of the constitutional obligation to deny participation in the witch hunt masquerading as an inquiry. Executive privilege, conferred by the President, along with half a century of Department of Justice guidelines, robustly defended senior presidential advisors’ immunity to testimonial compromises.
Nevertheless, driven by unchecked partisanship, the Committee advanced with its misplaced priorities. The Committee pronounced, in an audacious attempt, me and another ally guilty, forwarding charges that if proved could result in up to two years of imprisonment and exorbitant fines. This unfortunate series of events culminated in an infuriating and media-frenzied arrest. The fine details of my arrest, leaked to media channels earlier on, deprived me of my rights to contact legal aid; my phone was also summarily seized.
Despite living in close vicinity to the Department, instead of exercising discreet procedures that are common protocols for non-violent, white-collar offenses, a show of force was put on at my expense. Simply being requested to surrender myself peacefully, as is standard in 99.9 percent of such cases, was apparently off table for me. The scare tactics they employed sent chills down my spine, a deliberate attempt on their part to intimidate, demonstrating the absence of any information I could conceivably ‘flip’.
Subsequently, the debilitating financial consequences were set in motion – my fight for justice incurred a cost well exceeding a million dollars. The underlying goal of this skewed form of lawfare was to drain my resources. High-profile law firms would not hesitate to consider the termination of any partner in their ranks if they dared represent me. Adding salt to the wound, authorities manipulated the rules associated with conflicts to minimize the pool of potential legal representation accessible to me.
Once inside the court, the Judge blatantly protected the Department from any obligation to justify why certain individuals sharing similar circumstances were spared from charges. The Judge differentiated a specific ruling thereby straightjacketing me by restricting my ability to finetune any viable defense. As my trial proceeded, the outcome was somewhat of a forgone conclusion. The makeup of the jury was predominantly comprised of individuals seemingly loyal to a particular party.
Any jurors who presented even the slightest inclination towards my stance were disqualified by the attorneys, and those harboring palpable reservations about my party were allowed to preside. A break later, a verdict of ‘guilty’ had been reached, in just over ten minutes. The apparently biased judge rejected pleas for a mistrial. The sentencing process was equally marred by bias. Presented arguments in favor of probation fell on deaf ears while the judge decided to wield the gavel sentencing me for a total of four months of imprisonment.
The Judge dismissed all appeals to delay the sentencing, despite my case being heavily entwined with profound constitutional concerns. Following this, I faced an appeal process which treated my case as insignificant. The reactions from the three-judge panel, which happened to be constituted solely of Democratic appointees, fueled skepticism. The court seemed converted into a factory generating these lawfare tactics.
Despite my exhausted resources, I persist in my appeal not for personal gain, but for a cause much bigger than myself. I have served my sentence, but I still stand my ground, fighting against the tides. Why this staunch stand, you may ask? The answer is simple: If I falter and accept defeat, then every senior White House advisor, regardless of their political allegiance, would be compelled to confront the dilemma I faced: uphold the Constitution and risk imprisonment, or succumb to hostile partisan authorities and betray the very principles this republic stands upon.
It is a troubling fact that I am the first senior White House official to be criminally charged and incarcerated for contempt of Congress. An unforgiving reality I still face, despite currently serving as the White House Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing. This portrayal of my struggle is not to elicit sympathy, but rather to bring attention to the slippery slope that partisan politics has brought upon the role and integrity of our justice system, which should be nothing short of fair, unbiased, and built on the bedrock of the Constitution.
The post Injustice and Bias in the Democrat-Controlled Judiciary appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
