The rot in the FBI goes way beyond a few rotten apples.
Burn of the Day
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
Almost half the people in the United States are like those in the photo above who celebrated James Dennehy’s defiance of the order to release the Epstein files.
Yesterday my wife and I got our taxes done and the tax account doing them turned out to be a Democrat. We’ve been going to him for years because he is competent and efficient. But I never knew his political leanings until he initiated the conversation by remarking on DOGE, the FBI, etc. He fully supported Dennehy’s disobedience as heroism in the face of tyranny. He compared Trump to Hitler. Now don’t get me wrong. He is no stupid nor ignorant man. He knew when Caesar was assassinated, the names of the men of the Second Triumvirate, what the Federalist Papers are, etc., all things that typical post-modern neo-pagans in the Democrat Part are blissfully unaware. But my point is this: the man is intelligent and well-read, however, he hates Trump with an undying passion and he represents almost half the country, including people like Dennehy’s supporters. This is NOT going to end well because these people see politicians like incompetent idiot Kamala Harris as good, and men like Donald Trump as intrinsically evil. BTW, I said and did nothing to let my tax accountant know my politics. I made the usual conciliatory noises because I wasn’t interested in an argument with the man who was saving me money.
One last thing not relevant to this post: I publicly thank the Lord God that we owe the government nothing this year. But yes, the government got more than its fair share in taxes, you can believe that, which is one reason because of which I voted for Trump.
Issue #1: The federal penal code and provisions in other codes prescribing criminal penalties are too voluminous and cover too many contingencies.
==
Issue #2: Federal prosecutors are not limited to cases referred to them by other agencies.
==
Issue #3: Case assignment systems are corrupt and manipulated. They require outside auditing and trusteeships.
==
Issue #4: Federal grand juries are a waste of space and do not screen charges.
==
Issue #5: Federal magistrates and judges have excessive discretion over setting bail.
==
Issue #6: In regard to the few cases which go to trial, prosecutors are not compelled to disclose plea offers made to the defense.
==
Issue #7: The sentencing formulae in re federal charges are improperly calibrated and do not resemble the median of the states for charges of similar severity.
==
Issue #8: Federal trial judges have discretion over sentencing. Any arguments in a sentencing formula which require a factual determination should be made by a panel of a judge and two assessors, with the assessors drawn at random from rolls of professions other than law.
==
Issue #9: There is no regularized system for indemnifying those detained in circumstances where (1) the case is not processed, (2) they are comprehensively acquitted, or (3) their eventual sentence is less than their time in pre-trial detention.
==
Issue #10: There is no regularized system for indemnifying those who served time but whose convictions were later vacated.
==
Issue #11: There is no regularized system for indemnifying subjects and defendants for privately incurred costs when (1) the case is not processed or (2) they are acquitted or (3) they are eventually convicted but of charges for which the sum of prescribed penalties is a fraction of those on the original bill. (See Col. Oliver North for an example. The initial 23 count indictment led to conviction on three lesser charges).
==
Issue #12: There is no regularized system for bringing charges and penalties contra abusive prosecutors and abusive judges.
Stealing a line from Elon Musk, I’m beginning to think that the FBI”s problem is not that there is a worm in the apple, but that the whole thing is a ball of worms.
==
If you canned the management level, canned the salaried line employees in the Washington office, and canned rank-and-file agents who had credible complaints against them, you might begin to clean the place up.
==
It might help if the FBI were replaced with a menu of successor agencies each with a more specialized book. Ditto the IRS.
==
It might also help if the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Treasury were replaced by a set of about 10 departments with more specific and internally consistent functions.
==
It might help if recruitment and promotion in federal employment were regulated by examinations of various sorts, that the examinations were timely, that the examinations functioned as actual screens, and that the only status considerations of note in determining eligibility for them were citizenship, a history of criminal convictions, and a history of disciplinary infractions in federal service.
==
It might help in addition if federal civilian employees could be readily terminated – three signatures on a letter of dismissal from your chain of command and you’re out. There could be a system of post-termination reviews wherein an employee could be indemnified and / or a referral made to an ombudsman for action against his supervisors and managers if it were determined that the subject was terminated for one of six or seven impermissible reasons. Limiting discretion over whom to hire is salutary. Limiting discretion over whom to discharge is a cancer.
==
Can we have a transparent system of compensation for federal employees (and public employees generally)? Can we limit the award of early retirement credits to uniformed protective service personnel and to construction workers?
One of Art Deco’s suggestions should be applied to the US NRC: “It might help if recruitment and promotion in federal employment were regulated by examinations of various sorts, that the examinations were timely, that the examinations functioned as actual screens, and that the only status considerations of note in determining eligibility for them were citizenship, a history of criminal convictions, and a history of disciplinary infractions in federal service.”
As a qualified nuclear training instructor since my submarine sailor days of the late 70s, I have prepared such exams on both PWRs and BWRs, and I would happily volunteer to do so again. No offense against Donald, but no more lawyers would be appointed as Commissioners (or to any technical position); everyone would need to be a qualified nuclear energy professional with appropriate credentials and demonstrate ability to pass a 100-question exam with a grade of 80% or higher. Sliderules and calculators both would be allowed during the exam, whichever the student preferred. (I did my Naval nuclear power school exams with a sliderule). 😉
Pro-life citizens are “Right-wing extremists” Janet Reno.
Abortionists are anti-life terrorists.
Citizens who reject our Founding Principles: The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution forfeit their citizenship…and they ought to be sent to the island of Guam. The weight of their evil will cause the island to tip over.
In all fairness, some may have been there to enjoy dancing on his grave.