Abraham Hamilton III

American Family Association’s half-assed in-house lawyer has a few strange observations about the Mueller probe. That lawyer is Abraham Hamilton III.

So who is this guy?

In the way of background Hamilton doesn’t seem to have ever practiced civil law. Rather, he was an assistant district attorney in Houston and then New Orleans for about eight years combined. He is a graduate of that Mecca of critical thinking, Oral Roberts University. His law degree is from third or fourth tier Loyola University New Orleans College of Law. I can find no record that he has ever appeared in a federal court.

According to AFA’s Chad Groening:

American Family Association (AFA) General Counsel and Public Policy Analyst Abraham Hamilton, III believes that the incoming Democratic House majority is going to use the report to try hurt the president politically.

In 2017 that “public policy analyst” claimed that James Comey was undoubtedly at the center of the Mueller investigation. That same year, Hamilton confused a congressional joint resolution with the enactment of law.

We start with a Trump tweet:

Before we get to Hamilton, Groening takes notice:

The funny thing about that tweet is that it could be viewed as a confession of sorts. The only way that they could write an 87 page rebuttal is to know what they are rebutting which means knowing what evidence Mueller has of Trump’s misdeeds. That requires knowing what those misdeeds are.

They could also write 87 pages attacking everyone associated with Mueller’s probe. None of that alters the evidence. Either way, Trump is signaling that his expectation is that Mueller’s report will be scathing. Prosecutors call that “consciousness of guilt.”

On to Mr. Hamilton:

American Family Association (AFA) General Counsel and Public Policy Analyst Abraham Hamilton, III believes that the incoming Democratic House majority is going to use the report to try hurt the president politically.

“They’re going [to use] Mueller documents as a baseline from which to continue to cascade innuendo and the imprimatur of misdeeds to continue to bill President Trump as a rogue puppet [for] Russia and all kinds of other nefarious allegations that won’t be based in fact,” Hamilton asserted. “But they haven’t needed them to be based in fact, previously, to continue this Donald Trump drumbeat of the resist Donald Trump effort – all in an effort to try to flip the Senate and win the presidency in 2020. That is their objective.”

Oral Roberts U must offer classes in predicting the future: How to optimize your crystal ball.

Hamilton is acting as if Trump is, and will be, a victim. What we know at this point is that Trump committed campaign finance violations with hush-money payments to two women he had sex with (which Trump lied about). I do not think that rises to the level necessary for impeachment. More ominous is this text within the special counsel’s sentencing memo regarding Cohen:

Cohen provided the [special counsel’s office] with useful information concerning certain discrete Russia-related matters core to its investigation that he obtained by virtue of his regular contact with [Trump Organization] executives during the campaign.

Everyone connected to the Trump campaign, it seems, has ties to Russia. Trump has financial ties to Russia that probably extend beyond the Moscow project that did not materialize. When no bank would loan money to Trump, son Eric said that funding was coming from Russia.

Adding to the uncertainty is the absolute fact that Trump is a pathological liar. Nothing — nothing — that comes from Trump’s mouth or Twitter feed is necessarily true. In fact, it is probably false and he is only getting more mendacious. As of October 30, Trump has made 6,420 false or misleading claims.

The bottom line is that Mr. Hamilton should keep his mouth shut. Nothing that he says or that AFA writes in their blog is going to change the evidence. It is what it is.

The nauseating conclusion

Hamilton maintains that this is not a pursuit of justice.

“It is a pursuit in political shenanigans that has been operated on the taxpayer’s dime at the highest echelons of our government,” Hamilton argued. “Quite frankly, it’s sickening to watch.”

Define “this.” Critical thinkers make a deliberate effort to separate what they know (based on evidence) from what they think. It is the difference between fact and opinion Hamilton is presenting his opinions as fact with no support whatsoever. It is not so much intellectual dishonesty as it is stupidity.

Related content:

By David Cary Hart

Retired CEO. Formerly a W.E. Deming-trained quality-management consultant. Now just a cranky Jewish queer. Gay cis. He/Him/His.