The evidence of malfeasance coming out of the Mueller investigation is stunning in both span and scope.

The whole affair is taking on the air of a Monty Python skit – specifically the one in “Quest for the Holy Grail” where the medieval crowd tries to determine if a townswoman is a witch – except this contemporary farce has real consequences (Mueller and his team remind me of the monks at the beginning of the scene marching in to a chant and whacking themselves in the head with boards).

The Democrats warn that the results of the Trump camp pushing back against having a millstone tied about their necks and tossed into the mill pond is a “constitutional crisis” – when in fact, it is the lawlessness of the Democrats and the Deep State that are bringing about the constitutional crisis – not Trump acting in self-defense.

With each passing day more is revealed about just how little regard for the Constitution the “scandal free” Obama administration actually maintained. Short of assassinations, what the Obamaites did is reminiscent of the actions of the East German secret police, the STASI.

It is pure, unabashed and unmitigated lawlessness.

When the corruption of the legal system reaches the levels it apparently did during the Obama regime, the result is a system so arbitrary and capricious and so simultaneously ubiquitous and powerful as to render it virtually indistinguishable from lawlessness.

In his book “By the People – Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission”, Charles Murray notes five major factors indicating our current system is the functional equivalent of lawlessness. These are certainly not all-inclusive but they do provide a framework for objective assessment of the reality of our contemporary legal environment. They also provide a bit of an “Ahh, Ha!” moment as well.

Murray argues that a legal system is functionally indistinguishable from lawlessness when it consists of:

1 – Criminal law sufficiently removed from mens rea (guilty intent or an awareness of guilt).
2 – Law that is sufficiently complex.
3 – Law that is sufficiently subjective.
4 – Law that is sufficiently discretionary.
5 – Law that permits the state to take private property without compensation or has the ability to force the transfer of private property to other private individuals.

I would add a sixth criterion:

6 – Law without a clear and credible basis of justification (like the appointment of a Special Counsel without a named crime as required by statute).

All of the above make a great deal of sense in explaining the frustration many feel with the strange outcomes of public legal events or the madness of seeking explanation for where certain entities derive their power.

One of the strengths of a system based on the rule of law is its consistency. That is to say that it is based on such common, solid and irrefutable principles and concepts as to be almost entirely predictable. Even though it is said that ignorance of the law is no excuse, in a system described by the six characteristics above, ignorance of the law is a common feature and the law is often utilized to punish through process. We live in an era of “show me the man and I’ll find you the crime”, locked into a never-ending episode of the Twilight Zone where the Clintonesque mantra of “it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is” rules the day.

Law is no longer law, it has metastasized into political policy enacted at the whim of the ruling class and the Deep State. It is used to create and then cement protections in place for members of the Deep State.

Can it be unwound?

I’m not so sure. We may have to let it burn and rebuild from the ashes.