Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Wait, WHAT?!?

The circus at the border just went full Kafka.

You can’t make this stuff up. There is warfare-level violence right on our border between rival factions of cartels. Then the losing side comes to our border for asylum, states and county sheriffs are forced to deal with the security threats on their own, and the federal government continues to view this as an immigration issue, not a national defense problem that requires military protection of our border.

Late Monday into Tuesday, there was a significant increase in violence between rival Sinaloa cartel factions in Mexican towns Agua Prieta and Naco, both border towns with Arizona cities Douglas and Naco. Specifically, about nine people were killed in Agua Prieta and Naco, according to Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels. The sheriff told CR in an interview today that his sources told him on Tuesday “the plaza boss for Sinaloa in Agua Prieta got upset with one of the leaders of his team and wiped out the entire team, including the girlfriend of the lower boss.” Dannels told CR that the shootout happened just “half a block from the border” with Douglas, Arizona. Two adults and three children were taken to hospitals in Douglas and Tucson.

Sheriff Dannels confirmed to me the local media reports that four Sinaloa members requested asylum at the Douglas port of entry following the gun battle. While the status of those people is still unclear, just the fact that cartel members have the confidence that they have a shot at asylum is very disturbing.

“I just sit back and shake my head every day. It’s almost as if the politicians are desensitized to the border situation. They don’t realize that these cartels are bad, bad people and employ the same violence that the terrorists do. They just sit back and think all is well at our border. Where is the federal government in all of this? Sheriffs at the border have been a champion of this cause and the line [border] agents get it. But where’s the leadership from D.C.?”

The Uniparty “leadership” in DC has no interest in re-establishing the border, and no intention of allowing it.

The pattern in Arizona seems to be following that of Texas, in which the worst skirmishes are taking place at the border plazas that share space with the most populous America cities at the border. Those are the areas where the migrants are flowing. Thus, the immigration is inextricably linked to the cartel warfare and vying for control of the smuggling routes, which makes this a national security issue. If Trump designated the cartels as terrorists and directed military operations against them, it would completely transform this from asylum law to national security law.

And about three minutes later some liberal judge in Hawaii would issue an order preventing it, “pending further review,” which Congress would backstop. Meanwhile, bureaucrats at the DHS will covertly spring into action to thwart any such initiative from Trump. Something else to ponder:

President Donald Trump said Monday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will begin mass deportations of illegal immigrants starting next week.

The president indicated that ICE intends on attempting to remove the millions of illegal immigrants currently residing in the U.S. According to a Pew Research Center study released last week, 10.5 million “unauthorized” immigrants lived in the U.S. in 2017.

“Next week ICE will begin the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens who have illicitly found their way into the United States,” Trump tweeted late Monday night. “They will be removed as fast as they come in.”

The president has reportedly been planning to ramp up deportations for some time. Immigration officials who spoke to The Washington Post in May said former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) chief Kirstjen Nielsen may have been ousted partially because of her opposition to such a plan.

Nonetheless, multiple senior administration officials told The Daily Caller last month that the president was still planning on removing illegal immigrants from the U.S., and may even use the powers of the Insurrection Act to do so.

And about three minutes later some liberal judge in Hawaii would issue an order preventing it etc etc. And round and round the merry-go-round in Clown World Happy Fun Amusement Park will go, spinning ever on until its bearings seize up and We All. Fall. down.

Share

Gotta love it

I especially like the subhed here: “Barr’s bloodhounds are sniffing up Langley’s skirts.” His lips. God’s ears.

Last Wednesday the intelligence community launched its first attack on Attorney General William Barr’s investigation into its illegal acts and abuses of power during the 2016 election. In a New York Times article entitled “Justice Department Seeks to Question CIA in its Own Russia Investigation,” the IC makes clear its fear of the results of Barr’s investigation of their spy operation on candidate Trump in 2016 that continued through his early presidency.

John Durham, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut, is running the investigation under Barr’s direction. From the Times report, we can easily deduce the fact that those who ran the spy op — including CIA Director Gina Haspel — are running scared from the Durham investigation.

The reason the CIA’s “analytical work” is being subjected to a federal prosecutor’s scrutiny is that there is a lot of evidence of criminal conduct by the CIA and FBI. That’s one of the fundamental differences between the Barr/Durham investigation and the Mueller investigation into the imaginary conspiracy between candidate Trump and his campaign and the Russians.

Mueller & Co. had no evidence that a crime had been committed before their investigation began. (Or after, for that matter.) The Mueller investigation was, as I’ve noted elsewhere, consistent with the method used by Stalin’s secret police chief Lavrenti Beria: show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.

In the Barr/Durham investigation, it’s pretty damned clear that in their abuse of power under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act the FBI, and possibly the CIA, made false statements to the FISA court, under oath, to justify surveillance warrants on Carter Page and others. Those false statements — sworn affidavits in support of the FISA warrants — are, at least, violations of 18 U.S. Code Section 1001 which bars such false statements. Those are real crimes, not imaginary ones. Whatever other crimes are discovered while investigating them will come out as well.

Yet another one you folks are going to want to savor every last word of.

Share

Unforced errors

He chose…poorly.

House GOP leadership is now convinced FBI Director Christopher Wray is not cooperating with Bill Barr and John Durham’s investigation into the origins of Spygate.

According to investigative reporter Paul Sperry, GOP Reps believe Wray is part of the cover-up of Spygate after burying documents and refusing to make people available for interviews.
 
SPERRY: House GOP leadership has soured on Comey replacement Wray. They r now convinced Wray’s not part of the FBI cleanup & not cooperating w AG Barr & is in fact part of the cover-up of #SpyGate scandal after burying documents & refusing to make people available for interview

Swamp creature FBI Director Wray and FBI brass have yet to condemn the Obama administration spying on the opposition party during the 2016 election.

Last month Wray told the Senate Appropriations Committee that Bill Barr’s use of the word “spying” to describe the spying on the Trump campaign and administration was “not the term I would use.

Wray also told the committee he has no evidence the Obama administration was spying on Trump.

President Trump has had enough.

I should fucking well hope so. I should also hope he’s finally learned the long-overdue lesson about what appointing Obama stay-behinds and Deep State crawly things to high administration positions will get him. He’s done way too much of that already, and it’s never failed yet to bite him in the ass. As Bill puts it:

And right here is a perfect example of Trump’s oft-repeated error of shooting himself in the foot when it comes to his appointments.

FBI Director Wray was appointed to the position by President Donald Trump.

Worse, he did so after his terrible experience with FBI Director Comey, which should have led him to take extra care in choosing with whom to replace Comey. PB had it nailed early on.  I didn’t post much on it, because I mistakenly assumed Trump knew what he was doing with the appointment. But he didn’t. And so here we are.

Now, I know the Local Fan Club will tell me how Donald had no choice, or there was no way to know, or any of a host of excuses for this, but the fact remains: Wray had a track record, it was indicative, and it was ignored. And so now we have Trump in the weird position of having appointed Wray to a ten year position which was confirmed by Congress, being faced with the prospect of firing his own guy (who will be cheered on as a hero of the Resistance by all the usual suspects, and who will claim that any such firing would be obstruction of justice worthy of immediate impeachment).

Now, I don’t necessarily fear impeachment, but I think it is possible to be a bit too blithe about it. Once something like that is set in train, nobody really knows how it might turn out, and I’m not thrilled about taking too many chances with it.

I do understand that the pool of actual conservatives able and willing to run a large department like the FBI is a bit thin on the ground, but there are hazards to going back to the same corrupt Deep State well over and over again.

There certainly are. You made much of your intention to “hire the best people” during your campaign, Mr President. These Swamp shitweasels are NOT them. And, with all due respect, allowing them to continue festering in place is NOT what the American people hired you to do.

Share

Unwon wars, filled graves

WRSA gives us a steer to an oldie but still-relevant goodie from Codevilla explaining why we no longer win wars, and never will again.

The shape of U.S. foreign policy for most of the 20th century and into our own time was set by Progressive Republican statesmen, Elihu Root and Henry L. Stimson. They believed that military action should be pursued, if at all, for international peace and order, not to advance specifically American interests. Their colleagues—Andrew Carnegie, Nicholas Murray Butler, and David Starr Jordan (Herbert Hoover’s mentor)—were outright pacifists. Democrats Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Cordell Hull (FDR’s secretary of state for almost 12 years, longer than any American has ever served in that office), and their successors, Dean Acheson and Harry Truman, turned the idea of international order into realities: the League of Nations, United Nations, and subsequent permanent alliances embodying “collective security.” That ruling Progressive consensus has determined America’s military objectives ever since, and largely deprived America of peace.

By 1950, polite society—which excluded the American people’s vast majority—was well-nigh unanimous that victory and peace, as well as the very notion of an overriding, peculiarly American national interest, were concepts that belonged to the age of the dinosaurs. Military officers however were mostly dinosaurs, the most prominent of whom was General of the Army Douglas MacArthur. His conquest of the western Pacific in World War II, followed by the 1950 masterstroke that reversed military defeat in Korea, had captivated American opinion. By firing MacArthur in April 1951, President Truman began to enforce polite society’s wisdom on the military. By the end of the Vietnam war some 20 years later, that wisdom about war and peace conquered the Democratic Party wholly, spread to much of the Republican Party, and to the senior U.S. officer corps, too. Hence, since 1951, America’s renowned generals—Matthew Ridgway, William Westmoreland, Colin Powell, and David Petraeus—have brought only stalemate, defeat, waste, and more war, while drawing down the nation’s reservoir of respect.

As you might expect, our slow slide from WW2 victory into hapless, floundering futility was instigated by a dithering Democrat president more concerned with political appearances than winning wars; he tied the hands of a competent general, refused to clarify his wartime goals when directly asked, then saw to it that the general was smeared as an over-ambitious dictator-in-waiting with political ambitions of his own—an unjust tarring, helped along by a partisan mainstream media, that has stained his reputation to this very day.

Washington’s “responsible officials,” up to and including Truman, refused to take responsibility for ordering any course of action whatever. Brands gives the fuller account. MacArthur, the option of victory having been denied, asked, “Is the present objective of United States political policy to maintain a military position in Korea—indefinitely, for a limited time, or to minimize losses by evacuation as soon as it can be accomplished?” Brands writes, “Dean Acheson read MacArthur’s letter with astonishment,” saying afterwards that MacArthur was “incurably recalcitrant and basically disloyal to the purposes of his commander in chief.” But what were these purposes, and how did they translate into how and why American draftees were dying?

Truman, on advice of his counselors, had resisted bipartisan calls for a declaration of war. Such a request would have forced his administration to define and submit its objectives to a vote by both Houses of Congress. But by creating the fiction that the war was by, of, and for the United Nations, Truman et al. believed they were gaining flexibility, which is of great strategic value—but only to leaders who know what they’re doing. But Truman and his advisors did not, so their flexibility and disunity acted like a sail in the winds of events.

Truman, after convening the National Security Council, also chose not to answer MacArthur’s request for orders. “This present telegram is not to be taken in any sense as a directive. Its purpose is to give you something of what is in our minds.” U.S. troops’ successful resistance would demonstrate that aggression does not pay and would encourage others to believe in America’s pledges of assistance. “We recognize, of course, that continued resistance might not be militarily possible with the limited forces with which you are being called upon to meet large Chinese armies…if we must withdraw from Korea, it [must] be clear to the world that that course is forced upon us by military necessity.” Translated from bureaucratese, the message was: hold on with the forces and restrictions you’ve got, regardless of how many American lives it costs.

And cost it did. Some three fourths of the Americans killed in Korea died after the U.S. government stopped trying to win the war. Since Truman’s decision taught the world that no-win wars were now the American ruling class’s modus operandi, the cost of three later generations’ wars, including the incalculable toll of domestic decay resulting from Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, should also be added in.

And so Truman, despite such scurrilous waffling and weaseling, goes down in history as “Give ’em hell Harry”—a tough, flinty-eyed president and CinC, who brooked no nonsense when it came to defending the Constitution and the nation—while MacArthur is remembered as an egotistical megalomaniac—a blustering, incompetent would-be despot whose reach, thankfully, far exceeded his grasp. Truman’s record, now pretty much buried for all practical purposes, speaks for itself; let MacArthur’s own parting words speak for him:

MacArthur returned from Korea to a conquering hero’s reception: ticker-tape parades and a speech to a joint session of Congress. The pledge he made and kept to “just fade away” belied the contention that he had tried to usurp the Constitution, and bolstered the two warnings he left his fellow citizens. First, “In war, there is no substitute for victory.” Forgetting something so very basic had been no mere mistake, but a symptom of moral decay. Hence his other warning: “History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.”

And we haven’t won a war since—not because we can’t, but because we won’t. And until and unless that changes—stipulating, of course, that we should always be very damned careful and conscientious about doing so in the first place—we damned well need to make sure we don’t get into any more of them.

Share

Dogpiling on

Okay, I think I’m definitely starting to feel a wee bit sorry that poor Conservative Inc sad sack, David French.

Wait, no I’m not.

I quibble only on a semantic point. French should not be fired, as that term is commonly understood. He should never have been hired in the first place.

To understand why is to ask, “what the hell is his job anyway?”

Conservative, Inc. tends to be overwrought in its self-importance. The furrowed brows, the just-so bifocals, the stuttering interruptions on CNN panels where they are paid to play conservative minstrels… a vote for Trump was in part a vote to shut them up.

Just like liberals, they think themselves better because of their superior intentions; except, unlike their counterparts, they dare to cloak their posturing in treacly bible camp religiosity.

The most annoying of them – and French definitely is in that category – act like the only reason they don’t walk on water is their concern for the feelings of the water.

Mostly, NeverTrump pundits have been useful idiots to the belching Washington establishment.

They were crucial to fundraising under the Conservative, Inc. formula: scare old ladies, demand money by making messianic claims, and by all means lose. That way they could ask for money again the next week.

To his credit, no element of Trump’s brand was constructed upon a moral pose, which only makes people uncomfortable anyway. Ask Mitt. Trump the sinner was actually more righteous than the posers because he confessed to sometimes being a cad, which sounds like a contradiction but is not.

In the end, David French got high on his own supply. He snorted the neat rows of “a guy like you should be president” white powder Bill Kristol cut on the mirror in front of him.

Nope, I am definitely NOT feeling sorry for French, nor any of the rest of that smarmy, rotten-to-the-core crew. To hell with them all.

Share

How you steal an election get a civil war

It didn’t need to be true. It just needed to work.

After the initial results of the election in November surprised the Clinton campaign, the Russia collusion hoax became the means by which Democrats would attempt to nullify votes by flipping the Electoral College electors. The effort climaxed in the days between December 9 and December 17, 2016. America came within a hair’s breadth of the 2016 presidential election being overturned through a collaboration of the Clinton campaign, the media, and like-minded public officials.

The CIA made the first move. On December 9, the CIA leaked an accusation that Russia “interfered in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency.” On December 12, 2016, just one week before the electors were to cast the final votes for president, a group of mostly Clinton-supporting electors sent a letter in which they demanded a “briefing” from the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. The letter appears to have been informed by the notorious Steele dossier commissioned by the Clinton campaign and other partisan misinformation. The letter cited an account of Roger Stone’s communication with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange (which was false) and asserted that Stone knew about the hacked emails before they were released (which was also false).

The letter also cited unspecified contact between unspecified Trump aides and those associated with the alleged Russian election interference. This likely is a reference to the Steele allegation that Cohen traveled to Prague to pay-off Russian hackers (which was also false). Or it may have been a reference to the Steele dossier’s claim that former campaign manager Paul Manafort coordinated communication between the Russian government and the Trump campaign (also false). The letter further claimed that Carter Page met with the Putin aide in charge of the Russian intelligence on the U.S. election. That appears to refer to a meeting between Carter Page and Igor Divyekin (which didn’t happen).

Clearly somebody dripped Steele’s poison into the ears of compliant electors to build peer pressure against the Trump electors.

But somebody blinked. On December 16, 2016, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a press release acknowledging the request to brief the electors but declining the invitation to conduct it. The communique made an oblique reference to the classified nature of the underlying information. But this classification could have been lifted by presidential decree in a matter of minutes.

The real reason the electors were not so briefed might have been that insiders had already spotted critical flaws in Steele’s allegations. For example, an astute State Department official, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec, tipped-off the FBI that Steele incorrectly claimed the payments for the Russian interference were made through the Russian Consulate in Miami (a consulate that does not exist). Also, the FBI travelled to Prague in October of 2016 to run-down a promising arrest of a Russian hacker. It’s likely that they also used the trip to look into reports by Steele that Michael Cohen traveled to Prague months earlier to pay Russian hackers.

We now know that the Prague hacker had nothing to do with the 2016 election and that Cohen did not travel to Prague in 2016. Both Kavalec and senior Justice Department attorney Bruce Ohrwarned the FBI that Steele had transparently political motives. Ohr also knew from his own Russian source that the claim that Manafort coordinated with the Russians was “preposterous.” The briefing the electors would have received was just a regurgitation of the lies commissioned by the Clinton campaign.

Viewed in the context of the 2016 election, the present-day effort to end the Electoral College is not about amending the Constitution but about softening-up the playing field for the next post-election campaign to flip electors. By running up vote totals in states like California, Democrats can claim a moral victory in the popular vote to justify an attack on the Electoral College’s constitutional result. In this way, padded vote totals in blue states can be combined with “troubling intelligence” reports by insiders in the deep state to make the next play to overturn an “unacceptable” election result.

They came one hell of a lot closer to pulling it off than most people realize. Don’t you think for one second that their failure this time around means these slimewads won’t dare to try again, either. The only real hope of preventing the next attempt—and the next, and the next, and the next—is to see to it that the perps go to prison and don’t come out any way other than feet-first, recumbent, and at room-temperature.

Share

COLLUSION!!!

It’s baaaack.

In the latest media-manufactured crisis du jour, the president now stands falsely accused of inviting foreign interference into our elections.

During an Oval Office interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on Thursday, President Trump said there “isn’t anything wrong” with listening to information offered up by a foreigner about a candidate’s political opponent.

“It’s not an interference, they have information. I think I’d take it,” he told Stephanapolous when asked whether it’s appropriate to accept opposition research from someone in another country. “If I thought there was something wrong, maybe I’d take it to the FBI, if I thought there was something wrong.”

The rather innocuous comments unleashed the predictable and tiresome widespread outrage.

Kelly mentions odious lizard-woman Ellen Weintraub, who uncorked a blast of self-righteousness at Trump:

“Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election,” her statement begins. “This is not a novel concept. Electoral intervention from foreign governments has been considered unacceptable since the beginnings of our nation. Our Founding Fathers sounds the alarm about ‘foreign Interference, Intrigue, and Influence.’”

Back to Kelly for a small problem Weintraub would probably rather you not know about.

Weintraub’s agency continues to sit on a complaint filed 20 months ago by the D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center detailing how both committees failed to report payments to Fusion GPS, only disclosing nearly $13 million in payments to Perkins Coie during the 2016 election cycle. The funds were vaguely described as “legal services” on reporting documents.

But the FEC still hasn’t taken action on the complaint—and there might be a reason why. Before joining the FEC, Weintraub herself was an attorney at Perkins Coie, serving as “Of Counsel to the Political Law Group” according to her FEC bio.

Oooops. No conflict of interest there, no sirree. No further mention, either, of the many other Democrat-Socialists, going all the way back to Ted “Waitress Sandwich” Kennedy, who have either actively solicited or cheerfully accepted foreign offers of election-jiggering, and…HEY, LOOK, OVER THERE! A SQUIRREL!!

For his part Limbaugh asserts that, far from this being an unforced error or gaffe on Trump’s part as some have claimed, he has actually master-trolled his numbskull enemies once again:

And here we go again, folks. Here we go again. Donald Trump sets ’em up, they haven’t figured it out yet. I’m kind of reluctant to explain it here ’cause I don’t want ’em to figure it out, but I gotta explain it so that you get it. Everybody calm down here.

But it’s fascinating to watch this ’cause it – (interruption) Why do I call it a setup? Well, the reason I call it a setup is because the Democrats have actually done it! Trump is forcing these people to go on the record steadfast opposition to this while Barr and Durham are conducting an operation to find out what kind of illegal activity there was between the investigators and Russia and other foreign actors in order to sabotage the Trump campaign and then the Trump presidency.

So Trump is forcing all these people to go public here with their outrage over just thinking about doing it, saying it’s illegal, it’s unpresidential, it’s un-American, and the day is gonna come where everybody’s gonna know that the Democrats did it, that Hillary Clinton did it. And it’s gonna be very difficult for these clowns having conniption fits today to walk it all back, once Barr and Durham make their findings clear.

That’s why I think part of this is a set — Trump is not stupid. Don’t care what anybody thinks, he’s not stupid. And Stephanopoulos did not sandbag him. Stephanopoulos did not set him up, did not catch him in a moment of when his guard was down, or he was not prepared.

Well and good, I guess, but Rush is assuming that these people possess sense of shame enough to preclude them from hypocritically denouncing Trump for something they’re guilty of themselves. Ain’t no evidence to support such an assumption, not a bit of it. Quite the opposite, in fact.

There’s another angle to all this, though, that I haven’t seen mentioned yet: Trump’s flat statement that “…you go and talk honestly to congressmen, they all do it, they always have. And that’s the way it is.” People seem to be overlooking it, but I think it’s more important than some might think. What Trump did there is what he’s been doing all along: he made a simple statement reaffirming a home truth, with an offhand bluntness completely horrifying to the Business As Usual crowd, that all Normal Americans already know. It’s exactly the sort of thing that attracted people who have been longing for many years to hear such truths spoken right out loud to Trump; as such, it won’t damage their bond with him at all, but will only solidify it.

A righteous troll? Who knows. A damaging error, one that will leach support from Trump in 2020? Not on your life. Beat that dead horse as hard as they like, it will gain the Democrat-Socialists and their Enemedia rumpswabs nothing. And in the end, THAT’S the thing they still just don’t get.

Share

“Why Are the Western Middle Classes So Angry?”

Because reasons.

What is going on with the unending Brexit drama, the aftershocks of Donald Trump’s election and the “yellow vests” protests in France? What drives the growing estrangement of southern and eastern Europe from the European Union establishment? What fuels the anti-EU themes of recent European elections and the stunning recent Australian re-election of conservatives?

Put simply, the middle classes are revolting against Western managerial elites. The latter group includes professional politicians, entrenched bureaucrats, condescending academics, corporate phonies and propagandistic journalists.

Elites masked their hypocrisy by virtue-signaling their disdain for the supposedly xenophobic, racist or nativist middle classes. Yet the non-elite have experienced firsthand the impact on social programs, schools and safety from sudden, massive and often illegal immigration from Latin America, the Middle East, Africa and Asia into their communities.

As for trade, few still believe in “free” trade when it remains so unfair. Why didn’t elites extend to China their same tough-love lectures about global warming, or about breaking the rules of trade, copyrights and patents?

The middle classes became nauseated by the constant elite trashing of their culture, history and traditions, including the tearing down of statues, the Trotskyizing of past heroes, the renaming of public buildings and streets, and, for some, the tired and empty whining about “white privilege.”

If Western nations were really so bad, and so flawed at their founding, why were millions of non-Westerners risking their lives to reach Western soil?

How was it that elites themselves had made so much money, had gained so much influence, and had enjoyed such material bounty and leisure from such a supposedly toxic system—benefits that they were unwilling to give up despite their tired moralizing about selfishness and privilege?

It’s long past time for folks to realize that it’s better to be pissed off than pissed on. And with the advent of Trump the Disrupter and his peeling back the lid on the can of greasy grubworms that have misruled us for lo, these many years, it’s finally beginning to happen. But if one wants to seriously delve into the reasons why anger has boosted Real Americans into apoplectic orbit, look no further than the outrageous hypocrisy of double-dealing blowflies like Adam Schitt.

Democratic California Rep. Adam Schiff appears to have reversed his position on the ethics of using “stolen” information against political foes.

“It’s not OK to use materials they stole from your opponent, or to make it part of your campaign strategy,” Schiff tweeted on Sunday.

Schiff was responding to a Sunday morning interview during which Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani argued that, while he would have advised against it, “There’s nothing wrong with taking information from Russians.”

But when “the Russians” contacted Schiff in 2017, offering him information that they promised would prove compromising to President Donald Trump, he had a very different reaction.

Two Russian comedians, known as Vocan and Lexus, placed a prank call to Schiff pretending to be Andriy Parubiy, the chairman of the Ukrainian Parliament. They claimed to have recordings proving that Russian President Vladimir Putin, in an effort to force Trump to relax sanctions, was blackmailing the president with photographs of him and a model named Olga Buzova.

Schiff responded by asking, “What’s the nature of the kompromat?”

After being told that there were naked photos of Trump and the Russian model, Schiff instructed members of his staff to follow up — which they did, attempting to set up a meeting with Parubiy in order to move forward.

Because of course they did. After all, it’s diff’runt when Democrat-Socialists do it. Right, Schiff-for-brains?

Vocan and Lexus provided a copy of that email to The Daily Mail, at which point Schiff and his staffers claimed that they had known it was a hoax all along.

Uh huh. SURE you did, you suppurating pustule.

Y’know, I fret now and then over the horror that Civil War v2.0 will indubitably bring down on us. Then I read about some outlandish shit like the above, and suddenly a small, dark part of me just can’t wait for the ball to drop—when it will become open season, no bag limit on oxygen thieves like Schitt and his loathsome ilk.

New category, in honor of Schitt and pals: Kill ’em all, let God sort ’em out.

Share

School daze

A forgotten past will bury the ignorant.

Many of us do not know that senators were originally chosen by the state legislatures—and this change was made not that long ago. In 1913, around the beginning of the Progressive Era, the 17th Amendment to the Constitution tossed aside this critical feature of the Framers’ design, replacing it with the direct election of senators we have today.

The Founders would certainly have opposed the 17th Amendment because they would have understood that it would throw the system they gave us completely out of balance, as it, in fact, has done. It was perhaps the single change that would do the most to undo what the Founders had accomplished by means of the Constitution.

Hrrmmm; “…around the beginning of the Progressive Era,” you say? Must be a coincidence.

The Senate was once a barrier to the passage of federal laws infringing on the powers reserved to state governments, but the Senate has abandoned that responsibility under the incentives of the new system of election. Because the state governments no longer have a powerful standing body representing their interests within the federal government, the power of the federal government has rapidly grown at the expense of the states. State governments increasingly are relegated to functioning as administrative units of today’s gargantuan central government.

The Founders would say we no longer have a federal system, that the 17th Amendment in effect overthrew the 10th Amendment. Here is the 10th: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The 10th has become a dead letter. Instead of retaining many of their powers and responsibilities as the Framers intended, the states are more and more entangled in administering federal programs and in carrying out federal mandates. These mandates are often not even funded by the federal government; the costs of unfunded mandates fall on the states.

The many new departments of the federal government that have accumulated in Washington, D.C. during the Progressive Era in which you and I now live, such as Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, and the Department of Education, involve themselves in, and even direct, functions the Framers left to the states.

Direct election of U.S. senators undermined this critically important protection of liberty. The erosion of Americans’ individual liberty that has resulted is no doubt the most important consequence of the change. Many of our troubles today are self-inflicted, the result of us forgetting how the Founders’ system was designed to work and the unwise changes we have made because of our forgetting.

This ignorance is no more coincidental than the insidious 17th; it was painstakingly wrought according to a plan spelled out by a whole Progressivist pantheon of treacherous villains like Alinsky, Gramsci, and Marcuse, among many others. The doom it foreshadows is a feature, not a bug. And don’t think for a minute they’re done yet, either.

Tragically, because of our forgetting, we may be on the verge of making another mistake like the one Americans made in 1913. There is a powerful movement afoot to get rid of the Electoral College, an essential constitutional safeguard of American liberty.

As you know, each state is allotted as many electoral votes as it has senators and members of the House of Representatives. To become president of the United States, one must win election state by state. Eliminating the Electoral College and electing the president by direct vote, as the progressives are determined to do, would transform the office. Its occupant would in effect become the president of the Big Cities of America, and the last vestiges of autonomy guaranteed to the individual states by the Constitution’s electoral system would be swept away.

One more time: NOT by accident, NOT coincidence. Doubt that? Don’t.

The near sole purpose of present-day academia is indoctrination. This is a fairly bold thesis, but the evidence is in its favor.

A “bold thesis”? Really? It’s nothing more nor less than established, incontrovertible fact, seems to me, but YMMV. Onwards.

The increasingly progressive leftist agenda is sweeping through academia and conservatives are passively watching it happen.

The main indoctrination stories you hear are those of radical professors on college campuses, outlandish majors created to forward social justice movements, and, on occasion, a political outburst by a high school teacher.

Although these issues need addressing, by far the biggest – and the one that should scare everyone the most – is the silent indoctrination.

Indoctrination is no longer dependent upon the political beliefs of teachers. We are now past that. Course material is blatant political propaganda. Not just the course material for gender studies and similar. The core curricula of grade school through college.

I completed my first two years of high school at Oxbridge Academy, a private school in south Florida. My last two years at were at Laurel Springs, an online private school. This gave me a whole new perspective on bias in academia.

Although I had teachers and access to tutors, I seldom interacted with either. I thought removing interaction with an individual would reduce if not eradicate bias.

I was very, very wrong.

The removal of an instructor allowed me to see just how biased course materials are. And the discussion boards with fellow students showed me just how unaware of this others were. Unless you are involved with politics to a degree, it can be easy to miss politically motivated material.

The lack of political education in combination with the demand that students trust their textbooks as reliable sources allows the left to silently indoctrinate students.

She includes some truly appalling examples from actual textbooks that ought to be deeply shocking—but aren’t. Not anymore. Which is in itself a big problem. Bottom line:

Conservatives once laughed at radical campus politics, imagining that upon impact with the “real world,” blue-haired social justice warrior activists would have to grow up and confront the hard realities of the capitalist marketplace. Instead, what’s becoming increasingly clear is that academic leftism is metastasizing off-campus, spreading into some of the world’s largest corporations as well as institutions of culture, with graduated millennial employees as its carriers.

While the right wrestles with how to deal with big technology companies’ hostility to conservative voices on their platforms, the source of that enmity goes mostly unremarked upon: Google’s highly credentialed workforce has roughly the personal politics of a faculty lounge. Regrettably, universities don’t live up to the Las Vegas adage–what begins on campus definitely does not stay there. It spills over into every aspect of our broader culture, from complaints about actors not precisely matching the intersectionality profile of the characters they portray, to the leftward tilt of America’s corporations.

Say it with me: NOT coincidence. NOT by accident. They’re working a plan…and the plan is working.

Share

Hey, TeeWee, leave them kids alone!

All in all, it’s just another brick in Lefty’s wall.

Just because adult sitcoms like Modern Family imply that one of the men in a same-sex relationship merely replaces the mother role in the public mind, that does not make it true. In fact, it is an idea that manages to be insulting to both women and homosexual men. Throughout the years of the sitcom, the audience was supposed to pretend that a real daughter being raised by two men would never quietly pine for the absent mother. The audience was supposed to ignore a primal wound. Children know that a man, no matter how nurturing, is not a mother. And since when did women allow their irreplaceable role to be so dismissed and caricatured?

I would add that children know that a woman, no matter how “masculine,” is not a father. But since the father role has already been pummeled by Western society in recent decades, the removal of the father image in lesbian “marriage” causes few to bat an eye.

And please spare me the trope about “infertile couples can’t be a mom and dad, and they’re still married.” A man and woman who cannot have children are still the image of “mom” and “dad” in the minds of little children. Two men or two women can never be so.

There are solutions to the relentless LGBT push on young children. PBS, public schools, and public libraries are taxpayer-funded. Demand that taxpayer money not go to such efforts, and stand your ground when the inevitable slings and arrows fly. The media will not have your back. Conservativism, Inc. will definitely not have your back. And the Left already hates you with a hot passion. Speak and fight for your children’s right to innocence and healthy development anyway.

The many forces arrayed against your efforts — corporate, social, and political — will vilify you as a bigot and a homophobe. So what? They label so many who disagree with them that Americans are numb to it at this point.

True, most likely, and a big part of the problem. Too many of us are numb, when what we really ought to be is goddamn pissed off. Real damage is being done to our kids, intentionally and for malign purposes. And lest any of you folks think that righteous anger over that is rooted mainly in simple bigotry or a desire to be cruel to LGBTQWERTY types:

We need to speak clearly and plainly. Romantic attraction between adults of the same sex is a purely erotic concept, not an ontological one (i.e., not rooted in a child’s being). Two men pretending to be married on a kids’ show, books about two mommies in public school kindergarten classrooms, and the general LGBT push on young children are controversial not because of “religious differences” or “intolerance.” All of this is controversial because it is wrong to push adult sexual agendas on children, period.

Annnnd bingo. Kinda difficult to comprehend how anyone could argue with that perfectly reasonable assertion, ain’t it?

But the sexualization of children—one of the most crucial core tenets of Marxist ideology right from the start, explicitly spelled out as such in The Communist Manifesto—is one of the more grotesque fronts in the Left’s ongoing war on the traditional family and the values that once upheld it, nothing more nor less. The sudden ubiquity of such sick tropes all over children’s programming is no accident. One only has to observe the near-total success of the Left’s campaign to promote and normalize miscegenation to be concerned about where this latest onslaught might end up going.

Share

Congressional impeachment counsel

Slippery, slimy, conniving, and devious.

If you (somewhat selectively) read the carefully crafted lines of Mueller’s report, he said he would not reach a determination on obstruction. And he did not reach one. Therefore, the reasoning goes, it cannot be said that the OLC guidance was determinative: Since Mueller technically did not make a recommendation one way or the other, the OLC guidance was never actually triggered.

But if that’s the case, then the obvious question — to go back to where we started — is: Why mention the OLC guidance at all?

Answer: Because Mueller’s brief speech on Wednesday was not a matter of reading the lines of his report; it was about reading between the lines.

There is only one rational explanation for this performance. Mueller wants Congress and the public to presume that if it were not for the OLC guidance, it is very likely that he would have charged the president with obstruction — maybe not an absolute certainty, but nearly so.

And then, just in case we were too dense to understand the nods and winks, Mueller took pains to emphasize that, in our constitutional system, it is up to Congress, not federal prosecutors, to address alleged misconduct by a sitting president.

Simple as 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. Likely felony obstruction, plus inability of prosecutors to indict, plus duty of Congress to deal with presidential criminality, equals: Impeachment is the only remedy, unless congressional Democrats are saying that Donald Trump is above the law. (Good luck, Speaker Pelosi, trying to pipe down your AOC wing, to say nothing of the 2020 primary contestants, after that one.)

This should not be a surprise.

It most certainly should not. We know what they are—megalomaniacal Democrat-Socialist liars who will never concede any election they lose; Deep State schemers determined to preserve their excessive power and privilege; Enemedia partisans with their own perks to safeguard; Vichy GOPers in barely-clandestine collusion with all of the above—and we know what they do.

If the special counsel had told Barr that the OLC guidance was his rationale for not deciding, Barr would likely have told him, “Don’t worry about the OLC guidance, that’s not your job. The OLC guidance only says we can’t return an indictment now. We still need to know whether there is a prosecutable case. Just make a recommendation on that, one way or the other.”

If that had happened, Mueller would have been cornered. If he recommended in favor of indictment, he would have ended up in the confrontation with Barr over obstruction law that he was trying to avoid. If he recommended against an indictment, he would have undermined the impeachment effort.

So he punted. And it worked.

Well, that remains to be seen. The weasel Mueller’s hamfisted attempt last week at prodding them into action notwithstanding, Pelosi & Pals are still securely perched on the horns of a YUUUGE dilemna: if recent polling is accurate, impeaching Trump is overwhelmingly unpopular, tantamount to political suicide. Which makes watching as they all wriggle and squirm trying to find themselves a more comfortable seat a sheer delight.

Share

Step by step, inch by inch

The B’arr creeps up on ’em.

“These counter-intelligence activities that were directed at the Trump Campaign were not done in the normal course and not through the normal procedures as a far as I can tell,” Barr told CBS News’ legal analyst Jan Crawford.

Sadly, it may be a lot more “normal” than any of us would like to think.

Barr added that the questionable activities were “undertaken by a small group at the top,” not rank-and-file FBI agents.

This would refer to former FBI Director James Comey and his high-level deputies including Andrew McCabe, James Baker, Lisa Page, and Peter Strzok.

A fine list for starters, but let’s not blithely skip past Brennan, Clapper, and Lynch while we’re at it there, Mr AG. They and their related shenanigans ought to be kept firmly in mind.

Barr warned that the use of federal powers originally intended to detect foreign enemies but instead used against an American political campaign represents “a serious red line that’s been crossed.”

The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. My personal favorite quote from the CBS interview:

I think one of the ironies today is that people are saying that it’s President Trump that’s shredding our institutions. I really see no evidence of that, it is hard, and I really haven’t seen bill of particulars as to how that’s being done. From my perspective the idea of resisting a democratically elected president and basically throwing everything at him and you know, really changing the norms on the grounds that we have to stop this president, that is where the shredding of our norms and our institutions is occurring.

Annnd bingo. At some point, we have to start worrying about Barr falling victim to Arkancide—probably sooner rather than later, if he keeps steadily, doggedly on like he presently is. Link to the full interview transcript is rat cheer. It’s well worth perusing, if only because you just know that the sentiments expressed by Barr therein are probably causing the Klown Kar Koup intriguers some sleepless nights of late.

Share

All roads lead to…

Guess who. Go on, guess.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation had a budget approaching $10 billion during James Comey’s tenure as its director. Combined with budgets for the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency, these agencies cost taxpayers around $30 billion annually.

Therefore, one would think that incriminating evidence derived from the FBI, NSA, or CIA could have linked Donald Trump to Russian hackers or Kremlin operatives, if that evidence existed. Instead, almost all the major findings used to justify investigations into Trump’s campaign are linked to Hillary Clinton or the Democratic Party.

At a certain point, it can’t be mere coincidence that every major figure involved in probing Trump’s campaign is linked to Hillary Clinton in some manner. Christopher Steele was “desperate” to prevent Trump from becoming president and was paid $160,000 by Democrats before he compiled his infamous dossier.

DNC lawyers met with FBI officials before a surveillance warrant was granted, raising questions as to why the FBI would meet with a political party’s counsel, yet not inform Trump his campaign was under investigation. Fusion GPS, the firm that hired Steele, was paid by money from Hillary Clinton and the DNC, funneled through a law firm, to compile the Steele dossier.

Clinton allies gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to the political campaign of Andrew McCabe’s wife, yet the former FBI deputy director only recused himself from Clinton’s email probe one week before the election. Even before the FBI obtained a FISA warrant on Carter Page, Bruce Ohr of the DOJ informed FBI officials that the Steele dossier was connected to Hillary Clinton and filled with political bias. Ohr’s wife, Nellie, worked for Fusion GPS and now her emails are linked to controversy.

Crowdstrike, the only entity to analyze the claimed DNC email hack, was outsourced and paid by the Democratic National Committee. Australian diplomat Downer informed the FBI of a conversation with George Papadopoulos, where Downer stated the Trump campaign official was given information by a Russian operative about the DNC emails. Downer isn’t mentioned in the Mueller report, was never interviewed during the Mueller probe, and is linked to the Clinton Foundation.

Gee, imagine my surprise at finding Her Gin-Soaked Highness at the epicenter of all this festering, slimy rot. Plenty more at the link too, and I do mean plenty. All of which is still merely the tip of the iceberg, irretrievably corrupt as we know The Woman Who Will Never Be President to be.

Share

Pretext for impeachment

That’s all the Mueller witch-hunt ever was, and Mr Integrity himself just inadvertently confirmed it.

If there were any doubts about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s political intentions, his unprecedented press conference on Wednesday should put them all to rest. As he made abundantly clear during his doddering reading of a prepared statement that repeatedly contradicted itself, Mueller had no interest in the equal application of the rule of law. He gave the game, and his nakedly political intentions, away repeatedly throughout his statement.

“The order appointing the special counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. We conducted that investigation and kept the office of the acting attorney general apprised of our work,” Mueller said. “After that investigation, if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”

According to Mueller and his team, charged Russians are presumed innocent. An American president, however, is presumed guilty unless and until Mueller’s team determines he is innocent. Such a standard is an obscene abomination against the rule of law, one that would never be committed by independent attorneys who place a fidelity to their oaths and impartial enforcement of the law ahead of their political motivations.

Mueller’s performance made it clear for all to see that what he ran for the last two years wasn’t an independent investigation pursuant to the rule of law so much as an inquisition motivated by political animus. Mueller and his team refused to charge prominent Democrats for crimes he charged against Republicans. Paul Manafort was charged with unregistered lobbying for foreign governments, while Mueller left alone long-time Democrat donor Tony Podesta and former Obama White House Counsel Greg Craig.

George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn were charged with making false statements to federal investigators, while Clinton campaign cronies Glenn Simpson and Christopher Steele’s false statements to Congress and the FBI were ignored. Trump’s nonexistent Russian connections were plumbed while a dubious Clinton campaign-funded dossier sourced directly to Russian officials was used as a prosecutorial roadmap rather than rock-solid evidence of actual campaign collusion with the Kremlin.

Mueller claimed his report spoke for itself, then put together a completely unnecessary press conference more than a month after his report’s public release, in which he not just spoke for the report, but expounded on the new legal standards he created to govern its conclusions.

These are the actions not of an impartial and independent investigator, but of a scheming political operative.

Well, I mean, DUH. What Mueller was doing with his presser was simply passing the impeachment ball along to the Democrat-Socialists, prodding them in the direction they’ve wanted to go from the beginning.

Mueller’s equivocation and inconsistency tell you all you need to know. This was always a political hit job with two alternatively acceptable goals in mind: either they were going to impeach the president or damage and undermine him going into the 2020 elections. To be clear, I don’t think Democrats truly care which one it is so long as Donald Trump does not win reelection next year.

The fact is, Democrats have always wanted to impeach Donald Trump. From day one, unable to accept the results of the 2016 elections, they have sought to nullify them.

Now, with a strong economic tailwind at his back and a collection of Democratic Lilliputians clamoring to be the nominee against him, all of their election models are showing Trump winning re-election in 2020. Democrats, in defiance of common sense, knowing that a Republican Senate won’t remove him, want to impeach him because they think that might be the only way they can cripple him and keep him from winning again in 2020.

They keep blabbering about principle and a supposed constitutional crisis, to which I say: it’s hardly principle to launch oneself off a political cliff, but by all means, stop talking, find the nerve and do it—and be prepared to accept the political consequences for your actions at the ballot box in 2020.

Not likely; they’d much prefer to have their cake and eat it too, if a way can be found. In fact, dodging the political consequences for the destruction they’ve intentionally wrought on the country for so many decades now is a first-option MO for them by now, underpinnning a great deal of what we see them doing currently.

But I couldn’t agree more with the call for them to impeach. As I’ve already said plenty of times: JUST DO IT, you posturing, cowardly blowhards. If Trump is such a dire threat to Constitutional order, the US government, the rule of law, and the people themselves, how on earth could you possibly justify your apparent reluctance to save the country from this monster? If you truly believed your own unhinged shrieking, you wouldn’t hesitate a moment—in fact, had you an ounce of integrity and patriotism you’d have impeached him already. Duty, along with your own solemnly-sworn oaths of office, demand no less in confronting the menace to the Republic a tyrannical grotesquerie like Trump poses.

The problem being that “had you an ounce of integrity and patriotism” bit, natch. Once again, Democrat-Socialist rhetoric is belied by Democrat-Socialist conduct. They are without honor, decency, or shame. They have the moral probity of a weasel in rut; the judiciousness and restraint of a half-starved boar-hog at a full slop trough; and the courage of a crippled hyena. They are pathetic, deceitful, and utterly despicable—and that is absolutely all.

Update! RPJ shares a few concerns.

So of course the Left is talking impeachment, impeachment, impeachment. They desperately need something to fill the headlines and TV shows to drown out what’s coming. They know the coup failed, so they need to gin up their base. I was at a doctor’s appointment the other day and the TV in the lobby had some show – don’t remember which one – where they went over things and said “So, it’s not over yet”! And the smiles on their faces…giddy at the thought.

So it will be 24/7 talk of impeachment. And then, and I have no doubt, they’ll do it. Mueller gave them the pretext in his testimony. More investigations, more marinated tofu for the base (I’d say “red meat” but that might trigger any Leftard vegans reading this). All to provide something, anything, to keep the drip-drip-drip revelations from seeing the light of day.

They’ll file impeachment, and with the House being majority “D” – plus that Michigan moron Justin Amash who is currently getting the enemedia kneepad service full-on and doubtless a few other RINOs who see a chance to join in the enemedia orgasmatron – it will pass, and will go to the Senate.

Conventional wisdom is that it will die there. I’m not so convinced. We have RINO’s RINO “Mittens” Romney who, in praising Amash’s courage, seems to be sending a signal that there are GOP Senators who would go along. In parallel, I have zero doubt the Deep State-Left-Enemedia axis has been scurrying down every possible rat-hole to get leverage on enough Senators to force it through.

Eh, not so sure about all that myself. I still hold to the fervent wish they’d go ahead and pull the trigger; all the polling I’ve seen indicates that, except among the very-most-batshit of the Loony Left fringe, impeachment is hugely unpopular. I think Pelosi’s obvious ambivalence can be taken as a sign that she has access to some poll numbers that make her very, very nervous about it. If she really believed she could get away with it, can anybody seriously doubt that she’d have done it already?

I’ll stipulate that certain Vichy GOPe turncoats like Flake or Mittens could conceivably vote to convict in the Senate. In fact, I’d be surprised if one or two of the usual suspects DIDN’T. But Dov Fisher is thinking positive:

The clock ticks towards 2020. There still seemed to remain a chance that the Democrats might try doing something constructive, if only for political survival. Just as a Joe Manchin becomes a rock-ribbed conservative in the Senate, backing Trump judicial selections and initiatives during the months preceding an election in conservative Republican West Virginia, it was to be expected that the Democrats would be pausing cynically from their Trump Derangement Syndrome as 2020 approaches. However, Robert Mueller’s nine-minute press statement now has changed all that. With one nine-minute statement, he has assured that the Democrats, like the rabid dog that races in frenzied frothing madness after its tail to no end, will lose sight of all else but impeachment. They will pursue impeachment, investigate impeachment, draft articles of impeachment. Impeach, impeach, impeach.

In the end, even if the thing passes the Democrat-majority House, it will die in the Senate. By 53-47, Republicans control a majority of the United Senate. RINOs like Jeff Flake are gone. Trump-haters like Bob Corker are gone. Sen. McCain has passed away. Mitt Romney will end his political career with Utah voters if he even thinks of voting for impeachment. Any House impeachment resolution will die in the Senate. It takes two thirds of the Senate to convict. Sixty-seven votes? No way. It will not even be close. Indeed, the majority will vote to acquit. Yet, thanks to Mueller, this impeachment nonsense now is revived and will consume the rest of the political air through 2020. Then, when the first-term “moderate Democrats” go back to their centrist and moderately conservative swing voters and ask to be reelected, they will have nothing on which to run, except for impeachment and Nancy Pelosi.

Voters’ monthly mortgages or rent is not paid with impeachment. Nor their home insurance, life insurance, health insurance, car insurance, automobile gasoline, electric, gas, water, phone, or other utility, medical, or educational bills. Impeachment does not pay for food — not even for peaches. This President and his party have given America a strong economy, almost full employment, record employment in the Black and Hispanic communities, steadily higher wages, a stronger military defense posture without embroiling the country in new regime-change adventures overseas, and they have made a better country with academically documented less racial bias than existed during the Wasted Obama Decade of Ferguson’s Michael Brown, Baltimore’s Freddy Gray, and Florida’s Trayvon Martin amid a stultified economy that could not get beyond sputtering.

Robert Mueller’s press event will prove an example of the law of unintended consequences.

T’is a consummation devoutly to be wished. Only then will this conniving, double-dealing Swamp slime’s self-beclownment be complete. Toni Williams calls a spade a spade:

Robert Mueller is a cunning coward. Every word in his speech was carefully crafted. He said nothing that wasn’t in the released report. But, he chose to emphasize certain phrases.

Yes, he chose his words very, very carefully. Mueller and his team of cretins found nothing, nada, zip and zilch. If they had found anything, they would have shouted it from the rooftop of the Department of Justice building. The Mueller team found nothing, so instead, they used legalese to obfuscate and condemn in the report. Today, he gave his blessing to the Democrat fantasy of impeaching President Donald J. Trump.

Gordon Wysong says bring it, bitchez.

The predicate for his investigation was an allegation. Who made the allegation? What was the evidence? Can we simply verify this evidence, and succeed in our mission? That is the starting point, and all the rest of this dog and pony show is frou-frou.

But Mueller didn’t do that. It’s enough to discredit anything he did do. All his machinations were not to verify the allegations, but to obscure them. It is a piteous report he filed, followed by a contemptible series of lies to Barr and others at the DOJ and a self-serving and cowardly press conference he held. As special counsel, the rules are pretty much understood to be the same as a not so special prosecutor. When that didn’t serve his ends, Mueller violated those rules. Publicly, we saw that he had no such respect for the traditions of our system of justice. Privately, it is quite likely much worse.

The attempt to placate the Left, and to protect associates who were involved in violations so egregious that they amount to at least sedition, has put Mueller on the wrong side of history. The only way this will not be widely known, is to let the report die a quiet death. Yet Mueller is so vain that he is just beginning to realize this — hence his attempt to opt out of the plot.

For The Impeachers, the assistance they need is not to be found in the Mueller report. So they must turn to Aesop if they are to have their bloodlust quenched. This will be the spectacle of spectacles. Unable to coherently frame high crimes and misdemeanors, they will thrash about for an invented transgression or misname the nature of an etiquette faux pas. Doing so, they will rely on the usual cast of characters, drawn from the ranks of the bureaucracy. And that will be their biggest mistake of all.

Do it, Demonrats. Stop running your fat yaps and just do it. Until such time, the bottom line remains unchanged:

Much has been written already about the sheer pettiness of what Mueller did and said on Wednesday morning. Many actual legal scholars have commented; Alan Dershowitz, Sean Davis, the guys at Powerline and of course Mark Levin. Given their analyses, it is safe to say that Mueller stepped in a tar pit that may well fossilize this pathetic man. He has sacrificed his entire career on the altar of the unscrupulous politics of the Democrats, who refuse still to accept the results of the 2016 election. 

Since Obama took office, the Democrat party has been transformed into a criminal enterprise, police-state in nature. Obama’s spies assumed they would never be exposed, that their pulling the strings of government would be their unimpeded mission in perpetuity, passed on only to their chosen successors.

But exposed they have been and now they are desperate to change the narrative. Maybe that was Mueller’s goal Wednesday morning, an attempt to derail the declassification of documents that are sure to embarrass if not prove criminal acts by many denizens of the deep state. 

I saved the best for last: bad off as they are, these scurvy little Potomac pissants may wind up with more problems than they might think.

The executive director of Rolling Thunder, the annual military event that features hundreds of thousands of motorcyclists traveling to Washington to call for full accountability for prisoners of war and missing in action service members, said that the entire membership would arrive in the nation’s capital if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom he called an “arrogant little b****,” decides to try to impeach President Trump.

Artie Muller, 74, who served as a U.S. Army sergeant in the Vietnam War and is listed on the group’s website as a co-founder, spoke at the National Mall on Monday and posited that Pelosi should be ousted from Congress for the series of investigations she is involved with. He stated, “I would like to see Nancy Pelosi and her hypocrites work on the POW issue instead of bulls***ting [and] aggravating the President of the United States, who’s doing a fantastic job.” He added, “When the hell are they going to wake up? It’s not their children, their mothers, their fathers that are left behind in the POW camps.”

The Washington Examiner noted, “The numbers involved in a pro-Trump rally could be large. More than 1 million bikers are believed to have traveled to D.C. for this year’s Rolling Thunder rally. And infrequent, unrelated biker activism has drawn large numbers, including a 2013 ride that brought thousands of bikers to counterprotest a 9/11 event originally billed as the Million Muslim March.”

Oh, how I would enjoy seeing Comey, his thousand-dollar slacks all a-pissy and reeking, slink quietly off into the bushes to hide from all the mean, scary bikers.

Share

Spygate: high, wide, and deep

It’s a lot bigger than you might think.

Criminals rarely begin their careers with a capstone crime. Trivial crimes typically get bigger and more serious over the malefactor’s career. The same pattern applies to government crimes for the same reason. Specifically, the perp is unsure of how far he can go before he is noticed and reacted to.

Violations of privacy and differential citizen treatment were rife long before Trump came on the scene. The IRS scandal under Obama involved blocking conservative organizations from getting proper tax status.  James Rosen, a Fox reporter, was spied on as early as 2010 by the Obama Administration. Samantha Power unmasked an incredible number of people in her role at the United Nations. Debra Heine referenced Sara Carter saying:

“That’s unheard of,” Carter said. “Put it this way — when John Bolton was the at the U.N., he unmasked three people. Three people. She unmasked close to 300. And I’m going to tell you some of those names are going to be very important when they come out,” she added.

The Intelligence Community appears to have been unleashed against American citizens before Trump announced his intentions to run for office. Given what was deemed to be an infinitesimal chance of his winning, one wonders why any attention at all was paid to Trump, at least initially. Perhaps the ease with which the controls and checks and balances were vitiated in prior FISA abuses and unmaskings, made it seem almost “free” or “riskless” to engage in such behavior. If this thinking is correct, there is likely evidence to be uncovered regarding other Republican candidates, especially those considered as real opponents.

Criminality in government did not start in Obama’s administration. Serious abuses in J. Edgar Hoover’s long reign are well documented. How much of this was institutionalized into the fabric of the intelligence community? Does anyone believe that such perfidies and criminal acts did not occur under Carter, Reagan, Clinton, or Bush?

Hoover was a fanatic who considered himself a patriot. His behavior was as reprehensible as what is being uncovered today. However, there is a big difference! Hoover was the instigator and director of this behavior. He was a lone wolf at the head of a powerful agency.

Today, the effort does not emanate from one agency but permeates the entire upper echelon of the Intelligence Community. Someone higher-up had to coordinate and direct this organized effort. That is vastly more serious than a powerful, rogue FBI director infecting his own agency! There is no proof that Obama was in charge of the operation, but the fact that it was politically oriented is a meaningful difference from Hoover. The fact that it was coordinated across agencies also suggests that someone at or near the top directed it.

No proof incriminating Obama…yet. But that last line is a compelling indication of which way the wind might end up blowing. Meanwhile, terrified Swamp rat Comey has emitted yet another self-justifying whine:

Former FBI Director James Comey on Tuesday penned an opinion piece in the Washington Post about the Russia probe and Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s findings (or lack thereof). According to Comey, “the president is a liar who doesn’t care what damage he does to vital institutions,” which is why he felt the need to set the record straight.

“We must call out his lies that the FBI was corrupt and committed treason, that we spied on the Trump campaign, and tried to defeat Donald Trump. We must constantly return to the stubborn facts,” Comey wrote.

The irony, it burns.

As director, I was determined that the work would be done carefully, professionally and discreetly. We were just starting. If there was nothing to it, we didn’t want to smear Americans. If there was something to it, we didn’t want to let corrupt Americans know we were on to them. So, we kept it secret. That’s how the FBI approaches all counterintelligence cases.

And there’s the first problem with Trump’s whole “treason” narrative. If we were “deep state” Clinton loyalists bent on stopping him, why would we keep it secret? Why wouldn’t the much-maligned FBI supervisor Peter Strzok — the alleged kingpin of the “treasonous” plot to stop Trump — tell anyone? He was one of the very few people who knew what we were investigating.

We investigated. We didn’t gather information about the campaign’s strategy. We didn’t “spy” on anyone’s campaign. We investigated to see whether it was true that Americans associated with the campaign had taken the Russians up on any offer of help. By late October, the investigators thought they had probable cause to get a federal court order to conduct electronic surveillance of a former Trump campaign adviser named Carter Page. Page was no longer with the campaign, but there was reason to believe he was acting as an agent of the Russian government. We asked a federal judge for permission to surveil him and then we did it, all without revealing our work, despite the fact that it was late October and a leak would have been very harmful to candidate Trump. Worst deep-state conspiracy ever.

You didn’t “reveal your work” because it was based on a preposterous, bought-and-paid-for “dossier” that was nothing but a partisan smear-job purchased by one of the most corrupt, crooked megalomaniacs in American history. There was never any chance whatever of its standing up under even the most cursory scrutiny, and you and your fellow conspirators all knew it. No matter. You didn’t expect it to ever be put to the test; you had complete confidence in Her Herness’s ability to swindle, hoodwink, and defraud her way into the Oval Office. You ALL did.

Oooops.

Old news update! Buffoonish imbecile Maxine Waters spills the Spygate beans…in 2013.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), one of the left wing’s most prominent and vocal figures, has a 30-year history of ill advised, frothing rhetoric. “Auntie Maxine” is atop no one’s list of vise-lipped confidantes, yet because of her prominence, she is clued in on much of the darker machinations of the Democratic Party and its backers. Occasionally, she reveals more than intended. February 2013 was one of those times.

From Roland Martin’s television show:

The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life[.]…That’s going to be very, very powerful[.]…That database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before and whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They’re going to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it. And he’s [President Obama] been very smart. It’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.

Many observers at the time (myself included) found this statement a bit of a head-scratcher, as the database to which Ms. Waters referred was not immediately apparent. Personally, I assumed she was speaking of Obama’s prodigious campaign organization, perhaps exaggerating the information gleaned from the campaign’s wide-ranging social media contacts.

In any case, the comment drifted from collective memory in fairly short order and remained forgotten until just the other day, when it elbowed its way to the forefront of my consciousness.

…Combining this documentation with the revelations from D.C. super-lawyer Joe DiGenova that this illegal surveillance and data-gathering operation had been in full swing far longer than anyone suspected, dating back to just before the election of 2012, and you have the bones of the most egregious plot of sedition our nation has ever seen, one involving the takeover of the federal government by use of blackmail.

Taken in light of the previously opaque comments from Auntie Maxine, one can’t help but wonder whether the “database like no one has ever seen before” is in fact the result of the operation DiGenova references. Waters’s description certainly fits.

Whenever there is scandal among the high levels of an administration, the first question that springs to mind is invariably “What did the president know, and when did he know it?”

In the case of Obama and the illegal abuse of America’s intel and investigatory powers to gather information on his political opponents, it appears we need only ask Auntie Maxine, who helpfully told us six years ago that Obama was in on it from the outset.

Of COURSE he was. So what could be more fitting than that the tattered cover under which he’s been cowering all this time might be rent fully asunder by the gibbering of this slavering sub-moron?

Share

Sobering reminder

Francis makes a well-taken if uncomfortable point about Memorial Day.

America’s armed forces are the finest that have ever existed. The young Americans who populate it, regardless of their individual reasons for taking the oath, are the very best of us. When called upon, they go where they’ve been sent and do what they’ve been told – superbly. In every combat action on record they’ve performed prodigies that have baffled the military minds of other lands.

We’ve lost a great many of those young lives. If the Civil War be included, the count is well over a million. Any decent person must pray that they were not wasted, in some ultimate sense. And to be perfectly fair, most of the combats in which American forces have taken part were more popular than not. Yes, even World War I and Vietnam.

But it takes a severe stretch of the terms involved to propose that the World Wars, the Korean and Vietnamese conflicts, and the later actions were “to protect our freedom.” They may have been geostrategically wise, though there is legitimate disagreement about several of them. They may have protected various extraterritorial interests, or the interests of nations allied to us. But they correlate with the diminution of Americans’ freedom, not with its preservation…and certainly not with its expansion.

If the subject of interest is the motivation behind American engagement in those combats, let it be said, plainly and at once: the protection of Americans’ freedom was nowhere near the minds of those who sent them forth to do battle.

Over and over, our men at arms have gone forth. They fought, suffered, bled, died – and prevailed. Words cannot express the praise and honor we owe them. But the political classes that dispatched them to foreign combats cannot reasonably be thought to have been concerned with Americans’ freedom.

We owe our fallen men at arms a grateful remembrance on Memorial Day. But let us also be mindful of something less praiseworthy: the willingness of old men in suits, seated in comfortable chairs in places well removed from the hazards and terrors of armed combat, to send them forth for reasons about which they have been less than honest.

Troubling as that is, I can’t see how any honest man could deny it. I myself had a thought as I was putting my own MD post together, a sort of kissing-cousin to my long-held contention that Independence Day ought to be more like a national day of mourning at this point, rather than a celebration of ideals we’ve pretty much shat upon. To wit: remember our fallen soldiers, surely. Honor them, as they so richly deserve. But does it feel to anybody but me that maybe us cake-eating civilians might owe them a very public apology on Memorial Day too, for how we’ve taken the principles to which their sacrifice is dedicated so completely for granted? How we’ve sat complacently back and allowed the very Constitution they all swear an oath most solemn to uphold and defend to be bypassed and defiled?

As Francis says: they fight, they suffer, they bleed, they die…while we do little or nothing to demonstrate that we take their sacrifice seriously, by seeing to it that our national inheritance of liberty and self-determination is properly valued and not besmirched. The failure to defend our freedom is certainly not theirs. Nor can it be justly laid upon the Constitution’s doorstep. To our eternal disgrace, I’m afraid that We The People own all of that one. We’ve failed to do our part, whatever the reasons, and damned well ought to be ashamed of ourselves for it.

Share

Transparency now!

Declassify everything. EVERYthing. Leave no dark corner in which scuzzy Swamp rats may hide from the penetrating light of truth, and let the chips fall where they may.

Predictably, the people who are at greatest risk of exposure and danger of indictment erupted at Trump’s order. For example, Obama’s CIA chief, John Brennan, told an interviewer,“I see it as a very, very serious and outrageous move on the part of Mr. Trump, once again, trampling on the statutory authorities of the Director of National Intelligence and the heads of the independent intelligence agencies.” Brennan continued: “And it’s unclear to me what Mr. Barr is actually going to do. Is he investigating a crime? Well, what’s the predication of that crime? Or he is just going to be looking for information… that Mr. Trump can just give to his defenders on the right and cherry-pick information that could be taken out of context?”

That’s pretty rich coming from one of the coup plotters who must have personally approved if not instigated the counterintelligence investigation of Trump and his team. Their whole exercise — not Barr’s — was searching for a crime in the manner of Stalin’s secret police chief Lavrenti Beria who once said, “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.”

Brennan and his fellow plotters chose a counterintelligence investigation because it could be kept secret and because there was no evidence of a crime, only the unverified Steele Dossier created by the Clinton campaign. And when that investigation came up dry, then-FBI director James Comey, as he admitted, sent two memos about Trump’s supposed misdeeds to a friend for the express purposes that they would be leaked to the New York Times and cause the appointment of a special counsel. Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller, one of Comey’s closest personal friends, to be special counsel investigating Trump’s supposed collusion with the Russians.

Just how many Jim Comeys, Peter Strzoks, John Brennans, and Jim Clappers are still employed by the CIA, NSA, and other intelligence agencies? Did Comey, Brennan, Clapper, and their teams of lawyers and spies break the law in their “counterintelligence” investigation — i.e., spying campaign — directed against candidate Donald Trump in the 2016 campaign and continuing through the first months of his presidency?

We know that part of the spying campaign took place in England. A woman working for the FBI as an undercover informant, Azra Turk posing as an assistant to Stefan Halper, an American professor at Cambridge University, met with George Papadopoulos, a minor advisor to the Trump campaign, at a London bar in 2016. She asked Papadopoulos if the Trump campaign was working covertly with the Russian government. What else did the FBI do in England and other countries to peddle that theory? Halper was probably also working for the FBI or the CIA.

We’ll probably never know despite the president’s order. The nations whose intelligence involvement could be revealed will do everything they can to pressure Trump to not reveal their involvement. Moreover, the CIA and NSA will kick and scream and resist every request Barr and Durham make for any intelligence information.

Gee, that’s too bad; I hate it for ’em. But they can all scream their throats bloody for all me; they should’ve given careful consideration to the possibility of splashback when first they decided to launch a coup against a duly-elected President to forestall exposure of their conspiracy to preemptively rig an election, in Drunk Hillary’s favor and at Obama’s behest. Their next round of screaming ought to reverberate off the walls of the ol’ Greybar Hotel.

Update! He fights.

Hypocrisy, thy name is “Democrat,” and Trump has this amazing way of making them demonstrate it to the world that no one else has ever been able to pull off. Look at what we’ve seen just in the last week. With his declassification move, Trump has maneuvered them into publicly asserting that providing you more information about what occurred is now a “cover-up” of what occurred for some reason. Don’t think about it – just go with it. They’re rolling.

We have the lib poohbahs and their mainstream media Renfields in full spazz effect because Trump proposes to declassify info attesting to the antics of the Deep State moles who tried to spur the failed soft coup in part by…leaking classified info. Wait, so now exposing classified info is…bad? Didn’t Hollywood just make an eponymous movie about the brave firefighters of the WaPo defying the government to bring the people the truth by publishing the classified Pentagon Papers? Well, maybe – I don’t know because I don’t watch pinko self-slobberfest movies. I do know that the libs were all giddy when The Lightbringer/Dogeater gave underserved clemency to Bradley Manning for leaking classified material to Julian Assange, who the media now hates for publishing confidential material that hurt Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit.

If you go on the Google machine and punch in “Trump committed treason,” you get 10,100,000 hits. Some of us recall that since about July 2016, among the idiots on the left, “Trump committed treason” was a thing, a very big thing, complete with the High Grand Marshal of the Supreme Court marching The Donald out of the White House in cuffs for his trial for aggravated treasoning. We must have missed the memo that made “treason” not a thing again – I guess us Normals are not on the distro list.

We need a billboard that gives the status of Democrat memes to help us keep updated on the Liberal Lie o’ the Day:

“Promiscuous accusations of ‘treason’ are BAD effective at 0700 hours today and will continue to be BAD until further notice. Check here tomorrow for updates.”

Nah, a billboard would be wildly impractical. The guy charged with changing the letters and numbers would be so swamped he’d never get a chance to climb down and take a break; he’d have to live up there full-time, like the flagpole sitters from days of yore. A phone app might work better, but you’d need truly massive processing power to run it.

With our glorious ruling class, it’s all lies, it’s all garbage, and Trump gleefully exposes it all. Mueller declares him innocent and the Democrats claim that this actually shows Trump is more guilty of whatever he didn’t do than they ever imagined. Who is the person who hears this and buys it? People notice when they are being scammed – well, not stupid liberal people who buy into nonsense like socialism, global warming and the idea that men can have babies, but Normal people do. What Trump is doing by highlighting their hapless hypocrisy is undermining not just the garbage policies that make up the Democrat dogma but the entire notion that our liberal elite somehow consists of our betters.

These people are not our betters. They are our worsers, our much, much worsers. These self-satisfied liberal swells and their cruise-shilling Fredocon collaborators brought us the Iraq War, the Wall Street collapse, and the last season of Game of Thrones. They are terrible, and one of the myriad things they are terrible at is lying to us.

You’d think they’d be extremely good at it, what with all the practice they get. But we probably ought to be thankful for their hamfisted, all-thumbs incompetence. We’d be much worse off otherwise.

Dishonest, deceptive and diabolical update! A tainted man’s tainted legacy.

Mueller never deserved the “most trusted man” sobriquet. He has a long record of abusing the power of his office over the years, no matter which office he occupied at the time. He let four men rot in prison knowing they were innocent, a crime that cost taxpayers nearly $100M in recompense to the victims. He did the bidding of Hillary Clinton when she delivered uranium to Russia. Then, working with James Comey, he seriously misprosecuted the anthrax case, relentlessly pursuing an innocent man, Steven Hatfill, and again costing the taxpayers millions, this time $5.82M. As with Comey, Mueller’s positions of power over the years have gone to his head and made him both arrogant and careless.

Obviously, Mueller hoped to find Trump guilty of anything that would give the Democrats enough rope for impeachment. But as the truth has seeped out over the last eighteen months thanks to real investigative journalists — John Solomon, Sara Carter, Jeff Carlson, Gregg Jarrett, Margot Cleveland, Eric Felton, Lee Smith and several others — Mueller may have realized that to perpetrate more lies on the public could bring the entire house of cards down. Once all the facts are revealed, it is likely that he will be permanently tainted by his deceptive machinations for personal or political reasons many times over the course of his career in law. The same goes for James Comey.

As new information is about to come to light, the principals are pointing their fingers at each other. It would be amusing if it were not all so deadly serious. These “principals” are all of a piece: not nearly as smart as they think they are, overweening, and pompous. Like Hillary, the people they sought to deceive are deplorable anyway. They probably do not feel any guilt for their crimes. Quick to accuse Trump of being a dictator, it is they who behave like dictators. They were all for transparency until the moment such transparency is likely to implicate them.  Declassification of all things related to the attempted coup has the rats scurrying. “The truth will come to light…at length the truth will out!”

And that scares them completely witless. Deadly serious, yes…but amusing as well. Also deeply, deeply gratifying. Embrace the healing power of “and,” y’all.

Share

“WashPo Warns of Politicized Intelligence: Hilarity Ensues”

Democracy dies in dumbass.

The American news media need a collective neck brace to halt the self-inflicted whiplash now endemic among journalists following President Trump’s order to declassify materials related to “surveillance activities during the 2016 Presidential election.” Fresh off the heels of demanding that Attorney General William Barr release a fully-unredacted Mueller report, including grand jury proceedings and all underlying evidence, news organizations are freaking out that Barr might release classified information that will expose the corrupt FBI counterintelligence probe into Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

“Barr could expose secrets, politicize intelligence with review of Russia probe, current and former officials fear,” blared a May 24 headline in the Washington Post. Reporter Shane Harris quoted “current and former U.S. officials” who fretted that Barr’s actions could damage the reputation of the FBI (LOL) or be used as political weaponry to exact revenge on Trump’s foes. (One of Harris’ quoted sources is Comey’s former general counsel James Baker, who currently is under criminal investigation for…wait for it…leaking classified information to the media. NO, I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP.)

You couldn’t, any more than you could parody it. That’s how far around the bend these foamy dingbats have driven themselves.

All of this outrage is particularly ironic coming from the Post, the newspaper responsible for reporting two damaging leaks of classified information in 2017: The disclosure of details from an intercepted call between former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, and the FISA order against Trump campaign aide Carter Page. Way back when, in early 2017, the Post did not object to government officials revealing classified information as long as it helped advance the phony narrative that Trump and his people were in the tank for Vladimir Putin and his election was illegitimate.

Umm, helloooo? The Pentagon Papers? Woodward and Bernstein? Who even knows how many other examples of the Post toasties jizzing themselves in their autoerotic lust for illegally leaking classified info for purely partisan purposes?

Aww, never mind. Liberal outrage is, as always, highly selective and case-dependent. The rules apply exclusively to their adversaries, not to them, and are subject to reversal at a moment’s notice, according to whim and political usefulness in that particular moment. Flexible and temporary for them, eternal and unyielding for us. Once you get Woke to that it all makes sense, of a sort.

“Enemies of the people,” per Trump? You better fucking know it.

Share

Top-down treason

All the sedition you can swallow, from soup to nuts.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have both damaged the United States in ways the Russians couldn’t even hope to.  They have openly assaulted the integrity of our elections. Weaponized the intelligence agencies, the DOJ and the FBI against political opponents. Actively conspired to overthrow the President. Set in motion a series of corrupt activities and cataclysmic events that have eviscerated the character of America for the last three years.

In the process, Obama is the destroyer of the very notion of the peaceful transition of power. His criminal activities to undermine the Trump Presidency amount to sedition, abuse of power, abrogation of civil rights, waging an effective coup d’etat against the constitution and amount to treason.

Hillary Clinton continues, two years after she lost, to insist that the election was “stolen from her”. Obama Vice President Joe Biden agreed with a New Hampshire voter who declared Trump an ‘illegitimate President”.  Hillary Clinton invented the Russian Dossier that John Brennan and James Comey inflicted on the body politic. Joe Biden was part and parcel of the Obama administrations dirty tricks, criminal spying, and overt corruption.

Fortunately for America, Attorney General William Barr has appointed US Attorney John Durham to get to the bottom of the whole Russia Hoax. He has apparently been at work for several months. He has empaneled at least one Grand Jury. This is bad news for John Brennan and Jim Comey and James Clapper.

The IG Report from Michael Horowitz is about to be released. It will detail how all four FISA warrants obtained by Jim Comey were illegal. How the unverified Steele Dossier was deliberately included at the insistence of either Jim Comey or John Brennan.

But the tentacles stretch everywhere and now, at last, the full scope of illegal spying and criminal activity by a wide swath of the upper echelons of the Obama Administration will come to light. That is what terrifies Democrats. It should. There is a number of criminal indictments coming that will shake the foundation of the Republic.

Keith’s expansive recounting is the most thorough I’ve seen yet, including some details I wasn’t aware of or had forgotten about:

Of course, it all started years before Trump was elected. The Obama White House was using FISA court 702 authority to spy on a range of Republican figures since 2012. James Comey allowed three contractors unlimited access to the most sensitive NSA databases, including PRISM. Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Chief Justice John Roberts, Mitch McConnell, everyone was a target.

The NSA data was shared with Brennan and Comey and the Obama White House. The abuse was discovered and stopped by NSA Director Mike Rogers in April of 2016. Rogers notified the head of the FISA Court in October of 2016.

She has ruled that illegal access to NSA programs were granted through FISA court 702 authority. She has sent her ruling to the Attorney General William Barr. This will certainly fall under the purview of US Attorney Durham’s investigation. This is in addition to the FISA warrants illegally obtained on Carter Page.

At the Obama White House, it is well known that Ben Rhodes, Susan Rice, and Valerie Jarrett were up to their eyeballs in the whole sordid affair. Along with Samantha Powers at the United Nations.  Between them, they unmasked Trump associates from NSA wiretaps over 300 times in 2016 alone.

Plenty more at the link—PLENTY. Executive summary:

The Obama White House was illegally spying on Trump and other Republicans since 2012. They worked with Hillary Clinton to corrupt the electoral and judicial process by inserting the Steele dossier into the heart of the American body politic. As Peter Strzok texted, “POTUS wants to know everything.”

Brennan, Comey, and Clapper framed the candidate and then President Trump, and accused him of treason. They knew it wasn’t the case. They knew it all along. It was all a grand criminal Russia hoax. They did it anyway.

Now US Attorney John Durham is going to hold them all accountable.

Again: patience, people. This party is only just getting started. Yes, the perpetrators of this most heinous wickedness may yet somehow dodge their due reckoning, sure. But wheels are turning—grinding slow, perhaps, but surpassing fine. For all my jaded cynicism, I’m coming more and more to believe that there’s a real and increasing chance of seeing justice done here. If not…well, may God help us to survive what will follow.

Share

Most righteous walkout

Boss move.

When Trump tries to engineer a revamped trade deal with Mexico and Canada, he knows that each side will negotiate to achieve its respective goals. Once the deal is signed by all parties, the inference is that everyone sees a path to achieving many or at least some of those respective goals. Going forward, each side has motivation to cooperate productively. Certainly there will be disappointments on some or all sides that certain hoped-for goals will not be achieved, but they will proceed to obtain at least the meaningful benefits for which they successfully have bargained.

By contrast, when dealing with Democrats driven by an insane desire to impeach Trump or “at least” to destroy him personally — to ferret through his personal taxes, to go after his family and associates, to concoct one hoax after another aimed at bringing down his very reputation and raising preposterous specters regarding treasonous collusion with enemies or engaging in “cover-ups” — there is no point in his proceeding with them. No matter what is agreed, they ultimately will sabotage him and the agreement. For example, if an infrastructure agreement is reached, and subsequent polls reflect that voters are pleased with the results and credit the President for moving that infrastructure agenda forward, then Democrats will turn around mid-way and sabotage the agreements. Any person who ever has been in a real world situation like this in the private sphere has seen this done.

President Trump is not facing “Congressional Oversight.” Rather, he is enduring Congressional Torture. He was investigated for two years by a high-powered, unrestrained team of prosecutor sharks thirsting for blood, with an unlimited budget to feed their every whim, and they came up with nothing. In a reasonable world, that would be the end of the collusion fantasy. You hit him with your best shot — like the mental case who recently kickedArnold Schwarzenegger in the back — and you accomplished nothing. That investigation was a colossal waste — of time, of money, of national civility — and there is no further oversight needed on that front. So this is not about “Congressional Oversight.”

From Day One, Maxine Waters has been chanting “Impeach 45!” Now that she incomprehensibly sits as the chair of the House Banking Committee, with a gang of confederates alongside her including Rashida Tlaib, Ocasio-Cortez, and Al Impeachment Green, she gets to move forward on trying to drive Trump out of office. So it is with every other House committee. They are not doing “oversight,” and they are not accomplishing anything. Rather, they are on a vendetta against a guy who did not wrong any of them. He certainly cannot work with such people.

With an economy blazing, yet with inflation modest, the “wisdom of the American People” proved itself once again in 2018 to be a Henny Youngman joke: an old, old, quick one-liner. Instead of allowing the Trump Administration to carry its program to conclusion, the voters spiked the tires and jammed the cylinders. They gave the Democrats a majority in one chamber, electing a maniacal House that has no agenda but to destroy Trump.

The Demonrats aren’t entirely stupid at that: they figure if they can hinder, smear, and hamstring Trump badly enough, the crippling ineffectualness they themselves inflicted on him can then be used as a weapon against him in 2020. Thus can the Swamp status quo ante be restored, its Deep State support systems preserved, and the ruling PTB regain their eternal throne. As a bonus, future pretenders to it will have been taught a valuable cautionary lesson: don’t fuck with us, at your own peril.

As detestable, swinishly corrupt, and seemingly intractable as the whole DC circle jerk is, no one should ever expect any different from its enthusiastically parasitic participants. The truly depressing part is where the blame for the Democrat-Socialists’ incomprehensible 2018 resurrection must be placed:

It is the most amazing thing to watch. Iran is enriching uranium. North Korea is rumbling. China is strong-arming us economically, waiting to see who blinks first. Yet in Washington all House Democrat majority eyes are fixated on getting Trump’s taxes. The 2020 Presidential campaign already has begun. Debates are around the corner. Primaries soon thereafter. All focus is moving to 2020, with the Democrat House having accomplished nothing and on a collision course to produce nothing but more subpoenas.

If this is what American “swing voters” want, then they may revel in their “wisdom.” They had a situation that was almost too good to be true. Obama mockingly had sneered that it would take a “magic wand” to achieve such results. Yet the maniacal Democrat House has stopped all progress. In an environment of Congressional abuse, the frenzied Democrats are like a rabid dog unable to focus on anything other than chasing its tail. Healthcare coverage is not being improved. Infrastructure will not be addressed. Forget about fixing the border emergency.

Meanwhile, the Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians, Russians, even the Europeans and others, cannot be blamed for thumbing their noses at the United States as they watch an American government in paralysis while utter fools issue subpoenas and demand a man’s back taxes that have absolutely no bearing on his job performance as President since January 2017. The world’s most evil dictatorships — the ones that threaten us globally, militarily, economically — have absolutely no reason to be responsive to a Trump Administration that they see handcuffed within, in peril of being ousted in eighteen months. These dictators know that they themselves will remain in power, will face no such nonsense from within, and can wait out the worst flaws in American democracy as they almost always do. This is the mess created by the “wisdom of the American people.”

I’m just fine with American liberal stupes getting the government they want—good and hard, as much of it as they can stomach, force-fed them until they puke on it. What I don’t like is saner, more intelligent folks having it crammed down their throats into the bargain.

The 2018 elections were exactly what I said they were at the time: a no-shit, full-on disaster. It’s surely one that will be costing us all for a long time, in all kinds of ways. Maybe this time we’ll learn.

Share

Putting things right

Another encouraging example of fighting back instead of sitting back congratulating each other for “taking the high road,” while the Left steamrolls right over you.

Since the papacy of Francis, it seems there is not a month that passes without the Pope embarrassing himself or the entire church with his behavior or words. The Methodists decided to give him a break this winter and contributed to headlines across America. The United Methodist Church decided to not bend the rules of God by officiating same-sex marriages nor allowing openly LGBT clergy. This has set the UMC on a path towards schism. More importantly, it showed an effective coordination campaign by a traditionalist branch within an organization.

Before defending the traditionalists, it is honest to point out that they have allowed female clergy since the late ’60s. The church has suffered from the same weaknesses other mainline Protestant churches have exhibited. This goes back to two major mistakes. The first was a generation ago when the church decided to engage in what it called ‘openness’. This was inclusion before it was called inclusion and a liberal mindset. Cynics would argue that it was a ploy to fill the pews. Degenerates do not go to church unless they have hit rock bottom or are forced to in jail. This turned off traditionalists and allowed some reverends to engage in very liberal sermons and behaviors in their parishes.

The second mistake was having little control over their seminaries. Like virtually all Western institutions, the key was the training of future church leaders. There is where the liberals took hold and pumped out more liberal and progressive reverends. Few seminaries stuck to the Wesleyan model of a traditionalist view of religion and the faith. The majority decided to offer classes on Islam, produce atheists who were reverends for the attention and even churned out students who left the seminary to convert to Judaism.

This created an atmosphere where the shepherds moved left while the laymen wondered what was happening. The UMC is set up centralized like the Catholic church where bishops assign reverends to parishes. If a node was filled by a progressive bishop, he would fill parishes with dandy reverends. The buzzcut lady reverend found its way into the minds of Methodists with this infiltration. This made council votes tougher too as the progressive bloc could count on their ideological solidarity for votes. This was their mistake.

The vote held this winter was about sticking to God’s word or making the big announcement to the world that the UMC was a good, progressive church like those Episcopalians and Unitarians that have beautiful yet empty churches. Heading into the vote, the trad faction did not think things would go well, and many had set the issue of LGBT inclusion as their red line for leaving. Trads talked about leaving for 2020 in the event that they lost the vote.

Then the trads started talking differently. The internet was their friend, and they started to focus on nominating council attendees that they knew would vote for the traditionalist plan. Rather than nominate attendees as nice guys or even learned theologians, they decided to push for their side. They knew the progressive wing did it, so why not return the favor.

This worked incredibly well, and supposedly at the council vote, the moment the American trads started voting one after another for the traditionalist plan, the progressives screamed that something was up. No one cared because this is what progressives have always done. These were American trads because the foreign Methodists voted for the traditionalist plan by a 70-30 margin.

The foreign vote revealed something else. First, that the foreign wing of the church is more of the book. The next revelation was that the American church has presentation crews to discuss what a vote was about, and when different foreign reverends compared notes they noticed that the story told by progressive presentations did not match the the presentations of moderate and trad crews. As foreign reverends listened on, their response was, “What did you preach to us decades ago“?

The trads won with a 53%-47% vote thanks for the foreign contingent, but this was not the whole story. There were foreign attendees who could not make it in time to vote, which would have pushed the margin wider. Some suspect neutral presentations would have pushed the trad plan to a wider margin. Some suspected this enough that in the future there will be balanced crews to make sure voting issues are explained as they are, not as progressives wish them to be.

The more important piece to the vote is that the trads did not just win a vote and relax. They made changes to secure their victory. They made changes to prevent the skinsuiting of their church. Why let the progressives win, kill the church, and then parade around in its trappings like the zombie churches of mainline Protestanism. These changes also help the trads out in the event there is no schism, and in the future, they get outvoted by the progressives.

Lots of detail and analysis here, all of it encouraging. The UMC has indeed been tugged far, far to the Left, horrifyingly so. I myself watched it happen; the UMC was my family’s church throughout my childhood, and its unwelcome loss of way was a topic of dismayed discussion at many a Sunday family lunch right after church. I’m still a member there, as are the remaining members of my dwindling family. But it’s been years since I attended for anything other than weddings, funerals, and such-like.

But I’ve always felt the deep pull of my church, and still do. I’m glad and grateful for its influence on me in my youth, an influence I was barely aware of during my snotty atheist/agnostic phase during and right after college. I gradually grew out of that fairly typical adolescent folly, and even though I’m still not a regular attendee—I’ve been doing some exploration of Catholicism of late, a long-time fascination of mine, and have attended Friday vespers at Belmont Abbey a good few times—I’ve found reason (or manufactured it) to sort of hang out on church grounds and wander through the place when I get a minute.

Even during my questioning, skeptical college days an interest in and curiosity about religion stuck with me. I actually went so far as to take Comparative Religion for two semesters, a course entirely worthless to my meandering…umm, well, I’ll generously give myself a break and call my course of study “eclectic,” and leave just it at that. I LOVED those classes; I’m pretty sure out of all the textbooks eventually sold or thrown away, I still have those tucked away in a box somewhere.

When the ex and I were casting about for a preschool/kindergarten program to put Madeleine into a few years back, I surprised myself at how happy it made me to get her enrolled in the one at my old church. The ex was distinctly resistant to having MJ attend a church-run program, being a rock-ribbed, dedicated nonbeliever herself. I talked her into it in the end, and on Madeleine’s first day I walked her through the halls of the old basement, where my mom had worked for years as church secretary and my brother and I would run and roam after school. I put my daughter onto the same swing-set I had played on myself when I was her age, then we were off to class to learn that the whole thing was run by a couple of people I had known throughout my youth but hadn’t set eyes on since high school. It was…well, honestly, it was VERY cool.

Enough of all that. I’m very glad to find my dear old church finally trying to climb out of the wretched hole its liberal leadership entombed it in—a redirection long overdue, the one hope for rescuing it from the path of corruption, irrelevance, and decay. I don’t doubt that my dad, aunts, uncles, and kin are smiling down from Heaven to see it.

Share

Peeping Tom politics

Rogue, wrong, out of control.

Obama Judges Kill Americans’ Privacy to Help Democratic House Harass Trump
Two Obama appointees just greenlit two of the most invasive Congressional subpoenas for private financial information in American history. Their orders eviscerate and endanger privacy for all Americans.

Gee, imagine my surprise. Note ye well that this balls-out-illegal outrage is for records from a period when Trump A) was NOT President; B) was not RUNNING for President; C) was NOT under suspicion of phony “Russian collusion,” a specious connivance that has now been exposed as such.

Supreme Court precedent “makes it plain that the mere semblance of legislative purpose would not justify an inquiry in the face of the Bill of Rights.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 198 (1957). Congress cannot “unjustifiably encroach upon an individual’s right to privacy nor abridge his liberty of speech, press, religion or assembly.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 198 (1957). The Supreme Court warned “there is no congressional power to expose for the sake of exposure.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 200 (1957). The sole and whole goal must be “collecting information for a legislative purpose” which is limited to “obtaining facts upon which the full legislature can act.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 200 (1957). This imposes “a jurisdictional concept of pertinency” that constricts inquiries to factual issues needed for legislation. Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 206 (1957). This “scope of inquiry” must be “defined with sufficiently unambiguous clarity to safeguard a witness from the hazards of vagueness.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 217(1957).

“There is no general authority to expose the private affairs of individuals without justification in terms of the functions of the Congress…Nor is the Congress a law enforcement or trial agency. Those are functions of the executive and judicial departments of government. No inquiry is an end in itself; it must be related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of the Congress. Investigations conducted solely for the personal aggrandizement of the investigators or to punish those investigated are indefensible.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 186 (1957).

Not ONE of which conditions apply here. What this is is yet another completely illegitimate Democrat-Socialist fishing expedition, hoping to unearth something—anything, anything at all—that can then be inflated into a justification for impeachment. It is Constitutionally insupportable; legally without basis; ethically repellent; destructive to whatever tattered shreds remain of national comity; and despicable in every way. It is a low, frankly dangerous abuse of powers the Congress not only does not have, but has been explicitly denied them by the Supreme Court. It is political and personal harrassment, perpetrated by a party running scared and desperate, terrified that all the skeletons lurking in their closet might now rattle into public view. Here’s the telling, and infuriating, part:

The judges’ mutual refusal to stay their judgment pending appeal further reflects the partisan motivation behind their conduct. Anyone think they would have approved Congressional subpoenas into Obama’s still-sealed educational records? Anyone think they would have approved Senatorial subpoenas into Biden’s family finances that concern the large sums of money foreign countries and their agents paid his family during his Vice Presidency under Obama? Anyone think they would have approved wide-scale subpoenas into the activities of the Clinton Foundation during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State?

This judgment presents a risk far beyond the politics and personality of Trump, though it is the premise for the courts’ conduct; these court orders open Pandora’s box for any snooping, stalking, surveilling politician to pry open the most intimate private aspects of any person’s life at any time for any reason as they long as they write a memo to themselves that says: we need this for legislation someday, maybe, kinda.

Does anyone think these peeping Tom politicians will limit their window shopping to Trump Tower?

The legal and political left continues to attack the first freedoms of the Constitutional republic in ways even Orwell thought too implausible to foresee. The failure to protect privacy for those related to Trump is the failure to protect privacy for everyone. Let us hope SCOTUS steps in before 2024 becomes Orwell’s 1984.

Umm, hate to say it, but that ship has already sailed. No matter, though. The Democrat-Socialists are stepping heedlessly onto explosive ground here, still thinking themselves immune to any possible harm. They MUST be stopped, by whatever means necessary to do so, before it’s too late.

Trump needs to resist this indecent assault on his and his family’s privacy, vigorously and uncompromisingly; not only for his own sake, but even more for ours. For our part, we need to support him in that, unambiguously and without reservation. I know, I know, he hasn’t done this, he’s failed at that, he’s only halfheartedly attempted the other. He’s a boob, a blowhard, a deceitful fraud. Doesn’t matter now; he remains our very last chance to stem the Progtard tide politically, without an actual bloody, catastrophic shooting war. I am HIGHLY doubtful that such can be done, even more so with each successive shitlib shitfit. But we gotta try as hard as we can.

Share

A herd of swine

Y’all might notice a new addition to my small notable-quotes section at top-sidebar-right, an Immutable Truth I gleaned here.

The devious relationship between one party and its willing accomplices in the media has moved beyond the point of eye-rolls and shoulder-shrugs. It has reached a tipping point for our nation. Joseph Goebbels famously stated, “Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine.” This has become the incestuous relationship the Left lustfully pursues with increasing reliability. Through decades of permeation, the media have been given over to the Left, and for leftists, our society has become the herd of swine.

Not surprisingly, the playbook isn’t limited to the national mainstream media. Media technology group AllSides published a report that Google News results lean heavily toward media outlets with a “left” bias. The author of the study, John Gable, stated that the bias is a result of “most news outlets and most news consumption online being from a left perspective.” The purveyors of Google News are well aware of this egregious bias, but because Google’s corporate culture sways heavily left, we can hardly expect the company to create an algorithm that provides a fair and balanced narrative.

Indoctrination of the masses by the Left used to come in the form of opinion pieces. During the Reagan administration, White House network reporters certainly reported the news. However, they steadily began introducing the technique of ending each report with strongly worded opposing viewpoints from critics of the administration. Who were these unnamed critics? The ones holding the microphone.

Oh, they started a long, long time before that, buddy—certainly no later than Cronkite’s notorious post-Tet declaration of defeat, probably well before. By Reagan, their bias-insertion techniques were as highly developed as they were ever gonna get. After that, it was less a matter of refining them and more one of brazenly, relentlessly deploying them.

Thus began the stepped up infiltration of political views into national news. Subsequently, what began as infiltration has become full-on partisanship. The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, NBC, CBS, ABC, and various other “news” outlets used to portray themselves as impartial. Reading an opinion piece masquerading as a news story in a national news publication no longer seems brazen. It has become the new normal.

Opinion pieces masquerading as news is hardly their only ploy. A more subtle and insidious one is the calculated selection of which stories get reported, and which get buried. It’s a sneaky little subterfuge, that one; call it stealth-editorializing.

On any number of subjects, building a wall between Mexico and the United States being a current topic of the day, there are literally dozens of video recordings of Democrats contradicting themselves from the position they took even a decade ago. Joe Biden once pounded the pulpit demanding that we build a wall. With Joe Biden as the Democratic frontrunner for U.S. president, you’ve seen that contradiction reported all over the national mainstream media, haven’t you?

Contrast that with anything and everything Donald Trump says. The media are quick to pull any quote, any tweet out of context or bend it out of shape to promote the narrative that the president is an unhinged liar. With very few exceptions, how can one not be entirely cynical of our news sources and online media?

A: one can’t, without being either a liberal red in tooth and claw, or a total moron. Anybody who still believes in their integrity and honesty isn’t fit to tie his own shoes or feed himself without assistance, and should be kept well away from sharp objects…and voting booths. The first, for their own good. The second, for everybody else’s.

Share

Forecast: dire

Aesop examines the Coming Unpleasantness.

The entire point of law is that it be fixed and reliable for all.
Without that, when it’s random and capricious, it’s worse than no law at all.

If there aren’t indictments, trials, and convictions over what’s gone on, I can tell you what I do have faith will happen: there’s going to be war.

Not a tantrum, or a disturbance, or a riot, or even some low-intensity nonsense.
It’s going to be a full batshit war. It will come in its own time. Maybe slow unfolding, maybe all at once. But come it will.

People are going to start looking for an excuse, any excuse, and then they’re going to find one, and hunting season will be open. And once it starts, it’s going to spiral out of control, like things do, and one side or the other will become extinct before it’s over.

The social construct in this country is that every two to four years, we have peaceful revolutions at the ballot box.

Now one side doesn’t want to play by that any more, and has spent two years subverting every branch of government to support a slow coup against an elected president. Either we nip that nonsense in the bud, and people responsible pay with their lives spent in prison for a decade or two, or we’re going to start getting governments by hard coup, with all the trimmings, and we’ve seen how that’s played out, from Russia in 1917 to Venezuela yesterday.

I suspect a lot of other societal dysfunction is going to get a blowtorch up its tailpipe as part of the show.

The prospect of such times frankly scares the hell out of me, but not as much as the prospect of sitting on my hands and watching the crooked communists in power march ever onward, and plant 100M of their friends and neighbors in mass graves.

Because that’s where we are headed if nothing happens, and no one cares.

Agreed, completely. It’s a horrifying prospect to be sure…all the more so because the alternative scenario is even worse. But there yet remains a glimmer of hope for avoiding such a catastrophe, which can be taken from the most edifying spectacle of nefarious Shadow Government cockroaches scurrying in sheer, mad panic:

Note well: none of the leveraged targets of Robert Mueller turned state’s evidence to accuse Donald Trump of “collusion,” the object of the special counsel’s investigation, although to have done so would have mightily helped their cause and given them John Dean iconic status among leftists. In contrast, we have scarcely begun to investigate wrongdoing at the intelligence and justice departments and already the suspects are fingering each other.

James Clapper, John Brennan, and James Comey are now all accusing one another of being culpable for inserting the unverified dossier, the font of the effort to destroy Trump, into a presidential intelligence assessment—as if suddenly and mysteriously the prior seeding of the Steele dossier is now seen as a bad thing. And how did the dossier transmogrify from being passed around the Obama Administration as a supposedly top-secret and devastating condemnation of candidate and then president-elect Trump to a rank embarrassment of ridiculous stories and fibs?

Given the narratives of the last three years, and the protestations that the dossier was accurate or at least was not proven to be unproven, why are these former officials arguing at all? Did not implanting the dossier into the presidential briefing give it the necessary imprimatur that allowed the serial leaks to the press at least to be passed on to the public and thereby apprise the people of the existential danger that they faced?

These are rhetorical questions because we know the answers: our top officials at the DOJ, CIA, FBI, and NSC, as well as James Clapper as director of national intelligence, likely broke federal law, betrayed their agencies, and in general acted in an abjectly unethical manner on the premises that 1) Hillary Clinton would be the next president and their behavior would be rewarded; and 2) in the aftermath of her defeat and after Trump became president, that Trump could either be removed or so discredited that their own prior illegality would either never come to light or would be contextualized as noble resistance.

Until election night, they seemed to have been correct in their assumptions.

No longer are Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and McCabe along with a host of others insisting that they acted nobly. No longer are they in solidarity in their defiant opposition to Donald Trump.

Now, for the first time, they are pointing fingers at one another, because they have come to realize that their prior criminality may not be rewarded, praised, or even excused, but rather prosecuted.

As of today we can add another Ogabe-appointed malefactor, Loretta Lynch, to that steadily-lengthening list of alarmed cockroaches. Even Mueller himself seems a little nervous:

Special counsel Robert Mueller is reluctant to publicly testify about his report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election because he does not want to become part of a political firestorm.

CNN reported on Tuesday that Mueller and his team are worried about the political environment that he would be stepping into if he agreed to testify publicly before the House Judiciary Committee.

Oh, I just bet so…seeing as how said “political environment” amounts to an abrupt turning of the tables on the coup-conspirators and their cat’s paw Mueller. Secure for so long in their comfortable assumption of perpetual impunity, they never saw ANY of this coming. And they’re absolutely hating every minute of it. Cockroaches never enjoy having the spotlight turned on them, see.

As I keep saying: patience, people. The investigation is only beginning, and the process won’t be quick. It’s entirely possible, too, that Aesop’s worry about some sort of whitewash will turn out to be justified. But the way the seditious Deep State blaggards are turning on each other so readily at this early stage of the game ought to tell us all something about what their own expectations as to where all this is headed might be. Hopefully, they’ll turn out to be right for once.

Share

Wrong righted redux

Been waiting to see what Steyn would have to say about Trump’s pardon Mark’s friend and former employer Conrad Black.

You have the “right to a fair trial,” but U.S. prosecutors win 99 per cent of the cases that go to court — a success rate that would embarrass Kim Jong Un and Saddam Hussein. Indeed, the feds win 97 per cent without ever going near court. In 2007, on the first day of Conrad Black’s trial on the 12th floor of the Mies van der Rohe skyscraper that houses Chicago’s dozens of federal courtrooms, I went looking for somewhere to make a discreet call on my cellphone. There were people everywhere — reporters, lawyers, spouses, curious deputy attorneys dropping in from neighbouring offices, a fan of mine wanting me to autograph my Broadway book to his pal John Mahoney from “Frasier”… Eventually, I pushed open a door and found myself in an empty courtroom. So I phoned from there in complete privacy. When others attending the trial discovered the room, I went to the empty courtroom further down the corridor. And, when in turn that grew popular as a handsomely paneled telephone booth, I went to the empty courtroom upstairs, or downstairs.

So many courtrooms, and no trials. Because, when the odds of not losing are one in 100, who goes to court?

Americans who know anything about the country’s evil and depraved “justice” system grasp that central fact. It’s only rubes who say “let the process play out” or “if you haven’t done anything wrong, you’ve got nothing to fear.” For a start, by the time the process “plays out,” you’ll be broke and scavenging from dumpsters (as Trump’s fallen National Security honcho Michael Flynn learned, shortly before copping a plea). Second, from a prosecutorial point of view, “if you haven’t done anything wrong” they can still get you on misremembering to the FBI in a matter for which there’s no underlying crime (as Martha Stewart discovered), or, alternatively, on Robert Mueller’s second-favourite process crime of hanging out with too many foreigners in alleged breach of the “Foreign Agents Registration Act,” which Trump aide George Papadopoulos told me recently Mueller had threatened him with. (I met most Aussie cabinet ministers of the John Howard years, so I’m undoubtedly guilty on that front, even before you factor in dinner with Jason Kenney and a bit of chit-chat with Maxime Bernier).

It’s a corrupt system heavily reliant on blackmail. But its crude thuggish simplicity concentrates the mind, and thus everyone gets it. Which is why, when the dismantling of Conrad Black’s business empire began 16 years ago, the rich and powerful were the first to abandon him: whatever will be will be, but one thing’s for certain — Conrad’s screwed, he’s over, cut him loose now. 

This is a well-deserved crisping of America’s dysfunctional, disgraceful, warped “justice” system—as Steyn rightly says, a system evil, depraved, and corrupt to its core. Our Founding ideal of a speedy trial before an impartial jury of one’s peers has been reduced to no more than the punchline to a wholly unfunny joke; the endless prosecutorial manipulation and dirty-deal-making that has brought us to our sorry “the process is the punishment” state of affairs is but one of the factors guaranteeing that true justice will only rarely and accidentally be found within fifty miles of any courthouse in the land.

I’ve been telling both family and friends for years that our abominable system is set up so that, once they find themselves caught up in its crushing gears, it will be damned near impossible to get themselves out. Sadly, it has proved to be entirely true for more than just one of ’em. Alas, this is yet another of those issues for which I have no solution to offer—for which there may not even be a workable one at all, in fact. But one way or another, the system WILL change. It must.

Share

CF Comments Policy Statement

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit. Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't.

Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil." - Skeptic

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine." - Joseph Goebbels

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it." - NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in." -Bill Whittle

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix