Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Mea culpa!

TR offers up one, for the analysis I posted here the other day:

Boy, was I wrong! In my previous piece on Mueller’s joke of an investigation, I suggested that his Hail Mary would be a perjury trap laid for President Trump – one which, given the POTUS’ lack of precision and lawyerspeak, might have been successful.

Instead, Mueller pulled a move that is so genius, Wile E. Coyote would approve. He indicted 13 Russian ham sandwiches of various minor offenses and then charged them all with a “conspiracy.” What makes this move genius, on his part, is that they’re Russian. We have no extradition treaty with Russia. Hence, Mueller will never be asked to prove his charges in a court of law. It’s the ultimate golden parachute for him.

And John Q. Public will never trouble himself to do a little of his own investigation. He’ll never find out, for instance, that the total ad spend with Facebook was somewhere in the neighborhood of $100,000. He’ll never be troubled by the fact that over 50% of the efforts with which these Russkies were charged came AFTER the election. He’ll likely not know that the Russians actually staged pro and con Trump rallies on the same day. And not knowing these things – because these are facts that you have to DIG for nowadays – he’ll likely think that Trump did in fact conspire with the Russians. And with 13 commies indicted, it just HASTA be a big conspiracy! It’s truly genius on Mueller’s part.

Except.

Except that it appears that the Flynn indictment and plea might be vacated due to prosecutorial misconduct. How are they gonna hide that one?

Except that the UraniumOne investigation continues to be ongoing.

Except that the IG’s investigation of Felona Von Pantsuit’s email server is going to be released soon, as will Mueller’s role in dealing with that issue.

Except that the revelation that the FBI couldn’t even be bothered to talk to Nikolas Cruz – who was cleverly hiding online with the username of “Nikolas Cruz” – has perhaps pierced the faith that Mr. Public has in the Feebs.

I still think that Mueller is just trying to run out the clock until November, when he can cast enough suspicion over Trump to provoke a Democrat takeover of Congress and then a sham impeachment. The question is whether or not it will work.

That was the real question all along, right from the start. How could it be otherwise, really, since the whole thing was always much more partisan ploy than honest investigation? They’ve operated right along on some badly misguided assumptions: that normal Americans hated Trump as much as they do; that they’re much, much smarter than he is; that the rest of us couldn’t possible EVER catch on to their game; that they could intimidate Trump and/or his staffers into caving in and making some kind of deal with them; that their status as power brokers was permanent, leaving them untouchable.

Now they’re hanging on by their fingernails, scrambling and spinning just to try to keep themselves and their co-conspirators out of the jug (or the gibbet) for committing seriously treasonous crimes they assumed a Hillary! victory would forever provide them cover for. I still maintain the odds of any of them facing appropriate punishment are vanishingly low, but it’s still highly satisfying to see the wind being so thoroughly knocked out of them by all this.

Gonna have to come up with an acronym or some other kind of shorthand for “Why no, I am NOT tired of all the winning yet,” looks like.

Share

Open secret

Wow. I mean, just…wow.

“Go in and think like a liberal” was the advice two FBI agents gave Jonathan Gilliam prior to his taking an FBI entrance exam. Gilliam shared his anecdote during a Wednesday interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight with co-hosts Rebecca Mansour and Joel Pollak.

Gilliam, a retired Navy SEAL and former FBI special agent, spoke of left-wing political corruption across the federal government, specifically identifying the CIA and FBI.

Gilliam recalled that two FBI agents advised him to “think like a liberal” during his FBI entrance exam. “I was told by two FBI agents that did not know each other –  I was told, ‘Do not go in and take that test as though you are thinking like a SEAL.’ In other words, ‘If this happened, this is the way it should be done because this is the way a team works, and this is the way an investigation should be carried out.’ They said, ‘Don’t do that, you’ll fail. Go in and think like a liberal.’ And that’s what I did, and I passed.”

The FBI’s entrance exam illustrated how leftists use ideological filtering tools preferencing ideological fellow travelers, said Gilliam.

The “deep state” network of leftists, said Gilliam, extends across various federal bureaucracies. He advised President Donald Trump to cleanse federal bureaucracies of politically corrupt leftists.

“If you want to see the deep state, this is what you’re looking at,” said Gilliam. “It’s not just the FBI. It’s not just the DOJ. It’s also the State Department. It’s the IRS. It’s the DOD. It’s the VA. You want to look across the board and look (at) all of these.”

It’s one thing to know this intellectually, as we all do. It’s quite another to see it spelled out so unabashedly, straight from within the belly of the beast. Awestruck kudos to Gilliam for having the big clanking brass ones to fearlessly speak up like this. Given the FBI’s sordid history, he has most probably put himself in real peril by daring to lift the veil publicly—for publication, no less. He’s a brave man indeed.

We’ve had discussions here on a couple of occasions with people dismissive of the notion of any actual organized “conspiracy,” formal or informal, behind Leftist influence on government. But that’s the wrong way to think of it from the start—a flawed premise which can only lead further analysis astray and render it futile.

My position has always been that, when it comes to the dead hand of Progressivism on the levers of power, collusion (yeah, I said it) doesn’t require conspiracy. It’s more the result of a confluence of like-minded people in positions of influence, a Borg hive-mind that is diligent about taking care of their own and takes the institutional primacy of their ideology as a given, with conservative or Constitution-respecting types well aware of the hostility towards them and mindful of the necessity of keeping their own beliefs under wraps. Think of it as Hollywood writ much larger and you won’t be far wrong.

Much larger, and much more nefarious too. After all, you can always choose not go to the movies.

(Via WRSA and Heartiste)

Share

Charm, offensive

Schlichter seems shocked, but after years of seeing Lefty fellate the Soviet Union, China, North Vietnam, Venezuela, Cuba, and every other communist tyranny you care to name, it shouldn’t come as any big surprise.

And then there is siding with the North Koreans against our president and vice president. Look, liberals’ fake patriotism in the wake of the humiliating defeat – in an election – of Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit was always grating. But, as predicted, liberals can’t keep up the pretense of siding with America. This stuff about Trump and the Russians, the same Russians who couldn’t sit down during the Cold War without checking to make sure they weren’t going to crush a Democrat’s head, was always a joke. That the liberal establishment thinks worse of Mike Pence than a woman who is literally the head of the Propaganda and Agitation Department for a country that just threatened to nuke the United States says all you need to know about their fake patriotism.

No liberals, I’m not questioning your patriotism. Don’t be silly. I’d never do that. I don’t waste my time questioning unicorns either.

America’s most effective advocate of the principle of an armed populace is now officially the liberal media that usually seeks to do the ruling class’s bidding and strip us Normal Americans of that sacred right. But after the media’s bizarre display of eager tongue-bathing of the semi-human savages who run North Korea, any patriot has got to be thinking, “I best load up, because it’s pretty clear what the establishment’s desired end state is.”

The New York Times quivered: “Kim Jong-un’s Sister Turns on the Charm, Taking Pence’s Spotlight.”

Reuters tingled: “North Korea judged winner of diplomatic gold at Olympics.”

And CNN harassed airport travelers with: “Kim Jong Un’s sister is stealing the show at the Winter Olympics.”

But besides having bad taste, our mainstream media is revealing our ruling class once again. You watch the non-stop squee over these monsters and the only conclusion you can reasonably draw is that, for our worthless establishment, the North Korea murderocracy is not a cautionary example. It’s an objective.

Dude, of COURSE it is. The establishment of a globe-spanning Marxist misery-pit is the whole idea for them; it’s Job One, a feature and not a bug. What did you think they’d been working towards all the years they’ve been growing the federal government, making its power nearly absolute, taxing everything that moves (or doesn’t), demanding more federal spending no matter how astronomical the sum, waxing hysterical over the heartless evils of capitalism, denouncing the primacy of the individual and emphasizing the collective, and gushing with praise and envy over Europe’s embrace of socialism?

It Takes A Village, remember? Government is a word for the things we do Together? Taxes are the price we pay for civilization? Those and a bazillion other inspiring little liberal shibboleths?

Admittedly, North Korea is one of the more ghastly examples of Marxism’s inevitable failure; that being so, one might imagine Leftards would hesitate before extolling the place as any kind of example, if only as a matter of self-interest. But one would be underestimating their confidence in their talent for deception, overestimating their intelligence, or perhaps both.

Elsewhere, I sure hope Kurt ain’t holding his breath waiting for this. Yes, you betcha it’s related.

The FBI can buy manufactured evidence to spy on us, and that’s okay. We aren’t human.

The IRS can persecute us if we try to exercise our right to participate in the political process, and that’s okay. We aren’t human.

 Some Sanders fan who no doubt had a COEXIST sticker on his minivan can shoot up a bunch of Republicans, and that’s okay. We aren’t human.

Maybe his family getting sent fake anthrax will teach Don Jr. some obedience.

Let’s slide past the hideous moral bankruptcy of this way of thinking and get to the practical problem with normalizing terrorism and dehumanizing opponents. It creates a set of new rules, and the complicit liberal elite better think really hard about whether they truly want those new rules in effect. After all, they enacted new rules regarding vicious campaigning and then Trump came and wiped out Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit using them.

Do you liberals really want new rules allowing violence and terrorism?

Do you liberals really want new rules allowing denormalizing your political opponents?

Do you liberals really want new rules allowing dehumanizing your political opponents?

You may think you do now, but trust me, you really don’t.

There is a way out, a way that is obvious to anyone of good faith and common sense, and since it’s always a leftist attacking Republicans, the Democrat leadership needs to lead the way. The way out is to join together with the President and other conservatives and unequivocally reject violence and terror.

Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and all the other key Democrat leaders must stand on a stage beside Donald Trump and Don Jr. and say, without qualification that this is unacceptable and wrong. Then they and their minions in politics and in their pet press must stop with the non-stop, psycho-fueling hate for their conservative opponents – not the political disagreements but the senseless, drooling venom that infects the MSNBCs and the Twitters and all the rest.

But that will never happen.

Of course it won’t. In their eyes, that would be not just defeat, but surrender. It would require them to renounce the principles they’ve come to cherish most, depraved as those principles are.

The Left intends not to govern, but to rule. Their intent is not to debate, but to silence. They wish not to defeat us, but to enslave us—to bring us to heel, to train us to accept the bit. To force us by any means necessary to accept the superiority of their beliefs and foreswear any notion of dissent from them.

And if they can’t, well, that’s what the gulags are for.

Shocking, that Leftymedia would be so shamelessly fulsome in their praise for the Kim Il Whosits and their hideous government? Not hardly. They have so much in common, y’know.

Share

Stomp the swamp

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Why are so many of the people who have risen to the top of our government institutions, those who become the leaders or directors of our alphabet agencies, so imperious, so devious, so malevolent, so lacking in character and so disdainful of the American people? How is it that people of good character no longer want to work for the government or run for elective office? The answer: because it is not just a swamp, it is a toxic, venomous morass of self-serving lowlifes.

How on earth did such men and women reach the highest levels of power in our once-democratic government? Under Obama the government was weaponized at the highest levels of every agency: IRS, EPA, HUD, FDA, FEC, FCC, DNI, DOD, and other acronyms too obscure to recognize, but wielding enormous power over mere citizens. 

While there are more than a few talented men and women of character in government, they are still the exception in the upper echelons, not the rule. There are even fewer men and women of character in the mainstream media, which is why we are blessed to have so many reliable internet news outlets aside from ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC.

Far too many of these people, our so-called leaders, rose to their positions of power by default, with other people’s money, people rich enough to buy influence, or their own dynastic money like the Kennedys. How can men and women of fine character and an aptitude for leadership go up against candidates funded by an evil man like George Soros? They cannot.

And so we are saddled with ignoble people like those in the Obama administration and those who remain in the deep state who are doing their best to take out the most consequential and conservative President we’ve had since Reagan. We must find a way to weed out the reprobates. Most American are sick to death of the dregs running the show.

Well, it’s certainly to be hoped they are. But even after as vigorous a slap in the face for the swamp creatures as was the election of Trump, along with the clearly salubrious effects of his ascension becoming evident to every sane person, I fear that that still remains to be seen. Limbaugh sounds a particularly chilling cautionary note along those lines:

Something very quietly is happening out there. It’s not being touted, and it’s a little bothersome that it isn’t being touted. The Democrats are showing remarkable discipline here in not touting what is very quietly happening out there. And what is very quietly happening out there is that the Democrats are winning elections. They have recently begun to win elections. They are winning special elections. They are winning local and state elections.

And they’re not shouting about it. They’re not being loud and boisterous and celebratory at all. They won another one. And the last five or six of these elections that they have won — one was in Missouri — they’re flipping Republican seats. The election they won yesterday was in a district that Trump won by eight percentage points in 2016.

This has happened about 15, 16 times in the last six months, that the Democrats have won elections and in many of them have flipped seats occupied by Republicans. This is not anything to do with the resignations from Congress of all these Republican committee chairmen. That’s another story itself. The Democrats and the Drive-Bys are not doing their Tarzan routine of pounding their chest and saying, “Look at us.” It’s happening under the radar.

Now, the reason I’m bringing this up, ladies and gentlemen, there is no way, there is no way that any Democrat should be winning any election now. There is no way under the sun the Democrats ought to be winning a single election, with the economy alone, with the tax cuts alone, there is no reason for the Democrats to be winning any elections. And yet they are all of a sudden. Through most of last year they were losing elections left and right just like we were from 2010 on.

This is a massive and it’s apparently, to date, a very successful grassroots effort that is being funded by George Soros, primarily, but there are others. 

And there the name of that evil son of a bitch pops up again. Yes, I said “evil,” and I meant it. It’s neither hyperbole nor exaggeration: we’re talking here about a monstrously vile reprobate who made his billions by collapsing entire national economies, creating chaos and misery among who even knows how many people for the sole purpose of enriching himself at their expense.

Now this entirely loathsome, filthy-rich communist is using his ill-gotten wealth to buy elections for Democrat Socialists, cleverly constructing a mechanism to thwart any effort to undo the damage they’ve done to the nation and loosen the federal grip on American throats. One can only admire his cunning, and his patience.

If there was any justice in this world, Soros’ victims would have salted the sidewalk slug long ago, shriveling him up and sweeping him away into the oblivion he so richly deserves.

As Rush says, there is no way that Democrats should be winning elections now, other than in their faltering urban dystopias. I do maintain that the Democrat Socialists are finished as a nationally viable party in the long run. But they’re still capable of wreaking plenty of mischief and disaster in the here and now, and I remain…umm, not entirely sanguine, shall we say, about the percentage of Americans who have seen through them fully and for good. It is not inconceivable that there are still enough blind fools out there who will require further demonstrations of who they are and what they do before finally seeing the light.

I still eagerly anticipate a stinging Democrat Socialist defeat later this year—a many-times-merited abjuration that, while not quite amounting to the final nail in any coffins, will still be a major step towards sealing their fate. But a lot can happen between now and then, and I’m not fool enough myself to fail to recognize that I might very well be wrong about the thing, too.

It was always the case that the Deep State was going to fight tooth and nail to retain their power and perks. One of the most powerful weapons in their arsenal is the pustule Soros. While I do remain confident, that confidence can never be absolute in a nation that elected Barrack Obama president. Twice. The midterms are sure enough going to tell us a lot; the most important revelation of all might be just how damned stupid too many of us are, even yet.

Share

Questions, questions

Diplomad asks a couple.

The Trump-Russia collusion story is a hoax by the Hillary campaign and its allies, and if we had a legitimate press it would so have been declared. This humble and inconsequential blog called it a hoax long ago (here and here, for example). As I have stated repeatedly, the whole thing falls apart with one question: Why would Putin favor Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton? His buddies had paid Clinton millions, including via “speaking fees” to Bill. Except perhaps for Donald Trump,  everyone, at home and abroad, just assumed Hillary Clinton was going to be the next president.

Well, yet another nail has been hammered into the coffin of this horrible story.

In the last few days, we have had another letter and memo released (somewhat redacted) by Senators Graham and Grassley, two gents who do not particularly care for Donald Trump and are commonly seen as RINOs.

Read it; you don’t need me to tell you what’s in it, but if you want a devastating analysis of what this memo does to the whole Russia story, read Andrew McCarthy’s piece in the NR. There is no way I can do a better analysis than what McCarthy did; note, again, that McCarthy has not been a fan of Trump’s.

It’s clear that the FBI used the fake Steele dossier to get warrants to surveil American citizens. The FBI knew the dossier was fake and a product of the Hillary campaign. Yet they used it to get the initial surveillance warrant, as well as the extensions. Particularly galling, as McCarthy notes, the FBI did not provide any evidence of wrong-doing found by the initial surveillance when it sought those extensions, and, essentially, just repeated the lie that Steele was reliable and had reliable sources.

What I don’t see examined anywhere, however, is yet an even more troubling scandal and piece of evidence of the “deep state” at work.

Why would an honest, objective judge accept the flimsy “evidence” provided by the FBI?

A: an “honest, objective judge” wouldn’t. A bought-and-paid-for fellow-traveler, a Progressivist shill (or three, or four), did. These treasonous Deep Staters went judge-shopping for a fig leaf, a rubber stamp; the FISA “court” is well enough known for providing that already. Any bets on whether any or all of the too-biddable jurists in this instance will turn out to be Obama appointees, should our betters ever allow us to know their identities?

Yeah, thought not.

Dip poses a few more questions before his son puts the capper on: “I am tired of memos and investigations. We all know what went on. It’s time for people to be indicted and jailed.” Damned skippy it is. Sadly, I’ve said before I don’t expect any such, and I still don’t. That might well be the most depressing aspect of the whole thing, at least for me.

Time, and past time, to rid ourselves of the insidious FBI as well. If their entire history of corruption, treachery, lawlessness, and (apparently justified) sense of entitlement and impunity weren’t reason enough, the plot to rig the last election and the ensuing campaign to hamstring the duly-elected President would be plenty all by themselves.

As for why they ever attempted this hamfisted mishegoss of a coup in the first place, Daniel Flynn has that covered:

An administration siccing the surveillance state on the opposition party’s presidential candidate based on dubious reports compiled by the favored presidential candidate’s campaign ranks as a terribly reckless strategy risking the future freedom of its architects for their future power, no?

“Not if you think you will win the election and no one will ever find out,” an animated Joseph diGenova tells The American Spectator. “That’s why they did it. They thought she would win and no one would ever find out.”

Alas, Hillary Clinton did not, as so many expected, win the presidency. So, the incoming administration, investigated by dubious means, got to see what the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and various Justice Department officials believed it would never see.

Seems simple enough at that, don’t it? All the convolutions and contortions and headache-inducing lists of names and dates and places and timelines and other such piffling pedantry should not for a moment be allowed to obscure that essential truth. They just KNEW Her Herness couldn’t possibly fail to win, and the rigging of the election would be swept under the rug along with all of Obama’s other high crimes and misdemeanors forever.

Oops.

Let’s keep in mind another essential, core truth here: they’re fucking incompetent. Despite their monumental arrogance, the obvious takeaway is that these idiots—Democrat Socialists, the Fibbies, Obama and the Clintons, Comey, the whole can of slimy worms—could fuck up a one-car funeral.

Okay, granted, launching a clandestine attempt to overturn an election and overthrow a legitimate government might not be the easiest thing in the world to pull off, the basic right and wrong of the thing aside. But did that give these clowns even a second’s pause? Hell no. Far as I can discern, not one among ’em—not ONE—ever once expressed hesitation or doubt about the advisability of mucking about with one of our most cherished bedrock institutions. Nobody had wit or discernment enough to ask, “Hey, fellas, ummm, maybe destroying for all time Americans’ trust in the integrity of their elections might not be such a good idea, y’know?”

Kinda makes you wonder what else they might have gotten up to over the years, and gotten away with to date, that would instill such reckless faith in their ability to pull it off this time around, don’t it?

Thankfully, though, they couldn’t. Their arrogance was their Achilles heel; their incompetence was their undoing. The Keystone Kops would’ve made a better job of it than these shitheels. Even Inspector Clouseau always got his man in the end. But not these guys. And for that, we should probably all be grateful.

Share

History and patterns

Daniel digs deep to unearth some riveting ones, yielding insight into the ugly way the Clinton Crime Syndicate does business, and always has.

Cody Shearer is also the author of another Russia-Trump dossier used by the FBI, a memo that Steele, the author of the better known dossier, passed along. How did Steele come to possess Shearer’s memo? Shearer was one of Bill’s plumbers, notorious for spreading and circulating scandals aimed at Republicans. He’s also been accused of targeting and intimidating Bill Clinton’s victims. 

Is it more likely that a British agent happened to independently come across a memo by a Clinton political operative that echoed his own material or that his dossier was based on the memo? Was the Steele dossier an original piece of work by a former British intel agent doing his own research or had he been hired to put some meat on a conspiracy theory created by a Dem political operative? 

We don’t know the answer. Yet. But it’s quite possible that Steele, Russian intel operatives and all the other elements of the vast campaign were never more than window dressing on a smear from the same guy who had peddled the Dan Quayle cocaine story the last time the Clintons needed help. 

The Steele dossier, with its sloppy fact-checking and lurid tales of prostitutes urinating in a Moscow hotel, is far too unprofessional to be the work of a British ex-intel agent, but it reads like a Cody Shearer smear. Nasty and vicious has always been Shearer’s stock in trade as a variety of Republicans can testify.

Before Fusion GPS, there was Investigative Group International (IGI). Like Fusion GPS, IGI was a shadowy organization that specialized in digging up dirt for insiders. IGI’s boss was a longtime Clinton pal and the organization was turned loose on Bill Clinton’s political enemies. Shearer was accused of working as a subcontractor for IGI to go after George H.W. Bush and Dan Quayle.

There are still many questions to be answered about the Steele dossier. But the most important question is how a piece of opposition research was transformed into a law enforcement matter. 

And what is most troubling is that it may not even be the first time that the Clintons have pulled that off. 

The campaign against Trump is unprecedented because of the scale of the abuses. The collusion between Obama government officials and Clinton campaign personnel transformed opposition research into a license for surveillance on the political opposition. A conspiracy theory from the Clinton campaign became leverage for delegitimizing and trying to reverse the results of an election. And the conspiracy theory that elements of the FBI loyal to the Democrats relied upon to attack Trump originated from the deepest sewer in Clintonworld that had been covertly smearing political enemies for decades.

The Clintons are done. But their legacy lives on after them. The Russia conspiracies and the Mueller investigation continue to divide this nation even though Hillary’s political career is deader than Julius Caesar. Fusion GPS is still around. So is IGI. And there are other organizations like them out there. 

There will always be political operatives like Cody Shearer out there. But if we don’t insulate law enforcement from them, elections won’t be determined by voters, they’ll be decided by political coups disguised as scandals. The establishment and its private police state will decide who runs the country.

The damage wantonly done to America and its institutions by the Clintons, Obama, and the amoral lust for naked power that drives the sorry lot of them is damned nigh beyond calculation. It is no exaggeration to say that these are ugly, indecent, treacherous, and dangerous people, being entirely unburdened by scruple, conscience, or virtue. Years ago it was my considered practice to regularly dump on Bill Clinton by calling him a near-sociopath; this, after all, is a man known to relentlessly pursue his every desire and ambition without the slightest pang of either shame or remorse over the harm—real harm, serious and lasting harm—done to those he victimized along the way.

Seems to me that at this stage of the game, after having watched him at his grubby pursuit of self-aggrandizement for decades now, we can comfortably dispense with the “near-” qualifier. It stupefies me to know that the dirty wretch can still dupe anybody at all with the thin scrim of humanity he tosses over his maleficence and depravity like a tattered, threadbare old shawl. Yet somehow, he does. Far more than just a handful of those dupes, too. One can only stand back and marvel over it in…well, whatever it is, admiration probably isn’t quite the word for it.

But bad as Bill is, Hillary is probably worse, lacking as she does the soulless caricature of empathy that enhances The Creep’s manipulations by allowing him to fraudulently present himself as a caring, ordinary guy drawn to politics by a simple desire to be of assistance in alleviating the travails of his fellow citizens. Compared to the pair of them, the narcissistic, thimble-deep Obama is but a callow amateur, a real greenhorn, despite the fact that he’s actually a pretty nasty piece of work in his own right. The universally-reviled Nixon—held over Republican heads since the 70s by liberals as Satan, Charles Manson, Ed Gein, and Hitler all rolled into one appalling lump—doesn’t even rank on the same scale as these toads. Next to the Clintons, poor old Tricky Dick begins to look more like Santa Claus or Mother Teresa instead. They leave him in the shade by a considerable margin.

Looking at the bigger picture, it is to this country’s undying shame and detriment both that we ever allowed without protest the rise of a professional-politician class at all, in feckless disregard of our Founders’ passionately-expressed warnings against that very thing. The Clintons are of course extraordinary, highest-order examples of that repellent breed, the pinnacle of its evolution to date. But the basic traits developed to such an extreme in the Clintons are no more than typical of very nearly all of that class: absolute and insatiable megalomania; the ability to tell any lie, either trifling or egregious, without so much as batting an eyelash if it’s useful to them in the moment; facility for convincingly feigning emotions one does not feel to even the most infinitesimal degree, such as contrition, compassion, concern, regret, gratitude, or humility; falsely evincing respect for the opinions, ambitions, or concerns of one’s constituents; ability to conceal contempt for those constituents with fawning, near-groveling obsequiousness, and to pretend to enjoy being in their midst when occasionally necessary for campaign purposes; shamelessness astounding in its depth and breadth, even when caught in the very act of the most humiliating transgressions one could imagine; a self-confident, ever-ready glibness, supporting a talent for quickly assessing on the fly the response most likely to be deemed appropriate after being caught in such a transgression; a con artist’s eye for the gullible, credulous, and easily-led; a boundless egotism, inspiring an unshakeable belief in one’s own irreplaceability as the only real hope of meaningful progress for the benighted dimwits who vote for you; a bone-deep conviction that you deserve all the power you so viscerally crave, and that you are not only qualified but duty-bound to order the lives of those you rule rather than govern according to your innate superiority.

These traits among others…and Bill Clinton is the uncontested Lord and Master of them all, doubtless the envy of every lesser pretender to his mighty throne: Crazy Bernie Sanders, who never did a day’s honest work in his life, a thoroughly inadequate man who nonetheless feels himself adequate to rule the rest of us under a socialist tyranny; Lieawatha the Injun Maid, whiter-than-white appropriator of indigenous Native American culture, hypocrite nonpareil; creepy boob Joe “Feel Em Up Feel Em Up Grope Grope Grope” Biden, standing ready to heed the call of exactly no one and offer his unwanted service to the nation in yet another of his serial bumbling runs for the Oval Office; the execrable, befuddled, and increasingly pathetic empty suit John Kasich; eminently bribable serial molester John “No Reasonable Offer Refused” Conyers; even Slick Willie’s own “wife” too—who, after her last stinging repudiation, must find even brief proximity to her husband-in-name-only so grating as to be damned near intolerable by now, an excruciating reminder of the contrast between his success and her failure.

They all envy him, and quietly hate him for attaining a summit of professional-politician greasiness and smarm too lofty for them to so much as credibly aspire to. Or they would, that is, were they capable of a moment’s honest self-reflection and awareness. Which they aren’t, fortunately for them; if they were, they’d be spontaneously combusting in the streets from burning shame.

Yep, even as The Creep fades into obscurity and Constitutionally-mandated electoral irrelevance, he haunts their thoughts still. That’s got to just frost their nuts but good. Especially Hillary’s big brass ones. You want a Clinton legacy? Right there it is, bub: Bill’s ghostly presence darkening the Progressivist mind like a lingering shadow. That dubious legacy will endure a good long time, too, until the last backcountry dog-catcher to defraud his way into office under the ragged Democrat-Socialist rubric gives it up at last and decides to call himself something else next time out, just for appearance’s sake.

This nation indubitably owes Trump a mighty debt, one difficult to calculate and impossible to repay, for thwarting the Clintons’ re-infestation of the White House if for nothing else. It’s a measure of the NeverTrumpTards’ insane, myopic folly that they remain disgruntled by it—those dwindling few of them still aquiver with bitter indignation over an upstart electorate’s daring to ignore Conservative Inc’s predictions of calamity should DC business as usual be disrupted by such a vulgar, unserious buffoon, at any rate. The 2016 election was a pivotal, watershed moment in American politics: an election that truly did matter, to an extent that precious few of them have for decades now. There are plenty of others, of course, but looming largest among the reasons why is the unanticipated reprieve from a descent into the depths of a rerun nightmare, another dunking in the Clintonian cesspool.

So thank you, Mr President. From the bottom of my own heart, anyway, if not Ewan McMuffin’s, David French’s, or any other Vichy GOPe sad sack who prefers the comforting familiarity of defeat at the hands of a true blackguard to the risky uncertainty of meaningful victory.

Share

Better late than…

CF lifer TR sends this along, with permission for me to post it. Naturally, it came in the middle of the big move, so I’m only just now getting around to doing so. Events have overtaken some of the points herein, rendering them no longer relevant. But others are evergreen, I think, and it all adds up to a good outline of events so far, making it well worth a look.

Special Prosecutor Mueller is trying to throw a Hail Mary. For those who don’t know, a “Hail Mary” is a desperate, last-second forward pass on the football field, without regard for defensive coverage, just hoping that it lands in the hands of an offensive receiver who will then score and snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.

The “Special” investigation headed by Robert Mueller is about to come to an end. We know this because he’s throwing his Hail Mary right now, and you only do that when the clock is running out. His Hail Mary is to attempt to get President Trump under oath and hope desperately that he can catch the POTUS in something that he can then call a “lie,” and establish a process crime. He has to do that NOW because the clock is about to run out, not only on the investigation, but on Mueller himself. Why is that so?

To understand that, we must back up a ways. All the way to the original Uranium One sale to the Russians. While everyone focuses on the fact that Hillary Clinton was heavily involved in that sale, let’s not forget that Robert Mueller was also on the committee that OK’d the sale, as the FBI Director. Hence, if the sale was crooked, Mueller might feel that he’s as exposed as Mrs. Clinton. This wouldn’t be a problem IF Hillary had won the election; all the Obama/Clinton scandals would have gotten swept under the rug by a complicit Justice Department.

But Trump won. What to do? Well, that of course is the “insurance policy” referred to by Peter Strzok and his rather homely paramour, Lisa Page. Russia Russia Russia. Open an investigation, appoint a “special prosecutor” who is guaranteed not to be unbiased, and delegitimize the duly elected President. This strategy depended on many things, not the least of which is the spinelessness of the Republican Party and its NeverTrump wing.

At first, things were fine. AG Sessions, doing dishonor to proud Southerners everywhere (especially those named Jeffrey and Beauregard), recused himself despite it having been proven in Congressional testimony that he had no reason to do so.

In walks swamp dweller Rob Rosenstein, who then appoints someone whose career – and perhaps freedom – depends on keeping Trump at bay and the scandals quiet. Robert Mueller.

I think Mueller knew from the very beginning that the Russia investigation was, as Van Jones said, “a big nothingburger.” BUT, it was the only way to attempt to keep Trump on the defensive and make any inroads by the FBI/Justice into the Obama era scandals moot – with the help of a complicit and fawning media, of course. Even if Mueller believed that there was something there, he had to know within 60 days that there was no Russian collusion. However, the old paradigm that “work expands to fill the time allotted” came true, and we ended up with another endless investigation.

Early on, the plan was working nicely. Russia was all the media talked about (when they weren’t distracted by the ‘daily OMG’ of Trump saying a naughty word), and probably a plurality of people believed that there was something to the investigation. This strategy would have played itself out, but probably not for a couple of years – which might have given the Dems a shot to retake Congress in 2018 and do an impeachment show trial.

Then came the news that Justice was reopening the Uranium One investigation (which produced its first indictment a few weeks ago). Suddenly Mueller had a lot to lose. I have to think that, when he got the Flynn guilty plea, Mueller badly wanted this investigation to be over. The Flynn plea had all the hallmarks of a typical Washington investigation-ender. Indict the ham sandwich for nothing substantial, bring enough pressure to bear to get the sandwich to plead guilty, and then take a victory lap of the talk shows – where Mueller could say things like “We think the conspiracy went higher, but unfortunately couldn’t prove it,” and cast a shadow over Trump’s Presidency long enough to produce the aforementioned Democrat takeover and impeachment.

At the very least, Uranium One could disgrace Mueller; at the worst, he could be indictable. With Uranium One still being investigated, Mueller was denied that opportunity, and he had to keep searching to find SOMETHING indictable about Trump. The fact that he hasn’t just might mean that Donald Trump is, from a legal perspective, perhaps the cleanest person to occupy the Oval Office in decades. Isn’t THAT ironic?

Now the clock is running out. The truck driver indicted in Uranium One may have something substantial to say. The MEMO is about to be released (notice that with all the talk of the memo, talk about Mueller getting Trump to testify has gone away). Mueller’s only option left is the perjury trap. His last-second, midfield, Hail Mary.

And supposing he traps President Trump – which isn’t unreasonable, considering that President Trump is not known for precision of wording – then what? Perhaps an under-the-table deal where Mueller says, “I won’t make this public if you let me off from Uranium One,” or Mueller taking the shot to discredit President Trump to the point that U1 will just go away? It’s hard to say, but desperate men do desperate things.

I could be wrong, of course, but I can’t come up with a single reason that this sham investigation has gone on past the Flynn indictment.

A hundred years from now, historians may remember “Memo Day” as the day that started the restoration of our democracy, and President Trump as the man who reversed our path to tyranny. Or – they may only write what they’re allowed by the government overseers who follow Robert Mueller.

We live in interesting times, indeed.

Indeed we do; in truth, I’d say that’s putting it danged mildly. No matter how it all shakes out, though, it’s apparent enough that Trump didn’t come along a moment too soon.

Mueller might well turn out to be the most hapless of all the clowns in the Dem-Soc circus; he’s turned over plenty of rocks, all right, but they were in the wrong field, and the worms crawling underneath were ones he would probably rather have stayed covered. But maybe it wasn’t really his fault; the failed Obama/Clinton putsch attempt was a serious enough offense against the Republic that maybe it was all just too monumental not to come out in the event of Her Herness’s defeat.

I know I said a while back that Trump needed to dump Mueller and end his phony “investigation,” but seeing how thoroughly the splashback has doused the nefarious Clinton/Obama cabal, I’m damned glad he didn’t now. The intriguing question at this point is whether the unraveling of this sloppy skein of corruption and treachery was just a matter of happenstance, luck, and good instincts—or whether Trump sat patiently back and let all this spin out on purpose, with knowledge, forethought, and intent, craftily dealing out enough rope for the plotters to hang themselves with. In which case the man should be acknowledged as a bona-fide political genius, amateur or not.

Many thanks to TR for sending this along.

Share

Memo released, hilarity ensues

These guys are soooooo screwed.

I get some pushback when I use expressions like “rubber-stamp FISA court”. Shepard Smith was arguing on Fox yesterday that a FISA court judge is almost like a Supreme Court justice – I was laughing so much I nearly drove off the road. A judge can only judge what’s laid before him. In this case, almost every material fact about the “evidence” was withheld, or coyly skirted. For example, Christopher Steele was said to be in the employ of a “US person”, but not Fusion GPS or Glenn Simpson, who were being funded by Perkins Coie, who were being paid by the DNC – all of whom are cutouts, as the spooks say, for Hillary.

A FISA application has to be signed off on by the highest figures at both Justice and the Bureau – in this case Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey. Given the sensitive nature of the case, it is difficult to believe that they did not know the answers to all the questions above: they were demanding surveillance of a major-party presidential campaign in a two-party system on the basis entirely of uncorroborated rumors provided by the other party’s operative. Yet Yates and Comey saw nothing wrong in denying the judge “all material facts”.

A surveillance warrant against a US person also has to be renewed every 90 days – which this one was, thrice: That would presumably be just before the inauguration in January, and again in April and July. By the time of the first renewal, signatories Yates and Comey were aware that Steele had been fired as an FBI informant for blabbing to the press about being an FBI informant. In addition, an internal FBI investigation had found his dossier “minimally corroborated”. Yet evidently the diminished value of both the dossier and its author were not disclosed to the judge – in January or subsequent renewals. Indeed, one can be fairly confident that Deputy AG Rosenstein and the FBI would have been happy to apply for a fourth renewal, were it not for the fact that the general crappiness of Steele’s dossier was by then all over the papers and even a judge kept in the dark by the feds for a year might have begun to notice it.

In the middle of all this is an American citizen who was put under 24/7 surveillance by the panopticon state because it enabled the ruling party to eavesdrop on its political opponent. As much as Steele’s dossier, Carter Page was a mere pretext: The dossier was the pretext to get to Page, and Page was the pretext to get to Trump.

I flippantly asserted that this was hilarious in my title, and it is. But it’s far more than just that: it’s perhaps the most serious Constitutional crisis this nation has yet faced apart from the Civil War, and what it all says about the rot the Left has fostered at the highest levels of our government is chilling. The hilarity comes from seeing the perpetrators of this High Crime exposed at last. Their floundering and sputtering as they try to slip, slide, and slime their way out of the threat of justice being done upon them for their clear sedition can’t be anything less than enjoyable in some small way for any real American.

Aesop has put together a list (probably only partial, as he notes) of the crimes these villainous curs have committed, concluding with this:

FBI Dir. Comey, Dep. Dir. FBI McCabe, DAG Yates, Acting DAG Boente, and DAG Rosenstein all eat every bit of that.

(Before we get to Comey’s perjury, obstruction of justice, and violations of the Official Records Act.)

FBI Agent Strzok, FBI lawyer Page, and Assoc. DAG Ohr get substantial parts of all of the above, if not the whole enchilada. And anyone and everyone who knowingly aided or abetted their efforts, both upwards and downwards.
 
And Special Prosecutor (and lawyer, former FBI Director, and fully partisan Democrat hack) Mueller may get the whole shitburger as well, and at the very least, he’s down for #7, which gets him disbarred, convicted, and imprisoned all by itself.

Whether he knows it or not, his investigation ended Friday about noon, and he went from Special Prosecutor to Person Of Interest. That’s going to leave a mark.

Mueller could maybe do himself some good by a quick about-face here, switching the focus of his phonus-balonus “Russia collusion” investigation away from Trump’s team and onto the people actually, y’know, guilty of it.

And afterwards, we get to AG Loretta Lynch, and Hopey Dopey, and the Clinton Crime Family syndicate, who knew what, and when.

Then it really gets interesting.
 
BTW: There’s an upcoming Senate memo. Then the IG report. Then a memo on the role of the State Department in this. We’re just getting warmed up.
 
Deep State: Shit’s getting real for you. Soon.

One can only hope. If not…well, that will tell a story all its own. A grim one, one which carries with it all sorts of truly dismal potentialities.

But ultimately, the thing to remember is this: these Democrat Socialist fools are in fact completely incompetent. Their arrogance, their presumption, their sheer brazen chutzpah as they so recklessly futzed about with the very foundations of the American republic, ineptly conspiring to defy the “consent of the governed” and reverse the results of a Presidential election—these are all immutable qualities, impossible to rid themselves of, which will always serve to trip them up now that Normals are fully woke (ahem) to their bumbling skullduggery.

And bad as THAT is, it leaves their sheer, crippling stupidity right out of consideration. Exhibit A: Palsied Pelosi’s feeble mess of a response, as translated by Ace:

1. She says that the memo does not “protect sources and methods.” The only sources mentioned in the memo are:

a) Christopher Steele, who we already knew about

b) FusionGPS, who we already knew about

and

c) Michael Isikoff’s article for Yahoo News, which was of course a publicly-available article — we just didn’t know the fucking FBI and DOJ used that article to “corroborate” the Steele memo (despite that article being based on what Steele told Isikoff!!!)

As far as the “methods” exposed — yes, a major method of the FBI and DOJ was indeed exposed. That method is called “Lying to the court.”

I do not think that is an approved method of intelligence gathering, nor do I think the national security interests are well-served by keeping that “method” ongoing and secret.

Seems to me that this is the sort of method that would be approved of by Red Nan’s friend, Vladimir Putin.

Yeah, quite a coincidence, that. Ace goes on to nail the wormy, contemptible Deep State rumpswab Comey to the cross after he tweeted this pitiful, self-serving horseshit:


Back to Ace for the dismemberment:

What classified information was revealed? It was scrubbed by all agencies for classified information.

Also, this was all done on the up-and-up — it was voted to be published by Congress, and then given to the President, who has declassification authority, for review.

Say, Jimmy, you know who did leak classified information but who did not do so legally and who does not have declassification authority?

You did, asshole. And I’ll cheer when a special prosecutor is appointed to put your ass in jail.

Seconded, with friggin’ bells on. To which I would append: DOJ and FBI “must keep doing their jobs”? REALLY? Tell me, since when is it their fucking job to illegally spy on American citizens suspected of no actual wrongdoing whatsoever, justified by bought-and-paid-for fabrications purchased by the election’s losing party apparatus from a shady foreign intelligence agent who pulled them out of his filthy squeakhole, the whole goddamned subterfuge pursuant to an attempt to overturn an election that didn’t go the way YOU and your circus-freak cabal wanted, you loathsome motherfucking pustule?

Ahem. Sorry and all, but that felt…good. Put his ass in jail? Jail’s too goddamned good for him. Him and all the rest of his sorry, miserable-ass wrecking crew. For them, only a recreation of a good old Inquisition-era European dungeon would suffice to my satisfaction.

These slimy fucks committed their crimes under the desperate delusion that their shambolic, sickly, unpleasant, drunken trainwreck of a candidate could not possibly lose the election to a rank amateur like Trump, overlooking a widespread desire among Normals not to put themselves yet again into the manicured hands of yet another polished professional backstabber only to find themselves betrayed yet again by yet more false promises of reform. That miscalculation now puts Deep State/DemSoc/media operatives in the gravest imaginable peril, both as individuals involved in this particular—well, scandal seems too mild a word for such a tremendous goatfuck—and as a political party still aspiring to some semblance of national relevance.

But there’s a thorn for Trump lurking here too. He, and he alone, is soon going to be confronting a dilemma that, given his unabashed love of country, will make for an extremely difficult choice for him. Horn #1: does the damage done by going after these blackguards to the fullest extent of the law outweigh the prospective damage to the integrity of our institutions by easing up on them?

And make no mistake: prosecuting them, locking them up, crushing them utterly, to a man—in other words, punishing them as they deserve for their undeniable sedition if not outright treason—will certainly do damage. In my opinion, it could well be the trigger for some sort of national partitioning, or at the very least a more serious effort towards secession on the part of those Progressivist areas who have recently been flirting with the notion. I can’t imagine that insisting the Comey Cabal faces due and proper legal consequences wouldn’t lead to violent Leftard unrest in urban areas, maybe college campuses as well, at the very least.

Trump is no dummy; he will know this, and I expect he’ll be greatly troubled by it—maybe enough to stay his hand, even, if there’s any remotely reasonable way he can see to do it. Bumping right up against it, however, we have Horn #2: the idea of letting these treasonous shitweasels slide to even a small degree would have to be extremely galling to him as well, as it would to any right-thinking American with a shred of patriotism left in him. While the right choice between rigorous justice fairly but firmly applied or a pragmatic leniency that doesn’t excuse, minimize, or gloss over but preserves peace and stability would doubtless be easy enough for most of us to make, I suspect things will not appear so clean and clear-cut to the guy with all the weight on his shoulders, and the fate of the nation in his hands.

Which brings me around to the defense floated by the Comey Cabal and other feebs that I find the most amusing of them all: his/their scandalized horror over the terrible risk that releasing the memos would destroy Americans’ faith and trust in “their” FBI and DOJ. Hey guys, maybe you should worry about making yourselves worthy of faith and trust in the first place, eh? Because if there’s anything at all that the exposure of these foul shenanigans puts beyond debate, it’s that you are NOT deserving of it. You really, really aren’t. Only the most gullible, oblivious nitwit ever to shit behind a pair of shoes would trust you reprobates to so much as water his lawn. Rightly so, too. “Destroy Americans’ faith in the FBI”? Sorry, boys, but you did that to yourselves. Didn’t require any help doing it, either. In fact, out of all aspects of this shitshow, it would seem to be the one thing you got right, and did a thorough and respectable job of.

Assholes.

However it all shakes out, one response is absolutely essential: the FBI must be dismantled, root, branch, and bough. It should get the full vampire treatment: stake through the heart, cut off the head, burn the corpse, scatter the ashes, salt the earth. It has never been anything but what it now so inarguably is: a corrupt, too-powerful, out-of-control rogue agency willing and able to do serious harm to American citizens with or without any real justification. It is a threat to both liberty and the rule of law. It is and always has been a blight—an omnipotent, unaccountable, and untouchable obscenity of a sort entirely typical of every tyranny since always, a dangerously powerful tool in the hands of men at its upper echelons who should never have been allowed anywhere within arm’s reach of it. It is the breathing, brooding essence of the exact kind of thing the Founders so adamantly warned us of, and abhorred to the marrow of their bones.

I don’t envy Trump his dilemma, and I wouldn’t be in his shoes right now for anything. I do trust his judgment as he wrestles with it, and I will respect whatever conclusion he reaches. As I said before, I can see the difficulties of either approach, and the dangers they’re both fraught with. But in the end, for me it all comes down to just one thing:

We now know that almost every accusation leveled against the president with regard to so-called “Russian collusion” actually reflects the actions of what amounts to a cabal of Democratic Party operatives working with FBI and Justice Department fellow-travellers.

The picture painted by the Nunes memo is one of federal law enforcement officials who believe they are a wholly independent power, accountable to no one but themselves, and able to pick winners and losers in elections.

Based on what we know now, the conspiracy to undermine candidate Trump and later to destroy President Trump may have been limited to the Justice Department and FBI. That would be bad enough—and a serious threat to representative government striking, as it does, at the efficacy of our elections—but it may also have extended to the West Wing where U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power and National Security Adviser Susan Rice, at a minimum, used “national security” as a rationale to insert themselves into the election. This must also be the subject of investigation. And what of Ben Rhodes and his vaunted media echo chamber? It seems to have played a role as well. How many journalists either were duped or were complicit?

Nearly 50 years ago, the Watergate scandal forced a president from office. The Left thought it could do it again. But the Nunes memo—and the millions of documents and hundreds of hours of interviews behind it—makes clear that rogue elements within the FBI and Justice Department broke the law in an attempt to use the police power of the United States government first to throw the election to Hillary Clinton and then to destroy the presidency of Donald Trump.

This cannot stand. There must be consequences. And they must be swift, public, and severe.

Can’t honestly say I disagree with a single word of that, myself. The Deep State rot is, well, deep, and this mess stands as a nearly grotesque practical example of everything we mean when we use the term. Excising that rot will be painful, extremely so, and may even wind up destroying us as a nation…quite literally.

But failing to take decisive action to address such a clear-cut abuse of excessive power on the part of a federal agency charged with upholding and enforcing the laws, to include preserving the principles on which they’re founded—an abuse constituting a clandestine assault on the very heart of the American system, however far we may have strayed from its Founding ideals, reducing the notion of self-government to a bitter farce, if not an outright scam—is unacceptable to me. It will destroy us just as surely as any violent cataclysm resulting from the Left’s abhorrence of seeing justice appropriately rendered will, if maybe not as swiftly.

If Silent Jeff Sessions can’t bestir himself to bring the treasonous swine behind what I’ve (correctly) maintained from the start was a soft coup attempt against the legitimately elected government to account, he is unfit to be Attorney General, and should be immediately removed and replaced by someone with more integrity, bolstered by a basic comprehension of what the words “enforcing the law” actually mean.

May God help President Trump…and all the rest of us, too.

Share

Civil War v2.0 realities

A little speculation.

To begin with, it would not look like the first American Civil War, which was essentially a war between two regions of the country with different economic interests. The divide created two separate countries, both initially contiguous, intact, and relatively homogeneous. The lines of demarcation now are only somewhat regional, and tend to correspond to differences between urban and rural populations, as well as differences of race and class. A second American Civil War would be much more similar to the Spanish Civil War, with the leftists dominating the cities and conservatives controlling the countryside. Conflicts of this nature, with enemies mixed geographically, are a formula for spontaneous mass bloodletting.

Seems reasonable enough to me. Instead of set-piece clashes between large armies fielded in the old Napoleonic fashion*, Civil War v2.0 is way more likely to be fought with guerilla-style, hit-and-run tactics—quick, small-scale bloodlettings, raids, or sniper attacks followed immediately by a hasty, surreptitious retreat: the very embodiment of what is now referred to in military circles as Fourth Generation Warfare, or 4GW. Such an open-ended conflict could and very probably would drag on for a long time indeed; with resounding, decisive victory a practical near-impossibility almost by definition, such a war would end up a long, bitter, and brutal slog, ended not by victory or conquest but by sheer exhaustion.

The federal government, naturally, would attempt to intervene, but on which side and with what ultimate intent being difficult to predict. In Bracken’s Enemies trilogy, as well as Max Velocity’s excellent Patriot Dawn and many others, federal intervention in a Civil War/rebellion provides the State its justification for instituting true tyrannical oppression, taken to its practical limits, at last…which still winds up being largely ineffective except in the limited geographical areas it controls.

All of which is certainly chilling enough. This, though, might well be the most chilling observation of all:

Some dimensions of a future civil war would be, I think, largely unprecedented. When lesser countries have imploded in violence in recent times, they have done so with most of the world around them still intact. There were other nations to offer aid, assistance and intervention, welcome or unwelcome. There were places for refugees to go. The collapse of the world’s remaining superpower would take much of the world down with it. A global economic crisis would be inevitable. The withdrawal of American forces from bases across the world to fight at home would also create a power vacuum that others, even under economic strain, would be tempted to exploit. Whichever side gained control of our nuclear arsenal, our status as a nuclear power would probably persuade other nations not to interfere in our conflict militarily, but the collapse of trade alone would produce crippling effects that would be hard to overestimate. Many components for products our manufacturing sector makes are globally sourced. Add to this the breakdown of our transportation system, dependent on oil and transecting one new front line after another. The internet would fail. It is a frail enough now. Financial systems would fail. What happens if the banks find half their assets suddenly in hostile territory? All Federal government functions, including Social Security, would fail, many of them losing their very legitimacy to one side or the other. Food production, heavily dependent on diesel fuel, chemical fertilizers and pesticides, not to mention a steady supply of genetically engineered seeds, would slump alarmingly. In short, most things we depend on are now held together by a network of delicate and complex connections. Without those connections, would you have a job? If so, in what medium of exchange could your employers manage to pay you? What would there be for you to buy? Does your town, your county, or even your state have the ability to marshal its resources into a viable economy? How many people in those entities could deal with anything worse than a weather disaster, in which they count on the fact that help is coming soon?

The odds of civil war here, no matter how low-intensity or limited in terms of scale, inflicting chaos on other parts of the world seem to me to be pretty high. The question is whether such a looming threat, which would come to toxic fruition pretty quickly, would motivate some sort of direct intervention—necessarily involving foreign boots on American ground, of course—on the part of those other nations. Assuming any of them were even capable of any such intervention in the first place, of course, which is by no means a given. It’s safe to assume that the UN would regard the opportunity to take over and administer the US itself as heaven-sent, a dream come true—a chance to demonstrate both its might and its indispensability for all the world to see.

At first they would, anyway. They’d learn different pretty damned quick.

From an economic perspective, I think it is fair to say that the left would have a bigger problem than the right. Cities cannot feed themselves under any conditions, and what food could be grown on America’s resource-starved farms would be gobbled up by people nearer and dearer to the farmers. Leftists would have to both secure vast territories around their urban strongholds and relearn from scratch the generations-lost art of food production. Liberal enclaves stranded in the hinterland would simply be untenable. We, on the other hand, would be critically short of new Hollywood movies. Without a steady supply of the works of Meryl Streep and Matt Damon, millions of conservatives would instantly drop dead from boredom – that is, according to Meryl Streep.

And if there could possibly be a reason to actually wish for another Civil War, right there it is. A pretty powerful one it is too, I must admit.

Read the rest of it. WRSA holds that it’s “More than a bit optimistic,” and recommends perusing Bracken’s several comments too, which begin with this interesting thought:

A civil war will not be intentionally started by left or right. It will be an unavoidable downstream consequence of a disruption of our modern technological infrastructure. The disruption could be triggered by many vectors, but the consequences will all be the same. Once the lights go out in a major U.S. city, even for a week, chaos will ensue, and every supermarket will be looted to bare shelves. The Genie will then be out of the bottle, and it won’t be put back in.

This, too, seems right enough to me. Matt then links to one of his several WRSA posts on the topic, starting off with this preface:

A second civil war in the United States would be an unparalleled disaster. Nobody who is sane and who has studied modern civil wars from Spain to Lebanon to the Balkans and beyond would ever wish to see one occur. But if political, cultural and demographic trends are sweeping us toward that unhappy destiny, it would be wise to at least cast a weather eye over the possible terrain. 

Yep. As I keep saying myself, nobody but nobody among decent, well-meaning people ought to be seriously wishing for such a thing, and I very much doubt any significant number are. But the Left, incredibly, seems absolutely determined to force this horror on us, one way or another. Unless they somehow are brought to senses they don’t appear to possess in any measure, sooner or later they will leave Americans desirous of nothing more than their right to be left alone with no choice but to defend themselves. Again I say it: Lefty should be very, very careful what he wishes for…lest he wind up getting it.

The scenario wherein a tech or infrastructure disaster sparks such a conflict is even more alarming, the more so for being the more likely case. As Matt says, once urban grocery store shelves have been stripped, people trapped in the big cities will start to get hungry, with no recourse other than dispersing en masse into the surrounding countryside to forage for food. They won’t be content to just sit back and starve. And the folks they’ll be looking to loot aren’t very likely to just sit passively back and let themselves be looted, either.

Either way, Civil War v2.0 ain’t something anybody ought to be looking forward to with anything other than dread. Then again though, as unavoidable as it’s beginning to appear, maybe Grant had the right of the whole thing after all when he said, “If we have to fight I wish we could do it all at once and then make friends.”

* Ironically, the Civil War—and most especially the new weapons used to fight it—is generally regarded as having rendered Napoleon’s tactics obsolete—or more accurately, to have revealed them as such.

Share

BUSTED!

The IG leak-investigation story just got very interesting indeed.

Because the wrong information within the CNN leak was so conspicuously specific, and because the details were confirmed by two additional media outlets, a bunch of people realized such a fake news story could not possibly have happened organically. All three media outlets: CNN, CBS and ABC had to be using the same congressional leak source.

Indeed, it’s not just Donald Trump Jr. who suspected the culprit. Almost every intellectually honest person who has looked at this, comes to the conclusion the most likely source of the leak was Intelligence Committee Minority Chairman Adam Schiff.

If you accept the original seeds were planted to discover leakers, you then have to assume Schiff was a target of this joint task force. That likelihood also passes the common sense test.

Two “independent sources” both looked at an email, and both came away from reading that email with the wrong date? How is that possible?

It has been CTH contention for several weeks that a counterintelligence sting operation has been going on within the IC community. False trails of information, seeded by ‘White Hat’ investigators, intended to be captured by ‘Black Hat’ leakers – and delivered to their usurping allies in media. The stories are fake, the leaks are real.

The back-story on this endeavor includes an almost complete, years-long, Dept of Justice Office Inspector General investigation that no-one was paying attention to until recently. And don’t forget the ongoing FBI investigation into the Awan Brothers, vis-a-vis quantifying the potential intelligence compromise therein, plays into this.

That said, it would not be the IG carrying out a counterintelligence sting operation to identify leakers. In actuality, no official IC agency would be empowered to place fake news in front of congress. Setting traps for congress is generally bad form, and for matters of trust – really bad politics. That reality, amid those who follow DC politics, is the central point to dismiss such the “Black Hat Hunting” theory.

However, few people were paying attention four months ago when Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats told us they were going to do exactly that.

I think a quote from Wilford Brimley in Absence Of Malice might be in order here:

You had a leak?! You call what’s goin’ on around here a leak? Boy, the last time there was a leak like this, Noah built hisself a boat.

Now we’ll talk all day if you want to. But, come sundown, there’s gonna be two things true that ain’t true now. One is that the United States Department of Justice is goin’ to know what in the good Christ – e’scuse me, Angie – is goin’ on around here. And the other’s I’m gonna have somebody’s ass in muh briefcase.

Oh, okay, another:

I think I know where we’re headed here. Before we get there, I want to say something to you. You know and I know that we can’t tell you what to print or what not to. We hope the press will act responsibly, but when you don’t, there ain’t a lot we can do about it. But we can’t have people go around leaking stuff for their own reasons. It ain’t legal. And worse than that, by God it ain’t right.

And the capper, especially for the scheming Democrat Socialist weasel Schiff:

James A. Wells: What’d you figure you’d do after government service, Elliott?
Elliott Rosen: I’m not quitting.
James A. Wells: You ain’t no Presidential appointee, Elliott. One that hired you is me. You got thirty days.

Unfortunately, satisfying as it is, that one doesn’t strictly apply, since Schiff is a Congresscritter and not a DoJ employee. Nonetheless: thirty days my ass. Give him a few years…in prison.

But the ladling out of great dollops of hard time should by no means stop with just Schiff.


Treason.jpg

As Muir lays out above (click for a bigger, more easily readable version), there are plenty of others besides Schiff who are up to their elbows in this stinking slop-bucket full of treason most foul, beginning with Obama and Hillary!™. What they have attempted is nothing less than a nonviolent, clandestine coup against a duly elected administration. I’m sure we’re all aware of how unlikely it is that they’ll ever be called properly to account for their despicable crimes, not just against Trump but all of us. But they damned well ought to be, and if there was any justice they’d be quaking in their boots and pissing themselves right now in fear of it. That they aren’t is maybe the most damning indictment of all.

Share

If you can’t drain it, disperse it

I mentioned this not too long ago, but it bears repeating.

Amid the talk of draining swamps, restoring political might to blue-collar America and turning off the spigot of taxpayer cash that showers Washington, a familiar battle cry is ricocheting through this city: Move the bureaucrats out.

It has the ring of a Trumpian fantasy. Dislodge arms of the federal government from Washington and reattach them in faraway places, spreading the wealth generated by these well-paid agency workforces and forcing senior bureaucrats to face the people they affect.

But the idea has established populist roots that spread across party lines, and they are reemerging at this unique political moment.

The swaggering Interior secretary from Montana is putting the finishing touches on his plan to move the headquarters of three large public lands agencies to the West. The Stanford economist representing Silicon Valley in Congress sees opportunity to strategically seed regions of the country with pieces of the federal bureaucracy that can benefit them — and that they can benefit. The unlikely prospect of locating the Department of Transportation in Los Angeles is dangled by Republicans eager to show this crusade has bipartisan cred.

There hasn’t been so much buzz about getting “Washington” out of Washington since Franklin D. Roosevelt sent 30,000 federal workers to the Midwest after a presidential commission advised such moves would ensure the prototypical federal employee “remains one of the people in touch with the people and does not degenerate into an isolated and arrogant bureaucrat.”

It’s a fine idea for more than just one reason. Which makes it somewhat surprising that any Democrat Socialist would be anything but howlingly, immovably averse to it. Walsh adds:

The problem with Washington today is that far too much power and money is concentrated in a small geographical area, which lends credence to the Leftist fantasy that a country as large and diverse as the United States can be controlled from central command. Westerners, for example, have long known that the Bos-Wash corridor kidz have no real understanding of the issues that lie beyond the Hudson and Potomac rivers; getting some federal agencies closer to their areas of jurisdiction can only help.

After the war, the West German government was dispersed, so as not (to) allow a concentration of malevolence such as occurred during the National Socialist regime to repeat itself. Now that the Left has declared the “Resistance” to the GOP victory in the 2016 election, we might want to think about the German example, before it’s too late. At the very least, it will ease pressures on the D.C.-area real estate market, give the bureaucrats some much-needed fresh air and sunshine, and expose them to the real world beyond the Mall. Who knows, they might even learn something.

“Concentration of malevolence”—I really like that bit, which is as pithy a description of Mordor on the Potomac as I can think of. But let’s not get nuts with our hopes here, Mike; I mean, “learn something”? Naaaah, not a chance.

One of the nicer aspects of such a move, though, is that dispersing DC power would be a fine practice run for dispersing the libtards en masse themselves. Say, to a nice little Caribbean island, maybe.

Share

A consummation devoutly to be etc

We can only hope Lifson is onto something here.

When Rod Rosenstein evaded the answers being sought in a congressional hearing and deferred to the inspector general investigation underway, I thought it a reasonable response, even though Rosenstein is now a hate-object for having appointed Robert Mueller as special counsel. The I.G., Michael E. Horowitz, is no political stooge. (For background on the inspectors general, see Ed Lasky here and here. There are unsung heroes of our constitutional republic among them, hero-federal bureaucrats.)

And letting any of the I.G.’s cats out of the bag early could have serious consequences.

He then points us over to another of Sundance’s thoroughly researched and insightful posts, to wit:

The text messages between FBI Agent Peter Strozk and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, have been released to both Fox News and CBS.

The messages reflect a strong bias against President Trump. However, the bigger story is not the anti-Trump bias within the text communication, the BIGGER story is why the Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General (OIG), began even looking at Agent Peter Strozk’s communication in the first place.

Remember, the original mandate by the Inspector General’s office was initiated to review and discover any politicization of the FBI and/or DOJ officials.

After news broke of Strzok’s removal from investigative duty within the FBI counterintelligence unit, what the OIG responding statement said was for 11 months the Dept of Justice OIG office has been investigating the politicization within the DOJ and FBI and deciding if the actions, or lack of action, was driven by the political ideology of the participants therein…

Getting caught as a leaker is likely the reason Strzok was removed and reassigned to the HR post; not the bias. The bias, writ large, is essentially a snipe hunt; it makes good media clicks, it feeds a good headline, but ultimately it’s a nothingburger. The reports on this angle are flak and countermeasures.

However, Agent Strzok leaking information to the media; his changing the outcome of an FBI investigation into a political ally, Hillary Clinton; and his investigative involvement in the Trump Russia Conspiracy, via the Steele Dossier and FISA warrant, well, that’s the real issue evident here.

Interesting indeed. Without falling into the old wishful-thinking trap of assuming that Trump is some sort of 3D chess-playing wizard here, I will note that he’s shown himself to have patience enough to be capable of playing a longer game than people often assume, in both business and politics. This is convoluted, twisty, tangly stuff for sure; also, Occam’s Razor still makes for an excellent guide in most circumstances, and should perhaps be carefully borne in mind in this case, too.

All that said, though, I wouldn’t bet against Trump playing a pretty Machiavellian game here himself: one of his most under-acknowledged and useful skills throughout his career has been his ability to get adversaries to underestimate him to their own great detriment, as we’ve seen demonstrated again and again since the beginning of the Republican primary campaign. And Sundance himself has been adept enough at seeing forests instead of trees for long enough now that I ain’t willing to bet against his having the right of things here, either. Not quite yet, I ain’t. I seem to recollect seeing somewhere or other that Horowitz’s final report is scheduled to drop in April of next year; all will come clear by then, I guess. Back to Lifson:

We should be hearing from the I.G. in the early part of next year, in time for this to start to unfold in TV prior to the November midterm elections.

Sundance looks ahead the next couple of steps, toward prosecution, and follows the potential chain upward. Momentum, and consequently timing, is critical because of the expected all-out resistance. Watergate was nothing compared to this.

Well, no, it wouldn’t be, would it? I mean, Watergate was a bungled coverup of a penny-ante burglary—which, I think, hardly rises to the level of a soft coup aimed at nullifying the results of a legitimate presidential election and removing a duly-sworn-in chief executive from office without real justification. Not to even mention the revelation of partisan corruption from top to bottom of entire federal agencies, with arguably treasonous treachery and manipulation at the very highest levels.

Update! Steyn on the big picture:

Politically, America is a bitterly divided 50/50 nation, where a few hundred thousand votes in a dwindling number of swing states determines control of the national (it’s no longer really “federal”) government. That places an ever greater burden on the professional civil service to behave professionally, and to be perceived as behaving professionally. Mueller, Comey, McCabe, Ohr, Strzok, Page and the rest have engineered a situation that ensures half the country will never accept the legitimacy of whatever their “investigation” concludes. If they indict Trump, one half will regard it as a coup by Deep Staters in the bag for Hillary. If they exonerate Trump, the other half of the country will blame Trump for discrediting these fine upstanding career public servants.

So Mueller and his team have made things worse. Thanks a lot, corruptocrats.

It is not unreasonable to conclude that this pseudo-investigation is an elaborate bit of FBI dinner theatre to obscure Strzok and others’ attempt to subvert the election. What Strzok and Ohr have done is far worse than anything Flynn and Papadopoulos did: why should only the latter face jail time?

Why, because Stroke and Ohr are liberals, see. That makes it diff’runt.

Until we reach the heads-on-pikes stage, I mean. At which point I will eagerly look forward to Obama, Hillary!™, and the rest of the dirty gang sharing the same fate.

Share

Gone rogue?

BEEN rogue. Always HAS been rogue. Was never anything BUT rogue.

In order to boost the credibility of the FBI’s investigations of the Trump team, much of the media is whitewashing the bureau’s entire history. But the FBI has been out of control almost since its birth.

A 1924 American Civil Liberties Union report warned that the FBI had become “a secret police system of a political character.” In the 1930s, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court feared that the FBI had bugged the conference room where justices privately wrangled over landmark cases, as Tim Weiner noted in his “Enemies: A History of the FBI.” In 1945, President Harry Truman noted that “We want no Gestapo or Secret Police. FBI is tending in that direction.” And FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover compiled a list of 20,000 “potentially or actually dangerous” Americans who could be rounded up and locked away in one of the six detention camps the federal government secretly built in the 1950s.

From 1956 through 1971, the FBI’s COINTELPRO program conducted thousands of covert operations to incite street warfare between violent groups, to get people fired, to smear innocent people by portraying them as government informants, to sic the IRS on people, and to cripple or destroy left-wing, communist, white racist, antiwar, and black organizations (including Martin Luther King Jr.). These operations involved vast numbers of warrantless wiretaps and illicit break-ins and resulted in the murder of some black militants. A Senate Committee chaired by liberal Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) issued a damning report on FBI abuses of power that should be mandatory reading for anyone who believes the bureau deserves deference today.

According to Politifact, the FBI is not a “secret police agency” because “the FBI is run by laws, not by whim.” But we learned five years ago that the FBI explicitly teaches its agents that “the FBI has the ability to bend or suspend the law to impinge on the freedom of others.” No FBI official was fired or punished when that factoid leaked out because this has been the Bureau’s tacit code for eons. Similarly, an FBI academy ethics course taught new agents that subjects of FBI investigations have “forfeited their right to the truth.” Are liberals so anxious to get Trump that they have swept under the rug the 2015 Washington Post bombshell about false FBI trial testimony that may have sentenced 32 innocent people to death?

Politifact quotes a professor who asserts that “any use of unnecessary violence (by the FBI) would be met with the full force of the criminal law.”Is that why an internal FBI report claimed that every one of the 150 shootings by FBI agents between 1993 and 2011 was faultless?

Bovard lists plenty more—amounting to a mere handful of the things we know about—winding down here:

The so-called fact checkers insists that any comparison of the FBI and KGB is “ridiculous” because the FBI is “subject to the rule of law and is democratically accountable.” But there is little or no accountability when few members of Congress have the courage to openly criticize or vigorously cross-examine FBI officials. House Majority Leader Hale Boggs admitted in 1971 that Congress was afraid of the FBI: “Our very fear of speaking out (against the FBI)…has watered the roots and hastened the growth of a vine of tyranny…which is ensnaring that Constitution and Bill of Rights which we are each sworn to uphold.”

Well put indeed, sir. It’s funny to see Leftards, once so contemptuous of J Edgar Hoover and filled with dread at the unchecked power of the FBI, now supportive of them in their desperation to get Trump someway, somehow—and I don’t mean ha-ha funny, either. Then again, the Left has always been very, shall we say, liberal when it comes to their choice of allies-of-convenience.

The American Stasi, somebody called ’em, which is neither hype nor exaggeration. It’s nothing but the dismal truth. Trump has every reason now to make a serious attempt at reining them in, and is probably the only President one might reasonably expect to try. Along with the IRS—another unaccountable, out of control agency whose power is without meaningful limit, and whose serial abuse of that power is legendary—the FBI is indisputable proof of the existence of the Deep State, in complete contravention of the Constitution’s long-abandoned limits on federal power. If any further proof were needed of just how far we’ve strayed from the vision of our Founders (and it isn’t), these two rogue agencies provide plenty enough.

(Via WRSA)

Update! After reading Hale Boggs’s statement above, I found myself a wee mite curious if he was still around, or if not, what the circumstances of his death might have been.

Now I don’t want to come off all paranoid or flaky or anything here, but…well, imagine my surprise.

Thomas Hale Boggs Sr. (February 15, 1914 – presumably October 16, 1972 but not declared dead until January 3, 1973) was an American Democratic politician and a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from New Orleans, Louisiana. He was the House majority leader and a member of the Warren Commission.

In 1972, while he was still Majority Leader, the twin engine airplane in which Boggs was traveling disappeared over a remote section of Alaska. The airplane presumably crashed and was never found. Congressman Nick Begich, of Alaska, was also presumed killed in the same accident.

WELL. Interesting, innit? Kinda spooky, too. But just you wait.

As Majority Leader, Boggs often campaigned for others. It was also in his interest to cultivate support from those Congressmen who had voted against him for Majority Leader, as Representative Nick Begich of Alaska had done in 1970. On October 16, 1972, Boggs was aboard a twin engine Cessna 310 with Representative Begich, who was facing a possible tight race in the November 1972 general election against the Republican candidate, Don Young, when it disappeared during a flight from Anchorage to Juneau. Also on board were Begich’s aide, Russell Brown, and the pilot, Don Jonz; the four were heading to a campaign fundraiser for Begich.

The search for the missing aircraft and four men included the US Coast Guard, Navy, Army, Air Force, Civil Air Patrol and civilian fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters.

The Cessna was required to carry an emergency locator transmitter (ELT) per Alaska state statutes section 02.35.115, Downed Aircraft Transmitting Devices, which took effect on September 6, 1972, five weeks before the plane disappeared. This statute incorporated by reference, except for the effective date, Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) 91.52, which mandated ELTs on most non-jet powered fixed wing civil aircraft, including those used for air taxi and charter services. FAR 91.52, published on September 21, 1971, had an effective date of December 30, 1973 for existing aircraft.

No ELT signal determined to be from the plane was heard during the search. In its report on the incident, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) stated that the pilot’s portable ELT, permissible in lieu of a fixed ELT on the plane, was found in an aircraft at Fairbanks, Alaska. The report also notes that a witness saw an unidentified object in the pilot’s briefcase that resembled, except for color, the portable ELT. The NTSB concluded that neither the pilot nor aircraft had an ELT.

Bold mine. I hasten to declare that I’m making no accusations here, mind. Nope, none at all, and no assumptions neither. I’m just gonna give all that a quiet wow and a shake of the head, and leave it at that.

Share

Misdirected

Their real purpose is not what they claim it is. It never was.

We’re now in Act 3 of a leftist conspiracy to invent a conspiracy to justify its own conspiracy.

In Act 1, the Clintons created the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory and used a British former intelligence agent with connections to Russia and the FBI to inject the dossier into the FBI. In Act 2, Obama officials used the dossier to justify their eavesdropping on Trump officials. In Act 3, Team Mueller is using that illegal eavesdropping to entrap and generate crimes against assorted Trump officials.

After all this time, the conspiracy theory remains as unproven as ever.

And the conspiracy theory is that the past election was illegitimate, that Trump doesn’t belong in the White House and Hillary does, and that radical measures must be taken against the First Amendment, the Electoral College and our entire political system to prevent such a “mistake” from occurring again.

That’s not just a conspiracy theory. It’s a radical leftist conspiracy against America.

Mueller had every opportunity to make his case. He could have run a fair and transparent investigation. Instead he’s become the public face of a partisan witch hunt in which a confederacy of Hillary supporters and judges dispense with everything from attorney-client privilege to the U.S. Attorneys’ manual so that they can offer fresh heads to the baying D.C. mob reading the Washington Post.

Enough.

Mueller must go. This circus must end. And a real investigation must be conducted of the Obama administration’s eavesdropping on Trump officials and members of Congress. Both the DOJ and the FBI require urgent housecleaning. That is the only meaningful result of the Muller investigation. 

The revelation of that home truth—of just what kind of government we really do have, inarguably, for all to see—might actually render the entire circus worthwhile in the end…IF Trump makes the fullest possible use of it.

Share

Gone rogue

In fact, the very definition of a rogue agency: completely out of control, ignoring its proper mission and responsibilities when it’s not trampling them actively, with no real checks on the ability to abuse their excessive power, no boundaries, no meaningful oversight.

In Washington, the ostensible story is rarely the real story. We know, for example, that former President Clinton engineered a meeting with President Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch, on the tarmac of the Phoenix Airport on June 27, 2016.

That’s the official story, replete with the charming and intentionally disarming detail that all they talked about was their grandchildren. It was just coincidental, don’t you know, that at the time the FBI was looking into Hillary Clinton’s use of a “personal” email server to send, receive and store classified information.

And it was also simply coincidental that just a few days later, the director of the FBI – who served under Attorney General Lynch – announced that he wouldn’t recommend a prosecution of Hillary Clinton.

What we haven’t known, until now, is that a frantic scramble erupted in the halls of the FBI to cover up this meeting. In fact, the FBI turned its sharp light not on the scandalous meeting between the attorney general and Bill Clinton – but rather on one of the whistleblowers who got the word out.

The organization I head, Judicial Watch, asked the FBI on July 7, 2016, for any records that might pertain to the infamous tarmac meeting. We had to sue after we were ignored by the agency.

There’s more, of course. And it’s a drop in the bucket. Roger Simon pours more in:

In a series of heavily criticized tweets (aren’t they always) Trump is asserting that the FBI’s reputation is in tatters. Of course, he’s right. This isn’t justice as it’s supposed to be, not even faintly. It’s Kafka meets Orwell in the Deep State.

Robert Mueller may not realize it, but the conclusion of his investigation, whatever it is, will never be accepted by a huge percentage of the public. As the French say, Mentir est honteux. Lying is shameful. Mike Flynn may have lied, but so, undoubtedly, has the FBI, multiple times, more than Flynn could ever dream of doing or be capable of doing. And they’re the ones we’re supposed to trust in the end.

UPDATE:  Apparently my attack on the FBI was understated.  Peter Strzok, it turns out, was the man who was responsible for changing “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless” in Comey’s final report on the Clinton email investigation, thus setting Hillary free for a crime the world knows she committed.

Steyn redirects the flow:

Martha Stewart wound up behind bars for telling a lie in a matter in which there was no underlying crime. In the case of Flynn, I heard some bigshot in Congress argue that Flynn’s lies were somehow “material” to the investigation. But, as Professor Jacobson points out, it’s hard to see how Russia can “interfere” with the election after it’s been held. Flynn’s conversations occurred in his capacity as a senior figure in the incoming administration. That’s the normal business of diplomatic relations – and it is most emphatically not the business of minor policemen within a leaky and insecure permanent bureaucracy.

So Flynn’s “lies” are not material – unless the Deep State is “investigating” the winning side in the election for engaging in the usual business of government.

Actually, it’s not for “engaging in the usual business of government” at all; it’s for having won election on a platform promising to dismantle the Deep State. All of this—all of it—is just part of the larger and ongoing soft-coup attempt by Shadow Government minions determined to protect their positions and hold onto their (excessive, routinely abused) power.

Second, I happened to speak to the FBI about a certain matter a couple of months back. Very pleasant lady. Thought it all went well. But my lawyers were dead set against it – because, if you go to see the Feds in the context of some or other investigation and you chance to be infelicitous about this or that, you’ll find that suddenly you’re the one being investigated for, as noted above, the one-way crime of lying to the authorities. Did Flynn, in fact, lie? When you’re shooting the breeze with G-men, mistakes or faulty recollection can be enough to land you in prison – if the Feds think it useful to them to threaten you with that. When Flynn pleaded guilty, was he, in fact, guilty? Or was he rather a ruined and broke man who could no longer withstand the pressure of the metaphorical electrodes with attendant billable hours?

I think we all know the answer to that. As I always say, the process is the punishment. And the Federal Government (which wins 97 per cent of cases it brings to court) can inflict a more punishing process than anyone this side of Pyongyang. This is a vile business that does no credit to a civilized society.

Indeed it doesn’t. But worse, none of it would even exist in a truly free society whose government operated within the limitations specified in its Constitution. Worse still, Steyn has more—a LOT more.

Third, as longtime readers, listeners and viewers know, I strongly dislike the uniquely American “presidential transition” period. As you know, in, say, the Westminster system, if a prime minister loses on a Thursday, his goes to the Palace to resign on the Friday, and he moves out of Downing Street on the weekend. The new cabinet ministers are in place the following Monday or Tuesday. The “transition” is part of the general institutional sclerosis of Washington, and certainly no friend to swamp-drainers: A year after Trump’s election, key positions in every cabinet department – Deputy Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, Under-Secretaries, Deputy Assistant Secretaries, Assistant Deputy Secretaries, Deputy Assistant Under-Secretaries – are still held by Obama appointees.

Since January 20th, the party that lost the election has been, supposedly, out of power. But its appointees remain in charge – to the point where the President has to go to court to evict the in effect self-appointed head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau – a lawless and unaccountable body so beyond the much vaunted “checks and balances” of the US Constitution that it can shake down its targets (banks) and transfer the proceeds to its ideological allies (anti-capitalist activist groups). The permanent bureaucracy’s argument re the CFPB is that elections don’t matter. Primitive countries have coups against the president; subtler systems have a thousand below-the-radar coups in every rinky-dink bureau and agency.

Trump may be the elected president, but at the CFPB, the Justice Department, State, Homeland Security et al the self-selected permanent state cruises on.

It’s actually frightening, is what it is. Because what it means is that, in truth, elections really DON’T matter. Until the unmasking of the Deep State brought about by Trump’s election, such a statement would have been dismissed by almost everybody as mere paranoia and loony-tunes conspiracy-theorizing. Now, the proposition is so brazen and in-your-face as to be impossible to credibly argue against. Steyn calls that an inversion in his post, but the overarching inversion here is that only a lunatic would deny a reality that not very long ago would have—hell, did—get you dismissed as, umm, a lunatic for suggesting.

Now, there’s an irony so caustic it would scorch the non-stick right off your best T-Fal skillet, people. To sum up:

There are lots of powerful people in both political parties and around the globe who didn’t want Trump to win the election. They were afraid, and rightly so, that he meant it when he said he would pull the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accords and the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. Trump is the enemy of the plans they have made at places like Davos and other global gatherings where the left-liberal clique that has run the world since the 1960s gathers to plot out the future course of events.

Trump threatens their interests. It’s a matter of simple economics. As so he must be removed, one way or another. Mueller is their tool for doing so, whether the president actually broke the law or not.

We’re approaching a constitutional crisis that gets at the essence of self-government. Should “We, the people” be in charge of the U.S. government or should that role be ceded even further to the career bureaucrats, members of the Foreign Service, Capitol Hill staff, K Street lobbyists, media stars and others who make up the permanent government? The day of reckoning is coming, something the president could bring about sooner rather than later by – now that he has pleaded guilty to something – pardoning Flynn in order to destroy Mueller’s ability to put pressure on him. It would be something to see, watching the special prosecutor and his minions try to move ahead in their effort to construct a semblance of proof the Trump campaign coordinated activities with the Russian government to the detriment of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign without being able to squeeze a key player in this fantastic fantasy. It’s not a matter of Flynn not being able to talk as much as it is liberating him to talk about the pressure applied to him by the prosecutor – which, if past behavior is any indication, probably should itself constitute some kind of a crime.

The deep staters are dancing tonight because they believe they are one step closer to their objectives. Again, maybe so, but it would be wrong for the president to go down without fighting, bare knuckles, against the trends that could very well, in the long run, destroy our democratic institutions as designed by the founders and as we’ve come to know them.

They’ve already been destroyed. More precisely, they’ve been co-opted, perverted, and transformed into the very thing the Founders warned us against. There is no hope of fixing them; the more people become aware of that, the more imminently dangerous the ground we tread becomes.

Damning update! From Scott McKay:

Peter Strzok is everything, as it turns out. Strzok looks like the man at the center of what can best be described as the complete collapse of the FBI and Justice Department’s trustworthiness and credibility, a collapse which is triggering a crisis in the public confidence in the federal government as an institution we consent to have power over us.

To summarize, the Mueller probe is rotten to the core. It’s been nearly a full year in existence and is no closer to finding evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians than he was when he started, and to date all he’s managed is a pair of guilty pleas based purely out of conduct during the investigation, with Flynn’s the most significant.

This isn’t a banana republic, at least not yet. But it’ll become one on Trump’s watch if the president doesn’t act to put a stop to the runaway corruption in the Justice Department.

Here’s how to do that. First, Trump should pardon Flynn for the lie he admitted to the FBI, immediately. Only that, though — Flynn shouldn’t get a free pass for other things he’s done, like for example his Turkish escapades which might well bear further investigation.

Next, Trump should see to it that Strzok and Weissmann, and a number of others on Mueller’s team who are clearly compromised — they’d be disqualified as jurors on any case involving the president as having conflicts, much less as investigators — are fired. Not tomorrow. Today. This minute.

And Trump should tell Mueller he has until Christmas to bring an indictment against someone for collusion with the Russians, or else he’s fired and his probe gets disbanded. This investigation can’t be open-ended, and it also can’t be allowed to be a perpetual motion impeachment machine — not because it’s bad for Trump, but because it is poisonous to American democracy that this witch hunt might go on while the same people involved in it were actively at work exonerating Clinton.

Trump should also fire assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and assistant FBI director Andrew McCabe, both of whom are hopelessly compromised as well, and conduct a top-down review of FBI and DOJ personnel to rid those agencies of the partisan political corruption that clearly pervades them.

There can now be no mistake about the legitimacy of the Deep State coup against Trump his supporters have claimed. It’s real. The question now is what the president is going to do about it. The Democrats will use the 2018 midterm elections as a public referendum on whether they’re to be given the political power to impeach the president, and Mueller’s probe is nothing more than an effort to legitimize that naked grasp at the brass ring. Trump may have been practicing a bit of a rope-a-dope to smoke out just how empty this “collusion” narrative has been, but we’re past that now. Now it’s time to end the circus and turn out the clowns.

Enough already. Get rid of these people.

Amen—to include every last Obama stay-behind agent in the government he can reach. I’m highly skeptical that a massive round of firings at the FBI could ever be enough to undo the rot there, but it would at least be a start at something productive, and would indicate the seriousness of Trump’s commitment to draining the swamp…or the lack thereof.

Share

“The income tax system cannot be fixed. It must be destroyed”

I don’t know if “fix” is the right word anyway. It’s working as intended. It’s just that it has no place in any legitimate Constitutional government, is a wholly corrupt abomination, and is a tyrannical affront to the ideals of the Founders, that’s all.

The income tax is applied in a deceptive manner, in that by withholding taxes from paychecks, it becomes effectively invisible to the lower-level wage-earner once he gets over the initial shock of seeing his first paycheck arriving at far fewer dollars than he had counted on.

Not coincidence. Not accident. Not happenstance. On purpose.

The need to abolish the income tax permanently has become glaringly apparent. Congress has become paralyzed trying to reform a system that is beyond broken. Any fix in any one part of the tax code causes it to break somewhere else. It is a system of exemptions for favored portions of the population, who are in effect subsidized unfairly by those less favored.

The tax code has created the insane idea, ingrained into those who make laws, that your money is not really yours at all, but rather, it belongs to the government. Government takes what it wants, gorging itself in wasteful profligacy, and then doles what is left of it back to you, as if it were doing you a favor.

Worse yet, tax laws are used (in effect) to buy votes. Politicians adjust the tax laws to help their campaign donors, reducing their taxes at your expense. They then get re-elected to repeat the process.

Let’s just all repeat my mantra together now, shall we? Not coincidence. Not accident. Not happenstance. On purpose. Every bit of it.

Rough justice update! Sic simper tyrannis.

Former IRS executive Lois G. Lerner told a federal court last week that members of her family, including “young children,” face death threats and a real risk of physical harm if her explanation of the tea party targeting scandal becomes public.

Ms. Lerner and Holly Paz, her deputy at the IRS, filed documents in court Thursday saying tapes and transcripts of depositions they gave in a court case this year must remain sealed in perpetuity, or else they could spur an enraged public to retaliate.

“Whenever Mss. Lerner and Paz have been in the media spotlight, they have faced death threats and harassment,” attorneys for the two women argued.

“Not a smidgeon of corruption,” eh, Barky? I’ll toss in another good old quote: “When the people fear government, there is tyranny. When government fears the people, there is liberty.” With that truism in mind, I can’t restrict my reaction to mere indifference to Lerner’s plight, but find it positively encouraging. It says good things about the possibility of the political pendulum swinging back in the right direction, if nothing else.

Despite having gotten death threats before now as claimed above, I very much doubt her fear of attempted physical assault or murder is really justified by any real chance of its actually happening. She’s not likely to suffer anything but occasional inconvenience and discomfort for her criminal efforts to stifle dissent, to disenfranchise and harass people for daring to harbor views unapproved by the ruling Deep State/Progressivist cabal—people who mistakenly expected the First Amendment to apply to them, or to have any meaning at all.

She and every other petty despot embedded in every dark corner of the Deep State ought to be fearful, or at least cognizant of a very real risk concomitant with any depredation or transgression against the rights of the people they supposedly “serve.” Swift and severe retribution against them by an outraged populace would amount to no more than justice being served at last, and ought to be expected rather than shocking or rare. Complacent, fatalistic acceptance of such depredations is a large part of why we’re in the mess we’re in.

Far from receiving any just punishment at all, though, Lerner didn’t even lose her fucking pension, and was allowed to retire in peace after first lying about the targeting and harassment; then making a pre-emptive statement of “confession” calculated to shield her from justice for her inexcusable cooperation in subverting democracy and flouting the core principles of the Republic; then pleading the Fifth, thereby piling outrage upon outrage by seeking the protection of the very Constitution she had willfully and knowingly trampled underfoot. She was found to be in contempt of Congress, which matter was quickly and quietly dropped with no consequence to her. Incredibly, she even collected over a hundred thousand dollars in bonuses while presiding over banana-republic style suppression of the right to express dissent.

Then stir this into the noxious stew:

On June 13, 2014, the IRS first stated that it lost Ms. Lerner’s emails from 2009 to 2011.

The IRS said hard drives and backups are destroyed for six other IRS employees too. The IRS spent $10 million unsuccessfully trying to recover them, but much later, the Inspector General found them, noting that IRS IT professionals said no one ever asked for them. It is still possible Ms. Lerner could be queried over the hearings revealing 32,000 more emails, and possible criminal activity.

But on his last day in office, U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen concluded that Ms. Lerner’s statement was not a waiver of her constitutional right against self-incrimination. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz complained that, “Mr. Machen attempted to absolve Ms. Lerner of her actions by substituting his judgment for that of the full House of Representatives. It is unclear whether the Administration directed Mr. Machen not to prosecute Lois Lerner, or whether he was motivated by an ideological kinship with IRS’s leadership.”

Ms. Lerner will probably not face any further action. 

“Not a smidgeon of corruption”? My God, the whole thing was a pluperfect example of nothing BUT pure corruption, complete corruption, from start to finish and top to bottom. Obama’s preposterous assertion was never anything but laughable on its face, and was itself an example of his own sense of invulnerability, and his smug contempt for not just the rule of law but the American public itself.

Make no mistake: the weaponization of the IRS by the Obama junta and its deployment to harass people guilty of nothing whatsoever was a crime—a despicable one, a heinous one, a legally-actionable one, and one that should never have been dismissed, denied, excused, or accepted by any real American. It was a particularly odious abuse of power perpetrated by the most feared agency in the federal government—an agency long drunk on its own near-limitless power, capable of destroying lives permanently for the most minor of infractions with total impunity. It can—it has—wiped out the fruits of a lifetime’s work, struggle, and sacrifice over a trifling error of its own commission. It is a monstrous bureaucracy unfettered by meaningful oversight or restraint. It’s difficult to imagine anything more un-American.

These crimes cry to the heavens for redress. And we’re never going to get it.

In a more righteous era, with a government restrained by a healthy and proper reluctance to run roughshod over the rights of its people, enforced by the dauntless self-respect and vigilance of those people, she’d have been swinging by her neck from a DC lamppost long ago, just as soon as she openly confessed to her crime. But then, as the bumper sticker says: The Founders would have been shooting by now.

Lerner fears for her life? Good. She deserves a whole hell of a lot worse than that in payment for her despicable, immoral, and unforgivable suppression of the most fundamental rights of wholly innocent Americans. That she has the unbelievable audacity, the pure gall, to whine about her situation now just makes her even more contemptible. She is a vile worm; a blight on the landscape, a miserable excrescence without character, courage, virtue, or any other redeeming quality. Indeed, she’s far worse than that: she and her cohorts are dangerous, and are exactly what the Founders warned us against.

And once again, make no mistake: the IRS and every other Federal agency and department is staffed full to brimming with people just like her. Yes, there are exceptions. But she was by no means singular or extraordinary; she is the rule, the norm, and they’re all there still, beavering away in obscurity, eating away at our national foundation every minute of their busy workday.

Taken together, they in their thousands constitute a truly daunting problem, one that may well be insuperable. But the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, and Lois Lerner is an air-tight argument for doing away with the nest of vipers that is the IRS all by herself.

Share

Is America a failed state?

Francis mulls it over.

Corruption is pervasive inside many governments. The majority of Latin American nations, if their officials and lesser functionaries were to be denied the “privilege” of bribery, probably couldn’t function at all. Hernando de Soto could tell you all about it. Indeed, such practices are hardly confined to the Western Hemisphere.

Yet Argentina, Brazil, Peru, and so forth are never described as failed states. Clearly, the term doesn’t apply to corrupt regimes simply because they’re corrupt. What, then, is the distinguishing characteristic?

Is it a failure to enforce the law? But most nations have many, many laws that go unenforced. The United States of America is one such. Enforcement power is always insufficient to enforce all the laws on the books, because governments enact laws without regard for that consideration. The firearms laws of the U.S. provide an exceptionally compelling case.

Is it some characteristic of the law itself – some quality that the laws of a failed state must possess (or lack) that’s not present in (or absent from) the laws of other nations? That’s too nebulous to explain why the term has been applied so sparely. The luxuriant proliferation of law in every nation on Earth would reveal the presence (or absence) of any proposed characteristic in at least some of the laws of each nation.

Here’s an interesting case: Was South Vietnam, just before its conquest by North Vietnam, a failed state? It lacked the will, the power, or both to defend itself against the invasion, which is an important aspect of sovereignty. But at what point would that begin to matter? A number of smaller nations are probably just as ill-prepared to defend themselves against their neighbors, even if those neighbors haven’t troubled them yet.

No, there’s something else involved…some other characteristic of a nation that qualifies it as a “failed state.” It’s about the nature of the state itself.

More precisely, whether and how fully it lives up to its declared intentions and principles. The supposed intention of our government, its raison d’être, is to safeguard the natural rights and ordered liberty of its citizens, to regulate interstate commerce, and to provide for their common defense. Or so the documents that defined its original structure and guiding philosophy say.

By that measure, it isn’t completely failed but is inarguably well along the road to ruin, and our Ruling Class seems determined to continue along to the dismal terminus. On the other hand, the distance we’ve strayed from the vision of those documents, well into a territory the writers of those documents would consider entirely alien, argues that ours is indeed a failed state. But as Francis notes, our government is stable and secure, and is in no realistic danger of collapsing or being toppled at present—which would seem to argue against its being a failed state. Francis later considers an additional metric:

The defining characteristic of a state is an organization that possesses the pre-immunized privilege of coercion over those within its scope. Note the qualifier pre-immunized. Many non-state organizations can and do use coercive methods to attain their objectives. However, they remain liable to pursuit and penalty under the law, whatever it might be, should the state decide to act against them. Only the agents of the state are granted immunity – i.e., the presumption of lawfulness – for specified uses of coercion.

A state which can operate under the presumption of immunity for its deeds is a functioning one. Regardless of the laws it promulgates and whether or not it chooses to enforce them, it has not failed. It maintains its defining difference from the other organizations within its jurisdiction. Inversely, a state whose agents and other subunits are routinely punished for their actions by non-state actors is at the very least in danger of failure.

The federal government of the U.S. is not a failed state by that criterion. At this time there is no force in existence that threatens the immunity of its agents from punishment. Ruby Ridge and Waco provide clear demonstrations, regardless of our opinion of what happened in those two incidents.

You can say that again, buddy. Our government has inarguably failed to live up to its original principles and objectives; it has far exceeded the clear and specific limitations placed on it by its founding documents, casting the lofty ideals of its origin aside while still publicly claiming to abide by them and revere them. Its claim to moral rectitude and its very right to govern as defined in the Declaration is forfeit, voided by its own illegitimate actions. Its claim to the consent of the governed is maintained only by the populace’s terror of the State’s ability to, as Francis says, “operate under the presumption of immunity for its deeds,” which is all but unquestioned at this point.

Does that make it a failed state? Or just a successful tyranny?

I’ve always maintained that every government has one de facto purpose, whether acknowledged openly or (more commonly) concealed or denied: to consolidate and expand its power over those it governs. From that admittedly cynical perspective, our government has been spectacularly and depressingly successful. The irony is that that success always leads to failure in the long run: government’s encroachment on its subjects, gradually evolving into tyranny and abuse, breeds the discontent among the ruled that will sooner or later lead to its abolishment by them.

Think now of how many of us blithely evade or disregard on a daily basis many of the tens of thousands of regulatory restrictions they’ve burdened us with. It’s estimated that the average American commits between three and five felonies a day, each and every day. How could such an absurd state of affairs help but breed anything but contempt for the hapless government that seeks such total control over its subjects…but is obviously powerless to enforce it? That contempt may start out as a source of mild bemusement, but can and likely will degenerate into something a lot more dangerous to the grasping government should it ever seriously attempt to bring its subjects more fully to heel.

Think, too, of the sorry degeneracy of the appalling swine who run the government; not just the politicians, but the inept bureaucrats who actually do run the damned thing. The politicians alone are enough to reveal how far we’ve fallen. When was the last time you heard any of these contemptible cretins referred to as a “statesman”? The very idea of comparing any of the villainous poltroons currently in Congress to, say, James Madison, James Monroe, or, for that matter, Peter Muhlenberg of the first Federal Congress is risible on its face. The kind of people drawn these days to “serve” in Congress couldn’t be trusted to walk your damned dog. You certainly wouldn’t dream of hiring them to babysit your daughter, even for five minutes.

The profligate treachery and self-serving arrogance of John McCain; the addled witlessness of Maxine Waters; the complete mendacity and dishonesty of Nancy Pelosi; the smug double-dealing of Harry Reid; the slimy disingenuousness of Mitch “Yertle” McTurtle—these aren’t exactly ringing endorsements of the caliber of people in charge of government in the modern era. Some of them—most, probably—might be vain and presumptuous enough to think they’d fare well in a comparison to the true statesmen of an earlier age. But that only adds “delusional” to the litany of their inadequacy.

The character traits of those attracted to national elective office effectively guarantee that they’ll be the very type of person we wouldn’t want there. An overblown sense of self-importance; a desire to lord it over others, and an unswerving belief in their competence to do so; a monstrously and unjustly inflated ego; a mania for attention and affirmation; a near-sociopathic lack of interest in the needs or desires of other people; dishonesty and shamelessness; short-sightedness and disinterest in long-term consequences; basic fiscal greed—these pathologies, crippling disqualifications in just about any other field, are now requirements for success as an American career politician.

As for the bureaucrats, anybody who has spent a nightmarish afternoon struggling to deal with just about any government agency for just about any reason knows that they might be even worse. Hide-bound obstinacy; dull-wittedness; inflexibility; inability to distinguish between the trivial and the significant, or to usefully prioritize them; a bone-deep affinity for obsequiousness to superiors and bullying everyone else; an absolute dearth of creativity or empathy, and a loathing of any departure from routine to indulge them, even to their own inconvenience—these are the watchwords of the career bureaucrat. There are exceptions, of course; I’ve been pleasantly surprised to have run across one or two of late myself. But surprise only underlines the rarity of that deviation from the usual round.

Really, one could argue that EVERY state is a failed one eventually; that’s the evident historical pattern, at any rate. The amusing thing to me is how completely that implacable reality demolishes the core conceit of the Progressivists who are the driving force behind the growth of the Almighty State: namely, the belief in the perfectibility of the human animal. Unhappily for them, the harder they try to manipulate and reshape us according to their idea of “perfection”—the more encompassing the scope of their meddlesome interference—the quicker the seeds of our eventual rejection of them will flower into open rebellion against them. One of the “flaws” of human nature that they will never be able to correct to their satisfaction is our obstreperous, seemingly inborn resistance to the very kind of manipulation they envision.

If Progressivists and other Almighty State devotees had sense enough to leave us mostly alone as the Founders intended, their control over those aspects of life they might be permitted to oversee would be prolonged, and more stable. In an irony of nearly galactic proportions, their megalomania guarantees the undoing of their ambition…precisely because there IS such a thing as “human nature,” and the aspects of it they most dislike don’t easily yield to Progressivist tinkering or “perfecting.”

But then, if they had that much sense, or any at all, they wouldn’t be Progressivists or statists in the first place, and would recognize the fundamental truth of Thoreau’s (or O’Sullivan’s) axiom: that government governs best which governs least. Governs longer, too.

And that’s the crowning irony: by discarding the Founder’s ideal of limited government, the proponents and architects of the hoggish Superstate ensure its own inevitable devolution into a failed one. Call it karma, if you like.

Share

Bullets first

Schlichter sums up:

Show of hands. Who is up to give up your ability to protect yourself because the same people who celebrate us being murdered demand it? Anyone? Hello? Bueller?

Then, of course, the killing spree got stopped by the very thing that liberals insist doesn’t exist except for all the times it has existed – a good guy with a gun. A Texan exhibiting something liberals are unfamiliar with – manhood – took his rifle and went one-on-one with that walking chamber pot and put a round in him. The tubby terrorist, confronted with an armed American citizen instead of little kids, dropped his rifle and ran, gut shot. Let’s hope he suffered good and hard before he checked himself out like the coward he was.

So, let’s review. We’re supposed to demand laws that make it illegal for human suppositories like this to have guns, even though it was already illegal for him to have guns. We’re supposed to rely on government background checks to protect us even though the government keeps failing at that. We’re also supposed to disarm at the behest of people who know literally nothing about guns or existing gun laws. And we’re supposed to not believe that we have the ability to defend ourselves, even though normal Americans do so every day – here, an instructor from the NRA literally ended this bloodbath. But we should ignore that for reasons and because.

But wait, there’s more. We’re supposed to disarm in the face of people who celebrate when we are murdered. The Hollywood types, taking a break from molesting each other, didn’t exactly celebrate our deaths, but they couldn’t help spewing their hatred for our faith. I bet if we were disarmed, and a government controlled by liberals had a total monopoly on force, they’d be totally cool and respect our religious rights. I checked with Chet and he thinks so – it’s not like right now they want to bankrupt people for not baking cakes.

Here’s the sad fact – the people who want us disarmed don’t care if we get murdered. Not at all. Chicago has a slow motion Sutherland Springs every two weeks and the smarmy Democrats who run that hellhole don’t care. If they did, they would unleash the cops, who know exactly who the crooks are. Remember how liberals howled about “stop and frisk?” That took illegal guns off the streets, but progressive politics always take precedence. Our lives don’t matter except as a tool to be exploited when they want to take normals’ rights.

Our elite doesn’t want gun control. It wants us control.

Bingo, nailed it in one. But they have a big, big problem which, just as it always has, still boils down to this: from my cold, dead hands, bitches. I know they’d be fine with that as long as they could get someone to do it for them and all, but still.

Think I’m alone in that, or at best part of a tiny, statistically insignificant handful of radical, fanatical 2A extremists? Better think again, Poindexter:

In 2014, attorney and policy analyst Paloma Capanna filed suit on behalf of Rochester-based radio host Bill Robinson seeking data on NY SAFE Act compliance: specifically, how many assault weapons had actually been registered in the state.

Cuomo administration officials first ignored, then denied Robinson’s Freedom of Information Act request. But, on June 22, following two years of litigation, state police released the information based on a court decision which found that while the law forbade the disclosure of the actual registration forms, nothing precluded the release of aggregate data.

That data shows massive noncompliance with the assault weapon registration requirement. Based on an estimate from the National Shooting Sports Federation, about 1 million firearms in New York State meet the law’s assault-weapon criteria, but just 44,000 have been registered. That’s a compliance rate of about 4 percent. Capanna said that the high rate of noncompliance with the law could only be interpreted as a large-scale civil disobedience, given the high level of interest and concern about the law on the part of gun owners.

“It’s not that they aren’t aware of the law,” said Capanna. “The lack of registration is a massive act of civil disobedience by gun owners statewide.”

Oh, and did I mention their needing someone to confiscate ’em for them? Why yes; yes I did.

Opposition to the SAFE Act has been widespread across upstate New York, where 52 of the state’s 62 counties, including Ulster, have passed resolutions opposing the law. Upstate police agencies have also demonstrated a marked lack of enthusiasm for enforcing the ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. According to statistics compiled by the state Department of Criminal Justice Services, there have been just 11 arrests for failure to register an otherwise-legal assault weapon since the SAFE Act took effect in March 2013 and 62 for possession of a large capacity magazine. In Ulster County, where 463 assault weapons have been registered, there have been just three arrests for possession of large-capacity magazines and none for failure to register an assault weapon. Ulster County Sheriff Paul VanBlarcum has been a vocal critic of the law; he said he believed large numbers of Ulster County gun owners had chosen to ignore the registration requirement.

“We’re a rural county with a lot of gun enthusiasts,” said VanBlarcum. “So [463] sounds like a very low number.”

VanBlarcum said he had advised deputies to use their discretion when it came to making arrests for SAFE Act violations like unregistered assault weapons and he had no plans to undertake proactive enforcement measures.

“We are not actively out looking to enforce any aspect of the SAFE Act,” said VanBlarcum.

As I’ve mentioned before, I have friends and family who are cops; many of the customers at the Harley shop I used to work at are cops. And I can assure you based on my own conversations with these guys that there is absolutely ZERO enthusiasm among them not only for having to enforce these laws, but for the laws themselves in the first damned place. Their opposition to such laws, in other words, is based not on narrow concern for their own safety in enforcing an unpopular law, but on their personal firm belief in the right to keep and bear arms.

Too, they’re nearly all recreational shooters themselves; when I used to attend the bi-annual Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot every year, a goodly number of the attendees there were always cops. There are exceptions out there, of course, but on the whole these aren’t people who are going to be able to muster a whole lot of enthusiasm for personally going out to violate the Constitution on a door-to-door basis. In fact, they’re way more likely to refuse to do it flatly and without equivocation:

With more states passing stronger gun control laws, rural sheriffs across the country are taking the meaning of their age-old role as defenders of the Constitution to a new level by protesting such restrictions, News21 found.

Some are refusing to enforce the laws altogether.

Sheriffs in states like New York, Colorado and Maryland argue that some gun control laws defy the Second Amendment and threaten rural culture, for which gun ownership is often an integral component.

They’re joined by groups like Oath Keepers and the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, both of which encourage law enforcement officers to take a stand against gun control laws.

Lewis, who is running for re-election this year, said sheriffs have a responsibility to push against what he sees as the federal government’s continual encroachment on citizens’ lives and rights.

“Where do we draw a line?” he asked. “I made a vow and a commitment that as long as I’m the sheriff of this county I will not allow the federal government to come in here and strip my law-abiding citizens of the right to bear arms. If they attempt to do that it will be an all-out civil war. Because I will stand toe-to-toe with my people.”

If our 2A rights are ever to be fully restored—or even maintained as is, without further watering down or sneak-thief encroachments on it—we’re going to need as many like Sheriff Lewis as we can possibly get to help with it. As for non-compliance, it ain’t just New York, either:

While the recent experience in New York is strong evidence of the American public’s unwillingness to comply with firearms registration, it is only the latest instance illustrating the futility of these types of laws. In Connecticut, a 2013 law required residents to register certain types of semiautomatic firearms, and individual magazines with a capacity greater than 10, by January 1, 2014. Out of an estimated several hundred thousand guns and 2.4 million magazines that were required to be registered, by the deadline Connecticut gun owners had registered 50,016 firearms and a mere 38,290 magazines.

In March, the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission, assembled by Governor Dannel Malloy “to review current policy and make specific recommendations in the areas of public safety, with particular attention paid to school safety, mental health, and gun violence prevention,” issued its final report. The commission suggested that Connecticut “Prohibit the possession… of any firearm capable of firing more than 10 rounds without reloading.”

Similarly, in 1989 California enacted a law requiring registration of certain semi-automatic firearms. According to a February 17, 1992 Los Angeles Times article, in the years since enactment only 46,062 semi-autos were registered. The article goes on to note, “The state Department of Justice has estimated there are 200,000 to 300,000. Others have calculated as many as 450,000 to 600,000.” The authorities attempted to bolster the lackluster compliance with a 90-day amnesty period at the start of 1992; this program only netted another 13,470 firearms.

The results of New Jersey’s semi-auto ban were comparable. An April 17, 1992 New York Times article titled, “Owners of Assault Guns Slow to Obey Law,” notes, “In New Jersey, which enacted an assault weapon ban in 1990, 2,000 weapons have been surrendered, made inoperable or registered as collectors’ items, according to the State Police. The state Attorney General’s office estimates that there are between 20,000 and 50,000 assault weapons in New Jersey.”

And those are just the ones they know about. But hey, given our history and national character, only in America would such personal defiance of tyrannical edicts be likely to occur, right? Wrong yet again:

Canada passed a strict gun-control law in 1995, partly in reaction to a 1989 shooting  at Montreal’s Ecole Polytechnique with a semiautomatic rifle. The law required universal regulation of guns, including rifles and shotguns. Proponents said the central registry would give law-enforcement agencies a powerful new tool for tracking guns used in crimes. They also claimed it would help reduce domestic violence and suicide.

The registry was plagued with complications like duplicate serial numbers and millions of incomplete records, Mauser reports. One person managed to register a soldering gun, demonstrating the lack of precise standards. And overshadowing the effort was the suspicion of misplaced effort: Pistols were used in 66% of gun homicides in 2011, yet they represent about 6% of the guns in Canada. Legal long guns were used in 11% of killings that year, according to Statistics Canada, while illegal weapons like sawed-off shotguns and machine guns, which by definition cannot be registered, were used in another 12%.

The bigger lesson of Canada’s experiment, Mauser says, is that gun registration rarely delivers the results proponents expect. In most countries the actual number registered settles out at about a sixth. Germany required registration during the Baader-Meinhof reign of terror in the 1970s, and recorded 3.2 million of the estimated 17 million guns in that country; England tried to register pump-action and semiautomatic shotguns in the 1980s, but only got about 50,000 of the estimated 300,000 such guns stored in homes around the country.

All of which brings us ’round to this delicious 2014 press release, from Connecticut Carry:

To Officials of the State of Connecticut: Either Enforce or Repeal 2013 Anti-gun Laws.
It’s time for the State to enforce the tyranny they passed or repeal it entirely.

For years, Undersecretary Michael Lawlor, the upper levels of the State Police, and Governor Dannel Malloy have sought to disarm those whom they fear. The laws they passed show that they fear constitutionally and lawfully armed citizens. Despite thousands of gun owners showing up at each legislative session expecting to be heard by their ‘representatives’, government officials seized upon public panic related to the Newtown Massacre, as a means to exert legislative and executive fiats intent upon disarming gun owners who have harmed no one. The Connecticut Executive and Legislative branches showed their cowardice when they installed metal detectors and armed guards at the entrances to the Legislative Office Building (LOB) only for firearms-related hearings.

Gun hating officials now have their laws on the books in Connecticut. They dreamed up those laws, in their tyrannical dystopias, but it was NOT the majority of the public that supported such laws. Despite all the severe legal language that the government passed, there is still no open discussion of enforcing those tyrannical laws, as they stand. Throughout the Legislature and the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP), there is only talk of “amnesty” and possibly boiling the frog at a slower rate.

As many media sources have pointed out, there is very little compliance with the new edicts, and there is absolutely no way for the State to know who is obeying the law or not. State officials have made their bluff, and Undersecretary Lawlor has made his position clear, that the State will enforce the laws. We say: Bring it on. The officials of the State of Connecticut have threatened its citizens by fiat. They have roared on paper, but they have violated Principle. Now it’s time for the State to man-up: either enforce its edicts or else stand-down and return to the former laws that did not so violently threaten the citizens of this state.

There is nothing that will so completely destroy faith in those edicts faster than the State-provoked chaos and violence that will be required to enforce the 2013 anti-gun laws. Connecticut residents should not have to live in perpetual fear of “the jack boot” coming down on them. Unenforced, frequently repeated threats fall on deaf ears. By passing laws that they cannot or choose not to enforce, State officials tell the public that this State is ignorant, immoral, blind, and impotent in its legal and decision making processes. The passage of such foolishly conceived, insufferable laws is an affront to every law-abiding citizen. Every official who supports such legal foolishness mocks our State and the Constitution they swore to uphold.

“From Governor Malloy, to Undersecretary Lawlor to DESPP, Commissioner Schriro, and Lieutenant Cooke of the firearms unit, and including Lt. Paul Vance, the state needs to shit, or get off the pot. The fact is, the state does not have the balls to enforce these laws. The laws would not survive the public outcry and resistance that would occur.” – Connecticut Carry Director Ed Peruta

I remind you, as incredible as it may seem, that this comes to us from…Connecticut. The state hasn’t repealed the abominable thing as far as I know, of course, but not for want of effort on the part of CC and Ed Peruta; good on ’em for slamming the dimestore dictators like this, valiantly continuing the never-ending battle for liberty in a region not exactly noted for being particularly hospitable to it. I can’t say I envy them their struggle; it’s one of several reasons I left NYC in the first place, although it pains me to have to acknowledge that where I live now ain’t exactly known for being bereft of liberals either.

Kudos, too, to all the doughty patriots there and elsewhere who defiantly—and courageously—rejected tyranny and upheld the spirit of our Founders by refusing to meekly surrender their weapons to an overreaching, grasping government. As I always make a point of telling each and every gun-grabbing liberal I argue the issue with: you’ll never get mine, motherfucker.

Who knows, if Trump can keep helping the Democrat Socialist collapse along, and the RINOs continue to offend red-blooded Americans with their now-exposed fraud and collusion, maybe the time may not be too far off when we can stop concentrating on merely holding the line and actually begin to roll the insidious project to deny the basic human right to defend one’s self, one’s family, and one’s home back.

Share

“A Crime Or Just ‘Baloney’? Hillary Clinton Russian Scandal Keeps Getting Worse”

And ain’t it just delicious?

As evidence grows of actual collusion and possible illegal pay-for-play ties between Hillary Clinton, her closest political allies and Russian officials, the former secretary of state and presidential candidate declares on C-Span “it’s the same baloney they’ve been peddling for years, and there’s been no credible evidence by anyone.” She called the stories “debunked.”

O, irony. Her Herness says this, while all along they’ve been pushing an entirely fraudulent witch-hunt against Trump and his supposed “collusion” for a year now, WITH ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT IT EVER HAPPENED, OR THAT EVEN ONE FUCKING VOTE WAS CHANGED BECAUSE OF WHATEVER “CRIME” THEY’RE MAKING UP OUT OF WHOLE CLOTH.

The sudden re-emergence of the Clinton-Russia nexus — we reported on it last year — is mostly thanks to reports in The Hill and The Daily Caller last week showing that the FBI and Justice Department had found evidence that Russia had bribed a U.S. uranium trucking firm to further Moscow’s reach into the U.S. atomic energy industry.

It didn’t end there, however. As The Hill reported Tuesday, “They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.”

This is just one of a number of scandals that Hillary Clinton has embroiled herself in over the last few years. And the revelations just keep coming — turning what was initially claimed as minor contretemps into major commissions of crime. And yet, her response is always the same. Deny, call it “baloney,” until the painful truth emerges.

Heck, remember the Clinton email scandal? It’s not dead. Under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the State Department has processed some 32,000 pages of Hillary Clinton’s emails but, The Daily Caller reports, has “released a small fraction of those.” There are still some 40,000 other pages to be “processed,” which could take years.

Rush expands on the theme, which is less about any real “collusion” than it is about manufacturing a soft coup, and was all along:

This dwarfs Watergate in ways that I can’t even categorize. This has so many players involved who knew that this was phony. But for the highest investigatory intelligence agency in the world to knowingly accept pure fiction and use it politically? See, it doesn’t surprise me. This is who Obama is! This is right out of Saul Alinsky and Rules for Radicals.

This is exactly how community organizing works. You populate these places with your fellow extremist radicals, and you turn ’em loose — and everything they touch ends up being corrupted. The CIA? The FBI? This story… I guarantee you, Jim Kallstrom, who ran the New York office of the FBI for years, this is gonna… It’s gonna combine to devastate him and infuriate him like you can’t believe. The FBI is sacred to people who have devoted their lives to it, it’s sacred in its mission, and to have this? This is not just a mistake. This is not somebody getting fooled.

This is not Comey and Robert Mueller being fooled by any of this. This was knowingly used to help deny a duly elected president his victory — and then after he was inaugurated, it was used for the express purpose of driving this duly elected president out of office, and it encompassed the United States Congress. It encompassed the office of the Director of National Intelligence run by James Clapper. It ensnared the CIA and the FBI — or rather, the FBI and the CIA used this to ensnare all of these different House and Senate investigating committees — and, of course, the Drive-By Media.

More:

The country has spent the last year with Obama intelligence officials, the media, and Democratic leaders pushing a narrative of Trump collusion with Russia to steal an election that was supposed to be won by Hillary Clinton. A meeting between Trump officials and a Russian who falsely promised dirt on Hillary Clinton is the best evidence — by far — to support this narrative.

Yet here we have the realization that the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and the FBI all worked wittingly or unwittingly with Russians to affect the results of the 2016 election. Far from just meeting with a Russian and not getting dirt on a political opponent, these groups wittingly or unwittingly paid Russian operatives for disinformation to harm Trump during the 2016 election and beyond.

Worse, these efforts perverted our justice system by forcing the attorney general to recuse himself for the crime of having attended meetings with Russian diplomats and spawning a massive, sprawling, limitless probe over Russia. These things are so much more damaging to the republic than a couple thousand dollars in ads on Facebook paid for by Russian trolls about a pipeline protest.

That would have to be the understatement of the fucking century. In fact, the entire administrative-state edifice and its most powerful bureaucracies—the core of an illegitimate government that now controls every aspect of our lives, and does so in direct contravention of our Founding documents and principles—now stand revealed as wholly-corrupt players of partisan politics, a stunning breach not only of law but of ethics and morality.

The regular and repeated breaking of the oath they all swore when they took office or were hired we’ll leave aside; if that sort of thing meant anything to them at all, they never would have done the things they’ve done. In fact, any honest or honorable person would never have agreed to work for such a repugnant tyranny in the first place. Viewed in light of all this, Hemingway’s bland “understatement” looks almost life-threateningly naive—indicating blasé, meek acceptance of a reality that of right ought to evoke killing rage.

And: is there more, you ask? You damned well know there is.

Is there any Progressivist fantasy not being clandestinely bankrolled by the Russians? Even one? But the real problem here isn’t the plain fact of Russian direction of our treasonous-Left blowhards and useful idiots; that’s an old, old story, if a grim one. No, the problem is that our own damned government, up to the very highest levels, is riddled with collaborationists and fellow-travelers working hand-in-glove with the Russians to undermine the legitimacy of our last election.

And if THAT doesn’t make you killing mad, you’re probably a Democrat Socialist yourself.

Update! Questions, questions.

The explosive report in the Washington Post goes a long way to explaining how the dossier was so widely spread among political reporters during the election. The Clinton camp must have passed it out like Halloween candy to its media handmaidens.

The Post report provides possible answers to other questions, too. Because Clinton’s team paid for the dossier, it’s likely that she gave it to the FBI, where James Comey planned to hire the former British agent who had compiled it to keep digging dirt on Trump.

The finding also raises the possibility that the dossier is what led the Obama White House to snoop on members of Trump’s team, and leak the “unmasked” names to the anti-Trump media in a bid to help Clinton.

In short, we now have compelling evidence that the dossier was the largest and dirtiest dirty trick of the 2016 campaign. And Clinton, who has played the victim card ever since her loss, was behind it the whole time.

Lock. Her. Up.

Sordid update! A most useful (and link-rich) summary, for those of you keeping score at home.

So what do we have? We have a presidential candidate who, as Secretary of State, violated the Espionage Act in order to keep a private e-mail server for the purposes of soliciting bribes for her foundation, including facilitating the transfer of one-fifth of America’s uranium into Russian hands, away from the public’s view, while the FBI and Justice Department knew the Russians were trying to target her for an influence operation and, when they were able to break up the spy ring doing the work to move it forward, she set up a hasty exchange to get them out of the country. Meanwhile DOJ was busy covering up the bribery scandal surrounding the uranium sale. And then, when it was time for that candidate to run for office her campaign and her party paid a sleazy, unethical oppo research firm which had been doing business with the Russians, while violating federal law requiring disclosure of Americans engaged in such commerce, to drum up a dossier full of falsehoods written by a former British spy using his contacts in Russia.

And that dossier was used to craft a narrative that the candidate’s opponent had colluded with the Russians to fix an election. To such an extent that a special prosecutor was demanded to investigate that opponent after he won the election – and the special prosecutor had been director of the FBI when the bribery scandal above was covered up.

Let’s not forget that while all this was going on, someone hacked the e-mails of the candidate’s party headquarters and her campaign consultant and deposited the proceeds to Wikileaks. The candidate blamed this on the Russians, while at the same time the party chair was employing a criminal Pakistani with ties to the ISI, that country’s intelligence service, as her IT consultant, and a subsequent investigation offers at least a suggestion it may well have been the Pakistani who was responsible for the e-mail heist seeing as though the technical signature of the leaked e-mails indicates they were downloaded at a speed which couldn’t have been had over the internet but rather on the server itself. The Pakistani may or may not be in the process of turning state’s evidence in order to save his skin from his other criminal misdeeds.

If the makers of House Of Cards had all this as the plot line of the next season of their show, audiences would not believe it. And yet this is what the Clintons have wrought on American politics and foreign policy.

Lock HER up? Hell, lock ’em ALL up.

Share

The REAL question about Russian collusion

Just how deep does the rabbit hole of near-treasonous government corruption go?

Blame Sean Hannity. Or give him all the credit. The intrepid talk show host has been claiming for months that there is nothing to the Trump-Russia allegations, that the real tale of Russian collusion is linked to Hillary Clinton. The fact that very few people have taken this seriously has only caused the firebrand conservative to dig in deeper and repeat his talking points both more often and more fervently.

We might have believed Sean Hannity’s predictions, but we’d seen this movie before. Then came Tuesday. John Solomon and Alison Spann of the Hill and Sara Carter of Circa News had a story that may have broken open the largest national security scandal since the Rosenbergs.

If this story is true, then all our worst fears have been confirmed, and we are indeed living in a banana republic, with one set of rules for the rich and powerful, and another set of rules for everybody else.

The question going forward: what kind of country will we live in tomorrow? Now that we know that Russian collusion is real and that the Obama administration engaged in it, what will be done about it? Will the laws against government corruption finally be enforced, or will the guilty walk again as we’re treated to another round of Congressional committee show hearings?

This scandal will be a true test — perhaps the final test — of whether American government can still work for the people. If Republicans walk away from this story for fear of ruffling Democrat feathers, we will know that the fix is in.

If we are to remain a country of laws and not of men, the people we’ve chosen to uphold our institutions are going to have to do better than this. It’s one thing if our system of justice and our national security have been put up for sale; it’s quite another if the politicians and bureaucrats who did it face no consequences.

How corrupt are American institutions? We’ll know very soon. 

Oh, I think we can all make a pretty good guess on that already. As the author says earlier in the piece: “The early returns aren’t promising.”

Share

Vegas stench still rising

And strengthening.

The Mandalay Bay security guard shot in the moments leading up to the Las Vegas massacre checked into a “quick clinic” instead of appearing in a series of previously scheduled interviews, but his union representative does not know his exact condition or location.

“It’s highly unusual. I’m hoping everything is okay with him and I’m sure MGM or the union will let (media) know when we hear something,” David Hickey, the president of the Security Police and Fire Professionals Union told Fox News.

He’s dead, Jim.

Hickey said he’d been helping security guard Jesus Campos prepare for a string of interviews, scheduled for Thursday evening.

“For the past four days he’s been preparing,” Hickey said, noting the interviews were Campos’ idea to begin with. He said he hoped telling his story would help him move on.

He’s dead, Jim.

“Thursday we had a meeting with MGM officials, and after that meeting was over we talked about the interviews, we went to a private area, and when we came out, Mr. Campos was gone.”

Hickey told Fox he received a text Thursday night, saying Campos had been taken to a “quick clinic.”

A text from whom, pray tell? He’s dead, Jim.

“Right now I’m just concerned where my member is, and what his condition is,” he said.

He’s dead, Jim.

Plenty more from Denninger and Sundance. Thank goodness the Left finally decided to sacrifice their beloved Weinstein so as to provide a distraction from worrying about stuff like this, eh?

(Via Insty)

Update! Steyn, too, ain’t buying any.

As readers know, I have a low regard for conspiracy theories, mainly because the reasons the world is going to hell are pretty much staring us in the face. But I can’t honestly blame anyone following the Las Vegas massacre story from taking refuge in any conspiracy theory, no matter how wild and zany. Almost a fortnight from the moment when 58 people were gunned down at a country-music festival, officialdom has so bungled the case that almost every single one of the most basic facts about the act are up for grabs.

As I had cause to remark over a week ago, I dislike the contamination of police press conferences by various politicians and bureaucrats all indulging in an orgy of mutual self-congratulation. But, in this case, the self-congratulation is entirely unwarranted. From the beginning this seemed an unusual crime that didn’t seem to line up with any other mass shooting by a nutter who flips. It has only gotten weirder in the days since.

He has plenty more, and it all stinks.

Share

A criminal conspiracy

Indeed, a treasonous one. But nobody should be holding their breath waiting for a fully-converged DOJ to take them down.

There is big money behind the street violence tearing apart America from Ferguson to Berkeley.

And there are big foundations behind the big money. The DOJ took down the big crime families. It’s time for it to take down the big leftist foundations.

Many of these foundations were born in sin. And they’ve only grown worse since.

Their bid for “campaign finance reform” shifted the axis of political finance from donations to political organizations to “outside” groups that matched their agendas. We all live in the cracks of the shadowy political system created by the Ford Foundation, George Soros, Carnegie and MacArthur. The lefty foundations spent over $100 million to make “campaign finance reform” a reality. And that gave them enormous power to control national politics through unaccountable networks and soft money.

American politics was radicalized. The left controlled the foundations and the foundations controlled politics. Democracy was replaced with oligarchy. Campaign finance was made unaccountable under the guise of campaign finance reform. The oligarchy operated under the cover of Orwellian labels like the Democracy Alliance where you can help decide how the country should be run for only $200,000.

All this is ominous enough. But the oligarchy has gone from running the country to funding street riots.

And that’s not just subversion. It’s political terrorism.

What do you call powerful and wealthy organizations that subvert the political system with massive amounts of money and then also incite street violence against an elected government?

The big foundations are a cross between criminal organizations and terrorist groups. And they must be brought down.

“Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?” an Elizabethan courtier sardonically observed. “Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”

Crime never prospers for the same reason. If it gets big enough, it becomes government. And only Attorney General Sessions and the remaining honest Republicans in the House and Senate can stop it.

And CRUNCH, just like that, we founder on the rocks of the real problem here. Sessions? “Honest Republicans”? What, all three of ’em?

Daniel has, as is his wont, done some deep digging and committed an act of real journalism here. But the odds of our wholly-corrupt Justice Department actually doing its job and going after these violent commie traitors currently hover somewhere between “slim” and “you gotta be joking.” Pam Geller, thanks to bitter personal experience, understands it all too well:

The FBI was in on the planning of the jihad attack against the Garland Muhammad art expo in Garland, Texas. They did nothing to stop it, not even giving us a warning that my event was targeted by devout Muslims who meant to kill us Charlie Hebdo-style. We killed those jihadis. It was the security team I hired to protect my event that saved numerous lives, nothing the FBI did. We survived despite the FBI.

The FBI was in on the planning of a Boston plot to behead me. They did not warn me or alert my security team. It was a Boston cop who killed one of the Muslims who had attacked the cop on his way to New York.

The ISIS plot to carry out mass shootings in Times Square, the NYC subway, and at music concerts reported yesterday actually took place this past June. All three were arrested months ago, but the FBI had it sealed. What else are they not telling us?

The FBI knew about the attack before it happened, but did not alert law enforcement or my security apparatus. When I first heard that the FBI had prior notice of the attack, I thought that it was very short-term notice. It was assumed by many people that the FBI had had some sketchy prior knowledge of the attack, but nothing particularly specific.

But we know now they were in on the planning of the jihad attack, and did nothing about it. If you recall, the FBI only got around to a general alert just three hours before our event. It was Garland police, not the FBI, that coordinated all the super security efforts with our own security team.

It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the Obama FBI wanted me and the other speakers at the event dead. Dutch freedom fighter Geert Wilders was the keynote speaker; he has been living with armed guards for years for supposedly “insulting Islam.” My colleague Robert Spencer has received numerous death threats from Muslims. Cartoon contest winner Bosch Fawstin drew Muhammad. Did Obama’s pro-Islam FBI want us all dead?

What other conclusion can be reached?

So I ask you, do you trust anything the FBI is telling us?

Nope, I surely do not. In light of all this, the notion of the DOJ going after Leftist criminal terrorists and their filthy-rich funders—the diligent yeoman’s work done by Greenfield noted above notwithstanding—jumps right from “not bloody likely” to “patently absurd.” It’s worse than a damned shame, sure. But it’s just part and parcel of living under an illegitimate, tyrannical government—the nature and form of which would disgust our Founders to their very bones.

Share

Some folks never learn

Socialist is as socialist does.

Sounding eerily like the Sandinistas he once supported, the mayor of America’s largest city declared his love for heavy-handed central planning in surprisingly unguarded terms.

When asked about the enormous gap between New York’s rich and poor, the mayor responded:

What’s been hardest is the way our legal system is structured to favor private property. I think people all over this city, of every background, would like to have the city government be able to determine which building goes where, how high it will be, who gets to live in it, what the rent will be. I think there’s a socialistic impulse, which I hear every day, in every kind of community, that they would like things to be planned in accordance to their needs. Unfortunately, what stands in the way of that is hundreds of years of history that have elevated property rights and wealth to the point that that’s the reality that calls the tune on a lot of development.

Yeah. And speaking of “standing in the way,” let’s all just ignore the hundreds of years of history that have proven beyond any reasonable doubt, again and again and again, that socialism does not work, has never worked, never will work, and cannot work. It’s all that stands in the way of your childish utopian fantasy being successfully realized at last—right Bill?

At this late date, there’s really only one interesting question here: who would be the bigger moron, Red Bill or the dimwits who elected his stupid commie ass?

(Via MisHum)

Share

“Do we have a Justice Department or not?”

Not so’s you’d notice, no. Well, unless you’re targeted by them for the sin of opposition to the Deep State, that is.

During the past few weeks, we have confirmed what we suspected. The Comey investigation of the Hillary email “matter” was a sham. We knew that Comey did not call for a grand jury, did not issue subpoenas, and granted immunity to most of Hillary’s pals. Loretta Lynch told Comey to use the word “matter” instead of “investigation,” and Lynch met with Bill Clinton days before the FBI questioned Hillary. But now we know that Comey wrote the exoneration letter before he interviewed Hillary and before he completed the sham investigation. Now we know why Comey did not put Hillary under oath when questioned.  There was no point to it, since he had already decided to give her a pass. And not putting her under oath saved the additional problem that Hillary would naturally lie under oath, which would have required Comey to explain that Hillary lying under oath to the FBI was done without intent.

Now we know that Trump was correct when he said his lines at Trump Tower were “wiretapped.” Maybe he did not use the exact language required, but everyone knew the meaning of Trump’s charge. James Clapper knew but lied by saying there was no FISA warrant.

Comey knew but lied when he said there was no wiretapping of Trump.

Clapper and Comey knew there was a FISA warrant for Paul Manafort at Trump Tower. They knew that Manafort had worked as Trump’s campaign manager and knew that the surveillance must have picked up Manafort speaking with Trump. Yet both insisted they knew of no such evidence. They both parsed words, in the best spirit of Bill Clinton parsing the meaning of “is” and “alone,” not to answer fully and honestly.

But while Mueller is aggressively pursuing whatever it is he is investigating, spending millions, and creating his own justice department, our attorney general is missing in action. Meanwhile, Hillary is peddling her book, appearing on any TV show that will have her, attacking President Trump at every opportunity, and laughing at us because she escaped prosecution.
 
Attorney General Sessions made a yuge mistake in recusing himself from the “Russia” investigation, which led to the appointment of Mueller. He should have notified Trump that he would recuse himself so Trump could have appointed someone who is not afraid of the Democrats and their cheerleaders in the media. Sessions had a distinguished career as a senator and federal prosecutor, but his recusal and failure to investigate, especially the sham Hillary investigation, are inexplicable.

Not really. It’s not as if he’s “afraid” of the Democrats or the media. Like the rest of the malignant #FakeRepublicans, he’s on their side; he’s as crooked as any other of the Deep State termites, that’s all—a phony, through and through. Just like the Tower of Integrity himself, the bent liar Comey, or the “heroic” John McStain. As such, what Sessions thinks “his job” is and what one would expect from an honest, upstanding AG are two very different things.

If Sessions does not wish to do his sworn duties, he should resign, or appoint a special prosecutor who will follow the law.

That’s the last thing he wants, and nobody should be holding their breath waiting for it, lest they turn blue and fall over. Trump has made a couple appointments that are looking now like costly mistakes; for my money, Sessions would certainly be one of them.

Share

Getting to the root of the problem

It didn’t start with Obama. Nor Clinton, Carter, JFK, or even FDR.

In 1913, Woodrow Wilson was the newly elected president. Wilson and his fellow progressives scorned the Constitution and the Declaration. They moved swiftly to replace the Founders’ republic with a new regime.

There is widespread agreement that Wilson did not always show good judgment – for example, in his blunders in international relations – but in the project of overturning the Founding, he and the movement he led selected their targets shrewdly. By the time he left office, the American republic was, as they say, history. The fundamentals of the new regime were in place, and the expansion of government under FDR, LBJ, and Obama was made easy, perhaps even inevitable.

Nineteen-thirteen gave us the 16th and 17th Amendments to the Constitution. That year also saw the creation of the Federal Reserve. This burst of changes marks the effective beginning of the Progressive Era in American politics, the era in which we now live. Wilson was to do much more that would once have been considered out of bounds, but these three changes were enough to change everything. In 1913, the fundamental agreement the Founders made with the American people about the relation of the states and the federal government was broken.

Here is the Founders’ original bargain, stated by James Madison in Federalist 45:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce…The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

It is important to remember that when we speak of the ratification of the Constitution, this is what was ratified. But this is not the government we now have. Today’s central government is not the federal government of the original Constitution.

Boy, he said a mouthful there. He mentions the three pillars of Progressivism that were the first big steps on the road to undoing America as founded; the 17th Amendment, the abomination that allowed for direct popular election of Senators, is mentioned first, as well it ought to be. I’ve certainly railed about it here often enough.

Clearly, the bargain, honorably entered into by the Founders’ generation, was broken. It was broken by the 17th Amendment, which instituted the direct election of U.S. senators. That amendment struck directly at the heart of the Founders’ design.  According to the original Constitution, senators were chosen by the state legislators. Unlike the members of the House, who represent the people of their district, the senators had a special responsibility to represent their states in the deliberations having to do with the those “few and defined” powers the Constitution transferred from the states to the federal government. That is why the states with small populations and the states with larger populations got the same number of senators and the same number of votes in the Senate. It is also why the Constitution gives the Senate power over treaties and over the appointment of the senior officials of the executive, those whose responsibilities include “war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” The 17th Amendment eliminated the fundamental electoral guarantee of the Founders’ vision of a federal government with limited powers.

The system we have today bypasses the state legislatures. The consequences have been many and profound. Probably the most obvious has been the inevitable erosion of the independence of the states and of their ability to counterbalance federal power.  The Senate was a barrier to the passage of federal laws infringing on the powers reserved to state governments, but senators abandoned that responsibility under the incentives of the new system of election. Because the states no longer have a powerful standing body representing their interests within the central government, the power of the central government has rapidly grown at the expense of the states. The states increasingly are relegated to functioning as administrative units of today’s gargantuan central government.  

To my way of thinking, this was the Big One, the one crucial step to transforming Constitutionally limited government into something the Founders would have abhorred. He goes on to make the case against the 16th and the creation of the Federal Reserve, winding up thusly:

It is perfectly obvious that we are far down the path to a new kind of tyranny by way of endless bureaucratic regulation and confiscation. If we are to recover and secure our liberty, much must be done, and much must be undone. We cannot succeed unless we carefully remove these three pillars of the Progressive State.

Again: he said a mouthful there. But to accomplish that would require the determined and unequivocal insistence of a benighted and historically-ignorant populace well-indoctrinated via a monolith consisting of government schools, the media-entertainment complex, the university system, and the government itself to regard a too-powerful central government as the natural order of things, and the answer to all their problems. Frankly, I don’t see it happening—not now, not ever. The country will break apart long before that ever happens…and I don’t see that as being particularly likely, either.

But at least we all have the satisfaction of knowing that Woodrow Wilson—a hateful, conniving, treacherous, rancidly evil bastard—will burn in Hell for a thousand years.

Update! Related? Oh, you better believe it is.

Yet another Orwellian restatement of the obvious: Marxism isn’t done. It’s alive and well. Every time it fails, it re-brands itself, peddles itself to the next generation of wishful thinkers, and wrecks another country. Venezuela is the most recent, glaring example. The U.S. may be wrecked in time, too, because the proselytizers of Marxism (under various types of shiny Christmas wrapping) infest our university system, the entertainment establishment, the news media, and government.

Think Marxism will never happen here? Upton Sinclair—the ardent socialist intellectual—said: the American people will never accept socialism when it’s labeled as socialism, but they *will* accept socialism under different names.

Which is why modern American Marxists will so hotly and adamantly deny that their brand of socialism, is in any way Marxist, or especially communist. Because they know Marxism and communism have a bad rap. They are depending on their ability to re-brand the same bad ideas (which “sound good” in the words of Thomas Sowell) in order to push those ideas forward.

In the end, every time socialism fails, the Marxists will claim it’s magically not socialism. We have had numerous examples of different interpretations of Marxist theory implemented at the national level, and those examples speak of unprecedented human suffering. Which somehow doesn’t count, we are told, because these countries weren’t doing it right.

So, clearly, we have to try again.

And destroy another nation.

And another. And another. And another.

And now, at long last, they have America itself squarely in their crosshairs—making it a bitter irony indeed to hear people talk about how we “won” the Cold War. But hey, THIS time they’ll get it right for SURE. Right, libtards?

(Via Sarah Hoyt)

Share

Categories

Archives

"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



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