Oh boy, Hillary’s going to run again! From Tom Luongo at tomluongo.me:
Ideological possession always ends in pogroms. When the leadership of the most powerful organization in the world is at stake nothing is off limits, especially for power-hungry Democrats.
This is why we’re now seeing a concerted effort to smear Bernie Sanders just after he announced his Presidential campaign for 2020. The Democrats blame him for splitting the party in 2016 which allowed Trump to win.
This, of course, is nonsense. Trump took up Bernie’s mantle of championing Hillary’s ‘deplorables’ and repackaged it as MAGA. Simply good marketing. And since she didn’t have a campaign and was seen as one of the architects of the policies which brought those people out for Bernie, handicapping the election was really easy.
The response was predictable. The American left lost its collective mind in November 2016.
Since then, to assuage their grief, they have latched onto the patently insane idea that Trump was an agent of the Kremlin. As Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation has dragged on and on we’ve been given the pretty clear picture that it was Hillary and the rest of the DNC who concocted this story to get Trump removed from office.
And failing that it would be an open wound to keep Democrats hopeful, Trump chasing his tail and any reforms he might make to the unreal levels of corruption in D.C. stymied.
All of this in the hopes of ruining Trump for the Democrats to win in 2020. It was coldly calculated. The media was happy to oblige. And what’s next is the demonization of Bernie Sanders.
The long knives are out for Trump, but he may have a few long knives of his own. From James Howard Kunstler at kunstler.com:
As another president once remarked in a different context — LBJ speaking to a hanger full of grunts in Vietnam — “go on out there, boys, and nail that coonskin to the wall!” That was around the time the war was looking like a lost cause, with 1000 soldiers a month coming home in a box and even the Rotarians of Keokuk, Iowa, starting to doubt the official story of what exactly we thought we were doing over there. It was also, arguably, around the time America stopped being, ahem, “great” and commenced the long, nauseating slide into idiocracy and collapse.
The news media has taken LBJ’s place in today’s Wile E. Coyote phase of our history, cheerleading the congressional hunt for the glittering golden scalp of You-Know-Who in the White House. They got all revved up on Friday in a New York Times front-page salvo with the headline: F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia. The purpose of this blast was to establish the high and grave seriousness of Robert Mueller’s Russia Collusion investigation, because otherwise the yarn has completely shed its credibility. Note: it was around paragraph nine in the story that the team of three Times reporters inserted the sentence that said, “No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials.” The idea, you see, was to simply drag the teetering narrative back onstage to titillate the paper’s Creative Classnik readership who desperately want to nail that Golden Golem of Greatness to the wall, scalp, paunch, tiny hands, and all.
Posted in Crime, Cronyism, Government, Intelligence, Investigations, Law, Media, Politics
Tagged Hillary Clinton, President Trump, Robert Mueller, Russiagate, Steele dossier
The insiders take care of each other. From Bryce Buchanan at americanthinker.com:
More information is supporting the theory that the current big Justice Department “investigations” are actually functioning as big cover-up operations. Robert Mueller’s team is effectively hiding key evidence related to serious crimes committed by government officials. Mueller has nearly complete control over what the public or any investigator can see. He has control over what witnesses can talk about.
This means that the Huber and Horowitz investigations exist to make you think something is being investigated when it is not. That is why Representatives Doug Collins, Mark Meadows, and Jim Jordan sent a letter to Huber, the U.S. attorney, this week that essentially exposes the fraud.
The letter begins, “We write to request an update on the progress of your review of irregularities involved with the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) actions during 2016 and 2017[.]” The letter then points to facts that indicate that there has been no real investigation. None of the many key witnesses has been interviewed. Huber refused to testify at a recent congressional hearing about the Clinton Foundation. The letter then asks for information in four areas where Huber cannot reply without further demonstrating that this is a fake investigation.
The infamous “insurance policy” referred to in an email between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page has been misunderstood. From Larry O’Conner at washingtontimes.com:
FBI agent Peter Strzok made a reference to an “insurance policy” in a message to his paramour, signaling it was to be used not to harm Donald Trump’s campaign, but rather in case he won the presidency. (Associated Press/File) more >
It’s been over a year since the highly damaging text messages between FBI agent Peter Strzok and his paramour, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, were revealed to the American public. The correspondence showed two senior Justice Department officials engaged in the most petty, vitriolic political diatribes while making decisions on the most sensitive investigations of the 2016 political season.
Their hatred toward then-candidate Donald Trump as well as their contempt for his supporters gave reasonable observers every reason to question whether the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the counterintelligence investigation into alleged Russian influence in the Trump campaign (Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page played key roles in both inquiries) were handled in a fair, unbiased and judicious manner.
Their behavior was so egregious that special counsel Robert Mueller removed them from his team the moment Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz told him about the text messages. Mr. Strzok was dismissed from the FBI, and further investigations are continuing.
Despite all this, defenders of the James Comey cabal and “Russia collusion” aficionados make one strong argument that seemingly debunks the spygate scandal and outrage over the upper reaches of the Obama administration’s wide-reaching surveillance operation on the campaign of the president’s rival party.
Posted in Crime, Cronyism, Government, Investigations, Media, Politics
Tagged 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, President Trump, Russiagate investigation
Seemingly the only qualification of many critics of Trump’s troop withdrawal in Syria is that their policies have been tried…and failed. From Max Blumenthal at consortiumnews.com:
Too many of those protesting the removal of U.S. forces are authors of the catastrophe that tore Syria to pieces, reports Max Blumenthal for Consortium News.
President Donald Trump’s announcement of an imminent withdrawal of US troops from northeastern Syria summoned a predictable paroxysm of outrage from Washington’s foreign policy establishment. Former Secretary of State and self-described “hair icon” Hillary Clinton perfectly distilled the bipartisan freakout into a single tweet, accusing Trump of “isolationism” and “playing into Russia and Iran’s hands.”
Michelle Flournoy, the DC apparatchik who would have been Hillary’s Secretary of Defense, slammedthe pull-out as “foreign policy malpractice,” while Hillary’s successor at the State Department, John Kerry, threw bits of red meat to the Russiagate-crazed Democratic base by branding Trump’s decision “a Christmas gift to Putin.” From the halls of Congress to the K Street corridors of Gulf-funded think tanks, a chorus of protest proclaimed that removing US troops from Syria would simultaneously abet Iran and bring ISIS back from the grave.
Yet few of those thundering condemnations of the president’s move seemed able to explain just why a few thousand U.S. troops had been deployed to the Syrian hinterlands in the first place. If the mission was to destroy ISIS, then why did ISIS rise in the first place? And why was the jihadist organization still festering right in the midst of the U.S. military occupation?
Too many critics of withdrawal had played central roles in the Syrian crisis to answer these questions honestly. They had either served as media cheerleaders for intervention, or crafted the policies aimed at collapsing Syria’s government that fueled the rise of ISIS. The Syrian catastrophe was their legacy, and they were out to defend it at any cost.
Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, History, Media, Politics, War
Tagged Hillary Clinton, Iran, ISIS, John Kerry, Syria
Like a lot of people with something to hide, James Comey “forgot” a lot of things during his recent Congressional testimony. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:
Former FBI Director James Comey appeared December 17th, 2018, for a second round of questions by a joint House committee oversight probe into the DOJ and FBI conduct during the 2016 presidential election and incoming Trump administration.
The Joint House Committee just released the transcript online (full pdf below).
Director Blue blog’s Doug Ross read through most of the septic backflow so you don’t need to. You’re welcome:
1. Double Standard: Obama vs. Trump
Trey Gowdy grilled Comey on his vastly different handling of comments by Trump and Obama. When Trump asked Comey whether he could see his way clear to easing up on Flynn, Comey memorialized the conversation in a memo and distributed it to his leadership team, including Andrew McCabe and James Baker.
However, when President Obama on 60 Minutes publicly exonerated Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information — setting the stage for true obstruction of justice — Comey did nothing. He never talked to the president about potential obstruction, he never memorialized his observations, and he didn’t leak anything to the press. These were all things he did with Trump.
He might call it a “higher loyalty”, but it looks to us peons like a true double-standard. Democrats get Wall Street Bankster treatment, while the rabble get tossed in the slammer.
Posted in Civil Liberties, Crime, Cronyism, Government, Intelligence, Investigations, Law, Politics
Tagged Congressional hearings, FBI, Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Michael Flynn
How come raids are never conducted of the homes of people implicated in whistleblowers’ whistleblowing? Like Hillary and Bill Clinton, and Robert Mueller? From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:
The FBI conducted a six-hour raid on the home of a recognized Justice Department whistleblower who had confidentially submitted documents related to the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One to a government watchdog, according to the Daily Caller, citing the whistleblower’s attorney.
The Justice Department’s inspector general was informed that the documents show that federal officials failed to investigate potential criminal activity regarding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Rosatom, the Russian company that purchased Uranium One, a document reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation alleges.
The delivered documents also show that then-FBI Director Robert Mueller failed to investigate allegations of criminal misconduct pertaining to Rosatom and to other Russian government entitiesattached to Uranium One, the document reviewed by TheDCNF alleges. Mueller is now the special counsel investigating whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election. –Daily Caller
“The bureau raided my client to seize what he legally gave Congress about the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One,” said the whistleblower’s lawyer, Michael Socarras – adding that he considered the FBI raid on his client, Dennis Nathan Cain, an “outrageous disregard” of whistleblower protections.