Waiting for Barr and Durham: The 2020 Sequel to “Waiting For Godot”

Justice Department probe into Russia investigation could extend into late summer - CNNPolitics

In the last 48 hours we have discovered the following related to Spygate/Obamagate:

– The release of a series of text messages between multiple FBI personnel revealing that they knew the spying on the Trump campaign and efforts to frame General Mike Flynn were highly illegal and that they were so concerned about their own situations that they went out and purchased personal liability insurance policies in January, 2017;

– The revelation that the sub-source for Christopher Steele’s fake Dossier on Donald Trump was in fact a Russian agent and had been deemed by the freaking FBI itself as a “national security threat” as early as 2009. Despite this knowledge, James Comey and his FBI freak show allowed the Dossier to be used as the sole basis for no fewer than 4 fraudulent applications for FISA warrants to spy on the Trump Campaign, Transition Team and Administration;

– The fact that Hunter Biden, while his dear old Daddy was squiring him all over the world to peddle influence to various nefarious characters, received a wire transfer from the wife of the former Mayor of Moscow for $3.5 million and several other wires of several hundred thousand dollars each.

In the face of all of these revelations in a 48 hour period, our national news media yawns and continues to pretend that President Trump is the guy with a Russia problem.

It was in light of these revelations and the Democrat/media’s current “peaceful transfer of power” hoax that I wrote a piece on Thursday asking “When do we get Our Peaceful Transfer of Power for 2016?” because that is something we never received from Obama and his evil minions, who are still today running a shadow government operation designed to regain the presidency. Joe Biden is just the bumbling meat suit face of that effort.

The next question to ask is, when are any of the people involved in this never-ending coup d’etat effort going to be held accountable by William Barr, John Durham and the Department of Justice? We found out on Thursday that Durham did in fact take over the investigation of all the myriad crimes of the Clinton Foundation from do-nothing U.S. Attorney John Huber early this year, as has long been rumored. But, just as with his plodding Spygate and Obamagate investigation, we have seen no fruit from that effort, despite Barr’s promises that such fruit would be borne by the end of summer.

Oops. We are now three days past that deadline.

I had an email from a friend in DC last night saying that rumors are flying that something’s going to happen today. That would make some sense in a very DC Swampy kind of way, given that Fridays are traditionally the day when when the Swamp’s snakes and skunks love to make big news so it will dominate the Sunday talk shows. But we’ve heard those rumors many times before and have been let down each and every time. Waiting for John Durham to actually do something is like the old movie “Waiting for Godot”. We keep waiting, but Godot never arrives.

Meanwhile, we are about to have an election in less than 6 weeks and well over half of the country still does not know a thing about any of this thanks to the wall of silence by the corrupt national news media. The only way to break through that wall is for Durham and his investigators to start breaking down doors and performing some very public perp walks of high profile figures like Comey and Strzok and Brennan and Clapper, all of whom have become major TV stars over the past few years.

It would be like arresting the cast of “Love Island” – even the GenZ-ers would have to pay some attention here.

Sundance over at TheConservativeTreehouse posted a piece last night speculating that Barr and Durham have now decided that the political atmosphere has just become too toxic to add indictments into the mix. Thus, Sundance speculates that Barr is using Sidney Powell – who released the FBI text messages – and the various Senate committees – who released the revelations about Hunter Biden and Steele’s Russian sub-source – to get all of this damning information into the public domain without drawing fire in on their own position from the news media.

If true, we have a word for that kind of skullduggery: Chickenshit. Sorry for the semi-profanity, but that’s what such an effort by Barr/Durham would be.

If Durham really does have the goods on these people, and really does have hundreds of sealed indictments waiting to be unsealed, then election timing simply should not even factor into his and Barr’s equation. Because if Durham really has the goods, that means that there are treasonous criminals who planned and executed a literal coup d’ etat effort on U.S. soil roaming free as birds right now. It would also mean that half of American voters are about to cast votes for the next president without being in possession of real knowledge about any of this.

That would be an incredible travesty of justice, and a stain on their reputations that Barr and Durham could never wash off. If they really do have the goods, the only time to act is now.

I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for Godot to finally arrive, though.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Right on Cue, the New York Times Tries to Mount a new Russia Hoax

Meet the new Russia hoax, same as the old Russia hoax. – The Russia Collusion hoax was based entirely on a fraudulent dossier and lies told to reporters by anonymous sources. Well, and also by reporters just making crap up out of whole cloth in many instances, but that goes without saying. The Democrats and their corrupt media toadies managed to deceive the American public for three solid years and tilt the 2018 elections using that hoax, so it’s only natural they would repeat that same model in the runup to the 2020 elections.

Meet the new Russia hoax, this one claiming that President Trump was briefed on a plan by those evil Russians to bribe Afghanistan militants to murder U.S. and coalition forces in that sh*thole country (don’t even try to prove me wrong on that assessment), and that the President did nothing to stop them. The New York Times got the ball rolling on that doozy late last week with yet another fake report based on nothing but anonymous sources who may or may not even exist. You’re just supposed to trust that the New York Times, which has filed hundreds of completely false reports about President Trump since 2015, is finally telling you the truth this time, because of their journalistic “ethics” or something.

Even more, you’re supposed to believe the Times because other corrupt media outlets like the Wall Street Journal and Washington post “independently verified” the story – i.e., they talked to the same anonymous sources, who may well have been the reporter from the Times itself. Because that’s what these corrupt political operatives masquerading as journalists do.

As with this past week’s Bubba Wallace/NASCAR noose story, if you didn’t realize within about 10 seconds that both stories are clear hoaxes, then you just haven’t been paying enough attention to what’s been happening in our country for the past four years. But most Americans are too dense to figure it out, so the President and many of his people had to waste their time issuing outright denials of this false reporting on Saturday.

As reported by the Washington Examiner, former Director of National Intelligence Ric Grenell ended up in a back and forth on Twitter with despicable hack Ted Lieu:

Rep. Ted Lieu, a California Democrat, tweeted at Grenell daring him to confirm whether he did not tell Trump and Pence about a Russian military intelligence unit offering financial rewards to Taliban militants to kill U.S. troops or McEnany was lying.

“I never heard this,” Grenell shot back. “And it’s disgusting how you continue to politicize intelligence. You clearly don’t understand how raw intel gets verified. Leaks of partial information to reporters from anonymous sources is dangerous because people like you manipulate it for political gain.”

Lieu followed up by asking: “If you are telling the truth, why doesn’t White House deny bounty story instead of saying you didn’t brief @POTUS?”

Grenell replied: “All anonymous sources. And these same reporters gave us the Russian collusion hoax you still hold on to.”

Yep.

Current DNI John Ratcliffe issued this unambiguous statement on the matter:

Ok. Next!

The President of the United States tweeted this:

All true. Next!

Even Vladimir Putin and Russia accurately referred to the New York Times as “fake news”:

Header media

World news
Russia denies allegation that it offered bounties to militants in Afghanistan for killing American troops
According to The New York Times, American intelligence officials reported that a Russian assassination unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing American troops in Afghanistan. Russia responded by calling it an attempt to “invent new fake stories.”

Photo via @timesofindia

[End]

So, you are left with either believing “news” outlets who have repeatedly lied to you and worked hand in glove with the Democrat Party to spread a series of outright hoaxes to the American public over the last four years, or believing the President, DNI Ratcliffe and Ric Grenell, who spent his entire time as DNI debunking the media’s previous Russia Hoax by declassifying documents and bring transparency in government.

This is not hard, folks.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

William Barr: “It’s not gonna be the end of it.”

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II

Catherine Herridge continues to do her great work, even while under the thumb of corrupt management at CBS News. Last night, CBS aired a carefully edited, small portion of her interview with Attorney General William Barr, which came at the end of a momentous day during which Barr’s DOJ withdrew its charges in the Soviet-style show trial of General Mike Flynn.

The transcript of the full interview has now been published. It is reprinted here, and I’ve gone through and added emphasis on key points made by Barr. Pay special attention at the end, in which Barr tells Herridge that “we’re gonna get to the bottom of what happened.” There are no qualifiers, no weasel words there.

Note also, midway through, Barr states that he is having Missouri U.S. Attorney Jensen now working on other things, presumably with Durham. Shortly after that, also note the extremely tepid “vote of confidence” Barr slaps Christopher Wray with. He is very careful there not to praise the worthless FBI Director.

All in all, this is a very encouraging interview.

TRANSCRIPT

Catherine Herridge: Attorney General Barr, thank you for speaking first to CBS News.

Attorney General William Barr: Hi, Catherine.

What action has the Justice Department taken today in the Michael Flynn case?

We dismissed or are moving to dismiss the charges against General Flynn. At any stage during a proceeding, even after indictment or a conviction or a guilty plea, the Department can move to dismiss the charges if we determine that our standards of prosecution have not been met.

As you recall, in January, General Flynn moved to withdraw his plea, and also alleged misconduct by the government. And at that time, I asked a very seasoned U.S. attorney, who had spent ten years as an FBI agent and ten years as a career prosecutor, Jeff Jensen, from St. Louis, to come in and take a fresh look at this whole case. And he found some additional material. And last week, he came in and briefed me and made a recommendation that we dismiss the case, which I fully agreed with, as did the U.S. attorney in D.C. So we’ve moved to dismiss the case.

So this decision to dismiss by the Justice Department, this all came together really within the last week, based on new evidence?

Right. Well U.S. Attorney Jensen since January has been investigating this. And he reported to me last week.

Does Judge Sullivan have a say?

Yes. Under the rules, the case can be dismissed with leave of court. Generally, the courts have said that that provision is in there to protect defendants, to make sure the government doesn’t play games by bringing a charge and then dismissing it; bringing another charge, dismissing it. But he does have a say.

But is the Flynn case effectively over today from the Justice Department’s point of view?

We think the case against Flynn for false statements should be dismissed, as far as the Department of Justice is concerned.

And depending on the judge’s decision, could charges be brought against General Flynn in the future for other actions he took during the presidential campaign or during the transition?

Well, no charges like that have been brought. And I’m not gonna speculate about what charges there may be.

All of that said, General Flynn pled guilty to lying to federal investigators during his interview in January of 2017. And Flynn admitted in court, quote, his “false statements and omissions impeded and otherwise had a material impact on the FBI’s ongoing investigation into the existence of any links or coordination between individuals with the campaign and Russia’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.” Does the fact remain that General Flynn lied to federal investigators?

Well to constitute a false statement, you need two things. One, you need a false statement, lie. And then it has to be material to a legitimate investigation. And I think on the question of lying, it’s as Comey, Director Comey said just a few months after this episode, he said it was a closed question. And that, while you might make that argument, it was a very closed question.

But it’s on the question of materiality that we feel really that a crime cannot be established here because there was not, in our view, a legitimate investigation going on. They did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage, based on a perfectly legitimate and appropriate call he made as a member of the transition. So.

Let me just also say that when he pled, the issue of materiality is related to whether the government has a bona fide investigation going on. And that’s information that’s really within the control of the government. The individual party would really not have that information. So as new information just became available that has a bearing on whether there was a legitimate investigation, that requires us, our duty, we think is to dismiss the case.

Does the new evidence show that the counterintelligence case against General Flynn was simply left open to lay a trap for lying?

Yes. Essentially. They had started a counterintelligence investigation during the summer, as you know, related to the campaign. But in December, the team, the Crossfire Hurricane team, was closing that and determined they had found nothing to justify continuing with that investigation against Flynn.

On the very day they prepared the final papers, the seventh floor, that is the director’s office and the deputy director’s office up there, sent down word they should keep that open. So that they could try to go and question Flynn about this call he had with the Russian ambassador.

Let me say that, at that point, he was the designated national security adviser for President-Elect Trump, and was part of the transition, which is recognized by the government and funded by the government as an important function to bring in a new administration. And it is very typical, very common for the national security team of the incoming president to communicate with foreign leaders.

And that call, there was nothing wrong with it whatever. In fact, it was laudable. He– and it was nothing inconsistent with the Obama administration’s policies. And it was in U.S. interests. He was saying to the Russians, you know, “Don’t escalate.” And they asked him if he remembered saying that, and he said he didn’t remember that.

What should Americans take away from your actions in the Flynn case today?

Well, as I said in my confirmation hearing, one of the reasons I came back is because I was concerned that people were feeling there were two standards of justice in this country. And that the political and that the justice, or the law enforcement process was being used to play political games. And I wanted to make sure that we restore confidence in the system. There’s only one standard of justice. And I believe that this case, that justice in this case requires dismissing the charges against General Flynn.

Are the actions you’re taking today bigger than the Flynn case?

Well, I think they are bigger because I hope that it sends the message that there is one standard of justice in this country. And that’s the way it will be. It doesn’t matter what political party you’re in, or, you know, whether you’re rich or poor. We will follow the same standard for everybody. Was there a crime committed, do we believe a crime was committed? And do we have the evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? And we don’t think either of those standards were applicable here.

Has this been one of the most consequential decisions that you have made as attorney general?

I don’t know. I let other people judge that. It’s certainly – I feel good about the decision because that’s what we’re here to do. We’re here to do what’s right.

Not what’s easy.

Right.

Was it an easy decision?

It was an easy decision, yes. I think easy because once I saw all the facts and some of the tactics used by the FBI in this instance and also the legal problems with the case, it was an easy decision. You know, one thing people will see when they look at the documents is how Director Comey purposely went around the Justice Department and ignored Deputy Attorney General Yates.

Deputy Attorney General Yates, I’ve disagreed with her about a couple of things, but, you know, here she upheld the fine tradition of the Department of Justice. She said that the new administration has to be treated just like the Obama administration, and they should go and tell the White House about their findings. They and, you know, Director Comey ran around that.

When the special counsel report was released last year, you were accused by critics of putting your thumb on the scale in the president’s favor. Are you doing the president’s bidding in General Flynn’s case?

No, I’m doing the law’s bidding. I’m doing my duty under the law, as I see it.

President Trump recently tweeted about the Flynn case. He said, “What happened to General Flynn should never be allowed to happen to a citizen of the United States again.” Were you influenced in any way by the president or his tweets?

No, not at all. And, you know, I made clear during my confirmation hearing that I was gonna look into what happened in 2016 and ’17. I made that crystal clear. I was very concerned about what happened. I was gonna get to the bottom of it. And that included the treatment of General Flynn.

And that is part of John Durham, U.S. Attorney John Durham’s portfolio. The reason we had to take this action now and why U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen came in was because it was prompted by the motions that were filed in that case. And so we had to sorta move more quickly on it. But John Durham is still looking at all of this.

This is one particular episode, but we view it as part of a number of related acts. And we’re looking at the whole pattern of conduct.

The whole pattern of conduct before?

And after.

And after?

Yeah, the election.

After the election? Okay. You talk about the importance of timing in this decision. What was the evidence that helped you decide this issue?

I think a very important evidence here was that this was not a bona fide counterintelligence investigation – was that they were closing the investigation in December. They started that process. And on January 4th, they were closing it.

And that when they heard about the phone call, which is – the FBI had the transcripts too – there’s no question as to what was discussed. The FBI knew exactly what was discussed. And General Flynn, being the former director of the DIA, said to them, you know, “You listen,  you listen to everything. You know, you know what was said.”

So there was no mystery about the call. But they initially tried some theories of how they could open another investigation, which didn’t fly. And then they found out that they had not technically closed the earlier investigation. And they kept it open for the express purpose of trying to catch, lay a perjury trap for General Flynn.

They didn’t warn him, the way we usually would be required by the Department. They bypassed the Justice Department. They bypassed the protocols at the White House and so forth. These were things that persuaded me that there was not a legitimate counterintelligence investigation going on.

You know you’re gonna take a lot of incoming, as they say in the military, for this decision. Are you prepared for that?

Yeah, I’m prepared for that. I also think it’s sad that nowadays these partisan feelings are so strong that people have lost any sense of justice. And the groups that usually worry about civil liberties and making sure that there’s proper procedures followed and standards set seem to be ignoring it and willing to destroy people’s lives and see great injustices done.

Just to be clear, you said this was your decision.

Uh-huh.

Did you consult or discuss the decision in any way with President Trump?

No.

Did you advise the White House that you had made this decision?

No. They were aware, because of the schedule, that the Department would be saying something in court. And I said that we’d make up our mind what to do and file, you know, sometime before Monday.  File our responses to what was going on in court. But other than that, no.

So the White House became aware of the decision when it filed today?

Yes.

Not earlier?

No.

No. Okay. A lot of records have come to light. You talk about the records for closing the Flynn case. Were those new records to you? Because–

Yes.

–of Jensen? Okay. All right. In addition to those records, there are handwritten notes from January 24th, 2017. This was the day of Michael Flynn’s interview. And the writer states, “What is our goal? Truth, admission, or to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” Is that a routine, by-the-book conversation between senior FBI officials?

Well, as many people point out, you know, it’s not unusual. In the course of a bona fide investigation, when you’re doing a criminal investigation or a counterintelligence investigation, that has a basis it’s not unusual to have an interview with someone and expecting that they might lie. But here’s what’s different here is that there was no underlying investigation that was legitimate. And the whole exercise was just about creating the lie.

But that language, does it bother you at all?

Well, my understanding is, just looking at the documents, the way I interpret them, is there was a disagreement. And that one of the agents, one of the senior agents felt that “Let’s not be game playing here. We have the transcript. Show him the transcripts and find out what you wanna find out.”

Instead of instead of, you know, essentially reading excerpts and saying, “Do you remember saying that?” which seemed to be all for the purpose of trying to catch him in something that could be called a lie. But, again, because the FBI knew about the call, there was nothing wrong with the call, the FBI has the transcript of the call, whether or not he remembered saying something is not material to anything.

Who at the FBI was driving this?

Well, this particular episode, it looks like the impetus came from the seventh floor.

The seventh floor is Director Comey.

I believe it’s Director Comey and the deputy’s office.

Based on the evidence that you have seen, did senior FBI officials conspire to throw out the national security adviser?

Well, as I said, this is a particular episode. And it has some troubling features to it, as we’ve discussed. But I think, you know, that’s a question that really has to wait an analysis of all the different episodes that occurred through the summer of 2016 and the first several months of President Trump’s administration.

What are the consequences for these individuals?

Well, you know, I don’t wanna, you know, we’re in the middle of looking at all of this. John Durham’s investigation, and U.S. Attorney Jensen, I’m gonna ask him to do some more work on different items as well. And I’m gonna wait till all the evidence is, and I get their recommendations as to what they found and how serious it is.

But if, you know, if we were to find wrongdoing, in the sense of any criminal act, you know, obviously we would, we would follow through on that. But, again, you know, just because something may even stink to high heaven and be, you know, appear everyone to be bad we still have to apply the right standard and be convinced that there’s a violation of a criminal statute. And that we can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The same standard applies to everybody.

It sounds to me like one of your objectives is to never allow the Justice Department to be used as a political weapon. That’s what you’re saying you think happened here?

I think, yes. I think there was an aspect of that. And I think, for the last several decades, the Department has been used more and more, or the efforts have been made to draw the Department into that. And I think it’s very important that that not happen.

People, you know, we should choose our leaders through the election process. And efforts to use the law enforcement process to change leaders or to disable administrations are incendiary in this country and destroy our republic.

Before we move on to some separate questions, many of these records should have been provided to Flynn’s defense team long ago. Do you still have confidence in FBI Director Christopher Wray?

Well, you know, Chris Wray has always supported and been very helpful in various investigations we’ve been running. He cooperated fully with Durham, cooperated fully with Jensen. But, you know, there are a lot of cases in the Department of Justice and I don’t consider it the director’s responsibility to make sure that all the documents are produced in each case. So I don’t– I wouldn’t say that this has affected my confidence in Director Wray.

Does Director Wray have what it takes to make the changes at the FBI?

Yeah, as I’ve said, you know, he’s been a great partner to me in our effort to restore the American people’s confidence in both the Department of Justice and the FBI. And we work very well together. And I think both of us know that we have to step up. That it’s very important to restore the American people’s confidence.

Does he have his arms around the gravity of what happened in 2016 and 2017?

I think he does.

Newly declassified footnotes in the Horowitz report suggest that the Steele dossier was likely the product of Russian disinformation. And there were multiple warnings to the FBI at that time, yet they continued to use that. How do you explain that?

I think that’s one of the most troubling aspects of this whole thing. And, in fact, I said it in testimony on the Hill, I can’t remember if it was my confirmation, that I said I was very concerned about the possibility that that dossier and Steele’s activities were used as a vector for the Russians to inject disinformation into the political campaign.

I think that is something that Robert Mueller was responsible for looking at under his charter,  which is the potential of Russian influence. But I think it was ignored and there was mounting indications that this could very well have been happening and no one really stopped to look at it.

These are very smart people who were working in the special counsel’s office, and in senior levels of the FBI. So what drove them here?

Well, I think one of the things you have to guard against, both as a prosecutor and I think as an investigator, is that if you get too wedded to a particular outcome and you’re pursuing a particular agenda, you close your eyes to anything that sort of doesn’t fit with your preconception. And I think that’s probably the phenomenon we’re looking at here.

You know more about the investigation since Horowitz, since December. Do you see more evidence of personal or political bias today?

You know, I’m not gonna, again, get into reaching a conclusion at this point till I see everything. There’s certainly more information that has come out that, you know, points in that direction. But I haven’t reached a final conclusion.

Before we just move onto to a couple of off-topic questions, the last thing most Americans remember about General Flynn is that he resigned, was fired. And that he admitted lying to the FBI. Does the fact remain that he lied?

Well, you know, people sometimes  plead to things that turn out not to be crimes. And as I said, the question of lying, you know, it’s something he would know about. On its face, as Director Comey said, it’s not so clear. But the question of materiality is not something he would know about. That’s something that the government knows about. And we have now gotten into it, drilled down, obtained new information. And the Department of Justice is not persuaded that this was material to any legitimate counterintelligence investigation. So it was not a crime.

Before we leave this topic, is there anything that you would like to add?

No.

Okay. Just on COVID-19. Some of the news of today. The valet at the White House has tested positive. Have you had any exposure or interaction with this valet?

I don’t think I have, no.

Do you have a view on whether the president, the vice president should self-quarantine or be separated?

No, you know, I don’t have a view on that. I don’t know about how close they were physically or what the medical advice is the president gets. But we’re tested pretty regularly when we’re over at the White House to visit.

Every day, every other day?

It depends how frequently, though at least once a week, but sometimes, you know, if you’ve been around and could have been infected, you can get further testing.

The president said that he’s urging the Supreme Court to overturn the Affordable Care Act when it’s taken up in the Supreme Court later this year. What’s your position? Is that something the Justice Department will continue to back?

Yes. You know, we had an opportunity, all the stakeholders in the administration, to discuss this, and the Department is going to be taking the position as the president states.

Even if that means stripping millions of Americans of their health care in the middle of a pandemic?

Well, the case isn’t gonna be argued until October. And the president’s made clear that he strongly supports coverage of preexisting conditions. And there will be coverage of preexisting conditions. And, you know, he expects to fix and replace Obamacare with a better health care system.

If governors continue to limit the size of gatherings, including religious services, what further action is the Justice Department prepared to take?

Well, I think initially, you know, at the very beginning of the crisis, before we knew very much — and while, in some places, the infection rates were skyrocketing and threatening to overwhelm our health care system, you know, the initial limitations may have been defensible. But as time goes by, it’s harder to justify those kinds of blanket restrictions on religious practice.

I think, if people can follow social distancing by leaving space, wearing masks and so forth, there has to be accommodation to religious practice. The Department has already entered a few cases around the country where there have been these sweeping prohibitions against religion where there were comparable secular activities are not controlled the same way.

On the Bureau of Prisons– currently 2,100 inmates and over 360 Bureau prison staff have tested positive for COVID-19. Will you make universal testing available to the inmates and the staff?

I think over time, we’ll be testing and perhaps get to that point. You know, we got, right at the beginning, I dealt with FEMA and I was able to get some of the Abbott machines. And we’ve been building up our testing capacity. And we’re doing more and more tests.

And, you know, we’ve been trying to keep our inmates as safe as we can. We let a lot of inmates who are older and don’t pose a threat to the community, we’ve put them on home confinement to get ’em outta the institutions. So we’re taking every measure we can to protect those inmates.

Generally speaking, historically, the infection rates roughly, from what I’ve seen, are comparable inside the institution (SIC) as they are in society at large. And we’ve been able to prevent our prisons from becoming Petri dishes where they sweep through with the same lethality that they have in, you know, nursing homes and so forth. It takes a lotta work, and the Bureau of Prisons has been working hard on that.

In closing, this was a big decision in the Flynn case, to– to say the least. When history looks back on this decision, how do you think it will be written? What will it say about your decision making?

Well, history is written by the winner. So it largely depends on who’s writing the history. But I think a fair history would say that it was a good decision because it upheld the rule of law. It helped, it upheld the standards of the Department of Justice, and it undid what was an injustice.

Uh-huh. 

I mean, it’s not gonna be the end of it.

What do you mean, it’s not the end of it?

Well, I said we’re gonna get to the bottom of what happened.

And later this year, do you expect a report from U.S. Attorney John Durham? Or do you expect indictments?

Well, as you know, I’m not gonna predict the outcome. But I said that we’re certainly — there probably will be a report as a byproduct of his work. But we also are seeing if there are people who violated the law and should be brought to justice. And that’s what we have our eye on.

And that would include individuals involved in the Flynn case?

I don’t wanna get into particular individuals.

Attorney General William Barr, thank you very much for joining us here at CBS News.

Thank you.

Now, I know some of you are about to reply with something like, “I won’t believe him until we see indictments!!!!” I get it. You’ve said it 1,000 times. You don’t need to keep repeating it. We all get it.

All I will say is that Mr. Barr has now demonstrated some very good faith in both the Roger Stone case and the Mike Flynn case. If you aren’t capable of seeing the real, stark difference in the way he is conducting himself in the AG job and the way Jeff Sessions conducted the job, then I really don’t know what to say to you.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Mueller Special Counsel Team Humiliated Again: Corrupt News Media Hardest Hit

Today’s Campaign Update (Because the Campaign Never Ends)

So much for Russia, Russia, Russia. – Hey, remember when greasy Rod Rosenstein stood before the TV cameras and informed the nation that Gestapo Chief Herr Mueller and his band of Clinton/Obama thugs had found the source for all that “Russia collusion” that happened in our 2016 election? Yeah, good times, good times…

That was two and a half years ago, and in all that time, corrupt Justice Department prosecutors had made essentially no progress in the case, which in its essence alleged that a company called Concord Management and Consulting, LLC had spent a couple hundred thousand dollars on a bunch of social media ads designed to sow public division during the 2016 election cycle. Hell, Mini-Mike Bloomberg was spending 40 times that amount every damn day doing the same thing and no one from DOJ came after him.

But of course, the people at Concord are Russians and had no business trying to interfere in U.S. elections, regardless of how puny their investment allegedly was. And besides, the whole Mueller hoax was based on the myth of Russia colluding with the Trump Campaign, and Mueller’s thugs had to claim at least one Russkie scalp in order to keep the false narrative going.

So the disgusting Rosenstein stood there as the talking head for the American Gestapo, sniffing and slurping his way through his press conference, informing us that the brain trust of the evil Russian plot to waste $200,000 on Facebook ads and Twitter bots officed at the Moscow headquarters of Concord Managment, a firm no one in America had ever heard of. So, surely Americans would fall for the ruse, right?

Loyal readers here will remember that I told you on the very day Rosenstein held his presser that, even if Concord was guilty of what Rosenstein and Mueller’s thugs were alleging, a) their efforts made exactly ZERO difference in the 2016 presidential election, a fact that Rosenstein essentially admitted several times afterwards, and b) the DOJ would not be able to prosecute any charges against this Russian firm in any event unless the Russian government forced Concord to send its employees to America to face a judge and jury. Which was never going to happen, given the specious nature of the charges.

Well, guess what happened on Monday? That’s right: The corrupt DOJ lawyers who have bumbled and fumbled around with this idiotic case for a solid 30 months very predictably decided to drop all charges. Why? Well, golly, because they couldn’t get Concord or Putin to send any of those employees over here to face charges, and because DOJ decided it really couldn’t prove its case in any event.

From the Business Insider piece on the matter:

  • The Justice Department moved on Monday to drop its cases against 13 Russian nationals and three Russian entities indicted as part the FBI’s investigation into Russian election interference.
  • In a court filing, prosecutors accused one of those companies or taking advantage of the US legal process to harm national security while ignoring its own legal obligations related to the case.
  • Notably, the filing also said the government decided to drop its case “particularly in light of recent events and a change in the balance of the government’s proof due to a classification determination,” in addition to other factors.

[End]

Oh. You don’t say.

So, the “Russia, Russia, Russia” hoax ends with a whimper, an event that will be barely mentioned by the same corrupt journalists and TV talking heads who spent three solid years screaming about it from their lofty perches in their neverending effort to take down a President of the United States. It ends because, at the end of the day, it was in fact a complete hoax and the DOJ had nothing to work with.

But our society has been irreparably damaged by the volume and intensity of false information coming from Democrat politicians and our corrupt news media on the matter, just as it is being irreparably damaged by all the false information being purveyed by the media related to the coronavirus.  The saddest part of it all is that Attorney General William Barr has to this point issued zero indictments of any of the outlaw DOJ and FBI officials who carried out the hoax, and that no one in our corrupt news media will be held in any way accountable for their efforts to support the plot.

The best we can hope for is a pox – or perhaps a virus – on all their houses. That would be real justice.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Tapper Debunks NYTimes Russia Collusion Narrative-Setter

Today’s Campaign Update, Part III (Because the Campaign Never Ends)

Well, you don’t see this very often – the two fakest corrupt news outlets in America fighting over a narrative. It’s going to drive their Democrat masters crazy.

Not even 24 hours after the New York Times puts out a despicably fake piece trying to revive the whole Russia Collusion narrative, CNN’s Fake Jake Tapper, of all people, issues a thread on Twitter debunking the whole thing. Here is the text of Tapper’s tweets:

A national security official I know and trust pushes back on the way the briefing/ODNI story is being told, and others with firsthand knowledge agree with his assessment.

2/ “What’s been articulated in the news is that the intelligence community has concluded that the Russians are trying to help Trump again. But the intelligence doesn’t say that,” the official says…

3/ “The problem is Shelby” — Pierson, the elections threats executive in the intelligence community — “said they developed a preference for Trump. A more reasonable interpretation of the intelligence is not that they have a preference, it’s a step short of that….

4/ “It’s more that they understand the president is someone they can work with, he’s a dealmaker. But not that they prefer him over Sanders or Buttigieg or anyone else. So it may have been mischaracterized by Shelby” at the House Intel briefing last week…

5/ “And by the way,” the official says, “both Democrats and Republicans were challenging this at the briefing.” Then there’s the matter of the tense meeting between President Trump and erstwhile Acting Director of National Intelligence Admiral Maguire…

6/ “The President was upset that he had to hear about an intelligence conclusion from a Member of the House Republicans rather than from the intelligence community. So he was out of joint with Maguire on that process.”

7/ None of this disputes that Trump desires to replace those who have Intel expertise with partisan loyalists, or dismisses the larger issues and concerns about Russia and how the president seeks help from abroad. Just that there seems to be more to this particular story.

8/ ALSO none of this disputes that the Russians (and others) are attempting to interfere in the US election again.

Tapper, obviously disappointed to be getting this narrative-debunking information from his apparently legitimate source, naturally feels the need to add those last two tweets to try to keep the fantasy alive, at least to some extent. But it is obvious that what we really have here is a case where the New York Times intentionally and with malice aforethought mis-portrayed what was actually conveyed in this briefing in order to try to damage President Trump’s reputation.

Libel, plain and simple.

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Dems Have a Terrible Debate, So We’re Back to Russia Collusion One More Time

Today’s Campaign Update (Because the Campaign Never Ends)

In terror the Boy ran toward the village shouting “Wolf! Wolf!” But though the Villagers heard the cry, they did not run to help him as they had before. “He cannot fool us again,” they said. – Aesop’s Fables, from “The Boy Who Cried Wolf.”

It’s like clockwork, folks. – A truly, desperately bad event for the Democrat Party invariably results in a new false narrative coming out of the Party’s toadies in our corrupt news media.

The Party had a disastrous debate on Wednesday, during which everyone beat Mini-Mike Bloomberg to shreds and nobody laid a glove on President Donald Trump, leaving The Commie standing as the clear front-runner, and presto-change-o, we are back to Russia Collusion one more time!

On Thursday, the fake journalists at the corrupt New York Times published yet another narrative-setter piece for their Deep State masters, this one designed to support the Democrat Party’s plan to destroy voter confidence in the 2020 election results in advance. In case you’ve forgotten, the Democrats kicked off this particular plan way back in May of last year, as it became obvious that Quid Pro Joe was too impaired to become the Party’s standard bearer.

On May 6, Nancy Pelosi told reporters that “we cannot accept a second term…for Donald Trump…if we are going to be faithful to our democracy and to the Constitution of the United States. And that is just a fact.” Thus, she was already telegraphing her Party’s intent to destroy faith in the 2020 elections and to refuse to accept their results. That theme has been an ever-present part of Democrat Party/media messaging since that time, and was the main theme in the idiotic impeachment effort that held our country hostage for five long months.

Also participating in this neverending coup d’etat effort is our intelligence community, as we well know. The Times piece in question focuses on a briefing that outgoing Acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Joseph Maguire held on Capitol Hill recently, in which he and a whole passel of his loyal lieutenants informed congress of their belief that – get this – the “Russians” favor President Trump’s re-election over communist Bernie Sanders, and are already working to help Mr. Trump’s cause.

Oh yeah, sure, that’s totally believable. You betcha.

Nowhere in the Times piece will you find a single smidgen of detail about exactly what it is that Maguire claims the “Russians” (why doesn’t he just say it’s the boogeyman instead – it would have equal credibility at this point) are doing to “help” the Trump campaign. That would be because the “Russians” aren’t really doing anything in any organized fashion to do that, outside of the kinds of stuff they have been doing to meddle in our elections for the last 100 years.

The thought that these “Russians” would favor the election of Donald Trump over the eternally grifting Hillary Clinton in 2016 wasn’t absurd enough for these people. Now, we are supposed to believe that they are helping Trump to defeat an out-and-out communist ideologue.

Think about it: Vladimir Putin, more than anyone else on the face of the earth, fully understands the society-destroying impacts of socialist/communist ideology. He lived it. Putin – if our corrupt intelligence agencies are to be believed – wants to destroy and dominate the U.S. and other Western democracies. What better way to achieve that than by helping a freaking communist get elected President of the United States? The whole charade here is an absolute farce.

The opening paragraph of the piece is greatest part of it:

Intelligence officials warned House lawmakers last week that Russia was interfering in the 2020 campaign to try to get President Trump re-elected, five people familiar with the matter said, a disclosure to Congress that angered Mr. Trump, who complained that Democrats would use it against him.

Note the reference to “five people familiar with the matter”, none of whom are of course identified. Did the Times really talk to “five people” who had first-hand knowledge of this briefing? There is no way to know. But saying “five people” rather than “a person” is the Times way of trying to give the piece more credibility.

Then there’s my favorite part, the one about how the “disclosure to Congress that angered Mr. Trump, who complained that Democrats would use it against him.”

Um, doesn’t the very existence of this report in the New York Times clearly demonstrate that the President was right? Didn’t he have every right to be angered that Maguire, a freaking temp in his job, chose to spread this crap as a parting gift to the Administration as he prances out the door, no doubt about to get a big book deal or a contract as a contributor on CNN or MSNBC?

Now, do you understand why the President is intent on putting someone he can actually trust  into the DNI position? What Maguire – and his aide Shelby Pierson, whom the Times claims delivered the report to the members of congress – did is an outright betrayal, an outrage that should be punished by their immediate firings.

But the damage is done, and the Democrat/media narrative is set: Bereft of any other viable alternatives or viable presidential candidates to really challenge President Trump, the Axis of Disinformation goes back to pushing the Russia Collusion BS one more time. They will now poll-test and focus group public reactions to the new narrative, and if they think it has any legs, they will continue to pound it day after day right up until November 3. Because this is what these people do, and this is who they are.

Yes, it’s despicable. Yes, it’s depraved. Yes, it’s disgusting and demented and disloyal to our nation and destructive to our Republic. But, really, after the last four years, did you expect anything else?

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

A Nation Awaits the Next Democrat/Media-Concocted Hoax

Today’s Campaign Update (Because the Campaign Never Ends)

Tired of all this WINNING yet? – Apparently, Hollywood is. At last night’s Academy Awards ceremony – which I didn’t even know was happening until about 8:00 in the evening – the voters gave the award for Best Picture to some movie from South Korea. I’m sure it’s a fine movie, at least as far as movies go these days, but wow, the film industry in South Korea is now turning out higher-quality films than the film industry in California? That’s rather a stunning admission for the Academy to make.

Who is this Milton Keynes fellow, and how can we get in touch with him? er, or her? – Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez continues to make news for all the wrong reasons. Last week, she was in the headlines for delivering a rant during which she made it clear that, despite her claimed multiple college degrees from Boston University, she has no idea what a metaphor is. On Sunday, this claimant to a bachelor’s degree in economics said that her, like, totally favorite famed economist and stuff, or something, is, like, that whole Milton Keynes? You know? He’s like totes fleck and stuff, or something.

The problem is, of course, that no one can find any record of any economist named Milton Keynes ever actually living, at least not on earth.

I swear I don’t make this stuff up:

Obviously, the poor dimwitted soul confused the names of John Maynard Keynes and Milton Friedman, both of whom actually are famed economists, and both of whose names AOC likely had to memorize in preparation for a test or two while she was obtaining her obviously worthless “degree” from Boston U. Her handlers need to quit letting her go off-script. Every time she attempts to ad lib something, this is the kind of stuff that happens.

So, what will the next Democrat/media hoax be? Any guesses? – Now that the whole Ukraine/impeachment hoax has come and gone, we are left to wonder what new hoax the Democrats and their corrupt media toadies will devise next. In preparation for this piece, I went back through the last four years and compiled a list of the various hoaxes the Democrat/media propaganda complex has already run against the President.

Thus far, we have had to live through the following:

The Russia Collusion hoax

The Trump is Crazy hoax

The Kavanaugh Nomination hoax

The Charlottesville/”Fine people” hoax

The Porn Star hoax

The Playmate hoax

The Creepy Porn Lawyer hoax

The Emoluments Clause hoax

The Jussie Smollett hoax

The Trump’s a Racist hoax

The Trump is AntiSemitic hoax

The Ukraine/Impeachment hoax

Now, this is most likely not even a comprehensive list – I’m sure I’ve failed to mention several additional hoaxes that our despicable fake news media has worked hand-in-glove with the Democrats to concoct against this President and his Administration. This has been a never-ending, constantly-evolving process that really began as soon as Trump’s campaign was announced way back in 2015.

So, it’s obvious the Democrats have nothing else, which leads to the question: What hoax will they mount next?

San Fran Nan appeared to signal their intentions at the literally insane press conference she gave last Thursday morning in the wake of the Senate vote on acquittal. During that wildly disturbing presser, she mentioned at one point that she thought the President “seemed to be sedated” during his speech. She also spent a great deal of time trying to make the case that the current booming economy was something President Trump inherited from Barack Hussein Obama His Own Self.

Naturally, these statements led to much speculation that the Democrats and their media toadies were about to bring us a new hoax, i.e., the Trump is Drugged hoax. Or maybe they were about to leap off the cliff for good and try to go back and re-litigate the slowest recovery from a recession in U.S. history, which is what really happened during the Obama years, as that administration’s Soviet-style, command-and-control regulatory agenda choked the life out of what might have otherwise become a massive, real economic recovery following the Great Recession.

Oddly, though, there has been almost no followup from either the Democrats or their corrupt media toadies on either front. That could be because there were just too many other relevant news events to cover, as the Democrat Party committed political harikari in Iowa and the Trump Administration just kept on WINNING, bigly.

Or, it could be that Pelosi, who herself very often appears to be drugged – mostly with cheap vodka – was just engaging in a little projection during that press conference. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time that happened.

Or, here’s a thought, it could just be that the Democrats as a party have no idea where to go next, and if they’re lost, then their media toadies are going to be lost, too. That may be why, for the first time in really almost five years, the Democrat/media propaganda complex appears to be dead in the water, without a major hoax currently in play.

Regardless of the reasons behind this pause in hoaxery (I don’t think that’s a word, but I’m going to go with it anyway), we can be sure that it is only temporary. The Democrats have no choice but to keep running hoaxes at this President because they certainly cannot run on their policy record, which is non-existent during this Administration.

Lord knows they can’t leave it to their clown show presidential field to set their Party’s national agenda. The economy-and-society-destroying nonsense being tossed out into the public domain by that collection of radical lunatics, if left out there in a vacuum for the public to consume, would lead to the Democrats’ most crushing electoral disaster since 1984.

So, expect another hoax to start percolating up this week, especially after The Commie wins the New Hampshire primary. The hoaxes we’ve seen thus far have typically been started with an anonymously-sourced hit piece in either the New York Times or the Washington Post, so keep a close eye on those two Democrat propaganda outlets.

We don’t know right now what the hoax will be, but we can be certain that it is coming.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Lindsey Graham Drops the “Jail” Bomb on Judge Jeanine

Today’s Campaign Update (Because the Campaign Never Ends)

Appearing with Judge Jeanine Pirro on Fox News, Senator Lindsey Graham gave us another dose of big talk Saturday. The Senator who has done a lot of talking and accomplished pretty much nothing in terms of investigating anything for an entire year as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee was once again spouting off on investigating pretty much everybody. At one point in the clip below, you will hear him even promise Pirro’s audience that “half the people involved in the Russia investigation” will end up in jail.

Here’s the thing about this: He’s running out of time. Senate investigations take a lot of time. It can and often does take weeks or even months to get a single witness’s testimony, especially given the willingness of Obama judges on the federal courts to intervene in congressional processes these days. But Graham makes it sound as if he has a grand plan for finally, at long last taking some action in this regard now that the impeachment scam has been disposed of.

Below is a 7:23 clip of the interview, much of which is irrelevant to the subject of this piece. A transcription of several of the key passages follows the clip.

 

Partial transcript:

Pirro: What’s left for Mitt Romney?

Graham: Well, number one, I’m not going to say anything bad about Mitt Romney. I’ve known him for a long time and I think he made a very bad judgment call. I’m not going to question his faith. But let’s see if you and I can figure this out in about two minutes.

Who was behind it [impeachment]? Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi. Not  Mueller, not Watergate prosecutors, not Ken Starr. The 3 most partisan people in the country, who hate Trump’s guts. How did they do it? They impeached the man in 78 days. He couldn’t call a witness; he couldn’t cross-examine anybody; he couldn’t present evidence….[summary of the impeachment scam continues here] this was a bad decision for anybody to vote guilty on these facts.

Pirro: What do they do now? Do they move on?

Graham: I don’t think they can move on, because they’ve got nothing to move on to…

Pirro: Let’s switch it to you guys. Can we expect that you, or Burr as Chairman of Senate Intelligence, may want to look at the whistleblower…the Bidens…James Rich, Chair of Foreign Relations, doesn’t seem to have an appetite. He says “I’ve got other things I’m doing now and I haven’t given it any thought.” Haven’t given it any thought??? America’s been talking about this for 3 months!

Graham: So, we’re not gonna live in a world where, as a Republican, you get investigated from the day you’re sworn in; 3 years later, they’re still coming after you.

Here’s what amazes me. The Russia investigation, what happened? Half the people involved in the Russia investigation are gonna go to jail, and Trump was cleared…

Pirro: Hopefully…

Graham: Well, just hang tight. They come after Trump on Ukraine, and Biden blows up. So, every time they throw a rock at Trump, they get hit.

So, here’s what we should look at: Why did the State Department not act when they were told about the conflict of interest with Hunter Biden regarding Ukraine, right? Who is the whistleblower? Does he have contacts on Schiff’s staff? Did Col. Vindman lead information to the whistleblower? And as to the FISA warrant, how could you sign the warrant four times and not know the thing was off the rails? That’s where I come in.

Pirro: So, you’re going to do something. You want to tell us what you’re going to do?

Graham: Yeah, I’m going to give a list of witnesses to the Department of Justice that I want to call. It’s going to the case agent. I want to find out how this thing got so screwed up. Why didn’t they tell about the Russian source who said the Dossier’s not reliable? How could it be possible that it never goes up to the top?

I want to know what Obama knew about this investigation. I want to call Rosenstein, Sally Yates, Comey, McCabe, and all the people who worked on this case, to find out how it got so off the rails and make sure it never happens again. I want to know who in the White House knew about this counterintelligence investigation against the Republican nominee.

Pirro: [Immediately changes the subject to Joe Manchin’s vote to convict the President. It’s Joe freaking Manchin – who cares?]

Graham: …The reason I’m so upset about this impeachment is it puts every president after Trump at risk. You can’t even pick the phone up as president under this standard.

Pirro: [Changes the subject to Afghanistan.]

[End Transcript]

 

So, several things to unpack here:

  • As is always the case with Senator Graham, what we have here is a mixed bag. Graham continues to promise to perform investigations, which is great if he starts following through with some real action starting now. Not in April, not in June, not in August because by then it will be too late. Now, Senator.
  • It is encouraging that Graham pointedly lists the whistleblower – who we all know is Eric Ciaramella – Adam Schiff’s staff and Alexander Vindman as subjects he plans to pursue with his committee. Yes, Hunter and Joe Biden are important here, but they weren’t part of this coup effort in any real sense. Ciaramella, Vindman and the bad actors on Schiff’s staff – along with Schiff himself, obviously – were a part of it.
  • And how patently absurd is it that U.S. senators are still going on national TV and saying “the whistleblower” when everyone in the room and watching at home knows who the freaking whistleblower really is? This is national insanity. Ciaramella participated in a COUP D’ETAT, folks, and that is treason.
  • But look at Graham giving himself a convenient out on all of this, when he says he’s going to send a list of potential witnesses to the “case agent” for approval. That “case agent” is a guy named John Durham.
  • If Durham is really performing an actual investigation – and I believe he is – then that’s great. Let him determine whether the Senate taking public testimony will interfere with anything he’s doing. But if, as others suspect, Durham and Barr are just playing a delaying game in concert with Graham and other to put this all off until the November elections have come and gone, then not so great, right?
  • When Graham tells Pirro to “just hang tight” on people going to jail, that is an obvious reference to Durham. If you, like me, believe that Durham is actually conducting an investigation designed to prosecute people, then that might be a signal from Graham that he’s been told things are about to start happening on that front.

When you boil this all down, unless Graham really is planning to start an investigation posthaste, then it’s really hard to see why he would keep going on television to talk a good game. Coming as this appearance does this close to election time, his constituents back home are really going to have some pointed questions for him if, come September, he still hasn’t moved on any of this.

It does make sense that Graham and the other Senate committees would let the whole impeachment scam play itself out before opening their own investigations. It also makes sense that Durham would wait until those waters had calmed before moving on any indictments and prosecutions. Timing is very important in all of this.

Here’s the other thing: Durham is going after real justice for real bad actors. Scams like this fake impeachment can be mounted and play out quickly, but real justice in our system takes time. It’s like the difference between a bottle of Welch’s grape juice and a bottle of 2012 Cade Howell Mountain Cabernet Sauvignon.

In a just world, Attorney General William Barr would announce the appointment of a Special Counsel to investigate the origins of the impeachment coup d’etat, just as he has Durham investigating the origins of the whole Russia Collusion coup effort. Lacking that, we are left with only Republican-controlled Senate committees to do the investigative work, which will certainly end with a series of criminal referrals. Ultimately, either process will require DOJ to act.

Here’s the key statement Graham made in this entire interview: “So, we’re not gonna live in a world where, as a Republican, you get investigated from the day you’re sworn in; 3 years later, they’re still coming after you.”

Unless Durham is really conducting an earnest investigation that truly will end with a bunch of these people going to jail, and unless Graham and Burr and Senate Finance Chairman Chuck Grassley really do mount major investigations into the origins of the impeachment scam through their committees, that is exactly the world we are going to be living in from now on.

It is crucial to remember that all of this takes place with the November elections looming and the GOP holding onto a tenuous Senate majority. Should the voters decide to award the corrupt Democrats a majority in the Senate, then the hopes of ever bringing any of the coup plotters to justice will end, unless they have already been indicted.

Talk is cheap, gentlemen. Time to move.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Time to Act: Trump Sends Clear Message to Graham

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Paging Lindsey Graham. Paging Lindsey Graham… – South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham talks a good game about getting tough with all the seditious impeachment cabal participants. As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Graham has been prancing all over the Fox News talk shows for more than a year now, promising to hold hearings in which he calls Deep State actors from James Comey to John Brennan to Peter Strzok and all points in between to testify.

More recently, Graham has shown up on the Sean Hannity Tick-Tock Hour and elsewhere proclaiming his intent to call all the bad actors in the Democrats’ ongoing impeachment scam to come and talk to his committee under oath and threat of imprisonment. From the fake whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, to his partner Alexander Vindman, to Joe and Hunter Biden and even Adam Schiff and his staff, Senator Graham now promises to call them all and force them to answer for their mendacity and many acts of disloyalty to the country over the last six months.

Yet, despite of all his posturing and tough talk and more than a year in his chairmanship, Senator Graham has yet to convene a single hearing of his committee to take a look at anything having to do with the whole “Russia Collusion” hoax or the Ukraine hoax. Readers of Today’s Campaign Update long ago grew weary of Graham’s all-talk-and-no-action posturing, and it appears that President Donald Trump has also now arrived at the same point.

Early Monday morning, the President issued a re-tweet of a video of an appearance by his former White House Strategy Advisor, Steve Bannon, on Fox News’s “Sunday Morning Futures” program with host Maria Bartiromo, addressing the re-tweet to @LindseyGraham:

 

 

For those who still like to read stuff, here is a transcript of the exchange between Bannon and Bartiromo:

Bannon: Lindsey Graham – and I have tremendous respect for him – he guaranteed at the Senate Judiciary Committee, we need to have the whistleblower, we need to have the #2 whistleblower, we need to have Adam Schiff as a fact witness, we need Hunter and Joe Biden…I think we need Brennan. We need all of them.

And here’s the other thing we ought to do: President Trump ought to declassify all these reports; he ought to go back to Rosenstein’s … the 40 subpoenas from the House under Devin Nunes forwarded to Rosenstein, he ought to get all of those, he ought to get all those subpoenas and all of those people ought to be called to witness.

This has… we need to have an apparatus that’s official to go about this. To protect the office of the presidency going forward. 

Bartiromo: That’s why I have been so adamant about this for 3 years. It wasn’t about President Trump; it was about fairness. It was about being a patriot.  Having the top leadership of the FBI and the CIA put their finger on the scale and try to take down candidate Trump and then President Trump. That’s why my audience wants accountability.

Bannon: The same thing happened in the ’50s and ’60s. That’s why we had the Church Commission, that looked into the activities of the FBI and the CIA during the ’50s and ’60s. This is why you had this whole new structure come up [at those agencies].

We need, this needs to be put on trial. It needs to be put on trial for the American people. President Trump is right: It is the crime of the century, and we can’t cover it up. 

And we don’t need to go to the Foreign Affairs…it’s not a Foreign Affairs issue. It should be Senate Judicary. Here’s the reason: Nancy Pelosi and these people are not gonna stop. The formal acquittal vote on Wednesday is just the curtain coming down on Act One. They’re gonna continue on. They’re gonna try to subpoena John Bolton in the House, they want to get his notes. And I point…

Bartiromo: I don’t think this is gonna end anytime soon.

Bannon: It’s not gonna end. And listen: This ties back to what’s happening in Iowa. There’s no heat in any of those candidates. There’s no personalities out there that can beat the President. There’s no…their policies are so radical so they can’t run on personalities, they don’t have the policies… they must destroy Trump.

Nancy Pelosi, from day one, understands that to get back the White House they must destroy Trump. And the way they’re gonna use it is to use these fake hearings. This is not gonna stop. They’re gonna subpoena more people, they’re gonna leak more information, and this is why…I don’t mind getting John Bolton as a witness. Let’s cross-examine him. Let’s get his notes and cross-examine him about that. Let’s get…I don’t mind Mick Mulvaney or OMB people…all the emails – let’s get it all up there.

[End]

So, here we see President Trump sending a clear and unambiguous message to Lindsey Graham his time for making excuses for 13 long months of utter inaction in defending the office of the presidency has now run out.

Your turn, Senator.

 

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Posts navigation

1 2 3 4
Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: