[Townhall} The original question the FBI investigation of the Trump campaign was to answer was a simple one: Did he do it?
Did Trump, or officials with his knowledge, collude with Vladimir Putin's Russia to hack the emails of John Podesta and the DNC, and leak the contents to damage Hillary Clinton and elect Donald Trump?
A year and a half into the investigation, and, still, no "collusion" has been found. Yet the investigation goes on, at the demand of the never-Trump media and Beltway establishment. Hence, and understandably, suspicions have arisen.
Are the investigators after the truth, or are they after Trump? Set aside the Trump-Putin conspiracy theory momentarily, and consider a rival explanation for what is going down here:
That, from the outset, Director James Comey and an FBI camarilla were determined to stop Trump and elect Hillary Clinton. Having failed, they conspired to break Trump's presidency, overturn his mandate and bring him down.
Essential to any such project was first to block any indictment of Hillary for transmitting national security secrets over her private email server. That first objective was achieved 18 months ago.
On July 5, 2016, Comey stepped before a stunned press corps to declare that, given the evidence gathered by the FBI, "no reasonable prosecutor" would indict Clinton. Therefore, that was the course he, Comey, was recommending.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch, compromised by her infamous 35-minute tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton -- to discuss golf and grandkids -- seconded Comey's decision.
[Breitbart] Tuesday on MSNBC, Rep. Francis Rooney (R-FL) described the FBI and the Department of Justice as "off the rails" and suggested the possibility of a "purge" at the FBI and the Department of Justice.
Partial transcript as follows:
JACKSON: Before I let you go, I need to ask you about the president and his tweets. He’s been fairly quiet Christmas day, but the president is tweeting about the FBI. He’s been tweeting about his Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, why is that the right message right now for Donald Trump and Republicans?
ROONEY: Well, there’s two issues here. Yes, the president does have his own unique communication style, which I don’t think any of us have seen the use of Twitter deployed so broadly as a president does. But on the investigation, that investigation is totally off the rails. And I am really concerned ‐
JACKSON: But he’s not tweeting about the investigation. He is tweeting about the deputy director. He’s tweeting about FBI agents. Congressman, do you think that is appropriate for the president?
ROONEY: I’m very concerned that the DOJ and the FBI, whether you want to call it deep state or what, are kinda off the rails. When you look at what the Strzok guy was texting, you look at that Ohr guy talking to the dossier Clinton op research people, and the McCabe guy’s wife takes $600,000 from Clinton-related sources while running for state senator.
#4
Its all about the FEELZ™-- Trump's Twitter is Bad. A typical MSNBC panel consists of emoting about each members emotions, an actual factual analysis is beyond them.
They want to overlook the nose on their face to talk about the POTUS tweeting insults on the shamed Hillary.
Yes, the FBI and DoJ are off the rails. I just can't wait for the IG report and Sessions (who we have been abusing while he is quietly racketing up the evidence for a purge of DoJ).
[American Spectator] Once again, federal prosecutors are seen at their worst.
As Washington conservatives question whether partisan FBI officials working for Special Counsel Robert Mueller have stacked the deck against President Donald Trump, a criminal case in Las Vegas points to the sort of federal prosecutorial abuses that give the right cause for paranoia.
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro declared a mistrial in the infamous 2014 Bunkerville standoff case against rancher Cliven Bundy, his sons Ammon and Ryan, and co-defendant Ryan Payne, on the grounds that federal prosecutors improperly withheld evidence.
The standoff, in which both sides were armed, was a national news story that pitted a Western rancher against federal officialdom. Bureau of Land Management officials had tried to seize Bundy’s cattle following a decades-long dispute over grazing fees. The rancher had stopped paying federal grazing fees in 1993 to protest a BLM directive that he cut back on cattle grazing in order to accommodate the threatened desert tortoise.
In the course of the trial, Navarro found that prosecutors failed to share video surveillance, maps, and FBI interview reports with defense attorneys. "A mistrial in this case is the most suitable and only remedy available," Navarro explained.
#3
And why defending the 2nd amendment is so important. Without the fact the feds were outgunned on every corner, we had have never known about how the feds kicked him off his land, starved his cattle to death, and tried to sell the land to china so the senator from Nevada could get rich....
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
12/27/2017 11:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
And no one seems to want to mention how BLM essentially had a militarized team with all kinds of weaponry far in excess of that needed for law enforcement.
While I agree the local police departments need heavier weapons for dealing with our "little buddies" from the ME and their moon god, I don't agree with giving IRS, BLM, and other departments APC's, M2's, and full body armor...the militarization of the Executive branch under Obama was a precursor to what we would have had with Hillary...a national security force sort of like the old KGB or the new whatever they call themselves now, they are STILL the old Stalinist NKVD as far as I'm concerned.
#6
Things started to go downhill during the period 1890 and 1910. The election of Woodrow Wilson sped the downhill slide by a factor of three. Coolidge managed to stop the slide, but not to rebuild the trust necessary for Representative government to thrive. It's been all downhill ever since. The destruction of the unelected bureaucrats and their fiefdoms is the only thing that will save the US. What Trump is doing is a beginning, but it's going to take a LOT of hard work to succeed.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
12/27/2017 22:31 Comments ||
Top||
[The Hill] No matter where you stand politically, a growing body of facts raises the question: Is there systemic corruption or misfeasance at work inside America’s intelligence agencies?
By that, I don’t mean people stealing money. I mean officials who are stealing our privacy ‐ using the tools of intelligence-gathering and law-enforcing, which are meant to protect Americans, to instead spy on them, to gather information that isn’t the government’s business (at least not without a court’s approval). And, in some instances, it appears, to punish or silence those with whom they disagree ‐ personal and political foes, in and out of government ‐ rather than to pursue and protect Americans from the country’s real enemies.
Perhaps more alarming is the growing evidence that suggests some officials at all levels in intelligence and justice agencies are operating in a way that is clearly intended to serve their own political beliefs and interests ‐ not the public’s interests.
And sometimes, it appears, they operate not just in direct defiance of their superiors but of the Congress, the courts and the very laws of the land as well.
(Almost as disturbing, Congress, for its part, seems all too willing to allow all of this to take place, when it becomes known, rather than using its authority to stop the misfeasance, punish the miscreants who lie or stonewall, and protect their constituents.)
This is not, in my view, a partisan political question. The evidence leading us to ask such a disturbing question indicates there are forces inside our intelligence agencies that are more persistent and powerful than any single political party or administration. They can usurp the intentions of the many fine intelligence officers serving our country.
#4
The founding fathers (and behind every great man is a great wife rolling her eyes) feared a powerful federal government. They built protections (i.e. enumerated powers, bill of rights) into the US Constitution to limit abuses. They believed that states, being closer to the people, is where all powers not granted to the federal government belonged.
Then the US Civil War happened and in its aftermath, the states could not be counted on to protect the rights of all of its citizens. Thus started the rise of a powerful central government culminating in what we have today.
Federal power means control of where vast amounts of money are spent. Time to start rolling back Federal power. The Supreme Court can do it in a single stroke by closing the Commerce Clause loophole eliminating the legal bases for circumventing the enumerated powers structure of the US Constitution. That could be followed by a new amendment to the US Constitution which better defines regulating interstate commerce so as to prevent abuses by future Supreme Courts.
Posted by: A. Omereck6265 ||
12/27/2017 9:59 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Attkisson does a great job of being very PC in the beginning of the article to get a broader spectrum of readers and then about half way through the article, she goes full bore on the Obama administration politicalization and weaponization of the CIA, NSA, and FBI.
I wonder how long the DoJ, FBI, and NSA can stonewall Congress. I would think Donald would love to get that crap out on the table for everyone to see...and to use it to clean house in those agencies.
[ARABNEWS] Insanity was once defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. In the current period of European political madness, early elections and referendums are being repeatedly used in futile attempts to resolve political crises, as a substitute for vision and leadership. In most cases the results do nothing but highlight the deep divisions, mainly because the root causes of the issues at hand have not been adequately dealt with.
Last Thursday’s elections in Catalonia demonstrated exactly this. Catalan nationalism, whether one likes it or not, was not going to disappear just because the people of the region were asked to vote in an election for their regional Parliament. Rather than strategy, the move smacked of desperation by the central Spanish government and its Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy.
The elections only further demonstrated that Catalans are divided over the issue of separating from Spain. The results cannot be called a decisive victory for the separatist parties, who won 70 of the 135 seats, although they still maintain a majority in the Catalan Parliament. Rajoy, on the other hand, is clearly the big loser. He gambled on voters to do the job for him of killing off the nationalist challenge, and lost. Those parties who do not want to break away from Spain are in a minority in the Catalan Parliament, and Rajoy’s conservative Popular Party recorded its worst ever result; it was all but wiped out, losing 8 of its 11 seats.
These results also highlight that Rajoy’s ill-judged decisions to impose direct rule after the Catalan Parliament declared independence, to go after the members of the Catalan government who supported the region’s independence, and then to call an election, have all backfired. Accusing Catalan President Carles Puigdemont of sedition and rebellion and jailing other members of the deposed Catalan government for similar offenses, was an overreaction made in panic. Turning Puigdemont, a rather lackluster leader, into an almost Che Guevara-style rebel with a European arrest warrant on his head, was only ever going to entrench nationalist resistance to Madrid. Though the arrest warrant was withdrawn last month, the damage had already been done. And now the regional election results have left Spain and Catalonia on the verge of further confrontation, and an out-of-sorts EU facing a major crisis brewing within its borders.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/27/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11125 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm going to Barcelona in a few days. I will give my first hand report of the people's viewpoint when I get back to the states.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Townhall} The original question the FBI investigation of the Trump campaign was to answer was a simple one: Did he do it?
[Breitbart] Tuesday on MSNBC, Rep. Francis Rooney (R-FL) described the FBI and the Department of Justice as "off the rails" and suggested the possibility of a "purge" at the FBI and the Department of Justice.
[The Hill] No matter where you stand politically, a growing body of facts raises the question: Is there systemic corruption or misfeasance at work inside America’s intelligence agencies?
[ARABNEWS] Insanity was once defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. In the current period of European political madness, early elections and referendums are being repeatedly used in futile attempts to resolve political crises, as a substitute for vision and leadership. In most cases the results do nothing but highlight the deep divisions, mainly because the root causes of the issues at hand have not been adequately dealt with.
