The declassification directive to AG Bill Barr creates a dynamic ensuring Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer will align with the former intelligence officials and further attack the offices of the President and Attorney General; they have few options.
Those who participated in the creation of Russia-Gate or Spy-Gate have few options except to manufacture a narrative shield and accuse the President of unethical, immoral and criminal conduct. See: Pelosi’ recent “cover-up” charge.
By advancing an even stronger attacking against the president, the ‘small group’ position any investigation into their wrong-doing as political retaliation. A House impeachment investigation, in some manner or form, is more likely than ever.
The legal risk for participants in ‘Russia-Gate’/’Spy-Gate’ seems very real. The best defense against that risk is political. Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer know how to lead the defense by saying any evidence discovered by AG Barr is merely weaponized retaliation from the Trump DOJ. The media are already supporting that cause.
Speaker Pelosi needs to protect John Brennan, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates and the participating small group writ large, if she is to retain her gavel and power. Minority leader Chuck Schumer knows the play; and the media are already fully circling the wagons as part of their three-year ongoing participation.
I can read the polls--this is a sure fire losing hand. Washington DC and Big Media circling the wagons against Flyover Country? Spooks spying on Americans and ganging up on the President? I don't see any possible way for the Dems to win this one.
One thing I don't get. Sundance writes:
By advancing an even stronger attacking against the president, the ‘small group’ position any investigation into their wrong-doing as political retaliation.
Exactly how can the Dems launch a "stronger" attack against Trump than they already have? Is there somehow a stronger attack beyond Trump being "literally" Hitler? I mean, what have they not tried so far?
As Conrad Black recently wrote, the Dems have tried just about everything short of suicide up to this point. Will they try that? Then again, would you bet against crazy?
Pelosi might be walking a tightrope with her caucus, but defending the indefensible is a losing proposition, as no matter how evidence is characterized as to motivation--weaponized, politicized--it won't matter to the public at-large. That's an inside the beltway approach that has little provenance outside DC. Only the blind and deaf (and DC Dems) are stuck in the cocoon that waits for more facts to confirm their preordained beliefs about the nefarious Trump.ReplyDelete
The facts are out. Mueller's report has nothing more to say. The only questions that emerged from the report was: How did this obviously bogus investigation get started, and who instigated the Russian hoax?
If your game is to distract from those questions with allegations or insinuations ("stronger attack"), you'll get a friendly media reception, but it'll get pushed off the front page as the drip, drip, drip of declassifications, the IG report(s), and AG Barr's doings. The media might be heavily slanted in the Dem camp, but nothing beats breaking a juicy story.
It's gonna be a long summer...
Agreed. I still wonder how much of this has been truly driven by the Crazy Caucus and how much has forced by big money Leftists like Steyer and Soros. To me, Pelosi could probably face down her caucus, but money is a different story.Delete
Forbes -- I'm not sure 'impeachment' will get pushed off the front pages by the drip, drip, drip. It will be a media feeding frenzy. Imagine around the clock Maddow, Anderson Cooper, Wolf Blitzer covering the impeachment. You're right it will be a very long, and interesting, summer.Delete
We're about 17 months out from the presidential election and I wouldn't want to be in the Democrat's position.ReplyDelete
The most recent tweets by Comey and Brennan lack the defiant tone of prior ones. Maybe the gravity of their situations is becoming clearer to them.
Remember when the Dems tried the Chuck and Nancy show? Went over like a lead balloon. Jerrold and Adam hasn't worked any better. AOC and Tlaib? Please!Delete
The talking heads won't change anything either.
Indictments of former FBI and CIA types? I think that'll get some interest from the general public.
The Dems have had the House for almost five months. What legislative achievements can they point to?ReplyDelete
Infrastructure? That's be a perfect fit for them to work with the President on. Nope, Pelosi chose to choose Donald of a coverup. The wall? Nope. Then the President started threatening to send people to sanctuary cities and they got awfully quiet.
Save babies born alive? Nope, they're too busy saving endangered species.
I'm not sure what the Democrat agenda is. I guess they're the party of no.
James Clapper on CNNReplyDelete
"Meanwhile, Clapper told CNN's Anderson Cooper that the "bigger issue" is "what exactly is the scope" of the declassification, whether it involves all of Russia's interference in the election or just the counter-intelligence probe. He expressed similar concerns as Brennan regarding sources and methods being exposed and putting "people's lives at risk."" The people he means are Comey, Brennan, McCabe, Yates, Baker and himself.
Sources and methods? Answer, CYA. Brennan or Clapper (I don't remember which) just burned a source using the NY Times.
Once they're indicted no one will care what they said before. Not that hardly anyone cares now.Delete
Joe - Wasn't the 'source' was 'burned' over two weeks ago when Kavalec's verbatim notes were published? CassanderDelete
Yes. I do so much reading of Mr. Wauck and other sources that I can't generally recall names and timelines unless I can locate my source.
Yes- that is why indictments are necessary.ReplyDelete
As I understand Jeff Carlson's new article, the Deep State intends to warn the public that William Barr's investigation endangers a key CIA source, who is either Vyacheslav Trubnikov or (and?) Vladislav Surkov.ReplyDelete
Christopher Steele apparently pretends that he too received information secretly from Trubnikov or Surkov.
It's not clear whether the CIA's yarn will be that the CIA received information from Trubnikov/Surkov directly or only through Steele.
Unfortunately for both Trubnikov and Surkov, their lives are being endangered by Barr's investigation. Perhaps Vladimir Putin himself will pull the trigger to send the bullets through the backs of the heads of Trubnikov and Surkov. If Putin is not sure which is the traitor, then he will execute both of them, just to make sure that the CIA source is silenced forever.
Another part of the CIA's yarn will be that the CIA believed Steele's Dossier because the CIA recognized that Steele too, just like the CIA itself, was using Trubnikov/Surkov as a source of super-secret information about Putin's meddling in the USA's elections.
As you say, I think this is a yarn, and a desperate one. Shows how desperate they are. The whole "yarn" is packed with absurdities.Delete
Now that I have thought about Carlson's article some more, I offer the following speculations.Delete
The relevant Russian is Vladislav Surkov (not Vyacheslav Trubnikov). According to Carlson,
Surkov is ...
... a shadowy figure in Russian politics, is reported to be an aide of Vladimir Putin and the personal adviser to President Vladimir Putin on Ukraine. He has been referred to as a “political technologist” — one who engages in the shaping and reshaping public opinion.
I speculate that the CIA recruited Surkov as an agent, and he conned the CIA. Taking the CIA's money, Surkov sold the CIA a yarn about Vladimir Putin meddling in the USA's elections.
Then the plot thickened when someone in the CIA provided a summary of Surkov's yarn to Christopher Steele, who wove that yarn into his own Dossier. This strengthened Surkov's yarn through circular reasoning. The CIA believed that the Dossier was plausible because the Dossier confirmed Surkov's yarn, which had been shared between the CIA and Steele.
After Mueller's report was published, the CIA's assessment has disintegrated, and so now the CIA is selling two new, contradictory stories:
1) The Dossier (i.e. the CIA's own yarn) was caused by the Kremlin's "disinformation operation".
2) William Barr's investigation endangers the CIA's precious source (Surkov) who has been providing information about Putin's meddling in the USA's elections.
Of course, the true explanation is that Surkov conned the CIA on his own initiative. What Surkov told the CIA -- and what was included in the Dossier -- was simply Surkov's lies.
Interesting--and by no means impossible!Delete
The Deep State has contingency plans for this outcome, and they are not limited to a political campaign in the media. They will fund and implement an active lawfare response to challenge Barr in court and mount vigorous legal defenses for all the coup conspirators. In addition, the information that they harvested via illegal surveillance during the Obama Administration will be used to intimidate/blackmail members of Congress and Trump's staff in the hopes of gaining leverage over him. As a last resort, they have planned for several false flag OPs that could be used to instigate a Black Swan event. The latter is scorched earth, but if the top tier conspirators face genuine legal jeopardy (think prison time), they will not hesitate to play that card. This is serious business and it is not prudent to underestimate their desperation.ReplyDelete
I don't underestimate their desperation, otoh, I think they have underestimated the devastating power of declass. "Vigorous legal defenses?" I wouldn't put too much faith in that below the WH level. False flag ops I can see, except that Trump's delegation of authority to Barr is so far reaching that--combined with Barr's longstanding IC experience--room for maneuver is limited.Delete
I'm with you on your response to Unknown. The jig is up and these low-character men know it. Instead of false flag ops, it'll be as you said. They'll be running to DOJ to get rat on fellow schemers. Every man for himself.Delete
I came across Sergei Millian's twitter thread this morning. He is tweeting up a storm about the Chris Steele/Tatiana Duran meeting with Asst SoS Kathy Kavalec in October 2016. Lots of other stuff too, including implications/innuendo about Steele, Glenn Simpson, Russian sources, Cody Shearer, Sidney Blumenthal, etc., etc. Have you been following this developing aspect of the story and do you have any thoughts to share? Here's a link to Millian's twitter feed: https://twitter.com/SergeiMillian/with_replies
No, I hadn't seen that. Tx--highly entertaining.Delete
Dilemma--How to read and write at the same time?