What else is new?
Surber starts out, The impeachment we need, by quoting an amusing piece at the Babylon Bee:
Poll: Majority Want Impeachment Hearings To Continue As Long As Possible So Congress Will Be Too Busy To Meddle With Our Lives
He then moves to Ann Coulter, who laments that impeachment is preventing the Senate from doing all sorts of good and necessary things--infrastructure, fixing Obamacare, fixing our border crisis, and so forth.
Then Surber lays it out:
I agree with both, and disagree with both.
What we really need is for Congress to take a sober and unflinching review of Obama's Spygate, in which an American president used the FBI to spy on a political opponent. To get that power, the FBI lied 17 times to a federal judge. Not only that, but the FBI tried to entrap Donald John Trump's son and his son-in-law at Trump Tower in June 2016. Not only that but when Devin Nunes later informed the judge the FBI lied, she ignored it.
This is the constitutional crisis we need to address because if we fail to put in place strict penalties for using the FBI to spy, the next Democrat president will do even worse.
To be sure, John Durham is investigating but he's a Department of Justice lifer. He was supposed to start indicting in June. I am tired of waiting. I give up on him. He is the bus that will never arrive. I may as well start walking.
Watergate was amateur hour. Obama's Spygate is Big Brother done by professionals. I would like to say that they almost got away with it, but because there has been no public outcry, I must tell the truth.
They got away with it.
Powerful words, and not spoken recklessly. Unlike Surber, however, I haven't given up on Barr/Durham. As Surber says, the Russia Hoax was "Big Brother done by professionals," and Impeachment Theater is the continuation of the Russia Hoax through the Intel Community and the Legislative Branch (never mind what the Judicial Branch has been up to). It's the crime of the century, and you don't get to the bottom of that--which is where we need to get--in a few months. Progress is being made. As Lee Smith told Laura Ingraham last night, the plot is now clearly seen to have originated in the White House. That's real progress.
I too continue to feel patience and confidence where Barr and Durham are concerned. Having followed this mess for years at CTH, exposed to mountains of details (well-sourced), and watching myriad dots’ being connected, while more and more details continued to be unearthed, it is easy to disregard those who have been clamoring for arrests, indictments, frog-marching, the works, and holding Barr responsible for not sending at least one or two token miscreants to prison so that they (the impatient) can relax and leave their pitchforks in the closet for a little while longer.
ReplyDeleteI see this as a huge conspiracy - wide and deep and in existence over a longer period of time than most imagined, with players in the highest levels of our government and in other countries across the globe.
Barr got into this very belatedly and inherited a case in which much of the evidence had been held hostage for more than two years by the Mueller hoax investigation. Both he and Durham seem to be very prudent, very thorough prosecutors who do not want any possibility of appeal. There is strong belief that this will lead to the ultimate instigator, Barack Hussein Obama. This is heavy stuff.
This is not “Law & Order” where the perps are apprehended and brought to justice in less than one hour. I wonder how many of the impatient have been conditioned by watching programs like that?
Perfect.
DeleteYou do not go to court without a very strong possibility of a win.
DeleteHear that, Dems?
They apparently thought that Impeachment Theater could give them a win in the court of public opinion. But people are hip to fake news now.
Delete+1 for Bebe, Mr. Wauck and TexasDude.
DeleteYeah, Congress (hello, Lindsey!) mus probe the FBI/ CIA/ W.H. roles in this coup, but (as sundance keeps stressing), Barr needs to declass a trove of documents, e.g. on Strzok, the Ohrs, etc.
ReplyDeleteBarr has said, that Durham will bring busts late spring/ early summer. If we see no busts, and no major declassing, by mid-year, many patriots will have to conclude that, indeed, the D.S. has the power to sabotage all probes into its misconduct.
I think Barr has too much professional pride to punk out.
Delete"Barr has said, that Durham will bring busts late spring/ early summer."
DeleteThat is not what he said.
Projected timelines are always estimates because no one can see into the future - even later this Spring. Again, in a case like this one where so much has come out of the woodwork over time, I would not be sitting watching a calendar, ready to declare foul and malfeasance if the Barr-Durham estimate was not met. I am sorry to see the cynicism on a number of internet forums, little of it grounded in experience or reason. Too many seem to use it as insulation against disappointment when their own unrealistic attitudes set them up for disappointment.
DeleteHere is what Barr said on December 13, 2019:
DeleteUS Attorney General William Barr said on Tuesday that the Russia Investigation could reach an important “watershed” by late spring 2020 or early summer.
The rest of this important article is here. I have linked it rather than trying to stuff the entire article into this thread. It is an important read as many may need a refresher:
https://www.theepochtimes.com/inquiry-into-russia-investigation-could-be-completed-by-late-spring-2020-says-barr_3174088.html
I took that to mean that either indictments or plea negotiations would be on the table.
DeleteThat's what I meant, by using the summary- word "busts".
DeleteSeems my first comment to this post disappeared into the ether so I'll try again.
ReplyDeleteIt could be that, at least partially, the impeachment circus serves the purpose of increasing political fatigue among thevgeneral population in order to lessen the impact of the Barr/Durham inquiry (I know I'm sick of it). If there are not significant convictions, not just indictments; significant enough to overpower the Media spin, nothing will change and it will be business as usual for the Deep State. That is the one common denominator in all of this. Every lie, abuse, ruse, subterfuge has the ultimate purpose of hiding/protecting the Deep State. As long as it remains merely a "conspiracy theory" nothing will change. Whatever/whenever B&D brings forward it must be enough to wake America.
Tom S.
Most polling shows that a large percentage of the population tune out the fake news. In that sense I think the Dems are pushing on a a string. What used to work no longer does.
DeleteI disagree, this whole thing has got me revved up. It was Obama who turned me apathetic. My girlfriend who has never voted or taken any interest in politics is now registered to vote and works for Trump campaign in Delaware.
DeleteRob S
Every time Durham turns over a rock, he finds a new rabbit hole of monstrous criminality. And it's not just about standard DC greed and corruption, but also the selling out of the security of the United States in treasonous acts that defy belief. Barr will not flinch and he will not be deterred, but the revelations to come are staggering.
ReplyDeleteI think this must be true. What we've already seen keeps pointing up the chain of command and that means that the criminality increases with the responsibility.
DeleteThis is not meant as an "I told you so," but ages ago I observed (probably not here) that the directors of NI, CIA, and FBI had briefed the WH and NatSecAdv, so the presumption had to be that Obama was "in the loop." Rice's inauguration day CYA memo to file indicating Obama's "by the book" instructions confirms what this inner circle was up to. Clapper has stated publicly he was following orders/doing the president's bidding, i.e. he didn't understand why there was an investigation (presumably presidential orders are sacrosanct).
ReplyDeleteE.g. there was no defensive briefing given to Trump/Trump campaign regarding alleged foreign agent in the campaign is a "tell" that NatSec protocols were ignored.
As has been repeatedly stressed, national security intelligence activities are pursued on behalf, under authorities of the president as CiC. In his name.
Does Obama end up named as an unindicted co-conspirator??
Hopefully at least.
DeleteHopefully as an indicted co-conspirator.
DeleteIndicted, them pardoned, "in the interests of nat'l comity".
DeleteBreaking...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nationalreview.com/news/fisa-court-confirms-two-carter-page-surveillance-applications-not-valid/
FISC finds absence of predication for Carter Page FISA applications ##3 and 4. This is big. Techn Fog is also tweeting this development.
Yes, I was reading about it elsewhere. The important part is what is most likely:
DeleteThe last two warrants--to include the Mueller one--were invalid.
I say that's most likely because if you didn't have PC for the first two, it's unlikely that you'd develop later--in the circs. IOW, if Page knew you were spying on him and you didn't have PC that he was a Russian agent, how likely is it that he'd START working as a Russian agent.
Of course it was ALWAYS a no brainer that they NEVER had PC that Page was a Russia agent. I assume that this opinion is based on Clinesmith's forgery.
OTOH, it says they're still investigating the earlier ones. I'll repeat: It has ALWAYS been a no brainer that the FBI NEVER had PC that Page was a Russian agent.
What's big about it, of course, is that means Durham needs to turn Team Mueller inside out.
Another 'big' aspect may be the invalidity of use of evidence derived from the warrants in prosecutions under a 'fruit of the poisonous tree' theory. What does this mean for the prosecutions/convictions of Manafort, PapaD, Flynn and Stone?
DeleteObviously it depends on whether anything from that FISA was used. Right now I'm not clear that that was the case, but I'd be happy to be wrong.
Deletehttps://twitter.com/RealSLokhova/status/1220414744336781313
ReplyDeleteSvetlana Lokhova's tweet reminds me of a pet peeve I have.
Too many of Trump's supporters continue to repeat the meme that Steele used Russian 'information' or Russian 'disinformation' to compile the Steele Dossier.
No.
I am very inclined to agree with Svetlana Lokhova that "There were no [Russian] sources. They made everything up."
In fact while typing I have also been watching Dan Bongino interview Tom Fitton. Fitton agrees that the Dossier is totally made up and names Hillary Clinton's guy, Sidney Blumenthal, as the master author/compiler of the Dossier. Here's a link to the interview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3adWcyEYGg
To me, this also knocks out one of the major pegs supporting the continuing myth of 'Russian interference' in the 2016 election.
I saw Lokhova's tweet this morning. That's my view. They took general background info--possibly obtained from the Smolenkov guy--just to try to lend it some verisimilitude. But it was all basically fiction, except for a few obvious factual bits, like, Carter Page flew to Moscow.
DeleteLike you, I have no patience with people--and there are plenty who should know better--who still peddle that "Russian disinformation in Steele's dossier" story. It's always been unlikely in the extreme.
I should add--while there may be no fruit of the poisonous tree as such, there remains the possibility that FISA derived info was LEAKED by Team Mueller. The judge specifically points out that leaks like that are crimes.
DeleteIt's my view that the Russia "disinformation" assertion was made up in response to collusion supporters who kept claiming Steele's "reporting" was legitimate, and hadn't been disproven. It was a way to discredit the "you need to prove a negative" rebuttal made by Steele supporters.
DeleteI'd have said the March 2018 blog post by Yaacov Apelbaum "The Mechanics of Deception" pretty clearly identified the dossier was primarily fiction, with a few contemporaneous nuggets thrown it for verisimilitude.
https://apelbaum.wordpress.com/2018/03/17/the-mechanics-of-deception/
I wish he'd apply those techniques to some other areas, or update the Ukraine stuff.
DeleteThat Sara Carter interview of Svetlana a day or 2 ago is excellent.
Deletehttps://www.google.com/amp/s/saraacarter.com/svetlana-lokhova-money-trail-of-fbi-spy-will-expose-russia-hoax-origins/amp/
I read that Obama is ready to attack Bernie because he thinks that Bernie is too far to the left (he is). Obama allegedly doesn't want Biden, either.
ReplyDeleteSo who does he want and why?
Does Biden's candidacy bring the white hot spotlight on Barack? Obama knows Bernie can't win. Actually, none of them can. Obama is looking for the strongest candidate to save his scalp from a second Trump term.
At least, in my opinion
I think he's running scared.
DeleteI had the same thought; Obama is worried that people are going to be indicted and potentially are looking at jail time, and his fear is 1) Bernie can't win, and 2) even if Bernie were to win, Bernie would NOT cover Obama and his minion's butts from Durham's investigation.
DeleteIn short, Bernie, like Trump, is too much of an outsider for the Deep State gill-breathing Swamp Creatures.