Bill Barr Just Says 'No'

A high stakes game is playing out in Washington, DC. AG Bill Barr and the investigative and prosecutorial team led by John Durham are approaching crunch time. They were delayed by the Covid shutdown but were being told by Barr and his spokeswoman, Kerry Kupec, that significant "developments"--regarded as a codeword for "indictments"--are expected before the end of summer.

The Dems know that the information that will be coming out will be devastating, revealing eight years of lawlessness under Obama-Biden, featuring the weaponization of virtually every branch of the federal government against citizens who failed to agree with the Obama administration. Among those branches of the government that are lining up behind Obama is one that we should have been prepared for, but most of us are only now coming to terms with.

The only strategy left for the Dems after all else has failed--the Mueller witchhunt, the fake impeachment, etc.--is to delay, hoping against hope that the dementia addled Biden can somehow be dragged across the finish line ahead of a resurgent Trump. That strategy requires the cooperation of the judicial branch of government. We've seen the way Obama 'resistance' judges have attempted--and significantly succeeded for quite awhile--to postpone the implementation of many of Trump's initiatives. That should have prepared us to see the criminal justice system hijacked by 'Obama judges'--yes, Virginia, there are such things--in the interests of politics rather than justice.

I'll admit I was taken a bit by surprise at just how far that would go. The partisan way in which the Roger Stone trial was handled was one thing, but to see a federal judge attempt to actually conduct the prosecution of Michael Flynn after DoJ declined to prosecute, was a real eye opening moment. The goal of this was, transparently, to delay the moment when Flynn could return to public life free of the restraints imposed by a partisan prosecution. Increasingly, however, it has become apparent that the real goal of the delaying tactic is to prevent Flynn from being a witness for the prosecutions that Barr is lining up. To delay Flynn's exoneration or ... perhaps to try to force Flynn to ask Trump for a pardon, entailing an admission of guilt. Either would destroy Flynn's value of as a witness for the prosecution--and make no mistake about it, Flynn promises to be a devastating witness.

This concern appears to have been front and center for the Dems during Barr's "hearing" before the House. The Dems sought to extract from Barr a promise not to issue a "report" before the election. Barr responded in typically laconic fashion:

Rep. Mucarsel-Powell: Under oath, under oath, do you commit not to releasing any report by Mr. Durham before the November election?

AG Barr: No.

I believe that's a clear sign that Barr, who might in ordinary circumstances postponed politically tinged prosecutions, is wise to the strategy and won't be deterred. The result? The DC Circuit Court of Appeals outrageously accepted the petition for an en banc rehearing in the Flynn case. Again, the goal appears to be to delay and prevent Flynn from providing critical testimony. This is a degree of open judicial corruption that we're not used to seeing from the federal judiciary, but Barr seems determined and up to confronting it.

Why is the Flynn case so pivotal for the Dems?

As I've maintained for months now, I believe the Flynn case is the most direct path to exposing the corrupt conspiracy that was Team Mueller. The persecution of an innocent man--complete with "evidence" fabricated by the the FBI, certainly with the collusion of the prosecutors--should develop into a trial featuring one bombshell revelation after another of investigative and prosecutorial corruption fueled by the Obama and Clinton cabals.

My take is that while John Durham is the lead investigator - prosecutor, as discrete portions of the investigation reach critical mass the need arises to assign top flight prosecutors that Barr believes he can rely upon to prepare the cases for trial. That, of course, suggests that there will be several separate but related prosecutions. Durham himself appears to be focused on the origins of the Russia Hoax up to and including the fraudulent FISA against Carter Page. That investigation also includes the early overseas attempts to frame the Russia Hoax narrative using undercover operations against associates of the Trump campaign, as well as the fraudulent ICA. John Brennan is a prime target here. Will it include a look into the almost certainly fraudulent claim of 'hacking' at the DNC? We can still hope so, since we know that Barr and Durham have shown an extraordinary ability to control leaks.

On the other hand, the Russia Hoax action after the election focuses on the ginning up of a corrupt special counsel investigation--Team Mueller and its witchhunt. While several players in this stage also featured in the run up--notably Comey and McCabe and their close staff--I maintain that the avenue for getting inside that conspiracy, while including Rod Rosenstein, will be most advantageously achieved through the plot to frame Michael Flynn. That the Flynn case is nearing completion was certainly signalled by the appointment of USA Jeffrey Jensen. How Barr handles the Obama judiciary's blocking attempt should prove fascinating--and potentially critical for the future of our republic.

Unfortunately for the Dems and their blackrobed allies, there is another case that appears to have reached an advanced state of development. Toward the end of May we learned that Barr had appointed the USA from San Antonio, John Franklin Bash, to look into "certain aspects" will concern unmaskings that took place both "before and after the 2016 election." Kerry Kupec made made it clear that this investigation was related to Durham's investigation--in other words, it had been ongoing for some time:

... when you're looking at unmasking as part of a broader investigation -- like John Durham's investigation -- looking specifically at who was unmasking whom, can add a lot to our understanding about motivation and big picture events.

There are two things that are particularly unfortunate for Dems in this development. The first is that Dem operatives--whether in Congress or in black robes--have essentially no control or influence whatsoever over this investigation.

The second inconvenient aspect of this is raised by this Paul Sperry tweet (h/t commenter EZ):

Paul Sperry
@paulsperry_ 

DEVELOPING: Sources say special prosecutor Bash is looking @ Obama admin's "to/from/about" queries related to NSA's upstream collections of FISA Sec 702 data going back to 2015 & earlier, which include collections involving US citizens & the use of that raw data by FBI contractors. 

10:34 AM · Aug 1, 2020

"2015 and earlier" is pretty open ended, and reminds us that the Chief Judge of the FISC, in her report on this scandal, stated that the abuses could be traced back "at least" as far as 2012. At least means that it could go back further. And that means that all this can be traced back to the tenure at the FBI of one Robert Mueller--yes, the same Robert "Bob" Mueller who led the famous witchhunt that sought to stage a lawfare coup against a duly elected president.

This opens up a separate avenue of attack on Team Mueller, and one which can't be thwarted or delayed by an Obama judge. Further, there is the fact that the abuses can probably be traced to a memorandum of understanding between Mueller's FBI and the CIA that illegally provided the CIA--that would be the agency that employed Nellie Ohr, of Fusion GPS, ham radios, and Steele "dossier" fame, as a contract employee--with access to FBI search capabilities regarding US persons utilizing ... contract employees. That's a huge can of worms--for Dems--and raises issues that resonate deeply with ordinary Americans.