Thomas Lifson leads off with a startling article on the Dem strategy, working off recent public statements by Pelosi and Hillary. As Lifson notes, those statements give the game away:
The statements themselves could be termed 'unhinged', except that they unquestionably reflect thinking and strategy at the highest level of Dem organization. Here they are:
Hillary: “We’ve got to have a massive legal operation, I know the Biden campaign is working on that… Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances.”
Pelosi: "One thing I’ll say to the American people: Do not pay any attention to Donald Trump. It is his goal to scare people from voting, to intimidate them by saying he’s going to have law enforcement people at the polls, to welcome, in fact, Russian intervention into our election, ... the domestic enemies to our voting system and our honoring our Constitution are right at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., with their allies in the Congress of the United States ... enemies of the state."
That's right. Pelosi labeled the Trump and the entire GOP as "domestic enemies", "enemies of the state."
Lifson ties it all together into a three step plan to steal the election through mail-in voting fueled fraud, lawfare efforts to sow chaos, and direct street violence with the same end in view.
Can't happen here? Read Lifson. Look at the reality around you.
Byron York has a new book due out on September 8th, Obsession: Inside the Washington Establishment's Never-Ending War on Trump. A major theme of the book, judging from its page at Amazon, has to do with Trump's early decision to cooperate fully with Team Mueller to get the Russia Hoax behind him, based on an explicit understanding with Mueller that Mueller would move expeditiously--and then double-crossed Trump and Trump's lawyers. It's almost as if Team Trump had never heard of the Deep State. That part of the story is excerpted today in:
From York's account it appears that Trump--who had been through many legal battles--thought that he could come to DC and do deals to get things done for the country in a way not too different than he was used to doing. When Rod Rosenstein stabbed Trump in the back Trump still thought that approach would work with Robert "Bob" Mueller and his team of leftist legal barracudas. In this Trump was poorly served by at least some of his team, who somehow believed Mueller to be an honorable man, someone they could trust. Go figure. Had they never heard about search functions on the internet? Did they really think conservative warnings about the nature and makeup of the entire Russia Hoax and Mueller Witchhunt could somehow be ignored or wished away through cooperation? Did they truly think Rosenstein had acted all on his own? The answer to all those questions appears to be, Yes.
“There was more trust in our relationship [Dowd and Mueller] than in any in my entire career,” said Dowd.
The question of trust — that is, could Mueller and his team of prosecutors be trusted — was perhaps the most discussed issue on the Trump side in the early days. Not everyone agreed on Mueller’s worthiness of such trust. One of the skeptical ones was Jay Sekulow. “It wasn’t a personal thing,” he recalled. “I didn’t have the relationship with Mueller. I had met him probably three times in my life. This was John’s call. John had the experience and the relationship with him.”
On the other hand, [Mark] Corallo, a Mueller fan from the Bush years [!], strongly supported the trust strategy. He even staked his position on it. “When I took this job, I said, ‘I won’t be a part of any personal attacks on Bob Mueller,’” Corallo recalled telling his colleagues on the legal team. “He’s a friend. I’m loyal. And I believe he’s going to do the right thing.”
Corallo paused a moment. “Now, in hindsight,” he continued, “maybe I was wrong.” Others would come to think that, too, as the investigation wore on.
Trump's team--knowing that all the issues Mueller looked at were baseless hoaxes--thought they could have it all wrapped up by the end of 2017. Trump himself pressed the issue, realizing that his ability, especially, to conduct foreign policy was being seriously undermined. Then came the culminating late December, 2017, meeting with Mueller, when the scales finally fell from their eyes:
When the meeting began, Dowd outlined the team’s position. “We said, ‘Look, we kept our end,’” Dowd recalled telling Mueller. “‘Are you going to hold up your end?’”
The next moment marked an enormous change in the course of the investigation. “Well, you know, if we’re going to square our corners,” Mueller replied, according to Dowd, “we ought to really talk to the president.”
A probe into collusion was one thing — an investigation into the actions of people affiliated in some way with the campaign. But a probe into obstruction of justice was something else — it was an investigation into the intentions of the president of the United States. The next year of the investigation was basically a fight over the president’s testimony.
Dowd remembered asking Mueller and his team what questions they had that only the president could answer, that met the standard under Espy. ["A 1997 ... case that held that prosecutors ... had to show that the information they sought from the president was both important and not available from any other source."]
“I never got an answer to that question,” Dowd said. “I probably put it to him nine times. But I never got an answer. ...”
The phrase “square our corners” stuck in Dowd’s mind. “That’s when I first knew we were going to get the stall,” he continued. “And we were f---ed.”
A tough lesson to learn in the twilight years of a distinguished career: Get it in writing. Thank God for Bill Barr. I'm sure Trump does every day. Read the whole article.
Finally, the third article relates to the SSCI "collusion" report. The one that Kim Strassell said wasn't worth wasting much time on. She was, of course, totally correct in that assessment. Nevertheless, John Solomon has done the homework and dug out a perfect example of SSCI and Mueller perfidy--two arms of the Deep State working in tandem. Yes, we've seen this one before, but Solomon provides the details in a handy package:
Obama State Department considered Konstantin Kilimnik a ‘sensitive source,’ Senate report now identifies him as Russian intel officer.