Monday, October 12, 2020

SWC: What If Biden Wins?

Shipwreckedcrew addresses the unthinkable: If No Indictments Prior to the Election, What Is Durham’s End Game? Read the whole thing, but I think these few excerpts will give a good idea of what could happen.

First, SWC briefly addresses what I just wrote about at considerable length--what's taking Durham "so long":

I believe that the recent declassification and release of SOME information about the role of the Clinton Campaign in amplifying the Trump-Russia hoax has also created new investigative leads for Durham. I think Durham has a ton more information on that subject than the public has seen.

If I was leading this investigation, I would want to run those down before I started to “show my cards” to my targets. I expect when an indictment is filed — and I believe one will be filed — it will include and extraordinarily detailed conspiracy count — maybe more than one conspiracy — in terms of laying out the evidence against named and unnamed co-conspirators. ...

I would maintain that the recent declassifications and release of certain documents almost certainly did NOT create "new investigative leads." Declassification and access are two totally different things. I assume that Durham had access to the declassified documents long ago--the declassification had nothing to do with Durham's access to the documents, only to the public's access.

Then he gets to the heart of the matter:

The question really is “What is the end game if Biden wins?”

My guess is that Durham will have one or more indictments returned in December or early January, ahead of the inauguration. I think Attorney General Barr will then accept Durham’s resignation as US Attorney and name Durham as a “Special Counsel” under DOJ Regulations in simultaneous actions. He might do the same thing with US Attorney Jensen in Missouri who seems to be investigating the actual cases brought by the Special Counsel’s Office.


... whoever might be Attorney General in a hypothetical Biden Administration could fire Durham and shut the investigations down. But that action would have to be taken with all the allegations and evidence — in the form of a detailed and specific conspiracy charge — in full view for the public to see.  The political consequences of taking such action could be quite high.


  1. I think the decision not to put forth anything from the Durham investigation before the election is a smart political move (and not the betrayal that some would suggest). Had Durham acted before November 3rd, it would have tarred him as a partisan and harmed his credibility moving forward into future trials. In addition, when Biden loses, the Deep State and their MSM allies would have blamed the "loss" on the nefarious Durham meddling in the election to help Trump (Durham would undoubtedly be cast as a Putin pawn). The latter would fuel their legal campaign to rescue Biden's victory via the courts and Electoral College shenanigans.

    Barr is correct to keep his power dry and wait to strike until after the election,

  2. All this and SWC thinks we might get another Special Counsel appointment? With any luck, if that happens, they can drag it out until 2525.

    I understand the investigation has hundreds, maybe thousands of moving parts, that it's complicated. But I'm starting to think part of the delay is managerial. Maybe it's a good idea to wait until every period and comma is in place. But maybe it's not.

    1. Well, now that Pelosi has established new precedent that impeachment is nothing but a tool to use against political enemies, we could always start now with the groundwork to impeach Biden. Why wait for any discovery of evidence of an impeachable offense committed by him?

  3. Mark, I was directed to a twitter thread posted yesterday by Roscoe B. Davis.
    His thinking mirrors yours in a few areas and also has a couple of interesting observations. To your point above regarding declassification, he asserts it was done to share with grand juries to avoid all the complications re sharing classified info with the GJ. As you have said Durham has had them for a long time but how to share them with the GJ? Also an interesting comment re the accepted wisdom re Admiral Rogers. A little long and sourcing is unknown but
    a few new insights.

    1. I saw that, too. It's a good point re the GJ, because the jurors don't have clearances just by virtue of being on the jury. So declassification would be helpful. Re Rogers, I'd like to see some sourcing.

    2. Googled Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the guy cited by Davis. He was Senior Director of Intelligence at the NSC(Flynn’s guy). McMaster tried to get rid of him but failed initially due to pushback from WH(Kushner). He was cited by NYT as the person who provided Nunes with the intelligence that got the ball rolling a few years ago. Seems to be a person who would be in the know but how does Davis get the info. Another in a long line of “who knows” but a very different take from what we thought we knew on Rogers.

    3. Have a look at Rich Higgins' twitter feed. Rich is MAGA, worked with Ezra and was also fired by McMaster. Rich has long said it was Ezra that revealed the wiretaps to Trump, as opposed to Rogers.

      Rogers is an unknown at this point. Sundance has done the deep dive, and proves many positive points: he shut down the 702 abuse and instituted processes for it to not happen again, and only gave 'mild' confidence to the ICA sham. It's telling that Clapper Brennan and Ashton wanted him fired asap. He was also widely reported to have met with Durham very early on - there were MSM reports on this in late 2019 before the IG report came down.

  4. The Durham as SCO scenario raises the height of the speed bump, but I disagree that there would be political consequences. There SHOULD be consequences, sure, but there won't be. That's just not how the game is played.

    If they're really not ready to issue indictments, then so be it. But if they're concerned about the politics, then they're just wrong. The Dems invented a crime to prevent Trump's election and then maneuvered the SCO to take him down, all for politics. There's just no avoiding it.

    1. That would be my fear.

      In recent days Biden declared that the public doesn't deserve to know his views on court packing. Today he declared his candidacy for the Senate--apparently in Ohio, where he was speaking. Any other candidacy would be ended by that. No longer. We're in banana republic territory with the MSM.

    2. "The political consequences of taking such action could be quite high."
      "I disagree that there would be political consequences" (for firing of an SC?).

      Yeah, the political consequences would be trivial, in an environment effectively dominated by antiFa/ BLM.
      The only blowback with any clout would be from Sil. Valley, in the unlikely event that SV felt like/ dared to spank the DS, for reasons we could only guess at.

    3. "...if they're concerned about the politics, then they're just wrong."

      I share that view. The Demorats have already openly declared what their intentions are:
      2) Start packing the SCOTUS.
      3) End the filibuster.
      4) Make ballot harvesting the law of the land.
      5) Engage in open lawfare against all dissenters.
      6) Nat'l hate-crime legislation specifically to criminalize "white-supremacy" rhetoric and organizations, "partnering" with Silicon Valley.
      7) Mandatory "diversity" training in all work places, schools, and religious organizations with required certified plans for rooting out "racism/bigotry".
      8) Nat'l red-flag laws and "voluntary" buyback programs.
      9) A nat'l police force to enforce compliance with 6, 7, and 8 above.
      10) Nat'l energy compliance laws to phase out individual luxury (heating and cooling) and transportation waste (entertainment/media excepted).
      11) Dismiss the Electoral College.

      No I didn't forget number one
      1) End the Barr/Durham subversion and make it disappear, day one.

      Socialist theory of democracy applies, always: One man, one vote, one time. Or, as the bug-a-loo meme sez, "You can vote your way into genocide, but you can't vote your way out." Unfortunately both of those imply a level of honesty and integrity that the Democrat Party has in no way demonstrated an interest in displaying.
      Tom S.

    4. "Vote early and often".
      "you can't vote your way out."
      Endlösung der DeplorablesFrage.

  5. First of all, Trump is going to win big. Even if he doesn't, once Durham gets indictments, the train will have already left the station.

    1. "the train will have already left the station."
      Not necessarily, depending on what that means here.

      Failing all else, Biden could commute/ pardon all perps, and be thereafter nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize (to lavish acclaim from the Establishment/ MSM, who would then cordially invite the Deplorables to commit Seppuku).
      Unless the Deplorables then display massive Resistance, the Left will likely conclude that, indeed, the time has come, for an Endlösung der DeplorablesFrage.

    2. For the Democrats the only rule is power. There will be no incentive for them to honor an indictment when they are beavering away at the more important task of "fundamentally transforming" America, for real this time. The last four years have frightened them too much. They are not going to take a chance on subtlety again.
      Tom S.

    3. "four years have frightened them too much. They are not going to take a chance on subtlety...."
      Not so much frightened, as enraged, that the Deplorables dared to do anything other, than abase themselves before the SJW onslaught.

  6. "... in full view for the public to see."

    Seen by everyone who reads this blog, Conservative Treehouse, Redstate, (maybe) Breitbart, and (big maybe) Fox News. The rest of the public will never learn about it from the MSM, Facebook, or Google, since it will be classified as hate speech.

    If I had to make only one criticism of President Trump, it wouldn't be about his personality or his tweets. It would be about the fact that he would not (or could not) do what was necessary to resolve the situation and protect the country. In fairness, maybe nobody could have done it.

  7. I'll admit--a nation that could elect Joe Biden, who can't remember from one day to the next what office he's 'running' for, is one that could ignore just about any constitutional abomination.

  8. Maybe there is a simple reason Durham can't pull the trigger before the election... Binden's inner circle is going to be indicted.

  9. FWIW, as of today

    Joe Biden has 10.9 million followers on Twitter.

    Donald Trump has 87.2 million followers on Twitter.

    1. And how many of those are GOPers looking for gaffes?

  10. If Biden wins AND a special council is named THEn I believe it will lock up Biden’s Presidency for 2+ years.

    1. "it will lock up Biden’s Presidency...."
      No, any SC who goes near there, will be systematically sabotaged/ neutered, e.g. by career DoJ staff.

  11. Winning is becoming a relative proposition.

    This level of organization is what neutralizes the possibility of using the, probably, superior firepower of the Right. Years of organizing/gaming, a definite, if opaque, hierarchy, and a focused goal. There's nothing to shoot unless you're willing to go full-on fratricide and start shooting family, friends, neighbors, or total strangers for their yard-signs, bumper-stickers, or you just don't like the cut of their jib.

    While some may be willing to start that kind of action, it is not something that can be left "at the office". Once someone pulls the trigger, literally, it can't be unpulled. No sane person wants to step out and find themselves the only person/group acting. The tactics of the other side foreclose an Alamo event. No one wants to be remembered as a mere criminal.

    The Right has no organizing hierarchy, no group goals--other than normalcy, which the other side is specifically organized to deny--and nothing like a plan of how to reconstitute our Shangrila. A rational person is left with the prospect of merely engaging in a murderous rampage to no good end. 99% will demur,the other side then achieves their goal by default.

    Tocqueville will be generally proven right. We shackled ourselves, not because we thought the end of the chain was held by our fellow citizen; but because we assumed planning for resistance to be someone else's job.
    Tom S.

    1. Go after the funding sources and leadership in that order. The question of necessary intestinal fortitude to do that is separate.

    2. Organizations like the one above are designed specifically to obscure, confuse, or mask financiers and hierarchy. Tax laws, charity organizing/donation/financial management laws mitigate against discovery/culpability (funny how they just happen to be written to facilitate that). Layers upon layers and endless dead-ends. Going to send Granny to prison, or the firing-squad, because she checked a charity box on her Modern Crochet subscription renewal? If Barr thinks he can get it unraveled then more power to him. The whole mechanism has too many moving parts that mesh together too perfectly for it to be serendipity.

      On the other hand, A functioning, well oiled, machine is much easier to dismantle, once the pattern of connectivity is perceived, than a calamitous pile of junk.
      Tom S.

    3. "The Right has no organizing hierarchy, no group goals--other than normalcy...."
      Insofar as that is so, we're then left with formal or informal secession
      The informal version will involve cops etc. Going Fetal.
      Those cops, who touch so much as a pinkie of a black, will be spun by the MSM as if that black is the new Emmett Till, and will be deluged with federal civil rights charges.
      Quite quickly, other cops will get The Message.

      Other Deplorables will likewise see, that them still doing the phsical work they've always done, will just support a system that hates them.
      Let the Special Snowflakes start to dirty-up their fingernails, or demonstrate near the estates of Pelosi, Bezos, Oprah etc.
      A likely answer from those tycoons would be, to try to impose an Orwellian/ Huxley-style Superstate.

    4. @Tom S

      If I understand you, you're saying that civil wars are messy things and, at this stage, the 'normies' are underprepared...

      I've been seeing more and more suggestions that we are headed towards more violence regardless of the election outcome. Since we've really never been there in my lifetime (with the possible exception of 1968), I'm not sure exactly how things would escalate.

      If I had to guess, though, as of today, I would say the violence will escalate through increasing confrontations between armed groups on the hard left and hard right in downtowns. I can't really see suburban shootouts across backyard barbecue pits...yet.

      So...What do you foresee?

    5. Cass, I just got back from out & about, so here are preliminary thoughts.
      "escalate... confrontations.... in downtowns".
      Maybe it'll remain small-arms skirmishes, but so much will hinge, on the specs of the political situation, what strategic objectives the two sides may have, their *logistic*/ interdiction options, and their (commo/ ECM etc.) capacity (esp. to convey those objectives/ deployment options to their troops).

      If, say, DJT can keep/ get control of the bulk of DoD units, key comd. centers, server farms, and provisions stockpiles, he'll have the option of moving to defeat any (mostly urban) rebellions in detail, often by just starving them out (if he dare go that route).
      If the Dems get control of some such key installations, the Right may still likely have the option, of trying to give Dem cities logistic fits, by frequent interdiction of food supply convoys.
      A more cautious approach for Righties could be, to
      construct Redoubts, from which guerilla raids could harass various targets.
      In the world's first hyper-JIT economy, logistics- interdiction could easily make one side or the other run out of gas, such that this war could be a very short one.

    6. Further thoughts, mostly on surveillance/ Intel:
      A Redoubt is only as good, as its comdrs' ability to hide its noise.
      AntiFa/ BLM attacks on the burbs, of any real size, should be interdictable by a DoJ/ DoD under DJT's control.
      And, even a short war would likely kill tens of millions.
      Do Hillary, SparkleFarts etc. crave power so much, that they'll roll for snake-eyes, to seek power to torment Deplorables, at such a cost?
      Or dare they not, to think of such prospects?

    7. Whereas, such prospects will be very indeed, for DJT and his backers.

    8. @ Cassander

      Sorry to be tardy, but better late than never.

      1) The U.S. has never experienced a full on civil war, with the exception of western Missouri, circa 1860 – 1866.
      2) The controlling Agenda has been in progress for a very long time. The sudden balking of the American people, manifested in Trump’s election, has caused a disruption in timeline and procession, but has in no way deterred the Executive Agenda. They have adapted and are nowhere near defeat.
      3) “…the 'normies' are underprepared... .“ It isn’t that their unprepared as much as unaware. The Agenda, generally, is to have the gov’t handed over intact. The Antifa/BLM tools in the streets only think that they are part of a movement to throw down the established order when in reality they are being used as leverage to cement the established order. Trump is the only real revolutionary on the field.
      4) Short term there will be a simulacrum of normalcy, but with enough violence and chaos to keep the population on edge and feeling the need for more stability.
      5) There will be no civil war, certainly not in the sense that aNanyMouse indicates. The Executive will only allow Antifa/BLM so much leash. An occasional one-on-one shooting perhaps, but nothing that requires or justifies total collapse in trust in gov’t. If some Deplorable leaning militia does something dumb and allows itself to be maneuvered into a mass shooting incident then that will be very very good for the Agenda. Obviously Deplorables must be disarmed and many Deplorables, probably a majority, will agree, depending on how outrageous the media can paint the incident to be. They very nearly got their dream in WI but it turned out to be only one kid, not a discernible militia, and there weren’t enough casualties, particularly women and children, to give the narrative the inertia it required to be self-perpetuating. The FBI may have tried to add fuel to the narrative in MI.
      6) I believe what the Antifa orcs are saying. As far as they are concerned there will never be peace, ever.
      7) The Executive wants absolute control, not the mess that will ensue if there is complete collapse, much less a civil war. They don’t want to turn things upside-down: they just want to own it all. They will boil the frog until the Deplorables get tired of resisting, forget what they were resisting for, or are marginalized to the point or irrelevance. Once they own it all they will deal with their tools in due course.

      Maybe right, maybe wrong; that’s how I see the immediate situation. My long term prognostication is much grimmer.
      Tom S.

    9. Tom, do you mind if I use your comment as part of a post? A major part, that it?

    10. Use it as you will. I take a "bless and release it" view of posting.
      Tom S.

  12. If biden wins i'm moving back to the "Big Island". Hawaii is still paradise even if its blue.

  13. However if Biden wins he will have access to the investigation, even if shutting it down would be problematic. So any targets that haven't been warned... will be. Timing is everything when your opponent's ethics... aren't.

  14. Seems noteworthy

    Flashback: In 2005 Biden Refers to Unmasking Requests as ‘Spying’

    Shorter version: Joe Biden calling out John Bolton for spying and unmasking Americans