At Red State there's an article that draws on Michael Goodwin, columnist at the NYPost who's been all over the Cuomo story, to outline the increasing legal jeopardy that Cuomo is facing:
Are the Walls Finally Closing in Around Andrew Cuomo? NY Post's Michael Goodwin Nails It
The problem that Cuomo is facing is that his closest aides are now receiving subpoenas to produce official documents as well as to testify. Some of these subpoenas are coming as a result of the FBI investigation into the nursing home deaths. Here are two key paragraphs:
The subpoenas, which include demands for testimony and documents, are coming as the result of an FBI investigation into whether Cuomo illegally withheld nursing home fatalities from the Department of Justice and an investigation by the office of Democrat Attorney General Letitia James into the numerous sexual harassment allegations. For those of you keeping score at home, the number of accusers now stands at nine.
The FBI probe presents greater legal jeopardy for Cuomo, because “the prospect of criminal conduct is more pronounced, wrote Goodwin: “There is no doubt Cuomo’s team lied about nursing home deaths and withheld the truth by changing an official Health Department report.” Goodwin laid out one scenario in which a Cuomo aide could throw the governor under the bus in a heartbeat.
In Covid news, or perhaps in Authoritarian Government news:
Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down statewide mask mandate
Basically, the WISC said that "the governor did not have the authority to extend the state's public health emergency beyond 60 days without approval from the legislature." It's good to see government by executive decree finally being challenged in some states.
Finally, Steve Sailer reveals where much of "Wokism" is coming from. It's a good illustration of why philosophy--or ideology, at any rate--actually matters.
New Accusations Against Po-Mo Philosopher Michel Foucault
It's worth noting that the leading lights of the related phenomenon of the Frankfurt School of Cultural Marxism were almost uniformly perverts as well. Sailer quotes an earlier article he wrote on the same topic:
In arguing for the legalization of boy bothering, Foucault never quite gets around to claiming that age is just a social construct, but that’s the mood music.
How much of Foucault’s vast intellectual enterprise of denouncing categorization of individuals as possessing distinct identities was intended to undermine the legal category of children too young to consent? Did Foucault happen to dream up his ideas first and only then realize that his logic proved that it should be legal for him to have sex with boys? Or did he want to have sex with boys first and then dreamt up his vast system of justification?
Foucault himself once said:
In a sense, all the rest of my life I’ve been trying to do intellectual things that would attract beautiful boys.
Foucault was an evil man.
But he was right about something: that power helps you control discourse and controlling discourse helps you have power.
Today, though, it’s Foucault’s fans who have the whip hand.
Mollie Hemingway has an article about Durham... chugging along, giving out subpoenas and interviewing witnesses...ReplyDelete
What's funny is the tweets from everyone in response
It's not Mollie's article.Delete
The article is pretty vague. Why did they wait till ow to supposedly issue subpoenas for docs? Covid? Huh?
Mollie Hemingway links to a Washington Examiner article, which links to a CNN article, titled John Durham is looking at FBI's launch of Trump campaign probe, sources say, published on March 30.Delete
The CNN article seems to be informed largely by people (or those people's lawyers) who were questioned recently by Durham's team.
The CNN article includes this paragraph:
Some witnesses have also been asked about how materials from Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence official who produced a dossier alleging that Trump was compromised by Russian ties, made it to FBI investigators from a law firm working for the Democratic Party, according to a person familiar briefed on the interviews.
This paragraph indicates to me that Durham's team is investigating Michael Gaeta, the FBI official stationed at the US Embassy in Rome, who received Dossier reports and sent them to the USA. Gaeta sent some of the reports to the FBI's New York Field Office, where they were hidden in file cabinets of the Chief Division Counsel.
Some reports, however, were sent directly to the Counterintelligence office at FBI Headquarters. How and when and by whom were those reports sent there? And were that sending and receipt of those reports denied to Inspector General Horowitz?
Gaeta's sending of Dossier reports to the NYFO's Chief Division Counsel was, I think, a ruse.
I think and hope Durham will reveal Gaeta really was working directly for the Counterintelligence office, that some Dossier reports were sent to the NYFO as a ruse and that the FBI Inspector General was deceived.
a CNN article, titled John Durham is looking at FBI's launch of Trump campaign probe, sources say