Monday, June 18, 2018

Round and Round with Russiagate

More Horowitzmas fallout. National Review Editors (not a pro-Trump group as a rule): Yes, There Was FBI Bias
It’s only Horowitz’s extremely forgiving standard for judging investigative decisions that allows him to say that the impact of bias on the Clinton investigation is inconclusive. This is not to dismiss the usefulness of the IG’s report. It reaffirms that the president had ample legitimate grounds to dismiss Director Comey, who is shown to be insubordinate and deceptive, a self-absorbed law unto himself. Furthermore, the IG’s equivocation about the role of bias does not detract from his powerful condemnation of the disrepute rogue agents have brought on the bureau. Still, there is important work left to be done in fully accounting for the decisions of an FBI whose reputation won’t soon recover from its performance in 2016.
If a doctor told you he hated you and wanted you dead, you might consider looking elsewhere for your heart surgeon.

James S. Robbins, USA Today: Justice Dept. email report proves anti-Donald Trump/pro-Hillary Clinton bias. James Bovard, USA Today: Inspector general's report on FBI and Clinton's emails shows secrecy threatens democracy Worse, it threatens our republic. The Editorial Board, USA Today: FBI and Justice Department have gravely damaged credibility when we need them most. As Charles DeGaul is reputed to have said, the graveyards are full of indispensable men. That also applies to agencies, who unfortunately have a longer lifespan. Even their readers: Readers sound off: No bias on the part of FBI, Comey? Not buying it

Which is the greater threat to our democracy: An FBI run by hubris-laden leaders with disdain for time-honored rules of engagement that directs politically biased senior agents to run investigations, or a foreign country (Russia) that spends a tiny fraction of the total spent on the 2016 presidential election in an attempt to sway political opinion?

Russia reportedly spent about $100,000 on Facebook ads. Compare that monetary amount with the millions spent by Hillary Clinton’s and President Trump’s campaigns on Facebook during the election. The total spending on all 2016 presidential and congressional campaigns exceeded $6 billion.

Even if Russia spent several million dollars, only the most fevered Clinton fans would ascribe her loss to Russian interference.
Michael Goodwin at the New York Post:  FBI head proves Washington has a vendetta against Trump
The mystery of leaks is a mystery no more. The FBI was a giant faucet.

Except to Christopher Wray, who acted as if the disturbing findings were just another day at the office. While saying the report shows “we’ve got some work to do,” he stressed its limited scope.

“It’s focused on a specific set of events back in 2016, and a small number of FBI employees connected with those events,” he said. “Nothing in the report impugns the integrity of our workforce as a whole, or the FBI as an institution.”

Right, and otherwise Mrs. Lincoln, did you enjoy the play?
I say give him more time. At least a week. If the firings haven't commenced by then, Wray needs to be asigned to the coast defense of Wyoming.  Mark Levin: “FBI interfered with the election worse than the Russians could have ever dreamed of doing!”  Brandon J. Weichert at American Greatness: The Deep State is Winning. But the fat lady hasn't even warmed up.

Peter Strzok to testify? Bring it on!
According to the Washington Post, Strzok’s attorney, Aitan Goelman, sent House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) a letter Sunday revealing his client is ready to tell his side of the story and potentially “clear his name.”

Goelman said Strzok is willing to testify without immunity and would not invoke his Fifth Amendment rights in response to any question from a member of Congress. He also said Strzok is willing to testify before any committee that requests him.

“He thinks that his position, character and actions have all been misrepresented and caricatured, and he wants an opportunity to remedy that,” Goelman said.

“Pete is central to this story. We should let the American people see who he really is,” he added in comments to CNN.
Mark Penn, da Hill: James Comey's higher disloyalty to America. Jennifer Palmieri, Washington Post: Comey made the same error everyone made — assuming he knew who’d win. She's not a fan. Rex Murphy, National Post: Comey, Clinton are proof that it's egotism that corrupts completely.
Actually, the attitude behind those previous quotations, which is found in yet so many more from the report, is the really significant message, the big “tell” of the IG report. They know what’s best. They will tailor things for what they see as the “right” outcome. They, and they alone, are the enlightened. Those who think differently are “pieces of sh-t.” It’s not that they were going to “stop it.” It’s that they thought they had the right to stop it.

This is corruption. Not the corruption of money. The corruption of unfathomable, reckless moral egotism

And in all that basket of contempt and self-righteousness, who’s at the pinnacle, the chief Pharisee of the lot? James Comey. He has presided over a biased, democracy-defying FBI. He has used his position, in secret, to set the terms of the game. He went from judicious public servant to self-appointed master.
Allahpundit at Hot Air: Rudy: No, This IG Report On Emailgate Doesn’t Exonerate Trump, No but it tainted most of the people who started the Russian investigation

Lee Smith, American Greatness: Tying Hillary’s Emails to the Russian ‘Collusion’ Probe. Sundance at the Conservative Tree House: IG Report: Peter Strzok Statements About Weiner/Abedin Laptop Conflict With FBI Claims About Weiner/Abedin Laptop… and  IG Report: FBI Lawyer #1 Tashina Gauhar and The Huma/Weiner Laptop Issues…
Every intellectually honest person reading knows the MYE team didn’t investigate the laptop because they didn’t want to re-open the investigation; and the FBI team (Via McCabe, Page, Strzok and Tashina Gauhar) figured it could simply be avoided.  However, the IG cannot prove that, because the participants deny it.   So the IG can only disprove the FBI assertions and excuses…. and he did.  But that leaves the FBI getting away with the corrupt part of it…. and leaves all of us frustrated, again.
Kelly Cohen at the Washington Examiner: Trey Gowdy: GOP will hit DOJ, FBI with ‘full arsenal’ to get documents. Until you're willing to put someone in the clink for contempt, they will continue to hold you in contempt.

A new example of the FBI fishing for dirty in the Trump campaign, or another Russian approach? Or I guess it could be both simultaneously. WaPo: Trump associate Roger Stone reveals new contact with Russian national during 2016 campaign.  Jacquiline Thompson, at da Hill: Roger Stone: Russian wanted Trump to pay $2M for dirt on Clinton during the campaign. Trouble is, the guy has a history as an FBI informant. What are the chances
Interviews and additional documents show that Greenberg has at times used the name Henry Oknyansky. Under that name, he claimed in a 2015 court filing related to his immigration status that he had provided information to the FBI for 17 years. He attached records showing that the government had granted him special permission to enter the United States because his presence represented a “significant public benefit.”

There is no evidence that Greenberg was working with the FBI in his interactions with Stone, and in his court filing, Greenberg said he had stopped his FBI cooperation sometime after 2013.
But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. He could also just be a con man independently trying to make 2 million bucks. FBI informants tend not to be the cleanest of people.

WaPo: ‘Prepared for war’: As Mueller moves to finalize obstruction report, Trump’s allies ready for political battle.
If the president agreed to a sit-down, the special counsel has told Trump’s lawyers that he could finish within roughly 90 days a report on whether Trump sought to obstruct a probe into Russian interference in the 2016 campaign, according to two people familiar with the discussions. A separate report outlining Mueller’s broader findings on Russian attempts to bolster Trump’s candidacy is expected to take longer.
It's hard to imagine Mueller having a credible argument for obstruction in firing Comey. It's too obvious he was a bad leader. That's the only excuse Trump needed. I can see him wanting to protect his legacy, but it's way too late for that. He just wants to drag it out until after the midterms.

Justin Caruso: Da Caller: Dershowitz Explodes On MSNBC: Locking Up Manafort Before A Trial Is ‘So Obnoxious To Our Constitution’
“He has never been convicted of anything. He is as innocent as you and I. And the idea of locking somebody up before a trial is so obnoxious to our Constitution that every civil libertarian should be up in arms. What they can do if they think that he’s tampering with witnesses is: they can subject him to home arrest, take away his computer … they can have all kinds of restrictions, but the idea of putting somebody in jail before they’ve been convicted is an enactment of civil liberties” he said.
And for our minute of comedy, how about Comey/Daniels or Daniels/Comey in 2020! Monica Showalter at the American Thinker: James Comey is running for president. Tamar Auber, Mediaite: James Comey’s Weird Post From a Field in Iowa Has Twitter Abuzz About a Potential 2020 Run. Morgan Greene, Chicago Tribune: In Chicago, Stormy Daniels muses: 'Should I run for president?' You laugh, but after Donald Trump?

No comments:

Post a Comment