The FBI didn't ask if he had gotten sober, as a court directed him to do, before concocting his Trump Tales.Andrea Widburg at AmThink offers Help for those struggling to understand the immensity of the Russia hoax. Unfortunately the people who fail to understand the immensity aren't even trying, let alone struggling.
Who knew that you could research the links between the Kremlin and a New York real estate magnate just by going to the local dive bar you always go to?
Who knew that a convicted sloppy drunk's and likely hardcore alcoholic's preferred booze shooting gallery just happened to also be a hang-out for International Contacts with Deep Ties to the Kremlin and as many Free Peanuts as You Can Eat?
This guy was repeatedly prosecuted for public drunkenness and disorderly conduct, and ordered to seek both sobriety and mental health counseling, and the FBI didn't think it should be noted that his "Trump rumors" came from his alcoholic Russian dregs.
The Deep State’s machinations in trying, first, to prevent Trump’s election and, second, to undo it are confusing. It’s easy to get lost in a sea of names, many of them Russian or Ukrainian; dates that stretch out over several years; almost unlimited lies; and the complicated truths behind those lies. The Russia hoax isn’t an easy-to-learn bumper sticker; it’s a full Russian novel.Related, Capt. Ed at Hot Air, Turley Wonders: Why Are Media Outlets Uninterested In A Modern Watergate?, also Graham: The FBI Lied About The Steele Dossier To Congress In 2018 — And “Somebody Needs To Go To Jail” "Stay tuned next week. You’re going to find, not only did the FBI lie to the FISA court. They lied their ass off to the Congress." Also, Dan Chaitin at WaEx, Ex-Flynn deputy KT McFarland: John Durham has 'cold, hard evidence' that will lead to indictments. Yes, but can he convict in a D.C. courtroom? Another reason to move the nation's capital to Fargo, ND.
If you’re trying to explain to your leftist friends that Trump did not collude with the Russians and, instead, that the Deep State, working with the mainstream media, intentionally and deliberately engaged in a long-running coup against Trump, good luck. Within about 20 sentences, their eyes will glaze over, and they’ll tell you that you sound like a raving conspiracy theorist.
It’s irrelevant to them that you can back up every statement with documentary proof and under-oath admissions from within the FBI. Complicated facts don’t work for a New York Times audience with a short attention span that’s captured only by stories that begin, “Orange man bad….”
Enter Professor Lipson. With lucid prose, he explains exactly what you need to know to understand the immensity of the Russia hoax. This post offers just a few introductory paragraphs from his article at The Bridge (a publication of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University). It’s up to you to click the link and read the article in its entirety. After you do, you will not be confused but will, instead, have a sound understanding of the blatant crimes and immoral conduct in which government bureaucrats engaged.
“Now, there is cold, hard evidence. It turns out that these senior officials in the intelligence community and the FBI, they all took notes. They all texted each other. They all had handwritten notes of meetings,” McFarland said on Monday. “And from what I'm hearing, the Durham investigation and the Justice Department is getting to the point where I think we can expect some indictments before the end of the summer."Elad Hakim at Da Fed Why John Durham Should Release His Spygate Findings Before November. If the Democrats get it, they won't be shy about shutting it all down. All that bullshit about not interfering in investigations, is just that, bullshit. When the shoe is on the other foot, they won't hesitate to bring the boot heel down on the neck of justice.
Attorney General William Barr appointed Durham more than a year ago to investigate misconduct by federal law enforcement and intelligence officials during the Russia investigation. The Justice Department has signaled that it expects "developments" in Durham's investigation by the end of the summer.
Historically, the Department of Justice has refrained from taking any action for partisan purposes. As reported in Just Security:Today, Bill Barr has been called before the House to testify (remember, they impeached him) and Breitbart expects AG Barr to Nuke House Democrats: Covering Up for ‘Russiagate,’ Demonizing Police or as the slanted Wapoo puts it, Barr plans to mount a defiant defense of Trump in showdown with House Democrats. Sundance at CTH take time out of his busy schedule to post his opening statement in Attorney General Bill Barr Releases Opening Statement to House Judiciary Committee… Sounds promising:
. . .
Apparently, this policy has been interpreted so broadly as to prohibit conduct that could even suggest the appearance of partisanship.
While this policy makes sense overall, it does not make sense in this case for several compelling reasons. First, there is no evidence that Durham’s investigation is partisan in nature or that it is being conducted for partisan political purposes like the Michael Flynn and Roger Stone investigations. Durham’s investigation began long ago and well before Americans were seriously thinking about the 2020 elections.
Second, the purpose of Durham’s investigation appears to align with the department’s mission. Specifically, through his investigation, Durham is seeking to protect the integrity of the election process in the United States. More particularly, Durham is investigating whether one or more people were involved in a plot to sabotage a presidential candidate or to overthrow a duly elected president.
We are in a time when the political discourse in Washington often reflects the politically divided nation in which we live, and too often drives that divide even deeper. Political rhetoric is inherent in our democratic system, and politics is to be expected by politicians, especially in an election year. While that may be appropriate here on Capitol Hill or on cable news, it is not acceptable at the Department of Justice. At the Department, decisions must be made with no regard to political pressure—pressure from either end of Pennsylvania Avenue, or from the media or mobs.Julie Kelly at AmGreat reports that, fresh off his settlement with WaPoo, Sandmann Lawyer Agrees to Represent Carter Page. Ace, Nick Sandman's Lawyer, "Lawyer for the Damned" Lin Wood: I've Signed On to Sue the Shit Out of Carter Page's False Accusers
Ever since I made it clear that I was going to do everything I could to get to the bottom of the grave abuses involved in the bogus “Russiagate” scandal, many of the Democrats on this Committee have attempted to discredit me by conjuring up a narrative that I am simply the President’s factotum who disposes of criminal cases according to his instructions. Judging from the letter inviting me to this hearing, that appears to be your agenda today. So let me turn to that first.
As I said in my confirmation hearing, the Attorney General has a unique obligation. He holds in trust the fair and impartial administration of justice. He must ensure that there is one standard of justice that applies to everyone equally and that criminal cases are handled even-handedly, based on the law and the facts, and without regard to political or personal considerations.I can tell you that I have handled criminal matters that have come to me for decision in this way
Update: Lin Wood announces that CNN and the Washington Post are in breach of its settlements -- which included confidentially clauses -- by permitting its idiot "contributors" and actual employees to comment on the case.
This tweet by @MrDanZak may have cost him his job as a journalist at @washingtonpost It is called breach of confidentiality agreement. Dan Zak is a liar. I know how to deal with liars. pic.twitter.com/hIolaRx804— Lin Wood (@LLinWood) July 27, 2020
RCP, OAN News Report: Court Filing Shows Hunter Biden Earned $156 Million From Ukraine Corruption. Coke, hookers and paternity settlements don't grow on trees, after all.This retweet by @brianstelter may have cost him his job at @CNN. It is called breach of confidentiality agreement. Brian Stelter is a liar. I know how to deal with liars. pic.twitter.com/1VHxby9gim— Lin Wood (@LLinWood) July 27, 2020
Linked at 357 Magnum in Wednesday Link Roundup.