Trump Undermined

For John, BLUF:  It isn't a Democracy if the outgoing Administration is undermining the incoming Administration.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Biden and Other Obama Officials Sought to ‘Torpedo’ Incoming Trump Admin, Docs Show

From PJ Media, by Opinionator Matt Margolis, 10 July 2023, 1:36 PM.

Here is the lede plus one:

According to heavily redacted documents from the National Security Agency obtained by The Daily Signal, there was a coordinated effort by the outgoing Obama administration to “torpedo the incoming presidency of Donald Trump.”

Through a Freedom of Information Act request, The Daily Signal acquired 217 pages of documents.

“The documents reveal that Obama administration officials, from Vice President Joe Biden down to several ambassadors and many officials in the Treasury and Energy departments, gained access to secret information about Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, President-elect Trump’s choice for national security adviser,” the report says.  “The documents obtained by The Daily Signal include raw information of requests and other messages from these officials to the National Security Agency in late November 2016 through early January 2017, as well as emails among NSA officials explaining why the information was shared.”

I had known about actions within the FBI to fight a Trump Presidency.  That was obvious, with FBI Director Saint James Comey and the likes of Agent Peter Strozk and Lawyer Lisa Page.  This corruption, however, I believe was greater than those three.  More widespread.  To higher reaches.

We need to get back to the President being OUR President.  Regardless of his or her party.  It is what makes the system work.  If you didn't like the November outcome, work harder in the next election.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Prosecutorial Misconduct

For John, BLUF:  The Department of Justice is working hard to convict Presidential Candidate Donsald J Trump of somesthing.  Maybe too hard.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

If Alleged DOJ Misconduct Is True, A Judge Could Dismiss The Whole Case Against Trump

Here is the sub-headline:

The conduct claimed is perhaps unprecedented and certainly flagrant.  If proven true, the judge would be well within her rights to consider dismissal.

From The Federalist, by Former Federal Prosecutor Will Scharf, 5 July 2023.

Here is the lede plus two:

Lost in the breathless headlines over the indictment of President Trump for alleged violations of the Espionage Act is a story that deserves much more attention than it has received thus far: the allegation that a senior official at the Department of Justice attempted to shake down Trump’s co-defendant’s lawyer.  It is a scandal in the making that could result in the investigation of senior DOJ officials, which should lead to public congressional hearings, and that might even result in the entire case against Trump being dismissed.

Trump’s co-defendant is Waltine “Walt” Nauta, a Navy valet who served in Trump’s White House and who remained a personal aide to Trump after he left office.  Several weeks ago, Nauta’s lawyer, a distinguished, highly-regarded Washington attorney named Stanley Woodward, leveled accusations against senior members of the Department of Justice, including DOJ Counterintelligence Chief Jay Bratt, who is now a part of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team of prosecutors.  According to news reports, Woodward claimed in a sealed letter to D.C. District Chief Judge James Boasberg that, in a meeting to discuss Nauta’s case, Bratt indicated that Woodward’s application to be a D.C. Superior Court judge could be impacted if he could not get Nauta to testify against Trump.

If true, and I see no reason why Woodward would make such a threat up — and especially no reason why Woodward would risk his career by making such a representation to a federal judge — Bratt’s alleged misconduct could result in heavy sanctions, and is a potential ground for dismissal of the entire case against Nauta and Trump.  Depending on what exactly was said, Bratt could even face criminal prosecution himself.

Presidential Candidate Donald J Trump has a lot of flaws.  I am reading about some of them in Commander in Cheat, a 2020 book mailed to me by my buddy, Juan.  However, it is up to the Voters to decide if Mr Trump's flaws are greater than those of his opponent.  In 2016 they said no.  In 2020 they said yes.

Comparing candidates is the job of the Voters  It is not the job of the US Department of Justice.  We went through that with Saint James Comey, who took it upon himself to save the nation and the world.  We, the Voters, do not need that kind of help.  If Mr Trump broke some law, fine, go after him.  However, let us have no DOJ intervention to "save" the nation (or President Joe Biden).

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Politics at the Highest Level

For John, BLUF:  Ms Clinton may have done it (Russiagate), but that doesn't mean we go after her in the legal realm.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

CLINTON DID IT, WSJ EDITION

From Powerline Blog, Mr Scott Johnson, 23 May 2022.

Here is the lede plus one:

I took the occasion of the testimony in the Sussman trial last week to weigh “Watergate in the balance.” John reviewed what we already knew in “Hillary did it.” On Saturday, the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal — I think this is Kim Strassel’s beat as a member of the board — plays it straight in the editorial “Hillary Clinton did it.”

The Journal editorial lays out the template of the Russia hoax, minus the active participation of the FBI in pursuing the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, promoting the Steele Dossier in the FISA court and the Comey briefing of Trump as well as the conditions that led to the crippling Mueller investigation. We should probably add the setup of Michael Flynn, the incredibly fruitful “collusion” of the FBI and congressional Democrats with the prestige press, and a few other items, but here are the basics of the Russia hoax in its Alfa Bank iteration:

I am all for taking the campaign staff to trial, to deter breaking the law.  That said, going after the principal, Ms Clinton, Mr Trump, Mr Obama, Mr McCain, and so on, reduces us to the status of a Banana Republic.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Free and Fair Elections

For John, BLUF:  President Biden seems to think that the Republican Party, which fought for 100 years for the rights of Black People to vote, has turned into the Democratic Party of the Old South.  He is sadly, and damagingly mistaken.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Biden Says 2022 Election “Could Easily Be Illegitimate”

Here is the sub-headline:

“Oh, yeah, I think it could easily be illegitimate … The increase in the prospect of being illegitimate is in proportion to not being able to get these reforms passed.”

From Legal Insurrection, by Professor William A. Jacobson, 19 January 2022, 07:00pm.

Here is the lede plus two:

oe Biden is setting the stage for Democrats to claim 2022 wins by Republicans would be illegitimate, based on the false claims of voting suppression that even CNN said were lies, CNN Skewers Biden’s Voter Suppression Lies. Yes, CNN.

Democrats are using fearmongering about “the end of democracy” in order to try to nationalize election controls away from states and local governments to lower election integrity. Unless Democrats can bust the filibuster — and that looks like it’s not going to happen because Manchin and Sinema are holding firm — then the voting bill is dead. (That vote may happen tonight.)

Democrats are expecting to lose bigly in the 2022 elections, so of course, Biden preemptively is suggesting the 2022 elections may not be legitimate. That’s just how Biden framed it at his press conference today:

I admit I am a bit confused.  Is the Presidenet saying that the election two years ago may have been illegitimate?  I know Democrats questioned the 2016 Presidential Election.  At Least Ms Hillary Clinton stated that.

Or is it that certain states have been doing evil things, rolling back COVID Pandemic exceptions to our commonly accepted voting practices.  Since Politics is a negotiation, I would be happy to offer up some options in exchange for Voter ID and signatures on Mail-in Ballots.  Is there a deal to be had?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Wider Corruption

For John, BLUF:  Reporter Glenn Greenwald widens the view of the indictment of Lawyer Sussmann to expose the role of the Media in trying to overturn the 2016 Election.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Indictment of Hillary Clinton's Lawyer is an Indictment of the Russiagate Wing of U.S. Media

Here is the sub-headline:

The DOJ's new charging document, approved by Biden's Attorney General, sheds bright light onto the Russiagate fraud and how journalistic corruption was key.

From the Greenwald Substack, by Reporter Glenn Greenwald, 19 September 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

A lawyer for Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign was indicted on Wednesday with one felony count of lying to the FBI about a fraudulent Russiagate story he helped propagate.  Michael Sussman was charged with the crime by Special Counsel John Durham, who was appointed by Trump Attorney General William Barr to investigate possible crimes committed as part of the Russiagate investigation and whose work is now overseen and approved by Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Sussman's indictment, approved by Garland, is the second allegation of criminal impropriety regarding Russiagate's origins.   In January, Durham secured a guilty plea from an FBI agent, Kevin Clinesmith, for lying to the FISA court and submitting an altered email in order to spy on former Trump campaign official Carter Page.

The law firm where Sussman is a partner, Perkins Coie, is a major player in Democratic Party politics.  One of its partners at the time of the alleged crime, Marc Elias, has become a liberal social media star after having served as General Counsel to the Clinton 2016 campaign.  Elias abruptly announced that he was leaving the firm three weeks ago, and thus far no charges have been filed against him.

The lie that Sussman allegedly told the FBI occurred in the context of his mid-2016 attempt to spread a completely fictitious story:  that there was a "secret server” discovered by unnamed internet experts that allowed the Trump organization to communicate with Russia-based Alfa Bank.  In the context of the 2016 election, in which the Clinton campaign had elevated Trump's alleged ties to the Kremlin to center stage, this secret communication channel was peddled by Sussman — both to the FBI and to Clinton-friendly journalists — as smoking-gun proof of nefarious activities between Trump and the Russians.  Less than two months prior to the 2016 election, Sussman secured a meeting at the FBI's headquarters with the Bureau's top lawyer, James Baker, and provided him data which he claimed proved this communication channel.

Reporter Glenn Greenwald says what needs to be said.

It seems that when I begin to soften on Donald J Trump, more news comes out, showing that a) there is a swamp and b) the Democrats are into the swamp up above theiir Wellies and c) there is a need to drain the swamp.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Sussmann Indictment Could Go Either Way

For John, BLUF:  Blogger Ed Morrissey is no stranger to government scandle.  In the early days of blogging his blog, Captain's Cabin, helped bring down a Canadian government.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Sussmann indictment:  "Bizarre coda," or harbinger of deep-state exposure?  Update:  Watch Sullivan?

From Hot Air, by Blogger Ed Morrissey, 20 September 2021, 2:41 PM ET.

Here is the lede plus two:

Just what does the indictment of Michael Sussmann portend? MSNBC’s Barbara McQuade called it a “bizarre coda” to John Durham’s investigation, which seems to be the most unlikely bet on this last-minute action by the special counsel.  To get there, McQuade tries to shift focus to an early-on debunked part of the overall-debunked Russia-collusion theory, and overlooks Sussmann’s links at the same time:

It is hard to see how the case Durham filed on Thursday against Washington lawyer Michael Sussmann meets Justice Department standards.  The indictment alleges that Sussmann met with FBI General Counsel Jim Baker in September 2016 to provide information about connections between a Russian bank and the Trump Organization.  The FBI was unable to substantiate any links between Alfa Bank and former President Donald Trump’s businesses, but the charge against Sussman — making false statements to the FBI — doesn’t allege that the substance of the information was false.  Instead, Sussman is accused of having misrepresented on whose behalf he was providing it.

Well, yes, and that misrepresentation turned out to be highly material.  Sussmann at the time represented the DNC and had been providing assistance to the Hillary Clinton campaign, a connection that Sussmnan kept hidden from the FBI.  Sussmann passed along the rumor that Vladimir Putin-connected Alfa Bank had a server dedicated to Donald Trump’s finances to Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele, which had the effect of laundering that claim right back into the Steele dossier.  He also passed that information to the FBI, without informing agents that he was working for Trump’s opponent at the time, as the indictment alleges:

At the end Mr Morrissey rings in President Biden's National current Security Advisor, Mr Jacob "Jake" Sullivan.

This looks ugly.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Finally, an Indictment

For John, BLUF:  I give Federal Attornet John Durham kudos for his persistence in tracking down the participants in the efforts to smear a Repoblican Candidate for President in 2016.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Media, the unindicted co-conspirators

From The Don Surber Blog, by Reporter Don Surber, 16 September 2021.

Here is the lede plus four:

Today, after 2 federal investigations covering 4 years, we finally have someone indicted for something related to Russiagate.

And it turns out to be the fellow who peddled the Russiagate Hoax.

The unindicted co-conspirators are CNN, Jake Tapper, Carl Bernstein, the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Pulitzer Committee which honored and vouched for the Post and the Times, and just about every political reporter and columnist in America.

So is anyone in the media going to apologize for lying for more than 4 years about Putin somehow fixing the 2016 election for Donald Trump?

Of course not.  I should save my breath.  But I breathe for the truth and have known from the get-go that Russiagate was BS.

Read the whole thing.  Not much to add.  Yes, it would be nice to hear some apologies.  I too am doubtful.

In the mean time, the statute of limitations expires this weekend, at least for the indicted Mr Michael Sussmann, from the Perkins Coie law firm, which previously represented the Democratic National Committee (DNC).  Indicted in the nick of time.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Past Nags At Us

For John, BLUF:  There is a bit of snarkiness about about Trump supporters who are questioning of the outcome of the 2020 election.  The texter Martyr Made talks to that issue in thirty some tweets.  It is something worth contemplating if we are really serious about bringing this nation back together.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

I think I've had discussions w/enough Boomer-tier Trump supporters who believe the 2020 election was fraudulent to extract a general theory about their perspective. It is also the perspective of most of the people at the Capitol on 1/6, and probably even Trump himself.

From Thread Reader, by MartyrMade (Darryl Cooper), 8 July 2021.

Here are items two through six (of 35):

Most believe some or all of the theories involving midnight ballots, voting machines, etc, but what you find when you talk to them is that, while they'll defend those positions w/info they got from Hannity or Breitbart or whatever, they're not particularly attached to them.

Here are the facts - actual, confirmed facts - that shape their perspective:  1) The FBI/etc spied on the 2016 Trump campaign using evidence manufactured by the Clinton campaign. We now know that all involved knew it was fake from Day 1 (see:  Brennan's July 2016 memo, etc).

These are Tea Party people. The types who give their kids a pocket Constitution for their birthday and have Founding Fathers memes in their bios.  The intel community spying on a presidential campaign using fake evidence (incl forged documents) is a big deal to them.

Everyone involved lied about their involvement as long as they could.  We only learned the DNC paid for the manufactured evidence because of a court order.  Comey denied on TV knowing the DNC paid for it, when we have emails from a year earlier proving that he knew.

This was true with everyone, from CIA Dir Brennan & Adam Schiff - who were on TV saying they'd seen clear evidence of collusion w/Russia, while admitting under oath behind closed doors that they hadn't - all the way down the line.  In the end we learned that it was ALL fake.

The story goes on from there.  Disappointed and delusioned voters across the fruited plain.  Not Democrats.  Trump supporters and those who voted for him back in 2020.

This is not an indictment of the 2020 election, although I understand the doubt.  For me the thing that strains credulity is the continuious assertions that there was no cheating, no fraud, that ideas to the contrary are just "right wing" hysteria.  Does anyone, anywhere, believe there has ever been a perfect election, aside from Matthias (Acts 1:26)?  In my Wife's words, and William Shakespeare's, they doth protest too much.  The assertion of a perfect election is so Trumpian, and so unconvincing.  Do I see President Biden being removed from office before his term is over?  No, I do not.  However, I would appreciate my Democratic Party friends not being so sanctimonious.  When the quants, and historians, finally figure out what happened in 2020, there might be some crow to be consumed.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Ignored Hinterland

For John, BLUF:  I looked at the photo in the article and it reminded me of a relative's home in Southwestern Pennsylvania, when we visited it in the Summer of 2016.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Trump didn't form a populist coalition.  He was the result of one

From The Washington Examiner, by Reporter Salena Zito, 18 April 2021, 12:00 AM.

Here is the lede plus three:

They're still there, planted in front of stately homes in wealthy suburban neighborhoods, on flag poles in middle-class communities, and along the front stoops of inner-city row houses.

Whether they say "Trump 2020" or simply "Trump," there are plenty of people who have left their sentiments planted on their own personal hill.

It is not just here in Pennsylvania.  The signs are not hard to spot as you travel to the Great Lakes, the Midwest, and Appalachia.

The reason is complex.  People who come from a variety of socioeconomic, religious, and political experiences formed a conservative populist coalition long before Donald Trump descended Trump Tower's escalator in June 2015 in New York City.

I believe Reporter Zito is correct in her assessment.

What that means is that if President Joe Biden were to shoot Former President Trump dead, in "the middle of 5th Avenue," the coalition would still be out there, looking for the next person to represent them in our Nation's Capitol.

And, as the article says, these voters are unhappy with the Republican Establishment, passing over 16 other well known candidates to pick Mr Trump.

And think about how President Joe Biden had no coat tail in 2020.  I call it an Ike Jacket Election.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

John Durham Changes Jobs

For John, BLUF:  This looks bad, but it isn't.  However, it does kick the issue down the road.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Breaking:  Special counsel John Durham abruptly announces his resignation from the US Attorney's office

Here is the sub-headline:

Durham will reportedly continue his investigation into 'Crossfire Hurricane'

From The Blaze, by Reporter Carlos Garcia, 26 February 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

Special counsel John Durham, the U.S. attorney appointed to investigate the origins of the Russia collusion and election interference probe, abruptly announced Friday that he would resign from the U.S. Attorney's office.

Durham released an official announcement saying he would resign effective at midnight Sunday.

"My career has been as fulfilling as I could ever have imagined when I graduated from law school way back in 1975," Durham said in the statement.

While Durham will resign from the office, he will reportedly continue in his work investigating whether the FBI's operation to uncover Russian collusion with the Trump campaign was politically motivated.  Former President Trump has claimed that the probe named "Crossfire Hurricane" was an improper and illegal abuse of power by former President Barack Obama to target his political opponents.

All of the US Federal Attorneys were asked to resign as of the end of February.  That would include Federal Attorney Durham.  However, US Attonrey General William Barr made Mr Durham a "Special Counsel", giving him a continuing appointment.

That does not mean that we will eventually have a readout of what happened under operation CROSSFIRE HURRICANE.  The Special Counsel reports to the Attorney General, who will likely be Merrick Garland.  That is the point at which politics could reenter the situation.

Let us hope not.

Regards  —  Cliff

Impeachment Coming

For John, BLUF:  The Speaker is pretty confident she will get an Impeachment tomorrow.  And some Republicans are prepared to help her.  Paybacks are sometimes painful.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Pelosi Names Impeachment Managers

From the Office of the Speaker, 12 January 2021.

Here is the lede plus one:

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi today named Impeachment Managers.

“Tonight, I have the solemn privilege of naming the Managers of the impeachment trial of Donald Trump,” said Speaker Nancy Pelosi. “It is their constitutional and patriotic duty to present the case for the President’s impeachment and removal. They will do so guided by their great love of country, determination to protect our democracy and loyalty to our oath to the Constitution. Our Managers will honor their duty to defend democracy For The People with great solemnity, prayerfulness and urgency.”

Then she goes on to name them, with Representative Congressman Jamie Raskin as the Lead Manager.

And among the Managers is Representative Eric Swalwell.  Now isn't that just perfect.

One wonders if it is not a bit tacky and presumptious to name the Managers before the articles of Impeachment have been adopted.  And, without House Hearings on Impeachment, how do they get material to present?  Does the Speaker hand it to them or do they develop it on their own?  God Bless their little hearts.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

CNN Loses the Bubble

For John, BLUF:  Actually, I am not sure CNN knows there is a bubble..  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

How QAnon's lies are hijacking the national conversation

From CNN, by Reporters Rob Kuznia, Curt Devine and Drew Griffin, 15 December 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

It started with a Tweet from a QAnon supporter at 2:09 in the morning:  #SubpoenaObama.

Though devoid of context, the cryptic message made sense to anyone in tune with the groundless conspiracy theory that the Obama administration -- prior to leaving office in 2017 -- had taken active measures to undermine the incoming Trump presidency.

Are these three Reporters living in some time capsule, sealed in 2016?  By now all but the most partisan Democrats, and, apparently, news media, know that the Trump campaign, and Administration, faced a "hostile work environment".  From Carter Page to LTG Michael Flynn, to the President himself, under Impeachment, the land mines laid before Inauguration were signs of an Obama Administraition and Deep State resisting the President.  Sure, the President plowed through it, up until 3 November, but it was still there.

I am not a follower of QAnon.  However, neither am I a follower of CNN.  Neither is reliable.  Sadly, each has its followers.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

2020 is like 2016, Reversed

For John, BLUF:  The hypocrisy is strong in the Democrats.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Democrats are now reaping the whirlwind of their 2016 election ‘Resistance’

From The New York Post, by Columnist Michael Barone, 4 December 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

“My sense is that if Trump wins, Hillary supporters will be sad,” left-wing writer Sally Kohn tweeted the day of the 2016 election.  “If Hillary wins, Trump supporters will be angry.  Important difference.”  Kohn turned out to be wrong about her own side that year, which angrily set about delegitimizing Donald Trump’s victory.  She was wrong, too, in her apparent assumption — shared by shop owners who boarded up their windows — that Trump supporters would react as violently to his defeat as the Black Lives Matter movement reacted to a death in Minneapolis.

Which is not to say President Trump and many of his supporters are responding gracefully to their candidate’s failure to repeat his 2016 feat of winning the presidency by a margin of 77,736 votes in three crucial states (Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania).  They are not consoled that Joe Biden’s margin of victory in this year’s three crucial states (Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin) was an even smaller 43,809 votes.

There is more to the article than these two paragraphs.  After surveying the numbers, the writer goes on to look at reactions in 2016.  Twice, in twao adjacent paragraphs he writes "in violation of longstanding norms" to talk about how Democrats♠ acted in 2016.

Yes, the Democrats are reaping what they sowed in 2016 and 2017.  It is to their advantage that they hold the House of Representatives going into 2021.  Will they be so lucky in 2023?♥  If the Democrats don't clean up their act there could be interesting hearings in 2023 and 2024.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  And, I would add, the established bureaucracy.
♥  While one can steal an election on the margin, if the voting is overwhelming for the other side then stealing will be obvious to the casual observer, and that is a bad look for the theives.

Securing John Durham

For John, BLUF:  The US Attorney General took action, back in October, to ensure the Durham Probe would continue, regardless of who was Sworn in on 20 January.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

John Durham Appointed as Special Counsel to Keep Obamagate Investigation Active

From PJ Media, by Mr Matt Margolis, 1 December 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

Attorney General Bill Barr appointed U.S. Attorney John Durham as special counsel to continue investigating Obamagate and the illicit origins of the Russia probe.  “On May 13, 2019, I directed John Durham, U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut, to investigate certain intelligence and law-enforcement activities surrounding the 2016 presidential election,”  Barr wrote in a letter to the Senate and House Judiciary Committees.  “Although I had expected Mr. Durham to complete his work by the summer of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as additional information he uncovered, prevented him from doing so.”

Barr reveals in his letter that he appointed Durham as a special counsel prior to the election, on October 19, to ensure that regardless of the outcome, that the investigation would be able to continue.  “In advance of the presidential election, I decided to appoint Mr. Durham as a Special Counsel to provide him and his team with the assurance that they could complete their work, without regard to the outcome of the election,” Barr continued.  Durham has had “the powers and authority of a Special Counsel” since that time.

This is a status different from being a Prosecutor or a Special Prosecutor.  Mr John Durham is now a "Special Counsel".  The removal of a Special Counsel has certain special safeguards.

The letter from Attorney General Barr to the Senate and House Committee Leadership is here.  The lettere farom Attorney General Barr, to Mr John Durham, appointing him, is here.

I like this move by Attorney General Bill Barr.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Old Themes

For John, BLUF:  This, of course, refers back to the Election in 2016.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Scott Adams Tweets

Here is the tweet:

Scott Adams
@ScottAdamsSays

· 6h
Did Biden get the most votes because Putin did such a bad job with Facebook memes this election or because China did an unusually good job interfering this time?

It is a good question.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Where Are We?

For John, BLUF:  Late last night Candidate Joe Biden issued a statement on the race, which prompted a blog post from Professor Ann Althouse.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Weasels and chainsaws distracted me from getting to the obvious first thing I feel I'm supposed to blog this morning.  That's how dull it is.

From The Althouse Blog, by Law Professor Ann Althouse, 7 November 2020.

Here is the key section:

The evidence is still dribbling in, however, so he [Veep Joe Biden] also could have waited.  There must be some political advantage to claiming the stage and expecting us to listen to his prediction.  I'm just guessing the reasoning had something to do with its being Friday.  We need something semi-tangible to end Ele ction Week.

And what’s becoming clear each hour is that a record number of Americans of all races, faiths religions chose change over more of the same.  They’ve given us a mandate for action on COVID, the economy, climate change, systemic racism.

Oh, now that's a stretch. He's barely won, if indeed he's won. We still don't know.  But if he's won, he wants you to know, that there's the mysterious thing called "a mandate."  And he specifies the components of the mandate — "a mandate for action on COVID, the economy, climate change, systemic racism."  Wasn't it more of a vote just to be rid of Donald Trump?  But that's the claim, the 4 elements of what we supposedly want — do something about COVID, the economy, climate change, and systemic racism.

So, after four years of denial, we now face, in all likelihood, four years of stasis.

May God have mercy on us.

Hat tip to Ann Althouse.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Seemingly Never Ending Probe

For John, BLUF:  Leaking and smearing are as old as the Republic.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Barr tells Republicans Durham report won't be ready by election

From Axios, by Writer Alayna Treene, 9 October 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

Attorney General Bill Barr has begun telling top Republicans that the Justice Department’s sweeping review into the origins of the Russia investigation will not be released before the election, a senior White House official and a congressional aide briefed on the conversations tell Axios.

Why it matters:  Republicans had long hoped the report, led by U.S. Attorney John Durham, would be a bombshell containing revelations about what they allege were serious abuses by the Obama administration and intelligence community probing for connections between President Trump and Russia.

If it doesn't come out soon and President Trump loses in November, will it then ever come out?

This matters because we don't need forces behind the secene putting out false stories and suppressing information.  Today I read an article, " INSIDE JOB:  THE CHALLENGE OF FOREIGN ONLINE INFLUENCE IN U.S. ELECTIONS" (War on the Rocks).  The author did point out that in the last 75 years the United Sttes has interfered in more foreign elections that has the Russia/Soviet Union combnation.  This was not a shock to me, but it should help others put election interference into perspective.  It means it is on the nation holding an election to protect itself.  nAlthough it is fair to say that elements within the target ntion were looking for our help.

It was interesting that the article goes on to say that information purloined from campaigns should not be allowed.  Specifically, the article talked about information taken from the Democratic National Committee by with the Russians or Wikileaks.  Unmentioned was the possibility that it was an inside job.  That someone working for the DNC spirited the information away on their own.  The reason this is important is that it is possible it wasn't foreign intervention at all, but, rather, an inside job.

The article then goes on to condemn this leaking of information from a campaign and talks about how The Washington Post is looking to prevent that kind of thing in the future.  Which raises the question as to what kind of leaks are acceptable to the Press?  Did The New York Times go too far in disclosing President Trump's tax returns?  Did the press go too far in being a conduit for FBI Director James Comey's leaks regarding Russiagate?  What is the acceptable limit?

In answer to the earlier question about the Durham Report coming out if President Trump loses, the answer is no, unless someone leaks it, and even then it depends upon to whom they leak it.

Regards  —  Cliff

Corruption from 2016

For John, BLUF:  This whole collection of items from the 2016 Election should have gone away several years ago, but it hasn't.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

FBI official on Mueller team said Flynn prosecution had 'get Trump' attitude, collusion probe was 'not there'

Here is the sub-headline:

FBI official William Barnett was assigned to lead the bureau's original investigation into Michael Flynn

From Fox News, by Reporter Brooke Singman, 25 September 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

An FBI official who served on Robert Mueller’s team said he believed the special counsel’s prosecution of former White House national security adviser Michael Flynn was part of an attitude to “get Trump,” and that he did not wish to pursue a Trump-Russia collusion investigation as it was “not there" and considered it to be a "dead end."

FBI agent William J. Barnett made the comments during an interview on Sept. 17 at the Justice Department, before Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri Jeffrey Jensen, who was tapped by Attorney General Bill Barr to review the case against Flynn. Jensen has joined U.S. Attorney John Durham’s team in his review of the origins of the Trump-Russia probe. Those comments have surfaced in new government documents.

Fox News reviewed Barnett’s FBI 302, which was filed by the U.S. government early Friday as part of the Flynn case.

Barnett, during his interview, detailed his work at the FBI, and his assignment to the bureau’s original cases against Flynn and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Barnett said the Flynn investigation was assigned the code name “Crossfire Razor,” which was part of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation — the bureau’s code name for the original Trump-Russia probe.

In another thread someone wrote:

Oh, quit going on about acceptance of the 2016 result. Every has yielded to the result; the Dems just don’t like it. What do you care? He’s been doing everything a president is constitutionally able to do and more.

Here is my response:

I think it is the time lapse problem here.  If everyone had agreed after the Inauguration it would have been OK with me.  But, things continued after the Inauguration.  DOJ Career people seemed to just carry on.  Jim Comey was unable to walk away.  I wonder about the role of Sally Yates, or DNC Apparatchiks.  There were FBI guys who took out extra liability insurance.

Lawyer and Author Sidney Powell just got a “302” that indicates that even after the election they kept after the “Trump Team” in a less than professional way.  FBI Agent William Barnett talked of “Lack of integrity on the part of the Bob Mueller Team.”  Where is Inspector Lewis Erskine (Efrem Zimbalist, Jr) when you need him?

So, yes, I would like it to all go away.  I especially don’t want to see it reach into the Oval Office. That would blight the process for a long time.  But, the story keeps dripping out, drop by drop.  And, because the Judiciary wouldn’t let LTG Michael Flynn walk away they just keep it going.

In early this year we had an Impeachment on flimsy grounds, so Ms Pelosi hadn’t yet given up in the first part of this year.  Then Judge Emett Sullivan, a hero to me for his handling of the Ted Stevens case, stopped DOJ from dropping chargers against LTG Flynn.  I was very disappointed.

Now we are in the political silly season again and we are back to Trump being illegitimate.  Sure, he is President and gets to sign legislation and appoint Ambassadors, but the Dems have become cranky again.  Everything is off the table.  (Or is it Nothing is off the table?)  Please tell me Rep Gerry Nadler is not running again.

But, in closing, one wonders, in the back of the mind, if Judge Emmet Sullivan has keep the Michael Flynn thing going because he wants to smoke out these sub-rosa activities that tainted the “peaceful transfer of power”. Maybe he is a hero this time also.

Hat tip to News Reader Elizabeth MacDowell.

Regards  —  Cliff

Shifting Political Landscape

For John, BLUF:  The political landscape seems to be shifting.  Areas of the nation that used to vote one way are not voting another.  It seems to be going in several directions.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The forgotten counties will make their voices heard

From the Washington Examiner, by Reporter Salena Zito, 13 September 2020.

Here is the lede plus four:

JOHNSTOWN, Pennsylvania — Ken Miller walked into one of the four storefronts on the right flank of the Richland Shopping Center, asked if this was where he could change his voter registration, sat down with a purpose, and began to fill out the form.

“It is time to go,” he said, flatly, as he checked his Pennsylvania driver’s license number to place on the form.

Miller did not vote for Donald Trump in 2016; he didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton, either.  He said he is a retired insurance manager and does not like what he sees coming from the party he has been a part of his adult life. “I just get tired of the game-playing that the Democrats are doing.  Everything's just so disgusting today.  Something has to change.  Well, something's going to change,” he said.

“I'm afraid something's going to break out here, and I'm pretty sure it will," he said. He said he's concerned what happened to patrons having dinner at an outside cafe in Pittsburgh when protesters swarmed them will find its way here and other bucolic settings across the country. “I am tired of what I am seeing.”

Miller is not alone. For the first time that anyone could remember, Cambria County is no longer dominated by Democratic voter registrations.  They lost that dominance quietly on Labor Day weekend when Pennsylvania Department of State registration numbers showed Republicans having 37,951 registrations and Democrats holding 37,826.

I know, or knew, Johnstown, and Cambria County.  Yes, it was Democrat when I knew it.  Four years ago about this time we drove through the area and the county to the south, and there were a lot of Trump signs and pickup trucks.  And Reporter Salena Zito was reporting a vibe that the Mainsztream Media seemed to be missing.

These are the deplorbles of Mrs Clinton's campaign of 2016.  The sense is that they are not quite real Americans.  I wonder what that means in the event of a Joe Biden?  Does it mean that a Biden Administration will suppress these kinds of people, these American Citizens?.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

A Government in Overwatch

For John, BLUF:  I don't see much about this in the media, but it smells bad.  We should be better than this.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Judicial Watch: State Dept Records Show US Embassy in Ukraine Monitored Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, Journalists and other U.S. Citizens in Potential Violation of Federal Law

From Judicial Watch, 1 September 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

Judicial Watch announced today that it received 372 pages of records from the U.S. Department of State that confirm prior Judicial Watch reporting that the Ukraine Embassy under then-Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch monitored, in potential violation of law, Donald Trump, Jr. Rudy Giuliani, and major journalists on Twitter on their commentary on Ukraine, “Biden-Burisma 2020”, and George Soros.

The documents list the targeted persons as Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Rudy Giuliani, Dan Bongino, Sebastian Gorka, John Solomon, Jack Posobiec, Ryan Saavedra, Sara A Carter, Donald Trump Jr., Michael McFaul, Lou Dobbs and Pamela Gellar.  The search terms that were flagged to be monitored by State Department officials on social media included Yovanovitch, Ukraine Ambassador, Ukrainian Ambassador, Ukraine Soros, Clinton campaign, and Biden-Burisma.

The emails show that Yovanovitch was aware of the social media monitoring program.

Additionally, a State Department contractor warned his colleagues that their monitoring of private citizens was potentially in violation of the Privacy Act of 1974.

“These new documents confirm Deep State officials at the Ukraine Embassy seemed to set up an enemies list to help illicitly monitor and report on the social media postings of President Trump’s family and lawyer, as well as journalists,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “The State Department hid these smoking gun documents for months.”

This is a blot on the record of the Department of State.  We, as Citizens, should expect better from those who are representing us overseas.  Now I have even more questions about what was going on in the Ukraine.

Regards  —  Cliff