Can You Unlocked Your Phone

For John, BLUF:  Government records are meant to be preserved.  Laws passed by Congress say so.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Johnson seeks IG probe of wiped Mueller team phones

Here is the sub-headline:

Records released by the Justice Department this week suggest top Mueller aides erased records from at least 15 phones.

From Politico, by Kyle Cheney, 11 September 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

Senate Homeland Security Chair Ron Johnson is asking a Justice Department watchdog to probe recently revealed documents that suggest members of special counsel Robert Mueller's team wiped records from their official phones.

Records released by the Justice Department this week in response to a Freedom of Information Act request suggest top Mueller aides erased the information from at least 15 phones, citing forgotten passwords, physical damage and missing hardware.

"These reports are troubling and raise concerns about record retention and transparency," Johnson wrote in a letter to DOJ inspector general Michael Horowitz.  "Therefore, I respectfully request that your office open an investigation into this matter to determine what, why, and how information was wiped, whether any wrongdoing occurred, and who these devices belonged to."

Johnson is asking Horowitz to send answers by Sept. 18, as the senator winds down a related investigation of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation — the probe of the 2016 Trump campaign's contacts with Russians, which morphed into Mueller's probe in mid-2017.  He's also asking whether Horowitz may be able to retrieve messages from the phones.

It takes ten (10) bad passcode enries to wipe the phone.  Folks who have these kinds of problems should not be on panels doing investigations for the United States Government.  Surely you wouldn't wish for any of them to be your lawyer.

I don't wish to drag my Daughter, the Statistician, into this, but the likelihood this wasn't deliberate destruction of records is vanishingly small. Not as small as the possibility the Mainstream Media will go after the story, but small enough that no such equivalent event is likely in any other stretch of the universe. >.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Let Us Hope

For John, BLUF:  First with Judge Emmet Sullivan and then with Defense Lawyer Sidney Powell there was this hope that justice would be done.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

AP Exclusive:  Justice Dept dropping Flynn’s criminal case

From The Seattle Times, by Reporters Michael Balsamo and Eric Tucker, 7 May 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

The Justice Department on Thursday said it is dropping the criminal case against President Donald Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, abandoning a prosecution that became a rallying cry for the president and his supporters in attacking the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation.

The move is a stunning reversal for one of the signature cases brought by special counsel Robert Mueller.  It comes even though prosecutors for the past three years have maintained that Flynn lied to the FBI in a January 2017 interview about his conversations with the Russian ambassador.

It appears it was time for the Justice Department to cut losses.  I am guessing we were at the point where careers were going to be broken.

Regards  —  Cliff

FBI Misled

For John, BLUF:  The question is, was the FBI Misled, or did the FBI, knowing the facts, mislead the nation?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

While you were focused on the pandemic, it was revealed the FBI knew the Steele Dossier against Trump contained Russian disinformation

Here is the sub-headline:

Rather than colluding with the Russians, which the Mueller Report conclusively rejected, Trump was the victim of a Russian disinformation campaign exploited and promoted by Democrats, the media, and the FBI.

From Legal Insurrection, by Blogger William A. Jacobson, 11 April 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

In one of the least surprising, yet most important, developments in the years-long Russia-collusion hoax, a recently declassified portion of the DOJ Inspector General’s Report on the FBI investigation of the Trump campaign has revealed that Trump was the target of a Russian disinformation campaign.  And the FBI knew it.

So rather than colluding with the Russians, which the Mueller Report conclusively rejected, Trump was the victim of a Russian disinformation campaign exploited and promoted by Democrats, the media, and the FBI.

The revelation concerns the so-called Steele Dossier, a document commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaing and the Democratic National Committee.  The Dossier, containing allegations that Trump was compromised, turbo-charged the FBI investigation of the campaign and, after it was published by Buzzfeed, stoked anti-Trump derangement at MSNBC and elsewhere.

Yet it’s now revealed that the FBI knew at least no later than 2017 that much of the dossier was Russian disinformation.

For some people, Orange Man is so Bad that any action against him, true or false is justified.  In fact, I expect that for many suffering Trump Derangement Syndrome even things obviously false are, in their eyes, true.

This isn't the first time that the views of his opponents relative to a President were wildly off the mark, and won't be the last.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Shaping the Narrative

For John, BLUF:  The Democrats, as a whole, seem a very embittered lot, unwilling to let go of the past and move into the future, where, if they release their bitterness, they can win again.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

REPORT:  Mueller Hid Evidence Exonerating Don Jr. Over Infamous Trump Tower Meeting

From PJ Media, by Mr Matt Margolis, 3 April 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

Despite the fact that the Mueller report proved there was no collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians during the 2016 campaign, Democrats were convinced that there was more evidence out there, perhaps in the tiny fraction of the report that was redacted for national security reasons, that proved Trump actually did collude with the Russians.

It turns out that the most interesting things about Mueller's investigation were not what was redacted from the report, but what wasn't included in the first place.  According to investigative reporter John Solomon, Bob Mueller hid evidence exonerating Donald Trump Jr. over the infamous Trump Tower meeting, during which Democrats were convinced he had met with a Russian lawyer to discuss dirt on Hillary Clinton.

Another reason to not trust the Feds.  But, at a deeper level, was it Mr Mueller who hid the information or was it one of the Federal Attorneys working for him.

Did the people from Mr Mueller's Investigation think that their bad deeds would never come out?  That Democrats would cover for them for ever, or at least long enough?  This is very disappointing for someone who believes in the integrity of the permanent Civil Service.  If there is not integrity in Government, then we revert to the spoils system and should just abolish the Civil Service and replace it with the friends and sycophants of the incoming President.

A political cartoon in Harper's Weekly of 28 April 1877, by Cartoonist Thomas Nast.  It is President Andrew Jackson riding a pig, which is walking over "fraud", "bribery", and "spoils", and consuming "plunder".

Never talk to the Feds without an Attorney and a tape recorder.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Impeachment is Over, Start the Impeachment

For John, BLUF:  Nothing is settled.  This contest against President Trump will continue on several fronts, including more Impeachment and also the Presidential Race.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Senate votes to acquit President Trump on impeachment charges

From The Boston Globe, by Reporters Lisa Mascaro and Mary Clare Jalonick, of The Associated Press, 5 February 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

President Trump won impeachment acquittal Wednesday in the US Senate, bringing to a close only the third presidential trial in American history with votes that split the country, tested civic norms, and fed the tumultuous 2020 race for the White House.

With Chief Justice John Roberts presiding, senators sworn to do “impartial justice” stood at their desks to state their votes for the roll call — “guilty” or “not guilty” — in a swift tally almost exclusively along party lines.  Visitors, including the president’s allies, watched from the crowded gallery.  Roberts read the declaration that Trump “be, and is hereby, acquitted of the charges.”

The outcome Wednesday followed months of remarkable impeachment proceedings, from Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s House to Mitch McConnell’s Senate, reflecting the nation’s unrelenting partisan divide three years into the Trump presidency.

What started as Trump’s request for Ukraine to “do us a favor” spun into a far-reaching, 28,000-page report compiled by House investigators accusing an American president of engaging in shadow diplomacy that threatened U.S. foreign relations for personal, political gain as he pressured the ally to investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden ahead of the next election.

Here is the vote:

On the first article of impeachment, abuse of power, the vote was 52-48 favoring acquittal.  The second, obstruction of Congress, also produced a not guilty verdict, 53-47.

I expect that this is NOT the end of the story.  Rather, the House will go about doing a more workman like effort, actually calling witnesses and going through the arduous effort of fighting for them in Court.

The only question is how long it will take to resurface.

Well, and if they can dig up something that could result in conviction in the Senate.

Does anyone think that Speaker Nancy Pelosi will allow this defeat to pass without pushback?

I expect action on Impeachment within in a couple of days or weeks.  I expect a result like unto the Steele Dossier or the Mueller Report.

The House Democrats suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome.  They also suffer from Corbynization of the Party and from Innumeracy.

Regards  —  Cliff

Alternative View

For John, BLUF:  My wife thinks the only plausible explanation for Speaker Pelosi's actions is that she [secretly] wants President Trump reëlected.  This is a plausible alternative answer.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Pelosi Plays Her Role

From DaTechGuy, by baldilocks (AKA Juliette Akinyi Ochieng), 21 December 2019.

Here is the gist of the article:

Trump doesn’t care about the stigma of impeachment.  He knew they were planning it before the election and, once he got elected, it was on.

Some of them even said so in public on Inauguration Day.

So, after the Mueller investigation came up empty, President Trump goaded them into doing it; he was the one who made sure that the second Ukraine call got into the hands of the “whistle-blower.”  I theorized about this weeks ago.

He did it so that there would be a trial and, of course, during the trial, all eyes will be watching.  That’s when all the things that our government has been doing to us will come out and those things will come out of the mouth of the President of the United States.

That’s when we’ll find out the height, weight, breadth and time length of all the graft and money-laundering that has been going on in the US government at least for the last 50 years, perpetrated by all three branches of government and by both parties.

Pelosi knows this and it’s why she’s holding up progress.  The House voted in favor of impeachment and then promptly departed for Christmas break without sending the articles of impeachment to the senate, as is necessary for a true impeachment to occur.

She didn’t want the impeachment at all for this very reason.  But her caucus is much dumber and more vocal than she is, so she had no choice.  So, now she’ll play the role of Grand Impeacher of Trump and avoid sending the articles of impeachment to the senate for as long as she can.  She knows it won’t last, but she’ll play Trump-slayer — figuratively speaking — while she can.

How long can she manipulate this Impeachment drama.  Not very long, I would think.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Comparing Teams

For John, BLUF:  Deep down, Normal Americans favor the underdog regular person overcoming the elite posers.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Dream Team Loses to the Nobodies

From American Greatness, by Professor Victor Davis Hanson, 4 August 2019.

Here is the lede plus one:

When figurehead Robert Mueller likely allowed Andrew Weissman to form his special counsel team to investigate so-called charges of Russian collusion involving Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Kremlin, Washington elites became bouncy.  The high-profile legal “powerhouse” lineup immediately looked like a sure-thing—an elite slaughter of the yokels.

As they perused the résumés of the New York and Washington prosecutors, and the Wilmer-Hale veterans, reporters were ecstatic that the supposedly straight-shooting Republican Mueller had turned his investigation into what the media soon boasted was a progressive “dream team” of “all-stars,” a veritable “hunter-killer team” of get-Trump professionals.  One would have thought mere names and credentials win indictments, regardless of the evidence.

The subtext was that Trump had all but met his Waterloo. Indictments for conspiracy, obstruction, and worse yet inevitably would follow, until Trump either resigned in disgrace or was impeached.  The media counterparts of the dream-team on MSNBC and CNN would make short work of the rubes.  On air law professors and legal analysts who knew “Bob” Mueller (the same ones who assured us that “Jim” Comey was a “straight-shooter”), after all, swore this would be true.

Almost all the all-stars were not just liberal but “correct” as well.  Many were either Clinton donors; a few in the past had defended either Clinton aides or the Clinton foundation.  Many also had been tagged as Department of Justice future superstars.  Their tony degrees seemed designed to spell the doom of the buffoon Trump.

It is a little harsh to refer to recent Special Counsel Robert Mueller as a "figurehead".  On the other hand, this article does set up an interesting contrast between the Special Prosecutor Team and the President's defense team.

I do wonder who is going to pay the lawyers' fees for the President?  Or is that just a tax on Donald J Trump, passed by the Democrats in Congress and in the Executive Bureaucracy?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

"We Had to Destroy the Village In Order to Save It"

For John, BLUF:  The Democrats seem to have suffered some sort mental collapse over Ms Hillary Clinton's loss in 2016.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Warren calls for allowing indictment of a sitting president in wake of Mueller’s comments

From The Boston Globe, by Reporter Jess Bidgood, 31 May 2019.

Here is the lede plus four:

Senator Elizabeth Warren on Friday called for an end to the longstanding policy that bars presidents from being indicted, aiming squarely at Justice Department rules cited by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller this week in reviewing his decision not to criminally charge President Trump.

“No matter what he may think, Donald Trump is not a King. No President is,” the Massachusetts Democrat wrote.  “And our democracy only works if everyone can be held accountable.”

The once-obscure policy, issued by the Justice Department during Watergate and reaffirmed in 2000, holds that indicting a sitting president would unconstitutionally interfere with the duties of the executive branch.

Writing in a Medium post, Warren called on Congress to pass laws clarifying that a president can be indicted by the Justice Department and to amend obstruction of justice statutes to ensure they can be applied to presidents who abuse their power.  She also vowed to appoint Justice Department officials, including an attorney general, who share her belief that a president can be indicted and who would reverse the department’s opinion on the issue.

“If Donald Trump were anyone other than the President of the United States, he would be in handcuffs and indicted,” Warren wrote.  She added, with a nod to her presidential campaign’s signature tagline:  “That’s why I’ve got a plan to make sure that no president is above the law.”

In the mind of Senator Warren it is acceptable for a Cabinet level Department in the Executive Branch to make war on the President.  Does she realize how that will hyper-politicize the Department of Justice?

She hasn't thought this through.

The Democrats can't get over Donald Trump beating Hillary Clinton in 2016, and will tear down our way of Government to reverse that outcome.  They are unable to comprehend that a big chunk of people don't agree with them.  In the extreme it could lead to succession, civil war or the reduction of certain parts of the nation to the status of serfs.  This is not a good thing.

Senator Warren is showing a certain lack of couth with her "in handcuffs" comment.  Does she lack faith in the Impeachment process?  Or lack faith in the Constitution?

Here is a Wyoming rancher's summary of the Mueller report and Democrats' ongoing efforts, in one sentence:

While we recognize that the subject did not actually steal any horses, he is obviously guilty of trying to resist being hanged for it.

Regards  —  Cliff

Losing Trying to Win

For John, BLUF:  Not everyone one the Left wants to jump off the cliff of impeachment.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Noam Chomsky Calls Dem Focus on Russia a ‘Huge Gift’ to Trump:  ‘They May Have Handed Him the Next Election’

From Mediaite, by Mr Joe DePaolo, 19 April 2019, .

Here is the lede plus one:

Noam Chomsky, the noted progressive scholar, believes Democrats have focused far too much on Russia.  And he thinks it might earn them four more years of President Donald Trump.

Speaking at a forum in Boston with Amy Goodman, Chomsky stated his view that he always believed there was going to be little to no proof of collusion in the Mueller Report.

Professor Chomsky is not a lightweight, and not a Trump supporter.

Hat tip to the Drudge Report.

Regards  —  Cliff

Mired in the Past?

For John, BLUF:  Even Democrats in the Hinterland want to move on.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Why these Democrats fear ‘Mueller madness’ will boost Trump in 2020

From The New York Post! by Reporter Salena Zito, 30 March 2019.

Here is the lede plus two:

GETTYSBURG, Pa. — Now that special counsel Robert Mueller has concluded that no one from Trump’s presidential campaign “conspired or coordinated” with Russia, five residents of this Adams County town hope the national media moves on.

This has nothing to do with liking or voting for the president (they don’t and they didn’t) and everything to do with opinion news increasingly replacing straight news reporting.

Jim Henry, a fan of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” tuned into his favorite cable news program recently only to find the hosts still speculating about a Trump-Russia connection two days after the summary report was released.  “They just harp on the same thing, and you would think there’s nothing else Trump’s done wrong,” said Henry, 73.  “That’s the only thing they have on him?  Come on, talk about the other stuff.”

If the Democrats try to get President Trump by overthrowing the Mueller Report they will likely fail, and lose in 2020.

Overreach?  Yes.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Bitter Clingers

For John, BLUF:  I admire the tenacity of these 2016 Bitter Clingers.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

We Don’t Need to Read the Mueller Report

Here is the sub-headline:

Even if it is never released, the public already knows enough.

From The Old Gray Lady, by Ms Caroline Fredrickson, President of the American Constitution Society, March 22, 2019.

The way it is written it could have been about the Democrats in 2016, minus the Wikileaks and Russian components.

The disappointing thing is that Ms Fredrickson doesn't recognize the damage she is doing to our Constitution and our form of Government.  All this because Ms Clinton ran a bad campaign?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

One Take On Mueller Report

For John, BLUF:  Not every Progressive is drinking from the same polluted Russiagate pool.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Glenn Greenwald on the Mueller Probe

Here is the Tweet:

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
The Mueller investigation is complete and this is a simple fact that will never go away:  not one single American was charged, indicted or convicted for conspiring with Russia to influence the 2016 election - not even a low-level volunteer.  The number is zero.
5:13 PM · Mar 22, 2019

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
Compare what cable hosts (let's leave them unnamed) & Democratic operatives spent two years claiming this would lead to - the imprisonment of Don, Jr., Jared, even Trump on conspiracy-with-Russia charges - to what it actually produced.  A huge media reckoning is owed.
5:17 PM · Mar 22, 2019

Maybe this 17 February 2019 article by Professor Victor Davis Hanson, from American Greatness, sums up what happened:  "Autopsy of a Dead Coup".

I just listened to CNN give its headlines at 0830 and there is apparently no self-recognition of the fact that the basis of the probe, the Trump Campaign collusion with Russia, didn't pan out.  If we spin it to Russian meddling in US elections, then that is older than I am and is not Trump specific.  It was time for some humility, but it was "Orange Man Bad" the whole way.  Sad.  Very sad.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Close to the Wire

For John, BLUF:  Regarding the Mueller Report, I win either way, unless the books have been cooked.  The truth is inherently good.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Mueller's Final Report Will Ignite an Epic War Over Disclosure

Here is the sub-headline:

• Attorney General Barr will decide how much to release and when
• Democrats in Congress threaten to subpoena Mueller if needed

From Bloomberg, by Reporters Chris Strohm and Larry Liebert, 3 March 2019.

Here is the lede plus two:

When Special Counsel Robert Mueller closes up shop and submits his long-awaited final report -- possibly within days -- it will be only the start of an explosive chain of events.

There will be a struggle in Congress, on cable TV and social media and probably in the courts over how much must be disclosed from what will begin as a secret report to Attorney General William Barr.

There also will be an epic political fight over whether the findings implicate President Donald Trump in wrongdoing that may even merit his impeachment, as some Democrats say, or clear him after a 21-month investigation that he and other Republicans call a “witch hunt.

Then the Writers go on to suggest the various ways this could unravel.

The thing that would be most interesting to me would be to look at how we got here in the first place.  What were the early machinations of the Hillary Clinton Campaign/Democratic Party and of the Department of Justice, or a combination of the two.  Or, maybe it would be better to not know, given the damage such a revelation would do to our society.

I am still pulling for Special Counsel Robert Mueller to be a straight shooter  At least his public side avoids the press.

Regards  —  Cliff

"According to people familiar"

For John, BLUF:  I am sorry, Virginia, but there appears to be no there there.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Mueller is said to be nearing end of his investigation into Trump and Russian interference

While I found this item in The Boston Globe, it is really from the WaPo, The Washington Post.  And who did they talk to?  "People familiar."  How familiar?  The Charlady or some nameless, faceless bureaucrat?

From The Boston Globe! by Washington Post Reporters Devlin Barrett, Josh Dawsey and Matt Zapotosky, 21 February 2019

Here is the lede plus two:

WASHINGTON — Justice Department officials are preparing for the end of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s nearly two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and believe a confidential report could be issued in coming days, according to people familiar with the discussions.

The investigation has consumed Washington since it began in May 2017, and it increasingly appears to be nearing its end, which would send fresh shock waves through the political system.  Mueller could deliver his report to Attorney General William Barr next week, according to a person familiar with the matter who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Regulations call for Mueller to submit to the attorney general a confidential explanation as to why he decided to charge certain individuals, as well as who else he investigated and why he decided not to charge those people.  The regulations then call for the attorney general to report to Congress about the investigation.

The article notes that CNN has reported "that [Special Counsel] Mueller could send a report to Barr as early as next week."  Great.  Just as President Trump is sitting down with Chairman Kim.

Does anyone think this will be the end of it?  Not even a Trump victory in the 2020 Election will end it.

Regards  —  Cliff

Banana Republic

For John, BLUF:  I am embarrassed for my Nation and its Government.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Mueller Indicts Roger Stone On Seven Counts

From Hot Air, a short item, with no reporter attribution, 25 January 2019.

The thing is, Mr Stone was arrested in a early dawn raid by a dozen Agents.  Why the massed raid when an invite to Mr Stone's lawyer could have had him show down today at some reasonable hour?  And the presence of the Press?  CNN, to be precise.

Here is the Tweet from Reporter Glenn Greenwald regarding the Press presence:

It's possible this tip-off came from FBI rather than Mueller's office, but either way, nobody should be comfortable having law enforcement engineer with media outlets the filming of someone's arrest at their home like a reality TV circus.  But it's Roger Stone, so few will care.

I care.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Possible Mueller Outcomes

For John, BLUF:  There is the option that the Russiagate Probe will never end.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Mueller Probe—Outcomes

This is not authoritative, but just my doodling:

1. Guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors (Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution)
• "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
• At this kind of a report the US House of Representatives would spring into action, bringing impeachment articles against the President.
• It does raise the question as to if the Vice President was involved, which may or may not be answered by a report by Special Counsel Mueller.
• This raises an additional question, which is why this took so long.  An important question to emerge will be when did Mr Mueller know it and why did it take so long to get the news out?
2. Not proven
   • This is the Scottish Verdict, where the jury thinks the person is guilty, but not beyond a reasonable doubt.
   • I would think this report would just sow confusion and conflict and would hurt the country.
3. No indications of a crime by the President (or VEEP).
   • This would not quiet everyone, the House Democrats would proceed with their own investigations.
   • This would allow the President to focus more on being President, rather than being a defendant.
   • This might allow the President to now order the release of all pertinent documents, including the FISA Warrants and their supporting documentation.
4. Finding that the FBI/DOJ engaged in unpardonable activities for political reasons.
   • There are those who believe the FBI has not been much cleaned up since the time of J Edgar Hoover.
   • There are those who believe that Mrs Clinton tipped her hand in late October 2016 when she talked about a Trump/Putin connection, right after leaks from the FBI and Fusion GPS brought us stories in the press.

Are there other possible outcomes?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Deep State v Trump

For John, BLUF:  Yes, President Trump was within his rights, and doing his duty, when he fired FBI Director James Comey.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

FBI looked into whether Trump was working on behalf of Russia

From The Boston Globe, a New York Timess article by By Messers Adam Goldman, Michael S. Schmidt and Nicholas Fandos, 12 January 2019.

Here is the lede plus three:

In the days after President Trump fired James Comey as FBI director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation.

The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security.  Agents also sought to determine whether Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.

The investigation the FBI opened into Trump also had a criminal aspect, which has long been publicly known: whether his firing of Comey constituted obstruction of justice.

Agents and senior FBI officials had grown suspicious of Trump’s ties to Russia during the 2016 campaign but held off on opening an investigation into him, the people said, in part because they were uncertain how to proceed with an inquiry of such sensitivity and magnitude.  But the president’s activities before and after Comey’s firing in May 2017, particularly two instances in which Trump tied the Comey dismissal to the Russia investigation, helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, the people said.

So, The Old Gray Lady publishes old news and does it based on information leaked to the Press.  But that is how that city (DC) works.  When I was a lowly colonel on the Joint Staff the watchword was to not share anything that one would not wish to see on the front page of The Washington Post.  Someone I knew and worked with from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, an organization with a huge number of people, was incorrectly accused of leaking information to the press and it took months to clear it up.

As for not knowing how to proceed if they were suspicious of the loyalty of someone high up, there was precedent.  After all, FDR replaced one of his VEEPs with Harry Truman for his run in 1944.  surely the late FBI Director, J Edger Hoover, left some notes on how to move forward.

This was a slow news day regurgitation of already known material.  And, it lacked any real insight, any real analysis, and real nuance and balance.

I do hope this is not the Press carrying water for Mr Comey, who is not a shining example of what a Federal Civil Servant should be.

But, what really grabbed me was the comments at the end of the article.  Some, like mine, were brilliant.  Some were so bad they were deleted before we could view them.  Some were printed, but were just vitriol.  A lot of them of them did not speak well for the readership of The Boston Globe.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Alternate Conspiacy Theory

For John, BLUF:  Some of us out there are dubious about Mrs Clinton and dubious of the Deep State, and thus are Trump supporters—you know, Les Deplorables.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Are the Investigations the Cover-Up?

From The American Thinker, by Mr Bryce Buchanan, 26 December 2018.

Here is the Key sentence:

Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe and others discussed the need for an “insurance policy” in case Trump won.

From this is derived the theory that all investigations are designed to shield Mrs Clinton and frame Mr Trump.

As for myself, I am going to believe Mr Mueller will uphold Truth, Justice and the American Way, right up to the point facts prove Howie Carr was right all along.  I am an optimist.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Flynn Case Confuses Me

For John, BLUF:  If the press tries to sweep this Flynn imbroglio under the rug it will just make them look bad.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Neverending, Mysterious Saga of Michael Flynn

From American Greatness, by Professor Victor Davis Hanson, 23 December 2018.

Here is the lede plus four:

Certainly, no one should defend a top-ranking federal employee’s lying to federal investigators or to his superiors in the Trump Administration, if that is what former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn did, as evidenced by his own confession.

Note if Flynn lied to President Trump or Vice President Mike Pence about details of his private conversations, then that is unethical and understandably should be grounds for dismissal. The distinction, however, is whether Flynn deserved to be fired or to be in jail.

What put Flynn in legal jeopardy were the general’s statements to FBI investigators that purportedly were false, and allegedly given deliberately to mislead two federal investigators.

I express doubt here only because of media reports and leaks that Special Counsel Robert Mueller later either pressured Flynn for a confession, by strategies of financial exhaustion or leveraged him by threats to indict his son, or both.

Without that pressure, one wonders how Flynn might have explained his earlier alleged inconsistencies in recounting a private off the record conversation with a foreign diplomatic official to two FBI officials. That is, had he had adequate legal resources or not faced prosecutorial threats to indict his son, would he have later claimed that months earlier that he had been dishonest to Peter Strzok and his fellow FBI investigator?

I think Judge Emmet Sullivan smells a rat.

The Special Counsel investigation by Mr Robert Mueller has uncovered veniality in several places, but seems not to have uncovered a smoking gun with regard to Russian collusion.  Is it out there?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Job Isn't Yet Complete

For John, BLUF:  Cleaning up old items, but this is one of those things that should cause an ordinary citizen to pause.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

‘WHERE is Flynn’s original 302?!’ Kimberley Strassel RIPS Comey’s testimony and the Deep State apart even MORE and WOW

From Twitchy, by Sam J., 16 December 2018.

Here is the lede plus one:

Kimberley Strassel once again has wrapped up what is happening with the Flynn case in a few simple tweets so the rest of us can follow along.  No shame in it, so much of what we’re hearing about with these multiple investigations reads a lot like stereo instructions written backward in Japanese.

Kimberley Strassel
@KimStrassel
Fascinating that the 302 referenced in the Flynn filing is actually an August interview of Peter Strzok--recounting the Flynn meeting.  Though this raises the question... where is the original Flynn 302? Did special counsel file it to judge?
12:58 PM - 14 Dec 2018

I think it is questions like this which make Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan nervous about the Lieutenant General Michael Flynn case.

The job isn't over until the paperwork is complete.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff