“As Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s vast and fruitless investigation into supposed ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government drags on, it’s the FBI itself that appears to have been engaged in nefarious activities.”
———–
“As Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept rightly explains, “One of the gravest and most damaging abuses of state power is to misuse surveillance authorities for political purposes.” (Which makes the mainstream media’s utter disinterest in this story so bewildering.)”
“Then there’s the text where Strzok says he was conflicted about joining Mueller’s team because the Russia investigation was, in his own estimation, much ado about nothing. “You and I both know the odds are nothing,” he texted. “If I thought it was likely, I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern that there’s no big there there.”
But here’s where things really get interesting. It turns out that the FBI can’t find any of the texts the two sent each other from December 14, 2016, to May 17, 2017, which was the day Mueller was named Special Counsel. The FBI says it was due to a technical glitch. We shall see.
One way of reading all this is that, despite the obvious political biases of these officials, the FBI acted impartially when it came to investigating Trump, did everything on the up and up when it came to wiretapping his campaign, and suffered an innocent technical problem that erased exchanges between two key officials.
Another way of reading this is that corrupt FBI officials used the immense power at their disposal to illegally eavesdrop on private citizens, fuel a costly and bogus investigation into Trump — while giving Hillary Clinton a free pass on her own scandals — and then tried to keep these machinations under wraps.
We are not conspiracy-mongers here. And we, like everyone in the country, want to be able to trust that our federal law enforcement officials aren’t serving as political pawns.
But the facts keep pointing to the latter interpretation.”
—————————-
“During the financial crisis, the federal government bailed out banks it declared “too big to fail.” Fearing their bankruptcy might trigger economic Armageddon, the feds propped them up with taxpayer cash.
Something similar is happening now at the FBI, with the Washington wagons circling the agency to protect it from charges of corruption. This time, the appropriate tag line is “too big to believe.”
Yet each day brings credible reports suggesting there is a massive scandal involving the top ranks of America’s premier law enforcement agency. The reports, which feature talk among agents of a “secret society” and suddenly missing text messages, point to the existence both of a cabal dedicated to defeating Donald Trump in 2016 and of a plan to let Hillary Clinton skate free in the classified email probe.
If either one is true — and I believe both probably are — it would mean FBI leaders betrayed the nation by abusing their powers in a bid to pick the president.
More support for this view involves the FBI’s use of the Russian dossier on Trump that was paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. It is almost certain that the FBI used the dossier to get FISA court warrants to spy on Trump associates, meaning it used the opposition research of the party in power to convince a court to let it spy on the candidate of the other party — likely without telling the court of the dossier’s political link.
Even worse, there is growing reason to believe someone in President Barack Obama’s administration turned over classified information about Trump to the Clinton campaign.
As one former federal prosecutor put it, “It doesn’t get worse than that.” That prosecutor, Joseph diGenova, believes Trump was correct when he claimed Obama aides wiretapped his phones at Trump Tower.
These and other elements combine to make a toxic brew that smells to high heaven, but most Americans don’t know much about it. Mainstream media coverage has been sparse and dismissive and there’s a blackout from the same Democrats obsessed with Russia, Russia, Russia.”
I should be more clear here as well. It’s not the whole FBI I have a problem with. Just the lying Obama holdovers who turned it into a political weapon, which obviously happened, and yet many remain, and continue to obstruct at every opportunity to protect Obama.
So when did “the lying Obama holdovers” begin to work at the FBI? Answer: Decades ago. They served under both Democrats and Republicans, and rose up the ranks as they fought criminals and terrorists. In 2016, they were placed in an extremely difficult situation when both major parties nominated candidates whose dishonesty and stupidity led to FBI investigations of both of those corrupt New Yorkers.
Debra, Here is a discussion between Douthat and Frum about Frum’s new book:
On the surface this is a debate about whether the Trump Presidency is a tragedy (Frum) or a farce (Douthat). However, I was disgusted and you will be pleased that the argument reveals that both men want Trump to develop new programs to coddle Trumpers and Democrats. I am reminded of the time in the 60s when blacks rioted in the cities and both parties responded by blowing trillions of dollars on scores of new welfare programs.
Kevin D. Williamson is nearly alone among conservative writers in being willing to state harsh truths and preach personal responsibility.
Nichols is right here. Once the US became an idiocracy, it became easy for enemies to use social media against us:
The Russians are attacking us, quite intelligently, at our two most vulnerable (and related) points: our fascination with social media, and our staggeringly low level of cultural and political literacy. They're using the net to spread stuff they know Americans will believe.
Ricky @7:57am: Yet there is clear evidence that those FBI folks are themselves corrupt, abusing their power and doing illegal things in seeking to favor one presidential candidate over another.
You’ve stated that you follow the facts where they lead…
Tychicus, Is that why Comey announced they had found the emails on Weiner’s computer right before the election? Was he biased toward Trump as the Dems contend? No. Comey and the rest were just doing their jobs investigating two candidate/crooks. The emails of the adulterous agents contain various condemnations of Trump, Hillary, Lynch and others. Why did it seem that the condemnations of Trump were the harshest? Because as most educated people would agree, he was the biggest and the most outrageous of the idiots.
As one tiny example, one of Strzok’s harshest comments about Trump came in response to Trump bragging about the size of his genatalia in a Presidential debate. Today, many of us have grown used to living in an Idiocracy with the biggest moron in the Oval Office. However, back in 2016 his antics could still shock and outrage many.
Michelle, If the FBI was biased in favor of Hillary, why did Comey announce the discovery of the emails on Weiner’s computer right before the election?
The FBI is run by a Republican: Wray. Mueller is a Republican. Both are overseen by Rosenstein, a Republican. These men are also intelligent professionals, not half-wit grandstanding politicians like Nunes and his fellow Trump cultists.
Mueller is the establishment Ricky, as are the others, but you know this. And Comey has been caught lying under oath, or is it “misremembering?” And yet you still defend them. Your agenda is clear.
“Suppose what many are now suspecting is completely true — that the FBI, or parts of it, exonerated Hillary Clinton and her cohorts with a mock investigation, attempted to swing our presidential election against Donald Trump and then continued to undermine the new administration after they had won with illegitimate claims of Russian collusion orchestrated by sleazy political lowlifes?
While this is not quite Stalinist — no one was tortured in Lubyanka or sent to the Gulag for life — it’s not all that distant. It’s tantamount to an internal coup d’état that is still ongoing. And just as in many coups throughout history, many of the participants are convinced they are doing the right thing, that they are on the side of justice, even though they are bending it, especially because they are bending it. The ends justify the means, as the old homicidal slogan goes.
Peter Strzok and Lisa Page — that low-rent Hero and Leander of the Beltway — certainly believed that. You know that from the contents of their compulsive text messages even though five key months are suddenly “missing.” The inside of the FBI, particularly at the higher reaches, seems to have been filled with a band of smug, self-righteous ideologues who would do anything, erase or rephrase anything, to get their way. And then lie about it. Either that or quote scripture. Or form “secret societies.”
Or just cover up, as Robert Mueller did when Strzok and Page were caught, literally and ideologically, with their pants down. He simply shipped them off Soviet-style to FBI Siberia, not saying a word to the public, hoping no one would notice, hoping it would be ignored that those “secret societies” and “insurance policies” they referred to smack of exactly the kind of behavior that would open one to RICO charges in a normal FBI investigation. This coverup only came out by accident months later. (As Marc Antony might have put it, “And Robert is an honorable man.” He might add now: “And Loretta is an honorable woman.”)
Put another way, should “lying to the FBI” be a crime, when the FBI itself lies?
That’s not a zen koan. That’s reality.”
——————————
Mueller and Comey are part of the “establishment”. This means they are educated professionals with lengthy backgrounds in law enforcement. The same can be said of Wray and Rosenstein. I do support them. I do not support criminal candidates, their toadies or their cults.
Had Hillary won she would no doubt have instituted a purge of the “Republicans” at the FBI. Her actions would have been more serious and less ridiculous than the current actions of Trump and his toadies.
Comey’s friend who assisted him in leaking classified FBI info has changed his story in order to attempt to shield Comey from discipline for his leaks. A real stand up guy that Comey…. 🙄
“A friend of former FBI director James Comey who leaked sensitive FBI memos to The New York Times in the wake of Comey’s firing in 2017 now claims to be Comey’s personal attorney. Daniel Richman, a law professor at Columbia University, told The Federalist via phone on Tuesday afternoon that he was now personally representing Comey.
The revelation comes in the wake of news that Comey was interviewed by the special counsel’s office last year. According to The New York Times, the line of questioning from the office of special counsel Robert Mueller focused on memos that Comey wrote and later leaked after he was fired from his job by President Donald Trump. A review of FBI policies governing the handling of sensitive government documents suggests Comey violated FBI policy by leaking the memos, which were produced on government time, using government equipment, and directly related to his official government responsibilities, according to Comey’s own testimony before Congress.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who serves as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote in a letter to the Department of Justice on January 3 that at least one of the memos Comey provided to his friend was classified.
“My staff has since reviewed these memoranda in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) at the FBI, and I reviewed them in a SCIF at the Office of Senate Security,” Grassley wrote. “The FBI insisted that these reviews take place in a SCIF because the majority of the memos are classified. Of the seven memos, four are marked classified at the ‘SECRET’ or ‘CONFIDENTIAL’ levels.”
“If it’s true that Professor Richman had four of the seven memos, then in light of the fact that four of the seven memos the Committee reviewed are classified, it would appear that at least one memo the former FBI director gave Professor Richman contained classified information,” Grassley noted in the letter.
Reached by phone on Tuesday, Richman refused to say when his legal representation of Comey began or whether he was personally representing Comey when the former FBI director testified before Congress in June 2017 about his deliberate leaking of the FBI records. The specific timing of the attorney-client relationship is important, because it may shield conversations between Comey and Richman regarding the coordinated leak of FBI records to the media from law enforcement scrutiny. Richman’s legal work on behalf of Comey was not known before today, as Comey testified before Congress in 2017 that Richman was merely a friend.
“I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter,” Comey testified last June in response to a question from Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). “Didn’t do it myself, for a variety of reasons.”
“But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel,” Comey continued. “And so I asked a close friend of mine to do it.””
—————————–
rw @9:30: I don’t know why Comey announced that when he did. Perhaps to somehow “even the scales” somewhat, or cover his tracks b/c of his past actions. If he was just “doing his job,” then why did he write an exoneration statement before having even interviewed Hillary (the prime subject of the investigation), why didn’t he give rights advisement to Hillary, why did he change words in the exoneration statement in order to remove the clear felony language, etc. And in the wider FBI, what about using an unverified dossier to secure a FISA warrant? And the existence of these “secret societies”?
The body of evidence runs much deeper than Comey announcing what was on Weiner’s computer, and that revelation actually exposed even more corruption and further mishandling of classified information.
Tychicus, The correct answer on the Weiner disclosure is that Comey was just trying to do his job under very adverse circumstances even as Wray is trying to the same job under similar, but more comical, circumstances.
For healthcare providers facing restrictions on their rights of conscience, reinforcements are on the way.
On January 18th, the Trump Administration announced the creation of the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division of Health and Human Services.
According to Roger Severino, the head of the Civil Rights Office at HHS, the division’s purpose is to protect doctors, nurses, and other health care providers “from being coerced into participating in activities that violate their consciences, such as abortion, sterilization, or assisted suicide.”
That’s the question I have here…… Who isn’t tainted by it all, and by existing relationships with the major players, that’s qualified and could even do such an investigation? This runs deep.
“Voters think a special prosecutor is needed to see if the nation’s top cops have been playing politics.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 49% of Likely U.S. Voters believe a special prosecutor should be named to investigate whether senior FBI officials handled the investigation of Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump in a legal and unbiased fashion. Thirty-one percent (31%) disagree, but a sizable 19% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Sixty-two percent (62%) of Republicans are calling for an outside prosecutor to investigate the FBI, as is a plurality (49%) of voters not affiliated with either major political party. Among Democrats, 38% favor a special prosecutor; 40% are opposed, but 22% are undecided.”
I read both sides, Ricky, though I lean conservative. The issue is justice and confidence have eroded completely in this country–a large part due to the fourth estate not conducting themselves properly.
Back in the dark ages when I trained to be a reporter, we were reminded that everyone has a bias but our job as reporters was to present the facts as best and as objectively as we could and allow the reader to reach their own conclusions.
When ABC chose to make Roone Arledge their News director as well as their sports director, they turned their news agency over to a entertainment. I don’t remember the year, long ago.
When Woodward and Bernstein, “took down the president,” back in those same dark ages, young investigative reporters were hot to duplicate their work. I have not seen the movie The Post because I can’t bear to sit through it, but even then Ben Bradley knew to check out the legality of Watergate and proceeded very cautiously. Whether he did that or not with the Pentagon Papers, is another story (which is the current movie).
But what it meant was the fourth estate was using its most necessary powers: to shine light on corruption and truth, for aims that may not have been so pure. It has all gone down since then.
Remember, Deep Throat was an FBI insider (who retired here to my community).
The problem we have now is confidence in all institutions is severely eroded. The baby boomer generation got what they asked for “not trusting anyone over 30.” I don’t trust anybody now, government, news organizations, Congress. I’m judicious in my assessment of “professional” Christians–too much sin and when you involve the church with politics you are corrupting the church.
I don’t know who the patriots are. My military patriot friends have left the service–some under persecution for faith practiced out of uniform.
All I know is the Bible is true. I need to be as wise as serpent and as innocent as a lamb. Power corrupts, (wo)man is sinful. We need to guard our hearts, pray for our nation and wait to see what happens next.
I don’t expect it to be pretty. Fortunately, I and all of you, have a hope of heaven.
Michelle, I also remember Watergate. The Rick Weaver of 1972-1974 was much like Tychicus. Nixon was too liberal for me, but I believed him rather than “the biased liberal media”. It was disappointing when we learned that Nixon had obstructed justice and the leftists in the media had largely been correct. Many conservatives in Congress who had defended Nixon went down to defeat in 1974.
I still think the press is biased to the left-particularly on economic issues. However, Trump is like Nixon after a lobotomy. Nixon never admitted to obstruction of justice in a live interview with Lester Holt on NBC. The press, the Congress and the Special Prosecutor had to dig to discover the truth about Watergate. What was tragedy then is now repeated as farce.
I have a question for Trumpian anarchists: If you are able to achieve your goal and “burn it down”, who is going to issue all those government checks that come every month to Democrats and Trumpkins alike? How are the Democrats and Trumpkins going to continue to get their free or heavily subsidized healthcare?
Every day, the Right blasts the FBI and the Left defends it. And the Left is harder on the Kremlin than the Right. Is this real life? What’ll happen next, the D’s coming out for enterprise zones and the R’s coming out for midnight basketball?
Can someone explain to me how one can think Bill Clinton meeting with Loretta Lynch on tarmac stinks (a proposition i am not arguing) but *not* POTUS asking Comey for loyalty and asking McCabe for whom he voted? Thanks
Ricky, this is far, far worse than Watergate, and this time it’s not the president who has been steeped in corruption, but rather, unfortunately, one of our most revered and respected institutions.
Follow the evidence, not your preconceived judgments…
If there is evidence that Trump has done something illegal, let him be prosecuted. If Mueller has evidence that Trump crossed the line, let Trump be prosecuted. The problem is that the bar has been set so very low with Comey’s assessment of Clinton’s behavior that now it’s difficult for a prosecutor to say Trump had ill intent.
This is what happens when the bureaucracy is entrenched and protected as it has been for decades—it inevitably protects itself from change. And in this case, the establishment is well represented by both Democrats and Republicans, and so the enemies of the President’s agenda reside in both parties.
Tychicus, Most Dems would agree with you that this may be worse than Watergate – but in a very different way than you imagine.
I very much agree that we should follow the evidence. Remember we have seen no reports or memos yet from Mueller, just a lot of frantic yapping from Nunes and the Cult with counter-yapping from the Democrats.
I will agree to keep an open mind. Remember that from the beginning I told you that I thought Trump was innocent of any serious substantive wrongdoing, but idiotically framed himself with the Comey firing, bragging to the Russian ambassador, the Holt interview, etc.
Like Michelle does, read non-cult material and then compare and analyze. National Review and The Weekly Standard are non-Cult, but conservative.
Trust me, Debra. The FBI guys couldn’t care less about Trump’s “agenda”. They are not “globalists”, they aren’t angry about his Wall and they have no objection if he wants to fight with Nordstrom or be spanked with a Forbes magazine by a porn star.
I don’t see the evidence for your claims, Ricky. Comey quashed the Clinton investigation which pretty clearly should have been sent up to Justice–even if they chose to dismiss it. His own words indicated as much. He was most likely caved to political pressure. Later, he was probably trying to undo some of his self-inflicted damage by exposing the Weiner emails. Then he admitted that he leaked (presumably classified) information for the express purpose of prompting this investigation into Trump. For an anti-Trumper I suppose those are irrelevant tidbits, but for most unbiased observers, those facts are indicators that something is definitely wrong at the FBI.
Debra, Hillary agrees with you that something was/is definitely wrong at the FBI. She and the Dems say that Comey and his boys and their condemnation of her and that late Weiner announcement cost her the election. All I see are dishonest candidates and their supporters attacking law enforcement.
And I see the highest law enforcement agency in the land putting fingers on the political scale where they don’t belong. Comey is responsible for opening this can of worms by his own admission, and the fire will not die down until there is some resolution. I imagine he is regretting leaking the memos that precipitated this fiasco about now.
Debra, The mamas of both the Bloods and the Crips think the police are out to get their boys, so you and AJ and Trump and Hillary all hate Comey equally.
Ricky, from the beginning you claimed that Pres. Trump had colluded with the Russians, consistently parroting liberal talking points despite no real evidence, and labelling anyone who disagreed as a “Trumpkin” or a “cultist.”
It seems like you need to heed your own advice and read more widely (or at least with greater discernment), and perhaps be more gracious (with more nuance) toward your fellow conservatives.
I don’t hate Comey at all Ricky. In fact, I thought he was in an untenable position regarding the Hillary investigation. I thought he probably wanted to be an honest man, and perhaps convinced himself he was by both the way he dealt with the Hillary matter and the Weiner emails. I think he eventually caved to political pressure, but I was willing to give him some credit for trying, even if it was unsuccessfully.
But then he lost it with Trump. If there were actionable evidence in the memos, one might forgive him for the leak. But it seems more likely to me that his ego just had had all it could take, so if he was going to go out, then by golly, he was going to go out with a finger in Trump’s eye. Bad decision. And though it’s human, it’s not admirable. And worse, not only are we are now stuck in this firestorm that he precipitated, but there is now some evidence to suspect that the political manipulation runs even deeper. It’s not a good day to be top brass at the FBI.
Debra, I know you were really trying to be balanced and fair, but Comey did not precipitate the firestorm. His firing and the lying by Trump and his toadies about the cause for his firing led directly to the appointment of Mueller. Even Bannon knew what the firing of Comey would lead to and warned Trump, to no avail.
Ricky, We know what Comey did and we know why he did it because he told us. You can speculate that it would have happened anyway without him, but the facts say that it did not happen otherwise. I do not believe it would have come to this without Comey.
If Comey had pledged loyalty to Trump as requested and kissed his ring, I agree it would not have come to this. It would then have come to something much more like Watergate. In that case, many people including the acting head of the FBI, were convicted of felonies after the President tried to use the CIA and his influence on the FBI to stop a criminal investigation. Believe me, Comey and Wray know that history very well.
Tychicus @ 4:13 Absolutely not true. All through the moronic “tapp” tweets which you and others defended and the Comey firing itself and the idiotic confession to Lester Holt, my prediction was that your moron was framing himself. I stand by that prediction. If there was serious collusion or other malfeasance I will be forced to admit that I was wrong and that Trump is smarter than he appears.
Well good luck finding more info on that “secret society” stuff now. I’d willing to bet that the coincidentally (not) 10% number here somehow will cover anyone’s phone that they might have wanted a closer look at. Just a hunch….
“Thousands of FBI cellphones were affected by the technical glitch that the DOJ says prevented five months’ worth of text messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page from being stored or uploaded into the bureau’s archive system, federal law enforcement officials tell Fox News.
The missing messages have been at the center of a storm of controversy on Capitol Hill, after the DOJ notified congressional committees that there is a gap in records between Dec. 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017. Strzok and Page are under scrutiny after it was revealed that the former Robert Mueller team members exchanged a series of anti-Trump texts during the presidential campaign.
The gap in records covered a crucial period, raising suspicion among GOP lawmakers as to how those messages disappeared.
But Fox News is told that the glitch affected the phones of “nearly” 10 percent of the FBI’s 35,000 employees.
Senior Department of Justice officials told Fox News they are “taking steps” to possibly recover the texts from the appropriate cellphone carriers. The same officials told Fox News they are also making every effort to track down the physical cellphones in question so they could be subject to a forensic review.
The missing messages have also caused problems for the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General.”
———————–
rw: I never defended “tapp” tweets – you’re the one who has been obsessed with that phrase. I simply stated that Trump was under surveillance, which he was.
Bannon is gone and the alt-right has receded. But they’re winning. A hostility to American government institutions, a disdain for traditional norms, the embrace of conspiracy theories—all are astonishingly pervasive among the conservative commentariat and Republican politicians.
Wandering Views 
Don’t believe the latest lies from the FBI. First there was no evidence, then there was, but now they lost it. Sure………
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-fbi-is-looking-guilty-as-hell-in-russia-probe/
“As Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s vast and fruitless investigation into supposed ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government drags on, it’s the FBI itself that appears to have been engaged in nefarious activities.”
———–
“As Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept rightly explains, “One of the gravest and most damaging abuses of state power is to misuse surveillance authorities for political purposes.” (Which makes the mainstream media’s utter disinterest in this story so bewildering.)”
“Then there’s the text where Strzok says he was conflicted about joining Mueller’s team because the Russia investigation was, in his own estimation, much ado about nothing. “You and I both know the odds are nothing,” he texted. “If I thought it was likely, I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern that there’s no big there there.”
But here’s where things really get interesting. It turns out that the FBI can’t find any of the texts the two sent each other from December 14, 2016, to May 17, 2017, which was the day Mueller was named Special Counsel. The FBI says it was due to a technical glitch. We shall see.
One way of reading all this is that, despite the obvious political biases of these officials, the FBI acted impartially when it came to investigating Trump, did everything on the up and up when it came to wiretapping his campaign, and suffered an innocent technical problem that erased exchanges between two key officials.
Another way of reading this is that corrupt FBI officials used the immense power at their disposal to illegally eavesdrop on private citizens, fuel a costly and bogus investigation into Trump — while giving Hillary Clinton a free pass on her own scandals — and then tried to keep these machinations under wraps.
We are not conspiracy-mongers here. And we, like everyone in the country, want to be able to trust that our federal law enforcement officials aren’t serving as political pawns.
But the facts keep pointing to the latter interpretation.”
—————————-
https://nypost.com/2018/01/23/evidence-suggests-a-massive-scandal-is-brewing-at-the-fbi/
“During the financial crisis, the federal government bailed out banks it declared “too big to fail.” Fearing their bankruptcy might trigger economic Armageddon, the feds propped them up with taxpayer cash.
Something similar is happening now at the FBI, with the Washington wagons circling the agency to protect it from charges of corruption. This time, the appropriate tag line is “too big to believe.”
Yet each day brings credible reports suggesting there is a massive scandal involving the top ranks of America’s premier law enforcement agency. The reports, which feature talk among agents of a “secret society” and suddenly missing text messages, point to the existence both of a cabal dedicated to defeating Donald Trump in 2016 and of a plan to let Hillary Clinton skate free in the classified email probe.
If either one is true — and I believe both probably are — it would mean FBI leaders betrayed the nation by abusing their powers in a bid to pick the president.
More support for this view involves the FBI’s use of the Russian dossier on Trump that was paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. It is almost certain that the FBI used the dossier to get FISA court warrants to spy on Trump associates, meaning it used the opposition research of the party in power to convince a court to let it spy on the candidate of the other party — likely without telling the court of the dossier’s political link.
Even worse, there is growing reason to believe someone in President Barack Obama’s administration turned over classified information about Trump to the Clinton campaign.
As one former federal prosecutor put it, “It doesn’t get worse than that.” That prosecutor, Joseph diGenova, believes Trump was correct when he claimed Obama aides wiretapped his phones at Trump Tower.
These and other elements combine to make a toxic brew that smells to high heaven, but most Americans don’t know much about it. Mainstream media coverage has been sparse and dismissive and there’s a blackout from the same Democrats obsessed with Russia, Russia, Russia.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
I should be more clear here as well. It’s not the whole FBI I have a problem with. Just the lying Obama holdovers who turned it into a political weapon, which obviously happened, and yet many remain, and continue to obstruct at every opportunity to protect Obama.
LikeLike
So when did “the lying Obama holdovers” begin to work at the FBI? Answer: Decades ago. They served under both Democrats and Republicans, and rose up the ranks as they fought criminals and terrorists. In 2016, they were placed in an extremely difficult situation when both major parties nominated candidates whose dishonesty and stupidity led to FBI investigations of both of those corrupt New Yorkers.
LikeLike
If you can’t trust your FBI, who can you trust?.
Soon people will begin to doubt what they see and hear on TV.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Debra, Here is a discussion between Douthat and Frum about Frum’s new book:
On the surface this is a debate about whether the Trump Presidency is a tragedy (Frum) or a farce (Douthat). However, I was disgusted and you will be pleased that the argument reveals that both men want Trump to develop new programs to coddle Trumpers and Democrats. I am reminded of the time in the 60s when blacks rioted in the cities and both parties responded by blowing trillions of dollars on scores of new welfare programs.
Kevin D. Williamson is nearly alone among conservative writers in being willing to state harsh truths and preach personal responsibility.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Three cheers for globalism!
LikeLike
Nichols is right here. Once the US became an idiocracy, it became easy for enemies to use social media against us:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Having been in I.T. for over 50 years, I can tell you that when I hear the term “glitch” I know there’s BS involved.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Ricky @7:57am: Yet there is clear evidence that those FBI folks are themselves corrupt, abusing their power and doing illegal things in seeking to favor one presidential candidate over another.
You’ve stated that you follow the facts where they lead…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tychicus, Is that why Comey announced they had found the emails on Weiner’s computer right before the election? Was he biased toward Trump as the Dems contend? No. Comey and the rest were just doing their jobs investigating two candidate/crooks. The emails of the adulterous agents contain various condemnations of Trump, Hillary, Lynch and others. Why did it seem that the condemnations of Trump were the harshest? Because as most educated people would agree, he was the biggest and the most outrageous of the idiots.
LikeLike
As one tiny example, one of Strzok’s harshest comments about Trump came in response to Trump bragging about the size of his genatalia in a Presidential debate. Today, many of us have grown used to living in an Idiocracy with the biggest moron in the Oval Office. However, back in 2016 his antics could still shock and outrage many.
LikeLike
Chas’ comments are the most pertinent and troubling.
https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/what-do-we-do-about-the-fbi/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Michelle, If the FBI was biased in favor of Hillary, why did Comey announce the discovery of the emails on Weiner’s computer right before the election?
The FBI is run by a Republican: Wray. Mueller is a Republican. Both are overseen by Rosenstein, a Republican. These men are also intelligent professionals, not half-wit grandstanding politicians like Nunes and his fellow Trump cultists.
LikeLike
People who believe women have rights but men and children don’t, should sit down and shut up.
LikeLike
Mueller is the establishment Ricky, as are the others, but you know this. And Comey has been caught lying under oath, or is it “misremembering?” And yet you still defend them. Your agenda is clear.
LikeLike
This from Michelle’s link sums it up nicely.
“Suppose what many are now suspecting is completely true — that the FBI, or parts of it, exonerated Hillary Clinton and her cohorts with a mock investigation, attempted to swing our presidential election against Donald Trump and then continued to undermine the new administration after they had won with illegitimate claims of Russian collusion orchestrated by sleazy political lowlifes?
While this is not quite Stalinist — no one was tortured in Lubyanka or sent to the Gulag for life — it’s not all that distant. It’s tantamount to an internal coup d’état that is still ongoing. And just as in many coups throughout history, many of the participants are convinced they are doing the right thing, that they are on the side of justice, even though they are bending it, especially because they are bending it. The ends justify the means, as the old homicidal slogan goes.
Peter Strzok and Lisa Page — that low-rent Hero and Leander of the Beltway — certainly believed that. You know that from the contents of their compulsive text messages even though five key months are suddenly “missing.” The inside of the FBI, particularly at the higher reaches, seems to have been filled with a band of smug, self-righteous ideologues who would do anything, erase or rephrase anything, to get their way. And then lie about it. Either that or quote scripture. Or form “secret societies.”
Or just cover up, as Robert Mueller did when Strzok and Page were caught, literally and ideologically, with their pants down. He simply shipped them off Soviet-style to FBI Siberia, not saying a word to the public, hoping no one would notice, hoping it would be ignored that those “secret societies” and “insurance policies” they referred to smack of exactly the kind of behavior that would open one to RICO charges in a normal FBI investigation. This coverup only came out by accident months later. (As Marc Antony might have put it, “And Robert is an honorable man.” He might add now: “And Loretta is an honorable woman.”)
Put another way, should “lying to the FBI” be a crime, when the FBI itself lies?
That’s not a zen koan. That’s reality.”
——————————
To everyone but the willfully blind.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Did McCabe set Flynn up?
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/flynn-kept-fbi-interview-concealed-white-house-trump-n840491
————————————
And why Trump should just say no to Mueller’s trap. Tell him to stick it.
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/01/23/mueller-wants-question-trump-flynn-comey-firings-trump-say-no/
LikeLike
Mumsee – I’m curious as to what prompted your comment?
LikeLike
Mueller and Comey are part of the “establishment”. This means they are educated professionals with lengthy backgrounds in law enforcement. The same can be said of Wray and Rosenstein. I do support them. I do not support criminal candidates, their toadies or their cults.
Had Hillary won she would no doubt have instituted a purge of the “Republicans” at the FBI. Her actions would have been more serious and less ridiculous than the current actions of Trump and his toadies.
LikeLike
Comey’s friend who assisted him in leaking classified FBI info has changed his story in order to attempt to shield Comey from discipline for his leaks. A real stand up guy that Comey…. 🙄
http://thefederalist.com/2018/01/23/comey-friend-leaked-fbi-memos-now-claims-attorney/#.Wme1En0ft3o.twitter
“A friend of former FBI director James Comey who leaked sensitive FBI memos to The New York Times in the wake of Comey’s firing in 2017 now claims to be Comey’s personal attorney. Daniel Richman, a law professor at Columbia University, told The Federalist via phone on Tuesday afternoon that he was now personally representing Comey.
The revelation comes in the wake of news that Comey was interviewed by the special counsel’s office last year. According to The New York Times, the line of questioning from the office of special counsel Robert Mueller focused on memos that Comey wrote and later leaked after he was fired from his job by President Donald Trump. A review of FBI policies governing the handling of sensitive government documents suggests Comey violated FBI policy by leaking the memos, which were produced on government time, using government equipment, and directly related to his official government responsibilities, according to Comey’s own testimony before Congress.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who serves as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote in a letter to the Department of Justice on January 3 that at least one of the memos Comey provided to his friend was classified.
“My staff has since reviewed these memoranda in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) at the FBI, and I reviewed them in a SCIF at the Office of Senate Security,” Grassley wrote. “The FBI insisted that these reviews take place in a SCIF because the majority of the memos are classified. Of the seven memos, four are marked classified at the ‘SECRET’ or ‘CONFIDENTIAL’ levels.”
“If it’s true that Professor Richman had four of the seven memos, then in light of the fact that four of the seven memos the Committee reviewed are classified, it would appear that at least one memo the former FBI director gave Professor Richman contained classified information,” Grassley noted in the letter.
Reached by phone on Tuesday, Richman refused to say when his legal representation of Comey began or whether he was personally representing Comey when the former FBI director testified before Congress in June 2017 about his deliberate leaking of the FBI records. The specific timing of the attorney-client relationship is important, because it may shield conversations between Comey and Richman regarding the coordinated leak of FBI records to the media from law enforcement scrutiny. Richman’s legal work on behalf of Comey was not known before today, as Comey testified before Congress in 2017 that Richman was merely a friend.
“I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter,” Comey testified last June in response to a question from Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). “Didn’t do it myself, for a variety of reasons.”
“But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel,” Comey continued. “And so I asked a close friend of mine to do it.””
—————————–
LikeLiked by 1 person
rw @9:30: I don’t know why Comey announced that when he did. Perhaps to somehow “even the scales” somewhat, or cover his tracks b/c of his past actions. If he was just “doing his job,” then why did he write an exoneration statement before having even interviewed Hillary (the prime subject of the investigation), why didn’t he give rights advisement to Hillary, why did he change words in the exoneration statement in order to remove the clear felony language, etc. And in the wider FBI, what about using an unverified dossier to secure a FISA warrant? And the existence of these “secret societies”?
The body of evidence runs much deeper than Comey announcing what was on Weiner’s computer, and that revelation actually exposed even more corruption and further mishandling of classified information.
LikeLike
Kizzie:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/24/new-york-city-professor-tells-pro-life-marchers-to-sit-down-and-shut-up.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tychicus, The correct answer on the Weiner disclosure is that Comey was just trying to do his job under very adverse circumstances even as Wray is trying to the same job under similar, but more comical, circumstances.
LikeLike
From “The Colson Center”
For healthcare providers facing restrictions on their rights of conscience, reinforcements are on the way.
On January 18th, the Trump Administration announced the creation of the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division of Health and Human Services.
According to Roger Severino, the head of the Civil Rights Office at HHS, the division’s purpose is to protect doctors, nurses, and other health care providers “from being coerced into participating in activities that violate their consciences, such as abortion, sterilization, or assisted suicide.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
But who?
That’s the question I have here…… Who isn’t tainted by it all, and by existing relationships with the major players, that’s qualified and could even do such an investigation? This runs deep.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2018/voters_call_for_special_prosecutor_to_investigate_fbi
“Voters think a special prosecutor is needed to see if the nation’s top cops have been playing politics.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 49% of Likely U.S. Voters believe a special prosecutor should be named to investigate whether senior FBI officials handled the investigation of Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump in a legal and unbiased fashion. Thirty-one percent (31%) disagree, but a sizable 19% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Sixty-two percent (62%) of Republicans are calling for an outside prosecutor to investigate the FBI, as is a plurality (49%) of voters not affiliated with either major political party. Among Democrats, 38% favor a special prosecutor; 40% are opposed, but 22% are undecided.”
LikeLike
Two names come to mind……. and both are free at the moment…… 🙂
Rudy, the former prosecutor turned mayor.
And Chris, the former US attorney turned recently retired Gov…….
—————————————
Of course I say those names knowing full well the reaction to either from the other side…… 😎
LikeLike
I read both sides, Ricky, though I lean conservative. The issue is justice and confidence have eroded completely in this country–a large part due to the fourth estate not conducting themselves properly.
Back in the dark ages when I trained to be a reporter, we were reminded that everyone has a bias but our job as reporters was to present the facts as best and as objectively as we could and allow the reader to reach their own conclusions.
When ABC chose to make Roone Arledge their News director as well as their sports director, they turned their news agency over to a entertainment. I don’t remember the year, long ago.
When Woodward and Bernstein, “took down the president,” back in those same dark ages, young investigative reporters were hot to duplicate their work. I have not seen the movie The Post because I can’t bear to sit through it, but even then Ben Bradley knew to check out the legality of Watergate and proceeded very cautiously. Whether he did that or not with the Pentagon Papers, is another story (which is the current movie).
But what it meant was the fourth estate was using its most necessary powers: to shine light on corruption and truth, for aims that may not have been so pure. It has all gone down since then.
Remember, Deep Throat was an FBI insider (who retired here to my community).
The problem we have now is confidence in all institutions is severely eroded. The baby boomer generation got what they asked for “not trusting anyone over 30.” I don’t trust anybody now, government, news organizations, Congress. I’m judicious in my assessment of “professional” Christians–too much sin and when you involve the church with politics you are corrupting the church.
I don’t know who the patriots are. My military patriot friends have left the service–some under persecution for faith practiced out of uniform.
All I know is the Bible is true. I need to be as wise as serpent and as innocent as a lamb. Power corrupts, (wo)man is sinful. We need to guard our hearts, pray for our nation and wait to see what happens next.
I don’t expect it to be pretty. Fortunately, I and all of you, have a hope of heaven.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Rudy and Chris. Two Northeasterners who are almost as slimy and scandal-prone as Clinton and Trump. That would certainly restore confidence.
LikeLike
Confidence?…… pfft.
Three words for ya’….
Circus. Like. Atmosphere.
🤩
LikeLike
Follow the yellow brick road…..
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/01/paper-roads-lead-comey-evidence-suggests-scandal-big-believe-brewing-fbi/
LikeLike
Michelle, I also remember Watergate. The Rick Weaver of 1972-1974 was much like Tychicus. Nixon was too liberal for me, but I believed him rather than “the biased liberal media”. It was disappointing when we learned that Nixon had obstructed justice and the leftists in the media had largely been correct. Many conservatives in Congress who had defended Nixon went down to defeat in 1974.
I still think the press is biased to the left-particularly on economic issues. However, Trump is like Nixon after a lobotomy. Nixon never admitted to obstruction of justice in a live interview with Lester Holt on NBC. The press, the Congress and the Special Prosecutor had to dig to discover the truth about Watergate. What was tragedy then is now repeated as farce.
LikeLike
I have a question for Trumpian anarchists: If you are able to achieve your goal and “burn it down”, who is going to issue all those government checks that come every month to Democrats and Trumpkins alike? How are the Democrats and Trumpkins going to continue to get their free or heavily subsidized healthcare?
LikeLike
LikeLike
Jake Tapper with a question for Trumpers:
LikeLike
Ricky, this is far, far worse than Watergate, and this time it’s not the president who has been steeped in corruption, but rather, unfortunately, one of our most revered and respected institutions.
Follow the evidence, not your preconceived judgments…
LikeLike
If there is evidence that Trump has done something illegal, let him be prosecuted. If Mueller has evidence that Trump crossed the line, let Trump be prosecuted. The problem is that the bar has been set so very low with Comey’s assessment of Clinton’s behavior that now it’s difficult for a prosecutor to say Trump had ill intent.
This is what happens when the bureaucracy is entrenched and protected as it has been for decades—it inevitably protects itself from change. And in this case, the establishment is well represented by both Democrats and Republicans, and so the enemies of the President’s agenda reside in both parties.
LikeLike
Tychicus, Most Dems would agree with you that this may be worse than Watergate – but in a very different way than you imagine.
I very much agree that we should follow the evidence. Remember we have seen no reports or memos yet from Mueller, just a lot of frantic yapping from Nunes and the Cult with counter-yapping from the Democrats.
I will agree to keep an open mind. Remember that from the beginning I told you that I thought Trump was innocent of any serious substantive wrongdoing, but idiotically framed himself with the Comey firing, bragging to the Russian ambassador, the Holt interview, etc.
Like Michelle does, read non-cult material and then compare and analyze. National Review and The Weekly Standard are non-Cult, but conservative.
LikeLike
Trust me, Debra. The FBI guys couldn’t care less about Trump’s “agenda”. They are not “globalists”, they aren’t angry about his Wall and they have no objection if he wants to fight with Nordstrom or be spanked with a Forbes magazine by a porn star.
LikeLike
I don’t see the evidence for your claims, Ricky. Comey quashed the Clinton investigation which pretty clearly should have been sent up to Justice–even if they chose to dismiss it. His own words indicated as much. He was most likely caved to political pressure. Later, he was probably trying to undo some of his self-inflicted damage by exposing the Weiner emails. Then he admitted that he leaked (presumably classified) information for the express purpose of prompting this investigation into Trump. For an anti-Trumper I suppose those are irrelevant tidbits, but for most unbiased observers, those facts are indicators that something is definitely wrong at the FBI.
LikeLike
Debra, Hillary agrees with you that something was/is definitely wrong at the FBI. She and the Dems say that Comey and his boys and their condemnation of her and that late Weiner announcement cost her the election. All I see are dishonest candidates and their supporters attacking law enforcement.
LikeLike
And I see the highest law enforcement agency in the land putting fingers on the political scale where they don’t belong. Comey is responsible for opening this can of worms by his own admission, and the fire will not die down until there is some resolution. I imagine he is regretting leaking the memos that precipitated this fiasco about now.
LikeLike
And Hillary does NOT agree with me: I wanted her investigated. She’s much closer to the establishment camp that you inhabit, Ricky.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Debra, The mamas of both the Bloods and the Crips think the police are out to get their boys, so you and AJ and Trump and Hillary all hate Comey equally.
LikeLike
Ricky, from the beginning you claimed that Pres. Trump had colluded with the Russians, consistently parroting liberal talking points despite no real evidence, and labelling anyone who disagreed as a “Trumpkin” or a “cultist.”
It seems like you need to heed your own advice and read more widely (or at least with greater discernment), and perhaps be more gracious (with more nuance) toward your fellow conservatives.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t hate Comey at all Ricky. In fact, I thought he was in an untenable position regarding the Hillary investigation. I thought he probably wanted to be an honest man, and perhaps convinced himself he was by both the way he dealt with the Hillary matter and the Weiner emails. I think he eventually caved to political pressure, but I was willing to give him some credit for trying, even if it was unsuccessfully.
But then he lost it with Trump. If there were actionable evidence in the memos, one might forgive him for the leak. But it seems more likely to me that his ego just had had all it could take, so if he was going to go out, then by golly, he was going to go out with a finger in Trump’s eye. Bad decision. And though it’s human, it’s not admirable. And worse, not only are we are now stuck in this firestorm that he precipitated, but there is now some evidence to suspect that the political manipulation runs even deeper. It’s not a good day to be top brass at the FBI.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Debra, I know you were really trying to be balanced and fair, but Comey did not precipitate the firestorm. His firing and the lying by Trump and his toadies about the cause for his firing led directly to the appointment of Mueller. Even Bannon knew what the firing of Comey would lead to and warned Trump, to no avail.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ricky, We know what Comey did and we know why he did it because he told us. You can speculate that it would have happened anyway without him, but the facts say that it did not happen otherwise. I do not believe it would have come to this without Comey.
LikeLike
If Comey had pledged loyalty to Trump as requested and kissed his ring, I agree it would not have come to this. It would then have come to something much more like Watergate. In that case, many people including the acting head of the FBI, were convicted of felonies after the President tried to use the CIA and his influence on the FBI to stop a criminal investigation. Believe me, Comey and Wray know that history very well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tychicus @ 4:13 Absolutely not true. All through the moronic “tapp” tweets which you and others defended and the Comey firing itself and the idiotic confession to Lester Holt, my prediction was that your moron was framing himself. I stand by that prediction. If there was serious collusion or other malfeasance I will be forced to admit that I was wrong and that Trump is smarter than he appears.
LikeLike
Well good luck finding more info on that “secret society” stuff now. I’d willing to bet that the coincidentally (not) 10% number here somehow will cover anyone’s phone that they might have wanted a closer look at. Just a hunch….
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/24/thousands-fbi-cellphones-affected-by-glitch-that-lost-strzok-page-texts-officials-say.html
“Thousands of FBI cellphones were affected by the technical glitch that the DOJ says prevented five months’ worth of text messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page from being stored or uploaded into the bureau’s archive system, federal law enforcement officials tell Fox News.
The missing messages have been at the center of a storm of controversy on Capitol Hill, after the DOJ notified congressional committees that there is a gap in records between Dec. 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017. Strzok and Page are under scrutiny after it was revealed that the former Robert Mueller team members exchanged a series of anti-Trump texts during the presidential campaign.
The gap in records covered a crucial period, raising suspicion among GOP lawmakers as to how those messages disappeared.
But Fox News is told that the glitch affected the phones of “nearly” 10 percent of the FBI’s 35,000 employees.
Senior Department of Justice officials told Fox News they are “taking steps” to possibly recover the texts from the appropriate cellphone carriers. The same officials told Fox News they are also making every effort to track down the physical cellphones in question so they could be subject to a forensic review.
The missing messages have also caused problems for the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General.”
———————–
It’s all so convenient…..
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ricky, I’m still waiting for some of your predictions to come to pass. Maybe you’ll get lucky in November.. ;–)
LikeLiked by 1 person
rw: I never defended “tapp” tweets – you’re the one who has been obsessed with that phrase. I simply stated that Trump was under surveillance, which he was.
LikeLike
Sad, but true.
LikeLike