63 thoughts on “News/Politics 2-2-18

  1. I’m sure by the time most of you read this, the #memo will finally be released and we’ll learn it was Colonel Mustard in the library with a knife.

    In the meantime, however, I would like to comment as an ordinary citizen about those two FBI agents having an affair. Could we apply a little rational thought to this event?

    1. It’s against the law for FBI agents to have affairs and if one of them is in the other’s “chain of command,” that, too, is against the law. Any reasonable manager would know that. I’ll bet other people in the offices knew what they were doing, which leads me to

    2. How could they possibly be doing their jobs if they shared 50,000 texts between each other in two years? Just contemplate how much time it takes to think, compose, send and respond even 25,000 times. What were we paying them to do?

    BTW, how much do they make a year?

    3. If I came home with a new Iphone from work, and probably still had a Samsung 5, my spouse would want to know a. where I got it b. who is paying for it c. why the FBI is giving me two types of phones and maybe even d. what plan is that phone on and can I get a new one, too?

    And even if my spouse missed that new phone, if I had any kids in the house, you better believe they would want to play games on it and try out the camera.

    So, let’s get real. WHY am I, a taxpayer, paying these people? What value am I getting? Did they ever catch any REAL spies?

    Liked by 7 people

  2. Until the Nunes memo, Paul Ryan tried to straddle the line: One foot in Reagan’s Republican Party and one foot in Idiocracy. Nunes should have been removed as Committee Chairman by Ryan after his previous moronic behavior. By supporting Nunes, Ryan has joined The Trump Cult and has dragged all House Republicans (who weren’t already cultists) into the Cult.

    The election this November will between the Democrats and The Trump Cult. I suspect many conservatives will sit this one out.


  3. A friend suggests there may not have been an affair– that it was just a cover for their spy mischief.

    It took me 15 seconds to type this on my IPad. Oops, 20 sec


  4. I know a lot of people think I’m somewhat kidding when I blame the indoctrination/education system and poor parenting on a lot of what’s wrong with today’s youth. But it really is a serious matter, and the consequences of it continuing will only worsen. It’s not just the colleges any more.


    “Social justice activism is usually associated with higher education. We have documented the campus antics of social justice warriors countless times. But what would happen if you started training children from grades K to 12 to become SJWs? One school system in Minnesota is doing just that, and the results are not good.

    Katherine Kersten reports at the Weekly Standard:

    Inside a Public School Social Justice Factory

    For decades, the public schools of Edina, Minnesota, were the gold standard among the state’s school districts. Edina is an upscale suburb of Minneapolis, but virtually overnight, its reputation has changed. Academic rigor is unraveling, high school reading and math test scores are sliding, and students increasingly fear bullying and persecution.

    The shift began in 2013, when Edina school leaders adopted the “All for All” strategic plan—a sweeping initiative that reordered the district’s mission from academic excellence for all students to “racial equity.”

    “Equity” in this context does not mean “equality” or “fairness.” It means racial identity politics—an ideology that blames minority students’ academic challenges on institutional racial bias, repudiates Martin Luther King, Jr.’s color-blind ideal, and focuses on uprooting “white privilege.”

    The training starts in Kindergarten but reaches its peak in high school. Kersten notes:

    The primary vehicle in the indoctrination effort is a year-long English course—required of all 10th-graders—that centers, not on reading literature and enhancing writing skills, but on the politicized themes of “Colonization,” “Immigration” and “Social Constructions of Race, Class and Gender.”

    One student characterized the course this way on the “Rate My Teachers” website: “This class should be renamed . . . ‘Why white males are bad, and how oppressive they are.’”

    Kersten goes on to describe a father who pulled his child out of Edina schools because he escaped from Nicaragua when he was a child and came to America to be free from Marxist propaganda.

    Kersten also points to statistics which show declining reading and math scores.

    Read her entire report here.

    The featured image of this post is from a real ABC book used in the schools titled “A is for Activist” which features pages like “F is for Feminism” and “T is for Trans.””

    Her report is here.



  5. Michelle,

    You are not the only one with such questions/issues.

    Even other agents are questioning why these 2 are still on payroll when they’ve so obviously violated the agents code of conduct and compromised themselves and each other..


    “”I’m concerned that they’re still working at the FBI,” Carter said. “I’m hearing from my sources, too. FBI agents are saying, ‘Why are they still there?'”

    “The Lovebirds. They were having an affair, they were both married, they’re working counter-intelligence. That’s enough for blackmail,” Carter said. “Now they’re sending text messages on an unsecured phone. Believe me, the Germans, the Russians, the Israelis, everybody is going into those phones and trying to suck out all the information they have.”

    Liked by 1 person

  6. More on that here, and maybe attempts to clean up their act.


    “Failing to get traction on their Russia “collusion” front, Sen. Mark Warner and other top Democratic inquisitors now suggest President Trump is obstructing justice by forcing a shake-up at FBI headquarters. But FBI sources tell me the pressure to clean house is also coming from inside the bureau, and it’s based on real concerns over malfeasance by top brass there.

    In a healthy sign, new FBI Director Christopher Wray is slowly but surely sweeping partisan operatives out of the bureau’s executive suites all on his own. On the job just a few months, Wray told Congress in December he wanted to wait and see the evidence before taking any action against high-level investigators accused of bias and misconduct. Over the weekend, he saw some of that evidence, and it convinced him to remove his own deputy, Andrew McCabe.

    “Wray is a smart, experienced attorney,” former assistant FBI Director Ron Hosko told me. “He’s not gonna fold to BS pressure with no facts, so he saw something solid, something from the agency’s inspector general, who has been investigating political conflicts and irregularities involving McCabe for more than a year.”

    Whatever Wray saw wasn’t manufactured by the White House. It came from Justice Department watchdog Michael Horowitz, who launched his probe at the request of Democrats.

    In fact, it’s doubtful there’d even be an internal inquiry if Democratic leaders hadn’t complained about the FBI reopening its probe into Hillary Clinton’s handling of State Department secrets on the eve of the election.”

    I hope they get hoisted by it too.


  7. More bad news for Dems, and good news for Trump and Reps.

    Turns out taxpayers are pretty happy getting more “crumbs.”


    “Two months ago Nancy Pelosi announced that the GOP tax cut was Armageddon. “No, it is the end of the world. This—Health care, the debate on health care is life-death. This is Armageddon,” Pelosi said at a press conference. For a while, the bad-mouthing by Democrats was effective in driving polling on the bill underwater, but there is evidence that is changing. A Monmouth poll Allahpundit covered yesterday showed the public’s opinion of taxmageddon is now evenly split, 44-44. Today, the Associated Press adds some anecdotal color to what might be moving those numbers in a positive direction: People are starting to see the lower tax rates reflected in their paychecks.

    Wayne Love, who works in managed care in Spring Hill, Florida, got an extra $200 in his paycheck last week, which he said will help offset a $300 increase in the cost of his health insurance.

    “I have heard time and again that the middle class is getting crumbs, but I’ll take it!” Love said by email.

    Julia Ketchum, a secretary at a public high school in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, said she was pleasantly surprised her pay went up $1.50 a week. She didn’t think her pay would go up at all, let alone this soon. That adds up to $78 a year, which she said will more than cover her Costco membership for the year.

    And Todd Anderson of Texas and his fiance, who are both educators, got an extra $200 in their paychecks combined that they plan to use to cover the costs of a second baby on its way.

    The AP did find one person who still had a negative view of the tax cut. Aerospace engineer Jefferey Snively said the bill would mostly help, “the ones who needed it least.” But Snively, who got an extra 4% in his check admitted, “It’s tough to be upset about more money in my pocket.”

    All of this could have a real impact on how voters feel about the two parties come November. Back in December, FiveThirtyEight published a piece titled “The Democrats’ Wave Could Turn Into A Flood.” But improving numbers for the tax cut, for Trump, and on the generic congressional ballot has the site’s authors reconsidering their outlook a bit today:”


  8. This just made me laugh: (Posted by a former editor of ours):

    Charles Manson’s heirs are fighting over his estate. Charles Manson had an estate? I don’t have an estate!

    Liked by 3 people

  9. Dj , that was exactly my reaction to the Manson thing. Maybe he should pay the taxpayer back first for his lovely stay.


  10. Point and counter-point.



    “The basic income. The individual mandate. Cap and trade. Income-tax withholding. What do all of these ideas have in common? They are all schemes for implementing a massive and ever-growing welfare and regulatory state—and they were all brought to you by people on the Right.

    The basic income is the brainchild of Charles Murray. The individual mandate originated from a Heritage Foundation proposal. Cap and trade was floated by libertarian “free-market environmentalists.” And what about income-tax withholding, the mechanism that makes it possible to tax a third of our incomes without outright rebellion? That was invented by Milton Friedman.

    Now here we go again. The latest proposal is not quite on the same scale, but it’s a microcosm of how people on the Right, who otherwise see themselves as advocates of free markets and small government, have allowed the big government mentality to take up residence inside their heads.

    Last week, Kristin Shapiro and Andrew Biggs (of the American Enterprise Institute) made an original new proposal in the Wall Street Journal for how the federal government could provide generous paid “family leave” for new parents. Here’s the basic idea.

    Offer new parents the opportunity to collect early Social Security benefits for a period—say, 12 weeks—after the arrival of their child. To offset the cost, parents would agree to delay collecting Social Security retirement benefits, probably for only about six weeks.

    We estimate that to make the Social Security program financially whole, a parent who claimed 12 weeks of benefits would need to delay claiming retirement benefits by only around six weeks. The cost is low because parental-leave benefits claimed early in life would be low relative to retirement benefits claimed later, as earnings typically rise considerably from one’s 20s to one’s early 60s…. Consider an average woman, who enters the workforce at 21 and has her first child at 26. At 25 she would have a salary of about $31,100, according to Social Security Administration data. Using the same formula used to calculate Social Security disability benefits, she would be eligible for a Social Security parental-leave benefit of $1,175 a month, equal to 45% of her earnings at 25…. Because of Social Security’s progressive benefit formula, lower-income workers would receive a higher benefit relative to their earnings.”



    “Some conservative and libertarian writers have expressed their concerns about a proposal to allow people to access a share of their Social Security benefits after the birth or adoption of a child, in return for delaying their retirement benefits to fully offset those costs.

    Notably, this paid leave proposal would be structured to be at least revenue-neutral for Social Security, or it could even be designed to improve Social Security’s financial conditions by requiring people to give up retirement benefits of greater value than the parental leave benefits they use. The main criticisms from the Right are that the proposal would expand our nanny state, undermine needed reforms to the already financially insolvent Social Security system, and generally be an inappropriate and illegitimate expansion of the federal government.

    These are important and legitimate concerns. Yet there are reasons for optimism that this approach would work in the opposite direction, encouraging the consolidation and more efficient use of the social safety net programs that exist, rather than leading to their expansion.”

    “Last year, the American Enterprise Institute, along with the Brookings Institution, published a report calling for an entirely new entitlement program with a new payroll tax. Paid leave programs are overwhelmingly popular with the public—including with Republicans. Doing nothing on the federal level on paid leave may be an option for now, but it’s unlikely to succeed for long.

    Conservatives and libertarians should carefully consider what the options are on this issue. No option is perfect, and all involve trade-offs. Those supporting the Social Security paid leave approach do so with the belief that this could be our best, most realistic option and could have long-term advantages in reshaping how the public thinks about government and public safety nets. If there are better alternatives that have a change of succeeding, we’d love to hear them.”


  11. More here….


    “A memo that shows alleged government surveillance abuse includes testimony from a high-ranking government official who says without the infamous Trump dossier, the FBI and DOJ would not have secured surveillance warrants to spy on at least one member of the Trump team, Fox News has learned.

    According to sources, the memo, which has been at the center of an intense power struggle between congressional Republicans, has been declassified ahead of its expected release later Friday

    It also claims the FBI and DOJ used media reporting to lend credibility to the dossier, while the firm behind the dossier, Fusion GPS, briefed major American news outlets to include New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, New Yorker, Yahoo and Mother Jones.

    The memo shoes that after former British spy Christopher Steele was cut off from the FBI, he continued to pass information, as did Fusion GPS, through Justice Department Official Bruce Ohr. Ohr’s wife Nellie began working for Fusion GPS as early as May 2016.

    It also claims evidence that Steele has a personal animus for the President Trump.”

    Liked by 1 person

  12. So as expected, the whole Mueller investigation and the rest of it were based on a set-up by Obama, leadership at the Doj and FBI, Dems, Fusion GPS, their willing propagandists at major media outlets like WaPo and the NYT., and other assorted dirtbags to bring down Trump.

    Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein, Lynch, Yates…… all were part of this fraud, and need to be held accountable.

    As for all the Never-Trumpers who fell for it…… The crow is cooking as we speak. Hope they’re hungry……

    So when will the apologies and mea culpa’s begin?

    I guess I shouldn’t hold my breathe

    That PDF takes forever to load. I’m thinking there’s a lot of traffic at the moment. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  13. I’ve read the whole thing now. No wonder they didn’t want this to get out.

    And it raises even more issues as to the validity of Mueller’s witch hunt as well.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Like

  15. Like

  16. The biggest revelation is that the FISA warrant that was used to appoint a special prosecutor was supported by the discredited dossier, which was funded by the DNC and Hillary campaign. Former Deputy FBI Director McCabe testified to the Intelligence Committee that the FISA warrant would not have happened if it were not for the discredited dossier.

    This is just the first shoe to drop…

    Liked by 2 people

  17. The Dow Jones Average is now down over 600 points. Investors may prefer a nation which follows the rule of law rather the distortions of the puppet Nunes or the whims of the dishonest Trump.


  18. I’m not a big fan of FISA. FISA abuses should be fully and vigorously prosecuted. These are courts that operate without the usual guardrails of public scrutiny. If the public cannot have confidence that there is no abuse and that it is not being used for political purposes or personal gain, Congress should vote to discontinue FISA immediately. You would think the Left would jump all over that, but like the never-Trumper Republicans, irrational hatred of Trump and his supporters trumps everything.

    I will be glad when Mueller’s investigation is completed. It seems highly unlikely, but if there truly is just cause, let the impeachment proceedings begin. Of course, Kristol and other never-Trumpers don’t need reports or evidence, so they have already begun the proceedings. They’ve even written the history for us—which is probably every bit as accurate as their election prognostications. 🙄

    Liked by 2 people

  19. Mona Charen called my attention to this article on Red State which notes an important error in “the memo”.

    At the end of the day it will be very interesting to see how much of “the dossier” is accurate. We don’t yet know the answer. But I ask this question: Who would you be more likely to trust: Christopher Steele or Donald Trump?


  20. Gowdy and Ryan are trying to make the distinction that, even if entirely true, “the memo” does not in any way discredit the Mueller investigation. See Gowdy’s Tweet I posted above. I understand the logic of this argument. Lunatics and their cults are not logical.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. I believe the transcript linked @ 3:29 indicates that Comey also spoke in a ‘classified setting’ so the wording that Mona Charen is referring to may have occurred there. Is Comey denying saying that? I don’t know that anyone who was present is denying that he referred to the dossier as salacious and unverified.


  22. Now as for McCabe, the Comey fanboy……..


    “I don’t know former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. I’ve never met him. But I was supposed to. I was in an FBI car last June on my way to meet him and other top law enforcement leaders at a counterterrorism communications training event at the 9/11 Museum in New York City when McCabe suddenly ordered me not to show up. The car pulled up outside the museum and I was told not to come inside. I took a taxi back to my hotel and went home.

    Based on my one and only experience with McCabe, it proved to me that he has a “circle the wagons and protect James Comey at all costs” approach that is inconsistent with the type of behavior our nation should expect from a man who, at the time, was leading the FBI.”

    “One month before the event, Comey was fired and McCabe became acting FBI director. The day prior to the event, Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee. He acknowledged telling President Trump he was not under investigation, and he admitted he provided FBI memos to a friend so they could be leaked to The New York Times.

    That evening, I went on Fox News and was mildly critical of Comey. I said when President Trump sought a one-on-one meeting with him, he should have resisted it, a statement Comey himself made at the hearing. The next morning, about an hour before I was due at the 9/11 Museum, I was on another TV show and again was mildly critical of Comey. I questioned the ethics of his leaking FBI memos to a private citizen so they could be given to the press. I also said I saw no evidence of collusion between President Trump and Russia.

    I left the show, got into an FBI car and headed downtown for the counterterrorism training event. That’s when my assistant called me to tell me that she got a call from the acting FBI director’s office telling me not to show up. No explanation was provided.

    I was infuriated. I couldn’t understand it. I had worked hard and prepared a lot of useful information for these law enforcement chiefs. I called McCabe’s chief of staff, James Rybicki, and asked him to arrange a call with McCabe.

    On Monday, June 12, McCabe called me and said bluntly that he heard about what I said on the news and he made the decision to cancel my keynote speech. He said it was a particularly sensitive time for the FBI and, knowing what I said on the air, he thought his agents would be too upset to have me at the event.

    I told him I thought his decision was “inappropriate.” I couldn’t believe he could be so thin-skinned that my mild remarks would lead him to cancel a counterterrorism training event. I also had a hard time believing his agents would be so upset by an opinion.

    And that was that. I don’t know anything else about McCabe, other than what I have read in the press. But I do know that in this instance he demonstrated a “protect Comey at all costs” approach to his job that I find troubling.

    It is McCabe’s right to be close to Comey. It is his right to see Comey as a mentor. But it was wrong of him to retaliate against someone because he didn’t like what they said about Comey on a news show. The FBI I know is better than this.”


    Liked by 2 people

  23. From the article:

    Well, if the newly released Nunes memo is correct, House Republicans and the Trump administration just confirmed the Times’scoop. In the process, they blew up their core argument against the investigation. The investigation isn’t the fruit of the poisonous dossier (though the dossier did play a role); it existed before the dossier. Let’s look at the timeline. First, the memo notes that on October 21, 2016, the “DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order . . . authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC.” The dossier allegedly “formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application.” The memo then claims that the FISA warrant was renewed three times. The memo alleges in some detail that senior FBI officials knew of the “political origins of the Steele dossier” yet failed to disclose them and other troubling facts to the FISC — including evidence of alleged conflicts of interest and claims of Steele’s bias. (The memo says that he was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected,” which would be entirely understandable if he believed the claims in the dossier.) Its final paragraph, however, says this: The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel’s Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an “insurance” policy against President Trump’s election. [Emphasis added.] In other words, the counterintelligence investigation opened when the Times said it opened based on the person the Times identified. While the memo then does a nice job detailing Strzok’s misconduct, it also indulges one of those “material omissions” the FBI warned about earlier this week: the evidence supporting the opening of the Papadopoulos investigation. Strzok may have his biases, but if the evidence upon which the investigation was opened is sound, then the investigation is appropriate.

    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456063/nunes-memo-big-flaw-confirms-new-york-times-story

    It seems Trey Gowdy was correct in his comment that I posted at 2:18. As he said, the contents of “the memo” do not in any way discredit the Mueller investigation. No wonder Gowdy is retiring. He is now clearly at odds with The Cult.


  24. Three cheers for another dose of righteous indignation!


  25. SolarP, I don’t think Comey has a future in government. Hillary and her mob hate him just as much as do Trump and his Cult.


  26. Apparently no one at the FBI (or in never-Trump Land) cares if FISA is abused or not as long as a few political points can be scored. I say the whole Patriot Act should be ditched—at least this portion of it.


  27. Debra, I think I would prefer that weirdos like Carter Page remain under observation, even if they aren’t still working for Trump.


  28. I think I would prefer that the FBI and other agencies that wield incredible power follow the law without taking shortcuts using tainted FISA warrants. In other words, do their job. Maybe they could manage do some of that work between politically motivated texts and meetings. By the way, working folk get fired for things like that.


  29. I don’t subscribe to the WSJ, so I can’t read the article. However, the summary in the Tweet is about what I expected.


  30. .Not to be a stickler for needless detail, but the WSJ says they reviewed 7000 emails , but the information out there is that there are about 50,000 emails between Page and Strzok. So the WSJ only reviewed a portion of the relevant emails. I only bring this up because of the inclination of some to rush to discredit information without thoroughly vetting it or vetting the sources. I’m referring to Mona Charen and the Red State article that makes false claims that Nunez is fabricating statements supposedly made by Comey (which it turns out he did make).


  31. Debra, I disagree with you on Red State and Mona. The question is whether Comey said the dossier was entirely salacious and unverified or whether he said it contained items that were salacious and unverified. I read the article and I read Comey’s written testimony that you posted. The written testimony said Comey briefed Trump on material that was salacious and unverified. It doesn’t say that the whole dossier was salacious and unverified. In fact, we know many things that were in the dossier and the only know item we know about that was salacious was the “pee tape”. As the Red State article pointed out, Comey testified about parts of the dossier that were verified and parts that were not, so for Nunes to say that Comey had said that the whole dossier was salacious and unverified was not accurate.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. No, Ricky. He makes a blanket condemnation. If he knew there were specific inaccuracies he would most certainly call them out. He does not. He makes the kind of general disclaimer one might make if he knew he could be called to testify later in court regarding the deceptive FISA warrants. He’s covering his rear without actually saying anything of substance. Lawyers. 🙄


  33. Comey assumes most people can read his testimony and understand his meaning as did the Red State Author, Mona, AllahPundit and me. He assumes that most people can figure out that Carter Page flying to Europe or Putin being displeased with an aide or Trump trying to cut a business deal in Russia is not “salacious”. Things like that made up the bulk of the “dossier”. See post @ 2:31.

    Liked by 1 person

  34. Neither you nor Red State Author, or Mona knew about the statement Comey put into the record and it showed in the comments you all made. Again, I’m waiting for the evidence. You guys continue with your half-truths, innuendos and outright lies. It’s business as usual in never-Trump Land.


  35. lol. While you’re at it, Ricky, look up ‘is’ because it all hinges on what your definition of ‘is’ is. 🙄

    There are some good lawyers. But few things are as destructive in our system as the bad ones. They burrow into the wood like termites eating away at the structure, until one day weight is put on the wood and it all collapses. That’s when you clearly see it’s infected to the core.


  36. Debra, Unlike Trump and his Cult, Comey is truthful. His verbal testimony is consistent with his written testimony. Do you really think a man flying to Europe is salacious? Do you think Trump trolling for business deals (with a Russian, not a porn star) is salacious? We must try to use a wee bit of common sense.


  37. They should call you to testify, Ricky, you seem to know more than Comey. Nunez quotes Comey’s description. If Comey thinks he’s been misquoted he knows what to do. He hasn’t.


  38. I guess they are going to have to release the FISA warrant application. You guys can have fun adding words to that too, since the actual testimonies of the participants don’t seem to be getting the job done for you. :–)


  39. Comey is just sitting back smiling. The Trumpkins are enraged but they really don’t understand why. Most Democrats are enraged and they really don’t understand why. The intelligent oberservers are just sadly shaking their heads. Ryan and the House Republicans have allowed Nunes to make fools of them all in defense of a ridiculous buffoon who may have committed serious crimes, but may have only hilariously framed himself.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.