The Modern Octopus: The Anti-Trump Jihad and Watergate

May be an image of text
. Frederick Keller’s “The Curse of California”, which appeared in The Wasp on August 19, 1882, is the likely origin of the depiction of the Southern Pacific Railroad monopoly as an octopus.
Flashback to F.B.I. Chief’s ’93 Firing, and to Saturday Night Massacre - The New York Times
Archibald Cox, first Watergate Special Prosecutor
Durham Report proves COLLUSION between FBI and Hillary Clinton over ...
ames Comey, FBI Director, and Hillary Clinton. Her campaign originated the Trump-Russia Collusion hoax.
John Durham investigation largely focused on FBI: report
John Durham, special counsel into the Trump/Russia charade

*Grab a cup of coffee, sit awhile for I have much to get off my chest.  My readings during my recent 10-day eastern Mediterranean cruise have given me much to ponder.

***************

Frank Norris in 1901 had his “The Octopus: A Story of California” published, a novel of crafty control of state government by a railroad monopoly.  Today, a different octopus has a grip on the federal government in Washington DC and the blue states.  This one has personality traits that are a mixture of the ideology of progressivism with its obsession for perpetually fungible oppressed classes (neo-Marxism) and an overweening administrative state, mindless immersion in the FDR and Kennedy auras, deeply entrenched, and a proven capacity to drain the vitality of a once-great civilization.  Ours!

One can get a whiff of the putrefaction (decay) just having to go through TSA/customs at San Francisco airport (SFO), without having to actually step out onto the filthy, crime-plagued streets of the city-by-the-Bay.  The labyrinth is mind-boggling, and in stark contrast to the relative ease in old world airports in cities such as Frankfurt, Munich, and Athens.  I kept thinking to myself as we were navigating the SFO maze, “This is what civilizational decline looks like”: the meaningless scurrying through an array of channels and corridors, checks and rechecks, picking up luggage and hauling them to additional check-ins, and the near strip-search to add to the one already performed by the German federal police in Munich. And this is for people who never left the confines of airport security walls from Munich to the gulag-type walls of SFO – not much opportunity to acquire a cache of weapons and bombs to further the jihad.  It’s reminiscent of the late-stage Ottoman sultanate, and look at what happened to them in 1919.  It disappeared, and so is the population of San Francisco and California.

The nation is quickly resembling the condition of California: a society living off the fumes of the past.  Its essential infrastructure is crumbling as the state, and now the country, pursues the suicide pact of substituting high-density energy (fossil fuels, nuclear) with low (solar, wind).  There’s plenty of money for subsidized abortions up to infanticide, transgender mutilations of tweens absent parental cognizance, the effective repeal of the nation’s immigration laws leading to immense social costs, and million-dollar payments to descendants of ancient relatives of a distant history’s wrongs, but nary a cent to expand water deliveries or clean up the streets of the crime and the mental- and drug-addled.  Prices go sky high, nothing seems to work, and that scent of social decay overhangs nearly everything like a suffocating blanket of smog.  Welcome to our modern, putrefied sultanate.

The reason why nothing seems to work is that we are governed, essentially managed, by a class apart: the minions of the administrative state and assorted interconnected functionaries in allied institutions – a socially incestuous tribe of Ivy League graduates and academics, the media, and a cadre of self-appointed arbiters of culture.  They operate like a hive but resemble an octopus like the railroad monopoly in Frank Norris’s “The Octopus”.  It’s an octopus of and for the octopus.  Benefitting society’s citizens runs second to power, protections, and rewards for it.  They do well, we don’t.

It is vengeful when challenged.  We see how it operates by examining the Trump saga and, going back further, to Watergate of the 1970’s.  The recently released Durham report draws back the curtain on partisan chicanery targeting Trump by the FBI and Obama holdovers in the Justice Department and lesser minions in the national security agencies.  Nearly an entire presidential term was handcuffed in meaningless impeachments and massive investigations.  No evidentiary predicate existed to support them.  They were efforts of the octopus to remove an interloper – really, the American people through their electoral choices.

It’s the same template used against Nixon. Geoff Shepard in his book, “The Real Watergate Scandal”, from 2015 performed the role of John Durham in exposing this older skullduggery from the early 1970’s.  What has come to light since those heady days is a tale of judicial and prosecutorial collusion, serious beaches of due process, and the octopus of mostly networked Democrat operatives from Ivy League campuses filling power positions in DC.  They’re amazing in their nearly homogeneous partisan makeup, with only a sprinkling of publicity-hound Republicans joining the phalanx.  They form a Praetorium Guard protecting the interests of the Democratic Party and its ruling progressive orthodoxy in the upper reaches of power that is DC.

The Real Watergate Scandal: Collusion, Conspiracy, And The Plot That Brought Nixon Down | Geoff ...

On Shepard, he was a second-tier assistant to the president, not in any way connected to what came to be called Watergate.  He’s got two letters from Watergate prosecutors clearing him of any involvement.  As a member of the administration, he knew many of the principal players in the story and oversaw efforts to comply with court orders on such matters as the famous White House audio tapes.  On what later came to be popularly referred to as the break-in and cover-up, he had intimate knowledge of the indicted and the so-called evidence.  The popular story didn’t compute to him back then and has only been drawn into more question as more information has since come to light.

Foremost, the octopus – or hive if you will – that swarmed Nixon and his people.  A cursory examination of the key players in what can only be described as an anti-Nixon jihad would illustrate the workings of octopus.  The principal presiding judge, the publicity hound John Sirica, a nominal Republican, barely passed the bar exam.  He floundered as a U.S. attorney, went into private practice and faced an even more dismal experience (his “starving time” in his own words) before he was rescued by the eminent Democrat lawyer, fixer, and influencer Edward Bennett Williams.  Riding in the wake Williams’s prestige, Sirica got himself appointed to the DC District Court by Eisenhower.  The Williams connection and friendship would benefit him for the rest of his life.  The DC social Borg at work.

What of the first Special Prosecutor, Archibald Cox?  Here’s a who’s who from the Ivy League/Kennedy nexus.  From Harvard College to Harvard Law to the law school faculty, a lifelong Democrat and Kennedy clan confidant, he advised JFK and wrote many of his speeches in the 1960 campaign.  He filled the slot of chief federal litigator as Solicitor General under Attorney General Robert Kennedy, JFK’s brother.

If Cox’s prosecutorial team – often called Cox’s army – faced the inevitable appeals from Sirica’s gung-ho, get-Nixon style, waiting in the wings to handle the appeals was the chief judge of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, David Bazelon with a judicial majority on the Circuit to back him up.  A veteran of the Truman administration as assistant attorney general, he was known to harbor a dislike of Nixon since Nixon’s days on the House Committee on Un-American Activities investigating Alger Hiss, another Democrat/FDR protégé but since proven to be a Soviet spy.  Compounding the octopus’s Nixon antipathy is Nixon’s 1950 elevation to the Senate through his upset win over the much-loved, former star of stage and screen, firebrand progressive, and favorite, Helen Gahagan Douglas.  Nixon was the bête noire of the Democrat DC octopus in an obvious Democrat town.

1 David bazelon Stock Videos, Editorial Videos and Stock Footage | Shutterstock

That’s just a sampling. There’s more, much more.  The lineup of hired guns in the Special Prosecutor’s office under Cox and Jaworski exhibited the same partisan and social affinities.

The city’s demographic profile displayed, and continues to display, the same hard-edged partisanship.  For instance, the city’s overwhelming electoral base for the Democratic Party is a prosecutorial force multiplier for any judicial proceedings with Republicans in the dock. DC is a Democrat city run by and for Democrats.  The city’s growth owes much to FDR’s centralization of power, the patron saint for all subsequent Democrat administrations.  Back in the 1970’s, grand and trial juries were drawn from the city’s three-quarters Democrat voter base.  Today, it’s worse; 90% is more like it.

The galling Nixon 49-state sweep in 1972 didn’t faze the 78% DC election count for the humiliated Democrat candidate George McGovern.  This presents a tricky problem for Republicans elected from the hinterlands and who now must reside in a sea of hostility.  Partisan crusades – think Sen. Ted Stevens, Russia collusion, civil proceedings against Trump, anything drummed up against Republicans – will have a good shot at convictions and seeing Republicans in pin stripes.  The maw of DC awaited Nixon and still lies in wait for any Republican officeholder today.

The Constitutional protections for a fair trial, fair jury, fair, balanced and conscientious prosecutors, and due process are trampled under foot in this one-party city.  If you think that legal mechanisms such as preemptory challenges to remove biased prospective jurors are adequate protection, think again.  There aren’t enough challenges to compensate for a 78%-90%+ Democrat jury pool in an atmosphere ginned up by a longstanding local Democrat-friendly media.

A change of venue to a more balanced jurisdiction is laughable when the DC appellate and trial courts collude with prosecutors to ensure prosecution-friendly presiding judges and appellate judges who are noted for their progressive proclivities.  Appeals are stymied and so is due process.  Once in a DC court, you’re never going to be allowed any other place.  Republicans beware if you find yourself before a DC jury.

Biased Jury Cartoons and Comics - funny pictures from CartoonStock

Washington DC is an obese city gorging itself on the extracted wealth from the provinces – er, states, as in fourth-century Rome.  Its output is government, and more government, and has no relation to the generation of goods and services that compose real economic life for the nation’s citizens.  It grew and benefitted from the party of government, the party’s progressivism, the party of the administrative state, the Democratic Party.  The city’s denizens vote as if they know their benefactors.  From this lair, the octopus extends its tentacles to encompass nearly all facets of national life.

The situation has deteriorated to the point that for the nation to thrive, Washington DC must not.  The chances of national prosperity improve if DC fell into a deep commercial and residential real estate depression.  We have too much government rooted in abstract, ideological crusades, and possessing too much power to interfere in daily life.  Shrink the government and acquaint some of the federal workforce to the pink slip.  Strip the city of all operatives except for the minimum necessary for physical proximity to the heads of the three branches of government.  The functioning headquarters of the Department of Agriculture in Wichita, the base of the FBI and Justice Department in Columbus, Missouri, the operational centers for the four military service branches scattered from Mobile, Alabama, to Minot, South Dakota, might be just a thought, but certainly an appealing one.  Oh, how about the headquarters of the EPA ensconced somewhere in Ohio or West Virginia, surrounded by the victims of its regulatory excess?

Strangle the octopus and reinstitute popular sovereignty.  The type of people of Archibald Cox’s background have too much sway, and have only proven to possess the capacity to muck things up.  How’s that for a path to “make America great again”?

May be pop art of lighter, candy and text

RogerG

Read more here:

* Of all the books that I have read on Watergate, this is the one that resonates: “The Real Watergate Scandal: Collusion, Conspiracy, and the Plot That Brought Nixon Down”, Geoff Shepard, 2015. By now, in light of the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, the tale ought to sound like a familiar one. Of particular note, refer to pages 184-5, “The D.C. Jury Pool”, to understand the ingrained partisan prejudice against Republicans in D.C. Please go to “The False Heroes of Watergate”, page 12-17, for a deep dive into the backgrounds of people pursuing Nixon and his people.

* Geoff Shepard’s Watergate account reads like John Durham’s 316-page report of May 12, 2023: “Report on Matters Relating to Intelligence Activities and Investigations Arising Out of the 2016 Presidential Campaigns”, John Durham, at https://www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Durham-Report.pdf

Social-Political Tumors in the Depp/Heard Case and the Trump-Russia Con

See the source image

See the source image
A Washington DC soiree. A socio-political tumor?

According to verywellhealth.com, a tumor is “. . . an abnormal growth of cells, which serves no purpose in the body.”  In addition, “A tumor develops when cells divide too quickly and without control.”

Are tumors limited to biological manifestations?  I think not.  In today’s culture, the concept applies to the weird nexus of celebrity, media, activism, government, social class, and narrow geographic location that “develops” into an “abnormal” and tight-knit social grouping “too quickly and without control”.  Two stories of late illustrate the existence of a kind of social tumor with a decidedly political complexion: (1) the Amber Heard op-ed which led to the famous (infamous?) Johnny Depp lawsuit(s) and (2) the Trump-Russia imbroglio.  You won’t need better evidence for the actuality of socio-political tumors.

I find few things as amusing as when the public is shocked to learn of the chaotic nature of the personal lives of celebrities.  The recent Depp/Heard dustup provides ample proof of the toxicity of some celebrity marriages. Johnny Depp sued Amber Heard for defamation after an op-ed appeared in the Washington Post under Heard’s name characterizing Depp as a wife beater.

May be an image of 4 people
Heard and Depp at the trial.

But that’s only the half of it. “Under her name”?  Yes, the op-ed was ghostwritten by ACLU staffers after the organization received a windfall of $1.3 million from her after her divorce settlement with Depp.  Her ex-boyfriend, Elon Musk, added $2.2 million to the promised total kitty of $3.5 million.  Celebrity divorce, celebrity-sized payouts, and political activism came together in one socio-political tumor, or “abnormal growth”.

It seems that the ACLU was very appreciative to Heard, whom they referred to as an “ACLU artist ambassador on women’s rights”.  ACLU communications people were all over the op-ed’s composition and dissemination to big media.  All of this was born out in the trial. Robin Shulman, an ACLU communications staffer, wrote the first draft with edits from Heard’s lawyers, and Terence Dougherty, the ACLU’s Chief Operating Officer and general counsel, peddled it to the media.  Humungous gifts lead to humungous help in hatching a smear.

May be an image of 1 person
Robin Shulman, ACLU communications staffer and ghostwriter of Amber Heard’s defamatory op-ed.
May be an image of 1 person
erence Dougherty, ACLU Chief Operating Officer and general counsel.

In the end, the jury in the Depp defamation lawsuit would have none of it.  Juries are tied to the evidence at least to some degree.  The facts showed that these were two mutually abusive individuals wrapped in nuptials.  The verdict ordered Amber Heard to be on the hook for about $10 million to Depp and his legal team.  For the life of me, I fail to understand why the ACLU wasn’t in the dock as well since their fingerprints were all over the slander.

Then we come to Durham, the special counsel appointed by then-AG Barr to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia fable.  The Sussman trial and subsequently released court documents glaringly expose another “abnormal growth”.  This one is composed of two types of cells – the Clinton Campaign and certain federal agencies – developing in cooperation “quickly and without control”.  Indeed, they were intertwined like the common root system of birch trees, and like the cells of a tumor.  Professional and social courtesies abound. This class of DC operatives are interwoven in a web of friendships, past and present occupational connections, and similar backgrounds and outlooks.  All of this is cooped into the narrow confines of the DC metropolitan area.  They can’t help running into each other at the soccer field, Whole Foods, and dinner parties.  It’s a mutually reinforcing social ecosystem.

The prevalence of the bonds in the social petri dish of DC was on display in the Sussman trial, who was charged with making false and misleading statements to the FBI.  Michael Sussman, one of Hillary’s key campaign lawyers and a veteran of the Justice Department’s cybersecurity team, called an old acquaintance, James Baker, the FBI’s general counsel at the time, to kickstart the Hillary campaign’s scheme to connect Trump to Russia under the contrived moniker of Trump being “under federal investigation”.  Keep in mind that she was under investigation for the much more real charge of violating her legal responsibility to follow security procedures in her communications as Secretary of State, and the likelihood that she obstructed justice in destroying evidence (her emails, home brew server, hard drives, and cell phones).  She desperately needed the distraction of something to pin on Trump.

May be an image of 2 people and beard
Michael Sussman (l), Clinton Campaign lawyer, and John Durham, Special Counsel.

In stepped the malignant cells of the supportive DC tumor.  Court records show that Hillary gave the go-ahead to begin the scam.  The whole campaign apparatus in DC leapt into motion.  The Campaign’s part of the tumor included Fusion GPS and co-founder Glenn Simpson to dig up dirt on Trump, Christopher Steele who provided much of the dirt, Igor Danchenko (a suspected Russian asset) who was Steele’s source, and Rodney Joffe and his Neustar data mining firm (hired by the Hillary Campaign) to help create the illusion of a Trump “backchannel” to Putin through Russia’s Alpha Bank.

May be a closeup of 1 person and beard
Igor Danchenko suspected Russian asset and Christopher Steele’s source for the “dossier”.
May be an image of 1 person and text that says 'AN'
Glann Simpson of Fusion GPS, the company tasked by the Clinton Campaign to dig up dirt on Trump.
May be an image of 1 person
Christopher Steele, the compiler of the fraudulent “dossier”.
See the source image
Rodney Joffe of Nuestar, the source for the fraudulent story of a Trump “backchannel” to Putin through Russia’s Alpha Bank.

The stage was set for the sales job to friends and acquaintances in the sympathetic administrative state, the other part of the tumor.  Sussman texted his old friend at the FBI, James Baker, the FBI’s general counsel:

“Jim — it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss.  Do you have availability for a short meeting tomorrow?  I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau. Thanks.”

What did Sussman have for Baker?  The next day, Sussman plopped on Baker’s desk Joffe’s concocted illusion of Trump-Russia collusion through Alpha Bank.  The Hillary campaign lawyer, Sussman, gave the FBI an excuse to do what they were chomping at the bit to do anyway.  FBI headquarters opened the investigation with enthusiasm according to the chain of command in Chicago. James Comey was said to be particularly jazzed up.  The FBI higher-ups hid the Sussman/Hillary Campaign connection to the alleged “information” by carrying on as if it came from the Justice Department, not the Clinton Campaign.  It’s clear that the FBI wasn’t really duped by Sussman. Come on, everyone in the halls of power knew who Sussman worked for.  Let’s just say that they wanted to be “duped”.  It provided great cover.  The rest is a history that’ll live in infamy.

Picture

In the Depp-Heard case, a storied civil liberties group is muddied by its zeal to manufacture oppression through defamation.  In the Trump-Russia fairy tale, Hillary campaign friendlies in the superstructure of the DC administrative state were essentially adjuncts of the Campaign and the Democratic Party.  This is the reality of socio-political tumors that plague America.  Like the biological kind, they can be malignant and need to be irradiated.  After all, they “serve no purpose” other than as comfortable sinecures for government careerists.

How?  Dismantle the administrative monoliths in DC.  Scatter them to the wind.  The country has about 300 cities in the 100,000 range who’d love to have the headquarters for the Justice Department, its FBI, its ATF, the Department of Homeland Security and its sundry appendages, the Department of Agriculture, etc., etc.  It’d be nice to see the pressed suits running the Agriculture Department regularly having to clean manure off their shoes, or maybe the potentates running the show at the EPA having to live in the vicinity of the people whose jobs they destroyed.  It’s juicy to think about.

Malignant tumors need oncological treatment.  The events of the past six years show DC to be a dangerous concentration of cells that has developed “quickly and without control”.  Congress needs to act like a hospital oncology department by flinging the functions of government to the far corners of the nation.  Our mode of government would be healthier if DC was more of a ghost town.

As for the Heard-type smear, put an end to the mantra of always “believe her”.  Chromosomes should have very little bearing on truth and guilt.

RogerG

Sources:

*Andrew C. McCarthy’s piece on Durham and the Sussman trial: https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2022/06/27/russiagate-misunderstood/
*Dan McLaughlin’s piece on the Heard-Depp case: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/amber-heards-aclu-ghostwriters/

 

Wolves

A pack of wolves feeding on a carcass or humans in wolves’ clothing feasting on someone who challenged their accustomed arrangements?

Milieu: noun, a person’s social environment.

Trump and his boosters refer to DC as The Swamp for understandable reasons. More accurately, though, it’s an extended pack of wolves, a carnivore’s milieu.

A glimpse of the DC milieu: a Washington, DC, metro station.

What made the career employees of Big Government so hostile to Donald J. Trump? After all, there’s clear evidence that they had it in for him as he unwittingly stepped into their den by winning in 2016.

The latest disclosure to the Senate Judiciary Committee unveils a Russian Intelligence assessment that Hillary Clinton personally approved an operation in 2016 to “to stir up a scandal against U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee.” The news indicates that at least some in Russian Intelligence believed that she was up to no good, and therefore capable of being exploited to serve the Russian interest in sowing the seeds of discord within one of Russia’s adversaries, us.

The Democrats on the Judiciary Committee cried foul regarding these latest revelations, but the connection of Russiagate to Hillary can’t be dismissed out of hand. The Steele dossier was a predicate for the Obama administration’s dirty tricks on the Trump campaign. The money trail for the vile screed goes back to the Hillary campaign and the DNC. That’s true beyond question.

Christopher Steele
Hillary Clinton

There existed in the wolf’s den – DC – a disposition to utilize anything real or imagined to discredit Trump, his people, and presidency by miring him in innuendo, and, boy, did they succeed. Using false evidence like the dossier and fueled by their hatred for Trump, they ginned up the FBI to spy on Trump and his people; staffed up an excessively protracted tribunal called the Mueller probe; turned willing accomplices in the bureaucracy to act under cover of “whistle-blower” to release and take out of context a phone call and then turn it overt to ravenous partisan predators in Congress; and hogtie his presidency in manufactured scandal for most of his term. This is more than a swamp with venomous vipers; it’s a forest overpopulated with wolves.

Top row from left are former CIA Director Michael Hayden, former FBI Director James Comey, former acting FBI director Andrew McCabe and former national security adviser Susan Rice. Bottom row from left are former FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and former National Intelligence Director James Clapper.

Ironies of all ironies, a stronger case for collusion with Russia is evident in Hillary’s and the DNC’s relationship with Russian disinformation operatives. It turns out that Christopher Steele was working with a known Russian agent. It can be credibly shown that the claims in Steele’s dossier was fed to him by this lone operative. From there, the thing ends up in affidavits for spying warrants on Trump and his campaign and in the hands of Democrat headhunters throughout DC. The wolves were given the scent.

It’s stunning that the American people might be poised to put those snarling wolves and band of headhunters back in power. Once they return to power, their skullduggery will be flushed down the memory hole and a lesson taught to the people for being so impertinent as to make a choice that the wolves and the rest in their milieu disapprove.

It’s also amazing that the American people might vote to bow before these self-styled lords.

RogerG

Break Up the Nest

Kudos to Senators Josh Hawley (R, Mo.) and Marsha Blackburn (R, Tn.) for attempting to really drain the swamp.  Their bill, S. 2672, would move “90% of the positions in 10 Cabinet-level departments out of D.C.”  What a great idea: break up the place!  The thought occurred to me some time ago as the Trump-collusion imbroglio was gaining steam and I was reading Geof Shepard’s “The Real Watergate Scandal” on my Kindle.  Come to think of it, a real state depression in DC wouldn’t be such a bad thing for the country.

Blackburn and Hawley.

All those minions scurrying about DC have created a world all their own.  The progressives of the late 19th century assured us that the halcyon days of good government would be upon us if only more power was deposited in the hands of degreed professionals who were educated to treat all of reality as a matter for “science”.  In other words, people like themselves.

Ironically, they ignored the implications of the “science” of people both as individuals and in large groups.  People are simultaneously self-serving and altruistic, and not in equal measure – usually to the detriment of altruism.  As a collective, they create a distinct society with its own norms and expectations.  It’s a world unto itself.

The skyline of Washington, D.C., including the U.S. Capitol building, Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial, and National Mall, is seen from the air, January 29, 2010. (Saul Loeb/AFP)

A trip into the world of the Watergate scandal sheds light on the brave new world of this administrative state.  Let’s examine 3 prominent characters in the now bastardized but popular version of the story: Clark Mollenhoff, Mark Felt, and Bob Woodward.

Mollenhoff was a DC reporter and well-connected lawyer and friend of presiding judge John Sirica (Sirica is another of these networked DC folks).  Not only was he well-connected, he got a position in the first year of the Nixon White House.  His ambition to have direct access to Nixon and be Nixon’s premier sage was thwarted by learning that he would have to work under Haldeman and Ehrlichman.  The job didn’t last much longer than a year.  He becomes another of the disgruntled operatives – one among many thousands populating the District – roaming about looking for outlets for their scorn.  In clearly improper, if not illegal, ex-parte meetings with Sirica, he would fill that coveted role of “sage”.

Clark Mollenhoff

Mark Felt, ex-Associate Director of the FBI, is another example of a person with stymied high aspirations.  Passed over for the FBI directorate – it was handed to L. Patrick Gray – he simmered as second fiddle.  He willingly became an espionage agent for Bernstein and Woodward as “Deep Throat”.

Former FBI official W. Mark Felt arrive at federal court in Washington 9/18 for the continuation of his trial on charges of approving illegal break-ins during the Nixon Administration.

Finally, what about Bob Woodward?  He made his name in DC circles as an aide to Admiral Thomas Hinman Moorer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  His connections would be useful in his second career as WaPo muckraker.

Carl Bernstein, left, and Robert Woodward, who pressed the Watergate investigation, in Washington, D.C., May 7, 1973. (photo: AP)

What to make of all this?  The country is governed in a bog-like slough of cliques, the excessively ambitious, and self-serving inter-relationships.  If you’re an outsider from Ashtabula, beware!

Trump, does this sound familiar?

Forget all that stuff about rule by the people.  Progressives bequeathed to us a government of an unaccountable nomenklatura.

That’s right, Blackburn and Hawley, we have no realistic recourse but to break it up!  Break it up, and do so quickly.

 

RogerG

What You Read Ain’t What You Hear

The transcript of the “infamous” call to Ukrainian president Zelensky by Pres. Trump, July 25, 2019.

Regarding Trump’s phone call to Zelensky, president of Ukraine, an oral message put on paper and then read isn’t the same as performance of the conversation in the manner in which it was delivered: person-to-person in conversational tones.  Adam Schiff’s bastardized performance is a travesty.  I’m talking about taking the original transcript and vocally delivering the actual words as they occur in a natural conversation.  Once you do that, the air is taken out of the Democrat’s impeachment balloon.  There’s no there there.

Duane Patterson (l), Hugh Hewitt (r).

Hugh Hewitt and his producer, Duane Patterson, conducted such a reading (Hour 2, Hugh Hewitt Show, 10/2/19).  If performed as it was originally delivered, certain conclusions about the call stand out:

(1) Trump is right.  There was no quid pro quo.  There was no use of presidential power to advance his candidacy.  There was no offer, implied or otherwise, to withhold aid for purely partisan advantage.

(2) Zelensky brought up Giuliani, not Trump.  Trump was asking Ukraine for their assistance in our probe of Russia-gate.  Of course, Giuliani, being the personal attorney of the president, is also gathering evidence to defend his client against the Democrats’ anti-Trump jihad.  Remember, Clinton had an entire war room devoted to the defense of our priapic 42nd chief executive.  In fact, the conversation mostly skirts the mention of Giuliani.

(3) The aid that the US has given the Ukraine was mentioned to remind Zelensky that allies operate in a reciprocal manner, and Europe provides little help to Ukraine.  We need some international help to investigate a matter of international scope, not necessarily to go after “lunch pale” Joe.  We have treaties with other nations to cover these eventualities.

(4) Biden is mentioned by Trump in a brief, offhanded manner.  It was mentioned to highlight the possibility of Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election.  The Crowdstrike reference is brought up in the beginning by Trump to make the point.  That’s the context.

I could say more.  It is very strange for Congressional firebrands like Schiff to rush to impeachment over this frail thread. Is this an attempt to head off Barr and Durham as they draw close to the origins of Russia-gate?  If so, indeed, we have a coup underway.

In this April 25, 2006, file photo, John Durham speaks to reporters on the steps of U.S. District Court in New Haven, Conn. (AP Photo/Bob Child, File) (Washington Examiner)

Something to think about.  Eh?

RogerG

Are We a Deliberative Citizen Republic or No?

Our politics has descended into a shout-fest.  Trump doesn’t present reasoned arguments (argument as in viewpoint with reasons).  He resorts to boilerplate and name-calling.  The Dem leadership and its Squad are channeling a mix of over-caffeinated social justice warriors at a Charles Murray lecture and teenage inmates on acid in a juvenile hall cell block.  Don’t expect much calm deliberation to come of it.

If you have one hour and 20 minutes – or as much as you can handle – here is an example of what civil discourse is supposed to sound like (go to here or click on the icon below).

The editors of National Review gather to discuss the issue-meltdown du jour.  This session concerns the infamous call and impeachment.  There’s quite a range of opinion from the hyper Trump skeptic David French to Charles W. Cooke to the constitutionally fastidious Luke Thompson to Michael Brendan Dougherty to Rich Lowry, the moderator.  On the call and impeachment, French lies closer to Pelosi and Thompson closer to Trump.  All are critical of Trump and the Democrats but vary in their degree and basis of condemnation

The consensus, if there is one, is that Trump behaved badly and the Dems could have possibly stepped on another rake.  My take is closer to Thompson – Trump’s actions were within the historical bounds of presidential behavior and certainly not impeachable – and Cooke – what’s the standard for impeachable offenses given Andrew Jackson’s genocide to presidents making war without congressional approval to presidents with a phone and pen so as to slip the bounds of their oath of office?  Impeachment, really, over this?

Take a listen.

RogerG

The Transcript Says Something Other Than “Impeachment”

The transcript, read it for yourself here.

The transcript is a Rorschach test exposing the realities of domestic and international politics.  What does it mean?  Here’s my take.

(1) Politics brings out the crudity in people.  Yes, Trump is crude, him being a political neophyte with all the rough edges and a huge ego.  But have you watched the Democrats’ presidential sweepstakes lately?  It’s insanity on parade.  Their rants include more than wacko ideas but also serial insults to Trump (“punch him in the face”, etc.) and half of the electorate (“racist”, “anti-gay”, “we’re going to forcibly take your guns”, etc.).  Trump is crude and the Democrats are crude and unelectable.

(2) Washington, DC, is a cesspool – not the city but the environs around the capitol.  There is a Deep State and it’s in those dozens of blocks encompassing the Mall.  The “whistleblower” apears to be a never-Trumper.  The whistleblowing complaint apparently is based on scuttlebutt from water-cooler or social banter.  The complainant wasn’t tapped into the president’s line.  If he’s a never-Trumper, he (or she, et al) will have to join the hierarchy in the State Dept., Justice Dept., and intelligence community in 2016 and 2017.  A partisan leak has been recast as whistleblowing.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

(3) The transcript shows the nature of politics as it has existed since political power was wedded to a human being.  Trump’s call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is not unknown in history.  For example, FDR’s shenanigans in going after Samuel Insull, a prominent utility CEO, just because he needed a scalp for the Depression, was sickening.  After they finally got their hands on him, and after much chicanery with France, Greece, and Turkey, all FDR and the boys (girls, et al) got was an innocent verdict on all counts.  Do I need to delve into the more egregious antics of JFK, LBJ, and Richard Nixon?

Samuel Insull

(4) Trump’s call has an interesting predicate: Joe Biden’s on-air boast in 2016 that he got a Ukrainian prosecutor fired.  He was the same prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who was investigating Burisma Holdings for corruption at the time his son was on the Board of Directors.  Intriguing, eh?

Viktor Shokin

(5) The transcript of Trump’s call shows no quid pro quo: as in, you give me the dirt on Biden and I’ll give you American aid.  You could argue that it is implied, but that would be no more dispositive than Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, demanding the end of investigations critical of Robert Mueller’s probe.  They demanded that he “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”  You can read about the episode here.

Yuriy Lutsenko

(6) The Ukraine seems to be as entwined in American politics circa 2016 as Russia was alleged to be.  Trump’s call makes it abundantly clear.  First, Ukraine may have been on helpful terms with at least Obama if not the Democrats in that election cycle.  How helpful?  The transcript shows Trump mentioning two things: Crowdstrike and the US ambassador to the Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch.  The ambassador was, not surprisingly, an Obama administration conduit to the Ukraine, and given the spying capers on Trump in 2016, would be involved in any Ukrainian hanky-panky.  Speculation?  Yep, but no different than the knee-jerk cries of “outrageous” regarding anything Trump.  And there’s the mention of the cyber-security firm Crowdstrike.  It was the company who was paid by the DNC to take possession of their server and examine it for evidence of hacking.  It’s out of this Democrat-funded escapade that we have the Russia-hacked-our-election chant.  What’s the Ukrainian connection?  Well, there’s enough intriguing evidence for John Durham to be looking into it.  You can read about it here.

I’m sure that more can be said and will be said in the coming days.  As for me, as of right now, one more thing needs to be mentioned.  The Democrats are out to reverse an election.  Suburban voters in the 2018 elections handed power to a party bent on imposing socialism and removing a president.  Is this what these voters wanted?  I kinda doubt it, but they are getting it anyway.  Indeed, they should have known this would happen because the party leadership said as much since inauguration day 2017.

The 2018 elections show one weakness of democracy.  It was indicative of how an electorate can be whipsawed from detestation of presidential behavior to handing power to the irresponsible.  The individuals who were elected in swing districts may not be like the core of the party, but the newcomers will help a party with statist socialism in their political DNA to gain majority status.  Those 40 reps pale when compared to the 195 others.  It’s simply a matter of math.

Thank you swing-district voters.  Now we have an impeachment-palooza and socialism on the cusp of being the law of the land.

RogerG

Once Upon A Time … in DC

Mueller testifying before Congress, 7/24/2019.

Kyle Smith’s  review of Quentin Tarantino’s Once Upon a Time … In Hollywood  compared Tarantino’s film with Sergio Leone’s Once Upon a Time in the West and Once Upon a Time in America.  Tarantino adopted Leone’s technique of a singular story thread set in a panoramic and historical scene.  If some future filmmaker wanted to channel Watergate’s All the President’s Men and Leone, the current unraveling of the Russia-collusion-Mueller-Comey-et al saga would provide excellent grist for the mill.

The Setting

All the elements are present.  The grand backdrop is present-day DC with 364,000 federal government workers, many at the top of the federal pyramid scheming and plotting for partisan and personal advantage, and a mass of hanger-ons populating K Street and other nodes in the metropolitan area.  The administrator water cooler talk must be impregnated with the expectations born of a peculiar universe’s lifestyle and norms that are divorced from the real world’s preoccupation with producing the necessities and wants of life.  It’s a world unto its own, all put on steroids by the 44th president’s ideological penchant for big government as a cure-all.  It is great for those seeking highly remunerative and secure employment in a highly unproductive sector, coupled with fantastic opportunities for the city’s real estate agents.

Enter stage left, Donald Trump (protagonist or antagonist depending on one’s point of view): crass, boorish, sometimes vulgar, and a champion of the pitchfork brigade.  He wasn’t supposed to win.  And when he did, the curtain was thrown open as in the The Wizard of Oz.

Woodrow Wilson’s government of “experts” is exposed as a charade.  I can only speculate about the extent of the conniving, scheming, and plotting for personal and partisan advantage as a normal facet of life particularly in the administrative suites of the nation’s capital.  Regardless, the now-bogus collusion story ripped the smiley face off the Leviathan.

Act One: Pride Before the Fall

Like many scandals, this one has at least two acts or phases: the first one peddled by the left-oriented and self-styled cultural “betters” in the media, academia, and the Democratic Party in our cosmopolitan centers, and the later, more sinister one as the initial story began to unravel.

Phase one seemed implausible from the get-go for anyone with a scintilla of adult skepticism, but it was overwhelmed by volume, both in quantity and decibel levels in our left-dominated media channels.  That story is now familiar.  A litany of banalities consumed the airwaves: “Russia attacked our democracy”; “Trump is a Putin stooge”; “The Russians elected Trump”; “Trump conspired with the Russians”; etc., etc., etc.  You’ve heard the carnival barking.

ca. 1927 — W.C. Fields as a carnival sideshow announcer in a scene from the 1927 Paramount Pictures film, . — Image by © Bettmann/CORBIS

The party of more government and big government – the Democratic Party –  needs government power, and they failed to get it.  Their loss necessitates an explanation, and it can’t be that their vision of the better world isn’t popular enough.  The default excuse is malevolence by some unseen and nefarious forces attached to the winner.  It just so happens that an expedient was readily available from their own skulduggery in the 2016 campaign.   Democrat trolling for dirt – often called “oppo research” – led to the Hillary campaign > Fusion GPS > Christopher Steele > the Steele dossier > FBI/DNI/CIA spying on Trump > leaks to a salivating press.  The stage is set for its continuation after Trump’s shocking victory.

A common reaction after shock is rage.  Sure, Trump’s bombastic rhetoric acted as an accelerant, but that matters little.  George W bent over backwards in a contortionist’s pretzel to accommodate and still earned the rant, “Bush lied and people died”, alongside efforts at his impeachment.  Rage is a powerful motivator to do some really bad things, even using falsehoods to repeal an election.  Remember, power is far more important to a progressive than to those more conservative since it is needed to overwhelm parents’ concerns about such things as their little daughters sharing a bathroom with boys who believe – or simply make the claim – that they can think themselves into being girls.

 

The ploy required a predicate.  It was found in the jingle, “Russia attacked our democracy.”  We don’t have a democracy; we have a constitutional republic … but I digress.  How did Putin attack our so-called democracy and purportedly steal the election from her highness?  A few  trolling farms and $100,000 in Facebook ads, half of which were pro-Hillary and half were after the election?

In fact, the presiding judge in the trial of one of the defendants (Concord Management and Consulting LLC) indicted by Mueller chastised Jeannie Rhee, a former Obama Deputy Attorney General and part of Mueller’s team, and Mueller (and by extension Atty. Gen. Barr) for prejudicing a potential jury by reaching conclusions in the publicly released Mueller report not supported in the indictment, thereby raising doubts about the strength of the evidence linking the firm to the Russian government.  Could the mantra “Russia stole the election” be a bait-and-switch maneuver with the mantra being loudly proclaimed by a partisan mob in the media and Congress as the Mueller gang switches to the thin gruel of a far lesser claim in court?  Are we, the public, being scammed?

Jeannie Rhee, former Deputy Attorney General under Obama and Special Counsel prosecutor under Mueller.

How could 1/100th ($50,000) of a 30-second Super Bowl ad bend a 63 million-vote election spread over 274, 252 precincts and 113,754 polling paces?  Hillary alone was awash in $700 million.  Trump fell $300 million short.  The charge is preposterous given the minuscule effort, and ignores the history of this kind of thing.  Almost every Israeli election results in American campaign operatives tramping over to Tel Aviv to help Labor or Likud.  One of Obama’s chief campaign advisers, Jeremy Bird, showed up in the country in 2015 to try to defeat Benjamin Netanyahu.  We’ve left our fingerprints in other countries as well.  The PRC helped bankroll Bill Clinton’s reelection.  Soviet disinformation money seeded street protests in America and Europe throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s, a godsend to Teddy Kennedy’s efforts to frustrate Reagan.  Soviet efforts didn’t stop there.  The Venona disclosures in 1995 and the brief opening of Soviet Communist Party archives in 1991 showed evidence of Soviet espionage and the presence of agents of influence occupying powerful positions under FDR and Truman.  And today’s Democrats and their fellow travelers are carping about a few bots and Facebook ads?

Venona Project. Meredith Gardner, at far left, working with cryptanalysts, mid-1940’s.

The predicate is a farce.  It’s in the DNA of international relations for nations to influence strategically important countries.  In another time it was called statecraft.  We would be well-served if we remembered the concept when observing the vicious mullahs in Tehran.

Oh, they squeal that the Russsians “hacked our democracy” when they were alleged to have purloined Hillary’s and the DNC’s emails and began to disseminate them through Wikileaks.  Wikileaks is most certainly a pipeline for Russian (and any other nation’s) chicanery.  After all, they came out of the same anti-western and anti-US breeding ground that gave us CISPES (advanced the interests of the communist Sandinistas in Nicaragua), the nuclear freeze movement (supported by Soviet disinformation measures), Code Pink, today’s Antifa, and the perpetual peace-at-literally-any-price crowd.  The mission statement of being the guardians of government transparency is a facade for useful idiots.  They’ll take information from any source so long as it further their end, which is the embarrassment of only western governments.

What’s missing from the hacked-our-democracy charge is any semblance of context.  Of course, in our intensely techie world, cyber crime is as big a thing as mail fraud was in the days before Intel.  No doubt, the bumbling Hillary made it easy by concocting her own digital communication system in her basement, bathroom, closet, or what have you.  She would be an easy mark for any government with nearly unlimited resources (since all governments skim off as much as they want from their citizens’ private economic activity) to play this game.  The 2015 Chinese (PRC) hacking of the federal OPM data base, getting personal information on 20 million persons in the process, is illustrative.

Any system is vulnerable, including Hillary’s garage setup, the DNC, RNC, and anyone else thought to be important.  The Iranians remember Stuxnet in 2010, the joint US-Israeli worm to crash the regime’s nuclear program computers.  Whether through phishing or incredibly easy passwords in the case of the DNC, cyber warfare is part of statecraft.  Make the best safeguards as possible, but it will remain a staple of modern life.

Was it as vice-president Cheney called it, “an act of war”?  Hardly.  The behavior is so common that we would be in a constant state of war with almost any nation with access to a keyboard.   Cheney’s declaration is ludicrous.

But is it even relevant to Hillary’s 2016 loss?  Both candidates were held in low esteem going into the election.  Hillary’s negatives were 24 points higher than her positives and Trump’s were even worse (41 points).  It wasn’t hacked emails that dragged Hillary down.  Hillary has left a well-known slimy trail from Arkansas to DC.  She’s a known quantity, and it smells.  As for Trump, he was stinking up the works with his boorish rhetoric, past sexual escapades, and Access Hollywood.  Could it be that a easily dislikeable candidate, 8 years of Obama malaise, a horrible campaign strategy, poor campaign management, and Trump being a fresh face had more to do with the result than Wikileaks and $100,000 in Facebook ads?

However, giving the story heft was our FBI in DC, something euphemistically called the “intel community”, and who knows how many big cheeses in the Obama administration.  More than putting a thumb on the scale, they were sitting on it.

First, Comey’s gang “exonerated” Hillary after her clear violations of 18 U.S. Code § 798 et al.  Furthermore, and amazingly, Comey and his courtiers somehow reached the conclusion that  bleach-bitting her hard drives and servers and smashing devices to smithereens didn’t qualify as obstruction of justice.  And to think that Trump had to fight through hell for two and a half over the now-dubious charges of conspiring with Russia and interfering (obstruction) with Mueller’s inquisition into a non-crime.

Go figure.  Now that’s the stuff of movies.

As Comey was clearing Hillary, he was conducting a surveillance operation against the Trump campaign since at least summer 2016.  A piece of Democrat oppo research – the Steele Dossier – was funneled to the FBI, Obama’s Justice and State Departments, and Obama’s intel chiefs, Clapper and Brennan.  The Democrat oppo research was filled with vile falsehoods but was peddled to FISA courts to entrap people connected to Trump, no matter how loose their affiliation.  Ironically, the Dossier would turn out to be the only proven instance of collusion: the cooperative arrangement between the Russians, Steele, and the Hillary campaign/DNC.

With sycophants in the media, leaks would keep the pot boiling in an attempt to delegitimize Trump’s victory up to the point when drips and drabs of FBI/Obama mischievousness start to dribble into view, and the release of Mueller’s incoherent report in April of 2019 raised new concerns about the fable.

Anyway, the 2018 midterms gave the House to the Democrats and off into impeachment land we go.

By the time of the release of Mueller’s unintelligible tome, enough was known of the gross misbehavior of Obama’s people and his holdovers in the executive branch.  The rogues gallery includes Strok, Page, McCabe, Comey, the Ohrs, Clapper, Brennan, maybe Lynch, and anybody else in the Obama claque now looking to lawyer-up.  Include the minor interstellar bodies who are in the orbit of Obama’s intel glob like Halper and Misfud.  Also, friendly foreign intel services were more than happy to participate in the scam.

The plot thickens.  With one house of our bicameral legislature in hunger pangs for impeachment, getting Trump becomes more than partisan mudslinging.  It becomes institutional, partisan mudslinging on the federal dime.  Subpoenas fly and the Bolsheviks took over committee chairs.  Who’d have thunk it?

Jerry Nadler, chrmn. House Judiciary Comm., and Adam Schiff, chrmn. of the House Intelligence Comm.

Impeachment was juiced up.  The Democrats’ electoral success in 2018, though, could possibly end up breeding their own fall.  In Sophocles’s tragedy, Ajax, Ajax proudly asserts that he doesn’t need Zeus’s help.  Oedipus in Oedipus Rex boastfully claims the genius to solve a murder mystery.  It didn’t end well.  From the Book of Proverbs, 16:18: “Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.”  Warnings abounded, but the Dems insisted on pushing the issue.

The April release of the much-anticipated Mueller Report made matters murkier.  Trump collusion was put to bed but he was “not exonerated” (?) of obstruction, something Hilary did blatantly.  Now that’s an extremely odd concept in a prosecutor’s brief, “not exonerated”.  It’s such a loose concept that anybody not charged can be labeled “not exonerated”.  That’s not how our system works.  Innocence is presumed, not “not exonerated”.  Well, it’s enough of a kernel for Democrats blinded with rage for losing in 2016.

Then Mueller reluctantly testified after the Dems threatened him with subpoenas.  Mueller’s testimony proved to be the emperor with no clothes.  Bumbling, stumbling, incoherent, and ignorant of his own report made the show an embarrassment for both him and the Dems.

The spectacle raises questions about who was running the show in the Office of Special Counsel.  Was Mueller merely the man running interference for the likes of Andrew Weissman and Jeannie Rhee, both leftovers from Obama’s DOJ?

The Special Counsel and his team.

Mueller’s awkward performance and his lack of familiarity with the report that bears his name would seem to indicate that the partisan inmates were running the partisan asylum.  13 of the 17 prosecutors working under Mueller were registered Democrats – and prominent Democrat apparatchiks in DC – with the remaining four unknown or unaffiliated.

Mark July 24, 2019 on your calendar, the day of Mueller’s testimony.  It’s the day for all-things-Russia to exit stage left.  Another angle to the story, frothing beneath the surface, is about to spill over the top.

The curtain comes down on Act One.

Act Two: The Fall

The script for Act II has not been written.  Yet, key elements are present for a second generation Watergate.

The full story of the lefty nexus of the mainstream media, the Obama holdovers in the executive branch, and the Democratic Party has yet to be written.  This place has the potential for a real conspiracy.  Attorney General Barr, US Attorney Durham, US Attorney Huber, and IG Horowitz will have something to say in due course, though the general outlines are already present.  The investigation of the investigators has just begun, the start of Act Two.

Yes, the rogue’s gallery mentioned earlier should lawyer-up.  It’s a great time to be a criminal defense lawyer in DC.

Here’s a possible scenario.  The story begins with the effort to remove Trump from the political scene.  Comey’s in the middle of it.  Comey and his claque in the FBI were eager to use the fraudulent dossier to undermine the Trump campaign and presidency as early as summer 2016, after which they would end up with 4 FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.  The applications for the warrants to begin the effort were deceptions to the FISA judges.  The operation (“Crossfire Hurricane”) continued well into 2017.

The media played along to perpetuate the story.   They acted like a megaphone for wild and lurid claims for gross partisan advantage.  It was a cooperative venture among a triad of actors: (1) big name/legacy media, (2) the DNC/Hillary campaign, and (3) an executive branch that acted like its namesake, a community organizer – which is nothing but a rabble-rousing community activist.

But surprise, surprise: Trump won.  And …..  Stay tuned for the rest of the story.

RogerG

Disinformation Within Disinformation

Adams Schiff (D, Ca.), Chairman of the House Intelligence (?) Committee, and key champion of impeachment.

Are you as tired as I am of the endless incantation of “Russian attacked our democracy”?  I was going to write about the Dems’ call for a takeover of healthcare or Romney’s Trump-bashing.  Instead, I talked myself into this topic after running into the hackneyed charge for the zillionth time since before Trump placed his hand on the Bible, Jan. 20, 2017.  I feel like the Peter Finch character in “Network” when he shouts, “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!”.  Enough; please, enough!  Put it to bed.

The reason is obvious.  This is disinformation about a commonly-used disinformation campaign.  The Russians have been at it for a long time, and so have we.

The ex-veep Dick Cheney fed the monster of overheated rhetoric by calling Russian campaign interference an “act of war”.  But the monster had already been unleashed in the interregnum between the Obama and Trump presidencies (more about this is likely to come from the “investigation of the investigators”).  It became the established Democrats’ tag line to explain Hillary’s loss.  From the gitgo, it was a ruse to muddy the winner and exonerate the loser.  Apparently, the Democrats aren’t supposed to lose elections.

Do I really have to recount the long roll call of Russian attempts to influence western electorates?  The tactic was done through espionage by comrades in the various national chapters of the Communist Party (“Witness” by Whittaker Chambers) and “agents of influence” in the chancelleries of the West (Research our government’s Venona Project).  It was done by financially feeding fellow-travelling activists in the anti-nuke, anti-war, and anti-capitalist movements west of the Iron Curtain.

Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts addresses pro-freeze demonstrators on Capitol Hill, 1981 or 1982 (?).

Reagan faced a full fusillade of these “acts of war” in the 1980’s when he moved to counter the Russian medium-range nuclear missile threat in Europe.  Anti-war sympathizers went nuts in Congress, the media, and the streets.  Thank God he stuck to his guns … er, missiles.

Shenanigans in western elections were, and are, a staple … and it includes us.  Our interference in Israeli elections is less than unusual.  Obama sent some of his campaign veterans to Tel Aviv to assist Labor.  The smell of hypocrisy is rich in the air.

Jeremy Bird, a former Obama campaign organizer, who assisted the Left-leaning parties’ effort to oust Benjamin Netanyahu, 2015. (Melina Mara/Getty Images)

We could do much worse for humanity than doing more of this in places like Iran, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba.

The Democrats are desperate to remain politically relevant by any means at hand.  The means at hand, though, are patently ludicrous.  The crazy plot requires a god-like omniscience on the part of the Russians.  Russians are seemingly more adept at electioneering than Robby Mook, Hillary’s campaign tsar.  Maybe that’s true.

The scheme demands a Russian crystal ball to foresee how to precisely calibrate their phone bank of basement bots and Facebook ads to tilt the election to Trump.  But there’s a fly in the ointment.  They don’t need a crystal ball or time machine if their goal is to sow discord regardless of who wins.  Their objective was to sully the winner, who everyone, including the Russians, expected to be Hillary.

They succeeded beyond their wildest imagination.  The winner was falsely covered in mud.  Shockingly, it happened to be Trump.  If it had been Hillary, the story would end up in the same place as the Ark at the end of “Raiders of the Lost Ark”.

The place of storage for the collusion plot if Hillary had won? (“Raiders of the Lost Ark”)

The only successful part of the subterfuge was the Hillary-Steele-Russians element.  The product of the cabal – the Steele Dossier – was fed to the mandarins of the Obama administration, and used and leaked to soil the real electoral winner.  For over two years, the country, the president, his family and helpers, were subjected to a drawn out nothingburger.

A lot of people have egg on the face from their nothingburger (sorry for the mixed metaphor).  The “egg” is ruined reputations and more business for defense lawyers.  The sorry affair was always a Dem disinformation campaign rooted in a Russian one.

“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.”

John F. Kennedy

RogerG

Comey’s Phony “Higher Loyalty”

James Comey, the fired FBI director, has for the past 2 years since his firing been making the rounds as a sage while hawking his book, “A Higher Loyalty”.  Should he be accorded unquestioned esteem?  Rod Rosenstein thinks otherwise.  Take a look.

Rosenstein has been muzzled by his official and professional responsibilities as Deputy Attorney General while Comey makes the rubber chicken circuit.  A few days ago in a CNN townhall, the dispatched FBI Director, wrapping himself in a messianic aura, smeared the retired Deputy AG as a person lacking in “strong character”.  Well, Rosenstein is no longer manacled by his job and can fight back.  The self-anointed prophet of God, Comey, may turn out to be a three-card-monte scammer.

Rosenstein presents a Comey who got out in front of his skis, probably due to Comey’s inflated self-regard.  With Comey, investigators are prosecutors.  He did this twice in the heat of the 2016 presidential election when he announced the non-prosecution of Hillary and then publicly resuscitated the investigation of her.  The word “Investigation” after “Federal”, “Bureau”, and “of” will have to be replaced by “Prosecution”.  But admittedly FBP doesn’t have the same ring as FBI.

A higher loyalty?  Comey’s higher loyalty may not ascend much above the person looking back at him in the mirror.  Somehow the ancient Greek story of Narcissus keeps coming to mind.

RogerG