↓
 
Home » Whither Comey?

Whither Comey?

The New Neo Posted on by

Here’s today’s rumor about IG Horowitz’s report:

Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s much anticipated report on his investigation into the FBI’s probe into President Trump’s campaign is expected to be made public before Thanksgiving and the outcome is alleged to contain several criminal referrals, according to sources who spoke with SaraACarter.com…

According to several sources the report will be ‘damning’ and will allegedly contain criminal referrals on former FBI officials. The report will apparently have at least two criminal referrals, said two sources, with knowledge. One of those criminal referrals is expected to be Comey. However, the Inspector General’s office has not been providing comments on the report.

Grain of salt duly taken. And of course, even if there’s a criminal referral for Comey, that doesn’t mean Barr will prosecute.

Here’s my other thought: if there is a criminal referral and Barr does prosecute, will that change any minds? After all, Sara Carter also reports:

“If it’s strong and comes out soon, the IG report will do some real damage to the Democrats’ impeachment charade. It would show that Resistance bureaucrats really are conspiring to take down Trump,” said a House Republican source. “It would also fatally undermine the credibility of Schiff, who argued vehemently that there were no FISA abuses—it will mean that, as Intel Committee Chairman, he’s ignoring severe abuses for purely political purposes.”

In a logical world, that would be the case. But the world doesn’t necessarily work that way. My own cynicism suggests that, if Comey is prosecuted, all of Trump’s opponents will call it vengeance on the part of Trump and will consider it merely another reason to impeach him.

Comments

Whither Comey? — 73 Comments

  1. Does anybody seriously think any of these people will ever stand trial let alone go to jail?

    Even if they recommend charges it’ll just drag out til President Warren quietly tells AG Kamala to make it go away.

    People thinking anything will happen are the real Dreamers.

  2. I expect to see a number of viable prosecutions and, depending on the strength of the cases, lower level miscreants giving up their superiors. So, up the chain to the very likes of former director Comey. And who will he give up? Welly welly well, who indeed?

  3. I watched the spectacle of Democrat “experts” telling us how devastating the Mueller Report would be, so I am only hoping that conservative “experts” are more accurate than their leftist counterparts were. I’ll wait and see.

  4. sdferr,

    Yeah right and the IG report is coming soon and it’s going to be devastating yada, yada, yada.

    I hope you’re right but what real world evidence leads you to believe this?

    Call me cynical I guess.

  5. “. . .if Comey is prosecuted, all of Trump’s opponents will call it vengeance on the part of Trump. . .”

    Very likely — it is part and parcel of the psychological projection they have been engaging in for a generation or more.

    It all reminds me once again that we are a divided nation — severely divided — with one tribe unable to think good thoughts about the other.

    The effort to delegitimatize a Republican president is now standard practice for the Democrats, and if they were able to get Trump out of office there would not be a single day’s delay before they begin to consider impeachment proceedings against Mike Pence.

    This is, after all, about power. It is not about high crimes and misdemeanors, it is not about a quid pro quo with Ukraine, it is not even about Trump’s inelegant speaking style or boorishness. It is about power.

    So what are the chances any of the miscreants will be charged with anything? Very low. And if so, what is the likelihood they will be found guilty? Zero.

    These, after all, are our betters. The pretty people who can steal with impunity, including elections.

    I am terribly discouraged. Was it always so? Or is this a recent development? And if recent, since when? FDR? LBJ? Teddy Kennedy? They all displayed elements of what we are seeing now in spades. But I’m suspicious it did not even start with them.

  7. Read Lee Smith’s book for starters Griffin. He ain’t pullin’ yer leg, and he’s got the goods from public information. Only think what criminal investigators can develop with subpoena powers, legit FISA warrants, etc. This shit show was no phantom. It was all too real.

  8. sdferr,

    Never said it wasn’t real but that don’t mean jack in the real world. There is just no way any of these guys will be prosecuted.

  9. “… all of Trump’s opponents will call it vengeance on the part of Trump and will consider it merely another reason to impeach him.”

    It doesn’t matter what they call it, it matters that they see that their crimes carry nasty consequences. They can scream all they want, as long as they’re too scared of getting caught and going to jail to try it again!

  10. I sort of think being on this side of the political divide is all about managing expectations if you want to remain sane. So I just assume nothing will happen to these people then if something does I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

    P.S.- Works in other areas too like last night’s Seahawks/49ers game. Just figured they’d lose then when they won I was very happy. But if they’d lost I could just say ‘yep knew it’.

    All about managing expectations, I say.

  11. Never said it wasn’t real but that don’t mean jack in the real world. There is just no way any of these guys will be prosecuted.

    Griffin: I’m not unsympathetic. However, because I suspect the evidence is overwhelming, I believe there will be prosecutions. I have my doubts we will see any orange jumpsuits at the end.

    My main hope, though, is the investigations will blow a big hole in the Democrats’ impeachment offense against Trump.

  12. Griffin,

    “Does anybody seriously think any of these people will ever stand trial let alone go to jail?”

    I think it’s a possibility, though not a probability. I see two impediments to prosecution and imprisonment. One political and the other judicial. Prosecuting highly placed government officials before the 2024 election is politically problematic as democrats and the mass media will indeed paint it as petty revenge upon Trump’s part. Since it’s a federal matter, the DC district court would initially hear the case and a liberal activist judge is certain to rule against the DOJ prosecution.

    After the 2024 election, Trump would have nothing politically to lose. If he could then get the case before a constitutionalist federal judge he would win and that would probably result in widespread violence. That would provide Trump with the Casus Belli to declare Martial Law…

    18 U.S. Code § 2383 – Rebellion or insurrection | U.S …
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383

    It’s going to come down to Civil War given that the left and right literally and vehemently disagree as to the very nature of reality itself. A condition that tragically is utterly unbridgeable.

    Given that existential reality, it’s much more desirable that war erupt under Trump than under a leftist President.

  13. Liberals took Christine Blasey Ford seriously. There isn’t much critical intelligence at work in that subculture and I don’t think that the outcome of these investigations will change that.

  14. I watched the spectacle of Democrat “experts” telling us how devastating the Mueller Report would be, so I am only hoping that conservative “experts” are more accurate than their leftist counterparts were. I’ll wait and see.

    There is one difference. The Horowitz and Durham investigations are completely opaque. We know nothing. We could observe the indictments the Mueller was bringing (process crimes, extraneous matters Trump had nothing to do with, and charges against Russian nationals they knew they’d never have to argue in court) and we could observe what was not in the pleas (i.e. any admission to participation in any kind of conspiracy with Russians or anyone else). We could also observe the horrid abuses of Weissman et al (early morning raids on co-operating targets with reputable counsel, to which friendly media were tipped off). Partisan Democrats never acknowleged that the indictments were all diversions and extortion schemes, so they thought there would be something in the Mueller report, and all it was was a compendium of red-herrings.

  15. It doesn’t matter what they call it, it matters that they see that their crimes carry nasty consequences.

    Since the public doesn’t seem to react to these controversies (one way or another), I think the imperative is punishment, deterrence, and incapacitation. No question there was some combination of malfeasance, misfeasance, and nonfeasance on the part of key actors. The question is whether any of it was precisely unlawful and whether or not you can get the charge to stand up in court. If the answers are affirmative, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, the Ohrs, Yates, Weissman, Sztrok, Page, Rosenstein, Ciaramella, Simpson, and Schiff in orange and selling their homes to pay legal bills would be a fine deterrent to the rest of those working in the security state apparatus. The dissolution of the CIA and the dismemberment of the FBI would be another reminder.

    I’m expecting nothing, of course.

  16. I am expecting something positive, count me gullible, but I think Barr and Durham might be straight shooters. I doubt I will get my wish that this touches bho and hrc, but I’ll be happy to see Comey and a few others in a federal prison for 20 years.

  17. Put me in the I’ll believe it when I see it camp.

    For, what, two years Adam Schiff peddled the lie that he had evidence of Trump colluding with the Russians to affect the 2016 election in his favor. That the Democrats are letting him be his standard bearer on this impeachment farce says all you need to know.

    I’m terrible at political predictions, most often I’m just plain wrong, so I will predict that if a report does get issued there will be reams of wrongdoing documented but no criminal referrals and, so, no one will be held accountable for the wrongdoing.

  18. The perps, Comey, etal will plead that they were only doing what needed to be done. They could not risk that Trump was a Russian asset. They will point to the “dossier” as supporting this. All nonsense, of course, but the progs (Media, Hollywood, DNC, academia, etc.) will trumpet the excuse as valid and opine that any indictments are pure political pay back. The paid protestors will take to the streets. I can hear the chants now – “No justice, no peace.” They will raise Cain.

    Barr will have to have iron -clad, straightforward evidence of criminal violations. Otherwise, prosecutions will only provide fuel for the bonfires of leftist demonstrations and violence.

    IMO, the best path might be to make a public report of all the
    anti-Trump activities naming names and shaming them as far as possible. This report should be as short and clear as possible – hoping to get as many readers as possible. Then the AG should recommend that Congress pass laws that will prevent such unethical political activity from ever happening again. Example: It should be a crime for any party or candidate to hire foreign operatives to dig up dirt on their political rivals. A sentence of ten years in prison and a million dollar fine should the be the penalty for such activity. Might help deter it.

    The FISA abuse is probably the most straightforward crime that’s been committed. If anyone is indicted, I would expect it to come from that activity. IMO, we may see some actual charges there. Well, I can dream can’t I?

  19. Frankly, I’d like to see Comey and Company indicated and convicted, or at least indicated.

    Be a hoot then to see Trump pull the ultimate counter-ploy and pardon them all.

    To individuals with a shred of conscience, that would be a stunning blow. I’m imagining the look on their faces as they blurt: “He did WHAT?” But with this crowd, there’s no redemption, no derailing their insanity, spite and entitlement.

    Our forefathers would have called them traitors.

  20. Yada yada yada … wake me when something important happens with this b.s. Tired of hearing about IG reports and prosecutors getting their devastating charges ready. It’s always just around the bend.

  22. It’s evident folks aren’t paying attention to the publicly available information on these cases, information which goes well beyond the “dossier” and its distribution. Moreover, it seems that Donald Trump’s psychological makeup has been left out of the picture, somehow.

    Anyway, begin with Mr. Durham returning from Italy with two phones taken from Joseph Mifsud. Where did the phones come from, one might ask, and why are they of interest here? Think this through. Who is this guy, who was running him, and running him for what? He knows, and I think he’s talking. So, the phones: E v i d e n c e.

    Now, how about Stefan Halper? Who was running him? Oh, the DoD!? And what was he doing framing Lt. Gen. Flynn? Oh? That?

    So let’s quit with the simple version the newsie dopes are selling.

    Look at the knowns. Think them through. Look at Susan Rice’s “Memo to Record”.

    Why that? You know why that. So do all the principals, Pseudonym not least. The criminals know what they’ve done. Let them tell you. They can’t hide.

  24. Oh for Pete’s sake the IG’s report “will be out any day now” for how many weeks and months now? The lethargy of the process suggests less than a just and decisive statement. Oh yeah, the IG is a thorough and good man….so we are told, but on what basis? None. Hell, he is just another member of the Deep State.

    Why wait til Thanksgiving? So the whole piece of work can be snowed under by the holiday shoppers buying all that cheap stuff from communist China?

    We are done.Overcooked, in fact.

  25. Esp. seeing as PJT tweeted about how “I’ve caught them”, I can’t believe that he and Barr would so tease us, to then fail to move heaven and earth to deliver.
    His foes will try to call it vengeance, but their MSM allies no longer dominate things like before.
    Look at how he raises mega $$, despite the MSM.

  26. I am in the skeptical camp wrt to this really going anywhere. But, I am hopeful. I believe that it is vital for Barr to prosecute to demonstrate, if nothing else, to “we little people” that laws mean something.

    When laws will not, or cannot, enforced there is little respect. For instance, I am appalled that here in SoCal there is so little respect for any law; even the most basic ones intended to protect folks on the road. This is a precursor of a trend. If the great “unwashed” (of which I am a proud member) see another incidence of the privileged being above the law, as with Hillary, and lose all respect for any law, chaos and anarchy will prevail. The notion of different laws for different folk is a cancer in our society, and it could easily metastasize with devastating result.

    Apocryhphal? We cannot know.

  29. Unfortunately, I think that the truth here is likely to be that, whatever evidence is developed by Barr and Durham (assuming that they are the old fashioned, honest, straight shooters they are said to/appear to be), and however solid it might be, the rot, the subversion/perversion of our government and legal systems has become so pervasive and so deep, that it seems as if there just aren’t enough courageous people remaining in positions of power who still adhere to traditional values and to the rule of Law sufficient to get the process of indictments, then prosecutions, then guilty verdicts, and incarceration for the guilty through our current day political/ governmental/judicial system.

    Moreover, the MSM will go into overdrive to–1. bury or downplay any incriminating information that Barr and Durham find, 2. to twist whatever is found to make it seem as if it is minor, and of no real importance 3. to portray any possible prosecutions they will try to mount as vengefully railroading the innocent.

    I fervently wish it were not so but, bottom line—and based on our past shared experience of all sorts of people who very obviously committed multiple crimes and who should have been indicted and prosecuted, who should have been convicted, but who weren’t (see Bill and Hillary for starters)—when all the hullabaloo is done, they’ll all skate.

  30. Related, but coming from a source in the other Democratic Party Subversion Plot.
    This is the conclusion of a long, detailed analysis of Fiona Hill’s testimony in the Impeachment Farce:

    https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/11/10/its-the-rabbit-holes-yes-steele-dossier-contained-disinformation-but-its-what-else-fiona-hill-said-that-matters/
    By J.E. Dyer November 10, 2019

    So, to be clear, injecting conspiracy theories – presumably a form of disinformation – into the media is unhelpful in the quest to hold a credible, high-confidence U.S. election. That said, we’re kind of wasting our time on the matter by either debating the “conspiracy theories” or investigating who’s injecting them. What matters is the Russians.

    Fiona Hill implies the middle man doesn’t matter

    It’s probably obvious where I’m going with this now. Hill’s testimony appears designed to get us to take the middle man for granted – and indeed, to take the brokering method for granted; i.e., how disinformation from a source like Russia is introduced into the public square in the United States.

    Christopher Steele was “played.” Ms. Hill says she knows nothing about how the dossier was assembled, and in an exchange with Rep. Lee Zeldin (starting on p. 436) she says she knows nothing about Fusion GPS or its hiring by the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign. Here she is discreet about it not being her area of expertise, even giving an impression of kind of blowing that aspect of the matter off.

    Yet Christopher Steele and a cast of Americans – Democrats – acting of their own volition are how the Russians injected disinformation through the Steele dossier.

    Moreover, the only significant effect the dossier had before the election was through its inclusion as justifying intelligence in the FISA application for Carter Page – which Hill also prefers not to focus on.

    And that effect wasn’t actually on the election, in terms of its operation or outcome. The effect came later: on the perception of the election fostered afterward by the media and Democratic politicians.

    The Fiona Hill testimony seems to want to have it both ways. Or multiple ways, simultaneously.

    I.e., the dossier was disinformation, and therefore an attack by the Russians.

    But the Russians didn’t inject the disinformation directly through some medium over which they had control. Instead, they concocted it for a former British intelligence official who got associates to ask some Russians some questions. (There’s no indication the Russians were clued in as to who the ultimate client was, or what the purpose was for obtaining the information.) In the process, the British intelligence official probably got played. But that provenance path, we are apparently to understand, doesn’t matter a whole lot.

    Yet without the provenance path, the dossier would never have been assembled for the Russians to inject things through. It took Christopher Steele, the DNC, Hillary Clinton, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS, Sidney Blumenthal, Cody Shearer, and a handful of public officials at each of the Department of Justice, the FBI, the State Department, the DNI, and the CIA to enable the disinformation in the Steele dossier to have any effect at all on the 2016 election.

    And that effect, in political terms, was only after the fact. There was no electoral impact from the dossier. The public had no meaningful knowledge of it before Election Day 2016.

    If not for the onslaught of media coverage and Democratic political agitation once BuzzFeed published the dossier in January 2017, two months after the election, the disinformation planted through it by the Russians would never have even hit soil in the public consciousness, much less taken root.

    We wouldn’t even know about it. The dossier’s Russian disinformation would have gone unconsumed by a contented, confident public.

    Yet Fiona Hill, Russia expert, NSC regional director, and former national intelligence officer on the National Intelligence Council, is anxious that we not overemphasize who’s opening doors into our political system for Russian disinformation to go through, because that would be chasing rabbit holes.

    Right.

  32. Two points:

    1. “Criminal referral” is not necessarily as serious as it seems.

    We saw this in the last IG report that involved Comey. Some DOJ rule was broken so a “criminal referel” was made to DOJ. Useful Idiot John Solomon had you all convinced this was a block-buster, but I pointed out that all it means is that DOJ has to decide if they want to prosecute a breaking of rules as a criminal violation.

    2. IF the IG finds something serious, Comey is all but home free because POTUS has been running his mouth like a moron. The dumbest lawyer in town can find “reasonable doubt” of a political prosecution.

    Trump has been warned about this many times. But he persists. I mean, if you really want justice you don’t ask DOJ, let alone a foreign government, to go on CNN and publicly announce an investigation into the wrongdoer.

    Also, hows that Andrew McCabe prosecution going?

  35. I’d rather have an indictment over rumor of 2 criminal referrals, or even 10.

    It would be better to have clear laws that have been broken, and discussion about such laws.

    Like the law about having Secret communications illegally outside of the gov’t controlled communication network. The law Hillary was guilty of violating.

    All justice systems have two errors: innocents who get wrongly punished, and guilty who wrongly go free.

    There’s lots of error II here, guilty who are going free. More indictments would be better now. I also wanted them before. Evidence from the Mifsud & Halper phones, not available earlier, might well mean both indictments and convictions.

    The lawyer for Flynn seems to be doing a good job at pushing bakc on DOJ/FBI failures in their illegal set up of him. Funny sad how he’s continuing with his guilty plea, tho.

  37. Would a DC Jury convict anyone not connected to Trump or the GOP?

    There is a danger that a trial of anyone involved in attacking Trump would turn into a fiasco.

    Would jurors be doxxed? Would their employers be boycotted? Would their homes be subject to endless demonstrations? Would their children and grandchildren be subjected to retaliation?

    When jurors refuse to convict would they become heroes of the Resistance? Will it just increase the polarization?

    The only effective solution is for Trump to take both houses in 2020, which I think it likely. Then there will be a chance to legislate better protections against the behavior that brought us to this point, and to reform the departments that can do this.

  38. What is the swamp?

    In the 1950s, Senator Joseph McCarthy had a name for the swamp. He called it “the international communist conspiracy.” He spoke of the communist penetration of government, the subversion of U.S. policy, the betrayal of our servicemen on faraway battlefields. He pointed to communism’s nefarious domestic machinations. He wrote about our “retreat from victory,” the legacy of General George C. Marshall — the gifting of Eastern Europe to Stalin, the betrayal of Nationalist China to Mao, and the loss of our atom bomb monopoly.

    A chronically misinformed (or disinformed) reading public is sure to dismiss McCarthy as a fear-monger. “There was no communist conspiracy,” say our mainstream pundits with a characteristic smirk. “McCarthy was engaged in a witch-hunt.” Meanwhile these same pundits have promoted a real witch-hunt. They employ tactics falsely attributed to McCarthy in their unprecedented campaign of slander against President Trump.

    Like the Reichstag fire information we “all know” is wrong thanks to Willi Munzenberg, the same is true of McCarthy given that the man who coined the term “McCarthyism” was Owen Lattimore, a communist and a man who is believed to be a spy, though there was not quite enough to know for sure as to his connections.

    Who dares to notice that a reversal has taken place? Those who might be identified as communist infiltrators or “fellow travelers” now dominate the mainstream media, the commanding heights of counterintelligence, and the criminal justice system. It naturally follows that the witches are now leading the witch-hunts. The communists themselves, thinly disguised as mainstream liberals, threaten anticommunists with fabricated criminal charges and process crimes.

    This is exactly what is unfolding, though nearly everyone refuses to see it. We are now reaping what we have sown. Long ago the left managed to convince the country that McCarthy was a demagogue and a liar, that fear of communism was irrational, that no such infiltration of the government had occurred, that the Rosenberg (atomic spies) were innocent, that communist spy Alger Hiss was innocent. And today, if you look at a typical high school history textbook, McCarthy is the villain.

    At least he exists… People like Freda Utley ended up erased!!!
    To know her is to see how wide the rabbit hole is not just how deep!!!!!!!

    In a review, author
    Pearl Buck wrote: “It is a strongly unassailable indictment of Russian Communism. It is a strongly dramatic story and one interesting enough to make a major novel, the story of a brilliant mind, rigorously truthful in its working….”

    Communist publishers and intelligentsia in both Britain and the US tried to discredit Utley. In the posthumously published book Reagan, In His Own Hand: The Writings of Ronald Reagan That Reveal His Revolutionary Vision for America, Ronald Reagan’s speechwriter wrote about Utley that “many of the intellectuals didn’t want to hear what she had to say. She had impressive academic credentials when she came to the U.S. but publishers and the academy closed doors against her. She understood all too well. She had tried communism and learned its falseness.

    She said only those ‘who have never fully committed themselves to the communist cause’ can continue to believe in it.” — Wikipedia

    no one is interested in this great woman… ESPECIALLY feminists… but we aren’t either!!!

    Think now, friends. Who wrote those textbooks? Don’t you know? The communists took over education in this country, stealthily, patiently. This is why Johnny still can’t read. This is why we awake one day to find that America’s youth favor socialism over capitalism.

    The communists have been taking over the country, bit by bit, little by little. Ask yourself why we built up communist China as an economic power. Why has our navy been shrinking? Why did we allow our nuclear deterrent to rot from old age? Why does the Democratic Party want to eradicate America’s national border?

    None of this is accidental.

    The policies that are urged on us from the left are calculated to disarm and destroy us from within. Look around you. What do we find? Do you really think they want to reduce your carbon footprint to save the planet, or is it an attempt to sabotage capitalism? Do you think they really care about homosexual marriage, or do you think it’s a legal mechanism for persecuting the country’s anticommunist core? — Bible believing Cristians?

    Do you think everything has been culturally aligned with communist goals on accident? If so, I have some swamp land to sell you. And it is full of swamp creatures. — Nyquist

    Comey is doing his part as a leader in the movement…
    if you could understand the foreign languages and look to historical figures erased
    you would clearly see what Comey et al is…
    You wouldn’t be discussing things the same way as a Dodo bird, without experience, tried to make sense of sailors…
    this is apt, as these are the the lineage in ideology of the Sailors of Kronstadt!!

  39. Griffin on November 12, 2019 at 5:14 pm said:

    sdferr, I hope you’re right but what real world evidence leads you to believe this? Call me cynical I guess.

    AG Barr expands mysterious review into origin of Russia investigation
    If U.S. Attorney John Durham is conducting a criminal investigation, it’s not clear what allegations of wrongdoing are being examined. – NBC

    –=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation
    The move is likely to open the attorney general to accusations that he is trying to deliver a political victory for President Trump. – NY Times

    –=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    Barr’s Review of Russia Probe Now a Criminal Investigation
    Prosecutors gain subpoena power in controversial inquiry into origins of FBI counterintelligence case – Wall Street Journal

    –=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    16 Hours ago (from writing this)
    Watchdog Report On Russia Probe Nears Public Release

    The inspector general in recent days has invited witnesses and their lawyers who were interviewed for the report to review portions of a draft this week and next, a critical final step toward making the document public, according to multiple people familiar with the process who insisted on anonymity to discuss it.

    As part of that process, the people will have opportunities to raise concerns or suggest potential edits, making it unclear precisely when in the coming weeks a final version could be ready for release. Inspector General Michael Horowitz told Congress in a letter last month that he did not expect a lengthy review period and that he intended to make as much of the report public as possible, with minimal redactions.

    The release of the report is likely to coincide with House impeachment proceedings scrutinizing the Trump administration’s efforts to press Ukraine into investigating Democratic rival Joe Biden. Any finding of problems by the inspector general in how the FBI gathered and collected evidence in investigating ties between the Trump campaign and Russia could at least temporarily buoy Trump and other Republican supporters eager to turn the page from the congressional scrutiny now imperiling his White House.

    https://kxnt.radio.com/articles/ap-news/watchdog-report-russia-probe-nears-public-release

  40. The proper name for what is going on now is:
    Velvet Revolution

    But why bother to learn or even categorize them?
    its so much more entertaining to be confused and try to guess…
    whats at stake, is not relevant in this game so it appears

  42. Right now, they are racking off all the awards and things the subject has accomplished… as if that means anything in terms of proof…

    it doesnt… a deep operative would also work to do as much for the precise purpose that is out there now…

    NONE of his life history has any bearing on what he will testify..

    good thing the feminists took over school so that the polity cant think straight enough to understand why they are bent over a desk

    good job girls?
    or are we going to say that feminists are not effective?

    Taylor and Kent are being sworn in..

    No witnesses with contrary information will be allowed!!!
    and Schiff is claiming that outing the whistleblower is his reason for blocking all questions.. and he is smirking like a sociopath enjoying duping delight..

  43. Schiff just said he doesnt know who the whistleblower is
    and is loving this stuff… and i am a person who cant read faces well!!!

    so, he is going to block revealing someone he doesnt know, so how does he know who to block? but also, he is not sworn in… so he can lie… and he is happy shredding the constitutions right to know your accuser, thanks to feminists establishing this exception for protection of victims for 30 years..

    the purpose was never the purpose

  44. rignt now Kent is goig on about his father and the bataan death march he survived.. which i have no idea what it has to do with trump and such
    they are piling on his authority, as if he was a soviet general with so many medals that he walks tilted to the side

  45. My cynicism tells me nothing will happen, and indeed the IG report and anything about it will be spun. But I’m also getting tired of the notion that conservatives just accept their lot and turn the other cheek. Obama’s IC turned itself into an authoritative cabal. Either you are with them, or they will put you behind bars and destroy your family. Simply exposing this and watching it be spun away is dangerous in the long run. We should be demanding prosecutions and pestering our lawmakers until they happen. Otherwise, we will get the government we deserve.

  46. Taylor is now making the argument that there is a regular channel (working through the diplomats) and an irregular (ie assumed illegal) from the president and cabinet

    ie. if you want anything with an external country, you HAVE to go through the diplomats and that the president or his team should be forbidden.

    this is NOT valid given that the president has power to negotiate, and also power to delegate that power to others…

    they also make open claim that what Biden said at the CFR is as if it didint exist
    are they afraid of the CFR and the Trilateral commission (which uses a nazi triskelion as its symbol since birth)

    this is really crazy.. including justifying foreign nationals now in the mix, are like washington using Rochambeau or the von steuben… they could have cued up the patriot music, they would have.

    just as he pointed that out, i guess no one would point out Benedict Arnold who was not an american either…

    Velvet Revolution
    The Velvet Revolution (Czech: sametová revoluce) or Gentle Revolution (Slovak: nežná revolúcia) was a non-violent transition of power in what was then Czechoslovakia, occurring from 17 November to 29 December 1989.

  47. Watching the two impeachment witness opening hit man remarks from the deep state (career politicians who know more than the president and are butt hurt that aren’t as powerful as him,) it’s obvious that deep state coup artists like Comey (who is smarter than the President and butt hurt he isn’t s powerful as hime,) are pretty safe.

  48. its amazing… after saying things like i heard this and that, shiff is the person then talking about what Russia thinks, this person thinks…

    none of this would be valid in a regular court..
    it boggles the mind..

    [and its funny that Taylor said that Russia has violated all the treaties and other things that kept the peace… really? you mean the country that invaded Latvia while having 8 peace treaties, did that? so their spots have not changed? who knew?]

    its very unreal in that this was basically a long monologue, and ridiculous, which no witness in a regular court is allowed to do…

    amazing..
    game over..

  49. the major case is that you do not do anything without using the ambassador..
    and the idea was that we could not remove help for ukraine if president didnt want it… but that the president had to continue what an ambassador wanted to do..

    its mostly that people who are not in leadership are upset that they were not the leaders over the president… he keeps referring to julienne, but julienne is part of the presidential cabinet..the counsel has their hands tied..

    amazing…

  50. now he just testified to a feeling..
    and that it was HIS understanding of these things externally

    he is testifying what he “heard from people” (assuming they are perfectly accurate in what they say, how they say, not coloring it, and that the 2nd person got the actual information that way… but i wonder, can they tell me how do they know the feeling?]

    this is a farce…

  51. “this is a farce…”

    Of course it is. But the bottom line is that currently 90% of the population is going about their daily lives and not watching. The students will hear from their faculty how the hearings show how bad Trump is. Their parents will come home from work and turn on CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN news which will show the hearings proved Trump is bad. The Dems control the narrative, and thus the population.

  53. ok… so now it comes out

    what biden did was ok as that was the policy of the USA
    but what Trump did was not cause it wasnt usa policy
    except that as president its trumps job to make policy

    its almost a testimony by round about means that the president doesnt set policy
    but the ambassadors do… and if what is going on is illegal, but aligns with that policy, its ok… cause it does… but if the president wishes to set policy, which is what his job is, thats a no no..

    so in effect, this is a trial against the president for not bowing to ambassadorial desires in international policy…

  54. Tom Grey on November 13, 2019 at 12:26 pm said:

    Thanks for good commentary Artfldgr.

    See my comment a few posts ago:
    https://www.thenewneo.com/2019/11/09/whats-with-this-ok-boomer-business/#comment-2464847 (Don’t have your email)

    nope… and you ignored that i already had a team of leftists appear on my doorstep and threaten my family and child..

    so you keep asking me to put my neck out for people who would not defend me otherwise… you got that… when a team of leftists doxes you, or shows up, and you have a young child that plays in the yard…

    do you listen to a person who doesnt like your posts and can scroll by?
    fuck no!!!

  55. Vyzera to ze mate slovensku klavesnicu..

    no… my grandparents were Czech…
    and my grandmother was slovak
    my father is latvian
    my wife is indonesian

    and i am a polyglot – a person who knows and is able to use several languages.

  56. my grandfather spoke 7 languages including English, polish, russian, slovak, czech, german..

    grandmother a few that overlapped.

    I use google translate to help as i dont speak as well as i used to:

    Trudno uwierzy?, ?e twoja g?upota, zak?adaj?c, ?e j?zyk jest sam, jest oznak? lojalno?ci

    Nawiasem mówi?c, nie moje komentarze ma?p pochodz? z Polski

  57. i am currently trying to learn bahasa and mandarin
    maybe i want to talk to my wifes family in a language they find more comfortable?

    do i have your permission?

    though you may want to know that Obama speaks arabic, and russian
    Condoleeza rise speaks fluent russian
    there are others…

  58. “The Dems control the narrative, and thus the population.”

    As a political party, Repubs must have known this and have not done anything to correct it. Thus the Dems win, alas. Is it possible Repubs could have fixed this? Yes, but they have not gone nuclear, preferring to remain understanding and liberal in their approach. They might as well be Dems. I cannot say this strongly enough. They might as well be Dems.

  59. My jordan is doing a good job…
    i wonder where it goes.. as the clear understanding has just been contradicted
    and he is going to bring out paper and statements..

    he got the info from ambassador sondland..
    and told them that this was not a quid pro quo
    and if the president didnt clear things up, we would be at a standstill

    the issue is what things are and what would be a standstill
    the people testifying are inserting their assumptions as writ when the only people that actually know are the ones who said it, but are not testifying

    Mr Jordan work is the best and most interesting so far..

  60. Chris Stewart,(R-Utah) Has just blown the hearing wide open. He distilled the impeachment inquiry down to a singe sentence in the call’s transcript. Schiff and the witnesses seem to be glum and without energy as a result.

    All the Democrat arguments are assuming a Trump mind set to extort Ukraine’s President, when there is zero, nada, NO evidence whatsoever. Game, set, and match.

  61. it seems clear and apparent that the democrats cant separate the idea of investigating crime in general, from investigating crime in general that includes a man in office or potentially running for office

    ie. if a man is in office, or potentially running for office, they get to commit crimes and its verboten to investigate the crimes or potential crimes, even if there is a treaty by Clinton that would imply he has more than an assumed right to do so.

  62. jj. there is also the point where schiff blocks us from knowing the dates, times and any point where the whistleblower and he met despite him denying that he knows who that person is, and ignoring the right to know your accuser, and that schiff was not the right person to go to to do such a thing (given procedures in place), and no law that protects a whistleblowers identity, just their job.

    435 members of congress, and only 1 get to know who..
    only chairman Schiff knows who it is
    but at the beginning said he didn’t..

  63. “NO evidence whatsoever.”

    Well yes. Except that that’s precisely the problem”:

    They don’t need no steenkeeng evidence. (They’re just going through the “trial” procedure as a formality—manufacturing evidence where they feel it is strategically useful and relying on the echo chamber created by the complicit MSM to provide stratospheric amplification.. Throwing the America People—and the Republicans—a (rubber) bone, as it were…. Since make no mistake: what we’re witnessing here, as we witnessed throughout the Kavanaugh obscenity, is a long, drawn out, viscious, hateful, hysteria-fueled, auto da fe. A political lynching. A targeted pogrom—yes, that’s right.)

    In fact, the less evidence they have, the more they believe it. Enthusiastically. Hysterically. Religiously (remember: what we are witnessing here—and have witnessed from the get-go—is a matter of faith. Extreme, no-holds-barred faith.

    (The above—“the less evidence…” would ordinarily be considered a paradox; however, their unfettered faith converts paradox to utter, unassailable—and in their case, psychotic—belief, which in turn becomes TRUTH. It should be added that the need to protect themselves from being outed as the criminal mafia they are—replete with omerta, lying, stone-walling and deceitful misdirection, along with strange, unexplained, um, expirations—is an additional, and weighty—if more mundane(?)—motivation.)

    “NO evidence”??

    Yes, it should matter. But it doesn’t….

    …That is, unless the American People become absolutely sickened, repulsed, nauseated and disgusted with these toxic, Stalinist antics that the Democrats are foisting upon the body politic.

  65. Artfldgr on November 13, 2019 at 10:38 am said: “..
    they are piling on his authority, as if he was a soviet general with so many medals that he walks tilted to the side.”

    LOL

  66. Artfldgr on November 13, 2019 at 10:34 am said:
    Right now, they are racking off all the awards and things the subject has accomplished… as if that means anything in terms of proof…

    it doesnt… a deep operative would also work to do as much for the precise purpose that is out there now…
    * * *
    Excellent point for spycraft. Protective camouflage when needed.

  67. Barry,
    Bravo.
    Bravo for clarity.
    Bravo for devotion to Truth, as opposed to the false truth of the Democrats, who as I have remarked on this site must now be characterized as evil. As in China with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), here it is the Democratic Party uber Alles.
    Trouble is, the American people will not rise up en masse. Remember, only 30% of the colonials were anti-British. They pledged their Lives, Fortunes and Sacred Honor. Will we do that? Any of us?

  68. Artfldgr on November 13, 2019 at 10:09 am said: — and linked (a reasonably neutral report, glorioski –)

    https://kxnt.radio.com/articles/ap-news/watchdog-report-russia-probe-nears-public-release

    Horowitz’s team has reviewed over one million records and conducted more than 100 interviews, including several who were interviewed in the last few months, the inspector general has told Congress.

    The investigation is one of several inquiries into the origins of the FBI’s investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

    This could actually could be a fruitful field for actual journalists, or the GOP, to dig in, looking for conflicts in testimony by people interviewed more that once.

  69. Tom Grey on November 13, 2019 at 8:31 am said:
    …
    The lawyer for Flynn seems to be doing a good job at pushing bakc on DOJ/FBI failures in their illegal set up of him. Funny sad how he’s continuing with his guilty plea, tho.
    * * *
    IIRC, there are legal reasons for that, which could get Flynn a better outcome in the long run, having to do with the amount of evidence Powell can put into the record versus other options.

  70. sdferr on November 13, 2019 at 12:13 am said:
    AesopFan, I dont know whether you’ve seen already but if not, checkout the tail end of the “Christopher Steele is at it …” thread for a bit of Fiona Hill stuff.
    * * *
    Thanks – I hadn’t looked at that (I avoid Twitter whenever possible). The commentary matches Dyer’s, but they take slightly different approaches to the target, and of course, she goes much deeper into the analysis.
    Things are moving so fast, it’s hard to remember all of what I’ve read, and which pundits have covered what.

  71. Manju on November 13, 2019 at 2:15 am said:
    Two points:

    1. “Criminal referral” is not necessarily as serious as it seems.
    …
    2. IF the IG finds something serious, Comey is all but home free because POTUS has been running his mouth like a moron. The dumbest lawyer in town can find “reasonable doubt” of a political prosecution.
    * * *
    These are valid points, for reasons other than just because we’re dealing with a Legal & Justice system that is broken.

    “A criminal referral” doesn’t necessarily mean “lock ’em up and throw away the key”-type crime (we wish it did!) and there still has to be an indictment, and then a trial.

    A good defense lawyer will certainly try to get charges dismissed because of the President’s obvious bias, but I don’t know if that will be effective in a civilian justice setting. IIRC, it would be fatal to a court martial conviction if someone in the defendant’s chain of command, or a sufficiently high-ranking officer, had publicly or privately urged conviction.

    However, just asking for an investigation is clearly allowable, because that’s the story Obama’s minions were running with during this entire charade.
    “We had credible (ahem) evidence that Trump was corrupt, so we HAD to investigate, and charge him if we found something.” (HINT: they didn’t)

    I don’t see that as being in any way different from Trump asserting, “This is a witch hunt; arrest them all.”
    Or perhaps, “We have credible evidence that Joe Biden is corrupt, so we HAVE to investigate, and charge him if we found something.”

    To clarify somewhat: I don’t think there is anything intrinsically wrong with the Justice department investigating a candidate for any political office; the problem is that it looks like Obama’s minions were not dealing with credible evidence, since they were making up most of it themselves.
    HINT: that’s what the IG and AG are investigating.

    Also, how IS that Andrew McCabe prosecution going?

    https://www.wsj.com › articles › justice-department-filing-suggests-no-mccab…
    4 hours ago – The Justice Department suggested in a filing that it had no immediate plans to prosecute former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, saying it …
    (Maybe somebody can peek behind the paywall for us. Finding out the reasons might give us a clue about how the rest of the IG’s recommendations will fare.)

  72. “…no immediate plans…”

    I guess “someone” will be hoping/praying that the meaning of “immediate” is “a long, long, long, long, time”.

    But what if it’s “a short, short, short, short time”? What if it means “imminent”; or—since this last possibility is not too likely—what if it means “we are (certainly) keeping our options open”?—in which (latter) case, who knew that the DOJ could be such a tease?….

    Note that the last part of that WSJ article (quoted above), just before the paywall, is:
    “…saying it [i.e., the DOJ] would no longer try to keep documents related to Mr. McCabe from being publicly released…”

    Not sure what this actually means; but some curious types just might respond, “Oh, goody! What precious gems might we find here?”.

  73. }}} My own cynicism suggests that, if Comey is prosecuted, all of Trump’s opponents will call it vengeance on the part of Trump and will consider it merely another reason to impeach him.

    Yes, they will SAY that, because… hey, the Kabuki theater must go on, otherwise even the Useful Idiots will lose faith.

    But it will put them on notice that they cannot keep up the lying and the pushing without consequences.

    This is where we are at, now. The Right MUST stand its ground, and deny the left any further encroachment on our liberties and our very lives.

    This is a temper tantrum. We cannot allow these mindless children to have their way.

    And I mean all this the the most literal way… :-/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑