The battle isn’t over Trump, it’s over whether our normal democratic and constitutional politics which elected Trump will prevail over the deep state.

The pace of media frenzy and #TheResistance howling has picked up lately, particularly in the wake of the firing of Andrew McCabe.

But this frenzy is just a variation on a theme.

That theme is that the 2016 election was invalid, Donald Trump is an illegitimate president, and Trump must be removed from office one way or another. One of those ways is through the Mueller investigation.

None of this is new. It’s been a rolling anti-Trump thunder at least since election night.

With all the outrage over Trump’s tweets or statements or actions, I’ve yet to see a single Trump personality trait or modus operandi that was not fully exposed and litigated during the campaign. Trump won the election with full personality disclosure. So when people claim outrage over this Trump tweet or that, I mostly don’t care.

I also don’t care about the continued smoke blowing about supposed Russia collusion. At such point as someone shows me the fire, I’ll worry about it, but the smoke is just part of the attempt to delegitimize the election.

What I do care about is the intense anti-democratic (small “d”) nature of The Resistance in favor of a permanent espionage state which exploits its information for political purposes.

There were multiple chilling examples after McCabe was fired.

Former CIA Director John Brennan, who is as anti-Trump as they come, suggested that he knew information about Trump that was not yet public. Information, of course, he would have learned in his role at the CIA or through his connections:

When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America…America will triumph over you.

This is chilling stuff. Our intelligence services scoop up an incredible amount of information about all of us. There are limits on how it is supposed to be used, but when the former Director of the CIA suggests that there is undisclosed information about a President, it’s an abuse of power and a not-so-veiled threat.

Backing up this perception, Samantha Power, Obama’s former UN Ambassador and confidant, tweeted the warning that it’s “Not a good idea to piss off John Brennan”:

Power tried to walk it back, claiming it was misinterpreted, and she only was referring to Brennan’s indignation. Yet that’s not what Brennan was saying, and Power’s first tweet warning was believable. Why would she suggest that the former CIA Director’s outrage was more worthy of concern for Trump than the outrage of others?

James Comey also was threatening to come forward with information not yet public after Trump, as part of his McCabe tweets, also criticized Comey:

Mr. President, the American people will hear my story very soon. And they can judge for themselves who is honorable and who is not.

Maybe it’s just Comey building up interest in his upcoming book, but again it’s a suggestion that a former Director of the FBI knows dirt about the president that hasn’t yet been made public.

None of this should surprise anyone. Reflecting a view widely shared among anti-Trumpers, Bill Kristol infamously tweeted soon after the Inauguration:

Obviously strongly prefer normal democratic and constitutional politics. But if it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state.

That seems to be the attitude. And it’s dangerous.

Who elected the John Brennans of the world?

However imperfect, I’ll take our normal democratic and constitutional politics over the deep state. That’s what’s at stake in the attempt to take down Trump because he’s being Trump.

The overwhelming reason I don’t believe that Brennan and Comey have anything real to dump is that, if they DID have such information, there’s no way they could have resisted putting in on the front page of the NYT already. They have no restraint, they have no standards; why would they have held back?

They know they can feed vague innuendo to the media and they’ll run around with their hair on fire while the democrats shriek for impeachment. It’s all about turning the unstable left into a powder keg, ready to blow. It’s not like the swamp dwellers would actually get their hands dirty when they’ve got millions of useful idiots ready to take to the streets.

Trump has you people under a hypnotic spell, you believe whatever he says and demonize everyone looking into his illegal activities. Mueller is a republican so how can this be a democrats sinister plot ?
Trump is attacking our law institutions for his own benefit. This isn’t a left or right issue, it’s a legality issue between Trump and the law.

There is no hypnotic spell, you ridiculous dope. You’re thinking as Democrats do. Projection again. There is fascination, though. Fascination at seeing Trump rip the deep state new @ssholes and doing the same thing to corrupted partisan media. Nobody sensible even watches them anymore.

It’s with considerable dismay that I say that even after 16 mos. of this administration I have a fearful foreboding that it will no end well. And, indicated in this is what it would mean for our nation should it come to pass.

The late Rev. Billy Graham is to have said that he wept and prayed for America. I do likewise.

Like every other American he is exercising his first amendment right “Freedom of Speech” and as the former director of the CIA he knows a hell of a lot more than you putz’s. He is sending out a cautionary warning and you idiots are mocking him as if he is not an American concerned for his country. You are pathetic and you act like clowns.

1. And you’re surprised that Democrats have either never read the constitution, or don’t care what it says?

2. Were Trump actually to have colluded with Putin to take control of the US and have it serve Russia’s ends, as these people pretend to believe, well, it still wouldn’t be treason, but it would be a lot closer to it than what Brennan and the other “resisters” are doing.

3. Come to think of it I don’t recall any Democrats of note using the term “treason” of Trump, so I’m not sure your claim is correct; but maybe that’s just because I haven’t been paying much attention to them, so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Milhouse is right on this, and the definition is VERY important to the discussion.

Treason has a VERY specific, and very definite definition. See 18 USC 2381:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

The Democrat party members that have been setting the proglodytes collective hair on fire have been VERY, VERY careful to never use the term Treason because that would be easily disprovable. The same with the term conspiracy because you can’t have a conspiracy in the abstract: You have to have something you are conspiring to do (i.e. Treason).

They have been very careful to use the term “Collusion.” They have done so, because it is nebulous, undefined, and while it “sounds bad” it is not a crime in and of itself.

No, we’re debating our fundamental liberties, which are a whole lot more important than whatever the Clintonistas are up to. Charging them with treason would be a much worse betrayal of the constitution than what they’re doing.

How different is Brennan’s and others high crime from that of Aaron Burr and those who allied with him? That “deep, dark, and wicked conspiracy” of 1804 through 1807? Here we have Brennan and his cronies operating far longer.

There are only two kinds of treason. One requires literally taking up arms against the USA. Not against a president. And certainly not undermining a president by lawful means. The second kind of treason requires adhering to an enemy of the USA, and acting on that adherence by an overt act that gives the enemy aid and comfort.

Note well that an overt act giving an enemy aid comfort, but that is not motivated by adherence to the enemy’s cause, is not treason. So even if Russia were an enemy of the USA (which it isn’t, at the moment), and even if Trump were to conspire with that enemy to win the presidency, in return for concessions that would amount to aid and comfort, it still wouldn’t be treason, because his motive would not be to help the enemy but to become president. It would only be treason if his purpose were to help the enemy.

Brennan in particular may be accused of adherence to our Jihadist enemies, and over the course of his career he has certainly acted in a way that would be consistent with such a hypothetical treasonous adherence, but absent actual evidence for it this is speculation.

However the Clintonistas and deep state lefties whom we’re mostly discussing now don’t show any signs of adherence to any enemy. They are the “enemy”, in a sense, but they’re domestic, and therefore just as American as our side is. They have a certain vision for America and are working to achieve it, by illegitimate means when legitimate ones won’t work. That’s a lot of bad things, but it’s not treason.

If a Democrat admits to understanding the meaning and purpose of the Second Amendment, it’s a sure bet they understand the rest of the document. They’re just funnin’ us when they say crap like “it doesn’t protect and individual right,” or “it doesn’t protect a right to weapons of war.”

If the Deep State should prevail over our duly elected President, it is the duty of every Patriot to march up to DC and take care of business the old fashioned way. We know where these swamp creatures live.

Why would the former CIA Director and former UN Ambassador worry about the Deputy Director of the FBI? Why? Because they and others colluded to stop then candidate Trump and also to coverup their corruption.

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
― Samuel Adams

Kristol just dropped the mask, like so many others have been doing lately. As long as I can remember, he’s been a tool of the left, sipping their cognac and blowing out the flames of any meaningful discussion with his huffing and puffing.

He will NEVER live those words down. Ever. They will be on his tombstone someday.

I don’t understand why congress has not forced him to produce his so called evidence. I know it is all B.S. but seriously, publicly put him on the stand and demand any and all evidence that he is elluding to.

Former communist sympathizer Brennan (which affinity should have patently disqualified him for an appointment as CIA chief) wants to talk about “moral turpitude?”

How about a U.S. President quashing an active DEA investigation and efforts to dismantle an Islamic terrorist group and Iranian proxy’s multi-billion dollar operation importing cocaine into American cities, in order to curry favor with, and, kowtow to, Iran’s despots?

I didn’t hear or see the odious, grandstanding hypocrite, Brennan, or any of his Left-leaning, Obama boot-licking sycophants evince any opprobrium when this bit of true moral turpitude was going down, under his boss.

You have to love how all the Deep State bureaucrats and D.C. Swamp Mutual Admiration Society — aided, of course, by a compliant and water-carrying Leftist media — are rushing to defend “Andy” McCabe — these reprobates really care about nothing other than their own hides and protecting their sinecures.

Who says Brennan and Comey have to have real information? In this media environment insinuation is as good as fact. They can keep repeating “we have information”, and the media will dutifully report “Trump must be guilty, Brennan and Comey said so!”, for as long as Trump is in office.

as someone has said, it’s the same old game as soothsayers in ancient Rome, or gypsy fortunetellers with crystal balls – a lot of “ooooooOOOOoooooo, I can see your future! I see terrible things to come! oooooOOOOOooooo”

but if they ACTUALLY had anything, then why didn’t it go into the dossier they concocted? Here was this huge SooperSeKriT memo that they came up with, supposed to have All the Worst tales in it, and it turns out they made the whole thing up? Why, if there is so much “terrible information” out there they pretend to be sitting on?

and the only answer they have to that is “well you know what? He had (consensual) sex with a Playboy playmate 12 years ago!!!” Well whoop tee doo.

Professor Jacobson writes: “So when people claim outrage over this Trump tweet or that, I mostly don’t care.”

I agree 100% but not for the thought process that is used here. After saying he doesn’t care about Trump tweets, I am presented with tweets from John O. Brennan, Donald Trump, Samantha Powers, James Comey and Bill Kristol. But I reject them all because the short messages inside tweets are usually emotional, often out-and-out lies, at best distorted, and maybe even bot-generated. So they are all a waste of time – just as Crazy Donald is most certainly a pathological criminal – but that conclusion has not yet been processed by his unthinking followers.

The public evidence of Trump’s misadventures with his tenant evictions, treatment of immigrant workers, shady deals with politicians, rubbing elbows with the Italian and Russian Mafia, theft from his investors, employees, vendors, and partners when he filed six bankruptcies is certainly material as was his criminal Trump University scam. Throw in his money-laundering schemes with Russian oligarchs and his using occupancy lies to sell condos in his buildings (which are taped presentations) and the bag is full.

Tie all this together with his treatment of women, his 5000 lawsuits, his easy to dislike child-like emotionalism, the worst case of narcissism ever seen, his under-the-counter payments to hide his infidelities, his deliberate violations of the emoluments clause in the constitution . . . and the stench is overwhelming.

And his putrid past is exactly why he is doing all he can, With Republican support, to shut down the Mueller investigation.

his deliberate violations of the emoluments clause in the constitution

Everything else you wrote was either true or at least defensible, but not this. It’s very unlikely that he has violated the foreign emoluments clause. For one thing, the most reasonable interpretation of the constitution is that the clause doesn’t even apply to him, so he can’t violate it. Second, if it did apply to him, nothing he has done seems to be a violation.

Therefore, even if the question is justiciable (which it probably isn’t), and even if the courts one day decide that it does apply to him and to the way his business is operating, there is no way for him (or anyone else) to know that today, so you cannot honestly accuse him of deliberate violations.

I just tried it, and yes, you would notice. All the adjectives one could use of Trump apply in even greater measure to Clinton, but the specific details are vastly different. For instance she hasn’t cheated her tenants, because she’s never had any. And I’m not aware of any dealings she’s had with the Italian mafia, because they weren’t active in the areas where she operated. Basically his career has been that of a crooked developer, and hers has been that of a crooked lawyer and politician. He’s been a bribe-giver, she’s been a bribe-taker.

Well, okay. I suppose you’d have to change Italian Mafia to the Chicago and Dixie Mafia. And yes, one made actual money and paid actual salaries to employees in the uncaring dog-eat dog world of real estate, while the other used politics to illegally siphon off tax dollars and donations for her own personal use.

But you are, as my mother used to say, splitting hairs. the POINT was not the similarities, but that gad-fly has no standing to preen in front of the mirror, fancying himself a saint, because of his finger-wagging at Trump.

You could not resist showing your hand at the end there could you? What exactly is the Special Council’s purview, in you opinion? Is it to investigate a coordination of effort between President Trump’s campaign and agents working on behalf of Russia? Is it to investigate possible meddling in the 2016 Presidential election by the Russians? Is it to do an extended background check on Donald Trump? Is it to delegitimize the President?

If you say “all of the above,” then I can offer you some independent counsels who will be a never-ending thorn in the side of every Democrat still living, for as long as they live. How many would stay on this side of jail, considering the felonious nature of every Democrat still living? The cleanest Democrat in the world (I’ll get back to you) would make any ham sandwich look like a stand-up citizen.

When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history.

That’s pretty generic fluff. I don’t read it as a threat that Brennan has some dirt. And I don’t think it’s an attempt to buffalo Trump with a rather ordinary, general-purpose bluff. Even the dimmest Progressive must finally have noticed that he just doesn’t have whatever it takes to stampede Trump in any direction he wants. I think it’s just the rage of an inconsequential man who doesn’t know what else to do.

Who elected John Brennan? I suppose the people did, in 2008 and 2012, when they voted for 0bama and the worldview he represented. Brennan is just a faithful acolyte of that worldview. Thank God he’s no longer in any position of power.

No. I won’t “argue” with an ill-read dolt. I know Krystal and Rubin to be considered two extremists who are criticized by many of us for their closed-mindedness regarding Duh Donald.

See, for instance, Jonah Goldberg’s critiques of them both.

That makes a whole two, but it doesn’t make it “widely” anything. Now, if the Prof. can support that assertion, I’d like him to do that, because I like learning new things. As it is, the Krysal/Rubin branch is a tiny minority by my understanding.

Those of us who retain our grip on reality are capable of noting…and we DO note…when Duh Donald does something good. We are also objective in our criticism of Duh Donald.

I would classify them as principled, given only that much information. Charles Spurgeon said, “Given two evils, choose neither.” Note that I was more cynical than principled and chose the lesser. No conservative knew the practical ramifications of a Trump presidency before the fact. None knew for sure that he would be substantively better for our country or for conservatism than a one-and-done Clinton presidency would have been.

However, to continue to undermine our President and to reflexively push back against everything he tries to do is not principled, nor is it good for the country. You got a lemon. Make lemonade. It ain’t that complicated.

“Of two evils, choose neither.” Spurgeon’s quote has been posted numerous times on social media by Christians who find themselves in a moral conundrum at the very thought of voting for either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Here’s the problem with Spurgeon’s idea. Biblically there is no such thing as a choice between two evils. Let me explain.

Moral philosophers and theologians have long spoken of the problem of “tragic moral choice”, also known as the “incommensurability in values.” The man on the street simply calls it “choosing between the lesser of two evils.”
…
One reason people think they are trapped between the lesser of two evils is because they confuse this idea with what are really priorities in the Bible.
…
The second reason many Christians wish to avoid choosing between the lesser of two evils is because they confuse an evil with a wrong. An “evil” is something that brings suffering. Evil is therefore broader than a wrong.
…
Now let’s make sense of all of this. Imagine our two families are miles from land in a sinking boat. Suddenly, out of the mist, come two boats to save us. One is captained by an adulterer; the other is captained by a thief. Which boat will you get into? You say, “Neither one. I’m waiting for the evangelical boat which is captained by a devout Christian who will end abortion.” I say, “You’re kidding, right?” You reply, “Both these guys are reprobates and I’m not going to choose between two evils.”

You see what you’ve done? For one, you failed to prioritize scripturally. The immediate priority is to save our families so we can fight another day. Scripture passages against thievery and adultery simply don’t apply here.

As with any cult, the true test of belief is the willingness to commit suicide for the cult. Conservative #NT is a cult.

I could watch in horror as one or the other of them was elected, totally without my support or permission.

The Pontius Pilate defense – ‘I wash my hands…’. It didn’t work 2k years ago, and it doesn’t work today. BUt it does put you squarely into the conservative #NT cult. You were and are willing to let the deep state continue if it defeats Trump and you can claim innocence. And that means you lied when you told prof you didn’t know anyone who agreed with Kristol, etc. – you are one.

That is what our broken primary system delivered.

The primary system is NOT broken. It is designed to respond to the choices of the electorate and it did so. There are countries and cultures that agree with you that candidates have to pass a ‘morals’ test – Iran, the Soviet Union, ISIS, etc. They all have tribunals, manned by people like you, who pass judgement on a candidates fitness to serve. You can deny it, but that’s what you’re advocating and that’s what you are.

I think many looked at the election as a choice between two evils – one a known evil and the other an unknown evil of unknown potential. Some probably voted for Trump because they thought his potential for evil didn’t come close to the known evil represented by Hillary. Turns out Trump is not that bad, and is probably better than most of the rest of the Republican field he defeated for the nomination.

Even if he’s not good for the country, he is certainly less bad for it than Clinton would have been. Voting is sometimes a matter of damage control. Let’s face it, many politicians do serious damage. There are very few that are actually good for the nation, and nearly none that do no damage at all.

Right now you couldn’t pound a toothpick up Brennan’s sphincter with a 10 pound sledge hammer, so scared and uptight he is.

Him, Comey, Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, James Clapper, Power, and ultimately Obama. It isn’t so much that Sessions fired McCabe, it’s how. The IG reported that McCabe, then career professionals on the FBI’s OPR reviewed the evidence the IG provided and concurred that McCabe needed to be s**tcanned.

All the people I’ve named above have made a lot of enemies, and those enemies aren’t interested in protecting Obama’s errand boys from any consequences for their actions. Brennan made a lot of enemies as DCIA, Rice as Obama’s National Security Advisor. Clapper made enemies throughout the USIC. Does anyone besides me recall how the inthel analysts at CENTCOM practically mutinied when the Obama administration was telling them via Clapper to politicize their assessments to support his domestic political narrative particularly when it came to portraying his Syria policies as effective? They didn’t mutiny. They went to the CENTCOM IG to complain that Clapper was near-daily speaking to the CENTCOM J2, a one star army officer, and telling him what Obama wanted their assessments to say. Does anyone need to be told just how improper if not illegal it is for the Director of National Intelligence to jump not only over so many levels of the chain of command but to intrude into an entirely different command structure?

“Following his termination late Friday night, former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe declared that he was ‘singled out’ after ‘unrelenting’ attacks by President Trump and critics. McCabe’s objections are less than credible, given the virtually unprecedented recommendation of career officials to fire the one-time acting FBI director.

However, McCabe may have rectified his ‘singled out’ status with his long statement criticizing his termination: In the middle of it is a line that could be viewed as incriminating fired FBI director James Comey, not just in leaking sensitive information but also in lying to Congress.

McCabe is accused of misleading investigators about allegedly giving information to a former Wall Street Journal reporter about the investigation of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton family’s charitable foundation. McCabe asserts in his post-firing statement that he not only had authority to ‘share’ that information to the media but did so with the knowledge of ‘the director.’ The FBI director at the time was Comey.

…McCabe’s statement would seem to directly contradict statements Comey made in a May 2017 congressional hearing. Asked if he had ‘ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation’ or whether he had ‘ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation,’ Comey replied ‘never’ and ‘no.’

The Justice Department’s inspector general clearly saw this ‘interaction’ as problematic in seeking answers from McCabe. If the inspector general considered this to be a leak to the media, any approval by Comey would be highly significant. Comey already faces serious questions over his use of a Columbia University Law School professor to leak information to the media following his own termination as director.

…The McCabe controversy could also make life tougher for special counsel Robert Mueller. While McCabe lashed out at Trump in his statement, he may have just given Trump the long-sought cover to use his pardon power. If McCabe is not charged, Trump could cite that decision as the basis for pardoning Flynn, as a matter of equity and fairness.

More generally, the apparent conduct of both McCabe and Comey have fulfilled the narrative long advanced by Trump of a biased and unprincipled FBI investigation…”

This is the problem with lying. It’s hard enough to keep your own lies straight. When the conspiracy expands to a chorus of a half dozen or so high profile liars, all the lies start colliding into each other.

Treason is a crime, and accusing someone of it necessarily means an assertion that they’ve committed what the crime consists of. Since the constitution explicitly lists the elements of this crime, anyone accusing someone of treason who has clearly not committed those elements is brazenly defying the constitution.

Prof Jacobson’s rhetorical question “who elected John Brennan” is an entirely different kettle of fish. Nobody, least of all Brennan himself, claims he was ever personally elected to anything. Nothing Brennan did was in his own name; he acted at all times as the agent of the elected president. The question clearly means who voted for the Anti-American policies and worldview that Brennan represents, and the answer is that the people did, twice.

I’d like to believe it was a better, more-informed electorate that elected Trump, but I don’t. I think it was a more-selfless segment of a shabby electorate that elected Trump, and a mass of low-information, race-centric youngsters who stayed home and made it possible.

Hopefully Trump is making more supporters than he’s chasing off, because in 2020, the Dems could run someone with a personality and a bit darker in tint or even merit. We can’t depend on them to give the nomination to Clinton again.

I am not enamored of everything Trump has done or said. But the anti-Trump drum beat is so incessant and tiresome, that most of the time, no matter what he does or says, I cheer for him because he’s giving that segment the finger they deserve. I think we’re better off with a president who is relatively unfazed by criticism than if we had a president who turned to focus groups before every decision or who worried about which foreign governments he might offend when his intent is to do right by this country.

But I would still object to using any of these terms in this case, because no Democrat owes a duty of loyalty to the President, so trying to remove him, especially by lawful means, or to frustrate and undermine his administration, are not betrayal of any kind.

Now if, say, a member of Trump’s cabinet or inner circle were found to be involved in such efforts, it would not be treason but it would be a betrayal, and it would be fair to call that person a traitor.

I didn’t vote Trump because I thought he was a fine, upstanding citizen. I voted against Hillary and for a candidate who I suspected might actually get his hands dirty going after the corrupt DC establishment. I could care less about former strippers or business deals across the world. My mom voted for Trump in the primaries because she wanted someone to go to DC and burn it to the ground. Unfortunately she didn’t live to see him win the election but I imagine she’d be just as entertained as I’ve been.

I had no problem voting FOR Regan. And, frankly, I had had no problem voting for Trump. I saw in him a fighter who wouldn’t be intimidated by the media. When I voted it was with the idea that even if he only made good on half his promises he’d be better than most.

Much like Donald, her imperfection was a feature, not a bug. She came by her positions the old-fashioned way: by believing in them. All the gaps in her inside-the-beltway protocol understanding made her, like Trump, a rare creature who didn’t know and wouldn’t accept that “this is the way it’s always been done.” She was a natural swamp exfiltrator. I honestly don’t know if she still is, or if she’s just a Fox celebrity now. She certainly hasn’t featured much in the Trump presidency, at least that I’m aware of.

What I read here is no different than the cabal of Nazis prior to WW2 who usurped their authority while the world slept or flat out ignored it. We should all fear the deep state and our elected representatives who largely ignore their oversight responsibilities often in a quest for reelection. In Washington, outsiders need not apply.

After Brennan’s private security firm employee penetrated the State Department’s passport files to clean up Baracky Obammunist’s passport record, Brennan had his employee killed.
Unfortunately the killing didn’t end there. Brennan is the face of the ‘Evil Party’
Seth Rich and Antonin Scalia, unavailable for comment.

Hey Buddy. By “this place”, I sure hope you are talking about this thread and not LI.

In any event, I am neither. LI is the go-to blog for an intellectual discussion regarding the merger of politics and law. That is, until some of the “participants” in various threads start to personally attack the LI writer and crap on the LI carpet.

Do not lose sight of the reason all of these Obama
Administration hacks are coming out of the woodwork over McCabe’s firing. Fear.

Look, all of these people engaged in acts, that benefited the Democrats and HRC, which seem to be coming closer to being actual criminal offenses. They expected to succeed and so avoid any negative consequences for their actions. Director Comey and AG Sessions was supposed to guarantee cover. first Sessions takes a walk on the Russian Collusion op, but places Rosenstein in position to act as an insulator for those involved. Then Comey gets canned. Something which was not expected. But, McCabe is installed at the insulator there. Then the DOJ/IG begins outing all of these people reference the Russian Collusion FISA spying. McCabe gets demoted from his FBI insulator position. Mueller’s “investigation is discredited. Strzok and page are ousted from that investigation and largely demoted and their text storm is implicating virtually everyone in the upper levels of the DOJ and the WH, including Barack Obama. Enter Rice, whose fingerprints are all over the unmasking and leak operation and Brennan who was in charge of the intelligence apparatus and whose fingerprints are also all over leaks from that community, as well as being responsible for various potentially illegal acts over the last decade.

These people are terrified. They could end up going to jail. And, the system which was supposed to protect them is collapsing, rapidly. This will get more vicious as time goes on. Watch for it.

Regarding your comment: “Strzok and page are ousted from that investigation and largely demoted and their text storm is implicating virtually everyone in the upper levels of the DOJ and the WH, including Barack Obama.”

I sometimes wonder if these two were not as on board as believed which prompted them to record everything. If so it was brilliant because if Hillary won, they would be fine. If Hillary lost and they got set up, they had the little black book of all little black books.

I believe that Boris and Natasha were very much on board. They were simply the worst clandestine operative in history. They felt that they were true revolutionaries and never stopped to consider what they were doing was likely to get them in hot water. It is also unknown if they knew that their texts were being stored by the FBI or thought that any incriminating texts would simply be “lost” as almost happened. After all, how expensive are a couple of burner phones from Walmart?

I’m not aware of any evidence that he is himself a Moslem, though it wouldn’t surprise me at all if it turned out to be true. What’s certain is that he shows an unusual degree of sympathy for Moslems and Islam, which at the very least has influenced his response to the Jihadist war against us.

There has been an immense amount of money funneled to the leaders of our nation for the last couple of decades and it reached a high point during the Obama years. The transactions are beginning to filter out into the sunlight, with foreign governments and businesses essentially giving huge sums of money [some in the billion dollar range] to the families and friends of high level politicians. This money was not funneled to these people because they are handsome, articulate or honest. It went to them to influence their actions as part of our government. Follow the money.

Keep your eyes open and you will be amazed at just how corrupt our governments really are. What the results of these disclosures will be is still anybody’s guess.

“I’m not aware” is incorrect phrasing the proper one is “there is no evidence” because he is not a Muslim and no matter how long its repeated in wing nut world it will never become truth.
In what ways did he did he exhibit sympathy for Islam ? You don’t provide any sources, the charge in itself means nothing but your bias or personal opinion which means nothing to me. What was his response to the Jihadists ? Enlighten me.

When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America…America will triumph over you.
——————–
Why does every place write up the tweet followed by the tweet itself? Very annoying. Add the tweet or write up but we don’t need both.

Brennan lied under oath and our Attorney General doesn’t care and his deputy who he asked Trump to appoint lied to the Fisa Court, appointed a SP and has a vested interest in taking Trump out is more likely to cheer Brennan than indict him.