Though it’s not known how sharp the “teeth” in Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s internal report on FISA abuse will be --- the IG doesn’t even have subpoena power with people who aren’t current employees --- Attorney General Bill Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham are the Big Dogs who can look at anyone, anywhere, in their investigation into the real origins of the “Trump/Russia” probe. As we reported a couple of days ago, there are indications that they are very much on the case; they have expanded the timeline of their investigation and have made some overseas trips, particularly to Rome, where shadowy figure Joseph Mifsud taught at Link University. This is likely where they obtained the two Blackberrys owned by Mifsud, the person who told Trump campaign associate George Papadopoulos that story about Russia possessing thousands of emails damaging to Hillary Clinton.
But wait, there’s more: Durham has also expanded his witness list, and now Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan and Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper can expect to be called. (Durham is surely well aware that both have lied under oath in the past, before Congress.) Clapper’s testimony might be interesting in light of statements he made a couple of weeks ago, saying on CNN that it was President Obama who directed intelligence officials to “assemble all the reporting” about Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election. He said they were doing what Obama told them to do. These somewhat cryptic statements needs to be fleshed out in detail, certainly in light of some of the Strzok-Page texts that also implicate Obama.
You can tell Barr and Durham are on the right track when the media make any new push to discredit them, and that’s what is happening now. According to NBC News, multiple current and former officials told them that “a review launched by Attorney General William Barr into the origins of the Russia investigation has expanded significantly amid concerns about whether the probe has any legal or factual basis.” Oh, really? NOW they’re concerned about the legal or factual basis of an investigation, after putting the country through three years of an investigation that didn’t have any such basis? I think those “concerned” officials are afraid that when this report comes out, people are going to be stunned by its legal and factual legitimacy as well as its findings. What these officials are REALLY concerned about isn’t the basis of the investigation but its eventual outcome. In other words, we’re going to find out what they were up to.
If they want to see a probe with no legal or factual basis, they can look at Nancy Pelosi’s so-called “impeachment inquiry,” currently being held in secret. As Laura Ingraham reported Monday night, numerous State Department officials who have tried all along to undermine President Trump by “leaking, obstructing and resisting” (and winning praise for that from Trump’s media adversaries) are now violating their sworn duty and defying the State Department’s lawful orders not to testify in what the Executive Branch considers to be an illegitimate inquiry. They are testifying about security-related matters without having a State Department lawyer in the room, notes Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. “Adam Schiff ought to be embarrassed by the kangaroo court that he’s running,” he says.
Ingraham cites a few of these career State Department officials by name. A few examples: Michael McKinley, a veteran career diplomat who resigned as Pompeo’s top adviser after 37 years at State and who has hired renowned anti-Trump attorney John Bellinger; deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent; and former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, an Obama holdover who was recently removed from her post due to concerns --- perfectly legal and valid --- that she was not supportive of President Trump. McKinley reportedly resigned over the treatment of Yovanovitch. Oh, and there’s Bill Taylor, who replaced Yovanovitch as ambassador, testifies Tuesday, accompanied by HIS attorney, who happens to be...(drum roll, please)...John Bellinger. I am not kidding.
According to POLITICO, congressional staffers have indicated that they subpoenaed these willing officials “to give them some cover” just so they could go ahead and testify. But they’re glad to cooperate with the impeachment effort, subpoena or no subpoena. Keep in mind, these are remnants of the Obama State Department, his fellow architects of the Iran deal and other foreign policy disasters. They needed to be out on Day 1 of Trump’s administration, because as long as they’re in place, they’re going to do everything they can to sabotage him.
If you can stomach it, read how POLITICO paints these people as heroes…
Compare this cooperative attitude towards the impeachment inquiry with the resistance to Barr’s investigation. According to NBC News, three former CIA officials (surely including Brennan) told them Durham has requested conversations with CIA analysts involved in the Russia probe, and they are lawyering up. “And there is tension between the CIA and Justice Department over what classified documents Durham can examine.”
Gregg Jarrett still refers to Durham’s investigation as non-criminal, but there are indications that it may at this point be criminal. More on that soon.
Utah Rep. Chris Stewart, a Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, told Ingraham that there are career State officials who are good people who are offended by what’s going on. He said an FBI official had come up to him in the airport that morning to thank him and say, “Look, we’re embarrassed by what some of our Department of Justice and FBI agents [are doing].” They agree with Stewart when he says that these officials don’t just work for the President –- they work for the people of the United States. “And the people selected this President,” he said. “They’re not betraying the President. They’re betraying the people. They’re betraying the trust in the Constitution which has sustained us for more than 200 years. And they don’t view it that way; they view [themselves] as being so smart and [think that] we made a mistake and we have to correct it.”
I think Stewart has nailed it. The "resisters" view themselves as heroes and patriots and all-round superior people, when it will be shown that the real heroes are Barr and Durham.
It appears that Canadian voters missed their chance to restore some intelligence and maturity to their government by narrowly reelecting Justin “I can’t remember wearing black/brownface makeup but I guess from the photos that I did” Trudeau as prime minister. But his party lost its majority in the House of Commons so he’ll have to form a minority government (some wags pointed out that now he’ll see what it’s like to be a genuine minority.) The bad news is that he’ll probably form it with socialists, and make Canada’s government even more leftwing, oppressively PC and downright crazy.
Matt Vespa at Townhall.com makes the case there is a small silver lining in Trudeau’s reelection, and in fellow blackface-wearing liberal Ralph Northam still being Governor of Virginia. The next time leftists demand the resignation of a conservative over some small or imagined racist slight from years past, we can point to them reelecting this latter-day Amos and Andy duo and suggest that they go guzzle a frosty mug of Shut-the-heck-up.
Must-See Video: Hilarious musical send-up of “cancel culture” and the media’s addiction to digging up old tweets to destroy everyone.
President Trump gave an interview to Sean Hannity that aired last night on Fox News. You can see it at this link:
Among the highlights: Trump again refuted the claim that there was any “quid pro quo” about holding up aid to Ukraine unless they investigated Joe Biden’s son’s cushy energy company job (even though this write-up is from Fox News, it still includes the now-familiar but misleading note: “House Democrats have been looking into whether the president engaged in a political quid pro quo when he asked the new Ukraine president to do a ‘favor’ during the controversial conversation.” Many media outlets removed a huge chunk of the conversation from the transcript to make it appear that the mention of Biden immediately followed the request for a “favor,” when the favor Trump was referring to was finding the hacked DNC server that’s at the center of the investigation into alleged foreign meddling in the 2016 election.)
Trump also defended Rep. Tulsi Gabbard from Hillary Clinton’s insinuation that she’s a “Russian asset” who will reelect Trump by running as a third-party candidate. While it’s interesting to hear Trump rightly defend a Democratic Presidential hopeful from a scurrilous accusation (when most of them can’t put together two sentences without accusing him of being Satan), he also has personal reasons. Hillary made the same charge against 2016 Green Party candidate Jill Stein, and Trump said he wishes she’d done that earlier and not waited 2-1/2 years, because now Americans “have realized she is crazy. She’s crazy.”
To be fair, some of us realized that a long time ago, when she claimed to be a champion of women who accuse powerful men of sexual abuse.