Home » The Deep State hatched its plot against Trump very early, and they told us so

Comments

The Deep State hatched its plot against Trump very early, and they told us so — 43 Comments

  1. Time to “splinter the C.I.A. in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” JFK said that, or is said to have said it.

    Still good advice. I’m not feeling the love for the FBI, DOJ or IRS either. Some high-up people need to be tried and go to prison. It was good enough for John Mitchell and John Erlichman after Watergate, and this is much, much worse.

  2. Recall this early resister-blabber?: Evelyn Farkas

    Oh look, Ukraine again. How about that?

    These dolts lack all touch with practical wisdom (phronesis), the very thing Trump has striven his lifetime to acquire in spades. It’s no freaking wonder he runs circles around them.

  3. Thanks for your unflinching analysis.

    I think you may remember I was very anti-Trump but reluctantly voted for him. I think I made the right choice and while he has his flaws, he’s definitely doing many things I now agree with on say, border security, international relations, and other areas. I am in shock actually, in a continual way, at the resistence to Trump which began yes, before he was even inaugurated. It’s one thing to disagree or dislike a president and it’s another thing to aim to destroy him or remove him from office with any means necessary. I actually am and remain extremely worried about this country, we could be heading to armed conflict though maybe that is alarmist, I don’t know. However, if Trump is removed from office, there are people on the right who will actively resist and who are armed. This I hear and read online and I trust it is likely true.

    I am not sure where that would leave someone like me who is not anti-gun but doesn’t own one. Let’s hope the above scenario never materializes. At the least though there will be civil unrest which has already been escalating.

    The Dems are also now trapped under the spell of the socialist left as is the mainstream media. This has never happened quite like this. Again, worrisome…

  4. I’ll believe something from Huber when I see it — indictments of McCabe and Comey when I see them.
    Until indictments, Reps are losing.

    I don’t think it’s too late for Hillary to be indicted — but I doubt that Barr has any DOJ attorneys now willing to go to court. Not sure about the statute of limitations, either.

    Almost all of the gov’t decision makers, including those who hire new gov’t people, hate Trump and avoid hiring anybody who doesn’t hate Trump. I’ve seen many stories, which I believe, of high level gov’t positions supposedly open, but the pro-Trump folk applying don’t even get into the interview, so some (secret? or not) anti-Trump experienced clerk gets hired.

    Personnel is policy. The actual gov’t, like actual colleges, are full of anti-Free Speech, anti-Rep folk.

    It’s increasingly scary. On the other hand, the Dems are also trying to provoke a violent reaction, so as to justify their perfidy. I hope Reps keep mostly ignoring the Dem media.

  5. We are rapidly reaching the point where it might be a raze and salt the ground exercise with D.C. You can’t have a government that is answerable to no one, and a fair analysis is that that is exactly what we have today.

  6. When pro trump applies for job can they like pretend to hate trump in the interviews and only show their trump supporting true color after the appointment is secured?

  7. The prescient Mollie should be nicknamed Cassandra; the country as a whole might have been the focus of her warning, but the absolute schism in the Republican Party is happening as foretold.

    The campaign in which the media are too compliant also can hurt the media’s efforts to hold Trump accountable because it causes people who aren’t already histrionic about the president-elect to tune out a media establishment they see as overly compliant in pushing partisan political narratives.

    Also, oddly enough, it could serve to scandal-proof Trump. Pushing outlandish suggestions that are proven false makes it more difficult to convince the American public of any real threats or scandals that could arise.

    Heckuva job, everyone.

    NRO is proof in itself, but look at a few other headlines from conservative sites.

    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/09/trump_exposes_paul_ryan_and_romney_republicans.html

    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/09/judge_napolitanos_descent_into_foolishnes.html

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/09/28/meet-the-first-house-republican-backing-the-dems-impeachment-inquiry-n2553855

    Maybe the RINO wing is just biding its time (I cast no aspersons against Pence, but the NeverTrumpers seem to like him better).

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/the_800pound_gorilla_in_the_impeachment_room.html

    But the 800-pound gorilla in the room no one has yet to point out is that Mike Pence would ascend to the presidency upon Trump’s removal. A Pence presidency would not look very different from Trump’s in substance, although it clearly would in style. The impeachment and removal of President Trump would clearly outrage and disgust the public so thoroughly that it would practically guarantee a two-term President Pence.

    Although the Democrats have created what they think is a shrewd campaign of mass distraction by impeaching Trump, over the long run, it is going to damage them much more severely than it will the Republicans.

  8. That didn’t make sense because I left out the part about many people on the Right rallying around Trump in re the Ukraine phone call, and being chastised for it by other conservatives as being too ready to support the President.
    The examples were of those on the right being too ready to attack him by accepting the premises of the Democrats.

  9. On the subject of oracles, the GOP should have listened more to Gingrigrich (as quoted in Vanity Fair):

    Former Speaker of the House and longtime Trump ally Newt Gingrich, too, has made a number of alarming comments about the government workforce, even suggesting that anyone who voted for Hillary Clinton should be fired. “This is essentially the opposition in waiting,” Gingrich said. “He may have to clean out the Justice Department because there are so many left-wingers there. State is even worse.”

    The president has already fired one high-profile civil servant for not following orders. Whether Trump will entertain Gingrich’s more aggressive approach remains to be seen.

    The difficulty of following Newt’s advice has been a decided handicap to President Trump, as noted above:

    Dave on September 29, 2019 at 3:12 am said:
    When pro trump applies for job can they like pretend to hate trump in the interviews and only show their trump supporting true color after the appointment is secured?

    We seem to get more applicants pretending to be conservatives.

  10. McCarthy weighs in on the Napolitano-DiGenova fracas here, with his usual acumen, and supports my “schism” observation.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/how-about-a-bipartisan-treaty-against-the-criminalization-of-elections/

    I’m with DiGenova on this, but it’s a closer question than he suggests. Napolitano’s construction of the campaign laws, while not wholly implausible, is purely academic. It ignores real-world concerns about free speech and the prosecutor’s burden to prove intent.

    Most of the commentary on this has been very politicized (surprise!). For dyed-in-the-wool anti-Trumpers, no technicality is too trifling to be a felony. For the Trump base, it’s all a witch hunt. In light of this, the most helpful source we can turn to is the Mueller Report. (File in: Sentences I’d Have Bet My Life I’d Never Write.)

  11. I think it’s an interesting phenomenon that completely uncoordinated but roughly contemporaneous posts can draw on the same topics, in this case, “High Noon” the movie. Even if you don’t agree with the author, at least it’s an update from communist blacklisting (I doubt that Patricia is related to Senator Joe).

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/donald_trump_at_emhigh_noonem.html

    September 28, 2019 Donald Trump at High Noon By Patricia McCarthy

    The classic Western film High Noon, released in 1952, offers a compelling analogy to the Trump presidency. … But not one of the townsmen will agree to help. They are all cowards (Republicans) in fear of their lives, or they are friends and admirers of the outlaw Frank Miller and want to welcome him back to the town (Democrats). …
    “People gotta talk themselves into law and order before they do anything about it. Maybe because down deep they don’t care. They just don’t care.” This line is spoken by Kane’s mentor, who is too old to help. That pretty much sums up our Left today. They refuse to approve border security, and they above all want to protect criminal illegal migrants, no matter the cost to our citizens. They don’t care about the horrific consequences of open borders. The men in the film are merely cowards. Our Democrats and silent Republicans are worse than cowards. Their lives are not at stake; just their standing in the Beltway and the leftist media party circuit is at risk. They don’t want to jeopardize their social status in D.C. They are worse than cowards, those who do not stand up and fight for this president. Those who do are our champions, and we all know who they are.

    I do disagree with her on this point: the Deep State (and I think now we are clearly entitled to use that term of conspiracy-theory now) includes Democrats and Republicans who have far, far more at stake than simply social status.

    She also acknowledges the GOP schism:

    Consider how few Republican men and women in our Congress are willing to fight for Trump, despite his phenomenal accomplishments in office. A few of them seem to be actively hoping to see him impeached; Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney, for example. What disappointments those two are, along with the rest of their squishy ilk. Like Kane, Trump is largely on his own but for his legions of supporters throughout the country. Most of the Republicans in the House and Senate, but for our small group of heroes, are as cowardly as all the men in Hadleyville. We are not electing the right people.

  12. Refutations of the Whistleblower’s complaints, …

    https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/09/28/like-clockwork-per-susan-rice-obama-admin-also-put-sensitive-info-on-special-compartmented-server/

    But now we learn from Susan Rice, as reported once again at The Federalist (this time by David Marcus), that the Obama administration did the same thing. It put files whose contents it wanted to restrict access to on the compartmented system.

    As a good narrative-bot, Rice repeated the theme that the Trump administration could have sequestered the Trump-Zelensky transcript in order to cover something up.

    But so could the Obama administration, every time it did the same thing. There’s no reason we should believe it wasn’t the Obama administration’s intention to cover its traces, whenever it put an official record of something on the compartmented system. Indeed, if we played by the mainstream media’s rules, we would simply assume that’s what Obama was doing. How many cover-ups were there, Ms. Rice? What were you hiding?

    Dyer’s post is based on a Federalist expose:
    https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/28/susan-rice-obama-put-call-transcripts-on-top-secret-server-too/

    Dyer continues:

    But it’s even more important, in my view, to highlight something else about this, which is that the MSM spin is not in good faith, and never is. There is never any reason to play along with it.

    A lot of people make their living playing along with it, and spending time painstakingly parsing and refuting it. But increasingly, that’s a problem for actually dealing with it. It leaves the bad-faith actors in the driver’s seat. It creates homework for the honest brokers, at close to zero cost for the narrative-spinners. It occupies far too much of our precious interaction space, when we could be talking about other things.

    From an operational perspective — as in, how to get past this spin-creating-homework impasse — one consideration to ponder is that the spin has gotten to a critical point. It’s reached the point at which former Obama administration officials would have to lie about literally everything they did, to keep the narrative credible against the Trump administration. Susan Rice wasn’t prepared to go that far. We can be glad of that for the sake of her character — but it’s also a very useful operational data point.

  13. … and a timeline of the Coup du Jour (which I had been wishing for).
    Keep in mind one this first, very salient, point that I also noticed as soon as the Whistleblower (or, more properly, the leaking Rotten Snitch*) complaint was published.

    https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/09/28/timeline-of-a-six-ways-from-sunday-shadow-war-whistleblower-rule-change-other-events-in-context/

    The DOJ was under no obligation to forward it to Congress, given that it was a complaint based on hearsay and news reporting, made by an intelligence agency employee to the ICIG, about matters not within the cognizance of the IC.

    That’s why we went through the whole scripted melodrama over the last 10 days, with Congress demanding to see the complaint and the DNI and DOJ explaining that the complaint did not meet the standard of an “urgent concern” which the DNI needed to keep Congress apprised of.

    But Schiff and Burr already had the complaint.

    Meanwhile, it is hard to avoid the deduction that the whistleblower rule change was put into effect in August 2019 in order to enable the 12 August 2019 complaint.

    In the larger context of other related events, this begins to shake out like an operational campaign to lodge a specially-tailored “whistleblower complaint” at an opportune time. Pick your reasons for why it was especially opportune from the very biggest of pictures; I doubt we’d all agree on that.

    But in retrospect, there was a long-building drumbeat of innuendo about former DNI Dan Coats’s days as DNI being numbered – and that drumbeat culminated in a couple of thunderous whacks starting three days after the Trump-Zelensky phone call.

    The result was to leave the DNI organization without a long-entrenched head in the front office, just when the “whistleblower” complaint was filed, which was also just when the rule-change about whistleblowing was incorporated in the complaint submission form.

    The timeline below is nowhere near complete, but it conveys enough to limn the outlines of a shadow war being waged from within the intelligence community against Trump’s administration. It evokes, in fact, Chuck Schumer’s minatory comment from January 2017 about intelligence agencies having “six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

    Dyer is the only one I’ve seen who has folded-in the change-over in leadership at DNI (explained in the timeline) as part of the overall plan to Get Trump.

    An abbreviated timeline so far:

    29 Mar 2019: Accuracy in Media (AIM) publishes an article recounting an extraordinary number of media reports – entirely based on anonymous sources – that Trump was planning to fire then-DNI Dan Coats. …
    It prepared the ground for an abrupt departure by Coats at a tactically useful time. It conditioned the media’s audience to expect Coats to leave, and to attribute his departure to friction with Trump, which was flogged over and over in the reports.
    12 Jul 2019: Axios reports, based as always on anonymous sources, that Trump wants to fire Coats.

    22 Jul 2019: Politico reports, based on anonymous sources, that a visit by Devin Nunes (R-CA) to the White House was about discussing with Trump a list of potential replacements for Coats as DNI….
    25 Jul 2019: Presidents Trump and Zelensky hold their phone call.

    28 Jul 2019: Dan Coats’s departure from DNI is announced. (Sunday.) His resignation was to be effective 15 August 2019. The deputy DNI, career intelligence official Susan Gordon, would normally become the acting DNI until a new DNI nominated by Trump was confirmed in the Senate.

    8 Aug 2019: Susan Gordon* submits her resignation from the deputy DNI position, seven days before the date on which she would have become the acting DNI. CNN treated us to details that may or may not be significant, but – if true – are odd.

    August 2019: The standard for IC whistleblower complaints is altered on the complaint submission form. We don’t have a specific date on that, but it was presumably before 12 August 2019, and at a time when the offices of both the DNI and the deputy DNI were in flux.

    The change was a significant one for policy; it normally would not have been made without the review of both top DNI officials. In the August date range in question, however — 8-12 August — that could have been just what occurred.

    But publishing the new form before the 12 August complaint had played its role would have tipped off others in the IC that something was going on. That would explain why the actual Web publication of the new form was delayed until this past week.

    12 Aug 2019: The “whistleblower” complaint is filed with the ICIG, and is copied to Senator Burr and Rep. Schiff.

    15 Aug 2019: Dan Coats and Susan Gordon depart DNI.

    16 Aug 2019: Joseph Maguire moves from chief of the National Counterterrorism Center (an agency directly subordinate to the DNI) to the position of acting DNI.

    26 Aug 2019: ODNI, under Acting DNI Joseph Maguire, forwards the “whistleblower” complaint to the DOJ for an assessment of the “urgent concern” standard under which it might be forwarded to Congress.

    29 Aug 2019: Adam Schiff sends a tweet echoing the substance of the “whistleblower” complaint.

    3 Sep 2019: The DOJ renders its assessment of the “urgent concern” issue, concluding that the “whistleblower” complaint doesn’t meet the standard of addressing an intelligence activity. The ICIG is thus not required by law to forward the complaint to Congress.

    On ensuing dates in September, the media stirred the pot to make sure the complaint was publicized, and the current drama began.

    I have a feeling we’ll be adding to this timeline.

    A fuller timeline would, of course, include what was going on in Ukraine, including the status of the foreign aid that is supposedly the QUID, and the corruption investigations which are the alleged PRO QUO, including the NYT admission that the Ukrainians did not know, at the time of the phone call, that their aid had been frozen.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/23/us/politics/trump-un-biden-ukraine.html?rref=collection%2Fbyline%2Fkenneth-p.-vogel&action=click&contentCollection=undefined&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=6&pgtype=collection

    Mr. Trump did not discuss the delay in the military assistance on the July 25 call with Mr. Zelensky, according to people familiar with the conversation. A Ukrainian official said Mr. Zelensky’s government did not learn of the delay until about one month after the call.

    *https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/snitches_and_rats_and_backstabbers__geraldo_rivera_of_all_people_sympathizes_with_trump.html

    This is gonna be what the impeachment is all about, maybe one or two little other things fall in.

    So it’s going to be the president of the United States in a conversation that was intercepted by a rotten snitch — I’d love to wap him, but that’s another story.

    Imagine this poor president, his whole tenure in office has been marked by snitches, and rats, and backstabbers, it’s amazing how he functions at all.

    When you lose Geraldo….

  14. I don’t think that the Democrats knew ahead of time that Trump was going to talk to Zerensky about the Bidens, but they certainly might have expected something like that to happen because of all the back-stage stuff that was going on; or, perhaps, they were just laying ground-work to take advantage of anything Trump might do that would fit the template; or they may even have had another plot-line in mind that either fell through, or was pre-empted by the more useful Ukrainian gambit.

    Take your choice: we are not only living in a Spy Thriller Reality Show, but one with a Choose Your Own Ending format.

  15. The Deep State is not above changing its past if the present is a hindrance to their desired future.

    https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/09/28/senate-democrat-claimed-evidence-trump-ukraine-corruption-changes-story/

    As we move through the ridiculousness that is the current Trump-Ukraine “scandal,” one figure that attempted to place himself as offering corroboration of wrongdoing was Sen. Chris Murphy. He claimed that Ukrainian president Zelensky personally told him Trump pressured him to investigate Biden.

    This was bandied about early this week as proof that Trump had broken the law and applied immense pressure on the Ukrainian president to investigate Joe Biden. Eventually, we’d get the transcript and learn that it was a completely mundane conversation with no pressure or threats applied. Actually, it was surprising just how nonchalant Trump was about Biden. He didn’t press the issue at all and Ukraine wasn’t even aware of any holdup with the military aid.

    It’s also worth nothing that Murphy’s claims of what Zelensky told him were back-filled, as in they only appeared later. He originally made no mention of any such conversation with Zelensky about aid and Biden. Instead, he only took to the press to make his claims after the whistle-blower story broke. It was way, way too convenient. Then the Beacon got a hold of the Sept. 11th audio, where Murphy is shown to have not mentioned any of this.

    Now, apparently realizing he’s been caught in a lie, Murphy is running to change his story.

  16. https://www.redstate.com/stu-in-sd/2019/09/28/ukraine-leakerwhistleblower-part-ii/

    Schiff has had the complaint for over a month, and he and his staff have had plenty of time to seed and spin the complaint – which was solely based on second- and third-hand information – falsely throughout the news media. And that is exactly what has happened. A simple web search results in a whole host of legacy media stories that are “going with the spin,” i.e., that POTUS is “guilty” of a whole host of criminal activities. The story has evolved as previous breathless claims have been proven false, too. Here are a few headline examples:

    Notice how the headlines shift to “cover-up” and other process-oriented allegations and peripheral matters after the basic complaint was determined to be based on hearsay and contained false allegations there were exposed by the release of the phone transcript summary. The media piling on and running with rumors and allegations subsequently disproved and then shifting to other process-related allegations is EXACTLY the modus operandi of the Russia hoax that we’ve seen unfold over the past two years.

    This MO has been extensively discussed at The Conservative Treehouse.
    This poster, Stu Cvrk, gives a very thorough summation of what is suspected and what is known to date.

  17. https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2019/09/29/if-the-case-for-trumps-impeachment-is-so-strong-why-are-liberals-lying-about-it-n2553861

    Derek Hunter lists a lot of the new revelations about the coordinated moving parts of the Ukraine Phone Conspiracy, and closes with this:

    It was weird how everyone got on the same page so quickly,with the same (bad) information and false claims, and just after the intelligence community changed their whistleblowing requirements that information be firsthand, not hearsay. Even self-righteous alleged conservatives who hate the President were quick to get on board.

    None – not the Democrats, the “journalists,” or never-Trumpers – seem remotely bothered by the fact that every claim they’ve clutched their pearls over turned out to be false. When you embrace and repeat something you know to be false, you are lying. If the evidence were there, if it’s on their side, why lie?

    It’s precisely because the truth is not on their side that they have to lie.

    This was a coordinated coup attempt. Democrats were tipped off about the whistleblower complaint and pot-committed themselves to it being the silver bullet they’ve desperately been seeking. But the President was holding all the cards. He released everything to the public and authorized everyone to testify. By the time Democrats realized they’d gotten it all wrong it was too late.

    They knew the other stories they been feeding their supporters were garbage. LIberals simply used stories like “Russian collusion” to keep their base riled up and on the line. But this one, this time they thought they had him. Only they didn’t, there was no “there” there.

    You only get one bite at the impeachment apple, they have no choice but to plough forward with it anyway.

    Journalists and pundits, on the other hand, do have a choice. They’re sticking with their team and ignoring the facts, ignoring the truth.

    All these people are going to fight till the end, go down with the ship. They hate the President so much they are not going to let a little thing like having to lie deter them. They want him gone and are willing to lie to make it happen. Trump Derangement Syndrome is the Kool-Aid at Jonestown.

    For all their insistence that Donald Trump is corrupt, it is his opponents who are willing to pervert reality to get what they want. They deserve every bad thing that happens to them.

    In reading today’s news, I was amused to see how quickly the conservative pundits all jump onto the same new page, but in their case it is reactive (everyone has to give their own view of the New Bombshell to justify their existence), whereas the left is the side throwing the bombs.
    And, occasionally, being hoist on their own petards.

  18. Streiff focuses on a topic that actually may be of urgent concern, involving possible collusion, and actual governmental malfeasance.

    https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2019/09/28/intelligence-community-ig-actively-aid-whistleblower-impeachment-quest/

    [after a long recitation of ICIG Atkinson’s suspect activities, using occasional intemperate verbiage, he concludes:]

    To review the bidding. Someone in the Intelligence Committee leadership changed the definition of whistleblower so this whistleblower was elevated from a rumor monger to a protected individual. They did this about the same time as the complaint was filed. Because the IC IG is intimately involved in the whistleblower regulations (I’d be willing to guess that office is the proponent of the regulation but I don’t know that for a fact) Atkinson knew about the change. The major issues of concern Atkinson raised in his letter are, charitably, bullsh**. The allegation does not fall under the whistleblower statue because it is not an intelligence matter. It is not a matter of “urgent concern” because it isn’t. The fanciful potential criminal violation by Trump was not his business and it was investigated and resolved by the appropriate agency.

    Yet, despite all this, it is Atkinson who is the driving force in creating the scandal. He, against the directions of Department of Justice, decided that this was so extra special serious that he just had to tell Adam Schiff. Given the suspicion that the whistleblower had a lot of legal help in writing the complaint and the obvious involvement of Schiff for some weeks before it all became public, one wonders the degree to which Atkinson and his office were working with Schiff to make sure this became public.

    In short, at every juncture where the system was designed to stop abusive use of the whistleblower statute, Atkinson appears to object that this particular snowflake of a case was extremely special and needed deferential treatment. Right down to changing the regulation to allow a complaint to be submitted that would have been rejected only a month ago. …
    The fact pattern here merits a close look by the administration into whether Atkinson is part of the solution or a large chunk of the problem. At a minimum, he has shown a gutlessness and bureaucratic deference to Schiff that should disqualify him from any policy making position in the administration. At worst, he’s actively collaborated in an attempt to bring about the impeachment of a president.

    If true, this would further erode the public’s trust in government, as the Inspectors General are currently viewed as being at least somewhat above the partisan fray, as much as anyone can be in DC.

    If that trust is lost, I don’t know what other institutions remain accorded any public respect.

  19. https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/09/27/mark-levin-fire-calls-adam-schiff-release-90-days-texts-phone-calls-emails-leaker/

    Levin points out that a Ukrainian policy guy from the CIA doesn’t write like this. It reads like “a legal brief which has been vetted by lawyers.” And he wants to know who wrote it. Who was the whistleblower working with? Adam Schiff, Democratic staffers?

    The whistleblower’s attorney said it’s important to retain his client’s anonymity. That request infuriates Levin. “Too bad pal. Too late. You want to impeach the President.”

    And he noted something that a lot of us have wondered about. Why aren’t the Republican leaders in the Senate doing more to defend Trump? Why aren’t they sending out subpoenas? Calling for hearings, holding press conferences.

    Quoting Levin:

    You want to impeach our President using this BS. We want to know all about your guy. And I love today’s hearing where they wrap this guy in the whistleblower statute…

    He knew nothing, he heard that certain people at the White House were upset…Isn’t it funny that not a single person with first-hand knowledge filed a whistleblower complaint?

    You know, when the CIA overthrew the Iranian government years ago, the liberal Democrats were upset. When they overthrew Allende in Chile, a socialist marxist, the Democrats were upset. When they tried to overthrow Castro, the Democrats were upset…But when they try to overthrow our President, they’re whistleblowers. They’re heroes. They’re courageous. Mr. Schiff, why don’t release 90 days of your phone calls? 90 days of your texts. 90 days of your emails. Cause I know something pal. You’re a leaker. You’re devious. Same with your staff.

    You now have four U.S. senators who did far worse than that. Three of them, Menendez, Leahy, and Durbin who insisted that the Ukrainian government, insisted, investigate our President. You had another one, Murphy, from Connecticut, who insisted that the Ukrainian government not investigate Biden. How come they’re not facing ethics complaints? How come they’re not facing expulsion acts in the United States Senate?

    And finally, where the hell are the Republican chairman in the Senate? Why aren’t they issuing subpoenas? Why don’t they pretend they’re Elijah Cummings or Jerry Nadler? Or Schiff for that matter? I know it’s an ugly thought, but issue 100 subpoenas. Go after their bank accounts, go after their friends, go after their relatives. Go after their accountants. Go after their records. And if they don’t go for it, hold em in contempt.

    Game Theory – Anatole Rapaport’s Tit-for-Tat schemata is the best strategy to win in Prisoner’s Dilemma games.

    Saul Alinski – 4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

    Orwell – “So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot.”

  20. . . . where the hell are the Republican chairman in the Senate?

    So, that’s sort of a good question . . . except for the obvious difficulty that the Senate Intel committee is in the hands of Sen. Richard Burr, who is deeply implicated in the Spygate corruption after allowing himself to be led around by the nose by Sen. Mark Warner (a man even more corrupted by the soft coup of Spygate). So scratch that committee doing anything good, but working to prolong the torment.

    As to the Senate Judiciary committee? Is there something in it for Lindsay Graham? Maybe. Too, Sen. Graham may be pressured a bit by some of his members — or we can hope so anyhow — therefore we may see that committee rise to the occasion eventually. On the other hand, I suspect Sen. Graham is preparing his committee for big doings testimony from IG Horowitz after the recess, with quite a few of the central bad guys being lined up for public verbal assassination after Horowitz is done.

    These preparations may be overriding Graham’s ability to adjust to fast moving circumstances, hence, the lack of effort on the “wishyblower” case thus far. That’s wishyblower for a reason, not a typo.

  21. All these people are going to fight till the end, go down with the ship. They hate the President so much they are not going to let a little thing like having to lie deter them. They want him gone and are willing to lie to make it happen. Trump Derangement Syndrome is the Kool-Aid at Jonestown.

    Because if they don’t, their facade of being Nice People™/Smart People™ will be fully exposed as a false front … just as Al Czervik exposed the rot of Judge Smails in Caddyshack.

    And so much of their employability and social status – including the ability to look down on their neighbors – is hanging on that facade.

  22. The Romans had a way to encourage cooperation/performance. It’s called Decimation. Literally, if a legion/group rebelled, then 1 in 10 by lots would be chosen and executed by those who remained…

    …there is a modern equivalent. Eliminate program overlap. There a dozens upon dozens of offices, bureaus, etc., that duplicate the programs of each other. Eliminate them…reduce the size of government by 40%. That’s the only way to solve this problem. Furthermore, because of the rise in easy communication, move program offices and whole departments out of Washington, DC. Move them to flyover country. Get them out of the swamp that has become our nation’s capital. Decentralize everything…

    Just my 2 cents. If none of the above works, just shoot half!

  23. Aesop fan said, “Saul Alinski – 4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.”
    I also think this is a good idea. I am preparing my WB complaint now. After all: no direct knowledge required; can use MSM for “evidence”.
    Sending to L Graham. We will see if stands up.

  24. On one of my earliest comments here sometime before the inauguration, I linked to PJ Media’s/J. Christian Adams 2011 series, titled Every Single One, about the Holder hiring of nothing but radical leftists into all the upper level civil service positions in the DOJ. They’re all still there and this study doesn’t even cover who was hired from 2012-2016 so it’s probably much worse now. It also doesn’t even cover the hiring and promotions of partisans in the FBI, CIA and other intelligence agencies which were headed by two notorious partisans, Brennan and Clapper.

    I also said that Trump should ask for the resignations of every Obama appointee on Day One of his presidency, and one of his first priorities should be reform of the civil service protections so partisans can be more easily terminated, because otherwise they would be permanent poison pills leaking and preventing Trump from enacting any conservative policies.

    I posted that link to PJ Media’s series many dozens of times all over conservative sites since 2011 but I doubt many people took the time to read it because it is 13 very lengthy, highly detailed analyses of the resumes of every hire in the DOJ.

    Understandably, too many conservatives are too busy leading their lives, tending to their careers and families to pay a lot of attention to politics. Many don’t even vote.

    But look at the many high-paying “careers” those on the left gravitate towards: journalists, editors, government bureaucrats at all levels, pundits, politicians, lobbyists, union leaders, publishers, founders/employees of the ten thousand+ “non-partisan”, “public interest” tax-exempt leftwing 501(c) organizations, et al where politics is their damned job, and they can devote all their working hours to attacking conservatives, disinformation and pushing leftism.

    It’s obvious this impeachment movement was coordinated by the Democrats who knew about this long before the “whistleblower” “complaint” was released and probably helped him write it. It was timed to interfere with his UN speech and the announcement of a trade agreement with Japan, and to preempt and steal the oxygen from the Horowitz report which is soon to be released. They know the time is now or it may be never, so it is going to get vicious.

  25. Shortly after President Reagan took office I distinctly recall, since we were doing post election identification of individuals who needed to be removed from their civil service that someone walked into the conference room and announced that President Reagan had just fired the entire senior service. I don’t recall whether that was an exaggeration but those were GS 18 employees.

    And of course is possible that regulations have been changed but I have wondered for the last several years why President Trump and not taking a similar step.

  26. Democrats are impeaching the president for coercing the Ukraine president into doing his bidding by threatening to withhold military aid, but somehow the supposed victim of the alleged scheme the president of Ukraine has not expressed any resentment toward the president, on the contrary they remain to be on friendly term having a cordial conversation shaking hands for a photograph just as recently as days ago after the story had already come to light. Once again like the latest kavanaugh scandal the democrats are crying foul despite the supposed victim claiming nothing happened.

  27. geokstr on September 29, 2019 at 11:34 am said:
    On one of my earliest comments here sometime before the inauguration, I linked to PJ Media’s/J. Christian Adams 2011 series, titled Every Single One, about the Holder hiring of nothing but radical leftists into all the upper level civil service positions in the DOJ. They’re all still there and this study doesn’t even cover who was hired from 2012-2016 so it’s probably much worse now.
    * * *
    It’s worse, mostly because Adams’ prediction about the 2012 election failed miserably.

    http://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2011/09/14/j-christian-adams-the-politicized-hiring-of-eric-holders-criminal-section/

    The exclusively liberal background of these new lawyers is no accident. As I wrote [16] before, a pretextual hiring standard is being employed. Division leaders, of course, aren’t calling it a “liberal” litmus test; they are instead referring to it as a requirement that all successful candidates have “civil rights experience.” But their definition of “civil rights experience” only includes prior employment, membership, or affiliation with left-wing advocacy organizations.

    Worse, Loretta King, while serving as the acting assistant attorney general for civil rights at the outset of the Obama administration, ordered the resumes of highly qualified applicants to be rejected only because they didn’t have political or left-wing civil rights experience. Multiple DOJ sources with direct knowledge of hiring committee practices have confirmed this to me.

    So what does the corrupted hiring mean to the average American? It means if you go to the Wisconsin State Fair and are beaten because you are white, your federal government will do nothing for you, even as it would act if attacker and attacked races were reversed. It means if you are Marty Marshall standing in your front yard watching fireworks with your family, and are attacked [37] by a mob yelling “this is our world. This is a black world,” don’t expect DOJ to act. It means if you are Dick Retta and are pepper-sprayed by a liberal for praying and exercising federal rights to protest abortion, don’t expect the law to protect you.

    What does it mean? It means we have reached that dangerous line crossed in past civilizations where the law appears to apply to some, but not to all. This is un-American, and must stop. Otherwise, Americans will stop it next year at the ballot box.

  28. Hey, Neo. You just got linked by rantingly.com, right at the top of the page. That should generate some traffic for you.

  29. The most important thing that we can do is to make sure that we can “…stop it next year at the ballot box.”

    The Democrats and the MSM have been trying to push the idea that there is no election fraud in this country of any consequence. Sure, a fraudulent vote here or there, but nothing to worry about.

    Simultaneously, they have made every effort to see to it that no voter ID law–which would make it harder to fraudulently vote–ever gets passed, saying that large numbers of people–minorities in particular–would be denied the right to vote under such a law, because they do not have picture IDs, and it would be too onerous for them to obtain one, or its equivalence. (Some States, I note, will allow you to substitute six different forms of ID when voting, if you don’t have a drivers license.)

    This, despite the fact that you have to have some form of ID–that could be used to identify you as a legitimate registered voter–to do anything in our current day society–get social security benefits, a driver’s license, buy liquor, set up a bank or checking account, get some form of credit, enroll in the military, register your child for school, get medical attention or hospital admission, or even to adopt a dog.

    Say the Democrats, such a voter ID law would really institutionalize “voter suppression.”

    In addition,Democrats have resisted every efforts to purge voter rolls of ineligible voters.

    You might also remember that a couple of years ago, when President Trump set up a Commission to investigate voter fraud, that Commission asked States for copies of their voter rolls to begin their analysis, and so many major, Democrat controlled States refused to turnover those rolls that the Commission was prevented from doing the investigation and analysis it was supposed to do, and after a year of trying to get the information it needed to do its job, it closed up shop.

    Then, there is George Soros’ “Secretaries of State Project,” which has been quietly working, under the radar, to get Democrats elected to this usually obscure post, whose holder presides over his state’s elections, administers the rules, and settles disputes. Now that’s a position with power over elections in each State.

    Despite this constant refrain that there is no real voter fraud occurring in this county the odd news report or two occasionally manages to slip out of voter fraud in this or that part of the country–sometimes dozens of votes, sometimes hundreds, and occasionally indications of voter fraud on a massive scale, as when tens of thousands more voters vote than are registered in a district. Or, as was the case reported in Texas recently, when hundreds of thousands of people on the election rolls were found to be ineligible to vote, but may, in fact, have.

    Then, you might remember that after a contentious election Al Franken became a Senator, after the final recount had him winning by something like 300 votes.

    Does anyone think, given the efforts we have seen so far–all aimed at de-legitimizing, hampering and finally, removing President Trump from office–that the Left and Democrats won’t pullout all the stops, and try every dirty trick in the book to rig the upcoming election so that there is no way President Trump can get reelected?

    So, every vote counts, and that is why all of our efforts must be concentrated on making sure that voter fraud is not allowed to happen.

    Or we will lose at the ballot box.

  30. Pingback:Democrats Have Been in Constant “Attempted Coup” Mode Since 12:01am 11-7-16 | The Universal Spectator

  31. I don’t know how I got to this article over the week-end, but it is a very long, very detailed list of the Democrat’s view of the Ukraine situation.
    The “tells” include an early reference to the “debunked…conspiracy theory…Uranium One” and the headline for another article, “The Swiftboating of Joe Biden.”

    However, a cursory reading shows that times, dates, people, and controversial statements are probably more accurate than Mr. Schiff’s reading of the phone call transcript, although the spin is obvious, as are some of the omissions of, shall we say, exculpatory material for the Republicans.

    It’s useful to know what movie the left theater is watching.

    https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

  32. You know, when the CIA overthrew the Iranian government years ago, the liberal Democrats were upset. When they overthrew Allende in Chile, a socialist marxist, the Democrats were upset.

    1. The CIA did not overthrow the Government of Iran in 1953. They aided the lawful authority (the Shah) in preventing his own overthrow. NB, the Iranian legislature had been prorogued and the prime minister was subject to lawful dismissal. Operation Ajax wasn’t known at the time to be a CIA operation (and one suspects that agents exaggerated their exploits), so no one in Congress was ‘upset’ about it.

    2. The CIA didn’t overthrow Allende, either. The Chilean flag-rank officers threw him out on their own initiative. (Outfits like the Institute for Policy Studies have been throwing out chaff for decades on this point).

  33. Art Deco – thanks for the corrections.

    However, it is a good example of the kind of “history” people get when they only listen to radio/tv/print pundits — to the point where the media’s version (on whichever movie screen you are watching) supplants any actual historical reality.

    We are all living in alternate universes.

  34. Pingback:Progressives See Themselves As Above The Law And The Rest Of Us As Below It - Bookworm Room

  35. Pingback:Progressives See Themselves As Above The Law And The Rest Of Us As Below It - Watcher of Weasels

  36. Pingback:Ukraine, Russia and Impeachment as Coup | No Minister

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

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>