First Principles: Why Are You Okay with This?

Columbo
Columbo
6323
 

It seems that many historically Republican and conservative commentators, thought leaders and pundits take the same side as those in the Democrat party on certain issues that involve President Trump. One of those is Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation and the related controversy over the FBI and DOJ, and in particular the secret Memo. They insist that Trump is wrong-headed in his attacks on the FBI and DOJ.

One glimpse of this perspective is voiced by Senator Marco Rubio:

From his reputation and everything I know about him, I remain convinced that when this is all said and done, Mueller is going to only pursue things that are true, and he will do it in a fair and balanced way.”

My question is what about all of the new revelations coming out about the nefarious activities within the FBI? The 50,000 (seriously?!) texts between Strzok and Page were the earliest signs. But now on the eve of the Memo being released, more details are leaking out about serious criminal activity, at the highest levels of management.

Today, there is an article at PJ Media which provides much more detail about the truly nefarious activities of the now fired and shamed former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

It seems that the Deputy Director intentionally sat on and prohibited further investigation into Anthony Weiner’s laptop. At the exact same time, his wife “was receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Clinton’s close allies.” Only after the WSJ published an October 24 story about the donation to his wife’s campaign from Clinton sources did the Deputy Director get pressured to move forward. Evidently, there was also internal FBI grumbling and pressure to do something from the investigative team on the Weiner matter.

People within the FBI weren’t just asking about Weiner’s laptop — they were also asking about McCabe’s role in the Clinton email scandal. If McCabe was indeed stalling on the emails, it seemed he could do so no longer.

Something is very rotten in the state of our Federal Law Enforcement. Possibly treasonous behavior.

Why are you okay with such a politicized and criminal DOJ/FBI?

Published in General
Join Ricochet!
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 63 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
Join Ricochet
  1. A-Squared Inactive
    A-Squared
    @ASquared
    5:34 AM EST ⋅ Feb 2, 2018

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    I don’t agree that people are arguing we have to abandon some core principle because winning is more important.

    Guess there isn’t much to discuss then.

    • #61
  2. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG
    6:41 AM EST ⋅ Feb 2, 2018

    A-Squared (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    I don’t agree that people are arguing we have to abandon some core principle because winning is more important.

    Guess there isn’t much to discuss then.

    We could discuss which core principles you think people are abandoning for the sake of victory. We could also discuss how prioritization does not equal abandonment. I think, though, that those things have been talked about around here for pretty much as long as I’ve been a member. Maybe you’re right that there’s nothing more to talk about on this.

    • #62
  3. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge
    7:41 AM EST ⋅ Feb 2, 2018

    A-Squared (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    A-Squared (View Comment):

    Can you articulate what will prevent the next election from being a flight 93 election?

    I don’t know what the future holds. I also don’t know that I fully agree with the Flight 93 argument; mostly because it’s just an analogy and it goes only so far.

    …

    IF we’re in crisis mode now, how likely is it that turns around quickly? Unlikely. Could take awhile. Does that mean that every election is a Flight 93 election? No.

    The question isn’t whether the next (or the last) election is actually a “flight 93” election, the question is whether people will argue that this election is so important that we have to abandon some core principle and vote for the horrible Republican candidate (because the next one will be worse) to prevent [generic Democrat candidate] from getting the office.

    You’ve already seen it on these pages during the Roy Moore election. Sure, the Republican picks up teenage girls at the courthouse, but if we don’t elect the pedophile, someone really horrible will get that seat, a Democrat.

    It’s possible the fact that Moore lost might put a damper on the worst excesses of such catastrophizing rhetoric.

    • #63
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
Join Ricochet