Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Hidden in the IG Report: The Case for the Collusion to Elect Trump is Confirmed
Former FBI Director Comey’s concern that collusion contributed to Donald Trump’s election has been established. What was not confirmed until yesterday was the lengths to which he and his FBI assured the election of the man he clearly opposed. He and his cohort colluded overtly, informationally, or by deception to elect Hillary Rodham Clinton and by so doing, elected President Donald J. Trump. Say what you will, but Comey’s July, 2016 dance back and forth on Hillary’s criminal actions and his rewriting the law to extract her from prosecution convinced more than few Americans in Iowa, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin that enough was enough.
Comey’s effort to embellish his reputation with the late revelation of the Weiner investigation may have served his own campaign to rehab his reputation. It came at a point in the election when Comey thought Clinton would win, thus allowing him a last minute confirmation that his July pardon was just and fair. In fact, it actually hurt her reputation far more than he imagined – so tone deaf is Comey, and his colluders at the FBI.
But in all candor, what was Comey the Colluder to do? He was trapped by the reality that sooner or later the Weiner horde of confidential emails would be disclosed. So he let it sit for weeks, polished the apple, revealed it as he was obligated to do (Scout’s Honor), and then promptly closed it.
The FBI is a national police force. The Constitution relegated police powers to the states. Its creation came around the time that Progressivism and law and order were mingling to devise a rationalization for a small, but coordinating ‘investigative’ agency of the Federal government.
The FBI has on at least two occasions (and many more), proven it is a dangerously and politically motivated body. From its inception as J. Edgar Hoover’s pulpit of power, the FBI was a structural threat to our republic. The excuse that this is a just a “few bad apples” is just that. This is a concentration of power, operating in secret, and working to preserve itself, and its interests on a virtually unlimited budget. Think Star Chamber, but apparently devoid of stars. It is not that it is just a few bad apples. It is that it only takes a few bad apples to commandeer an election when you control the national police.
Kings and dictators rely upon national police forces. We do not have a king, nor a dictator. Which makes the FBI even more dangerous. It is now so powerful, it can serve as a tipping point in the political process. Ted Steven’s was removed from office just in time to assure a Democratic Senate sixty seat majority and launch America down the path of the Obamacare roller coaster. Ted Stevens may have been guilty of something, but the Attorney General’s Office armed with its police force, the FBI, did not play fair. Would this have been possible without the FBI?
Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, using FBI resources, investigated Scooter Libby for a crime Libby did not commit. In the end, ‘Fitz’ alleged he committed a different crime of perjury (though Libby could not recall events, he was charged with perjury or not being fully honest, something not hard to prove in a DC courtroom when a Republican, a Cheney Chief of Staff, was the defendant). At the time, Fitzgerald compared Libby’s actions to “throwing sand in the umpire’s face.”
How ironic that James Comey, Patrick Fitzgerald’s close friend, has been exposed for doing just that. Comey not only presided over a lax investigation, prejudged, made up law, rewrote law, usurped power and participated in “de facto” collusion (if not in fact naked collusion) in the Clinton case, he convinced many that the government under the Obama administration, with its failure to fulfill promises, sloppy seizure of healthcare, and open deceit was not only untrustworthy, but likewise dangerous. Thus, we got Trump.
Trump was an outsider. He was not mealy-mouthed. He was not coated with years of unctuous political relationships. He might be rude and careless, ruthless even, but the Obama perfidy backed by bureaucratic complicity and casuistry (IRS, EPA, HHS, ATF, DoJ) demanded redirection, not a readjustment. Comey, and his fellow travelers, cinched the deal.
Published in General
Ej,
Reality was never Comey’s strong suit.
Regards,
Jim
Comey knew that BHO had Communicated with HRC on her home server while she was in a hostile country. This made BHO as guilty as HRC if she was charged. Wasn’t going to happen to our first black democratic president. This fact was in yesterday’s IG report. The investigation had to have the conclusion it did or the Democratic Party would be dead for years.
I think this is very credible. Some of the texts between Strzk (or however you spell it. I mean buy a vowel for petes sake) and Paige came right out and expressed fear of what Hillary might do to them after she became president.
This goes right along with my vision of the FBI as her Praetorian Guard.
That’s a meaningless detail. The agents in NY knew the situation and informed DC. The breakdown was somewhere at FBI HQ between all the machers.
The difficulty, the director’s job is inherently political. Political in the aspect that much of the work involves managing relationships within the DoJ, with Congress and with the public. To frame an analogy, the job requires an Eisenhower not a Patton.
Regardless, Lynch failed at her duty to prescribe to Comey his responsibilities. To wit, provide a report of investigation to the DoJ. It was Lynch’s responsibility to determine who would make the decision about how to proceed. As Lynch had compromised herself by meeting with Bill Clinton, she was obligated to pass the authority to act on the report to one of her deputies.
Ultimately, the responsibility to explain and defend the outcome should have been borne by the Obama Administration. Instead, Comey, for his own reasons, undercut a key aspect of political accountability.
Yes, he did claim that. Which is laughable on the face of it. Because if he really didn’t know, it would mean that HRC’s e-mails ended up on the laptop of a completely unrelated sicko, . . . and he didn’t bat an eye.
A defining characteristic of all leftists…
This has come up a few times recently. It seems to be sourced back to this anonymous blog quoting anonymous sources making threats that were never fulfilled. Its only credibility seems to be a desire to believe it. While I might enjoy seeing the Clintons and other top Democrats prosecuted for the heinous crimes insinuated, these kinds of salacious rumors reek of Russian disinformation and/or click-bait until one of the many law enforcement officers who allegedly know about this alleged evidence breaks their frankly unbelievable silence.
Don’t worry, citizen, your two Tip Line contacts are safely on record in your dossier.
The DOJ/FBI asserts autonomy because they are allowed to by the Republican leadership of the House and Senate. The Congressional leadership is entirely dependent upon their members internal votes to put and keep them in position. It is each of our members fault. No member of Congress who has not acted to force change in behavior or change in leadership personnel is innocent. No candidate who has not taken a public position on compelling contempt votes and using the budget leash is serious about anything except personal ambition.
http://ricochet.com/527737/whose-side-is-the-ig-on/
What is required is another round of serious reform legislation, following real hearings like the Church Committee hearings.
Good they can take care of me when SS runs out.
Why in a 95% white state like Maine is the Democratic Party even competitive?
Oh, that’s right – identity politics is B-A-D.
I understand the historical roots of Democratic Party loyalism over the years, certainly since the days when it was “rock-ribbed Republican” in the 1936 presidential election.
But even the folks in the Deep South states who were born-and-bred Democrats from 1852 on had the sense to stop voting for that party once it became anti-white.
So what’s the matter with the voters in Maine? Is it what Michael Walsh calls, “preenciples”?
Maine has produced Republicans who aren’t even Republicans (Susan “Help I Have Marbles in My Mouth” Collins and Olympia Snow.
Just like Arizona!
Correct. That’s the weird thing. I mean, it’s not like Vermont, another formerly rock-ribbed Republican state. Vermont was fundamentally transformed into a socialist enclave by liberal Bostonians fleeing the consequences of their own votes and then stupidly maintaining the same claptrap ideals in a safe place: i.e., one with no colored people.
That psychosis may be regnant in lovely coastal areas of Maine like the Penobscot Bay region, but come on, Reality Bites.
They do have TVs and the internet in Maine, don’t they? The people who live there aren’t so dense that they can’t see what has clearly happened to the Democratic Party, to our major corporations, our arts communities and our universities, can they?
Do they just want to be oblivious and hope it’ll all be OK?
Arizona didn’t fight hard enough against immigration, even though it was on the front lines.
As it was being overrun, the people elected “generals” they thought could hold the line, such as McCain and Flake, and rejected “clowns” like Hayworth. But there were always too many, like Gabrielle Giffords, eager to accept terms (amnesty).
Now it’s almost too late.
Only a surprise counter-offensive of mass arrests, deportations and a wall will fend off defeat.
Total Immigration Moratorium.
Yes I agree with your last statement. And it will be important to point out that that policy existed before: from 1924 to 1948, our nation let in very few immigrants. This is part of the reason why men home from WWII could hang up a shingle and get to work as tradespeople.
When I was growing up, the three most prosperous guys my family knew of were the guy with the plumbing firm, another with a construction firm, and another man who was a VP at a bank.
As I drive around Northern Calif., when I see construction folks out working, invariably they are all immigrants.
After the very devastating fires of 2015 hit my community, people were saying “As bad as the fires were, it should mean full time employment for people who had been without full time work since the housing bubble collapsed.” Instead what we got was PG & E sending in crews of Spanish speaking people from Southern Calif., who did a haphazard job of cutting the trees.