Gay Patriot Header Image

Violence comes from the Left

We’ve been having fun in the comments about Representative-Elect Greg Gianforte (R-MT). He body-slammed a reporter in rage, probably committing misdemeanor assault, then lied about what he did. Later, he apologized – but only sort of – because he never said what for and, to my knowledge, he has not yet corrected his false witness. (Feel free to update me in the comments)

His actions are bad. Both violence and lying are totally unacceptable, in our politics, from whatever side. And I think he’s just sorry that he was caught. If he merits prosecution (or censure or expulsion in the House), let the right thing happen.

He also needs to be seen in perspective. As usual, Tucker Carlson and V the K nail it. From V:

Gianforte doesn’t seem like someone I’d defend to the last, but I’m not going to let people who supported Ted Kennedy and Gerry Studds lecture me on who’s unfit to serve in Congress.

Also, is it just me, or has this one dust-up between a Republican congressman and a reporter gotten more mass media coverage than all the violence inflicted by Antifa, the Portlandia Anti-Trump mob, the Middlebury/Berkeley/UW-Madison college Democrats, and the woman in Tennesee who tried to run a Republican congressman off the road combined?

And Tucker Carlson for your enjoyment:
YouTube Preview Image
Tucker has a laundry list of recent, left-wing political violence – including threats and violence against at least 3 Republican Congresspeople.

Gianforte lost all control of himself – as a 56-year old man – and muddied the waters. For that, he has my contempt. But he’s a globule of mud, in a virtual La Brea Tar Pits of left-wing political violence in America today that many Democrats refuse to condemn.

As always, the Left and the Controlled Media (but I repeat myself) would rather pretend that the speck in Republicans’ eyes is the New Coming of Hitler, than look at the many logs in their own.

Some stuff that some people probably think we should acknowledge

Consider this an open thread to talk about anything listed here, or not listed here.

  • Eric Clanton has been arrested by Berkeley police.

    Score one for the good guys. This is the Nutty Professor who was allegedly assaulting people with bike locks on behalf of Antifa, during those riots in Berkeley.

    “His work in political philosophy also centers on mass incarceration and the prison system,” Clanton’s former faculty page read. “He is currently exploring restorative justice from an anti-authoritarian perspective.”

    I hope Prof. Clanton will be finding out a lot about mass incarceration, the prison system, restorative justice, and authority.

  • The 4th Circuit has blocked Trump’s travel suspension.

    I find this a bit of a yawner. President Trump’s orders on the suspension (sometimes called a “Muslim Ban” by our biased media) have been pretty reasonable. The opinions blocking the suspension have been mostly ridiculous. There’s nothing I can do about it except hope it goes to the Supreme Court. And SCOTUS will do whatever they’re going to do, one way or the other.

  • The Gianforte matter. Again, yawns from me. If Gianforte committed assault, let the police/justice system take care of it and let him rot in jail. That’s what the police/justice system is for. Let it work. There, I just condemned Gianforte (provided he’s guilty).
  • NYT reporting that Russian officials discussed how they might influence Trump. Again: Yawn. Does anyone think that Russian officials hadn’t spent the previous 8 years discussing how they might influence Hillary and Obama?
  • This is more interesting. The Washington Post discusses how Russians may or may not have tipped off the FBI that Obama’s AG Loretta Lynch was planning to block any prosecution of Hillary Clinton in her e-mail scandal.

    So…Hillary Clinton(‘s campaign) colluded with the Obama administration, to block investigation and/or prosecution? And Russia had spies, in the Obama administration? Or somebody fooled them with phony tips? Sorry, my head is spinning from all the Inside Baseball.

The New Civil War

For the last 100 years – and, especially for the last 8 years under President Obama – more and more Americans have become feckless dependents of government.

They may be rich, middle class or poor. They may depend on government benefits, or on special favors written into our laws and regulations. Or they may be politicians and bureaucrats and government workers, deciding the fates of other people and taking paychecks a good deal larger than what most of them could get in the private sector. They may be journalists taking cash payments from the CIA, or billionaires with extensive government contracts.

And they are indeed feckless. They gladly believe and spread the most ridiculous things on zero evidence. For example, they choose a criminally dishonest politician (Hillary Clinton) to be president. When she doesn’t quite win the election, they gladly believe and spread rumors that the guy who did win is a Russian spy – on zero evidence, again – and chant “F*ck [him]!” at important political conventions.

On the other side are ordinary Americans who more-or-less believe in God, common sense, and supporting themselves through work. Again, they may be rich, middle class or poor. They choose 2 business people in a row to be president. The most recent one might not be a great role model in some ways, but at least he says sensible things in a forthright, unafraid manner. When he wins the election, he sets himself to the task of reviving America’s economy and manufacturing base – only to be undermined by the vast army and bureaucracy of the feckless government dependents, spreading their nonsense.

It’s a mortal conflict. And one side knows it: the feckless government dependents. Because America is fast reaching the point where it can’t afford to support them any longer. They, the cancer, are about to kill the host. They, the cancer, must be controlled and cut back – so that the rest of America can survive, and perhaps revive a little.

They, the feckless government dependents, know it deep-down. And, being out-of-control like any late-stage cancer, they are desperate to deny it and to continue a system – their own system – that promises to extract every last drop of life and treasure that can be extracted from normal Americans.

It’s Producers vs. Looters. Understand that the Producers are people of all classes and walks of life. Likewise, the Looters are people of all classes and walks of life.

And so we arrive at the political struggles of the last seven months. President Trump isn’t perfect. I did not support him. I still don’t support him, whenever and wherever I may disagree with him. But, somehow (and although I never wanted it), he became a leader for the Producers – or at least for the opponents of America’s looting, criminal Establishment. Imperfect Mr. Trump is the president we’ve got. And the vast army and bureaucracy of the feckless government dependents are determined to destroy him.

Thus the endless, utter nonsense they spew each day. I’m not sure what to do about it. I know that supporting Trump blindly will not help. But tolerating nonsense will also not help.

The only thing I know how to do, that might help in some tiny way, is to keep telling the truth as I see it unfolding around me.

Or posting links.

Schlichter sums it up well: “Someone came to Washington who wasn’t part of the club, and that’s intolerable. So they are desperate to expel him, and by extension, us. Every day will be a crisis, every action he takes will be the worst thing that has ever happened, and every step towards keeping his promises a crime.”

Each day, let us dedicate ourselves anew to rejecting the nonsense. And to offering truth, in its place.

He will propose spending cuts?

A few weeks ago, I took a dim view of President Trump’s tax proposal:

The true level of taxation is the government’s spending level. All spending must be paid for, one way or another. There are 3 possibilities.

1. Overt taxes.
2. Borrowing. This is a covert tax, a tax on the future (when either the debt must be repudiated, or more and more government revenues must be diverted to servicing it).
3. Money-printing. Another hidden tax, this time on the real value (the purchasing power) of everyone’s wages and savings. Also known as “inflation”.

So really, it isn’t a tax cut unless it’s a spending cut also. Trump wants to cut the overt taxes. So, what? Without spending cuts, it’s only a corresponding increase in the hidden taxes: borrowing and/or money-printing.

I gotta give credit where it’s due. It looks like Trump is going to propose spending cuts?

More details from President Donald Trump’s first budget proposal are trickling out via a flurry of overnight reports from The Washington Post, Associated Press and Bloomberg News…

The budget will slash $1.7 trillion in spending on entitlement programs, according to Bloomberg.
Trump’s budget will include a massive nearly $200 billion cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the modern version of food stamps, over the next 10 years – what amounts to a 25% reduction, according to The Washington Post.
The food stamp cuts are part of a broader $274 billion welfare-reform effort, according to a report by The Associated Press.
The budget calls for about $800 billion in cuts to Medicaid for fiscal year 2018, WaPo reported.
The budget is also expected to propose major domestic discretionary spending cuts – an earlier version of the budget called for $54 billion in such cuts next year alone.

Whether the Republicans in Congress will tolerate any cuts, is another matter.

Note that these cuts are hardly draconian. OK, the numbers sound large. But only because:

  1. some of the numbers are totals across many fiscal years, and
  2. the government IS large. Spending and promises (entitlements) skyrocketed under Bush 43 and Obama.

But the Controlled Media is sure to make them sound like the Entropic Heat Death of the Universe.

Comey’s dirty track record

Former FBI Director James Comey once served the Bush administration and is supposed to be a “registered Republican”. But some gay guys marry women and are supposed to be straight. Sometimes, the declaration doesn’t matter – or is there for cover.

I’ll provide some highlights of Comey’s career, then details. First, the highlights. Or should I say lowlights? As I realized everything that Comey has been into and how political he is, my jaw dropped.

  • Comey helped the Clintons to escape justice over Bill’s pardon of Marc Rich.
  • Comey appointed Patrick Fitzgerald to investigate the Valerie Plame affair. (A bizarre mess that ended in the prosecution of Scooter Libby, and the political tar-and-feathering of the Bush administration.)
  • Comey prosecuted Martha Stewart. (This may be OK; but I will show that it sets up the irony/hypocrisy of his later saving Hillary from prosecution.)
  • Comey helped the Clintons in the Sandy Berger investigation, by limiting its scope.
  • Comey limited the government’s actions to punish a corrupt auditor, KPMG.
  • Comey obstructed the Bush administration’s post-9/11 efforts to do warrantless surveillance. That could be a great thing; except that
    1. his actions were surrounded by allegations of lying and usurpation of power; and
    2. he went on to happily serve an Obama presidency that did far worse things than Bush, in terms of warrantless surveillance.
  • Comey served as General Counsel of a scandal-ridden defense contractor, then a Director of a scandal-ridden bank. (I don’t have anything strong here; mentioned for completeness.)
  • And then as FBI Director, of course, Comey knew Hillary was guilty but usurped authority and blocked her prosecution, turning the statutes on their head in the process.

If I missed anything, please let us know in the comments. For example, did Comey play any part in Hillary’s Uranium One fiasco? (UPDATE: Yes, indirectly. It involved Clinton Foundation corruption. Charles Ortel points that Comey has repeatedly been on-point to investigate that corruption and has refused to do so, giving it a pass.)

Some of Comey’s actions might be defensible. But looking at the overall pattern: I personally conclude that Comey is a longtime Democrat operative, as well as a liar-when-it-suits-him.

Now for details. (more…)

Some scandal updates

Anthony Weiner is to plead guilty “to a single charge of transferring obscene material to a minor, pursuant to a plea agreement…”

This is the same Anthony Weiner who

  • is still married to Hillary Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin
  • had thousands of Hillary Clinton’s illegally-handled emails on the same laptop that he used to commit his sex crimes with minors
  • caused former FBI Director Comey to reappear in the news last October, which many Democrats believe (probably wrongly) to be the cause of Hillary’s election loss.

It’s sad how Clintonites deflect the blame to Comey and Russia for all that, rather than putting it where it belongs on Weiner, Abedin and the Clintons themselves.

“A likely result of the plea is that Mr. Weiner would end up as a registered sex offender, although a final determination has yet to be made…”

UPDATE: Huma has finally just filed for divorce.


In other news, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange Rape Investigation Is Dropped in Sweden.

The accusations were always of a “he said, she said” nature, with Assange saying that he had met the alleged victim several times amicably, for consensual sex.

The announcement represents a victory for Mr. Assange, 45, an Australian…

[but] In Britain, he still faces a warrant for failing to appear in court, and the Metropolitan Police in London said on Friday that they would arrest Mr. Assange, who has maintained his innocence, if he were to try to leave the [Ecuadorian] embassy…

[U.S.] Prosecutors have long been exploring the idea of charging Mr. Assange as a conspirator in the underlying offense of illegal theft of documents…

[but] The Obama-era Justice Department, which had gone as far as to present some evidence about WikiLeaks to a grand jury in Alexandria, Va., was deterred from pursuing the case further because it proved difficult to distinguish what WikiLeaks had done in publishing the classified information provided by Ms. Manning from what The New York Times and many other mainstream news organizations do.

Most news organizations that cover national security and foreign affairs regularly publish information from sources that is considered classified by the United States government. By long-established tradition, however, only the government officials who provide such information have been prosecuted, not the journalists who publish it.


IN STILL OTHER NEWS: Evidence has emerged that, while still just a candidate, the President conspired with Iranian mullahs to undermine the foreign policy of the existing administration. Which meets a reasonable definition of treason!

Oh, wait – it was President Obama, while still just a candidate, conspiring with Iranian mullahs to undermine the foreign policy of the Bush administration. And lefties haven’t given the tiniest crap about it.

Let the DOJ appoint another special counsel

…to look into the Obama administration’s surveillance of its political opponents.

  • whether it was truly “incidental” to legitimate (other) concerns, and/or done under FISA warrants
  • whether FISA warrants were obtained properly (rather than relying on, say, a “dossier” hacked together by a foreign intelligence agency as a political favor)
  • whether NSA Susan Rice, an Obama White House operative who apparently ordered the “unmasking” of Trump associates’ names in the surveillance data, did so for honest and legal reasons
  • whether the subsequent distribution of the “unmasked” intelligence was necessary, legal and proper
  • and who leaked it (along with Trump campaign information) to the media and/or the Hillary campaign, possibly committing felonies in the process.

Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. We, the American people, need to know exactly what the Obama administration was up to with its domestic spying on Americans and especially on its political opponents.

And if illegal unmasking, distribution or leaking occurred: let there be indictments.

UPDATE: Tucker Carlson has a point: President Trump could have blocked the DOJ’s special counsel for Russia. And President Hillary would have (for anything connected to her). She would be too afraid of where an independent investigator might go. Trump isn’t.

I notice Trump calling it a witch hunt, but that’s a slag on the Left’s hysteria; not on the DOJ or Director Mueller.

And, that Russia investigation…

Obviously, we had news that former FBI Director Mueller will be a special counsel to investigate the Trump-Russia allegations. Provided that his investigation is honest, it will be a good thing. Given that people are so hysterical, let them play detective until they burn themselves out.

Slightly more interesting is this morning’s Reuters article, Trump campaign had at least 18 undisclosed contacts with Russians.

Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race…

Conversations between Flynn and Kislyak accelerated after the Nov. 8 vote as the two discussed establishing a back channel for communication between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that could bypass the U.S. national security bureaucracy, which both sides considered hostile to improved relations… [ed: Really? ya think?]

The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far…

Members of the Senate and House intelligence committees have gone to the CIA and the National Security Agency to review transcripts and other documents related to contacts between Trump campaign advisers and associates and Russian officials…

Translation: Yes, the Obama administration surveilled the living crap out of its domestic political opponents. When will we get a special counsel for that?

But hey – At least the surveillance will let us know for sure if Trump improperly colluded with Russians. Assuming, again, an honest report from Mueller.

My prediction for the result is that

  1. Trump and his aides didn’t collude
  2. Their not disclosing these 18 contacts was fairly innocent (as in, minor text messages that easy to forget when you’re asked about an area where you did nothing wrong)
  3. all the same, the Left and the Controlled Media are going to start a “Trump Lied!!” thing.

But hey, that’s just a guess and I could be wrong. We shall see.

How do you think it ends?

At least some people are noticing that the Controlled Media witch hunts against Trump are an attempted coup d’etat against a lawfully-elected president.

What’s the endgame? Does President Trump resign in disgrace? Or does he triumph, as the hysteria is exposed and burns itself out? Or does he allow himself to be neutered, governing from now on as a captive of the Democrats? I don’t know.

Nobody’s perfect, and the Controlled Media is great at keeping up drumbeats; so yes, they will find something real or semi-real against Trump eventually. Let’s face it.

I could dismiss the Controlled Media as an irrelevant province of old people, and to a large extent that would be true. But they have ongoing relevance to the extent that they can scare the Congressional Republicans into rejecting (or at least unsupporting) Trump.

To get his appointees in office (including judges), to build a wall, to pass his desired infrastructure spending or tax reform, etc., Trump needs Republican unity. The purpose of the manufactured hysteria is to destroy intra-Republican unity and so to derail Trump’s appointees, criminal investigations (of the Left) and legislative agenda.

I could see a scenario where Trump resigns in contemptuous frustration. He denounces the hysteria (rightly) as he does so, and his Tweets remain a force in American politics. What happens next?

Do the Deep State and Controlled Media play the same game on President Pence? Will it work again, so soon? If it does work again so soon, does America slide into civil war at some point?

Whom does President Pence choose, as his Vice President? Does he let the Deep State run wild, taking us into another war? Questions, questions. Please let us know your thoughts, in the comments.

Cernovich on the intel leaks

This refers to Monday’s drama where The Washington Post alleged that President Trump had inappropriately leaked intelligence to the Russians.

First, why should anyone care what Mike Cernovich thinks? Because lately, he’s been breaking stories. He seems to have sources. His claims are outlandish; and then they turn out to be on the right track (though not 100% on all details).

So, here he is on the WaPo story. It’s a long video. Listening at 1.5x speed helps. Or I can just tell you his key points. Disclaimer – take this as his opinion and speculation. I’m interested mainly to see if it’s going to come true again?

  • Whoever leaked the story to WaPo, leaked way more classified information than Trump did.
  • At most, Trump revealed a location where some intelligence had happened. But WaPo was given far more detailed classified information, by its source(s).
  • As such, the leaks to WaPo were highly illegal, and have done far more damage to American security.
    • Because WaPo computers/networks can be hacked (and probably are).
  • White House and NSC staff have been on lockdown while they figure out who is the leaker. Cernovich’s top candidates:
    1. David Laufman, chief of counter-intelligence at the FBI. Obama donor. Was in charge of investigating Hillary’s emails; i.e., helped whitewash her. Has been involved in previous leaks. Fits the profile of someone who was not present at the meeting with Russians, but who nonetheless saw the meeting notes and all kinds of other classified info.
    2. NSA McMaster. Has a troubled relationship with Trump; potential motive would be to create a disaster, then be the hero who gets Trump out of it.
    3. Kris Bauman, a pro-Hamas / anti-Israel hire of McMaster’s; potential motive would be to disrupt the U.S. relationship with Israel.
  • One way or another, people will be going to prison over this episode.

As to Seth Rich: Per Cernovich,

  • Rich was the DNC leaker. (again Mike’s opinion/speculation – although I agree)
  • He was one of that rare breed: a Democrat staffer who was an American patriot. He was outraged by the Democrats’ rigged primary.
  • The Rich family spokesperson who denies all this (Bauman) is a political consultant paid by the DNC (not the Rich family).
  • When the DNC reported the hacking, FBI agents asked to look at the hacked servers – and the DNC refused. DNC hired CrowdStrike to concoct the narrative that DNC wanted (Russia hacking).

I do recall that former FBI Director Comey has been a strong supporter of CrowdStrike and their report; for example in his testimony before Congress. It is remarkable how many different actions of Comey’s over the years have helped Democrats and/or Clintons.

The Swamp Strikes Back

Via HotAir: Yet another media football we are supposed to care about.

Former FBI Director Comey, who in 2016 usurped authority most improperly and to the advantage of one political party (their presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, not being indicted), and who was justly fired last week, is dishing dirt on the man who fired him.

First, some key details:

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey, according to [Comey’s account]. “He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey that Mr. Flynn had done nothing wrong, according to [Comey’s account]. Mr. Comey did not say anything to Mr. Trump about curtailing the investigation, replying only: “I agree he is a good guy.”

In a statement, the White House denied the version of events…

“While the president has repeatedly expressed his view that General Flynn is a decent man who served and protected our country, the president has never asked Mr. Comey or anyone else to end any investigation, including any investigation involving General Flynn,” the statement said. “The president has the utmost respect for our law enforcement agencies, and all investigations. This is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and Mr. Comey.”

…The Feb. 14 meeting took place just a day after Mr. Flynn was forced out of his job…

To review:

  • Even Comey agrees that former NSA Flynn is well-meaning and patriotic.
  • All the same, President Trump fired Flynn.
  • After he did that, and according to only one side of the story, Trump then wondered out loud why Flynn would still be a matter for investigation.

But this is what the New York Times put in the lede:

President Trump asked the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, to shut down the federal investigation into [Flynn]…

That’s taking sides, rather a lot.

I can see why Trump’s opponents think they’re onto something. POTUS should never discuss ongoing investigations with the FBI, lest their be any hint of improper influence. If Comey’s account is true, Trump made a mistake.

But that is no small “if”. Even apart from this incident, Comey has a recent track record of showboating, misunderstanding situations and improper behavior. And he was just fired. Narcissistic, Disgruntled And Disgraced Ex-Employee Dishing Whatever Dirt He Thinks He Has #1,499,503,777. Yawn, yawn, yawn.

The larger picture is this. President Trump wants to Drain The Swamp and Make America Great Again. That’s why half of America elected him. Also, the fact that Trump is an amateur politician, NOT a professional. People thought it would be refreshing.

The Swamp, naturally, doesn’t want to be drained. And it owns the Controlled Media: for example, it owns the New York Times via Carlos Slim, an immigration activist and Trump opponent (and alleged corrupt businessperson and/or drug lord). And so we’re treated to these accounts, which are then picked up by The Swamp’s many representatives in Congress.

There are going to be a lot of these kerfuffles to come. Trump is a sloppy, amateur politician. And The Swamp is determined to derail his reform agenda, by making a mountain of every mistake that they would gladly cover up for one of their own (Obama or Hillary).

In the end, either The Swamp will win, or Trump will. It’s out of my hands.

UPDATE: Mark Steyn (via commenter KCRob):

if this partially read memo is as the Times characterized it (“Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation”), that would be a very serious matter. Comey had several options:

1) He could have reported Trump’s attempted interference to the Department of Justice (as he was obliged to do);

2) He could have disclosed it to the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr;

3) He could have resigned on principle.

Instead, he did nothing…

In other words: More Comey impropriety! Either the man or his story (at least) is belied by the fact that he did nothing at the time, except write a Note to Self.

UPDATE: Rush has a point: Whatever Trump is alleged to have done in the Flynn investigation is far less than what Obama did in the Hillary investigation.

In my view: that wouldn’t make it OK, but double standards aren’t OK either.

UPDATE: Yes, Comey has a track record as a Democrat agent who lies to promote himself and help Clintons escape justice. I wondered. Sigh.

Seth Rich update

You may recall that Seth Rich was a Democratic National Committee insider in 2016, who was murdered. Someone (not necessarily his family, as stated earlier) hired a private investigator, who has found evidence that, prior to his death, Seth Rich was in contact with WikiLeaks. As Fox 5 DC puts it:

Rod Wheeler, a private investigator hired by the Rich family [sic], suggests there is tangible evidence on Rich’s laptop that confirms he was communicating with WikiLeaks prior to his death.

Now, questions have been raised on why D.C. police, the lead agency on this murder investigation for the past ten months, have insisted this was a robbery gone bad when there appears to be no evidence to suggest that.

Wheeler, a former D.C. police homicide detective, is running a parallel investigation into Rich’s murder. He said he believes there is a cover-up and the police department has been told to back down from the investigation.

This matters to the “Russia hacked our election!” narrative. It undermines it. As I have mentioned previously: WikiLeaks has long stated that that their source for DNC emails was no one connected to the Russian government, and was someone whose description matches Seth Rich.

If Rich was indeed the DNC leaker – and if his murder had nothing to do with a “robbery gone bad” – then a disturbing question arises, of whether Rich’s murder could have been connected to his DNC leaking? As in, retribution by someone powerful?

I haven’t drawn a conclusion, but will keep an eye on this story.

UPDATE: This morning, Fox has more; but that includes the Rich family’s denial. Fox has been updating the article (Breitbart quotes an earlier version). At the time of this writing, the article says:

…[Rod Wheeler’s] WikiLeaks claim…was corroborated by a federal investigator who spoke to Fox News.

But a spokesman for Rich’s family on Tuesday said Wheeler was not authorized to speak for the family and called assertions Seth Rich sent emails to WikiLeaks “unsubstantiated”…

The family has been sensitive to speculation that Rich could have leaked emails damaging to the DNC…Wheeler and the federal investigator insist that there is evidence to back their claims.

An FBI forensic report of Rich’s computer — generated within 96 hours after Rich’s murder — showed he made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter…

The federal investigator, who requested anonymity, said 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders, spanning from January 2015 through late May 2016, were transferred from Rich to MacFadyen before May 21.

On July 22, just 12 days after Rich was killed, WikiLeaks published internal DNC emails that appeared to show top party officials conspired to stop Sen. Bernie Sanders…

WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange has stopped short of identifying Rich as the source…but has taken a keen interest in the case…“WikiLeaks has decided to issue a US$20k reward for information leading to conviction for the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich,” the organization announced.

Washington’s Metropolitan Police Department has no suspects and no substantial leads as to who the killer or killers may be, sources close to the investigation said.

It’s worth noting that Rich was killed in the “Bloomingdale” neighborhood, which is considered posh and low-crime.

UPDATE: Rod Wheeler undercuts his own story; but nonetheless insists that there is a Federal investigator who saw Rich’s laptop and told Wheeler what happened. Wheeler won’t name him.

What are we left with? Hearsay and anonymous sources; nothing proven, nor disproven.

Another media football

The Washington Post claims that President Trump leaked classified info in a meeting with Russians.

NSA McMaster then denied the story. “The story that came out tonight, as reported, is false.”

I’m not sure what to make of this. (So, feel free to tell me in the comments.)

From what I can gather, Trump was discussing a particular threat posed by ISIS. He is accused – by anonymous, off-the-record sources – of letting slip a certain city name that, in Allahpundit’s words, would “let the Russians figure out how a U.S. ally was getting its information on ISIS. He didn’t reveal who the source was or how that info was obtained and WaPo isn’t claiming that he did.”

Legally (and again following Allahpundit), leaking even such a small detail would be a big deal for anyone else in the government, “but because the president has the power to declassify classified information, he can blab all he wants…” If that’s true, then there’s no legal issue. But that does not answer the substantive questions:

  • Did Trump let something slip, that he shouldn’t have?
  • Or is The Washington Post merely extending its campaign of “Russia!” innuendo in trying to destroy a constitutionally-elected President?
  • Or perhaps both? (Picture every President being prone to an occasional indiscretion; and then The Washington Post choosing to bury the story if it’s Obama, but make a huge story if it’s Trump. I mean, for political reasons. What were Obama’s slips, that they never told us about?)

IF this story reflects something that really happened: Is McMaster now saving Trump’s rear end? Would McMaster, reportedly a proponent of the U.S. invading Syria, then gain an upper hand in the Trump administration?

UPDATE: Yes, for the Left to fuss is hypocritical. In the past, CIA Director Leon Panetta and Vice President Joe Biden have blurted out classified information, resulting in deaths.

… it was [Panetta’s] loose talk after the Osama bin Laden raid that exposed a Pakistani doctor, Shakil Afridi, who helped locate the Al Qaeda leader. As a result, Afridi was imprisoned on fabricated charges and will live under fear of assassination for the rest of his life…

Panetta did not reveal that critical intelligence in a private meeting with a foreign emissary, but to the entire world, on CBS News’ 60 Minutes.

Even worse was the Obama White House’s decision to reveal that it was U.S. Navy SEAL Team 6 that carried out the bin Laden raid.

As Jeffrey Kushner recalled in the Washington Times: “On May 3, at an event in Washington, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. did the unthinkable: He publicly revealed the identity of the special-operations unit responsible for bin Laden’s killing…”

The response came on August 6, 2011, when the Taliban shot down a Chinook helicopter in Afghanistan, killing 30 soldiers. Among the dead: 15 members of SEAL Team 6. Years later, the fallen heroes’ families remain outraged at the Obama administration: “In releasing their identity, they put a target on their backs,” one of the fathers told U.S. News and World Report in 2013.

When people can’t admit the truth

HILLARY SHOULD HAVE BEEN INDICTED.

You can find out a lot about where someone is coming from, if you ask that as a yes/no question. “Can we agree that Hillary should have been indicted?”

For people who can admit it, a mindset follows naturally:

  1. It’s OK that she lost the election. (Indeed, she shouldn’t have been running.)
  2. Which means there’s no unusual or particular reason to suspect President Trump.
  3. Of course we should look at Trump objectively, and nail him for any wrongdoing. But let’s not drag it out forever. Because he may be fine; see points 1 and 2.
  4. Comey did a bad job in 2016. He grandstanded for the cameras and usurped authority that wasn’t his, in a way that ended with Hillary not being indicted. He should have been fired sooner.
  5. It’s deeply wrong and disturbing that the Obama administration was spying on its domestic opponents, such as Trump.

For people who can’t admit it:

  1. OMG, the election was STOLEN from her!!!1!!1!!
  2. Which means Trump must be something horrible, like a Nazi Russian spy!! who secretly loves Vladimir Putin!!
  3. If we haven’t caught Trump doing anything wrong, it’s because we haven’t looked enough! Keep looking! As long as it takes to come up with it!
  4. Comey must have been fired because he was getting too close to it! Crisis!!!!1!
  5. Thank Gaia the Obama administration was spying on its domestic opponents, such as Trump!

All those toxic contortions, because the person can’t admit the key truth – that Hillary should have been indicted.

Democrats: Before and After

Hat tip Stefan Molyneux. Hillary’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, on March 2:

It’s time for [FBI Director James] Comey to remove himself from this [Russia investigation] too. His credibility is gone.

But then, later on May 9:

Twilight zone. I was as disappointed and frustrated as anyone at how the email investigation was handled. But this [President Trump firing Comey] terrifies me.

So, Comey should be gone from the Russia investigation…until he is gone? And *then* it’s suddenly terrifying?

There’s more. Hillary’s creepy campaign chair, John Podesta, on May 9:

The American public is getting mildly nauseous listening to Jim Comey

But later on May 9 (the same day):

@realDonaldTrump Didn’t you know you’re supposed to wait til Saturday night to massacre people investigating you?

It’s supposed to be a Watergate reference but, as Daily Caller notes, “President Nixon did not fire the FBI Director. The only other president to fire a head of the FBI was Bill Clinton in July of 1993…”

Molyneux lists equally drastic, sudden turnabouts from Bernie Sanders, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer and still others. By the way:

I think the Democrats continue to hit new lows.

UPDATE:

The man can tweet


UPDATE: A commenter has made a reasonable challenge in another thread: (more…)

Comey fired; Rod Rosenstein’s memo against him

…is laid out here. A few highlights:

The [FBI] Director [Comey] was wrong to usurp the Attorney General’s authority on July 15, 2016 and announce his conclusion that the case [against Hillary Clinton] should be closed without prosecution. It is not the function of the Director to make such an announcement. At most, the Director should have said that the FBI had completed its investigation and presented its findings to federal prosecutors…

Compounding the error, the Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation…we never release it gratuitously. The Director laid out his version of the facts as if it were a closing argument, but without a trial. It is a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do…

[Major Justice Department figures from BOTH parties slam Comey’s actions]

…the FBI is unlikely to regain public and congressional trust until it has a Director who understands the gravity of the mistakes and pledges never to repeat them. Having refused to admit his errors, the Director cannot be expected to implement the necessary corrective actions.

My thoughts:

  • Hillary Clinton did things for which other Americans are in jail.
  • At the time in 2016, blogs/media had rumors of numerous FBI agents saying she had better be prosecuted.
  • Something always seemed weird about Comey’s 2016 press conference, where he laid out the case for her guilt – but recommended against prosecution.
  • I always assumed that the weirdness was in her not being prosecuted, and that he had laid out her guilt as a halfway measure to prevent an internal revolt. (And I may still be right.)
  • I also see now how Comey was wrong ever to give such a press conference. He should have let Obama’s Justice Department take the heat for not prosecuting Hillary.
  • I still say that either Comey was an idiot, or he was acting to protect Obama and/or Hillary. (As opposed to the Left’s thinking that he was out to get Hillary.)
  • Glad to see Comey go. The real test will be who Trump replaces him with?

UPDATE: Breitbart thinks it has The Simple Explanation for Trump Firing James Comey When He Did.

The case for firing former FBI Director James Comey has been made at length by both Democrats and Republicans…

But why fire Comey now? The answer is simple. The day before, President Barack Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper repeated, under oath, what he told NBC News’ Chuck Todd on Meet the Press on March 5 — that he had seen no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government…

Put simply, if Trump had fired Comey while there were still serious questions about Russia, then it would have been more plausible to accuse him of trying to interfere in the investigation or cover up whatever happened. It is now clear that nothing, in fact, happened. Monday’s hearing with Clapper and former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates was meant to reveal a “smoking gun,” and produced nothing but viral videos of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)…

“Shattered” gets it half-right

I just finished Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign. We’ve been commenting on excerpts from it for weeks. This is my take on the book as a whole.

On the plus side: The subject is delicious. (Reading the story of Election Night was pure Schadenfreude.) Allen and Parnes, the authors, write fairly well. And they don’t blame “Russia, Comey and misogyny” non-stop. They report on actual flaws of the candidate and her staff, and how those flaws kept her from closing the deal with Middle America.

On the minus side: The book is overly-detailed. The authors do blame “Russia, Comey and misogyny” some of the time. In the end, they are liberals writing for liberals. They don’t admit the depth of Hillary’s flaws. For example, they never admit the genuineness of the scandals dogging her: the fact that she broke laws for which other Americans are serving jail time, that she obstructed justice, that FBI Director Comey really gave her kid-glove treatment, etc.

In short, Allen and Parnes miss the larger story of the Clintons’ corruption – and how, in 2016, half of America finally stood up to it and beat it back. Instead, they bury the reader in details about Hillary’s innumerable aides and the in-fighting that she encouraged.

Overall, I enjoyed the book. Some key ideas (probably known to you already): (more…)

Reminder: Government health care is sub-DMV health care

Talk to a leftie and you will often hear how wonderful Canadian health care is. “Why can’t we be like them?” Crowder did an expose of Canadian health care in 2009 that is still relevant:

YouTube Preview Image

Here’s the summary. Canadians pay huge taxes for “free”, “universal” health care. It makes people wait, and wait, and wait. Many people either give up altogether (and their condition gets worse), or go to a private clinic.

That’s how they reduce patients to a manageable number. Economics 101 teaches us that all goods must be rationed by one means or another, and “waiting” for people to quit the queue is how they ration Canada’s public health care.

From Crowder’s anecdotes it seems that Canadians, if they don’t quit, will wait usually about four times as long as Americans. For example, last year I went to an emergency room on a Sunday afternoon. It took 20 minutes to get the triage nurse’s attention, then another hour to see a doctor. In Crowder’s video, they visit a Canadian emergency room on a Sunday. It takes them about an hour and a half to see the triage nurse, and then 5+ hours to see a doctor (except they quit at the 4-hour mark).

Likewise, an acquaintance of mine recently needed a cancer surgery. He got it in weeks; in Canada it would have taken months. This is what Bernie and Hillary want to bring us to.

How America’s largest cities voted

Commentor TnnsNe1 did some research. Thanks! I didn’t realize, until the moment I saw it, that I had been wanting to know.

From ESPN: “If you are a city in America, you are a racist city,” (Michael) Smith stated.

So, I did a bit of research (all figures by county) on the election results. Here are the results for the 15 most populated urban areas:

NYC Clinton 82%
LA Clinton 72%
Chicago Clinton 84%
Houston Clinton 48%
Philadelphia Clinton 82%
Phoenix -Trump- 48%
San Antonio Clinton 54%
San Diego Clinton 57%
Dallas Clinton 61%
San Jose Clinton 73%
Austin Clinton 66%
Jacksonville -Trump- 48%
San Francisco Clinton 85%
Indianapolis Clinton 58%
Columbus Clinton 60%

Emphasis added (because I just didn’t see, when I first read it). We can re-order it by Clinton’s percentage:

San Francisco 85%
Chicago 84%
NYC 82%
Philadelphia 82%
San Jose 73%
LA 72%
Austin 66%
Dallas 61%
Columbus 60%
Indianapolis 58%
San Diego 57%
San Antonio 54%
Houston 48%
Phoenix under 48%
Jacksonville under 48%

Given the premise that a vote for Hillary was a vote for the worst human being in that 4-way race, my guess would be that people are

  • reasonable in Phoenix, Jacksonville, Houston, San Antonio.
  • And less so in San Francisco, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, San Jose, Los Angeles.

I’m not shocked that California has many of America’s less-reasonable people.

Finally, I must point out that this is exactly why the Framers created the Electoral College: so that America’s large cities – what with their numbers, kraziness and groupthink – would not have an overpowering influence in choosing the President (nor in the Senate).