The bogus Whistleblower complaint is real election interference

William Jacobson:
A plain reading of the so-called Whistleblower Complaint supports the reporting by the New York Times and others that the complainant is in the intelligence community, likely the CIA.

It’s not so much a whistleblower complaint as a closing argument crafted by lawyers based on information the complainant never witnessed in order to create a pretext for impeachment, or at a minimum to damage Trump’s 2020 prospects.

The complainant, by his or her own account, is but a figurehead for a broader community within the government united against Trump. The Inspector General letter on the complaint noted:
“the ICIG’s preliminary review identified some indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the Complainant in favor of a rival political candidate.”

That sentence is the single most important sentence in this whole saga. The so-called whisteblower is politically hostile to Trump and favors another political candidate.

The gravamen of the Complaint and the Inspector General letter is that that Trump potentially violated the law in suggesting that Ukraine investigate alleged corruption of the Biden family in using Joe Biden’s then-position of Vice President to enrich his son, Hunter.

The notion that urging an investigation would be obtaining a thing of value or inviting interference in the 2020 election is absurd on its face. The alleged corruption took place in Ukraine. Seeking the truth of what happened is not a de facto campaign contribution to or interference on behalf of Trump, anymore than refusing to get to that truth would be a de facto campaign contribution to or interference on behalf of Biden.

Joe Biden and his son should be investigated. He has no immunity as a presidential candidate. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were investigated during the 2016 campaign. Calling for an investigation of Hillary or Trump or Biden is fair politics, not illegal election interference.

There does, however, appear to be an attempt to interfere in the 2020 election by the whistleblower and the people on whose behalf he or she was working.

This has every appearance of collective action to take down Trump, much as the upper echelons of the FBI collectively tried unsuccessfully to accomplish that mission. Kris Kolesnik, who has spend several decades addressing whistleblowers and laws to protect them, writes at The Hill:
On Thursday, former CIA officer Robert Baer suggested on CNN that the whistleblower’s efforts, together with others cited in his complaint, might reflect “a palace coup” against the president. I believe he said that before The New York Times reported that the whistleblower was allegedly a CIA officer.
Baer’s allusion was neither sinister nor fanciful. It was a well-grounded hypothesis.
I not only had a long career of dealing with whistleblowers; I also had the intelligence and national security portfolios while working in the Senate. After reading the whistleblower’s complaint, I reached a similar conclusion before I heard Baer’s remarks but with a slightly different twist.
Kolesnik’s “different twist” is that while there appears to be collective action against Trump with the complainant as the coordinator, it was justified:
I view this whistleblower group as of the same ilk. Trump would refer to them as deep staters who ratted him out. I would call them national treasures who pulled down his knickers for, literally, all the world to see.

It’s likely that this group of rats or patriots, depending on your view, was laying in wait, using their access to highly sensitive classified information to monitor Trump waiting for the gotcha moment. That moment came, for them, during and immediately after Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president, to which the complainant was not a party. It must have appeared to be a clean chance for a coup de grâce, being divorced from the politics of the failed Mueller investigation and Russia collusion.
...
This looks like a CIA based coup attempt this time.  The changing of the rules to facilitate this coup attempt also looks sinister.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more