The FBIs out of touch search of Trump's home

 Margot Cleveland:

What was the FBI thinking when it raided former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home on Monday? The possibilities are plenty, but none paint a pretty picture.

No matter the underlying purpose of the raid, one must wonder why none of the higher-ups in the FBI or the Department of Justice put the brakes on a search of the home of a former president of the United States — an event universally described as a modern crossing of the Rubicon.

How could the DOJ and FBI not anticipate the visceral reaction a broad swath of America would have to the Biden administration’s DOJ initiating a raid against a former commander-in-chief and the Democrat’s main political opponent? And how could government agents think securing a warrant would provide them cover?

Simply put, FBI headquarters couldn’t anticipate any shock or horror over the search because none of the many FBI agents who were willing to speak up had any qualms about the move. Rather, with FBI headquarters systemically politicized, the decision-makers likely heard no dissenting opinions, and the echo of their own leftist right-think rendered them oblivious to how middle America would react to a search of the residence of the former president.

And, significantly, that is how the public saw the raid — as a search of a former president’s home, not as a raid of Trump’s house. The DOJ and FBI likely also figured that the 50 percent of Americans who have a distaste for Trump wouldn’t care what happened to him. They were wrong.

To the extent the DOJ and FBI believed obtaining a search warrant from a federal judge would assuage the public’s concerns and assure them of the righteousness of the search, they miscalculated there too. By operating from the cocoon of fellow travelers who failed to take genuine offense in the FISA court’s abuse of Carter Page, the D.C. operators were likely blindsided by the public’s refusal to defer to a court’s judgment.

Coupling the previously proven FISA court abuse with the spectacle of a raid on a former president’s home, Americans of all walks of life responded with outrage, and it seems likely FBI headquarters did not anticipate that reaction.

While the FBI likely did not anticipate outrage over the Mar-a-Lago raid emanating from the center and even the left, the bureau surely foresaw the move angering Trump supporters. One must wonder if that goal served a second (intended or otherwise) purpose of the raid, with the FBI hoping to prompt large and angry protests.

With many Trump-backed candidates prevailing in midterm elections, the Democrats needed to return the former president and his supporters to pariah status. What better way than to raid his house and prompt an outburst?

After months of the Jan. 6 show trial framing ordinary conservatives peacefully rallying in D.C. as complicit in the violence that occurred at the Capitol, any Trump-related protest will play as fomenting violence. And the media cartel will be all too willing to convert conservative rallies into “mostly violent protests” no matter how peaceful they are.

Nor would it be beyond the FBI to target true anti-government extremists and entice them to engage in violence, with the corrupt press then convincing the country they represent conservatives. Such a theory might seem farfetched, but a jury already found that the FBI had entrapped at least two innocent Michiganders, using a paid FBI informant to induce them to plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
...

The FBI looks politicized and out of touch from the top down.  They are quickly losing the confidence of at least half the country and this raid on Mar-a-Logo puts the icing on the cake.  If they thought it would lead to Trump's demise with votes they appear to be grossly mistaken. 

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

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more