Russian collusion hoax worse than Watergate

 I&I:

The long-delayed, much-awaited Durham report has finally dropped. And what it shows is nothing short of shocking: A conspiracy at the highest levels of our government to fix an election in favor of one candidate over another. This is not something that deserves merely a handslap or the usual Inside-The-Beltway tut-tutting. It’s a criminal act for which people should go to prison.

Just for the record, this is far worse than Watergate. And that ended Richard Nixon’s presidency, even though he neither planned nor approved of the break-ins against the Democratic Party offices in the famed Watergate Hotel. What will the perpetrators of this crime get?

The FBI launched its now-infamous “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation of alleged Russian “influence” on the Trump campaign in July 2016. The premise for the investigation was a “dossier” of information from former British spy Christopher Steele that implicated Donald Trump and several of his supporters as being improperly influenced by Russia’s government.

The only problem: The dossier was found to be false, “misinformation” of the worst kind, but nonetheless reported as the “truth” by nearly all mainstream media outlets.


Worse still, in July 2016, as the FBI got underway with its investigation, it received a Russian intelligence analysis alleging that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was plotting to distract attention from her own very real law-breaking, “her use of a private email server,” a serious. even dangerous, breach of security and a clear violation of the law.

The so-called “Clinton Plan” was hatched by the Hillary campaign “to stir up a scandal” against Trump “by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee,” the Durham report said.

In August 2016, CIA chief John Brennan even briefed President Barack Obama, then-Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey about what the Clinton campaign was doing, according to the Durham report.

But the FBI did nothing to stop a clearly illegal act from taking place. As Special Counsel John Durham himself put it, the FBI “failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law.”

What’s worse, it should have been clear to those inside the FBI’s own investigation that they were being used by Hillary’s campaign to defeat Trump. But the FBI went forward with its investigation anyway.

“Unlike the FBI’s opening of a full investigation of unknown members of the Trump campaign based on raw, uncorroborated information, in this separate matter involving a purported Clinton campaign plan, the FBI never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information,” the report said.
...

The ongoing misconduct is overwhelming and pervasive, and clearly indicates a deep state political bias on behalf of the increasingly far-left Democratic Party among FBI, CIA and Justice Department officials.

The leadership of the FBI, frankly, was corrupt in 2016 and remains so today. As for Clinton, she hatched the plan and funded it illegally out of Democratic National Committee coffers. For that blatant misuse of funds, she got a measly $113,000 fine from the Federal Election Commission.

While the FBI says it has “changed,” it is even now slow-walking the investigation into the Biden family’s corruption, though there appear to be documented payments to at least nine members of the family from foreign sources. And don’t forget son Hunter’s incriminating laptop, which the FBI pretended was a Russian hoax until it was proved otherwise.

And what about the 51 former “intelligence” officials who signed a letter attesting to the veracity of the Russia hoax? Should they be allowed to continue to cash in on their government positions even though they supported an out-and-out lie and interfered in a U.S. election for purely partisan reasons?
...

There is more.

The Democrats' response to the Durham report is also troubling.   At the hearing on the weaponization of government, they defended the abuses of the FBI and DOJ.  As a party, the Democrats embraced a lie that cost the government millions. Their politics of fraud should have consequences.

See, also:

The Russia collusion hoax: unpatriotic?

And:

 Eight Takeaways From the Durham Report

Susan Schmidt examines the highlights and lowlights of the new Special Counsel report on Trump-Russia

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