He's ridiculous.
For real.
That's what's on page 203 of the IG report, according to Samantha Chang writing for Biz Pac Review.
“The OPA (Office of Public Affairs) Supervisor said that he later learned that former President Clinton’s Secret Service detail had contacted Lynch’s FBI security detail to let them know that the former President wanted to meet with Lynch. Although Lynch’s staff was supposed to receive notice of such 204 requests, witnesses told us that they were not informed of the request from former President Clinton.”A lot more damaging details surrounding that fateful meeting at the link.
That was June, 2016. Same time of year as now. As yet I haven't heard anyone mention you have to be insane to fly a private jet into Phoenix in late June to play golf. On its face it's a lie. Juno maybe, Phoenix no. They're such casual liars.
13 comments:
A few points here
YMMV
1 I think Trump is letting the case build. People like Sharyl Atkisson and Tammy Bruce are saying there's a lot that's damaging within the IG report. these are a couple of women who know their stuff. Most people stopped at the Executive Summary (kind of like the difference between CS and CIS).
2 After the election, there will be a lot fewer Whigs and a lot more Trumplicans.
3 Trump is the final arbiter of what happens when. If he tells Sessions to make out the indictments, get ready for a lot of perp walks.
4 On the day the Bastille fell, all King Louis wrote in his diary was that the hunting was lousy. Strook (or whatever his name is), Rosie, and the rest are cocky.
Now.
Wow.
Not a peep out of the news media.
Some things we can't do:
--let elected officials break the law without holding them responsible.
--prosecute the losers of elections.
It's a true dilemma. Which has worse consequences? Since we already allow celebrities and politicians to slide by, giving Hillary a pass is probably the lesser of two evils (it's remarkably hard to type that phrase). There was a window of opportunity to hold her accountable for her actions, and Comey shut that window as fast and hard as he could. Hillary's cronies are still vulnerable, but I'd wager she counted on getting a pass if she could make it to election day--regardless of the outcome.
It's a tough pill to swallow, but there's theory and reality, and I honestly think the reality is that she'll never be tried, let alone convicted, for anything. Then again, Trump's pulled off some impressive long shots already, so I'll be the first to cheer him if he can figure out a way to get at her. (I seriously doubt he wants to do that.)
Who’s worse, Slick Willie or Lick Swillie?
Sincere and serious question: Is this blog now written by only Cbip Ahoy?
They are brazen liars because they assumed they would never be questioned. Hillary would win and this would never be spoken of ever again.
If I recall correctly, we wouldn't even know about this tarmac meeting if some civilian at the airport hadn't seen it happen in the first place.
Where's Juno?
Oops!
I agree windbag that it is poor form to prosecute the losers. However, I think a case is building for prosecuting abuse of authority retained prior to and after the election.
Someone on the left came out a month or so ago complaining that this persecution of Trump election staffers was bad. The claim was it set a precedent that anybody supporting a campaign could be fair game for opposition research and having their life destroyed. He made good points, but nobody cared. They'll care if lower level supporters of Hillary's campaign, who also had key roles in government regardless of the winner, are put in jail.
The "not a peep In the news media" is the bigger story.
This was known well before the IG report was issued. What's unclear is exactly when it happened. If it happened on the tarmac moments before the meeting it's not a big deal. If it happened before Lynch landed it is.
The IG report doesn't say and the IG doesn't seem to have been too interested in finding out:
"The OIG considered but decided not to interview the head of Lynch’s FBI security detail because of concerns that requiring a member of the Attorney General’s
security detail to testify about what he observed in the course of conducting his official duties could impair the protective relationship and because the security concerns raised by the head of the security detail in his email were not a focus of this review."
Prosecuting the losers v. Defenestrating the deep state
It's a fine line and at this point I'm okay if that line gets a little blurred occasionally. Because from the IRS treatment of Tea Party groups to old school partisan witch hunts (Scooter Libby conviction), the left has always been the one to push the power means right envelope. I recall reading that the Russia story originally developed to persecute Trump after he lost. Clinton should be in prison. So should Obama but that's not realistic so I'd settle for Clinton. It's not going to happen but at least give some of her flying monkeys (Comey) something to ponder.
BTW, a few weeks ago there was some talk of Comey running for President. Probably because he thinks that'll get him a free pass out of prison.
Post a Comment