Especially, if you’re a lawyer….

The first courtroom test for Special Counsel John Durham ended in defeat Tuesday as a federal jury found a Democratic attorney not guilty of making a false statement to the FBI about allegations of computer links between Donald Trump and Russia. The jury deliberated for about six hours before acquitting Michael Sussmann, 57, on the single felony charge he faced: that he lied when he allegedly denied he was acting on behalf of any client in alerting the FBI to claims that a secret server linked Trump and a Moscow bank with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
— Politico, 5/31/22

Since the early days of the Donald Trump campaign, transition, and term in office, we’ve all seen one constant when it comes to the Democrat Party, federal officials and employees, their activists, and their media: they lie and get away with it.

In the Sussmann case, we had an Obama-appointed judge, jurors who managed to be seated despite clear conflicts of interest, and we were all supposed to take their word that they’d be fair and impartial.

Yeah, right.

As many as three Hillary Clinton donors — including one who also supported US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — are among the prospective jurors for former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann’s trial. Special counsel John Durham’s team objected to putting one Clinton contributor on the panel after the man said he would “strive for impartiality as best I can.”

But the prosecution was overruled by Washington, DC, federal Judge Christopher Cooper, who said the man — who works in public policy for Amazon and appeared to be in his 40s — “expressed a high degree of confidence” that he could be impartial. Cooper, nominated by former President Barack Obama, also said Durham’s prosecutors could use one of its peremptory challenges to strike him from the panel for the trial, the first to result from his three-year probe into the government’s investigations of purported ties between former President Donald Trump and Russia.
— New York Post, 5/16/22

Again having to replay that stupid scenario, what if this were a trial against a Republican defendant in a red state, the judge was appointed by President Donald Trump and prospective jurors were found to have donated to his campaign. First off The Washington Post, New York Times, CNN and MSNBC would have prefaced their coverage with “conflict of interest” shrieks and demands to begin with a change of venue and dismissal of obvious biased jury members. But the legacy media most hid the partisan nature of the court proceedings so the trial result would appear on the up-and-up.

A Clinton supporter, a former bartender who appeared to be in her 20s, said she’d also donated to progressive firebrand Ocasio-Cortez (D-The Bronx, Queens) but was put on the panel after a Sussmann defense lawyer told her that neither Clinton nor former President Donald Trump were on trial and asked if she could be impartial.

“Yes, knowing that,” she said.

Yes, even though we’re talking about a culture where 51 intelligence “experts” can knowingly lie with impunity to the public, take their word for it.

Another woman, who appeared to be in her 40s, said she likely donated to Clinton’s 2016 campaign but wasn’t entirely sure.

Who could forget that?

Although the woman told prosecutor Michael Keilty that she had “a strong preference of one candidate over the other” in the election, she insisted she could be impartial.

Take her word for it.

A prospective juror who works at an engineering firm and appeared to be in her 30s said that her husband worked for Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign but was allowed to remain on the panel after saying it wouldn’t affect her ability to be impartial

Take her word for it.

Another prospective juror who works for the Sierra Club and appeared to be in her 30s was questioned by Keilty about saying on a pre-screening questionnaire that she thought the criminal justice system was racist and “the police should be defunded.”

But her ideology wouldn’t have any effect during possible deliberations in a trial involving a Democrat. And we all know the wall-to-wall second-guessing that would occur during the evening opinion shows on CNN and MSNBC had a pro-Trump juror been a parent whose child hung out with the defendant’s child.

But the reverse was allowed to happen here.

A federal judge in the criminal trial of Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann denied a prosecution request Thursday to remove a juror whose daughter plays on the same high school sports team as the defendant’s daughter.

A woman, identified as Juror #5, came forward Thursday morning to tell the court that she only recently discovered that her daughter and Mr. Sussmann’s daughter play on the same high school crew team.
— Washington Times, 5/19/22

Americans should have a reasonable expectation to a fair trial and should not have to be wary of the appearance of a clearly rigged system that favors one ideology over another, and there are takeaways we should never forget going forward….

Federal officials and employees (the deep state) lie and will get away with it.

Lawyers lie and will get away with it. On the rare occasions they’re busted, they will be sentenced with genuine leniency.

Jurors lie so they can determine preferable, partisan outcomes.

I don’t think it should have been prosecuted. There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI. It was the government’s job to prove it, and they succeeded in some ways and not in others. We broke it down, and it did not pan out in the government’s favor.
— Jury Forewoman

And Hillary Clinton remains legally unscathed but some of the stink will stick.

Hillary Clinton personally approved her campaign’s plans in fall 2016 to share information with a reporter about an uncorroborated alleged server backchannel between Donald Trump and a top Russian bank, her former campaign manager testified Friday in federal court.
— CNN, 5/20/22

As we can’t recall one instance where it’s been proven that conservative Republicans in those positions have done the same, it can rightly be concluded that liberal Democrats willfully lie in government and the legal system.

There’s your “threat to democracy”.

Nina Jankowicz is President Joe Biden’s pick to serve as executive director of the Department of Homeland Security’s new Disinformation Governance Board—and her appointment has already met with some controversy.
— Newsweek, 4/28/22

“Controversy” is an understatement.

Psaki claimed Nina Jankowicz is an ‘expert’ with ‘extensive qualifications’ to lead DHS’ Governance Board
Biden ‘disinfo’ czar Nina Jankowicz ripped over cringeworthy Mary Poppins TikTok

Yes, it was that bad….

Nina Jankowicz is a classic test case for the liberal affliction known as psychotic “projection”.

So, who exactly is Nina Jankowicz? Certainly, not a person with any concerns about preserving freedom of speech or expression. A quick look at her Twitter history is enough to dispel that. When Facebook permanently banned Donald Trump from its service, Nina was in the wings complaining that this punishment was not harsh enough. Through a metaphor, Nina explained that only mass bans on hundreds or thousands of accounts would be enough to “fix” the disinformation “problem.”
— Revolver News, 4/29/22

So, why this now? Why is Joe Biden okay with forming such an ominous-sounding agency within DHS. Knowing Joe as we all do, it CAN’T be Joe’s idea or regarding Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter. What is this really about?

Could it be between now and the midterm election, a couple of major players in the Democrat Party could be at the center of uncomfortable attention; a couple of Democrats who MUST be protected at all costs?

During a speech at Stanford University on Thursday, former U.S. President Barack Obama presented his audience with a stark choice: “Do we allow our democracy to wither, or do we make it better?” Over the course of an hour-long address, Obama outlined the threat that disinformation online, including deepfake technology powered by AI, poses to democracy as well as ways he thought the problems might be addressed in the United States and abroad.
— Stanford News, 4/21/22

The committee for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign is seeking to block Special Counsel John Durham from obtaining certain documents related to law firm Perkins Coie and its work with the campaign, the Democratic National Committee and opposition research firm Fusion GPS. Hillary For America and the DNC are the holders of the privileges at issue, according to the filing.
— Fox News, 4/29/22

Interesting how this “disinformation” topic came out of nowhere and considering how many media outlets still have egg crusts on their faces for distributing Hillary’s Trump-Russia-collusion bullshit for four-plus years that distracted a presidential campaign, hampered a transition team, and kneecapped a presidency. It had to have been green-lighted by Hillary and Obama had to have known.

John Durham knows. He just has to have every i dotted and t crossed before he certifies proof of the greatest political scandal in American history. And when that happens, all involved in the conspiracy can’t depend on the legacy media to do all the heavy lifting. They’ll need something more and this is where Nina Jankowicz comes in.

Of all the old-and-reliable useful idiots Biden (or whomever) could have appointed for this DHS gig, he chose an expendable nutcase who’ll fit nicely under the bus when she goes after anyone and everyone who reports what may be coming from the special counsel. As usual when in the company of the like-minded, people like Jankowicz feel free to tell the truth about who they are, what they want, and what they’re willing (or not) to do to get it….

President Biden’s new disinformation czar Nina Jankowicz once belted out a raunchy parody version of a Christmas song — changing the lyrics to ask who she needed to “fuck” to be “famous and powerful,” according to resurfaced YouTube footage. “I want to be rich, famous, and powerful! Step on all my enemies and never do a thing,” Jankowicz sang in the clip from 2015.
— New York Post, 4/30/22

Looks like she got what she wanted. How…? We won’t ask.

Instead of being banned from a social media cite, Jankowicz could conceivably send goons with sub-machine guns kicking in the doors of Americans who shared a post embarrassing to Joe, Barack, Hillary, and Democrats as a whole.

After all, some things take relatively small amounts of intelligence to pull off.

So while it will be formerly known as the Disinformation Governance Board, it’s really going to be Disinformation Projection Board because like most of the so-called scandals specifically blamed on President Donald Trump, it turns out the Democrat left actually did the things the accused others of doing with no accountability.

For now.

UPDATE

It would appear the bully got too much a taste of her own medicine, and like most bullies, she ran away.

The Biden administration has “paused” its controversial plans to create a Disinformation Board, causing its would-be leader to resign.

In a statement Wednesday, Nina Jankowicz, the “disinformation expert” tapped to head the panel, said that “[w]ith the Board’s work paused and its future uncertain, and [sic] I have decided to leave DHS [the Department of Homeland Security] to return to my work in the public sphere.” Jankowicz’s departure and the decision to scrap the board was first reported by the Washington Post.

Whenever a liberal claims to be “mischaracterized”, it means uncomfortable truth was made public.

Jankowicz’s idea of standing up for the First Amendment included letting “verified” Twitter users “edit” other users’ tweets if the blue-checked chosen think they’re misleading. Jankowicz also repeatedly tried to spread doubt about The Post’s own reporting about Hunter Biden’s notorious laptop, telling the Associated Press in October 2020 that it should be viewed as “a Trump campaign product.” In addition, Jankowicz pushed the since-debunked claim in 2016 that then-presidential candidate Donald Trump had a tie to Kremlin-linked Alfa-Bank, an allegation at the center of an ongoing trial of a Clinton campaign lawyer accused by special counsel John Durham of lying to the FBI.

The misinformation maven was also ripped for a bizarre TikTok performance from February 2021 in which she altered the lyrics to the “Mary Poppins” song “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” to be about fake news.
— New York Post, 5/18/22

Jankowicz probably had been working on a landing spot long before her “announcement”. She’ll be back at work creating musical, pro-Democrat misinformation soon enough. After all, it IS what Nina does best.

With the recent revelation of Special Counsel John Durham’s court filings that have pretty much, using the left’s favorite conversation-crusher, “debunked” the whole Trump-colluded-with-Russia-to-steal-the-2016-election-from Hillary fiction, the media got the official cue to look the other way in response to Tucker Carlson’s breakdown of the falsehood they (and Democrats) inflicted on Donald Trump, President Trump, his supporters and the nation for years.

Leave it to Media Matters and the predictable others to ignore the bulk and substance of the segment and possibly point to a dead guy who can’t offer any clarification or even facts.

The NYT/CNN/NBC axis flooded the zone every time Robert Mueller scratched his nose. They spent hours and hours deciphering his every sneeze. Actual criminal indictments from Durham of Hillary’s lawyer or FBI operatives — crimes that created Russiagate — barely merit an article.
— Glenn Greenwald, 2/13/22

There are many consistencies when it comes to how this whole Durham investigation is playing out. One being that whenever there’s bad news for a Republican, there’s always someone who’ll leak that damaging info to an eager liberal media to disseminate. But when there’s bad news about a Democrat, nothing is leaked and if it is, it’s downplayed by the press. Aside from court filings that are public record, there’s been enough radio silence that the media’s been able to portray Durham as much ado about nuthin’… until now.

This is also where the media has itself stuck in the proverbial box where they have to either admit they were played by Hillary Clinton, her campaign and the DNC, or they knew Donald Trump never colluded with the Russians during his 2016 campaign and throughout his term as president. The latter is probably closer to the truth and the world saw how they were all in for the pro-Hillary/Democrat narrative.

The media really can’t admit they were suckers for Hillary’s disinformation as that would place an even bigger storm cloud over their already pitiful reputation for impartiality and honesty, but alas, that appears to be the only plea they can cop. As they gaslight the world claiming to be fair and impartial, their only remaining option is to admit to being overpaid, and in some cases, multi-millionaire suckers.

They’ll claim, despite no evidence ever being found, to have relied on impeccable “sources and methods“, which we all know cannot be questioned… until this one time. They’ll claim, despite no evidence ever being found, there was no reason to believe that Hillary Clinton, her campaign, the Obama administration, the FBI, CIA, and federal employees would EVER make up such an elaborate scheme to win a presidential election and once lost, sabotage a presidential administration. They’ll claim, despite no evidence ever being found, their instincts pointed to a direction that we all now know to be incorrect and as they are human, should be willing to look past this minor blip in judgment.

Why will the media seek such forgiveness? Because it’s not over.

Most Democrats want Hillary Clinton investigated for any role in Russiagate scandal: poll

We don’t know how many people in the media have been hauled in to testify in front of Durham’s grand jury. It stands to reason that players currently under investigation may have passed on slanderous information to members of the media for rapid circulation; information known to be false yet published anyway. It’s not a crime for a First Amendment-protected journalist to distribute lies, but it sure can put a dent in a resume and public reputation to his or her employer. The chances are pretty small that so many supposedly smart people could have gotten it all so wrong, thus it stands to reason too many were happily all-in on pushing false stories on the Donald Trump they collectively hated. They had no problem amplifying falsehoods that resulted in many people having to lawyer-up and some even seeing the inside of a jail cell.

As the Durham investigation nears its conclusion, look for legacy media so-called journalists and anchors try and paint a scenario where they just may have gotten inadvertently ensnared by bad opposition research and tactics. You know, we all make mistakes and they always remind us that Americans are very forgiving people. They will soon try and demand we forgive them because they’re all we have when it comes to getting news we can trust.

Hillary Clinton waves off questions about whether she spied on Trump in 2016

Take their word for it… IF they talk about it at all.

Special counsel John Durham told a federal court that he is scrutinizing members of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign as part of his criminal inquiry into the origins and conduct of the Trump-Russia investigation.
— Washington Examiner, 12/20/21

Oh… shit.

If Hillary was in any kind of personal legal jeopardy, what card would she play? Turns out she’s been down that road before and it all worked out in the end.

FBI clears Clinton – again
In Michigan, Donald Trump called Clinton “the most corrupt person ever to seek the office of the presidency of the United States.” But the Republican nominee, who has expressed hope in the last week that the FBI’s review of new emails might yield an indictment, emphasized to his supporters Sunday that Clinton is “protected” by powerful forces.

“Well, you have to understand it’s a rigged system and she’s protected,” Trump said in Minnesota.
— CNN, 11/6/16

While the narrative will be any mention of criminality regarding Clinton is verboten, she will be justifiably and mercilessly pummeled by Donald Trump (IF he decides to run again) over the whole Steele dossier-Russia-collusion hoax and while the pro-Democrat media will shrug it off as old news, dismiss it as censor-worthy “conspiracy theory” or conveniently forget it ever happened, John Durham will not and he may start handing Hillary bad news soon enough.

So, what would be the only shield she has available to keep a very newsworthy prosecution at bay?

A run for President of the United States where any legal move against her will (again) be called a partisan ploy to deny the will of Democrat voters. It worked in 2016 so why not play that card when she needs it again against someone who could care less about the squealing of CNN, MSNBC, and New York Times bodyguards?

Let’s not forget Hillary doesn’t need the drama. Aside from a bruised ego that STILL refuses to let go of her being robbed in 2016, she’s living a relatively good life. She has stay-at-home book and podcast deals, and an assortment of potential media projects at the drop of a phone call to the 818 area code. She can drink all the Chardonnay she wants and no one sees her fall over. She knows and dreads all the personal intrusions another run for president would bring. She also knows an indifferent, politically unfettered John Durham could put a serious crimp in her financials, if not her freedom.

Hillary is Durham’s ultimate target and she knows it. “Opposition research” coordinated between her campaign and the DNC, culminating in the elaborate Russia fabrication that resulted in millions in investigations, improper warrants, targeted “process crime” prosecutions, and the smearing of a United States president still to this day, would have only been green-lighted by the candidate. Hillary Clinton was solely responsible for the deployment of that Big Lie.

So while the pundit class boisterously speculate as to the motives of yet another Hillary run for the presidency, here’s something else to consider.

Steve Bannon, a former chief White House strategist, is charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, each of which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.

Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort was sentenced to a combined 7.5 years in prison, but he was released to home confinement in May because of the health risks posed by the coronavirus pandemic in federal prison.

Roger Stone, a longtime Republican political operative who advised Trump during the campaign, was convicted of lying to Congress and obstructing its investigation into Russian election meddling and sentenced to three years in prison. Last month, Trump commuted the sentence of his longtime confidant, just days before Stone was set to report to prison.

Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser pleaded guilty in December 2017 to lying to investigators about meetings with Russians while in the White House. He cooperated with Mueller under a plea agreement.

George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, served 14 days in prison and was ordered to pay a $9,500 fine and complete 200 hours of community service.
— USA Today, 8/20/20

We know that some of these people were set up by federal law enforcement and in at least one case, documents that could have exonerated one was altered and submitted to give a false impression of guilt. The person who committed that breach of trust and federal crime is now asking for leniency so he doesn’t have to go to prison.

Kevin Clinesmith made a grievous mistake. By altering a colleague’s email, he cut a corner in a job that required far better of him. He failed to live up to the FBI’s and his own high standards of conduct. And he committed a crime. Kevin pled guilty and accepts full responsibility. He deeply regrets his conduct and apologizes to all those who have been affected—including his former colleagues, the FBI, the DOJ, the Court, the public, and his family.

Not specifically to Carter Page; the man he tried to have imprisoned by his “grievous mistake”. Now, cue the violins….

Since the inception of the government’s investigation, Kevin has been devastated personally and professionally. And the financial and emotional costs of this ordeal have had a profound impact on him and his family.

As a result of his conduct, Kevin has lost his career and professional identity. He no longer works for the FBI and his conviction likely precludes him from ever working for the federal government again, let alone in his chosen field of law enforcement and intelligence, which was his true passion since college. Moreover, Kevin has lost his livelihood. His non-attorney job prospects are also bleak. For one thing, he will likely be unable to qualify for a security clearance, which will significantly hinder his ability to obtain a private sector role relating to national security, where his skills and competencies lie. Indeed, since leaving the FBI, despite his best efforts Kevin has been unable to find work. As a result, he and his family have and will continue to suffer financially, as evidenced by their negative monthly cash flow.

Michael Flynn would probably ask Clinesmith how it feels?

A sentence that includes incarceration is therefore unnecessarily harsh because it would expose Kevin to a greater risk of severe illness caused by COVID-19. On the other hand, a sentence of probation—which would be the most appropriate sentence even if there were no pandemic—would limit the risks that COVID-19 presents to Kevin as well as prison inmates and staff.
— Sentencing memo for Kevin Clinesmith, 12/3/20

When Clinesmith altered a federal document intent on framing Carter Page, did he consider the potential prison time he be sentencing an innocent man to serve? With all the lawyering-up and the costs associated with having to defend himself, did Clinesmith consider Page had suffered enough? Did Clinesmith consider Page’s life being “devastated” and his reputation ruined?

Obviously not, as Clinesmith’s action dictated. These actions, along with the persecution of those in the Trump orbit, show that those involved with the attempted sabotage of his 2016 campaign and presidency had no inhibitions when it came to ruining the livlihoods of those they sought to attack and showed no restraint when it came to their ability to deprive the politically innocent of their freedom.

People like Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, John Brennan, James Clapper, and especially Robert Mueller (who has a documented record of intentionally sending the innocent to prison), are horrible human beings. They have no problem sleeping at night after knowing they can weaponize their personal politics and use the power of federal law enforcement to financially ruin their accused but also technically sentence some to death in prison just because they can.

Clinesmith deserves no leniency because deliberate failure to upload the laws and Constitution of the United States should be considered the callous breaking of a blood oath. Should the day ever come where the #resistance coup-plotters ever face long-overdue justice, they should be sentenced harshly, without mercy, and to the fullest extent of the law.

UPDATE

The two-tier justice system strikes again.

Former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith, 38, received the sentence of 12 months probation (and 400 hours community service) from U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg Friday during a video hearing.

Clinesmith admitted that in June 2017 he sent an altered email to an FBI agent that indicated a target of court-ordered FBI surveillance, former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, was “not a source” for the Central Intelligence Agency. The statement, passed along as the FBI was applying for a third extension of surveillance of Page, made Page’s actions seem more suspicious by downplaying his past cooperation with the CIA.

The sentencing hearing featured an impassioned speech from Page, in which the energy industry analyst complained that his life was turned upside down by the media firestorm that followed public disclosure of the fact that he was a focus of the FBI probe into potential Russian influence on the Trump campaign.
— Politico, 1/29/21

They can make the lives of Americans hell but we can’t make their lives any more uncomfortable than necessary.

Rep. Devin Nunes and other Republicans blasted the probation sentence with no prison time for ex-FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who pleaded guilty to fraudulently altering a CIA email during the FBI’s flawed pursuit of surveillance against former Trump campaign associate Carter Page.

Nunes, the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee who unearthed a host of problems with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process in the Trump-Russia investigation, told the Washington Examiner that “once again, we see a two-tiered system of justice where average Americans get investigated and imprisoned based on fake media narratives like ‘Russian collusion’ while government officials who perpetuated these abuses get off scot-free.” He added: “The FBI, DOJ, and judicial system need to regain Americans’ trust, and this absurd sentencing won’t help.”. 

Other Republicans also expressed outrage at the judge’s decision.

“This sentence is absolutely despicable,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told the Examiner.

“An FBI agent falsified evidence in one of the Bureau’s most important investigations ever and a slap on the wrist isn’t going to cut it,” Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., said in a statement.

Sasse added, “this isn’t traffic court” and argued, “America only works if the truth matters, if lying has consequences, and if public servants are held accountable for breaking the laws.”
— Washington Examiner, 1/29/21

See how it works?

A source familiar with Durham’s ongoing investigation of the bogus Russian collusion operation tells @FDRLST: “Durham isn’t doing anything. Dropping his investigations. He’s worried about blowback from Biden. What an absolute disgrace.”
— Sean Davis, Co-Founder of The Federalist Tweet, 11/15/20

It makes one wonder why there’s nothing on The Federalist website, at least as of November 16, 2020, reflecting what this latest “source” said.

This is just an opinion but yes, it would’ve been great if the “report”, indictments and/or arrests came out BEFORE the 2020 Election, but if Mr. Durham’s stubbornly meticulous results means all of those Swamp rat fucks have to drain their bank accounts for lawyers and end up going to prison, I believe that’s more important as a stark deterrent to this ever happening again.

If these people walk, it will.

President Donald Trump is a racist.

Women Reporters Unite With Weijia Jiang Against Trump’s Racist & Sexist Media Attacks

Simple and easy for the left to retain and recite.

Despite their efforts to force President Trump to respond to the Twitter explosion of #ObamaGate, the media knows exactly what’s happening and their Russia-collusion hoax is imploding, despite their best efforts for over three years, before their eyes.

It looks like President Obama ordered up phony RussiaGate scandal

They know what the newly-released transcripts of Obama-era officials reveal about the lies they said on numerous cable television programs and in print. The media knows everything we know about the misdeeds of federal law enforcement and intelligence employees bent on stopping candidate Trump from getting elected, sabotaging his Transition Team’s effort and derailing his Administration with investigations built from faulty documents and strong-arming those they were investigating.

Why Did Obama Tell The FBI To Hide Its Activities From The Trump Administration?

It can’t be said enough that none of the players involved would ever embark on these tasks without getting a nod from a superior who got a nod from a superior who got a nod on up. At some point then-President Barack Obama had to have not only known, by okay’d all of the nefarious activities now coming to light.

When asking if Obama can be held legally accountable for actions committed during his presidency, the answer is usually “no”, but let’s also not forget that that goalpost has been moved against President Trump for most of his presidency.

The Justice Department’s policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted rests on the assertion that prosecuting a president would so impair his ability to perform the duties of his office that it would amount to an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers.

Even if there are reasons to question the legitimacy of DOJ’s policy, it is unlikely to change anytime soon. Instead, it’s more important to focus on the policy’s most significant limitation and when it is lifted: whatever protection from prosecution a sitting president enjoys comes to an end when he or she leaves office.
— Just Security, 8/13/19

If the left is just waiting to pounce and arrest a future Former President Trump for everything surrounding Russian interference in the 2016 election we know didn’t happen but you can never underestimate the resolve of those who’ll never admit they bought bullshit because they really wanted it to be true.

Durham Moving Full Throttle on Russian Probe Review

There’s a possibility Former President Obama could be in legal jeopardy (the case could be made for leading a coup d’etat) and that could be why the Democrat left is so eager to try and laugh off #ObamaGate, discredit (again) Attorney General William Barr, and U.S. Prosecutor John Durham. There are no private citizens who could have been engaged in similar conduct against a sitting United States president and expect to see the outside of a prison cell for the remainder of his or her lifetime. This is the really all those involve are potentially facing and when the heat starts getting applied, some will be more than willing to rat someone out for leniency, if not immunity.

And when some of those rats start point at Obama, there’s going to be only one possible strategy left to be played; one that’s worked so well for so long: the race card. They’ll say President Trump is a racist and the very people saying it will be know liars.

This narrative has already begun and Weija Jiang is the latest useful idiot. There will be more, there always are. The only time you see them on cable news programs is when they can be used and they’ll be willing participants… for free (“exposure”), as usual.

We’re well past kitchen sink when it comes to what’s left for liberals to throw at Donald Trump but the stakes have been raised.

Michael Flynn fiasco will reveal Obama’s truth

The 2020 Election is looming, Democrats have a cringe-worthy candidate and the president who they said was the “smartest ever” may have been proven wrong because he thought he could wreck candidate Trump and depended on a President Hillary to hide the bodies. Not so smart after all and the only excuse Democrats will have is that we’ll find out the truth behind his dirty deeds ONLY because Barack Obama is half black.

Screwed up logic but consider whom we’re dealing with.

Should Donald Trump be removed from office, that would make Mike Pence the president while there’s a scenario where Nancy Pelosi could become vice president (pending nomination and confirmation); a horrifying scenario to be sure. As vice president, Pelosi would continue her bully tactics and use her leverage with a Democrat-controlled House to create and/or shut down current policy items. One such federal activity she could definitely target for immediate termination, and Democrats have every reason to do so, would be the Durham investigation.

In October, it was reported that John Durham, U.S. attorney from Connecticut was expanding the scope of his investigation, adding agents and resources, to examine the post-election timeline up to the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel in May 2017.

Hmm, no leaks….

The “investigation into the investigators” was reported to be upgraded to a criminal inquiry later that month, which gives Durham the power to impanel a grand jury and hand down indictments.
— Washington Examiner, 1/27/20

“Grand jury and serve indictments” and the expanded “investigation into the investigators” is undoubtedly what has many in and around Capitol Hill very nervous as while it was very cool to have those within President Trump’s circle investigated, incur exorbitant attorney fees resulting in harsh financial hardship (and in some cases imprisonment), the very thought of the same happening to them is something that must keep many up at night given their possible involvement in what can only be called that “soft coup d’état”.

It’s not clear how many of those involved (that we currently know of) would be willing to fall on a sword for an immediate superior but do you really think Andrew McCabe, James Clapper, James Comey, John Brennan, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok and others would be willing to rely on GoFundMe solicitations to pay for high-priced lawyers, especially when (in this case) a grand jury decision can speed up the normal process and bring a defendant straight into a federal courtroom facing hostile DOJ lawyers?

Mark Zaid, the attorney representing the Ukraine whistleblower, boasted in two recently discovered tweets of ongoing efforts to stage a coup to remove Mr. Trump: “coup has started. First of many steps. rebellion. impeachment will follow,” Mr. Zaid tweeted in January 2017. Later the same month, he tweeted: “coup has started. As one falls, two more will take their place.”
— Washington Times, 11/20/19

What the Democrats know is that the Durham investigation findings are not just another federally-produced white paper with “suggestions” that can be amplified or blown off at the discretion of the affected agencies and/or the media. High profile defendants could be frog-matched in front of international cameras and a detailed list of their possible activities would be made public for all to see and digest. Then it would be up to those defendants to absorb the cost of their defense and have to decide how far in a trial they’d want to go, OR maybe plea bargain in exchange for ratting out someone above who knew about or even ordered them to commit crimes that may include treason.

No sooner had Mr. Trump been elected than Rosa Brooks, a former Defense Department official during the Obama administration, wrote an essay for Foreign Policy magazine discussing theoretical ways to remove Mr. Trump before the 2020 election, among them a scenario involving a military coup.

Think about how many people it would take to pull that off.

In September 2018, The New York Times published an op-ed from an anonymous White House official who boasted of supposedly widescale efforts inside the Trump administration to nullify its operations and subvert presidential directives.

“Inside”….

Mr. Trump’s opponents often have praised the deep state precisely because unelected career officials are seen as the most effective way to sabotage and stymie his agenda.

So while we’re all being told that President Trump committed impeachable offenses and deserves to be removed from office months before the next election because Democrats know they can’t beat him, think about what they’re NOT talking about and probably truly fear.

A Durham report coming out before the election could have a profound effect with dire ramifications for not only those accused, but those whose fingerprints verify involvement including Fusion GPS, the Democratic National Committee, Hillary Clinton and her campaign, those within the Obama administration and maybe even former president Barack Obama himself.

The thought of a President Donald Trump, unfettered by the yoke of reelection, taking it to the very agencies, personnel and politicians who decided THEY were going to undo the 2016 and 2020 will of the people is a scary prospect indeed because Trump will show no mercy and will carry a very big book to throw at them.

And they all know it.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), a top ally of President Trump, announced Thursday morning that he will retire from Congress at the end of his term. Meadows, a four-term lawmaker who represents part of western North Carolina, said in a statement that he “struggled” with leaving what he has long considered a “temporary job.”
— The Hill, 12/19/19

Whatever the future holds for Congressman Meadows, it’ll surely be more gratifying than having to deal with the cesspool that is Washington, D.C. But for those who know of the culture of self-serving leeches the populate the Hill, one can understand why Meadows may rightfully asking, “Who needs this shit?”

The upcoming John Durham report (with possible indictments) should be scaring the crap out of the fat, happy and comfortable in the federal government cabal, but we’ve all seen how the bureaucracy circles the wagons and protects itself while cavalierly manipulates exonerating evidence to railroad those who are politically opposed to them. These people, who live very comfortable lives on the payroll or pensions, sleep well at night while dutifully destroying reputations, livelihoods, bank accounts, and expose others to possible jail time but are given safe haven to play the victim when their activities could put them into the jeopardy they’ve exposed others to.

It’s safe to say NO politician on the Republican side could endure the shit Donald Trump has had to endure. Trump knew what was coming and it’s clear he revels in the daily obstacles thrown his way on a daily basis by the Democrats, their media, and perpetually aggrieved Never Trump so-called conservatives. It could be safe to say he may even enjoy it because he’s actually proving how worthless politicians and the embedded government employees promise and are in no hurry to ever deliver.

Donald Trump is reacting to impeachment just as we have come to expect. It is all about him personally, this is a personal insult, that he’s suffered a personal injury. He is not thinking about how best to lead the nation out of this crisis. He is not thinking about healing wounds, or unifying the body politic and rehabilitate himself as president. He is seething in raw anger and wants cold-hearted “revenge” upon people he sees as his enemies.
— Daily Sound & Fury, 12/19/19

Isn’t it funny how liberals feel entitled to inflict as much damage to a Republican as they can imagine but get all bent when the cannon is aimed back at them?

In the real world outside the Beltway, businesses try to destroy their competition. This concept is not new to Donald Trump and the top dog is always the target. Impeachment can also be seen as a personal validation that he’s created an engine no Democrat will ever be able to replicate thus all crosshairs are on the leader.

President Trump has overachieved, between the historic economic numbers, record-low unemployment in all demographics and groups, foreign trade policy where Americans are the last to be screwed, NO new wars were hundreds of thousands of Americans are sent to foreign theaters with vague terms of engagement, and a border where illegal immigration numbers are declining. Trump’s communication style is not nuanced where every sentence has to be parsed, was focused grouped and distributed to friendly media outlets for safe, partisan distribution.

While he’s repeatedly called a liar by the media, the case can be made that it’s not easy having every factoid readily available when you have dozens of microphones in your face and I defy anyone reading this to assert they’d be able to be 100% accurate in everything said publicly. But this is also the same media that selectively edits, omits, and editorializes against those they ideologically despise and covers for those they fawn over, assuming the American people are too stupid to tabulate their daily inconsistencies.

Democrats are dancing in the streets over impeaching Donald Trump; some stupidly assuming that Mike Pence is now the President of the United States, requiring a basic civics lesson not provided in our annual $700 billion dollar-plus public school system.

The vote means that Trump has been “impeached” and the case heads to the Senate. Trump still serves as president. It’s up to the Senate to hold a trial and decide whether to remove him.
— The ultimate guide to the Donald Trump impeachment saga

Only Donald Trump could see the adjective of being an impeached president as a badge of honor. The results of his policies are historic and provide a contrast that no Democrat running for president can even dream of maintaining, in fact everyone knows he or she will destroy the state of the nation as it stands today. A president with these kinds of numbers will win reelection and everyone knows it. The only remaining option is to either remove or severely damage President Trump.

It’s too late for Democrats to tread carefully. They pulled the trigger on impeachment and don’t think President Trump didn’t expect this when he first considered running, winning, draining the swamp, achieving beyond all expectations, calling out the media, and the response that would be coming. He’s probably enjoying this shit, deeply flattered to the extent he’s been targeted for ultimate political destruction and can’t hardly wait to take things to the next level.

In November 2020, the Americans who’ve been dismissed by this fiasco will have their say in the process and let’s hope defeated and demoralized Democrats will be sent packing asking, “Who needs this shit?”