Sen. Richard Burr’s sale of up to $1.7 million in stocks shortly before the recent market crash was one of the lawmaker’s only market-beating trades since record keeping began eight years ago, according to a new study. On a single day, Feb. 13 of this year, Burr unloaded a significant portion of his net worth — a departure from his typically low-volume trading history.
— NPR, 4/16/20

Normally when a Republican screws up, Democrats and their media collectively demand a resignation. However, this didn’t happen to Senator Burr with the normal desire for a public head on a platter. While Burr wasn’t the only one, he and others could have been ripe for political blackmail and that just may be what’s happened….

Republican-Led Review Backs Intelligence Findings on Russian Interference
A new Senate report undercuts claims by President Trump and his allies that Obama-era officials sought to undermine his candidacy by investigating Russia’s 2016 election meddling.

More recently, Mr. Burr, who slowly pushed his bipartisan investigation forward despite calls from Mr. Trump to disband it, has come under intense scrutiny for a decision to liquidate much of his stock portfolio in February, before the coronavirus pandemic ravaged the financial markets.
— New York Times, 4/21/20

Self-proclaimed intellectually superior liberal Democrats HATE to be proven wrong, especially by Republicans, thus they never let the Mueller Report pseudo-exoneration go. They also love any opportunity to label something as “bipartisan” when damaging to Republicans and/or beneficial to Democrats. And now that the United States may finally be turning the Coronavirus corner and the economy may actually rebound prior to the 2020 Election, it’s time to bring back Russia, Russia, Russia.

The real question is whether the Obama administration and its officials held over by the new administration fabricated a tale about the Trump campaign’s complicity in Russia’s hacking. Did they peddle that tale to the FISA court while willfully concealing key exculpatory evidence? Did they continue the investigation under the guise of counterintelligence after Trump was elected, in the hope of finding a crime over which he could be impeached? Did they consciously mislead an American president about whether he was under investigation? Did they purposefully suggest in public testimony that the president was a criminal suspect, while privately assuring him that he was not one? And finally, when the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense was collapsing in a heap, did they open a criminal obstruction case — based on an untenable legal theory and facilitated by a leak of investigative information that was orchestrated by the just-fired FBI director — in order to justify continuing the probe under the auspices of a special counsel?
— Andy McCarthy, 4/22/20

With the pending results of the Durham investigations and possible indictments, be very wary of the timing of the Intel Committee’s actions providing cover for all facing possible prison time.

Mr. Durham has been interviewing intelligence analysts about the central conclusion of that 2017 report, examining whether Obama-era intelligence officials hid evidence or manipulated analysis about Moscow’s covert operation. Critics of the assessment have focused on the fact that the National Security Agency had a lower level of confidence than the C.I.A. and the F.B.I. on the conclusion that Mr. Putin supported Mr. Trump’s election.

But the Senate report, from a committee led by Republicans, could shore up the intelligence agencies’ conclusions.

So we can thank Richard Burr (and fellow Senate Intel Republicans Jim Risch, Marco Rubio, Susan Collins, Roy Blunt, Tom Cotton, John Cornyn, Ben Sasse) for giving Hillary Clinton, Democrats, and their media pundits something to talk about again through November.

And now that the next shoe to drop will be the Inspector General of the United States Department of Justice’s report on misconduct by pro-Hillary Clinton “career” Justice Department and intelligence officials that sought to frame candidate-and-now President Trump that will surely result in criminal referrals, the colluding media is now looking for a way to say that they weren’t knowingly spreading misinformation and/or Democrat talking points.

These uber-professionals in the media… were fooled.

The 35-page dossier, spiced up with tales of prostitutes and spies, sketched out a hair-raising story more than two years ago. Russian intelligence had used bribery and blackmail to try to turn Donald J. Trump into a source and ally, it said, and the Kremlin was running some Trump campaign aides practically as agents.

But the release on Thursday of the report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, underscored what had grown clearer for months — that while many Trump aides had welcomed contacts with the Russians, some of the most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove. Mr. Mueller’s report contained over a dozen passing references to the document’s claims but no overall assessment of why so much did not check out.
— New York Times, 4/19/19

Really? Could it be the partisans on Mueller’s team wanted the liberal base to believe it and Democrats on the Hill and in the media to repeat it 24/7 on cable news and major news publications?

Now the dossier — financed by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee, and compiled by the former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele — is likely to face new, possibly harsh scrutiny from multiple inquiries.

Yes, the New York Times just printed something MOST of the Democrat base still doesn’t know (thanks to the misdirections by the cable news megaphones) and by doing so, has discreetly thrown he under the bus for future road-kill consumption by carnivorous insect and mammal alike.

Attorney General William Barr has said he will review the F.B.I.’s conduct in the Russia investigation. His remark that there was “spying” on the Trump campaign has already encouraged Republican accusations of misconduct.

The fact AG Barr made that now-infamous implied allegation, it’s clear he wouldn’t have gone there if he didn’t know something. Something that’s now scaring the shit out of senior DOJ-FBI-CIA officials and the willing below them who dutifully carried out their mission to save the nation from Donald Trump.

While The New York Times and many other news organizations published little about the document’s unverified claims, social media partisans and television commentators discussed them almost daily over the past two years. The dossier tantalized Mr. Trump’s opponents with a worst-case account of the president’s conduct. And for those trying to make sense of the Trump-Russia saga, the dossier infused the quest for understanding with urgency.

This is yet another example of bias-by-omission as we all know if there was a piece of fiction written about Hillary Clinton, you’d never hear anyone from the media say the “Times and many other news organizations published little about the document’s unverified claims”. There would be Clintonistas on cable news vociferously defending on any panel slot available, any time of day or night, and hundreds of op ed contributions dropped from every willing publication pushing back at the details of such claims and the author(s) would be made an international pariah.

BUT… none of that ever happened.

After Mr. Trump emerged as the likely nominee, Fusion GPS kept working but turned to a new source of funding: the law firm representing the Clinton campaign, Perkins Coie. Noticing in May 2016 the Trump campaign’s unexpected affinity for Russia, Fusion hired Mr. Steele, a veteran of Britain’s MI6 intelligence agency, to dig deeper. Mr. Steele has told acquaintances that he did not know the ultimate client was the Clinton campaign.

Bullshit.

This is also around the time that Hillary Clinton internals showed the sickly, shrieking harpy wasn’t going to win the election, thus the need for an insurance policy to damage Trump down the stretch or even better, once he won cast real doubt on his legitimacy to serve as president.

Daniel Hoffman, a former C.I.A. officer who served in Moscow, said he had long suspected the dossier was contaminated by Russian fabrications. The goal, he said, would be to deepen American divisions and blur the line between truth and falsehood.

#FakeNews.

“How many times have hearings on Capitol Hill used information from the dossier?” Mr. Hoffman said. “How much damage has it already caused?”

The damage sadly, but expectedly, was done.

Poll shows 68% of Americans are at least moderately concerned Trump had inappropriate ties to Russia
Half of voters believe Trump campaign colluded with Russia
63 percent of Americans now believe Trump has obstructed or impeded Russia probe
Despite report findings, almost half of Americans think Trump colluded with Russia

What’s missing now, and what will be missing until the next dragged-kicking-and-screaming media moment occurs, is how much of this former President Obama knew. As we’ve been told hundreds of collective times during his eight years in office was how smart Obama is. If that’s the case either he knew and that was bad, or he had a bunch of rogue law enforcement officials conducting a silent coup behind his back, and the fact he didn’t know that was happening was worse.

Again, the ONLY reason we know as much as we know is because Hillary lost. Had she won the presidency, federal government agencies would have seemingly perfected their weaponization against Republicans, it would have happen again anytime a Democrat candidate felt threatened, and the American people would never know an unelected select few would have more power over us than we’d ever imagine.

And let’s not forget what else this will reveal, right Great Britain?