by baldilocks

After previously denying it, James Clapper admitted that the FBI “might have been” spying on the Trump campaign.

Real Clear Politics:

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told CNN’s Don Lemon Thursday night that the president’s claim that the Obama administration spied on his campaign is “hyperbole” but if it is true, it is a “good thing.”

“They [the Obama admin’s FBI] may have had someone who was talking to them in the campaign, but, you know, the focus here… is not on the campaign, per se, but what the Russians were doing,” Clapper said.

But if there was an intelligence agent “observing” the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russia, “that’s a good thing because the Russians posed a threat to the very basis of our political system.”

If true? He doesn’t know? Yeah, okay. Clapper was Obama’s DNI.

Yesterday, Sharyl Attkisson pointed out that the corruption in our intelligence agencies long precedes the existence of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

These intelligence shenanigans aren’t new to anyone who has read Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA.

It has been a number of years since I read it, and, at 702 pages, the hardback version definitely qualifies as a tome. However, I read it, courtesy of the Los Angeles Public Library, very rapidly due to great and building amazement. And by amazement, I mean horror.  This entity of the government, allegedly dedicated to our security, is and has always been a failure. Or at least that’s what I thought at the time.

Now that I have become more cynical and more paranoid, it seems to me that the agency, the OSS(the CIA’s World War II incarnation) and all the other investigative arms of the government — including the longer-standing FBI — have been very successful at doing what they were created to do.

The CIA and all of the other intelligence agencies exist to Keep the Gates. Gathering them all under the DNI banner made that easier, or so it seemed.

But their gates aren’t the same gates as our gates. That is certain.

What a waste.

RELATED: The CIA’s Long List of Failures

UPDATE: Confirmed: John Brennan Colluded With Foreign Spies to Defeat Trump

An article in the Guardian last week provides more confirmation that [President Obama’s Director of Central Intelligence] John Brennan was the American progenitor of political espionage aimed at defeating Donald Trump. One side did collude with foreign powers to tip the election — Hillary’s.

Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, Brennan teamed up with British spies and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Hillary supporters, to spy on Trump and his people.(…)

The Guardian story is written in a style designed to flatter its sources (they are cast as high-minded whistleblowers), but the upshot of it is devastating for them, nonetheless, and explains why all the criminal leaks against Trump first originated in the British press. According to the story, Brennan got his anti-Trump tips primarily from British spies but also Estonian spies and others. The story confirms that the seed of the espionage into Trump was planted by Estonia. The BBC’s Paul Wood reported last year that the intelligence agency of an unnamed Baltic State had tipped Brennan off in April 2016 to a conversation purporting to show that the Kremlin was funneling cash into the Trump campaign.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar for his new not-GoDaddy host!

Or hit Juliette’s!

The FBI has a long history of errors, miscalculations, and outright failures that make the current allegations almost pale by comparison.

As a young journalist, I trekked back and forth through the FBI “cordon” around Wounded Knee in 1973, where Native American activists had taken over the site in South Dakota of a famous massacre of Indians by federal troops

DaTech3.jpgA few years later, I wrote about the virtual execution of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, two Black Panther leaders in Chicago. The duo had been a target of the FBI failed counter-intelligence program of radicals in the 1960s and 1970s.

The Counter Intelligence Program, known as COINTELPRO, was a series of covert and at times illegal, projects conducted by FBI and aimed at domestic political organizations. The program, initiated by Director J. Edgar Hoover, attacked anti-Vietnam organizers, activists of the Civil Rights movement or the Black Power movement, feminist organizations, and others. The program was responsible for the famous recordings of Martin Luther King’s private life.

The murders of Hampton, the deputy chairman of the party, and Clark occurred in a shootout with Chicago police and the FBI. The house where the Black Panthers were staying had nearly 100 rounds of incoming bullets and only one outgoing. Although the City of Chicago coroners ruled the action as justifiable, a court ordered the government to pay nearly $2 million to the families.

But there’s far more than my personal experience with the bureau.

Ruby Ridge, near my birthplace of Boise, Idaho, ended with the death of the son and wife of Randy Weaver and an eventual big cash settlement. The siege started over Weaver’s failure to appear for a firearms charge in 1992.

More important, the rise of the militia movement happened as a direct result of the confrontation. The incident was so poorly handled that the FBI agent-in-charge was sentenced to 18 months in prison for obstructing an investigation into the FBI’s incompetence.

The 51-day confrontation with the Branch Davidians ended with 76 people dead in 1993 in Texas in an ill-conceived assault that led to a massive fire. Again, the incident added fuel to the militia fire.

The FBI and other law enforcement officials failed to understand the significance of Ruby Ridge and Waco to a growing militia movement, which ultimately led to the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. So much so that the FBI initially thought Oklahoma City was carried out by Middle Eastern terrorists.

I’m not saying that domestic surveillance was inappropriate, but the illegality of some of the FBI’s actions was extensive. Also, I am not saying Hampton, Clark, Weaver, and others were choir boys. But the use of force was more than excessive.

The FBI had some success in the 1980s and 1990s in bringing down the Italian Mafia, although it took four trials to send John Gotti, the leader of the Mob in New York, to jail. Moreover, a variety of other ethnic groups filled the vacuum.

In the buildup to 9/11, the FBI, like many other agencies, failed on numerous opportunities to foil the attack.

Although the CIA may have been primarily responsible for the failure to realize the deadliness of the blind sheikh, Omar Abdel-Rahman, the FBI didn’t adequate investigate his New Jersey mosque, which provided the foot soldiers for the 1993 attack against the World Trade Center.

I crossed paths with him during the uprising in Egypt that eventually led to the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1981. Everyone in Egypt knew he was a dangerous man and terrorist agitator.

Nevertheless, Abdel-Rahman was issued a tourist visa to visit the United States by the the U. S. embassy in Sudan despite his name being on a terrorist watch list. He even obtained a green card. He ultimately was convicted of conspiracy for his involvement in several terrorist attacks and died in prison.

Furthermore, the FBI failed to recognize the analysis put forward by John O’Neill, who consistently pressed for more cooperation between agencies in fighting al-Qaeda. He was passed over for promotion and eventually took a job as head of security for the World Trade Center, where he died during the 2001 attack.

His story is told in The Looming Tower, a brilliant book about the failures of 9/11, and the subject of a recent television series.

Although there are many dedicated FBI personnel, the agency has not been a shining example of excellence. That’s why it’s not that surprising the FBI is facing yet another round of investigation into errors of judgment.

Here are a few other mistakes: https://www.ranker.com/list/top-10-greatest-fbi-fails-of-all-time/autumn-spragg

by baldilocks

When Barack Obama was president of the United States of America, I was afraid, but not of Obama the individual. Neither his party, nor his ideology – mundane Leftism – nor even his spiritual beliefs whether it was Black Liberation Theology or crypto-Islam or covert atheism – were fear-inducing to me.

I was afraid of what his candidacy and, subsequently, his presidency represented.

There are lists and lists of the former president’s violations of the US Constitution, but those are mostly gratuitous to my point. There was, however, one specific indicator of the underworld — the underlying representation — showing itself very early on. Remember this?

After writing twice about the deliberate decision by the Barack Obama campaign to avoid validation checks on credit-card contributions [via the campaign website], I’ve heard from a number of people in the credit-card industry on how this works. Two explanations in particular explain the depth of deliberation and deception involved in disregarding address and security-code verification. The first explains that Team Obama probably didn’t just opt out of using these verification processes, but more likely rewrote the code on their site to bypass them.

That was during the 2008 campaign. It worked so well that the reelection campaign did it again in 2012. Of course, the most of the mainstream media entities yawned about it. But that’s still not the point.

The point is that VISA, Mastercard, etc. ignored it.

These conglomerates were willing to do anything, including allowing their own safeguards to be bypassed, to get Barack Obama into the Oval Office. Because they could. Because what are you going to do about it?

So, when that level of political and financial fraud gets ignored, is it really a surprise that the same partisans got cocky with this Steele dossier?

This kind of thing will happen again, you know, regardless of party label. Because they can. Because what are you going to do about it? That last part is especially relevant. Such fraudsters know that there will be no real legal ramifications for this, though there may be some scapegoats. I predict that, for this episode of Who Runs The World, the scapegoat will be Peter Strzok. And like a good spear-carrier, Strzok will let it happen.

I feel as though we have been living in a house infested with termites for decades. Centuries? It has to be God’s grace that keeps it standing.

The good news? I’m not afraid anymore because I know who really runs things.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB: Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!

by baldilocks

Filling in today for Fausta.

The latest revelations about the FBI may feature Donald Trump, but they are not really about him. What they are about: deep corruption. Foundational rot. Pride. Hubris. The list is endless and ugly.

Roger L. Simon:

Suppose what many are now suspecting is completely true — that the FBI, or parts of it, exonerated Hillary Clinton and her cohorts with a mock investigation, attempted to swing our presidential election against Donald Trump and then continued to undermine the new administration after they had won with illegitimate claims of Russian collusion orchestrated by sleazy political lowlifes? (…)

How do we deal with the dishonesty of our officials and bureaucrats when those same people are the keepers of our secrets and the enforcers of our laws (both of which are related)?  When is transparency necessary?  When is secrecy justified? Who will watch the watchers? Are the congressional oversight committees enough?  Do they have sufficient power?

There are several options, all of which are unnerving. We let the agency, subordinate to the Department of Justice, take out its own trash – something that it is manifestly unwilling to do. We clamor to our elected legislative officials to act – something which most of them do not possess the stones to do. And there are other more frightening options.

Clearly, however, the FBI and all the other federal agencies are, in my opinion, fundamentally transformed or, in the case of the CIA, born corrupt.

Used to be that such musings were tarnished as babblings from crazy conspiracy theorists.

Not so theoretic anymore.

Democrats, you should be angry about this, too. It could happen to a Democrat president. In fact, it probably already has.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB: Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!

There’s was piece at CNN concerning the compromising of the FBI in the attempt to take down that is so good that one is shocked that it appeared at the site:

McCabe remains a very important figure in the unfolding Mueller investigation; the latest reports arethat McCabe may be a key witness backing Comey’s claim that the President had improperly asked him to terminate the Flynn investigation. McCabe’s credibility, however, may now be compromised by the facts and circumstances regarding Strzok’s text messages, the meetings in “Andy’s Office” and the political contributions given to McCabe’s wife.
While I rarely agree with much of what the President does or says regarding legal issues, this time he’s got it right. The FBI’s reputation has been severely damaged not by the President’s criticism but by a systematic failure of the bureau’s leadership.
The story which lays out the evidence is something but the story behind the story as reported by the Conservative Treehouse is even more interesting:

Mr. Callen broke the cardinal rule, he actually did some investigating of the claims he was criticizing.  To CNN’s horror, Paul Callen came away from his research with an evolved and informed position that Trump was right, and his detractors were wrong.

Callen appeared on a CNN segment with Poppy Harlow to discuss his findings on Wednesday December 27th.  At the very end of the segment an obviously uncomfortable Ms. Harlow told viewers they could read Mr. Callen’s Op-Ed for themselves and decide.

Except, there was a problem.  CNN never published the Op-Ed.  However, two days after the interview, around 8:26pm tonight (Friday), the op-ed appears.

Now think about this.  You have CNN having an expert look at a matter, their expert writes an op ed on the subject and goes  on the air and discuses his findings, and it a full two days after the on air interview from one of their regular hosts before they put it up?

And people wonder why CNN gets called fake news.

Three cheers to the Conservative Treehouse for being on top of this, and all things Trump this year for that matter.  If only CNN did as well.

**************************************

If you’d like to continue to support independent journalism, the type that covered the swatting stories when CNN didn’t please consider hitting DaTipJar here.



Consider subscribing.  If we can get 92 more subscribers at $20 a month I can do this full time without worry.


Choose a Subscription level


Finally might I suggest my book  Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer makes an excellent Gift.

By John Ruberry

Manhunt: Unabomber, is an engrossing eight-episode Discovery Channel mini-series, which is also available on Netflix, that dramatizes the search for the man dubbed the Unabomber by the FBI, Ted Kaczynski.

Sam Worthington, best known for his starring role in Avatar, stars as James “Fitz” Fitzgerald, the FBI profiler and linguist who connects what became known as the Unabomber Manifesto to writings by serial bomber turned into the FBI by Kaczynski’s brother, James.

The Unabomber’s attack spree began with the explosion of a device that caused minor injuries in 1978 at Northwestern University and ended the fatal attack with a much more sophisticated bomb that killed a timber industry lobbyist in California in 1995. Two other people were murdered by Kaczynski’s bombs, several more were permanently maimed.

Shortly after the murder of he lobbyist, in what the still-unidentified Kaczynski later dismissed as a prank, he threatened to blow up a jet airliner. Ten months later Kaczynski was arrested in his primitive cabin Montana after a search warrant was issued that was based largely on the FBI’s linguistic analysis. Inside the cabin loads of incriminating evidence was discovered, including a bomb ready to be mailed.

FBI sketch of the Unabomber

Paul Bettany portrays the former mathematics professor in an appropriately enigmatic fashion. Is Kaczynski, who is serving six life sentences at the “Supermax” prison in Colorado, an evil man? Or is he a deeply troubled genius trying to find the elusive balance between creativity and madness, in a manner reminiscent of Vincent van Gogh’s struggles?

Manhunt explores Kaczynski’s youth in the blue collar southwest Chicago suburb of Evergreen Park. A social misfit, Kaczynski was double-promoted in elementary school but, as his Manhunt character says, “I was still the smartest one in my class.” Entering Harvard at 16, Kaczynski was mentally tortured in cruel experiments conducted by psychiatrist Henry Murray (Brian d’Arcy in the series). In this statue-razing era, I say if there is one of Murray standing somewhere, tear it down now.

Kaczynski gets into the head of Fitzgerald in his many jailhouse interviews with him. But there’s a problem here. This is a dramatization of the Unabom story–there were no meetings between the two. Here’s another: the linguistics professor with whom the married Fitz has a soft romance with in the series, was in real life a man.

Abandoned rail line north of Chicago

On the other hand, Kaczynski gets into the heads of viewers, or at least this one. My degree of separation with the Unabomber is three. A friend of mine who lives in Lombard, Illinois, where Kaczynski’s parents moved to around 1970, used to have coffee at the home of his parents. “A nice and sweet old couple,” she told me. They never mentioned anything about their sons to her. Just a couple of blocks from the Kaczynski’s modest frame house in Lombard is the Illinois Prairie Path, which was constructed in the late 1960s, it was the first trail in America created from an abandoned rail line. After the terrorist’s arrest and conviction, I mused while running on the Prairie Path that perhaps he was inspired by the pastoralization of the old Chicago, Aurora & Elgin Railway. Perhaps post-industrial society was that not far away, Kaczynski may have reasoned. He lived with his parents in Lombard for a while in the 1970s.

“The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race” is the opening sentence in the Unabomber Manifesto. A few paragraphs later he adds, “We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system.”

Bettany’s Unabomber is a bit too sympathetic of a portrayal for me. Missing are the cold-blooded journal entries recounting his bombings, including one described as “excellent.” In another recounting, Kaczynski expressed “no regret” that his last murder victim was not his intended target.

“People with advanced degrees aren’t as smart as they think they are,” Kaczynski mockingly wrote to one of his victims who was severely wounded by one of his bombs. “If you’d had any brains you would have realized that there are a lot of people out there who resent bitterly the way technonerds like you are changing the world and you wouldn’t have been dumb enough to open an unexpected package from an unknown source.”

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit and he is a native of Chicago’s southwest suburbs.

You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.

1 Samuel 12:12

One of the things that has confused me since the days following the election has been the MSM and the left’s 24/7 all hitting Trump all the time business.

I understood the shock but the simple fanaticism of the attacks non stop confused me in it’s idiocy.

Now I get it.

And why did the story break when it did? Credit the much-maligned Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. The California Republican has been pursuing the dossier more aggressively than anyone else, and it was his Oct. 4 subpoena for the bank records of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that handled the dossier, that finally shook loose the information.

But knowing that the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and Perkins Coie supported the dossier is not the end of the story. The most important next step is the FBI.

Sometime in October 2016 — that is, at the height of the presidential campaign — Christopher Steele, the foreign agent hired by Fusion GPS to compile the Trump dossier, approached the FBI with information he had gleaned during the project. According to a February report in the Washington Post, Steele “reached an agreement with the FBI a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him to continue his work.”

It was an astonishing turn: the nation’s top federal law enforcement agency agreeing to fund an ongoing opposition research project being conducted by one of the candidates in the midst of a presidential election. “The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican nominee for president in the run-up to the election raises further questions about the FBI’s independence from politics, as well as the Obama administration’s use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends,” wrote Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

This is why the left went all in the day after the election, why pressure was put on Jeff Sessions to recuse himself so a special prosecutor could be appointed and why Rep Nunes was target one from day one, because once if it was revealed that the FBI and other federal agencies were used by a Democrat administration to target their political foes at the highest level it (combined with the Weinstein revelation) has the potential to completely and utterly break these people both politically and legally. And even the MSM is starting to figure this out.

I knew the Obama/Clinton machine was corrupt but even I didn’t realize how bad it actually was

I think what we are going to find out over the next year is going to be amazing but there is one thing I’m now sure of.

Donald Trump may or may not make America great again but there is no question anymore that his election saved this country.

by baldilocks

Remember this?

Omar Mir Seddique, also known as Omar Mateen, was an American mass murderer who killed 49 people and wounded 58 others in a mass shooting at the Pulse gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, on June 12, 2016. He had been interviewed by the FBI three times and was on their radar because he had made comments sympathetic to terrorists and attended the same Florida mosque as a suicide bomber named Moner Abusalha, who had gone to Syria to blow up Syrian government soldiers in 2014.

When asked why Mateen was dropped from the FBI list, [Former FBI Director James] Comey indicated that the FBI’s concerns about Mateen were eased after a witness told the bureau that Mateen got married, had a child and found steady work.(…)

Likewise, the Boston Marathon terrorists, the Tsarnaev brothers had been investigated and the FBI had even received warnings from Russia of a possible terror attack. NBC reported: In March 2011, the FSB, the Russian intelligence agency that arose from the remnants of the KGB, sent a cable to the FBI with its concerns about Tamerlan Tsarnaev and the Tsarnaev family. (…)

The letter was a page and a quarter long and very detailed. It included contact information, with addresses and phone numbers, for many of the members of the Tsarnaev family, including Tamerlan and his mother . . . .in June 2011. The FBI investigation of Tamerlan Tsarnaev was closed. According to the report, “the assessment found no links to terrorism.”

Remember the Fort Hood terrorist, Col. Nidal Hasan? An FBI-run terrorism task force knew last December that Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, sent 16 e-mails to Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric in Yemen who supports violence against the West.

When the Fort Hood Shooting and the Boston Marathon Bombing—and 9/11–occurred, Robert Mueller was the FBI director. Could be a coincidence, but consider this 2008 report by Rowan Scarborough:

[The Council on American-Islamic Relations] trains FBI agents across the country on Islam and how to treat Muslims. CAIR’s archived press releases show numerous instances of CAIR representatives training the FBI, as well as the Marine Corps, local law enforcement and government employees.

The FBI severed formal ties with CAIR back in 2009, but the camel’s nose—in the form of a corporate mindset—seems to have remained inside the tent for a few years afterward. Is it still there?

There’s a new acting director, of course (Andrew McCabe), and a new nominee for the position, Christopher Wray. But changing leadership is easier than changing the course of a bureaucratic culture. (It seems to me that the FBI’s present state is the result of a process implemented long before Donald Trump or even Barack Obama.) Also to be kept in mind, the FBI is a cog in the National Intelligence wheel.

There are many who claim that our government has been intentionally infiltrated by those who long to implement fundamental change, whether that change is moral, social and/or spiritual. Our most recent former president was more open about his desire to shake the foundations of this country and, to a certain extent, he was successful. But he didn’t start that fire; he only kept it kindled.

Can Trump Administration can throw water on it?  Time will tell. And, I suspect that much of the Organized Left’s present tactics are intended to distraction the Administration from getting down to this serious business.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!

I paraphrase, but here’s the transcript from last night’s Tucker Carlson show, where Brit Hume asked an excellent question,

Emphasis added (starting at 3:05 into the video, link via Real Clear Politics):

BH: There’s one other thing worth mentioning here — that the FBI director also said in an answer to the question that he had found no evidence, no information pointing to a wiretap of Donald Trump or of Trump Tower. No evidence of that. However, what about this investigation that’s been going on since July of the Trump campaign and Trump associates?

TC: Great question!

BH: Are we not to believe there is no surveillance associated with that? We do know, as you pointed out, that Mike Flynn was caught up in a wiretap. That may be a routine wiretap of the Russian ambassador to whom he was speaking. But who knows?”

“And when he made this announcement, Comey, that there was this investigation going on, which he said he received permission from higher up to do this announcement — there was a story back on January 19 in The New York Times, which basically laid this whole thing out and said it was based on surveillance that indicated there had been these contacts. That story also said it wasn’t clear that the wiretaps turned up anything about the Trump campaign. So, we kind of don’t know where we are. And remember this — this is also supposedly a counter-intelligence investigation, which that means it is basically national security matters. So, what’s up with that? I mean what’s that tell us about how likely they are to find about Putin or collusion? One wonders.”

TC: You just made the point of the month, if not year. If there was an investigation, and there was, there was surveillance.

And we wait for Congress to demand an answer to that question.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz posts on U.S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog

Today, the DoJ entered the fray to put an asterisk next to Donald Trump’s Presidency. They announced that they’re investigating the FBI for their pre-election actions. As you may recall, FBI Director James Comey was the first scapegoat offered up by the Democrats about why they lost so badly.

According to The Blaze:

The inspector general’s office at the Department of Justice announced Thursday that it will investigate the FBI’s probe into Hillary Clinton’s emails during her time as secretary of state, as well as FBI Director James Comey’s decision to send a letter to Congress stating that the bureau was reopening its case involving the Democratic nominee for president just days before the Nov. 8 election.The inspector general’s office at the Department of Justice announced Thursday that it will investigate the FBI’s probe into Hillary Clinton’s emails during her time as secretary of state, as well as FBI Director James Comey’s decision to send a letter to Congress stating that the bureau was reopening its case involving the Democratic nominee for president just days before the Nov. 8 election.

It’s been over two months since their devastating losses and we’re still seeing liberal publications scratching their collective heads. They simply cannot comprehend that Americans could say no to their agenda that they believe has worked out so wonderfully the last eight years. As a result, they’re doing everything in their power to make it appear as if they were robbed rather than accepting that their message simply isn’t resonating.

They’re looking for as many bogeymen as they can find to attach to Trump’s Presidency. They want this to be an unmitigated disaster from day one, so they’re employing jamming and propaganda techniques to force that perspective onto the American public. This, more than anything else, is why BuzzFeed did what they did.  They intend to beat all of Trump’s horses, living or dead, until a majority of Americans believe that they’ve made a terrible mistake.

DC politicians are working behind the scenes to do the same thing. There are questions that the DoJ rightly needs answered by the FBI, but those questions can be done privately and without a full blown investigation. The reason they’re taking it as far as they are is simply a well-timed statement to the public. In essence, they’re saying, “In the midst of this Russian problem, don’t forget that Trump had help on the inside as well.”

Their plan would actually be quite entertaining if it were put into a fictional realm. Imagine the story line (read in a deep movie-trailer-guy voice): “They thought they had the perfect plan to rule the most powerful nation on the planet, but they got trumped. Now, the Democrats have a plan to wreak havoc on the political system and teach the people once and for all that the left is right. No one is safe. No action is too disgraceful. In 2017, they’re out for blood and they’ve got nothing left to lose.”

The Democrats aren’t trying to gain more power or affect public policy. They want one thing: retribution. Their actions are designed to make as many Americans as possible regret their choices in 2016. This year is going to be about making us feel bad so they can feel better about themselves.