Donna Brazille
via twitter

Timon: Let me get this straight. You know her. She knows you. But she wants to eat him. And everybody’s okay with this?

The Lion King 1994

Over at Yid with Lid old friend Jeff Dunetz writes about an interesting bit from Donna Brazile’s book:

According to Philip Rucker of the Washington Post who obtained an early copy of the book, after her 9/11 fainting episode, Brazile considered replacing Clinton and Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine, with then-Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

Brazile writes that she considered a dozen combinations to replace the nominees and settled on Biden and Sen. Cory Booker (N.J.), the duo she felt most certain would win over enough working-class voters to defeat Republican Donald Trump. 

Now it’s worth noting (as legal insurrection points out) that there were a lot more Clinton health episodes then this which prompted this discussion but from this quote alone two things jump out at me both pretty obvious, one minor one major.

The minor thing:  Why would you consider replacing Tim Kaine over Hillary Clinton’s fainting spell?  Kaine was duly nominated and approved as the Democrat Party VP pick.  No amount of sickness on Hillary’s part has anything to do with him.

Now granted the replacement of Kaine would likely not have raised much of a fuss, except perhaps in some parts of Virginia but still it seems odd to me and a violation of rules.

The Kaine business is interesting but the real major question is this:

Why would you replace an ill Hillary Clinton with Joe Biden who choose not to run for president instead of with Bernie Sanders who did and came in 2nd in the Democrat Primaries?

 

Forgetting the so called Democrat principle of letting every vote count does nobody get the irony of passing over someone who got millions of primary votes for someone who got none?

Furthermore could you imagine the uproar this would have caused among the Bernie Bros who already (correctly it turns out)  thought that the fix if the DNC chief (moreover a DNC chief who apparently knew and was shocked at the fix) replaced Hillary with someone other than Bernie?

The revolt would have been spectacular and epic and that’s not even taking into account candidate Donald Trump at every campaign stop and event talking about the Democrats screwing Bernie one more time.

I suspect a fair amount of Bernie Bros didn’t vote dem last time around but if Biden had replaced Clinton instead of Bernie I would not have been surprised if enough stayed home or voted green to give Trump Minnesota, New Mexico, Virginia, NH and maybe even Maine.  It would have been a spectacular disaster for Dems (although on the bright side it would have given them a more palatable excuse for their defeat and lessened the shock and embarrassment of the media on election night.

Closing Thought:  If you are a Bernie Sanders supporter consider this:  The head of the DNC during election 2016 has come out and admitted that the fix was in against you in 2016 and professed to be appalled by it, yet even with this knowledge if the chips were down she was ready to throw Bernie Sanders and you under the bus for her chosen ticked rather than right the wrong against you that she claims upset her so much. 

Next time the Democrats ask for your vote keep that in mind.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to sell or the sponsorship of a national pizza company I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

The clear corruption within the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign were well known to Donna Brazile after their convention, but she decided to aid the cover up until now because she feared what would happen if Donald Trump won the election. Some are calling her brave. Sorry, folks, but what she did is not bravery. It’s a way for her to clear her conscience after the fact.

Here’s a tidbit from her article on POLITICO:

The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.

The short version of the story is that the DNC was broke, Hillary’s campaign came in and took over by putting them on financial life-support so they could keep control before winning the nomination, then they funneled as much money as possible into her campaign. Oh, and it’s a combination of poor management by Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Barack Obama that caused the financial problems in the first place.

It’s an interesting read that gives us more details about three things we already knew:

  1. The DNC fails because they practice the same economic irresponsibility that their politicians practice in DC.
  2. Hillary Clinton will work whatever backend deals she can to elevate herself regardless of what damage it does to the people surrounding her, the Democratic Party, or the nation.
  3. Barack Obama was the epitome of horrendous financial decision-making for both the DNC and the country.

What Brazile did by revealing all of this was make herself feel better about participating in arguably the most corrupt primary process the nation has ever seen. I always thought it should have been a Ted Cruz vs Bernie Sanders general election, but it wasn’t. The difference between the two winners is that Donald Trump beat Cruz fair and square while Hillary had to steal the nomination from Bernie. Brazile’s revelations at this late stage prove that she’s a coward, not a hero.

A lot of my friends on the right don’t like Jake Tapper much these days Jon Nolte who I absolutely love dropped him last year over these two interviews:

In full grandstanding, self-righteous mode (we’ve seen this Tapper come out against Republicans before), Tapper hammers Trump over this judge 23 times — 23 freakin’ times! Tapper refuses to move on for about 4 minutes.

Note, though, how Tapper hides crucially important and mitigating information from his audience, like the judge’s cozy relationship with the racist hate-group La Raza.

And this is not the first time in his quest to destroy Trump that Tapper has hidden information from his audience.

Back in February, Tapper asked Trump if he would condemn David Duke and the KKK. Trump famously bungled the question, but during the interview, Tapper chose not to disclose the crucially important fact that less than 24 hours earlier, Trump had not only disavowed David Duke but done so without being asked to do so. Tapper pretending that for the first time he is asking Trump to do something he had just voluntarily done is propaganda not journalism.

With all of that in mind, watch the video below… The key part of Tapper’s Hillary Clinton interview occurs near the end at the 6:20 mark, where Tapper practically apologizes to Hillary for bringing up the myriad of scandals surrounding the corrupt Clinton Foundation (“And I’m not equating Trump University with the Clinton Foundation,” Tapper squeaks.). Moreover, after she not only dodges the question with lies (“we’ve disclosed everything“) and then uses the question to attack Trump, Tapper doesn’t ask a SINGLE FOLLOW UP (much less 23).

And since Trump’s election has been even harder on him:

Note how Tapper carefully avoided stating that Trump mocked an actual disability. Well, he cannot come out and say that because it is a lie. If you recall, though, that was the original charge — that Trump openly mocked the specific handicap of this reporter. But now that everyone knows that this accusation is a lie, in order to keep the accusation alive, Tapper weasels his words into the more generalized charge that Trump “make[s] fun of disabled people” — as though Trump should condescend to the handicapped and treat dishonest reporters with a disability any different from dishonest reporters without one.

The latest entry comes from another friend Stephen Krusier

I’ve been mystified for the last couple of years as to why so many conservatives on social media think that Jake Tapper is one of the good guys in the MSM. Yes, he gives support to the military, which one doesn’t see a lot from the leftmedia. Beyond that, however, he is a garden-variety Democrat advocate media hack. He loves sticking it to conservatives on social media and Republicans whenever he can. This nonsense he’s offering the equally hacktastic Colbert only makes sense if you are in the camp that doesn’t acknowledge the essential truth about Joe McCarthy: that he was right.

Let me stipulate for the record that both Krusier and Nolte are right that Jake is wrong about Trump and that he seems to have it in for him more than other do.  My purpose in this post isn’t to defend Jake Tapper as I already wrote that post months ago but I do want to make an important point concerning Jake Tapper.

He elected Donald Trump.

Now you might be thinking “DaTechGuy you’re crazy, how can you make a statement like that?”

Here’s how.

I will concede that Jake was very hard on Trump during the run up to the election but he was also willing to hit Clinton both before the primaries :

While this morning Politico was spinning Nancy Pelosi Jake Tapper decided in proper journalist fashion to unspin Hillary Clinton

as members of the Obama administration can attest, Clinton was one of the leading drivers of the TPP when Secretary of State. Here are 45 instances when she approvingly invoked the trade bill about which she is now expressing concerns:

Tapper’s piece give 45 examples of Hillary Clinton publicly supporting the bill.

and right before the general election when Donna Brazile feeding her questions came out

Jake Tapper told me earlier this morning that the news that his former CNN colleague, Donna Brazile, obtained questions in advance of a CNN Town Hall event and then forwarded them to the Clinton Campaign was “very troubling” and “horrifying.”

Now of course both of these were pinpricks  compared to the anti-Trump onslaught but the day Jake Tapper elected Donald Trump wasn’t a day when he reported on Clinton lies or pushed Trump.  It was Sept 11th 2016 when he choose to report the news straight as it happened while everyone else did not.

Let me take you back to that fateful morning.  Hillary Clinton was at a 9/11 ceremony and suddenly had issues.   Fox’s Rick Leventhal immediately tweeted it out and wrote about it

and while conservatives were all over it,  immediately everyone on the left went into full damage control spin mode to protect her and CNN was the worst:

I’ve just sat through a Mr. Seltzer and a panel of three discuss the story, the only person I knew off the top of my head was the ultra far left Katrina vanden Heuvel of the Nation. UPDATE: another was David Zurawik of the Baltimore sun and the other Tara Sotmayor) They had very little to say about Hillary Clinton but a lot to say about Fox news. They had no problem using words like “conspiracy”, “irresponsible” and were united in painting the Fox story as poorly soured, overblown and attacking the network for reporting it. Nowhere on the panel was any person defending the story, or providing any balance and let me remind you this is a show about taking an unbiased look at the media.

For a full hour they played this story as if it was completely phony something that the MSM could easily ignore and discount as a Fox/Breitbart trick.  I was watching them do it at the time and tweeted:

And then Jake Tapper took over, live.

Instead of the usual repeat of the 9 am show Tapper took the stage live and did something nobody on the network did, he treated the story as an actual news story, showed the video and questioned. Here is what I wrote at the time:

meanwhile in a disasterous devleopment for the Clinton Campaign Jake Tapper is now live on CNN meaning that the network will practice actual journalism for a while.

In fact he just played the video of her stumbling.

On twitter you could see the meme change in real time

And the whole conversation changed

Once Tapper played it as straight news so did Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post

I wrote this on Tuesday morning:

The simple fact is that there is zero evidence that anything is seriously wrong with Clinton. If suffering an occasional coughing fit is evidence of a major health problem, then 75 percent of the country must have that mystery illness. And I am one of them.

Well, that is no longer operative. Context matters. A coughing episode is almost always just a coughing episode. But when coupled with Clinton’s “overheating” on Sunday morning — with temperatures something short of sweltering — Clinton and her team simply need to say something about what happened (and why the press was in the dark for so long.)

and the dam was broken.

Hillary’s health was no longer a story confined to conservative media, it was a legit story to be reported by the MSM.

The sage of election 2016 Scott Adams put it best 

when it comes to American psychology, there is no more powerful symbol of terrorism and fear than 9-11 . When a would-be Commander-in-Chief withers – literally – in front of our most emotional reminder of an attack on the homeland, we feel unsafe. And safety is our first priority.

Hillary Clinton just became unelectable.

I submit and suggest none of this breaks into the MSM if either CNN decides to play the repeat of Tapper at noon that day or Jake decides to play down the incident as Reliable Sources did before him and the rest of the CNN team did after he got off the air.  This was breaking news happening on a Sunday where people were available and would naturally switch to CNN to find out about breaking news and there was Jake Tapper, the single most trusted reporter on that station playing it straight.

Now my fellow conservative writers and bloggers can argue that this moment doesn’t cancel out Jake Tapper’s anti-Trump obsession for the last year and I’m sure they will make plenty of fine points 90% of which that I might agree with.

But for my money none of that can happen if Tapper decides to tow the Hillary Campaign line during those critical two hours.  Even Hillary voters understood that she was dishonest but the idea that she might not be up to being President physically was established that day and it was Jake Tapper who did it.

I think I, the entire country and the world, is in his debt for it.

Closing thought:  I suspect we’ll see a counter point suggesting that this is why he is so hard on Trump, he blames himself for his election.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

And the WaPo‘s anonymous sources say so:  Fusion GPS was paid by Marc E. Elias, a lawyer acting on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee,

Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community.

Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the firm in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC.

How much? It’s unclear how much money went to Fusion GPS directly, but according to campaign records, the Hillary campaign paid Elias’s firm $5.6million legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, while the Post states that the DNC paid Perkins Coie $3.6million in ‘legal and compliance consulting.’ Roughly $9 million. Under campaign rules, I assume that the amounts can be verified.

According to the post, there were three sources of funding.

The unknown first client:
The Post’s anonymous sources claim that (emphasis added)

Prior to that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by a still unknown Republican client  during the GOP primary.

IF the first client actually exists (and I’m not the only skeptic) it’ll be interesting to find out who the Republican (or not?) was, and why (s)he stopped funding it. Was there “no there, there “? Were they outbid by the Dems?

The second: Hillary/DNC,
Either way,

The Clinton campaign and the DNC through the law firm continued to fund Fusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.

Aaron Blake notes that Steele was only funded by Democrats.

The third: The FBI, who apparently offered, but didn’t, pay
The Daily Mail reports that After the election the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence, but they reneged when he was identified. Paul Mirengoff explains,

The agreement reportedly was reached before the election. If Clinton won, as the parties to the agreement probably expected, the FBI would take over financial responsibility for the apparatus she was funding in order to discredit her political opponent, even after he was defeated. If Trump won, the FBI would take over financial responsibility for trying to discredit the president-elect.

My doubts:
Ace wants to know who the first client is, as Fusion fights a congressional subpoena to avoid disclosing that information,

But the first remains hidden — and if Fusion prevails in court, it will remain hidden.
. . .
Someone really doesn’t want Fusion to be compelled to open up its books and client list.

As I said above, IF the first client really exists, it may not be a Republican , because,

someone wishing to obscure the actual client would, of course, put out that kind of disinformation, anonymously.

Be that as it may,  while both sides paid Fusion GPS, Steele was only funded by Democrats, and Fusion GPS had the Kremlin as a client for . . . wait for it . . . a smear campaign against Russian whistleblower Sergei Magnistsky.

When asked about the original Russia collusion story, Hillary’s talking point/bromide – repeated by her minions on cable news interviews – is “it’s been debunked.”

This is a huge story, undoubtedly. We’ll see what kind of coverage it gets from the same reporters Hillary lied to, and what Congress does about it.

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

An interesting followup to yesterday’s post suggesting that if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 Harvey Weinstein would not today be exposed as the man he has been for years.

Two days ago just as I arrived for work Red Sox left fielder Andrew Benintendi hit a two run homer off of Astro Ace Justin Verlander making his first relief appearance ever giving the Sox a 3-2 lead in the bottom of the fifth of game 4 of their series. I walked in smiling and when I told my lead the score, at he confidently predicted an Astro win so we bet a candy bar on the result.

Yesterday I was running late and found myself, thanks to Houston’s late comeback rushing into Shaw’s in Leominster to buy the bar to pay off that bet. I found myself stuck in a line behind a woman who was visiting her daughter who had just had her first child. The conversation in the line and with the cashier was Trump vs Mexico. At this point I interjected, “Well consider this, if Donald Trump isn’t elected there is no way that Harvey Weinstein is exposed by the NYT as he was a vital ally and fund raiser for Hillary Clinton.” The cashier agreed that this was true but the woman ahead of me had a slightly different take, while she agreed with my premise she stated quite emphatically: “Still isn’t worth it.”

Given that Mr. Weinstein preyed on woman (which she was) I found that opinion interesting and as I was leaving it hit me that not only would her daughter be of the age that Weinstein would go after but there is no reason to believe that if that new grandchild of hers wanted a career in movies a Harvey Weinstein or someone like him, would in 15-18 years be making the same demands on her if she wanted to get ahead in the business.

This is how crazy the left has become, a liberal women so dislikes Trump that she would have been willing to not only let Weinstein’s crime be unexposed and unpunished but would have been OK with him being allowed to obtain new victims for the sake of keeping him Trump of the White House.

So for those who you Hate Trump but are outraged over Weinstein I have two questions for you:

Would the price of Weinstein never being exposed have been worth it to you if it meant Hillary Clinton beating Donald Trump in 2016?

If the answer to the first question is yes: At what number of new women victimized by Mr. Weinstein would that price become too high?

I think these two question really give this story the perspective it deserves don’t you and I’d love to see a roving reporter asking these question to a bunch of women’s studies majors at liberal universities across the nation wouldn’t you?

I’ll give the last word to Thomas Wictor


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

Henry Gondorff: If they put you on the spot, we have to fold the con

The Sting 1973

We have seen plenty of posts concerning Hillary Clinton book tour like this:

On September 18, Hillary Clinton will kick off the book tour for What Happened, her memoir about the 2016 presidential election, in Washington, D.C. The crowd at the Warner Theatre will, no doubt, be filled with many representatives of Pantsuit Nation and other pro-Clinton factions of the Democratic Party. But, as Politico found out by talking to Democratic lawmakers and other Clinton allies, there will be plenty members of the minority party staying home on the 18th, preferring to stick toothpicks in their eyes than relive the nightmare of the 2016 elections.

“There is a collective groan whenever there’s another news cycle about this,” said California Democratic representative Jared Huffman, who added that Clinton’s tour comes at “maybe at the worst possible time.” It’s not just the distraction the book will provide from a party fighting for issues such as DACA, Huffman said, but the party fissures that could be reopened by Clinton’s critiques.

But there is one aspect of the tour that everyone is missing.

Historically a book has been a great way for people or organization to give big money to a connected person. After all if an author gets say $2 for the sale of a book then a business can buy 10,000, 20,000 or even 100,000 copies of their book and viola you have just given twice that figure to said connected person without showing up as a donor.

Furthermore not only are said books a tax write-off for said company but if you give those books away to a charity, any charity, suddenly you have a charitable deduction as well.

After all why do you think book publishers give large advances to pols books that generally end up in the dollar bin at stores across the nation?

However this time there is something different.

Hillary Clinton is no longer considered a good investment for foreign governments, large corporations or donors anxious to buy favor. With no influence to sell and even less potential to regain any , dollars given to her are simply thrown away.

However there is one group that thanks to media hysteria is still invested in Hillary, Democrat voters still in denial over the last election.

There are millions of people still on meds in blue states, on college campuses and in trendy neighborhoods who are not only still in mourning but are “still in therapy over Hillary’s loss”. To them Hillary Clinton is a symbol of the paradise that was, in their minds “stolen” in a Russian conspiracy and her very presence will be cathartic.

Now under normal circumstance this would not be the case, but thanks to the media’s own obsessive behavior, people who would normally have gotten on with their lives are still in a state of shock and dismay in need of a release.

When it came to running a campaign or the state department Hillary Clinton might have been 2nd rate but let it never be said that any member of the Clinton clan didn’t recognize a bunch of suckers (perhaps millions of them)  with cash ready to be parted from them when they saw one.

Thus we see stories like this:

Hillary Clinton Coming to Connecticut for 2 Book Signings

Hillary Clinton shows up late as fans turn out in hundreds for NYC book signing

Hillary Clinton to hold book signing in Buffalo

With more to come Portland, Boston, Seattle, Milwaukee, Atlanta

Time is of the essence, there is no way of when reality will compel these folks from abandoning their self-pity and delusion and get back to living their lives so Hillary has to strike while the potential to make from two to five bucks a head is still there. Sure it’s not the easy money she is used to but it’s the only influence she has left to sell.

So now we will be treated to something extraordinary. Hillary Clinton dealing with these suckers plebes all over the country, cracking a smile, signing her name and even risking the odd conservative in line asking a question about Benghazi or email servers or Bill’s Bimbos as she travels the country hawking books to make a buck and perhaps dreaming that it will turn into a groundswell to have one more go at the White House.

But if you are a voter of the left excited to get close to Hillary to give yourself closure remember this:


As it’s very unlikely that anyone is out to buy 10,000 or 100,000 copies of my book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer (although if someone wants to do so fee free) the best way for you to let us know that our reporting, our writers and the growing collection of short youtube interviews, are worthy of support we do is here is of value please hit DaTipJar Below



Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



Remember your subscription pay our Magnificent Seven writers each month

RH (NG36B) (Saturday Afternoons):
Zilla of the Resistance (Friday Evenings):
Jerry Wilson (Thursday Evenings)
JD Rucker (Thursday afternoons and Sunday Evenings)
Fausta Wertz (Wednesday and Friday Afternoons)
Juliette Akinyi Ochineg (Baldilocks) (Tuesday and Saturday evenings):
Chris Harper (Tuesday afternoons):
Pat Austin: (Monday Afternoons)
John (Marathon Pundit) Rubbery: (Sunday Afternoons):

And Don’t miss our Part Time Riders either
Ellen Kolb (1st & 4th Wednesday Afternoons each month):
Jon Fournier: (3rd Wednesday Afternoon each month)
Michigan Mick: (1st & 3rd Monday Evenings each month)
Tech Knight (2nd Wednesday Each Month)

by baldilocks

It’s another one of those times when I just start typing and see where it leads. Rest assured that you will not get the first draft.

At any given waking moment, there are dozens of things I’m pondering simultaneously. Here’s one of the contemporaneous things: Hillary Clinton’s new book, entitled What Happened, which purports to outline the reasons she lost to Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

Others are ridiculing bad (ghost-)writing and worse blame-shifting on Clinton’s part, but what I want to know is this: what no-imagination-having one-dimensional thinker came up with the title? And is it “What Happened” with a period or What Happened” with a question mark?

Even calling it “WTF Happened,” or “Stuff Happens” would have demonstrated a bit of sparkle and a sense of humor. But, I think that such a demonstration is probably too much to ask. Even if the publisher wanted to give the title some zip, Herself would have never allowed it. The blandness of the book’s title reflects the personality of the protagonist, it seems.

I heard – but am not interested in confirming — that Amazon is deleting all the one-star reviews on Mrs. Clinton’s latest demonstration of her tendency to blame others when things go wrong. Too bad. One-star review swarms can be quite entertaining as long as most people realize that it’s political trolling and not serious reviewing.

It just occurred to me that these after-action reports by presidential campaign losers are a form of political trolling, as well — a “you-all-stink” note from the candidate. Pathetic, isn’t it? Almost makes me feel sorry for the woman. Thing is, if she were president, I think we would already be nuked by now. Thank God for all favors, regardless of size.

Love the Bond villainess look.

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!

Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other

John Adams

Over the last several days we’ve heard about many developments concerning the Clinton Lynch story,  one of the critical moments in last year’s election cycle.

The bit about the media trying to bury the story wasn’t good, hearing about alias’ used by the Attorney General, the top law enforcement officer in the country, to hide her questionable actions and the fact that these meetings were planed and coordinated is pretty bad.

But for my money the most critical part of the story is this bit (via legal insurrection) concerns not the revelations but the FOIA request itself: (all emphasis mine)

On July 1, 2016 – just days before our FOIA request – a DOJ email chain under the subject line, “FBI just called,” indicates that the “FBI . . . is looking for guidance” in responding to media inquiries about news reports that the FBI had prevented the press from taking pictures of the Clinton Lynch meeting. The discussion then went off email to several phone calls (of which we are not able to obtain records). An hour later, Carolyn Pokomy of the Office of the Attorney General stated, “I will let Rybicki know.” Jim Rybicki was the Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor to FBI Director Jim Comey. The information that was to be provided to Rybicki is redacted.

Also of note several of the documents contain redactions that are requested “per FBI.”

It is clear that there were multiple records within the FBI responsive to our request and that discussions regarding the surreptitious meeting between then AG Lynch and the husband of the subject of an ongoing FBI criminal investigation reached the highest levels of the FBI.

However, on October 21, 2016, the Comey FBI replied to our legal demands that “No records responsive to your request were located.”  This is in direct contravention to the law, and we are preparing further legal action to force the FBI to come clean and turn over ALL documents related to this matter to us in a timely manner.

Think about this statement from folks at Powerline again (all emphasis mine)

There are only two possibilities here: either someone at the FBI destroyed documents relating to the Bureau’s communications about the Lynch/Clinton meeting, or someone at the FBI lied in response to ACLJ’s FOIA request. Federal agencies have personnel dedicated to responding to FOIA requests, and presumably the people who carry out this relatively mundane task would not lie or destroy documents without instructions from the top.

There was a time when that presumption was a given, not anymore.  This case clearly demonstrates the only reason why the FOIA, a law specifically designed to promote open government was obeyed was:

  1.  Barack Obama’s Term was over
  2.  Hillary Clinton was not elected
  3.  James Comey was fired

There is no point in having laws like FOIA, or any other unless the people charged with carrying them out are honest and honorable enough to obey them no matter who’s in power unfortunately we now have two cultures in this nation.  One of them believes in the Judeo-christian moral code and the other believes the ends justifies the means.

Once that presumption that the laws will be obeyed by those who are charged with carrying them out is gone, the social contract between the government and those who are governed is gone, and when gone it’s nearly impossible to get it back.

This is the legacy that the Clintons and Barack Obama and their allies in the Democrat Party who have embraced the culture of ends and means have left America and it’s a legacy that our nation will be paying for generations.


The Layoff bleg continues. with 4 days to go we’re $1515 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show (shows?) and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.

Hillary Clinton went on a tear yesterday blaming everything and everybody for her 2016 presidential campaign failure. Hillary brought up Macedonians not once, but thrice in her rant.

Mr. Spock and Aristotle were not present in her logic as she droned to interviewers Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg,

“And I have a lot of sympathy at this point. Kara doesn’t, but I do [KS laughs] for people trying to make these decisions. I would just urge them to hurry up. Because even if you err slightly more on the curating editorial decision-making, so some voices are going to be cut off, some fake news outlets, the guys in Macedonia are going to be denied entry into your platform, I’d rather see us erring on that side for a while to see what the effects are, instead of being kind of overwhelmed by the challenge, like, “What do you do?” I mean, how do you try and determine who should or shouldn’t be on your site? And so I think it’s a mixed bag.”

Say, what?

Prior to Hillary’s rant, the only Macedonians I ever heard of were Alexander the Great’s thundering hordes, who took over a large chunk of land from 334-323 B.C.,

Alexander, like Hillary, wanted to be boss. Or, as Alan Rickman’s Hans Gruber famously said in Die Hard,

“And when Alexander saw the breadth of his domain, he wept, for there were no more worlds to conquer.” Benefits of a classical education.

(If you want to be pedantic about whether Hans Gruber quoted Plutarch correctly, do knock yourself out. This post is about Hillary.)

Instead of antiquity, Hillary was referring to “guys over in Macedonia who are running these fake news sites,” thus checking two items off her pretext list: electoral interference from overseas and fake news.

Add the sneaky Macedonians to the basket of deplorables.

The message is clear: in Hillary’s mind, we uneducated rubes can’t exercise own own judgement, because, if we had, she would be POTUS.

Unlike Alexander, Hillary wept because she could not conquer. I’m actually relieved she’s not POTUS. That interview leaves the aftertaste, as Scott Johnson put it, that, “To borrow a phrase from Milton, herself is Hell.”

UPDATE

Linked to by The Other McCain. Thank you!

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes in U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog.

By John Ruberry

Liberals and members of the mainstream media–okay, other than how they earn their paychecks there isn’t much difference between the two–have many intellectual flaws. But I’m going to zero in on just one here–their predilection to view all events through the sphere of the ’60s. For this discussion I’m going to bend time a bit–and call the ’60s as the years of 1964-1974, the period that covers Vietnam and the anti-war protests, the Civil Rights movement, and the Watergate Scandal. Richard M. Nixon, by the way, was elected to the presidency in 1968.

Older journalists looked back at the first and second Gulf Wars with nostalgia, especially when the anti-war protests broke out and during the pre-surge quagmire of 2005-2007. Younger journalists felt cheated by their absence from that first quagmire, Vietnam, and they didn’t want to miss out on what they saw as a second one.

Very few reporters who were on the job during Watergate are still working in journalism, the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward. who is 74, is a notable exception, so those in the biz now are hoping that President Donald Trump’s firing of embattled (yes, embattled) FBI Director James Comey is their Watergate, which of course crescendoed with Nixon’s resignation before his almost certain removal from office by the Senate.

Watergate was of course much more than the break-in at the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Hotel, it was the cover up as well as the side scandals, such as the White House Plumbers, the dirty tricks, and the slush funds that made it America’s gravest political scandal.

Trump’s firing of Comey was ham-handed. If he had canned Comey shortly after being sworn-in, there would have been muted criticism from the left, as many Hillary Clinton supporters blamed Comey for her defeat last fall. Comey of course, in 2016’s October Surprise, reopened the investigation of Clinton’s reckless and illegal use of a home-brewed email server while she was Barack Obama’s secretary of state. Many prominent Democrats called for Comey’s resignation. When Trump did fire Comey last week, the White House didn’t know where to find him–Comey was in Los Angeles. And he learned of his dismissal from a television news report. And Trump, in an interview with NBC’s Lester Holt, contradicted the explanation from his deputy press secretary as to why he fired Comey. Finally, Trump’s hint that he may have taped one of his conversations with Comey doesn’t help the president’s case the public.

The media of course is drawing parallels to Comey’s firing to that of Richard Nixon forcing the dismissal of Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox in the “Saturday Night Massacre.” Yes, Trump cited “this Russia thing” as one of the reasons for getting rid of Comey, but what is this “Russian thing?” Collusion? Meanwhile James Clapper, Barack Obama’s director of national intelligence said only a few hours ago that there is no evidence of any Trump campaign collusion with Russia.

And who seriously believes that Russia hacked the presidential election?

Rather it appears “this Russia thing” was invented by sore losers within the Hillary Clinton campaign.

So repeat after me. “Russian collusion” is not Watergate. James Comey is not Archibald Cox. Donald Trump is not Richard Nixon. While we’re at it, Black Lives Matter is not the 1960s Civil Rights Movement and the regular anti-conservative riots at Berkeley are not the Free Speech Movement.

So what does Woodward, who along with Carl Bernstein broke the Watergate scandal for the Washington Post, think about the Comey controversy? While conceding on Fox News Sunday this morning that there are some questions on Russia that he wants answered, he also told host Chris Wallace, “This is not yet Watergate. Not a clear crime.”

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.