Progressive Democrat Bounty Hunters, 'J. Edgar Comey' and President Trump

When a major American political party and major media outlets are determined to bring down a United States President, it is news -- Big News. • • • POLITICAL CIVIL WAR. The Progressive Democrat Party and its propaganda-machine mainstream media think they have forund the instrument for destroying President Trump and his conservative Republican Party. Their slogan could easily be a variation of the slogan James Carville created for Bill Clinton -- "It's the tapes, Stupid." • The Democrats are pulling out the old Nixon playbooks to use them on Trump, and they have a willing accomplice in their fake crisis in the MSM. But, it just isn't going to happen. Not this time. • Reuters reported that 17 US lawmakers on Sunday called on President Donald Trump to turn over any tapes of conversations with fired FBI chief James Comey, as Democrats considered a boycott of the vote on Comey's replacement. Trump's suggestion last week that Comey should be careful what he "leaks" because he may have been taped brought shouts of glee from the ProgDem bounty hunters who work for Obama, the Clintons and Soros, and in no case the American people or the US Constitution. The Progressive media and Democrat congressional leaders took Trump's tweet to mean that he had done the taping, a perfectly legal act for a US President, but in their eyes the act of a rogue President trying to stop FBI probes -- probes of fake "criminal" acts by Trump or his campaign team, because No Evidence of any Trump connection with Russia exists, and even Russia has denied all these claims. As for Trump's position about re-opening the Hillary email server investigation, he doesn't need to take a position because the American people have spoken and what they said is that Hillary Clinton should be indicted and tried for violating the Espionage Act. That is one of the reasons they elected President Trump, who has put into place an Attorney General highly qualified to decide if and how to proceed against Hillary Clinton. • But, of course, #NeverTrump Republicans jumped on their horses to join the bounty hunter ProgDems. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said the White House must "clear the air" about whether there are any taped conversations : "You can't be cute about tapes. If there are any tapes of this conversation, they need to be turned over." [Why, Senator Graham? Why, if nobody can produce evidence that would warrant a subpoena for them???] If there are recordings, Republican Senator Mike Lee, a Trump supporter, told "Fox News Sunday," it is "inevitable" that they would be subpoenaed and the White House would have to release them. [The same question...Why? The President would demand a legal subpoena, not partisan rummaging by a congressional committee.] Lee also said recording conversations in the White House is "not necessarily the best idea." • The leader of the bounty hunters is Senate Democrat Leader Chuck Schumer, who said Trump must immediately provide Congress with any tapes and warned that destroying existing tapes would violate the law. [Why, Chuck? If the tapes exist, they are not subject to either a legal or congressional subpoena or order not to destroy evidence -- there is no legal procedure underway.] Schumer also said Senate Democrats are weighing whether to refuse to vote on a new FBI director until a special prosecutor is named to investigate Trump's potential ties to Russia. Schumer told CNN : "To have that special prosecutor, people would breathe a sigh of relief because then there would be a real independent person overlooking the FBI director." Schumer told that to CNN's "State of the Union" program, but he seemed to forget that the Independent Prosecutor Statute has lapsed and so it would be Attorney General Sessions who would appoint any such prosecutor, or the Senate GOP would have to agree with the Democrats and vote to name one, and I doubt that Mitch McConnell would be very interested in that. So, where does that leave the ProgDems? And, if a Senate vote on a new FBI Director breaks down along party lines, Democrats would not have the votes to block a nominee because Republicans hold a majority in the Senate. Shcumer said : "The key is getting some of our Republican colleagues to join us." But, while #NeverTrump Republicans like Senator Lindsey Graham may be willing to try to stay on the good side of the MSM for pubicity's sake, it is highly unlikely that they would buck GOP Majority Leader Mitch McConnell when the FBI Director replacement comes to a Senate vote. And, Republican leaders in the Senate have rebuffed calls for a special prosecutor, saying it would interfere with ongoing congressional probes. Even #Never Trump Graham said there may come a time when a special prosecutor is needed but not now : "Right now, it is a counterintelligence investigation, not a criminal investigation. So you don't need a special prosecutor," Graham told "Meet the Press." • On the question of appointing a special prosecutor to review the Clinton emails, Andrew McCarthy wisely stated that the Constitution has a single means of dealing with official criminality : impeachment. The aim of people like Senators Schumer and Durbin that call for a special prosecutor is to keep the game going -- announce an investigation is ongoing, leak information which may well be false -- and then decline to testify about matters because they are “still under investigation.’” If the special prosecutor finds nothing, the conspiracy claims will continue. If he goes off the rails and is removed, it will still keep going. • Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein doesn't find it necessary at this point to appoint a special prosecutor to probe Russia's interference in the presidential election, a decision that must greatly disturb CNN, because last Friday it cited sources familiar with his thinking, saying that one source said that Rosenstein is unlikely to make a change unless the FBI investigation seems endangered. Rosenstein has reportedly vowed to lawmakers and staff that he plans to allow the FBI’s probe to keep operating free of White House pressures -- Rosenstein also added that there has bene no White House interference, but CNN won't tell us that. Yet, Democrats continue to call for a special prosecutor to replace fired FBI Director Comey, who was leading the bureau's investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin said Friday that Rosenstein must either name a special prosecutor or resign. Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, joined that call on Friday evening, arguing : “These investigations are far too important to risk disruption, delay or interference." • CNN also reported on Friday that Rosenstein does not believe it is necessary to recuse himself from the investigation, which is currently being led by Dana Boente, the US Attorney in Alexandria, Virginia, who also heads national security prosecutions at the Justice Department. • • • DID THE FBI TAPE COMEY'S DINNER WITH TRUMP? American Thinker has published an article by Bruce Heiden that suggests just this : "It would not be so terribly surprising to discover that Comey's exchanges with Trump actually were recorded -- by the FBI. After all, the FBI and other US intelligence agencies have recorded, at least 'incidentally,' personnel associated with the Trump campaign, and perhaps even Donald Trump himself. Who knows what the FBI has or hasn't recorded, or what recordings made by others it can't obtain? And in view of ex-FBI director Comey's public disclosure that the bureau was conducting a probe of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian meddlers, it might not even be unreasonable to suspect that the FBI's surveillance of Trump had 'incidentally' picked up Jim Comey himself -- who, now that he's a civilian, might have a much harder time finding out whether that recording exists and controlling its circulation than he would have two weeks ago, when he was still top dog of the whole kennel of bloodhounds." So, says Heiden, Trump's message about the existence of tapes could well have been : 'You enjoyed it, didn't you, Mr. Comey -- that feeling of dealing with people who didn't know what you had on them, or could get on them, or could spread around about them from a source like Christopher Steele? Well, welcome to the non-FBI world. Signed, POTUS.' • As I have said before, the insistence by the ProgDems that Trump be investigated for everything he does or says, perhaps even including his breakfast preferences, may be the smoking gun that doesn't point at Trump but at the ProgDems and destroys their Obama/Clinton/Soros plots to bring down Tummp and all conservatives. • • • WHEN WILL THE PROGDEMS QUIT BEATING THE DEAD RUSSIAN HORSE? During President Trump’s interview with NBC's Lester Holt last Thursday, the President said that one of the things that went through his head when deciding to fire FBI Director James was the Russia investigation. Many on the left took that to mean Comey was fired because of the investigation itself. • “That admission shattered the early White House spin that the President's decision had nothing to do with the Russian investigation,” announced Clinton lackey George Stephanopoulos during ABC’s This Week on Sunday, but that assertion was soon shot down by White House Correspondent Jon Karl. Here is what Trump actually said : "Regardless of recommendation, I was going fire Comey. Knowing there was no good time to do it. And in fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, ‘you know -- this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It's an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.' " Stephanopoulos said : "It also brought back three words from the days of Watergate : ‘Obstruction of justice.’ To be fair, the President in that same interview, said he wanted the investigation to absolutely be done properly. But his actions have raised questions about those words." • Later on in the program when Stephanopoulos stopped preaching, ABC News reporter Jon Karl spoke up and contradicted the false narrative : “On what he said in the interview about Russia. I don't think that President Trump was saying ‘I fired him because of the Russia investigation. I think what he was really saying is : that on the idea that there would be massive blowback because he was firing the guy in terms of the investigation, he was not worried about the blowback because he thinks the Russian investigation is nothing." • It is worth remembering that the false narrative that Trump fired Comey because the FBI was hot on Trump's trail has been pushed by the Big Three Networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) since last Wednesday. On the night the news of the firing first broke, primetime cable shows compared Trump to Nixon 107 times -- do we need clearer proof that the media is amplifying the Comey firing to make it seem to be something larger than it really is? • • • IT'S THE CLINTONS WHO HAVE CONTACTS WITH RUSSIA. American Thinker published a piece last Friday by Clarice Feldman that says : "The notion that Russia interfered in the election to help Donald Trump was a John Brennan/James Clapper confection created in an unorthodox way, and defied logic, given that Hillary and her associates had far closer connections to Russia than Trump or his associates did." Feldman cited a report by John Merline at Investor's Business Daily : "THE CLINTON FAMILY BUSINESS. Bill Clinton received half a million dollars in 2010 for a speech he gave in Moscow, paid by a Russian firm, Renaissance Capital, that has ties to Russian intelligence. The Clinton Foundation took money from Russian officials and oligarchs, including Victor Vekselberg, a Putin confidant. The Foundation also received millions of dollars from Uranium One, which was sold to the Russian government in 2010, giving Russia control of 20% of the uranium deposits in the US -- the sale required approval from Hillary Clinton's State Department." The leftist New York Times pointed out : "What's more, at least some of these donations weren't disclosed. 'Ian Telfer, the head of the Russian government's uranium company, Uranium One, made four foreign donations totaling $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all such donors." • "JOHN PODESTA. In March -- that is, long after the election was over -- it was revealed that Mrs. Clinton's campaign chairman had failed to disclose the receipt of 75,000 shares of stock from a Kremlin-financed company -- Joule Unlimited -- for which he served as director from 2010 to 2014, when he joined the Obama White House in 2014. Podesta apparently had a large chunk of the shares transferred to 'Leonidio Holdings, a brand-new entity he incorporated only on Dec. 20, 2013, about 10 days before he entered the White House,' according to a news account. • "TONY PODESTA. Mr. Podesta's bother, who has close personal and business relations with Mrs. Clinton, was 'key lobbyist on behalf of Sberbank, according to Senate lobbying disclosure forms. His firm received more than $24 million in fees in 2016, much of it coming from foreign governments, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics,' a March news story reported. The bank was 'seeking to end one of the Obama administration's economic sanctions against that country.' The report goes on to note that 'Podesta's efforts were a key part of under-the-radar lobbying during the 2016 US presidential campaign led mainly by veteran Democratic strategists to remove sanctions against Sberbank and VTB Capital, Russia's second largest bank.' Mr. Obama imposed the sanctions following the Russian seizure of the Crimean region of Ukraine in 2014." • "JOHN BREAUX. Forbes magazine reports that Mr. Breaux, a former Senator from Louisiana who cut radio ads for Mrs. Clinton's 2008 campaign, represents Gazprombank GPB, a subsidiary of Russia's third largest bank, on 'banking laws and regulations, including applicable sanctions.' " • "THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN. In March, Mr. Putin's spokesman said that Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak met with members of Mrs. Clinton's campaign several times while she was running for President in 2016. Further, the campaign never disclosed the number or nature of these secret meetings." • Twelve prominent public statements by both Republicans and Democrats who reviewed the evidence or were briefed on it confirmed there was No Evidence of Russia trying to help Trump in the election or colluding with him : The New York Times (Nov 1, 2016); House Speaker Paul Ryan (Feb, 26, 2017); Former DNI James Clapper , March 5, 2017); Devin Nunes Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, March 20, 2017); James Comey, March 20, 2017; Representative Chris Stewart, House Intelligence Committee, March 20, 2017; Representative Adam Schiff, House Intelligence Committee, April 2, 2017); Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senate Intelligence Committee, May 3, 2017); Senator Joe Manchin Senate Intelligence Committee, May 8, 2017; James Clapper (again) (May 8, 2017); Representative Maxine Waters, May 9, 2017); President Donald Trump,(May 9, 2017). And, Senator Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, indicated that his briefing confirmed Dianne Feinstein’s view that the President was not under investigation for colluding with the Russians. • • • FIRING COMEY WAS FULLY JUSTIFIED. The firing of FBI Director James Comey caught both the ProgDems and their mainstream media off guard. Until a few hours before the firing, prominent Democrats were calling for Comey to resign or be fired and the MSM was critical of his performance. • As the author of the Wall Street Journal’s Best of the Web observes : “Whoever has been leaking classified information, reporters might want to start asking their sources why the leaks never seem to contain any collusion evidence. They might also ask Mr. Schiff what it would take to get him interested in investigating potential abuses by his political allies." • Law Professor Jonathan Turley agrees : “No one has yet to explain to me what is the core crime that would be investigated with regards to Russian influence. I don't see the crime, so I don't see how it's closing in on Trump. For weeks I've questioned the need for special counsel because honestly I still don't see the underlying crime here. You know, when we talk about the Russian influence and collusion, there's not any evidence I've seen of collusion." • But, James Comey obviously considered himself above the law that applied to everyone else. He thought he could hold open forever an investigation of his boss, the President of the United States, with no factual basis. It was part of his pattern of posing as an above-it-all impartial FBI Director while engaged in the most partisan pro-Democrat actions -- his botched handling of the Clinton investigation; his 2015 appointment of E.W. Priestap to his Counterintelligence Division, although Priestap’s wife, a former FBI agent, contributed $5,000 to Hillary’s 2008 campaign and served as a campaign consultant; and his brushing over the fact that Andrew McCabe, Comey’s second in command, also has close ties to the Clintons -- his wife received almost half a million dollars from one of Hillary’s closest associates and pals, Virginia Governor McAuliffe, but McCabe failed to disclose those contributions in financial disclosure forms as required by law and he’s still at the FBI. • In a March 20 hearing, Comey stated there was an investigation into intelligence leaks to the media. However, on May 8 the source of the reports that were eventually leaked to the media, acting AG Sally Yates, said she was never questioned by the FBI. In a segment of the questioning, Representative Stefanik asked Comey what are the typical protocols, broad standards and procedures for notifying the Director of National Intelligence, the White House and senior congressional leadership when the FBI has opened a counter-intelligence investigation. Comey intentionally clouded over knowledge of the question from Stefanik, using many words to separate himself from the timeline. [The counter-intel investigation, by his own admission, began in July 2016. Congress was not notified until March 2017. That’s an eight-month period that obviously cuts against Comey's earlier claims that quarterly reports were required.] • But, Comey did show his knowledge of the politicized Office of the DNI James Clapper used by President Obama rather extensively as an intelligence shield, a firewall, or useful idiot. Anyone who followed Obama White House intel policy will remember DNI Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan, Obama's two primary political operatives. Clapper lied to Congress about collection of metadata. Brennan also admitted investigating, and spying on, the Senate Intelligence Committee as they held oversight responsibility for the CIA itself. Comey quickly understood the gist of the questions from Representative Stefanik in the March 20 hearing -- that is, there is only one reasonable explanation for FBI Director Comey to be launching a counter-intel investigation in July 2016, notifying the White House and Clapper, and keeping it under wraps from Congress until March 2017 -- Comey was a participant in the intelligence gathering for political purposes -- wittingly, or unwittingly. So, Comey had to be fired. • The NY Post's Michael Goodwin writes the best account of why Comey had to go : "Comey’s power-grabbing arrogance is why I called him 'J. Edgar Comey'....His willingness to play politics, while insisting he was above it all, smacked of Washington at its worst. He was the keeper of secrets, until they served his purpose....The President [Trump] didn’t have just one good reason to act. He had a choice among many. The one he cited, Comey’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private server, is rich with irony, given its prominence in the campaign. And the irony doesn’t stop, with Democrats who not so long ago were furious with Comey over the Clinton probe rushing out condemnations of Trump for firing him....Comey’s refusal to accept the department’s conclusion that he made major mistakes are reasonable grounds for dismissal of any employee in any circumstance, not least one who enjoys self-aggrandizing displays of independence. It is understandable that his bosses, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his recently confirmed deputy, Rod J. Rosenstein, lost confidence in Comey. They pushed for his ouster, and the President agreed. Yet Comey could have been fired for other aspects of the Clinton probe. The failure to empanel a grand jury, the willingness to destroy evidence as part of immunity agreements, the absurd claim that no reasonable prosecutor would take the case -- each action and assertion suggested a less-than-thorough probe designed to please his Democratic bosses. Then there are the leaks of investigations that amounted to a flood of illegal disclosures about the Trump administration. Virtually everything we know about whether anyone in the Trump campaign colluded with Russian meddling in the election comes through leaks. The names of those supposedly being investigated -- General Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Carter Page -- all were made public through leaks. The fact that Sessions himself was wrong to tell the Senate he had not met with the Russian ambassador -- we know that because of leaks to the Washington Post. We know a computer server for Trump Tower was communicating with a Russian bank -- because of leaks. Not incidentally, Hillary Clinton jumped on those leaks to insist Trump was guilty of collusion. Only later did we learn -- through leaks -- that the FBI determined the server was sending spam. Yet Comey adamantly insisted to Congress that he could not even confirm that he was investigating any or all of these leaks -- and that was that." • • • DEAR READERS, James Comey was fired for his bungling political moves in the Hillary email server probe, for his probe of non-existent Russian collusion with Trump, and for his generalized taking on of a self-made aggrandizing mantle as the all-powerful decider of all things legal in Washington. So far, the only crime that has surfaced from the Russia probe is the constant, illegal leaking of classified information to the media. Trump and the GOP correctly see this as a major risk to national security. While the National Security Agency has been cooperating with the House Intelligence Committee and allowing lawmakers to review documents that might show the source of the leaks, Comey’s FBI has refused to do the same. Why? Media reports suggest that the FBI obtained a secret court order last summer to monitor Carter Page, and perhaps former Trump advisor Mike Flynn and the Russian ambassador. If so, the FBI must be considered a possible source of the leaks. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Senator Grassley pointed out in a Senate Committee hearing recently that the entire top leadership of the FBI is suspect : “So how can the Justice Department guarantee the integrity of the investigations without designating an agency, other than the FBI, to gather the facts and eliminate senior FBI officials as suspects?” Comey didn’t provide an answer. • So, if we are witnessing another Watergate -- the criminals are the FBI and Comey and Lynch and Holder and Clapper and Brennan and Rice and Obama and Hillary, and maybe Schumer and Reid and Feinstein...BUT IT SURE AS HADES IS NOT TRUMP.