The "Rule-Of-Law-Optional" Nation
Jul 17, 2018 07:25:51 #
Classic!!!!
Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,
So, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page declined to testify before a congressional committee because she didnât feel like it. Apparently weâre now a rule-of-law-optional nation. Until recently, we were merely reality-optional. That was fun, but when officers of the countryâs leading law enforcement agency go optional on standard legal procedure, like answering subpoenas, then weâre truly in the land where anything goes (and nothing matters).
After two years of Trump-inspired hysteria, it's pretty obvious what went on in the bungled Obama-Hillary power handoff of 2016 and afterward: the indictable shenanigans of candidate Hillary and her captive DNC prompted a campaign of agit-prop by the US Intel âcommunityâ to gaslight the public with a Russian meddling story that morphed uncontrollably into a crusade to make it impossible for Mr. Trump to govern.
And whatâs followed for many months is an equally bungled effort to conceal, deceive, and confuse the issues in the case by Democratic Party partisans still in high places. It was very likely begun with the tacit knowledge of President Obama, though he remained protected by a shield of plausible deniability. And it was carried out by high-ranking officials who turned out to be shockingly unprofessional, and whose activities have been disclosed through an electronic data evidence trail.
Mr. Trump's visit to confer with Russian President Putin in Helsinki seems to have provoked a kind of last-gasp effort to keep the increasingly i***tic Russian e******n meddling story alive - with Robert Muellerâs ballyhooed indictment of twelve âRussian intel agentsâ alleged to have âhackedâ emails and computer files of the DNC and Hillary's campaign chairman John Podesta. The gaping holes in that part of the tale have long been unearthed so I'll summarize as briefly as possible:
1) the bandwidth required to t***sfer the files has been proven to be greater than an internet hack might have conceivably managed in the time allowed and points rather to a direct download into a flash drive device.
2) the DNC computer hard drives, said to be the source of the alleged hacking, disappeared while in the custody of the US Intel Community (including the FBI).
3) the authenticity of the purloined emails by Mr. Podesta and others has never been disputed, and they revealed a lot of potentially criminal behavior by them.
4) Mr. Mueller must know he will never get twelve Russian intel agents into a US courtroom, so the entire exercise is a joke and a fraud. In effect, heâs indicted twelve ham sandwiches with Russian dressing.
Tragically, the American public is led to take this ploy seriously by a morally c*********d news media, especially CNN and the The New York Times. The latter outfit is so afflicted with a case of the Russian meddling vapors that it ran this laughable headline at the top of its front page yesterday: "Just Sitting Down With Trump, Putin Comes Out Ahead." Gosh, whatâs the message there? Donât even bother talking to foreign heads of state, especially in the interest of improving relations?
The salient question that persons in authority might ask out-loud is how come so many officers of the Intel Community have not been hauled in front of grand juries to answer for their obviously incriminating behavior. Mr Mueller is perhaps too busy chasing Russian phantoms to draw up a bill of particulars against characters such as former CIA chief (now CNN shill) John Brennan, who apparently orchestrated the early chapters of the Russian meddling ruse, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, who ushered the DNCâs Steele Dossier into the FBIâs warrant machinery, fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who managed the Steele Dossier and its spinoff mischief as an "insurance policy" against Mr. Trump, Peter Strzok, who executed the "insurance policy," and, of course, Ms. Page, his paramour, who decided that testifying before Congress was beneath her dignity. These and probably many others.
Tragically, also, these matters can only be fully corrected by the very Department of Justice that includes under its management the rogue FBI. Who else can formally and legally bring these cases before grand juries? The DOJ appears intent on preventing that from ever happening. Congress has so far omitted enforcing its subpoenas or using its impeachment power to dislodge obdurate DOJ officials. Mr. Trump, for now apparently, has declined to use his inherent executive powers to clean out this rats nest, say by removing secrecy shields from many of the documents at issue in the DOJâs possession - most likely because he canât afford to be seen "meddling" in the tangled proceedings.
The net result of all this subterfuge, inaction, and gaslighting, is the defeat of the rule-of-law generally in American life. This ought to be taken seriously. If it's asking too much of the system, then the system itself will eventually not be taken seriously, and that will be the end of the republic as we knew it.
Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,
So, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page declined to testify before a congressional committee because she didnât feel like it. Apparently weâre now a rule-of-law-optional nation. Until recently, we were merely reality-optional. That was fun, but when officers of the countryâs leading law enforcement agency go optional on standard legal procedure, like answering subpoenas, then weâre truly in the land where anything goes (and nothing matters).
After two years of Trump-inspired hysteria, it's pretty obvious what went on in the bungled Obama-Hillary power handoff of 2016 and afterward: the indictable shenanigans of candidate Hillary and her captive DNC prompted a campaign of agit-prop by the US Intel âcommunityâ to gaslight the public with a Russian meddling story that morphed uncontrollably into a crusade to make it impossible for Mr. Trump to govern.
And whatâs followed for many months is an equally bungled effort to conceal, deceive, and confuse the issues in the case by Democratic Party partisans still in high places. It was very likely begun with the tacit knowledge of President Obama, though he remained protected by a shield of plausible deniability. And it was carried out by high-ranking officials who turned out to be shockingly unprofessional, and whose activities have been disclosed through an electronic data evidence trail.
Mr. Trump's visit to confer with Russian President Putin in Helsinki seems to have provoked a kind of last-gasp effort to keep the increasingly i***tic Russian e******n meddling story alive - with Robert Muellerâs ballyhooed indictment of twelve âRussian intel agentsâ alleged to have âhackedâ emails and computer files of the DNC and Hillary's campaign chairman John Podesta. The gaping holes in that part of the tale have long been unearthed so I'll summarize as briefly as possible:
1) the bandwidth required to t***sfer the files has been proven to be greater than an internet hack might have conceivably managed in the time allowed and points rather to a direct download into a flash drive device.
2) the DNC computer hard drives, said to be the source of the alleged hacking, disappeared while in the custody of the US Intel Community (including the FBI).
3) the authenticity of the purloined emails by Mr. Podesta and others has never been disputed, and they revealed a lot of potentially criminal behavior by them.
4) Mr. Mueller must know he will never get twelve Russian intel agents into a US courtroom, so the entire exercise is a joke and a fraud. In effect, heâs indicted twelve ham sandwiches with Russian dressing.
Tragically, the American public is led to take this ploy seriously by a morally c*********d news media, especially CNN and the The New York Times. The latter outfit is so afflicted with a case of the Russian meddling vapors that it ran this laughable headline at the top of its front page yesterday: "Just Sitting Down With Trump, Putin Comes Out Ahead." Gosh, whatâs the message there? Donât even bother talking to foreign heads of state, especially in the interest of improving relations?
The salient question that persons in authority might ask out-loud is how come so many officers of the Intel Community have not been hauled in front of grand juries to answer for their obviously incriminating behavior. Mr Mueller is perhaps too busy chasing Russian phantoms to draw up a bill of particulars against characters such as former CIA chief (now CNN shill) John Brennan, who apparently orchestrated the early chapters of the Russian meddling ruse, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, who ushered the DNCâs Steele Dossier into the FBIâs warrant machinery, fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who managed the Steele Dossier and its spinoff mischief as an "insurance policy" against Mr. Trump, Peter Strzok, who executed the "insurance policy," and, of course, Ms. Page, his paramour, who decided that testifying before Congress was beneath her dignity. These and probably many others.
Tragically, also, these matters can only be fully corrected by the very Department of Justice that includes under its management the rogue FBI. Who else can formally and legally bring these cases before grand juries? The DOJ appears intent on preventing that from ever happening. Congress has so far omitted enforcing its subpoenas or using its impeachment power to dislodge obdurate DOJ officials. Mr. Trump, for now apparently, has declined to use his inherent executive powers to clean out this rats nest, say by removing secrecy shields from many of the documents at issue in the DOJâs possession - most likely because he canât afford to be seen "meddling" in the tangled proceedings.
The net result of all this subterfuge, inaction, and gaslighting, is the defeat of the rule-of-law generally in American life. This ought to be taken seriously. If it's asking too much of the system, then the system itself will eventually not be taken seriously, and that will be the end of the republic as we knew it.
Jul 17, 2018 09:12:03 #
ACP45 wrote:
Classic!!!! br Authored by James Howard Kunstler v... (show quote)
If yall think someone is guilty of something then prove it and hang them.Trump has told yall over and over our intelligence agencys are against him ,Trump has the power to do what he wants so why doesnt he do it?
Jul 17, 2018 15:43:14 #
roy wrote:
If yall think someone is guilty of something then prove it and hang them.Trump has told yall over and over our intelligence agencys are against him ,Trump has the power to do what he wants so why doesnt he do it?
The "House Cleaning" is almost done, Roy. Perhaps the last major remaining obstacle to deal with is Rod Rosenstein. You must first remove the bad actors from the scene that would otherwise impede any effort to bring those responsible for crimes to justice.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.