Is this the week?

There are loud whisperings from various quarters that this is the week the Department of Justice’s Inspector General releases his report on various alleged shenanigans within our government during the last election cycle.  If so, it’s been a long time coming, and without much fanfare until recent weeks.  I hope that’s an indication of a professionally run, thorough investigation that produces airtight evidence and leads to justice and accountability — not just for small-fry scapegoats, but also for heavy hitters who knowingly put their thumbs on the scales.

While I’ve not discussed Q much on this site (only mentioning the source recently for the first time), it will be interesting to see where this week goes.  You see, Q (which appears to be a group working together) put down a marker for Wednesday, May 23, as being a good day to watch the news.  Q has hinted quite strongly that recent statements by the administration were preparatory to the report coming out… and that many of the targets of that report are already spinning madly to try to get in front of it.  I did not realize until recently that the draft IG report was circulated not just within the department but also to those it targets.  If so, it would explain a lot of the heated rhetoric over the weekend from people like John Brennan.

Something else about Q’s recent posts drew my interest.  Here are a couple from Thursday, May 17th:

Q recent

As someone who has professional experience in media relations, I can say that driving news cycles is a key part of controlling the national discussion.  If something bad is about to break, industry practice is to time it for a Friday afternoon, so that if anyone bothers pays attention after the weekend it’s dismissed as “old news.”  Another is to time the release so a more prominent event draws off the focus.  Such is the sad commentary on our short-attention-span society.  There were hints the past couple weeks the Trump administration was ready to let some shoes drop.  So what happened the next day after the posts above (Friday the 18th)?

Santa Fe high school

This is not the first time Q has implied some of these events are deliberately designed, either to further an agenda or to suck the media oxygen out of the room and suffocate potentially damaging news about the shadow government (or Deep State as some refer to it).  One of Q’s constant remarks is “this is not a game.”  Sadly, as I’ve already confessed, such an accusation seems increasingly plausible to me.  Here’s were it gets more interesting (note the dates):

Thought wrong

“Follow the pen” refers to a posted photo that seemed to show a signed Executive Order about to drop.  The implication was that Trump was about to order up some answers.  Notably, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on Sunday ordered the DOJ to look into the allegations highlighted by Trump.  The “NowC@mesTheP@ain—23!!!” line was an exposure of Q’s password before changing it and the passcode ID that verifies who’s posting.  Q claimed this to be a deliberate move.  It had been some time since Q’s last passcode change, so the implication is Q knew/knows something about May 23rd.  By Wednesday, not only will the initial furor over the school shooting be (sadly) past, so will the hoopla over the weekend’s royal wedding.

In other words, no distractions for dropping shoes.  Finally, Q did something unusual Sunday, worth noting here:

Q Armor of God

Q posts have alluded in the past to a spiritual battle going on, but this is the first direct Bible quote I’ve seen.  Such a post seems to indicate whatever maneuvering has been going on behind the scenes is about to break into the spotlight.  As frustrating as it’s been to see people like Her Hillariness seem to avoid consequences, there’s reason to believe justice has only been delayed, not denied.

The only proper response to Q’s Bible quote is to pray.  Pray hard for our nation.  Pray for those in authority.  Pray for those patriots working to restore good governance.  And pray our people have discernment, to tell truth from falsehood.

With that accomplished, let justice be served.  May this be a week for the history books.

Advertisements

Saying what many are thinking

Not everybody gets a chance to address Congress this way; even fewer choose to do so.

Michael Caputo, a former Trump campaign adviser, delivered this statement to the committee on Tuesday, May 1, 2018:

‘In 2009, my wife and I moved to my hometown of East Aurora, New York to have a family. Making far less money back home, we had a far better quality of life. That is, until the Trump-Russia narrative took off. Today, I can’t possibly pay the attendant legal costs and live near my aging father, raising my kids where I grew up.

‘Your investigation and others into the allegations of Trump campaign collusion with Russia are costing my family a great deal of money – more than $125,000 – and making a visceral impact on my children.

‘Now I must to move back to Washington, New York City, Miami or elsewhere, just so I can make enough money to pay off these legal bills. And I know I have you to thank for that.

‘Here’s how I know: how many of you know Daniel Jones, former Senate Intelligence staffer for Senator Dianne Feinstein? Great guy, right? Most of you worked with him. One of you probably just talked to him this morning…

((Read the entire statement for his takedown of Jones and the shady origins of the investigation))

‘What America needs is an investigation of the investigators. I want to know who is paying for the spies’ work and coordinating this attack on President Donald Trump? I want to know who Dan Jones is talking to across the investigations – from the FBI, to the Southern District of New York, to the OSC, to the Department of Justice, to Congress.

‘Forget about all the death threats against my family. I want to know who cost us so much money, who crushed our kids, who forced us out of our home, all because you lost an election.

‘I want to know because G*d Damn you to Hell.’

Scattered thoughts and today’s read

Posting has been light lately, but I’ve been doing what I can to keep up with events.  Some observations:

  • If the current trajectory in Korea sticks (i.e. move to denuclearize and formal end to the Korean War), it can be considered the most important foreign policy development since the immediate aftermath of 9/11.  But don’t hold your breath waiting for the same people who screamed the nukes were falling four months ago to come to their senses and hand out a Nobel Peace Prize to the administration.
  • With scores of migrants now attempting to climb the border barriers in our Southwest, it’s time to move past policing and start firing beanbags, pepper spray and other nasty items to dissuade the would-be housecrashers.  Either we have a border and sovereignty, or we don’t.  Which is it?
  • The treatment of Sarah Huckabee Sanders by a “comedian” at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner shows the wisdom of Trump foregoing attendance again this year.  These people are losing their relevancy and their power… and they sense it.
  • Question: why have we heard nothing new about the Las Vegas shooting since right after it happened?  Is it plausible to believe our vast intelligence and law enforcement resources cannot put a picture together for the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history?  Or is everybody too busy looking for Russian collusion under the beds?
  • The much-anticipated report from Inspector General Horowitz is due soon.  It will be informative to see how many already revealed dots that report connects.  To that end, this is a great review:

There are three scary but crucial factors underlying the rapidly growing FBI scandal that most people miss, even though these factors are hidden in plain sight.

Recognizing and understanding this trio goes a long way toward explaining what has happened in the scandal — and where it is likely to go next… (read the whole thing)

Finally, I’ll note my curiosity about the increasingly frequent internet poster “Q” is fairly piqued.  I’m a skeptic of anything that smacks as “Live Action Role Playing” as the kids call it, or “conspiracy theory” as our generation knows it.  But I’ve been keeping an eye on this one for a while.  As the various investigations under way come to their conclusions, it’ll be interesting to see how Q’s posts continue to pan out against the revelations.  There’ve been enough synchronicities to this point that I’m willing to admit my interest now.  If you aren’t familiar with “Q,” start here, then go here, here (for cast of characters and terms) and here (for attempted advance deciphering).  That said, here’s hoping this recent post comes from legitimate high-level insight and points the way to the near future:

Q post next phase JUSTICE

Creating problems to “solve”

After any well-publicized shooting we hear calls for more gun laws, proposals from banning entire categories of weapons to “stricter background checks.”

I suspect far too many people don’t realize just how strict background checks already are when one goes to purchase a weapon legally.  That said, it’s hard to take the “stricter background checks” talking point seriously when the same side of the political aisle (that would be the Democrats) does stuff like this:

The Justice Department under Barack Obama directed the FBI to drop more than 500,000 names of fugitives with outstanding arrest warrants from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, acting FBI deputy director David Bowdich testified Wednesday

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about law enforcement’s faulty response to Parkland, Florida shooter Nikolas Cruz, California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein asked Bowdich about the removal.

“That was a decision that was made under the previous administration,” Bowdich testified. “It was the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel that reviewed the law and believed that it needed to be interpreted so that if someone was a fugitive in a state, there had to be indications that they had crossed state lines. Otherwise they were not known to be a fugitive under the law and the way it was interpreted.”

Why on earth would the previous administration move to allow half a million people wanted by the law to be able to obtain firearms?  I submit it’s because it creates greater potential for events like the Parkland shooting, which stokes public sentiment against guns and creates an environment favorable for further gutting of the 2nd Amendment.

This theory goes back to what I said right after the shooting in Florida:

This entire event is best summarized by a military acronym whose use I also keep to a minimum: FUBAR. I’ve really, really tried not to entertain theories that mass shootings are a conscious tool of people who want to disarm us, but such a complete and catastrophic failure makes that increasingly difficult.

During Obama’s administration, I occasionally saw the question posed “if he wanted to destroy America’s prestige and power, what would he do differently?”  The same could be asked about disarming Americans.  If our government wanted people to loathe firearms enough to be willing to give them up entirely, what would they do differently?

So the next time someone is screaming that “background checks aren’t effective,” simply reply “taking half a million criminals out of the database tends to have that effect.”

When government makes it easier for criminals to obtain weapons than the law-abiding, it is not protecting the rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”  Something to keep in mind.

The Senate weighs in

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs today released an interim report of their ongoing investigation into how the Department of Justice and FBI handled the discovery that Hillary Clinton used an unauthorized personal email server, through which a considerable number of classified emails flowed.  Per the interim report, the committee’s investigation is looking into the following questions:

Whether, and the extent to which, any personal animus and/or political bias influenced the FBI’s investigation;

Whether, and the extent to which, the Obama Department of Justice or White House influenced the FBI’s investigation; and

Whether, and the extent to which, any personal animus and/or political bias influenced the FBI’s actions with respect to President Trump.

Unlike the brief House Committee memorandum released a few days ago, this 25-page report uses extensive footnotes to document the material from which their conclusions are drawn.  As it points out, the release of thousands of text messages between FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page raise many questions.  The entire report is available here.  While noting the Senate Committee continues to investigate the matter, this interim report concludes (emphasis added):

The information available to the Committee at this time raises serious questions about how the FBI applied the rule of law in its investigation of classified information on Secretary Clinton’s private email server. We know that:

• The FBI did not use a grand jury to compel testimony and obtain the vast majority of evidence, choosing instead to offer immunity deals and allow fact witnesses to join key interviews.

• There were substantial edits to Director Comey’s public statement that served to downplay the severity of Secretary Clinton’s actions, and that the first draft of the memo was distributed for editing two months before key witnesses were interviewed.

• Director Comey stated that he had not consulted with the Justice Department or White House, when text messages suggest otherwise. We have text messages in which two key investigators discuss an “insurance policy” against the “risk” of a Trump presidency,and “OUR task.”

• Messages discuss “unfinished business,” “an investigation leading to impeachment,” and “my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.”

• Senior FBI officials—likely including Deputy Director McCabe—knew about newly discovered emails on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner for almost a month before Director Comey notified Congress.

• Over the period of at least four months, the FBI did not recover five months’ worth of text messages requested by DOJ OIG and two Senate committees; however, when pressed, (The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General) was able to recover missing texts in less than one week.

It’s a mark of how divided our nation is that what is known so far hasn’t raised a bipartisan cry for major reform of the DOJ and FBI, including greater accountability for the secretive FISA Court process.  When our criminal justice agencies act as they have in this instance, it’s a clear and present danger to the liberties of every citizen, regardless of party affiliation.
The question now is whether accountability will make a comeback as a result of these current investigations.  Stay tuned.

Laying out the timeline

UPDATE: (Feb 8, 2018) – It seems Forbes took down the timeline after a couple of days.  No explanation I’m aware of as to why.  Nevertheless, the Internet is forever, and a copy of it remains available here.

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

ORIGINAL POST:  One of the challenges for the American public right now is keeping up with the drip, drip, drip of scandalous information coming out of Washington.  The pieces of the puzzles are being slowly dribbled out, and thus it’s difficult for the average citizen to piece together a picture of just how bad the malfeasance of the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation is.

So Forbes has done the nation a great service by assembling the known pieces at this point.  The Epoch Times produced a visual summary in January, but Forbes’ product brings the chronology up to date and provides disturbing clarity.  Keep in mind while reading it there is considerable information that remains redacted or unreleased, and the parties involved will clearly go to great lengths to keep it that way.  The magazine rightly concludes (emphasis added):

It is right to say that this episode is the worst abuse of political power in American history related to elections. Watergate is nothing by comparison. That involved people not employed by the government.  Later it involved a cover-up in which Nixon participated.

Watergate did not involve the DOJ and the FBI – two institutions which must be non-partisans for this Republic of ours.

This case does involve the FBI and DOJ.  It also is foolish not to assume that Loretta Lynch and President Obama were ignorant of the goings on – if not involved in them.

Finally, the dishonest investigation of Hillary who committed actual crimes should not be acceptable. Nor should FBI or DOJ officials be allowed to alter events and Court proceedings for political purposes.

If we let this go, and people are not brought to justice, we will have forever damaged our Republic and the World’s view of us as a nation of laws.

Not to mention that in the eyes of those of us paying close attention, the credibility of our government has taken a body blow from which it may never recover.  Only seeing the key figures in this melodrama in handcuffs and behind bars will suffice to start the process of restoration.  Nothing short of that will matter.

Lots of sound and fury…

…is building in Washington.  Here’s hoping it doesn’t ‘signify nothing.’  It would be nice if accountability is about to make a comeback:

The House Intelligence Committee on Monday evening voted to make public a GOP-crafted memo alleging what some Republicans say are “shocking” surveillance abuses at the Department of Justice (DOJ).

That memo was reviewed Sunday by FBI Director Christopher Wray.  Interestingly, on Monday Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe suddenly sped up plans to retire:

Andrew G. McCabe abruptly stepped down on Monday as the F.B.I.’s deputy director after months of withering criticism from President Trump, telling friends he felt pressure from the head of the bureau to leave, according to two people close to Mr. McCabe.

In a recent conversation, Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, raised concerns about a forthcoming inspector general report. In that discussion, according to one former law enforcement official close to Mr. McCabe, Mr. Wray suggested moving Mr. McCabe into another job, which would have been a demotion.  Instead, the former official said, Mr. McCabe chose to leave.

Note: the inspector general report and the Congressional committee memo are two separate products.  The latest news would seem to indicate both contain seriously damning information about abuses at the FBI.  It’s much to be hoped for that the authors of both documents took the time (as appears to be the case) to lay out meticulously their findings.  McCabe is a player in the Hillary email (non)investigation, the beginnings of investigation into the Trump campaign, and likely referred to (as “Andy”) in the now infamous Strzok-Page flurry of texts showing hyper-partisanship at the Bureau.  Representative Trey Goudy rightly says that Strzok and Page should be called to testify about their missives, their actions, and whether they worked with others in the FBI and DOJ to protect one presidential candidate while illegally surveilling the other.

Having voted to make the Congressional memo public, Congress should now authorize release of the inspector general report as well.  The public deserves to know the full extent to which national law enforcement has been compromised.

It also deserves a thorough house-cleaning in Washington.  We already know the IRS was politically weaponized under the previous administration.  May this FBI investigation be just the beginning of a multi-agency cascade of accountability.