Patterico's Pontifications

4/20/2018

President Trump Should Declassify Material Showing Loretta Lynch Influenced the Hillary Investigation

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:00 am

One of the most significant revelations of James Comey’s book is that there exists classified information, still unknown to this day, supporting the argument that Attorney General Loretta Lynch subverted the Hillary Clinton email investigation:

If the investigation continued on the same trajectory, the challenge was going to be closing the case in a way that maintained the confidence of the American people that their justice system was working in an honest, competent, and nonpolitical manner. We’d never convince the extreme Clinton haters in the news media of that, of course, but hopefully we could persuade a majority of fair- and open-minded Americans.

But in early 2016, there was a development that threatened to challenge that effort significantly. A development still unknown to the American public to this day. At that time, we were alerted to some materials that had come into the possession of the United States government. They came from a classified source — the source and content of that material remains classified as I write this. Had it become public, the unverified material would undoubtedly have been used by political opponents to cast serious doubt on the attorney general’s independence in connection with the Clinton investigation.

There has been a small amount of attention about this — and in a moment I will discuss just how little attention it has received — but I haven’t seen anyone ask the question I ask in this post: Why doesn’t Donald Trump declassify this information?

We’ve seen unprecedented levels of declassification in recent months in service of partisan agendas, most strikingly in the case of the memos relating to the FISA warrant on Carter Page. The President can declassify anything he wants to. Why not this?

The only reasonable conclusion I can think of is that President Trump doesn’t know about it — because it hasn’t been on the teevee, and it has not been discussed as a major national controversy.

Think about it. Have you seen anything about this on TV? Why is this not the subject of a national outcry? Amid all the focus on trifles, like the fact that Comey described the size of the president’s hands and the color of his skin, this revelation has received remarkably little media attention.

It has not gone wholly unreported, especially if you read blogs like RedState or Hot Air. streiff had a post about it here, although the principal focus of that post was to argue that Comey was untrustworthy and disloyal to Lynch for mentioning it at all. John Sexton at Hot Air had a typically sharp and insightful post about it here.

But, while the story has been mentioned in Big Media, they have treated it as a side note. In a rollout post from ABC News hyping Snuffleupagus’s interview with Comey, the headline was Comey comparing Trump’s desire for loyalty to the concept of omerta in the Italian Mafia. The passage about Lynch? That is buried in paragraph 17 of the story. ABC News was not alone. Even Fox News buried the Lynch information in paragraph 14 of an article that prominently featured Comey’s comments about Trump, with quotes about tie lengths and tanning goggles coming in paragraph five.

That means Fox News decided to make Comey’s personal observations about Trump nine paragraphs more prominent than any mention of secret information showing the attorney general may have subverted justice in a criminal investigation of the Democrat candidate for the presidency of the United States.

In John Sexton’s post, he called it “amazing, given all of the leaks of unverified information we’ve seen in the past year, that this particular tidbit on Lynch remains unknown to the public.” But Big Media isn’t particularly interested in information that shows Hillary Clinton got a pass in the email investigation. (And oh boy, did she. Actually reading Comey’s book makes that clearer than ever.)

That’s not just because Big Media editors are leftist partisans, although they are. It’s also a business decision. They get your eyeballs by focusing on one topic: Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump. And this Loretta Lynch story connects to Trump only indirectly. So Big Media will distract you by calling Comey’s memoir “bitchy” to Trump and focusing on trivia about Trump, revving up partisans about Trump Trump Trump, and obscuring the single most interesting and significant revelation of the book.

Keep your eye on the ball. Let’s get the message to President Trump that this material exists and that the American people want to know what it is. Share this post on social media. Tell your friends about it. Write prominent people and urge them to talk about it.

I can’t imagine that President Trump wouldn’t declassify this information — if we could just get the nation to stop talking about book quotes about half moons under Trump’s eyes, and focus on a potential subversion of justice by a top law enforcement official.

UPDATE: A commenter at RedState links to a 2017 Washington Post story that suggests that this document has been discussed before, and discounted by the FBI. If this is the document, there may be nothing to this story after all.

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]

158 Responses to “President Trump Should Declassify Material Showing Loretta Lynch Influenced the Hillary Investigation”

  1. A development still unknown to the American public to this day.

    Jim Comey lies a lot so it’s hard to know for sure if this is for reals

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  2. Yeah, Comey is lying to embarrass the Obama administration because he’s a partisan hack.

    Oh, wait…

    Dave (445e97)

  3. In other news:

    Democratic Party files lawsuit alleging Russia, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks conspired to disrupt the 2016 campaign

    I doubt this will ever see the legal light of day, but I suppose it was inevitable.

    Dave (445e97)

  4. The President can declassify anything he wants to. Why not this?

    The only reasonable conclusion I can think of is that President Trump doesn’t know about it — because it hasn’t been on the teevee, and it has not been discussed as a major national controversy.

    Heh. Your biases are warping your logic and preventing to see the most likely explanation, even though it is right in front of your nose in the material you quoted.

    They came from a classified source — the source and content of that material remains classified as I write this.

    It is probably the case that our intelligence agencies are telling Trump not to blow the source, and that declassifying the material would do exactly that.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  5. Hey Dave, Just corrupt lawyers doing the job other corrupt lawyers don’t have time for.

    mg (9e54f8)

  6. LoLo has double immunity. We all know that. Besides she leads right to you-know-who. And he’s untouchable.

    Boo Mertz (5a4596)

  7. Back on topic, there is an important word in Comey’s quote: “unverified”.

    Without any idea what the secret material says, or what its origin is, it’s pretty hard to judge.

    But let me just suggest that the US government very likely has in its possession unverified material derogatory to lots of people – including, for example, Donald Trump.

    Should the government declassify and release *all* unverified material from classified sources that might conceivably serve someone’s political interests? Should the government selectively declassify and release only unverified material that serves its own agenda and discredits its opponents? That seems like a pretty risky path to go down.

    If it were, for instance, a recorded phone call or other communication between Lynch and someone else, in which Lynch said something improper (like promising to kill the investigation), it would presumably not be “unverified”.

    Dave (445e97)

  8. So Lynch is dirty, or Comey is liar? Gee, do I have to pick between the two?

    And pick on Trump all you like, but I can’t help but note the entire news media seems singularly uninterested as well.

    “In John Sexton’s post, he called it “amazing, given all of the leaks of unverified information we’ve seen in the past year, that this particular tidbit on Lynch remains unknown to the public.”

    Ha, my god that is funny. Hysterical. Leaks are always designed to help leftists, not hurt them. Unless there is no choice, and a brave leftist will leap into the flames so they can immediately claim it is all old news, and the corruption is not linked to anyone else.

    Cassandra (a815b9)

  9. loretta lynch is obese and unsophisticated

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  10. Being a dreaded trumpet

    Pat did make me bark out loud a few times in this essay, his snark is world class, in a past life I think Pat was a Royal Marines drill Sargent

    On the other hand given the Comey memos, the Schiff is going to hit the fan

    EPWJ (94362d)

  11. One possibility: maybe a Secret Service agent overheard Lynch’s tarmac conversation with Bubba, and, being convinced that what was said between the two violated the law, reported the substance of it. Or it could have been some similarly corrupt exchange overheard and reported by a Secret Service agent (in Obama’s, Clinton’s or Lynch’s detail) in some other situation.

    In that case, revealing the material could end the agent’s career, and might well be considered to jeopardize the Secret Service’s ability to carry out its protective mission.

    It would be a “he-said, she-said” situation, although it would be pretty damning, since most people would assume (with some reason) the Secret Service agent had no reason to lie. It fits the definition of being “unverified” but also explains why Comey apparently finds it credible.

    Dave (445e97)

  12. but also explains why Comey apparently finds it credible.

    I think Comey phrased himself in a way that makes seem he did not believe the information, whatever it was. That is, he wants people to think he doesn’t believe it, but without explicitly saying he doesn’t believe it. (So perhaps he does believe it, but wants to pretend otherwise.)

    I also think the headlines for this post does not accurately reflect what Comey was saying: he seems to have gone out of his way in the book to say that Lynch was not influencing the investigation. All he’s really saying is that the classified information could be used by Team Trump and the GOP to bolster the argument that Lynch was biased in favor of the Clintons. And the fact that Lynch was biased isn’t exactly news, is it?

    kishnevi (bb03e6)

  13. E-mails. “Hey LL, Bubba says he’ll meet you on the tarmac at six, M’kay?” from Hills@hotmail.com.

    Cassandra (a815b9)

  14. But Big Media isn’t particularly interested in information that shows Hillary Clinton got a pass in the email investigation. (And oh boy, did she. Actually reading Comey’s book makes that clearer than ever.)

    ‘Big Media’ covered Comey’s presser; aired it live, etc. The excuses made were weak [technophophia, sloppiness, etc.,] given her decades of experience in government at the highest levels dealing w/sensitive information. The fault lay first, w/Clinton and second w/Comey, not w/ media.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  15. ^ technophobia

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  16. Why doesn’t Donald Trump declassify this information?

    Because the OIG review of department actions in the email mess is ongoing. We’ll know soon enough.

    crazy (d99a88)

  17. Dave: Should the government declassify and release *all* unverified material from classified sources that might conceivably serve someone’s political interests?

    I’m sure Dave’s question is not prompted by the fact that an Obama official is now in the crosshairs. For some odd reason, it’s a question to only ponder now as opposed to the past 18 months.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  18. Every time this sort of thing comes out there is always a self-admitted criminal act, or a complete abandonment of ethical duty, in the pile. Nothing is ever done about it. There is no moral, ethical, or legal high ground anymore. It’s been graded flat and is now open for development.

    Allen (5f3847)

  19. Isn’t that the DoJ/FBI/Comey shtick? Pretend something is “classified” but “Unverified” – but is like super important and will rock everyone’s world but has to be kept “Hush/Hush”.

    Y’know like the Dossier. Or the FISA warrant. Or Trump’s not being a target. Or his memos.

    If there’s any there, there – it should be “de-classified”. If this Trump-Comey-FBI-Russia nonsense has shown us anything, its the DoJ and the FBI are keeping stuff secret for reasons other than “National Security”.

    rcocean (a72eb2)

  20. I also think the headlines for this post does not accurately reflect what Comey was saying: he seems to have gone out of his way in the book to say that Lynch was not influencing the investigation. All he’s really saying is that the classified information could be used by Team Trump and the GOP to bolster the argument that Lynch was biased in favor of the Clintons. And the fact that Lynch was biased isn’t exactly news, is it?

    He went out of his way to say that he didn’t see her doing anything to influence the investigation — other than ordering him to call it a “matter” in his public statements, consistent with the Clinton spin. Which is not quite the same thing.

    I also agree that Comey signals that he does not necessarily the believe the information — which is, again, a little different from kishnevi’s claim that he signals that he doesn’t believe it.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  21. As for Anon Y. Mous’s typically snide and inaccurate comment: yes, I do know that there is a possibility that it could reveal a source, and it goes without saying that Trump should not do it if that were the case. It also goes without saying that he would still do it if he knew about it and thought it would help him, because he doesn’t give a crap about anyone except himself.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  22. I finished Comey’s book this evening. (I didn’t get an advance copy like the media people.) I have some thoughts that non-partisans would find interesting. I think there is still a handful of you left.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  23. can we really trust the gestapo pussyhat FBI’s estimation of which sources it’s really necessary to protect

    i don’t think we can

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  24. A development still unknown to the American public to this day.

    Jim Comey lies a lot so it’s hard to know for sure if this is for reals

    This reminds me of John Ziegler’s scatalogical simile in his latest piece:

    Finding Comey lacking in reliability based on this this level of specious scrutiny, especially when being judged against a known pathological liar like Trump, is like being repulsed by a guy who accidentally farted, while ignoring the one who regularly defecates in public.

    Maybe this simile will get through to the feces-obsessed happyfeet.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  25. 22.I finished Comey’s book this evening. (I didn’t get an advance copy like the media people.) I have some thoughts that non-partisans would find interesting. I think there is still a handful of you left.

    One of the TeeVee wags noted that even people w/passing interest have grown so numb to this tedious back and forth that they’re basically saying ‘just let us know when this all over and you get to a conclusion; ‘ that Comey can come off as egocentric but an honest person w/poor judgment.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  26. i accidentally farted once

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  27. I don’t think that confidential informants for the secret police who report on the activities of Cabinet officers should be classified information in America.

    Or are we to infer that this is from a foreign source? The CIA learned this from its mole in the FSB which had learned it from its mole in the Justice Department, FBI or Secret Service?

    nk (dbc370)

  28. well said Mr. nk

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  29. “I have some thoughts that non-partisans would find interesting. I think there is still a handful of you left.”

    Short of being convicted of a heinoys crime, he couldn’t have tarnished the FBI’s reputation any more if he tried.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  30. Hoover used to do that. Keep files on highly placed persons in government, very likely Presidents too. That’s how he got his contract renewed every ten years from 1924 to 1972. How many times is that?

    nk (dbc370)

  31. Thanks Patterico, this post is your best work since the GOP Primary.

    ropelight (f589bb)

  32. Heinous

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  33. Wait ’til Trump lands a Nobel Peace Prize for moving the denuking North Korea and ‘ending the Korean War.’ As our Captain noted with wonderment, ‘Many are unware it is still going on!’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  34. that Comey can come off as egocentric but an honest person w/poor judgment.

    That sums up a lot of my reaction. I don’t find him as sanctimonious as many do, but he definitely has that trait in his personality. I don’t mind that very much in people trying to do the right thing under trying circumstances.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  35. i accidentally farted once

    No, you’re the pooper in the simile, and you do it all over my comments, every day.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  36. I have some thoughts that non-partisans would find interesting. I think there is still a handful of you left.

    Is that how you view yourself?

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  37. 26.i accidentally farted once

    Once? You’re guilty of outgassed more than once, Mr. Feet.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  38. and you do it all over my comments, every day

    this is an accusatory statement

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  39. I don’t find him as sanctimonious as many do

    maybe you should look at that

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  40. I don’t much trust people who refuse to recognize the intent of the far left.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  41. meanwhile you said earlier Mr. narciso is making comments in moderation

    this is so poignant to me

    he’s practically the least-worthy of punishment person in america if you don’t count drew barrymore

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  42. @34. Agreed. Certainly more believable over issues pertaining to Trump.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  43. It was a set-up from Day One and Comey is a large part of it. He helped to set the wheels in motion.

    Colonel Haiku (46f395)

  44. Is that how you view yourself?

    It’s what I am.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  45. this is an accusatory statement

    I try not to accuse without a wealth of evidence, which I have in your case.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  46. that’s saddening to learn cause I thought things were going rather well

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  47. One possibility: maybe a Secret Service agent overheard Lynch’s tarmac conversation with Bubba, and, being convinced that what was said between the two violated the law, reported the substance of it. Or it could have been some similarly corrupt exchange overheard and reported by a Secret Service agent (in Obama’s, Clinton’s or Lynch’s detail) in some other situation.

    In that case, revealing the material could end the agent’s career, and might well be considered to jeopardize the Secret Service’s ability to carry out its protective mission.

    It would be a “he-said, she-said” situation, although it would be pretty damning, since most people would assume (with some reason) the Secret Service agent had no reason to lie. It fits the definition of being “unverified” but also explains why Comey apparently finds it credible.

    Dave (445e97) — 4/20/2018 @ 9:52 am

    I thought there were recording devices on the planes.

    Pinandpuller (be5553)

  48. Comey and Sally Yates were unforced errors. I thought Mr. President the Trump was good at saying: “You’re fired!”

    nk (dbc370)

  49. Isn’t that the DoJ/FBI/Comey shtick? Pretend something is “classified” but “Unverified” – but is like super important and will rock everyone’s world but has to be kept “Hush/Hush”.

    Y’know like the Dossier. Or the FISA warrant. Or Trump’s not being a target. Or his memos.

    If there’s any there, there – it should be “de-classified”. If this Trump-Comey-FBI-Russia nonsense has shown us anything, its the DoJ and the FBI are keeping stuff secret for reasons other than “National Security”.

    rcocean (a72eb2) — 4/20/2018 @ 1:53 pm

    They stole Harry Reid’s move.

    Pinandpuller (be5553)

  50. maybe govtards are bad at getting fired

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  51. It doesn’t matter, anyway. I will never like him anymore after I saw his true colors on the Second Amendment. A p!nkish hue with a broad streak of yellow.

    nk (dbc370)

  52. 43.It was a set-up from Day One and Comey is a large part of it. He helped to set the wheels in motion.

    ==Haiku= Gesundheit!

    OIC: ‘Deep State’… pot shots from a Grassy Mole, eh.

    “This is a conspiracy!” – ADA Tommy Chamberlain [Rudy Vallee] ‘The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer’ 1947

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  53. guns are so good

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  54. 46.that’s saddening to learn cause I thought things were going rather well

    So did our Captain, but the next thing he knew: divorces, bankruptcies, Rudy in drag…

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  55. 52… tales from a gassy ‘hole…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  56. @55. =Haiku=! Gesundheit!

    Red tail and Bunny tales.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  57. It’s what I am.

    I guess it depends on how narrowly you define non-partisan. I know you quit the GOP, and, if I’m not mistaken, you haven’t joined any other party. But, one can still be a partisan in other uses of the word besides belonging to a political party. Such as the #2 usage at Wiktionary:

    A fervent, sometimes militant, supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea.

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/partisan

    I would say that you are a man with a cause when it comes to Trump. But, if you were merely stating that you are without a party, I won’t quibble.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  58. Questions to ask Mueller and questions to ask EX FBI Comey as offered by a retired FBI agent:
    Mr. Comey Isn’t it true that you were an assistant U.S. attorney for a prosecutor between 1996 and 2003?
    In your official capacity at the Department of Justice, did you investigate and did you clear Bill Clinton of any wrongdoing for extending a presidential pardon to Marc Rich, a fugitive from justice, a fugitive of the United States?

    Isn’t it true that between 2003 and 2005, you held a position with the office of the Attorney General?

    Isn’t it true that in 2005, you resigned from the Department of Justice and accepted a job as the senior vice-president with the office of general counsel at Lockheed Martin, a company that is a major, major military contractor?

    Isn’t it true that in 2010, when you were employed with Lockheed Martin, Lockheed won 17 approvals for private contracts with the Department of State while Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State?

    Isn’t it true that in 2010, while you were employed with Lockheed Martin, Lockheed became a major contributor to the Clinton Foundation and non-profit organizations?

    Isn’t it true that in late 2010, after Lockheed was awarded those contracts by the Hillary Clinton State Department, you stepped down from Lockheed and received a $6 million payout for your services?

    Isn’t it true that in 2013, the largest bank of England, HSBC, was being investigated by federal authorities for laundering billions of dollars for the Mexican drug cartels, channeling money to the Middle East, specifically Iran, which is in violation of law?

    Isn’t it true that Robert Mueller, former director of the FBI and now the special counsel to investigate the alleged “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia… isn’t it true that Mr. Mueller was the chief counsel at HSBC… the same bank that was laundering money for the cartels?

    Isn’t it true that HSBC was a significant Clinton Foundation contributor? That Bill Clinton was being paid about $200,000 for his speeches at HSBC events… and this is while Mrs. Clinton was the Secretary of State? No conflict of interest there?

    Isn’t it true that HSBC was basically let off the hook with a $1.2 billion fine – which was paid by shareholders – and none of its officers, managers, directors were charged criminally or terminated?

    Isn’t it true that while all hell was breaking loose at HSBC, YOU, Mr. Comey, were appointed as a director and member of the board at HSBC to assist with damage control?

    Isn’t it true, Mr. Comey, that your salary went from $206,000 in 2002 when you were a government employee, to $33.5 million in 2012…. And that you earned these moneys while working for entities that were major contributors to the Clintons?

    Isn’t it true that you worked for Bridgewater Associates between 2010 and 2013, and that they are also a major contributor to the Clintons?

    Isn’t it true that you worked for Columbia University in 2013 as a senior research scholar at the school of law, and that Columbia University is also a major contributor to the Clintons?

    Isn’t it true that you gave this memo that you wrote on Bureau time on a classified computer in a Bureau car… and you gave this memo to Daniel Richman, your friend, a liberal professor (at Columbia), and he gave this memo to the New York Times?

    Mr. Comey, you were appointed FBI Director by former President Obama in 2013, as Secretary Clinton was leaving the State Department. Isn’t it true that you were appointed by Obama as FBI Director because you had proven yourself to be of service to the Clintons and their associates and entities that contribute millions of dollars to the Clintons’ non-profit organizations?

    Isn’t it true that you, as Director of the FBI in 2013 did absolutely nothing in regards to the missing $2 billion from the State Department finances, and this happened while Mrs. Clinton was Secretary of State?

    Isn’t it true, that while you were Director of the FBI, for over two years, nothing happened as a result of the FBI “investigations” into the Clinton non-profit organizations?

    If it had not been for the emails that were leaked involving Mrs. Clinton and her associates, all this would be unknown to everyone. But these emails were leaked… and fortunately, the truth is coming out.

    Mr. Mueller isn’t it true that you took US Uranium to RUSSIA FOR HILLARY CLINTON? Isn’t it true you assisted Clinton in the sale of 20% of US uranium?

    Mr. Mueller did you receive any monies or position appointments due to helping secretary Clinton?

    Robert Mueller is an expert at making nothing look like something. He did it in Iraq, he did it when he sent a planeload of people to frame WikiLeaks and he is doing it to frame President Trump and his administration. I do not trust Rosenstein either he appointed Mueller knowing full well he is a Clinton troll.
    Robert Mueller has yet again been proven to be a biased and unfair counsel in terms of the investigation.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  59. Comey and Sally Yates were unforced errors. I thought Mr. President the Trump was good at saying: “You’re fired!”

    Firing Comey would have put McCabe in charge of the FBI. Not seeing that as the smart move. It would just be a different move that people would be pointing to in order to say that Trump is dumb.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  60. the FBI is gayer than Jan Brady’s first boyfriend

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  61. What FBI snoops want to ask and what the law obligates people to answer are two different things. And a judge ruling on the questions will know what “irrelevant”, “immaterial”, “incompetent”, “innuendo”, “speculation”, and “red herrings” mean.

    nk (dbc370)

  62. 46.that’s saddening to learn cause I thought things were going rather well

    So did our Captain, but the next thing he knew: divorces, bankruptcies, Rudy in drag…

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 4/20/2018 @ 7:35 pm

    He was trying to test the Broke Widow Fallacy.

    Otto the German was driving from Germany to Paris to visit some relatives.
    A French cop stops him and asks the usual questions:

    cop: name?

    Otto: Otto

    cop: address?

    Otto: 341 Brandenburg Street, Berlin

    cop: Occupation?

    Otto: no, just visiting…

    Pinandpuller (be5553)

  63. “the far left”

    Is there any left that isn’t “far left”?

    Davethulhu (7e7722)

  64. @13

    E-mails. “Hey LL, Bubba says he’ll meet you on the tarmac at six, M’kay?” from Hills@hotmail.com.

    “P.S. Let me know if he tries anything.”

    Dave (445e97)

  65. Col H
    It boils down to this: Trump had enough dealings with foreign entities, many of them from Russia and ex Soviet republics, many of them apparently shady, to make it seem reasonable to think Trump is as corrupt as anyone in the Deep State. In fact, it can be taken as a sign of FBI incompetence that those dealings weren’t investigated long before he became President.

    As it is, all we have now is the Trumpian kettle calling the Clintonian pot black.

    Kishnevi (413847)

  66. the clintonian pot’s a dark morass of weedy corruption and dead skunk

    with a pair a erstwhile potentially-historic saggy boobs on top

    and when the sun shines we shine together

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  67. Is there any left that isn’t “far left”?

    It sure doesn’t seem like it anymore. There are a few: Camilla Paglia, Dershowitz, a few others. I would have included Megan McArdle, but she keeps claiming she leans right. Looking at what passes for the left these days, I can see why.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  68. I finished Comey’s book this evening. (I didn’t get an advance copy like the media people.) I have some thoughts that non-partisans would find interesting. I think there is still a handful of you left.

    I hope you’ll post a review. I haven’t decided whether to buy it yet (I’m keeping my dance card open for Jonah’s Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy, which comes out next week).

    Dave (445e97)

  69. Megan McArdle’s jes tryin keep her head bove the swampwater (gimme sum dat sweet rotisserie chikin)

    and when the sun shines we shine together

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  70. As it is, all we have now is the Trumpian kettle calling the Clintonian pot black.

    Kishnevi (413847) — 4/20/2018 @ 9:08 pm

    The main difference is Trump was trying to make money and the Clintons were trying to take money.

    Pinandpuller (be5553)

  71. be real if you wanted to cast a pre-caitlin bruce jenner (before transition) in your production you’d get womanish james comey on board

    because

    when the sun shines we shine together

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  72. oopers *caitlyn*

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  73. If I were inclined to gauge the ratio of corruption between the Trump-Kushners and the Clintons, I’d use the ratio of their respective fortunes. Or is that too far left?

    nk (dbc370)

  74. yeah that’s waaay too far left

    pls to stop being such a pinko

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  75. Figure out what you have to say and then say it. This post is another waste. What is the value add of knowing you bought the book…oh, now you’ve started reading it…now you’ve finished it?

    Come up with some synthesized point or analysis and then express it.

    Anonymous (d41cee)

  76. woke candyland

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  77. Did you know that Alexandra means “repels men”?

    nk (dbc370)

  78. ok that changes everything

    brb

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  79. because!

    when the sun shines we shine together

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  80. Oil Shrugs Off Trump Tweet to Rise for a Second Straight Week

    by Bloomberg

    way to shrug off that trump tweet, oil

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  81. @80. Will a Nobel Peace Prize for North Korea go in a frame on a shelf or to his head, Mr. Feet?

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  82. Oil Shrugs Off Trump Tweet to Rise for a Second Straight Week

    That’s because it’s the oil cartels, not the Rothchilds, who control the weather and they are causing unseasonably cold temperatures around the world.

    nk (dbc370)

  83. do u hear the people sing mr. dcsca

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  84. Did you know that Alexandra means “repels men”?

    nk (dbc370) — 4/20/2018 @ 9:40 pm

    I did not, but I’m glad it’s one of my daughter’s middle names.

    Pinandpuller (be5553)

  85. @80. Will a Nobel Peace Prize for North Korea go in a frame on a shelf or to his head, Mr. Feet?

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 4/20/2018 @ 10:33 pm

    He’s gotta get it the old fashioned way. Plus, he can beg for the NYC Olympic games, right?

    Pinandpuller (be5553)

  86. As it is, all we have now is the Trumpian kettle calling the Clintonian pot black.

    Kishnevi (413847) — 4/20/2018 @ 9:08 pm

    You read all that and this is what you come up with? Interesting.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  87. @85. Only Donald Trump could end the Korean War. He’ll tell us so.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  88. @84. Did you know that Alexandra means “repels men”? nk (dbc370) — 4/20/2018 @ 9:40 pm
    I did not, but I’m glad it’s one of my daughter’s middle names.

    Just as well; ‘Scotchgard’ is trademarked.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  89. 83.do u hear the people sing mr. dcsca

    Golden melodies, Mr. Feet; it’s fate: the Nobel Prize medallion matches the color of his hair.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  90. effing scandies and their effing colour schemes

    it’s how it is

    but it’s not right is it

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  91. paperhouse

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  92. @90. Trump’s hair color may be trademarked, too, Mr. Feet. Sue Sweden! Or maybe just date her instead– he wants more of them to emigrate.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  93. he wants the best of stuff for us Mr. DCSCA

    that’s almost all he wants, mostly

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  94. that Comey can come off as egocentric but an honest person w/poor judgment.

    With a trace of sanctimonious jerk. Exactly the person I want running the FBI. Can’t see why he’d get fired.

    —-

    But as to the main topic, I’d expect that the MEANS, not the source are the issue. If Trump’s people don’t release it, you can be SURE that there are good reasons. They must be chomping at the bit to change the channel.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  95. “There was great indignation and much disapproval last year when it was reported that President Trump had asked then-FBI Director James Comey for “loyalty.” Such a request, it was said, was more characteristic of a mob boss than a president — “mob boss” being a phrase Comey himself would use in a book whose title (A Higher Loyalty) he took from the president’s request.

    Now, Comey’s book and the revelations it has triggered are casting new light on the “loyalty” issue — a light that makes Trump’s position look far more understandable.

    The short version is this: In Trump’s first meeting with the FBI director, on January 6, 2017, when Trump was president-elect, Comey asked to meet alone with Trump. When the two were by themselves, face-to-face, Comey told Trump about the “golden showers” episode in the Trump dossier. Comey didn’t discuss any other parts of the dossier. He just outlined the dossier’s tale of Trump involved in a kinky sex show in a Moscow hotel room in 2013. . . .

    At Comey’s next meeting with the president, however, on January 28, Trump brought up loyalty, according to the Comey memos. The two men were discussing leaks and how damaging they could be. Comey explained to the president that “the entire government leaks like crazy.” Then Comey wrote that, “[Trump] replied that he needed loyalty and expected loyalty.”

    The news of that exchange — leaked by Comey after Trump fired him — spurred widespread outrage over Trump’s mention of loyalty. But the context of Trump’s statement — not known until now — adds to our understanding of the president’s talk.

    Why would Trump wonder about the FBI director’s loyalty? Perhaps because in their first meeting, the FBI director dropped the Moscow sex allegation on Trump, followed immediately by its publication in the media. It seems entirely reasonable for a president to wonder what was going on and whether the FBI director was loyal, not to the president personally, but to the confidentiality that is required in his role as head of the nation’s chief investigative agency.“

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  96. Trump conducts his own sting operation to ensnare intelligence briefers – and says he caught them leaking

    President-elect Donald Trump described a sting operation he says he conducted after becoming infuriated by a series of leaks about his own classified briefings

    He says he decided to tell no one about a particular secret briefing, shielding even his longtime scheduling aide, Rhona Graff, to rule out the possibility leaks were coming from his staff

    When word got out anyway, Trump concluded it was the intelligence community who was putting out information

    He described the operation he conducted after suggesting intelligence officials leaked a fake dirty dossier of information about him

    From Daily Mail (UK) a week after Comey briefs Trump privately selectively on part(s) of the 2 page summary Clapper/Brennan/Comey preparrd for the Trump Tower meeting on the importance of PDB’s and after the WH meeting Susan Rice memorialized Obama’s direction to proceed “by the book.”

    crazy (d99a88)

  97. UPDATE: A commenter at RedState links to a 2017 Washington Post story that suggests that this document has been discussed before, and discounted by the FBI. If this is the document, there may be nothing to this story after all.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  98. Why would Trump wonder about the FBI director’s loyalty? Perhaps because in their first meeting, the FBI director dropped the Moscow sex allegation on Trump, followed immediately by its publication in the media. It seems entirely reasonable for a president to wonder what was going on and whether the FBI director was loyal, not to the president personally, but to the confidentiality that is required in his role as head of the nation’s chief investigative agency.

    This is the new hotness: IC was blackmailing Trump. You guys run with that. Have fun.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  99. Byron York has been proven right much more often than not. Be glad to run with it.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  100. Byron York has been proven right much more often than not. Be glad to run with it.

    I used to like Byron York. Now, not so much.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  101. It’s very admirable of President Trump to be so silent about this blackmail attempt. His restraint reminds me of Gandhi. His silence gives the blackmail story a lot of credibility, because it’s not like Trump is a stream of consciousness goofball who squawks in public about literally every bad word said about him or threat made to him.

    Yes, this is a very credible story, and I think you should spread it far and wide. Careful and sober journalists like Mollie Hemingway and Byron York are willing to push this theory, and I think you should too.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  102. “I used to like Byron York. Now, not so much.“

    Seems to be a trend here.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  103. Seems to be a trend here.

    Yup. A lot of people who get paid to opine for a living have cast aside all reason to support their President.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  104. Seems like an awful lot of people owe you apologies for disappointing you so.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  105. I don’t get paid so I have the freedom to react the way a normal person would.

    You can put all the social pressure you want on me to fold. You’d think you would have learned by now that I don’t.

    But you admire the people who do fold. So why don’t you go admire their craven BS and leave me alone? Are you enjoying hanging around here tsk tsking that I don’t appreciate the wonderful accomplishments of your bald orange con man the way you do?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  106. Seems like an awful lot of people owe you apologies for disappointing you so.

    You know what? You can believe whatever stupid nonsense you want to believe. Just stop trying to pressure me to sign on. It’s not going to work. Ever. So give it up.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  107. Now go run off to the site of the guy who removes content when legally threatened by a convicted bomber and perjurer. He’s the real hero here.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  108. And if he weren’t so openly contemptuous of Trump critics as supposed weaklings, I wouldn’t say a word about that — as I didn’t for months.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  109. I like the fact that you consider Barack Obama to be a good example of morality, given his use of busloads of SIEU thugs over his two terms. For instance.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  110. I like the fact that you consider Barack Obama to be a good example of morality, given his use of busloads of SIEU thugs over his two terms. For instance.

    Give me the quote and a link. My feelings about Obama are complicated, and I don’t think I ever would have made a blanket statement like that about him. I think you’re twisting my words. So quote them.

    And if it’s the 2008 post, then GFY because I have discussed that to death, and you’re definitely twisting my words if that’s your source.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  111. UPDATE: A commenter at RedState links to a 2017 Washington Post story that suggests that this document has been discussed before, and discounted by the FBI.

    Sounds like Comey’s been eating too much pie. Though, to be fair, fake Russian info usually results in a FISA warrant so there’s precedent for taking it seriously.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  112. And if it’s the 2008 post, then GFY because I have discussed that to death, and you’re definitely twisting my words if that’s your source.

    Somebody recently asked you if you considered Obama a better or more moral person than Trump, or something to that effect, and you said yes because (IIRC) he behaved with some dignity while he was in office.

    I don’t remember the exact wording, or what thread it was in, but it was within the last week or so.

    (I agreed with the way you phrased your answer…)

    Dave (445e97)

  113. Somebody recently asked you if you considered Obama a better or more moral person than Trump, or something to that effect, and you said yes because (IIRC) he behaved with some dignity while he was in office.

    I don’t remember the exact wording, or what thread it was in, but it was within the last week or so.

    (I agreed with the way you phrased your answer…)

    I do consider Obama a better and more moral person than Trump. And here is exactly what I said, with a quote and a link:

    A better human being? Sure. He’s a far more moral human being.

    That is not saying much, and it certainly does not mean that I “consider Barack Obama to be a good example of morality.” He clearly engaged in a lot of immmoral behavior both before being elected President and while serving.

    Not remotely as much as Donald Trump.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  114. Agreed. There’s a helluva lot of dignity in delivering billions to the Iranians, and lying about it. It’s not nearly in the same class as lying about paying off a porn star. Obama lied with dignity.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  115. Yeah, “more moral than Donald Trump” is like “smarter than Maxine Waters”. It’s a pretty low hurdle.

    Dave (445e97)

  116. Colonel Haiku

    I saw what looked like an extended cab Smart Car but it was a Fiat 500 sort of convertible. Do those come with a cupon for a free deep vein thrombosis ultrasound study?

    Pinandpuller (5b5cf0)

  117. Agreed. There’s a helluva lot of dignity in delivering billions to the Iranians, and lying about it. It’s not nearly in the same class as lying about paying off a porn star. Obama lied with dignity.

    Yay! Twisting other people’s words is fun! Internet FOR DA WIN

    Patterico (115b1f)

  118. People can’t succeed in “winning” by discussing things with me by treating what I say fairly. So they put words in my mouth.

    People like that will be ignored or mocked, and not met with respect, because they are not respecting me.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  119. Agreed. There’s a helluva lot of dignity in delivering billions to the Iranians, and lying about it. It’s not nearly in the same class as lying about paying off a porn star. Obama lied with dignity.

    What are you hoping to accomplish by mispresenting my words like this? Some virtual backslaps from the other Trump-humpers?

    Patterico (115b1f)


  120. It’s a pretty low hurdle.


    And yet neither hurdle can be cleared by any known leftist democrat, comrade Dr. Dave.

    Rev.Hoagie (1b0402)

  121. Yeah, “more moral than Donald Trump” is like “smarter than Maxine Waters”. It’s a pretty low hurdle.

    If I said Obama was smarter than Maxine Waters then the geniuses here would pull every stupid Obama quote in history and dishonestly pretend that I had praised the wisdom and intelligence of those stupid quotes.

    I’m really over this puerile form of idiocy. This is grown men doing this?

    Patterico (115b1f)


  122. Trump-humpers?


    Really?

    Rev.Hoagie (1b0402)

  123. And yet neither hurdle can be cleared by any known leftist democrat, comrade Dr. Dave.

    You don’t think Barack Obama is smarter than Maxine Waters, Hoagie? Seriously?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  124. Really?

    Really.

    What, you’re going to clutch your pearls now? In the next comment you’ll be calling any Trump critic a commie.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  125. “I saw what looked like an extended cab Smart Car but it was a Fiat 500 sort of convertible. Do those come with a cupon for a free deep vein thrombosis ultrasound study?”

    Ha! I own a 2012 500 Abarth (which is the 160hp/170 lb-ft version) and it’s much roomier inside for 2 peeps than it looks. I’ve driven it RT NorCal to SoCal 5 or 6 times and it’s a comfortable car, a big improvement over it’s predecessor, a 350Z. The Z would wear me out on that same trip.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  126. Taints Back-bencher Squad

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  127. Taint for one or the other.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  128. Taint Netherregion World

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)


  129. What, you’re going to clutch your pearls now? In the next comment you’ll be calling any Trump critic a commie.
    Patterico (115b1f) — 4/21/2018 @ 1:14 pm


    Cut it out, Patterico. I don’t clutch my pearls and I only call people commies who act like commies. My “Really?” was meant to point out that type of comment is not like you. I can understand comrades noel, Tillman, Dr. Dave and Duhlio saying stupid sh!t but you aren’t that intellectually limited. Just cause you don’t like Trump? Silly. Plus, you always make good arguments you needn’t stoop to name calling. That’s what lefty’s do when they’re out of ideas.

    Rev.Hoagie (1b0402)

  130. Yay! Twisting other people’s words is fun! Internet FOR DA WIN

    Patterico, I was responding to Dave @113

    I twisted nobody’s words.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  131. you needn’t stoop to name calling. That’s what lefty’s do when they’re out of ideas.

    This is an evergreen post.

    Davethulhu (7e7722)

  132. Patterico’s exact words: “A better human being? Sure. He’s a far more moral human being.“

    When Trump releases billions of dollars to Kim Jong Un, I’ll consider Obama to be a “far more moral human being” than Trump.

    There are countess other examples, such as lying about the impact of the ACA, etc.

    A “far more moral human being” does that I suppose.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  133. Tainted Love Team

    Sometimes they feel they’ve got to
    Run away
    They’ve got to
    Get away from the vote they cast for that pot smokin’ guy
    The way they think would
    Drive a man to drink
    And they’ve lost their way
    For they b*tch and moan both night and day
    Once they knew what’s right (what’s right)
    Now they fuss and fight
    This tainted team they play for
    I’ve said too much but I will say more
    Suck on this and that’s not nearly all
    Oh tainted team
    Tainted Team
    One day soon they’ve got to
    Take a stand, they’ve got to
    Make ‘em pay
    They don’t really want it any more than me
    To make things right
    They’ll need to show less fright
    If they think Trump ain’t the way
    Well I’m sorry crazy’s here to stay

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  134. @131: If I were a blog host, I’d say “Take it back!” — as I’ve seen done numerous times here. But, alas, I’m not.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  135. There are countess other examples, such as lying about the impact of the ACA, etc.

    A “far more moral human being” does that I suppose.

    Yup. A far more moral human being (Obama) did many immoral things. That is what I am saying. Sorry-not-sorry to take your black and white world and show you some gray.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  136. Patterico, I was responding to Dave @113

    I twisted nobody’s words.

    OK. It wasn’t clear but I accept your explanation.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  137. Trump-humpers?

    Like that! Brief. Imaginative. Descriptive.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  138. Now back to your regular programming…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  139. Like that! Brief. Imaginative. Descriptive.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 4/21/2018 @ 3:23 pm

    Or irregular…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  140. @123. Hoagie:

    [ ] Trumpster?

    [ ] Trumpeteer?

    [ ] Trumpeter?

    [ ] Trump-humper?

    Which fits your pistol… really.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  141. @141. =Haiku!= Gesundheit!

    Or irregular…

    Try bran. Flake.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  142. Who has taken more balls to teh chin AND developed an apparently well-deserved reputation for telling tall tales?

    [ ] Tommy Flanagan

    [ ] Barry Bonds

    [ ] Yogi Berra

    [ ] Rock Hudson

    [ X] DCSCA

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)


  143. Which fits your pistol… really.
    DCSCA (797bc0) — 4/21/2018 @ 3:26 pm


    Which ever you like, comrade DCSCA. I realize those bereft of ideas sling sh!t. Sling away cupcake, sling away. It’s beneath Patterico but way, way expected of you.

    Rev.Hoagie (1b0402)

  144. Y’all will like the next post because it’s anti-Comey and you like anti-Comey stuff because it seems pro-Trump. I still insult Trump once or twice so a couple of people will complain that I still have to insult Trump in the middle of a post attacking Comey. But mostly you will like it, because it seems pro-Trump.

    A tiny, tiny number will also like it because I spent a lot of time on it to make sure it was detailed, informative, and well-written.

    But most of you will like it because it seems pro-Trump.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  145. Actually I take it back because I say he didn’t make the decisions out of partisan bias and that’s what you have to say to get the Trumpers’ stamp of approval. So never mind you’ll hate it

    Patterico (115b1f)

  146. Patterico, quit pretending. You actually do like Trump, you just don’t like him all that much.

    ropelight (2b34e3)

  147. @144. telling tall tales?

    =Haiku= Gesundheit!

    Open wide, Colonel: Comey is a big man.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  148. Tedious.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  149. I hope he was gentle with you, ASPCA.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  150. Actually I take it back because I say he didn’t make the decisions out of partisan bias and that’s what you have to say to get the Trumpers’ stamp of approval. So never mind you’ll hate it.

    You’re a bad person.

    Dave (445e97)

  151. @151.=Haiku!= Gesundheit!

    Jealous. A man’s man, Colonel!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  152. Lol… TMI, Pops…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  153. I think a difference between moral and immoral presidents is the moral ones might feel bad for their excesses.

    Pinandpuller (69da0c)

  154. @155. I think a difference between moral and immoral presidents is the moral ones might feel bad for their excesses.

    Or pretty damned good; let’s ask Fiddle and Faddle.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  155. Why doesn’t Donald Trump declassify this information?

    People are telling him not to, and there may be plausible sounding reasons for not doing it. And hes not interfering very much with any investigation. He didn’t even order the Departnmenmt of Justice to turn ove rthe Comey memoes to a Congressional committee.

    It’s also true maybe taht Donald Trump is really not aware of this, although it probably has been on the teevee, but it was passed over quickly without commentary. Donald Trump pays attention to commentaries by people on Fox News mostly.

    There is much confusion about this. Whether it is phony or not, or had anything really to do with Loretta Lynch not wanting to “clear” Hillary.

    We don’t need and didn’t need any of this or anything like this to “cast serious doubt on the attorney general’s independence in connection with the Clinton investigation.”

    That’s a BIG LIE.

    You mean really, but for some phony disinformation, we would think Loretta Lynch was impartial?

    That claim is itself a lie.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  156. The “unverified” informaiton jhas bene published. It is evidently something one Russian wrote to another a- or supposedly wrote to another – about what two – who were not actually in contact with each other – said where one supposedly said to the otehr that Lynch would not charge Hillary.

    Comey used that as the excuse for his intervention or for Lynch recusinmg herself (except that she didn’t), like as if you needed that to doubt the crdeidbility of anything from Obamas DOJ clearing Hillary.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4920 secs.