As the dueling impeachment narratives unfold, one of the recurring themes is the Demsndenial of any Democrat involvement in rigging 2016.
They bend over backward to throw around words like ‘debunked’ and ‘discredited’ when talking about Ukraine involvement in influencing our election — despite knowledge of the Black Dossier that resulted in Manafort’s firing, and documents John Solomon has unearthed about connections between Burisma and Obama’s Administration.
They NEED to be seen as the ‘good guys’ in this story or their entire narrative falls apart.
If it turns out that they were gaming the system all along, the Dems are royally screwed. And in the same Trump’s moment, claims of being the target of a witchhunt are completely validated.
The product of a year-and-a-half-long investigation, Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s findings are poised to create a new rift between Republicans and Democrats in their clash over the federal investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
“It’s been reported and it’s my understanding that it is imminent,” Barr told reporters Wednesday in Memphis, Tennessee. “A number of people who were mentioned in the report are having an opportunity right now to comment on how they’re quoted in the report. And after that process is over, which should be very short, the report will be issued. That’s what the inspector general himself suggests.”
President Trump’s GOP allies assert Horowitz’s report will show top Justice Department and FBI officials misled the FISA court by using an unverified dossier compiled by British ex-spy Christopher Steele to obtain warrants to electronically monitor onetime Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Democrats, as well as current and former FBI officials, dismissed allegations of wrongdoing and have raised concerns that information about U.S. intelligence gathering could be weaponized to discredit special counsel Robert Mueller.
Touting Horowitz as a “fiercely independent” and “superb” investigator who “conducted this particular investigation in the most professional way,” Barr said he expects his report to be “a credit to the department.”
What was he looking into?
In response to requests by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions and members of Congress, Horowitz announced the investigation in March 2018, writing that his review would “examine the Justice Department’s and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) compliance with legal requirements, and with applicable DOJ and FBI policies and procedures, in applications filed with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) relating to a certain U.S. person. As part of this examination, the OIG also will review information that was known to the DOJ and the FBI at the time the applications were filed from or about an alleged FBI confidential source.”
In addition, Horowitz said he would “review the DOJ’s and FBI’s relationship and communications with the alleged source as they relate to the FISC applications” and “if circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider including other issues that may arise during the course of the review.”
His announcement followed the February 2018 release of a memo from the House Intelligence Committee, which at the time was led by Republicans, outlining allegations that DOJ and FBI officials misled the FISA court. Democrats put together a rebuttal memo that defended the actions of the DOJ and FBI.
That brings into sharp focus the question Bill Barr wanted answered one that Mueller didn’t take an interest in.
Was the surveillance of a Presidential campaign justified, or corrupt?
The answer to that question could change everything. And we already have clues to it being corrupt, which could potentially lead to criminal referrals at the highest levels, possibly adding weight to Durham’s investigation which has itself moved into the Criminal Investigation phase.
And we already know that the FISA requests were signed by people who confirmed the reliability of the evidence therein, and that evidence relied either heavily or entirely upon the
Who could be hurt the most by this?
Ironically, Adam Schiff and his impeachment fantasies.
If Devon Nunes and Adam Schiff have sat on the same committees, and Nunes has known for years about the serious problems in the surveillance against the President.
If it turns out that Nunes was right about the set-up while looking at the same information that had Schiff steadfastly insisted he had inside information ‘proving’ Trump was a Russian stooge, why does that do to the credibility of the Schiff Showtrial?
We’ve all seen the dishonest games the left have played with the power they’re entrusted with, they’re obviously unworthy of that trust.
But what about 2020? Could a moral person pull a lever for Trump with their integrity intact? Would Jesus himself vote for Trump? We’re glad you asked. There’s a brand new book that covers precisely that question:
“Would Jesus Vote For Trump?” by Doug Giles and Brandon Vallorani.
Would Jesus ever choose someone, with a less than stellar past, to be a leader? Would Jesus be cool with how Trump blasts CNN, The Left, and his feckless ‘compadres’ on The Right? What about Health Care? Would the Great Physician give Trump’s opposition to ObamaCare the ‘two thumbs up?’ Find out in this BEST-SELLER!