Kimberley Strassel: The “Mindset” of the “Coup” is more alarming than Partisanship…

Excellent presentation by Kimberley Strassel discussing the scale and scope of the government weaponization during the 2016 election; and the willful assistance by an ideological U.S. media.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, President Trump, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

199 Responses to Kimberley Strassel: The “Mindset” of the “Coup” is more alarming than Partisanship…

  1. Sentient says:

    Overall that was a great summary. She’s still a little credulous about Mueller in that, while she said he had a conflict of interest and she couldn’t believe he didn’t investigate the source of the dossier, she doesn’t seem to have concluded yet that he was almost certainly part of the obstruction trap plot from well before he was named Special Counsel. And of course, that means that Rosenstein was part of that plot, too.

    Liked by 10 people

    • BernieSandersDiaper says:

      In the congress hearing said that ” mueller And muller was up to the task ” of “investigating” the president, only Mueller, said comey , only mueller…

      He said so in Congress


    • Dutchman says:

      Agree, but; As a GOOD reporter, its in her DNA to report FACTS, that can be CONFIRMED, not speculate, or give opinions.
      And she certainly would want to maintain that in a Public, videotaped speech.

      We all ‘know’ Mueller was focused on “Obstruction”, before he was even appointed,…we all KNOW a lot of things.

      But PROVE it. She rightly stuck to whats provable, in her presentation, pretty well.

      So, we all know the gang of 7 were in it up to their eyeballs, but PROVE it.
      Only if Comey ‘flips’and tells how he gave a different briefing to Nunes than to the others, and that the Speaker of the House, amongst others, signed of on a coup against the new POTUS, will we be able to prove it.
      (It WAS Comey who briefed gang if 8, wasn’t it? Or was it Brennan? All 3 mouthy clowns seem the same, to me!)

      Liked by 6 people

      • Mikgen says:


        Liked by 1 person

      • budklatsch says:

        Yes, as I am watching now the three characters pointing fingers at one another, I am reminded of the Three Stooges routines where one would point his finger at the other and get slapped up side his head and then point his finger at the third and on and on. But seriously, I see this as their defense. No one was responsible, it just happened in their zeal to protect the country.


  2. Luz Maria Rodriguez says:

    So refreshing to read or listen to a real journalist. Such a rare breed these days.
    Thank you, Kimberly.

    Liked by 8 people

  3. Kleen says:

    Undercover Huber

    FollowFollow @JohnWHuber
    EXCLUSIVE: Congress is in possession of sworn testimony from a senior FBI official that the “Woods Procedure” for FISA does not involve *verifying* whether “facts” are actually *true*

    Just that there is a source for each footnote. Those sources can be as simple as a news article
    4:05 PM – 18 May 2019

    Undercover Huber

    FollowFollow @JohnWHuber
    EXCLUSIVE: The FBI Supervisory Special Agent sworn “affiant” on the @carterwpage FISA warrant did not even review the underlying “Woods File” before signing it and submitting for DOJ review

    Andy McCarthy. Verified account
    5h5 hours ago
    Replying to @JohnWHuber
    I wouldn’t make this about the Woods Procedure. It’s basic: Steele was not the SOURCE; he was the ACCUMULATOR/PURVEYOR of the info, like a case agent. You can’t get a warrant on the case agent’s credibility; you’re supposed to give court reasons to rely on actual sources.

    Earlier today, McCarthy said even if there are only news articles to “verify facts” or if the Woods File is completely empty, that it is not criminal

    The Woods File is a procedure, not law🤷🏻‍♀️


    • Kleen says:

      People on Twitter think that the woods procedure not being a law but just a procedure is what Comey was trying to say with his picture in the woods staring at trees

      Not following it, is not a crime according to Andy McCarthy. Also even a News report can be used to get a FISA.

      What Constitution????

      Rumors on Twitter says that Muller was the author of the woods procedure. I have no idea if that’s true.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Maquis says:

        My understanding is that Mueller instituted the Woods procedure as FBI Director because he was caught abusing the FISA Court. Oops.

        Sorry McCarthy, FISA is already an unConstitutional atrocity and procedures to avoid its abuse should damned well be honored as if they were law, even law with the severest of penalties.

        Go sell your quisling equivocating somewhere else, to some people that know not freedom and who willfully embrace foolishness such as passes for your wisdom.

        Liked by 4 people

        • Grassleysgirl/Breitbartista says:

          Good ole AndyMac is a swamp dweller and never-Trumper IMO . Highly respected. Highly respected! I put him in the same bucket as Saul on Ingrahams show. Just can’t get past the distaste in his mouth.
          Keep conducting my MAESTRO#KAG

          Liked by 3 people

    • Justin Green says:

      It’s still not legal to withhold exculpatory evidence, lie about having reliable sources when you know they aren’t, and to illegally spy before having the warrant.

      Good thing that this doesn’t hinge on just the Woods Procedure.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. William Schneider says:

    Another voice of reason amidst the madness. Kimberly is a blessing for sure. Let us pray her efforts are not in vain to uncover the truth and bring justice and lasting reform to the old swamp creatures of Washington. Let us pray for the warriors who will really make this happen-Barr , Graham, Trump, Nunes, Jordan, to name a few. Victory is within sight!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • boomerbeth says:

      Graham has backed out; he blows in the wind.
      And John Durham wants to wake up and live another day, & provide for his family.
      No Indian chiefs will get punished; only the unknown Indians,

      Just like Papadopolous.


  5. Elle says:

    So we are now at the point where they admit that they did not bother to verify* whether the “facts” presented to the FISA court were actually *true*. But no worries. As long as they filled the form out by the book, it’s okay.

    Liked by 1 person

    • johnps30 says:

      Unfortunately for them, Adm. Rogers found abuses against the FISA court going back into 2015 and it is suspected that the contractors getting illegally acquired raw intelligence worked for GPS Fusion. Di Genova suggests the FISA judge knows they were lied to and who it was that did the lying!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Pyrthroes says:

        If these mystical, magical FISA judges were so aware that criminal misrepresentation, evidence tampering, perjury, were de rigueur in Intel Community (IC) circles, how cum these paragons of integrity forebore to squash Brennan, Comey et al. like the commie Rats they were (and are)?

        Seventy-two years following Hiroshima, the post-WW II period ended right on schedule in January 2017. Once such three-generation Zeitgeists shift, Old Orders passeth “like ships in the night”… so let it be with deadhead, trogbrain Bernie Bros, Brer Biden with his peculating briar patch outworn.

        Liked by 1 person

    • phillip jeffreys says:

      Susan Rice e-mail.


  6. Violation of the Woods Proceedure and established procedure to uphold the 4th amendment would be a violation of substantive due process under the 5th amendment. This Failure would be a conspiracy to deprive constitutional rights

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

    Kim is outstandlng…….

    Says Barr: JEJUNE

    “Seems to me a single FISA and a confidential informant is a rather ANEMIC OPERATION given the nature of the threat as it’s been reported.”

    Liked by 1 person

  8. 6x47 says:

    I have been posting this for at least a year: The process of laundering false information through British sources, giving it the patina of veracity, is pulled straight from Hillary Clinton’s “vast right wing conspiracy” theory of the 1990’s.

    In her white paper (available online from the Clinton Presidential library) the process by which Clinton enemies planted lies in the British tabloids, which American media sources then picked up as newsworthy for the reason that British newspapers had reported it, is precisely what she did with the Steele Dossier.

    Via the Perkins-Coie cutout, Fusion GPS assembled the hoax, and then routed it to the through Christopher Steele to the FBI via multiple routes (Brennan’s EC, Senator McCain, Senator Reid, the State Department) to create the appearance of veracity from “multiple sources” (all really the lone, non-credible source), which THEN became newsworthy and the predicate for opening an investigation. Not in its own right, but because there was so much buzz about it.

    I recall seeing Hillary supporters lamenting that it was disgraceful that Trump was also under FBI investigation but it wasn’t widely reported before the election. I think at least in part the intention was to take some heat off Hillary by creating some equivalence of criminality for Trump.

    Liked by 4 people

  9. John says:

    I think it is more accurate to say that the dossier was created by Fusion and laundered through Steele to give it spy legitimacy.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Papoose says:

    Sunday School Sermon
    April 2018

    Political Corruption- Kimberly Stassel

    Commence, Patriots ~


  11. tav144 says:


    In 2014, 47 of the nation’s 73 inspectors general signed a letter alleging that Obama had stonewalled their “ability to conduct our work thoroughly, independently, and in a timely manner.”

    Even so, they were still able to do some limited oversight:

    In 2012, Horowitz recommended that 14 Justice Department and ATF officials be disciplined for their conduct in the “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scandal.

    A 2013 IG audit found that the IRS had targeted conservative groups for special scrutiny prior to the 2012 Obama reelection effort.

    In 2014, an internal audit revealed that CIA officials had hacked the Senate Intelligence Committee’s computers while compiling a report on enhanced interrogation techniques. CIA director John Brennan had claimed that his agents were not improperly monitoring Senate staff computer files. He was forced to retract his denials and apologize for his prevarication.

    In 2016, the State Department’s inspector general found that Hillary Clinton had never sought approval for her reckless and illegal use of an unsecured private email server. The IG also found that other Clinton aides silenced staffers who were worried about national security being compromised by the unsecured server.

    Still, Obama was right in a way: A scandal does not become a scandal if no one acts on findings of improper behavior.

    Under former attorneys general Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, the findings of dozens of IGs were snubbed. That raises the question: What good are inspectors general if a president ignores any illegality and impropriety that they have uncovered?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Alan Reasin says:

      True IGs have limited use and any federal prosecutor who would dare to prosecute would be legally fired. During the Watergate scandal. U.S. President Richard Nixon ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire independent special prosecutor Archibald Cox; Richardson refused and resigned effective immediately. Nixon then ordered Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus to fire Cox; Ruckelshaus refused, was fired. And they were not heard of again; careers ruined although they did what was right. Thus federal prosecutors have an example of what happens if you dare to go it alone. In your examples you show that careers are more important than doing what is right under the rule of law. Disgusting.


  12. Bob, Esq. says:

    Anybody ever hear of this guy? Anthony Schafer? His ability to sum things up rivals Kimberley Strassel and Joe DiGenova.


  13. Bob, Esq. says:

    Wow; that wasn’t the video I just watched. Same topic, but I haven’t seen it yet.

    This is the one I just saw and thought was great


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s