New York Times Confirms Peter Strzok Team Underling, Kevin Clinesmith, is FBI Lawyer Who Altered FISA Application…

The New York Times is confirming that Kevin Clinesmith is the “low-level lawyer” within the FBI who doctored evidence within the Carter Page FISA application.

As anticipated, the DOJ and FBI ‘small group’ leaks are from their individual review of a heavily compartmented IG report; and now they are being selectively shaped by the favorite ‘small group’ media network: NY Times, Washington Post, CNN, Politico et al.

Remember, each of the principals only was able to see the draft of the IG report specific to their outline therein.  All principal reviews were very compartmented.  No principal has any idea what the bottom line conclusions are from the totality of the assembled compartments.  An example of this is in the very first paragraph.

The New York Times article is purposefully heavy on narrative engineering.  However, given how the accountability trends are identified by the specifics of the narrative construction, that’s not a bad thing.  As CTH outlined in anticipation of this phase, take the first wave of media justification with a grain-of-salt. There are two clear angles visible in the narrative assembly.   First, here is the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — A highly anticipated report by the Justice Department’s inspector general is expected to sharply criticize lower-level F.B.I. officials as well as bureau leaders involved in the early stages of the Trump-Russia investigation, but to absolve the top ranks of abusing their powers out of bias against President Trump, according to people briefed on a draft.

One can read that from the perspective of accountability and become frustrated.  However, notice the construction closely: “to absolve the top ranks of abusing their powers out of bias against President Trump”… or put another way, there was an “abuse of power”, but that abuse cannot specifically be attributed to bias against the President.  Key point: there was an “abuse of power”, it is in the motive for that abuse where narratives step in.

Secondly on this point… CTH has specifically, intentionally and repeatedly outlined how the “bias” issue was a foregone conclusion ever since the July 2018 IG report of FBI conduct in the Clinton investigation outlined the same position.   If the IG report of the DOJ/FBI conduct in the “mid-year-exam” found no overarching political bias; and all of the principals were exactly the same in the 2019 report on the Carter Page surveillance issue; it stands to reason that same lack of bias conclusion would extend.

[…] Investigators for the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, uncovered errors and omissions in documents related to the wiretapping of a former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page — including that a low-level lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, altered an email that officials used to prepare to seek court approval to renew the wiretap, the people said.

Mr. Horowitz referred his findings about Mr. Clinesmith to prosecutors for a potential criminal charge. Mr. Clinesmith left the Russia investigation in February 2018 after the inspector general identified him as one of a handful of F.B.I. officials who expressed animus toward Mr. Trump in text messages and resigned about two months ago, after the inspector general’s team interviewed him.

Three points here: (1) While Clinesmith, as a normal function of his FBI job, did not report to Peter Strzok, when the teams were assembled for MYE, Crossfire Hurricane, and Robert Mueller investigation, Clinesmith DID work directly for Peter Strzok.  When the teams were selected, Kevin Clinesmith reported to Peter Strzok.  Therefore when the inappropriate behavior was identified; and when the action of manipulating FISA evidence was done; Kevin Clinesmith was reporting directly to FBI supervisory agent Peter Strzok.

(2) Kevin Clinesmith remained in the FBI during the entirety of the Horowitz investigation. He was not released until the investigation was complete and the draft report was submitted.  So the FBI knew they had a problem with Clinesmith back in February of 2018 and he was allowed to continue work until September of this year. It would seem obvious he was being monitored.

(3) Clinesmith’s status during the investigation aligns with another Main Justice employee also connected to the FISA process who was similarly in position throughout and also left in September 2019.  That would be Tashina Guahar.

[…] More broadly, Mr. Horowitz’s report, to be made public on Dec. 9, portrays the overall effort to seek the wiretap order and its renewals as sloppy and unprofessional, according to the people familiar with it. He will also sharply criticize as careless one of the F.B.I. case agents in New York handling the matter, they said.

In my opinion, the report is going to be much more than that.  Why? Because they didn’t just get a ‘wiretap’, they got a Title-1 FISA authorized surveillance warrant; the most extensive and intrusive form of surveillance warrant possible.  A Title-1 warrant allows any and all surveillance. Wiretaps, bugs, electronic surveillance, physical surveillance, the works.  A Title-1 warrant is used against suspected terrorists in the U.S.

[…] In particular, while Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation in some ways, he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials Mr. Trump has vilified like the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey; Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy who temporarily ran the bureau after the president fired Mr. Comey in 2017; and Peter Strzok, a former top counterintelligence agent.

Notice the contradiction and the parsing: “in some ways he made no finding of politically biased actions“…  Some ways?  So there are findings of bias, just not in all ways.  Notice how they repeat a needed narrative tone, yet simultaneously contradicting their lead paragraph.

Again, take this stuff with the proverbial grain of salt.  This is the “small group” selling their narrative through their media allies.  They are trying to make an argument that they are simultaneously undermining.  That’s what happens in the narrative engineering process.

This entire NYT article is fraught with the intent to be obtuse.

[…] The early accounts of the report suggest that it is likely to stoke the debate over the investigation without definitively resolving it, by offering both sides different conclusions they can point to as vindication for their rival worldviews.

[…] The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court first approved wiretapping Mr. Page, who had close ties to Russia, as a suspected unregistered agent of a foreign power in October 2016, after he had left the campaign.

The Justice Department obtained three renewal orders. The paperwork associated with the renewal applications contained information that should have been left out, and vice versa, the people briefed on the draft report said.

“and vice versa”, meaning there was information that should have been included.  Yes, that would be the exculpatory information…. the absence therein speaks to the motive of assembly.

The email Mr. Clinesmith handled was a factor during the wiretap renewal process, according to the people.

Mr. Clinesmith took an email from an official at another federal agency that contained several factual assertions, then added material to the bottom that looked like another assertion from the email’s author, when it was instead his own understanding.

Mr. Clinesmith included this altered email in a package that he compiled for another F.B.I. official to read in preparation for signing an affidavit that would be submitted to the court attesting to the facts and analysis in the wiretap application.

The details of the email are apparently classified and may not be made public even when the report is unveiled.

[…] Additionally, Mr. Clinesmith worked on both the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the Russia investigation. He was among the F.B.I. officials removed by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, after Mr. Horowitz found text messages expressing political animus against Mr. Trump.

Wait, the article just said, including the lead paragraph, Horowitz found no evidence of political bias?

Shortly after Mr. Trump’s election victory, for example, Mr. Clinesmith texted another official that “the crazies won finally,” disparaged Mr. Trump’s health care and immigration agendas, and called Vice President Mike Pence “stupid.” In another text, he wrote, in the context of a question about whether he intended to stay in government, “viva la resistance.”

In a June 2018 report by Mr. Horowitz about that and other politically charged texts, which identified him as “F.B.I. Attorney 2,” Mr. Clinesmith said he was expressing his personal views but did not let them affect his official actions.

The inspector general apparently did not assert in the draft report that any of the problems he found were so material that the court would have rejected the Justice Department’s requests to continue surveilling Mr. Page. But the people familiar with the draft were uncertain about whether Mr. Horowitz said the problems were immaterial, or instead avoided taking a position on that question.

[…] The report is also said to conclude that Joseph Mifsud, a Russia-linked professor who told a Trump campaign official that Russia had damaging information on Mrs. Clinton in the form of hacked Democratic emails — a key fact used to open the investigation — was not an F.B.I. informant. That undercuts an assertion of conservative critics of the inquiry.

No-one in conservative critic circles said Mifsud was an “FBI informant.”  The concern is whether he is a CIA, or Western Intelligence, operative…. not FBI.

You can continue reading the NYT article here.  The bottom line is there is going to be much more than presented in these weak defenses and media constructs.

Having read the initial round of justifications and defenses, CTH is more optimistic than a week ago on the issue of accountability.  It won’t stop at Kevin Clinesmith.

This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, Occupy Type Moonbats, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY. Bookmark the permalink.

565 Responses to New York Times Confirms Peter Strzok Team Underling, Kevin Clinesmith, is FBI Lawyer Who Altered FISA Application…

  1. hawkins6 says:

    sundance’s comprehensive analysis here and others before it are what draws most of us to the site. He/they? always seek to reveal the bigger and more complete story or perspective rather than just report what others have written or learned.

    SD-“Notice the contradiction and the parsing: “in some ways he (IG) made no finding of politically biased actions“… Some ways?

    Only a naive fool would believe that personal bias had no effect on these conspirators but it’s hard to prove “beyond a reasonable doubt.” The numerous interviews of Comey, Brennan, McCabe etc over the last few years were filled with intense disrespect, vitriolic hate and repugnance of PT. It’s not reasonable to believe these powerful emotions had no affect on their actions. Brennan’s toxic message to President Trump, ‘May Your Downfall Be Swift’ is the latest indication that sourpuss Brennan didn’t suddenly develop his mind altering toxic biases after he was replaced. His words reveal a personal vendetta against an elected President and a total lack of respect for PT’s voters.

    Liked by 11 people

  2. thedoc00 says:

    If he does not flip and is admitted to witness protection, he will not last beyond a few days of hitting lock-up. There will actually be a raffle for the contract at the lock-up among prisoners.

    Remember the CYA and by the book memo to self by Page (or was it Rice or Yates). I was skeptical of SD assessment that this memo was the get out jail card for the coup members and I now stand corrected. This guy created a “false pretense and excuse”. The memo is now in play as the saving grace for the coup members.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Jimmy Jack says:

    Thank you for that dose of optimism. We all need a dose of it.

    Mifsud is CIA and possibility connected to other intel agencies. I stand behind my supposition on other posts that much of what we are seeing is all CIA and intelligence agencies. Full CIA infiltration of the FBI, State Department, NSC, DoD, Pentagon etc.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Les Standard says:

      1. Defense Intelligence Agency
      2. National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
      3. National Reconnaissance Office
      4. National Security Agency
      5. Military Intelligence Corps
      6. Office of Naval Intelligence
      7. Twenty-Fifth Air Force
      8. Marine Corps Intelligence
      9. Coast Guard Intelligence
      10. Office of Intelligence and Analysis
      11. Central Intelligence Agency
      12. Bureau of Intelligence and Research
      13. Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence
      14. Office of National Security Intelligence
      15. Intelligence Branch
      16. Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence
      17. Director of National Intelligence

      17 ways to get back at you, as per Chucky Schumer

      Like

    • Matthew LeBlanc says:

      I agree 100%. Strozk is the perfect example. CIA magically appearing nearly everywhere a deep state sensitive role was necessary inside FBI. PDJT is exposing all of it intentionally or not.

      Like

  4. mikeT says:

    Think you’re misreading one sentence. It’s not saying there are some ways in which Horowitz didn’t find politically biased actions. “In some ways” modifies what comes before. Full sentence is saying Isaying though there are some ways in which Horowitz criticized FBI leadership, he’s not accusing anyone of political bias. [Note the comma after “ways.”]

    “In particular, while Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation in some ways, he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials Mr. Trump has vilified like the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey; Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy who temporarily ran the bureau after the president fired Mr. Comey in 2017; and Peter Strzok, a former top counterintelligence agent.”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Alison says:

      You are correct. Sundance removed the comma. That comma makes a world of difference.

      Liked by 1 person

    • RAC says:

      So is that he says they screwed up how they did things, but he made no judgement whether the screw up was politically motivated, the jury can decide that ?
      5 years for the screw up, increased to 20 years if the prosecution can convince the jury that partisan politics made it an aggravated offense ?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Elle says:

      Horowitz made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials Mr. Trump has vilified like the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey;

      So is Comey “like” the only top official being named without politically biased actions? Are they just naming 3 people Horowitz is criticizing for their handling of the investigation? I leave that question to those more familiar with colons and semicolons than I.

      Like

    • Yeoman says:

      I disagree, the comma is immaterial. I would agree with you if it were a semi-colon of a period or even a conjunction with a comma but, as it is written, it provides little more than a slight pause in the reading, like identifying an individual.

      I think Sundance is right because “he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials” is a complete sentence. While it is buried among a bunch of modifying phrases, it is the central point.Therefore, the preceding modifying phrase, “while Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation in some ways”, modifies the core statement.

      If indeed, Horowitz, had found “no…politically biased actions” then, that would have been the leading statement without all the modifiers to make it arguably true. As narrative engineers, they want to make as strong a case as possible.

      Leading with “In particular, Mr Horowitz made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials Mr. Trump has vilified like the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey; Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy who temporarily ran the bureau after the president fired Mr. Comey in 2017; and Peter Strzok, a former top counterintelligence agent; although, Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation in some ways.” Is a MUCH stronger defense than the way they chose to phrase it.

      Just my 2 cents, we’ll see the report soon enough to know which view is more accurate on this.

      Like

  5. islandpalmtrees says:

    LOOK AT THE INTERVIEW FOLLOWING CARTER PAGE AT THE END.
    I believe this is right on target

    The Ingraham Angle 11/22/19 | Laura Ingraham Fox News Novembe­r 22, 2019

    Liked by 3 people

  6. CanaCon says:

    Sundance, thank you for this. I had heard a few selected quotes and was losing the bit of hope I have left before reading this.

    I think you have misconstrued one of the passages. (haven’t read all the comments so apologies if this has been raised earlier)

    “[…] In particular, while Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation in some ways, he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials”

    The comma, coming after “in some ways”, attributes that caveat to “handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation” as opposed to “politically biased actions”.

    I could have been written: “[…] In particular, while Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership in some ways for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation, he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials”

    This interpretation, which I believe is correct, makes the statement “he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials” unmitigated without the caveat “in some ways”.

    I hope that is not as ominous as I find it.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. jello333 says:

    Just a reminder:

    We’re focused on this one guy and this one criminal act. Most of us understand that this will not end with this guy, since it’s pretty obvious he did NOT do this on his own. Fine.

    But what we also want to realize is that this is ONLY ONE criminal act that (we believe) took place, each of which are intertwined, with many other individuals involved. There’s a LOT more than this.

    Like

  8. Pew-Anon says:

    Having read the initial round of justifications and defenses, CTH is more optimistic than a week ago on the issue of accountability. It won’t stop at Kevin Clinesmith.

    We can only hope…but it better not stop there

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Paul Cohen says:

    Unfortunately, the conjunctive sentence asserts TWO separate things: (1) Horowitz criticism of FBI leadership, and (2) NO FINDING of “politically biased actions by top officials”

    (1) “while Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation in some ways,”
    (2) “he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials”

    Like

    • Paul Cohen says:

      Of course we know that Comey, Mccabe, et al. have/had extreme political biases, but the article does not say that the IG report will assert anything like this influencing their actions.

      Like

  10. Rgt says:

    Why not pull a Weissmann on this dough boy and suggest a twenty year stint in a “pound you in the ass” prison. He doesn’t look like he would feel comfortable in orange.

    Seriously though, he has to be convinced that “taking one for the team” will mean losing his freedom while the likes of Peter Peter Lisa Eater pens a book deal in Georgetown.

    I don’t think he knows what a prison is like… they ain’t all country clubs.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Dim Osmab says:

    So now they say that the only problem with FISA was that he changed few lines in email?

    No, problem with FISA is that it contains giant false facts – “Carter Page is agent of foreign country”, “Carter Page met with Sechin and Dyviekin”, and they gonna blame it one one email?

    Liked by 1 person

  12. BitterC says:

    “in the form of hacked Democratic emails”…I know the talking heads have always tried to tie the allegedly offered emails as the DNC hack, but I have never seen it as part of the Papa D quote “in the form of emails”

    The executive summary of the IG report better be kick-ass. Too bad no one on Broadway or Hollywood will likely do a reading of the report. Maybe the GOP House can emulate the Dems and do one tho C-Span may not televise.

    Maybe Fox News will dedicate a days programming to that endeavor (j/k)

    Like

  13. dallasdan says:

    NYT:
    “A highly anticipated report by the Justice Department’s inspector general is expected to sharply criticize lower-level F.B.I. officials… but to absolve the top ranks of abusing their powers out of bias against President Trump…”

    IMO, with Horowitz, Wray, and Barr on the job, the Deep State has its own version of the “Trust the Plan” mentality, and theirs is real and working.

    Like

  14. Mr. Clinesmith said he was expressing his personal views but did not let them affect his official actions.

    How does this crap weasel explain tampering with a document used to get a FISA warrant if his personal views did not affect his official actions. Did he tamper with any documents related to the Obama administration? Of course not. Clinesmith has an extremely punchable face.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. moonpup says:

    Rosenstien and his shit eating grin when he said “ that’s not my understanding what it said….

    Like

  16. Dim Osmab says:

    Papadoupolus wrote on twitter that it was Clinesmith and Moyer who interviewed him in 2017!!!

    Small group.

    Like

  17. Peter Noone says:

    “Having read the initial round of justifications and defenses, CTH is more optimistic than a week ago on the issue of accountability. It won’t stop at Kevin Clinesmith.”

    Wow. You’ve been my barometer for a number of years now, and you were sounding very grim. To hear you say it’s serious is a big deal.

    Like

  18. Chilidog says:

    Looks like they found their patsy. It’ll be interesting to see how the media treats this guy. Will they hang him out to dry or circle the wagons?

    Like

  19. Countrywatch says:

    Thank you, sundance, for your excellent analyses in all your articles. Invaluable.

    Like

  20. Fake Ruby says:

    We can expect the exculpatory tone of the NYT piece to be echoed throughout the MSM (and especially on the three U.S. broadcast networks which are far more important in shaping narratives in the larger societal perception management program than are the cable news networks).

    This is bad guano, folks.

    Like

  21. Raymond Capwell says:

    This dum axs’ life is over before it started.Over what?
    Stupid.
    Unless someone pays,he can’t afford a lawyer.

    Like

  22. Nowut Ameen says:

    The IG report looks like a Roadmap to Indictments.

    That means it will be summarized in the media in two sentences and then forgotten.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. BitterC says:

    If they cannot prove bias, how about slapping some federal hate crime charges on this crew? I loathe the concept of “hate crimes”, but as long as we have them….& it’s pretty obvious they all hated Trump

    Liked by 1 person

  24. John Juan says:

    I’m trying not to look too far down the road, but I believe, too, that Clinesmith is the way to potentially unwrap this thing a lot further. Let’s hope he isn’t the target of foul play.

    Like

  25. TANGO268 says:

    A few questions immediately come to mind: 1. Why was Carter Page never arrested, if probable cause exists that he is the unregistered agent of a foreign power? Was he even interviewed? Did he tell the truth to FBI agents? and 2. Why was the Trump administration never given a defensive counterintelligence briefing about Mifsud (or if he is a U.S. asset, why was he never given a compartmented briefing about Mifsud’s activities)? What about Halper? Has POTUS been briefed about his activities? Is Halper a registered FBI informant? If not, how was he allowed to spy on (a) US citizen(s)? Why isn’t the Senate calling the employees of the embassy in London to testify in show trials to counteract the impeachment circus? 3. How long will the Deep State be allowed to spin and cover up?

    Liked by 1 person

  26. bluebongo says:

    A scapegoat certainly, but the risks to the small group for pushing a narrative without knowing the whole of the report are hopefully substantial……yes I’m still optimistic.

    Like

  27. doohmax says:

    So the top law enforcement agency in the world is so “sloppy” that it used false information 4 separate times to obtain warrants to spy on the President of the United States? And the NYT thinks that’s OK? These people think most Americans don’t pay attention….and they may be right.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Ace of space says:

    Low level? As to make it sound like the upper tier had no control or idea.. to absolve… so when all is said and done only low hanging fruit will be prosecuted.. they are covering up for the real head perpetraitors!! Blame low level people!! Save the upper level criminals! Downplay and compartmentalize so media and public focus on a rogue biased lawyer or agent… damage control? WTF!!!!!???? This is the Horribilewitz report!!

    Like

  29. iwasthere says:

    Good grief, is this another guy Page was sleeping with?

    Like

  30. Pokey says:

    Clinesmith is a pawn who will be sacrificed in order to prevent the checkmate of the One. There should be many other pawns moved into position in the near future, but remember the ominous words “should be”.

    Like

  31. I don’t have the time or patience to read 540+ comments but I have to wonder was ONE and ONLY ONE FISA application altered?

    Seriously with a skunk this big is it going to have only one flea?

    Like

  32. TomA says:

    This gambit is simply a lame attempt by the Deep State to offer up a sacrificial scapegoat to Durham in hopes of stopping the bleeding at a low level FBI employee. Essentially this is about protecting Comey and Brennan from indictment by using this ploy as a firewall. Clinesmith has told that if he takes the fall, he will be rehabilitated and well paid down the line for this act of immolation. It won’t work. He’s a bit player in the coup and Barr has his sights set much higher. This episode is solely a distraction. Big revelations ahead.

    Like

  33. Nlights says:

    Imagine the dirt already collected on this guy regardless of it’s authenticity. If he doesn’t squeal he will get a slap on the wrist and be a hero to the delusional left. If he does squeal he’s got the deep state to worry about.

    Like

  34. Judy says:

    I’m a fan of CTH and hope they’re correct.
    But, ‘not one’ person has been held accountable for any of the articles outlining the coup against our President. Not one person held accountable by Horowitz’s reports.
    Your reporting reads good, but nothing ever happens to the bad guys. Nothing!!!

    Like

  35. Judiciary says:

    As an admitted member of the resistance Clinesmith is anti-Trump first and an employee of the FBI last. We’ve seen this same seditious ideology controlling the behavior and actions from restaurant owners to judges. It is an obvious lie for any resist ideologue like Clineman to claim they could ever put their job, or its required ethics, first.

    Like

  36. Judiciary says:

    No one ever brings up the fact that Carter Page worked with the FBI. Further, in spite of that connection and though he’s never been charged, the FISA filings make it seem as if Page was a dangerous unknown. If the small group is claiming the Clinesmith lies were of little import in the face of other “evidence” and we can’t know that evidence, then, these traitors could get away with it. But, I’m still willing to see what Durham/Barr will conclude. Also, it was cute how the NYTimes deflected Misfud’s connection to our intelligence community by specifying no connection to the FBI. (Rolls eyes.) Thanks, Sundance, for your invaluable analysis., as always.

    Like

  37. paulashley says:

    In other news, Sergeant Schulz was exposed as the underling who typed up the Final Solution.

    Like

  38. individualright says:

    Like

  39. Bill Dumanch says:

    As he enters prison, banjos serenade and then…it’s Ned Beatty!

    Like

  40. Concernedcitizen says:

    The NYT spin job did not directly address the crucial issue in the Clinesmith Affair. That is, was the information that Clinesmith added to the email that was used in the renewal affidavit true or false? If false, Clinesmith is in a heep a trouble. If the alteration contained truthful information, then Durham really doesn’t have the hammer he needs to hit Clinesmith with some serious charges (lying to the FISA Court).

    It’s not IG Horowitz’ interpretation of the alteration that counts, rather it’s Durham’s interpretation that carries the weight and no amount of NYT spin will change that.

    Like

  41. Trent Telenko says:

    No excitement until indictment.

    ‘Nuff said.

    Like

  42. lansdalechip says:

    Ding, ding, we have a prize winner!
    Took a cushy government job to enhance a resume. Blindly followed orders and rode someone’s coat-tails to ever higher “positions of responsibility” without doing any due diligence on the sponsor.
    Failed to really cover his malfeasance out of arrogance or stupidity.
    Now competing for First To Be Tossed Unceremonially Under the Bus.
    Kevin, Bubba called from Leavenworth. Why haven’t you returned his calls. Not smart to offend your future cellmate.

    Like

  43. Harry Nipples says:

    LOL…You know someone used to take this guy’s milk money back in grade school…omg. What a dweeb,,,sorry if this out of line with your all’s standards but Facts are Facts…LOL. You want your Cornbread? LOL

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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