Varying Expectations For IG Horowitz Report – The Convenient Application of “intent”……

If Senator Lindsey Graham is correct – tomorrow the DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz will release a much anticipated review, looking into how the FBI and DOJ used an application to the FISA court to investigate the Trump campaign. There are wide-ranging opinions about what exactly this report may, or may not, outline.

The IG review has been ongoing for 21 months.  This report is anticipated to be a culmination of that investigative effort.  The ‘tick-tock club’ of Sean Hannity, Sara Carter, John Solomon and various Fox pundits have promised the report will be the most devastating outline of gross FBI and DOJ misconduct in the history of IG review.

Additionally, a network of financially dependent social media voices, book writers, podcast pundits and Q-theorists collectively known as the ‘trusty plan group’, have predicted criminal indictments, wide-scale arrests and a shock to the DC system that will fracture the foundation of the administrative state and simultaneously drain the swamp.

Meanwhile the Lawfare group has been the most visible advocacy network for the current and former DOJ and FBI officials who participated in setting up and using the FISA surveillance system now under IG review.   The Lawfare group has stated the IG report will exonerate all of their pre and post election activity; validate the justification for their predicate efforts; and leave the ‘tick-tockers’ and ‘trusty planners’ having to reconcile to their stunned audiences how they interpreted all the data so incredibly wrong.

A review of the last three IG reports which brush up against the same DOJ and FBI network: (1) IG review Clinton email/FBI conduct; (2) IG review of McCabe/media leaks; and (3) IG review of James Comey conduct; shows the IG report on FISA is likely to come down somewhere in the middle.  ie. mistakes were made; poor judgements were evident; some unprofessional conduct was found; some lack of candor was identified; department policies were not followed; but no direct evidence of intentional wrongdoing was attributable to a coordinated political effort.

If prior IG reports are predictive we should see something akin to:

…Everyone collectively just happened to make identical mistakes, at the same time, in the same direction, together with all the administrative staff within all intelligence organizations… many of them were professionally trained lawyers… but no-one did anything wrong on purpose….

Remember the modern mantra for DOJ definitions of legality are all about “intent“.

Defining statutory violations by the intent of the violator is specifically attributable to how President Obama, AG Eric Holder and AG Loretta Lynch changed the entire enterprise of lawful application to make outcomes arbitrary, variable, changeable to the situation.

The IRS targeting wasn’t unlawful because it wasn’t intentional.  The death of four Americans due to sketchy CIA and State Dept. operations in Benghazi was not unlawful because the risky situation wasn’t created intentionally.  Hillary Clinton’s private email server with classified information wasn’t “intentional”, etcetera – etcetera, the list is long.

The nice thing about switching to definitions of lawbreaking by “intent” is the ease in arbitrary application.  Republican targets ‘intended’ to violate laws… Democrat targets, well, not-so-much.  Fluidity is a necessary oil amid a two-tiered administrative state.

If you elevate, I mean really elevate, and look at the bigger issue inside each of the examples there’s a connective thread surrounding a purposeful shift in accountability for broken laws by focusing on “criminal intent.”

“Intent”, not consequence, is now the larger shield being applied toward excusing the action of people within institutions of government and society.  Consider:

Ah yes, Hillary Clinton was not guilty or accountable because FBI Director James Comey said they couldn’t prove intent….. But the statute doesn’t require intent… But the DOJ said ignore the statute, they require it… and so it goes.

Also see years of Inspector General internal investigations culminating in the very familiar phrase: “declined to prosecute”; yup, they all surrounded intent.

Apparently anyone who breaks the law (lies) while inside the DOJ or FBI didn’t intend to… While lawbreakers (fibbers) outside the FBI/DOJ offices are intentful sons-of-bitches.

The “intent” issue extends everywhere….

Illegal alien entry, and accountability for fraud, all downplayed because there’s no proof of intent.   Walk down a pier in San Francisco and shoot a girl in the head… your honor, my client didn’t intend to do it.  The focus on intent -a specific decision made within the administration of a modern justice system- has become a shield against consequence.

It was a “mistake”…. he/she/it made “a poor decision” etc.  A pattern of obfuscation downplaying consequence and allowing those decision-makers charged with delivering accountability to withdraw or apply the rules of law based on their individual overlay of ‘intent’.

That shift is factually visible everywhere now.

The prior IG report by Horowitz [FBI bias & investigative outcome] was fraught with the application of ‘intent’ inside the inspectors explanation of absent evidence toward bias.

Each of these examples does not seem to be arbitrary, but rather connected to a more consequential decision by those in power to water-down accountability and open the doors for further abuse.

If the official didn’t ‘intend’ to do wrong, or more specifically if the people in position of delivering accountability for the wrong-doing cannot find specific intent, then the action is less-than regardless of outcome.

Consider what FBI officials were doing inside the FBI regarding media-leaks, then insert the James Wolfe example here & ask yourself how could they ever hold him accountable?

Pro Tip: They didn’t.

Following along the ideological lines we can all see how a shift to ‘intent’ can become a very serious issue within a corrupt system.

Within that system, and against that purposeful filter and determination, plausible deniability becomes the construct for intentional criminal engagement.

The illegal alien voter didn’t intend to violate the law… therefore no law was violated.  The Democrats who ballot-harvested illegal alien registration didn’t intend to violate the voting integrity statute… therefore no statute was violated.  Everyone just, well, made a mistake.

Whoopsie daisy.

A corrupt official doesn’t even need to put a finger on the scales of justice, once the scales are intentionally mis-calibrated like this.

If you wonder why there is such an overall sense of anxiety, poor conduct, lack of virtue and general unease within the recent landscape…. I would deposit the likelihood all of the unnerving instability around us is being caused by this shift away from consequence based entirely on ‘intent‘.

Brazen unlawfulness and abuses are now subject to arbitrary determinations of intent.

According to the current DOJ legal proceedings Michael Flynn the outsider intended to lie… FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the insider, didn’t:

It’s this weird mish-mosh world where changing your party registration before you defraud your investors rob the bank might just help you out if you get caught.

From all current indications FBI Director Christopher Wray is directing his organization to spend more time filling the cracks in the dam (bias training) -trying to hold back the tide of electoral anger- than they are doing actual FBI work.  Which begs the question….

….did Bill Barr purchase scuba gear?


This entry was posted in 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Election 2020, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Impeachment, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, propaganda, Russia, Spygate, Spying, Susan Rice, THE BIG UGLY, TowerGate, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

756 Responses to Varying Expectations For IG Horowitz Report – The Convenient Application of “intent”……

  1. freespeechfanatic says:

    21 months. Absolutely disgraceful and absurd. It took 4 months to write the US Constitution.

    Liked by 3 people

    • CharterOakie says:

      Agreed. The only explanation plausible to me is an intentional drawing out and delay of the report to get the enemies of the republic to play their cards and expend their ammunition. Moves and countermoves.

      Also plausible, and we’ve heard as much, that officials at risk have come back to amend their testimony to the IG in order to reduce their legal exposure.

      Either or both potential explanations make sense to me.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Garavaglia says:

        IMHO..the IG report release has been coordinated with the impeachment scam for greatest effect against Trump/us. To delegitimize one (“conspiracy theories”) while legitimizing the other (scam impeachment).


      • Zippy says:

        “The only explanation plausible to me is an intentional drawing out and delay of the report”

        The McCabe investigation that took nearly a year that should have taken only a few months according to Judicial Watch since they interviewed only 20 people concluded over two months ago that he lied, but to date still no decision to prosecute from “Barr’s” DO’J.’

        Mifsud gives a taped deposition about his involvement in the Trump campaign frame-up in the SUMMER OF 2018 (before the mid-terms!) and yet it’s only after John Solomon reveals several months ago that Mifud’s lawyer claimed to him that Mifsud was working for Western intel associated organizations do Barr/Durham SUPPOSEDLY travel to Italy to listen to what we can assume was that tap.

        ALL a slow-walked FARCE to avoid finding what they don’t WANT to find.

        Liked by 1 person

    • harleyd says:

      It took one year and 45 days to build the Empire State Building.

      We are paying for all this and it is going nowhere.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. CTH Fan says:

    Schumer must love this. I hope the President is smarter than to fall for this. He must mount a defense, nothing less will do.

    I think that what Rudy has discovered in Ukraine might just upset the Dems apple cart. If I am not mistaken his information will be handled by Presecutor Durham.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Zy says:

      It’s the Uniparty it upsets. Just ask Willard.

      Liked by 5 people


        Liked by 4 people

        • cdor1 says:

          Unless they were more or less on the periphery of being a Donald Trump associate. Several of those folks have been slammed.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Peoria Jones says:

          With all due respect, we “Treepers” don’t need your reminder – much less in all cap’s.

          Much of this sordid mess is dependent upon the revealing of another. We don’t have the first answer, let alone the second or third. We have guesses and informed speculation at best – but NOT all the actual information.

          Even with that, there is the human factor at play within the political construct of the governing bodies involved (including the judiciary). We simply don’t know how this will play out in the long run.

          At the moment there’s not much we Treepers can do about it. But one thing is for sure – I have 100% faith that PTrump and his brilliant team are doing EVERYTHING possible to ensure the best outcome for the American people under the circumstances.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Zippy says:

          LOL! Do we see a trend here? Serious foreshadowing I’d say.


        • Dutchman says:

          Cause the CAN NOT indict one, without indicting ALL.
          HOW can they indict Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Stroxz, Page etc. for perjury (lieing) without, during the trial, making it CLEAR WHAT they were lieing ABOUT?

          And what they were lieing about, was a massive conspiracy to overturn the election, and impeach a POTUS under false pretences.

          Conspiracy, ditto. Obstruction of Justice, yup. In order to indict ANY, would be an official aknowledgement of the coup, and that they can not do.

          In addition, it is very clear all of the small group are being protected, because the small group have made it clear; NONE of them are going to “take the fall”, be the ‘good soldier’, and allow themselves to be thrown under the bus.

          Hence, IMHO there will continue to be NO indictments. As long as TPTB remain in control of the DOJ, the small group will be shielded from any legal consequences for their actions.

          No ‘perp walks’, no indictments, no trials, no convictions. Investigate to exhonerate, its the way of the Swamp.

          Problem for ‘THEM’ is, this time it won’t WORK. And yet they have nothing else, hence this hail mary impeachment charade.

          I am ‘pessimistic’ about perp walks, yet optimistic about the outcome, and don’t feel any ambiguity in that position.

          To me, it isn’t about the ‘small group’ facing consequences, it is about the large group, that countenanced and ordered the Coup, that finance the ongoing effort, and the underlieing system; that system, and those at the top must be dismantled and discredited, forever.

          And THAT is what I see happening, and why I am optimistic.


          • Zippy says:

            “I am ‘pessimistic’ about perp walks, yet optimistic about the outcome”

            Sorry, but the ONLY effective deterrent to prevent this from happening again ARE perp walks to BUBBA PRISON (like Epstein) and not some Fed resort. That’s the only way one dismantles and discredits those at the top. Resignations and firings only to go on to six and seven figure swamp reward jobs and book deals won’t cut it. Not even close.


            • Dutchman says:

              You certainly present a common view, of a segment of the treehouse, and I respect that view, although obviously disagree.
              Firstly, to say “There is only ONE way” (to achieve a goal) is often counter-priductive.

              When the access hollywood ‘pussy grabbing’ tape was released, any political or pr consultant would have advised the candidate to do the cookie cutter responce.
              WHO but PDJT would have thought to invite Bills victims to the next debate?

              In dealing with Norks, PDJT took an approach NONE of the ‘experts’ over many years, had even contemplated.

              Point being, DJT has NEVER restricted himself to only ONE possible way of achieving the goal, as you do.

              Beyond that, to me I notice a lot more outrage about the injustice of those ‘getting away with it’ than the more aggregious and profound injustice of the innocent being made to suffer.

              There are 2 main categories of injustice; the guilty ‘walking’, and the innocent being punished.
              Our system, AS CONSTRUCTED, is deliberately weighted so that, in order to do everything possible to avoid the latter, we virtually insure that some guilty will walk.

              Seeing such outrage at the perps walking, disproportionate to the outrage of the innocent punished, causes me to suspect those saying “The Perps MUST be punished, or our Republic is done” are speaking from emotion, rather than logic.
              Very seldom in life, is there only ONE way to accomplish a goal, and the,World is not made up of black and white, but many shades of gray.

              IMHO, we are now entering the phase known in Chess as “the end game”, and I suspect PDJT has gambits set up, that will surprise us all.

              Between now and November, none of us can KNOW what we’ll happen, but we can all be confident,…its gonna be INTERESTING!


              • Judith says:

                I get it: On a monopoly board they may not go straight to jail, but after their monopoly money is confiscated, then where do they sit in the grand scheme of things?

                Through bilateral trade resets President Trump is turning them into NPC’s, or “non participating characters,” an emasculating move if ever there was one.

                Losing all the marbles is a far-reaching fate. Devastatingly so, as it gives *future* players and wannabe grifters no skin in the game, whatsoever.

                For this reason, removing the incentive can be just as effective as the punishment, if not more so.


                • Dutchman says:

                  Well done! Exactly, by dismantling the SYSTEM, you A) Destroy the participants; not just the small group of actives, but the larger group who ordered/encouraged, countenanced and have covered up B) the system of corruption that this larger group is trying to protect C) thereby removing the INCENTIVE for such activity “ever again”.

                  And if anyone doesn’t think much progress has been made, just look at the LEGACIES of Obama,,Bush and Clinton.

                  4 years ago, Bush was the odds on favorite for the,R’s, and Clinton for the D’s, and most thinking if Obama could serve a 3 rd term, that he would be reelected (hence, Hillary running a 4 more years campaign.

                  Now, can anyone imagine a Bush getting the R nomination?
                  Hillary is a desperation play, and I wouldn’t give odds Obama could beat PDJT.

                  Its hard to remember, when your up to your *ss in alligators, that your GOAL is to DRAIN the swamp.

                  You don’t wade in, and start wrestling alligators, with pyranha and water moccasins slithering inside your waders, boa constrictors dropping from trees to wrap around your neck, malaria mosquitos biting you, and risking stepping into quicksand with each step.

                  The intelligent VSG thing to do, is to go miles AWAY from the swamp, to the head rivers, that supply the WATER, and damn them up.
                  THEN, dig DRAINAGE ditches, to bleed off the water, which won’t be replaced.
                  As the water level drops, all the,creatures, that thrive on concealment in the murky waters, will hunker down in the decreasing pools of water, eventually fighting amongst themselves, for territory.

                  Many will wander off (Paul Ryan and the 40 R’s) and eventually you WILL have to kill off those remaining.
                  THATS how you DRAIN the Swamp.


        • ruckustom says:

          And since it was mean’ole Orange Man who got anyone fired, those that were are suing to keep their retirements.


      • Tl Howard says:

        I think just one guy threatening to bust Mitt in the teeth would be enough to put him away. The guy is a puff of a male.


    • Garavaglia says:

      A forum must be provided in order to mount a defense.


  3. “Seditious Coup-Attempts are somewhat unprofessional and can make others around you uncomfortable.”–Chris Wray, Bias Training Graduate

    Liked by 8 people

  4. brycebuchanan375081664 says:

    Horowitz has a track record. He and Wray bent over backwards to defend the Deep State in the Hillary ‘investigation’. This column explains why Horowitz is likely to defend the government, not us.

    “Horowitz, Blind Men and the Elephant”


  5. TomA says:

    If, in fact, the OIG report codifies the “intent” criteria as an exoneration for criminal conduct, then all future civilian defendants in Federal Court should be afforded the same opportunity and discretion as federal employees. Then, if fairly applied, there likely will never be another conviction in Federal Court for any white collar or non violent crime. Anything less would be a hypocrisy of sufficient proportion to justify a second Revolutionary War against manifest tyranny. If Mr. Howorwitz throws down the gauntlet, the citizens of this nation must rise to the challenge and oppose overt tyranny.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ShainS says:

      “Then, if fairly applied, there likely will never be another conviction in Federal Court for any white collar or non violent crime.”

      Or even violent crimes (at least committed by illegal aliens in sanctuary cities — see Kate Steinle as noted by Sundance above).

      Liked by 2 people

    • BoreMole says:

      Kinda where I was headed as well. The clarifying piece in that statement is that they judge legality FOR THEMSELVES based in intent. Not for thee.

      And therefore, they need to be burned to the effing ground, IMO.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Redzone says:

      Horowitz should not be opining on intent. It is neither relevant nor measurable. The fact that he includes such statements demonstrates extreme prejudice on his behalf. The practice of speculating on intent should have resulted in his termination long ago.

      Unfortunately, thanks to Mitch M’s long-held impeachment leverage, PT has effectively been prevented from doing many things that he very likely otherwise would have done without that threat.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Lost My Glasses says:

      It has come to this. But will even conservative Americans complacent in their comfortable lives get themselves en masse to their state and/or federal seats of government to loudly claim malfeseance?


    • Chick-fil-A Traffic Jam says:

      You still think equality matters. It doesn’t, it’s just a cute lie that helps keep the plebs placated; only naked power and authority matters. The dirty truth we don’t want to accept is we are no better than our medieval ancestors.

      As the saying goes, the more things change… the more they stay the same.


  6. “Therefor, we find that Julius Caesar did not intend to cross the Rubicon, Oliver Cromwell had no bias against Parliament and Fidel Castro was an HMO-reformer who just got a little carried away.”–The Horowitz of Oz

    Liked by 8 people

  7. Didn’t comey say he couldn’t prove hillary’s ‘intent’ to destroy tapes? So she wasn’t convicted?

    Liked by 1 person

    • aez says:

      I am figuring the President is going to point to intent as the reason why he didn’t commit extortion or bribery (he can do this, frankly, more easily than most of the figures in the Horowitz report, if it goes that way), assuming the Left is resolved to bring specific counts to the Senate. If the characterization of the Horowitz report by sundance is solid, Horowitz will have helped pave the way for such a defense – it’s not needed in order to reflect the rule of law, but may help. Durham-Barr is the report to wait for.


  8. burnett044 says:

    Boots write….”.It’s imperative the people organize and plan to throw off the chains of tyranny”
    and there is the nut of it…..organize….I see many many opinions…little organization…
    a network of to pass on ideas /plans that the corrupt can not take down…
    to read about and study what our founder did is wonderful…but to do what they did in this day and age is a total new ball game….
    many are keyboard warriors …few really willing to give up their lives…
    apathy got us into this mess and it is a hard habit to break….
    so many preach follow the plan yet never give ya a plan to follow…
    Pep rallies are great fun …but have never won a single game…
    wheres da beef …show me the plan….\

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Joe says:

    For the hundredth time, the problem here is confusing intent with motive. They are not the same thing. The point at which “intent” enters into a decision to charge—and it’s crucial—is: Did the accused intend to commit the alleged criminal act? In Clinton’s case, the answer is obvious. She clearly “intended” to put the classified emails onto an unsecured server. She did not make a mistake or do so accidentally; and that is before we consider that the statute she violated, the Espionage Act, goes out of its way to make mistakes, accidents, and negligence culpable acts.

    Obama royally confused the matter by claiming Clinton didn’t “intend” to harm the US. But that speaks only to Clinton’s motives, her reasons for doing so, not to her intention to do what she clearly intended to do.

    As to the FISA warrants, the intent question comes down to: Did FBI agents intend to hide critcal information from the FISC?

    Liked by 6 people

  10. Brian Baker says:

    The “intelligence” community IG Atkinson facilitated a ridiculously dumb impeachment inquiry. Should we expect the “justice” department IG Horrowitz to recommend prosecution against individuals in an institutionally corrupt agency?


  11. Bob Parker says:

    Another outstanding preview/analysis.

    And if I may draw an analogy, this IG report would be akin to asking the Wolf to study & submit a report on the security of the hen house.

    However, unlike the other IG reports that provide us with a clue as to this report’s content, let us forget that AG Barr has John “Bull” Durham pursuing a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION on all of these Leftist/Marxist bastards.

    We know that Barr/Durham have had the opportunity to discuss their cases with IG Horowitz over since Bull’s appointment. And Barr/Durham have surely seen IG’s report in its various drafts. In my view, the IG report simply HAS to provide at least SOME clues/guidance to Barr/Bull as navigating thru Durham’s investigation.

    And while we await the IG’s report we simply have no clue YET as to WHAT Bull Durham has found, who he is going to prosecute, & most important: EXACTLY HOW SOON WILL WE LEARN BULL DRUHAM’s FINDINGS & (hopefully) INDICTMENTS??

    So, the IG report is coming out tomorrow & it may not be the “RED MEAT” that we all have been longing for. However instead of the “RED MEAT” I believe that it will serve as the APPETEASER in anticipation of Bull Durham’s findings & (hopefully) indictments!!


    • vfm#7634 says:

      Agreed. If Sundance has noticed this application of “intent” to let Leftists skate on everything they do, I’m sure Barr and Durham have as well. The IG is an investigator, whereas Barr and Durham have all the prosecutorial power.


  12. Stephen Grabe says:

    Given that IG is more then likely to waffle, and the EXECUTIVE SUMMARY could [again!] bear zero resemblance to the actual report, we can HOPE that US Attorney Durham will reach their conclusions independent of the IGs CONCLUSIONS .. and dont forget, the ig could only interview current doj staff…..tho he reportedly met w steele, and couldnt question CIA folks. RE Page– there is so much in the PUBLIC record indicative of abuse…..


    • Dutchman says:

      Stephan Grebe
      As Sundance has detailed, in his reviews of previous IG reports, the Summary/Conclusions are written by, or at the behest of “the Principle”, i.e. the AG, or ‘acting’ AG, in the case of Rosie.

      Therefore, if this report reflects a schitzophrenic disconnect between the BODY of the report, and the,Summary/Conclusions, as you suggest it might, it will then tell us Barr is,a ‘Cleaner’, rather than a ‘Housecleaner’.

      Referrals for prosecution, from the IG mean NOTHING, as previous criminal referals have gone NO WHERE.

      IF there is a disconnect between body and summary/conclusions, then “Durhams report”, like the “Huber report”, are non-existent.

      I just don’t see any way to thread the needle to a different conclusion, and believe any attempt to do so is wishful thinking, that flies in the face of logic.


  13. Zy says:

    Who needs a FISA anymore? Just go to your buddies in the NSA.


  14. 2112 is now. says:

    Seek not solace in mankind for man is corrupt.
    Do not expect Horowitz to burn the chaff with unquenchable fire.


  15. MO Pragmatist says:

    I ask the question once again. What does “intent” have to do with actual “action(s)”?


  16. brycebuchanan375081664 says:

    “The nice thing about switching to definitions of lawbreaking by “intent” is the ease in arbitrary application. Republican targets ‘intended’ to violate laws… Democrat targets, well, not-so-much.”

    That’s it, exactly! There are many, many examples.


  17. CTH Fan says:

    Although Schiff is untouchable while in Congress is he not liable with regard to cases he tried before he became a Representative. In view of his track record over the last few years with regard to lying about evidence and indeed manufacturing evidence, all of his previous prosecutions should be open to scrutiny.

    Of course they won’t be.


  18. Matthew LeBlanc says:

    Hope for the best prepare for the worst


  19. Kalena says:

    I,sadly, have vary low expectations that anyone will be held accountable. We know what happened. We know who made it happen. We haven’t seen jackshifft that anyone is going to ensure the culprits go to jail. I am furious.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Garavaglia says:

      Individuals can be held accountable in a multitude of manners.


      • X XYZ says:

        As I’ve asked before, what does that now popular buzz-phrase” held accountable” mean? It can mean anything that you want it to mean, from a slap on the wrist to incarceration. In the final analysis, it means everything… and therefore nothing.


  20. AnotherView says:

    Spot on Sundance! Another fantastic analysis.


  21. bruzedorange says:

    Sundance observed “…’Intent’, not consequence, is now the larger shield being applied toward excusing the action of people within institutions of government and society.”

    How ironic and revealing it is that in the co-existing world of political correctness, it is asserted that consequences are the standard by which prejudice should be judged, rather than the intent or heart of the individual.

    Ultimately, this two-tiered system of politicized justice is also a two-tiered filter for Constitutional rights: only right-thinking people will be observed to have consciences. We deplorables don’t have a (socially responsible) conscience, because if we did, we wouldn’t be amongst the deplorables.

    John Locke is being buried deeper in his grave, while the spectre of Rousseau rises like swamp gas from intellectual fissures and clefts of corruption across our nation.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Re bruzedorange:
      Very-well stated!
      I must say, also, that Sundance’s penetrating analysis stabs this matter right in the heart!!
      But isn’t also enormously glaring that this DOJ sophistry omits the fact that, even in legal cases where ‘intent’ is indeed the focus of inquiry, ‘intent’ is never established based on the words of the defendant alone, but rather according to the ‘reasonable person standard’ where issues like background, training, and awareness are the critical factors in establishing intent and criminality?? I
      In other words, Hillary Clinton, former First Lady, an attorney-at-law, Secretary of State, would not be presumed to have criminal intent based on her position, knowledge, and training ONLY BECAUSE SHE SAYS SO??
      In contrast, Donald Trump, President of The United States, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, the only constitutional officer empowered to negotiate treaties with foreign governments, is presumed, ipso facto and prima facie, to have criminal intent while making constitutional requests regarding anti-corruption measures of the President of Ukraine?? And that no further House inquiry is needed to establish this criminal intent?????

      Liked by 1 person

  22. Zy says:

    So Ms. Lindsey has set this up so that the Senate judicial committee has one working day to prepare questions for Horowitz. What might this indicate?


  23. litlbit2 says:

    I have long passed creditably to Horowitz as his past abilities lead me to him being the biggest star of OZ on stage “lacking candor”.

    Can we move along to Durham, just possible the only man on board the Trump Train of actually restoring The USA to one law for all?

    I’m very thankful Sundance really READs these so called scripts explaining what is really at hand yet always maintaining honest credibility. Merry Christmas to all here.

    2020 MAGA/KAG 🇺🇸🇺🇸🙏

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Mongo Mere Pawn says:

    The double standard articulated by Sundance is consistent with the Left’s entire approach to law, which is equitable, remedial. What is the best outcome from the point of view of the judge or other individual “adjudicating” the dispute, after the fact? From this perspective, “intent”, “equal protection” and “due process” are highly malleable because their meaning is in the eye of the beholder and always prospective. What should the law be going forward? This is why a majority of the Supreme Court can hold that the 14th Amendment withdrew from the States, i.e., the People, the authority to define marriage as a monogamous, heterosexual institution, even though (1) all 37 States in the Union at the ratification of the 14th Amendment so defined marriage, (2) it was a requirement for Utah and every other State to join thereafter, and, I believe, (3) if considering the Defense of Marriage Act to have been a constitutional amendment, at least 30 States effectively ratified the amendment by amending their statutes or constitutions, with California doing so twice.
    The Consent of the Governed, with consent being a retrospective, mandatory requirement, simply matters not to a jurist like the late Justice Brennan or the living Justice Ginsberg. Or an FBI Director such as Comey. They will attribute to the People and to the People’s law their own prospective, subjective notion of justice, be it intent or gross negligence or equal protection or due process or cruel and unusual punishment. Even when those words and phrases had definite meanings retrospectively, at the time of their enactment or ratification.
    The Constitution and the entire purpose of law is to establish standards for accountability. Up front. So every member of our various communities has a reasonable expectation of how every other member will act under future defined circumstances. And to enforce that expectation, there are varying degrees of penalties. All set out up front so no one can say they were not aware. So when a judge or other person in authority prospectively changes the rules, amends the Constitution or a statute by subjective reinterpretation or misinterpretation, ignoring the retrospective understanding of those who enacted or ratified, even if informed by notions or equity, they have violated their Oath of Fidelity by thwarting the Consent of the Governed.
    That is why this is so frustrating. Conservatives, being originalists, textualists, traditionalists, generally revere the rules, the law, the Constitution, as the written and inviolate Will of the People, the Consent of the Governed, to be changed only when the People say so. Ours is a Government of the People, by the People and for the People. We respect the process of obtaining governing consent from the People.
    The People are an afterthought to equity judges like Justice Ginsberg. They see only the parties before them and adjudicate to remedy the dispute before them, the People, their consent, and the law be damned. Justice Brennan called this “contemporary ratification” but most now call it “living constitutionalism.” Because they “know” that the People, as currently constituted, would ratify their own subjective understanding of the Constitution, they don’t have to consider, retrospectively, what the understanding of the People, as then constituted, was at the time of its ratification. Even when, as in the case of Obergefell, the People have very recently and forcefully spoken, and have actively rejected the very misinterpretation offered by equity.
    This is nothing if not a complete usurpation and abuse of power, the lifeblood of the Left. And it will ultimately result in the loss of the lifeblood of not only conservatives and other traditionalists, whether secular or religious, but also the Left and their fellow travelers, whether secular or religious, just as it did for other utopian and equitable revolutions, whether led by Jacobins, Bolsheviks or Maoists. When it is those in power who make the rules, arbitrarily, as circumstances and “equity” require, accountability is impossible and the “Consent” of the People is what the end of a gun requires. That is where we are heading. God help us.

    Liked by 1 person

    • D says:

      Please, God, Help us.

      That ‘equity’ element INSISTS that a woman is the same as a man, despite the natural differences, the biological fact, the pure logic.

      People are being LIED to by their government and the result is confusion, irritation, sick feelings in the pit of the stomach, agitation, ignoring what ‘their lying eyes tell them’ with diversions such as alcohol, drugs, Peleton . . .

      We do not CONSENT to living in the above described states of emotional straits, YET we ARE living in, about, and among a multitude of individuals who just do not know the manipulation their souls are undergoing.

      What our government has accomplished with their reliance on ‘legal fictions’ and ‘imputed intent’ to control the masses, is to tell us peons that ‘ignorance of the law is no excuse’, but ‘WE KNOW THE LAW (because WE made the laws!) and, thus, we could not possible intend to break those laws! IOW, BECAUSE they are ‘law makers’, they clearly know when they are not breaking any law simply because they are NOT ignorant of the law!

      It is au upside down world for those not grounded in truth, reality, natural law . . .

      Liked by 1 person

    • MustangBlues says:

      Mongo Mere Pawn says:
      December 8, 2019 at 11:22 am

      From a friendly lurker here:

      Could not access your obvious lengthy brilliance, because it is one sentence of hundreds of words, and not a single paragraph. Chug a lugging pages of text is not reading friendly.

      Hope you learn to paragraph as Sundance explains in his guidelines to posting comments.

      Liked by 1 person

  25. billybob says:

    Whatever the report says this won’t be the treehouse tomorrow . Some of us live in realville and then there are democrats . Some things just never get stale no matter how many times you see them .

    Liked by 5 people

    • MVW says:

      The point is election results are everything, not justice for traitors, as dissatisfying as that may be. Hillary lost and the results have made a sea change difference.

      Just as ‘peach 45’ is bad politics, ‘lock her up’ is also at best a losing squirrel to chase.

      Venezuela was lost to Socialists and the results are tragedy, but the world has, again, a sign post to say Socialism does not work and for us and the world, one Socialism in practice tragedy is a life saver. Traitorous Democrats in action on the media’s billboard for all to see, 24/7, is the Democrats’ Venezuela.

      Because Trump won (literally America was saved from Globalist vulture-ism), Trump has given the world a signpost to say Globalism has an alternative. ‘Lock em up’ is not what Trump is after. The 2020 House is.


  26. Michael Hennessy says:

    Who has expectations?


  27. Super Elite Lt. Col. Covfefe999 says:

    We know what the traitors did, and they know we know, and they are trying so hard to pretend they didn’t do it.

    Horowitz is the reason roaches Strzok, Page, and McCabe are out of their government jobs, so let’s appreciate that. And other roaches are gone too. It’s progress.

    Hopefully Horowitz’ report will provide some useful information. And Barr’s investigation too, later on.

    The swamp isn’t going to be drained in a single term of Trump’s presidency, especially after idiot voters allowed the Dems to seize control of the House. We have to vote smartly to continue to make progress. And it has to be done over the course of many years, sustained smart voting depriving the Dems of power and choosing true conservatives over RINOs. Don’t screw this up.

    Liked by 2 people

    • delighteddeplorable says:

      Add to the reportage line up the one coming from USA John Durham. The roll-out of various reports appears to be a carefully crafted strategy. As our favorite President often says, “We’ll see what happens.”


    • StanH says:

      Definitely. This is a long game.

      Let us not forget “vote harvesting” and other methods the swamp uses to cheat. It could explain some of the loses in 2018. The swamp says there was no vote cheating, therefore we know there was. We must overwhelm their ability to cheat in 2020.

      Liked by 1 person

  28. TexasDude says:

    For what it’s intent is key to what may be a crime and what may not.

    If we didn’t have intent, then accidental deaths by another would be murder every single time.


  29. islandpalmtrees says:


    It sounds like Director Wray issued a NSL for Adam Shiff. NSL’s are to be used to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.” I don’t think Nunes phone calls fit into this category. Add to this, that the provider is put under a gag order. So AT&T, can not say a thing.

    If the above is confirmed and Wray s not fired then Barr will be underwater!

    What’s so bad about NSLs?

    By using NSLs, the FBI can directly order companies to turn over information about their customers and then gag the companies from telling anyone that they did so. Because the process is secret, and because even the companies can’t tell if specific NSLs violate the law, the process is ripe for abuse.

    To whom can NSLs be issued?

    Credit reporting agencies
    Telecommunications providers
    Financial institutions
    Travel agencies
    Can the FBI obtain content—like e-mails or the content of phone calls—with an NSL?

    Not legally. While each type of NSL allows the FBI to obtain a different type of information, that information is limited to records—such as “subscriber information and

    Does an NSL require a court order?

    No. Although there are procedures for review after they are issued, NSLs can be issued by the FBI without any judicial oversight.

    What’s the legal standard for issuing an NSL?

    Under the most commonly used NSL statute, the FBI must certify that the records sought are “relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.” While the statute does prohibit investigations “conducted solely on the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States,” this provides little actual protection as there is no judicial oversight of NSLs.

    Does a judge play any role in the NSL process?

    A judge does not have to approve the NSL or an accompanying gag order. Under the statutes, the only occasion in which a judge is required to review an NSL is if a recipient files a legal challenge.


  30. islandpalmtrees says:

    NSL’s, FISA warrants and the NSA database should be removed! Clearly, these processes are totally corrupt.

    Not only, are they being miss used. The people involved are unwilling to take responsibility for their actions. Just look at the FISC Judges for example. Or, the gag order on the NSLs.


  31. Paul says:

    There are many criminal dots to this criminal puzzle, inside and outside of the government. Horowitz will only have part of the criminal puzzle inside of the government and Barr/Durham will have the other part along with the reaching out to foreign governments, giving Barr/Durham the complete criminal puzzle (picture).

    Horowitz does not have Durham’s subpoena power of anyone outside of the government, to impanel Grand Juries, hand down indictments and to compel witnesses to testify under oath and/or turn over documents. Durham has taken overseas fact-finding trips with A/G Barr. Pleas deals will be made with Barr/Horowitz not Horowitz.

    Durham secret investigations will have thousands of pages of testimonies that Horowitz will not have and will cross check with Horowitz Report, along with the 3 years of testimonies, mountains of paper/digital trails of evidence. There will be a mountain of conflicting statements and perjury charges and plea deals will be made.

    Horowitz report is necessary because it will detail the so-called errors/mistakes of the FBI/DOJ and show mountains of policies and procedures were not followed. It is up to Barr/Durham to connect the so called mountains of errors/mistakes and alleged policies and procedures not being followed with Durham outside investigation (testimony and paper/digital trails).

    Horowitz report is necessary because it will show all the policies and procedures that were not followed. For Example; not following proper policies and procedures during Hillary email investigation for political reasons is a criminal act; giving out immunity deals for no-consideration is not normal and the deals can/will be reversed. Criminal can’t give each other immunity deals.

    The mountains of Horowitz reporting of errors/mistakes and the policies and procedures that were not followed will clearly show a good part of the criminal picture; it will be up to Barr/Durham to complete the picture and to reclassify Horowitz part of the picture as intentional criminal acts which will be added to Barr/Durham criminal puzzle. This will create such a clear picture of criminal acts; the complete criminal puzzle (Clear Criminal Picture) will be 200% beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The questions will be asked during the Barr/Durham investigations; who’s ready to go to prison for Obama/Hillary?

    All employees of the FBI/DOJ should be extremely nervous in possibly being questioned by Durham and his staff under oath. One example; just delaying or hiding a document request is a criminal act. How many FBI/DOJ employees were involved in the hiding/delaying of thousands of document request for the past 3-years?

    No FBI/DOJ agent can state they were ordered to withhold or hide evidence; they had a duty to refuse to participate in the obstruction of justice acts.

    These are just a few examples of the power of Barr/Durham to save the United States. For the past 3-years PDJT has strategically set up the perfect stage for easy criminal prosecutions by allowing the criminals to destroy themselves by adding mountains of additional paper/digital and testimonies of evidence and to education all of us (America People).

    If PDJT and the American people knows the crimes that were committed, and who (group of people) were involved; Barr/Durham also knows. The American People and the (Constitution) knows what is happening. The American People aren’t stupid.

    PDJT is 100% responsible for implementing Justice and has a bound duty to the Constitution and the American People to implement Justice.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Nicole says:

      Excellent Post!

      Agreed-Horowitz only built the detailed foundation for Barr/Durham; nothing more.

      Conflicting statements and delaying or hiding evidence;

      Conflicting Statements will create several hundred years of prison time in total for perjury charges that will be used for plea deals and many defendants becoming a witness for the prosecution.

      Delaying or hiding evidence can also create several hundred years of prison time in total that will be used for plea deals and many defendants becoming a witness for the prosecution.

      Great method of draining deep into the deep state; PDJT promised he will drain the swamp.

      Prosecutors will look for the delaying or hiding of documents;

      Judicial Watch as shown documents were being classified as Highly Classified Intentionally to protect the Coup and later revealed as not being highly classified; showing criminals were intentionally aiding and abetting the Coup.

      If the FBI/DOJ destroyed any evidence they are obstructing Justice.

      There is an easy identifiable paper/digital trail of evidence built into all system to reveal who actually implemented the destruction.

      There are several Back-up systems stored in off-site Highly Secured Government agencies of all government databases. To destroy documents in every off-site back-up database system would leave many identifiable paper/digital trails of evidence. One Example; there is a digital fingerprint of the employee who logged into the database showing who and when etc. actually implemented the destruction. How they also actually entered the off-site database system and at that exact moment showed the disappearance of the document. Etc.

      All employees either being a regular staff employee, supervisor, manager or any level following orders of deleting documents will be obstructing Justice and can be easily identified and prosecuted. Following orders of deleting documents is a criminal act; the employee had a duty to refuse to participate in the criminal act.

      The employee will most likely plea a deal and become a witness for the prosecution and reveal who gave the orders. This process will reveal a long stream of criminals.

      Again; this is a Great way to start the process of eliminating the Deep Criminal Swamp.

      Criminal Deep State; Corrupt DOJ Admits FBI Lost and Destroyed Original 302 Report from Michael Flynn Interview. IMPOSSIBLE; there is an identifiable trail of what happened.

      Enforce the Rule of Law or lose the Country

      PDJT must do his duty to the Constitution and the American People by ensuring Justice. Judicial Watch has already revealed many of these intentional acts.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Sherri Young says:

        “Enforce the Rule of Law or lose the Country”

        This is where we are.


        • Nicole says:

          Just like all U.S. Wars; there is a major/key/decisive battle that must be won or be eliminated forever.

          The Rule of Law is the Major/Key/Decisive Battle to Win, for the United States not to disappear forever.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Janice says:

        Paul/Nicole; your summary detailed reporting outlines exactly what has to happen. Anything less would destroy this country from within. Doing nothing is guaranteeing 3rd world status and we will deserve our faith of living in a 3rd world country.

        Not one-person did anything for over 25 years except for President Trump allowing for this one-time opportunity to stop the globalist. I believe the majority of the people felt something was wrong with our country but was either blindsided or scared or just too busy with life.

        All involved in the selling that the Rule of Law is not important, we must move on, we do not have time, we do not understand how it all works, MAGA will replace the Rule of Law; are contributing to the destruction of the republic. This type of thinking is how we actual got here…


    • Janice says:

      It will be a devastating cascade of horrors for anyone involved in this coup; unbelievable that the United States was/is being attacked from the inside of our government. This prearranged coup is equal to the enemies of all our wars…

      YES! P/T is 100% Responsible for implementing Justice. Barr works for P/T who gave orders to Barr during the interview process (his duty) to do his sworn duty or he will be fired etc.

      P/T has many paths to implement Justice and if Barr doesn’t do his duty to the Rule of Law, Constitution and the American People; P/T is 100% responsible and must/will (bound duty) implement Justice directly.

      P/T brilliantly outplayed China (world) and all his opponents for the past 3 years and to even use one brain cell to think P/T does not have the ability to destroy his enemies that are trying to imprison him, his family and destroy the United States is nonsensical. P/T strategically built and is now holding an unbeatable hand for prosecutions.

      Watching all involved (criminals) in the coup age overnight as their 100th failed coup attempt over some imagined quid pro quo and the coming out of the truth of Treason by the Crossfire Hurricane Conspirators will be interesting. And much more….

      All criminals will be destroyed financially, endless sleepless nights, the stress will destroy their health and there peace of mind will be lost forever. This is the beginning of Justice; stage 1. The next stage is plea deals, Trials and Prison.


    • Road Runner says:

      I agree with everything you and Nicole (below) posted…

      I simply want to ask when do we go after the REAL culprits behind all that we have endured going back years, the corrupt ‘MEDIA’???…

      None of the Deep State heathens, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Strozk, Page… even Obama and his WH cabal and dare I say Soros) would have been able to pull of this elaborate scheme with out the Media… They are truly the ones that have driven it all…

      As corrupt as the Deep State is I venture to say that without the Media they would not have even attempted to begin this treasonous behavior going back a decade or two…

      The 1st Amendment does not conflate Freedom of Speech with Sedition and Treason…


      • Paul says:

        I agree the 1st Amendment does not conflate Freedom of Speech with Sedition and Treason…

        The Media aided and abetted these criminal acts for their own self-interest for “More” money/power by the Globalist.

        And, the Rinos, Business Round Table, Chamber of Commerce, etc. has betrayed the American People for over 20 years for their own self-interest of “More” money/power by Globalist (Trade, Illegal Immigration, Jobs). Notice the word “More” such selfish Evil Greed…

        I do not know what legal recourse there is against the Media.

        I believe another reason for Justice is the Shock and Awe of all involved in the coup being destroyed financially, stress of metal/physical deterioration, plea deals and prison time will destroy the liberal Media. Prosecutions will allow the Truth to be known and inform/educate all those who were misled or uninformed.

        Real News and Real-Laws will Easily prevail over Fake News and Fake Laws. If there were no prosecutions not only will the criminals become twice as powerful and corrupt when PDJT leaves office; the liberal media will continue to report fake news and fake laws forever. This will fit perfectly with a Globalist Constitution. MAGA obviously will be ignored and Reversed very easily without the Rule of Law; stated and displayed by the liberals ever second of the day.

        With prosecutions policies and procedures will immediately be written to ensure if there is even one-millionth of this coup appearing in the future; it will be noticed immediately and those involved would be prosecuted and imprisoned or worse.

        There will be hundreds of factual books and movies in how the U.S. was seconds away from being eliminated and our children will understand corruption does not pay and the Rule of Law is the Shield that Protects the Constitution and our way of life.

        I believe PDJT stated there should be laws for the media to be held liable.

        I believe after prosecutions the current media will be replaced.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Road Runner says:

          Exactly… I believe that the push back or consequences against the willing accomplices in the media must be stronger than simply changing the channel…

          Regardless of whether indictments/convictions materialize or not, if the corrupt media is left in place, unruffled they will simply gloss it all over and start again…

          In 2024 they will have identified a new and improved chosen one and begin the process of undoing everything PDJT and we deplorables have accomplished….

          The corrupt media is the most dangerous enemy America faces…

          Liked by 1 person

  32. Sherri Young says:

    What an idiot. Fake News Chuck Todd tries to debate with Ted Cruz on Meet the Unimpressed this morning.

    Ted Cruz is one of the main guys the Dimms will be up against if there is a trial in the Senate.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. AccountabilityPlease says:

    The totality of the circumstances found across the Clinton whitewash and muh-Russia investigations clearly illustrate the intent. What are the odds that all those decision points turn in favor of Democrats without some malevolent force (aka conspiracy)? Simply listing those decision points presents a very powerful case. Let’s see if we can build a comprehensive list together. I will offer the following to get started:
    – DOJ required the FBI to prove Hillary’s intent when the Espionage Act only set the bar at gross negligence,
    – the FBI ignored Clinton’s intent to violate the Espionage Act by setting up and using her private server when she knew it was inevitable that she would be sending/receiving classified information,
    – the DOJ granted immunity to Clinton’s server administrator and primary aides while getting nothing in return,
    – the DOJ failed to prosecute Clinton for destroying records and mobile devices under subpoena,
    – the FBI interview with Clinton was not transcribed or recorded,
    – the FBI allowed co-conspirators to sit in on their interview with Clinton,
    – FBI lawyer Lisa Page texted Agent Strzok to go easy on Clinton during the interview…


    • Zippy says:

      “FBI ignored Clinton’s intent to violate the Espionage Act”

      I suspect her real intent in setting up a personal server was to violate federal communications retention requirements which, as a result, put her personal communications outside the data searchable in a FOIA request.

      After all, it was a Judicial Watch FOIA request that FOUND her personal server in the first place (and some of you may have thought it was government action that did that… silly you).

      Liked by 1 person

      • Zippy says:

        Of course, her actions then led to the unsecured transmission of data so classified that the ICIG didn’t have a high enough security clearance to view it and had to be read into a “special access” program before he could do so. That data was data collected by our spy satellite system.

        I tell ya’, we veterans who would have gone to jail ten times over for what she did just love it when arrogant pols expose classified data in unsecured emails because sometimes there’s a very good military personnel LIFE SAVING reason for data classification. I wonder how many times US military actions have been compromised by arrogant pols like her failing to properly handle classified materials.


      • AccountabilityPlease says:

        I agree that Hillary’s primary motivation was to circumvent FOIA and hide her Clinton Foundation related misdeeds. However, she knew she was going to be sending/receiving classified information. Hillary also knew that a big consequences of that decision would be to jeopardize U.S. national security by transmitting/storing classified information in an unauthorized fashion. How do we know she knew? There are numerous emails from State Department IT officials raising those concerns.


  34. islandpalmtrees says:

    Understanding were Nunes may be going.

    A judge does not have to approve the NSL or an accompanying gag order. Under the statutes, the only occasion in which a judge is required to review an NSL is if a recipient files a legal challenge.

    Nunes said he was in the process of “filing a legal challenge”.

    But, how would the common citizen even know about the use of the NSL? Remember, the gag order.


  35. Mincus says:

    DC does not police itself.


  36. Les Standard says:

    To lodge all power in one party and keep it there is to insure bad government and the sure and gradual deterioration of the public morals.
    ~Mark Twain

    Liked by 1 person

    • Tl Howard says:

      California….and just about every urban center in the whole of the country. In face, just as the Framers understood that the economies of the Northern colonies and the Southern colonies were based on the differences in geography and the climate of those colonies, so too are we learning that urban centers, because of their huge numbers of people and their different needs from suburban and rural folks, will over-run those outside their territory.

      For years, Northern Californians were not averse to the notion of dividing from Southern CA because the South and their huge numbers took our water w/out ever attempting to conserve that valuable resource.

      Today, if you look at a blue v. red map of CA, you’ll see the separation is basically that of the affluent coastal populations v. the middle class and working class of inland CA.

      The number of illegals and the number of first and second gen. Americans from south of the border that occupy the larger LA and San Diego areas add huge numbers to the relatively small numbers of affluent coastal Dems.


  37. Johnny Dollar says:

    Could this recent DOJ IG finding be refering to the Strzok – Page relationship.

    FTA: “The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated an investigation of a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) senior official based on information that the senior official committed misconduct by failing to report a romantic or intimate relationship with a subordinate and participating in decisions concerning the subordinate’s temporary promotion.”

    “Misconduct by failing to report?” Me thinks this is just the beginning for the two love birds.

    Drip. Drip. Drip.


    • Sherri Young says:

      Might be Kevin Clinesmith and Sally Moyer. She may have given him a good review so that he could work on the Special Counsel’s team.

      Total speculation on my part.


  38. Everett Miller says:

    No one should have any confidence that the IG report will have meaningful content or effect. He is not an independent, unbiased investigator–he is actually an insider–a creature of the DoJ swamp. Before being named “Inspector General” he worked for the DoJ at the Department of Justice headquarters in Washington D.C., first as a deputy assistant attorney general, then as chief of staff. His JOB is to protect his buddies. Period. OBAMA is responsible for him being IG.

    From White House archives dated July 21, 2012: “WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individuals to key Administration posts: Michael E. Horowitz – Inspector General, Department of Justice.”

    Still think he is Independent or Unbaised or that his report will expose the Traitors?

    Liked by 1 person

    • gary says:

      i think he is under intense scrutiny from bill barr. i think a key element of the report will be that mike flynn walks. that ,in and of itself,destroys the mueller probe. other reports from this man have been very bad for the fbi/doj. barr is waiting for all the evidence to come in. flynns lawyer certainly had some help from inside the DOJ,evidenced by her motions agaonst the prosecutors. also,the motion to delay flynns case ,to sullivan, wasn’t signed by van grack. as all other motions were. it came from the DOJ. BARR. i have confidence in barr,until i don’t.


    • islandpalmtrees says:

      And, the same can be said for Barr. This guy worked for the CIA. Just how many CIA people have we seen involved in the impeachment attempt by the coup members? How many CIA people have we seen involved by the spying on President Trump or his campaign?

      Liked by 1 person

      • gary says:

        when i see the speeches that barr gave at the fderalist scociety and notre dame, i tend to believe his allegiance isn’t to the cia.


    • Clue says:

      The traitors have already been exposed.

      The question is will they be held accountable…

      Or will our criminal intel agencies continue circling the wagons to protect the members of their incestuous diseased rat nest of criminal malfeasance!


      • freespeechfanatic says:

        Exposed to whom and to what end or consequence? I can expose somebody or something and if no one cares what does this exposure mean? The exposure may even have a perverse outcome, as in enhancing the person’s social profile and value? Comey’s exposure has certainly led to greater riches for him. He’s sold a book with a huge advance and now has a major film about him coming out.


        • X XYZ says:

          “There’s no such thing as bad publicity.” Gotta make big $$$ on that book or movie deal. You will need it to help pay for your future defense lawyers.


    • Tl Howard says:

      I think he’s a lot like John Roberts.


  39. islandpalmtrees says:

    If IG Horowitz Report of FISA abuse does not reveal that some of the information critical to the defense of Carter Page was not provided to the FISA court by the Gang-Of-Eight then Barr is under water again

    So as Sundance put it “….did Bill Barr purchase scuba gear?”


  40. WeThePeople2016 says:

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Sherri Young says:

    Feel free to RT if you agree. There must be quite a few House D’s who are uncomfortable having someone so devoid of morals in high position. A source told Bongino that Nancy made her statement to the press last week right after a caucus meeting during which she gave the D’s a chance to reconsider before going full steam ahead with their impeachment efforts.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Tl Howard says:

      Every time I contact my Congressman, I call him a coward or an anti-American thug, for you can’t vote as he has, can’t support his Speaker, as he has, w/out being one or the other or both.

      Liked by 1 person

  42. Tl Howard says:

    Wonder what Hillary and Barry O. have done to threaten Horowitz.


  43. Ernie Hemway says:

    The real battle is spiritual, not legal. Relativism has come full circle. Gird yourselves. “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, . . .: Eph.6:12-13. What may have seemed trite to some, is now a glaring reality.

    Liked by 3 people

  44. Alan Reasin says:

    The necessity for intent is BS. If it is we now have criminal thought crimes. And as we know many of the laws do not require intent as at least 5 service members have found out, but NOT Mrs Clinton..


  45. Linus in W.PA. says:

    While John Solomon is certainly a part of the Three Amigos Tick-Tock Club, I feel he is generally well informed and has good, real sources.

    He never seems to go all ‘sensational’ about things like the other two Amigos; perhaps that’s just his demeanor.

    While I don’t expect the IG report to do anything substantive for us, I hope it’s the trigger for real justice to follow.


  46. thedoc00 says:

    When Comey or his legal advisors introduced the “Intent” criteria and it was accepted, an entire new realm corrupted legal processes was introduced. Not sure this was part of original purpose, but “Intent” is now being elevated to actually being a criminal act (committed or not committed).

    The dangerous part is that it enables the massive amounts of Hear-Say by “Experts” who can render “Expert Opinions” on the meaning of the Hear-Say. Never mind the veracity, content and context of the Hear-Say because there is just so much of it, per the “Experts”. That is the current basis of the Articles of Impeachment, massive amounts of Hear-Say commented upon by “Experts” to a public that is sound bite literate and a congress that is either highly partisan or acting out of self preservation (many members of GOPe).


  47. YY4U says:

    “Mistakes were made but nobody made them” or something like that.

    If nobody is held accountable, that is sad. Sadder still is the number of people willing to sell out to the Deep/Administrative State. It’s like a hospital full of quack doctors only the quacks all know they’re quacks and don’t care so long as they bring home a paycheck and pay lip service to medical ethics.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Debra says:

      The gist of what these ‘intent’ forgers are doing is, they are telling all of us that, ‘of course, ignorance of the law is no excuse, but since WE are NOT ignorant of the law, we obviously do not intend to violate it . . .’


    • X XYZ says:

      Bingo! You just nailed it in one simple phrase, Note that that’s the basis of everything in our society now where there is no longer any personal responsibility. Note that the passive voice is always used – “mistakes were made”. The left thrives on that fallback phrase. Deliberate illegality is indictable; incompetence isn’t.

      Socialism: the world in which everyone is supposedly responsible for everyone else, but no one is responsible for anything.


  48. MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

    There is NOBODY in DC that I trust other than The Donald. The man is up against the most powerful people on the planet 24/7/365.I don’t expect anything positive from those corrupt bastids in DC and neither should you.


  49. Chieftain says:

    In other words,
    Expect a cover up.
    Rule of law is dead.
    Two tier Justice.

    Liked by 1 person

  50. chojun says:

    I just spoke very briefly with my neighbor. It looks like a middle-of-the-road approach to expectations with the IG report are most reasonable. He says that the IG will find that procedures weren’t followed at the DOJ/FBI but he’s unclear whether there will be criminal referrals – if there are, Durham will be handling them at a later date. That’s a pretty underwhelming update so I apologize for that. We’ll just have to read the report when it comes out but if anyone is expecting perp walks and people being thrown in Guantanamo then they’re going to be disappointed.

    He also mentioned some things that lead me to believe that there’s a lot more to what Durham is doing than is public. Did you know that Durham has a son, who is also a federal prosecutor?

    Liked by 4 people

    • mimbler says:

      Did he ever tell you why Huber dropped off the map?


    • Den says:

      It’s a know fact that Durhams reach was much wider because had more latitude and access to sources that the IG who is nothing more than a suggested roadmap which may be somewhat off course. Durham’s findings and indictments trump whatever the IG has to say.


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