News Of John Bolton’s Experience At The White House Isn’t News

Tweet Tower—Why are John Bolton’s revelations from his upcoming book revelations? Who knew a narcissist could act narcissistic by putting his own re-election over the greater good? That’s the flippin’ definition of narcissism! Why are we still surprised by Trump’s actions in 2020? The DSM hasn’t changed that section since flippin’ Freud. Meanwhile, my friend and blogvesary, a man with a Rorschach-with-an-electron-microscope level of commitment to the minutiae, is still ranting about Spygate and he wants widespread liberal prosecutions. What is your endgame, sir? Trump’s rather notorious place in history is sealed and my Trump/Mussolini and Barr/Franco analogies seem less hyperbolic each and every news cycle. We elected a crime-boss president with fascist friends, and like any other modern-day conservative experiment: It.Failed.Miserably—to the point where the dollar itself hangs in the balance. What are you even hoping for, Pokey? That the widespread incompetence plaguing our country, which no doubt reached our intelligence community, has some positive political implications? Maybe there’s a bad cop in there somewhere so the crime boss walks? [Walk Don’t Run joke removed by the Ventures Foundation.] How do you continue to ignore the obvious? When are you going to see what’s actually happening, not the fantasy foxal matter counter-narrative? When will you realize that when people who share your ideology lead it’s akin to a cluster fuck giving birth to a mega-snafu during an F-5 sharknado?

My friend and blogvesary ended our last messenger FB session with another Spygate rant, something akin to “Strzok lied and people spied. You know I’m right, Zano. Admit it.” What? I predicted procedural errors would be found by Horowitz, and I predicted they would be prosecuted and politically weaponized post-Durham yet, try as Fox & Friends may, no tangible links will be bridged to Obama, Hillary or Biden. The resulting dust that’s kicked up, however, could still impact the election …because that was always the plan.

Zano, Zano. Now that Bolton’s excerpts are leaking, Barr and Trump are finished.

You’re not getting it, Colonel Klink is still in charge of the Stalag. Too old? Fine, there’s still a vacancy sign in front of the Bates Hotel. No? How about, Hannibal Lechter is still in charge of the menu? Our commander in chief and his Sheriff Scheisskopf are not going anywhere. There is no act too egregious for a republican to turn on another republican and they are the law. They are the bad cop protecting the worse cop.

They will persevere. The Trump enablers won’t want to make a change this close to an election. Of course, a medical issue and a Pence/Haley ticket is increasingly likely (Hat tip: Tommy G.), but there will be no next impeachment, no investigation, just more denials and excuses from the cretins that call themselves republicans.

To the backdrop of Bolton’s new damning revelations, Fox News is only increasing their calls to prosecute the agent responsible for the mistakes in the Carter Page FISA warrant. Go for it, but Horowitz found widespread procedural irregularities across the board, so this is selective enforcement. And keep in mind, again, nothing in this country works anymore. Have you tried to do something lately? Anything? Transactions end badly, internet portals suck, and everything is about as easy as IKEA minus the instructions. Hey, the bookshelves are here! …uh, we didn’t order bookshelves?

Meanwhile, my concern has stayed laser-focused on the danger of this president speaking to other world leaders out loud, unsupervised, and woefully unprepared. Bolton’s book isn’t out yet, but here’s a sneak peek per Politico:

Bolton writes that the House should have broadened its impeachment inquiry to other areas of his foreign policy, contending that he can document — and identify witnesses to —”Ukraine-like transgressions … across the full range of his foreign policy.”

So this was our president’s M.O. all along. Who knew?  Oh yeah, me …last year:

“Here’s what I want to know: when each and every conversation this president has with world leaders likely ranges from impeachable to indictable, who gave the order to stop spying on the enemy within?”

If you’re spying on a criminal and no one is there to extend the FISA warrant, does it make a Burisma?

Granted, Bolton should have testified to congress but, like all republicans, he went for the money over principle. Or, my joke at the time:

It’s too late now, so good luck with the book sales, John! Maybe if the dollar collapses, you will still make enough for your lawyer fees.

Crimes are occurring and Trump is selling this country out phone call by phone call, or, per Bolton, “obstruction as a way of life.” And this period will have profound consequences for our future and our place in the world. And this is occurring while my friend, who I still consider a smart guy, remains fixated on the equivalent of some Miranda rights violation. I don’t actually want to downplay the mistakes of our intelligence community, but this is probably how they’ve always operated, badly—just like everything else amidst the last throes of our democracy. People should be punished for the FISA mess, but the bigger story is this: my cat could make a stronger case to keep listening to this president than the FBI managed, and she’s really aloof.

How chilling do events have to become before you take notice, Poke? How many Inspector Generals and whistleblowers must go? How many Saturday night massacres are too many for republican sensibilities? How many Bolton excerpts must leak before a clear picture emerges? At the heart of today’s conservatism, lies an impressive vigilance. They ceaselessly repel any and all facts from entering their field of consciousness. And they don’t even notice because abject cognitive dissonance is an important prerequisite for becoming a republican. And make no mistake, this post-truth world will give way to a post American one. Are your affairs in order?

Let’s end with this gem. Per Adam Schiff, here was a recent exchange with our AG:

Adam Schiff: Don’t you worry how history will judge your handling of all of this?

William Barr: History is written by the winners.

If they are the winners, we have already lost.

 

(Visited 74 times, 1 visits today)
Mick Zano

Mick Zano

Mick Zano is the Head Comedy Writer and co-founder of The Daily Discord. He is the Captain of team Search Truth Quest and is currently part of the Witness Protection Program. He is being strongly advised to stop talking any further about this, right now, and would like to add that he is in no way affiliated with the Gambinonali crime family. 

  14 comments for “News Of John Bolton’s Experience At The White House Isn’t News

  1. Pokey McDores
    June 18, 2020 at 5:18 AM

    3 Lies:
    1) As you know, in our last discussion, I never suggested that “Strzok lies”; that was NOT my position. Just the opposite—Strzok told the truth in his texts.My position— There is no evidence that Strzok or any other investigator was EVER suspicious of Trump. So why are you? Obviously because the investigators chose to instill suspicion in the general population, a suspicion that the investigators did not share. That is what the evidence proves and what I am asking you to admit.
    2) This next one is a perfect case study of how the Left, the Mainstream Media, and you Zano, routinely Lie—Bolton’s alleged accusations of Trump are “damning revelations” but the investigator’s crimes against Trump’s campaign are not “damning revelations” but rather “mistakes,” “procedural irregularities,” and “procedural errors.” Of course, Zano does not want to “downplay” these “mistakes.” That’s the most egregious way the Left repeatedly lies—because of course Zano HAS DOWNPLAYED them by referring to them as “irregularities” rather than “damning revelations.” Zano, by using the English language to politicize the meaning of words for journalistic purposes, you have become the Big Brother Thought Police that is at the heart of every tyranny. I just wonder if you are aware of what you have become. I ask you to acknowledge this point.
    3) Horowitz “found widespread procedural irregularities across the board.” This implies that the irregularities worked for AND against Trump. If so, name one “procedural irregularity” (damning revelation) that did not work against Trump’s political interests. To my knowledge all of the the “widespread procedural irregularities “coincidentally “favored the Anti-Trump resistance. If you can’t name one ( maybe you can; but I don’t know of one) then acknowledge the falseness of your implication.

    At least 2 lies, probably 3. Own up to them, then we can discuss an honest critique of Trump.

    • Mick Zano
      June 18, 2020 at 11:23 PM

      1. “Strzok lied people died” was a paraphrased catchy summary phrase for your enjoyment. Rhymes and alliteration are important, Pokey, especially when you do them both at the same time like comfy & cozy. That’s important! I too am curious as to why the FBI can’t seem to speak to the onset of crossfire hurricane, when a. it’s obvious why surveillance was necessary b. it started with papadapwhatsas not Page, and c. Wray, Horowitz and Mueller all said the onset of the investigation was justified. It is odd, i will give you this much, that they can’t seem to speak to these dots which seem pretty obvious to the rest of us. Use your words FBI.

      2. I’m really not aware of this. i make predictions, i share my insights each week then I link back to them when they prove accurate sometime later. We have a search and link funtion here at the Discord, but i understand why you can skip this tutorial. I have said from the beginning if you can connect Obama to spying That’s news, but i refuse to feed into the nonsense designed to cost Biden the election. Fool me once… My prediction stands, procedural errors will lead to accusations that will never be proven, because they’re false, but they will muddy the 2020 election, aka the point. I could be wrong on this. Durham may connect some serious dots, but that is simply not my prediction. so far you’ve connected dots from Stzrok all the way to his GF. Granted there could be a racy emoticon in there somewhere as well. Now that Barr is under some pressure to behave maybe, just maybe, he backs away from Operation: Make Shit Up And Fry People For It. One can only hope.

      I am just not there yet. We are still at procedural abnormalities, which, again according to Horowitz, are not abnormal. They.Are.The.Norm. Post 9/11 i don’t even understand what’s illegal about any of this? We gave our intelligence communities a blank check to listen in to all foreign conversations so, of course, we were monitoring the Russians, because it was proven they successfully interfered with our election. And, as it turns out, everything Trumps peeps said to the Ruskies was a little suspect …which, uh, is how they became suspects.

      3. Your theory has some holes. Why did then FBI director, Jim Comey, only publicly do things to hurt Hillary’s chances?. Hmmm. a red herring? Why didn’t anyone leak any of this to the public in order to muddy the election? oh, thats right, that’s the republican playbook. Dems tend to observe the rule of law. If this was a coordinated effort to change the election, it was very poorly executed.

      I agree with you on this much, someone in the FBI needs to explain why they can’t explain their justifiable actions in a coherent fashion. This does confound me. That part of the circus I will be interested in hearing, but just not for the same reasons as you. I will make full retractions where I am wrong, post Durham and post testimony. I just would never bet against me.

      • Pokey McDores
        June 19, 2020 at 7:56 AM

        I do appreciate your acknowledgement to the FBIs inability to speak to the onset of Crossfire Hurricane. It’s been 4 yrs. Do you have any reasonable theory as to why they cannot speak to the onset of Crossfire Hurricane?

        I do appreciate your acknowledgement—“Someone in the FBI needs to explain their justifiable actions in a coherent way.”
        But how can you assume their actions to be justifiable. Why do you give such benefit of the doubt to the accusers rather than to those who are being accused. Isn’t the benefit of the doubt supposed to remain with the accused until the accuser can prove their case.
        But you are wrong in that—SINCE the FBI cannot explain their actions in a coherent way, then their ACTIONS ARE UNJUSTIFIED.

        The FBI has had 3 years to explain their actions. Comey and McCabe have both been proven to have “lied to investigators.” Wait, isn’t that the same crime that was charged to Papa and Flynn. With Papa and Flynn, those were “damning revelations.” Comey and McCabe—“procedural errors.” You have presumed the guilt of the accused and given the benefit of the doubt to people who repeatedly abused the powers of one of the most powerful investigative institutions in the world. These people still REFUSE to explain their actions after nearly 4 years.
        Zano at what point do you come to the obvious conclusion—The reason that the investigators refuse to give us a coherent story is because their actions were based on politics rather than justice. I know the answer—once Trump is no longer President.

        2) You refer to the FBIs many questionable actions as “errors” or “mistakes,” but in the same paragraph you refer to Bolton’s (a man who you have never trusted who is profiting off a book he wrote that exploits a position in government that he was paid to keep that releases sensitive information about a president who is still serving) “damning revelations.” Have you ever heard of a person who served a position for a president publishing a memoir of those events WHILE the president was still serving. A sane country would not permit such a travesty. In our country the Left will now turn Bolton into a hero for his “damning revelations.”

        3) one procedural irregularity that served Trump’s interest. You mentioned Comey—Comey had to inform the public that he had reopened the investigation into Clinton only BECAUSE OF HIS PREVIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGUALARITY—that is he earlier announced that he was closing the investigation (it’s irregular for the FBI to public ally announce the closing of an investigation in case they have to open it back up). It is also irregular for the head of the FBI to announce that there would be no charges brought against a person (that is the Attourney Generals decision and job)

      • Pokey McDores
        June 19, 2020 at 10:50 AM

        It comes down to one question—Can you even imagine one reasonable explanation as to why the FBI has not yet explained their actions (after 4 years) in a coherent fashion? Please provide that reasonable explanation in a coherent fashion.

        Those of us who have looked beyond your presuppositions of “dots that seem so obvious to the rest of us,” can provide a reasonable explanation that acknowledges all known facts.
        When I look at the objective evidence, I see dots of circumstance woven together by investigators for the purpose of making them “seem so obvious” even though these investigators “can’t seem to speak to these dots.”

        “It’s much easier to deceive a person than it is to show a person that they have been deceived.”

        Did you provide that reasonable explanation yet, Zano?

        • Mick Zano
          June 19, 2020 at 8:08 PM

          I think we’re finally getting somewhere, my friend. Yes, I can imagine a reasonable explanation. I think you’re confusing “political motivation” with “common sense/survival instincts.” I would hope if I were sitting in FBI headquarters …someone would escort me out. But, for this matter, anyone in their right mind would try to do something (within the limits of the law).

          A brief history of our demise, big players can squash whomever they desire without consequences (what I call our shift from capitalism to vulture capitalism). Say you are an FBI agent and in 2016 a known criminal is moving into the WH. We know he’s compromised to several countries, we know he uses dirty money to fund his vulture capitalistic enterprises. In this late stage democracy, open criminality is permissible for those at a certain net worth, but president? Anyone have an insurance policy? What do you do as that FBI guy? The investigation into Russia is netting results, now the crime boss already has his peeps on the phone starting their dirty deals. Flynn: thanks for the win, we’re gonna work together, nudge nudge, wink wink, and dozens of other “forgotten” meetings. Post the Patriot Act, we have access to these phone calls, legally. So now what?

          Why, today, I can make the case better than them is also explainable. We have a Gestapoesque DOJ and a president Ass-clown Hitler, what do you do with the truth now? Have you gone toe to toe with the boss? Are there garbage shoots available at the FBI? The gig is up. I predicted the day the Mueller Report came out that he missed the charging bear–now we’re in an environment where the truth is dangerous. Whistleblowers are being walked out, or worse, and our IGs are on the run (also predicted). The thugs run Gotham. What can you do now when only the right kind of truth is permissible? I think the testimonies, under oath, will be revealing, but keep in mind that these will likely be close door testimony only, because Barr needs to contain and control all the embarrassing/damning information that will surface. He wants to just highlight and magnify the Spygate narrative. I will need to be convinced this isn’t …well, handled like anything else William Barr has handled to date.

          I can also ask you, why after four years no one has made the case that any wrongdoing reaches beyond the second floor of the FBI? I just doubt believe this reaches the Dems. The Obama folks had cooth. And sometimes the cooth hurts.

          As for #2. The Bolton thing is a travesty, anything outside a banana republic would have enforced his subpoena in the first place. But we all know this is a post checks and balances kind of place. Buckle up.

          • Pokey McDores
            June 19, 2020 at 9:06 PM

            That’s not bad Zano, but we’re back to the same point. Why no indication of genuine suspicion on the part of the FBI.

            Now, if you’re suggesting that the investigators just KNEW that Donald Trump was dangerous to our nation like you KNEW he was dangerous, and therefore they decided to take extreme action to do anything in their power (legal or illegal) to resist Ass Clown Hitler, then we do agree. That’s what happened and its still happening. That’s the RESISTANCE–its illegal. That’s why the FBI won’t come clean until Trump’s presidency is over; and thats why they deserve to go to jail and they will go to jail unless of course they can avoid justice by starting this race war…

          • Pokey McDores
            June 19, 2020 at 9:57 PM

            That’s good, Zano. I’ll take that–common sense survival. Yes, that’s exactly how they saw it. The investigators saw Trump and said this guy is so dangerous to the country that we are justified at taking extreme action to stop him. The only problem was they couldn’t find any “big there there,” but since Trump was SOOOO dangerous they concluded that ANY (even illegal) action was justified in its RESISTANCE of such a danger. Now Zano, if the FBI could now show ANY evidence of genuine suspicion, then they would be in the clear. Yeah, Obama stayed buffered; he has nothing to fear, but Coney, McCabe, Clapper, Brennan, and probably even Susan Rice deserve to go to jail, and they WILL go to jail…well, unless something crazy happens like a plague or a race war…

  2. Pokey McDores
    June 19, 2020 at 11:38 PM

    This is my third attempt with this one.

    Yes, finally you present a reasonable answer–the FBI investigated Trump out of common sense/survival instinct. Like you, and the Clintons, and the Bushes, the FBI elite looked at Trump and thought, no way! This guy is too dangerous. We must do whatever we can to stop him. So they started to investigate, unfortunately for them they found that “there is no big there there.” But still they knew he was dangerous, so they justified doing anything (legal or illegal) to RESIST him. Now, if the FBI could show any evidence that they had genuine suspicion of Trump, then they would be in the clear; but they have no such evidence. Now, I know Obama kept himself buffered, but the FBI elite and Clapper, Brennan, and perhaps even Susan Rice, they deserve jail, and they will get jail, unless of course there’s some huge crisis like a plague or a race war…

    • Mick Zano
      June 20, 2020 at 1:23 AM

      There’s a very big orange there, there. i have never defended breaking the law to bring him down, in fact, it shows an astounding incompetence on the part of our intelligence community that they couldn’t nab a crook, thus my other theory, we gettin’ dumb. I always like to play, what’s Pokey on about while terrible shit happens. Right now AG Barr is purging all the judges in all the Trump probes. https://apnews.com/56faebddd07e5fc3b349e3e3e30453b2 I guess, you’re right: if crimes are legal, are they really crimes? As i said, they missed the bear, and now we will all pay the price.

      • Mick Zano
        June 20, 2020 at 8:48 PM

        Let me make another prediction, because that’s what I do best. Barr will bend all kinds of rules prohibiting his release of investigation findings on the lead up to an election (timed with coordination from the WH, of course). These “revelations”, aka procedural errors, will be released in a way that leaves tantalizing questions about which Democrats are behind this attempted coup/spying. Now, if they had evidence of a connection they would release these facts, but the won’t which never really matters with these assholes. The results of Durham and the subsequent sworn testimony will–along with voter suppression, welcomed foreign interference, gerrymandering and the grossly obsolete electoral college–represent a possible path for the worst president in our nation’s history to enjoy a second term. It’s still an uphill battle, because he’s horrible even by normal republican standards, but this could level the playing field just enough. A second term will represent the final death knell for this sad sad place we now reside. Kidding, we’re already toast. Let’s call Barr’s nonsense the October non-surprise.

        • Pokey McDores
          June 21, 2020 at 4:13 PM

          Slow down, Zano. The FBI leadership has the ability to release any information that shows us justification for the actions they took at any time. They have not.

          You depend too much upon what “experts,” “specialists,” “inspectors,” and “special counsels” conclude. Listen to what these people say, but think for yourself Zano. These reports always include only that information that they must include because it’s already public knowledge, and then their conclusion always shapes the narrative in the best form that Covers the Leaderships Asses. Find their facts and fuck their conclusions.

          After 3 years of listening to these people the best evidence shows:
          1) no investigator of Trump was ever genuinely suspicious that Trump had “colluded” with Russia.
          2) leader of the FBI worked with (colluded with) members of the media (by sometimes illegally leaking information) to promote a public narrative of “Trump Russia collusion.”
          3) the FBI has refused to release critical information about the early stages of the investigation

          I don’t need to wait for the next Inspector General report or Special Counsel to tell me what this means. I know how to think for myself. Now you try.

          • Mick Zano
            June 21, 2020 at 8:21 PM

            I’ve been predicting stuff for nearly 20 years–with you there, thankfully–and my track record speaks for itself. In fact, I will link back to the prediction in the above comment someday soon. But I’m a big picture guy. Back in 1930s Germany, you’d be raging about certain brewers drifting from their beer purity laws, while I was tapping your shoulder to point out the funny symbol on the red tapestry. I’ve also said, repeatedly, I’m in an odd position as we have a criminal syndicate vs the Feds scenario. And the Feds were given waaaay too much power to surveil people post 9/11. Again, I was not silent on that back then.

            I also said on day one of Mueller report, the FBI would be dismantled brick-by-brick whether they deserved it or not. Maybe they deserve it, but that’s a damn chilling world. If they made a slew of errors or if they think they’re above the law, umm, it fits either my Weez Gettin’ Dumb theory, or ‘why did we extend the Patriot Act again’ concerns? Or most likely, somewhere in between. As for this debate, any grand conspiracy of yours begins and ends with the FBI, whether we’re talking mid-level, higher-ups, whether they were politically motivated, or more Maslow motivated, or Hertzberg—hell, I don’t care if it’s Wahlberg playing the Ghetto Shaman, but I am only wrong if it reaches key democrats, aka in the know, giving the orders, pushing the buttons–otherwise why would I care if we reform something that I already felt needed reform? So we have an out of control intelligence community? Who is surprised by this?? And when did you even climb on board?

            And, if it does lead back to the Dems, who’d even want to hope for that? Who’s that dystopic? The republicans have failed us, intellectually, economically, and morally, so their place in history is sealed. You’re banking on everyone’s a criminal in the US in 2020? That’s actually not that far from my position, but gosh that’s …well, I’m having those Bill Paxton flashbacks again.

            As for your three points:

            1. This is part of the gig is up. They missed the bear. The bear’s in charge now so everyone is scrambling. Attempted collusion occurred publically, but Trump is an idiot and they did know that even then.
            2. These happen, and in the case of the Hillary probe leak, that one should be investigated as it impacted an election and, unlike russia, was wholly unfounded.
            3. We are in agreement on this one. I have a better theory than the Feds have released, which is ridiculous. It started with Papadawhatsas via an Austrailian ambassador, it was kept open because of the near contstant wrongdoing and supsicous acts by Trump and Co. Just spell that shit out already. i could do a better job, jeez

            If you think Obama is behind this, just say it. You’ll be wrong, again, but at least I’ll have an idea why your panties are in a bunch.

            • Paul Dooris
              June 21, 2020 at 10:52 PM

              You assume it was “kept open for constant wrongdoing and suspicious acts by Trump and company.” Why do I have to keep repeating that Strozok had a 1st class seat (THE first class seat) through this investigation and documented the entire fiasco. Why do you still assume that the investigation was “kept open for wrongdoing and suspicious acts” when you can show NO EVIDENCE from the 10,000 undestroyed text messages of Strzok/Page to support that assumption? It all comes down to this point, a critical point that you are STILL avoiding. THE POINT—those who were investigating Trump with NO EVIDENCE OF SUSPICION and at the same time were promoting a very suspicious narrative—those people serve the DC SWAMP that we elected Trump to drain. Trump was the only candidate who could possibly pull off this difficult but necessary task of draining this corrupted swamp of DC politics. Nobody ever said that draining a swamp was gonna be pretty (enters Donald Trump). So the Swamp has been desperately fighting back through the conjuring of the Trump/Russia collusion narrative, the whistle blowing impeachment efforts, the legalistic civil war, the race bating, and the riots. And anybody who is RESISTING this drainage is either knowingly or unknowingly in the service of the Swamp. That is what the known objective evidence indicates about the point of history we are at right now.

              P.S. J.K. Rowling is an anti-trans bigot!

              • Mick Zano
                June 21, 2020 at 11:42 PM

                i tend to speak to what i see and what i predict. And this is where I think we’re at in Spygate land as compared to my predictions:

                Is there any doubt Trump is at the very least somewhat compromised to Russia et al, and both welcomed help and attempted to collude with Russia. And that he’s done it with Ukraine and China also? No.

                Did Trump obstruct justice in the Mueller investigation? Yes.
                If there were clearer instances of collusion or conspiracy, they were successfully blocked by Trump’s toadies. Per Mueller, likely.
                Did the investigation prove a coordinated Russian effort to interfere and that they had a clear favorite in the race. Yes.
                Should the 25th Amendment kick in for Trump’s refusal to protect the sanctity of our elections? Yes.
                Did the FBI mishandle the Trump side of the Russian investigation? Yes.
                Is this the norm for FBI investigations and operations? Probably, as eluded to by Horowitz but we will never know under Barr.
                Does this DOJ have the credibility left to investigate Crossfire Hurricane? No.
                Do they already have enough “facts” to stagger these “revelations” and impact the election? Yes.
                Will the release of these “facts” by the DOJ be in breach of normal FBI non-interference protocols? Yes.

                Was this mishandling of information during the investigation intentional and, if so, does it link back to Obama or key cabinet members in a coordinated effort to bring down as sitting ass-clown? It doesn’t matter. It will be the talk of the town on the lead up to the election, regardless.

                If Obama was concerned and suspicious of Trump and his actions, amen, he has functional neurons, but if they lied and trumped up the charges to bring him down outside of the law, it is a huge scandal. But that’s only if, and when have those ever panned out for the rightwing conspiracist? I don’t predict that, which is almost as good as knowing for sure, ha ha. We would have the emails, or the communications, the whistleblowers. None have been found, because none exist. Meanwhile, Trump whistleblowers have already pulled an Elvis.

                The truth for this part is irrelevant, at least so far as the Trump playbook goes, they have enough to spin all kinds of bullshit (they’re specialty). Does anything on this list vary from my original predictions? No, or at least i don’t believe so.

                This “evidence of suspicion” of which you speak was public and most was executed out in the open. If the Feds did not meet the threshold to extend the FISA, A. they shouldn’t have continued and B. they’re idiots.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *