Day 777

Day 777 Friday February 22, 2019

619 Days to the 2020 election and 697 Days to Inauguration Day

In the weird world that we live in Andrew McCabe is said to not be believed because it is said that he lied and because he lied he was fired from his job 1 1/2 days before being eligible for a pension. Those same people do not mention that the president was gunning for him, that the president had repeatedly harassed him and his family and lied about him, that the president sarcastically said it would be too bad if McCabe lost his job before he got his pension, etc. etc. etc. Nor do those people say what it was that McCabe supposedly lied about. Mike Pompeo said this week how can you trust someone whose own people say he lied. Really Mike? You are working for the liar-in-chief and you have the gall to say that? You don’t even have the guts to say McCabe lied. You say essentially, “Well, those around him said he lied,” which is true. If you had said McCabe lied that would be a lie. Very clever Mike. 

Okay so let’s go to the heart of the matter. What is it that McCabe is accused of lying about?

According to a news report in the Washington Post dated April 13, 2018 McCabe is accused by the Justice Department’s Inspector General’s Office of lying on four separate occasions, three under oath. It involves disclosure of information that he authorized to the media. 

The original document says “Oversight, Integrity, Guidance” just below the title of the office. It’s in red caps with stars in between.

The initial question and reason for their original investigation was the disclosure of sensitive information concerning Hillary Clinton, which the Wall street Journal published under a headline saying there was a feud at the FBI about this. The conclusion of the report was that McCabe “may have lacked candor” when questioned by FBI agents about this. It says that he had a different recollection of events and what he said to then Director James Comey about this. It says that while he was authorized to have people within the department speak to the media if it was in the public interest, their report concluded that McCabe’s actions weren’t in the public interest and therefore violated the FBI’s media policy and were therefore misconduct. 

That’s it. That’s the big deal. What? If you’ve ever worked in a large organization and someone is out to get you this is what it looks like. There’s a term for it. It’s called BULLSHIT.  

McCabe in his book outlines what he says happened. The Wall Street Journal was getting ready to publish an article, which had errors in it. McCabe authorized someone within his department to talk to the reporters to try and clear up the errors. He was later asked about this by the FBI’s Inspector Division. He had been assured that the meeting was a friendly one and that he had no need to have a lawyer present. They just had a few questions. When he went to the meeting they showed him a series of emails and or texts between two people in the FBI. The comments in those texts were inappropriate. The two people were having an affair. McCabe had never seen the emails; didn’t know that the two were having an affair. He was shown emails and texts and asked about them. – What did he think? – What did this mean? – What did that mean? – etc.

He had no idea. He had never seen any of this before. The agents were asking multiple overlapping questions. McCabe tuned out. This was not the meeting he was told they were going to be having. He tried to end the meeting. He had been set up.

He and Comey were asked to recall a certain event. McCabe remembers it one way; Comey another. The report sides with Comey and therefore concludes that McCabe violated FBI media guidelines. This isn’t plain BS, this is bureaucratic BS.

The report came out in February 2018. Yet in December of that year, 26 hours before McCabe could have received his pension, he was fired. The president who had threatened to do this earlier, now crowed about it.

If by the standard that was used to fire McCabe was applied to those in the White House and those appointed by this administration I would say none of them would be left in their positions. Not a bad idea. 

In other news – I am a prophet! There is no doubt. Roger Stone was in court and he was meek, and contrite, and said he was stupid. Just like I said!!! This didn’t stop Stone from lying, but come on, it’s Roger the dirty trickster! Yeah. He told the judge that he didn’t know that the crosshairs were crosshairs. He said he thought they were something else, I forget, like a sign of the devil or something? Yeah. Right. One reporter pointed out that Stone has used that symbolism a lot on his posts. He’s also been shown holding a big rifle with a gun site that if you looked through it you’d see crosshairs. Yet, he doesn’t know what it is? He told the judge that he didn’t post something or other. The judge asked who did? He didn’t know. Someone else. Like who? He wasn’t sure. Others had access to his account. How many? Five or six. Who are they? I don’t know. You don’t know who the five or six people are that have access to your account and posted something to it within the last day? That’s right your honor. 

To say that the judge was lenient is an understatement. Stone and his buddy over at InfoWars have caused real harm and inflicted fear on many people. But as Chuck Rosenstein pointed out, Stone will be serving ten to twenty years soon enough. 

The judge said to Stone that this isn’t baseball you don’t get three strikes. He already has two. (I would quibble with that analogy. If Stone screws up again that would be three strikes and he’d be out, but who am I to worry about such details?) 

Okay suckers, place your bets. How long before Roger opens his mouth and is back in front of the judge kicking sand on his shoes and saying he’s stupid and a bad boy and that he didn’t realize … blah blah blah blah blah?

Two days? A week? Step right up. Place your bets. Les jeux sont faits.

(A wonderful French saying, made popular by Jean-Paul Satre which translates to “The bets are placed,” and the call of a croupier in a casino after all the bets are placed. Very James Bondian I’d say.)

Oh and don’t you love the – he’s having trouble putting food on the table – comment?

OMG. After all the dirty tricks, all the lies, all the mean horrible things he’s done, he claims he’s broke!

Moving on. Rachel examined the question of whether a sitting president can be indicted. I fell asleep and woke up from time to time. It kind of washed over me. Let me answer the question – Yes.

Yes, a sitting president can be indicted. Let’s say the president shot someone on Fifth Avenue. (He likes that example.) Would he loss a vote? Yes, of the guy he shot. Would he get arrested? You bet your sweet bippy. (Shout out to our Canadian friends: Rowan and Martin. If you don’t understand it means you are under 50. It’s okay.)

There is a Justice Department directive saying they don’t do it (indict a sitting president.) But they have. Leon Jaworski did it with Nixon. Or he got real close. The directive is weak according to what I gleaned from TRMS and btw it’s not in the law or the Constitution. So? If that directive comes up against the law and the Constitution whaddaya think will happen? I think the four Supreme Court justices that have no business being on the Supreme Court and claim to be strict Constitutionalists and card carrying members of the Federalist Society will twist themselves in knots trying to get out of this one, but the vote will be 8 to 1 with Kavanaugh, beer boy wonder, dissenting.

619 Days to the 2020 election and 697 Days to Inauguration Day

PS Me and Zeus (or Neptune)