There has been so much corruption in the FBI, DOJ, CIA and DNI that trust in these important and powerful agencies can only be restored if AG Barr prosecutes Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, Clapper, and Brennan. If he doesn’t, then all credibility will be lost in those institutions. Obama and Rice also need to be held accountable for their illegal actions, but that will never happen. Lastly the totally corrupt and criminal Clinton crime family must be prosecuted. If this doesn’t happen then no one will ever believe that there will ever be equal justice under the law. All of these people have committed crimes that any responsible prosecutor would overwhelmingly prove in court.

Just another quick note. One of the reasons given for not prosecuting Comey is because he would be tried in front of an overwhelmingly Dem jury in DC. But I think that that would make it more difficult, but I want him to be indicted and tried so he has to spend tons of money on his defense just like all the Trump people had to do, even if he ultimately prevails. Then indict him again for the FISA frauds, and bleed him dry just like he did to Flynn and Page.

There is nothing surprising in the report. It’s also not particularly surprising that DOJ declined to prosecute. They probably couldn’t find anyone who couldn’t be prosecuted for similar actions. Comey acting like he was vindicated and owed an apology is typical of that bloviating gas bag.

The reason for this rant is again Juan Williams on the FIVE. Juan said he didn’t break the law because the documents he leaked weren’t classified at the time he leaked them. There are two problems with this nonsense and once again nobody else had the smarts or knowledge to shut him down. The first is that nobody but Comey had seen the documents before he leaked them and so no one other than Comey could classify them. Second as director of the FBI, he undoubtedly was the top classification officer there and it was his duty to classify the documents. He was either too stupid to do his job or intentionally broke the law. Neither option is worthy of a victory lap.

Last night on the Five Juan Williams finally answered my question as to whether he was as stupid as he seems or just a talking point puppet for the left. And lest you forget his kids are conservative Republicans.

In the first segment on Trump’s call to abolish automatic birth right citizenship, Justice Jeanine Pirro led off pointing out that the Supreme Court has never addressed the question of whether or not a child born here to parents here illegally automatically becomes a US citizen. The only case they have decided concerned I believe Chinese parents who were working here legally and had a child and then later returned to China and when the son came back he was refused entry. The Supremes held that he was a citizen and could not be denied entry. (As an aside, you should know that the provision in the 14th Amendment stating that persons born here that were subject to our jurisdiction were citizens was as virtually all of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments referring to former slaves.).

As Justice Pirro pointed out the case of an alien crossing the border illegally and having a baby has never been ruled on by the Supremes — and I believe that our representatives responsible for the 14th Amendment would roll over in their graves if someone told them that their amendment applied to births by people illegally in this country.

Next up was Juan, a non attorney who proves that consistently, who immediately after the judge said it hasn’t been decided yet said the Supremes had already determined that it had. Clearly he was just parroting leftist talking points and didn’t even acknowledge what the judge had just said. This leads me to conclude that Juan isn’t stupid but just paid to say leftist nonsense.

More importantly, no one pointed, even Pirro, that Juan was full of shit. My ultimate conclusion is that the Five just has a required slot for an idiot to voice socialist nonsense so they can have a foil.

Lastly, I hope Trump goes hard on this, not only for illegals crossing to give birth, but also for the birth tourism industry where Chinese folks come here supposedly for vacation and amazingly drop a kid while here and claim citizenship for their kid and then through the anchor baby nonsense could get themselves here. Total nonsense.

Listen I’m very good at math and am not normally a conspiracy theorist, but there is just too much about this alleged suicide that doesn’t add up. Apparently, the medical examiner concluded that it was a suicide by hanging but has not really explained her conclusions. Now here’s where the math comes in. Epstein’s hyoid bones were broken which for anyone who watches CSI or reads detective or courtroom novels knows means that the person was murdered by strangulation. I know based on all the reports that it is possible that the hyoid could be broken along with the other neck bones that were broken in a suicide but it’s extremely unlikely absent a great deal of force like would be caused in the old days when someone was hanged by dropping the floor out from under them.

But let’s look at reality. I heard that Epstein could have dropped from eleven feet off the top bunk in his cell. My first thought was what bunk bed has the top bunk eleven feet off the ground. Hell in a lot of places that would mean the top bunk was higher than the ceiling. But later it was revealed that the top bunk was 5.5 feet off the floor. So how could Epstein have jumped from eleven feet. Well if you consider that Epstein was a little over six feet tall, then he could have stood on the top bunk and jumped. My problem is that if that was the case then then the sheet would have been at least been 5.5 feet long to reach from the bed to his neck and when he jumped he would have hit the floor, if he landed flat on the floor, with no stress on his neck given that the length of the sheet was exactly the same as the length to the floor. Moreover, it has apparently been reported that he was found on his knees with the sheet around his neck. Therefore that couldn’t possibly be what happened. The sheet would have been hanging loosely because it was longer than the fall.

So that doesn’t add up. Now maybe he forcibly threw himself off the top bunk on his knees and landed perfectly on his knees with two feet or less of sheet. Remember, Epstein is over six feet tall. So if he was on his knees, the distance between his neck and the top bunk was at best two feet. That makes it extremely unlikely that this scenario makes any sense. So at this point I’m calling bullshit on this nonsense. The facts as we know now just don’t make the suicide plausible.

Maybe something will be revealed that will change my mind, but at present there is no way that the crap we’ve been fed is possible.

I read an excerpt from Andrew McCarthy’s new book in the National Review this morning and it was spot on. Andy is not a Trump lackey, but he is also not a never Trumper. He Is a very smart guy who was an AUSA in the Southern District of New York. He is a straight shooter and has put out a definitive book on the whole scheme to protect Hillary and ruin Trump. It’s called Ball of Collusion and I would highly recommend it. I downloaded it and am reading it. It is not written for lawyers but is written to be understood by everyone.

This is a subject that is near and dear to my heart. The right has been ecstatic that the FBI’s 302’s on Bruce Ohr have finally been released. I’m happy also but it’s important to understand what the 302’s are. Just like the Comey notes memorializing his meetings with Trump they are hearsay. They have zero evidentiary value. FBI agents interview people and then write up their version of what was said. The individual interviewed doesn’t see or approve of their version of the interview. Thus as I said previously, they are free to put anything they want in the 302’s or leave out anything they want.

My point is that we should not get overly excited about the information contained in these documents. I’m sure that they are most likely fairly accurate but in the Russian collusion hoax I am skeptical of everything.

The reason that this is near and dear to my heart is because I had an ongoing disagreement with the IG investigators in my agency. They did interviews and then wrote up what they thought was said. I told them that it was virtually useless to me. They said if it was good enough for the FBI it should be good enough for me. I explained to them the difference between the FBI and them. In the federal criminal justice system, you must get an indictment to prosecute an individual and that means you have to go before a grand jury and present evidence under oath that is transcribed. 302’s are never introduced in judicial proceedings. They are not admissible because they are rank hearsay. In the administrative world there are no indictments. So all you have is at best a he said she said stand-off. I explained this to two IG investigators and they said that it should be good enough and then I pulled out one of their interview notes and they couldn’t agree on what it meant. After that they started transcribing interviews.

First, I was going to comment on Fredo Cuomo, but it has pretty much already been covered. The one thing I will point out is that this morning his fellow ‘journalists’ were saying that calling an Italian Fredo is racist. Forget that Fredo is not an Italian slur. The point I noticed is that the left seemed to think Italian is a race. In whose delusional mind is this true? It was so absurd that by this afternoon the rhetoric changed to an ethnic slur.

Now let’s discuss Nadler’s lie that his committee has opened a formal impeachment inquiry. That’s a whopper. To open a formal impeachment inquiry requires a vote of approval by a majority of the House of Representatives. That didn’t happen. He has tried to get Pelosi to bring a resolution authorizing it to a vote but she correctly has refused. It has been reported recently that a majority of House Dems support it. And from the numbers I’ve seen, it is just over half of Dems — nowhere near a majority of the House. Remember that pretty much all Republicans will oppose and that there are a good number of Dems in vulnerable districts that Trump won biggly who don’t want to antagonize voters that they are going to need.

So why you ask is Nadler pretending that he has opened a formal impeachment inquiry? Maybe because when you wear your belt around your neck you restrict blood flow to the brain or maybe he just never was very bright. But the real reason he’s pretending he did something that he doesn’t have the authority to do is because he keeps subpoenaing grand jury testimony and other records that would be illegal to give him. Courts have made it clear recently that District Court judges do not have discretion to release this information outside the letter of the applicable laws.

So this brings us to the real reason that Nadler is lying. One of the exceptions to protecting grand jury transcripts is if they are needed in a judicial proceeding and impeachment proceedings have been held to be judicial proceedings and thus formal impeachment inquiries are considered to be part of a judicial proceeding. So basically he is trying to lie to a court just like like Comey and friends. The difference this time is that these proceedings aren’t secret. Thus his bs will be exposed.

The other possible reason is that he is trying to appease his base by claiming he is doing something that he is not.

One thing I forgot was that comrade Bill said when discussing illegal immigration that some of these people have been here for 300 or 400 years. Really so some illegal was here before the existence of the US. If that’s true although impossible then they would be citizens. Hannity missed this also.

Last night Sean Hannity devoted his entire show to interviewing Bill deBlaiso. It was as always seems to be the case when Fox hosts question Dem candidates — a poor showing for the Fox hosts. It seems like since the DNC decided they wouldn’t allow Fox to hold a debate, Fox has gone out of it’s way to get Dem candidates on for debate type interviews or town halls. I believe they had one with Bernie Sanders in which Sanders threw in that the VA healthcare was great and no one questioned that lie. The feeling I get is that Fox executives have told them to go easy so that they wouldn’t appear partisan. And it results in namby pampy interviews that might as well have been done by MSNBC.

Now I don’t know if that’s why Sean did such a poor job last night and managed to make comrade Bill look almost sane, or if he just isn’t good at these types of interviews. I think that after last night it’s possible that pencil neck Schiff may take him up on his offer of the entire TV hour and all three hours of his radio show because he apparently would have nothing to fear.

Sean covered areas that were obvious and yet seemed surprised that deBlaiso would come prepared for it. Sean got off to a pretty good start not letting deBlaiso avoid the question on whether he believed that law abiding citizens who pass background checks and have no mental health issues should be able to own guns for their own protection since they don’t have security guards like he and all rich elites do.

Then it kinda went down hill. Two areas really annoyed me. First when it got to Green New Deal (socialism disguised as environmentalism), Hannity agreed that climate change is real and then started questioning what the cost would be and how many people would lose jobs etc. I am sick and tired of all the people that should know better refusing to take on the eco-natzis. Sean should have said as Bongino just did that all of this nonsense has been debunked. Here are the points I wanted Seen to make.

1. Yes the climate is changing. It always has and always will. The question is why you folks switched from manmade global warming, and the answer is because for 18 years while CO2 increased the temperature didn’t.
2. Are you aware that there have been at least two ice ages when the CO2 levels were ten times as high as they are now? Can you explain how that can be if CO2 is the determining factor for the temperature.
3. When the inevitable 97% of scientists agree that this is the case came up, Sean should have said you and I both know that is a lie that has been debunked repeatedly. Just because Obama parroted the lie it doesn’t make it true. He parroted many lies.
4. Since when did science become a matter of consensus? Virtually all scientists agreed that the earth was flat and that the sun rotated around the earth. Did that make it true? Science is proven facts not modeling. Please Mayor, give me the proven scientific equation that proves that CO2 controls the temperature of this planet. You know like Einstein’s E=mc2 or Newton’s laws of motion.

You know comrade Bill would have looked like a deer caught in the headlights, just like Kerry did when he got questioned on the Hill by a congressman from Tennessee. I know I’m going on about this but what’s really needed to put this nonsense away is an opportunity like Sean had. A major public figure on a major tv show having his feet being held to the fire and exposed as a total fraud.

The other area I wanted to single out is the throwing water on NY cops. I predicted that this would come up but Sean didn’t really appear to have prepared for the mayor’s obvious talking points. He said he added 2000 cops and supports the police to the max etc and that they were going to prosecute every one involved but wouldn’t say if they had actually arrested anyone. Sean was obviously trying to say the police didn’t think he had their back but just didn’t know how to do it. The obvious question should have been why didn’t these cops arrest the responsible folks on the spot. It was obviously an assault on a police officer. Hell in one case the cop was hit in the head with the bucket. I dare you to go to downtown Clayton and throw a bucket of water on an officer. I guarantee your ass will be locked up. So Mayor Bill, why didn’t your officers arrest their attackers? Is it because they know you don’t have their back? Didn’t they turn their back on you at a police funeral? Didn’t you tell your black son to fear the police? Haven’t you been denigrating the police throughout your career?

In closing just let me say that as Hannity frequently mentions he’s not a lawyer and clearly he’s not. He doesn’t know how to react on his feet. His normal mode is making prepared points not cross examination on the fly. We will never know if Sean did a poor job or was under restrictions from Fox, but his interview wasn’t successful. And you know how I know, I didn’t see it mentioned anywhere today!