Jump to content

Operation Boomerang AG Barr's Investigation of Acts of Treason by Federal Employees


Recommended Posts

Just now, GG said:

 

The calculation apparently all along was that once the facts start coming out, the narrative would change, not that they would dig in their prior positions.  

 

How's that theory working out?

 

Well...in DR's defense, we are still in the phase of "Look!  This new information damns Trump!"  We haven't yet moved to the "This new information that damns us was faked by Trump, which damns Trump!" phase.  

 

Although we've started moving to that phase with the "Trump's lying about Biden, even though Biden confirmed it!"  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

How?  Are CNN/WaPo/NYT no longer going to be setting it?

 

Keeping in mind: the narrative they've already set is "Trump is using the authority of the Executive Branch to persecute political opponents."  Nothing that can conceivably be released can change that - in fact, anything that would change the national narrative actually reinforces the current narrative.

 

3 minutes ago, GG said:

 

The calculation apparently all along was that once the facts start coming out, the narrative would change, not that they would dig in their prior positions.  

 

How's that theory working out?

 

I hear you both, and repeat my long stated position that yours is the rational position to hold based on history. Without question. 

 

But if what I'm hearing is accurate, it won't matter. There's no way to spin it, though they will try. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

I hear you both, and repeat my long stated position that yours is the rational position to hold based on history. Without question. 

 

But if what I'm hearing is accurate, it won't matter. There's no way to spin it, though they will try. 

 

There's always a way to spin it: "Fake news!"

 

Or don't even report it.  You know, if the media doesn't report the investigation results, but starts reporting with the indictments, warrants, and arrests, they get to set the narrative "Trump has control of the executive, law enforcement, and the courts.  Just like Hitler in 1934!"  

 

People don't do their own research; they are going to believe what they're told.  And what they'll be told is that Trump has taken control of the police and the courts and the civil service, and is using them to persecute his political opposition, including First Amendment violations in persecuting the free press (since Brennan is likely to be one of the first of anyone to be picked up.) 

 

And accurate or not, that narrative is a single Reichstag fire short of the NSDAP playbook.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

I hear you both, and repeat my long stated position that yours is the rational position to hold based on history. Without question. 

 

But if what I'm hearing is accurate, it won't matter. There's no way to spin it, though they will try. 

 

Let me offer a football analogy.  It's like talking about your favorite team's young QB, and pretending that the opposing defensive coordinators won't have a game plan to attack his weaknesses.

 

I don't know if it was you or someone else who linked the Brian Cates rant about the criticism that he's been getting about the slow rollout of whatever this news is about to come out, and that the slow rollout was part of a gran plan.  And when the news hits, there will be no alternative for the targets but to cover in fear.  The problem with that theory is that the targets are people in high positions who stand to lose everything and have been preparing for this for about 3 years.  

 

So, while we're supposed to marvel at the behind-the-scenes strategery masterminded by a Cheeto caricature who can't put a coherent sentence together, in reality the slow rollout lost him a House chamber, muddled legislative actions and started impeachment proceedings that threaten the stability of the country.

 

So please, tell me how the end game is going to turn out well? 

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

Let me offer a football analogy.  It's like talking about your favorite team's young QB, and pretending that the opposing defensive coordinators won't have a game plan to attack his weaknesses.

 

I don't know if it was you or someone else who linked the Brian Cates rant about the criticism that he's been getting about the slow rollout of whatever this news is about to come out, and that the slow rollout was part of a gran plan.  And when the news hits, there will be no alternative for the targets but to cover in fear.  The problem with that theory is that the targets are people in high positions who stand to lose everything and have been preparing for this for about 3 years.  

 

So, while we're supposed to marvel at the behind-the-scenes strategery masterminded by a Cheeto caricature who can't put a coherent sentence together, in reality the slow rollout lost him a House chamber, muddled legislative actions and started impeachment proceedings that threaten the stability of the country.

 

So please, tell me how the end game is going to turn out well? 

 

Seriously, you think the Candied Yam in Chief is the mastermind behind any of this?  He's the figurehead.  The lightning rod that keeps the whole edifice from burning down.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

There's always a way to spin it: "Fake news!"

 

Or don't even report it.  You know, if the media doesn't report the investigation results, but starts reporting with the indictments, warrants, and arrests, they get to set the narrative "Trump has control of the executive, law enforcement, and the courts.  Just like Hitler in 1934!"  

 

People don't do their own research; they are going to believe what they're told.  And what they'll be told is that Trump has taken control of the police and the courts and the civil service, and is using them to persecute his political opposition, including First Amendment violations in persecuting the free press (since Brennan is likely to be one of the first of anyone to be picked up.) 

 

And accurate or not, that narrative is a single Reichstag fire short of the NSDAP playbook.

 

No disagreement -- and this is precisely the debate being had (from what I've been told, in part by people who are professional liars so take it how you will). The investigation in 2017 (!) found more evidence than they ever expected to find due to fact the ones in most legal peril were caught so off guard by 45's win, that they had left themselves incredibly (stupidly) exposed to certain forms of ... collection. You can fill in those blanks if you'd like. The amount of evidence captured put Trump's investigative team in a pickle: how much can they actually expose/clean up without causing exactly that kind of blowback (the civil unrest/revolt kind) and undoing the very republic they're efforting to preserve. 

 

There have been two camps in 45's ear on that issue from the beginning. Ones that want to do less public cleanup and more changing of the regs/laws while doing "spooky" cleanup behind the scenes of the worst offenders, and a second camp that wants to blow the whole thing up come what may. 

 

The come what may crowd have taken the reins. So it might very well come to what you're painting above. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Let me offer a football analogy.  It's like talking about your favorite team's young QB, and pretending that the opposing defensive coordinators won't have a game plan to attack his weaknesses.

 

I don't know if it was you or someone else who linked the Brian Cates rant about the criticism that he's been getting about the slow rollout of whatever this news is about to come out, and that the slow rollout was part of a gran plan.  And when the news hits, there will be no alternative for the targets but to cover in fear.  The problem with that theory is that the targets are people in high positions who stand to lose everything and have been preparing for this for about 3 years.  

 

So, while we're supposed to marvel at the behind-the-scenes strategery masterminded by a Cheeto caricature who can't put a coherent sentence together, in reality the slow rollout lost him a House chamber, muddled legislative actions and started impeachment proceedings that threaten the stability of the country.

 

So please, tell me how the end game is going to turn out well? 

 

The slow roll out was really pushed by the former camp mentioned above. 45 has oscillated between which side he was listening to in terms of his political strategy, and probably still is, but what I've been told (and have no way to confirm of course, so again, take it how you will) is that the come what may camp has moved into the driver's seat. My personal take is that, like when Trump offered an olive branch to Clinton after the election and she (and 44) set that olive branch on fire, Trump is taking the impeachment push VERY personally and has decided to go scorched earth. 

 

Yes. The other side has absolutely been preparing for this. And there will be a fight for control of the narrative. In no way am I expecting a "smooth" ride ahead. There will be turbulence... the question is how much. I tend to lean towards less than more on that scale, but "more" is still a very real possibility. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

I hear you both, and repeat my long stated position that yours is the rational position to hold based on history. Without question. 

 

But if what I'm hearing is accurate, it won't matter. There's no way to spin it, though they will try. 

As much as I want to believe this, I tend to think Tom is right. I can't envision any scenario where the media can't or won't shield the Democrat establishment from public accountability.

 

When I said Obama could torch an orphanage on TV and still enjoy their support, I wasn't exaggerating by all that much. 

 

If some Dems get caught in a serious criminal scandal, morality will get real relative real quick. The presumption of innocence will suddenly become the paramount value of an enlightened society, and jumping to conclusions will be so last year. 

 

The pundits will suddenly find the dots impossible to connect. Chuck Todd will look like Brian Stelter trying to make sense of the Jussie Smollett story (see clip below). 

 

Even if a Dem or group of Dems were in so deep they became too much of a liability to protect, they would be sacrificed and scapegoated. They would be cast out for bringing shame upon their virtuous Democrat colleagues by engaging in the kind of corruption we expect from Republicans.

 

The moral of the story becomes principled Democrats cleanse their own ranks of ne'er-do-wells, unlike Republicans who rally behind theirs. 

 

Think they'll have any trouble convincing your liberal buddies in California?

 

 

 

Hell, If they got caught red handed it wouldn't surprise me to see them say the whole thing is a Republican conspiracy, call for impeachment, and have the mass media push that narrative. That's not too far removed from what they're doing now.

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Purely anecdotal...

My SIL has joined us for 10 days on our OOT trip. She is in NO WAY political. I was giggling about some sort of meme someone posted here about Joey-B and the Ukraine. When she asked me what I was reading, I told her "oh, it is political".  She still wanted to know, so I read it to her and she laughed out loud. She knew exactly what Joey-B was up to in regards to the Ukraine, in spite of the media trying to spin it as a "Trump scandal" to "get his political opponents".

The truth IS getting out there, even to those who do not follow this in detail. Sure, you have the even lower info who will believe #OrangeManBad, but there is a lot of the middle that is seeing this scam for what it is (if not predisposed to think #OrangeManBad).  It appears likely that the MSM is not being believed at the moment.

I think when all this finally comes to a head the Trump administration has a game plan to get the real news out, and not the MSM/Democratic (BIRM) narrative. Joey-B screaming "political persecution" really hasn't helped him much - if the current polls (hahahaha) are to be believed. Even if the polls are accurate as simply a trend, it has been a negative for him.

Do I think this was too slow a roll? Yup. Will scorched earth hurt Trump for reelection? Not if he is running against Elizabeth Warren and unemployment remains where it is. 

 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, B-Man said:

MUELLER: My understanding was I was not applying for the job. I was asked to give my input on what it would take to do the job.

 

That's a clever answer as "my understanding" is hard to disprove.  I'd be interested to see what documents the article cited.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what is General Barr looking into again? 

 

image.jpeg.9d179de665b164ca3d1938a62401bcf7.jpeg
15 hours ago · As President Trump amplifies unsubstantiated claims of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election, the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee reaffirmed on Tuesday that Russian operatives engaged in a widespread social media campaign to improve his chances in the race.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

So what is General Barr looking into again? 

 

image.jpeg.9d179de665b164ca3d1938a62401bcf7.jpeg
15 hours ago · As President Trump amplifies unsubstantiated claims of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election, the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee reaffirmed on Tuesday that Russian operatives engaged in a widespread social media campaign to improve his chances in the race.

Between Dumb and Dumber, which one was your father? Russia's social media efforts were solely to disrupt the election and weaken Hillary because they were convinced she would win. When Trump walloped her, they then went after him. It was all about weakening the Presidency rather than choosing a President. You know this though, since it has been explained to you many times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 3rdnlng said:

Between Dumb and Dumber, which one was your father? Russia's social media efforts were solely to disrupt the election and weaken Hillary because they were convinced she would win. When Trump walloped her, they then went after him. It was all about weakening the Presidency rather than choosing a President. You know this though, since it has been explained to you many times.

The Russians never went after Trump. He's been holding private secret meetings with that murdering terrorist, trying to get his terrorist country into the G8 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

The Russians never went after Trump. He's been holding private secret meetings with that murdering terrorist, trying to get his terrorist country into the G8 


Private secret meetings?  Do they have a cool handshake?  Decoder rings?  Invisible ink?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the interesting thing that occurred to me is what it means to either side if Trump were assassinated( and no I don't want nor advocate that)

Buying in to the theories, deep state is trying to drive the narrative Trump is everything bad.  If he were to go away of course the left would be blamed but it would also be an opportunity to change the narrative.  Nirvana for conspiracy folks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump RT'd this: 

 

Remember what I say about posting dates... (still that's just before the window I was told). 

 

13 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

Actually the interesting thing that occurred to me is what it means to either side if Trump were assassinated( and no I don't want nor advocate that)

Buying in to the theories, deep state is trying to drive the narrative Trump is everything bad.  If he were to go away of course the left would be blamed but it would also be an opportunity to change the narrative.  Nirvana for conspiracy folks!

 

If they killed him now, and they've apparently tried more than once, it would mean war imo. 

 

There'd be no narrative to change. It'd devolve quickly into something very, very ugly.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Purely anecdotal...

My SIL has joined us for 10 days on our OOT trip. She is in NO WAY political. I was giggling about some sort of meme someone posted here about Joey-B and the Ukraine. When she asked me what I was reading, I told her "oh, it is political".  She still wanted to know, so I read it to her and she laughed out loud. She knew exactly what Joey-B was up to in regards to the Ukraine, in spite of the media trying to spin it as a "Trump scandal" to "get his political opponents".

The truth IS getting out there, even to those who do not follow this in detail. Sure, you have the even lower info who will believe #OrangeManBad, but there is a lot of the middle that is seeing this scam for what it is (if not predisposed to think #OrangeManBad).  It appears likely that the MSM is not being believed at the moment.

I think when all this finally comes to a head the Trump administration has a game plan to get the real news out, and not the MSM/Democratic (BIRM) narrative. Joey-B screaming "political persecution" really hasn't helped him much - if the current polls (hahahaha) are to be believed. Even if the polls are accurate as simply a trend, it has been a negative for him.

Do I think this was too slow a roll? Yup. Will scorched earth hurt Trump for reelection? Not if he is running against Elizabeth Warren and unemployment remains where it is. 

 

 

You search news stories in the 2010-2015 time frame, and you find articles from the Times, Atlantic, etc. saying the same damn things about Biden that Trump is saying now.  And that those same outlets are now making excuses for.

 

(Note that they're hard to search for - Google doesn't return them.  You seriously need a Lexis-Nexis account to chase this stuff down.)

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

You search news stories in the 2010-2015 time frame, and you find articles from the Times, Atlantic, etc. saying the same damn things about Biden that Trump is saying now.  And that those same outlets are now making excuses for.

 

(Note that they're hard to search for - Google doesn't return them.  You seriously need a Lexis-Nexis account to chase this stuff down.)

 

Yup -- or duckduckgo for finding some. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

ROGER SIMON: Democrats’ Fear of Durham About to Reach Panic Level.

The important news of the day — far beyond the inevitable tedious impeachment jousting — is that John Durham’s investigation of the provenance of the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation of possible Trump-Russia collusion has expanded, according to several administration officials.

 

 

Read the whole thing.

 
 
 
.
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...