…proves in and of itself that she broke the law.
If those agents are patriots, they’ll come forward before the election.
Also, related: Hillary’s security detail requested reassignment due to her abuse. This is totally in character; numerous Secret Service agents reported similar behavior when she was First (non)Lady. A young Chelsea reportedly followed her parents’ lead and called them “trained pigs.”
[Update a few minutes later]
More at the Daily Caller:
People inside the bureau are furious. They are embarrassed. They feel like they are being led by a hack but more than that that they think he’s a crook. They think he’s fundamentally dishonest. They have no confidence in him. The bureau inside right now is a mess.”
He added, “The most important thing of all is that the agents have decided that they are going to talk.”
They need to talk before the election. After will be too late.
[Update a few minutes later]
Hillary’s sworn deposition reveals more public lies. Of course it does. She’s been getting away with lying, under oath and otherwise, for decades. Why would she think she can’t continue, particularly on the verge of becoming totally beyond the law?
[Update a couple minutes later]
Victor Davis Hanson: The case for Trump:
Trump’s defeat would translate into continued political subversion of once disinterested federal agencies, from the FBI and Justice Department to the IRS and the EPA. It would ensure a liberal Supreme Court for the next 20 years — or more. Republicans would be lucky to hold the Senate. Obama’s unconstitutional executive overreach would be the model for Hillary’s second wave of pen-and-phone executive orders. If, in Obama fashion, the debt doubled again in eight years, we would be in hock $40 trillion after paying for Hillary’s even more grandiose entitlements of free college tuition, student-loan debt relief, and open borders. She has already talked of upping income and estate taxes on those far less wealthy than the Clintons and of putting coal miners out of work (“We are going to put a whole lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business”) while promising more Solyndra-like ventures in failed crony capitalism.
The damage done by the lawlessness and corruption of the Democrats is incalculable. Trump is and will be terrible, but here’s my simple case to vote for him:
1) He’s not her.
2) Unlike her, he can be impeached and removed, and will provide an opportunity to rein in a tyrannical executive branch.
3) It would issue a huge and well-deserved F**k You to the media.
[Update a while later]
“It’s almost impossible to keep up with the evidence of Clinton misconduct, wrongdoing and illegality that continues to emerge. It is overwhelming.”
And three weeks before an election, the most important one of our lifetimes, I think.
The first time I ever heard about Comey was on a tv program. The narrator said he was a strong, upstanding, no-nonsense, by the book, lawman.
Red flags should have popped into my head right then and there:
The program was 60 Minutes.
I don’t think 60 minutes ever made it clear which book Comey goes by… I wondering if it’s Mein Kampf or the Little Red Book…
William Weld, VP of the Libertarian Party also called him fine, upstanding, etc. He said Comey’s detractors were silly.
Well stated, Rand.
Doesn’t look like it’s going to happen before the election. At this point, I think it’s Clinton’s.
Rally turnouts imply a Trump landslide victory. Before you put too much stock in the polls, take a closer look at the metadata.
Though with the Democrat Fraud machine in overdrive they may still steal the election.
Romney had big rallies too, and that was cited by Romney supporters as evidence that the polls were “skewed”. But the polls turned out to be tilted towards Romney; the final RCP average was Obama +0.7, the actual result Obama +3.9.
For comparison, at this point in the race, the RCP averages are/were:
2004: Bush +0.8 (result: Bush +2.4)
2008: Obama +7.2 (result: Obama +7.3)
2012: Romney +0.1 (result: Obama +3.9)
2016: Clinton +7.0
Out of these examples the biggest swing from polling 21 days out to final result was in 2012, with a 4.0% swing to Obama. Trump needs almost twice that to catch up in the popular vote.
Romney had nothing compared to Trump or Obama. If you were a republican, you’d know that.
The Republicans at Breitbart and Gateway Pundit seemed impressed at the time, e.g.:
You can find one or two examples, but overall you are wrong. There was no enthusiasm for Romney.
At the time, the claim was the polls were not accurate. You know this because we all talked about it with you. What you never brought up, or anyone here, was rally size predicting a Romney win.
I said it before. The way Hillary will get the polls to match reality is by cheating just enough to make it so.
The fact that the media ridicules and will not investigate voter fraud (examples everywhere) tells the story.
When you see poll workers just waiting for the moment they think they are unobserved to make a mad dash to stuff reams of ballots into the box you still will not get the sense of the problem. When Soros owns a piece of the voting machines in 16 states (it doesn’t even require a good programmer to cheat, just access to the machines) and you can see the temptation is more than they can bare.
Republicans engage in voting fraud as well. They just aren’t in the same class.
Trump is wasting all of his time speaking at rallies of his supporters. In order to win he needs to persuade people who are not already supporting him to do so. He needs to flip half a dozen Clinton leaning states and win Ohio or two other tossups. He does not have the resources to do it. He does not have the campaign organization in place to go knock on doors and talk to people. He does not have the money to buy large amounts of advertising. This is because he chose not to fundraise six months ago when it counted. He can preach to his choir all he wants, but if he doesn’t persuade millions of people who are not already for him to *change their minds*, then he will lose. He is going to lose.
If those agents are patriots, they’ll come forward before the election.
Is there a single named FBI agent or supervisor who was part of the investigation who is on the record as saying there was anything improper about it?
he can be impeached
By those profiles in courage Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, who can’t even bring themselves to oppose Trump today? If Trump wins the GOP Congress will fall in line, just as they did with George W. Bush.
“Vote Trump in so we can vote Trump out” is an odd, and unrealistic appeal.
“Is there a single named FBI agent or supervisor who was part of the investigation who is on the record as saying there was anything improper about it?”
The silence is deafening. The FBI as a whole must be ok with siding with a criminal because she’s a powerful member of the favored political party. So much for the rule of law, now it’s just will to power.
Or maybe the people who actually know think the investigation was done properly. Honest, competent FBI agents — what a crazy notion!
Quid Pro Quo was done properly? Do tell us what you know, Jim.
The “quid pro quo” documents describe an FBI employee unaffiliated with the Clinton investigation offering a trade of bureaucratic favors to a career State Department employee. The trade didn’t happen. The FBI employee is no longer at the bureau. Nothing about the story suggests Clinton’s involvement, much less criminal culpability.
The “quid pro quo” documents describe an FBI employee unaffiliated with the Clinton investigation offering a trade of bureaucratic favors to a career State Department employee. The trade didn’t happen.
Interesting, do go on with your description of this corruption.
The FBI employee is no longer at the bureau.
Sid Blumenthal is no longer an employee of the government either. Again, do tell us more about the corruption.
Nothing about the story suggests Clinton’s involvement, much less criminal culpability.
Laughing could be heard from the grave of G. Gordon Libby.
You really are an amazing idiot, Jim.
Here’s an interview with the FBI official in question. No corruption to be seen.
FWIW, G. Gordon Liddy is still alive.
Nothing about the story suggests Clinton’s involvement
They had people thinking the Sanders people were behind the riots at Trump rallies. For Hillary this is child’s play.
Nothing about the story suggests Clinton’s involvement, much less criminal culpability.
The proposed quid pro quo was on her behalf and what makes this worse is that Hillary wasn’t even Secretary of State at the time. The State Department was breaking laws on her behalf long after she left office.
Of course its not all that shocking that the Obama administration would work to protect Hillary like this. Afterall, they classified emails from Powell and Rice in order to provide Hillary a talking point.
Ok. I am embarrassed. I did look up, prior to posting, the status of Mr. Liddy. I made the mistake of using Wikipedia, and there saw the information about the death of his wife. As a quick check, I mistook it as being him. I’m glad to know he is alive. I dare CNN to interview him in regards to the emails.
Here’s a thought: most of those agents don’t make a lot of money, and they’re concerned what might happen to their careers later. You think the White House wouldn’t retaliate against whistle blowers? They’ve already used the IRS against political opponents.
Someone keeping their mouth shut because they want to keep their job and/or get a different, but related job later may not make for a thrilling profile in courage, but it’s comprehensible.
“Vote Trump in so we can vote Trump out” is an odd, and unrealistic appeal.
Be nice Jim. We know Rand is suffering.
No, it’s vote Trump in so if necessary we’ll have an opportunity to vote Trump out if necessary. Like Romney, I like to be able to fire people, and I know there’s no chance of hell of that with a Democrat in the White House, and particularly a Clinton.
If Trump wins the GOP Congress will fall in line, just as they did with George W. Bush.
There is a lot of evidence to the contrary as we can see with the NeverTrump movement that is pulling voters away from Trump. This is why Hillary is pushing the Russian stuff so much. Democrats don’t care about Russia, they like Russia, its the Republicans that have a long history of distrust for Russia.
Notice how Democrats and their media have paused in their claims Russia is rigging the election and that elections need to be under national control?
“If those agents are patriots, they’ll come forward before the election.” They haven’t done so yet, there is no reason to believe they will do so now. Perhaps they are just not nearly as angry as the story makes out.
Or maybe they’re waiting to be subpoenaed, which won’t happen until after the election, because Congress has recessed until then.
Interesting thought. Would that be before, or after, the electoral college votes?
According to the current House Calendar, they return the week after the election. Don’t know if Chaffetz has scheduled any hearings, but he should.
Try to imagine a Trump impeachment. Impeachment happens in the House, where Paul Ryan controls all business, so it would have to be at his behest. But without Dem votes the effort would be doomed; there are too many GOP reps who support Trump or fear their Trump-loving constituents to make up a majority with GOP votes alone. The Democratic minority, no fans of Mike Pence, could refuse to go along without substantial concessions from Ryan on the budget, Obamacare, immigration, etc.
Trump already considers Ryan a traitor. For Ryan to impeach him in collusion with the Democrats would be admitting the charge: that the amnesty-loving GOP elite and Democratic party are in cahoots to stab Trump and his constituents in the back. The GOP base would revolt, the impeachment would go nowhere, and the GOP leadership (and perhaps the GOP majority) would be swept out.
In short, there’s no way the Republicans would dare impeach Trump.
You’ve just backed yourself into a corner, Jim. Or rather the Senate did in the late 90s. Congratulations. There is now no way to remove a lawless dictator from the oval office short of civil war. Guess what that eventually guarantees?
“Statesmen”. Jesus Christ. I’d rather have people with some damned common sense and knowledge of history and foresight.
“[W]ho fear their Trump-loving constituents.”
Terrible, actually showing concern for what their electors think, isn’t it?
But without Dem votes the effort would be doomed
No way a Trump impeachment could get Democrat votes. We are doomed.
or fear their Trump-loving constituents
As has been noted here before, Trump is the vote against the establishment. If it turns out he’s crooked, he’s not going to have those Trump lovers. We are impeaching him because he’s been caught doing wrong. Right, Jim?
We are impeaching him because he’s been caught doing wrong.
He’s been caught doing wrong every week of this long campaign, and still he has his core of devoted supporters. No matter what he’s accused of he’ll say it’s the globalist Washington elites out to get him and screw over Real Americans, and his voters will rally to his side. Who are they going to believe, Trump or the corrupt mainstream media?
I’d take that as “Yes, Karl”.
He’s been caught doing wrong every week
There is a big difference between actual wrongs that rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors and the fevered imaginings of unethical Democrats.
The case for Trump is much simpler and should persuade 3rd party voters. If Hillary wins we will have a one party system. You will never see another party win except to persuade the rubes that it still exists.
That’s actually an argument for Clinton. A Trump win would almost certainly mean GOP control of the House, Senate, White House and SCOTUS, plus most of the state legislatures and governor’s mansions. It’s the GOP that’s close to having one-party rule; if they’d nominated Rubio or Kasich they’d likely be on the verge of winning it.
My girlfriend (KfH) is from Gary, Indiana, a virtual suburb of Chicago. She’s watching this election closely, and her observation is that it is Chicago machine politics on a national level. Your comment, Ken, is right on the mark. The Republican candidates for all Chicago offices are put forward by the Democrat party, and are hand picked to lose.
KfH had an assignment in high school to interview someone, so she picked a Republican candidate for Congress who had honestly won his nomination over the “Republican” put forth by the Democrats. He told her that he was naive in running for office, and had since learned that the “Republican” the Democrats ran was always supposed to win. When KfH interviewed him, he was already under assault by the Democrat machine, and feared for his life. The last thing KfH remembers about him is hearing a news story that he was barricaded in his office with police in force outside. Apparently, they go in.
Jim, you may avert your eyes all you like, but when the Democrat lawlessness becomes irrevocably institutionalized no one, including you, will be safe. Smirk all you want, roll your eyes, whatever. The system can be used against you, and if someone in government gets pissed at you for any reason, it will be. And you’ll have no recourse.
when the Democrat lawlessness becomes irrevocably institutionalized
It already has. Democrats have been doing this for over a century. They either know and don’t care or are part of the group the Democrat’s Nomenklatura view as useful idiots who must be kept unaware and compliant, to borrow a paraphrase from Hillarys staff’s emails.
Totally agree regarding the FBI investigation, and Rand’s opinion that the agents, if patriots (or even, IMHO, decent) would come forward before the election.
Regarding polls, I’m convinced they are off, but I don’t know which way.
I’m reminded of the Brexit polling, ( Remain’s lead in the polls and betting pools). Basically, the usual modeling applied poorly. I think it does now as well, but I that could well be in either Trump or Clinton’s favor.
As for enthusiasm, I’ve been driving around the US Northwest for the last few weeks. I saw a lot of Trump signs in Wyoming and Montana (not too surprising) and no Hillary signs, unless one counts the “Hillary For Prison!” ones (saw quite a few, mainly as bumper stickers). I saw very few Hillary or Trump bumper stickers (the only Hillary ones were Hillary for Prison). Most of the Trump signs were yard signs posted on the road’s edge (Private property). Two had been vandalized.
What shocked the heck out of me was Oregon and Washington; two very blue states. There, even on the somewhat lefty coast, almost no Clinton signs (saw two, both Clinton/Kane). Vastly more Trump signs – they were more apparent there than in Wyoming or Montana. Fewer Hillary for Prison stickers or signs, but a lot more than the real Hillary signs or stickers. I did see quite a few mixed-party signs in Oregon; Kate Brown (D) for governor, next to Trump signs. (I didn’t note that kind of mixing in other states).
I noticed a near total lack of any election signs (other than local races) in Utah.
I’ll be watching the Oregon returns with particular interest, to see how they match up with polling. What I was seeing doesn’t match the polling, but in Oregon, Portland is the 800 pound gorilla in the electoral room.
Caveat: No clue what was going on in the cites of any of these states, because I avoid cities when possible.