Posted on 07/22/2025 4:50:42 AM PDT by MtnClimber
“The forces behind this coup have done and will do anything to protect their grasp on illegal & illegitimate power.” — Stephen Miller.
Let’s not pretend that RussiaGate was ever anything but a “treasonous conspiracy” and a “years’ long coup” as bluntly labeled by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) on Friday. The election prank launched by Hillary Clinton’s campaign turned into an overt sedition op led by President Barack Obama to overthrow his elected successor, Donald Trump. DNI Tulsi Gabbard went even further and proffered criminal referrals on all this to the US Attorney General. If you think this is not extremely serious, you are not paying attention.
The New York Times was not paying attention in its Sunday edition. Not a word about this historic action on the paper’s website landing page. So now you know why the Harvard law professors, the Martha’s Vineyard chardonnay widows, and all the creative class hipsters of Brooklyn persist in their personal globes of political delusion. Instead, The Times dwelt on the Epstein business, still haplessly hoping to catch the Golden Golem in its golem trap. (Mr. Trump’s lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize committee for rewarding the Time’s RussiaGate coverage is still pending, by the way.)
Meanwhile, DNI Gabbard went on Maria Bartiromo’s Sunday confab and warned of more info releases coming this week. Sooner or later AG Pam Bondi will have to announce that a case based on that referral is under construction. My guess is that this is exactly what Kash Patel’s FBI has been preoccupied with for months with no leaking — you can imagine severe penalties against that. You might also note that there are no higher crimes under our law than treason, as explicitly spelled out in the DNI report. The DNI also stated flatly on Sunday, “There must be indictments.” If you think DNI Gabbard went forward without consulting some crack constitutional lawyers, you’ll be disappointed.
And also meanwhile, Deputy AG Todd Blanche has applied for release of the sealed grand jury transcripts on the 2019 Epstein case from the DOJ’s Manhattan outpost (SDNY). And consider: all that info was completely segregated from the Epstein files that former FBI Director Christopher Wray controlled for years and years, meaning it was not subject to editing and manipulation. You may finally get to see the difference between the “hoax” elements of the story and the actual evidence.
The Russian meddling and collusion story might have seemed like “a thing” to many in the early January days of 2017 before Mr. Trump’s first inauguration. But when they went after the newly appointed National Security Advisor, General Mike Flynn, for having a conversation with the Russian ambassador, you had had to know that something sketchy was afoot. As this blog asked at the time: why are ambassadors from foreign lands here, if not to speak with our government officials? The story was preposterous but, of course, the news media helped run Gen. Flynn out of office and then led the cheering for the DOJ’s malicious prosecution of him afterward in Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s DC district court.
You also have to wonder if anyone in the news media might be subject to indictment above and beyond the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press. Is there a line between that and acting as an accessory to treason? What did New York Times editor (at the time) Dean Baquet think he was doing, publishing all that patent garbage? Or the producers of CNN and other network news?
The DNI called these activities a “treasonous conspiracy” for a reason. A conspiracy charge that encompasses a skein of persons in a continuous series of crimes extends the statute of limitations to the latest criminal act for all involved. You might also wonder how wide a net the DOJ could cast. Will it include such obvious players as Senator Mark Warner, who schemed to play along on RussiaGate as Vice-chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence? Or then-Congressman Adam Schiff on the House Intel Committee when, for years, he pretended to have “proof” of (i.e., lied about) Trump-Russia collusion? Or FBI Director Wray, who hid evidence, might have tampered with evidence, and apparently lied to Congress about many of these connected matters? Or Andrew Weissmann, who virtually ran the phony Mueller Investigation as a RussiaGate cover-up op because Robert Mueller was mentally infirm? Or Lawfare Ninjas Marc Elias, Norm Eisen, and Mary McCord who appear liable for 2020 election hackery and the Jan 6 “insurrection” op (including the House J6 Committee fakery afterward) along with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi? Or former AG William Barr, who sat on the Hunter Biden laptop during Trump Impeachment No. 1, when the device was stuffed with exculpatory evidence withheld from Mr. Trump’s lawyers? Or CIA agent Eric Ciaramella, Lt. Col Alex Vindman, and Intel Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who conspired with Rep. Adam Schiff on the “Ukraine phone call” operation that was the basis of impeachment No. 1? Or DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who botched his investigation (on purpose?) of FISA court criminal irregularities, or Judge James Boasberg who presided over those criminal irregularities and issued many of them? Or Special Counsel John Durham who took years to overlook the salient elements of the RussiaGate coup? Or many other figures involved one way or another. . . McCabe, Strzok, Page, Pientka, Thibault, Baker, Rice, Yates, Rummler, Halper, Pompeo, Haines, Bruce and Nellie Ohr. . . .
Are they all rounded-up and sent to court together, like a Nuremberg proceeding? Or do they get their own separate cases? Or will the DOJ only go after the top dogs: Obama, Brennan, Clapper, and Comey?
Finally, consider this: demonizing Vladimir Putin set the stage for the Ukraine War — which was initially kicked off in 2014 under President Obama and his State Department / CIA group led by Victoria Nuland orchestrating the Maidan revolt. The official disclosures now by the DNI should make it clear that Mr. Putin did not deserve the treatment he got for years on end, and that the overall effect of it has been catastrophic for world peace. Half the people in the USA still believing all the manufactured [BS] about Mr. Putin has made it extremely difficult for President Trump to end the war in Ukraine that has killed millions.
RussiaGate had the gravest consequences, and now there can be consequences for the merry pranksters who started it and kept it going, one way or another, for a decade.
The only constitutionally authorized death penalty for actions against the nation involves treason. Treason is quite clearly defined along the lines of eating and a bedding and enemy of the United States. Since Congress has not declared war on any nation after December, 1941, it would be rather difficult to convict someone of treason. Sedition, or in this case, a seditious conspiracy, is another matter altogether. My understanding is that the maximum sentence for sedition or seditious conspiracy is 20 years. I am sure that there are other penalties that could be attached, such as loss of pension, and the civil suits that would come about in the aftermath of a conviction would break even the wealthiest of offenders.
By the way, even if these people were aiding China, and I would argue that anything that weakens this country aids China, we are not in a declared war against that nation, so treason is not operative. Unfortunately, that word is bandied about too freely, without people understanding that the judicial system not only does, but HAS to, mete out punishments in a very precise way, according to very specific definitions. If it doesn’t do that, then we end up with Star Chambers and the like.
*aiding and abetting
I really have to check Siri - it can’t transcribe easily understood English.
——Sedition, or in this case, a seditious conspiracy, is another matter altogether-—
That’s pretty much what I thought too.
I can’t see aiding and abetting an enemy in what was more along the lines of a conspiratorial coup.
Not at all what I was thinking it meant. (Lol, speech-to-text, gotta love it!)
”Since Congress has not declared war on any nation after December, 1941, it would be rather difficult to convict someone of treason.”
As I understand, treason is the only crime demanding the death penalty described in the constitution. Hmmm…maybe that is why war has not been “declared” in spite of executing “operations” that sure look like a war. Invoking the death penalty for the war pigs would interfere with their power structure, ie their ability to wage war and to profit from it.
Now, what about “The war on xxxx”. Can there be traitors to these actual declared “wars”, (poverty, drugs, terrorism) or are they somehow different?
Nuremberg them all. 5 minute tribunals, immediate executions.
Right you are but I am nt clear about this “eating and a bedding and enemy of...”
You and TTFlyer should spend some time learning words and definitions before you so blithely use them.
In view of my 50-year career in publishing, I'd say you need to develop a sense of humor.
By the way, your outrage at the widespread blurring of language definition is more than half a century behind the times. Prominent recent example: mural to describe a slogan painted on a street. Spellcheck error and definition creep are here to stay until A.I., with all its other pitfalls, starts cleaning up digital language production.
The Dawn of Digital Spell Checking (1959 to 1970s)
The Degradation of Language and Why We Should, Such as, Care (2010)
By dismantling its copy desk, The New York Times is making a mistake that’s been made before (2017)
Ping a ling...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.