One by one, these theories have gone down in flames in the face of overwhelming evidence. For example: James Comey? The half-baked theories promoting him as a "white hat" were never backed up by anything more than wishful thinking and "He can't be as dumb/corrupt/partisan as he appears" "reasoning." The jury is in: James "Jimmy the Weasel" Comey IS every bit as stupid, corrupt, and partisan as he appeared to be. Maybe even more so.
Robert Mueller? There are still holdouts, but again, there is very little other than wishful thinking and a chain-of-goodness that proclaims that he's anything other than a scumbag. The chain-of-goodness argument goes like this: He was appointed by Rosenstein, who was appointed by Sessions, who was appointed by Trump. Therefore, he must be a white hat.
On the other side of the ledger we have this:
Rod Rosenstein? If you think Rosenstein is a white hat, why did he appoint Mueller? Why has he withheld information from the various congressional committees? And before you tell me "muh... ongoing investigations," compare the latest round of recently unredacted testimony from the HPSCI from James Comey with the original, heavily redacted "classified" testimony. The ONLY differences is that the fully exposed testimony makes it clear that James Comey and Andrew McCabe are LIARS and contains NO -- I repeat NO -- sensitive national security or sources and methods redactions. NOT. ONE.
So riddle me this? If Rosenstein is a "good guy" why would be he withholding testimony that has no bearing on anything being done either by the IG or Huber, the sole reason for which was that it embarrassed DOJ/FBI? In fact, in embarrassed at least one FBI executive who was already fully, publicly, disgraced: Andrew McCabe. So why hide it?
I would also ask you to take a look at who Rosenstein's wife is, and who her clients have been over the years if you still think he's a white hat actor.
It's true that Rosenstein hasn't yet proven himself to be a skunk. Unlike Mueller, Comey, and most of the previous top people at DOJ and FBI, he hasn't yet revealed himself as a scumbag. But... he does have a number of dark marks and the only bright one is "he was appointed by Sessions."
I don't think Sessions is crooked. But I think the pool of career people he had to pick from at FBI/DOJ was very small, and based on what they've done, I don't see a lot of room for hope. We also don't really see much evidence that Huber is doing much of anything. Is it really possible that corruption on the scale we know existed within the DOJ could be investigated without any leaks from Huber, his office, or a grand jury? I must say I'm skeptical.
I'd love for you to be right. But, given what we know, there is very little reason to believe that things are anything other than what they appear, and the history we have to date tells us that all the clever theories about super-secret good-guys weeding corruption at the DOJ have--so far--been proven to be inane nonsense.
Bravo, excellent summary.
Thank you for that.
The Sessions sycophants invoke Occam’s Razor even as they violate it: building one supposition upon another in order to create the fantasy they require for these apparatchiks to be in reality so-called white hats.
These people have been Clinton cronies for decades. They have not changed.
Excellent presentation there, worthy of its own thread.
These “insiders” don’t have Trump’s best interest at heart, imo.
Awesome post 97. You hit everything. Brilliant. Well worth the time you sacrificed to produce it.