Posted on 12/15/2017 12:34:24 PM PST by jazusamo
Full title: Gregg Jarrett: Did the FBI and the Justice Department, plot to clear Hillary Clinton, bring down Trump?
There is strong circumstantial evidence that an insidious plot unprecedented in American history was hatched within the FBI and the Obama Justice Department to help elect Hillary Clinton and defeat Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.
And when this apparent effort to improperly influence the election did not succeed, the suspected conspirators appear to have employed a fraudulent investigation of President Trump in an attempt to undo the election results and remove him as president.
Such a Machiavellian scheme would move well beyond what is known as the “deep state,” a popular reference to government employees who organize in secret to impose their own political views on government policy in defiance of democratically elected leadership.
However, this apparent plot to keep Trump from becoming president and to weaken and potentially pave the way for his impeachment with a prolonged politically motivated investigation – if proven – would constitute something far more nefarious and dangerous.
Such a plot would show that partisans within the FBI and the Justice Department, driven by personal animus and a sense of political righteousness, surreptitiously conspired to subvert electoral democracy itself in our country.
As of now, we have no proof beyond a reasonable doubt of such a plot. But we have very strong circumstantial evidence.
And as the philosopher and writer Henry David Thoreau wrote in his journal in 1850: “Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.”
Newly revealed text messages about the apparent anti-Trump plot are the equivalent of a trout in the milk. It smells fishy.
The Plans
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Totally agree with you, don't see anything else it could logically be.
The woe-is-me crowd do not want to hear it: that Trump, Sessions, Rosenstein, Wray, Mueller ... and Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz are getting ready to take down the corrupt and possibly treasonous Clinton/Obama machine.
After watching both Wray and Rosenstein testimonies, I am almost 100% certain of this.
Aside from the bad apples (Strzok, Ohr) who have been weeded out, the FALSE idea that Mueller is out-to-get Trump is a flimsy cover story (albeit believed by many Congressional Republicans and conservative commentators) woven strictly out of a few thousand dollars in political contributions.
NEWS FLASH: Some political contributions are nothing but business expenses, akin to wearing nice business suits. Contributions alone DO NOT CONSTITUTE BIAS.
Yes, but under a Clinton administration. The plan was to make sure Trump and others like him would NEVER run for public office by destroying Trump, his family, friends, and his business.
Yet here we are today, with the Preisdent’s Attorney General Jeff Sessions just on my radio in his snobby voice saying he disagrees with the President’s remarks earlier this morning that there is an issue within the FBI.
DC is sure a small, cozy little town.
De facto sedition.
Not a damn thing.
I think they were talking about their backup plan for getting him impeached if, despite their best efforts, he got elected. That would be “insurance” (as Strozk said, like life insurance in the unlikely event that you die before the age of 40) and they probably started working on assembling their “insurance documents” so that, if need be, they could swing into action just after the election, try to prevent his inauguration, and if that didn’t work, get him impeached.
If that were to happen, I hope the POTUS could rely on the men of the USMC to protect our country from its domestic enemies. It hasn't come to that yet, but we may be heading towards it.
I think you’re being exceedingly optimistic. They have already done an enormous amount of damage to Trump by slowing down his agenda and paralyzing his diplomatic contacts (particularly with Russia, which the left hates now that they have abandoned Communism).
If they had really wanted to take down the Clinton/Obama machine, they could have told the truth at the start. But they didn’t.
Sedition.
Has Wolf and his expert panel discussed the insurance policy and how it is Trump’s fault that certain FBI official went rogue?
I think the Clinton email investigation will be resurrected because Strzok obstructed justice with help from many others. That would be too good to be true. Clearly, Strzok was a Clinton plant.
so why no calls for Strzok to explain himself and the use of the word ‘insurance’, this text has been known for days now.....what is the hold up?
If so, then we would expect to see similar contributions to BOTH party's...if they were a business expense. Is that the case here?
Would you give 10k to the DNC as a business expense?
He won’t be asked to explain the comment. It’s regarded as normal office banter.
Part of this was the effort by Comey to focus attention away from the question of whether Hillary knowingly passed US government-protected secrets through her email server (of course she did) and onto the distraction of whether she was grossly negligent or extremely careless and whether it is constitutional to impose a criminal penalty for gross negligence (Comey says no) and whether others in the same position had ever been punished for such negligence.
It's an old lawyer's trick: contrive a debate over a less harmful, distracting issue (negligence) in order to avoid consideration of a much more dangerous issue (Hillary's knowing use of her email server to store and transmit US government secrets).
Obama even got in the act by claiming that Hillary had no intent to harm US national security, which is irrelevant to the statutory crime, which requires simply that she knowingly mishandle US government secrets. We don't even need to get into the question of negligence, she obviously knew what she was doing, by doing it repeatedly, a large number of times.
” don’t think it need refer to anything like assassination
I think we can infer that it’s a possibility from what we’ve seen so far. But there are 10,000+ texts, all have not been read from what I understand, so there may be more to come that could point to assassination — or point away from it.
There is also the question of whether or not the FBI paid for the dossier. Whether they did or not, it appears that they were at the very least considering doing that.
They were aware that Clinton and her DNC had originally paid for the dossier. IMO, the FBI debated whether or not to pay for it in order to add credibility to their FISA application in regard to having their own sources and methods.
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.