Connect with us

Politics

But There’s No Evidence of a Political Motive

We beg to differ.

Published

on

The unequal treatment at the FBI can he seen in how a Clinton witness got immunity while those associated with Trump get charges.

According to the IG report, there was no political motive that affected the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton.

Do you remember the Clinton witness, Paul Combetta?

Trending: US Women’s Soccer Team Skips Representing U.S.A. at Opening Ceremony

take our poll - story continues below

Do you think Cubans are fighting for healthcare or freedom from Communism?

  • Do you think Cubans are fighting for healthcare or freedom from Communism?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Combetta wasn’t charged with anything to convince him to testify. Rather, he was given immunity. How did that work out?

Paul Manafort was actually put in prison yesterday? General Michael Flynn was charged with lying to the FBI under dodgy circumstances. No one was offered immunity.

But the IG reports says there’s no evidence of a political motive!

Andy McCarthy writes in the National Review, “The IG’s Report May Be Half-Baked.”

The IG is going to tell you that while immunity might not have been the best choice, it was a defensible choice — it enabled the FBI to get his testimony faster (i.e., to lie to them in a more timely fashion on the artificially compressed deadline they’d established for closing the case without charges). What is Horowitz not going to consider? That a hundred times out of a hundred, in cases not involving Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy, most normally aggressive federal prosecutors, including Trump-Russia prosecutor Robert Mueller, would have charged Combetta and squeezed him to roll over on his confederates.

Instead, Horowitz says it was a rational decision, so we’re done with that one. Whoa, whoa, wait a second. Was it an appropriate decision? Was it made because they were in a rush to close the case so that Clinton (their preferred candidate) could run against Trump (whom they were determined to “stop”) without the cloud of an investigation hanging over her?

The IG won’t answer that question — not without a canyon’s worth of wiggle room. Utterly biased people may have made manifestly flawed decisions, he tells us, but as long as they were not blatantly irrational decisions, we’re going to call them justifiable and move on. But were the decisions politicized? If a biased person makes a less than optimal decision, isn’t there an itty-bitty possibility that the bias clouded his judgment?

In essence, the IG answers, “Who really knows?” . . . except he says it in a way that enables the FBI to pretend he has found no evidence of bias at all. Observe this gem, from the report’s executive summary:

“We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions.”

Directly affected? What does that mean? Do the FBI and Obama Justice Department have to stamp the “I’m with Her” logo on Combetta’s immunity agreement before we can say bias directly affected the decision? Could bias have indirectly affected the decision?

Who really knows, right?

Read the full story.

 

 

Opinion

Trump Weighs in on Cleveland Baseball Name Change…and It’s Not Pretty

The former President was NOT happy!

Published

on

Donald Trump, like a great many conservatives around the nation, isn’t all that thrilled with the way in which our national culture is changing.  Of course, this isn’t terribly surprising given that this is the nature of conserving, to allow things to remain the same or to work to bring the nation back to the way it was. So, almost predictably, Trump had plenty to say about the recent change announced by the Cleveland Indians baseball team. In a statement, Trump wrote that he is a “FORMER” baseball fan and said “a small group of people, with absolutely crazy ideas and policies, is forcing these changes to destroy our culture and heritage.” The name change came after years of protests from Native American groups and baseball fans. The former President had a far different opinion than many. Trump’s statement said he thought the name was an “honor.” However, the Lake Erie Native American Council released a statement supporting the team’s new name, WTOL reports. “We are pleased the Cleveland baseball team took a comprehensive approach to listen and learn and show it is possible to take steps toward change,” the statement read. The name change came just months after the Washington Redskins dropped their own mascot to temporarily become the “Washington Football Team”, just until a new moniker could be decided upon.

Continue Reading

News

Tests Show QAnon Shaman is ‘Mentally Ill’, According to His Own Lawyer

But is this all just a part of a broader legal strategy?

Published

on

From the moment that Jacob Chansley set foot on our television screens, we knew that we’d be talking about him for some time into the future. Chansley, known more commonly as the “QAnon Shaman”, was the iconic character who participated in the January 6th insurrection shirtless, with his face painted, and wearing a large fur headdress adorned with bison horns. Now, as Chansley faces charges in the storming of the Capitol, his lawyers are trying a rather tricky defense:  They’re claiming that the Shaman doesn’t possess full control over his faculties.  In an interview, defense lawyer Albert Watkins said that officials at the federal Bureau of Prisons, or BOP, have diagnosed his client Jacob Chansley with transient schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety. The BOP’s findings, which have not yet been made public, suggest Chansley’s mental condition deteriorated due to the stress of being held in solitary confinement at a jail in Alexandria, Virginia, Watkins said. “As he spent more time in solitary confinement … the decline in his acuity was noticeable, even to an untrained eye,” Watkins said in an interview on Thursday. But is this all just legal maneuvering? Watkins said authorities will need to determine how Chansley can get access to the treatment he needs to “actively participate in his own defense.” Pleading guilty to a charge negates the need for a trial, but defendants still have to be declared mentally competent to do so. Watkins said the BOP’s evaluation of his client did not declare Chansley to be mentally incompetent, and he does not expect Chansley to be ordered to undergo what is known as competency restoration treatment. Watkins turned heads early on in his role at attorney for the Shaman, after making derogatory remarks about his own client’s mental health, using phrases that are deemed unprintable…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week