At the very least, Comey is biased

Considering what former FBI Director James Comey said recently, he seems
to have taken sides against POTUS Trump.

Does this not seem like bias?  It does to me, and may explain why he
decided to take the Flynn conversation with POTUS, and his firing, as
he did.

Let's take the Flynn first.  Given his own description of events, could
it be said that if it were Hillary saying the exact same thing, would
he have reacted the same way?  Would it not be reasonable to rephrase
what POTUS Trump said about letting Flynn go, as a means of making
sure that is what Trump meant?  If Hillary had said the exact same
thing, and if she were POTUS, would he have done things the same way?

For instance, could he have asked Trump: "Do you mean that I should
let Flynn go?"  If Trump had said "yes", then he could mention that
it could be construed as obstruction of justice, and given that info,
would he like to rephrase what he said?

He certainly gave Hillary the benefit of the doubt when the law didn't
require it.  Even if the law doesn't require it in Trump's case, it
would seem that he would at least show as much courtesy toward Trump
as he did towards Hillary.  Since that appears to be the case here,
does it not seem that he was biased against Trump?

Since he didn't open an obstruction case against Trump, could it be
that he was trying to get back at Trump for firing him, then?

Clearly, Comey wants to interpret Trump's words as obstruction in the
Flynn case, and his firing seems to be motivating him as well.  He
says his firing may have been motivated by obstruction as well.  If
Comey believed that Trump was obstructing justice, why did he not
open an obstruction case as did then Deputy McCabe?

There are other reasons to consider Comey biased.  He seems to have
paid much attention to detail when he signed off on the FISA warrant,
which is supposed to be verified.  In his own words, several months
after fact, he said that the Steele Dossier was "salacious and
unverified".  McCabe said without the Steele Dossier, there would
not have been a FISA warrant.  If no FISA warrant, then there would
be no Mueller.  Therefore, Comey seeks to have a special prosecutor
named after POTUS Trump fires him, but not before.  His lack of
attention to detail was another way in which he shows bias against
Trump, and he might well have known that it could lead to a special
prosecutor being named, and that is what he was after when he leaked
that info to the press just after he was fired.

Why not show more attention to detail?  Would he not have done the
same for Hillary?  He seems to go out of his way to help Hillary,
even if his efforts were not appreciated, he clearly believed that
he was helping her.  Why not show the same courtesy to Trump, unless
he biased against him?

Comey Implores audience to “use every breath we have” to defeat Trump in 2020 https://t.co/JGz1TGPlMW

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) December 11, 2018

Obligatory, 12.9.18-- James Comey

Updated,

12.10.18:

Sharyl Attkisson has an article worth reading.  It goes into detail, with some analysis and background.  Well done.

Key Takeaways From James Comey’s Testimony Before Congress https://t.co/7enLTLI4Tc via @epochtimes

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) December 10, 2018

18:09:

Just finished reading this thing, or as much as the thing would let me read.

Some quick observations:

• Nobody seems to be nailing down the fact that the Wikileaks emails were hacked or leaked.  Rather, it seems to be assumed that they were hacked.  Otherwise, why do all this?  It has long been my contention that the hacking claim has not ever been established.
• Secondly, the Dems seem to be moving the goal posts.  It was about "collusion".  If that fails, the it will be about obstruction of justice.  I predicted this at the beginning of the Mueller appointment.
• Thirdly, Comey keeps saying that POTUS Trump asked him to drop investigation of Flynn.  Nobody pressed him on this, but it should have been pressed a bit harder.  Did POTUS actually ASK him that, or was it more of a hint?  The way the story gets told, Comey portrays it as asking, but another interpretation could be made.
• Comey didn't initiate an obstruction of justice investigation based upon the now alleged Flynn conversation.  If he felt so strongly about it then, why didn't he begin one?
• Comey is so sure that the Russians interfered in the 2016 election, but he cannot name the predicate event that initiated the investigation.  His testimony is evasive in front of GOP questions, but effusive in the front of the Democrats.
• I get the impression that Comey is the biggest incompetent I have ever seen, or the biggest liar.  He seems to know little, but acts as if he knows a lot.  Either he is lying about it, or he is a great big doofus.

15:43:

Most of today has been spent reading the James Comey testimony in Congress last week.

It is over 200 pages, and it is quite time consuming to read it all.

Perhaps I will comment upon it.  Don't know yet.

For now, I will make no comment until I have read it all, and maybe some other stuff besides.

That is all.

Perhaps this is an explanation for wall street selloff

An unwinding of QE.

It seems like a possible explanation, but yours truly still does not get it.  Interest rates should be going up, but instead, seem to be going down on the "long" end.

Anyway, it may explain.  It should be noted that there is no claim in the article for the wall street selloff as a reaction to QE unwinding.

What's the scoop in France?

It's a revolt against globalism, the author of the video says.  The French seem to be able to organize.  France has been the subject of derision before in these parts. Where was all this type of organization before the recent election in this country--- the USA?  The establishment continues to thumb their noses at the people.  The next thing you know they will be saying something like "let them eat cake".

Oh wait, I forgot.   We are supposed to be having a civil war.  My bad.  /sarc

What to write about today?

Update:

12.7.18:


Well, looky here!  Somebody put their feet on a table in class, the teacher said put your feet down, and they fired her for it.

Maybe if she had a way of dealing with this character the way they did here.  Or maybe the crooks are really running the casino.  Makes you think, doesn't it? 

11.8.18:

As I scan the news, I note that many out there haven't given up on the campaign.  Yes, the campaign is over, but for these folks... Never.

Yep, and 2016 isn't over either.  We have to have that election re-litigated forever and ever until we get the right result, I suppose.

Then the guy I was writing about yesterday got his White House pass revoked.  Fine with me.  While they are at it, they may consider taking out a few more of them. You might even consider doing what was in the movie Casino, in which an offender was sent out head first.



One thought about that, while I am here...  These guys are really weenies.  Acosta that is. Not only him, but his supporters.  You know that they are weenies because they wouldn't go after Obama.  Obama abused the press.  Trump just talks tough back at them, but he doesn't really punish them.  Obama did punish them.  But they never went after Obama.  Why?  Too chicken.

So this is just posturing to show how tough and courageous they are for going after Trump.  But they really aren't tough.  If they were really tough, they would go after anybody, including Obama.  But they'll never do that.  Therefore, the posturing means nothing.

What should the GOP do about its "cucks"?  Take a hard line with them.  This gives the best results.  Instead, Trump went easy on them, and tried to get their cooperation.  So now, they probably sat out this election, and they believe that they have license to give him a hard time.  Screw them.  I'd go out of the way just to tick them off and dare them to join the Dems.  The Dems don't want them either.  After all, if the Dems really wanted another pinko, they have got plenty of real ones already.

But I would be electioneering again.  Time for that to stop.  But these people won't leave it alone.

What do you do?  Pretend it isn't there?  Ignore it?  Or go after them full throttle?  If Trump had went after them full throttle, he might have survived and cleaned up this crap that he as to deal with today.

Or they would have taken him out.  One way or another they will try to take him out or nullify him.  If he is going to be a real president, he is going to have to deal with them.  Avoiding the issue, or trying to be nice to them isn't going to do it.

Direction of USA is still going down

Despite of all the good work that Trump has been doing, he is not reversing the main trend. "Making America Great Again" may be too big of a challenge for him.

It seems all rather perverse, to have a majority of the country thinking that decline is better than greatness.  The perversity is real, however.  Nothing is done properly anymore.  Take the Mueller investigation.  If the law were truly followed, the matter would not have gotten any further than an IG report.  The IG report itself would have wrapped up pretty fast.  There was no crime.  If there was no crime, there should be no prosecutor---- period.  That fact that there was one, and a push to keep him on no matter what, is the kind of perversity that is prime evidence of the decline.

Of the things that are still working well, you can be assured that it won't last.  All of it is under unceasing attack from the same forces that are attacking Trump.  For example, the STEM ( Science, Technology, and Mathematics) sector is doing relatively well.  But the SJW crowd is making diversity more important that qualifications for the work.  It is becoming increasingly more important what a person's skin color or gender is, as opposed to their ability to do the work.  Of course, to point this out is "bigoted" in some way, shape, or form.

Our adversaries aren't so wrapped up in so-called social justice.  They will surpass us, while we argue over these irrelevant issues.

AGW is a big test.  The fact that it continues is a bad sign.  AGW is not a science,  It anti-science.  Science encourages dissent, as dissent is what make science go forward.  AGW theorists suppress dissent.  Therefore, they are not interested in the science, but to the contrary.  If they are successful, first rate STEM work will be a thing of the past.  It is the last leg that is holding the country up.

Trump is just a pin prick in this huge balloon--- of the phony baloney existential claptrap of the left.  Yet, they act as if he is far more significant than he really is.  If he was really determined, he wouldn't be putting up with 1 percent of the nonsense that he is putting up with now.  Trump is just like those who preceded him-- a mere speed bump on the way down.  There is no change in the direction, it is still going downhill, but not quite as fast as before.

Once Trump is out of the way, things will begin to accelerate on the downward path.  Obviously, I am not convinced that there will be a happy ending to this.

Last Refuge:Occam's Razor: Michael Flynn

That there is a game here, there can be no doubt.  How many times have I read it stated as a question as to Mueller's "end-game"?

It may not be possible to end all games, but it may be possible to step back from them, and try to detach one's ego from them.

One's ego gets attached when it goes tribal.  You probably have heard that term bandied about.  How our politics have gone tribal.  It's "my" tribe versus "their" tribe.

If one can detach from the tribe for the moment, and ask what is the truth behind what is going on here?  That may be hard to do.

The article is a part of a long running series of articles about the "soft-coup" against Trump.

Does anyone doubt that there is an effort to remove Trump from office?  Why?  Was there ever any real "collusion" with Russia, or is the accusation a part of the dishonesty of this game?  What do the participants seek?

Update:

Mueller has asked for a postponement of Flynn's sentencing for quite some time.  Now that the election is over, maybe he got what he wanted!  That is, the control of the House going to the Democrats.  This means that the soft-coup can be covered up.

Occam's Razor: Michael Flynn... https://t.co/ttSGnOUJYw via @thelastrefuge2

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) December 6, 2018