Lock her up – Hillary is going down

A Hillary Clinton lawyer has been indicted for lying to the FBI in the Clinton campaign’s 2016 smear of Donald Trump.

The lawyer fed bogus information to the FBI to fuel the false allegation that Trump was colluding with Russia. The lawyer lied to the FBI by stating that he was acting purely as a private citizen, while his own firm’s billing records prove he was actually working for Hillary’s campaign.

As the current occupant of the office for which Hillary was campaigning might say in a rare lucid moment, “This is a big f*cking deal.”

Recall that the Trump-Russia collusion allegation ultimately proved baseless. A two-year, $32 million investigation by Robert Mueller and his staff of 19 Democrat partisan lawyers together with 40 FBI agents interviewed 500 witness and reviewed thousands of documents, but came up empty. They found no evidence of Russian collusion. But they did succeed in casting a cloud over the Trump administration and gifted a ratings bonanza to CNN whose viewers still remember CNN’s breathless nightly reports of the investigation, courtesy of leaks from Mueller’s team, but have forgotten the outcome.  

The debunked Russia collusion story wound up not just baseless but very fishy. So fishy that after Mueller’s team finally wrapped up, a special prosecutor was appointed to investigate how the story ever got started. In effect, the new special prosecutor was tasked with investigating the basis for the baseless earlier investigation.

The new special prosecutor is well-respected John Durham. Trump supporters have been frustrated at the slow pace of his investigation, but this guy takes time to get ready and carefully aim before he shoots. He embodies the adage that the wheels of justice turn slowly but grind exceedingly fine.

That’s shown by his 26-page indictment of Clinton’s lawyer. The first sentence grabs your attention:

“[A]pproximately one week before the 2016 U.S. Presidential election . . .  multiple media outlets reported that U.S. government authorities had received and were investigating allegations concerning a purported secret channel of communications between the Trump Organization, owned by Donald J. Trump, and a particular Russian bank.”

The indictment explains that this story got in the press because the lawyer put it there. He leaked it to his news reporter buddies just before the election.  

The indictment details the fact that the lawyer and his accomplices knew this information they were providing to the FBI was doubtful at best. According to the indictment, one of the accomplices said in an email, “you do realize that we will have to expose every trick we have in our bag to even make a very weak association?”

But they didn’t care if the allegations were false. What they cared about was that the allegations couldn’t possibly be shown to be false in the few days before the election.

The Clinton campaign itself was indisputably in on the smear orchestrated by their lawyers. The indictment states that the lawyer “exchanged emails with the Clinton Campaign’s campaign manager, communications director, and foreign policy advisor concerning the . . . allegations that [the lawyer] had recently shared with” the press.

What about Hillary herself? Is it possible that none of those three – Hillary’s Campaign Director, her Communication’s Director and her Foreign Policy Advisor – ever told Hillary?

It’s possible but highly unlikely. Subordinates don’t go that far out on a limb of dirty tricks without a heads-up to the boss.

It’s also possible but highly unlikely that they’ll say they didn’t tell Hillary while in fact they did. Saying they didn’t when they did would constitute another lie to the FBI for which they could get indicted.

Moreover, in weighing the odds of them lying to the FBI, note that persons interviewed by the FBI don’t know what the FBI knows. So even if the FBI doesn’t have the goods, the person being interviewed has to assume they do in order to avoid perjuring themselves.

Finally, the underlings will be motivated to toss Hillary under the bus by Durham’s offer of plea bargains if they do. Offering plea bargains in exchange for testimony incriminating the higher-ups is of course standard operating procedure for a prosecutor working his way up the chain of command in an organization, whether it’s the mafia or Public Enemies like the DNC.

A likely outcome, therefore, is that executive staff in Hillary’s campaign who reported directly to her will admit to the FBI (if they haven’t already) that they did in fact tell her about the scheme. There’s a good chance that the communication with Hillary will be in an email, and so it will be undisputable. Hillary has a habit of accidentally hammering her phones in a way that destroys the emails they contain, but the other side to the email will probably still have copies in a deleted file somewhere.

Bottom line: Durham has established that Hillary’s campaign was conducting a dirty tricks operation under the mask of its law firm. They enlisted the FBI in their dirty tricks by providing the FBI information they knew was misleading or spurious. Days before the election, with too little time for the information to be refuted by Trump, they leaked the ensuing smear to the press.

This was done through a lawyer for the campaign who falsely told the FBI he was acting on his own behalf and not on behalf of the campaign. (Query: Did the lawyer actually think the FBI would buy that? The agents must have said to one another microseconds after the interview with the lawyer was over, “Subpoena his billing records!”)

What probably comes next is that Hillary’s lieutenants will confirm that she was in on the scam. Hillary will be disgraced as a dirty trickster of the first order if she confirms she knew of this. If she denies it in an interview with the FBI, then she could well be the next indictment.

(Query: What about this lawyer’s law firm, a Seattle-based firm with aspirations? This indicted lawyer was a partner there along with another partner who appears to be the operator who drummed up the debunked Steele dossier purporting to say that germaphobe Trump engaged in pee-pee sex with Russian prostitutes. Both are gone from the firm now (the last one left hours after the indictment issued, and the other one left a few months ago) and the firm has scrubbed its website of any mention of them. But the actions of a partner are ordinarily attributed to the partnership as a whole, whether the other partners actually knew of them or not. And how could they not actually know? Surely the managing partners of the firm got periodically briefed on the firm’s representation of the Hillary campaign and the Democratic National Committee, two big-name and controversial clients of the firm.)

(Query: How much does Bill know? You know the answer. Bill knows everything.)

Glenn Beaton practiced law in the federal courts, including the Supreme Court.

The Aspen Beat recently topped a half million readers. Join them with a free subscription HERE.

Something wicked this way comes – the midterms will be a Democrat apocalypse

It will be a catastrophe of Biblical proportions.  Think fire and brimstone. The Four Horsemen of Joe, Kamala, Nancy and Chuck riding off a cliff. Cats like AOC sleeping with dogs like Bill Clinton (OK, that’s not odd, but it’s sure icky). Locusts. Hillary’s persistent pestilent pantsuits.

The first midterm elections during a presidential term are a test that he/she/they/it usually fails. Democrats do particularly badly, since most Democrat voters are not aware of midterm elections of their House and Senate representatives. Heck, they don’t even know who their representatives are. The Democrats lost 64 House seats in the 2010 midterm when Barack Obama was president and 54 seats in the 1994 midterm when Bill Clinton was president.

That’s bad. Even the outmanned and outplayed Broncos in Superbowl XXIV lost by only 45.

This time, the Dems don’t even have politically competent Obama or Clinton. They instead are headed by a stupid, senile, hair-plugged, incompetent, tongue-tied, foolish President Lite whom Obama warned we should “never underestimate” in his ability to “f*ck things up.”

His son and business partner is a criminal, drug addicted life and laptop loser who videotapes his encounters of the prostitute kind while parlaying dad’s political connections into a lucrative family racket that nets “10% for The Big Guy” according to his own emails that the FBI authenticates but the Democrats at the New York Times, which is everyone at the New York Times, dismiss as “unsubstantiated.”

Think Sodom. Think Gomorrah. Think ugh.

The Dems have not only bleak midterm history and political malpractice by their president going against them. They also have the issues of the day going against them.

Inflation has rocketed to the highest levels since the malaise of Jimmy Carter, a guy who’s looking pretty good right now. We’re assured that these price increases are only temporary and, besides, they’re not so bad unless you use gasoline or eat beef, fish or chicken.

Democrats probably don’t. They drive virtue-signaling electric vehicles that run on rainbows. For food, they eat one another – ask AOC and Joe Manchin.

Frogs. Think frogs. Think a plague of frogs in your bed with the plague.  

For an immigration policy, we administer an IQ test of sorts. If you’re stupid enough to wait in the legal line, you don’t get in. If you’re smart enough to cut the line and come illegally, you do get in. Some 9,000 illegal ones are living under a bridge in Texas at the moment. We let them in, and ask them to appear later for a vetting. If they appear, then we let them stay. If they don’t appear, then we – well, we let them stay.

Whether they stay because they appear for the vetting or they stay because they don’t, Democrats push to get them the right to vote for Democrats and, in the meantime, encourage them to do so whether they have the right or not.

These illegals (I call illegal immigrants “illegals” because I know I’m not supposed to and because they are) are pouring over the so-called border from COVID-plagued banana republics. They are not required to get vaccinations, and about a third don’t.

Although illegals don’t have to get vaccinated, The Big Guy has ordered three million federal employees to get vaccinated (if they refuse to follow his order, I’ll bet the Democrats will call them “illegals”). Maybe they can get an exemption if they go to Mexico and then sneak back home across the border.

The Big Guy deflected attention away from the so-called border with his unconditional surrender to the barbarian terrorists of Afghanistan. Actually, there were indeed conditions – but on us, not them. To induce the barbarians to accept the American surrender, The Big Guy gave them a few hundred American hostages and $100 billion in U.S. military equipment and weapons to conduct their War For Terrorism.

In exchange, The Big Guy negotiated for the barbarians to provide “security” at the remaining civilian airport after we fled our own military air base in the dead of night. That “security” limited the American deaths in Afghanistan to only the most in about a decade. As for the American hostages that are left stranded in Afghanistan, we’re assured that they’re not stranded; they merely can’t get out.

Additional casualties in the airport bombing (can we call the deliberate explosion of the bomb a “bombing”?) included a few hundred formerly friendly and formerly alive Afghans who helped us while naively thinking that The Big Guy would make good on his promise to take them along. The Big Guy said it was all their fault, apparently for believing him.

Annoyed at the interruption to his vacay caused by the inconvenient massacre, The Big Guy ordered a drone strike to obliterate an Afghan family car and the family it contained.

Overall, reported The Big Guy, the surrender mission was a mission accomplished. In fact, he reported, it was “extraordinarily successful.”

If that characterization of “success” makes you wonder what “unsuccessful” would look like, you’ll find out when you watch the performance of the Democrats in the midterms. 

The Aspen Beat now has over a half million readers. Join them with a free subscription HERE.

Two conservatives will join the three Supreme Court liberals in upholding discrimination against Asians

Harvard actively and obviously discriminates against Asians. To get admitted, Asians need an SAT score 140 points higher than whites and 450 points higher than blacks.

Harvard’s justification for this discrimination is almost as painful as the discrimination itself. Harvard says that the Asian applicants have poor personalities.

The way Harvard evaluates an applicant’s personality is not with any standardized test, but with an in-person interview by a bureaucrat – where it just so happens that the bureaucrat can take note of the applicant’s skin color

Asian applicants sued. The suit was in Boston before a federal judge appointed by President Obama. The judge sided with Harvard.

Continue reading

I was an engineer for Boeing – before they got woke

Back in your correspondent’s Version 2.3 or thereabouts, he was an engineer for Boeing. This was back in 1978-79.

My starting salary was $15,400. When I left Boeing to start my personal Version 3.0, my salary was still less than $17,000. My parents thought I was crazy to give that up and take on debt to go to law school.

Boeing was booming. Airlines were being de-regulated, airline travel was becoming less expensive while still being slightly sexy, and everyone wanted to go to Europe for the first time.

Several things about Boeing stick out in my mind. First, they didn’t compromise on quality. The airline customers could specify whatever bells and whistles they were willing to pay for — I worked on a few custom planes for Saudi princes that included frivolities like solid gold ashtrays — but the airworthiness of the plane was non-negotiable.

Continue reading