Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays, thanks to my shameless contract, as well as appear on the Sack Heads Radio Show each Wednesday evening.
I labeled this the Skewer Leftists Night because, after all, I skewered Leftists. Not difficult, as they exposed their soft white underbelly to me. They always do. Most recently much worse than normal.
Tonight in the Saloon:
Chief of Staff John Kelly responds to Lunatic Hat Lady;
James Comey lies his arse off;
Trey Gowdy exposes the truth;
Comey drafted his exculpatory speech months before he exonerated Hillary Clinton; just why would that be? A politicized FBI beyond redemption?
The “fix” was “in” and everyone knew it;
More First Amendment regulatory threats;
Leftists want to shut down the informational flow of truth by any means necessary;
It keeps their corruption in the dark, purposefully;
Drudge, Facebook, NYT readers could face libel suits for sharing “fake news”;
There is so much more to come;
If you care to listen to the show in Spreaker, please click on the yellow start button at the upper left.
If you care to watch the show on YouTube, please click on the red start button.
Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin(on Twitter @BZep and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.
As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.
Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives in podcast? Go here. Want to watch the past shows on YouTube? Please visit the SHR Media Network YouTube channel here. Want to watch the show live on Facebook? Go to the SHR Media page on Facebook here. Want to watch the show on Lone Star TV? Go here.
Everyone remembers the meeting between Demorat former president William Jefferson Clinton and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix, Arizona on June 26th, 2016.
Leftists swear it was nothing more than an innocent meeting between Clinton and Lynch, who stopped to simply catch up on grandkids and such.
Those of a more free-thinking and questioning spirit looked upon the meeting as an update or a decision proffered to Clinton by Lynch regarding his wife Hillary Clinton, who was then in the midst of her home-grown email server scandal. The FBI Director at that time, James Comey, had not yet released his opinion on the investigation of Hillary Clinton. That was done only a week later on Tuesday, July 5th.
Total coincidence. To those with weak and uninquisitive minds, such as Leftists, Demorats and specifically the American Media Maggots.
Despite the fact that James Comey stated under oath he became “influenced” by the tarmac meeting between Lynch and Clinton. And by Lynch insisting that Comey refer to the Hillary Clinton investigation as a “matter.”
“You have been criticized on your Clinton email decision. Did you learn anything that would have changed how you chose to inform the American people?” Chairman of Senate Intelligence Committee Richard Burr, R-N.C., asked the fired FBI director.
“Honestly, no,” Comey answered. “It caused a lot of personal pain for me – I think it was the best way to protect the justice institution—including the FBI.”
Translation: it was the best way to protect James Comey. No one else. The FBI can and always will take a second seat to his own personal protection. Have you ever heard of an FBI director undermining an investigation publicly?
James Comey subsequently became influenced to the point where he believed he was going to leak FBI documents in order to instigate an investigation — which became that which Robert Mueller is spearheading.
To those with questions, however, like Judicial Watch, the situation required answers in order to discover if there was a provable link between Comey’s decision at the FBI and the meeting between Clinton and Lynch. Was the “fix” already “in” at least a week prior to the announcement by then-FBI Director James Comey?
Meanwhile, FBI agents expressed their “disappointment” over FBI Director James Comey’s decision not to recommend charges against Clinton, sources close to the matter told The Post.
“FBI agents believe there was an inside deal put in place after the Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton tarmac meeting,” said one source.
Another source from the Justice Department was “furious” with Comey, saying he’s “managed to piss off right and left.”
Let us also remember that in Edward Klein’s book Guilty As Sin, he wrote:
Bill Clinton’s private jet was cleared for takeoff and was taxiing toward the active runway at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport when a Secret Service agent informed him that Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s plane was coming in for a landing.
“Don’t take off!” Bill barked.
Instigated by William Jefferson Clinton? Apparently so.
As his plane skidded to a halt and then headed back to its parking space, Bill grabbed a phone and called an old friend — one of his most trusted legal advisers.
It was June 27, 2016 — one year into the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails.
“Bill said, ‘I want to bushwhack Loretta,’ ” the adviser recalled. “ ‘I’m going to board her plane. What do you think?’ And I said, ‘There’s no downside for you, but she’s going to take a pounding if she’s crazy enough to let you on her plane.’
“He knew it would be a huge embarrassment to Loretta when people found out that she had talked to the husband of a woman — the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party — who was under criminal investigation by the FBI,” the adviser continued. “But he didn’t give a damn. He wanted to intimidate Loretta and discredit [FBI Director James] Comey’s investigation of Hillary’s emails, which was giving Hillary’s campaign agita.”
Bill hung up the phone and turned to a Secret Service agent.
“As soon as her plane lands,” he said, “get the attorney general on the phone and say the president would like to have a word with her.”
Once inside Lynch’s plane, Bill turned on the Clinton charm. He gave Lynch’s shoulder an affectionate squeeze and shook hands with her husband, Stephen Hargove.
“Bill said he could tell that Loretta knew from the get-go that she’d made a huge mistake,” his adviser said. “She was literally trembling, shaking with nervousness. Her husband tried to comfort her; he kept patting her hand and rubbing her back.
Translated: Lynch knew precisely what she’d done and how it would look.
“Bill made small talk about golf and grandchildren and [former Attorney General] Janet Reno, and he kept at it for nearly a half-hour. It didn’t make any difference what they talked about; all he wanted to do was send a message to everyone at Justice and the FBI that Hillary had the full weight of the Clinton machine, the Democratic Party, and the White House behind her.
“It was clearly tortuous for Loretta. Bill told me later that he noticed there were beads of sweat on her upper lip.”
Message sent and received? But wait; there’s more.
One week later, Barack Obama invited Hillary to fly with him to North Carolina for a campaign rally. He wouldn’t have let her use two of the greatest symbols of presidential power — Air Force One and the podium with the Seal of the President of the United States — if he thought there was even the slightest chance she was going to be indicted. But Attorney General Lynch had privately assured him that she wouldn’t let that happen, and that the fix was in.
Oh my, the fix was so in.
Now, almost one year later, we discover the FBI made a discovery. Some cabinet door or desk drawer was opened and, magically, here we now have 30 pages of documents related to that tarmac meeting that — zounds — the Department of Justice just couldn’t. A lot of shoulder-shrugging at DOJ.
Is the DOJ incompetent? Or did the DOJ simply lie? It’s one or the other. It’s no oversight or mistake.
Judge Andrew Napolitano, one of my favorite analysts, weighed in on October 16th. He repeats BZ’s DC Axiom:
“It’s an institutional culture in government. We don’t want to go after our predecessors because we don’t want our successors to come after us.”
Oh, but wait, Judge Napolitano. There is so much more.
Judicial Watch says FBI has found Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting documents
by Brooke Singman
Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch said Friday that the FBI has uncovered 30 pages of documents related to the controversial 2016 tarmac meeting between former President Bill Clinton and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
The newly uncovered documents will be sent to Judicial Watch by the end of November in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, a spokesman for the group told Fox News.
Judicial Watch originally filed a FOIA request in July 2016 — which the Justice Department did not comply with — seeking “all records of communications between any agent, employee, or representative” of the FBI for the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server use, and all records related to the June 27, 2016 meeting between Lynch and Bill Clinton.
“We presume they are new documents. We won’t know what’s in them until we see them, unfortunately,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told Fox News in an email Friday. “The fact they just ‘found’ them is yet another scandal.”
But wait; there’s more. Again from FoxNews.com:
Judicial Watch clashes with DOJ over ‘talking points’ from Lynch-Clinton tarmac meeting
by Brooke Singman
Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is clashing with the Trump Justice Department over access to “talking points” the DOJ prepared under the Obama administration to explain the controversial tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton last year.
Judicial Watch is seeking the documents as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The group complained late Wednesday that it had received “heavily redacted” emails pertaining to the department’s internal preparations last year to press inquiries on the Lynch-Clinton meeting.
Judicial Watch says Peter Kadzik, then-assistant attorney general, was involved in handling the Justice Department’s response to media inquiries regarding the tarmac meeting at the time. But one email exchange shows a redacted response from him to an email with the subject line: “DRAFT: Statement/Talking Points” on June 28, 2016.
Another email shows then-director of the Justice Department Public Affairs Office Melanie Newman emailing with colleagues to “flag a story” about a “casual, unscheduled meeting between former President Bill Clinton and the AG.”
I want you to see and hear just how incredibly rife with corruption is your government and more pointedly and even more sadly, your federal law enforcement agencies.
First, it is crystal clear from the evidence released by the FBI after the first investigation that the former Secretary of State used a private email server to transmit national security information rather than safeguard such information, as required by law, and that she subsequently made statements contrary to the facts as we continue to learn.
Second, the real actor in this Theater of the Absurd is the Justice Department’s decision to commence an investigation that was a sham from the very beginning. After all, it was the Justice Department that failed to convene a grand jury, issue search warrants for computers, place witnesses under oath and appoint a special prosecutor who could operate free from conflicts of interest. Hey, just like Robert Mueller, right?
Comey admits that Clinton lied. But here is the difference (that we won’t know precisely because there was no oath and no recording).
You can lie publicly all you want, if people are sufficiently stupid to believe it — like much of the electorate and the American Media Maggots are doltish enough. But you should not lie to the FBI. My guess is that Hillary Clinton came relatively clean in 3.5 hours. And that is why I believe she was not placed under oath and the interview was not recorded. Things like that make it easier to dispute later when politically necessary.
But James Comey outed himself to Jason Chaffetz:
Chaffetz then asked whether it was that he was just not able to prosecute it or that Clinton broke the law.
“Well, I don’t want to give an overly lawyerly answer,” Comey said. “The question I always look at is there evidence that would establish beyond a reasonable doubt that somebody engaged in conduct that violated a criminal statute, and my judgment here is there is not. “
And this is how James Comey attempts to rationalize his decision. He states he does not believe his case established guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
NEWSFLASH: It is not UP to YOU, Director Comey, to assemble a case that yields a determination of “beyond a reasonable doubt.” That threshold is up to the DOJ or more pointedly a Grand Jury, not you or your organization. All you need to compile a case for submission is “probable cause.” That’s what real cops and real DAs in America do. Their jobs. They stay in their lanes and do their jobs.
As I have said time and again, there are two kinds of crimes as written by statute: those of general intent and those of specific intent. Comey stated that HRC had to have possessed a very specific intent to commit her crimes. EXCEPT that the US codes applicable are not those of specific intent because they do not include the phrase “with the intent to.”
That is how a crime of specific intent is crafted. It is stated.
Even more disturbing: Attorney General Lynch did not recuse herself from the final decision on whether to prosecute the case — nor did she give that decision to a career prosecutor at the Department of Justice. She instead prejudged the case by supposedly blindly accepting the FBI’s recommendation.
“[AG Lynch] said…she would accept whatever recommendations career prosecutors and the F.B.I. director made…” –NYTimes July 1, 2016
Of course she would. The fix was in. And Comey was predestined to take whatever fall occurred, not her. After all, he is white and male; she is black and female.
Comey drafted letter on Clinton email investigation before completing interviews, FBI confirms
The FBI released documents Monday proving former FBI Director James Comey began drafting a letter regarding Hillary Clinton’s email investigation months before conducting several key interviews, including speaking to Clinton herself.
The document release was titled “Drafts of Director Comeys July 5, 2016 Statement Regarding Email Server Investigation Part 01 of 01.”
The contents of the email were largely unclear as nearly all of it was redacted. The now-public records show the email titled “Midyear Exam — UNCLASSIFIED” was sent by Comey on May 2, 2016, to Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, general counsel James Baker and chief of staff and senior counselor James Rybicki.
On May 16, the documents showed a response email from Rybicki, saying “Please send me any comments on this statement so we may roll into a master doc for discussion with the Director at a future date. Thanks, Jim.”
Hello. “Fix,” meet “in.” Shake hands and keep dissembling.
The existence of the documents, reported by Newsweek, were first brought to light by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., also a member of the committee, after they reviewed transcripts of interviews with top Comey aides who alluded to the email’s existence. The Senate Judiciary Committee is investigating Comey in his role as FBI director and President Trump’s decision to fire him in May.
The senators penned a letter on Aug. 30 to newly-appointed FBI Director Christopher Wray noting their findings, saying that “it appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton. That was long before FBI agents finished their work,” the letter said. “The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.”
Apparently it was the dog who ate Samantha Powers’ homework.
And why have you not heard that astounding information trumpeted all across the fruited plain by the American Media Maggots? You know why. Agenda. Narrative.
I said and wrote this back in late 2016 and, with each passing week, I find myself more vindicated. I stated that with this false emphasis on President Donald Trump and Russia, in order to account for Hillary Rodham Clinton’s absolutely corrupt and disastrous abortion of a campaign — and because the Demorats and Leftists haven’t yet even stepped into November 9th — the insistence of narrative pressure will surely arc back like a fine bladed boomerang and embed itself in their asses.
We are discovering more, with each passing day, how the Demorats are like putty in the hands of Russians, as we certainly believed, and that the exposure isn’t on the side of Trump or his team, it’s with the Demorats.
Hillary Clinton’s Russian uranium, anyone?
Hello? Bladed boomerang meet Demorat, Leftist and American Media Maggot ass.
FBI says lack of public interest in Hillary emails justifies withholding documents
by Stephen Dinan
Hillary Clinton’s case isn’t interesting enough to the public to justify releasing the FBI’s files on her, the bureau said this week in rejecting an open-records request by a lawyer seeking to have the former secretary of state punished for perjury.
Ty Clevenger has been trying to get Mrs. Clinton and her personal attorneys disbarred for their handling of her official emails during her time as secretary of state. He’s met with resistance among lawyers, and now his request for information from the FBI’s files has been shot down.
“Shot down” by whom? Right. The Federal Bureau of Investigation. Who should be investigating an issue such as this.
It appears I’m going to have to change my classic logo about the FBI. . .
From this very specific graphic . . .
To this very generic graphic. And it pains me. It pains me terribly to realize the biased and politicized depths to which the FBI has sunk.
I shake my head in sadness, I well and truly do. This is so incredibly disspiriting for me and for law enforcement everywhere. In retrospect, truly, what does your NA experience really mean?
“You have not sufficiently demonstrated that the public’s interest in disclosure outweighs personal privacy interests of the subject,” FBI records management section chief David M. Hardy told Mr. Clevenger in a letter Monday.
“It is incumbent upon the requester to provide documentation regarding the public’s interest in the operations and activities of the government before records can be processed pursuant to the FOIA,” Mr. Hardy wrote.
Oh. Yes. Because there isn’t more of a clangor and clamoring — by the “public” — that is sufficient justification to withhold facts and evidence.
Mrs. Clinton, was the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, former chief diplomat, former U.S. senator, and former first lady of both the U.S. and Arkansas.
Her use of a secret email account to conduct government business while leading the State Department was front-page news for much of 2015 and 2016, and was so striking that the then-FBI director broke with procedure and made both a public statement and appearances before Congress to talk about the bureau’s probe.
It was, oddly enough, under her watch in which four Americans lost their lives. That no longer “counts.” To mention that now is nothing but “bias” and “prejudice.”
In the end, the FBI didn’t recommend charges against Mrs. Clinton, concluding that while she risked national security, she was too technologically inept to know the dangers she was running, so no case could be made against her.
The FBI says it will only release records from its files if a subject consents, is dead, or is of such public interest that it overrides privacy concerns.
Protecting those elements who need to be protected by the Left for the Left, so that people continue to vote for the Left. That is the basis for the FBI’s politicized decision.
Mr. Clevenger said he thought it would have been clear why Mrs. Clinton’s case was of public interest, but he sent documentation anyway, pointing to a request by members of Congress for an investigation into whether Mrs. Clinton perjured herself in testimony to Capitol Hill.
“I’m just stunned. This is exactly what I would have expected had Mrs. Clinton won the election, but she didn’t.
It looks like the Obama administration is still running the FBI,” Mr. Clevenger told The Washington Times
“How can a story receive national news coverage and not be a matter of public interest? If this is the new standard, then there’s no such thing as a public interest exception,” he said.
Correct. This is a biased decision expected from, say, a Hillary Clinton administration.
This is another in a continuing series of revelations indicating that, clearly, the Deep State is alive and well, influencing every level and agency in DC.
You were told at some point, when learning American history, that there are three separate and distinct branches of government as created and delineated by our founding fathers in their brilliance.
I would not just submit but insist there are four branches of government, as indicated.
This newest branch, the likes of which we’re now realizing, is frequently every bit as powerful and occasionally more so than the other three. This is one obvious instance. Hardy is a bureaucrat. A paper shuffler. He was not elected. Therefore he gets to stymie the investigation and hold back the information.
Just one basic question: since when is whatever amount of interest shown by the public a deciding factor in the revelation of documents which are not in and of themselves classified and therefore subject to nondisclosure?
Is the FBI saying that, had their been a greater rumbling by “the public” that the agency would have looked more favorably upon Clevenger’s request? Or is the FBI saying, via Hardy, that he is solely making the determination — and he is — the information is not in the public’s interest?
Good to know. A perception of “public interest” is now a lawful criteria with which to determine the relevancy of a FOIA request. I suppose Hardy will expect future requests to have ginned-up public support behind them prior to consideration.
This is the same FBI where former director James Comey in 2016 laid out a perfect case against Hillary Clinton then decided he was going to not recommend an investigation, taking this decision out of the hands of then-AG Loretta Lynch.
Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton confidant, helped steer $675,000 to the election campaign of the wife of an FBI official who went on to lead the probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email system, according to a report.
The political action committee of McAuliffe, the Clinton loyalist, gave $467,500 to the state Senate campaign of the wife of Andrew McCabe, who is now deputy director of the FBI, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The report states Jill McCabe received an additional $207,788 from the Virginia Democratic Party, which is heavily influenced by McAuliffe.
This is the same FBI where former director James Comey decided to purposely leak classified information to a third party in order to prompt a special counsel to investigate President Trump regarding Russia, et al.
House seeks clarity on FBI facial recognition database
by Matt Leonard
The FBI has expanded its access to photo databases and facial recognition technology to support its investigations. Lawmakers, however, have voiced a deep mistrust in the bureau’s ability to protect those images of millions of American citizens and properly follow regulations relating to transparency.
Kimberly Del Greco, the deputy assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division, faced tough questioning from both sides of the aisle at a March 22 hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
“So here’s the problem,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), the committee chairman. “You’re required by law to put out a privacy statement and you didn’t and now we’re supposed to trust you with hundreds of millions of people’s faces.”
The FBI’s NGI-IPS allows law enforcement agencies to search a database of over 30 million photos to support criminal investigations. The bureau can also access an internal unit called Facial Analysis, Comparison and Evaluation, which can tap other federal photo repositories and databases in 16 states that can include driver’s license photos. Through these databases, the FBI has access to more than 411 million photos of Americans, many of whom have never been convicted of a crime.
The FBI obeys all laws. And no, the FBI isn’t politicized at all.
Perish the thought.
Except that confidence in the FBI is itself perishing.
(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced that on August 8, 2017, D.C. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta ordered the State Department “to search the state.gov e-mail accounts of Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jacob Sullivan,” former aides of Hillary Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State. The State Department is ordered to search in those accounts “for records responsive to [Judicial Watch’s] March 4, 2015, FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] request.” (A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit first broke open the Clinton email scandal.)
Good news for truth, bad news for the Clinton campaign and aligned Demorats.
Judge Mehta described Judicial Watch’s Clinton Benghazi FOIA lawsuit as “a far cry from a typical FOIA case. Secretary Clinton used a private e-mail server, located in her home, to transmit and receive work-related communications during her tenure as Secretary of State.” Further:
[I]f an e-mail did not involve any state.gov user, the message would have passed through only the Secretary’s private server and, therefore, would be beyond the immediate reach of State. Because of this circumstance, unlike the ordinary case, State could not look solely to its own records systems to adequately respond to [Judicial Watch’s] demand.
[The State Department] has not, however, searched the one records system over which it has always had control and that is almost certain to contain some responsive records: the state.gov e-mail server. If Secretary Clinton sent an e-mail about Benghazi to Abedin, Mills, or Sullivan at his or her state.gov e-mail address, or if one of them sent an e-mail to Secretary Clinton using his or her state.gov account, then State’s server presumably would have captured and stored such an e-mail. Therefore, State has an obligation to search its own server for responsive records.
State has offered no assurance that the three record compilations it received [from Secretary Clinton and her aides], taken together, constitute the entirety of Secretary Clinton’s e-mails during the time period relevant to Plaintiff’s FOIA Request. Absent such assurance, the court is unconvinced “beyond material doubt” that a search of the state.gov accounts of Abedin, Mills and Sullivan is “unlikely to produce any marginal return.”
Accordingly, the court finds that State has not met its burden of establishing it performed an adequate search in response to Plaintiff’s FOIA Request and orders State to conduct a supplemental search of the state.gov e-mail accounts of Abedin, Mills, and Sullivan.
Judicial Watch asked a federal court to compel the Trump State Department to undertake a thorough search of all emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding the terrorist attack on Benghazi, including those of Clinton’s closest advisors. Judicial Watch also specifically asked the court to compel the agency to produce all records of communications between Clinton and top aide Jake Sullivan relating to Ambassador Susan Rice’s appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” the Sunday following the 2012 Benghazi massacre.
Democrat Party Faces Fundraising Crisis As “Doom and Gloom” Message Falls Flat in Trump-era
by Joshua Caplan
The Democrat Party in the Trump-era is in shambles. The Party is moving full speed ahead towards the 2018 midterms without a message, a destructive fixation on Russia and a looming fundrasing crisis. Today’s “doom and gloom” message isn’t working with voters.
Under the leadership of former Obama official Tom Perez, a new FEC report reveals the DNC finished the month of June $3.3 million in debt.
The month of May wasn’t any better for the DNC, which reported $1.9 million in debt.
In contrast, the RNC is on an amazing financial run, having raised a whopping $13.4 million in June.
How are you going to get back all those seats lost to Republicans, not to mention governorships, when you have no cash, DNC?
These, ladies and gentlemen, are called “consequences.”