🕵🏼‍♂️ #SpyGate Part III ~ THE LIST: Essential Sources & Reading

UPDATE, Tuesday, September 18, 2018: My bad. My VERY, VERY bad. BAD Annie! How could I NOT include THE TIMELINE! Doug Ross has compiled, and continually updates, THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE TIMELINE AVAILABLE. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve referred to it to overlay this fact or that and gained INVALUABLE insight. ANY decent researcher must ALWAYS keep one, or have access to one, and THIS IS IT.


Most of my reading on the biggest scandal in American history starts on Twitter. Why? Because Twitter knows things before the legacy media does. Often it’s the only place that knows it because the legacy media is complicit in this scandal and wants very much to ignore it.  And once Twitter knows it, and links to stories on it, the story advances forward.

I write this presuming that you are generally familiar with the #SpyGate scandal, not out in the wilderness like say, a CNN viewer might be, so if you are lost, I am sorry. This is not the post to catch you up. It is the post to dig deep. I will offer you this thumbnail summary however:

Team Obama, in concert with Team Hillary, mounted a full-spectrum, multi-agency, counter-intelligence political-espionage operation on Donald Trump starting at least as early as 2015 (I’ve seen some reporting that made me think they might have started snooping around years earlier, when Trump first started mouthing off about Obama’s birth certificate, but I don’t have enough to really bite on that, so I won’t. Just want it out there just in case we find out later it’s true. If you put a gun to my head right now, I’d tell you I think it is.)

But, back to my thumbnail: they spied. This is not arguable. If you don’t or won’t believe it is, I can’t help you. Facts are stubborn things. It happened. Period. Full stop. Like the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, and there’s gravity on earth, it happened. You cannot argue it. Well, you can, but you’d be an idiot.

So, with that premise in hand, here are my best #SpyGate sources – in no particular order. (Honestly. They are all brilliant… well… except the first one. I just have a cool list.):

1. Me! I keep a Twitter list of about 90 sources (that number can change) which you can subscribe to. If for some reason the link is broken to my list, you can always just go to my Twitter home page and click the link for my lists and grab it there. Here is my Twitter home page if, for some reason, the embedded link is broken: https://twitter.com/bloodless_coup (Note: All of the sources that follow are in my #SpyGate Twitter list, but, obviously, I’m not listing all 90+ here. Just the absolute essentials.)

2.   for LEGAL DOCUMENTS. There’s a person who calls himself “Techno Fog” and has his location marked as Trump Tower. NO IDEA who s/he is but s/he must be a lawyer with a subscription to Pacer (court generated paperwork). I presume this because s/he has court transcripts & analysis up on Twitter lickety-split. So if you’re wondering what happened in court that day with something Trump-Russia related, Techno Fog is your go-to guy/gal.

3.  for DEEP INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY SOURCES. John Solomon. This guy has has sources, deep ones, and understands the whooooole picture, micro and macro. For some inexplicable reason, The Hill, where he writes, puts him under “Opinion” and does not make his by-line clickable. (I know, I know… It’s very explainable. Just not to normals like us…) Anyway, this guy is doing absolutely groundbreaking reporting on this story and they bury him. Whatever. He’s essential reading. He doesn’t tweet much, if at all, but whenever he posts a story, you’ll see it on his Twitter feed, so follow him.

4.  for EXCRUCIATINGLY DETAILED ANALYSIS. Jeff is a money guy. According to his own website “Jeff Carlson is a CFA® charterholder. He worked for 20 years as an analyst and portfolio manager in the High Yield Bond Market. He holds degrees in finance and economics.” As such, he is extremely detailed, methodical, logical, and… intuitive. He susses out conclusions he’s drawn from a series of facts and brings us along for the ride. IOW: He reads between the lines and shows us what the invisible ink says. He’s very, very smart. His tweets are always informative and his articles always deeply sourced, with tons of links, and usually require two or three reads to absorb it all. He doesn’t tweet often, nor does he post often, but when he does, it’s always, always worth it. He and “Sundance” at The Conservative Treehouse (The Last Refuge) seem to have formed an alliance of respect for each other’s work, and that just makes me respect the both of them even more. I wrote about “Sundance” in my first #SpyGate post of links & sources, and you can link to him on Twitter here.

5.  Sarah & Solomon are sort of the Frick & Frack of DEEP STATE SOURCES. They often appear on Hannity together. When he’s not interrupting them they impart unique and excellent information. They are usually first with new Strzok & Page texts, news of pending document releases, dramatic turns in the story on the whole. They are both absolutely essential. Parenthetically, Sara has worked as a foreign correspondent in some very dangerous areas, Syria for example. I have profound respect for her courage and careful reporting. You can find her personal home page where she publishes her work here. She’s a Fox News Contributor but does not seem to publish there, just does analysis. Must be part of her deal. Whatever. She’s a gem.

6. Paul Sperry writes for the New York Post & sometimes for RealClear Investigations. His Twitter feed has a habit of dropping SpyGate MOABS then… we have to wait for the story. Sometimes days. It’s absolutely maddening! But in the best possible way. Anyway, he seems to have a few very good sources on what’s going on. He doesn’t tweet or post often, but when he does, it’s because he has something new and very, very important to advance the story forward.

7.  Lee Smith is someone new to me. I’d never heard of him prior to this whole mess. What a pity. He’s an excellent reporter/analyst. Smith is sorta like Jeff at The MarketsWork in that he has a way of reading between the lines and noticing what’s not there. So much of the best analysis in the Obama/post-Obama eras is exactly that, and it’s a very particularized talent. For instance, in his latest piece he lays out, as Dan Bongino perfectly describes it “a devastating indictment of the media’s significant role in the plot to take down Donald Trump.” Understand? They weren’t passive observers in all this, just taking information from their sources and printing it. They were active collaborators in the effort to subvert then remove a duly elected president of the United States. They knew they were lying. They knew it. How do we know? Because as Jeff at the MarketsWork ably deduced, (using his talents to suss out things not immediately evident) the media has had the full, unredacted Carter Page FISA since last spring, the spring of 2017. That’s right. The media has it, has had it, for over a year… and has not published it. Now why would they do that? What reporter worth his salt would hold that back? It’s like the holy grail of the congressional investigations, at least, and the whole Trump-Russia investigation writ-large. Answer? Because they’re not reporters. They’re activists, propagandists. There can be no other explanation. Repeat: there can be no other explanation.  You can find him at RealClearInvestigations and at The Tablet.

8. The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland is my footnote lady. You want deep in the weeds? Like, there’s-not-enough-Benadryl-in-the-world-to-save-you-deep-in-the-weeds? Margot’s your gal. When you read her bio at the The Federalist you’ll understand why I’m so impressed with her. When you read her writing, you’ll be even more impressed. Girl’s got game. She doesn’t publish often, but when she does, boy howdy – be ready to fire up the neurons. You can find her writing here.

9. Fox’s Catherine Herridge. Catherine Herridge does not have a Twitter account. She’s got to be the only reporter alive without one, and in a way, it’s admirable! She has deeeeeep sources in the intelligence community, both the intelligence officials and the congressmen who oversee them. It’s just not possible to have more respect for a reporter than I have for Catherine. She’s rock solid, unflappable, essential. You can find her latest articles for Fox here.

10. Fox’s Russia coverage can be found here. They have a page dedicated to the “Russia Investigation” and this is it. Updates a few times a day, typically. Less so on the weekend.

In my post #SpyGate 🕵🏼‍♂️ Primer / Cliff Notes, Part II I referred you to Fox’s Gregg Jarrett and The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway. You can follow Jarrett on Twitter here and Mollie here.

In my post #SpyGate 🕵🏼‍♂️ Primer / Cliff Notes (Part I) I referred you to The Last Refuge and Dan Bongino. You can follow The Last Refuge on Twitter here and Bongino here.

THAT’S IT! Strap in! It’s going to be a bumpy ride!

🕵🏼‍♂️ #SpyGate – Short Story Form

The Federalist is out with an excellent story – The Facts Behind The Trump Tower Meeting Are Incriminating, But Not For Trump – laying absolute waste to the lie of Trump-Russia “collusion” you hear all day, every day, on every news channel not named “Fox.” (And even there you get some goofy-jons…)

It’s quite something, actually, what they’ve managed to pull off. They’ve (the Democrats & the media, but I repeat myself) managed to stick everything they’ve done on the other guy. And they’ve got the entire media save 10% dancing like the Rockettes to keep this narrative ball rolling. This is weapons-grade projection, my friends. Had Goebbels had the internet & cable television you’d be calling me Frau Annie – and believing the Jews invented eugenics and killed the themselves to perpetuate & preserve the master race – and, being Jews, made a profit doing it. (That’s bitter sarcasm, folks. Don’t go bat guano.)

So herewith is a heavily edited* version of Willis L. Krumholz’s excellent July 30, 2018 piece. You can find the entire thing here, or if the link doesn’t work, copy & paste the url and head over there that way.  http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/30/facts-behind-trump-tower-meeting-incriminating-not-trump/

*The Federalist, rightly, deserves the clicks. I just wanted to give you the guts of it, enough to get you over there to read the whole thing.


The Facts Behind The Trump Tower Meeting Are Incriminating, But Not For Trump ~ The real colluders with Russia are the Democrats, intelligence agencies, and corporate media. The facts about the Trump Tower meeting only reinforce that.

By Willis L. Krumholz

According to “sources with knowledge” talking to CNN—whatever that means—Michael Cohen is prepared to tell Special Counsel Robert Mueller that Donald Trump knew in advance about the June 9, 2016 Trump Tower meeting between Don Jr. and Russians. The president still denies knowing about that meeting beforehand.

Don Jr. was emailed by a British music promoter, Rob Goldstone, who promised that the Russian “crown prosecutor” had information that would “incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia.” When the meeting took place, in walked two Russian nationals, Rinat Akhmetshin and Natalia Veselnitskaya, who proceeded to talk to Don Jr., Jared Kushner, and others about how Americans could once again adopt Russian children, if only the Magnitsky Act were repealed. Eyes surely rolled, and the meeting was ended. Kushner even messaged his assistant to try to come up with an excuse to leave the meeting early.

For those who belong to the religious cult of Trump-Russia collusion, this meeting is prima facie evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia to rig the 2016 election. One of the sacraments of this cult is that its adherents wake up every morning and hope that on this day, just maybe, Trump will finally be done away with. CNN is of course central to this practice. [snip]

The truth is that it doesn’t matter whether Trump knew of this meeting or not, or whether Mueller can ever prove that he did. Don Jr. and his associates did nothing wrong in setting up this meeting. But the events surrounding the meeting are damning for the intelligence agencies, the media, and the Democrat Party. [snip]

Keep in mind that during this time nobody knew that Russia had interfered in anything, aside from the regular deluge of phishing emails common to both Russian and Chinese hackers that were directed at both Democrats and Republicans. [snip]

Somebody colluded with Russia, and it wasn’t Donald Trump. Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin were working to repeal the Magnitsky Act for the Kremlin with none other than Fusion GPS, the same opposition research firm the DNC and Clinton campaign had hired in April 2016 to dig up—or create—ties between Trump and Russia.

Fusion’s Glenn Simpson met with Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin both before and after that Trump Tower meeting. Simpson told Congress he had no idea that the two Russians were meeting with the Trump team, but Fusion GPS even provided the materials and handouts for the meeting in question.

Three days after the June 9 Trump Tower meeting, the public learned the DNC had been breached. [snip]

Former CIA Director John Brennan took that dossier, full of what is likely Russian disinformation straight from the Kremlin, and shopped it around to Congress. Brennan also pushed the FBI to investigate Trump. The FBI’s Peter Strzok opened an investigation based on this Russian disinformation.

Former top Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr’s wife, Nellie, worked at Fusion GPS, another avenue by which Fusion laundered its weaponized Russian disinformation into the upper echelons of the U.S. government. James Comey’s FBI violated the spirit and the letter of the law and spied on a former member of Trump’s campaign—Carter Page—using the unverified dossier. Once the warrant to spy on Page was secured, the “two-hop rule” allowed American intelligence officials to delve into much if not all of the Trump campaign’s communications.

Most important to team Clinton, Steele and Simpson vociferously shopped the dossier to American journalists, which our intelligence agencies suspiciously ignored, so stories would publish before the election about Trump’s nefarious ties to Russia. Because these stories said the American government was investigating Trump, they lent the Clinton campaign’s talking points on Trump and Russia—meant to distract from the treatment of Bernie Sanders and Clinton’s integrity issues—legitimacy. If that isn’t election interference, then what is?

All the Real Russian Colluders So Far Are Democrats

Let all that sink in. The Democrats hired Fusion GPS to find ties between Trump and Russia, primarily by means of a dossier sourced by Russians tied to the Kremlin. Our so-called intelligence agencies used this dossier to spy on the Trump campaign and mislead an American court, trampling over Americans’ civil liberties to do so. At the same time Fusion GPS was working for the Democrats, Fusion GPS was working for the Kremlin, and with the Russians that showed up at that Trump Tower meeting.

Those who have worked with Fusion GPS have worked with a shadowy group that has acted as an arm of the Kremlin seeking to interfere in U.S. politics.
Because of this, any association with Fusion GPS should be toxic. Those who have worked with Fusion GPS have worked with a shadowy group that has acted as an arm of the Kremlin seeking to interfere in U.S. politics and elections. Yet a lot of people in the Beltway establishment have their hands stained by dealings with Fusion GPS.

The intelligence agencies are stained by Fusion GPS through their use of the Steele dossier. So are the DNC and the Clinton people. And so are a great deal of journalists. Perhaps this explains why the media is so desperately invested in obscuring the fact that the FBI spied on the Trump campaign using Russian disinformation. Maybe this is why the media and many establishmentarians parrot the talking points of James Clapper, Brennan, and Comey. All have at the very least been duped by Russian disinformation.

Even worse, there are still Democrats and so-called journalists working with Fusion GPS to this very day. And the problems with Fusion are no secret. This is a firm with a detailed history of working to spin and gloss over corruption, including for the regimes in Russia and Venezuela.

As Lee Smith has noted, Fusion GPS is tied at the hip to a host of journalists, including Atlantic reporter and MSNBC/NBC contributor Natasha Bertrand, and NBC’s national security reporter Ken Dilanian (a.k.a. “Fusion Ken”). One of the primary goals of creating the Steele dossier, after all, was to shop it to journalists who would then “report” nefarious ties between Trump and Russia before the election. Fusion GPS did just this, and so-called journalists bought it.

Many journalists have continued to run Fusion stories after it was known that Fusion had worked with the Kremlin. Fusion has even made payments to journalists, although the identities of the journalists paid and the extent of this corruption are yet to be discovered. [snip]

Our republic is on the line if unelected bureaucracies can continue to ignore Congress and act as they please. … Stop treating the media like something other than Democrats looking to obscure the truth…

### end ###

FBI to NSA “Got HRC’s Rx?”

This is a STUNNING article. It is the backstory on what led to FBI Director Comey’s surreafbi_badge__gunl news conference non-indicting-indicting Hillary Clinton. The day before, the 4th of July (poetically), the FBI asked the NSA “Hey, you guys got Felony Grandma’s medical records? Can we have a look-see? Girlfriend says ‘I can’t recall due to my head injury’ so we want proof she’s full of it.” Comey intervened, said “Don’t you dare,” then 24 hours later, the surreal news conference. Enjoy.


What Happened to the FBI? It’s Been Corrupted by Obama and his Team
By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
Published October 27, 2016

Napolitano: What’s happened to the FBI?

When FBI Director James Comey announced on July 5 that the Department of Justice would not seek the indictment of Hillary Clinton for failure to safeguard state secrets related to her email use while she was secretary of state, he both jumped the gun and set in motion a series of events that surely he did not intend. Was his hand forced by the behavior of FBI agents who wouldn’t take no for an answer? Did he let the FBI become a political tool?

Here is the back story.

The FBI began investigating the Clinton email scandal in the spring of 2015, when The New York Times revealed Clinton’s use of a private email address for her official governmental work and the fact that she did not preserve the emails on State Department servers, contrary to federal law. After an initial collection of evidence and a round of interviews, agents and senior managers gathered in the summer of 2015 to discuss how to proceed. It was obvious to all that a prima-facie case could be made for espionage, theft of government property and obstruction of justice charges. The consensus was to proceed with a formal criminal investigation.

Six months later, the senior FBI agent in charge of that investigation resigned from the case and retired from the FBI because he felt the case was going “sideways”; that’s law enforcement jargon for “nowhere by design.” John Giacalone had been the chief of the New York City, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., field offices of the FBI and, at the time of his “sideways” comment, was the chief of the FBI National Security Branch.

The reason for the “sideways” comment must have been Giacalone’s realization that DOJ and FBI senior management had decided that the investigation would not work in tandem with a federal grand jury. That is nearly fatal to any government criminal case. In criminal cases, the FBI and the DOJ cannot issue subpoenas for testimony or for tangible things; only grand juries can.

Giacalone knew that without a grand jury, the FBI would be toothless, as it would have no subpoena power. He also knew that without a grand jury, the FBI would have a hard time persuading any federal judge to issue search warrants. A judge would perceive the need for search warrants to be not acute in such a case because to a judge, the absence of a grand jury can only mean a case is “sideways” and not a serious investigation.

As the investigation dragged on in secret and Donald Trump simultaneously began to rise in the Republican presidential primaries, it became more apparent to Giacalone’s successors that the goal of the FBI was to exonerate Clinton, not determine whether there was enough evidence to indict her. In late spring of this year, agents began interviewing the Clinton inner circle.

When Clinton herself was interviewed on July 2 — for only four hours, during which the interviewers seemed to some in the bureau to lack aggression, passion and determination — some FBI agents privately came to the same conclusion as their former boss: The case was going sideways.

A few determined agents were frustrated by Clinton’s professed lack of memory during her interview and her oblique reference to a recent head injury she had suffered as the probable cause of that. They sought to obtain her medical records to verify the gravity of her injury and to determine whether she had been truthful with them. They prepared the paperwork to obtain the records, only to have their request denied by Director Comey himself on July 4.

Then some agents did the unthinkable; they reached out to colleagues in the intelligence community and asked them to obtain Clinton’s medical records so they could show them to Comey. We know that the National Security Agency can access anything that is stored digitally, including medical records. These communications took place late on July 4.

When Comey learned of these efforts, he headed them off the next morning with his now infamous news conference, in which he announced that Clinton would not be indicted because the FBI had determined that her behavior, though extremely careless, was not reckless, which is the legal standard in espionage cases. He then proceeded to recount the evidence against her. He did this, no doubt, to head off the agents who had sought the Clinton medical records, whom he suspected would leak evidence against her.

Three months later — and just weeks before Clinton will probably be elected president — we have learned that President Barack Obama regularly communicated with Clinton via her personal email servers about matters that the White House considered classified. That means that he lied when he told CBS News that he learned of the Clinton servers when the rest of us did.

We also learned this week that Andrew McCabe, Giacalone’s successor as head of the FBI Washington field office and presently the No. 3 person in the FBI, is married to a woman to whom the Clinton money machine in Virginia funneled about $675,000 in lawful campaign funds for a failed 2015 run for the Virginia Senate. Comey apparently saw no conflict or appearance of impropriety in having the person in charge of the Clinton investigation in such an ethically challenged space.

Why did this case go sideways?

Did President Obama fear being a defense witness at Hillary Clinton’s criminal trial? Did he so fear being succeeded in office by Donald Trump that he ordered the FBI to exonerate Clinton, the rule of law be damned? Did the FBI lose its reputation for fidelity to law, bravery under stress and integrity at all times?

This is not your grandfather’s FBI — or your father’s. It is the Obama FBI.

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel.

### end ###

Trump Liquefaction

liquefaction
noun. [lik-wuh-fak-shuh n]

  1. the act or process of liquefying or making liquid.
  2. the state of being liquefied.

Geology: The process by which sediment that is very wet starts to behave like a liquid. Liquefaction occurs because of the increased pore pressure and reduced effective stress between solid particles generated by the presence of liquid. It is often caused by severe shaking, especially that associated with earthquakes.


I first learned of liquefaction by having an example of it quite literally shaken into me. Though I was “safely” on the bedrock of North Beach when the Great Quake of 1989 struck, the bruised cloud of the fires that burned in the Marina District of San Francisco were visible from my window. Why did the Marina burn? Well, turns out the Marina District of San Francisco, like the Back Bay of Boston, are landfill. Just… sand. Lots of it. Manufactured land that is there not by the Grace of God but by the hand of man. We built it. To make extra room. Which is all fine and good until there’s an earthquake. Then all that cemented over sand acts like, well, sand. And gives way.

The cement roads in North Beach looks just like the cement roads in the Marina. You can’t tell just by looking at them that beneath the former is bedrock and the latter is sand.

Until something destructive happens.

In the political arena, that’s Trump. We’ve found out the hard way who’s bedrock and who’s sand. I opined on this the other day, but Did They Ever Believe? says it better.

Enjoy.


Townhall.com 4/21/2016
Did They Ever Believe? by Derek Hunter

To hear TV personalities and pundits who’ve espoused conservative values and policies for years abandon them for an egomaniac incapable of the most basic discussion of policy makes you wonder if they ever meant it.

Is the desire for relevance so strong that principle can be cast aside? Or did they ever hold those principles in the first place?

Are they so beholden to ratings and money they’re willing to betray all they’ve presented themselves as for access?

Either they’ve been lying all along, they’re lying now, or they never had any idea what conservatism is about.

Trade wars, government intervention in the economy, ordering businesses around about how to operate, health care mandates, whining about rules, etc., etc., … Republicans have espoused all of them in the past. But that doesn’t make them conservative.

Truth can’t be situational. Principle is not dependent upon circumstance. Yet these “leaders” swept aside reality in Colorado, which held a caucus on May 1, and embraced the “voterless victory” lie. To do anything else would risk their access to Trump, who won’t return to interviewers who ask real questions and call him out on his non-answers.

Did they fall for a bumper sticker? Is it all that simple? Are they that open to suggestions written on hats? Do they follow people home to ask them about their grandchildren because they read it on the back of a minivan?

“Make America Great Again” reads well, as long as you don’t ask the only follow-up question that matters: How? Does citing poll numbers wipe the section of the brain containing the fact Social Security and Medicare have 100+ trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities and Donald Trump said straight out he doesn’t want to reform them at all?

These pundits and hosts have become unwatchable. They’ve betrayed all they’ve done to this point. So much so, you have to wonder if they were this awful all along. Did they pull the greatest hoax in history?

Like the “GOP establishment” they decry, they’ve been selling one thing but became something else when the chips were down. After years of demanding accountability from squishy Republicans in Congress, they’ve become John Boehner.

They plead neutrality, but they embarrassingly badger other candidates to justify playing by the rules because Daddy Trumpbucks whines about a “rigged system.” If the system is so corrupt, and he’s winning, what’s that say about him?

The throne-sniffing media “conservatives” know not to bother with difficult questions on complex issues. Substantive discussions with Trump are like throwing a newborn into the deep end of a pool. So they don’t happen, no matter how many times they interview him.

When not kissing Donald’s ring, these establishment media types can be heard sucking up to his children. It is embarrassing.

No, they couldn’t have switched on everything overnight. They must’ve been playing a role. Conservatism sells, especially on radio and in cable news. So you just have to say a few buzzwords, go “rah-rah” for this or that cause, feign outrage at all the right times, and boom – job security.

When that security is threatened by the most powerfully addictive drug America has seen since Heisenberg’s blue meth – a celebrity – a course adjustment becomes easier if your highest principle always has been yourself.

We’ve been duped by a marketing gimmick akin to “Batman vs. Superman,” which left us thirsty, holding cases of “New Coke.” These weathervanes of the right are the father who went out for a pack of smokes and never came back.

If Donald Trump doesn’t reach 1,237 delegates before Cleveland, count on these mic’d up megaphones to maintain their silence as Donald’s goon squads make good on their promise to threaten and harass delegates to get their way.

Be it by stalking them in their rooms or preventing them from even getting to the convention, this subject will remain a blow-off topic in their sessions with The Donald. They’ll mention it, and he’ll say those people have no connection with the campaign. Since Trump’s company is private, and he won’t release his tax returns despite not actually being under IRS audit (another no-go topic for interviews), we’ll never know if they’re getting money from him or how much.

We’ll be left to wonder why these people are so devoted to a man they’re willing to work tirelessly for him for free.

Then again, that’s what these “titans” of conservative media have been doing, so maybe it’s not so farfetched.

In the end it doesn’t much matter if they ever believed. It’s clear they don’t now, and now is all there is. Well, now and tomorrow. After November, the tomorrows for these soothsayers of victory will run as dry. Their audiences will wonder how “the man who was going beat Hillary” lost. To paraphrase the mythical Pauline Kael quote, they won’t know how Trump lost … everyone they listened to said he was the only one who could win.

###

Megyn Kelly: Little Sister of the Poor

Huh?  Megyn Kelly’s a NUN?  Dang!  They don’t make nuns like they used to, huh? Wowza!

No… That’s not what I’m saying.  I’m saying that everyone is missing the argument about Megyn’s question at the Republican debate:  it’s not that Megyn ‘had an agenda’ to ‘take out Trump’ (which, even if it’s true, and it may well be true, still doesn’t harm what I am about to say in any way.  They can both be true, so if you’re a Trump supporter or a conservative just unhappy with Fox, don’t click away!) What everyone is missing is that by asking the question at all, she’s implicitly endorsed the ‘War on Women’ liberal meme as valid and worthy, in the same way Obamacare, by making Little Sisters of the Poor, sign a piece of paper pushing off the responsibility to pay for abortion to someone else, makes the nuns endorse abortion as valid and worthy of their notice and their facilitation of its continuance

Even if you ascribe the most benign reason for the question, “Well, they’re going to be asked this stuff on every other network debate, so might as well get it out of the way early,” you assume 1.) It’s a valid meme now and it will still be a valid meme then, thus ascribing to us all a unique ability to see into the future, most especially, the ability to see into presididential-campaign-season future, which would be a pretty nifty trick, 2.) That the purpose of Republicans debating is to defend themselves morally and politically from Democrats at all, ever, thus conferring upon this defensive posture legitimacy and validity, 3.) That a Republican debate should be about politics not substanceever, 4.) That a single solitary second of precious air-time should be devoted to this nonsense over _________ (Pick any one of dozens of colossal Obama administration failures, felonies, or fires burning in any corner of the the world.) And finally, 5.) Properly crafted, a “woman-question” might elicit such outrage, such horror – at the Democrats’ in general and Hillary’s in particular – actual “extremism” on women-related matters, that the “War on Women” meme, as implicitly offered by Megyn, could be rendered moot, utterly turned on its head, by merely articulating facts, that the Democrats would be on the defensive by morning! With 24 million viewers, it might have been the first articulation of these facts millions of them may have ever seen, and, thus, caused a catastrophic political earthquake.

That’s what everyone is missing in their pile on of one, Miss Megyn Kelly.

That’s the missed opportunity we all lament.