Russian Collusion

I swear we already knew this stuff. The book, Clinton Cash, has so many deals within deals that it’s hard to keep up, so maybe this is all new.

Read the whole thing but here’s Ed’s lede.:

Call it the original Russia collusion case, only it came long before the 2016 election. According to The Hill’s John Solomon and Alison Spann, the FBI began to piece together a Russian operation designed to advance Vladimir Putin’s control of nuclear materials in 2009 that involved both bribery and extortion. The discovery predated two key decisions that gave Moscow control over a significant portion of the US uranium market, including the Uranium One deal that put hundreds of thousands of dollars into Bill Clinton’s pockets:

Benghazi

And there it is…..
The corrupt DOJ is dropping charges against a weapons dealer in order to keep Clinton and Obama out of the limelight of an arms deal that they theoretically believe in.

Imagine a day when people make choices that they believe in and then can defend in the court of public opinion vs hiding behind a corrupt dept of justice.

Imagine a day when the head of the FBI admits it chooses to investigate certain people with kid gloves and others with iron fists.

Imagine a day when those who claim they are “most prepared” for anything that could happen in the world really is and can explain why/how or even say “I’m sorry – I can’t divulge anything now”.

Imagine a day when the IRS is not out to get certain classes of people and instead just do job.

Kangaroo courts is what we have here in ‘merica now folks. Brought to you by the Clintons and Obamas.

“They don’t want this stuff to come out because it will look really bad for Obama and Clinton just before the election,” an associate of Turi told Politico, claiming that information sought by Turi’s team would show Clinton’s own role in arming Libyan rebels fighting former strongman Col. Muammar Qaddafi while she was secretary of state.

Fox News, citing federal records, reported last year that documents showed U.S. officials supported Turi’s effort to channel weapons to Libyan rebels while Clinton was secretary of state.

Many of the arms destined for Libyan rebels ultimately fell into the hands of Islamist militants, reportedly including those in Syria.

“When this equipment landed in Libya, half went one way, and the half went the other way,” Turi previously told Fox News, emphasizing that poor oversight, allowed individuals hostile to the United States to get arms. “The half that went the other way is the half that ended up in Syria.”

And I thought I was cynical

Buck Sexton of the National Review has figured out that the review of Hillary’s seized emails will go on past the 2016 election.

As with her husband’s transgressions during his time in office, Hillary’s obvious violations of the law will probably be wiped away and largely forgotten. She is too important to the apparatus of governing elites and to the Left. The seized e-mail server, thumb drive, and whatever else the investigation sweeps up will disappear into the flabby folds of bureaucracy at the DOJ. There it will linger under a perpetual “review” that will stretch well beyond the 2016 election.

Really? Are we in THAT nation now?

Benghazi

Why must these games be played?
Especially if “what difference does it make“?

Karl points out that Carney has repeatedly insisted from the White House spokesman podium that these claims came from the CIA, not the White House.

……………………..
The White House’s claim has been (for eighteen long months of lies) that whatever misrepresentations entered the talking points, and whatever truths departed from them (such as evidence that this was an Al Qaeda attack, that there had been previous attacks, that there had been previous warnings, etc.), it had nothing to do with the White House, as other people, not anyone in the White House, constructed the talking points.

Now comes this email from Ben Rhodes telling Ambassador Rice to go out there and sell the Internet Video cover story and so what does Jay Carney do?

He claims the talking points weren’t about Benghazi.

Exit Quote: “If you look at the document in question, it is not about Benghazi.”

Second Exit Quote: “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US consulate and subsequently its annex.”

Third Exit Quote: After a year and a half of vigorously insisting the White House had no input into these Talking Points — that all information came from the CIA and FBI — Carney now says “obviously” the White House had input into the Talking Points.

Don’t these people have mirrors?