Flynn pretext investigation continued on Obama's orders
So says the just-releasedbombshell of Strzok's notes on the January 5th meeting, intended for Strzok's consumption. They appear to say that the Kisliyak call was legitimate, Biden proposed the Logan Act excuse, and Obama ordered the investigation to continue by saying "These are unusual times". Obama also said "Make sure you look at things" (ie, continue the investigation) and "have the right people on it" (ie, reliable Deep State folks).
At long last, justice is done. With the termination of the case should also come the termination of Judge Sullivan's gag order on Flynn preventing him from talking about the case in the media. If Flynn has anything to say to the public, he's now free to say it. And Trump is now free to put Flynn in a position of authority should he be so inclined.
AG Barr says the Kung Flu has slowed down the Durham investigation
I had already figured out that the virus was being used and overhyped for political purposes. The virus -- or more accurately the excessive hype and panic that induced and extended the economic lockdowns -- has effectively destroyed Trump's massive economic success in his first term. It serves as a very useful media distraction from anything related to Durham's investigation being declassified (in fact, the timing of that is particularly suspicious).
Remember that the Deep State's aim is simply to draw the matter out past the election. If they can beat Trump, they can shut down any investigations or prosecutions easily. That was also the aim of the Mueller investigation and even the impeachment proceedings -- it would be nice if either got Trump out of office, but it was always a long shot. The real goal was delaying any ability to investigate and prosecute past the election.
And a virus which conveniently shuts down court systems, and thus grand juries, for the 5 months or so between now and election day is just what the Deep State ordered.
There was an edit made there. Why? If it was trying to hide something Maria said in her initial response, the insertion of a without-glasses response (presumably recorded later, hence the continuity blip) is odd and serves as a very easy to notice and very easy to fix indicator of the edit. So why didn't they get it right?
My guess is that Maria said something that Barr doesn't want to be public yet, but I have no idea why they would make the edit so obvious.
More background on the investigation into Trump's foreign policy team
Sundance lays out the case. Start with this twitter thread. This is a good piece for understanding how the investigations into Page, Papadopolous, Flynn, Manafort, and (recently revealed) Phares all link together, and also form the link from the pre-election illegal surveillance and the post-election Mueller investigation.
I would bet a huge amount of money that this is another incident of "fake hate", and another large amount of money that the "noose" was placed in Wallace's garage by Wallace himself or someone with authorized access to the garage who is an ideological fellow traveler of Wallace and BLM.
As for the idiot who had a plane fly the confederate flag over the track after the flag was banned, well, the jury is still out on that one. It would be an expensive stunt. (How much does it cost to hire a plane to fly a banner?) And while a flag may offend the easily offended, it's a long ways from the death threat that a noose consists of.
AG Barr announced that a DOJ attorney was resigning, but the attorney denied it and said he would remain in the post until his successor was confirmed by the Senate. The combination reveals the attorney (responsible for investigating Michael Cohen, among others in the Trump orbit) is a member of the Deep State. The attorney knows the Senate confirmation process will take forever, especially when the idea is to replace a Deep State ally, and if he remains in his current position he can wield power to defend his allies while giving Trump a black eye in the media. If Trump fires him (which he should), the attorney gets to play the martyr and start a gofundme to reap the riches of high profile political opposition to Trump.
Me, I speculate that one or two of the Justices on the right is signaling that he won't vote in favor, but doing it subtly. The large number of cases was an effort to find one that justice liked, but he didn't like any of them.
Speculating further: It's Roberts and he's being blackmailed.
It was Roberts and the usual four liberals in a 5-4 decision. Roberts claimed that Trump gave only a single reason for stopping the program and that wasn't enough. Trump's reason was that the program was outside of presidential authority and therefore unconstitutional. Apparently that's not good enough for Roberts.
The decision is horrible. Given Trump's power as President, he should be able to reverse any previous Presidential decree with or without a reason. Regardless, in this case he gave a reason, and a very good one that should be more than sufficient. The predictable result here is that Trump will simply further expound on that reason and win the next case. Of course, in between now and then there will likely be an election with a lot of hispanic voters who will presumably be freshly invigorated by being reminded of this issue. That's the real motive for Roberts and the left, or perhaps for whomever on the left has his hand stuck up Roberts' ass when he votes.
Fake news and Big Tech attacks competitor for comment section
NBC News has a unit dedicated to attacking competitors, and that unit published an article attacking a competing (and right-leaning) news website for content appearing in the comments section rather than the article itself. And got Google to either demonetize the whole website, or issue some sort of warning. It's not clear which.
What IS clear: 1) Section 230 prevents websites from being held accountable for what their users post when they are acting as a platform rather than a publisher. (The user is still accountable).
2) Google and NBC rely on that to avoid liability themselves...
3) But their terms of service for advertising apparently do not allow clients to rely on that protection, but instead require comments to be moderated...
4) Which would violate Section 230 by acting as a publisher rather than a platform and voiding those protections.
Roberts has been suspect for a while, but Gorsuch just wrote an opinion saying that "sex" means "sexual orientation" and "gender identity". It was a 6-3 decision: Gorsuch, Roberts, and the usual liberals.
So I guess Obama's blackmail squad found something on Gorsuch too.
These suspiciously commercial riots are happening so regularly in election years lately that I am seriously starting to wonder who is agitating them. Does the DNC just send people out into certain communities and start a whisper campaign that if you riot, and claim it's all about the latest questionable death, no one will stop you or make you give back anything you looted. Like a free pass to take the stuff you wanted and maybe burn a building or two.
That said, the facts in this resisting-arrest death do not seem favorable to the police. You can't just kneel on someone's throat until they die. It seems unlikely that death was actually intended, but it was certainly a foreseeable consequence. Some sort of negligent homicide is definitely on the table, depending on autopsy results. Please do investigate.