Why aren’t ordinary American’s outraged over ongoing government malfeasance? This could probably be sequenced to a Billy Joel tune (We Didn’t Start the Fire)….Afghanistan, inflation, gas prices, energy prices, transportation induced goods shortages, COVID mania, LGBTQ insanity, CRT stuff, military wokeism, personnel choices that would gag a maggot (doozy alert-Biden Unleashes Dog Fetish role playing advocate,) battles against school children-DOJ battles against parents-lying and liars on school boards in Virginia who cited hands are tied-govt policy last year on masks-this year-gov changes policy-instant lawsuit from 7 districts—so-teachers union that doesn’t give two craps about our kids, Ukraine insanity, 6 Jan Insurrection Hyperventilation (OH MY GOD)-people held for over a year without bail like they are terrorists or something–I mean, for Pete’s sake already, give us a break, just pick 5…
The incrementalism that comes with tolerance is best described as the “bigotry of low expectations.” More on this way below as my elegant waxing forces this into a multi-part article, but I gave a somewhat deep tongue in cheek song reference in my title in lieu of a movie, and I think the Billy Joel tune above would fit if I had the mad skills of AFNN’s parody artist-Albert Constantine, Jr. But if I had to pick a movie reference title it would be “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof”-not the movie but the imagery of Renegade and Evergreen doing somewhat of the “perp shuffle.” Notwithstanding that my above Billy Joel reference reminded me (Catcher in the Rye) of an actual movie that fits-it’s one of my favs I could watch anytime-Conspiracy Theory–starring Mel Gibson and Julia Roberts. It’s probably just me and old age, but as I write some of these articles that are dense and somewhat disturbing-some level of full spleen vents-I increasingly like working in music and movie references to take somewhat of the sting off: I don’t think that will help this article…
I’ve been writing increasingly pointed and what some would likely describe as “hysterical conspiracy theory” emails lately regarding the latest facts and evidence reported out of the Durham Special Counsel effort.
My excuse is I truly believe it is very probable to very likely (above an 85% chance) that the Biden administration is going to direct AG Garland to shut down the Durham effort and transition it to get to the final stage of a coverup that started with Mueller-the DOJ, FBI and the court systems. The case would “transition” to an “administration friendly DOJ lawyer” for disposition, citing the exemplar-precedent-of Barr (and I love this extract from this piece- It is unclear why Barr has been unable to obtain “satisfactory” answers as part of his inquiry, but President Trump’s move last week to sign a memo requiring the declassification of surveillance documents from 2016 could be helpful in the attorney general’s review: hello, McFly?) and the Mueller Special Counsel shutdown-an analogy that truly is kind of like watermelons and hubcaps in comparison-considering you have a pretty high bar (no pun) finding by the AG that the investigation “lacked a valid predicate.” But when you are desperate and that’s all you have-lemons-you go with it. Who is going to oppose it-any democrats? How about Lindsey Graham? Mitch McConnel? Mitt Romney? Buhler?
“Okay, oh paranoid one” you are thinking (and I would respond-hey-just because I am paranoid, that does not mean nobody is after me (seriously, if you haven’t seen Conspiracy Theory, ya gotta watch it,)) sure there are some new facts out there, but what has really changed? (in fact, Andrea Widburg wrote that article in American Thinker already…) Now Andrea covers in good measure a lot of the pertinent details I get into below. But what is interesting about the speed of media and the internet today is it enables the power of crowd sourcing to be brought to bear quickly and speeecifically to percolating issues, in this case her characterization of the Durham information as somewhat new-“makes Watergate look like small potatoes”, but “ho-hum” from the larger accountability sense that views Durham as deep state cover-up 2.0.
And who can blame her? We’ve seen just dozens of broadside malfeasance on main street, SWAT-like raids on cooperating suspects-notice to the LSMBTG to cover it-FBI agents changing well established facts and record emails-evidence-to fit the narrative they want and need to obtain FISA’s like some ambulance chaser-that ruin the reputation, income sources, lives of Patriots and veterans-and yet have the judge not only call one of them a traitor and take on the case like the prosecutor, but then in effect slap the government’s responsible attorney’s wrist because among other things, “suffered enough.”
If you are not cynical and distrustful of the system by now, what does it take-criminals highlighted at the Super Bowl Halftime Show by a sports enterprise that seems hell bent on targeting “you” as the problem, supporting groups that call for the elimination of the nuclear black family that already has a single parent rate (moms) of over 70% causing a poverty rate of over 40%? What does it take?
So Andrea’s article “drew fire”- in the vernacular-, being assessed in detail by somebody greatly qualified to do so, Mark Wauck, retired FBI Counter-Intelligence Special Agent (in the business we would say he knows people and he knows schtuff.) Andrea’s response to his response (the beauty of internet media when not manipulated-strikes me that it could be the LSMBTG theme song “You’ve Got to Keep it Manipulated” (Albert?)-A More Optimistic Take On the Durham Bombshell–includes a lot of the material Wauck wrote-but I would observe that I similarly had somewhat of an issue with the notion in Andrea’s first article that was attributed to Conservative Treehouse, “If Joffe was spying on the White House, why hasn’t he been indicted?” Oh pshaw, my first thought was Durham is going after Moby Dick-the great white whale-not some minnow or HRC “relatively minor” JV team member. The second question is the doozy that sparks the cynic or doubting Mary and Tom’s, being posed as the “dilemma in the room (from Andrea’s piece):”
How is John Durham going to reveal everything that is possible about the deep state Trump targeting operation, and simultaneously handle the involvement of Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and the Special Counsel team who were specifically appointed to cover it up?
The short answer is, Durham can’t. The ramifications would collapse the U.S. government; yes, all three collaborating branches.
I’m getting ahead of myself and the story here, but feedback indicates that I tarry getting to the point a bit too much for some readers (tennis apology dear reader, where I come from that is called style, and where I live now it is called a lifestyle of leisure.) Wauck’s article/response is a good read. He points out that when a person involved in a conspiracy is targeted for cooperation, there is only one reason and that is when there is a bigger person involved who was directing it (and be still my beating heart.) In addition to the obvious reason as to why Joffe has not been indicted, Wauck also points out that what Durham has been doing, is-in my words-finessing, triangulating or maneuvering through legal process and evidentiary means, a way to “get the cat that is in the bag, out” (and having wrestled with a feral cat recently I can tell you that there is no part of that struggle that is easy, fun, safe or enjoyable.) Back to my heart-the cat is now out of the bag and-you guessed it-it is Evergreen the Hildebeast!” Toward that end he points out in his response to Andrea’s first article that there was another reference to campaign lawyer-numero uno-who is a big fish in democrat circles-and despite him testifying already, he has not been charged yet, either: Marc Elias (oh, the flutters and the vapors!)
How can we be sure that HRC was the cat in the bag? The bottom-line reason given by Wauck-that I went to immediately upon reading the Durham exhibit and agree with 100%-is a dead certainty in my view. We are talking body on the front stoop, knife in the back kind of thing, HRC on the security camera, prints, conversation-it’s a lock-and the evidence is that Sussman attempted to peddle the Alpha Bank, spying materials on POTUS and the DJT collusion story to the CIA in February 2017 to get them to reopen the case (post Brennan). Sussman is either dumb as a rock with cojones the size of Texas or he was pretty dang cocksure that he had sufficient “cover” against being turned over to somebody for possession of the illegally obtained WH Presidential internet traffic. That could only have been under the imprimatur of HRC-it certainly wasn’t based on Joffe’s “juice.”
Wauck and Widmar both have a lot more to say in their very good articles. The big question is what’s changed in the Durham releases and they both focus on this issue being huge and unprecedented, given what we know HRC did and the obvious dirty deeds it took to pull it off: makes Watergate look like Tiddlywinks.
My view is not different, I just consider that the focus of all this has now officially escalated to the resident-and to Barry-cause the chances that any of this took place without the knowledge of the White House-Obama, Biden and Rice-and if not their actual approval, then their turning a blind eye to it and ignoring it-is zero: its zero (zeeeero-it’s dead Jim.)
Somebody obviously authorized the administration to support it as a “whole of government” effort and somebody choreographed it to keep it going according to something akin to a plan of actions and milestones, while also scrupulously and religiously limiting distribution. Is our government talented enough to do this without some type of choreography (did you read my opening paragraph???) Note that many of the references and memos list this inner circle that sometimes included Samantha Powers-remember her with the strange penchant of doing scores of requests for release of American names, “accidentally-winky, winky” vacuumed up in published and widely distributed (in comparison to previous convention) SIGINT traffic: in the vernacular its “unmasking” and kind of unusual-unprecedented-eye opening-suspicious as a cocaine toupee to see a UN Ambassador request such a thing over 260 times during this critical period. But the inner circle mostly included Obama, Biden, Rice and Denis McDonough (the guy who doesn’t know how to spell his first name.)
But somebody authorized John Brennan to document-in July 2016-the brazen attempt undertaken by the HRC campaign to smear Trump. At that point in time-who had the “con” on that issue: who could have or would have authorized such a thing-and why? Do you think sycophantic John Brennan got a wild hair and decided to do a little CYA on his own volition? Really? Committing it to a record copy that was destined to be public at some point in the movie. Ironically enough adding a little bread crumb in the midst of an attempt to distract from an email server that was established to combat the exact problem set in motion by the generation of such a document: vulnerable to FOIA, and more importantly to congressional oversight. Does that sound like a variation or gambit Brennan would launch because he is “such a bureaucratic, rogue cowboy?” Hahahaha, let me talk to you about some beachfront property….
Part 2 follows….
Max Dribbler
23 February 2022
*Renegade and Evergreen-Secret Service alias for Obama and HRC
Follow AFNN
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAz…
Twitter: @AFNNUSA
GETTR: @AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
Patriot.Online: @AFNN
2 thoughts on “The Hildebeast Exposed: Et Tu Barry?”