My friend, Randy Credico, is angry with Tulsi for trotting out the newly declassified documents showing that Barack Obama, John Brennan, Jim Clapper and James Comey conspired to convince the American public that Trump’s surprising win in the 2016 Presidential election was because of Russian interference.
DJT Campaigned on this!! That’s why we’re angry with him! That, & that stupid cabinet meeting where he asks the reporter,”Are we STILL talking about Epstein?” What a FOOL DJT IS!!! Of course we’re STILL TALKING ABOUT IT! And he made it SO MUCH WORSE for himself by LYING AND MAKING BONDI LIE!!! There IS a list and WE all know it!!
It looks hamfisted. Someone else pointed out how much the normally unflappable Trump seems to be caught in the headlights on this. By treating the Epstein issue as yet another hoax, he damages the credibility of allegations regarding real hoaxes, like Russiagate. This gives the legacy media cover for persisting with Russiagate whilst effectively ignoring Epstein except to use that as yet another stick with which to beat Trump.
Ratcliffe clearly and especially has questions to answer, but we are back at the issue of Trump’s appointments and their lack of competence or suitability for an America First agenda. Possibly Tulsi was already in the process of getting these documents released and there was foot-dragging while others in the bureaucracy organised an Epstein-related ambush calibrated to throw Trump and AF allies off course to neuter the impact of the Russiagate revelations, among other goals. Netanyahu’s role in all this is likely to be significant - possibly also reminding Democrats not to shake the tree too violently re Epstein.
All this is speculation. What we can say with certainty is that when people like Mike Walz and Pete Hegseth are chosen over and above Mike Flynn and Doug Macgregor, this administration is bound to fail in achieving its strategic objectives, especially as events inevitably overtake it and the opposition gathers itself, as it must. Executive Orders by themselves are not enough.
One reason why “Russiagate” is receiving such a detailed official denunciation now, with the relevant documents made public, and did not during Trump’s first term, may be because he did not have then Tulsi Gabbard as an ally working on the matter. The difference it makes of having a person with the qualities of Gabbard in that position may be underestimated.
Robert Barnes on episode 273 of Viva and Barnes has an interesting theory: the causality runs in the other direction. The deep state, knowing the report from TG was coming, got in front of the story by pushing the Epstein case to the front burner. Personally I hope both issues get full exposure, not shunted aside
Trump does not have enough political capital to dig out this E issue. During the campaign season, he could talk about it because he was not digging it. Right now, I don't think the people who can pull the strings on Trump can tolerate the actual digging. Some ultimatum had been delivered, and Trump made a 180-degree turn. If he keeps the lid on, the damage to his reputation, legacy, MAGA, and the GOP's mid-term election will be big, but he has a chance to survive all these. If he did not, he may not be able to serve his full term. What do you want him to do? I did notice that Trump was not nominated for the Nobel Saint Prize. If people think Vance can handle the pressure better, then of course, pushing about the E issue is great. By the way, how much of the stuff still controlled by the good guys is legally powerful enough to achieve a guilty verdict against anybody significant?
It seems fairly obvious that the Tulsi release is a distraction from the Epstein debacle, but consider that the Biden DOJ had four years to doctor the Epstein evidence to bury an indictment of Trump (or others). It makes sense that they have found some edited documents and are now having to meticulously go through them all and compare each document or video to the backups. That could take some time. It doesn't explain tough why they just didn't say that and instead came up with the "there is no list" baloney.
It is no secret Larry, that you don't like Trump, but you are not screaming to cleanse Hollywood of the rampant pedophilia, which is far worse than Epstein's honeypot.
I think Gabbard's release was on a pre-established timeline. Perhaps the question should be: Why Epstein now?
On another note, this article's mention of the involvement MI-6, GCHQ and other foreign intelligence services reminded me of Jonathan Pollard, who worked for the intelligence service of another "ally." He was convicted of espionage. The statute of limitations for espionage is 10 years.
DJT Campaigned on this!! That’s why we’re angry with him! That, & that stupid cabinet meeting where he asks the reporter,”Are we STILL talking about Epstein?” What a FOOL DJT IS!!! Of course we’re STILL TALKING ABOUT IT! And he made it SO MUCH WORSE for himself by LYING AND MAKING BONDI LIE!!! There IS a list and WE all know it!!
It looks hamfisted. Someone else pointed out how much the normally unflappable Trump seems to be caught in the headlights on this. By treating the Epstein issue as yet another hoax, he damages the credibility of allegations regarding real hoaxes, like Russiagate. This gives the legacy media cover for persisting with Russiagate whilst effectively ignoring Epstein except to use that as yet another stick with which to beat Trump.
Ratcliffe clearly and especially has questions to answer, but we are back at the issue of Trump’s appointments and their lack of competence or suitability for an America First agenda. Possibly Tulsi was already in the process of getting these documents released and there was foot-dragging while others in the bureaucracy organised an Epstein-related ambush calibrated to throw Trump and AF allies off course to neuter the impact of the Russiagate revelations, among other goals. Netanyahu’s role in all this is likely to be significant - possibly also reminding Democrats not to shake the tree too violently re Epstein.
All this is speculation. What we can say with certainty is that when people like Mike Walz and Pete Hegseth are chosen over and above Mike Flynn and Doug Macgregor, this administration is bound to fail in achieving its strategic objectives, especially as events inevitably overtake it and the opposition gathers itself, as it must. Executive Orders by themselves are not enough.
One reason why “Russiagate” is receiving such a detailed official denunciation now, with the relevant documents made public, and did not during Trump’s first term, may be because he did not have then Tulsi Gabbard as an ally working on the matter. The difference it makes of having a person with the qualities of Gabbard in that position may be underestimated.
Robert Barnes on episode 273 of Viva and Barnes has an interesting theory: the causality runs in the other direction. The deep state, knowing the report from TG was coming, got in front of the story by pushing the Epstein case to the front burner. Personally I hope both issues get full exposure, not shunted aside
Trump does not have enough political capital to dig out this E issue. During the campaign season, he could talk about it because he was not digging it. Right now, I don't think the people who can pull the strings on Trump can tolerate the actual digging. Some ultimatum had been delivered, and Trump made a 180-degree turn. If he keeps the lid on, the damage to his reputation, legacy, MAGA, and the GOP's mid-term election will be big, but he has a chance to survive all these. If he did not, he may not be able to serve his full term. What do you want him to do? I did notice that Trump was not nominated for the Nobel Saint Prize. If people think Vance can handle the pressure better, then of course, pushing about the E issue is great. By the way, how much of the stuff still controlled by the good guys is legally powerful enough to achieve a guilty verdict against anybody significant?
It seems fairly obvious that the Tulsi release is a distraction from the Epstein debacle, but consider that the Biden DOJ had four years to doctor the Epstein evidence to bury an indictment of Trump (or others). It makes sense that they have found some edited documents and are now having to meticulously go through them all and compare each document or video to the backups. That could take some time. It doesn't explain tough why they just didn't say that and instead came up with the "there is no list" baloney.
It is no secret Larry, that you don't like Trump, but you are not screaming to cleanse Hollywood of the rampant pedophilia, which is far worse than Epstein's honeypot.
I think Gabbard's release was on a pre-established timeline. Perhaps the question should be: Why Epstein now?
On another note, this article's mention of the involvement MI-6, GCHQ and other foreign intelligence services reminded me of Jonathan Pollard, who worked for the intelligence service of another "ally." He was convicted of espionage. The statute of limitations for espionage is 10 years.