90 Miles From Tyranny : A Cretinous Beltway Reproduction of a Stalinist Show Trial

Monday, June 20, 2022

A Cretinous Beltway Reproduction of a Stalinist Show Trial


Are Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger accomplices after the fact?

If one watches episodic police and detective dramas, there often occurs a scene wherein a culprit is apprehended and charged as an accomplice “after the fact” for helping to cover up the crime. In the British equivalent of such shows, the police use the phrase “perverting the course of justice.” The bottom line is, if one aids in concealing, distracting, or diverting attention from the criminal act to prevent its detection, one is guilty of participating in a criminal enterprise, whether it be before or after the fact.

The House of Representatives’ January 6 committee has been called many things, such as a failed TV pilot, but sadly one knows what the committee is not and was never intended to be, courtesy of Victor Davis Hanson. As for the events of January 6 and its aftermath, the diligent and intrepid work of American Greatness’ Julie Kelly is essential reading.

Regarding the motivation behind the committee, one is to damage Donald Trump’s prospects in 2024, which the committee is in fact abetting by driving his base to rally around him. (Of course, this could well be the Democrats’ covert hope, as many of them, rightly or wrongly, consider him the most beatable GOP nominee.) Another motive is to deflect public attention from Joe Biden and the Democrats’ disastrous economy. (Good luck with that).

Yet, in conjunction with current developments in an ongoing criminal investigation and upon further reflection following this cretinous Beltway reproduction of a Stalinist show trial, these Democrats’ hearings have a far more subversive motive: namely, concealing and preventing the detection of their own party’s weaponization of the federal government’s police and surveillance powers against its opponents, most notably in the instance of “Russiagate.”

Why? Because the truth is coming out. The New York Post’s editorial board nailed it:

The FBI knew the Trump-Russia collusion narrative was utter bunk even as it suggested otherwise to Congress, the courts and the public early in 2017. Evidence revealed by special counsel John Durham proves it beyond dispute . . . It was a purely political hit job from the start, by top members of the highest law enforcement agency in the land, against a candidate-and-then-president they opposed. For all the justified anger at Trump over the Jan. 6 riot, this methodical and effective deception plot looks far more like an attempted coup.

Special Counsel John Durham’s critical investigatory work continues, unearthing more evidence of the Democrats’ corrupt and potentially criminal weaponization of the federal government against its opponents, such as Donald Trump, which at present persists and intensifies.

As the editorial warns, the reason is both elementary and essential: “At this point, it’s up to Durham to keep exposing this unprecedented abuse of power for nakedly personal partisan ends, though Congress may help out once Democrats no longer run it.” (Emphasis mine.)

Given her party’s fading chances to retain power in the midterm elections, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) launched her latest norm-shattering maneuver. Following her unprecedented refusal to seat Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) GOP caucus selections on the January 6 committee, Pelosi instead seated Representatives Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) and Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.). As ardent opponents of former President Trump, the GOP duo could be counted on to assiduously abet the Democrats’ narrative regarding the day’s events; and not stray off message into how the Pelosi and her caucus, like the notorious sieve Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), aided and abetted the weaponization of the federal government by pimping the...




Read More HERE

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Earn income while simply working online. work from home whenever you want. just for maximum 5 hours a day you can make more than $600 per day online. (hj05) From this i made $18000 last month in my spare time.
Check info here:- ==> https://Www.desalary.com/

Sarah Elizabeth said...

I am making $92 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now. I experience mass freedom now that I'm my non-public boss.
That is what I do.. Www.Profit97.Com

JD said...

I believe "Useful Idiots" is the correct term for them