I am excerpting from Jonathan Turley below and it is a long excerpt but I think you will see why:
Baker was asked why he never informed Special Counsel John Durham of the text despite the long investigation of Sussmann. Indeed, he did not turn over the text after Sussmann was indicted on September 16th.
Baker’s response was telling: “It’s frankly — I’m not out to get Michael and this is not my investigation. This is your investigation.”
That came off a lot like “why should I help you?” Even being used as a conduit for a baseless, false allegation by a campaign did not seem to motivate Baker to actively seek to turn over any evidence in his possession. The phone that Baker used in the DOJ was reportedly turned over the Inspector General but Baker admitted that the information was on the cloud and he was able to later locate it. However, the question is how this communication on a key issue under investigation could have skipped the mind or attention of Baker given prior interviews and testimony.
Baker said that he found the message in March and turned it over to his lawyer. That seems like a rather belated discovery. Alfa bank was under investigation for years, including extensive investigations by Congress, the Mueller investigation and the Durham investigation. Yet, Baker did not previously review his own interactions with Clinton counsel or involvement on either the Steele dossier or Alfa Bank allegations?
Baker specifically testified in 2018 on Russian collusion claims involving the Trump organization and campaign. This included extensive questions about his interaction with Sussmann. In the hearing, Baker told Congress that he “did not recall” if Sussmann said he was representing anyone in the meeting, even though he had a text expressly stating that he was not representing the campaign or anyone else in the meeting. Indeed, Baker testified “I don’t remember knowing why Michael Sussman, for example, was coming into the office.”
Even if Baker continues to maintain that he did not know that Sussmann was working for Clinton at the time of their meeting, it was clear early in the investigation that Sussmann and his partner at Perkins Coie, Marc Elias, were involved in the allegations of a false campaign-driven Russian collusion allegations.
Baker, however, reportedly shrugged off the question and testified “I’m not out to get Michael and this is not my investigation. This is your investigation. If you ask me a question, I answer it.”
In truth, it is the investigation of the United States Department of Justice, where Baker held a top position.
The testimony left the impression that Baker was going to cooperate but could hardly be expected to seek to help the Justice Department in proving a possible crime by Clinton campaign counsel. He indicated that he had to be specifically asked for such information and could not be expected to volunteer it or to seek to confirm evidence in his possession: “Nobody had asked me to go look for this material before that.”
What Baker did was a violation of any ethical code at all. He knowingly hid evidence and it was evidence he had as a result of working for a government agency when he was supposed to be a trusted public servant.
I do not believe a word he says and I do not trust any work he did at the F.B.I. He has also demonstrated that he is never be trusted and I will questions the ethics of any organization stupid enough to hire him in the future.
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Thursday:
Thursday, May 19, 2022. People are losing their grip on both integrity and sanity.
I am so tired of the Trump obsession some people have. Yesterday, a 72-year-old woman I've known for some time made the mistak eof unloading. I'd never heard so much stupidit in my life. Trump is evil, Trump is this, Trump is destroying the country, Trump is destroying her marriage, on and on it went and I just stood there blankly waiting for the moment when she'd stop to draw a breath, you don't know much of anything except what you should know if you're that opposed to Donald, which is that he's not in the White House.
These idiots destroyed four years of activism with their obsession of Trump.
There were real issue s to focus on. And the left has successfuly fought against sitting presidents. We did it with Ronald Reagan, for example.
It's llike everyone's becoming a stupid and powerless moron.
If Doanld Trump upsets you that much and you are convinced that he's going to win in 2024, how about you stop a moment, take a breath and enjoy the present.
I'm not saying it's perfect -- it's not an dJoe Biden isn't. But I do not know why what might happen two years from now is a justification for you to be crying and so angry that you're shaking.
More to the point, that you can't appreciate the good marriage that you have.
She wanted to talk to me because she wants a divorce and wants to know how to break it to him.
After listening to her reasons -- so-called reasons -- I otld her, "Tell him you've gone nuts. I'm sure he'll understand."
Her husband, an actor I've known for years and years, much longer than I've known her, has gone Trump!!!
How so, I asked?
He says Joe Biden isn't doing a good job.
Well Joe's not doing a good job.
He's saying if Joe tries to run again and Donald runs again that Donald will win.
That could be a possibility.
She insists that when she told him he had to vote for Joe in 2024, he told her if Joe ran, he wouldn't vote for president.
"And that is as good as supporting Trump!"
The crazy is way too much and it's way out of control.
The woman married up. Yes, in terms of looks but also in terms of humanity. Long before she married him, her husband an dI had a brief fling (which is not a secret to anyone). At a different point in life, I might have tried for more than a fling. When he met her -- long after our fling -- I was happy for him and happy for her. He doesn't cheat on her, he doesn't abuse her, he doesn't ignore her, he doesn't treat her as an after thought.
But because he won't promise to vote, in two years, for a man he sees as ineffective at best, she's going to divorce him. (She's supposed to have spoken with him last night. If she didn't, yes, he does read this site, and yes, he will know.)
People need to get a damn grip, this is beyond stupid and beyond crazy. At one point, I pointed out that as bad as she thinks Donald is, we have had worse in our history and we did have worse recently with Bully Boy b/ush.
No, she insisted, he's a saint because he called out Trump.
Oh, I'm sure that makes all the dead Iraqis rise from their graves with a smile on their face. Sure he's responsible for their deaths and he lied the world into war but, hey, he insulted Donald Trump, slate clean, we're all good now.
What a load of b.s. The crazy one is not her husband. The woman is deranged and she really does need help before she destroys her life and her marriage.
It reminds me of when Bully Boy Bush was in office and Matthew Rothschild and THE PROGRESSIVE were featuring one loony article after another about how Bully Boy Bush was using FEMA and we were all about to be locked up and . . .
BB was committing War Crimes out in the open and you felt the need to go off on ssome theory/hypothesis that you had? Reality was right in your face but you had to invent garbage instead?
And yet now these same toxic warriors ar etreating him as wonderful and a friend because he said mean things about Donald Trump.
As Aretha sang (and wrote), of integrity, "Put the word in your vocabulary."
AFP reports, "Donald Trump is not in the White House. You do not know if he will run again (he seems to want to but Donald loves to f*k with people's heads), you do not know if he could get the GOP nomination if he tried to run, you do not know who the Democrats will run in 2024, "
Freud said the criminal had a compulsion to confess. I'd like to think the incident was more than a mere slip of the tongue. I'd love to believe the millions of Iraqis he killed haunt Bully Boy /bush's sleep, that they wreck every waking moment.
That's what should happen. Hes responsible for an illegal war, he's responsible for suffering, he's responsib le for a genocide.
Shame on those who are too weak and too stupid to hold him accountable. I'm referring to the ones who in 2015 would have called him out but now, because they share his hatred for Donald Trump, they're BB's best buddy.
They're adult-children with the emphasis on children. They are not anyone to trust. They have no center and they have no ethics and they will turn on you as quickly as they have decided to embrace Bully Boy Bush.
They need help, professional help and they should not be given platforms to adavne their crazy to others. They should be told, "You really need to seek some professional help."
A woman is destroyin gher marriage because Trump might run in 2024 and, if he does and Joe Biden runs, her husband says he's not voting in the presidential election.
How f**ked up is that woman?
And she's crazy if she thinks that if this turns out to be a mistake she can just go back. Her husband is more than a catch, he's a prize and she'll see just how quickly other women rush in. And if I were her husband, I'd never take her back. I'd say, you were willing to throw away decades of happiness just because I wouldn't vote for a man in 2024 who may or may not run.
Talk about devaluing everything you've had with someone.
On the lack of integrity, Margaret Kimberley (BlACK AGENDA REPORT) writes:
Twice in the month of April Barack Obama spoke about “disinformation.” First at the University of Chicago and then at Stanford University he claimed that democracy is at risk because of social media. Democracy is certainly at risk but not because of anyone’s tweets. His words were really meant to frighten Americans into accepting censorship should anyone dare to present a narrative that differs from the state’s. Of course, that isn’t what Obama said. He spoke of Trump’s claims of election fraud and racist posts and all sorts of things that liberals would support. But neither Trump nor anyone else on the right was his target. The left are his targets and the need to silence the public about Ukraine was the reason for his renewed efforts to address an issue concocted by the democratic establishment.
Less than one week after the Stanford speech the Department of Homeland Security announced the establishment of a Disinformation Governance Board. (They needed Obama to lay the groundwork with his disinformation tour.) Of course only conservatives and those who are truly on the left saw the danger in what some called a Ministry of Truth, as described in George Orwell’s 1984.
While republicans deemed lesser lights and the butt of liberal jokes such as Representative Lauren Boebert spoke out against the very problematic entity, liberals said nothing at all.
Bernie Sanders, House members known as “the Squad” and others thought of as progressives or leftists were silent. While democrats go along with and defend every Biden administration policy, republican members of congress held a press conference to share their concerns. Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and other republicans are seeking to defund the Board. “The President’s Ministry of Truth is just an un-American abuse of power, which is a scheme conjured up by Washington Democrats to grant themselves the authority to control free speech.” Of course abuses of power are very American but McCarthy’s assessment of what Biden and the democrats want to do is correct.
Fortunately there was enough pushback that the Biden administration felt the need to create a Fact Sheet in order to quell doubts about the dubious endeavor. “The working group does not have any operational authority or capability.” In other words, it is unneeded. Or rather it is needed to discredit anyone who dares to oppose state narratives, especially now when the Ukraine crisis needs a constant supply of public buy-in.
Yet the question must be asked about liberals’ silence. There was a time when they would be the first to oppose governmental overreach, including any efforts to control public discourse or to even give an appearance of limiting what was deemed acceptable to speak and to write.
But liberals are joined at the hip with the democratic party and that means they are the worst purveyors of misinformation and the group most interested in censorship. The Jeff Bezos owned Washington Post represents the democratic wing of the duopoly, and presented the Propaganda or Not hit list after the 2016 Donald Trump political earthquake. The fear that Trump might actually do what working people wanted was the cause of their fear and the need to label him and anyone who rejected the establishment agenda as a Russian bot, Putin puppet, or useful idiot.
Now Ukraine is the focus of their fervor. The Biden administration needs to misdirect attention from its instigation of the crisis. They want the public to accept every claim without question and believe that Vladimir Putin is evil, that the Ukrainian military can defeat the bigger, better equipped, and better staffed Russian army, and keep silent when $40 billion is spent on the effort. They don’t want the public to question why their needs are deemed to be too expensive while Ukraine is turned into a forever war and cash cow for the military industrial complex. Biden is forced to create a stupid expression such as, “Putin’s price hikes” to explain sanctions that can’t hurt Russia but also hurt Americans too.
There are very real issues at stake right now. Those without common sense and/or integrity can pretend otherwise but don't pretend you're dealing with reality because you are not.
ANd you're harming yourself and others.
Let's wind down with this from Ms.:
Enjoy this newsletter? Forward to a friend!
1600 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22209
The following sites updated: