« Academic Conformism is the road to "1984." | Main | The Intelligence Whistleblower protection Act did not apply to the phone call ... Reposted »

01 December 2019


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Comey, the flag-waving patriot, author of books, stories and narratives.

blue peacock


What are the penalties, if any, if Horowitz either does not answer or obfuscates in his answers to the questions raised by Graham & Grassley?


Teasing out Question #17:

Chairman Grassley wrote to former Director Comey nearly a year ago requesting him to resolve apparent material discrepancies between information he provided in a closed briefing and information contained in classified documents.

Specifically, what Mr. Comey disclosed in a private briefing to the Chairman and Ranking Member Feinstein about the timeline of the FBI's interactions with Mr. Steele appeared inconsistent with information contained in FISA applications the Chairman and Ranking Member later reviewed.

No explanation for the inconsistencies has ever been provided.

It is unclear whether this was a deliberate attempt to mislead the Oversight Committee about whether the FBI's communications with Mr. Steele about the Trump allegations began before or after the FBI opened the investigation.

What is the reason for the difference between what Mr. Comey told the Chairman and Ranking Member in March 2017, and what appears in the FISA application?

Did Director Comey intentionally mislead the Committee?

Why did the FBI never respond to Chairman Grassley's questions about the inconsistencies?

Did the Chairman's letter first alert the FBI to the inconsistences?

Did the FBI seek to correct them in anyway?

Did any one block or delay a response to the Chairman on this issue?

If so who, and why?

Has Mr. Comey provided any other information to congressional committees, Members, or staff, in public testimony or in private briefings, that is inconsistent with the classified documents produced by the FBI in response to congressional inquiries related to the 2016 election?


My own favorite: #8

If so, were any Obama political appointees able to read internal Trump campaign emails before the election? During the transition period? If so, who, when, and for what purpose?


I don't see how anyone can rely on Sen. Graham for anything.
He is all over the map on this & other issues.
In the end I think Graham will cave to the MIC & Deep State.


Worst case - contempt citation. But it will never come to that because Barr is the AG and the Senate Republicans would not want to undercut him, prudently in my opinion. This act. anyway, is just another piece in the ongoing political theater. If it leads to any practical effect, it will be to generate hearings into the Agency abuses that gave rise to the debacle. Held in a saner less partisan world, such hearings could be expected to lead to reform. In the world that we live in, the tar babies would absorb any blows with nary a wince.
The impetus for real reform will have to come from a successful Durham investigation with high profile prosecutions. He will have to produce prosecutions from which even feckless Washington can't avert its eyes.

Rick Merlotti

Yeah, don't trust Graham as far as I can throw him. It's gonna depend on which way the wind is blowing at the moment. Who offers more MIC goodies.


The infamous former FBI attorney Lisa Page, once the mistress of Peter Strzok, is flaunting herself and claiming victimhood by Trump in a fawning Daily Beast interview just released. Now, a recent rumor (seemingly backed up by her texts with Strzok) is that she "edited" (or altered?) a 302 of the FBI's interview of Gen. Flynn, which according to what Larry is telling us, will NOT be addressed by IG Horowitz's soon-to-be-released report because Flynn's case is still in litigation.

Is this why she has the cheek to go public right now, claiming victimhood? Is there a book deal or crowdfunding in the works for the poor martyred woman?

Since her employment with the FBI is already terminated, I wonder what penalty she could suffer if the rumor is true that she altered a 302?



Joe and Mika were on the MSNBC megaphone this morning down-playing the "leaked" version of the Horowitz Report as a nothing burger that refutes Trump conspiracy theories about a deep state coup, involving FBI and Intelligence agencies, to take Trump out and disproving Trump's claim that Obama "tapped" (their characterization)Trump's phone.

What is happening? Is Horowitz folding or does the MSM have it all wrong?



I think he is folding.



I received this comment for DMR, presumab;y a member of the professoriat.

"Mr Robinson's remarks are spot on. In my experience most academics worth their salt are absorbed in their research area however microscopic the focus, and delight above all in lively exchange of ideas with colleagues and students when afforded the opportunity to do so in the classroom, at conferences, in published research. Conformism, some of it timid, and competition, often cut-throat, there certainly are. Who would deny this? But as in any profession or walk of life they are par for the course. Forty years as a university teacher encourage me to say that these deformations professionelles are far from definitive, still less all-encompassing. Most unusually for you, Col. Lang, and pace your vaunted experience on boards of award-granting bodies/degree committees, your judgements in this instance smack of personal animus and bespeak an unwarrantedly generalized contempt. I say this with respect and no wish to annoy." It is a characteristic of the academy that its members wish to be thought independent thinkers. They are united in that thought. Professor, i will seek to conform to your "professional" mores. My most personal animus is reserved for social "scientists."


I herded Academic cats like these for Six years as CEO of a University Commercialization company. I agree with Col. Lang and disagree with DMR.

The “delight in exchange of ideas” is real, but it is brutally tempered by orthodoxy into just another expression of groupthink.

To put that another way, their idea of “radical” still lies within the bounds of accepted theory.

The whole shooting match rotates about research funding. Nobody is going to stuff your mouth with dollars for questioning climate research fundamentals or the even larger scam, the “big bang theory”.


I think the fix is in. Both sides I think are exhausted and will call it a draw. Russiagate goes nowhere and neither does impeachment. That leaves a largely discomforted public to contemplate the 2020 election.

The question then becomes, will a re elected Trump try again to drain the swamp? I think not. I think whoever is elected is going to have their hands full trying to manage the economy.



Do you vote by absentee ballot?



The WaPo is leaking that your expectation of the Horowitz report is correct. Apparently Barr disagrees with the findings. It seems the only way the public will know the truth is if Trump declassifies. However he has been reluctant to do that so far.


Larry Johnson

Given the track record of the Washington Post, I would advise caution in believing this report. I watched Senator Graham on Hannity. He is pretty adamant that a fraud was perpertrated on the FISA Court. The bottom line is clear--Barr knows that crimes were committed and will ensure that those responsible are held to account.


AG Barr allegedly is disputing Horowitz leaked conclusion the carter Page FISA applications were justified.



"Trump try again to drain the swamp?"

If he doesn't then bigger knives than those currently in use will be out for for all those who supported the elected government.

"I think whoever is elected is going to have their hands full trying to manage the economy."

You mean if the left gets elected in 2020 "free stuff" and the California lifestyle for all!


larry johnson

They did not need much of a fraud. They had Rosemary Collyer.



It will be remarkable if Barr indicts Brennan, Clapper and Comey. That will be a 9.0 political earthquake!


From ZeroHedge


Eric Newhill

I think you're going to be very disappointed. The Horowitz report will be as a big a dud for you as the Mueller investigation was for the anti-Trumpers and the Hillary Clinton email investigation was for people concerned about it.

The Swamp isn't going to allow any of the stuff you write about to become the center of serious public attention. Much better to dismiss it as largely conspiracy theory. So the report will describe some minor issues, but nothing rising to any kind of serious level of crime, let alone a coup d'etat. Then pundits will spend the next couple of months looking for secret meanings in the report or deriding those who do. Sometimes you have to stop and ask yourself what you getting all geared up over.


The Horowitz report is inconsequential except as political fodder to be exploited for gain by one side or the other. The locus of consequence has moved to the criminal investigation that is being handled by Durham under the direction of Barr. Decisions of real consequence are no longer within the purview of the IG. The determination of whether justice has prevailed is contingent solely on whether Durham's efforts have been thorough, accurate, and fair.


Worse than Watergat? - When Halderman, Ehrlichman, Dean, Mitchel, Colson, etc were all marched off to the Graybar Hotel. We survived that 9.0 earthquake.


Will the Barr-Durham "criminal" investigation drag out so long as to be rendered moot after the 2020 election?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad