Patience is supposed to be a virtue but just how much is enough?

What’s behind FBI-DOJ stonewall on probable FBI spy in Trump campaign? By Thomas Lifson – “We may be on the verge of uncovering a shocking abuse of its powers by the FBI that it and the Department of Justice frantically have been concealing from Congress and the American people.”

“Kimberly Strassel of the Wall Street Journal has been doing superb detective work, and has uncovered strong hints of an FBI spy planted in the Trump presidential campaign.

Sara Carter points out that it took a threat to hold A.G. Sessions in contempt to get a closed-door meeting at the DOJ to discuss the classified information being withheld

Following the meeting, the two chairs issued a statement that expresses surprising patience, indicating to me that something big is on the way

I am as impatient as anyone to learn more about this scandal. But I also want to see the ultimate prosecutions be successful. I have long defended A.G. Sessions in the belief that as a former prosecutor, he is a stickler about dotting the is and crossing the ts so that solid cases don’t get thrown out of court on procedural errors.

My patience timeline shamelessly includes November 8, 2018 as the most important deadline

Ace has the summary on the Mueller case stories this week. One is that Comey coordinated with Mueller about his Congressional testimony and another is about one of the Russian companies Mueller indicted calling for its day in court. “Lotta firsts in this case.” – “The Special Counsel is not entitled to special rules and is required like the Attorney General to follow the rules of the Court,” Dubelier stated in his response to Mueller.”

Sean Hannity accused of repeatedly evicting tenants who paid no rent by Ed Straker – “The great things about liberals is that even though most have never run a business, they all know exactly how businesses should be run.” An insidious bias rears its ugly head at the WaPo by attacking a capitalist investing millions to solve a critical inner city problem.

“It’s hardly surprising, then, to find an exposé in the Washington Post focusing on Fox News commentator Sean Hannity. … When Sean Hannity invested millions of dollars in rental properties, he actually expected the tenants to pay rent to him!

Liberals, of course, know that this is immoral and scandalous – the economic equivalent of keeping a “brown slave” like Eric Schneiderman or sexting while babysitting like Anthony Weiner.

I get the feeling that if liberals ran Hannity’s properties, very quickly they would run them into the ground like public housing. In the meantime, liberals pontificate on the moral way to run businesses they don’t have the slightest understanding of.

Dana Milbank rages against Tom Cotton by Paul Mirengoff – “Yesterday, Cotton could not conceal his disgust with the hypocritical posturing of committee Dems.”

“Milbank has converted his policy disagreement with Cotton into an attack on the Senator’s personality. All the while, he castigates Cotton for being unable to disagree without being disagreeable.

The flaw extends to Milbank’s entire hit-piece. It’s based on the notion of civil, good faith disagreement, an ideal that has always been alien to the snarky Milbank and that was repeatedly violated by the preening, moralistic, hypocritical committee Democrats during the Haspel hearing.

Sarah Sanders Responds to Iran Critics by John Hinderaker – “MS. SANDERS: I think based on each of those individuals’ lack of success in this entire process on foreign affairs, they would probably be the last three people that we would look to for advice and counsel, and whether or not we had made the right decisions.”

Incivility, Media, and the Left by Steve Feinstein – “Liberal behavior towards conservatives is so outlandish that it borders on the absurd.”

“If the liberal media cover the offending action at all — which they often don’t — it is done more in a “See? You can’t accuse us of not covering it, now don’t ask us again” fashion than in a serious attempt to hold the offender fully accountable on the public stage.

When examining the “What if a conservative did/said this about a liberal?” comparison, it’s all too obvious that conservatives are quickly and unconditionally branded as racists, homophobes, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, misogynist, intolerant, unsophisticated and simplistic for saying things that liberals get away with completely.

What is to be made of all this? That there are double standards of decorum and acceptable public discourse for conservatives and liberals is well-known and easy to document.

The real take-away is that this kind of intolerant, one-sided, unintellectual hate speech perpetrated by liberals — where arguments are based on empty sentiment rather than a serious, sober discussion of facts — has been legitimized by the national liberal media to such a degree that today’s younger generations have taken the cue that it is acceptable for crass, dismissive emotionalism to replace rational, patient conversation. Today’s media consumers — whether that media is experienced on-line, watched, listened to or read on paper — are being taught in no uncertain terms that it is permissible to attempt to assassinate the character of those with whom you disagree, rather than to engage them in reflective, substantive debate.

American Law Is Becoming an Ass by Fay Voshell – “When arbitrary law is established, the law becomes an ass.”

“In other words, the law as created by legislatures and administered by the courts cannot be relied upon to reflect common sense or to be fair.

Under capricious law, the citizen cannot know when he or she will be charged with some offense against the powers that be. The result of chronic uncertainty is perpetual anxiety leading to ulcers of the spirit.

American law has increasingly followed the Bolshevist model as the progressive Left has sought to enshrine its political ideology into law while eliminating through persecutory and arbitrary procedures certain classes of people who are the equivalent of the bourgeoisie represented by the kulaks.

The solution? Return to the rule of law based on Law that transcends the individual and is applicable to every man and woman; namely, the Judeo-Christian ethic based on the Ten Commandments and natural law.

Will those in the swamp slide? Will the law be enforced reflecting common sense and fairness – both in terms of the corruption in the swamp and in heavy handed prosecutors?

Comments are closed.