I chose not to have the entire McCarthy interview by Sean Hannity. I have audio by him already, saying mostly the same stuff. HOWEVER, I did want to upload these two short responses by him to Hannity. Andrew McCarthy really zeros in on the center of the issue — “it didn’t happen.”
Dennis Prager invited Andrew McCarthy on his radio program to discuss his (McCarthy’s) article entitled, “Stone Indictment Makes Clear There Was No Trump-Russia Conspiracy”. Key to the article is this short paragraph:
- It is very simple. If the Trump campaign had been in an espionage conspiracy with Russia to hack Democratic email accounts, why would the campaign have needed Stone to try to figure out what stolen information WikiLeaks had and when it would release that information?
Yep. There you have it. Unless it’s as bad as Sidney Powell thinks it may be if Andrew Weissmann writes the report for Mueller (), McCarthy may be right that Trump will be vindicated.
NOTE: During the interview Andrew McCarthy responded, “Yes, I think…” which reminded me of a Boogie Down Productions song, “My Philosophy” — so I spliced it in.
Sean Hannity interviews Jerome Corsi. I first want to say that I am not a fan of Jerome – at all. BUT, the interview sheds a lot of light on the entire case, and he (if this is true) should win his case easily. But discussion about Roger Stone and Julian Assange add some substance to the case[s]. Good stuff, I hope it helps fill-in holes for the listener. Here is more information:
- Could Jerome Corsi’s Lawsuit Destroy The Mueller Investigation? (American Thinker)
- Judge Denies Mueller Request for Delay in Corsi Case (NewsMax)
- So The FBI Staged Quite The Show In Arresting Roger Stone (HotAir)
- Stone Indictment Follows Concerning Mueller Pattern (The Hill)
HOT AIR reports on this:
WOW! Dan Bongino explains well what I wasn’t grasping… and the key for me next time is to read the “in court transcript,” as it makes clear what the Judges actions were really about — rather than the MSM running roughshod over the happenings in the courtroom. For headlines. Judge Sullivan threw a red-flag for Flynn… I hope his legal team takes the generous offer to rethink their strategy. Bongino’s fourth point is about the Logan Act (at the 16:02 mark) – great stuff!
SARA CARTER has more:
Comey let’s out small snippets of his thoughts in handling the Russian Dossier. Comey AGAIN slips up. Enjoy the fun:
Gregg Jarrett: Rod Rosenstein WILL NOT ALLOW Gen. Flynn Interrogator Joe Pientka To Testify. Hmmm, I wonder why?
GATEWAY PUNDIT has some good stuff on this:
As GATEWAY further notes… Joe Pientka’s name was redacted in the newly released 302s:
As noted above, Special Agent, Joe Pientka, who was present during the interrogation of General Flynn. He has been ready to give testimony regarding circumstances surrounding the ambush interview (GATEWAY PUNDIT | SARA CARTER). Investigative reporter, Sara Carter says Pientka, if issued a subpoena, will discuss how forthcoming Flynn was about very specific sensitive information that Flynn could not have possibly known the investigators already knew, which may give additional insight into Flynn’s veracity and willingness to tell the truth.
SARA CARTER notes that with these new revealed documents, that some internal document discrepancies are noted… and it is because of the changed 302 we know Strzok had written:
JOHN SOLOMON also is in the mix as he dropped a bombshell of information:
As the NATIONAL SENTINEL continues in their posting, we see the Judge in Flynn’s case
DAN BONGINO also joins the fun by letting us know about the destruction of key evidence to another investigation (seperate from Mueller’s of course) that hints at something damning is being hidden:
I guess they were learning from Hillary Clinton? As Trey Gowdy noted about the HIllary:
I called this a year ago (Alan Dershowitz was calling it a few days earlier as well!):
- When Lying To The FBI Wasn’t A Crime
I predict Flynn will be exonerated from all this. And with Mueller’s teams past, other cases he has and will put forward may fall apart. NOT because he is wrong, but because of the tactics used (like with Enron and the like).
- WOW! Judge In Flynn Case Abruptly Recuses Himself
I see the justice supporting Flynn. Except he is broke now… maybe he will sue?
Leftist legal scholar Jonathan Turley says Flynn was put in a perjury trap:
Rep. Jim Jordan has been on this scent for a year… here he lays out his thoughts anew:
PJ-MEDIA makes note of the judge involved:
Wrap It Up, Mr. Mueller. Wall Street Journal, 10 December 2018. A16. (Click image if you prefer to read it from the paper – image will enlarge)
- “…Trump’s White House has pursued what is arguably the harshest set of policies toward Russia since the fall of Communism…” | Vanity Fair
Larry Elder reads from a Vanity Fair article that is entitled, “Is This It? A Trump-Hater’s Guide To Mueller Skepticism.” The “Sage” also plays a recent interview on CNN of Jerry Nadler by Jake Tapper.
Here is one of the powerful paragraphs from the article:
- Certainly, Trump’s ethical standards are low, but if sleaziness were a crime then many more people from our ruling class would be in jail. It is sleazy, but not criminal, to try to find out in advance what WikiLeaks has on Hillary Clinton. It is sleazy, but not criminal, to take a meeting in Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer promising a dossier of dirt on Clinton. (Just as, it should be mentioned, it is sleazy, but not criminal, to pay a guy to go to Russia to put together a dossier of dirt on Trump. This is one reason why the Clinton campaign lied about its connection to the Steele dossier, albeit without the disadvantage of being under oath.) It is sleazy, but not criminal, to pursue a business deal while you’re running for president. Mueller has nailed people for trying to prevaricate about their sleaze, so we already have a couple of guilty pleas over perjury, with more believed to be on the way. But the purpose of the investigation was to address suspicions of underlying conspiracy—that is, a plan by Trump staffers to get Russian help on a criminal effort. Despite countless man-hours of digging, this conspiracy theory, the one that’s been paying the bills at Maddow for a couple of years now, has come no closer to being borne out.
Larry elder and Chapman University’s Henry Salvatori Professor of Law and Community Service and Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, John Eastman, discuss the latest regarding Mueller’s “witch hunt.” A passing comment comparing Whitewater is made that is informative. Good stuff, but will soon be dated.
PJ-MEDIA has the story:
- MORRISON v. OLSON, (1988)
- Scalia’s Finest Opinion (WEEKLY STANDARD)
- On Presidents V. Special Counsels, Justice Scalia Got It Right Long Ago (THE HILL)
- The Price America Pays For Out-Of-Control Special Prosecutors (NEW YORK POST)
- Justice Scalia’s Greatest Dissent (TOWNHALL)
BTW, to be clear, I am neither a fan or Corsi or Stone. I think both men are wacko conspiracy guys (one of my stated issues with Trump and his going on the Alex Jones Show). But that aside, we will see in the end where Corsi’s refusals lead… to the truth? This upload may disappear at some point (not because of a conspiracy, but because of copyright issues.) Good analysis starts at the 30-minute mark.