A Plague on Both Your Houses

“A plague on both your houses,” Shakespeare wrote in Romeo and Juliet. While the Trump-Comey drama is not one of star-crossed lovers—indeed, there is little love to go around—the phrase is apt. Neither Trump nor Comey comes out of the Senate committee hearing yesterday with full credibility intact.

There is no hero here, but there was enough detail offered to make the plague comment applicable.

First, James Comey.

What to think of him? People who know him well say he is a man of integrity. If that’s so, why did he go before the public last July, lay out all the reasons why Hillary Clinton ought to be prosecuted, and then decline to do so?

He says now it was due to the problem he perceived with Loretta Lynch, reigning attorney general at the time, who told him to tone down the Hillary investigation and who met with Bill Clinton on that infamous airport tarmac while the investigation was going on.

Somehow, in Comey’s mind, to maintain the FBI’s independence, he had to drop the Hillary “matter” (the word Lynch wanted him to use publicly rather than investigation).

Democrats loved him in July.

Then in October, the dreaded October Surprise surfaced when he announced the investigation was opened again due to new information. Democrats squealed, Hillary lost, and they and she have used that incident to prop up the accusation that Comey lost the election for her.

Republicans loved him in October.

Once Trump took office, the Russian influence investigation began to circulate in the liberal media: the newest reason offered as to why Hillary lost. Tensions rose between Trump and Comey over that. Eventually, Trump fired Comey.

Democrats rejoiced over that, hoping it meant the FBI was on to something about Trump and Russia. Comey’s testimony, they enthused, would bring him down for good.

After yesterday’s revelations, their enthusiasm has dampened. The Russia allegations thus far cannot be tied to Trump or his top campaign officials. Gloom descends on Democrat headquarters.

Comey made it clear in his testimony that Russia definitely did try to interfere with the election, but he also made it clear that the investigation couldn’t connect anything to Trump (except for the ongoing Mike Flynn dramedy) and no votes were tampered with. The tally was accurate.

Of course, most Americans probably came to that conclusion long ago.

Now for the Trump side of the plague on both houses.

While firing Comey was his right as president, it was outstandingly foolish, and Trump has become adept at doing outstandingly foolish things, thereby making everything worse for himself.

Rather than abide by the official explanation for why Comey was fired—one that came from the adults in his administration—he opted instead to have an interview with NBC in which he said the firing had to do with the Russia probe.

All that accomplished was the appointment of a special counsel to look into all these matters. Again, the administration adults came out with a statement that declared this a good step in that it would finally put to rest the accusations.

Trump couldn’t let that stand. He tweeted that the appointment of the special counsel was an outrage, calling it “the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history.” Next time, maybe you shouldn’t be so restrained, Mr. President. Use some hyperbole instead.

Not settling for stirring the pot with that one, he then offered this tantalizing tidbit:

James Comey better hope that there are no “tapes” of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!

Comey commented yesterday in the hearing, “Lordy, I hope there are tapes!” He believes they will back up his accusations of what Trump said to him in their meetings.

So, now we have a special counsel, primarily because Trump couldn’t leave things alone and had to vent like a juvenile who wants the last word.

Comey was not reticent with his view on Trump’s honesty. In the hearing, he proclaimed that Trump is a liar, and that he took extensive notes on their conversations in order to document what Trump said.

The first major accusation is that Trump cleared the room of everyone else one day except for him and Comey, and then proceeded to urge Comey to end the Flynn investigation because Flynn is a good man. Comey says he didn’t follow that presidential wish.

While that doesn’t rise to the level of obstruction of justice, it still reeks of an attempt to unduly influence the course of an investigation. This may be the way Trump has operated in his business, but that’s not what’s expected in the Oval Office.

The second accusation is that Trump wanted a pledge of loyalty from Comey. The FBI is supposed to be independent in its investigations, not bowing to whatever a president wants. What kind of loyalty did Trump mean? Do whatever he’s told?

Trump’s lawyer came out later and stated that Trump categorically denies those accusations. They never happened, he says. Comey is making it all up.

Well, Comey was under oath. If it is discovered that indeed he is making it all up, he will be subject to prosecution. Does anyone really think he’s opening himself up to that?

Trump’s denial is not under oath. It’s simply a denial.

Who to believe? Is this merely a “he said, no, he said” quandary that has no resolution?

I can’t say that I have complete confidence in Comey’s integrity, and he certainly hasn’t displayed honor in all his actions. But then there’s Trump.

Does anyone recall how blatantly Trump lied during the campaign season? How he threw out whatever hints of scandal against his opponents that crossed his mind? How he insulted everyone running against him for the nomination?

If you have no problem with Trump’s history of insinuations, hints, and outright falsehoods to get what he wants, I’m not sure what I can say at this point that will make a difference.

The takeaway?

  1. Trump didn’t obstruct justice in the legal sense. There is nothing there for Democrats.
  2. The Russia probe is probably a dead end. Democrats and the liberal media are going to have to find a new narrative.
  3. Comey hasn’t exactly distinguished himself in his actions. He did leak some of his comments about Trump, he allowed Lynch to derail the Hillary investigation, and he never stood up to Trump when asked to do things he thought were wrong.
  4. An investigation of Loretta Lynch is needed; did she obstruct justice?
  5. Trump’s honesty and integrity have every reason to be questioned.

Shakespeare was right: “A plague on both your houses.”

Forfeiting Our Souls

“For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?” Those words of Jesus are in the forefront of my mind today as I survey what is happening in the presidential race.

Bill and Hillary Clinton had their eyes on the presidency ever since they were a young couple in Arkansas—probably even before that. Everything they have done has had one goal: gaining worldly power, even to the point of using their “fame” and high office to enrich themselves while offering favors to individuals and nations that have paid for those favors.

Hillary’s private e-mail server served one primary purpose: to hide what they were doing.

james-comeyBack in July, I was, along with millions of Americans, astonished that FBI Director James Comey could provide a laundry list of all the things Hillary had done that were obviously illegal and then follow that up with the conclusion that there would be no prosecution.

Political chicanery was evident, what with the “secret,” yet not-so-secret meeting Bill Clinton had with Attorney General Loretta Lynch in an airplane while both were in Arizona. Lynch, of course, is Comey’s boss.

Clinton Testifies Before House Hearing On State Dep't BudgetNow, as the FBI continued its investigation into the reprehensible Anthony Weiner, separated spouse of Huma Abedin, Hillary’s right-hand gal, we are told the investigation into Hillary’s e-mails has been reopened. Apparently, Weiner’s computer contains roughly 650,000 e-mails, some of which appear to have some connection with Hillary’s server.

Coming just a week before the election, this comes across as a bombshell exploding within the Clinton campaign and possibly affecting the outcome of an election that she thought she had wrapped up.

Naturally, Democrats are apoplectic over this development, accusing Comey, whom they have previously lauded, of playing politics. Strange, but isn’t that the same accusation Republicans have leveled at him since July? So which is it? Is he political or is he simply doing his job?

look-crooked

If this scenario makes Hillary look crooked, it might be because she is. And she’s not alone. We now know that Loretta Lynch tried to stop Comey from sending his letter to Congress informing them of the reopened investigation.

As Forrest Gump might say, “Crooked is as crooked does.”

Nothing about the content of these e-mails will be revealed before the election. Hillary supporters will dismiss the whole episode as irrelevant. In one sense I agree: this doesn’t add to Hillary’s corruption; she was already blatantly corrupt.

Trump supporters, meanwhile, are rejoicing, believing that this now opens the door to victory. They might be right. Polls seem to be tightening. Now, all of a sudden, after declaring that the election is rigged and all the polls are wrong, Trump and his minions are touting how accurate they are.

Nothing that comes out about Hillary’s corruption changes the way I view Donald Trump. This news doesn’t change who he is by one iota. Any honest survey of his personal history shows he has been just as crooked as Hillary to get his way in business. He has pulled the wool over the eyes of many people with his numerous failed ventures, chief of which, to me, was his fake “university.” That’s still coming to a courthouse near to all of us.

Nothing that comes out about Hillary’s corruption changes Trump’s over-the-top personal immorality and his arrogance. As I’ve said countless times, and will repeat again here, we have two unbelievably corrupt individuals seeking the power of the presidency.

There are those who are blinded to that fact. Here’s an interesting meme I thought I would share today:

how-i-see

The picture at the right of both rows is where I am. We are told we have to choose between two evil people and that we must go for the “lesser of two evils.”

I won’t do that because I don’t think the word “lesser” applies to this situation.

The result of this latest revelation may very well be a Hillary victory tainted by the prospect of an indictment:

stronger-together

That would be a low point for the republic.

It would be equally a low point to put into office a man whose moral core is no different than Hillary’s. Both are simply out for themselves.

The Republican party has chosen to hitch its star to the Trump hot-air balloon. To that I say, “What does it profit a political party to gain the whole nation and forfeit its own soul?”

And to Christians who have made that same choice, I simply ask, “What does it profit the Christian witness to gain a place at the political table and forfeit our own souls?”

Forfeiting our souls is never what God wants.

2016 Is Not a Replay of 1980

So we now have the notes the FBI took when they interrogated Hillary Clinton about her e-mail server. What have we discovered? She is adept at blaming her staff for everything and protesting that she doesn’t “recall” almost anything having to do with training on how to handle sensitive documents.

This is after having signed forms that testified she knew the specifics of how to handle such documents. What comes across is that she is playing the “I just don’t get all this technology” card in an attempt to escape prosecution (which the Justice Department at the behest of the FBI has allowed her to do).

Don't Understand

And we’re supposed to believe this baloney. It’s about as surreal as it can get. Has there ever been a presidential candidate who has been exposed as this corrupt before?

Self-Inflicted

Yet she may be our next president.

With Donald Trump putting illegal immigration back in the news with his foray into Mexico and his speech on the topic afterwards, one might want to ask Hillary (if anyone is allowed to ask her anything) what her stance is on the subject.

Ready to Assimilate

I’ve read parts of the transcript of Trump’s speech and seen excerpts. While there are points in the speech with which I agree, I still can’t stand his attitude. This is the moderate Trump?

Earlier in the day, he was all sweetness and light with the Mexican president. Later, in the speech, he threw out the red meat to his followers, sounding like the “old” Trump. One thing his followers might have missed, though, is that he didn’t say what he would now do with those currently living here illegally. Wasn’t the big deportation thing one of the main reasons he amassed such rabid support at the start? Now he’s backing down on it (which only makes sense) and very few of his supporters seem to have a problem with his flip-flop on an issue that they considered a cornerstone.

Consistency

He’s been all over the place, trying to come up with something that can be called a genuine policy. He’s done the same with abortion in the past. He’s totally unreliable.

Back in 1980, we were in the throes of the Carter administration. That led to a revival of common sense under Ronald Reagan. Some people are seeing a historical parallel in that we are in dire straits similar to what we experienced under Carter, and that another Reagan is waiting around the corner. Here, though, is where the parallel breaks down.

Doesn't Cheer My Up

Donald Trump is no Ronald Reagan and 2016 is not a replay of 1980. Sadly.

A Squandered Opportunity

There has never been a more eminently beatable candidate than Hillary Clinton. Yet she is now poised to win the presidency despite her manifold lies, despicable character, disastrous tenure as secretary of state, and no real record of accomplishments.

The latest is that the FBI has now “found” another 15,000 e-mails that ran through her private server. We will be told what is in some of those by mid-October, according to the report I read.

One has to wonder if FBI director Comey may now be forced to reopen the investigation for the purpose of an indictment after all. Of course, with the Obama administration still in charge, that is probably a fantasy.

Hillary has also made herself scarce when it comes to answering questions from the press, having not held a press conference for something like 200 days. What other candidate would be allowed to get away with that?

Next Question

Questions have been raised about her health, stemming from a possible concussion a few years ago. Some of that may be pure speculation, but there are legitimate concerns about whether she is really up to handling any responsibility, let alone the presidency.

Hillary's Health

Polls show that a significant number of Americans don’t really trust her and believe she lies about almost everything.

And yet she is on the verge of occupying the Oval Office.

This was supposed to be the year when we could put the Clintons behind us forever. This was the year Republicans were practically salivating over, after two disastrous Obama terms. This was the year when widespread revulsion over what has transpired over the past eight years would give Republicans the chance to fulfill their promises.

Then this happened.

Eminently Beatable

I’ve been accused by some of “Trump-bashing.” The reality is the Republican voters and the establishment have joined together to bash themselves with a Trump candidacy, thereby losing the greatest opportunity ever presented to them.

They said they wanted a candidate who tells it like it is. They blindly followed someone who fed their anger and fears. They stopped thinking and just let their emotions take over. This is the result.

Tells It Like It Is

Set aside, for the moment, all the ideological reasons why Trump is a bad nominee. Don’t think about, for now, his character (equal in despicability to Hillary’s). Just look at how he’s conducting this campaign.

Trump promised to spend a billion dollars of his own money on the campaign. He has thus far contributed $50 million. Why not more? Why has he not fulfilled that promise? Could it be because he’s something like $650 million in debt, far more than what people thought? Is he really telling us like it is?

In his most recent campaign disclosure, we find that Trump spent nothing on ads in June. The total raised in July is only one-third of what Romney raised that month in 2012.

Of the $18 million spent in July, $8 million went to a web-design firm for fundraising, which is a little disproportional.

The campaign spent $500,000 on hats.

The campaign spent $2.5 million on private air travel, which is six times more than what it spent on staff, state organization, and ground game in the states.

Conservative commentator Steve Deace points out the following instances of incompetence:

What would we say if trailing consistently in polls, Hillary Clinton decided to hold rallies in unlosable blue states like California and Massachusetts with less than 80 days to go before the election? Because that’s essentially what Trump is doing by campaigning in Texas and Mississippi this week.

Trump lacks organization in Hamilton County, which may be the most pivotal county in must-win Ohio. Last week, Trump opened a second field office in must-win Florida, where Hillary Clinton already had 14 field offices. Trump’s organization lags behind Hillary’s in Virginia, which no Republican has won the presidency without since before Reconstruction.

Earlier this summer GOP leaders in Pennsylvania, which is crucial to any hopes Trump has of winning the White House, said there was “almost no sign” of a Trump organization there.

This is virtually a no-hope candidacy.

I’ll restate it: Hillary Clinton is the most eminently beatable candidate in recent history. Republicans have squandered their best hope. What remains is the issue of whether the party can pull itself together again after this fiasco.

The Astounding Non-Indictment

I watched the entirety of the statement FBI Director James Comey made yesterday about whether to indict Hillary Clinton for mishandling government documents while she was secretary of state. My reaction as I watched was the same as countless others have shared afterwards.

James ComeyComey spent approximately 14 of his 15 minutes laying out a very strong case for a Clinton indictment. As I watched, I actually began to believe that was where he was going to end up. His litany of what the FBI discovered exposed lie after lie that Hillary has told over these many months. He even said that others in her e-mail chain were probably hacked and admitted that even though they couldn’t pin it down completely whether she was hacked directly by foreign powers, those kinds of hackers would know how to hide their activity.

Everything he said led to an indictment. That’s what made the final minute so mind-numbingly shocking.

Comey didn’t have to make a public recommendation for the Department of Justice, but he did. He declared that since Hillary had no “intent” to harm the nation through her gross negligence (he didn’t use that term precisely, but his account of what they found points to it without a doubt), he didn’t think that any “reasonable” prosecutor would bring a case like this to trial.

Why did he make this decision to proclaim this publicly when all his authority really amounted to was to send the evidence over to the Department of Justice? If he had done that, without giving his opinion so blatantly, the decision would have fallen on the shoulders of Loretta Lynch, already disgraced by her secret meeting with Bill Clinton.

Comey gave Lynch an out; this public recommendation offered her a way of escape from making the decision herself since she already had said she would follow any recommendation made by the FBI.

Those who know Comey personally and have always touted his integrity are shocked by what he did. They say it goes against everything they know about the man. Naturally, conspiracy theories abound. No, I don’t believe he did this to avoid a mysterious death at the hands of the Clintons, but with the Clinton history of corruption and hardball, I can see why people may jump to that conclusion.

What Comey did was to lay an extra legal burden on this case: having to prove that Hillary had “intent” to harm the United States through her actions. Those in the know about the law have commented forcefully that he practically made that up. The law doesn’t require that kind of proof; it focuses instead on negligence, and people are responsible and should be penalized on that basis alone.

Comey himself even said this. He noted that while he didn’t advocate criminal charges, that government employees who do this kind of thing face penalties and other administrative actions.

What penalty will Hillary Clinton receive? A presidential nomination? Some penalty.

We now have as the presumptive Democrat nominee someone who, if she weren’t running for president, would be disqualified from being given a security clearance.

The justice system at the highest level of our government has become a joke. When I refer to the Department of Injustice, I’m being descriptive, not sarcastic.

Meanwhile, feel free to use Comey’s concept of justice the next time you face a situation like this:

Simply Careless

Unless your last name is Clinton, Kennedy, or Obama, it might not work.

Is Justice Dead Yet?

Unbelievable. Well, not really. We’re talking about the Clintons here. To what am I referring? That secret not-so-secret meeting that took place between the former president and the current attorney general, Loretta Lynch.

Let’s see now, why would Bill Clinton want to speak to the person in charge of investigating his wife who is running for president? For the life of me, I just can’t figure that out, can you?

Under Criminal Investigation

Oh, that explains it. Nothing to see here. Move on.

Secret Meeting

Of course, there is that matter of Lynch having been appointed to her federal judgeship by Bill Clinton, but I’m sure that had nothing to do with it. She doesn’t owe him anything.

Yes, Godfather

Clinton denies that he was trying to put any pressure on Lynch. He’s very good at denials. It kind of reminds me of another one he tried to foist on the country:

Improper

Trust. It’s important. Integrity. It’s what we should look for in any candidate. When it comes to the Clintons both have always been absent.

If You Believe

Hillary was questioned by the FBI for over three hours last Saturday. What will come of that? The Benghazi Report came out earlier last week; it was damning, but both the Democrat party and the media don’t care.

Nothing New

If Hillary Clinton is not indicted for her actions as secretary of state, we will know that justice has died in America.

And on the Democrat Side . . .

I’ve spent more time analyzing the Republican field than the Democrat. Of course, one reason is that there’s really no “field” on the Democrat side, but it has become more interesting. This was supposed to be a Hillary coronation, but it hasn’t quite worked out the way she expected.

I admit I never thought Bernie Sanders would get any traction anywhere. Maybe I was living in a dream world where I never imagined that even in the Democrat party an outspoken socialist would be a threat to Queen Hillary. Keep in mind that Sanders has not run as a Democrat for many years; he has preferred the title of “independent.”

Yet here he is as a possible nominee in a party he eschewed. One thing you can say for him is that he is consistent: as an avowed socialist, he is promising the sky—free this, free that, free everything:

Slackers Like Me

The little secret that his followers don’t understand of course is that nothing is free; somebody is going to pay for all of that, and that somebody is the rest of us who aren’t getting those freebies.

Hillary, realizing the threat, has become even more outspoken as a progressive. Those who know her (and the party as a whole) aren’t surprised by this; she’s always been a progressive but hasn’t been quite this open about it for fear of losing votes. Now, in a tight race, she feels she has to pull out all the stops.

What all of her rhetoric about the evils of Wall Street hides is just how tied in to Wall Street she is. Where does she receive much of her financial support? Reports show exactly where:

Definition of Progressive

Why the Sanders surge? Could this have anything to do with it?

Slow Speed Chase

I freely admit I would love to see Hillary (and Bill) finally get what they deserve. The FBI seems poised to recommend indictment. If the Obama Justice Department—a misnomer if ever there was one—declines to prosecute, she could still get the nomination. With that hanging over her, she should be easier to beat. If Sanders gets the nomination, America would have finally bottomed out if he is elected, but I believe he would be even easier to overcome.

The key now is whether Republicans are wise in their selection of a nominee or whether instead they will turn to Donald Trump. A Trump-Clinton or a Trump-Sanders race would be the worst of all possible scenarios because no matter who wins, the nation would lose.