McCabe: Rosenstein Complained That Trump Forced Him To Justify Comey Firing

We have previously discussed the tell-all book written by James Comey. Now Andrew McCabe has cashed in on his own tell all — and not surprisingly it is scathing. The most notable allegation however concerns the memorandum written by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on why Comey should be fired. McCabe insists that he and others witnessed a visibly upset Rosenstein complain that Trump and aides pressured him to write the justification for firing Comey. The book is The Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump.

On May 12, 2017, McCabe recounts how a “glassy-eyed” Rosenstein became emotional in describing the pressure and how he was being set up as a scapegoat. McCabe says that Rosenstein insisted that it was not his idea and that Trump basically ordered him to do it. He added that Rosenstein lamented “There’s no one here that I can trust.”

If that account is true, it would contradict the thrust of statements made by both the White House and Rosenstein that the memorandum was his idea. Sean Spicer denied that Trump direct Rosenstein to write the memorandum and that “it was all him.”

The account raises some questions however. The memorandum references communications and opinions from a broad array of current and former justice officials who viewed Comey as unprofessional and unjustified in some of this decisions as FBI Director. Unless the representations were unsupported, it is hard to see how such work could have been thrown together in the short period between Rosenstein’s appointment and Comey’s firing.

However, the book gives a glimpse into what McCabe told Mueller. The final report now expected in March could delve more deeply in the such alleged pressure. That would of course raise again prior objections to why Rosenstein did not recuse himself as a material witness.

152 thoughts on “McCabe: Rosenstein Complained That Trump Forced Him To Justify Comey Firing”

  1. We are supposed to believe a brazen Rosenstein was forced by Trump to write Comey memo, yet Trump had no control over rogue Rosenstein hiring special counsel Muler. Totally illogical. Look at source – Comey BF and fired/disgraced FBI political hack. What is this – Trump Attack Book of the Week Club? Who pay$ to reads this crap – so many “book$”.

    1. Excerpted fro the Wikipedia article on “The Dismissal of James Comey” linkednear the bottom of this page:

      On September 1, 2017, The New York Times reported that Trump had drafted a letter to Comey over the weekend of May 4–7, 2017. The draft, which is now in the possession Special Counsel Mueller, was dictated by Trump and written up by Trump aide Stephen Miller. It notified Comey he was being fired and gave a several-page-long explanation of the reasons. The draft was described by people who saw it as a “screed” with an “angry, meandering tone”. On May 8 Trump showed it to senior White House officials, including Vice President Mike Pence and White House Counsel Don McGahn. McGahn was alarmed at its tone and persuaded Trump not to send that letter. McGahn arranged for Trump to meet with Sessions and Rosenstein, who had been separately discussing plans to fire Comey. Rosenstein was given a copy of the draft and agreed to write a separate memo on the subject. His memo, delivered to Trump on May 9 along with a cover-letter recommendation from Sessions, detailed Comey’s handling of the Clinton email investigation as the reason to dismiss him. Trump then cited Rosenstein’s memo and Sessions’ recommendation as the reason for terminating Comey. Trump had previously praised Comey for renewing the investigation into Clinton’s emails in October 2016.

      [end excerpt]

      You can believe whatever you like, Beaky. But Rosenstein thought that he was doing Trump a favor by giving proper reasons to fire Comey rather than the “angry, meandering screed” that Trump and Miller had cooked up together three days before Rosenstein wrote his memo. And then the next day after Comey was fired Trump reverted to his and Miller’s angry, meandering screed against Comey.

      You know there’s a reason that Trump and Miller’s angry, meandering screed against Comey is in the possession of he who will not be deterred, Robert Swan Mueller The Third. It’s the same reason that Rosenstein said that he would recuse himself if Mueller called upon Rosenstein as a witness. Mueller did not call upon Rosenstein as a witness. Not even after Whitaker replaced Sessions. Nor will Rosenstein be called as a witness even after Barr takes over from Whitaker. And the reason is whatever Trump and Miller put in that angry, meandering screed that caused Don McGahn to plead with Rosenstein to give Trump proper reasons to fire Comey.

      Rosenstein said that he will eventually be vindicated. I believe him.



    There’s a trend on these threads to open an attack with indignant moral outrage! Something someone did your opponent must answer for.

    These arguments make good theater on cable news channels. But as written comments they read as illogical. Intelligent discussions don’t begin with apology demands.

    No one is obliged to apologize for news figures they never met or voted for. Such demands are made with presumptuous outrage. Presuming the other person ‘has’ to apologize.

    Like he or she is incorrect if they don’t apologize. That’s how dumb it gets!

    These apology demands are accompanied by references to multiple issues. Multiple demands for ‘more’ apologies! Like the other person is now obliged to spend the next two hours addressing every issue in carefully worded statements.

    Anyone with imagination and knowledge of politics can think of outrages the ‘other side’ should apologize for. And if they quickly follow up with ten more demands, they’ve won the argument. Or so they imagine.

    Apology demands, by their nature, become dead ends on comment threads. A willful effort to poison any level of civility. No self-respecting commenter has to apologize. It’s a stupid test!

    1. “No one is obliged to apologize for news figures they never met or voted for”.
      By “news figures”, I’m not sure of you mean politicians, people in the media, different personnel in different media outlets, political ideologists, or something other than those figures.
      I do know that when people use phrases like “basket of deplorables”, or “Trumpers”, or like to pretend that “Fox News” or “Hannity” or “Limbaugh” are what shapes their political views, it’s a common and cheap stunt that is constantly on display in these threads.
      And it almost never had anything to do with an actual issue. In a few cases, it seems to be the sum total of what they’re capable of “debating” here. It’s their “entire act”, usually in a few sentences or less.
      And it is, in fact, “a willful effort to poison any level of civility”.

      1. Tom, ‘news figures’ is vague. And that’s how it goes with these attacks. Sometimes we never heard of the person we’re supposed to apologize for.

        And once again you seek to portray Donald Trump as a normal president. Like only radicals object to Donald Trump. In reality Trump’s base has never encompassed more than 40%.

        So the problem isn’t me. I’m with the other 60%.

        Right-wing media is the crucial component of this presidency. Without its full support Trump would have no base. His main strength is the willingness of right-wing media to back him up on every issue.

        Therefore right-wing media becomes an entirely valid component of any discussion involving Donald Trump. This is essentially the Fox News Presidency. Several Fox News people are working at the White House. Trump is watching Fox News for much of his day. One can’t separate Donald Trump from Fox.

        1. Trump has NPD, Narcissist Personality Disorder. No doubt about it.

          He would throw his own son, Don Jr., under the bus and not feel even the slightest bit bad about it. He would even throw his “Golden Child” Ivanka Trump under the bus and not even feel bad about it. #EmptyVessel

          But this has nothing to do with politics. Just a statement on who he is “as a person.”

          1. & your comments show yourself as a very ignorant person!

            DJT is likely only the first of many of the Trump Named as President of the USA.

            I suggest your type people start sucking it up & getting used to it!

                1. When Allan has nothing else to say he sputters “anonymous Diane.”

                  No point in arguing with this boy who calls himself Allan. He’s clearly a waste of time, etc. He likes to talk, but readers would do well to scroll past his “comments.”

                  1. Anonymous Diane, the brainless one has been reduced to telling everyone else what to do as if no one else is smart enough to decide for themselves. Anonymous Diane, you should close your keyboard and take the garbage out.

                2. You do realize that there are multiple “Anonymous” in here, right?

                  They can’t all be “Diane.”

                  I was speaking about psychiatry, not politics. That is my specialty.

                  I loath politics.


                  1. “You do realize that there are multiple “Anonymous” in here, right? They can’t all be “Diane.” I was speaking about psychiatry, not politics. That is my specialty.”

                    Of course there are different anonymous’s. But anonymous Diane has a particular characteristic. She doesn’t add anything to a conversation and is rather dull. You may not be anonymous Diane because in this last posting you didn’t demonstrate the dull rhythm of anonymous Diane but the one above seems to have the characteristics of anonymous Diane and if it isn’t then maybe I should refer to that individual posting as anonymous Diane 2 on a temporay basis.

                    If you choose no distinct alias then you run the risk of being assumed to be anonymous Diane when your comments are merely emotional venting or just plain stupid. A lot of people in the psychiatric field take their opinions far beyond their expertise and many of their opinions with regard to Trump are plain trash. This doesn’t mean that one can’t lable Trump with certain terms but when those terms are used in a pure perjoritive way even an expert can start to sound like anonymous Diane.

                    Working in a field and thereby claiming expertise requires more of an explanation of what one does before that expertise should be recognized.. Even then such predictive powers as discribed above should be limited to what one knows not what one wishes to believe.

            1. “Your type people”

              Oh, you mean this…?

              Yep, these are definitely my people. Or should I say, not people. 😉

          2. “Democrats have (for good reason) criticized President Donald Trump for his signature campaign rally chant of “Lock her up” in referring to his then opponent Hillary Clinton.. Many of us objected to the display as obnoxious and demeaning to our political system.”

            You, Prof Turley & others are maybe tone deaf or fearful of some law & order returning to the US.

            Your types seem to have trouble seeing/hearing the massive crowds that gathering everywhere Trump goes, like the one tonight.

            Turley, why in the hell is he ok with Hillary/Obama/neocons/deep staters & their Mafia followers selling our Enemies advance military weapon tech that can be used against us. We used to call it Treason, Espionage, etc…

            Lock them Up Trump!!

        2. “Once again you seek to portray Donald Trump as a normal president”.
          That isn’t what I said, and it didn’t take you long to get back to your “right-wing media” and “Fox News” meme.
          Since you feel that “right-wing media becomes an entirely valid component of any discussion involving Donald Trump”, then your worship of Brock, Soros, Chris Matthew, Rachael Maddow, etc. becomes equally “valid”, and your farcical HHHNN propaganda outlet toes their party line.

        3. I did respond to Peter Hill’s latest round of his typical bulls***.
          It may or not eventually post, somewhere in this thread, and if it doesn’t I’m not going to bother retyping it.
          I don’t like wasting time with a sanctimonious fool like Hollywood Hill.

        4. “Therefore right-wing media becomes an entirely valid component of any discussion involving Donald Trump. ”

          Peter, the mainstream media does the same for leftist figures so your reliance on the mainstream media is just as questionable as the reliance of another on Fox News. However, your reliance shouldn’t be based on the opinions of either source rather you should be basing your opinion on fact and logic.

          You are the individual on this blog that posts portions of columns that are opinion pieces or hit pieces disguised as news and when questioned on them you can never defend them. I for one am perfectly willing to stick with facts something you lack in almost every posting you make.

          1. Alan, there are several ‘liberal’ news sources that I don’t bother with. But you can’t distinguish between mainstream and leftist. And your failure to make that distinction comes from being too far right.

            Mainstream isn’t ‘left’.

            1. “Mainstream isn’t ‘left’.”

              That is your opinion. The Washington Post is not only left wing but a tabloid hit piece as well. They need to learn how to separate news from opinion on the news page. They don’t and in that fashion they cannot be differentiated from Hannity. The biggest difference is Hannity makes it clear that he provides opinion while the Washington Post provides their opinion as the news. Another difference is that the Washington Post has lied about the news. Hannity doesn’t (except by error, opinion is not lying) and is clear about where he stands.

    2. Mr. H said,”There’s a trend on these threads to open an attack with indignant moral outrage!”

      Be A Straw-Man (a.k.a. Estovir) is something of a trend on the Turley blawg. The technique, however, is as old as hills. You got it right when you called it “poisoning the well.” There are other tricks, of course, such as The Red Herring, The Rabbit-Hole, The Straw Man and more besides. All of those ploys serve the purpose of changing the subject by going off topic.

      Remember: We were invited to discuss McCabe’s claim that Trump pressured Rosenstein to write a memo showing cause to fire Comey. And, instead, we are discussing Estovir’s claim that Mr. H, L4D and who-knows-how-many Leftists are supposedly Socialist Baby-Killers in Blackface.

      You know what, Mr. H? You’re right, again. That is, in fact, how stupid it gets. The high moral dudgeon of Estovir is but another pantomime. And you don’t need grease paint on your face to sing along with Rare Earth:

      I just want to celebrate.
      I just want to celebrate.
      I just want to celebrate another day of living.
      I just want o celebrate another day of life.

      Don’t let ’em get you down. No! No!
      Don’t let ’em turn you around and around and around and around . . .

      1. pan·to·mime [pan-t uh-mahym] NOUN

        1. the art or technique of conveying emotions, actions, feelings, etc., by gestures without speech.

        2. a play or entertainment in which the performers express themselves mutely by gestures, often to the accompaniment of music.

        3. significant gesture without speech.

        4. an actor in dumb show, as in ancient Rome.

        5. a form of theatrical spectacle common in England during the Christmas season, generally adapted from a fairy tale and including stock character types who perform songs and dances, tell jokes, etc.

        1. Peter, perhaps that is because that is who you are or your ideology doesn’t permit you to think straight so you never recognize how you lend unearned support for these ideas.

    3. i agree with that general statement but I guess I don’t understand why it is relevant, either. I must have missed it.

    1. Maybe I wrote that the wrong way? I’ll try again.

      McCabe? Why hasn’t that Commie/Nazi American Hatin Piece Of Trash Criminal McCabe Been Dealt With?

  3. “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing.”

    – Lisa Page to Peter Strzok


    – Peter Strzok

    “This text is from August 2016, and “Andy” may refer to Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe. The argument among some on the right is that ‘insurance policy’ refers to some kind of deep-state conspiracy to take down Trump, and that it possibly even implicates McCabe, the No. 2 official at the FBI whose wife, Jill, happened to be a Democratic candidate for the Virginia state Senate last year.”

    – WAPO

    “The texts mean what the texts say.”

    – Lisa Page to Congress

    The co-conspirators in the Obama Coup D’etat in America; the most prodigious abuse of power and scandal in American political history:

    Sessions, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Comey, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Kadzic, Yates, Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power, Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Obama et al.

  4. Its time for the O.B.I.T security monitoring system

    There is no answer. You’re all the same dark persuasion. You demand, insist on knowing every private thought & hunger of everyone. Your families, your neighbors, everyone, but yourselves.

  5. Off topic, however it remains important when trying to figure out who we are dealing with when Democratic politics are involved.

    “Senate Democrats block GOP anti-infanticide bill spurred by Ralph Northam comments”

    1. Alan, correction: ‘Democrats block Severe Abnormalities Bill’.

      Republicans, who claim to be fiscal haws, cannot explain ‘who’ will support babies born with severe abnormalities which may require 24-7 nursing facilities. Republicans insist these babies be delivered to punish women for even thinking about abortions. Financial burdens could be grave for families lacking major wealth.

      1. Republicans insist these babies be delivered to punish women for even thinking about abortions.

        No, they insist on babies being delivered because they are living beings. And only bent minds see babies as punishments. Long-term care ls largely financed by Medicaid, btw.

        1. Tabby, how are Republicans with Medicaid? Aren’t they pushing work requirement laws to nudge people off Medicaid? And should mothers of abnormal children be forced to meet work requirement laws?

          Also, if Republicans ‘are’ indeed concerned with healthcare, why can’t they develop a comprehensive healthcare policy? Obviously Republicans have serious problems with healthcare funding. In short it’s an issue Republicans prefer to not address.

          1. ABORTION STATS:


            Although both the rate and number of abortions have steadily fallen in the U.S., an estimated 1 million procedures are performed each year, according to the Guttmacher Institute. These procedures remain very safe, considerably more so than pregnancy and birth, in fact. Of these abortions, 91.4% are performed in the first trimester, less than 14 weeks into pregnancy. Just 1.3% of abortions are performed at or after 21 weeks, and an estimated 0.2% of all abortions involve the dilation and evacuation procedure.

            Edited from: “No, Late Term Abortions Don’t ‘Rip’ Babies Out Of Wombs. And They Exist For A Reason”

            FORBES, 10/20/16

            1. Petrified Shill….Is today the day for Whataboutisms?
              Since that appears to be the case, …

              “Last year, according to the Washington Post’s tally, just 16 unarmed black men, out of a population of more than 20 million, were killed by the police. The year before, the number was 36. These figures are likely close to the number of black men struck by lightning in a given year, considering that happens to about 300 Americans annually and black men are 7 percent of the population. And they include cases where the shooting was justified, even if the person killed was unarmed.”

              Police Violence against Black Men Is Rare

              Which means that abortions performed after T2 is not only an abomination given that the developing baby’s heart is beating during T1, but killing her moments after she is delivered as proposed by Governors Cuomo and Northam, Planned Barrenhood, Guttamacher and Democrats are similar to what the Nazis did in their brutal concentration camps, killing defenseless innocent souls…while they made excuses just like the Left in this country

              Whataboutisms is today.

              Thanks for playing!

              1. Estovir, your entire ‘argument’ here falls outside any factual statistics. And if you bothered looking at the stats I posted above your’s, you’d know how far off your statistics are.

                Your interest in this subject begins and ends with calling liberals ‘Nazis’. You have no genuine concerns beyond that.

                1. more data for our challenged troll, Peter Shill


                  Induced Abortion and the Risk of Breast Cancer

                  Mads Melbye, M.D., Jan Wohlfahrt, M.Sc., Jørgen H. Olsen, M.D., Morten Frisch, M.D., Tine Westergaard, M.D., Karin Helweg-Larsen, M.D., and Per Kragh Andersen, Ph.D.

                  January 9, 1997
                  N Engl J Med 1997; 336:81-85
                  DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199701093360201

                  New England Journal of Medicine

                  “The numbers of person-years at risk were calculated for groups defined according to the week of gestation for induced abortions that took place at 18 weeks’ gestation. Women with more than one induced abortion were, in the period between the first and second abortion, considered at risk according to the week of gestation at the time of the first induced abortion; between the second and third abortions they were considered at risk according to the week of gestation at the time of the second induced abortion; and so on.”


                  Lets wait for counter Evidenced Based Data from pro-abort PH

              2. lets use Peter Shills data even if Guttamacher is a left wing organization aligned with Planned Parenthood.

                “an estimated 1 million procedures are performed each year, according to the Guttmacher Institute. … Just 1.3% of abortions are performed at or after 21 weeks..”

                Since Peter hates data, and prefers to excise words and abort meaning, here is the math
                (1,000,000) * (1.3%) =
                1,000,000 * 0.013 = 13,000

                Compared to police “brutality” of black men, clearly abortions at/past 21 weeks is an abomination

                We observe how the Dims have made a cottage industry out of the mantra of police “brutality” of black men, and yet, like the dark angel of death, they relish in killing 13,000 developing babies if one is to use the left wing Guttamacher numbers

                The Left lies, just like Hillary

                “Clinton Off on Late-Term Abortions”

                Hillary Clinton said that late-term abortions “are because of medical necessity.” There is little research on the subject, but existing data do not support her claim.


                1. Wow, Estovir, so much to respond to. My Sunday afternoon is shot!

                  The Mrs understands. She’ll go shopping alone. She knows what a stresser Estovir has been. Her husband must respond to 67 different categories.

                  That’s how good Estovir is at clicking off topics and names.

                  People think it’s easy trolling for Brock. But Culture Commandos like Estovir can make your job a nightmare. The sheer volume of angry sarcastic references takes a toll on trolls.

                  And it’s funny Republicans, who call themselves ‘Pro-Family’ should want to take away ‘my’ family time.

                  It makes you wonder if Estovir has a family. I wager he hasn’t. That’s what makes him angry. Estovir wants to shred liberals and punish women for supporting them.

                  And notice how Estovir frames the abortion discussion with Black Male victims of police shootings? ‘I’ never raised that topic. Why am ‘I’ obliged to address a completely different issue??

                  Estovir presumes that as a so-callled Leftist I am naturally quite passionate regarding Black male victims of police shootings. Therefore I must answer for ‘my hypocrisy’ in caring more about Blacks than ‘murdered White babies’.

                  That’s how dumb it gets! Just a series of assumptions where I am not an individual expressing ‘my’ opinions. Instead Peter Shill is honestly a troll for Dave Brock. Which obligates him to answer for every Leftist in the country.

                  Estovir would have me answer for imaginary leftists; vague “liberals” referenced in right wing media. The kooky, perverted types hostile to Christians. As a troll for Brock I must answer for them. That’s how dumb it gets!

                    1. He has no cerebral cortex. He is all amygdala.

                      “Black women were overrepresented among abortion patients and had the highest abortion rate: 27.1 per 1000…..Women with family incomes less than 100% the federal poverty level accounted for almost half of all abortion patients in 2014, and this group had the highest abortion rate of all groups we examined; 36.6 per 1000. As income levels increased, the abortion rate decreased; women in the highest income group had an abortion rate less than half the national rate: 6.0 per 1000. Although abortion declined for all income groups between 2008 and 2014, poor women experienced the smallest decline (26%), and the declines grew greater with income.”

                      Rachel K. Jones, Jenna Jerman, “Population Group Abortion Rates and Lifetime Incidence of Abortion: United States, 2008–2014”, American Journal of Public Health 107, no. 12 (December 1, 2017): pp. 1904-1909.
                      DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2017.304042


                      Thus, true to form, Pro-Aborts earn money and power by enslaving (wait for it) blacks, hispanics and people with poor economic standing

                      Pro-Aborts suck

                    2. Estovir, of course those numbers are higher for poor women. That’s the whole debate! Women in poverty are several times more likely to seek abortions.

                      Poor women can’t afford pregnancies. Just carrying a pregnancy could interfere with the low wage job they depend on.

                      And a lot of women in low wage jobs already have children. That’s drives their desperation in seeking abortions.

                      Whereas happily married women, with sufficient income, will happily carry a pregnancy.

                      None of this come as any surprise to people in the real world.

            2. The key word here is “estimated.” Some states, including California with a population of 40m, do not report.

              1. If you do a search on abortion in the medical literature, you will find the authors of the literature use scientifically derived data BUT their conclusions are slanted with pejoratives towards the pro-life side, and bend over backwards to paint with a soft brush the realities of terminating the life of the developing baby and the effects therein afterwards to the mother. One such article, published in an Emergency Medicine Journal, was so dishonest in their selective use of adjectives and euphemisms that the data was a mere sideshow.

                Much like Planned Parenthood, the use of data is often manipulated because they can not allow the data to tell the story

                Since “Wootsy” is a “medical professional”, he can piggy back on my comments….once he provides copy / paste verbiage from a few medical journals with proper citations like I have. Sorry, Wootsy, Youtube does not count…..unless if youre a “Wholistic quack

                1. Sorry, Woosty, well she is just not interested in having a debate with a thuggishTroll. In fact she is taking a break from this ugly place where truth is most definitely and deliberately twisted and skewed to suit the thugs purpose. What’s your next step, sending uber-commandoes to beat people into submission to your arguments so you can justify the current political bloodshed and undermining of current law and the Constitution? Your attempts to de-civilize this Country have taken a toll but will not prevail in the bigger, wider, saner World. 😉 Phfffffft…..

                  1. “undermining of current law and the Constitution”

                    Becka, if you make a statement like this then certainly you can let us in as to where Trump has undermined the Constitution and the law. We saw that in previous administrations but not in this one. Tell us, or are you shooting blanks again?

                    1. “etc, blah blah blah…..”

                      Your response makes you look pretty foolish Becka. Trump has yet to use that power with regard to the wall, but what do you care. You only have 2 minutes of knowledge on all subjects. Little have you considered that Trump, if he can demonstrate an acceptable National Emergency, makes him right and you wrong.

                      What do you care? You just like to voice another uneducated opinion. Since you like to site websites that you don’t read I’ll just provide another question that you can look up and not read as well. Did GWB use these powers? Did Obama use these powers?

                      Such foolishness on your part Becka. I expected better.

                    2. uh oh, the moderation police got me but I’ve sent you a list of links Mr. Allan…such that my 2 minute break allowed me to gather…have fun….what is the limit on links and sources here to get me moderated for answering your question?

                    3. “uh oh, the moderation police got me”

                      No moderation police and you never do answer the question which only involves a few words if you knew what you were talking about. Instead you prefer to reply referencing the NYPublic Library as your source figuring someone there must have provided those answers though you don’t seem to know what they are or how to defend them.

                      Why don’t you prepare answers to your statements before posting? I know, you have only two minutes and therefore you really don’t have time to learn about what you are saying or why. Instead you utilize talking points provided by others that you can regurgitate whether you understand them or not.

                    4. Becka,

                      You are correct. This web blog only allows two hyperlinks per comment. I edited your other comment so that it would post.

                      If you wish the readership to review more than two links, this may be accomplished by using multiple comments of two links each.

                    5. “Hey Allan, I’m at work, I have a real job ”

                      Congratulations Becka, do you want a medal? Do you think other people don’t work?

                  2. Becka, CREW is a sorosphere outfit run by David Brock, a man so bizarre John Podesta didn’t want to touch him with a 39 1/2 foot pole.

          2. Aren’t they pushing work requirement laws to nudge people off Medicaid?

            No, Republican politicians are not pushing work requirements on nursing home residents.

            1. Tabby, please, expand your explanation to describe the current policies of Republicans regarding healthcare.

              Since Republicans care so deeply about ‘life’ issues, what are their policies regarding preventive medicine for people lacking the means to afford health insurance? Early detection of cancer, for instance, is a proven life saver. But if one can’t afford to even see a doctor, how can they obtain early cancer detections? One presumes that every American suffering from cancer is just as important as an unborn child.

              1. Hey Petey Weenie,

                the subject is abortion.Stay on topic

                Abortions kill the developing baby and also cause lasting harm to the mother




                Published online: 02 January 2018
                Given the methodological limitations of recently published qualitative reviews of abortion and mental health, a quantitative synthesis was deemed necessary to represent more accurately the published literature and to provide clarity to clinicians.

                To measure the association between abortion and indicators of adverse mental health, with subgroup effects calculated based on comparison groups (no abortion, unintended pregnancy delivered, pregnancy delivered) and particular outcomes. A secondary objective was to calculate population-attributable risk (PAR) statistics for each outcome.

                After the application of methodologically based selection criteria and extraction rules to minimise bias, the sample comprised 22 studies, 36 measures of effect and 877 181 participants (163 831 experienced an abortion). Random effects pooled odds ratios were computed using adjusted odds ratios from the original studies and PAR statistics were derived from the pooled odds ratios.

                Women who had undergone an abortion experienced an 81% increased risk of mental health problems, and nearly 10% of the incidence of mental health problems was shown to be attributable to abortion. The strongest subgroup estimates of increased risk occurred when abortion was compared with term pregnancy and when the outcomes pertained to substance use and suicidal behaviour.

                This review offers the largest quantitative estimate of mental health risks associated with abortion available in the world literature. Calling into question the conclusions from traditional reviews, the results revealed a moderate to highly increased risk of mental health problems after abortion. Consistent with the tenets of evidence-based medicine, this information should inform the delivery of abortion services.

                1. “Estovir says: February 10, 2019 at 2:54 PM
                  Hey Petey Weenie,

                  the subject is abortion.Stay on topic

                  Abortions kill the developing baby and also cause lasting harm to the mother”

                  Hey Estoweenie, most likely to cause lasting harm to a woman who needs or chooses an abortion is the thing that caused that need in the first place, aka a cowardly absent father, a rapist, the state of poverty that will force by fear that decision rather than bring a child into the world to suffer, and so on. But I know that doesn’t really make your argument work so I get that you don’t understand it….

                  Here’s what I don’t understand…the Earths population is greater than it has ever been and it is more than apparent that we are not managing that state of affairs well yet you continue to wield abortion like a sword…why not start working on creating the kind of conditions that actually benefit the populace and empower people to make better choices? How about treating the rapist as the criminal rather than the woman that says “no” right up front. Affordable education for citizens of this Country rather than inviting the monied over to indulge while denying those that live here (in everything actually, not just education….). I have never seen so many homeless on the street sufferring lack of basics like a roof and food nevermind healthcare and decent jobs….the fact that people who do the actual work of this Country are getting less and less for doing more and more is one of the greatest failings of this Country ever…especially given the swollen profits being channelled by hook and by crook into the hands of the few. And Healthcare????? That’s the new Cotton fields baby….Blech. Just Blech. You Grendel.

                  1. Hey Wootsy….how is the bird? 🖕🏾

                    “woman who needs or chooses an abortion is the thing that caused that need in the first place,….”

                    News flash: poverty or rape do not cause abortions. Poverty and absent fathers have been with us for millennia. Historically women and men did not resort to throwing their children over a cliff or into rivers just because they were poor. Rape is a cannard in the abortionists armamentarium as they are no more concerned for women as Virginia Lt Gov Justin Fairfax is…nor Bill “the Rapist” Clinton for that matter.

                    Here is the thing: life is sacred. When you study genetics, biochemistry, physiology,…. oh, who are we kidding. Doubtful youll pick up resources that explain the basic medical sciences.

                    The classic text in Embryology:

                    Langman’s Medical Embryology

                    Read it and learn what has been said for decades: Life begins at conception. Sonograms reveal a heart beat weeks after conception.


                    pretty pictures

                    1. “Historically women and men did not resort to throwing their children over a cliff or into rivers just because they were poor.”
                      Are you kidding???? LOL!!!!!! You ignorant shmuck. babies most certainly were thrown over cliffs, down wells and a whole lot of other nasties that come along w/poverty. Abortion is not pretty but it is certainly prettier than trafficking, and the above mentioned violences thast you seem to be so unaware of. I am not surprised. We live in the kind of conditions that are created by people whose awareness and understanding is so brilliantly narrow that they act surprised to learn of these things. And since they are so unaware (purposely or not) how can they effect a positive change?

                    2. “Also, I am in the medical field”

                      If you claim any more expertise in the medical field than the janitor state it or skip trying to convince us of your expertise. We have enoughpresumed lawyers on the blog that don’t know their so called field of expertise.


                    Blame this on the Progressives. Economic freedom translates into better economies and better standards of living. Capitalist US has done more to raise the standard of living for people all over the world than any of the socialist and fascist nations ever did.

                    1. It’s not the progressives….this is a current actual state of affairs….progressives have not created this. And Capitalism is a shill word for the actual current fascist state. There is no Capitalism here as Cappitalism demands sensitivity to the market forces and no false controlling of either side of the equation. The only people, ONLY people whoi have made gains over the past 20 years are those Corporatists who have been given ‘incentives and those Corporate players that play numbers on paper games at the expense of those they are laying off. Grendel.

                    2. “It’s not the progressives….this is a current actual state of affairs….progressives have not created this”

                      Woo, learn your history. Capitalism has enriched lives all over the world. Socialism has enslaved them. When one talks about the Left whether it be Progressivism, socialism or fascism they all move in the same direction towards more government and less individual freedom. The classical liberal (not a Liberal) moves in the opposite direction of less government, more individualism and a better standard of living.

                      The word corporatism has to be carefully understood because when the state happens to be the large interest in the corporations you are dealing with fascism or a movement to the left which is where the Italian fascists came from as did the Nazi facsists. Don’t confuse simple corporations with corporatism though today some large corporations create a danger because of the broad control they may have. However, a lot of the problems with them might be heightened because the political structure and government is becoming too close to them and too involved.

                      Some of what you write is pretty unintelligeable.

                    3. A high percentage of the homeless seem to be “unemployable” for a variety of reasons.
                      There may be programs in some cities trying to get them into the workforce; I’d be interested in the results of those efforts.

                    4. Tom, there are a lot of homeless people that are employed. Trump’s reduction in regulation has led to an improved economy. All one has to do is go to the .gov sites and see how the number of food stamp recipients is falling.

                    5. Tom, there are a lot of homeless people that are employed.

                      No, there are not. The Census Bureau reports about 550,000 vagrants in the United States. Antique studies undertaken a generation ago reported by NIH put the share who are employed at 5-10% at any one time. A more recent study done by an advocacy group in Baltimore put the share at 17%. It’s a reasonable wager that very few of these people are coded as ‘chronically homeless’ by the Census Bureau.

                2. probably they have a lot more latent mental illness in the first place which is why they get knocked up in a bad way

                  suggest you not make a correlation / causation error

              2. Get back to me when you’ve learned the difference between medical care and long-term care, and how they are financed.

              3. ” regarding preventive medicine for people lacking the means to afford health insurance? Early detection of cancer, for instance, is a proven life saver”

                Peter, learn your terms. Preventitive medicine involves things like vaccination not early detection of cancer. Vaccination is the only preventive medicine that I can think of off hand that meets a satisfactory cost benefit relationship.

                An interesting study done a number of years back compared the number of mamograms and Pap smears done on women from the US and Canada. In Canada everyone is insured but when compared to the insured woman in the US far more of these procedures were done in the US. You are now going to say BUT what about the uninsured (in capital letters)? When comparing the uninsured in the US to the insured in Canada the numbers were about equal.

                The costs for early diagnosis are much higher than you might believe. When it comes to colonoscopies the insured under national health insurance don’t get, per capita, as many colonoscopies as Americans do. That is one of the reasons their survival for colon cancer is much worse. The other reason is that we offer over all better care.

                1. Alan, I have no way of knowing what you read or saw regarding colonoscopies and Canada.

                  But if you’re arguing that early diagnosis should be reserved for executives with Cadillac health plans, I couldn’t disagree more.

                  And the fact that you aren’t entirely clear on that is significant in itself. You dismiss Canada’s system, yet I’m not hearing any specifics for an acceptable healthcare system.

                  Preventive medicine includes regular check-ups. That’s what leads to early detections of cancer.

                  Yet those with no insurance lack the means to even consult a doctor. So cancers go undetected for deadly periods of times. That’s a life issue.

                  So if you call yourself “Pro-Life” you should want healthcare for everyone (and not executives only). But you can’t call yourself “Pro-Life” on abortion then balk about the costs of preventive medicine.


                    I can’t? You gonna sue me if I do, Peter?

                    Whether ‘preventive care’ is or is not worth the candle is an empirical question, and the answer to it requires a granular knowledge of the actuarially determined benefit of each procedure.

                    The question of whether or not you leave an infant to die or suck it’s brains out or soak it in caustic brine has a lot fewer moving parts. (The answer is always ‘no’).

                  2. “Alan, I have no way of knowing what you read or saw regarding colonoscopies and Canada.”

                    I actually look at the studies that have been done and don’t rely on an ideology.

                    ” if you’re arguing that early diagnosis”

                    That you don’t know what I am arguing for is obvious. We have limited resources so I try to put them to their best use while recognizing the best way to progress is to substantially rely on people that work within the profit system.

                    I do not dismiss any system including the healthcare system in Canada. That is you making up stories.

                    “Preventive medicine includes regular check-ups. That’s what leads to early detections of cancer.”

                    A regular check-up doesn’t doesn’t lead to early detection of cancer of the colon. A colonoscopy does. Why do the socialized systems of the world do less colonoscopies than the US?

                    “Yet those with no insurance lack the means to even consult a doctor. ”

                    Insurance is not = to medical care. Insurance in many countries simply permits one to wait in line. There are many ways to get care without insurance though I like the insurance model.

                    I don’t remember calling myself “So if you call yourself “Pro-Life” “. That is another one of your stories. Not only can’t you stay on topic but you have difficulty understanding what people say. We do not live in a bi-polar yes or no world. You do and the yes or no is dictated by your ideology rather than any active thinking. Estovir is right . All your thought goes directly to the amygdala and comes right back out.

                    When it comes to abortion you are just like some of the citizens of Nazi Germany that didn’t bother to think rather they acted in concert to the steps of their leaders.

                    “preventive medicine.” Everything has a cost and when you spend money on one item it is taken away from another so one has to be careful in permitting the amygdala to make decisions that have to be made based on knowledge and assessment of various things. I don’t think you have that capability. You will provide a colonoscopy ( a good thing) but deny providing support to the police so they can prevent the deaths of many minority children.

              4. Why is that our responsibility? If you care so much then fork over your own money.

                Have the courage of your convictions. Lead by example.

          3. It’s impossible to deal with healthcare in an appropriate fashion when Democrats are involved. The easiest way to handle it is through the marketplace and subsidies to those in need a long with some changes in the understanding of certain laws. Democrats like complete control over life and death and want to decide who gets what and where. They also have a history of using eugenics in a very bad fashion along with a history of hate, racism etc. For Democrats what is good for the elites is not good for the common person. The first bill that should be passed should place all federal employees under Obamacare including our legislators and their staffs. If that happened the Democrats would suddenly find an urgency to actually work for a solution that doesn’t leave the elites out of any of the problems faced in healthcare.

            1. Above: In which Sluggo facetiously argues that it is supposedly impossible to raise the income cap on payroll FICA contributions to the trust funds for Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment Compensation and the rest.

              Worse yet, Sluggo says that it’s supposedly impossible because Democrats would be involved in raising the income cap on payroll FICA contributions to the trust funds for Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment Compensation and the rest.

              Sluggo further argues that you can’t solve the problem just because the marketplace can’t solve the problem, either, unless the marketplace subsidizes those in need. Huh? Whaaaa? I can explain. Sluggo says “Subsidize the marketplace.” But who are those in need of subsidies? Sluggo says, “The marketplace IS in need of subsidies.”

              But why not just privatize The United States Treasury? Sluggo says, “Don’t tempt me. I’m thinking about it. I’m thinking about it.”


                That is not the argument. You need to think a bit more before responding.

                “Subsidize the marketplace.”

                When Diane can’t respond to an arguement or when that argument is above her head she changes everything and starts misquoting others. That is what liars do. Stalinists do it as well. One subsidizes people not the marketplace for as Hayek would say ‘one wants to effect the marketplace as little as possible’. This is way beyond Diane’s head. I suggest she read Hayek so she gets a better understanding.

                “The marketplace IS in need of subsidies.”

                Again Diane creates a phony quote that further demonstrates how ignorant she truly is on this subject. The ignorance though seemingly impossible to be so ignorant continues to degenerate further in the rest of her comments.

                Diane, check with your son. He might have a better understanding of what is being said. He has helped you before.

        2. Let the liberals and the rest of them terminate their unborn next generation. It will mean less demographic power to keep on bullying the hell out of the rest of us 2 decades hence. I am seeing the logic of Margaret Sanger more and more these days.

          I know that’s not very Christian of me but ever since the Pope started criticizing enforcement of legitimate national migration citizenship and residency laws by Europe and America, I have decided that I will let God judge me and not his purported appointed advocates on Earth.

          So let the Democrats abort themselves into oblivion.

          I also propose that we offer recent Mexican caravan amnesty applicants, immediate admission and an amnesty applicant preferential position, conditional in part upon sterilization at the gate. Perhaps Planned Parenthood can get the federal money to do it?. How’s that for a bipartisan compromise idea? Will the Democrats here join with me on this?

      2. Again Peter places quotes around what he wishes others said instead of what they actually said. Thus a good reason for calling him a liar. He changes the dynamics from any infant to only those with abnormalities. That is not unusual for the Progressive whose eugenic programs wanted to kill abnormal babies all the time especially if they were black and poor. The Progressives murdered these infants for the ‘good of the black population’. Thus Peter continues in the tradition. He doesn’t list what is abnormal rather leaves that up to the decisions of others much like the Nazi’s did in true fascist tradition. Though I must say the Democrats created a rule or who would be called black; the one drop rule that at the Nuremberg discussions on this topic were considered overly harsh by many true Nazis.

        Peter prefers the loose wording of abnormalities, physical or psychiatric much like the Stalinists that used the same type of rationale to lock people up based on psychiatric disease. Peter sounds more and more like a true fascist and may even adopt some of the Progressive eugenicists desires for involuntary euthanasia or sterilization as performed by the NAZI’s.

      3. Here is your film, Peter. Make sure to buy tickets for your wife and children and pickup a few anti-emetics at CVS. Youre going to need them

        “Gosnell: When Art Collides with Reality and Exposes the Truth”

        A new law in New York legalizes the actions for which abortionist Kermit Gosnell was sent to prison for life.

        Rarely has a new movie become available at a time when the news made its subject matter timelier and more appropriate. Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer is the true story of a doctor who went to prison for life in 2013 for stabbing several infants he had delivered alive inside his hellhole of an abortion clinic in Philadelphia. After being almost completely ignored by critics during its release last year, last week the movie went on sale in Walmart and on Amazon, where it is the No. 1 best-selling dramatic DVD. At the same time, infanticide became a key issue in major stories in Virginia and New York.”

        Movie info here: GosnellMovie.Com

        1. More Culture Wars, Estovir. Just outrage for the sake of outrage. A constant effort to keep dredging up issues liberals are supposed to be ashamed of. Like the accumulation of shame is so overwhelming that no one in America should dare to even call themselves a ‘liberal’. Like we’re all supposed to shut up and keep our heads down. Because we’ve been accused of being Nazis! That’s how dumb it gets.

          1. When Estovir posted quotations from Saul Alinski’s “Rules For Radicals”, Estovir was clearly signaling his intent to deploy those rules against the enemies of Trump. Estovir is all about “payback.” And so is Trump. Trump remains the foremost vendettist in America. Trump has cast America down into a pit of vendettist culture. So far the death toll is not too great. But our once great nation is teetering on the brink between figurative vendetta versus excessively literal vendetta. When Trump gives word, “Come and get me Coppers. Look Ma! I finally made it to the top of the world,” the title of that Cagney movie “White Heat” will take on a whole new excessively literal meaning. And we will NOT be made great again.

          2. Peter, you are projecting. It is those on the left that are telling everyone else to shut up. It isn’t laws coming from the right that suddenly permit infanticide. It wasn’t from the right that the leaders of a party engaged in blackface, wearing KKK hoods and raping women. You are part of all of that because you try to hide it though you do a bad job.

            1. Kurtz, I’m not positive what you’re asking here. Are you saying, “Whites are mostly anti-abortion”..?? They aren’t. In fact, college educated White women are more likely to be pro-choice.

              But abortions rates are lowest for Whites because of economic reasons. Happily married couples, with sufficient income, might truly ‘want’ children. Also, for economic reasons, White women are more likely to have access to effective birth control.

              1. ah college educated white women. I realize they are interested in being pro choice for selfish reasons and do not care about racial outcomes.

                but the key factor the graph illustrates, is that whites have fewer abortions person for person compared to others. That is good news for white folks. Because a group has power in some proportion according to its numbers. Thus the Chi-com government has mothballed its one child policy in the PRC.

                In other words the next generation is an important resource. And the pro choice reality encompassed in that graph, favors the white population as a whole. This may be shocking to conservatives and people who can’t think about group competition on the whole but you probably can wrap your head around it since leftists are usually better at it.

                Some white racist may soon nominate BIll Gates to get an award. Look at this worthy enterprise:


                Now Peter you understand why I am so sure that Roe v Wade will not get overturned. I think I am not the only person smart enough to get the picture. [grins]

              2. you seem to misjudge my interest, in opinion, rather than effect.

                opinion on abortion is not that consequential. it is not a democratically controlled law. it is a judicial fiat from the SCOTUS.

                and the net effect on abortion legalization has been to stabilize the rate of growth in the nonwhite population. the effect on abortion among white people has not been that consequential. white people are and have been for decades more inclined to use birth control than nonwhites as you already observed. so the net population consequence of legalized abortion among relative groups, has been to tamp down the rate of growth in the nonwhite population rather than whites.

                this is also the probably unintended outcome of “equal rights for women” in the third world too== stabilization of population growth. of course the cause may just be industrialization and that usually accompanies women’s rights, not sure about that, but it’s a real thing that usually happens contemporaneously

                while the propaganda of feminists is annoying, repugnant, and dismal, there are these silver linings.


  6. I don’t see what the big deal is here. Trump and Rosenstein were not equals – the latter worked for the former. Trump had every right in the world to fire Comey fact is, Comey also was not Trump’s equal). Trump, as the boss of both Comey and Rosenstein was well within his bounds to fire the one, and order the other to write up the necessary paperwork. If Rosenstein felt that badly about it, he could have walked.

  7. Glaringly absent from this article is Rosenstein’s unequivocal public statement that he wrote the memo, he meant it, and he stood by it.

      Good point, Lin. I remember at the time, right after Comey was fired, “sources said” that Rosenstein was upset that his memo was used as justification for Comey’s dismissal.
      McCabe’s version confirms that. But what did Rosenstein think he was writing, a glowing job performance review?
      He testified that he wrote the scathing memo after he already knew that Trump was going to fire Comey, so it should not have been a suprise to him that Trump cited Rosenstein’s criticisms of Comey.
      Trump, of course, foolishly tied the firing to the “Trump-Russia thing” with Lester Holt and the Russian diplomats.
      Had he not done that, I think firing Comey, by itself, would not have resulted in the appointment of a Special Counsel.


        Based on the text evidence made public, Trump was never going to fire his way out of an FBI investigation. For all we know, a Mueller-like investigation may have been exactly what Trump needed to expose the corruption within these agencies. I don’t buy Rosenstein’s whining given the DOJ’s reluctance to investigate every lead that has been uncovered.

        1. Olly,…
          I agree that Trump could not stop the FBI investigation, even if he axed the top 3-4 senior FBI officials along with Comey.
          The comments that Trump made right after firing Comey, to Lester Holt and especially to the Russian diplomats, seem to suggest that Trump actually thought he was stopping or derailing the investigation.
          Just making those comments was really “asking for it”, and if he actually believed he put the “Trump-Russia thing” behind him, he was not being at all realistic.
          I wonder if we’ll learn someday if Trump’s advisors ever cautioned him about linking Comey”s firing to his anger over the Russia investigation.
          Maybe they thought it was so obvious not to do that, it never occurred to them to warn Trump not to do that.
          I think Trump and his associates would have probably fared better with FBI investigation continuing under Comey, although with people lije Strzok involved and Sessions sidelined, that’s far from certain.
          There was no “cover” of an accommodating DOJ like there was when Holder and Lynch could “influence” an investigation, and Strzok’s hostility toward Trump might have dominated the outcome.
          I’m not sure how firmly in control Comey actually was as FBI Director. If he was in control and the one who finalized the investigations, he might have just held a press conference and announced that Flynn, Papadoupolous, Manafort, Gates, Cohen, etc. were “extremely careless”😒, and let it go at that.
          In any case, I don’t think keeping the investigation under the control of the FBI rather than the Mueller Special Counsel investigation could have turned out any worse for Trump and co.
          Mueller’s professional and personal ties with Comey, and his choices in stacking his team with hyperaggresive, partisan Democrats, indicated from the beginning that the SC team was out for blood, and would push the envelop of aggresive tactics to get it.

  8. What do liars do? Lie. The whole bunch have been selectively lying since the start. The FISA papers should be released because many of the signers of the FISA documents also lied to the FISA Court. Then they should be prosecuted for lying to the court which has impacted many lives in many different ways.

  9. As the Russian “collusion” fades the Socialists print more lies. The gullible who saw Russians in their voting booth slowly fade away now buy into Free Medicare, Free education, no more aircraft, turn your Ford into a planter, speeding trains to everywhere, predict the end of times in 12 years and by all means stop those farting cows. They’ll give you all of this whether you work or choose not to work. A Utopia run by the likes of AOC, Cowboy Hat Lady, Waters, Little Nancy and Shifty Adam. Come one, come all to DemoSocialand.

  10. It is hard to sort out all the itShay from the ouYay in this Comey, Trump, Mueller, etc array of aHolejays. Do not spend money on any books written by any of these dorks.
    My clairvoyence tells me that Trump will resign before the next election and it may be soon. His doctor report yesterday had some ommissions. His wife wants them to spend the rest of their time in life in Mar A Lago and not some house named after Whites.
    My prediction is that Trump will resign in three weeks and one day.

      1. now that was one abortion I delighted in witnessing. Hillary’s second run for Presidency was a slow motion partial birth abortion.
        As to the harm done to womyn post abortion, Hillary is an excellent walking statistic.

        Then there is this

        “We observed a 2.1% abortion-related complication rate after nearly 55,000 abortions diagnosed or treated at all sources of care.”

        “Significant Adverse Events and Outcomes After Medical Abortion”
        Cleland, Kelly MPA, MPH; Creinin, Mitchell D. MD; Nucatola, Deborah MD; Nshom, Montsine MPH; Trussell, James PhD
        Obstetrics & Gynecology: January 2013 – Volume 121 – Issue 1 – p 166–171; doi: http://10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182755763

        Doing the math:

        (55,000) * (2.1%) =
        (55,000) * (0.021) = 1,155

        Staggering considering these are stats taken from California’s Planned Parenthood organization which of course are low-balled.
        Data collection at PP is a joke particularly when data are adversarial to their mission since they use no standardized methods across their national abortion centers to collect data. None

  11. “The final report now expected in March could delve more deeply in the such alleged pressure. ”

    Why does anyone care? Who believes anything coming from the US Government is true, honest, shows integrity, offers just and balanced insight and is non-partisan? The Dims were apoplectic with rage in relentless attacks of Ken Starr regarding his investigations of a moral cripple, nefarious, Greek tragic narcissist, like ripe fruit hanging for all to see that he was /is a self-absorbed, megalomaniac, vicious evil politican, and yet the Dims refused to believe anything reported all this back in the 1990s. In spite of this immense moral baggage, Hillary ascended from all of this black tar pit twice to run for the highest elected office in this country.

    Today’s Fed govt culture is so toxic and dysfunctional that nothing short of purging all of the dirty rats from their marble and brass mancaves will guarantee it will all continue forever more

    “I love the smell of napalm in the morning.”
    — Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore, Apocalypse Now

    1. Estovir, Republicans have played a large role in government since the so-called ‘Gingrich Revolution” in 1994. So if you think the Federal government is “toxic and dysfunctional”, Republicans are largely to blame.

      But you’re coming from a 1980 perspective when Republicans had been ‘out’ of power for 20 years. Which confirms what I’ve always suspected: ‘For too many Republicans it’s always 1980’. It’s always Reagan running against Jimmy Carter and ‘big government’. The issues never change.

      1. Without personal love for Republicans the Gingrich-Clinton duo led to a good economy, welfare reform and a government that seemed to function. Clinton moved away from his previously very left position. Government remained toxic, just not as toxic as it would have been without Gringrich’s ideas.

        Peter you have little perspective, little understanding of the world we live in and your knowledge of economics is nil. You should keep your comments on a simpler level and try being more specific with facts that you have cross checked. By using specifics you might even recognize the faults in your statements and logic.

        1. Alan, for the past 25 years, Republicans have had as much control of Congress as Democrats and possibly even more.

          Yet Estovir pretends Democrats have controlled Congress all these years.

          Or maybe Estovir is putting equal blame on Republicans. Though I suspect he isn’t.

          1. I guess Peter’s limited knowledge of the subject has him trapped so he reverts to what aboutisms without knowing his facts. I won’t bother to correct them now, rather leave it to him to look up the facts from a primary source where he has to do his own calculations.

            I will say, I am no lover of the Republican Party even though there is a stark difference in the history of the two parties where one believes more in fascim and socialism (Democrats) and the other responds with talks of capitalism and the free markets (Republicans) though frequently loses its bearings. I simply don’t want to be killed or enslaved by the Nazi’s or the Progressives.

            Some may think my characterizations of the left are a bit on the edge, but if one knows knows their history they realize these characteristics are real and very valid. El numero Uno Progressive was Woodrow Wilson who demeaned the founders of our country, loved fascist ideas and jailed more Americans in the Palmer Raids than did Mussolini throughout the war. You lost your freedom of speech under Wilson and couldn’t speak against the government. Though he didn’t start the second wave of the KKK he was instrumental in that wave’s existence. He segregated the government and was total racist. Today, he is a Democratic icon.


              Allan, I believe that’s less on the edge than you think. If you consider where Roe v Wade has led us to, if you consider how massive the federal government has become, and of course our national debt, you will notice progressives never change course. They always seem to want more; more abortions, not less; more government, not less; more spending, not less. It’s as though progressives have taken Franklin’s quote as personal challenge to be the instruments of both.


              Maybe they were inspired further by this line from Margaret Mitchell’s line in her book, Gone With the Wind:


              1. “Allan, I believe that’s less on the edge than you think.”

                Olly I don’t think I am on the edge rather I think I am right in the center of things that cannot be understood by vegetative persons existing as Progressives or Fascists if you will. The history of Facism is clear as is the history of Socialism and Progressivism. Those three may not be exactly the same but they are moving in the same direction. Like him or not FDR had admiration for the fascist Mussoline and Hitler had admiration for FDR and the Progressives.

            2. “I simply don’t want to be killed or enslaved by the Nazi’s or the Progressives.”

              Don’t worry, Allan, you are not a keeper.

              1. I hope not YNOT, for when one is kept with people of your mindset one can be enslaved or killed. Maybe you just like to keep or kill the defenseless like infants who are left on the table while others determine if they should live or die.

          2. “equal blame on Republicans”

            George Orwell, Animal Farm

      2. From a similar perspective, the Democrats are 10 years ahead of the Republicans by wanting to reduce pollution to 1990 levels. Oddly, the Democrats are uninterested in reducing budget and taxation to 1990 levels. Maybe the 1980s and 1990s are arbitrary picks?

          Thomas J…..,
          – This article is about 6 years old, but according to it, U.S. air pollution has been steadily declining since 1980.
          ( It also notes that the rate of pollution reduction had slowed in “recent years”, meaning up until the Dec. 2012 date of the article).
          I didn’t find more recent data in a quick search. But it appears that levels of U.S. air pollution were higher in both 1980 and 1990.
          If the Democrats want to get us “back to” those levels, are they advocating for more pollution?😉


      That’s easier said than done; as the first priority of the rats is to convince the electorate that the rats only exist in that other party.

      1. “that other party”

        True dat.

        But lo! Calls for Impeachment are being heard, made by Democrats in Virginia for another Democrat.


        “Democratic Del. Patrick Hope said he wants to introduce articles of impeachment against Fairfax on Monday, but Hope is not a powerful figure in the House and there’s little sign there’s a broad appetite for impeachment with lawmakers set to finish this year’s legislative session by the end of the month.


        Fairfax has denied both allegations and on Saturday asked that “no one rush to judgment.”

        “Our American values don’t just work when it’s convenient — they must be applied at the most difficult of times,” he said.”


        Mind blowing that Fairfax appeals to “our American values”.
        Like Bill Clinton, Fairfax must think Americans not only will do oral but also swallow his load of BS.

  12. Turley wrote, “The memorandum [Rosenstein’s memorandum on Comey] references communications and opinions from a broad array of current and former justice officials who viewed Comey as unprofessional and unjustified in some of this decisions as FBI Director.”

    Well, did Rosenstein specify the names of the sources for those communications and opinions? If Rosenstein chose the words “broad array of current and former justice officials,” rather than somebody else (one knows not who) choosing those words, then Rosenstein was probably NOT euphemizing Giuliani and the New York Office of the FBI. OTOH, if somebody else chose the words “broad array of current and former justice officials,” then my best guess would be that Giuliani and the NYO FBI euphemized themselves in Rosenstein’s memorandum on Comey. And that, in turn, might be the sort of thing that would lend credence to McCabe’s account of the difficult predicament in which Trump put Rosenstein.

    I’d bet that IG Horowitz knows who chose the words “broad array of current and former justice officials” as well as to whom those words refer. They say that IG Horowitz is not talking to us anymore. And neither is Huber. Pretty soon Matty Whitaker won’t be talking to us any more either. Good for him. Given that Rosenstein and Francisco et al probably removed the bandages from Whitaker’s eyes not too long after he took over from Ernie The Keebler Elf, chances are that blowing that pop stand will be the best thing that has happened to Matty-Matt-Matt in a good long while.

    1. Did you know that Matty-Matt-Matt Whitaker recently told Jerry Nadler that, “It [recusal] was his [Whitaker’s] decision to make”? I wonder to what sort of material facts Matty-Matt-Matt might have been witness. He told Nadler that he refused to discuss with Congress any of his private conversations with The POTUS, Trump. What are the chances that The POTUS, Trump, told Matty-Matt-Matt something along the lines of, “Thou shalt not recuse”? Well why didn’t Trump tell that to Ernie The Keebler Elf? Or did he?

      Maybe Trump should’ve ordered Rosenstein to recuse. Or did he? Surely Trump could’ve asserted executive privilege over Rosenstein’s prospective testimony to Mueller’s grand jury. Trump has asserted executive privilege over his own written answers to Mueller’s questions about pretty much anything and everything that happened after the polls closed on Tuesday November 8th, 2016. I wonder. What’s going on? What’s going on?

      1. Whitaker’s 5 minutes in Congress with Sheila Jackson Lee was hillarious. One should see if they can’t find it on youtube. It demonstrates the banal and incompetant mindset of the Democrats.

      2. L4D, Matthew is more of a man than you could ever hope to be.

        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        As Members of Congress, we should not be using public office for private gain.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        I happen to represent Enron here in Houston. We have many good corporate citizens here in Houston. Enron happened to have been one.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        Those who used to wear sheets are now being able to walk down the aisle and speak as a patriot because you will not speak loudly about the lack of integrity of this movement.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        All those who wore sheets a long time ago have now lifted them off and started wearing, uh, clothing, uh, with a name, say, I am part of the tea party.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        Dont let anybody tell you that those who spit on us as we were walking to vote on a health care bill for all of America or those who said Congresswoman Jackson-Lees braids were too tight in her hair had anything to do with justice and equality and empowerment of the American people. Dont let them fool you on that.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        America, I am not ignoring you.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        I am a queen, and I demand to be treated like a queen.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        I took and received campaign donations under the existing laws.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        Millions of Americans find community, comfort and support in their faith.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        People have been turned away from hospitals simply because they have no insurance. People have been put out of hospitals because they have reached the lifetime caps.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        Anything my staff does in my office is pursuant to congressional rules.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        I am about the people of the United States of America and the people of Houston, Texas.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

        It’s all right to agree or disagree on the balanced budget amendment. It’s all right to talk about how we’re going to appropriate.
        Sheila Jackson Lee quotes

      1. Excerpted from the Wikipedia article on “The Dismissal of James Comey”:

        Rosenstein’s memorandum said that the “reputation and credibility” of the FBI had been damaged under Comey’s tenure, and the memo presented critical quotes from several former attorneys general in previously published op-eds.

  13. It’s a reasonable inference that Rosenstein’s been in charge of this scam from the moment he was confirmed. No surprises here.

    If there’s a solution to the problem presented by the Department of Justice, one necessary component will be to break the department up into about 4 pieces and then break the FBI into about a half-dozen pieces (after firing everyone who was a direct report to McCabe and then firing their direct reports). You can then scatter the various agencies now in Homeland Security between three of those four pieces.

    1. Tabby, I got news: ‘Trump lacks the juice to break-up the Justice Department’. He never had that power and he never will. So your fantasy is only that. It ain’t gonna happen.

          1. “Whitaker is stepping down as soon as Barr is confirmed.”

            That doesn’t make that court of fools look any better. Face it you have to live with these lunatic representatives voted in by Democrats.

            1. It consisted of a great deal of obnoxious grandstanding, especially with them complaining about time constraints and then gumming up his answers by continually interrupting him. And, of course, complaining about time constraints and then going off on tangents about his previous employer in what was supposed to be an ‘oversight’ hearing.

              In truth, Congress is a structural disaster. The committees are way too large, committee jurisdictions are a mess, the allocation of seats puts a wretched excess of discretion in the hands of floor leaders, the allocation rules in use in the Democratic caucuses allow for the development of fiefdoms, and the Senate rules allow witless practices like the filibuster.

              1. “In truth, Congress is a structural disaster. ”

                That is why we need term limits. I don’t think Congress can get out of this mess by themselves and their main interest is staying in office.

                1. Rotation-in-office is a good thing. The rotators have to amend the committee structure and the parliamentary rules, though. You get rotators who behave as incompetently as the current crew, their utility is circumscribed.

Leave a Reply to Estovir Cancel reply