Democrat Hypocrisy Part 2

      Probably the most obvious and important example of recent Democratl hypocrisy is the ridiculous hoopla over Russian's interfering with our 2016 presidential election.  As we are well aware, Democrats still can't believe that HRC lost, despite the fact that she was a horrible candidate, who ran a pathetically out of date and out of touch campaign, with no real plan for the future except vote for me, I'm a woman.  Hacking by ? turned up some very revealing information about her and those involved with her campaign.  During the primaries, Democrat Party operatives, who were supposed to stay neutral, cheated by aiding her campaign against Bernie Sanders.  This knowledge certainly alienated some Sanders supporters who may not have voted for HRC or Trump, but decided to stay home election day or vote for a third party candidate.  Revealing emails from HRC's campaign manager, John Podesta, also gave voters insight into the candidates feelings about the "little" people whose vote she sought.  Rather than fight this damaging information, the Clinton campaign decided to attack the messenger, since they could not really attack the message.  Though the messenger in most cases was Wikileaks, HRC tried to blame the Russians.  If Donna Brazille, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, John Podesta, and other Clinton operatives had not done or said what they did, there would have been nothing for Wikileaks or anyone else to report.  Voters don't like liars, cheats, and criminal activity.  HRC could never get out from under the Benghazi coverup, the corrupt Clinton Foundation, and her stupid comments about "deplorables" and coal miners.  Her support for President Obama's policies including Obamacare, high taxes, and anti business and Wall Street speeches didn't help her either.

      After Trump won the election, in an effort to delegitimize the Trump Presidency, the Democrats continued on this shameful lie of Russian interference, as if it made any difference at all.  All the intelligence agencies were quick to reply that the voting process was not interfered with and Democrat attempts at recounts were totally unsuccessful. George Soros trying to fix the vote has more credibility. They then attacked the electoral process, whereas electors, not voters decide the presidential election.  This has been part of our Constitution for 200 years and that many presidents have won with less than 50% of the vote.  The electors were put into the Constitution for a purpose, to give importance to all states and voters, otherwise campaigning in a half a dozen or so large states would be all that was necessary.  Voters only get one shot and if there is a tie or no one gets a majority of voters, the House of Representatives decides happened in the election of 1800 when after 3 dozen ballots on the HOR, Jefferson was selected over Aaron Burr.
      Despite controlling both houses of Congress and the Presidency, the Republicans have stupidly let the Democrats dictate investigations into Russian involvement with Trump and his team.  The Republicans should have said okay, we will also investigate the Clinton campaign including the selling of US Uranium to the Russians for a $145 million contribution through a shell Canadian charity to the Clinton Foundation and hacking of the illegal server.  Should they also investigate Obama was his comments on an open mike to Russian President Medvedev about having more leeway after the election.  The Democrats have called for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself, though I didn't hear any of this for Loretta Lynch, when her clandestine meeting with Bill Clinton on an Arizona airport tarmac.  Lynch, a Clinton appointee as a government prosecutor, appeared as a minimum to have a conflict of interest.  No investigation was requested, despite the serious criminal and traitorous activity that  was reported by the FBI investigation. No one who heard Director James Comey's presentation, could deny that the fix was in.  There was no call to investigate the Russians for hacking HRC's illegal State Department server.  In fact the Democrats tried to prevent any investigation.
      The Democrats are even calling for a special prosecutor to be appointed to investigate President Trump and a number of his appointees. It must be noted that despite very serious scandals during the Obama regime, no special prosecutors were allowed.  The Justice Department, headed by the corrupt Attorney General Eric Holder, was even permitted to investigate itself over the "fast and furious" debacle. Naturally nothing ever came of that investigation even though several murders in the United States, including one of a border agent, were traced to weapons involved in the scandal.  none were appointed for Benghazi, IRS, the VA, the $6 billion missing from the Clinton  State Department, and crony capitalism for grants to failing companies of Obama campaign financial supporters and bundlers.  We can even go back to the second Clinton regime, where Janet Reno protected scumbag Terry McAuliff from a senate investigation into organizing a union sponsored money laundering scheme to fund the Clinton reelection.  Union officials went to jail, but McAuliff wasn't even questioned.  I doubt if a real investigation of McAuliffe was carried out by Reno's DOJ.
      Now it seems like the Democrats have opened up a can of worms that may come to involve  Obama and ranking members of his regime in serious criminal activity.  President Trump was seriously criticized for claiming that the Obama regime tapped his phones, but although his phones were not necessarily tapped, it is obvious that surveillance was performed of the incoming President and his appointees starting a year before the actual election.  First we learned that Mike Flynn, who was selected to head the NSA, had conversations with the Russians.  He was fired by Trump, not for the communications, but lying to VP Pence about it. How did that information make its way to the media is something the Democrats are trying to ignore. As we have learned in the last few days, it seems that unmasking of US citizens who just happen to be President Trump and his appointees and associates, has been on going by the Obama regime. I won't speculate on the legality of this, though the leaking of General Flynn's name to the media is a felony.  Although she has previously denied any knowledge of unmasking, lying political hack, Susan Rice has been definitely identified as specifically requested the unmasking of Trump and his associates and keeping and possibly disseminating a spread sheet of their phone calls..  When this is analyzed with the comments that Rep. Devon Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has stated that the surveillance material that he reviewed was not about Russia and of low intelligence value, it may have been the Obama regime's method of getting around FISA regulations.  Former Obama StateDepartment official Evelyn Farkas admitted on MSNBC that intelligence needed to be gathered on the future Trump administration.  Just before leaving the White House Obama eased regulations protecting American citizens.  NSA info could be passed on to all of the other intelligence agencies.  Now we know why. The question now is whether Susan Rice will fall on her sword to protect Obama or give up him and other high ranking official within the regime.  We all know of her loyalty to Obama, who rewarded her with a promotion to the NSA after she lied about Benghazi and continued to lie about Beau Bergdahl.  Though the investigation of President Trump and his appointees' relationship to Russia will turn up nothing that will matter, we don't hear anything from the Democrats about investigating Obama's spying on the Trump campaign and transition.  The leaker or leakers could spend considerable time in prison.  One name that comes to mind is another liar and man without morals, Ben Rhodes, Rice's assistant at the NSA.

     Lastly we have learned that perpetual scum bag Terry McAuliff has raised his ugly head again and may have bought the assistant FBI director Andrew McCabe.  McCabe's wife, a Democrat, was running for the Virginia state senate in 2016 and McAuliff, a key Clinton crony, arranged for $700K to be given to her campaign. With that kind of money it would have been appropriate for  McCabe to recuse himself from any investigation involving the Trump team, especially as he has done so when investigations involved Virginia politicians.  Instead he apparently paid for a fake dossier on Trump that British agent Christopher Steele collected. The dossier was so inaccurate and untrue that when it was  leaked to the media,  only Buzzfeed.com published it.
      In my opinion, the investigation will uncover no important information about President Trump and his administration in regard to collision with Russia, though Democrats and the mainstream media will continue to try to make something out of nothing.  Instead, we will learn that Obama and his surrogates illegally spied on the Trump campaign and transition and illegally leaked their information.  Who goes to prison is still in question.
      Next blog will be my take on Democrat hypocrisy in the nomination and confirmation of Judge Gorsuch.