An old adage holds that while history doesn’t repeat itself, it rhymes. Not so in the case of the latest manufactured anti-Trump “scandal.” The anonymous whistleblower’s allegations of corruption involving President Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, appear to be a note-for-note reproduction of the discredited “dossier” of 2016.
The template for a coordinated media and intelligence community hit against the president was first perfected in the dossier. British ex-spook Christopher Steele compiled the bogus allegations at the behest of the Democrats. Yet it formed the basis for secret wiretaps, human informants and a sprawling, multi-year special-counsel probe of the president.
Liberals presented Steele as an operative with impeccable credentials and a deep network of Russian sources. His reports, we were told, set a gold standard for intelligence, so much so that the FBI regularly relied on his counsel. His claims found immediate purchase in the highest circles of American journalism — until they were utterly debunked along with the whole “collusion” theory.
The New York Times, whose reporters were deeply involved in propagating the Russian-collusion hoax, reported on Thursday that the new anti-Trump whistleblower is similarly a career CIA operative “steeped in the details of American foreign policy” and “demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of Ukrainian politics.” The insinuation is that, given this résumé, he must be beyond reproach or partisan animus.
In his dossier, Steele levied shocking accusations of corruption and impropriety by Trump and his team, going so far as to claim that Trump was bought and paid for by Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, who allegedly had compromising information on Trump that all but forced Trump to do the Kremlin’s bidding.
Steele hadn’t gathered or witnessed any of this evidence first-hand. Rather, he relied on anonymous sources, many of them third-hand. “Source B asserted that the Trump operation was both supported and directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin,” Steele wrote. “Source A confided that the Kremlin had been feeding Trump and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents,” including Hillary Clinton, Steele claimed.
Earlier this year, former Goldman Sachs adviser and columnist Ron Hart wrote in the Orange County Register about Democrats’ strategy “to fan the fires of racial division in order to win back the White House in 2020.”
While true, much more than 2020 is at stake. Democrats want an us-and-them country, one in which they alone have the raw political power. It’s a long-term strategy that has most prominently appeared in their gun-control efforts. Their objective isn’t to reduce firearm violence but to separate Americans into two groups: backward hicks bitterly clinging to their guns and urbane sophisticates who have evolved beyond that primitive state and therefore have standing to rule the hicks.
By segregating America into two parts — vile, retrograde deplorables who can’t be trusted, and educated, forward-looking progressives — Democrats are setting up a society in which they wouldn’t govern under constitutional limits but rule by political mandate.
Read the whole thing.
BUT THE NARRATIVE! Not All Democrats Support Impeaching Trump.
Certainly not after today’s mess.
BRAVE SIR ROBIN BRAVELY TURNED AND FLED: Pelosi Declines to Say if Trump Violated an Existing Law with Ukraine Phone Call.
JULIE KELLY: ‘Ukraine-Gate’ Is About the Russian Hack That Wasn’t. “President Trump asked the Ukrainian president about CrowdStrike, the politically connected cybersecurity firm that investigated the alleged Russian ‘hack’ of the Democratic National Committee. Here’s why that matters — and why it should not be ignored.”
Read the whole thing.