subscribe: Posts | Comments      Facebook      Email Steve

Those Republican smears of the FBI? Don’t make me laugh

2 comments

 

In the entire 128-year existence of the Wall Street Journal, they have never criticized the Federal Bureau of Investigation for anything. Indeed, Rupert Murdoch’s flagship rightwing newspaper has been a strong proponent of the law-and-order state, and of all law enforcement agencies in America—in the world—the Wall Street Journal admired none so much as J. Edgar Hoover’s F.B.I.

Until, that is, the probable crimes and misdemeanors committed by Donald Trump and his entourage began falling under the F.B.I.’s investigative scrutiny. Now that Special Counsel Mueller is moving ever closer to the Oval Office, the Wall Street Journal has decided that the F.B.I. isn’t such a good law enforcement agency after all.

What Murdoch’s minions find to complain about in the F.B.I. is laughable. Consider their lead editorial from Monday, “Christopher Wray’s FBI Stonewall.” Wray is, of course, the agency’s new director, whom Trump called a “man of impeccable credentials” when he appointed him last June.

Wray “will serve his country as a fierce guardian of the law and [a] model of integrity”, Trump said in his announcement speech. But now that Wray is taking his job seriously, refusing to corral Mueller or impede the Congressionally-mandated investigation in any way, Wrap is suddenly  Public Enemy No. 1.

How’s that? The Wall Street Journal has come up with a number of reasons to hate on him, all of them ridiculous. For starters, the Journal accuses, Wrap is refusing to reveal “the role that the Steele dossier played in the FBI”s decision to investigate the Trump presidential campaign.”

Really? That one’s easy to demolish. The F.B.I. hasn’t been shy whatsoever about revealing “the role that the Steele dossier played.” It’s all been open and aboveboard: The F.B.I. has been investigating the dossier’s allegations for a year, as well they ought to. The dossier is evidence in a criminal investigation. Who thinks that evidence of a potentially serious crime should be ignored, or shared in its entirety with a newspaper, before the investigation has even been completed? The Wall Street Journal, that’s who. So this charge is completely bogus. What ticks the Wall Street Journal off isn’t that they don’t know what role the dossier is playing in the investigation–we all know precisely. It’s that they’re scared to death that its allegations—including the ones concerning sexual perversions—are true.

But wait, there’s more! What else is the Journal complaining about? Why, they want “answers about reports” that Mueller demoted F.B.I. investigator, Peter Strzok, for exchanging “anti-Trump texts with his mistress.”

That is just grasping at straws. They have all the answers they need. The F.B.I. demoted Strzok! He did something inappropriate by disparaging Trump; he should no longer be connected to the case. And guess what? He’s not. The F.B.I. did exactly the right thing. But think about this: How many Trump administration officials have made anti-Hillary or anti-Obama remarks? If every one of them were demoted, Jeff Sessions, Michael Pence and Donald Trump himself would be out of their jobs, and Michael Flynn would never have had one. Trash-talkers only suffer consequences, it seems, when they’re Democrats.

Everybody knows that the White House and their apologists, including the Wall Street Journal, want the Mueller (and House and Senate) investigations derailed because they pose a clear danger to Donald J. Trump. Everybody knows, or should know, that these Republican demands for an investigation of the Justice Department are ludicrous. They’re meant for one reason, and one reason only: to throw doubt upon the Trump investigations. They’re smokescreens, red herrings. It’s easy to see right through them. It is the height of lunacy to question Wray’s integrity. Was Donald Trump incorrect only six months ago when he showered praise on Wray? If he was, then what else is Donald Trump incorrect about? In what other areas has his judgment proved faulty? Those are questions the Wall Street Journal should be asking.

Late news: Doug Jones has pulled off a Hanukah miracle win in Alabama. THANK GOD ALMIGHTY. On to the next election!

  1. “whom Trump called a “man of impeccable credentials” when he appointed him last June.”
    All his appointees are; until they do something Trump doesn’t like. Or get caught at something.

  2. Bob: True words! He’ll throw anyone under the bus except for his kids. And maybe even them! Happy holidays.

Leave a Reply

*

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives