All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Monday, August 29, 2022

WSJ takes on the FBI

Journalists are the biggest conformists in the world. The groupthink in newsrooms is so thick that by comparison, sheep are rebels. Liberals figured out newsrooms a century ago and dominate them.

The Wall Street Journal handled this by building a brick wall between its news side and its opinion side but under Murdoch, the opinion side slid closer to Lala Land.

The raid on Mar-a-Lago changed that. The Wall Street Journal had all it can stands because it can't stands no more.

The newspaper came out swinging. In its first opportunity to react, the newspaper gave an attack worthy of the name Wall Street Journal. It published an editorial, "The FBI’s Dangerous Search at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago."

WSJ said, "Monday’s unannounced Federal Bureau of Investigation search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home isn’t a moment for anyone to cheer. The Justice Department is unleashing political furies it can’t control and may not understand, and the risks for the department and the country are as great as they are for Mr. Trump."

The FBI went to Mar-a-Lago to collect documents for the National Archives. At least, that was the cover story.

WSJ said, "Document disputes are typically settled in negotiation, and that is how Mr. Trump’s disagreement with the National Archives had been proceeding."

National security risk? As secretary of state, Hillary was a security sieve. Obama refused to prosecute, sending Jimmy the Weasel Comey out to take responsibility for Obama's call.

WSJ said, "Didn’t someone at Justice point out that a search in this case would draw comparisons to Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information before her 2016 presidential campaign? She was never prosecuted, as Mr. Trump was quick to point out."

The newspaper did not write one editorial and move on.

Kimberley A. Strassel wrote a column the next day, "The Payback for Mar-a-Lago Will Be Brutal. What went around Monday will come around hard for the Democrats when Republicans control the Justice Department and FBI."

Sure they will. Just like they repealed Obamacare.

But always hold out hope because you never get anything by throwing in the towel.

WSJ is waving its towel like a Pittsburgh Steeler fan waving a Terrible Towel. The time has come to rally behind the Fourth Amendment.

This weekend, WSJ mocked the affidavit that the FBI used to rationalize its raid on the presidency and the Constitution.

WSJ said, "A federal judge on Friday released a heavily redacted version of the FBI affidavit used to justify the search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, and we can’t help but wonder is that it? This is why agents descended on a former President’s residence like they would a mob boss?

"It’s possible the redactions in the 38-page document release contain some undisclosed bombshell. But given the contours of what the affidavit and attachments reveal, this really does seem to boil down to a fight over the handling of classified documents. The affidavit’s long introduction and other unredacted paragraphs all point to concern by the FBI and the National Archives with the documents Mr. Trump retained at Mar-a-Lago and his lack of cooperation in not returning all that the feds wanted."

The magistrate had issued a general warrant like King George III used to do. 

The Fourth Amendment bans this.

It says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Today the Wall Street Journal dragged out Hillary to make the point that the FBI is a political sewer (my words, not the newspaper's).

WSJ said, "The Comey-Clinton Document Standard and Trump. When Hillary kept classified information on her private email server, Justice and the FBI let her off."

The editorial said, "We don’t know everything about the documents Mr. Trump retained, how he handled them, what he told the FBI and other facts that are still hidden by the redactions in the affidavit. New details may emerge that differ in significant ways from Mrs. Clinton’s behavior.

"But that isn’t evident so far, and Mr. Trump’s lawyers will surely argue that under the Presidential Records Act he has some right to hold documents, even many that are classified, for some period of time or some personal purpose.

"All of this has to weigh on Merrick Garland as the Attorney General considers whether to indict Mr. Trump for his handling of classified documents. We didn’t like the Clinton Standard but we didn’t establish it. A Democratic Justice Department did, and in a case with enormous political consequences.

"If Mr. Garland can’t make a compelling case that Mr. Trump’s transgressions are greater than Mrs. Clinton’s, with enough clear and convincing evidence to warrant a criminal charge, the better judgment is not to prosecute and put the country through the trauma of a political trial that half of America will suspect is a case of unequal justice."

There comes a time in every Popeye cartoon where he eats his spinach, gets off the canvass and fights back for God, country and Olive Oyl.

WSJ ate its spinach. I doubt its editors like Donald John Trump. But this is not about Trump. This is about a free people being protected from partisan goons at the FBI.

Thank goodness the people running the Wall Street Journal finally ate their spinach.

69 comments:

  1. Donald Trump can declassify documents. He was president. Hillary Clinton was never president and cannot declassify anything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She certainly had some classification and declassification authority delegated to her under soetoro, but could not just declare anything she wanted declassified as the president can.

      Delete
    2. They may have eaten their spinach but they upchucked the backbone to speak out like this starting in 2016 when trump won. Better than nothing i guess, now that it WON"T MATTER!

      Delete
    3. Hildabeast can only recommend declassification. She has NO Authority. She can only recommend.

      Delete
    4. She recommended they take hammers to the cell phones and bleach bit to the server that were both under subpoena.

      Delete
    5. Correct. Garland will never prosecute because he has less than zero chance of success and the outrage would be so extreme that the meek GOP would have to do something to Garland, something serious.

      Hey, GOP - and we mean you Mitch - it's time to start telling the voters, at least your voters, but the leftists as well, that you recognize what is going on - and you are prepared to start putting the left through the meatgrinder - and seriously so starting in January 2023. Wray will be brought in - and he will answer questions or we will put him in the capital hill jail - without a phone and without any visitors. Maybe some J6 treatment can be arranged.

      This needs to end. Now. And the only way to end it is to really make some leftist DC elite scum hurt. Really, really bad.

      Delete
    6. Expecting "Mitch" to do anything but whine about the "quality" of Republicans is asking a "lot".

      Delete
    7. I want to see the upcoming slaughter make Custer's last stand look like a picnic!

      Delete
  2. Indeed. I used to read the WSJ edit page first thing every morning. My byline appeared there many times. But in recent years, I found I was scarcely looking at it at all. It's distaste for DJT was obvious and it insisted on pushing its tax-cuts-and-open-borders line when it was clear the American people had had enough of it and wanted something that took more note of their interests and concerns. Maybe they're waking up a bit now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sadly, WSJ's influence is not what it once was, because it hides all of its content, including opinion pieces, behind a paywall, giving most of the rest of the press permission to ignore it, meaning most of the country will never know of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Propaganda 2.0. 1930's Germany

      Delete
    2. I quit the WSJ the minute it announced a Biden election win before all votes were counted.

      Delete
    3. Murdoch son wives hurt it. But its paywall decision was well done. There is no other print media close to them in value. They still have significant influence, because people in the know, know they are still legit.

      The sons just need to tell their wives to stop worrying about the business and go back to drinking chardonnay all day - because as business mavens they suck.

      Delete
    4. I understand pubs hiding their news reporting behind a paywall, but the wisdom of hiding your opinions escapes me. You would think that they would want as many people as possible reading and perhaps being persuaded by their opinions.

      Delete
    5. Getting around (some) paywalls:

      Append 12ft.io/ in front of the URL you're trying to get to. For example:

      12ft.io/https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-dangerous-donald-trump-search-mar-a-lago-merrick-garland-justice-department-11660074118

      So if the WSJ article was behind a paywall, you could most likely read it in its entirety now.

      Delete
    6. I canceled WSJ [and Fox] after they supported the steal. I read the WSJ from childhood. I am 60. Controlled opposition. Like Jeb! in 2016. And Romney in 2012. And McCaine in 2000.

      Delete
  4. Don: I hope you are right about the WSJ, a publication that, in the past, I relied on for information and commentary. But when the opinion folks went left, I stopped reading.
    If they are back on board with the truth then America once again has a formidable allay in the hard times that are ahead of us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Randy says: I too hope this is an awakening for the WSJ. At this point, a few truthful stories on the FBI raid is just an anomaly. It’s a good start, but they have a lot of lost ground to recover. Let’s hope this is truly a new direction for them, and not just a temporary detour on their leftist journey.

      Delete
  5. Don, don't get me started. This is a really sore topic for me. I always prided myself as being outside groupthink in the newsroom. (It used to be fairly normal to be contrarian as you know.) I'll never forget my disgust at seeing certain reporters colluding to decide on what topics and what the lead should be so they would all be on the same page and not get any calls from their editors. I never participated in that. My bosses knew I wouldn't. Sometimes I was right (most times) and sometimes I was wrong in my calls, but I always stood by them and backed them up. Done with the Wall St. Journal, as I have said on this blog. I am headed in the same direction with the New York Post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. __Love the professional anecdotal input of Mr. Surber's regular posters! We don't thank you all enough, as we read the posts as a daily compliment, to make Mr. Surber's new-age news reporting [still miss black coffee and the daily, weighty printed last b&w (no fotos) WSJ each morn. at my desk...Made us newbie investment bankers univ. grads feel like the older successful guys. zb

      Delete
  6. The WSJ ate their spinach because they had to. I wouldn't count on them for much more. I hope I am wrong, but I doubt it. Donald Trump just isn't their kind of people. These conservatives would rather have the right friends, get invited to the right parties, have the right manners and lose gracefully while keeping their graft. Fight -- they definitely do not.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I keep looking for a good legal take on this Raid coming away with the thought that Biden and et al listened to left’s mob of supporters rather than the legal side of the Constitution and justice. Nothing good comes from listening to a mob and Biden is showing what lengths he is willing to go down to remove an enemy. If you don’t think that he’s affected by Hunter and Ashley Biden scandal… then you don’t know Joe.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The unplayed card in all this is the GOP who inhabit the Hill. What are they going to do in Jan 2023 if they take back control, an issue still up in the air? Here's a hint: if they keep the same leadership in both Houses, nothing will come of it all. They will simply say, " we are calling for investigations into the DOJ and FBI, and in the interests of reducing the division we are moving on". If that happens, following that pronouncement, the country will erupt in a civil war, the likes of which no one will be able to stop. The Dem's are effectively finished for this election cycle now, the fate of the GOP still remains to be decided, but it isn't looking good right now. Choose wisely, GOP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jeffery channels the fear at Troll Central. The people are angry.

      And a rope is just as good as Madame La Guillotine.

      Delete
    2. Randy says: There have been good gains of America First candidates primary-ing* deadbeat republicans and RINOS, but it has not been a clean sweep.

      My district chose to return a Republican barnacle to the House who has been in politics (state + federal) for 42 years. He is in the top tier of absentee representatives Congress. In fact, he even skipped the impeachment vote! But he was “all in” for voting to shovel billions of dollars to Ukraine.

      His primary challenger was a young America First, Trump-loving firebrand who trailed the incumbent by 10 points. Any Republican is better than a Democrat, but in this case, not much better. Hopefully we can retire him in 2024.

      *My spell-checker really, really doesn’t want me to make a gerund out of “primary.”

      Delete
    3. The red wave is only coming by those with the MAGA byline. If they don't have that surrounding them - they don't fare nearly as well. You could easily get 70 house seats if you went that way. I'll take the 40-50 that are coming, but it could be more. In 2024 it will be.

      Delete
  9. Deplorable California Refugee in IdahoAugust 29, 2022 at 3:55 PM

    The only thing weighing on Garland’s mind is how he can further the democrat’s seizure of power. And he knows most of the MSM still has his back, and that the WSJ can’t derail them all by its lonesome.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don’t remember who, but I recall someone a little over a year ago wrote “Don’t Misunderestimate Biden.” Very true words. Definitely, can’t Misunderestimate the level of corruption and Gestapo tactics the demented Biden and the fully corrupted federal intelligence agencies and other bureaucracies will unleash to retain an iron grip on power, regardless of the desires of the American People.

    They aim to “lock up” President Trump for real. They are playing for keeps.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you think this is more of Obama 3rd term leading Biden or Biden corrupted fingers all over this latest attack against Trump? Perhaps one of the major reasons Obama picked Biden?

      Delete
  11. Now the 1%'s ox is being gored and Donald Trump seems to feel the wind at his back.

    Consider his latest remarks, This is massive FRAUD & ELECTION INTERFERENCE at a level never seen before in our Country. REMEDY: Declare the rightful winner or, and this would be the minimal solution, declare the 2020 Election irreparably compromised and have a new Election, immediately!.

    I think Fall is going to be fun.

    Sure they will. Just like they repealed Obamacare.

    Don't blame the party for St John of Hanoi, now freezing his cojones (if he had any) in the 2nd round of the 9th circle of Hell, as well as vacationing in several of the bolgias in the 8th Circle.

    Trump did succeed in gutting it..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually Trump did do a good job of that, and rescued the small group insurance market in the process - and had good people in HHS and CMS specifically. Biden has barely touched any of it thankfully.

      Delete
  12. Public hangings of all involved would put a smile on my face.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Slow hangings, in other words, put the noose around their necks and gently lower them until they start suffocating, then let them swing in the wind. Don't drop them and snap their necks, that's way to quick, let them suffer. Hey, how about lowering them to stand on their tippytoes, on a ledge? That way, they could think about their evil for possibly hours. Works for me.

      Delete
    2. 👍👍👍💪💪💪

      Delete
    3. They deserve long, healthy, mentally alert lives, behind bars with none of luxuries and power that they amassed by trading the lives of American servicemen and trillions of taxpayer dollars for personal gain

      Delete
    4. Put them all on a deserted island and let them kill and eat each other.

      Delete
  13. On the other hand Andy McCarthy is still holding out hope that the FBI and the DOJ are not corrupt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good grief, it is pathetic to listen to him now.

      Delete
    2. It is really sad to see someone whose opinions were once so highly regarded descend so low.

      Delete
  14. When the justice department is corrupt, it is up to the people to fix things?. Corruption can be fixed with rope.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I guess you won't be doing any smiling in the near future.

    ReplyDelete
  16. ahh, the voting machine algorithms are still present among us.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This is Hillary’s revenge. When Trump eviscerated Clinton during their debate in 2016 with his “you would be in jail” retort, Hillary was embarrassed and humiliated on national television. The look on her face is that of a person who at that moment swore retribution on her enemy. Many of the DOJ top brass began their careers under the Bill Clinton administration and owe allegiance to the Clinton clan. Dig deep enough and connect the dots. The answer is out there.

    https://youtu.be/K1Q71k6fmts

    ReplyDelete
  18. The Federalist today did an excellent job showing how the DoJ is trying to twist laws to create crimes for which which POTUS is absolutely and utterly immune / exempt. What I don't understand is why Trump isn't filing charges of criminal conspiracy in violating his Constitutional rights with the patently illegal warrant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whups, link here. https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/29/redacted-mar-a-lago-affidavit-confirms-bidens-doj-fished-for-a-crime-to-pin-on-trump/

      Delete
    2. Randy says: Perhaps Trump senses that he is getting more traction by giving them enough rope to hang themselves. The raid has certainly not given that FBI and DOJ the adulation they were expecting. Trump has plenty of time to respond, and you can bet your last dollar his response will be memorable.

      Delete
    3. I wouldn't bet against Trump.

      Delete
    4. FBI and DOJ are playing like they are going into the election. There has been a lot of red pilling over the last couple years. The CDC lying, the FDA lying, the DOJ pulling it's stunts w the J6 prisoners. That doesn't include the FBI w entrapment on a couple fronts, then declaring parents are terrorists or them 'missing ' several mass shooters who the FBI knew about and declared harmless.

      It's not the same audience they had. They've burned a lot of good will. So I'm kinda expecting Trump to let them run w rope and then feel them it when it hurts most. Make it easier to disband in the long run.

      Delete
    5. * the last election. Sorry. Randy's spellchecker showed up at my place. I had to correct FBI and DOJ every effing time.

      Delete
  19. The WSJ may have realized that if we lose the country, their newspaper will be worthless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They don't care. In fact, for them it will be a victory celebration.

      Delete
  20. WSJ is late to the party

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An an unwilling participant.

      Delete
    2. The Wall Street Urinal usually is late!

      Delete
  21. Everybody and I mean EVERYBODY misses why Comey, FBI and the rest of the swamp let Hillary skate.
    They were SURE that she would beat Trump.
    They didn't want to piss off their future boss.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, but what difference, at this point, does it make?/s

      Delete
  22. Why do people compare what Trump did to what Clinton did? Trump. Was. The. Fucking. President. Trump could declassify whatever he wanted to. And Clinton, not the president, should be in fucking jail.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Excellent article. Very important insight IMO, could even be a turning point.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Don that headline just begs for a semi colon then the words Popcorn sold separately

    ReplyDelete
  25. too little too late

    ReplyDelete
  26. Come on the last 2 dem A G s were corrupt, why wouldn't this one be

    ReplyDelete
  27. Oh I see... They waited until now. That was the last straw. Please.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Trump didn't keep active classified material on a hackable server. He double padlocked it per the FBI's request - which ought to undermine any case.

    I'd call Hillary a whore, but you can't sell what you can't give away if you tried.

    Political and access where, she has no peer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trump didn't keep any classified material at all. The warrant is therefore illegal - and they know it. The warrant itself is proof of a criminal conspiracy between Garland and Reinhart to violate Trump's Constitutional rights.

      Delete
  29. Here's a link to the ORDER that President Trump gave declassifying the "Operation Crossfire Hurricane" (aka. Russiagate) documents:

    https://trumpwhitehouse.arc...

    The FBI finally delivered them just a few days before Trump left office. These docs were then inventoried, cataloged, and shipped to Mar a Lago by the GSA (not Trump's political staff).

    So, 1) All of the docs FBI just seized at Mar a Lago were Russiagate docs
    2) The FBI has known all along what he had, because THEY SENT HIM THE DOCS in the first place, in response to his order cited above.
    3) Trump is currently pursuing a RICO case against the leading conspirators in "operation hurricane", who spied on his campaign for the benefit of his opponent.
    4) It has been widely reported that the same FBI agents that raided Mar a Lago had been part of operation crossfire hurricane
    5) The judge-magistrate (he's not actually a judge, and in fact does not have authority to issue warrants) that issued the warrant for the raid was one of the judge-magistrates working on the RICO case, but was forced to recuse due to conflict of interest. Hillary is named by Trump's RICO case and this "judge" Reinhart had represented Epstein and his associates, which included Bill Clinton. He recused just from the RICO case just 44 days prior to signing the warrant to raid Mar a Lago.
    6) Considering the docs seized at Mar a Lago were the evidence in the RICO case against the russiagate conspirators, you'd think the judge that was conflicted out of working the RICO case would also be conflicted out of any new case the FBI wanted to start with their warrant to seize the documents that prove the RICO charges.

    So, the whole point of the raid was for the FBI to get their hands on, and bury, the "crossfire hurricane" documents that President Trump was using against them in his RICO case.

    ReplyDelete
  30. If they didn't use the word "Gestapo", they're still pretending.

    ReplyDelete