Watergate 2.0 unfolding?

Nixon resigned and was almost impeached for the Watergate break-in.  Someone has broken into the Trump campaign's headquarters.  The question is who did it, who knew and when did they know. Was the Harris campaign involved? This could be Watergate 2.0:

The level of dirty tricks being used by the left is insane; impeachments, lawfare, ballot removals, assassination attempts and break-ins.  If you check your confirmation bias and question if supporting Trump you could be on the wrong side, ask yourself this "Why does every charge they level against the right eventually end up disproved?" Or, "Why do we not see these evil acts coming from the right?" We are clearly on the right side of this divide.

Democrats spying on Trump was beyond Watergate

According to a report by The Federalist, the spying on Trump was bad that it vastly exceeded the Watergate scandal. And apparently, there's more legal bombshells to come.

Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway validated former President Donald Trump’s weekend claim that the latest revelations to emerge from the Durham probe expose the Russia hoax scandal as worse than Watergate.

On Friday, the latest filing from John Durham’s special counsel investigation alleged that the Hillary Clinton campaign paid tech workers to “infiltrate” servers at Trump Tower and the White House.

“It’s not just the president’s view that this is worse than Watergate,” Hemingway said on Fox News’ “MediaBuzz.” “If you want to remember what happened in Watergate, that was a relatively low-level break-in to a Democratic Party office and then a cover-up from the White House. … The spying operation against Donald Trump wasn’t just during the campaign, they were also spying on White House servers [and] Trump Tower while he was president.”

Of course this is all a year too late but at least it's validation that we are not a bunch of lunatics for suspecting this. Now the need is to get this story out there, loudly.

#ReleaseTheMemo suffers it's own diversionary tactics claims

The background is apparently black and white: either president Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election from Hillary Clinton, or Hillary Clinton, former president Obama and the FBI and Justice Department colluded to discredit then candidate Donald Trump from having a chance to win the 2016 presidential election.

The memo in question is explained pretty well by the NeverTrump (and formerly august publication) The National Review:

Over the last several days, online debate has centered around a memorandum drafted by Devin Nunes and House Intelligence Committee staff that allegedly details surveillance abuses in the American intelligence community. When the hashtag #ReleaseTheMemo trended on Twitter, Democrats suspected possible help from Russian bots, but preliminary reports on Twitter’s internal analysis, according to the Daily Beast, suggest that the “groundswell . . . appears thus far to be organically American — not Russian propaganda.” More than 200 members of Congress, nearly all of them Republican, have seen the four-page memo, but Republicans are reportedly refusing to share it with the Department of Justice.

The diversionary tactic regarding the memo (which is claimed to be a diversionary tactic), is that Russian bots are behind the trending hashtag #ReleaseTheMemo. They're not Russian bots and to say so is the very diversionary tactic they are accusing the memo to be.

On Tuesday, two Democratic leaders urged Facebook and Twitter to conduct an “in-depth forensic examination” of #ReleaseTheMemo to determine the extent of Russian propaganda promoting the hashtag. They relied on a report from the German Marshall Fund’s Alliance for Securing Democracy claiming that #ReleaseTheMemo was had become the favorite hashtag of Russian-sponsored Twitter accounts. (The report did not make any judgements about such activity on Facebook.)

“If these reports are accurate, we are witnessing an ongoing attack by the Russian government through Kremlin-linked social media actors directly acting to intervene and influence our democratic process,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Adam Schiff, two California Democrats, wrote to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

But a knowledgeable source says that Twitter’s internal analysis has thus far found that authentic American accounts, and not Russian imposters or automated bots, are driving #ReleaseTheMemo. There are no preliminary indications that the Twitter activity either driving the hashtag or engaging with it is either predominantly Russian.

All of this would be solved by releasing the memo, after all, the details are so explosive as to be a bigger deal and worse than Watergate. Ironically, the Democrats turning Russia into a bogeyman, may indeed be helping Russia as it continues to paralyze Washington.  

Damage Done - Candy Crowley Redux

This may sound like a told-you-so post, but that is not it's intent.  The intent of this post is to point out the Benghazi scandal that is bubbling up now was deliberately tamped down long enough for Obama to get through the election and to question whether the press, now suspicious of the president's narrative, was deliberately complicit at the time of the election. 

Remember this?  Candy Crowley, worst moderator ever, is seen below giving president Obama a free pass on his interpretation of how events unfolded post-Benghazi.  In fact a free pass is too small a description of what she did.  She enabled a cover-up and helped mislead the American public on what now is turning into a scandal of possibly mammoth proportions.

She'll never moderate again.  Forget presidential debates, she's not fit to moderate a PTA meeting.  But the real problem is the damage she caused to the country by allowing and enabling this facade.  Innocent dupe misled by the Obama administration's talking points, or partisan hack trying to get Obama re-elected? The motive doesn't matter the results would have been the same regardless of why the debate moderator Crowley sided with the president, impartially in the CNN presidential debate.

Should Benghazi turn into another Watergate-scale scandal, Crowley would rightly be regarded as a hack journalist with purely partisan intent.  What will likely happen is that she will continue to be employed by CNN with nary a whisper of ineptitude on her part.  That's because the problem she exhibited in the debate is endemic to CNN.  It's core to their thinking.