Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day, …
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.Shakespeare, Macbeth, Act 5, scene 5
One of the main storylines the Democrat News-media Colluders (hereafter the DNC) have been working in recent years in order to hold on to wealth and power is that they must save our democracy from the evil MAGA Republicans. It is, therefore, not surprising that they are furious at Special Counsel John Durham for so thoroughly exposing their Trump-Russian collusion hoax with documented facts. For, it is hard, even for shameless Democrats, to maintain, with their usual practiced sanctimony, that they are defending democracy when one of their main efforts to interfere with several elections by framing Donald Trump for collusion with Russia has been so clearly exposed by John Durham.
Unlike the FBI, which has, at least, admitted some “mistakes” in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax (but this is no biggie because everyone makes mistakes), the Democrats have chosen the different path of attacking the very people that they have victimized. As Prof. Jonathan Turley, not a conservative Trump supporter but, in fact, a liberal Democrat who has somehow managed to remain an honest man in these days of dirty tricks and smoke and mirrors, points out that
While Durham noted that no one has challenged the facts in his reports, he [Durham] was labelled as a handmaiden of MAGA and one more body to throw on “the pyre. … [V]arious Democrats were resurrecting bogus past claims about criminal acts linked to a meeting in Trump Tower with Russian figures. No one, including former FBI director Robert Mueller, found any such criminal conduct despite a host of legal experts declaring clear evidence of crime on cable programs.
Turley notes that Democrat House members continue to repeat discredited bogus claims that even they, in their fantasy-land, must know are false, e.g., the bogus claims about the completely inconsequential meeting in Trump tower with Russian figures.
Similarly, Rep. Hank Johnson (Georgia) repeatedly asked Durham questions and then refused to let him answer them by talking over him. Johnson also accused Durham of not finding certain things that Durham was not tasked with finding. No wonder he didn’t find them! But the accusations, with feigned sound and fury, do make for good television. Indeed, Durham, too polite by half, should have replied that since Johnson already had the findings that he wanted, he should have dispensed with the pretence of questioning Durham to learn what he had found and given a speech instead (which is in fact what he did).
Similarly, Rep. Ted Lieu (California) had to bring up the (irrelevant) fact that Trump’s former campaign manager Manafort was convicted of something but, Durham replied correctly, “not in connection with these matters.” Nice diversion Ted. One would have though that Lieu would have learned something about the perils of deception when Candace Owens exposed him in previous House hearings. Unfortunately, Lieu has no desire to learn what Durham found.
Comically, Rep. Eric Swalwell (California) asks Durham if he proved that it is false that Trump gave polling data to a spy for a Russian intelligence service. Durham replies that he was not tasked with investigating that. That is true. Durham was tasked with investigating “the origins of the Russia inquiry and the FBI’s surveillance activities.” He was investigating the FBI investigation, not every claim, even inconsequential ones, of Trump-Russia collusion. Got it Eric? Durham had not been tasked to help the Democrats find Trump-Russia collusion. Apparently, Durham is a failure for not proving things he was not asked to prove. In fact, Swalwell is still claiming he has evidence of Trump-Russia collusion although he actually only claims that “It doesn’t smell less like collusion. It smells more.” Swalwell should certainly present his smells of evidence to the public in the least comical fashion he can muster.
Swalwell’s innuendos are particularly shameless since he of all people should certainly have smelled evidence of foreign spies trying to exploit US politicians. For Swalwell was himself apparently involved in an affair with a Chinese spy, Fang Fang, who “left the country unexpectedly in mid-2015 amid the investigation.” Now why would she do that when she and her willing target in the California House are innocent? Perhaps the best way to get people to forget that one has been accused of giving information to a “honey trapper” spy sent by our main foreign adversaries is to accuse the other side of doing precisely what one has oneself been doing.
Rep. Steve Cohen (Tennessee), for his part, made an astonishing personal attack on Durham and, of course, on Donald Trump, that being now an essential in any Democrat performance,
You [Durham] … had a good reputation … But the longer you hold on to Mr. Barr, and this report that Mr. Barr gave you as special counsel, your reputation will be damaged. As everybody’s reputation who gets involved with Donald Trump is damaged, he’s damaged goods, there’s no good dealing with him because you will end up on the bottom of a pyre.
Jonathan Turley describes this as a “dire warning” to Durham but it is a threat, not just to Durham but to “everybody … involved with Trump.” That would be 74 million Americans. Since a pyre is defined as “a combustible heap for burning a dead body as a funeral rite,” Cohen’s attack is a symbolic death threat, not a literal threat to kill anybody but a threat that anybody associated with Durham or Trump will have their life and reputation destroyed.
Instead of dealing with Durham’s findings of fact, the Democrat strategy was to produce their petty sound and fury in order to distract from Durham’s facts, so devastating to the integrity of their side of the aisle.
The Democrat strategy is clearly simply to continue repeating claims that they know have been shown to be false because they believe that with most of the media in their pocket most people will still believe their false assertions on election day, a thoroughly cynical strategy in the unrestrained pursuit of power.
Naturally the usual suspects came out immediately to claim that the “much-hyped investigation by Mr. Durham ended with a whimper that stood in contrast” to Republican expectations. On the contrary, Durham found, among other things, that the Justice Department and FBI “failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law” in the Trump-Russia collusion investigation. Wait until someone does this, or even 1/10th of what they did to Trump, to their side, and see if they see it as an inconsequential whimper.
If the Democrats had good arguments to refute Durham’s findings, they would have given them. Since, as Prof. Jonathan Turley points out, they cannot refute Durham’s facts, they disgracefully resort to diversion, deception, innuendo, smears and even threats in their disgraceful hour upon the House stage, hopefully, after 2024, to be “heard no more.”
Agree/Disagree with the author(s)? Let them know in the comments below and be heard by 10’s of thousands of CDN readers each day!