There’s So Much Smoke. Why Worry About a Fire?

Judicial Watch Sues for Text Messages of FBI’s Strzok and Page
There's So Much Smoke. Why Worry About a Fire?

U.S.A.-( What are we to make of the GOP and Democrats' dueling scandal wars? So much information, so little time.

We'll have to wait until special counsel Robert Mueller completes his investigation to be sure, but I don't believe there's any credible evidence that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to affect the presidential election.

On the other hand, though I was initially skeptical that the investigations into the Democratic scandals would produce much, I've changed my mind. I know I'm biased, but after having studied the voluminous information more thoroughly, I'm convinced there is an alarming amount of evidence of misconduct. For every allegation that doesn't bear fruit, there are several that are damning. Let me highlight just some of the problem areas and add my observations as space permits.

— The Nunes memo contains inculpatory information against certain key Department of Justice officials, and no amount of obfuscation from propagandists about what it doesn't contain discredits its probative value. A dud it is not.

— The memo essentially claims that an anti-Trump dossier, which was just glorified opposition research procured and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee through a law firm, was an essential component of an application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a warrant to spy on Trump associate Carter Page. That is, it is incontrovertible that the warrant wouldn't have been issued without the dossier. Neither the initial application nor any of the renewals disclose or reference the role of the DNC or the Clinton campaign, though senior DOJ and FBI officials were aware of the political origins of the dossier prepared by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele. As it happens, the FBI presented another item of tainted evidence to the court — a Yahoo news article based on information spoon-fed to reporter Michael Isikoff by Steele, the same character who prepared the dossier. The article was reportedly presented to the court as independent and corroborating evidence when it was just circular journalism — recycled from the dossier. Moreover, Steele compiled the dossier based on information obtained, in part, from Russian operatives. Further poisoning the waters, Clinton family confidants Sidney Blumenthal and Cody Shearer were allegedly feeding information to Steele, possibly through a State Department official, for inclusion in the memo. The FBI allegedly represented to the FISC that Steele was credible, though former FBI Director James Comey has admitted the dossier contained unverified material. Steele, you should note, said that he was desperate that Trump not be elected. Steele was dropped as an FBI source because he allegedly lied to the bureau about leaking to the press.

— To prevent publication of the memo, Democrats knowingly misrepresented that it contained classified or other information damaging to national security.

— The criminal referral of GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham for Steele confirms key points of the Nunes memo — namely, that the dossier was crucial to the FBI's warrant for Page and that the application omitted the key fact that the Clinton campaign and the DNC had funded the research through Fusion GPS, which hired Steele. And, as noted, senior FBI officials knew this information and still didn't disclose it to the court in its application. Democrats and their apologists in the liberal media contend that there was a disclosure about the Clinton and DNC connection in the footnotes, but rudimentary examination reveals that the footnote was deliberately vague and said nothing about DNC and Clinton campaign involvement. It was as if the FBI inserted the footnote for reasonable deniability, knowing it would facilitate its deception of the court.

— The liberal media are in lockstep in denying the significance of the referral, as well, claiming it was a letter issued to bolster the Nunes memo, when in fact the referral had been submitted weeks before the Nunes memo was released and was independent of it.

— The thousands of text messages between adulterers Peter Strzok, FBI counterintelligence agent, and Lisa Page, FBI lawyer, were unseemly, improper, sometimes suggestive of egregious misconduct and alarmingly illuminating as to their mutually toxic anti-Trump bias, revealing them singularly unfit for the jobs they were performing. What did Page mean that Obama wanted “to know everything” or that she needed to brush up on Watergate? What did Strzok mean by the following? “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in (then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe's) office — that there's no way (Trump) gets elected — but I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40.”

— Though Strzok and other DOJ and FBI officials have been fired or reassigned, both Strzok and Page are still at the bureau, which is unconscionable, given their inexcusable behavior. Strzok should be terminated for making himself vulnerable to blackmail alone, yet he and his fellow Trump-hating lovebird remain perched on the government payroll.

— Just as the liberal media speciously attempt to downplay the Nunes memo and the Grassley-Graham referral, they contend that the GOP's original take on the Page text about keeping Obama informed is wholly discredited because it concerned the Trump Russia investigation rather than the Clinton email scandal as the GOP claimed. Not so fast. Even if the text was about keeping Obama informed on the Russia investigation, it could be just as bad or worse, especially if they were informing him about the nefarious renewal of the warrant to spy on a political opponent during a presidential campaign with a fraudulent dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. What (and when) did Obama know?

— The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee just released a report on the Clinton email scandal. It raises many questions about Clinton and the FBI, such as why the FBI liberally used immunity offers instead of impaneling a grand jury to elicit evidence and why Comey circulated a statement exonerating Clinton before she and many other witnesses had been interviewed. And don't get me started on Clinton's serial killing of emails. Who else could get away with what she did?

Come on, naysayers. Be fair. There's so much smoke here — and I've just covered some of the highlights — we don't even have to worry about a fire. Asphyxiation can be just as lethal.

About David LimbaughDavid Limbaugh

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book is “The True Jesus: Uncovering the Divinity of Christ in the Gospels.” Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at

  • 26 thoughts on “There’s So Much Smoke. Why Worry About a Fire?

    1. We have a president that for some how or by the grace of God. Has been given to us to lead. Hillary should of won. And now that we have a president that cant be bought or compremised and goes against the grain of those who try and continue to keep the people and the republic at bay. While they continue to erode our constitution and our way of life by our god given rights, and subject us to their way of life., I think not. We the people of this great country, and those who will defend there way of life, I know that times have changed. And the wicked will advance against us by turning our own people against us. But we must defend our right of way to live and follow our way of life though jesus. I know some of you out there dont believe in christ. But Chirst cant stand a coward who does not defend another in need. Im a vet who is loyal to my brothers and sisters. Please continue the fight against those who oppress our way of life. Go Trump!

    2. @ Mark DV I agree with your opinion on cleaning the swamp. However, some are becoming impatient that all has not been accomplished yet. When dealing with government people sometimes it takes longer than it would in normal life. Afterall, one would not want these people to overwork and have extra time on their hands.If DJT goes about it systematically, like he seems to be doing, what you say may come to light.

      1. @TC.
        Very true ! But 1 step at a time , 1 position
        at a time ! It Will Get Done . They are so,
        Scrambled Now Trying to Hide the Dirt.
        Nobody Expected to get Caught . They
        figured he’d be gone by now. Fed up by ,
        the whole dirty game or open his mouth
        and get impeached. Somebody got to him.
        That’s a good thing. We need him there.

        1. @Tcat and Marc, Yes, if anything Trump is too nice a person. I would have had every SES, special commissioner, and bureaucrat down to the GS 14 level in the unemployment line competing for entry level McDonalds jobs, by now.
          I saw a video of Trump getting off Marine One, the other day. The wind blew the cover off of the Marine private on Marine One. The young man was at the position of attention and could not move as his dress uniform cap was getting dirty. Trump walked over, picked up the young Marine’s cover and walked it back to him. The young Marine was black. When was the last time the Commander in Chief picked up after a private? Go Trump.

          1. @wb
            A similar thing happened to me back in my day .
            In formation for inspection , cover flew off, I got dinged
            for not being squared away . Capt. was pissed, let it fly!

            1. @Marc DV, I suppose that everyone was at attention in the formation and could not move. So, I guess that would leave it to whomever was not at attention to bend a knee and pick up your cover. God forbid a commander should do that! And that is another reason that I like Trump… he never read “The manual*”!

              *FM 21-5 Drill and Ceremonies.

          2. @ W. Bill and Mark remember back when we had Obumer in the White House and during a ceremony he had a soldier hold an umbrella over him while he was standing at a podium and the soldier had to stand in the rain. I think I remember that happening more than once and it really burned me he would treat a member of our armed forces like that. While many in his age group was signed up to defend this country he was smoking dope. Something is bass ackwards about the whole thing.

            1. @Tcat, a good observation. The soldier who had to hold the umbrella is a white kid. The Marine whose hat Trump picked up is black. Hmmmm.

    3. David Limbaugh, just like his big fat brother are giant cock-suckers.

      P.S. Ammoland. What does this dumb article have to do with guns and shooting?
      P.P.S., Hillary lost the election. I know Trump never got over it. Same with you?

      1. @martin, You can write anything you want, but Ammoland can’t? That takes being a guest, here, pretty close to “gone to far”.

    4. I see a lot of people complain that their posts are not shown. Many e-mail clients hide a person’s posts from them by default. That is, everyone else can see them, only the poster can’t. That may be what is happening, check your settings. I see the posts of the people who complained with follow-up posts from others, THEN an OP’s complaint that theirs was redacted. I suspect either timing or the previous issue is the cause. Ensure that there is a problem before complaining about one.

    5. @David Limbaugh, Dave you named names! Good for you. Just to recap and add a few: the persons that were attempting to avoid a Trump presidency and post election destroy the Trump presidency are Main Justice Sally Yates and John Carlin (who signed the FISA court warrant applications and has since quit the USDOJ and has disappeared); and the following Feebees: Comey, McCabe, Page, Strzok, Baker and Pristep (head of the FBI Counter Intel. Division and probable planner of the op.)

        1. I agree, you don’t remove posts. You just don’t post them to begin with. Nothing I’ve “posted” since I was thrown to the dogs a few months back has appeared here. Just like this one won’t show up.

        2. Perhaps it is a matter of semantics. Removing a post or just not posting it in the first place. The bottom line is that there is something happening on occasion. It is irritating, but, I usually just say “screw it’ and go on with my life. But, crafting a comment only to have it not appear is irritating. I know that quite some time ago my posts stopped appearing and I called the phone number (which isn’t there anymore) and spoke with someone who said that it was a technical issue on their end and he would take care of it. Voila, problem solved. Who knows.

          1. Actually what happens is that there are instances where a comment is held for moderation. If it has a link or profanity or a keyword that triggers moderation then the comment is held for a real editor to review the comment. If the comment violates our comment policy then it could be pushed to spam or the editor may decide that the comment ads value to the conversation and they will push the comment live. Most all comments 99.9% that are held for moderation are pushed live. We always delete spam comments, link baiters, and racist garbage. But we want all sides heard so if you feel that you are not getting comments posted please call me. I welcome your call and I will take time to research the post, comment and your history to make things right. Here is our comment policy:

            my details :

            Brian Johnson, CEO
            mobile: 732-673-2652
            email: [email protected]

    6. Something to ponder. When money was tight and American banks weren’t lending, what were Russian banks doing? How did Trump weather the financial crisis that Obama claimed was left to his administration?

      1. As your love-interest infamously stated, “What difference does it make?” He wasn’t in office then, he was just a businessman. USA has done much worse than loan money to people you don’t like. If you want look at who made deals with the Russians, look to your Left, both Clintons, in and out of office are well past their necks in it.

        1. @Heed the Call-up – See that, you automatically assumed I’m a ‘Never Trumper’. Besides that, I have no love for Hillary Clinton. The whole point of my post was to stimulate debate. The whole thrust of these Commie Democrat ‘investigations’ is to sully Trump who wholeheartedly believes in Capitalism. So quit acting like a TROLL!

          1. Jamel, nowhere in my post did I state you are a “never trumpet”. I was only pointing out that the Left is much more likely to be colluding with the Russians than Trump. Over a year of investigating and still nothing on Trump. However the investigation is highlighting a lot of issues on the Left.

            Ironically, you call me a troll, but admit that is exactly what you were doing. Stimulate debate, that’s almost amusing.

      2. Wow, more smoke.
        I thought we were talking about the ongoing investigations. You want to worry about how he rents properties?
        Here’s something for you to worry about.
        Tens of THOUSANDS of federal felonies in the form of illegal e-mails by HRC with the knowledge and connivance of ALL the officials of the previous administration, including the ousted president. Comey saying that nobody would prosecute is BS and lots of people go to prison for a lot less under the same statute. Knowledge and intent are irrelevant to this crime.
        Here’s some more to worry you.
        Providing material aid to the enemy in the form of uranium. That’s the definition of treason.
        One more stick on the fire.
        Collecting loan monies by stating that you are not a US citizen, and then deciding that you are a citizen because you want to be president, is either fraud or usurpation of authority.
        Take your choice.
        This could take down more than one shrill career criminal.

    7. Instead of trying to figure out who said what, just answer these simple questions to see if Mueller should continue:
      Why so many contacts between Trump’s people and Russians, and WHY did so many people LIE about it UNDER THREAT OF PERJURY? There you go.

      1. @Martin, Neither the great number of DNC contacts with the Russians, nor the few GoP supporters “contacts” with “Russians” was and remains legal. If you wanted to call your friends in Russia, this afternoon, that would be legal.

      2. That has already been answered! Concusively.

        18 months of furious, intense investigation by Mueller and his handpicked gang of Trump-haters has produced NO evidence (not an iota) of collusion – which is not illegal, in the first place – between the Russians and the Trump Campaign. Every Democrat leader (Schumer, Pelosi, Feinstein, etc) has publicly admitted that no evidence exists.

        If, at any time during that year-and-a-half, even a hint of anything approaching questionable behavior actually HAD been found, that information damnably-well would have been instantly “leaked,” and the resulting headlines would be in 4″ capitalized lettering.

    8. Let the Ashes Fall and the Dust Settle .
      Then Trump can put New Blood into ,
      the Areas that Have Burnt to the Ground !
      A BIG BROOM and a Lot of Elbow Grease !
      Clean that Part of the Swamp. Then Start Again ,
      On the Next Batch of Low-Lifes in DC.

    Leave a Comment 26 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *