• Jim Costa

Jim’s Rant For the Day. See Nothing Bill Barr.

Recently Bill Barr said that the DOJ has not seen any voting corruption. The natural reaction to this of course is that we all gasped in shock to such an outlandish statement, didn’t we?

But maybe Barr was telling the truth. In fact, I am leaning more towards that direction; he probably did tell the truth. Barr heads up the DOJ. He and the FBI search for crimes to prosecute. Is it possible that both the DOJ and the FBI have been told to stand down in regards to the voting fraud? And if they were ordered to do so, then Barr is telling the truth in that he hasn’t seen any evidence (gathered by his department).

So if we go down this suggested scenario one has to ask “Why would Trump order the FBI and the DOJ to stand down in such an important crime investigation? To me the answer was obvious – they are tainted and could poison the evidence. In short, they can’t be trusted.

The next question is "If they can't be trusted why does Trump still leave Barr in charge?" Now this is where you may turn on me. Perhaps the FBI and DOJ are so corrupted and some of those corrupted employees are lifers remember, that Barr and Wray(?) cannot clean them out the traditional way fighting Human Resources Department and being sued after the cuts.

Could it be that they were told to stand down so a bigger Human Resources department can be brought in to do the house cleaning? Of course I am referring to military tribunals here. That Get Outta Jail Free card held by the lifers isn’t bullet proof you know. Military tribunals act swiftly and decisive. I have the impression they aren’t so much seeking truth and justice as they are to accomplish what dirty warfare calls for at the moment. They have an agenda, not a loyalty to one of the gang.

And lest we not forget that some of the biggies are saying that there are now 200,000 sealed indictments at this time. How on earth can Barr oversee this strictly from a “justice” point of view and insure that all 200,000 cases are managed by only the good guys left in his rotted organization; 200,000 cases covering crimes committed over years that need to be prosecuted?

I once read about a newly enlisted GI that sent his girl back home a Dear John letter. She asked what his new girlfriend had that she didn't have. His response was "Nothing, but she has it all here." So what does a Tribunal have that Barr doesn't have? Just this. Barr has to prosecute for most of the crimes committed by an individual whereas a Tribunal just goes after ONE act of treason and court's over. There will be no lengthy appeals.

No, I don’t question Barr’s statement of seeing nothing. To me it is a hint of the decks being cleared for action for the big team to enter the ring. It is his "Welcome Aboard!"

90 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All