(CTH): The Ukraine story is Obstruction 2.0.
Obstruction 1.0 – Russia: To get impeachment, they needed obstruction. To get obstruction, they needed an investigation. To get the investigation, they needed evidence. To change dossier from oppo-research to evidence they needed a FISA. To get a FISA they needed a target. The target was Carter Page.
Obstruction 2.0 – Ukraine: To get impeachment Schiff needs obstruction. To get obstruction, Schiff needs an investigation. To get an investigation Schiff needs evidence. To change political innuendo into evidence, Schiff needs a ‘whistle-blower’. To use a ‘whistle-blower’ they need a report… And guess where we are?
OPINION! The basic elements are the same. The players are the same. IMHO It begins with corrupt elements within the intelligence community intent on preventing President Trump from dismantling their corrupt construct.
By originating the phony accusation from inside the intelligence apparatus it can be shielded from independent investigators.
Next, the Lawfare alliance of manipulative lawyers construct a narrative for the Democrat/Deep State/MSM to run through its echo chamber.
Finally, dirty politicians shield themselves from their own criminal actions by pointing to the Democrat/Deep State/MSM narrative and crying obstruction against those daring to defend themselves. (H/T CTH)
Rep. Adam Schiff says that if the reports about Pres. Trump’s conversation with Ukraine are proven true, then impeachment may be the only "remedy." “This seems different in kind and we may very well have crossed the Rubicon here." #CNNSOTU pic.twitter.com/0dsWBXpC6g
— State of the Union (@CNNSotu) September 22, 2019
Then there’s this. Michael K. Atkinson is the current Inspector General for the Intelligence Community.
Atkinson accepted the so-called whistleblower’s complaint and advanced it despite the fact that the whistleblower admitted having no direct knowledge of the president’s phone call.
(CNN) The whistleblower didn’t have direct knowledge of the communications, an official briefed on the matter told CNN. Instead, the whistleblower’s concerns came in part from learning information that was not obtained during the course of their work, and those details have played a role in the administration’s determination that the complaint didn’t fit the reporting requirements under the intelligence whistleblower law, the official said.
So why did Atkinson advance the complaint? (H/T CTH)
Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD).
Translation: Atkinson was senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the alleged ‘coup’ attempt was underway.
Carlin and McCord are the same DOJ-NSD players who apparently lied to the FISA court about the non-compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors, filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.
As Senior Counsel, Atkinson was at the epicenter of the plan to violate the trust of the FISC and the plot to destroy Donald Trump. That means he has ample incentive to advance, even encourage this new anti-Trump narrative.
This is the real corruption that the Fake News Media refuses to even acknowledge! pic.twitter.com/FCvUtWA33j
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 23, 2019