by Burt Prelutsky

If you want to Comment directly to Burt Prelutsky, please mention my name Rudy.

To me, the biggest question about the FBI scandal that hasn’t been answered or, for that matter, even been asked, is why so many people in the hierarchy of the Bureau were so eager to see liar-Hillary Clinton elected that they were ready to betray their oaths of office and put their reputations and their careers on the line for a woman who has never put anyone’s interests, let alone America’s, ahead of her own.

Furthermore, as the nation’s First Lady, she had never displayed anything but contempt for the military and the police, insisting that anyone in uniform assigned to White House duty stay out of her sight.

So, why would members of the nation’s premier law enforcement agency favor her over Donald Trump, who, whatever his real or fictional shortcomings, has always expressed his admiration for those who risk their lives for their fellow Americans?

I understand that in the case of Loretta Lynch, she was pulling for Mrs. liar-Clinton because she wanted Barack liar-nObama’s legacy items enshrined, not nullified.

One can even see where Andrew McCabe would have been grateful to liar-Hillary Clinton because her former bagman, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, encouraged Mrs. McCabe to run for state office and coughed up several hundred thousand dollars to fuel her campaign.

But what could have possibly motivated so many others, including James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, James Baker and Bruce Ohr, to engage in their illegal and immoral shenanigans? Why were they so eager to assist a woman who was so wantonly corrupt that, while serving as Secretary of State, she handed over a huge percentage of the nation’s uranium to Russia in exchange for a bribe; allowed four Americans to die in Benghazi and then lied about it; and who never thought twice about jeopardizing the nation’s security by employing a private server for no other reason than to conceal the money-laundering activities of the liar-Clinton Foundation.

⦿ As bad as McCabe, Strzok, Page, Baker and Ohr, are, even worse was their boss, James Comey. Under Comey, the FBI was a fish that stank from the head down.

Until I read a speech delivered by former U.S. Attorney Joseph Digenova, titled “The Politicization of the FBI” and reprinted in Imprimis, the monthly published by Hillsdale College, I had either forgotten or never even knew about some of Comey’s crimes and misdemeanors.

For instance: “Comey allowed one lawyer to represent four material witnesses, an arrangement ripe for the four to coordinate their testimony.”

For instance: “After needlessly giving immunity to two lawyers representing liar-Clinton, Comey permitted both to sit in on her July 2, 2016, FBI interview – a patent conflict.”

For instance: “Comey authorized the destruction of laptop computers that belonged to liar-Clinton aides and were under congressional subpoena.”

For instance: “Comey ignored blatant evidence of culpability. It is ridiculous to the general public and risible to those who have security clearances for liar-Clinton to claim that “(c)” placed after paragraphs in her emails meant the material was in alphabetical order rather than meaning it was classified. If she thought (c) indicated alphabetical order, where were (a) and (b) on the documents? liar- Clinton and her supporters touted her vast experience as a U.S. Senator and Secretary of State, positions requiring frequent use of classified information and presumably common sense. Yet neither experience nor common sense informed her decisions when handling classified materials.”

For instance: “Comey and the FBI never questioned liar- Clinton about her public statements, which changed over time and were blatantly false. “I did not email classified information to anyone” morphed into “I did not email anything marked ‘classified,’” which morphed into the claim that (c) did not mean what it clearly meant. False and changing statements are presented to juries routinely by prosecutors as evidence of guilt.”

It’s shocking, but not surprising, that James Comey would title his recent book “A Higher Loyalty.” If someone else had written a book bearing that title, one might assume his loyalty was to God or the Constitution. But inasmuch as Mr. Comey is 6-foot-8, you don’t have to be either a codebreaker or a psychiatrist, to understand the scoundrel’s loyalty is entirely to himself.

⦿ Speaking of reprehensible women who assumed positions of authority based entirely on their marriage certificates, Winnie Mandela recently died and received a send-off worthy of a saint, which only goes to prove that South Africans are as easily deluded as American liberals.

After her husband, Nelson Mandela, was arrested, his wife inherited the leadership of his leftist political party. She took advantage of her power by taking on a stream of young male lovers, most of them culled from her personal gang of bodyguards, whom she dubbed the Mandela United Football Club. In addition to being on call to service Mrs. Mandela, they also carried out her orders to kidnap, torture and murder, anyone who had ever looked at her cross-eyed.

Her preferred means of execution was something called “necklacing,” which consisted of forcing a rubber tire over the victim’s chest and arms, and then setting it on fire. It could take her victims as long as 20 minutes to die.

So, naturally, in a shithole like South Africa, where the blacks are once again, in the name of “agrarian reform,” killing white farmers and stealing their land, the people spent a week expressing their grief over the passing of “The Mother of the Nation.”

With a mother like that, it should come as no surprise that the nation has turned out to be the unholy monster it is.

⦿ Speaking of rogue nations, when the U.N. Security Council voted on a Russian resolution to condemn the U.S. for the airstrike on Syria’s chemical sites, eight countries voted against it — the United States, France, Britain, Netherlands, Sweden, Kuwait, Poland and Ivory Coast. Four nations — Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, Equatorial Guinea and Peru — decided to abstain, causing some people to question why their ambassadors even bother showing up, and left others to wonder where the hell is Equatorial Guinea?

There were only two nations that decided to support Russia. They were China and Bolivia. China was no big surprise, but what’s with Bolivia? I think President Trump is going to have to voice his displeasure, perhaps by labeling it with one of his patented nicknames, such as “Itty-bitty Bolivia” and maybe mocking their lack of ocean-side property, having lost its coastline in a war with Chile a while back.

⦿ As a conservative, I hate to be seen carrying water for the Republicans, so many of whom I find dishonest and deplorable, but at least there are some who consistently behave honorably and display the appropriate fealty to the Constitution. But unless others with an (R) after their names are elected, leaving the GOP in the majority, people like Jim Jordan, Devin Nunes, Louie Gohmert, Chuck Grassley and Tom Cotton, will lose their influence after the midterm elections.

The thing that too many absolute political purists lose sight of is that America is not a conservative nation, and therefore Republicans in Name Only (RINOs) are preferable to the alternative, whether they call themselves Democrats, liberals, socialists, communists or progressives.

When you get right down to it, the problem with Republican politicians is that too many of them neglect to do what they promised to do and were elected to do, whereas the problem with Democrats is that they always do what Chuck clown-Schumer and Nancy Pulosi were elected to do.

If you want to Comment directly to Burt Prelutsky, please mention my name Rudy. 


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