We’re still in the very early days since the Trump/Russia collusion hoax blew up in the faces of its Deep State and media promoters. But many in those circles have a visceral need to find something new every day to meet an official minimum quota of accusing the President of some kind of wrongdoing at least once per news cycle. What is going to fill all those front page columns and prime time program slots now that “Russia!!!” is gone? There just doesn’t seem to be anything remaining that remotely matches the scariness of the great imaginary Russian caper. But how far down the bottom of this barrel will we need to scrape?
The past two days bring forth a couple of examples that take this game to a whole new level of ludicrousness.
First, in yesterday’s New York Times, we have a front-page article headlined “White House Whistle-Blower Tells Congress of Irregularities in Security Clearances.” The authors are Nicholas Fandos and Maggie Haberman. Yes, it’s the same Maggie Haberman who authored a good third of the big Times “scoops” on the Russia hoax. Looks like she’s found her new McGuffin.
In the Times’s telling, a senior career bureaucrat in the White House’s Personnel Security Office by the name of Tricia Newbold has decided to come forward as a “whistle-blower.” Ms. Newbold’s job over several administrations has been to investigate White House personnel as to whether they should get security clearances. Now, it seems, President Trump and/or his senior staff have overridden Ms. Newbold’s recommendation in multiple instances. She has decided that it is time to take her concerns to Congress. Here is the Times’s spin on the situation:
A whistle-blower working inside the White House has told a House committee that senior Trump administration officials granted security clearances to at least 25 individuals whose applications had been denied by career employees for “disqualifying issues” that could put national security at risk, the committee’s Democratic staff said Monday. . . . “I feel that right now, this is my last hope to really bring the integrity back into our office,” [Ms. Newbold] said.
And can you give us a few examples of individuals as to whom the bureaucrats wanted to deny security clearances but got overridden by “senior officials”? The Times admits it has no complete list, but does give us three names as to which Congressional investigators have asked to see backup information: Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, and National Security Advisor John Bolton. And what is it that has supposedly disqualified these people from getting top-level security clearances? The entirety of what the Times says on that subject is “possible foreign influences.”
Right. Let’s give the more honest spin: Career bureaucrats attempt to use vague and fake “national security” mantra to block President they don’t like from having the people he knows the best and trusts the most advise him on critical foreign policy and national security issues.
Ms. Newbold and her associates buried in the “Personnel Security Office” may be much smaller time players than the FBI, CIA and DOJ bigwigs that staged the Russia!!! hoax, but the mindset is unmistakably the same. Our job is not to assist the elected President in carrying out his duties, and if we don’t like the guy we totally reject the idea that we work for him. Indeed, if we don’t like the guy, our real job is to protect the country against him and his people, no matter what the voters may have decided. Meanwhile, our procedures and protocols are not mere guidelines for how we are to assist President, but are themselves, in our immensely capable hands, the most important thing in the government if not the world, and can be used by us to block the President or his personnel choices or his policies if we want to.
Of course, these are the same people who were around when the Secretary of State conducted the nation’s foreign policy on unsecured email and her husband took a $500,000 speaking fee (in 2010) from Russians. Do you recall Ms. Newbold going to Congress with her concerns then? I don’t either.
And if you think that one is about the most ridiculous example of presidential “wrongdoing” that anyone could possibly come up with, then you haven’t been paying attention to CNN. According to CNN, also yesterday, the President cheats at golf! And not just a little. And they have eye-witness sources!
A longtime sportswriter who claims in a new book that President Donald Trump frequently cheats at golf likened Trump's habit to a way of "showing you that he's better than you." "He cheats like a mafia accountant. He cheats crazy. He cheats whether you're watching or not. He cheats whether you like it or not," Rick Reilly told CNN's John Berman on "New Day" Tuesday.
Give us some examples, please:
According to Reilly, Trump hit two balls in the water when he played professional golfer Tiger Woods and then claimed to have almost tied with him, kicked sportscaster Mike Tirico's ball into a bunker when the two played, and claims to have a 2.8 handicap despite professionals such as Dustin Johnson assessing him to be a 9 or 10.
This guy must be really, really bad! Meanwhile, I wonder what “wrongdoing” they are going to come up with in the remainder of today, let alone tomorrow.