The Crowhill Report - Content

Views and opinions on the news, culture, politics, beer, art, science, education, religion and ethics

Sites endorsed by Crowhill:
Crowhill Publishing
The Krehbiel Report on Publishing@gregkrehbiel

What we seem to know today

by Greg Krehbiel on 4 April 2017

1. We always knew Susan Rice carried a partisan hatchet and was willing to break the rules for the cause. The case against her seems to be mounting.

2. Parts of the media — specifically the NYT and Bloomberg — were sitting on information about Susan Rice to protect Obama. Gee, what a surprise. Trump is right to call them the “very dishonest media.”

3. Trump’s accusation that the Obama administration was spying on him is getting more substantiated every day.

4. The Obama administration turned intelligence into a partisan weapon. If Nixon had done this, we’d still hear the howls from the left. Let’s see if they have any integrity.

Still to come.

Q: Did the Obama admin share any of this information with the Clinton campaign?

Q: Did Obama know about this?

Q: To what extent are the intelligence chiefs complicit?

2017-04-04  »  Greg Krehbiel

Talkback x 13

  1. smitemouth
    4 April 2017 @ 9:38 am

    Isn’t the story about Rice fake news, according to your definition? I thought you hated it. Bloomberg had unnamed sources and now the echo chamber is repeating the Bloomberg story. I guess the ox you want to get gored is getting gored so it’s ok…

    I won’t call it fake news. To me it’s only fake news if it’s not true. We’ll see how it pans out.

    So, if it wasn’t for fake news and possibly Rice’s outing of Trump officials, would we still have an agent of a foreign government (Flynn) as head national security advisor? Did you see that Flynn filed new financial paperwork disclosing payments from Russians? Maybe this is what he wants immunity for–for filing the financial paperwork with a bunch of payments left off of it.

  2. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    4 April 2017 @ 9:56 am

    The story about Rice’s involvement has now been confirmed by multiple sources, so I don’t think it’s fake news. (When did I define it, by the way?)

    The story re: Flynn is certainly getting complicated / interesting.

  3. Dave Krehbiel Dave Krehbiel
    4 April 2017 @ 11:06 am

    It seems to me this whole area of investigation, both of the incoming and outgoing presidents, show the absolute necessity of congressional oversight. My understanding is that the chairman of various congressional committees has a great deal of latitude regarding which topics are investigated and which are ignored. I would personally like to see a great many more investigations, even initiated by the party not in power.

  4. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    4 April 2017 @ 11:38 am

    I’m of two minds on this.

    I want more investigations because I don’t trust anybody with power — i.e., somebody has to keep an eye on the miscreants in office.

    I don’t want investigations because I don’t trust anybody with power — i.e., the investigation itself can ruin innocent people’s lives.

    Also, investigations often become a circus.

    I’m not sure what the right balance is.

  5. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    4 April 2017 @ 2:18 pm

    Frank Natoli gets it right in his comment on this article.

    The job of the media, as seen by the media, is to further the goals and policies of the Democrat Party. When the media comes to know that Rice was doing the same, in her case using the entire intelligence apparatus of U.S. government to hurt Donald Trump, the media nods its assent and its approval. No rational person would expect anything else from them.

    Or, to put it briefly — “Well, that’s what she should have been doing. End of story.”

  6. smitemouth
    4 April 2017 @ 8:14 pm

    Well, regarding your definition of fake news or my interpretation, search my comments in your blog for the word Watergate. I somehow recall that being related, but i have never had success searching your blog for comments using the search feature. my experience has been that it only searches articles and not comments.

    Next, in your initial #2, the complaint is made that Bloomberg was sitting on the Rice story. Seems weird to say since they were the ones that broke the story. All the news yesterday was quoting Bloomberg including Fox. Maybe they were waiting for more confirmation of their sources. you could send them a memo saying something like, “when you get X number of unattributed sources it’s fake news, but when it crosses the line to Y unattributed sources, then it’s holding back.” I am sure they would welcome the feedback.

    As far as I can see, we were spying on Russians we considered bad guy or spies. while spying on the Russians, we came across contacts that Trump officials had made with these bad guys. the intelligence community believed that the Russians influenced the election. rice saw some reports and gave their names to other heads of intelligence agencies. in her role she had some leeway and i have not seen where she committed a crime.

    As for Natoli whining about the whole intelligence apparatus being used to hurt Trump, that is laughable.

    Again, Flynn. And he’s just one of the guys. Roger Stone.

    What we do know…. For a few years, some conservatives have been saying that Wikileaks is a front for FSB (russki intelligence). We basically know this is true now. People were too slow to believe it. Podesta emails leaked by wikileaks and predicted by Roger Stone… Don’t know if Trump’s teams was working with FSB or just being played by them.

  7. Greg Krehbiel GregK
    4 April 2017 @ 8:22 pm

    Actually it was Mike Cernovich who broke the story. He claimed that Bloomberg and the NYT were sitting on it, so after he broke the story Bloomberg finally reported on it.

  8. smitemouth
    4 April 2017 @ 9:17 pm

    You do recall that all the news agencies were sitting on the Trump dossier about russian prostitutes and piss stained sheets story/memo waiting for confirmation of its contents? Eventually Daily Beast or some other rag posted it, and CNN simply confirmed that, yes, there is such a dossier floating around the news agencies, and we have been trying to verify the contents. With that, CNN was labeled fake news by the big fing whiner. As if there wasn’t a dossier they were trying to verify.

    So Cernovich who promoted the fake Pizza Gate story (FSB here, too?) which resulted in a shooting at a DC area pizzaria is some kind of reputable newsman? How much beer do you drink?

    You don’t see the parallel?

  9. Derek
    5 April 2017 @ 12:26 am

    Rice is guilty as hell – she’s already lied about it saying that she “knew nothing about it”, to now admitting that she unmasked them but that it was “not for political purposes”. Yea right. She’s a liar and a political hack for Obummer. Nixon was a piker compared to these people.

  10. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    5 April 2017 @ 11:40 am

    I realize this is entirely subjective, but there’s something about her face and her eyes that scream “liar with no conscience” to me.

  11. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    5 April 2017 @ 11:41 am

    @SM, it’s certainly true that not all stories should be published. There has to be some confirming evidence. In this case — with Susan Rice — it seems there was more than enough confirmation of the story.

  12. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    5 April 2017 @ 11:42 am

    And the answer to your other question is either too much or not enough. I’m never quite sure.

  13. William
    10 April 2017 @ 2:25 pm

    Interesting, seems a friend of Fox isn’t playing along with O’Reilly’s agenda. Seems Peters makes reasonable points.