If you didn’t watch the Barr interview by Laura Ingraham

If you didn’t watch the Barr interview by Laura Ingraham

Roscoe B Davis

If you didn’t watch the Barr interview by Laura Ingraham you need to watch it and pay damn attention. Here is what I think are the important points we can take from what Barr said.

9:26 AM · Apr 14, 2020·

First of all, it seems apparent that the Durham investigation has completed most of its evidence gathering, whether documentary or through interviews. That doesn't mean the investigation is finished.

There is also the question of putting together a prosecutable case, and that will probably involve complicated negotiations with the lawyers for the persons being investigated. That, in turn, could lead to further substantive investigation.

But the bottom line is that at this point Barr appears confident that he knows what happened and, most likely, who were behind it. As Barr says, this is a "sprawling" case, Barr is not known for hyperbole. Second, Barr several times refers to things that "they" did.

Not things that "were done." So, multiple human perpetrators. That points toward the strong likelihood that a conspiracy case is being pursued that will encompass an attempt to "sabotage the presidency." As Barr says, this is a "sprawling" case.

And this case is very much focused on developing a criminal prosecution of the conspirators. Third, Barr says that, while Durham's "primary focus" is not on preparing a report, a report will "probably" result from Durham's investigation. That's important.

IMHO, the American people deserve a report that lays out the narrative of how a group of highly placed federal government operatives conspired to "sabotage the presidency."

Such a report would be unusual coming from a prosecutor, but this is an unusual case that goes to the heart of our constitutional order.

The American people deserve to have a report that they can read and readily understand, rather than having to glean the narrative from complicated testimony, court proceedings, and documents written in bureacratic language and, possibly, released without full context.

The release of the Papadopoulos interview is a down payment, as are no doubt the firings of corrupt Deep State operatives such as Dan Coats, Michael Atkinson, and others. Fourth, there is a twofold key in what Barr tells.

He tells us that Crossfire Hurricane"this investigation of Trump's campaign" was inititated "without any basis or predication." That means that Crossfire Hurricane was initiated without proper predication and was an unlawful investigation.

I think we will see confirmed what we've always known, that Crossfire Hurricane was initiated for the purpose of developing a narrative that could derail and sabotage a presidential election.

But, that baseless investigation nevertheless served as the predication for what Barr says he has found "even more concerning". When Barr says "what happened after the campaign with a whole pattern of events while Trump was president to sabotage the presidency."

That is the definition of a coup. That’s the definition of seditious behavior. From this I think we can readily gather why this Durham investigation is so "sprawling." What happened after the campaign?

The attempt to frame Michael Flynn and to sabotage the presidency through the frame job on

@GenFlynn

, at the very inception of the administration, to tar it as "colluding" with Russia, rather than conducting foreign policy.

The continued renewals of the Carter Page FISA, known to be fraudulent, which implicate the highest levels of the FBI and of DoJ-McCabe, Comey, Yates, Boente, Rosenstein, and many more.

The bogus Intelligence Community Assessment, the development of which we're told Durham has spent so much time examinging.