Is Bill Maher Really So Biased He Can’t See the Forest for the Trees?

Elder Patriot – After Bill Maher learned of disgraced Andrew McCabe’s firing he reacted by saying:

Well, that’s just — I mean, that doesn’t really affect anything, but it’s just mean.  I don’t know what’s happening to this country. It’s very upsetting.”

It’s one thing to be a sycophant, it’s another thing to be so biased that you’re incapable of any kind of balanced thinking at all.  This level of predisposed thinking, when widespread enough, can lead to tyranny.

We need look no further than McCabe’s pursuit of Michael Flynn, President-elect Donald Trump’s original pick for National Security Advisor, for evidence of malicious and heartless prosecution.

McCabe’s subordinates were charged with interviewing Flynn and came away from that meeting believing any inconsistencies that existed in his testimony were unintentional.  In other words, they believed Flynn was being truthful and forthcoming to the best of his recollection.

That interview took place at the White House where Flynn was asked for a few minutes in passing.  Prior to the meeting, he wasn’t told that he was the subject of an investigation and did not have his attorney present.

For this, special counsel pursued Flynn relentlessly and set his target on Flynn’s son, as well.  When Flynn’s legal bills ran to $1 million he was ruined financially and he copped to making a single lie to investigators to stop the bleeding. 

According to the Inspector General’s report and the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) McCabe had been guilty of altering the 302’s that F.B.I. agents are required to file after every interview.

It’s hard to see why the OPR that is comprised of F.B.I. agents, would recommend McCabe’s termination if this wasn’t one of the underlying reasons. 

It’s equally hard to understand why Mueller would’ve gone so hard on Flynn, and accepted a plea to a single count of lying, if it had been made clear to him that Flynn hadn’t lied at all.

Flynn is facing imprisonment and bankruptcy.  There were no documents falsified by Flynn to support the case against him.

There are, however, falsified documents to support the case against McCabe.  They included falsified applications to the FISA court that McCabe had signed attesting to the veracity of the Russian dossier that he was responsible for verifying.  Month’s after McCabe signed that warrant application, then F.B.I. Director James Comey admitted under testimony that the dossier remained “salacious and unverified.”

The legal scholar Jonathan Turley explained the significance of this on his website:

“People continue to spin this issue by noting (as the piece states) that Flynn agreed to this false statement crime as part of a plea bargain with more serious potential crimes. However, that misses the point. Prosecutors are required to apply the criminal code evenly. They are not allowed the luxury of a criminal charge that can be easily applied to a wide array of people at their discretion.  It makes it very difficult for people to contest a criminal charge when prosecutors can simply criminalize any inaccurate or misleading statement while ignoring the same conduct in others.  It is particularly concerning when the favorable parties are fellow prosecutors or government officials.”

[…]

“According to these reports (re: the I.G.’s findings), investigators believed that McCabe misled them about his approval of a leak to the media on the Clinton investigation. An alleged false or misleading statement by McCabe could rekindle questions about how the Justice Department addresses alleged false statements within its own ranks.”

Turley then points out the difference in penalties when the violator is a federal prosecutor.

“It is a perceived luxury enjoyed by federal prosecutors that routinely charge others with even borderline false statements but rarely face such charges themselves. While most prosecutors adhere to the highest ethical standards, a minority of Justice Department lawyers have been accused of false or misleading statements in federal cases. However, they are virtually never charged with false statements by their colleagues. There is no such reluctance in using this easily charged crime against targets outside of the department.”

It’s probable that McCabe was relying on this double standard when he issued his statement following his firing attacking President Trump on a purely political basis.

It’s just as likely that the OPR saw ample evidence prior to making their recommendation to terminate McCabe that this was far from the first time the Deputy Director had altered evidence to influence the outcome of an investigation.

How many devices were destroyed, and files deleted and scrubbed, in the Clinton email investigation that McCabe was in charge of?

McCabe, if not directly responsible for Flynn’s legal problems and financial woes, played a major role in causing them, in the least.

Now McCabe is crying because he was fired and it’s likely his pension will be denied?  Ask Michael Flynn what he thinks about that.

Bill Maher is either too stupid, too biased, or too much in the pocket of the globalists, to admit McCabe is deserving of a whole lot worse than he’s gotten so far.