Dark To Light With Frank & Beanz: All The World Is A Stage

On this week’s episode of “Dark to Light with Frank & Beanz,” we take a good amount of time to go over the indictment of James Wolfe, a very high level staffer to the Senate Intel Committee who was charged with lying to investigators about leaks of classified and secret information he made to four reporters over the course of about 18 months. A 30 year veteran in his position, he was tasked with keeping confidential information confidential. As it turn out, not only was he leaking this information to reporters, he was also sleeping with one of them, several years his junior, in what is amounting to a real life episode of “House of Cards.”

We take a good bit of time to discuss the role of Jeff Sessions and what his motivations are. Why is he so quiet? Is it just that he’s a busy bee, or is he REALLY a swamp creature like so many say? AND we delve into some newly found text messages from paramours Page and Strzok, and how having more of the story often allows us a better perspective when it comes information that we have had for a while. This blends right into a great conversation about leverage and how politicians and others in positions of power use that leverage, and how the LIGHT shining on things that were once DARK makes for a dangerous predicament for those who feel they are above the law.

PLUS, McCabe wants immunity, Loretta Lynch “happens” upon Clinton on the tarmac, James Comey seems to be in trouble, and WE FINALLY HAVE A DATE FOR THE IG REPORT!! Tune in to hear all of this and more (with a surprise giggle at the end) on this great episode!

SHOW LINKS:

James Wolfe Indicted
McCabe wants immunity
@Nick_Falco “lures” us in with a masterful find
A “Wire Carrying Current”

Follow Tracy Beanz on Twitter and subscribe to her YouTube channel!
Follow Frank on Twitter, subscribe to his YouTube channel, and follow his solo podcast, Quite Frankly!
Subscribe to Dark To Light With Frank & Beanz on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, TuneIn Radio, and Google Play!

2 Responses

  1. Greg

    We are led to believe that having anything to do with Putin is illegal, or even wrong at best. A President can have any foreign policy he so desires, and as President can determine “what” is in the “national interest”. So why is there even a Russian investigation in the first place. If Russia were trying to plant subversives in a campaign then the FBI would investigate only AFTER informing the candidate. But it’s not really about Russia, is it.

    For example, under Obama it was in the “national interest” to isolate Israel, as was done in his last days. Of course, while campaigning Obama gave No indication his Israel policies would be so drastic as to disallow even room additions to existing buildings if they were in so-called disputed territories. Was “this” policy in the US national interests.

    Trump, as a Presidential candidate can formulate and begin a process to develop HIS own foreign policy pursuits even though some may consider it against the national interest. And “that” is why there are elections. As the campaign hammered home, the main concern was of ISIS and Mideast terrorism, and one method to accomplish this goal was to align with Russia to “root it out”. Trump presented the argument that IT, the Russia policy, was IN the national interest, and was elected with that in mind.

    Therefore, a great deal of the, “noise”, in media assumes a President, now Trump, a candidate (Trump), has no business aligning in any way with Russia. Just as Treaties, (Foreign Policy) has its origins with a President, so will any other pursuit in foreign policy. The Constitution nowhere ascribes any authority given to Congress to “mandate” foreign policy, but does give “Advise and Consent” to those who would develop and implement such policies. This is the same argument in rebuttal to those who will cite Obstruction in any Russia related matter. The Executive has extensive Powers and this probe, in itself, is a violation of His Executive Powers, especially with Mueller probing actions WHILE in office.

    What the previous Administration was doing is much more problematic on a Constitutional level. The evidence suggests an “interference” in a Constitutional “process”, namely an election and a candidate for that elective office, to prevent or at least interfere. This, itself, continued after the candidate became elected whereby national security information was “withheld” from the incoming Administration. This was a clear and distinct violation of the succession of power. These are questions and answers that are NOT being discussed and if we are to continue as a Constitutional Republic we damn well better start asking and demanding answers.

    Reply
  2. Bustah

    My family used to play a game called ‘HATE” with two decks of cards … I can’t remember all the rules, but it was aptly named … My parents played Pinochle too …

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.