Here are my observations and opinions on my selected news items of the day.

WHAT TO BELIEVE – My curiosity was obviously piqued when I read the Washington Times headline, “Strzok, Page messages from Mueller probe lost after phone resets.” What now, I wondered aloud.

The article revealed that “Investigators weren’t able to find any text messages between fired agent Peter Strzok and former bureau lawyer Lisa Page from their time on the Mueller probe because by the time their phones were recovered, they’d been reset for others’ use,” according to an inspector general report.

Despite the black eye the bureau has suffered from Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page, the Times reported that the FBI still isn’t reliably collecting text messages of all of its employees, citing an IG report issued earlier this month.

While researching the online IG report on message recovery, I came across a piece in Politico that seemed to ignore the lack of success with its headline, “DOJ investigation turns up thousands of missing texts from Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.”

Mysteriously, Politico was quick to report that the report “did not attribute the missing texts to malicious intent on behalf of the two, but rather a technology failure by the FBI’s tool used to sweep up text messages.

YOUR INEPT GOVERNMENT IN ACTION – Here are three incredible findings I noted while reviewing the IG report on Strzok and Page’s mobile phones.

“Strzok and Page had each returned DOJ-issued iPhones six months earlier when their assignments to the Special Counsel Office (SCO) had ended. The IG was told that the DOJ issued iPhone previously assigned to Strzok had been re-issued to another FBI agent following Strzok’s departure from SCO. The SCO obtained the iPhone from that individual and provided it to the IG. The IG’s Cyber Investigations Office obtained a forensic extraction of the iPhone previously assigned to Strzok; however, this iPhone had been reset to factory settings and was reconfigured for the new user to whom the device was issued. It did not contain data related to Strzok’s use of the device.”

There’s more … “The SCO was unable to locate the iPhone previously assigned to Page, which had been returned to DOJ’s Justice Management Division (JMD). Subsequently, in early September 2018, JMD informed the IG that it had located the iPhone that had been assigned to Page. Page’s iPhone had been reset to factory settings on July 31, 2017, but had not been issued to a new user. The IG forensic review of the phone determined that it did not contain any data relating to Page’s use of the device.

“The SCO’s records officer stated that she did not receive the phone following Page’s departure from SCO and therefore she did not review Page’s iPhone for records that would possibly need to be retained prior to the phone having been reset.

And finally … “The SCO ‘s Executive Officer completed Page’s exit clearance certification (July 13, 2017), but said that she did not physically receive Page’s issued iPhone and laptop. During a phone call, Page indicated to SCO that she had left her assigned cell phone and laptop on a bookshelf at the office on her final day there. The SCO located the laptop but when asked on January 24, 2018 to locate Page’s iPhone, the SCO was unable to locate the iPhone.

“In early September 2018, JMD staff located Page’s iPhone and notified the IG, which took custody of the device. Upon examining Page’s phone, the IG determined that it had been reset to factory settings on July 31, 2017.

Well, duh … The IG investigation determined that, although the FBI uses an automated application to wirelessly collect messages sent to or from FBI-issued mobile devices where it is retained by the Enterprise Security Center, neither the FBI nor the DOJ currently has a policy directive mandating collection and preservation of text messages by the Center and that the identification and retention of substantive electronic communications is left to the judgement of the individual employee.” That would be Strzok and Page.

Doesn’t all of this give you a lot of confidence in our DOJ and FBI?

BODY LANGUAGE – You may recall how some in the opposition sour grapes media insisted that President Trump crossed his arms in defiance at what was being said during former President George H.W. Bush’s memorial.

Everyone knows that crossing one’s arms across the chest is common and done unconsciously, like folding your hands or resting your chin in your hand.

Yesterday, I noticed the president briefly folded his arms across his chest during a cabinet meeting while he was speaking to the media he had permitted to come into the room. In defiance? Give me a break.

I HAVE ABOUT HAD IT with the Democrats and their complicit sour grapes media who talk continuously about the divisiveness that exists in the country and blame President Trump for dividing us. Never mind that the vote in 2016 clearly indicated a pretty even split between the two candidates.

But, let’s look at how the divisiveness began.

On October 24, 2106, even before Donald Trump was elected, Hillary Clinton, tweeted @HillaryClinton: “Donald Trump refused to say that he’d respect the results of this election. That’s a direct threat to our democracy.”

You may recall that candidate Trump merely said, “Of course I would accept a clear election result, but I would reserve my right to contend or file a legal challenge, in case of a questionable result.”

While Hillary responded with “I for one am appalled that somebody who is the nominee of one our major two parties would take that position.” Yet it was Hillary who chose not to appear before her supporters who waited for her concession at the Javits Center on election night after Trump swept the electoral vote 304 to 227.

And, she joined in the Wisconsin recount with Green Party candidate Jill Stein.

Then, before Trump’s inauguration on January 16, 2017, Georgia Democrat Rep. John Lewis, appearing on NBC’s Meet the Press, called into question Trump’s legitimacy as president. In the weeks that followed, the talking heads of the opposition sour grapes networks continued to invoke the legitimacy issue.

On January 20, 2017, Inauguration Day, nearly 100 Democrats refused to attend Trump’s swearing-in ceremonies, a move that the opposition media pronounced loud and clearly to their audiences.

Those were but a few of the visible beginnings of the anti-Trump or Never Trump resistance movement. Within the walls of the Washington bureaucracy, however, the Deep State’s strategy to block the Trump presidency was set into motion with his victory on November 6, 2016.

Understand that the nation is exposed to an unrelenting drumbeat of 90 percent negative reporting (fake news) by the opposition sour grapes media that results in   low job approval ratings for the president.

It’s not the president who is dividing the country. He’s doing what he promised to do.

FAST FORWARD TO TODAY – The Democrat divisiveness continues. Democrat leaders Pelosi and Schumer refuse to release their members to vote for the $5 billion President Trump has asked for to build the wall in sections of our southern border.

Clearly, their refusal to support the president’s modest request for funding to secure our border is further evidence of resistance to support Trump and obstruct him at any cost when you recall that they voted for the Secure Fence Act in 2006.

The issue is important to the president’s base. A recent Marist Poll revealed that 53 percent of respondents approve of his protection of the U.S. border

          May God bless the United States of America.