Laying The Foundation

In evaluating President Biden’s speech last night, there are a few things to consider when trying to put the speech in context.

Consider the impact of Saul Alinsky on the Democrat party since the 1990’s. If you are not familiar with Saul Alinsky, he was a Chicago community activist who worked through in the Industrial Areas Foundation in Chicago. He was an inspiration for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (and, I am sure, a number of other Democrats). In 1971, Saul Alinsky wrote Rules for Radicals as a guide for political activism and mobilization of politically unrepresented communities. One of the guiding principles in his book was Rule 13: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Another, Rule 4, states, “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” Both of these principles were illustrated last night.

The New York Times posted the transcript of President Biden’s speech.

The President stated:

But as I stand here tonight, equality and democracy are under assault. We do ourselves no favor to pretend otherwise.

So, tonight, I’ve come to this place where it all began to speak as plainly as I can to the nation about the threats we face, about the power we have in our own hands to meet these threats and about the incredible future that lies in front of us, if only we choose it.

We must never forget, we, the people, are the true heirs of the American experiment that began more than two centuries ago.

First of all–we are a representative republic–we are not a democracy. Secondly, equality is not under assault except by those pushing Critical Race Theory, reparations, etc.

The President stated:

Too much of what’s happening in our country today is not normal. Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our Republic.

Now, I want to be very clear, very clear up front. Not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans, are MAGA Republicans. Not every Republican embraces their extreme ideology. I know, because I’ve been able to work with these mainstream Republicans.

But there’s no question that the Republican Party today is dominated, driven and intimidated by Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans. And that is a threat to this country.

Rule 13 in action–pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

The President continued:

And here, in my view, is what is true: MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution. They do not believe in the rule of law. They do not recognize the will of the people. They refuse to accept the results of a free election, and they’re working right now as I speak in state after state to give power to decide elections in America to partisans and cronies, empowering election deniers to undermine democracy itself.

Note the term ‘election deniers.’ That term is used as a pre-emptive attack against any evidence that may come out about election fraud. Remember that the man who just unconstitutionally granted student loan forgiveness is complaining that the MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution. Also note that he is only attacking the MAGA Republicans. The ‘Club’ Republicans are his friends.

The President continues:

MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards, backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you love. They promote authoritarian leaders, and they fanned the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, to the rule of law, to the very soul of this country.

Obviously these accusations are false, but there will be people who will believe them. I don’t believe it was the Republicans who bailed out the rioters of the summer of 2020.

The President stated:

But while the threat to American democracy is real, I want to say as clearly as we can, we are not powerless in the face of these threats. We are not bystanders in this ongoing attack on democracy. There are far more Americans, far more Americans from every background and belief, who reject the extreme MAGA ideology than those that accept it. And folks, it’s within our power, it’s in our hands, yours and mine, to stop the assault on American democracy.

Unfortunately, this is the rhetoric that will be used to justify the limiting of free speech and the attack on political conservatives. Since these people are a threat to American democracy (it’s a republic!), they need to be taken out. We have already seen swatting attacks on Marjorie Taylor Greene and Steve Bannon and a planned assassination of Judge Kavanaugh. This rhetoric will encourage more of that.

The President stated:

MAGA Republicans have made their choice. They embrace anger. They thrive on chaos. They live, not in the light of truth but in the shadow of lies. But together, together, we can choose a different path. We can choose a better path forward to the future, a future of possibility, a future to build a dream and hope, and we’re on that path moving ahead.

Please follow the link above if you want to read the entire speech. Frankly I see the speech as the building of a platform from which to attack any American who does not fall in lockstep with President Biden and those who are controlling him. The attack on MAGA Republicans will only be the beginning. We are heading into a dangerous time.

In Case You Hadn’t Noticed The Double Standard

On Tuesday, The Daily Caller posted an article about the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago (yes, it was a raid). The article points out the contrast in the justification for the raid and historical precedent.

The article notes:

Unless scores of witnesses saw Donald Trump stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot someone, the FBI’s raid of his Mar-a-Lago home represents an unforgivable politicization of our justice system. The proof rests in the peaceful, undisturbed abodes of Hillary Clinton, Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, James Comey, Stefan Halper, Rodney Joffe and every other partisan the FBI investigated without violating the sanctuary of their homes.

…The FBI that raided the former president’s personal residence never sought a warrant to search Clinton’s homes after The New York Times reported on March 3, 2016, that, while secretary of State, she had used a private server. Weeks later Clinton, while plotting her upcoming run for president, wiped her entire server clean using “a sophisticated software program, BleachBit, which eventually made it extraordinarily difficult for the FBI to recover her emails, several thousand of which were successfully destroyed.”

Among the emails deleted were some 30 connected to the Benghazi murders that Clinton never supplied to the State Department upon leaving office — a fairly analogous, albeit more appalling scenario to the theory floated that agents raided Trump’s house on Monday to seize supposedly classified documents.

Agents also didn’t raid Clinton’s homes to recover the 13 mobile devices that the FBI believed the former secretary of State may have used to email her staff. Instead, the DOJ asked Clinton’s attorneys to provide agents the Blackberries and other devices. Less than two weeks later, her lawyers claimed “they were unable to locate any of these devices,” leaving the FBI “unable to acquire or forensically examine any of these 13 mobile devices.”

The article concludes:

Former Department of Justice attorney, Jeff Clark, another Trump loyalist, also saw his home raided by the FBI.

Against this two-pronged approach to justice, Americans need not lean conservative or support Trump to spot the scandal. And Americans need not care about politics to oppose the politicization of the DOJ and FBI: They just need to care about the future of the country — one that cannot survive long if such corruption and cronyism continues.

We need to remember that the President is the person who determines the classification of documents. He has that authority. There is speculation (which I believe will prove true) that the documents the FBI was after were the declassified documents relating to the FBI’s role in the Russiagate scandal. There are a number of powerful people who want those documents destroyed. Although they are declassified, they have not been released. Judicial Watch is suing the Justice Department to obtain them. Stay tuned.

Lessons Learned In Life That Apply In Politics

On Tuesday, The American Thinker posted an article describing what you can learn about an employee by the way he spends his last few days before leaving your employ.

The article notes:

If you work in the business world long enough, you will notice that an employee reveals the most about his own personal work ethic, not when he starts out, not when he’s angling for a bonus or promotion, but at the end, when he gets a new job and gives his two weeks’ notice, or when he starts training his successor as he reaches retirement.

How hard does he work those final weeks? Does he still put the company first, or does he just phone it in? Or does he stuff his briefcase with office supplies, raid the petty cash drawer, and pilfer the prototype cabinet every evening before he goes home?

If he really gives it all he’s got, right up to the last day, then there’s a role model to remember with love.

The same goes for political leadership when it has had its walking papers served on Election Day, or even when that eventuality becomes evident, months in advance.

The polls now are in agreement: barring some earth-shaking shock this autumn, the Democrat party will be out of leadership in the United States House of Representatives and in some state legislatures as well, following the November elections.

Despite what I just quoted, my advice to Republicans is not to count their chickens just yet. There are three plus months for Democrats to pull every dirty trick they can to make sure they hang on to power. Expect anything.

However, the article makes some very good points about the actions of the past Democrat political leadership versus some recent Republican leadership:

As author Barbara Olson revealed in her shocking book, “The Final Days,” much of the Clinton team was so certain they would be carried forward in a Gore administration, many engaged in petty (and some not so petty) acts of sabotage across the executive branch, especially at the White House, between Election Day 2000 and Inauguration Day 2001. That crew spent their final months doing damage.

By contrast, think back on the end of Donald Trump’s first term, as the clock ticked off the final months in 2020-2021.

President Trump’s medical response team had been working on fast-tracking the development and approval of vaccines and treatment arrays for Covid-19 throughout 2020; they didn’t let up, they accelerated their work, right up to the final day, turning over a complete, impressive vaccine and treatment program to the incoming Biden regime.

The article concludes with the actions of the current Congressional leadership:

The Pelosi/Schumer team sees the end of their own gravy train approaching, and they’re gathering every last handful of perks, doling out every last favor to their friends, distributing the largesse that you and I fund to the non-profits and NGOs from whom they will likely seek lucrative jobs the very morning after the voters toss them out on their ungrateful ears in November.

And worst of all, even though this future is all but written in stone, we have to watch it unfold, predictably but unalterably, for another six long, painful months.

There are good reasons why, in the private sector, once you realize you have employees like this in your organization, you have them pack up their desks, and you direct Security to march them out immediately, without postponing the inevitable another day.

Hang on to your hats–unfortunately it’s not over yet.

The Company Town

On Saturday, American Greatness posted an article about how Washington, D.C., currently functions (or does not function). The article is titled, “Dismantle the D.C. Company Town.” What a great idea.

The article reports:

Gertrude Stein famously warned that it was important to know how far to go when going too far. 

It pains me to admit that Democrats seem to have a far better sense of all that than do Republicans. Perhaps it’s because Democrats have a visceral appreciation of William Hazlitt’s observation that “those who lack delicacy hold us in their power.” The Democrats, that is to say, long ago became expert at the game of holding their opponents to standards that they themselves violate not just with impunity but with ostentatious glee. 

The news last week that Michael Sussmann was found not guilty by a D.C. jury of his ideological peers was another thumb in the eye of the American so-called system of justice. Scary-looking super-cop John Durham had indicted Sussmann for the same thing that brought down Trump’s flash-in-the-pan National Security Advisor Mike Flynn—lying to the FBI—but no one who has been paying attention thought the two men would be treated the same way. Flynn was close to Donald Trump, therefore he must be considered a sacrificial beast, someone to be made an example of, a pariah. And so he was. 

Sussmann, by contrast, was a covert employee of the Hillary Clinton campaign. He helped get the Russian Collusion Delusion going and lied to the FBI in the process. But he was on the side of the regime party, so, as Jonathan Turley observed as the Sussmann case unfolded, he was afforded every consideration while Flynn found himself ruined. In this tale of two trials, we got a textbook illustration of how you can deploy a two-tier system of justice in which, as George Orwell put it in Animal Farm: All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others. 

The article also notes the recent arrest of Peter Navarro:

Sussmann joins a long list of Hillary cronies and Department of Justice lackeys (but I repeat myself). In any just world Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, James Comey, Kevin Clinesmith, Loretta Lynch, and indeed Hillary herself would be behind bars. But this is our world, not any just world. 

And here’s some salt to rub in the wound. Peter Navarro, a former Trump economic advisor, was held in contempt of Congress because he refused to hand over documents to the Kangaroo Court, er . . . the Democrat-controlled January 6 inquisition. Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s self-declared “wingman” and Attorney General was also held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over documents. But not to worry. As CNN reported soon after the affront, “The White House and the Justice Department made clear Friday what had been expected all along: Attorney General Eric Holder will not face criminal prosecution under the contempt of Congress citation passed by the U.S. House.”

The article concludes:

In his Philosophical Investigations, Ludwig Wittgenstein says “all philosophical problems have the form ‘I have lost my way.’” The first response to being lost should be to retrace one’s steps in order to escape the maze. It’s time that Americans faced up to the reality that their governing apparat is a corrupt, self-engorging Leviathan. This is not, or not only, a partisan issue. Sure, Washington, D.C. is a fully paid-up concession of the Democratic Party, regularly voting some 93 to 95 percent Democratic. Sussmann was never going to be convicted there.

So a preliminary antiseptic, as I have argued elsewhere, would be to downgrade Washington in the political metabolism of the country. Indeed, I think the capital, if not the Capitol, ought to be dispersed. Washington, D.C., could continue to function as what it has already in part become: a sort of stage set where functionaries preen and simper before the cameras of a preposterous media and press corps. 

Donald Trump made a few half-hearted stabs at dismantling the lumbering machine that is the Washington establishment, but that seems like a long time ago and, besides, the swamp closed almost instantly to reassert its prerogatives. In his next term, however, he should make the destruction of the Washington machine one of his highest priorities. It won’t be easy. To be frank, I am not sure, absent some world-shaking calamity, it is even possible. But it is nevertheless necessary if anything resembling the republic as envisioned by the founders is to be salvaged.

We have wandered far from the republic the Founding Fathers created. I pray it is not too late to get it back.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article.

The Seeds Were Planted For The Destruction Of The Republic In 2012

On Tuesday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article that explains a lot of the initial and ongoing attacks on the Trump administration and President Trump. It also offers a possible explanation as to why so few in the Washington swamp have been willing to fight the seemingly endless corruption.

The article reports:

There is very little that surprises me, but this is completely stunning.  An FBI whistleblower came forth to inform Rep Jim Jordan and Rep Matt Gaetz that the FBI maintains a workspace inside the law firm of Perkins Coie.  {Direct Rumble Link}

In response to a letter sent by Rep. Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan, Perkins Coie, the legal arm of the DNC and Hillary Clinton, admitted they have been operating an FBI workspace in their Washington D.C. office since 2012.  Pay attention to that date, it matters.

This is a huge development.  Essentially, what is being admitted in this claim is that a portal existed into FBI databases within the law firm that represents democrats.  This means access to FBI database searches exists inside the office of the DNC and Clinton legal group.  Think about the ramifications here.

CTH has long claimed there was some kind of direct portal link between the Clinton campaign team and the FBI databases.  There were too many trails of extracted non-minimized research evidence in the hands of the Clinton team that CTH could not trace to a transferring FBI official.  If Perkins Coie operated a portal in their office that allowed them to conduct search queries of American citizens, then everything would make sense.  That access portal is exactly what is being claimed and admitted in this report.

The start date of 2012 is important for several reasons, not the least of which is FISA presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer criticizing the scale and scope of unlawful FBI database access going back to exactly 2012.  Keep in mind a FISA-702 search, is simply an unlawful FBI warrantless electronic search of an American (“702” represents the American citizen) into the central database -maintained by the NSA- that contains all electronic data and communication.

I have been in the deep hole of the FISA-702 database search query violations for so long I don’t even need a flashlight.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It includes some of Rosemary Collyer’s prior report on FBI abuses of the database.

There were some people who warned us when the Patriot Act was passed after 9/11 that it would lead to government abuses and illegal spying on Americans. Evidently they were right.

Something To Keep In Mind

It is becoming obvious that someone will be thrown to the lions in the John Durham investigation. It will probably be someone (or someones) associated with the Clinton campaign. It may even include a Clinton (but I doubt it). The mob (many Americans) are demanding accountability, and some accountability will be provided. However, the root of the problem will never be dealt with.

The following is an excerpt from an article posted in The Conservative Treehouse on May 17:

As noted by Charlie Savage, prosecutor Deborah Shaw, a member of the Durham team, delivered the opening remarks to frame the government position in the case.

The telling remarks came early: “Shaw addresses “the elephant in the room” – tells jury their feelings about Russia, Trump, Clinton can’t play a role in the case. This is about “our FBI” which should not be used as a tool by anyone, Republicans or Democrats.”  In essence, prosecutor Shaw is telling the jury the FBI were duped into the Trump-Russia conspiracy investigation by outsiders connected to the Clinton campaign.

That’s a critical baseline from the government we must understand and accept.  That baseline now indicates that none of the DOJ and FBI operatives involved in the fraudulent scheme will be held accountable by the Durham team.  “Our FBI should not be used as a tool by anyone,” yet they were, so sayeth the United States Government.

There you have it folks.  For those who tried to avoid the uncomfortable reality of the situation. The Durham prosecution has set down the cornerstone establishing the DOJ/FBI was used and tricked.

The prosecution cannot later turn toward DOJ and FBI officials who were victimized by the Clinton outside group, reverse the predicate motive of the prior trial, and then hold the DOJ and FBI legally accountable.

That’s that.

The Durham accountability focus is now narrowed to the Clinton team, starting with Michael Sussmann.

This outcome was always visible when we accept the totality of the Robert Mueller probe as an overlay into this entire scenario.  Put into a question I have asked for two years:

How could John Durham hold DOJ and FBI officials accountable for participating in the Trump-Russia fraud, when those same DOJ and FBI officials were part of the Robert Mueller cover-up operation? 

Answer, they can’t.   If Durham were to connect the conspiracy of the outside government and inside government collusion, he would be penetrating an impregnable firewall that would take down multiple DC government institutions simultaneously.

Durham is being permitted to give the illusion of accountability, but he was not authorized or permitted to expose the Dept of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, or any other institution.

The vehicles of our justice institutions are rusted and broken.

Bill Barr was the Bondo application.  John Durham is the spray paint.

The article includes the following Tweet:

That’s where we are, folks. Until we pay closer attention to primary elections and un-elect the Washington swamp creatures, things will not change.

 

Is It Possible To Restore Trust In The FBI?

Yesterday The American Thinker posted an article highlighting how the FBI has broken its relationship with the American public.

The article notes:

All large organizations suffer from the occasional presence of bad actors.  The FBI is no exception.  But it managed to retain a good relationship with the public in spite of its flaws because it was still solving rather than creating crimes. 

But something fundamentally changed in the last five years.  The Comey clown car arrived in the center ring and unloaded under the spotlight.  As the public watched the comedy of James “The Cardinal” Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page, searching for phantom Russian colluders under the bed, while actual Russian colluders cheered them on, we knew we needed to take a closer look.  The examination has been shocking.

The “Midyear Exam,” the bureau’s name for the Hillary Clinton email investigation, was a farce.  No subpoenas were issued, central figures were given immunity without cooperation, evidence was destroyed by the FBI, and then the attorney general had a clandestine meeting with “Slick Willy” Clinton — the husband of the target.  Surprise: No charges were filed.  “The Cardinal” Comey held a press conference and announced that even though Hillary had broken numerous laws, she didn’t mean it, so he was giving her a pass.  It must have been an accident that an email server, containing classified documents, appeared in her bathroom — with a support staff.

“Crossfire Hurricane” was the investigation into alleged Trump collusion with Russia to steal an election.  Within a couple of months, the bureau knew that the whole thing was a hoax created by Hillary, yet the investigation continued for three years — eventually transitioning into a special counsel investigation.  Peter Strzok called “Crossfire Hurricane” the bureau’s insurance policy — against a Trump presidency.  It was a good way to show off for his mistress, Lisa Page — a rabid anti-Trump FBI lawyer.

The “Midyear Exam” was a cover-up, and “Crossfire Hurricane” was a setup.  Both were exposed by the clown show the FBI put on.  Now the public is paying attention.  Conspiracies that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago seem entirely plausible now.

The article concludes:

The FBI will cease being the “plumbers” (the nickname for Nixon’s henchmen) for the Democrats and become the enemy of both parties.  Then either it or America will die.  A free people cannot coexist with a secret police force, using investigations for purposes other than law enforcement.  The contest will be epic.

A recent Zogby poll found that by 46 to 31 percent, members of the public think their sheriff’s department has more legal authority than the FBI.  Obviously, the legal authority of the bureau is not subject to opinion.  It is defined by statute.  But there’s an important message in that poll.  We are self-governed.  Legal authority, without moral authority, equals no authority — at least not over free people.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. We currently have a problem in the Department of Justice, and the FBI is only a small part of that problem. When anyone who disagrees with the Democrats is at risk of being investigated for being a domestic terrorist, we have entered the world of totalitarian governments. That is not a place I want to be.

An Interesting Perspective

Yesterday Trending Politics posted an article showing a series of Tweets by former NY Times reporter Alex Berenson. Recently Alex Berenson is known for challenging the fear-based mainstream coronavirus narratives. His observations on the current election are interesting.

Here is a summary of the Tweets. If you follow the link above to the article, you can see the original Tweets:

Look, I don’t know if President Trump wins or not – the polls say one thing and the rallies say something else, and it feels like it’s going to be close either way – but this is already the most serious populist repudiation of elite opinion since at least Andrew Jackson. 

Remember, in 2016 the elites thought Trump was a joke. They didn’t think he could possibly win and they treated the election that way. This time they are treating him as a deadly threat, and practically EVERY center of gravity in the United States is aligned against him.

Not just conventional media and Hollywood and the social sciences, as in 2016, but big technology companies/social media, non-profits, the physical sciences and medicine, which have been relatively non-partisan, and most shockingly much of the national security community.

And yet, despite all of this, and despite the efforts to frame the Coronavirus as an end-of-days plague, and despite now running at a big fundraising deficit to Uncle Joe (as he did to Hillary Clinton) Trump is clearly in striking distance. People are FED UP.

That pretty much sums it up!

This Post Was Deleted By Facebook

This was posted on Facebook at RADlaw Radio by Robert DuChemin. He had tried to post it on home page, but Facebook deleted it. This sort of censorship doesn’t help anyone.

This is the post:

Here is part of my personal post that FB banned.
On Monday, while most people were still reeling from his recent racist comments, Touchy Joe referred to some nearby children saying, “And I want to see these beautiful young ladies, I want to see them dancing when they are four years older too.”
I knew he wasn’t just hiding from the Chinese Plague in his basement; he is watching Cuties 24/7. He cannot wait for the “smell-the-hair” sequel.
——
The Director of National Intelligence released John Brennan’s hand-written notes on his briefing President Obama in July 2016 on HRC’s attempts to get Russia to help her win the 2016 election.
ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC all failed to comment on this release. These networks spent three years vilifying President Trump on no evidence, for something a $40 million investigation proved to be false. Yet they chose to ignore actual evidence of Slick Willie’s wife doing exactly what they claimed the President was doing. Newspapers in Paris, London, Geneva and Lion (and I am sure many others but there’s a limit as to how many papers I can read each day) all led with the story today. The news media in the USA simply cannot be trusted.
John Brennan publicly confirmed that the notes were his and that he notified Obama of HRC’s attempt to have the Russians influence the 2016 election on her behalf in July 2016. He tried to downplay it but he took the unusual step of personally briefing the president. He must have thought it was quite important at the time.
Still silence from the networks.
HRC held a press conference to tell the world that this was simply a Republican “election ploy.” Yeah, Hilly, a CIA director appointed by a Democrat and himself a very outspoken Democrat had a conversation with the Democrat President of the United States about your illegal activity and it was a Republican ploy. Go back to your vodka.
——
Speaking of Clinton gang activities, the CIA and the DOJ both responded to court-ordered production of documents yesterday by saying they will “neither confirm nor deny” the existence of any documents, including email communications, to or from Clinton operative Eric Ciaramella. The DOJ has a valid case because there is an open investigation into the Clinton corruption.
The CIA, however, has a horrible case that this is an interest of national security. It is not.
In addition, this is the fourth time in the last seven days that CIA director Gina Haspel has used her position to block the release of information that proves the existence of HRC’s corruption of the DOJ and CIA.
It looks like another swamp creature has come to the surface. Hopefully our Witcher, Donald J Trump, will remove this one as well.
——
Finally, Ms. Obomb Released a video in which she blames President Trump for all of the racism caused by her husband and her. She actually claims there has been no violence at the BLM protests in United States this summer. Hmmm. How did those officers get shot?
I noticed she released it from her multi-million-dollar estate on Martha’s Vineyard and not from her hometown of Chicago, were they just had the deadliest September since the days of Al Capone, 98% of which was black-on-black crime.
Keep it up Michelle and you too can have a love affair with vodka, just like your idol.
——

Searching For Transparency

Gregg Jarrett has been one of the few people who has investigated the Obama spy scandal from the beginning. Everything he was saying three years ago has turned out to be true. He posted an article on his website today about some recent comments from Representative Devin Nunes.

The article reports:

Representative Devin Nunes, a Republican from California and top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, has suggested a drastic idea to hold U.S. intelligence agencies accountable.  Specifically, for not turning over information regarding their intel on then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016.

In an interview with Fox News on Sunday, Rep. Nunes said “every Republican senator and member of Congress should be saying…we want every damn bit of evidence that every intelligence agency has or it’s maybe time to shut those agencies down.”

Rep. Nunes’s comments come after the release of a shocking memo last week from John Ratcliffe. Ratcliffe, the director of national intelligence, released through the Senate Judiciary Committee a memo which said “U.S. intelligence agencies obtained intercepted Russian intelligence agencies discussing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s authorization of a plan to link President Donald Trump to the Kremlin’s hacking efforts” reports the Daily Caller.

In the memo, Ratcliffe quoted a U.S. intelligence community investigative referral to the FBI which mentions the “approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.”

The key paragraph in the article states:

Nunes’ concerns stem from the fact that a lot of information on the matter is still classified, therefore he and other lawmakers cannot discuss it publicly. Nunes says he has seen those pieces of intelligence which are “definitely smoking guns” that “definitely needs to be made available to the American public.”

We need to know the truth before the election. Voters also need to understand that the misuse of the federal government to spy on political opponents will continue if the people responsible for it in 2015 and 2016 are not held accountable. Do you want to live in a country where a political party uses the instruments of government against its citizens? That is what will happen if the Democrats gain control of the government in November.

And The Games Continue

The Democrats are quietly trying to blunt the impact of the Republican National Convention on voters. Unfortunately, the people who put the Republic convention together had a better understanding of television production than the people who put the Democrat convention together. The latest effort by the Democrats was putting out a list of Republicans voting for Joe Biden. That was almost impressive until you looked at the list.

The Daily Caller posted the following today:

Nothing says “authentic” like a list of “Republican” supporters who aren’t Republicans.
That’s the sleight of hand Joe Biden just tried to pull. On Monday afternoon, his presidential campaign blasted out a “[h]uge list of Arizona Republicans … endorsing @JoeBiden today,” in an attempt to paint the Democratic ticket as bipartisan. We in Arizona were a little confused, though, because most of the endorsees on the list aren’t exactly what you’d call Republicans.
Right at the top of the list (you guessed it) is former senator Jeff Flake, who suddenly dropped out of his reelection race in 2017 after realizing that Republican primary voters didn’t like him — and neither did anybody else. Most of the time, the former senator is out of sight (and out of mind). But every now and then he’ll pop his head above ground to remind the media how woke he is and get a sniff of that “Strange New Respect.”
This week’s endorsement is just another example of that. In 2016, Flake announced that he wasn’t voting for President Trump. In 2019, he bragged that “I would support a Democrat” for president, adding: “… obviously Joe Biden comes to mind.” Finally, in early 2020, he reiterated that November “won’t be the first time I’ve voted for a Democrat.”

…Following Flake on Biden’s list is Jim Kolbe, who left Congress while George W. Bush was still in office. The former congressman soon after became an Obama appointee and subsequently crossed “Republican” off of his voter registration.
Following him is Grant Woods. You might be asking: “Who is that?” So are we.
Woods, a politician from the 1990s, gained a reputation as a liberal Republican before disappearing from the political world for a decade while working as a trial lawyer. He came out of the woodwork in 2010 to endorse Felecia Rotellini (now the Arizona Democratic Party’s chairwoman) for state attorney general and again in 2014 to endorse Democrat Fred DuVal for governor. Woods then endorsed Democrat Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 — he called her “one of the most qualified nominees to ever run” — and endorsed Democrats Hiral Tipirneni and Kyrsten Sinema in 2018 before formally changing his own voter registration to Democrat.
But, yes, definitely a Republican.

You get the picture. After a while you begin to wonder why President Trump is such a threat to the Washington establishment. Remember the statement by Hillary Clinton, “If That F-ing B*stard Trump Wins, We All Hang From Nooses.”

A video of the incident is posted at YouTube. Also here.

People who lose elections in America do not generally hang from nooses. This statement has always made me wonder what she was guilty of that put that thought in her mind.

As we continue through the political silly season, be aware that most of what you read from the mainstream media is simply not true or simply incomplete information. Be your own best fact-checker.

This Could Get Interesting

The following Press Release was posted by Judicial Watch yesterday:

Judicial Watch: Appellate Court Hearing on Clinton Email Testimony Tuesday – Hillary Clinton Seeks to Block Court Order Requiring Her to Testify

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch today announced that a hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 2, by teleconference, in U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit regarding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s efforts to avoid testifying, under oath, about her emails. Clinton’s former Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, also seeks to avoid giving testimony.

The appellate court is considering Clinton and Mills’ extraordinary request, known as a “petition for writ of mandamus,” to overturn an order issued by U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth requiring them to testify. 

Clinton argues she shouldn’t have to testify because she is a former, high level government official and that the case is moot because the FBI already tried to recover her emails from various sources when it investigated allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on the personal e-mail server she used at State. Judicial Watch argues neither Clinton nor Mills have demonstrated that they should not have to follow ordinary appellate rules to challenge the District Court’s order and that the case is not moot. Judicial Watch argues that the FBI’s effort was not exhaustive, as demonstrated by the discovery of some 30 additional Clinton emails late last year, among other developments, and that other emails may be recovered if State is required to look for them.

The hearing is in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit: 

Date:               Tuesday, June 2, 2020

Time:               9:30 am ET

Location:        Telephonic, oral argument can be heard on the court’s website 

This hearing comes in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that seeks records concerning “talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack” (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)). In 2014, Judicial Watch uncovered “talking points” created by the Obama White House showing that statements about the attack made on the eve of the 2012 elections by then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice were misleading, if not false. This FOIA lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of the Clinton email system in 2015. 

On March 2, 2020, Judge Lamberth granted Judicial Watch discovery that includes taking testimony from Clinton and Mills, under oath, regarding Clinton’s emails and the existence of records about the Benghazi attack. In April, Judicial Watch and the State Department, which is represented by Justice Department lawyers, filed responses opposing Clinton’s and Mills’ request to overturn the order requiring their testimony. The lower court found that Clinton’s testimony was necessary:

The Court has considered the numerous times in which Secretary Clinton said she could not recall or remember certain details in her prior interrogatory answers. In a deposition, it is more likely that plaintiff’s counsel could use documents and other testimony to attempt to refresh her recollection. And so, to avoid the unsatisfying and inefficient outcome of multiple rounds of fruitless interrogatories and move this almost six-year-old case closer to its conclusion, Judicial Watch will be permitted to clarify and further explore Secretary Clinton’s answers in person and immediately after she gives them. The Court agrees with Judicial Watch – it is time to hear directly from Secretary Clinton.

In December 2018, Judge Lamberth ordered discovery into whether Clinton’s use of a private email server was intended to avoid FOIA; whether the State Department’s intent to settle this case in late 2014 and early 2015 amounted to bad faith; and whether the State Department has adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request. The lower court also authorized discovery into whether the Benghazi controversy motivated the cover-up of Clinton’s email. It ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”

What The Transcripts Tell Us

Just the News posted an article yesterday listing the top six revelations from House Russia probe’s newly declassified witness interviews. Please follow the link to the article to read the details, but here is the list of the six revelations:

  1. No Collusion: The U.S. intelligence community never had any evidence of collusion between Russia and the 2016 Trump presidential campaign.
  2. FBI didn’t have a case: Former Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe admitted during his testimony that the agency knew from the start that Trump associate George Papadopoulos wasn’t in contact with Moscow, thereby undermining the agency’s entire basis for opening Crossfire Hurricane, i.e., the Russia investigation. “Papadopoulos, didn’t particularly indicate that he was the person that was interacting with the Russians,” McCabe told the House Intelligence panel.
  3. Podesta and Clinton knew about funding for Steele Dossier: John Podesta, chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, testified that he and Clinton were aware in general terms that the campaign was paying for opposition research to link Donald Trump to Russia, but he said neither of them knew specifically who had been hired to conduct the effort.
  4. Clapper, Comey, and McCabe provide conflicting narratives: Clapper testified that he did not brief then-President Obama on former Michael Flynn’s conversation with the Russian ambassador in January 2017. However, both former FBI Director Comey and McCabe say otherwise.
  5. CrowdStrike says evidence of DNC hack was “not conclusive”: The president of CrowdStrike, a data security company retained by the DNC after it was hacked, testified to the House panel that there were “indications” of a hack into the DNC servers, but not concrete, irrefutable evidence.
  6. DNC lawyer ordered to tip off the CIA: Michael Sussmann, a Perkins Coie lawyer who represented both the Clinton campaign and the DNC in their response to presumed Russian hacking, testified that in February 2017, he went to the CIA, on behalf of a client whom he did not name, in an attempt to tip them off about the Trump organization’s ties to Russia.

The more we learn, the more this looks like a coup.

More Information About Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election

I don’t fault people in Washington for having political beliefs. I do fault them when their political beliefs interfere with their ability to do their job honestly. Unfortunately we saw a lot of that during the Obama administration.

On Sunday, The Gateway Pundit posted a video of an interview of Fred Fleitz, former CIA Analyst and National Security Council Chief of Staff, by Jan Jekielek at American Thought Leaders.

The video is posted at the sight, but I would like to share an excerpt from the transcript:

Fred Fleitz: The House Intelligence Community discovered from the CIA that there was evidence that the Russians actually wanted Hillary Clinton to win the election and for Trump to lose. And this was strong intelligence. The reason was they thought Hillary was a known quantity. Trump was an unknown quantity and they were worried he would bring anti-Russian hawks into the administration. That information according to a House Intelligence staff, they told me this, was excluded over the objections of CIA analysts by Brennan. On the other hand, there was weak intelligence that the Russians wanted Trump to win. And according to House Intelligence Committee staffers this was included over the objection of CIA officers by Brennan. So Brennan actually slanted this analysis, choosing anti-Trump intelligence and excluding anti-Clinton intelligence. The problem is the House report, which I think is full of all these bombshells has been stuck at the CIA since the fall of 2018.

And, I’m hoping that Rick Grenell or maybe John Durham, who is doing an investigation of government misconduct surrounding the election. I’m hoping one of them is going to pry this loose because the American people have to know about it.

The article includes the following tweet:

Stay tuned.

This Is A Real Story–It’s Not Satire

The quest to be Joe Biden’s running mate is getting interesting. One of the people that is said to be in the running is Michigan’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer. Her handling of the coronavirus has made the news more than once. At one point (I don’t know if this is still in force), Michigan residents were forbidden to leave their primary residences to go to their second homes. They weren’t allowed to work, but they weren’t allowed to go to their lake house and chill. They were also prevented from buying seeds to plant a garden.

One America News posted an article about Governor Whitmer yesterday. What you are about to read is not a joke.

The article reports:

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) said former vice president Joe Biden has been counseling her on how to handle the coronavirus in her state.

In an interview Monday, Whitmer praised her “good relationship” with Biden by saying she talks to him often about how to “communicate with people” about the pandemic.

This comes as many are speculating that Whitmer may be on the short-list of candidates that Biden is considering to be his running mate.

“I have a good relationship with the (former) vice president, he came and helped me a bit when I was running for governor,” she stated. “We’re cut from a similar cloth…he loves people, he is regularly checking in with me about what’s going on here in Michigan and what do we need.”

Is this the same Joe Biden that couldn’t even stay awake during the video of Hillary Clinton’s endorsement of him? Wow.

The article continues:

When asked about rumors she may be on Biden’s short-list, she said “you don’t run for that” and anyone he’s considering should focus on just “doing their jobs.”

You have to give the lady credit–she has obviously learned to lie with a straight face.

Bucket Five Is Released

Those of us who have followed the investigation into Crossfire Hurricane closely have been waiting for the information in Bucket Five to be released. That is the information that investigative reporters have cited from the beginning as having the real story behind the surveillance on the Trump campaign and the early days of the Trump presidency. The Conservative Treehouse posted an article today about the documents the Senate Judiciary Committee has released today. The article includes links and screenshots of information and is very detailed. I recommend that you follow the link and read the entire article, but I will includes some of the highlights here.

The article reports:

The documents include more Papadopoulos transcripts from wired conversations with FBI confidential human source Stefan Halper; and also for the first time less redacted version of all three Carter Page FISA applications.  It’s going to take some time to go through this.

The declassification and release includes some seriously interesting documents the DOJ submitted to the FISA court, as far back as July 2018, which completely destroy the prior claims made by Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, James Baker, James Comey, Andrew McCabe and their very vocal media and Lawfare defenders.   Here’s one example:

Lisa Page testified to congress, and claimed in media, that the FBI never had any contact with the Steele dossier material until September 2016.  However, the DOJ directly tells the FISA court that Chris Steele was funneling his information to the FBI in June 2016.

Obviously those involved in the surveillance never expected the truth to come out. They assumed that Hillary Clinton would be elected and their illegal activities would be buried in a sea of classified information. All Americans need to understand that if the Democrat party gains power in Washington, no one involved in this illegal surveillance will ever be held accountable and similar activities will continue in the future. Until the people involved in these activities are held accountable, there will be no guarantee that the civil rights of Americans will not be violated by our government in the future.

The Case For Investigating The Trump Campaign And Presidency Just Keeps Getting Weaker

Yesterday John Solomon posted an article at Just The News with the following title, “The 13 revelations showing the FBI never really had a Russia collusion case to begin with.”

I am going to list the revelations without the comments, so please follow the link to read the entire article. It is chilling to think that a political party in power can use such flimsy information to spy on the political campaign (and presidency) of the opposing party.

Here is the list:

1.) The FBI possessed information dating to 2015 in Steele’s intelligence (Delta) file warning that he might be the victim of Russian disinformation through his contacts with Vladimir Putin-connected oligarchs.

2.) Senior Justice Department official Bruce Ohr warned the FBI in August 2016 that Steele held an extreme bias against Trump (he was “desperate” to defeat Trump) and that his information was likely uncorroborated raw intelligence.

3.) Steele’s work on the dossier was funded by Trump’s rival in the election, Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and the Democratic Party, through their opposition research firm, Fusion GPS.

4.) Steele told a State Department official in October 2016, 10 days before the FISA warrants were first secured, that he had leaked to the news media and had an election day deadline for making public the information he had shared with the FBI as a confidential human source.

5.) Steele was fired Nov. 1, 2016 for violating his confidential human source agreement by leaking to the news media.

6.) Information Steele provided to the government was proven, before the FISA warrants were granted, to be false and inaccurate.

7.) Steele was caught in October 2016 peddling a false internet rumor also being spread by a lawyer for the Democratic National Committee and a liberal reporter.

8.) The FBI falsely declared to the FISA court it had corroborated the evidence in Steele’s dossier used in the search warrant application, including that Carter Page had met with two senior Russians in Moscow in summer 2016

9.) The FBI interviewed Steele’s primary sub-source in January 2017, who claimed much of the information attributed to him was not accurate, exaggerated or rumor.

10.) The FBI possessed statements of innocence from Page collected by an undercover informer in August and October 2016, including that Page denied meeting with the two Russians and did not play a role in changing a GOP platform position on Ukraine during the Trump nominating convention.

11.) The CIA alerted the FBI that Page was a friendly U.S. asset who had assisted the Agency on Russia matters and was not a stooge for the Russian government.

12.) The FBI possessed exculpatory statements made by Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos in which he told an undercover informer he and the Trump campaign were not involved in the Russian hacking of Clinton’s emails and considered such activity to be “illegal.”

13.) The FBI concluded in January 2017 that Trump national security adviser Mike Flynn was not being deceptive in his interviews with agents and likely suffered from a faulty memory and was not operating as an agent for Russia.

The only thing I can add to this is that this should NEVER happen again in America. The only way to prevent it from happening again is the put the people in jail who violated the civil rights of Americans by lying to the FISA Court.

Elizabeth Warren Has Dropped Out Of The Democrat Presidential Race

Elizabeth Warren is no longer running for President. I am not sure who she will support–I suspect it will be Joe Biden. That is because I think she wants to be in the good graces of the party heavyweights who are supporting Biden. The Democrat primary is now between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden. It is interesting to me that both are blaming President Trump for everything that is wrong with Washington–they have been there more than forty years and he has been there three.

Yesterday Accuracy in Media posted an interesting article about what is going on behind the scenes in the Democrat primary.

The article notes:

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) claimed the 2016 Democratic Party primary was rigged in favor of his opponent, Hillary Clinton. President Trump made the same claim on behalf of Sanders, especially after the coalescing of moderate Democratic Party candidates behind former vice president Joe Biden.

President Donald Trump told the press, “I think it’s rigged against Bernie.” He said that Sanders is not out of the race yet and could “pull through” and win the nomination in the party’s convention. The president previously tweeted that the Democratic Party was “staging a coup against Bernie” on Monday.

…By all appearances, the timing of Buttigieg and Klobuchar exiting the primary race was unorthodox because the Super Tuesday primaries were taking place within 72 hours. Neither candidate indicated that they would leave the race after the South Carolina primary election.

Additionally, news reports said that Buttigieg suspended his campaign after speaking with former president Barack Obama, a Biden ally. NBC News said, “There appears to be a quiet hand behind the rapid movement: former President Barack Obama.”

Although it cannot be proven that the Democratic Party primary system is rigged against Sanders, there are indications that the party establishment is working against Sanders’ campaign. It also does not help that the media will not publicly question the theory that the party establishment is working against Sanders. For example, last week, NBC News claimed Sanders “’rigged’ the system against himself.”

The media was dishonest in its news coverage because it failed to emphasize the behind-the-scenes workings of the Democratic Party establishment to coalesce around Biden and hamstring Sanders. It cannot be proven by conjecture and news reports, but the coverage trends do not favor Sanders’ viability as a candidate fighting an internal battle against the party establishment.

I am having trouble believing that the media is unaware that Joe Biden is a horrible candidate. The only reason for having him be the candidate is to prevent Bernie Sanders from being the candidate. This is flawed logic–if Bernie Sanders is denied the nomination again, I doubt his supporters will vote at all. Young voters don’t have a great voting record to begin with and having their candidate denied the nomination unfairly might easily cause them to stay home. I really don’t believe that when all is said and done that Joe Biden will be the candidate. I am suspicious that someone will step in during the convention and take the nomination. I can’t imaging how that would happen, but Joe Biden seems to be so mentally incompetent that I can’t imaging putting him on the ticket. Can you picture a debate between Joe Biden and President Trump? Do you remember Admiral Stockwell?

An Interesting Question

The Federalist posted an article today that asks an interesting question–“If Bloomberg Couldn’t Buy 2020, How Could Russia Buy 2016?”

The article quotes The Federalist Senior Editor Mollie Hemingway:

“We had years where people were saying a couple hundred thousand dollars in barely literate Facebook ads from Russians caused Donald Trump to win. Here you had a guy spend nearly $1 billion and he went nowhere. It’s a humiliating defeat for Michael Bloomberg,” she said.

Host Bret Baier drilled the point home: “So Russians influenced the election with $200,000, or $300,000 in Facebook ads? And Mike Bloomberg couldn’t get more than 50 delegates with $600 million dollars?”

“And this hurts Bernie Sanders’s message, too, because he likes to say the billionaires control everything,” Hemingway said. “Clearly Bloomberg having all this money didn’t do as much for him as Biden having the media and the establishment behind him. I would pick media and establishment over millions all day.”

If money could buy elections, we would have either President Jeb Bush or President Hillary Clinton. American voters do respond to ads, but they also have common sense.

A Person’s Reputation Matters

Everyone has a reputation. You have a reputation among your close friends and among people who don’t know you very well. That reputation is based on observations of your honesty, integrity, character, and other personality traits. That reputation determines the opportunities and experiences that will be available to you. Occasionally people make decisions that seem odd in light of another person’s reputation. That has happened recently.

The Gateway Pundit posted an article today noting a comment by former Clinton advisor Dick Morris upon hearing that Michael Bloomberg is considering Hillary Clinton as a possible running mate.

The article reports:

Former Clinton advisor Dick Morris fired a warning shot to Mike Bloomberg following Matt Drudge’s claim that Bloomberg was considering Hillary Clinton as a running mate.

“Sources close to Bloomberg campaign tell DRUDGE REPORT that candidate is considering Hillary as running mate, after their polling found the Bloomberg-Clinton combination would be a formidable force…” Matt Drudge said.

DICK MORRIS: To: Mike Bloomberg: Before you put Hillary on your ticket, better hire a taster

The Clintons have never actually been convicted of a serious crime, yet they have a reputation that has followed them in their political career. The number of associates of the Clintons or people preparing to testify against them that have died under unusual circumstances is long. I doubt the Clintons will ever be convicted of anything, yet their reputation has followed them through the years. The fact that Dick Morris would joke about this (if he was joking) is telling.

There Are Serious Problems In Our Justice System

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about the sentencing of Roger Stone. Frankly it seems as if Roger Stone’s biggest crime was supporting President Trump.

The article reports:

Federal prosecutors’ initial recommendation that Roger Stone serve between seven to nine years in prison was unusually excessive compared to similar sentences imposed for lying to Congress, according to an analysis by The Washington Times.

However, the Justice Department’s move to reduce the sentencing recommendation for an ally of President Trump set off a politically-charged fracas in Washington. Capitol Hill Democrats demanded an investigation into why the department overruled prosecutors’ initial request as “excessive and unwarranted.”

A Washington jury convicted Stone in November of lying to Congress, obstruction of justice and witness tampering for thwarting lawmakers’ investigation into Trump campaign collusion with Russia.

Roger Stone was arrested in a predawn raid with a S.W.A.T. team. He was not considered a danger to anyone, and his wife is deaf. Can you imagine the fear she felt. This whole scenario is over the top.

Meanwhile, do you remember Brock Allen Turner? He was a Stanford University student athlete caught in the act of raping a female student. He was sentenced to six months in the county jail and probation. What about Hillary Clinton and her secret server? How many security violations and destruction of evidence charges were overlooked there? Meanwhile a young submariner was sent to jail for taking a picture of his workspace.

Our justice system is wandering down a road that should not be traveled.

The article at The Washington Times notes:

Two other political figures ensnared in then-special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe also were convicted for lying to Congress:

⦁ Lobbyist W. Samuel Patten pleaded guilty and prosecutors dropped the charge. He got three years probation for illegal lobbying.

⦁ Former Trump fixer Michael Cohen received four years in prison after he pleaded guilty to lying to Congress and other crimes.

The key difference between Stone’s and other cases is he also went down for obstruction and tampering with witnesses. Prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington said the added convictions demanded more prison time.

They were “piling on,” said former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy.

“A sentence of nine years is unreasonable,” he said. “The Justice Department could have brought this whole case as one count of obstruction and instead brought seven felonies.”

This sentence does need to be revised.

When The Truth Is Stretched So Thin You Can See Through It

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article that included an amazing comment by one of the House Impeachment Managers.

The article notes:

Impeachment manager Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) on Thursday was asked whether the Clinton campaign’s use of the Steele Dossier in 2016 would be considered impeachable under the Dems’ standard.

Hakeem Jeffries said no because the Steele dossier was opposition research that “was purchased.”

What a disaster for the Democrats!

So if Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election, the legitimacy of her victory would not be in question by the Democrats even though she paid a former British spy to compile a dossier using Russian intel sources.

In other words, foreign interference in US elections is fine as long as you are a Democrat and you pay for it.

Wow. So according to Representative Jeffries, it is okay to use foreign sources to influence and election as long as you pay those sources.

What is interesting about this is that the Democrats are no longer contesting the fact that the Clinton campaign paid for the Steele Dossier. Are they also willing to admit that the Dossier was passed on to government agencies for nefarious purposes? Will they be willing to admit that their opposition research was used by the Obama administration to spy on the Trump campaign? Will the Democrats ever take responsibility for the use of government agencies for political purposes that occurred during the Obama administration?

I am not worried about foreign influence supporting Republicans in the 2020 election. I have no reason to believe that the Democrats will again choose to break any law they think they need to in order to win. If you haven’t seen the Politico article about Ukrainian interference in the 2016 Presidential election, please read it (I strongly disagree with the opening statement, but there is a lot of good information in the article).

I Suspect We May Hear More About This In The Future

There were a lot of really squirrelly moments in the 2016 presidential campaign. Some of them are beginning to come to light–(Politico reporting on the Ukraine involvement in support of Hillary Clinton, the Steele Dossier, making sure Bernie Sanders was denied the nomination, and the fact that the FBI was never allowed to look at the DNC computers that the Democrats claimed were hacked). I suspect that over the coming months we may learn things about these events that will be totally different to what the mainstream media has told us. One item that comes up periodically is the murder of Seth Rich and the investigation that followed. The Gateway Pundit posted an article today about the investigation into that murder.

The article reports:

Christopher Wray’s FBI lied again.  His FBI claimed that Seth Rich’s DNC computer and emails were investigated upon his death but then his FBI backtracked and claimed no related docs were available in a FOIA request.

Now we know it was just another Deep State lie!

We reported on September 19th

that Texas businessman Ed Butowsky filed a lawsuit where he outed reporter Ellen Ratner as his source for information on Seth Rich. The DNC operative [Rich] was murdered in the summer of 2016 in Washington DC. His murder was never solved. According to Butowsky’s lawsuit, Seth Rich provided WikiLeaks the DNC emails before the 2016 election, not Russia.

This totally destroys the FBI and Mueller’s claims that Russians hacked the DNC to obtain these emails.

Butowsky claims in his lawsuit:

Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange told her that Seth Rich and his brother, Aaron, were responsible for releasing the DNC emails to Wikileaks. Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange wanted the information relayed to Seth’s parents, as it might explain the motive for Seth’s murder.

On November 9, 2016 Ellen Ratner admitted publicly that she met with Julian Assange for three hours the Saturday before the 2016 election. According to Ratner, Julian Assange told her the leaks were not from the Russians, they were from an internal source from the Hillary Campaign.

The article reports today:

After previously claiming no FBI records could be found related to Seth Rich, emails have been uncovered.  These emails weren’t just from anybody.  These emails were between FBI lovebirds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two most corrupt individuals involved in the Russia Collusion Hoax.

In a set of emails released by Judicial Watch on January 22, 2020, provided by a FOIA request on Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, two pages on emails refer to Seth Rich:

The article includes a screenshot of the redacted emails given to Judicial Watch.

Stay tuned. There are some good guys in Washington. It is my hope that they will continue their investigation into this matter.

This Is Getting Ridiculous

No, this isn’t a post about impeachment (although that, too, is getting ridiculous). Scott Johnson posted an article today at Power Line Blog about a lawsuit brought by Representative Tulsi Gabbard against Hillary Clinton. This is interesting–a few years ago, no one would have dared bring a lawsuit against the ‘powerful’ Clinton family.

The article reports:

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has sued Madam Hillary Clinton for defamation in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Gabbard’s press release is posted online here; Gabbard’s Complaint is posted online here.

Clinton defamed Gabbard as a “Russian asset” in a statement that did not call her out by name, though I don’t think there can be any doubt that Clinton’s statement was “of and concerning” Gabbard. Identification of the plaintiff in the defamatory statement is of course an essential element of the cause of action for slander or libel. Gabbard’s Complaint addresses the issue in paragraph 28 et seq.

Is the statement that Gabbard is a “Russian asset” protected as a statement of opinion (rather than one of fact)? I hope not. See generally Complaint paragraphs 26-46.

The Complaint recites Gabbard’s request for a retraction from Clinton. Madam Hillary has declined to retract. See Complaint paragraphs 23-25.

The article concludes:

In the second sentence of her Complaint Gabbard asserts: “Tulsi Gabbard is running
for President of the United States, a position Clinton has long coveted, but has not been able to attain.” I look forward to checking out Clinton’s response on this point when she files her Answer.

Let the good times roll.

This is interesting because it puts Hillary Clinton in the spotlight (not in a positive way) at a time when some of the Democrats running for President are sidelined by the impeachment. There is still some conventional wisdom that sees a brokered Democrat convention with Hillary Clinton emerging as the candidate. The next six months are going to be very interesting.

Presenting A Deceptive Brief

Yesterday Byron York posted an editorial at The Washington Examiner about the impeachment brief Democratic House managers have compiled. The title of the article at The Washington Examiner is, “Two deceptions at the heart of Democrats’ impeachment brief.”

The editorial notes:

Democrats insist on Trump’s immediate removal because, they argue, he was the knowing beneficiary of Russian help in the 2016 election, and if he is not thrown out of office right now, he will do it again. But in making their argument, Democrats make two critical mischaracterizations about Trump, Republicans, and 2016. One is flat-out wrong, while the other is misleading.

The one that is flat wrong is the Democrats’ assertion that Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate “a debunked conspiracy theory that Russia did not interfere in the 2016 presidential election to aid President Trump, but instead that Ukraine interfered in that election to aid President Trump’s opponent, Hillary Clinton.”

The problem is, the theory does not hold that Russia “did not interfere” in the 2016 election. There is a mountain of evidence that Russia interfered, and that has been the conclusion of every investigation into the matter, beginning with the first congressional probe, by the House Intelligence Committee under then-chairman Devin Nunes. The theory is that in addition to Russian interference, some people in Ukraine, including some government officials, also tried to influence the U.S. election. It was not a government-run effort, and it was on a far smaller scale than the Russian project, but it happened.

I don’t know if any of the available information about Ukrainian interference will ever make it out to the mainstream media, but there have been criminal trials in Ukraine that confirm that the government was involved in 2016 in support of Hillary Clinton. The information is out there, but most of the mainstream media has successfully avoided reporting it.

The editorial reports the second deception:

The other mischaracterization in the Democratic brief is the assertion that, in 2016, Trump “welcomed Russia’s election interference.” The brief quotes special counsel Robert Mueller’s report that the Trump campaign welcomed Russian help because it “expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

That’s not wrong — Trump did, in fact, welcome Russia-based leaks — but grossly out of context. The context is this: Trump welcomed Russia-based leaks about the Clinton campaign because the media were enthusiastically embracing and repeating Russian-based leaks about the Clinton campaign. Print, internet, TV, everyone, was accepting, repeating, and amplifying the material released by WikiLeaks from the Russian hack of top Clinton campaign official John Podesta.

Perhaps people have forgotten how prominently media organizations featured the Russia-based material.

The editorial then lists a number of examples of media hysteria about Russian during the 2016 election.

The article concludes:

Of course, the Times was not the only media organization to trumpet the Russia-based leaks. They all trumpeted the Russia-based leaks. Everyone was complicit. And that is what makes the Democratic charge against Trump so misleading. He wasn’t welcoming something that everyone else was condemning. He was welcoming something that everyone else was welcoming, too. And now, in retrospect, that is a terrible offense, part of the foundation for removing the president from office?

Neither mischaracterization in the Democratic brief is a mistake; Democratic prosecutors know full well what actually happened. But the mischaracterizations are necessary to build the case against the president, to show that he had corrupt motives in the Ukraine matter. They are, of course, not the entire case, but they are important. And they are wrong.

Any Congressman who enables this farce of an impeachment to continue needs to be voted out of office as soon as possible.