They say that a picture is worth a thousand words. Well, in this case, we’re told everything we need to know about everyone in this image in three: “workers against work.”
The modern regressive left has until recently been very subversive in its messaging. Building on the Fabian socialist model from the early 20th century, socialist movements claimed to represent the underclass, which they say has been exploited by the evil capitalist class that controls everything.
The banner in this image is far more honest about what leftists actually want — which is a society that allows them to live their lives without having to do…well…anything. This is what “freedom” means to the hard left — freedom from responsibility or discipline.
Freedom in the capitalist sense is intrinsically tied to responsibility in that one cannot exist without the other. In the west, your freedom extends to your personal agency, rather than a promise for someone else’s resources. This is the real philosophical question which divides the right and left today, and its clear which approach is more grounded in reality.
~ Facts Not Memes
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pompeo's mission impossible and what will be the consequences? (See 1 below.)
Meanwhile:++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pompeo's mission impossible and what will be the consequences? (See 1 below.)
Things might be going better for Trump, Pompeo and Bolton in Iran. (See 1a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++
When the UN's scam regarding Palestinian refugees is allowed to be revealed and exposed more rational decisions could become a reality. If there ever was a more worthless organization fathered by The U.N it is UNRWA. (See 2 below.)
And
Soros's philosophical and financial tentacles reach deep and wide. He remains one of the most dangerous men on the face of the earth in terms of challenges to democratic governance. (See 2a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++
Kim is back from her European Vacation and once again has the FBI in her sights. How much Clorox will it take for The FBI and Rosenstein to come clean? (See 3 below.)
And:
A nut shell repeat of what have posted before. (See 3a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Pompeo's Mission Impossible
By Steve Berman
Trump and Kim made promises neither intends to keep. Now it's Pompeo's job to hold it together.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is heading back to Pynongyang. This time his mission is to "fill in some details" on how Kim is going to de-nuclearize his nation, after posing for the crème de la crème of public relations coups. It could be mission impossible.
Saying that is a big deal to me. I am an optimist on what's going on with North and South Korea. I think Trump's strategy was actually sound--it could not have been any worse than previous administrations which totally failed to move the North Koreans into any meaningful slowdown in pusuit of their nuclear and missile ambitions.
Shortly after the summit, Trump said that Kim promised to destroy a rocket test site, but observers at 38 North, which tracks North Korea’s weapons program for the Stimson Center, have found no evidencethis happened. Indeed, their 38 North’s analysts say that construction of nuclear reactors is continuing, noting that “the North’s nuclear cadre can be expected to proceed with business as usual until specific orders are issued from Pyongyang.”
This makes perfect sense if you look at it through the prism of North Korean history dealing with the West. They take what's given and pretend they got nothing at all, then ask for more. In the past, it's been money--lifting of economic sanctions, that when given, are greedily taken in return for nothing. Now it's direct negotiations with the U.S., recognition that Kim gets to play at the big boys' table, and outsized status in dealings with North Korea's patron state, China.
Pompeo can expect a heaping plate of "what have you done for me lately" from the North Koreans. They'll conveniently forget every promise that Kim made in his historic meeting with Trump.
So what should we do?
I don't pretend to be a great expert here, but I do believe that keeping the sanctions in place is the most powerful lever we have. Second to that is letting South Korea handle the technical and diplomatic efforts to move toward a legal ending to the Korean War. I think the only solution for the two Koreas is reunification, a path that older South Koreans find appealing, but younger generations reject. If something is going to happen, it needs to happen soon, as in the next decade or so.
There may not be time to use up a whole ten years. Kim could string Trump and the U.S. along, while continuing to improve his missile and warhead technology, until he reaches a point where the best America can do is offer a deterrent, like we do with all other nuclear powers. At that point, reunification may be off the table forever, except as a result of the North conquering the South. With its non-existent economy, the North cannot win a war with the South, even with curtailed U.S. military support to South Korea. So it would be back to more years and decades of extortion, crime, and drug production.
If Trump, and Pompeo's team are waiting for de-nuclearization, they better not hold their breath. It's most likely mission impossible.
1a) As I see it: The Iran opportunity and European infamy
By MELANIE PHILLIPS
A senior Iranian official has accused Israel of stealing its clouds. Yes, you read that right. Clouds as in the sky.
Brigadier General Gholam Reza Jalali, head of Iran’s Civil Defense Organization, has said: “Israel and another country in the region have joint teams which work to ensure clouds entering Iranian skies are unable to release rain. On top of that, we are facing the issue of cloud and snow theft.”
His evidence? A survey showing that all mountainous areas higher than 2,200 meters between Afghanistan and the Mediterranean were covered in snow except for Iran.
Brigadier General Gholam Reza Jalali, head of Iran’s Civil Defense Organization, has said: “Israel and another country in the region have joint teams which work to ensure clouds entering Iranian skies are unable to release rain. On top of that, we are facing the issue of cloud and snow theft.”
His evidence? A survey showing that all mountainous areas higher than 2,200 meters between Afghanistan and the Mediterranean were covered in snow except for Iran.
Case closed, eh? Although the general’s claim was refuted by the head of Iran’s meteorological service, it fits the regime’s generally paranoid and deranged statements about, and threats against, Israel and the Jews.
Such lunacies should constitute a red flag against having any dealings at all with such people. Yet Britain and the EU continue to insist on treating them as rational negotiating partners instead of the genocidal religious fanatics that they are.
This illustrates a refusal to acknowledge the real point about antisemitism: that it is not just a prejudice but a marker of paranoid derangement and an eclipse of reason.
Britain and the EU regard the Iranian fanatics as people with whom they can to do business – both diplomatic and economic. But the only reasonable, moral and self-defense position is to regard them as a regime beyond the pale which must be destroyed.
No one wants war; the aim should be to prevent the terrible war that is almost inevitable unless the Iranian regime is removed. The best and most likely way to achieve this is for the people of Iran to rise up against it.
For the last few months, that has been happening. From December to January, nearly 5,000 people were arrested during protests in which at least 21 people died.
Last week, thousands demonstrated in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar with unconfirmed reports that four protesters were killed.
The unrest is driven by Iran’s crippling economic conditions. Unemployment is soaring as Iran’s currency, the rial, has plummeted. Khorramshahr in southwest Iran has been without potable water for more than two weeks.
The result is popular demand for an end to the regime itself. In stark contrast to uprisings that have erupted in the Arab world, the Iranian demonstrators support Israel and the West. The Iranian regime regularly pronounces “Death to Israel.”
The protesters have been shouting instead “Death to Palestine” and demanding that the regime stops funding Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria’s President Assad and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
SUDDENLY, what seemed impossible is now being talked about as a distinct possibility: that a regime which until now has been strutting across the region imposing increasing control may in fact collapse.
So what’s changed? In two words: President Trump. By withdrawing the US from the Iran nuclear deal, he has changed the entire power dynamic within Iran and in the region. Now sanctions have been reimposed and are about to bite far more severely.
With tacit backing by both the US and Russia, Israel has been attacking Iranian military assets across Syria.
The game is now afoot to achieve what until now no one contemplated as a serious possibility: to pry Russia away from Iran and squeeze Iran out of Syria, thus smashing the fulcrum of Iranian power in the region.
While the Left in Britain, Europe and America froths and fulminates that the forthcoming US-Russia summit proves that US President Donald Trump is in the pocket of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, a bargain is being developed between them which may deal a fatal blow to Iranian power.
Russia is coming to realize that, having used Iran to gain a foothold in the region, its asset is turning into a liability. That’s because the regional stability Russia now needs is actively threatened by the growing reality of Israeli war in Syria against Iran.
So Russia is throwing Iran under the bus.
That’s why it sided with Saudi Arabia over increasing oil production to restrain oil prices which can cripple Tehran. Russia has previously said Iran must pull out of Syria once the war there is over.
Now Putin reportedly wants to strike a broader deal with the Trump administration.
This would apparently involve the US pulling its troops out of Syria while Russia pushes Iran at least away from proximity to Israel, if not out of Syria altogether.
Clearly, much remains murky and alarming about such a complex dance of deterrence.
America’s ultimate strategic goal, however, is clear: to weaken, stymie and ultimately destroy the Islamic regime in Iran.
Yet, incredibly, Britain and Europe are still attempting to support it. This weekend, the five powers still party to the nuclear deal – Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia – are meeting Iran’s foreign minister Mohammed Javad Zarif in Vienna to discuss how it might continue without US support.
This, even though earlier this week, six people were arrested in Belgium, France and Germany, including an Iranian diplomat posted to Vienna, over an alleged Iranian terrorist plot to attack an Iranian-opposition rally in a Paris suburb this weekend.
BRITAIN, FRANCE and Germany may realize very soon that they will need to choose between trading with Iran and trading with the US. The State Department has threatened to punish sanctions violators, while major European companies such as Peugeot, Siemens and Total are reportedly preparing to halt their dealings with Tehran.
Both Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have made a point of telling the Iranian people that they have American and Israeli support and that the fight by the US and Israel is merely against the regime that oppresses them.
Iran’s brave dissidents desperately need Western support, both material and psychological, if they are to continue pitting their lives against the regime. Yet, appallingly and shamefully, their protests are receiving virtually no coverage at all in the British or American media. Instead of the wider support needed to help them bring down the regime, they’re being ignored.
Trump is trying to do something which for the first time looks like it might just be possible: to neutralize the Iranian regime, and thus not only rid the world of its most deadly threat to life and liberty but make the defeat of other malign actors such as North Korea more likely.
It may not work. But whatever happens, the role being played by Britain, France and Germany and the decadent Western media will surely be bracketed by future historians with Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of Hitler in the annals of political infamy.
Such lunacies should constitute a red flag against having any dealings at all with such people. Yet Britain and the EU continue to insist on treating them as rational negotiating partners instead of the genocidal religious fanatics that they are.
This illustrates a refusal to acknowledge the real point about antisemitism: that it is not just a prejudice but a marker of paranoid derangement and an eclipse of reason.
Britain and the EU regard the Iranian fanatics as people with whom they can to do business – both diplomatic and economic. But the only reasonable, moral and self-defense position is to regard them as a regime beyond the pale which must be destroyed.
No one wants war; the aim should be to prevent the terrible war that is almost inevitable unless the Iranian regime is removed. The best and most likely way to achieve this is for the people of Iran to rise up against it.
For the last few months, that has been happening. From December to January, nearly 5,000 people were arrested during protests in which at least 21 people died.
Last week, thousands demonstrated in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar with unconfirmed reports that four protesters were killed.
The unrest is driven by Iran’s crippling economic conditions. Unemployment is soaring as Iran’s currency, the rial, has plummeted. Khorramshahr in southwest Iran has been without potable water for more than two weeks.
The result is popular demand for an end to the regime itself. In stark contrast to uprisings that have erupted in the Arab world, the Iranian demonstrators support Israel and the West. The Iranian regime regularly pronounces “Death to Israel.”
The protesters have been shouting instead “Death to Palestine” and demanding that the regime stops funding Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria’s President Assad and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
SUDDENLY, what seemed impossible is now being talked about as a distinct possibility: that a regime which until now has been strutting across the region imposing increasing control may in fact collapse.
So what’s changed? In two words: President Trump. By withdrawing the US from the Iran nuclear deal, he has changed the entire power dynamic within Iran and in the region. Now sanctions have been reimposed and are about to bite far more severely.
With tacit backing by both the US and Russia, Israel has been attacking Iranian military assets across Syria.
The game is now afoot to achieve what until now no one contemplated as a serious possibility: to pry Russia away from Iran and squeeze Iran out of Syria, thus smashing the fulcrum of Iranian power in the region.
While the Left in Britain, Europe and America froths and fulminates that the forthcoming US-Russia summit proves that US President Donald Trump is in the pocket of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, a bargain is being developed between them which may deal a fatal blow to Iranian power.
Russia is coming to realize that, having used Iran to gain a foothold in the region, its asset is turning into a liability. That’s because the regional stability Russia now needs is actively threatened by the growing reality of Israeli war in Syria against Iran.
So Russia is throwing Iran under the bus.
That’s why it sided with Saudi Arabia over increasing oil production to restrain oil prices which can cripple Tehran. Russia has previously said Iran must pull out of Syria once the war there is over.
Now Putin reportedly wants to strike a broader deal with the Trump administration.
This would apparently involve the US pulling its troops out of Syria while Russia pushes Iran at least away from proximity to Israel, if not out of Syria altogether.
Clearly, much remains murky and alarming about such a complex dance of deterrence.
America’s ultimate strategic goal, however, is clear: to weaken, stymie and ultimately destroy the Islamic regime in Iran.
Yet, incredibly, Britain and Europe are still attempting to support it. This weekend, the five powers still party to the nuclear deal – Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia – are meeting Iran’s foreign minister Mohammed Javad Zarif in Vienna to discuss how it might continue without US support.
This, even though earlier this week, six people were arrested in Belgium, France and Germany, including an Iranian diplomat posted to Vienna, over an alleged Iranian terrorist plot to attack an Iranian-opposition rally in a Paris suburb this weekend.
BRITAIN, FRANCE and Germany may realize very soon that they will need to choose between trading with Iran and trading with the US. The State Department has threatened to punish sanctions violators, while major European companies such as Peugeot, Siemens and Total are reportedly preparing to halt their dealings with Tehran.
Both Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have made a point of telling the Iranian people that they have American and Israeli support and that the fight by the US and Israel is merely against the regime that oppresses them.
Iran’s brave dissidents desperately need Western support, both material and psychological, if they are to continue pitting their lives against the regime. Yet, appallingly and shamefully, their protests are receiving virtually no coverage at all in the British or American media. Instead of the wider support needed to help them bring down the regime, they’re being ignored.
Trump is trying to do something which for the first time looks like it might just be possible: to neutralize the Iranian regime, and thus not only rid the world of its most deadly threat to life and liberty but make the defeat of other malign actors such as North Korea more likely.
It may not work. But whatever happens, the role being played by Britain, France and Germany and the decadent Western media will surely be bracketed by future historians with Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of Hitler in the annals of political infamy.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) Expose the Palestinian ‘Refugee’ Scam
2) Expose the Palestinian ‘Refugee’ Scam
Obama concealed a myth-smashing report. Trump can reveal it to the world.
By Richard Goldberg and Jonathan Schanzer
If President Trump wants to promote peace in the Middle East, his first step should be to declassify a key State Department report that would end the myth of Palestinian “refugees.”
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency is singularly devoted to the Palestinian refugee issue. Unrwa labels more than five million Palestinians “refugees”—an impossible figure. The first Arab-Israeli war, in 1948, yielded roughly 800,000 Palestinian Arab refugees. Perhaps 30,000 remain alive today, but Unrwa has kept the refugee issue alive by labeling their descendants—in some cases great-great-grandchildren—as “refugees,” who insist on the “right of return” to their ancestors’ homes. Israel categorically rejects this demand.
Unrwa’s operations run counter to the broader mission of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, which is to resettle those displaced by war. Unrwa’s mission, on the other hand, keeps the conflict’s embers glowing by refusing to resettle Palestinians in neighboring countries or even in the Palestinian territories.
If Mr. Trump wants his peace plan to have a chance, he has to challenge false Palestinian narratives. He did this by recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and moving the U.S. Embassy there. For decades, Palestinian leaders issued maximalist claims on Jerusalem. Mr. Trump’s move sent the message that making peace requires accepting reality.
Mr. Trump can send the same message by declassifying one document. In 2012 Congress ordered the State Department to disclose how many Palestinians currently served by Unrwa fled the 1948 Arab-Israeli war and how many are merely their descendants. The Obama administration classified the report, citing national security—as if revealing foreign census data were a threat to America.
A year and half into office, Mr. Trump hasn’t reversed this policy, but momentum is building against it. In April more than 50 House members urged State to declassify the report. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has done the same.
Removing the label of “refugee” from millions of Palestinians wouldn’t hurt them. Instead, it would unlock their economic potential and create an opportunity for lasting peace. Perhaps that’s why the Palestinian leadership is fighting it. Once the refugee issue is exposed as a scam, Palestinian leaders would have to learn how to govern, not merely stir up antagonism with Israel.
The inability of Palestinian leaders to detach from this 70-year-old story raises real concerns about whether peace is possible. But if Mr. Trump is committed, he can send a clear message to the millions living in Unrwa camps: Your leaders want to keep you in squalor, while America wants you to prosper. It’s the most pro-Palestinian step an American president could take.
Mr. Goldberg is a senior adviser and Mr. Schanzer senior vice president at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
2a) White House Stands By Ambassador to Israel David Friedman
Under attack from liberal group, Trump administration backs top diplomat
By Adam Kredo
The White House and leading lawmakers are dismissing a liberal Middle East policy group's escalating attacks on the U.S. ambassador to Israel, according to conversations with Trump administration officials and others who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon about the situation.
J Street, a liberal advocacy group viewed as operating on the fringes of the Jewish community due to its harsh criticism of Israel, recently called for U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman to be recalled from his post for promoting closer U.S.-Israel ties as he carries out President Donald Trump's policy priorities in the region, which included relocating the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to the country's capital city of Jerusalem.
While Friedman has been hailed by Republicans for his work to repair the historically close U.S.-Israel relationship that had frayed during the Obama administration, J Street and its allies have been attacking the diplomat for recent comments stating, "There's no question Republicans support Israel more than Democrats."
J Street has repeatedly been on the losing side of confrontations with the Trump administration. It's efforts to save the Iran nuclear deal, oppose Friedman's nomination, stop the U.S. embassy move to Jerusalem, torpedo the nomination of current Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and numerous others, have all failed in recent months.
J Street, which has long found itself isolated in the Jewish and foreign policy communities, is now calling for a Senate investigation into Friedman as part of what many insiders described to the Free Beacon as a smear campaign meant to undermine the ambassador and the Trump administration's increasing efforts to foster peace between the Israelis and Palestinians.
The White House is standing firmly behind Friedman. A spokesperson for the White House National Security Council said that Friedman will continue to build increased ties between the America and Israel.
"Ambassador Friedman is among those tasked by the President with strengthening the relations between the United States and Israel," the official told the Free Beacon. "He has done so effectively and diplomatically."
J Street's attacks on Friedman also have received sharp criticism from American lawmakers and Israel's former ambassador to the United States under the Obama administration.
Friedman "is doing a fantastic job and the attacks against him by the Soros-backed, anti-Israel group J Street are as misguided as they are predictable," Rep. Ron DeSantis (R., Fla.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, wrote on Twitter. "The US-Israel relationship is stronger than ever and David's strong diplomacy is a key reason why."
Elliott Abrams, a foreign policy expert who served as a top official in both the Regan and Bush administrations, also dismissed attacks from J Street.
"The J Street attacks on Amb. Friedman are shameful, hitting a new low even for J Street. No administration has called the Israeli settlements ‘illegal,' and the most common way the State Department has referred to them for decades is as ‘unhelpful' to the ‘peace process,'" said Abrams. "Amb. Friedman is committing what J Street thinks are crimes: he is celebrating the American-Israeli alliance, celebrating the current administration's strong support for Israel, and defending Israel strongly against unfair attacks. We are used to seeing our U.N. ambassadors do that—from Moynihan and Kirkpatrick to Bolton and Haley—but not to seeing our ambassador to Israel do it. J Street will not forgive him for all this, especially as he now does it from Jerusalem and not Tel Aviv, but the truth is he deserves commendation for this work."
Friedman also received support from Michael Oren, an Israeli lawmaker who served as Israel's ambassador to the U.S. from 2009 to 2013.
"J Street's problem is not with Amb. Friedman but with democracy," Oren wrote on Twitter. "It supported the previous ambassador who represented his president's policies on Israel but not the current one who does the same. J Street opposes the more pro-Israel policy and the will of the American people."
Trump administration insiders who work on Israel issues have mocked J Street's campaign against Friedman behind closed doors. While the group calls on the Senate to recall him from his post, that legislative body has no power to carry out such an action. Only a president can recall his own ambassador.
"What a bunch of clowns," said one senior U.S. official who works on regional issues. "J Street spent eight years driving a wedge between the United States and Israel. They said Republicans who supported Israel were warmongers and traitors. They said Democrats who attacked and endangered Israel actually had Israel's best interests at heart. Their conventions these days are like a who's-who of Israel haters from the Obama administration."
"Adults don't take J Street seriously at all, and even the people who sign their petitions are mostly humoring them to make them go away," the source said.
J Street promoted a series of misleading half-truths and outright lies in its public attacks on Friedman, including falsely accusing him of being involved with a designated terror organization.
In its release, J Street alleges that Friedman, while the head of a pro-Israel group called Beit El Yeshiva Center, helped funnel "thousands of dollars to [a] right-wing extremist group named Komemiyut."
While a group by that name is on the U.S. designated terrorist list, initial reports tying Friedman to the organization were later corrected to explain that there is another group called Komemiyut that is wholly separate and unaffiliated with the organization on the terror list.
J Street additionally charged that Friedman is unilaterally altering longstanding U.S. policy of so-called settlement activity in Israel due to recent comments by him stating, "I don't believe the settlements are illegal."
However, J Street confuses actual American government policy on settlements, particularly that of the Obama administration, which never stated that settlements are "illegal," but rather "illegitimate," a significant legal distinction.
J Street further promotes the lie that no Democratic U.S. lawmakers were invited to the new U.S. embassy opening in Jerusalem. In fact, there was an open invitation to all lawmakers, but not a single Democrat accepted it.
Noah Pollak, a Middle East expert, told the Free Beacon that J Street, long on the far left, has become unhinged since Trump took office.
"J Street has always had a casual relationship with the truth, but the smears against Ambassador Friedman are breathtakingly dishonest even grading on the J Street curve," Pollak said. "Why have they become this crazy? The extent of their derangement is proportional to the extent of their failure. There is no longer a policy agenda, so any attack will suffice, the more emotionally satisfying the better."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3) Will the FBI Come Clean?
3) Will the FBI Come Clean?
Lawmakers demand the truth about the origin of the 2016 Trump investigation.
By Kimberley A. Strassel
That is, if the department complies. It has flouted so many subpoenas, and played so many games with redactions and deadlines, that the entire House GOP united last week to vote for the resolution demanding submission to Congress’s requests for documents. The vote was an order but also a warning—that this is the last chance to comply, and the next step will be to hold officials in contempt. It is a measure of the stakes that even that threat doesn’t guarantee cooperation.
At issue is the FBI’s “origin story,” in which it claims its full-fledged investigation into a presidential campaign was conducted, as it were, by the book. According to this narrative, the FBI did not launch its probe until July 31, 2016, only after Australia tipped it to a conversation junior Trump aide George Papadopoulos had with Australian diplomat Alexander Downer in the spring of 2016 in London. Only after this formal commencement of a counterintelligence probe—Crossfire Hurricane—did the FBI begin to target U.S. citizens with spying, wiretapping and other tools usually reserved for foreign infiltrators. Or so the story goes.
This account, relayed by the New York Times in December 2017, has proved highly convenient for the FBI. The Australian “government” connection allowed the bureau to infuse the meaningless Papadopoulos conversation with significance, justifying the probe. The origin story suggested the FBI had followed procedure. Mostly, it countered the growing suspicion that the bureau had been snooping on a presidential campaign on the basis of truly disreputable info—a dossier of salacious information compiled by an opposition research firm working for the rival campaign.
The story is full of holes, and they are widening. No one has explained why two months passed between the Papadopoulos-Downer conversation and the July 31 probe. We’ve learned that it wasn’t Australian intelligence that passed along the info, but Mr. Downer personally, to State Department personnel in violation of procedure. And a growing list of Trump officials now relate moments when they were approached by suspicious figures before July 31.
That’s why congressional investigators have come to suspect the real origin story is very different. They believe the FBI was investigating Trump officials well before July 31, on the basis of the dossier and dubious information from State Department officials. They think the bureau was employing a variety of counterintelligence tools before there was an official counterintelligence probe—and that this included deploying spies against political actors. They suspect that only when the FBI decided that it wanted to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant against Trump aide Carter Page (which requires an official investigation) did it surface the Downer information (collected back in May) and make it the official pretext in July.
This theory is at the heart of the standoff with the Justice Department, which focuses on FBI actions prior to July 31. I’m told that multiple senior congressional members have repeatedly asked Justice Department leadership to affirm that the department had provided Congress everything relevant with regard to the Trump investigation. The department has said yes. Yet investigators have credible evidence pointing to the use of FBI informants against the Trump campaign earlier than July 31, and last week’s resolution requires the department to answer whether that is true, and if so, on what basis they were used.
The FBI and its media allies have waged a ceaseless campaign to lower the bar on what counts as appropriate. We are told it is OK that the government opened a counterintelligence probe into a presidential campaign. OK that it obtained a warrant to spy on a U.S. citizen. OK that it based that warrant on an unverified dossier from the Democratic campaign, and then hid that true origin from the FISA court. OK that it paid a spy to target domestic political actors.
It’s not OK. Not so long ago, the FBI would have quailed at the idea of running an informant into any U.S. political operation—even into, say, a congressman under criminal investigation for bribery or corruption. These are the most sensitive of lines. But Mr. Trump’s opponents, in government and media, have a boundless capacity to justify any measures against the president.
If it turns out that the Justice Department and FBI lied about how and when this all started, that is scandalous. Worse if it comes out that senior officials lied to Congress about whether they had complied with its demands for information. And once again, it is a reason for Mr. Trump to step in and declassify everything.
3a)This is a fairly quick read but it is what has been going on in a nut shell.
DOJ AND FBI CORRUPTION
INTERESTING READ
From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
A Grand Jury had been empaneled. Governments from around the world had donated to the “Charity”. Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations” to the Clinton Foundation were declared. Guess who took over this investigation in 2002? No other than James Comey. Guess who was transferred in to the Internal Revenue Service to run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS? Lois “Be on The Look Out” (BOLO) Lerner. Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the Department of Injustice from 2001 to 2005? No other than the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Rod Rosenstein. Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation during this timeframe??? I know, it’s a miracle, just a coincidence, just an anomaly in statistics and chances, Robert Mueller. What do all four casting characters have in common? They all were briefed and/or were front line investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation. Now that’s just a coincidence, right? Let’s fast forward to 2009. James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go and cash-in at Lockheed Martin. Hillary Clinton is running the State Department, on her own personal email server by the way The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of the Hillary. Like all good public servants do, you know looking out for America’s best interest, she decides to support the decision and approve the sale of 20% of US Uranium to no other than, the Russians. Now you would think that this is a fairly straight up deal, except it wasn’t, the People got absolutely nothing out of it. However, prior to the sales approval, no other than Bill Clinton goes to Moscow, gets paid 500K for a one hour speech then meets with Vladimir Putin at his home for a few hours. Ok, no big deal right? Well, not so fast, the FBI had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery scheme. Guess who was the FBI Director during this timeframe? Yep, Robert Mueller. He even delivered a Uranium Sample to Moscow in 2009. Guess who was handling that case within the Justice Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland. No other than, Rod Rosenstein. Guess what happened to the informant? The Department of Justice placed a GAG order on him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out about it. How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the United States of America end up in Russian hands when the FBI has an informant, a mole providing inside information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise? Guess what happened soon after the sale was approved? ~145 million dollars in “donations” made their way into the Clinton Foundation from entities directly connected to the Uranium One deal. Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue Service working the Charitable Division? No other than, Lois Lerner. Let’s fast forward to 2015. Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi discovers that the Hillary ran the State Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlaw personal email server. He also discovered that none of those emails had been turned over when she departed her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was required by law. He also discovered that there was Top Secret information contained within her personally archived email. Sparing you the State Departments cover up, the nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we shall leave it with this…… they did everything humanly possible to cover for Hillary. Now this is amazing, guess who became FBI Director in 2013? Guess who secured 17 no bid contracts for his employer (Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was rewarded with a six million dollar thank you present when he departed his employer. No other than James Comey. Amazing how all those no-bids just went right through at State, huh? Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the “Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal Revenue Service and exonerates her. In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile the DOJ is handing out immunity deals like candy. They didn’t even convene a Grand Jury. Like a lightning bolt of statistical impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like the true “Gangsta”
Comey is, James steps out into the cameras of an awaiting press conference on July the 8th of 2016, and exonerates the Hillary from any wrongdoing.
It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Asst. Attorney General, Comey gets fired based upon a letter by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the story continues. FISA Abuse, political espionage.... pick a crime, any crime, chances are...... this group and a few others did it. All the same players. All compromised and conflicted. All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves. All connected in one way or another to the Clinton's. As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in its 20+ years of operation of being the largest International Charity Fraud in the history of mankind, has never been audited by the Internal Revenue Service.
Let us not forget that Comey's brother works for DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation's taxes.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment