May 232017
 

Former national security advisor Michael Flynn announced his intention to invoke his Fifth Amendment right. Obama administration officials have done the same 8 times.

8 Times Obama Administration Officials 'Pled The Fifth'

8 Times Obama Administration Officials ‘Plead The Fifth’ In High Profile Scandals
  1. Jeff Neely, the former Pacific Rim regional commissioner for the General Services Administration, plead the fifth on April 16, 2012 when Congress asked him to testify about overly-lavish spending on GSA conferences. He was eventually sentenced to prison for fraud anyway.
  2. John Beale, a former official at the EPA, plead the fifth on October 1, 2013 when Congress probed into Beale’s theft of nearly $900,000 worth of salaries and bonuses from his own agency.
  3. John Sepulveda, a former VA official, plead the fifth on October 30, 2013 after Congress subpoenaed him to testify as to why the department spent $6 million on conferences in Florida.
  4. Diana Rubens and Kimberly Graves, two senior officials in the Department of Veterans Affairs, each plead the fifth before Congress on November 2, 2015 when asked to testify about $400,000 they had allegedly milked out of a VA relocation expense program. They were eventually given back their jobs.
  5. Greg Roseman, a deputy director of the IRS, plead the fifth on June 26, 2013, after Congress asked him to testify about why the largest contract in IRS history was awarded to a close friend of his.
  6. Patrick Cunningham, chief of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona, plead the fifth when Congress asked him to testify about Operation Fast and Furious, which trafficked more than 2,000 guns along the U.S.-Mexico border.
  7. Lois Lerner, an IRS director in charge of tax-exemptions, plead the fifth numerous times during Congress’ investigation into the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups.
  8. Loretta Lynch, Attorney General Loretta Lynch invoked her Fifth Amendment protection not to incriminate herself over the Obama administration’s transfer of money to Iran.

 
 

May 192017
 

Harvard Study Proves Trump Was Right About Negative Media Coverage

Harvard Study Reveals Huge Anti-Trump Media Bias

The Mainstream Media isn’t even pretending to be objective anymore. Fox news at 52% negative and 48% positive… sounds almost balanced in their reporting. They still lean negative though.

From Heat Street:

A major new study out of Harvard University has revealed the true extent of the mainstream media’s bias against Donald Trump.

Academics at the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy analyzed coverage from Trump’s first 100 days in office across 10 major TV and print outlets.

It found that the tone of some outlets was negative in as many as 98% of reports, significantly more hostile than the first 100 days of the three previous administrations:

Harvard Study Reveals Huge Anti-Trump Media Bias

In America they analyzed CNN, NBC, CBS, Fox News, the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal.

They also took into account the BBC, the UK’s Financial Times and the German public broadcaster ARD.

Every outlet was negative more often than positive.

Only Fox News, which features some of Trump’s most enthusiastic supporters and is often given special access to the President, even came close to positivity.

Fox was ranked 52% negative and 48% positive.

The study also divided news items across topics. On immigration, healthcare, and Russia, more than 85% of reports were negative.

On the economy, the proportion was more balanced – 54% negative to 46% positive:

The study highlighted one exception: Trump got overwhelmingly positive coverage for launching a cruise missile attack on Syria.

Around 80% of all reports were positive about that.

The picture was very different for other recent administrations. The study found that President Obama’s first 100 got positive good overall – with 59% of reports positive.

Bill Cinton and George W Bush got overall negative coverage, it found, but to a much lesser extent than Trump. Clinton’s first 100 days got 40% positivity, while Bush’s got 43%:

Trump has repeatedly claimed that his treatment by the media is unprecedented in its hostility. This study suggests that, at least in recent history, he’s right.

 
 

May 182017
 

A Timeline Of Events Surrounding The Russian Hack Narrative

An awesome timeline by reddit user RulerOfSlides:
Russia-Wiretapping hypotheses only timeline

I think I’ve got some of this worked out. The pieces are really starting to come together. First, what we learned recently:

  • Andrew McCabe gets manipulated/bribed into hiring a former MI6 agent to “research” (read: bullshit) the Trump dossier. Ties directly to the Clinton campaign (his wife received money from them or donated, iirc).
  • Hillary Clinton was confirmed to have access to intelligence and classified files after she left office as Secretary of State.
  • CrowdStrike recently redacted their statements that were used to support their claims of Russian interference in the election. They also were the only ones to look at the DNC’s servers; the FBI was prohibited to do so by the DNC itself.
  • Hillary Clinton and the head of CrowdStrike, Dimitri Alperovitch, were both ranking members of the Atlantic Council, a Soros-financed think tank.
  • Susan Rice requested that all intelligence relating to the Trumps (his whole family), gathered across a period of several years going back to 2013 (possibly earlier) be unmasked.
  • Jeh Johnson may also have been involved in unmasking Trump-related intelligence, but that connection is tenuous at best.
  • EDIT: I neglected to mention Evelyn Farkas, who accidentally disclosed the fact that the Obama administration had been spying on members of Trump’s campaign, as well as some of his friends is also a member of the Atlantic Council. She also had worked under the Clinton campaign since around 2015, and in her previous job dealt with Russia/Ukraine foreign policy.
  • EDIT II: Cernovich reported a few moments ago that three people close to Obama who had the authorization to unmask intelligence reports were Susan Rice, John Brennan, and Loretta Lynch – all three of whom were key players in the Russia narrative.
  • EDIT III: Developing possibility that Flynn and Trump may have cooperated to catch the spying apparatus/”Council of Evil” that Obama left behind, going off of a foreign intelligence tip. I have incorporated this into the timeline.
  • 4/3/2017 EDIT IV: Bloomberg now reporting on Rice’s unmasking efforts. The big takeaway here is that Nunes made a visit to the White House before his press conference to view the National Security Council systems that held the logs of Rice’s requests to unmask people that intelligence had been gathered on. I think this explains why Bannon was added to the NSC – Trump has eyes and ears in an area that he would otherwise have been blind to. It probably aided in gathering information about what was going on, too. (It’s also funny to see the media clinging to the literal definition of “wiretapping”). Adam Schiff also viewed these logs, hence his decided reluctance to properly comment on what was found.
  • 4/3/2017 EDIT V: Adding some small additional details that I uncovered from digging through the Podesta files. Podesta ID #34639, which better detectives than I concluded that this showed an effort at tying up Trump, Assange, and Russia. The screenshot is dead, sadly, but this happened in March 2016. Podesta ID #17020 also establishes a tenuous but still-present connection between Podesta and the Atlantic Council.
  • 4/4/2017 EDIT VI: As of a few hours ago, we now know slightly more about what happened with the fake Trump dossier. Steele was not paid directly by the FBI as originally speculated – that deal appears to have fallen through, but McCabe was closely involved in negotiating that payment, leaving the Clinton connection valid. The firm involved with it, Fusion GPS, began working on the dossier in September 2015, hired by an anti-Trump Republican donor. That deal was broken off some time after that, and then a Democratic supporter of Clinton started paying Fusion GPS to keep going, and this is the point where Steele was brought into the project.
  • 4/4/2017 EDIT VII: Contents of one of the Department of State emails (sent on November 21, 2009) recently declassified by the FBI indicate that Clinton’s infamous server was established to work around the intelligence-gathering systems that would later be used against President-elect Trump, or an ancestor to those systems. I unfortunately don’t remember who originally found this; I can’t be credited with this discovery – only integrating it into the timeline.
  • 4/5/2017 EDIT VIII: Apparently Susan Rice had a lot of friction with, of all the agencies, the NSA. One fellow ‘pede summarized this very nicely. I have a feeling that this gives Rogers adequate motive to go to Trump Tower about the unmasking on November 22 – she was horribly unpopular, possibly even coming to blows with Rogers himself.
  • 4/5/2017 EDIT IX: New information seems to implicate the one and only John Brennan as the man who ordered enhanced surveillance on key Trump allies, including General Flynn, Erik Prince (head of Blackwater and a top CIA critic), and Sean Hannity. Brennan was also the one to order Susan Rice to unmask those Trump allies. I’ve placed this in its rightful spot on the timeline.
  • 4/5/2017 EDIT X: Man, today is the gift that keeps on giving. Fox published an article describing that the intelligence reports involved here were uncomfortably detailed, but that’s not what I’m interested in. This report gives us a better understanding of when the unmasking campaign began, (concurrent with the Obama administration’s “investigation” into the DNC leaks) and tells us that only one agency would have the capability to fully trace back the paper trail that led back to Rice, as well as the fact that only one agency could approve unmasking requests – the NSA.
  • 4/6/2017 EDIT XI: Further information about Clinton’s continued access to classified material even after leaving her post as Secretary of State in 2013 has surfaced, for the purpose of “writing her memoir” (emphasis on air-quotes mine). Beyond Clinton, six staffers had access to the same classified intelligence. I have a feeling that the six people are on this list – specifically, the five people involved with management and strategy (Mook, Benenson, Renteria, Podesta, and Abedin) and Cheryl Mills. This would explain classified information ending up on Weiner’s laptop, and Mills’ request for partial immunity in the email investigation back in September.
  • 4/6/2017 EDIT XII: At the risk of making this seem implausible by not citing sources (who I’d like to keep private, though they are an active member of this community I have received permission to cite this source), it seems likely that Nunes discovered that he himself was unmasked by Brennan, McCabe, and/or Obama’s combined orders (there are three points where unmaskings were ordered, it would seem – by McCabe before the election, by Obama starting in December, and then again by Brennan after the new intelligence-dissemination rules went into effect in January) – that’s why he stepped away from the investigation. Nunes was on the Trump transition team as of December 1, 2016.
  • 4/8/2017 EDIT XIII: New Wikileaks release indicates that Guccifer 2.0, an individual supposedly responsible for leaking the DNC emails to Wikileaks (in addition to other doccuments) was neither Russian (with 97% certainty) and may have been a staffer named Warren Flood (or someone that stole his computer). Wikileaks does not indicate that the DNC knew Seth Rich was the leaker, however, because when Rich was discussed in Guccifer 2.0’s messages to a certain actress, he had been dead for over a month.
  • 4/12/2017 EDIT XIV: CNN accidentally admits (screenshot) that John Podesta had ties to Russia via the Podesta Group. The Podesta Group represents, among other things, the interests of Sberbank of Russia, which itself is owned by the Central Bank of Russia – which is part of the Russian government. The filing of the Podesta Group as a foreign agent is highly suspect on top of that. Perhaps the Russia narrative originated not out of revenge, but simply because the Clinton campaign (itself tied to Russia) assumed that Trump’s campaign was doing the exact same thing they were.
  • 4/18/2017 EDIT XV: I have been informed of an excellent summary of Obama-era wiretapping activities. Of note is that the single successful FISA request revolved around Carter Page’s alleged Russian connections, likely stemming from very close ties to the Russian government. This opened the door to Trump himself being officially spied on.
  • 4/18/2017 EDIT XVI: CNN accidentally admits, for the second time, more evil things. The Steele dossier was used by the FBI to justify FISA approval of surveillance of Carter Page. Bear in mind that Steele was under negotiation to be paid by Deputy Director McCabe for the dossier, and that Comey himself informed the Trump administration of what was in it. What does this mean? This means that the FBI knew it was full of shit (also why Steele was never paid), but it was still used in a court of law as evidence. Page is currently being leveraged because, being a Russian sympathizer, he is the weakest link in the Trump campaign and the most easily painted as a pro-Russian agent – and he was far removed from Trump’s inner circle. This is the length they had to go to to find some kind of Russian ties – faking evidence and hunting for Russian sympathizers, the latter of which was just found recently.
  • 4/23/2017 EDIT XVII: Kind of small, but still important – the Failing NYT confirmed that the FBI indeed attempted to pay Steele $50,000 for the dossier – if he could prove the claims in it. It appears that Carter Page’s visits to Moscow in 2016 – though they were innocuous, and though Page never met with Trump – were the legal foundation for much of the “Russian ties” claims (used for the FSIA request). The source of the Page-Russia connection, beyond Steele, was identified as Sergei Millian, a particularly shady Belarusian-American businessman. Page was also detested by the Trump campaign, and a cease-and-desist for calling himself a Trump advisor was sent to him in December 2016.
  • 4/25/2017 EDIT XVIII: Christopher Steele admitted that the claims in his dossier were 100% unverified. Apparently he’s going to court over the fact that the contents of the dossier were printed; there’s also some additional details of interest in here. The “hacker” that Steele claimed was involved in all this was Aleksej Gubarev, who runs a web-hosting company, XBT Holdings. Additionally, it seems that it was not Steele himself who released the dossier to the media; instead, Fusion GPS took it and leaked it to try and damage the Trump administration’s credibility. Steele did have less formal communications with the media, though. We now have a place for the meeting between Steele and the FBI – Rome, Italy, at some unknown time.
  • 5/13/2017 EDIT XIX: Big league news, if true. A Russian citizen has come forward and claimed that the FBI wanted to frame him for the DNC leaks, offering US citizenship and a dismissal of charges in return. The FBI apparently visited him several times – notably “mid-November” 2016, and February 7, 2017. He was arrested on unrelated charges on October 5, 2016. The relevant dates have been added.
  • 5/15/2017 EDIT XX: The family of Seth Rich hired a private investigator, who today announced that there is evidence he was in contact with Wikileaks prior to his death. There is evidence, too, that local police were told to step back from the investigation into his murder.
  • 5/17/2017 EDIT XXI: More information from one of the chans about Seth Rich. Also some potentially interesting deaths that occurred around the same timeframe – Joe Montano, the DNC chairman before Wasserman-Schultz and aide to Tim Kaine (July 25, 2016); and Shawn Lucas, head of a class-action lawsuit against Wasserman-Schultz for rigging the DNC primary (August 2, 2016).
  • 5/17/2017 EDIT XXII: Lucky timing on this. I was just about to go to bed, and happened across someone else on this domreddit linking Podesta email number 25651, which describes the best approach to stopping Trump as leveraging his “bromance with Putin.” This was sent by Brent Budowsky, a Huffington Post contributor and a writer for The Hill. Looks like Syria might have been one of the deciding factors on getting the Clinton campaign to turn against Russia. What is more significant is that this email was sent on December 21, 2015 – a whole three months before the earliest construction of the “Russian hacker” narrative.

My timeline, approximately:

  • EDIT XXII: The December 21, 2015 email exchange between Bret Budowsky and John Podesta occurs, touching upon ISIS and the continuation of Obama-era foreign policy surrounding Syria, in which Budowsky advises Podesta to make a departure from then-current policy for fear of it becoming political baggage. A notable quote: “But at the least she should not be branding and infecting herself with Obama’s policy towards Syria and ISIS by offering such high and direct praise for it.” I suspect this is the genesis of the Russia narrative, and the reason why the Clinton campaign went so far down the anti-Russia path.
  • The Obama administration most likely had been gathering intelligence on every GOP candidate – either as part of their expanded intel operations or as an intentional, focused sabotage plan. This information would likely have been contained in the President’s Daily Briefings, which Nunes is rumored to have investigated on March 22 – just before making the announcement that Trump’s wiretapping claims were correct. EDIT IV: Though Nunes may have viewed the President’s Daily Briefings at some point in his investigation, or intends to, it seems that the linchpin for Nunes was viewing the logs of Rice’s unmasking attempts.
  • Clinton got wind of this investigation through her ability to access intelligence files and other means (i.e., direct ties to people in DC who were active in intelligence-gathering). This is where the “Russian hacker” narrative began, possibly bolstered by her relationship with Alperovitch – who is a Russian expat and absolutely loathes Vladimir Putin. She may have built a narrative out of CrowdStrike’s report, hopeful that the intel-gathering by the Obama administration would uncover further information about Russian interference. EDIT: Evelyn Farkas, who had been involved in Russia/Ukraine affairs, may also have been involved with this, again through the Atlantic Council. EDIT V: Upon digging through the Podesta files, it would seem that the Trump/Russia connection narrative was constructed just before March 16, 2016. The Atlantic Council had a meeting about “combating far-right extremism in Europe” on March 22 – less than a week later. I think it’s possible that the Atlantic Council meeting on the 22nd was when the Clinton campaign, represented by John Podesta (who was in DC the day before the meeting, according to this – Clinton herself was in Washington state) exchanged information with CrowdStrike. EDIT VII: Since we can now establish that Clinton was aware of a covert spying system as far back as 2009, it’s possible that she counted on that same system to uncover some kind of Trump/Russia connection. EDIT XI: Now we also know that there’s a strong possibility that six of Clinton’s staffers also had access to classified intelligence – I wouldn’t be surprised if they were involved in dissemination, either.
  • On June 12, 2016, Julian Assange teases the release of the DNC’s emails, some three weeks after the latest possible date they could have been collected.
  • June 14, 2016 is the earliest date that has been connected to the official release of CrowdStrike’s report on the DNC “hack.” It may have been released the day after, too.
  • EDIT XIII: Guccifer 2.0 emerges onto the scene on June 15, 2016, and claims responsibility for the DNC hacks that were teased by Julian Assange barely three days earlier. Signs indicate that this may have been some kind of damage control by the DNC, coming off of the Podesta-Atlantic Council-CrowdStrike exchange that likely happened the previous month – basically, releasing “additional” information while lazily incorporating Russian “fingerprints” (i.e., writing the metadata in Cyrillic) into those releases as a means of shifting the blame to Russian influence. This is the second-earliest point at which “Russian ties” had been discussed publicly, and I have a feeling that the DNC took marching orders from the Clinton campaign (who had a discussion about Trump/Putin/Assange ties two months before, likely because they sensed a threat) in trying to sabotage Trump. Based off of some things that Guccifer 2.0 misinterpreted, it seems that he had zero connection to CrowdStrike’s report aside from reading it, so some insulation existed between the DNC and Clinton campaign.
  • EDIT XX: On July 10, 2016, Seth Conrad Rich, a DNC staffer, is murdered in Washington D.C.
  • On July 22, 2016, Wikileaks begins the release of 44,000 emails from the DNC spanning a period from January 2015 to May 25, 2016.
  • EDIT III: Oh boy. This – roughly July or August – is about the point at which, should the possibility laid out by Jonathan Langdale be correct (which Flynn’s apparent “thumb’s-up” lends extra credence to), Russia was responsible for approaching the Trump campaign and making them aware of the surveillance that was going on. Basically, Trump and Flynn laid out a trap for the “Council of Evil” (which I’ve come to call the Lynch/Rice/McCabe/Brennan/Clapper circle that seems to have been the main people involved with the Russia narrative) and the deep state, in which Flynn would be made to seem untrustworthy in order to draw out and embolden leakers. They couldn’t do anything about it, like go public with it, because it would jeopardize their chances of winning the election and thus prevent the campaign from investigating it further. Additionally, the FBI’s actions with Clinton made them seem untrustworthy; it was readily obvious as well that the DoJ was compromised after Bill’s infamous meeting with Lynch on the tarmac – meaning they had nowhere to turn but inwards.
  • CrowdStrike’s report, which formed the backbone of Russian hacking allegations, found its way through the three-letter agencies and eventually indirectly caused the last FISA request over a Trump-controlled server to go through. [EDIT III: This may have been motivated by Russia’s detection of Trump’s surveillance as hypothesized by Langdale] Several previous requests had been made, probably because the former (above EDIT III) bullet point happened in around June or July. The FBI found nothing while investigating it. EDIT II: Loretta Lynch’s ability to view unmasked intelligence documents may have played a role in allowing the FISA request to go through – likely as a way of building evidence for the brewing Russian hackers narrative.
  • EDIT XXI: On August 9, 2016, Wikileaks officially offers $20,000 for information about Seth Rich’s murder.
  • EDIT VI: At around this point, the funding for Fusion GPS to create the Trump dossier dries up, shifting away from the unknown Democrat. Clinton, fearing that the Russian hacking narrative is on shaky grounds, indirectly pays off Andrew McCabe to come up with some kind of dirt on Trump. McCabe then begins negotiating hiring Fusion GPS, who has brought Christopher Steele, a former MI6 agent, into their investigation. The money never makes it to Fusion GPS, and Steele spends several months “working” on it, sends it off to the mainstream media, and it floats around for several months until Buzzfeed publishes it as a means of undermining the Trump administration. Bear in mind that, by this point, the dossier had been in development for over a year.
  • McCabe believes Steele’s then-incomplete dossier, as well as CrowdStrike’s claims, and then begins to plan a soft overthrow of the Trump administration starting with the weakest link – Mike Flynn. Flynn is later forced out due to his own faults, [EDIT III: My original assumption here may be untrue, and this may have been part of a grander plan] but the assault doesn’t stop there. Comey may have been aware of McCabe’s actions, but ignored them. [EDIT XVII: This has been basically confirmed – the FBI knew of the dossier.]
  • EDIT XIX: Yevgeniy Nikulin, a Russian national, is arrested on October 5, 2016 by the Russian government over unrelated hacking charges (on the order of the US government). Two days later (October 7), the DNI (Clapper) and DHS (Jeh Johnson) jointly stated that Russia was behind the DNC server hack, as well as the Podesta leaks.
  • On October 7, 2016, Wikileaks begins releasing the Podesta emails, covering a period from approximately 2006 to March 21, 2016.
  • In the third Presidential debate on October 19, 2016 Clinton makes the first public accusation that “Russian hackers” interfered with the election.
  • This is about the point where the media begins to go crazy over the “Russian ties” allegations, bolstered in some form or another by the CrowdStrike claims, Steele’s dossier, and quite possibly leaks from McCabe’s anti-Trump crusade in a kind of Deep Throat Jr. situation. I have a suspicion that McCabe and his FBI-based allies (the “McCabe 16” mentioned in the True Pundit article) were the source of the narrative. EDIT II: The CIA under Brennan – because of his access to unmasked intelligence reports – may also have been involved with leaks to the media, especially via the Washington Post, which some have deemed the “mouthpiece of the CIA.”
  • On October 22, 2016, Gavin MacFayden – Seth Rich’s rumored contact at Wikileaks – dies of lung cancer in London. He had apparently been ill for quite some time (I personally don’t consider his death suspicious – only that it makes it harder to piece together the truth).
  • EDIT IX: This is approximately Election Day. If the anonymous sources are indeed correct, then this is the point at which CIA director John Brennan orders enhanced surveillance on people in Trump’s inner circle – like Mike Flynn (already targeted by the FBI under McCabe), Erik Prince, and Sean Hannity. He may have also provided Rice with the specific documents or directions to find them that were later disseminated at the Obama administration’s behest starting sometime in December. Flynn was chosen due to the ease at which he could be leveraged; Hannity was chosen due to his apparent close ties to both Trump and Julian Assange, and Prince may have been focused on due to a long-standing personal feud with Brennan. The enhanced surveillance continues from November 8 to January 20. Note as well that this failed to turn up anything of note, as Director Clapper left office on January 20 and reported on March 6, 2017 that no evidence of Trump-Russia ties existed. In other words, the enhanced surveillance failed.
  • EDIT XIX: Nikulin receives his first visit from the FBI in “mid-November,” mere days before John McCain learns of Steele’s dossier.
  • EDIT VI: Thanks to the Daily Caller, we now know that John McCain learned about the dossier at the Halifax International Security Forum, which took place between November 18 and November 20, 2016. The person involved in bringing it to his attention was Sir Andrew Wood. Wood was a former ambassador for the UK to Russia, and knew Steele from his time at MI6. I have a suspicion that the exact date the discussion about the dossier happened was November 19, because Wood was involved in a panel on “Maidan, Crimea and the Obstacles to Democracy in Ukraine” on that date according to the agenda. Wood flew back to the UK, met with Steele, and handed the dossier off to McCain between November 19 (the last date I can confirm with reasonable certainty Wood was present in Halifax) and December 9, when McCain gave the dossier to James Comey during a meeting. Comey then briefed Trump on the existence of the dossier – which suggests to me that he was unaware of McCabe’s actions in trying to hire Fusion GPS – and once that meeting became known to the press, BuzzFeed published the complete dossier. EDIT XVI: Now we know that Steele’s dossier, likely the complete version handed to Comey, was used to bolster the FBI’s FISA request. Highly suspicious, and indicates the document was laundered.
  • EDIT X: Early December 2016. The Obama administration announces the beginning of an investigation into the DNC hacks, and the requests for unmasked intelligence reports relating to this begin at around this point. I think it’s likely that someone higher-up than Susan Rice ordered the unmasking, as the aforementioned paper trail through the NSA would have been immediately suspicious to the incoming Trump administration. This may also explain Rogers’ visit to Trump Tower, as unmasking in a less official manner had been going on for many months up to this point – this would merely be the latest effort to direct it at the Trump administration. I suspect the higher-up who ordered Rice to do this was most likely John Brennan; he intended Rice to be his fall guy when Trump caught up to what was going on.
  • The real unmasking begins once Obama amends EO 12333 to encourage free sharing of information between the three-letter agencies, on January 12. The new rules were signed by Clapper on December 15, so it’s reasonable to assume they had been floating around for a decently long time before that. Less than a month before Clapper agrees to them, NSA head Admiral Rogers visits Trump in an infamous “unscheduled meeting,” which draws ire from the rest of the intelligence community. It’s obvious at this point that this was in order to warn the new administration of what was going on behind closed doors, likely including the information sharing.
  • Susan Rice orders the unmasking of all Trump-related intelligence at some point after the information sharing rules go into effect. This allowed intelligence previously collected on Trump and his family to be widely disseminated between the FBI, CIA, and NSA, and thus exponentially increased the chances of leakers spreading that information to the press – which can (and did) happen. McCabe was involved in this due to his desire to force Flynn and then Trump out of office. Jeh Johnson may also have been involved in the unmasking process as well, but it’s unclear as to what his position was.
  • EDIT III: The trap from before the election was set; Flynn volunteered to be the fall guy as already a kind of black sheep in the administration (by being the sole Democrat), and he baited the intelligence community into going after him just before the new inter-agency intelligence sharing rules took effect. It worked like a charm – the media latched on to it, and Flynn handed Trump his resignation letter as the whole intelligence community fell for it hook, line, and sinker. It was now obvious who the leakers were and where they were coming from.
  • EDIT XIX: Nikulin receives his second visit from the FBI on February 7, 2017. Note that this happened after the unmasking scandal began falling apart in the waining days of the Obama administration.
  • EDIT II: Cernovich revealed tonight that H. R. McMaster was responsible for discovering Rice’s actions, and he was responsible for sending an aide to Nunes in order to blow the lid open on what was going on. This happened between February 20 (when he assumed office) and March 22 (when Nunes held his press conference). EDIT III: Flynn, it should be noted, resigned seven days before McMaster took office; I don’t think it’s a coincidence that he uncovered what Rice was doing in just over a month – Flynn’s dismissal drew all the termites out of the woodwork, and emboldened them in attempting to leak new, “damaging” information. The only effect this had was to highlight the leakers.
  • The White House figures out all of this, or some key portions of this, between January 20 and March 4. Thus follows Trump’s series of tweets discussing “wiretapping,” and the rest is history. EDIT IV: It wasn’t until early March that Rice was pinned down as the unmasker by lawyers at the White House, so I tend to think that Trump reported on “wiretapping” almost as soon as the smoking gun was found.

 
 
Source…

May 182017
 

Media Propaganda Of The Day: Reuters Reports Trump Campaign Had 18 Undisclosed Contacts With Russians

Reuters reports the Trump campaign had 18 undisclosed contacts with Russians. Then clearly states in black and white “The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far”

From Reuters:
Exclusive: Trump campaign had at least 18 undisclosed contacts with Russians – sources

Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race, current and former U.S. officials familiar with the exchanges told Reuters.

The previously undisclosed interactions form part of the record now being reviewed by FBI and congressional investigators probing Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election and contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

Six of the previously undisclosed contacts described to Reuters were phone calls between Sergei Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the United States, and Trump advisers, including Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser, three current and former officials said.

Conversations between Flynn and Kislyak accelerated after the Nov. 8 vote as the two discussed establishing a back channel for communication between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that could bypass the U.S. national security bureaucracy, which both sides considered hostile to improved relations, four current U.S. officials said.

In January, the Trump White House initially denied any contacts with Russian officials during the 2016 campaign. The White House and advisers to the campaign have since confirmed four meetings between Kislyak and Trump advisers during that time.

The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far. But the disclosure could increase the pressure on Trump and his aides to provide the FBI and Congress with a full account of interactions with Russian officials and others with links to the Kremlin during and immediately after the 2016 election.

Read more of the Bullshit…

 
 

May 172017
 

In light of the Seth Rich “Coincidence”, Here is an info-graphic and PDF to refresh people’s memories.

A Look At The Clinton Body Count

Click to enlarge

THE CLINTON BODY COUNT

 

May 162017
 

Hillary Clinton approved the transfer of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Russia and nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary Clinton Gave The Russians 20 Percent Of The U.S.’ Uranium Supply

While Hillary Clinton’s State Department was one of eight agencies to review and sign off on the transfer of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Russia — then-Secretary of State Clinton herself was the only agency head whose family foundation received $145 million in donations from multiple people connected to the uranium deal, as reported by the New York Times.

The reason that the Mainstream Media and the Washington Elite continue the false narrative of Trump colluding with the Russians is to distract from the Clinton’s dealings with the Russians, Bill’s speaking fees and Hillary’s uranium deal. That is the real Russian scandal and has been from the beginning.

Donations to the Clinton Foundation, and a Russian Uranium Takeover

Uranium investors’ efforts to buy mining assets in Kazakhstan and the United States led to a takeover bid by a Russian state-owned energy company. The investors gave millions to the Clinton Foundation over the same period, while Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s office was involved with approving the Russian bid.

Uranium

investors

September 2005

Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining financier, wins a major uranium deal in Kazakhstan for his company, UrAsia, days after visiting the country with former President Bill Clinton.

2006

Uranium

One

Mr. Giustra donates $31.3 million to the Clinton Foundation.

FebRuary 2007

UrAsia merges with a South African mining company and assumes the name Uranium One. In the next two months, the company expands into the United States.

June 2008

Negotations begin for an investment in Uranium One by the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom.

Rosatom

2008-2010

Uranium One and former UrAsia investors make $8.65 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One investors stand to profit on a Rosatom deal.

June 2009

Rosatom subsidiary ARMZ takes a 17 percent ownership stake in Uranium One.

17%

Stake

2010-2011

Investors give millions more in donations to the Clinton Foundation.

June 2010

Rosatom seeks majority ownership of Uranium One, pending approval by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, of which the State Department is a member.

 

Rosatom says it does not plan to increase its stake in Uranium One or to take the company private.

June 29, 2010

Bill Clinton is paid $500,000 for a speech in Moscow by a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that assigned a buy rating to Uranium One stock.

October 2010

Rosatom’s majority ownership approved by Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.

51%

Stake

January 2013

Rosatom takes full control of Uranium One and takes it private.

100%

Stake

Rosatom

Real News as reported by the New York Times
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal:
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal - The New York Times

 
 

May 142017
 

Another Clinton Foundation pay-to-play scheme has been revealed by a foreign government.

Bangladesh Prime Minister Says Hillary Clinton Pressured Her To Help Clinton Foundation Donor

While secretary of state, Hillary Clinton made a personal call to pressure Bangladesh’s prime minister to aid a donor to her husband’s charitable foundation despite federal ethics laws that require government officials to recuse themselves from matters that could impact their spouse’s business.

The Office of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina confirmed to Circa that Mrs. Clinton called her office in March 2011 to demand that Dr. Muhammed Yunus, a 2006 Nobel Peace prize winner, be restored to his role as chairman of the country’s most famous microcredit bank, Grameen Bank. The bank’s nonprofit Grameen America, which Yunus chairs, has given between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Global Initiative. Grameen Research, which is chaired by Yunus, has donated between $25,000 and $50,000, according to the Clinton Foundation website.

“Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telephoned Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in March 2011 insisting her not to remove Dr. Muhammad Yunus from the post of Managing Director of Grameen Bank,” Deputy Press Secretary Md Nazrul Islam told Circa in an email.

Islam said the prime minister informed Mrs. Clinton that according to Grameen Bank rules and regulations, nobody can hold the position of the Managing Director of Grameen Bank after the age of 60. He was 70 at the time of his removal and had wrangled for months to no avail with the prime minister over his removal.

According to the Bangladesh government, Grameen Bank is part of a statutory body of the government and therefore is subject to the banking laws, saying they told Clinton “Dr. Yunus drew salaries and allowances illegally for 10 years.”

A commission set up by the Bangladesh government also began investigating Grameen Bank in 2012 for financial mismanagement.

Yunus did not return calls seeking comment. But he has long denied any wrongdoing and suggested his ouster was the result of internal politics — he considered creating a rival political party in 2007 but ended up not doing so.

In a 2013 interview, Yunus said he feared his ouster would put the bank he founded to help millions of impoverished people with microcredit — small loans that are often unsecured by assets but have higher interest rates — under too much government control and alter its mission.

“It will be a disaster,” he said at the time. “Everybody in Bangladesh knows that if any business is controlled by the government, it goes down. Now why do they want to do that for the bank?

“Attack me as a person if you don’t like me, but what wrong has the bank done? The bank is owned by the poor women, it is financed with their deposits,” he added. “The bank should be under the control of those women. That’s the way I had always wanted to keep it.”

Mrs. Clinton’s newly disclosed call to reinstate Dr. Yunus marks one of the most direct involvements in an official government matter that impacted one of her husband’s donors. It may trigger new calls for a criminal investigation into the foundation’s activities but “it’s not likely that anything would come of it,” said Richard Painter, former Chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush.

“People in public life shouldn’t be raising money from anybody, anywhere, or for anything,” Painter said. “But until we fix the campaign finance system this is the way it’s going to be.”

Painter, who supported Clinton during her campaign for president, said that there is little if any evidence that she crossed any legal lines regarding the Clinton Foundation. He said favoritism to somebody giving money to campaign is often and frequent in Washington D.C. politics and “if that were the case we’d be investigating the entire U.S. Congress.”

“This shows the Clinton’s insensitivity to the public’s anger and lack of judgement when they expanded the fundraising beyond politics,” said Painter, who said people in public office should not be raising money.

But opponents of Mrs. Clinton, including President Trump before the election, have made calls for a criminal investigation into the foundation and whether there was a pay-for-play, in which they donors allegedly received favors from the State Department during her tenure from 2009-2013.

The Associated Press reported in August, that at least 85 of 154 “people from private interests who met or had phone conversations with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity” or pledged to donate to one of her international programs.

While Mrs. Clinton was at the State Department she also voted to approve 20 percent sale of U.S. uranium production capacity to the Russian Atomic Energy Agency. The company donated $2.5 million to the Clinton Foundation while the deal was ongoing and before the deal was finalized President Bill Clinton was invited to Moscow and given $500,000 for a speech.

And when it came to Yunus, declassified cables show that Mr. Yunus sought to use Mrs. Clinton’s power as secretary of state to pressure the Bangladesh government.

In 2009, Dr. Yunus sent a personal email to then Secretary of State Clinton’s office asking for intervention into the Bangladesh bank and stated his concerns, according to a declassified WikiLeaks cable.

Those declassified cables show the U.S. ambassador also raised the issue with government officials prior to Mrs. Clinton’s call and that Mrs. Clinton asked State officials to alert her husband to the problems Yunus was having with Bangladesh.

“Please see if the issues of Grameen Bank can be raised in a friendly way,” the email from Yunus to then Clinton advisor Melanne Verveer stated. “I sought an appointment with the Prime Minister to brief her on our problems, at the advice of the U.S. Ambassador in Dhaka.”

Yunus received the Medal of Freedom in 2009, from President Obama, for his work in aiding the 150 million poor families receive financing and business loans through his microfinance program at the bank.

“Almost every important person in Bangladesh congratulated me for receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom,” he states in the cable. “But the Prime Minister and her party said not a word about it, so you can see the depth of the problem,“ Yunus wrote in the cable to Verveer, who now is the executive director of the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security at Georgetown University. “I thought I should keep you briefed and let you figure out what to be done. Thanks for your help,” Yunus wrote to Verveer in 2009. Verveer could not be reached for comment.

Sajeeb Wazed, the son of Prime Minister Hasina, and a permanent U.S. resident, says that between 2010 and 2012, he was repeatedly pressured to ask his mother to end the investigation into Mr. Yunus, and threatened with an audit or other action if he did not comply.

WATCH | In an interview with Circa News, Wazed claims that Clinton State Department employees pressured him to talk with his mother, the prime minister, and get her to end the investigation into Yunus. He has no documentation to back up this claim.

“At two instances during those conversations they brought up the fact that, ‘look, there could be many actions taken against your country, your mother, your family, who knows, you could get audited by the IRS, since you live in the U.S.,” said Wazed, who has been making the allegations for over five years.

 
 
via

May 132017
 

Is this why James Comey was really fired?

Potential Conflicts In Top FBI Official’s Role In Russia Collusion Probe

This PDF from Senator Grassley’s website is a must read but the last 4 pages are GOLD. If anyone questions you on the timing of Comey’s firing send them this.

McCabe is NEXT!

An additional bombshell here – as of Match 28 2017 the Clinton Foundation is still under investigation!

A snippet:

Mr. McCabe is already under investigation by the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General for failing to recuse himself from the Clinton investigation due to his meeting with McAuliffe. After that meeting, McAuliffe-aligned political groups donated about $700,000 to Mr. McCabe’s wife, Dr. McCabe, for her campaign to become a Democrat state Senator in Virginia.

This is alarming. McCabe gets away with this without any questions from the media regarding ethics.

You won’t find anything that is informative in the Mainstream Media. That’s a given at this point. If it’s being trumpeted in the Mainstream Media, you can automatically assume one of two things.

  1. It’s a bold faced lie for some agenda
  2. Whatever is being touted has been cherry picked from a barrel of other related facts and spun to benefit the elite somehow.

If the Mainstream Media is not talking about any given subject, and you see a lot of rumblings about it online, you can almost guarantee it’s probably true and/or important… It’s a sad state of affairs, not that this should be a shock to anyone in the know.

Archived link.
2017-05-02 CEG to DOJ (McCabe Continuing Conflicts)

 
 
h/t reddit

May 122017
 

No one cared when China colluded with the Clintons to interfere in the ’96 Election; “Back in 1996, China helped then-President Bill Clinton get re-elected by funneling money to the Clinton campaign”

China Colluded With The Clintons To Interfere In The 1996 Election

The Mainstream Media has devoted exhaustive coverage over the allegation that Russia may have interfered with the 2016 election, as most recently seen in their massive reporting of the James Comey hearings. But there was a time when they didn’t care when a foreign country tried to buy a U.S. election (Hint: It helped a Democrat).

Back in 1996, China helped then-President Bill Clinton get re-elected by funneling money to the Clinton campaign. During Clinton’s re-election campaign against Republican Bob Dole, the Chinese Red Army (via fundraiser Johnny Chung) donated $300,000 to the Clinton campaign. After Clinton won, his administration quietly approved the export of key technology that aided China’s ballistic missile program.

Despite scoops by the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, Washington Post, The Washington Times that detailed connections between Chinese contributions and espionage efforts, as well as exhaustive Congressional hearings the Big Three networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) all but buried the Clinton-Chinese fundraising scandal.  

And even when they did cover the scandal, anchors and reporters were dismissive. The late ABC World News Tonight anchor Peter Jennings, on his April 10, 1997 show, thought the investigation into the scandal wasn’t worth the effort: “When we come back, two investigations of fundraising abuse, two of them on Capitol Hill. Is it a waste of time and money?”

When the late-Senator Fred Thompson’s Governmental Affairs Committee took up the matter in the summer of 1997, ABC correspondent Linda Douglass was quick to claim there was nothing to the investigation: “Senator [Fred] Thompson is clearly tired of taking a beating from the Democrats, who every single day point out the fact that he’s failed to prove there is any Chinese plot in connection with the Democratic presidential campaign.”

On June 17, 1997 then Today co-anchor Katie Couric absurdly asked The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward “Are members of the media, do you think, Bob, too scandal-obsessed, looking for something at every corner?”

And while today the liberal media is playing up the sinister KGB past of Vladimir Putin, back then they were offended by any labeling of China as communist or “red.” On the April 4, 1997 CBS Evening News, reporter Phil Jones huffed: “Republicans call this money ‘a direct slap at those brave young Americans who spilled their blood defending freedom.’ China is referred to as ‘Red China.’ Why not just call it ‘China’? Why ‘Red China’?”

The following are some of the major discoveries from that era and how they were or were not covered: 

China’s Army Funds the Democrats.

On April 4, 1999 the Asian fundraising scandal culminated in a Los Angeles Times report: Johnny Chung told Justice Dept. investigators that the chief of Chinese military intelligence gave him $300,000 to donate to the Clinton campaign. None of the broadcast networks touched this bombshell until Chung appeared before Congress on May 11, but even then the ABC and NBC morning shows and the CBS Evening News ignored him.

China Acquires U.S. Missile Technology.

Beginning in April 1998, The New York Times reported the Chinese government had been given technological expertise that “significantly advanced Beijing’s ballistic missile program,” and the head of one of the offending defense contractors was the largest individual contributor to Democrats in 1996. The number of evening news reports on this story since April 1998? ABC: 7. CBS: 3. NBC: 2. ABC outnumbered these 12 pieces in a 24-hour period highlighting their Monica Lewinsky interview.

China Acquires U.S. Warhead Technology.

One year after that discovery, The New York Times found that the Chinese government had stolen technology from U.S. nuclear labs that would help them miniaturize their nuclear warheads. In the first ten days the Big Three aired only 11 evening stories and six morning stories, then dropped the issue. The networks have since ignored several significant revelations and conducted only one morning show interview.

Clinton’s Denials Exposed.

When pressed by print reports about whether he knew Chinese espionage was occurring on his watch, President Clinton claimed in two press conferences that he was told nothing about espionage occurring during his term. When new print reports revealed him to be lying, the networks again refused to give viewers the evidence. 

 
 
via

May 042017
 

Screw the people! The lawsuit, filed against the Democratic National Committee, and its former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, by Bernie Sanders donors reveals the DNC believes its own rules of impartiality don’t apply, and they can pick whatever candidate they wish.

DNC Admits They Had Legal Right To Rig 2016 Primaries

Last year, the political election process exposed Americans to more corruption and vote rigging than at any time in their history. Now, a recent lawsuit has exposed that this corruption and fraud is actually standard operating procedure.

The lawsuit, filed against the Democratic National Committee, and its former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, by Bernie Sanders donors reveals the DNC believes its own rules of impartiality don’t apply, and they can pick whatever candidate they wish.

“We could have voluntarily decided that, ‘Look, we’re gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way,” DNC’s lawyer Bruce Spiva told a Florida court.

The lawsuit, originally filed in June, accuses the DNC and its former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz of seven different violations, including fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and negligence.

As RT reports, 

A South Florida court presided over by U.S. Federal Judge William J. Zloch heard the defendants argue a Motion to Dismiss last week, which revealed a number of surprising arguments made by the DNC’s lawyers.

The most shocking was the argument that, despite impartiality being part of both its charter and bylaws, the DNC is free to choose the nominee it wishes, and could “go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way.”

The defendants’ lawyers also argued the suit is based on an “internal rule” which cannot be enforced, and that the term “impartial” can’t be defined.

People paid money in reliance on the understanding that the primary elections for the Democratic nominee—nominating process in 2016 were fair and impartial,” the plaintiff’s lawyer Jared Beck said. “And that’s not just a bedrock assumption that we would assume just by virtue of the fact that we live in a democracy, and we assume that our elections are run in a fair and impartial manner.”

“But that’s what the Democratic National Committee’s own charter says. It says it in black and white.”

However impartiality was nowhere to be found.

Beginning in Iowa and eventually getting blown wide open in Arizona, the fraud and suppression of votes quickly let Americans know that the DNC was set in their rigging ways.

Examples of this fraud were captured on video, documented on paper, and even broadcast live on television.

The defendants, in their motion to dismiss the lawsuit, argued that a judge cannot determine how the DNC carries out its nomination process, noting that it would “drag the Court right into the political squabbles.”

However, Judge Zlock responded by saying, “So you are suggesting that this is just part of the business, so to speak, that it’s not unusual for, let’s say, the DNC, the RNC to take sides with respect to any particular candidate and to support that candidate over another?” 

And that is exactly what voters witnessed last year.

The mainstream media was even complicit in the selection of Hillary Clinton over Sanders. A firestorm exploded when the AP abruptly announced Clinton had garnered sufficient delegates and superdelegates to clinch the nomination — before California even held its primary. Irate voters justifiably condemned the inexplicable announcement as premature, especially in light of California polls showing Clinton outpaced by or neck and neck with Bernie Sanders.

Whether or not the judge will rule to dismiss the case remains unknown. However, if it does go to court, Wasserman Schultz and others would be forced to give depositions. And, during these depositions, evidence from WikiLeaks, Guccifer and others will be presented.

Make no mistake, the DNC admitting to having the right to rig the 2016 democratic primary is just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to trial, America will see even more of the dark underbelly that is the Democrat election process.

 
 
via

The Devil Went Down To Georgia

 Political  Comments Off on The Devil Went Down To Georgia
Apr 192017
 

Democrat Jon Ossoff is headed for a runoff in June against a Republican contender after failing Tuesday to score an upset victory

The Devil Went Down To Georgia

Georgia congressional race: Democrat Ossoff, Republican Handel will go to run-off.

Seems like an appropriate song for today!

The Devil went down to Georgia – He was looking for a soul to steal – He was in a bind, ’cause he was way behind – He was willing to make a deal – When he came across this young man – Sawing on a fiddle and playing it hot – And the Devil jumped up on a hickory stump and said – “Boy let me tell you what:

I guess you didn´t know it, but I’m a fiddle player too,
And if you’d care to take a dare,
I’ll make a bet with you
Now you play a pretty good fiddle,
Boy, but give the Devil his due
I bet a fiddle of gold against your soul
‘Cause I think I’m better than you”
The boy said, “My name’s Johnny and it might be a sin,
But I’ll take your bet, you’re gonna regret,
‘Cause I’m the best there’s ever been”
Johnny, rosin up your bow and play your fiddle hard,
‘Cause hell’s broke loose in Georgia and the Devil deals the cards
And if you win you’ll get this shiny fiddle made of gold,
But if you lose, the Devil gets your soul!
The Devil opened up his case and he said, “I’ll start this show”
And fire blew from his fingertips as he rosined up his bow
And he pulled the bow across the strings and it made an evil hiss
Then a band of demons joined in,
And it sounded something like this
When the Devil finished, Johnny said,
“Well you’re pretty good old son
But sit down in that chair right there
And let me show you how it’s done!”
Fire on the Mountain, run, boys, run
The Devil´s in the house of the rising sun
Chicken in the bread pan a picking out dough,
Granny does your dog bite, “No, child, no”
The Devil bowed his head because he knew that he’d been beat
And he laid that golden fiddle on the ground at Johnny´s feet
Johnny said, “Devil, just come on back
If you ever want to try again,
I done told you once, you son of a bitch,
I’m the best there´s ever been”
He played,
Fire on the Mountain, run, boys, run
The Devil’s in the house of the rising sun
Chicken in the bread pan a picking out dough,
Granny will your dog bite, “No, child, no”

Where is Jon Ossoff’s money coming from?
Watch:
ActBlue is a cousin of ShareBlue.
Ossoff is a Soros pawn.

 

 

Time To Re-read The James Comey / Michael Rogers Testimony

 Political  Comments Off on Time To Re-read The James Comey / Michael Rogers Testimony
Apr 042017
 

What if James Comey and the FBI are actually investigating the former Obama Administration?

Time To Re-read The James Comey / Michael Rogers Testimony

We all know that FBI Director James Comey and NSA head Michael Rogers testified before the House Intelligence Committee on March 20. Given recent developments with Evelyn Farkas admissions and Susan Rice evidence – I invite you – NO I IMPLORE YOU – to read again the testimony from the FBI and NSA.

I respectfully suggest that new insight can be gleaned from this testimony that indicates any investigation by the FBI regarding Trump and Russia is not necessarily directed at Trump or his Administration but is in fact directed at the former Obama Administration and the leaking of classified materials.

This may explain why Trump hasn’t fired Comey yet.

Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election
Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election