“To My Democrat Brothers and Sisters….”

I’m NOT a Republican. I’m NOT a Democrat. I’m registered as “other” in my state, where one cannot register to vote as an “Independent.” But I AM a politically conservative independent.

That said, today I am making a few points addressed primarily to the thousands of my friends and relatives who are Democrats. I in no way am today demeaning the process of political parties in the U.S. But I echo the sentiments of the third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson when he said:

“Both of our political parties, at least the honest portion of them, agree conscientiously in the same object: the public good; but they differ essentially in what they deem the means of promoting that good. One side believes it best done by one composition of the governing powers, the other by a different one. One fears most the ignorance of the people; the other the selfishness of rulers independent of them. Which is right, time and experience will prove.”

It’s safe to say that Jefferson was not a fan of political parties. There were two major parties just as now. It’s uncanny that Jefferson’s America experienced the same or similar angst with political parties as do we. However, just as did Jefferson in his day, we too need to find ways to mitigate the damages perpetrated by political parties in our America. And attempting that today is proving to be just as tricky as then. I’m beginning to feel the same way Jefferson felt when he said this:

If I could not go to Heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.”

The “Villains”

I’m certain political parties themselves are not the entities with which Jefferson had his beef. The same holds today. The methods used by political parties and the reasoning that initiates their operating tactics are the aggravating elements of political parties. After all, their very existence is to coordinate efforts and garner resources sufficient to work to destroy their party counterparts continually! There’s nothing in party operations that can be considered “peaceful while diligent” methodology.

So who ARE the villains in politics? Today, there are several different parties on the nation’s political landscape. But the main two are apparent: Democrat and Republican parties. Let’s chat a bit about OUR political parties.

The GOP

I am by no means a Republican hack. I have today (and also in the past) many issues with the Republican Party. Most of those things the GOP has done that rub me wrong are simply things that, when put in the perspective held by most Americans, are useless attempts to give Republicans an advantage of some sort regarding some political issue. And most of those end up being useless at worst and ineffective at best.

Take, for instance, the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

No doubt Bill Clinton made some horrible choices in his personal life. No doubt, some of those personal choices spilled over into his “public” life — particularly in the Oval Office. I understand that everyone has the explicit right to feel he should have been removed from office. But in my mind, as bad as were those improprieties with the intern that occurred in the White House, my question was then and still is, “Were those impeachable offenses?” Here come the Republicans.

They didn’t care about Hillary Clinton as Bill Clinton’s wife and how horrible it was her finding out about her husband’s dalliance with Monica Lewinsky in a news report. They didn’t care that the President of the United States had taken advantage of a 20-something-year-old young woman. All they cared about was that President Clinton’s wrongdoing justified their desire to run him out of the White House. Using that information alone, they launched a multi-year impeachment debacle that resulted in nothing but embarrassment for the President.

Then House Speaker Newt Gingrich spearheaded the Clinton impeachment. His doing so along with the House impeachment set the Republican Party back for quite a while. All that resulted is that Bill Clinton is today, and probably always will be, considered one of America’s most accomplished modern presidents.

George W. Bush

Republicans were ecstatic after the Clinton debacle to see one of their own back in the White House. “W” was able to take advantage of some excellent economics and international circumstances that he inherited. But he had that Middle East “thing” — Iraq — eating at him from the day of his inauguration. His father, who had tangled first with Saddam Hussein felt he left a job undone. The World Trade Center bombing took us right back into war with Iraq that many say should have never happened. Those weapons of mass destruction Bush used as fuel to start that war never were uncovered.

Thousands of young men and women paid the price for that uncertain war with their lives. Many think Bush 43 did that only to finish the feud between Hussein and Bush 41. We probably will never know for sure.

“W” missed some great opportunities for doing some extraordinary things for the U.S. during his eight years in office. He was the perfect president to initiate actions to fix the southern border illegal problems. I felt certain he could have mastered an effective immigration overhaul that would have repaired the border issues while simultaneously closing loopholes in other areas of immigration. He neglected to instigate any real immigration reform.

Though he gave it a valiant effort, Bush 43 gave up his proposed reform of Social Security to protect its longevity. I attended his Social Security reform meeting in Louisiana in which he promoted a partial conversion of the system to privatization that would have given participants options for the investment of at least their contributions into the system. He, of course, received major Democrat pushback for the idea. He walked away from it.

In his second term, it was as if he walked away from the campaign promises he made — like he just gave up. Spending went through the roof. He let Democrats run roughshod over budgets while deficits and U.S. debt went through the roof. It seemed the Iraq war wore him out, and he just gave up.

Mitt Romney

I thought Mitt had a decent shot at turning the White House back to red. He fought hard for a while. But at the very end of his campaign, when polls showed he had cut into Obama’s standing with Americans to a level many thought would not happen, he seemed just to quit. It appeared to many — including me — that he at some point decided he didn’t want to take on the responsibility of running a nation. The last 45 days of his campaign proved that to be true. And Obama easily won his second term.

Today’s GOP is looking more and more like a “status quo” party. Until the impeachment attacks on the President, Republicans played into the sense that all they want is to make no waves — to be the party of “Can’t we just get along?”

Impeachment brought the GOP back to attention. Impeachment, in the wake of the tremendous Trump accomplishments, even with scant support, opened their eyes. Little by little, I have watched as more Republicans have jumped aboard the “Trump Train.” As a party, they are as united as I can remember since the Twin Towers toppled.

Republicans seem more engaged, more challenged, and more resolute to prove the Trump Agenda is real, productive, and all-inclusive. None of it is politically motivated but driven by one thing: Mr. Trump, when campaigning, made promises that he has kept today.

Then The Democrats on the Left

This is where I part ways with Democrats: we have nothing in common anymore. When Trump beat Hillary, it was on. And the war instigated by Democrats against President Trump is one of historic proportions. And in starting and perpetuating this war, Democrats are daily giving Americans new clues proving that Democrats have lost touch with average Americans.

What is most troubling and what confirms that Democrats have lost it is their immediate and total dismissals of facts regarding Mr. Trump. Add to that their consistent expressions of anger and hatred for first Mr. Trump then for every American who supports him and more and more Americans are leaving the Democrat Party.

It appears that Democrat leadership and most Democrats have abandoned all reason. Think about this: they’re impeaching Trump amid many amazing accomplishments handed to Americans by this Trump Administration:

  • Lowest unemployment in decades;
  • More Americans employed than ever;
  • More jobs available than Americans to fill them;
  • Record federal revenue;
  • Lowest income tax rates in a generation;
  • Re-patriation of hundreds of billions in corporate income with a Trump deal that has put billions into new jobs, benefits, and expansions;
  • Two of the most significant trade agreements in U.S. history:  China, and USMCA — the treaty with Canada and Mexico;
  • Six million fewer Americans on government assistance because they have jobs which didn’t even exist four years ago.

We could continue listing his accomplishments but will stop for the sake of time.

This investigative impeachment process has been a charade — a clown show. Orchestrated by Nancy Pelosi, Jerry Nadler, and Adam Schiff, it has each day exposed Democrat hatred and subsequent losses of reason. It’s all over the marketplace. And Americans are learning the truth of the Democrat Party: they want only to control the lives of Americans — all Americans.

After a faux House investigation that resulted in articles of impeachment, and after the stall by Speaker Pelosi for three weeks to refer those articles to the Senate, she finally did while simultaneously “finding” new evidence with which to implicate the President in something else.

Here’s the synopsis of this evidence as presented by the Associated Press:

House Democrats have released a trove of documents they obtained from Lev Parnas, a close associate of President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, including a handwritten note that mentions asking Ukraine’s president to investigate “the Biden case.”

The documents, obtained as part of the impeachment investigation, show Parnas communicating with Giuliani before the removal of Marie Yovanovitch, who was the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. A man named Robert F. Hyde disparaged Yovanovitch in messages to Parnas and gave him updates on her location and cell phone use, raising questions about possible surveillance.

Among the documents is a screenshot of a previously undisclosed letter from Giuliani to Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelenskiy dated May 10, 2019, which was before Zelenskiy took office. In the letter, Giuliani requests a meeting with Zelenskiy “as personal counsel to President Trump and with his knowledge and consent.” In the letter, Giuliani said he would be accompanied at the meeting by Victoria Toensing, a Washington attorney and Trump ally.

The notes were scratched by hand on a Ritz Carlton note pad paper and are barely legible. Additionally, the wrongdoing alleged is at best second-hand and provides no evidence that the President knew any of the conversations or if he even knows those included in the comments!

One important note was left out of of the plethora of stories about this “blockbuster” expose: Parnas and his business partner, Igor Fruman, both U.S. citizens who emigrated from the former Soviet bloc, were indicted last year on charges of conspiracy, making false statements and falsification of records!

You can’t make this stuff up. And Democrats make no apology for their ignoble allegations of this ridiculous “evidence” that lacks any remnant of the possibility of holding any truth.

Keep in mind, however, that Americans have never seen any piece of the mountains of evidence held by Rep. Adam Schiff that — according to Schiff himself and confirmed by other Democrat House members — are absolute that Mr. Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin and other Russians to steal the 2016 election. And Schiff will be in the Senate on behalf of the House trying the President of the United States! Why doesn’t Schiff simply reveal the Trump treasonous he has claimed for more than two years exist and end this impeachment debacle?

Summary

To my friends that hold to Democrat blue, I am sad to be an observer of the fall into oblivion by your party. Fueled by a fawning media that very obviously take marching orders from Democrat Party leaders have failed to convince Americans of Mr. Trump’s wrongdoing. While doing so, their hatred for “all things Trump” and “all Trump supporters” is there now for all to see.

Democrats as of today summarily reject that Americans wanted and still want a president who can deliver to Americans for the first time in ten years accomplishments that EACH are 100% for middle Americans and NOT just for elites that are mostly Democrats. And Trump has accomplished what he promised to accomplish when campaigning.

There are reasons why Mr. Trump won Americans’ votes in 2500 counties and parishes in 2016 while Hillary Clinton won votes in just 500 counties. Yes, those 500 counties happened to be from California, New York, Connecticut, Chicago, Massachusetts, Maryland, and Washington, D.C. That election and its results are the reason for the establishment of the electoral college. Democrats refuse to accept that as viable.

For my Democrat brothers and sisters, only one thing ahead is certain — at least in my projections for 2020: Donald Trump will not only win in a margin far wider than did Obama and Bill Clinton in their elections as President, Republicans will win a larger margin in the Senate AND Republicans will gain once more the majority in the House of Representatives.

Why will all this happen? Americans have had it with the constant untruths and gross misrepresentations made and given to Americans by Democrats and other Leftists. And Americans, while glorying in their larger net paychecks and lower taxes and new jobs and skyrocketing investment and retirement accounts that withered away under Obama, are not so stupid as to snatch all the actions put in place by Mr. Trump and go back to 2016 financially. Americans are smarter than that. And most Americans understand today that Totalitarianism is unwanted here. Americans are more committed than ever to a market of free ideas.

Those Americans will gladly support Mr. Trump in November.

Play

Ukraine U.S. Election Fraud Real & Being Hidden: for $$$$

It is surprising to me that the Media would not even touch the self-professed blackmail of the former Ukrainian President by former Vice President Joe Biden. I’m sure you remember these few sentences at a public gathering in which Biden not only confessed his blackmail, he bragged about it:

Remember this: Biden was named by Obama to oversee the massive corruption in Ukraine for the Obama Administration. Biden had spent much time there purportedly to concentrate on the certainty that Ukraine had been — among other things — aggressively trying to interfere in the U.S. 2016 election. 

And then there’s the Burisma Holdings mystery.

Only foolish people believe that Biden’s son Hunter received a seat on the Burisma Board of Directors as a result of his expertise in oil and gas. Hunter Biden knew NOTHING about the energy business. Yet he was paid $83,000 a month to serve on the Board of the largest Ukrainian oil and gas company. The only explanation is that he got that position only because he was the son of the U.S. Vice President.

Why do you think today’s media pile-on all those who today mention the Ukraine election-interference story when those claims were accepted as fact by all a few years ago? (We’ll get into those reasons in a bit) Today’s news outlet leaders then touted Ukraine’s election interference on par with that of Russia. But today, they report that all those who believe Ukraine’s 2016 election interference happened are nothing more than conspiracy theorists.

  • Chuck Todd of NBC’s Meet The Press actually laughed at Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) for believing Ukraine tried to interfere in U.S. elections;
  • Even FBI Director Christopher Wray said there was no indication that Ukraine meddled in the 2016 U.S. elections. “We have no information that indicates that Ukraine interfered with the 2016 presidential election;”
  • U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Mitt Romney (R-UT) both state there was no Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. election;
  • A Ukrainian Court found that Ukraine DID attempt to impact the U.S. 2016 election on the behalf of Hillary Clinton.

These denials — even from several Republican Senators — are odd. Why? In light of the approximate seven stories from reputable news sources that have NO leanings toward the Republican Party all ran investigative stories chronicling the 2016 election interference by Ukraine:

1. Financial Times, 08/28/2016

The Financial Times reported Ukraine attempted to intervene in the U.S. election.

“The prospect of Mr. Trump, who has praised Ukraine’s arch-enemy Vladimir Putin, becoming leader of the country’s biggest ally has spurred not just Mr. Leshchenko but Kyiv’s wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before: intervene, however indirectly, in a U.S. election,” Financial Times reported.

2. Politico, 01/11/2017

Politico reported the Ukrainian government tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump.

“Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election,” Politico reported.

They also reported that a Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington, D.C., to expose ties between Trump, Paul Manafort, and Russia.

3. Financial Times, 12/22/2016

The Financial Times reported Russia used Ukrainian technology to hack the DNC server in the 2016 election. Based on the reporting, it appears the technology used to hack the election was operated in eastern Ukraine.

“The discovery of an alleged Russian government hack of a Ukrainian mobile phone app has boosted investigators’ confidence that Moscow was behind the hacking of Democratic National Committee servers in the U.S.before the presidential election,” cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike said.

The firm, which was hired by the DNC to rebuild its cyber defenses after the attack, said “Fancy Bear”– a code name it assigned to hackers that it believes are associated with Russian military intelligence, the “GRU” — had implanted malware in an Android mobile phone application used by anti-Russian forces operating in eastern Ukraine.

4. Politico, 02/23/2017

In 2017, Politico reported that a Ukrainian parliamentarian attempted to contact Paul Manafort, claiming to have politically damaging information about Manafort as well as Trump.

“The undated communications, which are allegedly from the iPhone for Manafort’s daughter, include a text that appears to come from a Ukrainian parliamentarian named Serhiy Leschenko, seeking to reach her father, in which he claims to have politically damaging information about both Manafort and Trump,” Politico said.

5. New York Times, 12/12/2018

Ukranian courts ruled that releasing information to Manafort about the 2016 U.S. election was illegal interference.

“Both lawmakers asserted that if the release of the slush fund information broke the law, then it should be viewed as an illegal effort to influence the United States presidential election in favor of Hillary Clinton by damaging the Trump campaign,” the New York Times reported.

Why The Sudden Denial of the 2016 Ukrainian Election Interference?

Ukraine has always struggled with government corruption. Ukraine depends heavily on its friendly neighbors and those from the West for military and other types of foreign aid. Its proximity to Russia and several other strategic considerations have for 20+ years kept Ukraine in the “political corruption” spotlight. There has been so much speculation about Ukraine’s interference in our 2016 election AND so much demonstrative denial by the Media, it is incumbent for the truth to be vetted and passed along to Americans.

We (with outside assistance) have tracked the Ukrainian 2016 U.S. election interference with great difficulty. What follows is a complete “roadmap” for all interested in providing proof that Ukraine DID attempt 2016 U.S. election interference.
As is our normal practice to make reading easier, these details are put in bullet format that are numbered from 1-18.
Please don’t get lost in these. It may appear to be much information, but this is a heretofore hidden roadmap showing how to get from “A” — how U.S. corrupted politicians — get to “B” — accessing the U.S. political process in our government for personal gain.
  1. The Ukraine Crisis Media Center was founded by Soros in March 2014. This organization is Ukraine’s version of Media Matters.
  2. Serhiy Leshchenko was a Ukraine Member of Parliament.
  3. NABU — Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Bureau — is formed and, the Executive director is Artem Sytnyk.
  4. Another NGO (Non-governmental Organization) was founded by Soros called the AntAC (Anti-Corruption Action Centre). They received $1.7 million in funding, about $1 million from the U.S. Departments of State and DOJ, and $290,000 from Soros’ International Renaissance Foundation. THIS is the organization that the Obama Administration worked through.
  5. NABU and the Obama government were working closely with Soros NGO Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC) in Ukraine, as John Solomon reports on The Hill. When Ukrainian prosecutors investigated AntAC over a missing $4.4 million in U.S. funding, they were told to stand down by Obama officials. This is the missing money for Joe Biden’s son. Biden’s son was coordinating activity in Ukraine for the Obama Administration.
  6. AntAC (Obama administration and George Soros) pushed a Ukrainian investigation into then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort’s business activities in Ukraine – WITH HELP FROM THE FBI, according to John Solomon from The Hill.
  7. On March 21, 2017, Leschenko and Sytnyk, held a press conference at the Ukraine Crisis Media Center, alleging Manafort took $12.7 million in illegal payments from Ukrainians and made a claim of a “black cashbox ledger.”
  8. Leschenko gave the info to Alexandra Chalupa, a DNC operative who worked with Hillary Clinton. Both Chalupa and Arepovitch, the CEO of Crowdstrike, are connected to a hard left authoritarian fascist group in Ukraine.
  9. April 28, 2016 – Chalupa and Isikoff, a Yahoo Reporter who was deeply involved with Christopher Steele, held a press conference in Washington, D.C., and invited 68 Ukrainian journalists and distributed the dirt on Manafort. The program was called the Open World Leadership Center, held at the Library of Congress, and again, connected to George Soros.
  10. NABU and the Obama Administration worked closely with Soros NGO AntAC. When Ukrainian prosecutors investigated AntAC over a missing $4.4 million in U.S. funding, they were told to stand down by Obama officials. Again, this is all tied to Hunter Biden and the missing $3 million dollars from Burisma Holdings. “When the new prosecutor general Yuri Lutsenko went to meet Obama Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, he says he was stunned when the ambassador “gave me a list of people whom we should not prosecute.”
  11. Chalupa received details of the payments from Leschenko. Payment detail from 2007-2012 lists advertising, computers, polling, consultant fees, etc. NONE OF THE PAYMENTS OR Manafort’s signatures WERE EVER CONFIRMED.
  12. Chalupa also passed the Black Ledger info on to Glenn Simpson at Fusion GPS, who passed them on to DOJ staffer Nellie Ohr. Ohr passed the info on to her husband, Bruce Ohr.  On May 30, 2016, Nellie Ohr sent an email to Bruce Ohr and Justice Department staffers under the subject line “Reported Trove of Documents on Ukrainian Party of Regions’ ‘Black Cashbox,’” which means they were investigating Paul Manafort prior to the July 31, 2016, inception of “Crossfire Hurricane.”
  13. Isikoff broke the story on Yahoo on Aug. 18, 2016, one of the first public mentions of purported “collusion with Russia” by the Trump team. Manafort had to step down as Trump’s campaign manager the next day.
  14. In addition, Leshchenko served as a direct source of information for Fusion GPS—and their hired researcher—former CIA contractor Nellie Ohr. Yes, Nellie received info from Ukrainians, directly or via Fusion GPS, to influence a Presidential election.
  15. Ohr told congressional investigators on Oct. 19, 2018, when pressed, she recalled them, “mentioning someone named Serhiy Leshchenko, a Ukrainian.” She later admitted she knew of Leshchenko before her time at Fusion GPS as he was a “very well-known, Ukrainian, anti-corruption activist.” Leshchenko had adopted a robust anti-Trump stance (because Trump wanted to pursue a more friendly relationship with Russia). And remember, Putin is a nemesis to George Soros.
  16. Remember when Manafort was charged with witness tampering, by the Mueller Special Counsel? Manafort’s daughter’s phone was hacked, and a text message was discovered. It was reported by Politico in late February 2017, that a hack of the phone belonging to one of Manafort’s daughters revealed a text containing a blackmail threat that Manafort has attributed to Leshchenko. It’s not known with any certainty who sent the text, which includes an attachment that references “the Yanukovych accounting book” and lists an email address for Leshchenko. Manafort received additional charges because of the text.
  17. Leschenko and Sytnyk were found guilty. “December 2018, a Kyiv court ruled that Leshchenko, along with NABU Director Artem Sytnyk ‘acted illegally’ when they revealed that Manafort’s surname and signature were found in the so-called ‘black ledger’ of ousted President Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions,” the Kyiv Post reported on Dec. 12, 2018.
  18. Leschenko and Sytnyk interfered in an American election. ” The court noted the material was part of a pre-trial investigation and its release “led to interference in the electoral processes of the United States in 2016 and harmed the interests of Ukraine as a state.”

Summary

I know that’s a lot of information to follow. By way of explanation as we close today’s story, we’ll ask some pointed and salient questions to at least have all looking and listening in to get on the same page:

  • Why has there been so much intense interest in Ukraine by the American government during the Obama Administration?
  • Why would President Obama appoint his Vice President to head the corruption investigations by the U.S. of a foreign nation — ANY foreign country?
  • Why would the Ukrainian government (that was rife with corruption) investigate corruption of Burisma Holdings during the time Hunter Biden was a member of the Board of Directors?
  • Why would Vice President Biden even care about the Burisma investigation — a sovereign country and one of that country’s privately held corporations?
  • Why would the Vice President not only demand the firing of that Ukrainian prosecutor but give Ukraine eight hours to fire him?
  • Why would any foreign OR domestic energy resource company hire Hunter Biden paying him $83,000 per month to serve on their Board of Directors?
  • Are they protecting someone some others? If so, who?

Let’s fast forward to 2020:

  • Why would so many U.S. news sources vehemently deny Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. election after thorough investigatory research found and reported previously that Ukraine DID interfere in the 2016 election?
  • Why would Congressional Democrats and former V.P. Biden pushback on Hunter Biden and the former V.P. testifying before a Congressional committee investigating Ukraine corruption?
  • Why would Senators Mitt Romney and Lindsey Graham — in light of scads of evidence that prove Ukraine 2016 U.S. election interference — not only reject the alleged Ukraine interference but refuse to support the investigation to determine its validity and who was involved?
  • Why would the current FBI Director Chris Wray deny the Ukraine election interference when so much evidence exists confirming it?
  • With the 1999 Treaty between the U.S. and Ukraine specifically for both countries to collaborate on political corruption in each that pertains to the other NOT instigate a formal U.S. investigation into this corruption that John Solomon from The Hill along with information garnered by others uncovered?

Many feel if such an investigation is allowed to occur, it will lead not only to the Obama White House but to the Obama Department of Justice as well as to multiple current and former members of Congress.

What’s the common piece of evidence? “Show Me The Money!”

Play

The “Inconvenient Truth” Isn’t an Al Gore Movie

Do you think that Democrats are petrified to believe that Donald Trump is looking more and more likely to be re-elected in 2020? Few will acknowledge that the 45th President’s support among Americans is NOT falling in the wake of the non-stop attacks mounted by Democrats and their bevy of Leftist supporters. Their attacks seem to encourage Americans who have tired of the “same old thing” in Washington: tax and spend, political corruption, ignoring federal laws, refusal to enforce immigration laws while repairing U.S. immigration, and tearing apart American healthcare. Add to that the massive loss of jobs of all kinds to foreign nations that drove millions even to quit looking for jobs in the U.S. Americans just had enough. Then came Donald Trump.

In the wake of the three-year plethora of amazing accomplishments on all fronts during Trump’s first term, one would think Americans — ALL Americans — would trumpet (pun intended) the American achievements in every sector and fall in line. Instead, the Left has just ramped up their nonstop attacks on the President. Tagging right along (if not leading the charge) is the Lame-Stream Media. They not only miss-report actual news, but manufacture story after story that demean the President personally and professionally. They report fake news as real news while ignoring every accomplishment achieved for Americans during Trump’s first term. They even use Americans on a personal level to fuel their attacks:

“Mark” tells a really sad story in this political ad. According to media reports, Mark is just one of the millions of Americans who, with the hope of change, voted for Donald Trump in 2016 who are appalled and ashamed of their 2016 votes. The only problem with this story is that “Mark” didn’t even vote in the 2016 election! BL News reported the story recently this way:

News reports revealed that a man who appears in an ad saying he regrets voting for Donald Trump did not even show up to vote in the 2016 presidential election. The controversial video was funded by Democratic Party supporters.

The controversial American Bridge 21st Century ad features Mark Graham, a man from Erie, Pennsylvania, who claims to have voted for Trump in 2016 and today regrets his decision.

“I voted for Donald Trump in 2016 because I thought he would make a change,” Graham said in the video urging Pennsylvanians not to support President Trump and even comparing voting for him to pouring “gasoline on a fire.”

However, Erie County elections office records indicate that Graham did not vote in the 2016 election.

What could be going on here? Was this an honest mistake that happened to a group of American patriots diligently trying to get the truth out that Pennsylvanians who voted for Trump are so disappointed they regret those votes? That doesn’t appear to be the reason for this ad and others like it.

American Bridge 21st Century, the entity that financed the ad, is considered a Super PAC. Political action committees (PACs) are organizations that pool contributions from donors to use those funds for campaigns for or against candidates, election initiatives, or legislation.

The American Bridge PAC, one of the significant liberal groups coordinating election fundraising, is funded mainly by Democratic donors and unions. Controversial billionaire speculator George Soros was the group’s largest donor for the 2012 and 2014 cycles, contributing $1 million in 2012 and more than $1 million in 2014, according to reports by the NGO Fact Check.

It’s one thing to point to the actual failures and wrongdoings of elected officials as reasons for voting for their removal or against their re-election. But it’s another thing to unethically seed the ground with falsehoods and fake ads to try to in underhanded fashion impact election results.

Wait a minute: isn’t that what the Mueller Investigation was about? Didn’t the Media implicate the Russians for subversively through social media ads and fake accounts to induce American voters to vote against Hillary and for Trump in 2016? I guess, in this case, it’s OK because it’s not a foreign government committing the fraud. Most would probably agree that both were incorrigible attacks on America’s election system. But only one was illegal.

The “Real” Story

Mark Graham’s story — at least as used in the context of that television ad — is not unique. One can put two and two together and conclude that if Mr. Soros and others of his political persuasion are willing to conflate facts and even outright lie, there are far more campaign tricks with which to fool Americans.

Democrats for generations have shouted from the mountaintops that they alone have been the supporters of minorities in America. They with the support of numerous African-American leaders have successfully led the majority of Blacks in the U.S. to their staunch support of the Democrat Party. Why? Because “conventional wisdom” proves that the GOP has always fought against the rights of African-Americans and even fought to keep Blacks suppressed in every way.

Indeed, there have always been Republicans who have discriminated against African-Americans.  But, it’s a fact that Republicans have pushed through legislation that gave the African-American community more freedom, more opportunity, more justice than have Democrats. Doing so created more chances to fulfill the promises made by our forefathers to all Americans in the Constitution.

In this brief audio/video report, one gets the truth of the Democrat Party’s lies about their Civil Rights gifts to African Americans:

It comes as no surprise to most that the tools of the Left are NOT legislative, social, or racial accomplishments for the poor or disenfranchised. In fact, Democrats fought against such freedoms for 100 years or longer. Their purpose is so obvious to some while so confusing to others that they have been successful in keeping members of the African-American community and other minorities from “seeing” the truth. Democrats are undoubtedly masterful communicators. But their achievements for minorities in America do not support their promises, nor their touted accomplishments.

Most Americans have known for decades the truth of the Democrat Party: their existence as a party depends solely on the maintenance of a nationwide voting majority. In the last twenty years or so, they watched as their voting majority began to slip. Why? Because Americans realized that Democrats had actually become the Taskmasters of minorities. How could these minority members allow this? Democrat Party leadership planted the seeds of deception that taught minorities that Democrats are the only Americans who care. Democrats supposedly were the only ones that would help them achieve the American Dream. That lie has been perpetrated in minority communities for more than half-a-century.

Under Donald Trump, Democrats have been exposed!

Summary

Here’s what’s happened: Donald Trump’s policies in total have given minorities massive life improvements in just his first three years. They are fleeing the Democrat Party in droves. Why? They are tired of empty promises, party policies implemented to perpetuate party power over its members, and legislative proposals that, if ever signed into law, would do nothing but further stifle opportunities for ALL Americans.

Democrats have been exposed.

It’s not just African-Americans that have seen the truth. Native Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, and immigrants from all over the world who have emigrated to the U.S. SEE the benefits in their lives they never saw under Democrat presidents. They more than ever understand the promises given to them for decades by Dems have been empty promises devised to do nothing but keep their votes.

The video ad at the beginning of this story today proves just how desperate they are. The Democrat Party lies in shambles. They watch as its storied history fades into a distant past. Their power is dwindling, and that scares them the most. They know that without that power, they are doomed. They refuse to admit it, but to their horror, the Democrat Party is taking its last gasps.

The George Soros millions put into advertising and promotion along with the zillions of dollars from Bloomberg and Stern flooding this election cycle has done little to attract new Democrat voters. Polls show dramatic numbers of Democrats are leaving the party altogether.

The alternative for Democrat voters — Donald Trump in 2020 — leaves them speechless. Donald Trump and the Republican Party together form “The Inconvenient Truth”  of today’s political landscape. They are clamoring to overcome that “Truth.” But everyday ends for them saying, “What can we possibly do to prevent this from happening?”

There’s not much they CAN do: Americans have awakened.

Big City/State Leadership: No Accountability

The feud between the leadership of the two largest states by population and Washington D.C. has reached monumental levels. California Governor Gavin Newsom and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo have far more than professional “issues” with President Donald Trump. “They hate the guy.” Having such feelings should make everyone sad. But in this case, because of who is involved, it makes everyone uncomfortable. Political leaders are supposed to work together for the common good of their states and the nation. It is hard to find “common good” when both governors and the President feel the others are inept and inferior leaders.
This personal animus goes far beyond the standard policy disagreements that are so common between those from different political parties. It has consumed these two governors so much that they each have stopped even trying to fix dire situations in their states in their war with Mr. Trump. And while they continue to hurl insults toward the Potomac, their states are falling apart.

Homelessness

The nation is struggling with homelessness. The levels to which homelessness has risen is unconscionable. According to the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, California has 129,972 living in the streets while New York has 91,897.  No other states are even close.
Both states receive billions of dollars of federal assistance earmarked for social issues. California gets $376 Billion (for the Fiscal year 2017) but does not explicitly budget for handling the homelessness situation. Most of that money goes to specific obligations like Social Security, Medicare, and other social agencies. New York receives about the same.
The “story” is that neither governor accepts responsibility for the homelessness in their states, nor do they have concrete plans to address that issue. Instead, both point toward D.C. and blame President Trump for not just their homelessness, but pretty much every other issue within their states. That is called “No Accountability.”
Their stance on refusing any accountability has spread through their state governments and trickled down into county and city governments. Every politician wants the money but declines responsibility.
Therein lies the problem we face today. Instead of rolling up sleeves and digging-in for solutions, these and many other governors prefer to point to others who should be accountable.
Want some more examples?

The “Left” Coast

President Trump supporters will clean up excess feces in the Democratic city of San Francisco
The city of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has a big problem concerning homelessness, and that includes the issue of feces. For this reason, pro-Trump activists decided to take action to assist with a group cleanup in the city of San Francisco, California.

TheDaily Signal reported that the San Francisco Department of Public Works responded to 30,136 cases of “human or animal waste” this year, up from 28,353 in 2018. The city launched a $750,000 “poop patrol” in September 2018 to combat the plague of feces, but that didn’t stop this year’s numbers from exceeding last year’s. This data shows that the city of San Francisco, governed by the Democratic Party, is becoming increasingly dirty.

A Twitter post quoted in the Conservatives article reported that homeless people are defecating in grocery stores. For this reason, pro-Trump supporters decided to organize a cleanup activity in the city.

According to The Gateway Pundit, Donald Trump posted a tweet for Nancy Pelosi about the complicated situation on Thursday, Dec. 26, “California leads the nation, by far, in both the number of homeless people and the percentage increase in the homeless population—two terrible stats. Crazy Nancy should focus on that in her very own district, and helping her incompetent governor with the big homeless problem!” he wrote.

Conservative pro-Trump activist Scott Presler announced on Dec. 26 that he would head to San Francisco for a day of organized cleanup. Presler has previously done this community work in the cities of Baltimore, Chicago, and Los Angeles.

“I’m coming to San Francisco for a cleanup. I hear that SF has a “Poop Patrol,” so we’re going to wear hazmat suits as we did in LA. My goal is to go into America’s dirtiest cities, register voters, & do the job that no one else will do,” he said on his Twitter account.

One would think that San Francisco — especially as the home of the most powerful member of Congress — would be the first in the U.S. that would receive any and all resources necessary to take care of homelessness and other problems. Remember: homelessness comes with more than just a housing problem: there’s drug abuse, mental health issues, and criminal  activities that have paralyzed the once beautiful “City by the Bay.”

But it gets worse:

Consequences of progressive policies in San Francisco: Oracle cancels conference moves to Las Vegas

Technology giant Oracle announced that starting next year, it will move its renowned annual conference from San Francisco to Las Vegas. Previous visitors to OpenWorld had complained about “poor street conditions” and high hotel rates in the Californian city.

The decision by the major Silicon Valley company raises “concerns” about whether the Democrat-governed city can host significant business events that have long been a pillar of its tourism, according to a San Francisco Chronicle report.

High hotel costs, homelessness, open drug use, and incidents of street violence that alarm visitors are among the challenges the city faces.

OpenWorld is a technology conference that has been held in San Francisco for the past two decades, attracting some 60,000 visitors each year.

The San Francisco Travel Association estimates the move will cost San Francisco $64 million a year, according to an email to its members.

We did not even include similar problems like these in Los Angeles and Sacramento. Local leaders in all these cities plus every member of California’s Washington D.C. Congressional contingency refuse personal, local, or state accountability for these and other issues crippling their state. Yet they in unison point to the White House and place blame directly on the Trump Administration.

By the way: the homelessness and criminality problems in California began its precipitous escalation during the first Obama term, long before Trump’s election.

The “Other” Coast

The “Big Apple.” No, New York City is NOT the whole of the state of New York. But it dominates the state in every way. Many don’t even realize New York’s capital is upstate: Albany. But Manhattan sucks up most of the oxygen anywhere in New York.

The two most powerful men in NY state and local government are Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. Both carry the exact same feelings for the President as do California’s governor and Congressional members. Both Cuomo and de Blasio struggle with homelessness, massive drug abuse, and rampant criminal issues that are all escalating rapidly. They have no fixes. So, how do they handle it? They blame the Trump Administration.

New York’s mayor — in spite of the massive federal dollars that pour into his city to help with homelessness — wants and expects more from President Trump. He wants the feds to issue more housing vouchers to let people staying in shelters move into rental homes. He’s aiming to eliminate long-term homelessness in the city over the next five years.

“The problem ultimately is Donald Trump has not shown any willingness to give us the tools we need, most especially Section 8 vouchers, which allow people to live in rental housing, de Blasio said. “That’s the single-strongest piece we need from Washington that we are not getting right now.”

In addition to these problems is a rash of hate crimes that of late have been targeted at members of the Jewish Community in Manhattan and elsewhere. Anti-Semitic hate speech is flooding the nation but is especially vicious in New York because of the vast Jewish populace. It’s not just a vitriolic speech. It has spread to violence — even murder.

The New York Police Department is increasing its presence in several Brooklyn neighborhoods as it investigates at least nine possible anti-Semitic attacks that took place in recent days. All of the suspected hate crimes took place in Brooklyn, known for being home to a large number of Jewish residents. “Anyone who terrorizes our Jewish community WILL face justice,” Mayor de Blasio wrote on Twitter. “Anti-Semitism is an attack on the values of our city — and we will confront it head-on.”

The mayor continued: “An atmosphere of hate has been developing in this country over the last few years. A lot of it is emanating from Washington, and it’s having an effect on all of us,” he said.

When asked if he was blaming Trump, he said, “not just the president,” but said “we need a different tone, starting in Washington … that encourage this country to actually find some unity and some common ground” that he does not think the country has had in recent years.

Accountability

Folks, in big cities all across American and most of our largest cities, there is no accountability shared among their leaders!

They refuse to be accountable to those who they are supposed to answer to voters. It’s not just in L.A., San Francisco, other California cities, and New York City and State and other cities — it’s in almost every large city in the U.S. and their respective states. These leaders, along with many of their Congressional representatives in D.C., shirk the accountability that goes with the responsibilities they accepted when they each took an oath of office. How do they handle it? They all point at the White House and loudly cry, “It’s Donald Trump’s Fault!”

There is a common denominator in most of these circumstances: the states are controlled by Democrat governors and state legislatures, and their Congressional members are almost all members of the Democrat Party.

I am not saying Democrats are the problem. What I AM saying is that there is an adopted attitude of political elitism that permeates the leadership of the Democrat Party that says, “I am responsible for everything. When things go well, they do so because I am in charge. When things go poorly, they do so because Republicans obstruct my leftist wishes and destroy what was to be a long list of accomplishments!”

The wheel always stops at “Donald Trump” on their “Wheel of Blame!”

Summary

It’s become nothing but a comedic taking point when these leaders always blame the GOP and the President. GOP leadership in D.C. has known the spiel perfected by Dems. What’s different today is that under this President’s direction, Conservatives are no longer content to ignore it and just let Democrats spin their stories. GOP leaders are now encouraged to stand up and shout the truth in each circumstance.

Dems are not used to having real leaders in the federal government. Trump is a leader. Trump is a problem solver. He identifies issues, determines how it repairs those issues, puts the resources and leadership in place to right the issues, and then holds those in leadership over each area accountable! 

Democrats are always quick to find problems, blame each problem on their political opponents, cry that more money needs to be spent to fix the problems, allocates the money, the problems are never fixed, and no one is held accountable for the break-downs!

The list of Trump accomplishments in his presidency is exhaustive. We have published them each year and will do so for 2019 in a few weeks. That list will once again prove that Donald Trump became President because voters wanted problems solved, and there were no problem solvers in D.C.

There have been some things he’s tried that when implemented, did not (or have not yet) accomplished their expected objectives. Some call those “failures.” Mr. Trump calls them “obstacles.” Most often, when those things happen, those who request them failures quit and walk away. Mr. Trump operates this way: “There were good reasons to go after this. We just hit a snag. Let’s find ways to learn what part of the process did not work and find a better way.”

His way is NOT traditional in Washington, D.C. But his way most often DOES work.

I laugh until I cry when Democrats continually refuse to acknowledge his many positive results for ALL Americans. Instead, they throw everything they can muster to make him look bad — even in the midst of something working perfectly! 

Once again, the Left thinks Americans are stupid. I’ll finish by quoting that great American Historian, Forrest Gump: “Stupid is as Stupid does.”

FISA: Time to Reform or Time to Go?

Unless you live in a barrel, you have heard in numerous conversations the word “FISA.” “FISA” actually stands for “Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.” FISA legislation regulates the United States Government’s ability to surveil (or “spy”) American citizens who may be communicating with people outside the U.S. Such surveillance is governed by a special court called “FISC,” or “Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.” Why would this ever be necessary?

The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC, also called the FISA Court) is a U.S. federal court established and authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to oversee requests for surveillance warrants against foreign spies inside the United States by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Such requests are made most often by the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

In 2013, a top-secret order issued by the court, which was later leaked to the media from documents culled by Edward Snowden, required a subsidiary of Verizon to provide a daily, on-going feed of all call detail records—including those for domestic calls—to the NSA. The Edward Snowden matter brought the FISA process to light and thrust it into the forefront of intelligence agencies’ process operations. This was the first time average Americans knew anything about this process.

How Does FISA Work?

Each application for one of these surveillance warrants (called a FISA warrant) is given to an individual judge of the court. The court may allow third parties to submit briefs. When the U.S. Attorney General determines that an emergency exists, the Attorney General may authorize the emergency employment of electronic surveillance before obtaining the necessary authorization from the FISC, if the Attorney General or their designee notifies a judge of the court at the time of approval and applies for a warrant as soon as practicable but not more than seven days after approval of such surveillance, as required by 50 U.S.C. § 1805.

If one judge of the court denies an application, the federal government is not allowed to make the same application to a different judge of the court but may appeal to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review. Such appeals are rare: the first appeal from the FISC to the Court of Review was occurred in 2002 (In re-Sealed Case No. 02-001), 24 years after the founding of the court.

Also rare is for FISA warrant requests to be turned down. During the 25 years from 1979 to 2004, 18,742 warrants were granted, while only four were rejected. (this is important and will be discussed later) Fewer than 200 requests were modified before being accepted, almost all of them in 2003 and 2004. The four rejected applications were all from 2003, and all four were granted in part after being submitted for reconsideration by the government. Of the applications that had to be modified, few were before the year 2000. During the next eight years, from 2004 to 2012, there were over 15,100 additional warrants granted, and another seven were rejected. Over the entire 33-year period, the FISA court issued 33,942 warrants, with only 12 denials – a rejection rate of 0.03 percent of the total requests. This total does not include the number of warrants that were modified by the FISA court.

FISA Corruption

It’s easy to see how the FISA process could easily be corrupted for partisan and covert purposes. The fact that FISA corruption is so easy to implement has given pause to numerous of those on Capitol Hill, who are both concerned with the obvious actual and attempted electronic intrusions into multiple U.S. companies and even the government itself. The most recent of such alleged FISA abuse occurred during the FBI Trump Campaign investigation. It allegedly began with a FISA warrant submitted to the FISC for authorization to surveil the communications of Carter Page, who was an associate of the Trump Campaign. Uproar ensued about alleged “wiretapping” of then Candidate Donald Trump shortly after a visit to Trump Tower by former NSA head Mike Rodgers. Speculation is that Rodgers, in that meeting, informed Mr. Trump that his campaign headquarters at Trump Tower was electronically surveilled. The next day, the Trump Campaign moved its headquarters to New Jersey.

NOTE: unless and until President releases to the American public the FISA warrant applications filed by the FBI to obtain FISA warrants, we will not know the specifics of the basis for that surveillance. It is expected for those to be released at any time

It is uncanny how partisan are the comments and analyses of the findings of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz as published in his 500+ page report a few days ago into FISA abuse alleged to have occurred during the Trump Campaign investigation. It depends on whom you speak or listen as to whether the Horowitz findings vilified the FISA process during the FBI investigation or supported it. Shortly after its release, Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana made this request of the President:

“The Inspector General report showed the FBI was willing to do anything in order to spy on Carter Page, including making 17 significant inaccuracies and omissions. The American public deserves to know everything the FBI did,” Kennedy said in a statement. I’m asking President Trump to declassify the entire record so that Attorney General Barr and FBI Director Wray can release it to the American people. If the FBI wants to continue the employment of rogue, politically-motivated agents, then let the public read the entire record.”

As does Senator Kennedy, numerous Americans both inside and outside of Washington feel the structure of the Court gives the government an “open season” on surveillance of Americans — ALL Americans — that apparently have and could going forward be for partisan and political purposes. Remember this: only twelve of 33,942 FISA warrants filed in its history did the FISA Court deny.

Fix FISA or Dump FISA

The House recently voted against an amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Section 702, proposed by Reps. Justin Amash of Michigan and  Zoe Lofgren of California. FISA Section 702, which was inserted as an addition to the 1978 FISA Act in 2008, was intended to be used solely to monitor communications by foreign nationals outside of the United States.

In recent years, Edward Snowden’s revelations showed that Section 702 provided the government with a legal cover to collect data on communications between millions of U.S. citizens without warrants or probable cause. According to a National Security Agency (NSA) transparency report from April 2019, in 2018, communications by U.S. citizens or residents were queried 9,637 times, over 2,000 more queries than the previous year.

The Amash-Lofgren Amendment would have withheld funding for Section 702 in the budget for the fiscal year 2020. If it had passed, any requests for Section 702 funding by governmental bodies such as the NSA would have had to make an express commitment to not use those funds on the warrantless collection of U.S. citizens’ data.

Forty-seven organizations, including the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and FreedomWorks, urged Congress in a June letter to pass the amendment to “significantly advance the privacy rights of people within the United States.” Two Republican representatives, Chip Roy of Texas and Jim Jordan of Ohio, rose to defend the amendment during the ten minutes of debate that was afforded. Despite these endorsements, the change was struck down 252-175, with over 100 members of each party voting against it.

Unfortunately, as ordinary American citizens, we find ourselves in something of a conundrum. It’s hard for us to say, “Yes, we support FISA and want it to continue,” or “No, we think the Government with FISA has too many unchecked opportunities to abuse the FISA system, so we want it abolished.”

Summary

Here’s what a legal writer Mark Wauck stated about whether we should keep or abolish the FISA process:

“It seems to me that since Watergate our politics have been almost totally transformed, with the Left feeling ascendant, despite occasional setbacks. At the same time that the Left has taken over education and most other public institutions, the Intelligence agencies–and of course the FBI in particular–have assumed a huge role in domestic intelligence. It’s true that this is partly the result of the GWOT (“Global War on Terrorism”) and FISA’s application to it, but I believe it was happening anyway.

The current abuses that we’re seeing coming to light attributable to the Obama Administration, are very scary. However, given that the Left feels no constraints about our traditional liberties, is it possible that FISA actually gives them a bit of pause, slows them down a bit just to hide what they’re doing? If they were to have 8 years with no constraints, with the total and enthusiastic cooperation of Big Data companies, what might the result be?

This is what worries me. Would the abolition of what is undoubtedly unconstitutional lead to Big Brother?”

Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul — a Libertarian at heart — has long questioned the validity of the FISA system in regards to the Constitutional protection of the rights of Americans. According to the Senator, the process in its purest forms should work correctly. But there is a problem: people with partisan opinions and perspectives of its purposes:

Should we fix the process hoping for good results? Or should we simply ax it to once again rely on a prosecutor presenting evidence to a judge sufficient to justify a surveillance warrant?

There is far too much corruption at the DOJ and FBI that has been exposed in the last few years for me to feel comfortable recommending continuation of the FISA process. Too many people in powerful positions that impact FISA investigations have been shown to be grossly politically biased. Unless and until the Intelligence agencies have demonstrated their commitment to strict adherence to not just the letter of FISA warrant applicant and subsequent warrants, but to the FISA process, I recommend that FISA be ditched and we return to the 250-year-old process to obtain warrants: convince a judge with facts of any case when presenting a sworn warrant application for a surveillance warrant. If facts in evidence justify such a warrant, that judge can issue it.

If there’s “meat on the bone,” justice will be served. And the personal lives of Americans will once again be protected from Big Brother or surveillance abuse who once gains power seldom every relinquishes it.

NEWS BULLETIN!!!!!!

In a rare public order Tuesday, the chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [FISC] strongly criticized the FBI over its surveillance-application process, giving the bureau until Jan. 10 to come up with solutions, in the wake of findings from Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz.

The order, from the court’s presiding judge Rosemary M. Collyer, came just a week after the release of Horowitz’s withering report about the wiretapping of Carter Page, a former campaign adviser to President Trump.

“The FBI’s handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the [Office of Inspector General] report, was antithetical to the heightened duty of candor described above,” Collyer wrote in her four-page order. “The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable.”

“As [FBI Director Christopher Wray] has stated, the inspector general’s report describes conduct by certain FBI employees that is unacceptable and unrepresentative of the FBI as an institution,” the bureau responded in a statement Tuesday night. “The director has ordered more than 40 corrective steps to address the report’s recommendations, including some improvements beyond those recommended by the IG.”

Horowitz said he did not find significant evidence that FBI agents were involved in a political conspiracy to undermine Trump’s candidacy in 2016. However, the report did find numerous errors and inaccuracies used by FBI agents to obtain permission to monitor Page’s phone calls and emails.

While Collyer’s order did not specify exactly what reforms the FBI needed to implement to its policies for obtaining permission to wiretap people under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, the order did say that the FISA court will weigh in on whether the reforms are deemed sufficient.

“The [FISA court] expects the government to provide complete and accurate information in every filing with the court,” Collyer wrote. “Without it, the [FISA court] cannot properly ensure that the government conducts electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes only when there is a sufficient factual basis.” (FOX News)

Play

Ukraine: “Honey-Hole” for U.S. Political Corruption

Ukraine has certainly been in the news of late. It seems that its being in the U.S. news so much has to do with some pretty sketchy political corruption.

Former VP Joe Biden’s son Hunter has been stuck in the spotlight of Ukraine the past few months because of his excessive compensation from Burisma — a Ukrainian gas company — for which he served as a Board member. He received significant payment for his service.

The spotlight on Hunter was there because of his father’s intervention while Vice President in a Ukrainian government corruption investigation of Burisma. The Vice President forced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor on that case in exchange for the U.S. release of $1 Billon of aid to Ukraine. That was the beginning of “Ukraine-Gate.” And “Ukraine-Gate” is alive and well. The Bidens are certainly not the only American political family involved in Ukraine’s corruption.

The husband of Democrat Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL), who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, reportedly took $700,000 from firms connected to a Ukrainian oligarch who has allegedly been “accused of ordering contract killings.”

      Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL)

The husband of Democrat Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL), who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, reportedly took $700,000 from firms connected to a Ukrainian oligarch who has allegedly been “accused of ordering contract killings.

Public records show that Debbie Mucarsel-Powell’s husband, Robert Powell, spent much of the last ten years as general counsel for companies owned at least in part by Igor Kolomoisky, a wealthy Ukrainian businessman involved in banking and mining. In federal financial disclosures, Mucarsel-Powell reported that her husband of 15 years earned most of their household income during the previous two years — at least $695,000 — from a ferroalloys trading corporation associated with Kolomoisky.

The connections between Robert Powell and Kolomoisky were first reported by Daily Beast reporter Betsy Swan last year — who also highlighted some of the allegations that have been made against the Ukrainian oligarch.

Swan reported in April 2018 that the FBI was “investigating” Kolomoisky over “potential financial crimes, including money laundering, according to the sources, who say the probe is wide-ranging and has been underway for quite some time. Kolomoisky has not been indicted for ‘initiating or participated in any global crime,’ and a lawyer representing him said he denies any wrongdoing.”

“Kolomoisky has a host of enemies. He’s been accused of commissioning contract killings,” Swan continued. “And in 2016, Ukraine’s central bank nationalized Kolomoisky’s PrivatBank because it didn’t have enough cash. Billions of dollars disappeared from its coffers because it lent so much to Kolomoisky associates, according to the FT. The move was widely viewed in the West as a victory for transparency and good governance, in a country whose politics are impoverished on both counts.”

Robert Powell’s connections to Kolomoisky could create a significant distraction for Democrats during their impeachment hearings since they launched their inquiry into President Donald Trump over a July 25 phone call that he had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Democrats claim that Trump pressured Zelensky into investigating former Vice President and current Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden in exchange for U.S. military assistance to Ukraine, which Democrats claim amounts to a quid pro quo or bribery.

So far, Democrats’ claims that Trump engaged in a quid pro quo or bribery have largely not been substantiated in their public impeachment hearings as multiple witnesses, including Ambassador Marie YovanovitchSenior NSC official Tim MorrisonAmbassador Kurt Volker, and Ambassador Gordon Sondland all testified that there was no quid pro quo during the phone call.

In a separate report, The Daily Beast noted that the connections between Debbie Mucarsel-Powell’s husband and the Ukrainian oligarch left many concerned.

“Anders Aslund, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council who focuses on Russia and Ukraine, said the link is concerning, citing accusations that Kolomoisky has been involved in billion-dollar criminal schemes and contract killings,” The Daily Beast reported. “He called the ties ‘highly suspicious.”

“When you work for a guy like that, you know what you’re dealing with,” said Edward Chow, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “There should be no illusion of what you’re dealing with, even if the business you have to conduct for him in the United States is spotless. You know where the wealth came originated. There should be no reason not to know because everyone knows.”

We would be remiss if we did NOT mention the allegations that several other political heavyweights have sons connected directly or indirectly to Ukraine in business dealings. Those “heavyweights” include House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Senator Mitt Romney, and former Secretary of State John Kerry. There are numerous stories from several sources that confirm the Ukrainian involvement of these. There are several stories that discredit these allegations. But it is factual that Ukraine has, in the past, been a “honey-hole” for financial corruption. After all, why would so many from the political and economic world in the U.S. have any ties to Ukraine? “Follow the Money.”

We’re not into Conspiracy theories at TruthNewsNetwork. But what we ARE into is ferreting out the truth. We learned that in the world of politics, where there is smoke, not only is there currently a fire, the fire started burning long before the smoke was noticed.

Steve Hilton of FOX News did a story on his Sunday night show detailing some more of Ukraine/U.S. political, financial “smoke:” (Hilton’s words in italics)

Remember Devon Archer, Hunter Biden’s business partner in Ukrainian company Burisma Holdings? He had previously been a top fundraiser for John Kerry, who was Secretary of State at the time. And soon after Devon and Hunter joined the Burisma Board, the company channeled $90,000 to a lobbying firm called ML Strategies, which was headed by none other than David Leiter, John Kerry’s former chief of staff.

That’s handy because then-Secretary of State John Kerry himself has visited Ukraine with promises of U.S. aid and assistance. Well, Leiter registered as a Burisma lobbyist in mid-2014. But in the year leading up to that, he gave close to $60,000 to Democrats, including a select group of U.S. senators who would later be instrumental in pushing cash towards Ukraine’s energy sector, directly in line with Burisma’s interests.

He donated to Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., four times and to Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., three times. A month after the last of those donations, both Markey and Shaheen were among four senators who wrote a letter to President Obama that said, “We should leverage the full resources and expertise of the U.S. government to assist Ukraine in improving its energy efficiency, increasing its domestic production and reforming its energy markets.”

This was at a time when Democrats were waging war on fossil fuels, opposing fracking, and trying to shut down U.S. energy production. American natural gas was terrible for the environment. Still, Ukrainian natural gas was good for the campaign coffers when it involves Hunter Biden’s business interests and John Kerry’s former chief of staff. As Hilton points out, Sen. Markey’s hypocrisy runs particularly deep:

Sen. Ed Markey was the Senate sponsor of the Green New Deal! He wants to shut down gas production in America. Yet he personally intervened with the Obama administration to send your tax dollars to boost Ukraine’s gas production. And not just once.

Not only did he write that letter to Obama, but he sponsored multiple pieces of legislation that called for more U.S. assistance and aid specifically to help Ukraine’s natural gas sector, including one that “directs the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to prioritize support for investments to increase energy efficiency, developed domestic oil and natural gas reserves and develop renewable energy sources in Ukraine.”

Democrat senators take campaign cash from Ukrainian interests while urging Ukraine to help remove a duly elected President from office, and these are the people who would vote in an impeachment trial.

Summary

In this Ukraine “thing,” there are indeed deep and intense financial ties between U.S. political heavyweights and family members and Ukraine oligarchs. We’ve heard of relations that include the sons of Nancy Pelosi, Mitt Romney, and John Kerry in addition to those of Hunter Biden. Let’s be honest with each other:

  • What does Ukraine have that U.S. financial institutions (represented by the sons of these very-connected politicians) want or need?
  • Why have these ties with Ukraine been political rather than just one international company doing business with another international company put together by politicians?
  • In the case of the Bidens, why are they being given free passes — even the former VP who publicly confessed of his bribery of Ukraine officials?
  • What were ties to former top Ukraine government officials with Barack Obama? What were the details of those ties?
  • Why do Congressional leaders from both parties ignore discussions of past and current Congressional involvement in Ukraine?

We don’t have “for-sure” answers to these questions. But Americans want and deserve answers to these and other questions. What is now absolute is that there is an entirely different level of accountability for those who serve in the federal government from average Americans in regards to ties with foreign governments. It appears to ordinary American citizens that legislators have advantages. They and their family members are allowed to be part of “questionable” business interactions with a foreign government and elites in those countries approved to do work with the U.S. These people have been called the “Deep State” and other names. Regardless of the group name, it is real, IS working and functioning.

One good thing about our 24/7 news capabilities is that we are privy to much more news detail than ever before in history. That’s good. What’s terrible is that the determination to provide news facts is controlled totally by private news organizations. Each of those involved holds a political perspective. It seems that those political perspectives determine not only what see and hear; they decide the actual substance of the stories.

That’s at least as scary as the above-reported financial involvements of politicos and siblings with the nation of Ukraine.

“Follow the Money”

The Universal Seed of ALL Corruption: “SELF”

It’s hard for most Americans to fathom why there is so much venom spewed among members of Congress and this Administration these days. I’ve been asked over and over the last few years why there is so much anger and hatred. It’s not Democrat Party or Republican Party hatred and even violence. It’s an American problem. But what is its source?

First, please understand that it is not new — it’s been bubbling beneath the surface for decades. But its hidden agenda protected America from its penalties: hatred and anger. But as it began to be seen four or five decades ago, people began to implement its use more often and more boldly. Its basis is the commonality of all men and women: self.

Self

There are many different theories and definitions of “self” among professional psychologists. Many agree that the “self” consists of a person’s conscious and unconscious aspects, their personality, cognitions or thoughts and feelings. All these traits or aspects combine together into the person’s core identity. Other synonyms for “self” are soul, ego, personality, or individual. To dumb-down the definition of “self” to use in this conversation, let’s just consider “self” as “everything in our lives pertaining to you and me individually and seen, identified, and applied in our lives by OUR choices.” To simplify it, each of us though an individual “self” have much in common, including the basic traits of all humans. Self Actualization lives in all of us. That’s the trait that pushes us each to maximize what we can for ourselves in every way possible. The basic element of that is that it naturally pertains to us alone. Bring others into the picture, and the picture completely changes.

How does this apply to this minefield in which we find ourselves individually and as a nation?

Almost every American has asked at one time or another, “How do people go to Congress in one economic class, spend time on Capitol Hill, and leave Washington as multi-millionaires?” The answer to that is at the core of our discussion today.

Before we get into exactly what is going on, know this: from 2010 through 2016 — the last year for which we can find statistics — not a single person who served in the House of Representatives and the Senate has seen a decline in net worth. Net worth is the measure of the value of their total assets minus any debt they may hold. This includes the current 435 members of the House and 100 Senate members. Also included is every member of the House and Senate who has left office during that time. How does that happen when Congressional salaries are about $170,000 a year?

Indeed, some have invested smartly in the stock market, in commercial real estate, personally owned businesses that thrived, or added great inheritances. But I dare to say that if we looked at the net worths of 535 randomly selected Americans plus the several hundred others who were replaced in Congress, there would be a large number who saw actual decreases in their net worth during that period.

There is one benefit of being in Congress for which those average Americans are not eligible: the benefits of serving in Congress are known in Louisiana as “lagniappe.” Lagniappe is something that is added at no additional cost to whatever you purchase.

Congressional Lagniappe

The ”Big Lagniappe: Lobbying benefits. If you are unaware of these extras, every significant business, non-profit, labor union, and municipality from every sector in America pay for law firms to represent them in legislative matters before Congress that are of  importance to them. Those lobbying firms receive tens of millions of dollars to sway the votes of members of Congress who have votes within committees and on the floor of each House that directly impacts each of these entities.

Lobbyists are masters at using those millions to reach into the lives of members of Congress. We will not get into all the laws and regulations that control lobbying but know this: a significant amount of those lobbyist dollars find their way into the lives of Congressional members. They cannot simply write legislators checks as bribery, but they can find jobs for family members — Cush jobs that pay big bucks with incredible benefits. Universities are often “open” to scholarships for those close to members of Congress. Luxurious vacations in the Caribbean and the South Pacific, speaking engagements, all come with dollars and cents attached. And it’s all legal.

Don’t misunderstand what I am referencing: numerous honest and hardworking legislators have taken an oath of office and are straight-shooters and above reproach in the service of their constituents. These would NEVER participate in any underhanded financial home runs like these mentioned above. But many DO participate in those. History proves it.

Being in Congress means access to information that often is unavailable to ordinary Americans. Sometimes constituents do see some of that info, but not at the same time or same manners as do lawmakers. One example of this resulted in the House passing legislation signed into law to prevent insider trading. Do you want to know what that law is called? ”The Pelosi Law.” Nancy Pelosi and her husband received inside information about commercial real estate property far in advance of any information about it became public. They invested, news hit the media, property values soared, and they cashed in. It happens with stocks for which companies are about to receive approval for sale from the government, and their values assuredly will skyrocket when they hit the market. Members of Congress buy early before the public has that chance and make millions.

Then there’s merely selling Congressional influence. I doubt much of that is actual bribery. But it indeed happens. In Washington, a legislative opportunity is based on who you know. Then it became who you know and when you know any specifics. Now it’s getting access to people who make those things happen.

It all boils down to one thing and one thing only: Money.

“For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. And some people, craving money, have wandered from the true faith and pierced themselves with many sorrows.” ‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭6:10‬ ‭

I’ve heard this Scripture quoted this way: “Money is the root of all kinds of evil.” That’s not true. Money holds no inherent evil. It’s the way money is used. And the purpose for its usage is determined by who controls the money.

But it gets worse. Decades ago, D.C. hawkers discovered that while money got most things accomplished, there were other avenues to get to cash that made doing so quicker, smoother, and made getting Lagniappe along with money a sure thing. What is that thing? Power. Think about it: with sufficient power, one gets everything — including money!

”Self” is the driving force for money. “Power” is the driving force for cash with a bunch of Lagniappe. The seed formerly was money. Now it is power.

Here’s the Answer

Self Actualization starts all this. And that’s a necessary human trait that alone is not evil. It leads many to create jobs and establish and grow companies. It pushes those who want to help others to medicine, social services, and charitable operations. But the type that exists and is developed to gain and maintain power to accumulate everything that Self wants is plain evil.

Enter the Deep State.

Yep: it’s real. The Deep State is comprised of all kinds of folks. But today we concentrate on those in Washington, D.C. Through these last decades, politicians discovered the Power key to the accumulation of all the things they wanted. They built a bureaucracy. In that system, THEY make all the rules, THEY control who gets in and who is not allowed, THEY find opportunities for their members. In finding ways to protect their Dragon, they unify in attack mode to protect their domain and their fellow members against exposure and, when exposed, the rabid defense of all who might attack.

And that’s what we are seeing today.

  • Did you wonder why the rabid and unsubstantiated non-stop assault on Donald Trump? It began before his inauguration. Within an hour of his swearing-in, the Washington Post released a story with this headline: “The effort to impeach President Donald John Trump is already underway.”
  • Have you wondered why so many members of Congress suddenly decided to retire or not to run for re-election since Trump’s election? Never before have such numbers of those doing so occurred. What might be the reason for “some” of those not finishing terms or deciding to leave Congress?
  • Have you, like many Americans, tried to understand the hatred for Donald Trump in the shadow of the most significant economic recovery in at least 50 years that has dramatically impacted the lives of every living American? Most think it’s time to be happy and thankful. To this day, House Democrat leadership refuse even to mention these economic benefits.
  • Do you wonder why Democrats are rushing through this impeachment process? Do you wonder why they have refused to allow the President representation in these hearings, the right to question and cross-examine witnesses, bring in and present their witnesses, present evidence, question evidence presented by Democrats? Why has there been no due process, no consultation with the Minority about hearing structure and content? After all, in both the Nixon and Clinton impeachment processes, the Minority party was offered the same hearing opportunities as the Majority. Dems operating this way with the Trump matter is historical.
  • Why would Democrats not understand that if this process stands, every future president will have a Democrat-controlled House holding a gun to his or her head? “If you as President don’t do our bidding, we’ll impeach you!” This impeachment process would permanently alter American history with no Constitutional authority.

Why are Democrats and other Deep Staters So Adamant?

Here’s the big reason for all of this. Deep Staters — try as they have — cannot take control of Donald Trump! That is driving them insane.

Think about it:

  1. He came to D.C. as a billionaire. He certainly doesn’t need the money. That’s unlike the Obamas and the Clintons who moved into the White House having moderate net worths. When both couples left, each couple left with $100 million+ of wealth. How did that happen and continue to blow-up after leaving? From influence and quid pro quo. (Heard that term lately?)
  2. He ran numerous billion-dollar corporations that employed hundreds of thousands of people with locations across the U.S. and around the World. His power and influence rivaled that of those “supporters” that enabled the Clintons to accumulate their wealth, peddling their influence both during and after their presidencies. Trump doesn’t need or want that.
  3. Trump’s predecessor was obsessed with what HE was and did do while in office, regardless of the impact on Americans — even when negative. Trump too obsesses, but his obsessions are outwardly for all to see, not just by what he says but what he does at improving the lives of Americans. And he’s the only president in my history who has fulfilled his campaign promises to voters immediately after taking the oath of office! 

The Deep State does not know what to do about Donald Trump. They knew after those accomplishments started piling up that if they let them continue uninterrupted, he not only would serve a second term, but his accomplishments would expose the Deep State’s true power and control methods to Americans. And they knew that exposure would ruin the Swamp they created for all Deep State compadres in which to thrive. In short, Trump immediately began destroying their “deal too good to be true.”

And expose those things, and the guilty parties are precisely what the President has done.

Summary

That’s it. It certainly is not an intricate mystery. But it certainly has been well-hidden. During the day today, think through the things that have happened in the U.S. the last decade or so that you have wondered, “How could they let that happen?” It is most likely, those in the Deep State were conducting “business as usual.”

Let’s watch and see. I, for one, desperately want this to get to the Senate for trial and for the Senate to use the test to (through public and continuous testimony of those guilty of numerous federal violations) expose the Deep State to Americans.

If that is not allowed, you can be confident the Deep State existence among Republicans will be confirmed. The only realistic explanation for those Conservatives in the Senate to not let such testimony happen is they are Deep State members who are desperate to maintain their status quo.

God help them! Their exposure would undoubtedly be known to the World.

They’ll be toast!

Play

Horowitz Report Realities: They Aren’t Good for Dems

Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz appeared before Senator Lindsey Graham’s (R-SC) Intelligence Committee Wednesday to answer questions about his report on the FBI investigation’s basis and inception. The 434-page report, Horowitz penned one point and one only that gave the Lame-Stream Media and Democrats a possible out for the rampant corruption in the Trump investigation. He stated there was no provable partisan political bias that started the FBI investigation. He did not indicate there was no political partisanship among those who investigated.

The Media danced; Democrats threw victory parties; fired FBI Director James Comey and Obama former CIA director John Brennan decided to excoriate the President via Twitter for their exoneration they perceive from the Horowitz Report. Those thoughts are far from the truth.

First, Horowitz did not say there was NO political bias that started the investigation. He said his team could not PROVE it was the basis for its beginning. There’s a big difference. Why do I say that? Throughout the report, Horowitz detailed dozens and dozens of examples of the political bias of members of the F.B.I. and DOJ that certainly played into a one-sided investigation.

Further, he identified seventeen specific examples of what he termed severe “errors” by the FBI. He used errors instead of labeling those instances “criminal acts” because the job of his team was not to investigate criminal matters but to find facts to prepare a report. If there are exposed criminal acts — and there are positively egregious criminal acts — Federal Attorney John Durham, who is now conducting a separate and criminal investigation, will handle those.

Is the Horowitz report a slam-dunk for President Trump?  It depends on which media source to which you read, listen, or watch to get the “truth” of the report. No matter which source you use for your information, be confident of this one thing: there will be indictments, and people will be prosecuted for grave crimes before this is complete. This is complete…” is not going to be for some time. I can picture a scenario in which we are still dealing with F.B.I.wrongdoing during the 2016 election cycle and beyond for several years to come. The fishing net has caught-up a bunch of fish.

Let’s dig in.

There were serious errors in the applications for secret eavesdropping warrants.

  • Mr. Horowitz found that F.B.I. Officials appeared to discount evidence that did not support probable cause to wiretap Carter Page while playing up information that seemed to justify one. “That so many fundamental errors were made by three separate, handpicked teams on one of the most sensitive F.B.I. Investigators briefed to the highest levels, and that F.B.I. Officials expected it would eventually be subjected to scrutiny, raised important questions regarding the F.B.I. chain of command’s management and supervision of the FISA process,” the report said.

 

  • The Inspector-General did not speculate whether the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court would have granted the application — renewed three times — to wiretap Mr. Page anyway. But he said the F.B.I. should review the actions of everyone who had a hand in drafting the applications. And he identified in each form where information verifying a fact was not included.

 

  • Relying on the F.B.I.’s information, the Justice Department first obtained court approval to wiretap Mr. Page in October 2016. The wiretap application portrayed Mr. Page, who had recently stepped down as a Trump campaign aide and had close ties to Russia, as a suspected unregistered agent of a foreign power. Mr. Horowitz found dozens of examples of missing or flawed documentation in the applications to wiretap Mr. Page. By the way, while the FBI intimated in all of the FISA warrant applications that Carter Page was a known Russian operative, Page was NOT working for Russia, but was a C.I.A. operative working directly with the CIA! Guess what: then CIA Director John Brennan knew that and hid it from all.

 

  • The applications relied heavily on information provided by Christopher Steele, a British former intelligence agent whose research was funded first by Mr. Trump’s Republican rivals, then by Democratic organizations. Mr. Steele told the F.B.I. that he based much of his information on a confidential source. But when the F.B.I. Interviewed that person, the source failed to back up some of Mr. Steele’s assertions, the report said. For instance, according to the F.B.I. Interview, the source saw “nothing bad” about communications between the Trump team and the Kremlin, and never discussed WikiLeaks with Mr. Steele, according to the report. The F.B.I.’s failure to inform the court of those discrepancies was a severe error, Mr. Horowitz said. “Despite the inconsistencies between Steele’s reporting and the information his primary sub-source provided to the F.B.I., the subsequent FISA renewal applications continued to rely on the Steele information, without any revisions or notice to the court,” the report stated.

 

  • The F.B.I. also failed to notify the court after it learned that Mr. Steele was “desperate” to undercut Mr. Trump, the report said. Kevin Clinesmith, a low-level F.B.I. lawyer, altered an email from the C.I.A. to incorrectly state that Mr. Page was not a source for the intelligence agency. That error was then repeated in an application to renew the warrant. Mr. Horowitz has referred his findings of Mr. Clinesmith to possible criminal investigation for making a false statement.

The Attorney General said the F.B.I. failed to justify the steps it took to investigate the Trump campaign.

John Brennan

Attorney General William Barr praised one element of the Inspector General’s findings, saying the report showed “malfeasance and misfeasance” and “clear abuse” of the wiretap application process by the F.B.I. But Mr. Barr also suggested that he disagreed with Mr. Horowitz’s conclusion that the F.B.I. had sufficient reason to open an investigation of the Trump campaign and Russia.

“The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the F.B.I. launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken,” Mr. Barr said in a statement.

John H. Durham, a federal prosecutor whom Mr. Barr appointed to run a separate criminal investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation, backed Mr. Barr’s findings in his own highly unusual statement. “Last month, we advised the inspector general that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the F.B.I. case was opened,” Mr. Durham said.

Were there problems with the use of informants?

Mr. Horowitz concluded that the F.B.I. did not attempt to place informants or undercover agents inside the Trump campaign, but he found that the current policy for using informants should include more oversight.

As part of the Russia investigation, F.B.I. Agents authorized the use of at least one informant to determine whether Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos were working with the Russians. The informant met with the two men while they were still associated with the campaign.

The use of the informant, Stefan A. Halper, a Cambridge professor, has led Mr. Trump and his allies to accuse the F.B.I. of spying on his campaign. The F.B.I. director, Christopher A. Wray, has defended the bureau against accusations of spying. On two separate occasions, A.G. Barr in interviews (one in testimony before a Congressional committee) stated that it is clear the F.B.I. DID spy on the Trump Campaign. When asked that question in Wednesday’s hearing, Mr. Horowitz also stated the F.B.I. spied on Mr. Trump.

Mr. Horowitz’s team scrutinized the F.B.I.’s roster of informants for any work they might have done in connection with the Russia investigation. He found that the F.B.I. did not try to infiltrate the campaign itself. And the inspector general found no evidence that the F.B.I. used informants to interact with anyone on the Trump campaign before the official opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

The inspector general said Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese professor who met with Mr. Papadopoulos and offered him dirt on Hillary Clinton, was not an F.B.I. informant.

How Bad Was It?

In a partial example of just how vile was this investigation by the F.B.I., watch this snippet between Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and I.G. Horowitz:

Put in perspective, Horowitz made it clear in Wednesday’s testimony that the Steele Dossier WAS part of the initial FISA warrant application and each FISA renewal. He also stated an F.B.I. attorney in dramatic fashion edited an email to prove that Carter Page was indeed working with Russia. The actual email said precisely the opposite.

Fired F.B.I. Director James Comey immediately after the Horowitz Report release ran to Twitter to say this:

In the Horowitz hearing, the Inspector General stated this: “No one was vindicated in this report.” Further, Horowitz noted that Comey violated numerous guidelines and broke federal statutes. Regardless of what Comey claimed, you can bet the John Durham investigation will result in Comey indictments with at least one trial to follow.

Peter Strozk

Who else was tagged for wrongdoing in the Horowitz Report? Andrew McCabe, Peter Strozk, John Brennan, James Clapper, that unnamed F.B.I. attorney who forged a FISA application, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, and that list is just getting started. Many more will face the Grim Reaper when the dust settles on all this.

Summary

What this has exposed is what many have believed not only existed but has thrived in Washington for years: a Deep State. What precisely does that mean?

  • James Comey is likely going to be remembered as the most corrupt F.B.I Director in U.S. history.
  • John Brennan lied multiple times before Congress, and this report reveals he hid many facts from the DOJ attorneys, investigators, and conned the FISA courts to gain illegal access to surveillance of the Trump Campaign.
  • There was deep political bias through numerous levels of employees in several Intelligence agencies. While it was first thought that corruption was specifically within senior management members of several of those agencies, it now appears it made its way through numerous levels in the F.B.I., C.I.A., D.N.I., and other agencies. It is certain that even though F.B.I. Director Christopher Wray has stated he has already taken suggested “corrective actions” within the F.B.I. contained in the Horowitz Report. If he has done so, it is apparent that he had to have at least known about the wrongdoing that occurred under Comey if not personally complicit.
  • It is expected that in the Durham criminal investigation that members of the Obama F.B.I. and DOJ and probably even some from the White House staff will be implicated.

The Deep State is real. But the above government employees did not act alone. There were those in Congress that at least knew much of what was happening. If evidence confirms that, here’s what that means: some workers in the three Constitutional branches of government — Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branches — will be implicated. But there’s one more:

Though not Constitutional, today’s Media took an active role in this fake collusion investigation into Donald Trump. The Media are guilty of suborning perjury, falsifying information used in news reports, and knowingly presented through corrupt government officials defaming information about Trump officials while publicly supporting the lies of those active in this coup d’état.

In the committee hearing in his opening remarks, Sen. Lindsey Graham finished with this advice to us all: “Don’t judge the personnel of our Intelligence Agencies based on this. This does not tell the story of those agencies. We’re better than this.”

I like Mr. Graham, who I consider a great conservative lawmaker. But, in this case, I am now inclined to disagree with the Senator. I feel that far more than have previously been thought to be “great Americans committed to the Rule of Law” that work within these agencies have been, and probably are, driven by gross political bias. And I’m not referring to political ideals which every American has the right to hold. For decades, members of the Government were undoubtedly encouraged to support and vote for their political preferences. But they were instructed to leave their political perspectives at home — no partisanship was allowed on the job in which they work for ALL Americans.

That’s changed: the Deep State has a much bigger choke-hold than I suspected on the heart that beats to keep our nation alive.

Wake up, America!

Play

The Beginning of The End

It’s over! President Trump is done: his presidency is in tatters, NATO nation leaders laugh at the American president, American voters have lost confidence in President Trump’s ability to lead, and the nation is doomed.

That’s the message that has been presented to Americans for month after month by the American Press. While doing so non-stop since the 2016 election, they giggle with glee for Trump’s non-existent failures! The irony of all this? Americans don’t agree with them!

Likely Articles of Impeachment Content

It is not likely the House Judiciary Committee will complete as soon as this week’s proposed Articles of Impeachment against President Trump. What will those probably include?

The articles of impeachment are likely to cover two major themes — abuse of office and obstruction. But they could be divvied up into multiple articles.

An impeachment article accusing Trump of abuse of office, or abuse of power, would focus on the findings of the Ukraine investigation and his efforts to persuade the Ukrainian government to investigate Democrats as the U.S. withheld military aid. That conduct is the focus of a House Intelligence Committee report that will be presented to the Judiciary panel for consideration in a Monday hearing.

Some lawmakers have suggested that Democrats could break out “bribery” as a separate article. It would likely center on Trump withholding the aid and also withholding a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in exchange for the political investigations.

Obstruction articles could be broken up into obstruction of Congress and obstruction of justice, or the two could be combined.

The administration’s repeated refusals to provide documents and testimony would serve as the basis for an article charging Trump with obstruction of Congress. If Democrats decide to draft an article on obstruction of justice, it could mention the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

The Impeachment Process

If the House continues down the impeachment road, here is how it will most certainly look like:

  • The Judiciary Committee will present their finalized charges — “Articles” — to the full House for approval by a House vote. Each Article will be presented, debated, and determined by a House vote one at a time.
  • It is likely as few as three Articles to as many as five or six will be presented, considered by the House, and determined by votes whether to move forward.
  • At the completion of the House process, however many of those Articles are approved by the House will then be presented to the Senate for a trial.
  • The Senate could actually via a motion determine to not even take impeachment under consideration. That is unlikely to happen.
  • If/when the Senate initiates a trial, each “charge” (or Article) will be presented by an appointed prosecutor who will present evidence that will include documents and the testimony of witnesses. The President’s defense team will also counter with the cross examination of each prosecution witness presented as well as evidence. Then the defense team will also present witnesses and evidence that the prosecution will also cross examine and challenge as desired.
  • U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts will preside over the Senate trial. He will have total control of the process of the Senate trial according to Senate rules. When trial details are completed a vote will be taken. The President would if found guilty of any charges be removed from office.

Summary

How likely is it that President Trump will be removed from office? The answer to that question depends on who you ask. Most Americans when confronted with facts of Democrats’ allegations will shake their heads in disbelief this is actually happening. Sure, many Americans disagree with the President’s demeanor, his way of speaking, his brash, confrontational communication, and even his bragging. But most Americans question those things are impeachable offenses.

But I must be honest: this is only the third time in U.S. history this has happened. And the fact the Democrats are actually pushing down this road with the tremendous across-the-board Trump accomplishments that have and are significantly impacting Americans is scary. Common sense should dictate impeachment of a president might be appropriate for criminal activity by a President or unethical actions in office that include ”bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors.” But no one has presented any evidence of any of those necessary wrongdoings by this president.

Because those facts have not been sufficient to shut the door on impeachment is giving millions of Americans pause: this really could happen!

Fear is gripping the hearts of millions! This fear is of a government that is considering overturning the votes of 63 million Americans. Their doing while ignoring not just those voters but the best economic data in the nation in decades should make all Americans afraid. The fear is that Democrats just might pull this off.

The next two weeks will show the World exactly where the U.S. is in support of the Constitution, the American people, and the Rule of Law. If Democrats succeed in this, it will be the death-nail in history’s greatest country ever.

Democracy will die.

 

 

Michael Horowitz Part II

Conservatives for months have been waiting breathlessly for the release of the Horowitz report on the sources and the basis for the inception of the FBI investigation into collusion with the Russians by the Donald Trump campaign. Horowitz is the Inspector General of the Department of Justice. His report was expected for release in the late Spring of 2019. It will be released to the public Monday, December 9.

Supposedly the delays are the result of witnesses who, for whatever reasons, did not cooperate with Horowitz regarding testimony early in the investigation but decided to come forward late. Their doing so is rumored to be because of fear of Federal Prosecutor John Durham, who was tasked by Attorney General William Barr to investigate all the 2016-2017 matters in the election. These matters include the Clinton Foundation, FISA warrant applications and all details about the warrants, and who the players were in the surveillance of members of the Trump campaign by the FBI. Durham, unlike Horowitz, has subpoena power. He can convene grand juries (and probably already has), interrogate witnesses, and has wide latitude to obtain evidence of wrongdoing. It is expected many who are included in the Horowitz report are subjects of Durham’s investigation. They are choosing to cooperate with Horowitz so as to not make themselves Durham’s targets for their lack of cooperation.

                   President Trump with U.S. Attorney General William Barr

Just a week after Justice Department Inspector General Horowitz’s report on the Obama administration’s spying on the Trump campaign in 2016 was published, The Washington Post released another supposed leak.

Attorney General Barr apparently disagrees with the Inspector General that Obama officials and agents were justified in spying on Trump’s campaign and Trump’s transition team, according to the Washington Post report.

Barr may include a formal letter in the report or may publicly state his concern.

According to leaks, behind the scenes at the Department of Justice, there appears to be a disagreement over one of Horowitz’s central conclusions about the origins of the Russian investigation. The conflict could be the beginning of a significant rift within the federal agency over the controversial issue of investigating a presidential campaign.

Barr has not been influenced by Horowitz’s “logic” to conclude that the FBI had a sufficient basis to open their investigation on July 31, 2016. Horowitz will testify in the Senate on Dec. 11 about the findings of the investigation into possible FISA abuses.

For more than a year and a half, Horowitz has been investigating an alleged abuse of FISA by the Obama Justice Department and FBI during the 2016 elections against President Trump.

But the report is more than just a FISA abuse; it is a whole conspiracy campaign against President Trump orchestrated by the Democratic Party in cooperation with U.S. intelligence agencies. The IG report will also likely result in the declassification of documents requested by high-ranking Republican legislators for several years.

Republicans and President Trump had argued that the FBI’s alleged FISA abuses, which occurred when the federal agency sought criminal links between Trump’s campaign team and Russia during the 2016 campaign, were politically motivated.

In fact, in recent months, several documents have been uncovered that corroborate those claims, for example:

  • Text messages obtained by Fox News showed that before the FISA application was approved, FBI agents were dealing with a senior Justice Department official who had “continued concerns” about “possible bias” of a source pivotal to the application.
  • The 2016 messages, sent between Lisa Page and then FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, also revealed that members of the intelligence bureau circulated at least two ‘anti-Trump’ blog articles.
  • These text messages were based in part on information from former British spy Christopher Steele who cited Page’s alleged links to Russia. The FBI assured the FISA court that the media independently corroborated Steele’s claims, but it later came to light that Steele had previously leaked those data to the press.
  • The FBI did not clearly state that Steele worked for a company hired by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

Much of the Steele dossier has been discredited or unfounded. In fact, the extensive report by special counsel Robert Mueller found no evidence of alleged collusion between Trump’s campaign members and the Kremlin.

The “Disagreement”

Reports are beginning to float to the surface that Barr is basically saying that Horowitz, confined as he is to examine issues related to the DOJ, doesn’t have the information he and Durham have uncovered as to what other agencies (such as the CIA) and entities may have been doing during the investigation.

He doesn’t have all the information, Barr says, so his conclusion might be appropriate within the limited parameters he had to work with, but there’s more to the story.

That’s it.

It’s not a slam against Horowitz, nor is it a slam against the report. Only an acknowledgment — and a necessary one, given the spin-doctoring that’s been happening in the lead up to the report’s release next week — that Horowitz was limited in the scope of his investigation.

This is actually how governing is supposed to work, with the players showing respect for each other’s roles and taking care not to step on toes. The Obama administration had a different view of how the intelligence agencies were supposed to function, and Barr seems to be thinking back to a time before super-sharing between agencies was a thing.

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham warned that if you believe Horowitz and Barr are at odds with each other in their upcoming reports, you’re buying into the spin.

“Be wary of the Washington Post and the New York Times reporting on what is coming up with Horowitz. They have been trying overtime to spin this thing to diminish its effect, to downplay it,” Graham said Monday.

“I can tell you without any hesitation Attorney General Barr has every confidence in the world in Mr. Horowitz,” Graham added. “He believes that he has done a good job, a professional job, and he appreciates the work and the effort he has put into disclosing abuse at the Department of Justice.”

Summary

Uncharacteristically, Radio Host Rush Limbaugh has been skeptical of any blockbuster revelations of DOJ and FBI wrongdoing in the Russia collusion probe being included in the Horowitz report. Conservatives have been nervously anticipating the story, hoping that there will be certain damning information added that will result in criminal referrals to the DOJ for the prosecution of those who allegedly illegally created and maintained the allegations of Russia collusion by the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. Many Conservatives will be sorely disappointed if no action is recommended by Horowitz.

On the other hand, Federal Attorney John Durham has all the power necessary to do exactly what Horowitz cannot do: grand juries, subpoena witnesses, issue indictments, even conduct arrests. And Durham made an announcement recently that his investigation is now considered a criminal investigation as compared to that of Horowitz.

All this means, Folks, is that we are set for waiting again for any definitive information about alleged wrongdoing by those in the Obama White House, the FBI under James Comey, the Department of Justice under Attorneys General Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder, and by management at several of the intelligence community departments: specifically John Brennan and James Clapper.

Yes, this is a convoluted and intricate period of digging for the truth. What bothers many Americans is that no one seems to know for certain who are the “guys wearing the black hats” and who “wear the white hats.” Are the investigators in all this clean and objective, or are they “in the tank” for the perpetrators? In other words, millions have queasy stomachs when thinking through it all.

It’s sad to know that any people who work for the American people in government are evil. But there’s one thing that is indisputable: there are plenty of people in our government who are evil. Corruption runs amuck. We must discover who they are, identify their specific wrongdoing, and hold them accountable.

Do you think that will ever happen?

Play