Tag: Email Server

NYT Op-Ed Source Revealed!

Despite our aversion to anonymous sources, sometimes you just need to get a job done.  That is the position we found ourselves in when we reached out to our anonymous source at the New York Times and they revealed that he, yes he, is a member of the Deep State and is leading the resistance movement from within the administration.  So when we saw some of the key markers in the writing and the substance of what was said, we had a pretty good idea.  Our unnamed source confirmed it.  Fearful of losing her job with the New York Times, she asked that we don’t reveal her name and we agreed.

When you think about it, the Op-Ed writer identity makes sense.  He writes that they have worked to curb Trump’s agenda.  But Trump’s agenda marches on with tax cuts, portions of the border wall already under construction, zero tolerance on illegal immigration, tariffs, wins with North Korea, and a tougher stance with allies who haven’t paid their fair share.  Obamacare has been dismantled without the mandate, and pages of crippling regulations have been tossed in the trash.  Trump has successfully placed 24 judges, including one to the Supreme Court and one pending.  There is only one area where his agenda has been thwarted, and that aroused our now confirmed suspicion.

The anonymous Op-Ed came from the office of Rod Rosenstein.  Whether he wrote it himself or a staffer claimed his name is unclear.

Trump has failed to “lock her up”, referring to Hillary Clinton and her illegal email server and destruction of evidence.  Trump has not fired Rosenstein, Sessions, Ohr, Mueller, or several others potentially involved in the “Deep State” movement to protect Clinton.  The agents who have been fired have been as a result of internal DOJ investigations with overwhelming evidence of bias.  Rosenstein in fact attempted at one point to create an Obstruction of Justice charge against Trump by recommending he fire Comey and then refusing to clear the record when people speculated that Comey was fired to stop the Russian investigation.

Rosenstein also set up the special counsel investigation with Mueller and has prevented Mueller from being fired.  Meanwhile, he has not set up a second special counsel investigation to look into how the Clinton email investigation was handled.  Many observers, including Trump, have been tearing their hair out trying to figure out why the Clinton email investigation continues to go under the radar.  It is clear now that Rosenstein considers this part of his resistance duties, to steer Trump away from what he believes are Trump’s worst inclinations.

Rosenstein himself at one point faced impeachment proceedings from Congress for failing to produce evidence, refusing to remove unnecessary redaction from reports, and refusing to set up a second special counsel to look into the FBI’s handling of the Clinton investigation.

Chuck Schumer himself said that intel officials have a way to “strike back” if someone speaks badly about them.  Rod Rosenstein wrote the New York Times Op-Ed because he believes he has a duty to stop Trump.  That idea has been articulated throughout the FBI higher ups in texts on record, and through DOJ employee Bruce Ohr who continued to feed fake dirt on Trump to the FBI from Christopher Steele even after the FBI fired Steele.  Rosenstein also knows his time is running out.  As soon as the Russia investigation is over, which should be very soon, or right after the election Rosenstein and Sessions will be looking for jobs.  For Rosenstein it was now or never.  He knew he would eventually be discovered, but he is the most expendable.

Our report likely won’t be picked up.  That’s Ok.  Unbiased observers have already seen this move to invoke the 25th amendment by the Deep State and take it for what it is.  It is the Birther Movement part II.  No one who matters takes it seriously.  The New York Times doesn’t have the credibility it used to.  The story, like Russian meddling, won’t affect a single vote.  But the source will be discovered by the media in time and face the consequences that come with trying to stage an internal coup against the President of the United States.  Until then, President Trump will continue to implement the portions of his agenda that don’t run through Rod Rosenstein’s office.

Need to Know 7/18/18

Democrats are claiming that Trump told Russia to hack the DNC.  What they are actually referring to was a campaign speech Trump gave after Hillary Clinton deleted 30,000 emails under subpoena from her illegal private server.  The FBI couldn’t find those incriminating emails, so Trump joked that he hoped the Russians could find them.  And that is the closest thing we have to Russian Collusion.

Trump asked Russia to find Clinton’s emails

David Love, writing for CNN, is suggesting that #walkaway is actually a ploy by the Russians to make people think that there is an exodus from the Democrat party by those disillusioned with the extreme turn the party has taken toward Socialism.  So when your friends use #walkaway, just know that means they are actually a Russian bot.

Russian bots are using #walkaway to try to wound Dems in the midterm

Trump is being accused of going soft on the Russians by not starting a war with Putin over the hackers.  But actually, it was the Obama administration who decided to back burner efforts to stop Russian hackers.  After US intel agencies had developed a plan to fight back against Russian hacker attacks, Susan Rice issued a stand down order.

Obama cyber chief confirms ‘stand down’ order against Russian cyberattacks in summer 2016

Ocasio-Cortez has screwed up on Israel again.  Despite holding a degree in international relations, the young Socialist candidate for New York’s 14th district has now bumbled through three different interviews on questions about Israel.  But take heart, she is going to be “speaking to activists” so they can finally tell her what to think about Israel.  I feel better already.

Ocasio-Cortez backpedals on two-state solution comments

Confirmed: The Fix Was In

The Washington Post is reporting this morning that James Comey knew the Justice Department was protecting Hillary Clinton, drafted a letter exonerating her in early May, then gave immunity to her aides who subsequentially confessed to lying and destroying evidence.

A month later, after Comey wrote the exoneration letter, Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton privately where they “talked about wedding plans”. They didn’t. The fix was in. All they needed for the show was to have Hillary be interviewed by the FBI. Bill needed assurances that the Justice Department still had her back and that Comey had already chosen to exonerate her.

Five days later, Comey interviews Hillary Clinton, with her aides who had been granted immunity allowed in the room to serve as her lawyers.  Two days later, Comey goes public with his exoneration letter as though he had just come to that decision.

September 28, Comey tells Congress that he did not make his decision until after interviewing Hillary Clinton.  He states emphatically that he did not make the decision until after interviewing Hillary Clinton.

Here is the Washington Post timeline:

Early March – Comey receives information from Russian sources that the Justice Department is working to ensure Hillary Clinton won’t be prosecuted.  Loretta Lynch had also spoken to Comey and asked him to call the “investigation” a “matter” instead so as not to make it sound so bad.

(Sidebar: why would Russia know anything about the Justice Department’s relationship to Hillary Clinton?  Perhaps because of how the Uranium One deal was covered up?)

May 2 – Comey drafts the exoneration letter

May 3 – Paul Combetta, Clinton computer specialist, admits to lying to the the FBI about knowing the emails should have been preserved and deleting them anyway.  Combetta is given immunity because Comey, apparently, wanted to move up the line to get someone more important.  AFTER he had already written the exoneration letter.

May 5 – The media reports that there is little evidence Clinton committed a crime

May 16 – Comey sends the draft of his exoneration around to other members in the FBI.  This is before Cheryl Mills is interviewed.  Part of the deal to interview Cheryl Mills becomes immunity and the destruction of her laptop, which likely contained evidence.

June 27 – Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton meet privately on his jet.

July 2 – Hillary Clinton is interviewed by the FBI for 3 1/2 hours with her aides in the room serving as her lawyers.  The aides have immunity already.  They can confer and make sure they get their stories straight.

July 5 – Comey exonerates Hillary Clinton.

Anyone with any sense and understanding can clearly see the fix was in.  There was no way the Obama Justice Department was going to prosecute Hillary Clinton.  And Comey worked with the administration to make sure it never happened.  The investigation should be reopened, and prosecution of Comey, Lynch, the Clintons, Mills, Combetta, Abedeen, and Obama should be on the table for obstruction of justice and perjury.

5 Times Obama Didn’t Appoint a Special Prosecutor
I saw a meme recently mocking the Trump team for lawyering up. There’s a reason Obama and his team never needed to lawyer up. They had Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch as the attorney generals. Neither of them had any interest in looking at wrongdoing by the Obama administration. Even the thought of Obama hiring a special prosecutor to investigate himself is hilarious.
 
Here are five times Obama should have appointed a special prosecutor but didn’t:
 
1. Fast and furious – the gun running scandal where the US sold weapons to Mexican drug lords that were then lost and later used to kill US border agents. The murder of the border agents was initially used by the administration to call for greater gun control, until it was discovered where those guns came from.
 
2. The IRS targeting scandal – the IRS targeted right-leaning political groups by denying their applications and subjecting them to unreasonable questioning. Congress investigated, but no charges were ever filed by the Obama DOJ and the administration did not appoint a special prosecutor. The person responsible, Lois Lerner, never faced legal consequences.  Multiple calls for a special prosecutor were ignored by the Obama DOJ.
 
3. Benghazi – not only did the administration lie to the public, but Hillary Clinton violated the law when she distributed classified information about the Benghazi incident and destroyed classified information regarding the incident.
 
4. Hillary Clinton’s email server – despite the destruction of evidence, and Loretta Lynch completely invalidating the investigation by meeting with Bill Clinton on his private jet, a special prosecutor was not appointed. This is despite evidence that Obama knew about her server and that the Obama DOJ made unethical deals with Clinton attorneys to help destroy and hide evidence in the case.
 
5. The Iran Nuclear Deal payment – This was when Obama negotiated a poorly structured nuclear deal with Iran, and then sealed it with a huge cash payment delivered in the middle of the night. After the payment was discovered, the Obama administration claimed it was an old debt from a couple Iranian governments ago when we cancelled an arms shipment to them during their revolution.
 
Any of these were more salacious than the idea that Trump associates may have sought opposition research from the Russians. But none were investigated by any body with actual authority. None resulted in special counsels.
 
This also doesn’t include the smaller things, like the raid on the Gibson Guitar factory, Solyndra, or NSA spying on reporters.  And it doesn’t include the bigger things that came to light more recently such as Obama spying on Trump associates and unmasking them. I haven’t even touched on the leaks.
Trump fired James Comey.  Obama’s first year in office was a blood bath for Bush administration attorneys and officials.  The difference so far between Trump and Obama is that Obama had more scandals and fewer people in his government that had any interest in noticing.

The Russian Fiction

Obama complained for months about the Russians tampering with the US election to get Trump elected.  Apparently for all of Trump’s lack of political experience and his apparent intention to start World War III the first time he loses his temper, he is also somehow irresistible to the Russians.  It has nothing to do with Trump’s desire to sell the American uranium industry to the Russians, Hillary already did that.

For some unexplainable reason, Russia is willing to start a cyber war to install Trump.  So much so that they “hacked the election”.  They literally caused you to vote for Trump. The Russians worked intentionally to aide Trump.  I’m not even sure if we can call this America anymore or if we are just a puppet of Russia.  And of course, if Trump doesn’t denounce Russia and concede this sham election, he should be hung for treason, right?

Back to reality.

What does the media mean when they say Russia hacked the election?  Russia did not tamper with voting machines.  Russia did not funnel fake news to the mainstream media who then dutifully reported it.  In fact, the last major example we have of that was when the CIA told the President who told the media that Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs.  Russia did not get into your computer and use subliminal messages to make you feel like voting for Trump.  None of that happened.

In fact, it’s not clear that this was a Russian national effort.  Apparently the CIA has identified some Russian officials (unnamed) who might be involved.  But there’s another wrinkle.  The CIA might not even know what they are talking about.

The “hack” of the election wasn’t a hack of the election at all.  It was a hack of the DNC servers.  To be clear, no one invented the Podesta emails.  No one modified them.  Whoever the hackers are, whether Wikileaks who took responsibility for it or Russian officials according to the CIA, all they did was publish real, actual emails written by real, actual Democrat staffers.

According to the CIA, the hackers hit the GOP and DNC, but only released the DNC emails. The FBI disputes that, saying the GOP servers were never hacked.  If the GOP servers were never breached, that eliminates the CIA argument that the Russians were trying to hurt just the DNC.  In fact, the argument was flimsy to begin with.  It’s possible they hacked the GOP and just didn’t find anything incriminating.

So did Trump really win simply because Russia hacked the DNC?  Did people walk into the voting booth thinking to themselves “Gosh, I just can’t vote for a party that let’s their servers get hacked by the Russians”.  It seems like Hillary Clinton’s loss had a little bit more to do with what was on those emails.  Contained in the Podesta emails was evidence of media manipulation, CNN sending debate questions to Hillary ahead of time, racism within the party, Hillary’s health issues, and of all things proof that Team Hillary not only rigged the DNC primary, but also promoted Trump in the GOP primary because they thought they could beat him.

Just to make sure the reader caught that: Hillary Clinton and her team rigged both party’s primaries in 2016.

Problem emails didn’t just come from Wikileaks.  Team Hillary also got in trouble with the emails released by the FBI from her illegal server, and the undercover video of Scott Foval and others by Project Veritas.  Those two sources showed how the DNC bussed people across state lines to vote illegally, and even paid homeless people to go into Trump rallies and cause violence.  One would think the CIA might be interested in that.  At least one might think that had more to do with Hillary’s loss.

Calling on the Russians to hack and rig an election is nothing shockingly new.  Ted Kennedy did it in 1984 to try to get rid of Reagan. But the Russians didn’t decide the US election in 2016. If they are truly involved, all they did was shed light on the treacherous, terrible, racist, and illegal things the DNC was already doing to hack the election.

Maybe we should send them a thank you card.

How Trump won and Clinton lost

The question has been asked and answered several times.  In an attempt at self-diagnosis, the media has theorized about why the perfect, most qualified candidate in history lost to a racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic deplorable.  They are still missing the correct answers.  Here are five facts and perceptions the media continues to overlook.

The Black Vote

One of the biggest aspects of Hillary Clinton’s loss that the media is only now recognizing is the million or so African Americans who stayed home.  Barack Obama won 93% of the black vote in 2012, Hillary received 88%.  That was the lowest percent in this demographic since the last white Democrat to run and lose in 2004.  An inconvenient truth for the DNC is that after losing two elections in a row against Bush, about 1 million new African American voters came out to vote for the first African American candidate. Then they disappeared. It was the largest demographic shift from 2012 to 2016. Nothing significant has changed in the DNC platform in 20 years.  Obama successfully played the race card, Clinton had no such luck with the gender card.

A Flawed Candidate

Part of the reason the gender card did not work is that Hillary Clinton was not what many women wanted to be representative of the historical first female President.  Clinton was flawed from the start.  Anyone looking at the email scandal could see that she had violated the law.  Democrats could justify voting for Clinton because the FBI refused to recommend an indictment, but even then Comey’s statement was basically that Clinton was too incompetent to be a criminal or hold a government job.

Clinton was the chosen one.  But unlike Obama, she knew it and ran on it.  Obama at least bothered to have a message.  Even during the debates, Hillary seemed to be scared to stray from memorized platitudes and applause lines.  It didn’t help when she experienced public health issues or lashed out at critics.  Throughout the whole thing she acted as though she was entitled to the Presidency and offended if anyone didn’t agree.

Of course, most people who would be discouraged to vote for her because of her criminality or entitlement were already #neverhillary.  Cheating in the primary, controlling the media, and all of the filth that came out of the Podesta emails swayed independents more than the blind DNC is willing to admit.  Even when Sanders came out and endorsed Clinton, it was not enough to change the fact that she had canceled the revolution.  More people stayed home in 2016 than voted.  The crowds that belonged to Bernie Sanders did not follow Hillary Clinton.

Third Parties Failed

The Clinton campaign has lashed out at third party voters since the end of the campaign. But Gary Johnson voters did not have a significant effect on the election.  If you think Gary Johnson’s 3% was anything significant, I would remind you that third party votes have been 2-3% since the last Clinton era when third parties took 10% in ’96 and almost 20% in ’92.  2016 should have been the best opportunity for a third party to make an impact because nobody liked the two main choices.  Consistently in polls, Gary Johnson pulled from both parties.

Gary Johnson was a flawed candidate.  A liberal Republican pretending to be a Libertarian, Johnson was joined by liberal Republican Bill Weld who spent more time praising and defending Clinton than advancing Johnson.

Gary Johnson himself was a clown who demonstrated often that he had no foreign policy intelligence and was probably high during the entire campaign.  Libertarians selected Johnson and pressed forward with no intention of winning, but hoping and praying that someone would realize they existed.  2020 may change their fortunes, but 2016 can objectively be seen as nothing other than a massive failure.  They gave it a Ralph Nader effort and walked away with the same result.

Not All Republicans Are Alt-Right

When Hillary Clinton labeled a large portion of Republicans as “deplorables”, I called that her “47%” moment.  Democrats made a huge miscalculation when they tried to substitute substance with sectarian attacks.  The problem is most Republicans do not believe that they are racist, sexist, bigoted, and many do not even consider themselves homophobic. That is probably because they aren’t.  Sure, some are.  The KKK, who Trump denounced 14 times, are all those things.  But the vast majority of Republicans view the KKK through the historical lens of their past involvement with the Democrat party.  The vast majority of Republicans feel no connection to the KKK and are offended when they are lumped together.

The vast majority of Republicans are also smarter than the media thought.  When Trump said Mexico was sending rapists and murderers, Republicans understood that he was talking about illegal immigrants and simply making the point that scientists, doctors and engineers are not crossing our border illegally.  Republicans also read through his poor communication skills to understand that he was talking about illegal immigrants and not Mexicans in general.  When celebrities called Trump Hitler, many Republicans rolled their eyes remembering they said the same thing about Romney, Bush, and others.  Trump was the beneficiary of generation so over inundated by superlatives and hyperbole that it has lost any affect.

When Democrats even today toss out insane metaphors and analogies, most recently how Trump’s cabinet selection has been Stalin-esque, sane people roll their eyes.  That is a big part of why Trump won.

The “Alt-Left” and Right Anger

What do you call it when someone refuses services to a particular group based on their beliefs?  What do you call it when one group that hates another group takes to the streets and destroys private property whenever they don’t get their way?  What do you call it when it is OK for one group to discriminate, but not the other?  These are the perceptions that drove the angry vote.  When celebrities, professors, and Wall Street try to marginalize conservatives or label them as dangerous, that drives conservatives to the polls.

The anger vote has been a narrative in the media since Trump won the primary.  The anger vote was significant, but the causes have been misdiagnosed.  The media narrative seemed to equate the anger vote with white supremacists and fringe members of the Right.  Even now, leftists like Jon Stewart and Michael Moore are correcting the Left’s perception on what drove rightwing anger.  It wasn’t simply a case of a bunch of racists not wanting a black or female President.  It had very little to do with the Supreme Court ruling in favor of gay marriage.  It had far more to do with reaction to destructive policies hurting our country and the “Alt-Left”, AKA SJWs.

Republicans voted for Trump mainly because of failed policies.  Obamacare drove insurance rates through the roof.  After 8 years of reported national recovery, people were still waiting for their own recovery.  Hillary Clinton listed two litmus tests for Supreme Court justices. They amounted to invalidating the 2nd amendment and legalizing all forms of abortion at all stages of a pregnancy.  We lost ground in every foreign engagement we involved ourselves in, including making ridiculous deals and ransom payments to Iran, consistently being embarrassed by Russia and China, losing in Iraq and Afghanistan, and rushing head first into messy entanglements in Syria, Libya, Egypt, and wherever else we could arm terrorists.

Perhaps the most Republican anger came at SJWs (Social Justice Warriors).  Again, these are just observations of the sentiments that were expressed by the Right.  The feeling was that professors created safe spaces to protect primarily liberal students from primarily conservatives students.  Conservative views were oppressed in Universities in demonstrable ways.  Anyone who disagreed with Obama or Clinton were too quickly labeled racist.  Eventually, the term “Alt-Right” was coined and used as a catch all to quickly dismiss anyone who was angry at the Left.

For every 100 sincere Black Lives Matters protesters attempting to bring light to police brutality, there were another 100 paid by George Soros to smash windows and set cars on fire.  In fact, many BLM protesters turned out to be Occupy Wall Street protesters recycled.

It seemed as though the entire race war was scripted.  While black protesters hugged police officers in the streets and people sought healing, bussed in groups of community organizers chanted “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon” and called for violence against police.  The angry Republicans were the ones sitting in their cars stopped on the highway by Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter protesters.  Angry voters were driven by what should have been a charge of indifference, but was instead over-inflated into a charge of all historical racial and financial injustice.

Occupy Wall Street, the original Soros funded mob, was no better.  Americans across the country who still believe in the American Dream were being accused of hoarding and oppressing these liberal tent dwellers. Yet the movement collapsed in on itself and the DNC put forward a candidate who made $500,000 an hour giving speeches to Wall Street. It is no wonder American workers voted for Trump.

The Result

In the end, the election came down to two candidates who were so scary that neither side could afford to back down.  Trump didn’t win because half the country is racist.  He won because half the country was scared of Hillary Clinton, scared of her policies, and scared of how the SJWs already viewed them.  Desiring everything Hillary Clinton did not represent, and regardless of what Trump did represent, half the country voted #neverhillary and for the only viable alternative they had.  Trump wasn’t a great communicator.  He didn’t have to be.  All he had to say was “I’m going to make America great again, and I’m not Hillary Clinton”.