Tag: Emails

Bad week for the Democrat circus

First, let’s talk about the circus at the Kavanaugh hearing.  Nothing is going to stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation.  So the question was whether Democrats would act civilly like a bunch of elected US Senators, or if they would go off the rails into crazy town.  They chose the latter.  In fact, Democrats in the committee mirrored the paid protesters in the crowd in their level of crazy.

Corey Booker took the cake with his “I am Spartacus” moment.  Booker tried everything he could to throw his Senate career away as a martyr for the cause.  But surprisingly, he failed.  Booker, in a moment of epic grandstanding, promised to release confidential emails even though he knew the consequences were expulsion from the Senate.  He then released 12 pages of emails that did absolutely nothing but show Kavanaugh as an impartial observer who focuses on complete accuracy.  So did Booker succeed in getting himself crucified?  Not quite.  The emails were already cleared to be released.

The next clown to get out of the car was Kamala Harris.  Senator Harris hit Kavanaugh with a line of questioning that amounted to “have you ever talked to anyone about anything”.  When Kavanaugh tried to clarify the question, she mocked him saying “I just asked it a minute ago, I can’t believe you forgot already.”  When he tried to answer by pointing out that he used to work with Bob Mueller and that Russia is on the news every day so of course he has talked to fellow judges about it, Harris gave up in frustration and said “I’ll move on, clearly you aren’t going to answer the question”

She asked Kavanaugh if he had a conversation, but wouldn’t say with who.  She implied he knew who.  Why wouldn’t she just say the name?  Because she didn’t have one.  Kamala Harris was fishing.

Skip to 5:45 in the video to to get to the idiocy of her questioning.

Kamala Harris asks Kavanaugh if he’s had a conversation with you know who

The anonymous Op-Ed in the New York Times is continuing to make fools out of Democrats.  In fact it has had the opposite effect.  Trump senior officials have been quick to not only deny that they wrote the Op-Ed, but to strongly support the President and point to the successes of his administration.  In fact, the Op-Ed has been such an abject failure that some have speculated that Trump wrote  or had it written to have the opportunity to demonstrate the strong support he has in his administration.

What is clear is that if the anonymous author had any hopes of invoking the 25th amendment to have Trump removed from office as incapable of carrying out his duties, that effort has miserably failed.  The author would have had better luck naming himself and calling for a vote.  But I suppose if he did that, then he would completely destroy the credibility of the Russian investigation, which is his only other hope of getting Trump toppled.  Because it’s Rod Rosenstein.

Trump officials come out in support of the President in response to “gutless” Op-Ed

And right on cue, out comes another Democrat clown.  On Thursday, Democratic Socialist Elizabeth Warren was asked if the President should be toppled with the 25th amendment based on the anonymous Op-Ed.  Warren said yes.  She is actually suggesting that the cabinet, along with the Senate and the House, remove the President from office and put Mike Pence in charge because somebody wrote an anonymous Op-Ed.

Do people realize how dangerous this is?  Our constitutional democracy has survived based on the peaceful transfer of power and the vote of the people.  If Democratic Socialists want to cheat to topple a Capitalist President, then the voters will rise up to restore our democracy.  I think Warren perhaps underestimates the voters in her coup attempt.  But socialists toppling free governments and turning them into banana republics is nothing new.

She might want to consider which side all the second amendment supporters are on before starting a civil war.

Elizabeth Warren calls for coup based on anonymous NYT Op-Ed

 

Advertisements

Democrats stunned in Florida upset

The primaries took a turn for the worst for the establishment DNC on Tuesday when front runner Gwen Graham lost to progressive socialist Andrew Gillum in Florida.  The Florida governor primary race results came as a shock.  Gillum, the 39 year old mayor of Tallahassee, was outspent and barely known until Bernie Sanders came down to campaign for him.  Gillum is from the Ocasio-Cortez wing of the Democrat party and is also currently under an FBI investigation for illegal real estate deals.  He is promising a $15 minimum wage and Medicare for all, despite the massive job losses caused by such a drastically high wage floor in other states and no way to pay for Universal Healthcare.

On the Republican side of the aisle, Ron DeSantis won easily after a Trump endorsement gave him statewide notoriety.  He was already a very popular congressman in the Northeast part of the state.  DeSantis is also a member of the House “Freedom Caucus” made up of more libertarian leaning Republicans.  This sets up a stark contrast for November.

History will play on both sides of the race.  Gillum would be the first black governor of Florida if elected.  On the other side, Florida continues to do incredibly well under Republican governors.  Economic growth in Florida has skyrocketed under outgoing Governor Rick Scott.  Gillum meanwhile presides over a city known for high crime and falling behind other Florida cities.  In the end though, the race may simply turn into a Bernie Sanders versus Donald Trump cult of personality referendum.

Establishment Democrats lose Florida primary to Ocasio-Cortez style 39 year old mayor

Narrative alert: for the second day in a row the mainstream media hit Trump for making a claim “without citing evidence”.  The first was Trump’s claim that Google searches for his name were directing people to left leaning news organizations.  Trump did not cite the article in his tweet, but was referring to a PJ Media report. 

Yesterday the Daily Caller reported that China had hacked Hillary’s email account and set up code that was sending a courtesy duplicate of every email she sent to a Chinese run company in DC.  The Daily Caller did not name their sources, but after the CNN/Lanny Davis screwup, the MSM can hardly complain about that.

Trump isn’t citing stories without evidence.  He simply isn’t linking to the articles he is reading.  Mainstream media outlets likely don’t read news that conflicts with their narrative, and that may be why they missed these two stories.  I wonder where the “without evidence” narrative disappeared to when Florida’s Bill Nelson claimed the Russians had hacked our voting machines?

The “without evidence” narrative is back in the Mainstream Media

White House counsel Don McGhan may be moving on.  That’s the rumors coming from left-leaning Axios.  But the tone of the headline doesn’t match the story.  This isn’t the first time that’s been the case with a McGhan story either.  After McGhan spent 30 hours with Mueller representing the President, media outlets speculated that he had flipped on Trump.  That turned out not to be true.  The new rumors also do not indicate a split between Trump and McGhan.  In fact, the story demonstrates the value he has shown to the administration and why he may be moving on.  McGhan could be replaced by Emmet Flood.  Flood has represented Clinton and Bush against Congressional investigations and is known for fighting against investigator overreach.

Don McGhan’s work may be done

Why we need Jeff Sessions

The frustration Trump has with Jeff Sessions is not unreasonable.  In fact, it’s felt by many on the right, and some on the left who are concerned with stopping crime.  In case you missed it, we have a former FBI director who worked in concert with a former Attorney General to protect a political candidate and exonerate her of criminal mishandling of classified materials at all costs.  Comey pulled out all the stops to make sure Hillary Clinton faced nothing worse than a strong rebuke for her obvious and willful negligence.  Comey had to at least say something.  Other people were going to jail for the exact same thing.

But Comey knew Loretta Lynch was never going to prosecute Hillary Clinton.  And he knew, according to his own testimony, that Hillary Clinton was going to be the next President.  So he suppressed evidence.  He offered plea deals to Hillary’s attorneys that included destroying the evidence of a coverup on their laptops.  He let her attorneys be in the room when he interviewed her to make sure they got their stories straight.  When Loretta Lynch told him he couldn’t use the word “negligent” in his testimony, he substituted the made up legal term “extremely careless”.  But it didn’t matter, cause he knew Hillary was going to win.

When Weiner’s laptop surfaced, Comey lied to congress.  He said the FBI examined every email on Weiner’s laptop.  In reality, they barely touched 1% of them.  Later in testimony, Comey said the only reason he reopened the investigation with Weiner’s laptop was because he knew Hillary was going to win and he didn’t want the discovery to somehow leak out and be a cloud over Hillary’s presidency.  As FBI director, Comey had set himself up for a sweet deal in the new Clinton administration.  But it never happened.

Comey then wrote a book trying to exonerate himself.  He told about how honorable he was and how dishonorable Trump is.  He suddenly found himself with memos about conversations he had with Trump.  Private conversations with the President.  He used his memos to get his friend Robert Mueller appointed as a special counsel.  When Mueller headed the FBI, he fed contracts to Comey’s employer Lockheed Martin and Comey made $6 million in one year on those contracts.  Comey and Mueller have a history of enriching one another.

So what does this have to do with Sessions?  We see all of this obvious corruption before our eyes, even documented in Congress and the press.  We see Inspector General Horowitz reading Peter Strzok’s texts about stopping Trump and saying those texts weren’t politically biased.  We see all of this injustice and the Left gloating about Hillary Clinton getting away with her illegal activities.  We see Hillary Clinton using campaign funds to collude with Russia through a foreign spy in the creation of the Trump dossier and her friends in the FBI using that dossier to get FISA warrants to spy on her opponent.  But we see no justice.

For the last 8 years, we have had Attorney Generals who did what the President said.  They protected the President.  Holder was the first Attorney General held in contempt of Congress and resigned shortly after the Justice Department started illegally seizing phone records of journalists.  In fact that was one of the only times Holder recused himself.  The other times had to do with criminal investigations into clients he had once represented, like Roger Clemens and a Swiss bank being used for tax havens.  Loretta Lynch never recused herself, even after her secret tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton during the Hillary Clinton investigation.

Holder and Lynch never would have appointed a special counsel to investigation wrongdoing by Obama.  Even the thought of that seems ridiculous.  They certainly wouldn’t have recused themselves.  Sessions felt that because he had been part of Trump’s campaign, he should not be involved in these investigations.  In doing so, Sessions has left the Department of Justice in the hands of the conspirators who sought to take Trump down.  McCabe, Strzok, Ohr, Comey, Page, Yates, we know all the names because we’ve seen their internal communications plotting to take Trump out.  The fact that Trump is still standing without a single charge against him and not even being the target of the investigation demonstrates that the justice system overall is working.

But there’s still no justice against criminals like Hillary Clinton.  All we can do is be patient.  In the meantime, I applaud Jeff Sessions for not being like Holder and Lynch.  We know that the result of Mueller’s investigation is not skewed by partisanship to the right.  We know that Sessions’ DOJ is going to be fair.  We don’t have to worry about a situation like we had with Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch where we knew justice was an illusion and the system was rigged to protect Obama and his potential successors.

As painful and frustrating as that is to conservatives, Trump supporters, and those who truly love justice, it is necessary.  The last 8 years have destroyed our confidence in the United States justice system.  Sessions has helped restore that confidence by going back to a policy of abundant non-partisanship and avoiding the appearance of evil.  For that, as hard as it is to say this, we are thankful.  We need more good people like Jeff Sessions in the Department of Justice.

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

Trump Campaign Mole Had One Question

The cat is out of the bag.  The FBI did actually have a mole working with the Trump campaign.  Cambridge professor Stefan Halper was hired by the FBI and paid nearly half a million dollars by the DoD’s secretive Office of Net Assessment to gain the confidence of Trump campaign officials and inform on them to the FBI.  But the questions Halper asked had nothing to do with Russian collusion.  They wanted to know one thing: did the Trump campaign have Hillary’s emails.

According to reports, Halper asked George Papadopoulos and Carter Page if the Trump campaign had gotten Hillary Clinton’s emails from the Russians.  He wasn’t concerned about collusion, but rather if the Trump campaign had received those emails and was holding on to them for the opportune moment.  If the Trump campaign had those emails, it could spell doom for Clinton, the Obama administration, and the FBI.

Obama’s FBI had exonerated Hillary Clinton before they even began their investigation.  As part of the immunity deal with Clinton’s attorneys, they allowed for the destruction of evidence that might have established a timeline of when and how her emails were deleted.  Obama himself and other Obama administration officials like Loretta Lynch had emailed Hillary under pseudonyms.  The discovery of Hillary’s emails could be detrimental to the entire power base of the Democrat party.  Obama had just as much reason as Hillary to find out if Trump had them.  So that was Halper’s mission.

This wouldn’t be the first election espionage mission for Halper.  In 1980, Halper worked as a mole in the Carter administration, leaking foreign policy intel to the Reagan campaign under George H.W. Bush’s direction.  He was part of a group in the CIA who helped Reagan anticipate Carter’s foreign policy positions during an election year.  The scandal came to light a couple years later, but was quickly forgotten.  Halper also had connections with MI-6, the British spy agency that Christopher Steele used to work for.

The Bush’s have been against Trump from the start.  Stefan Halper was their former spy.  Even working for the Obama’s to help save Hillary, he was the perfect man for the job.

For those keeping score at home, this is another instance where Trump was proven right.  He said the FBI was tapping his phone.  After much ridicule, the FBI admitted that they were surveilling the phone lines at Trump tower.  Trump said the FBI used the phony Steele dossier to start the Russian investigation. The House investigation determined that in fact the dossier, which was paid for by the Clinton campaign, had been used to secure FISA warrants to spy on Trump.  Trump as recently as last week suggested there was an FBI informant working his campaign officials.  After being ridiculed again by the media and relentlessly fact-checked, the truth has come out and he was right again.

But the scariest thing is that Halper wasn’t investigating Trump or Russia, as former CIA director Brennan suggested.  Halper wasn’t there to find out about illegal Russian influence.  He was there to let the Obama administration and Hillary campaign know if there was going to be an October surprise.  His mission was to find out if Trump had Hillary’s emails.

 

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.

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.