Assessment of the Left

Remember the old Van Jones’ cliche about how he viewed the progressive, liberal strategy?

“Top down, bottom up, inside out.”

Van Jones: “Change has to be top down. bottom up, and inside out. It’s got to be top down… we can’t just leave the federal government in the hands of our enemies and expect to make a lot of progress.

So even if we can’t get everything done we WANT to get done out of DC, we certainly can’t let other people have the levers of control of DC. But also, you can see right now, DC can’t do much by itself. You have to have that bottom up movement….and that’s what’s been missing is that bottom up sense of movement to get the best out of DC. And What’s {inaudible – cog]…in stopping that is the inside out piece. “

Van Jones said “we need to have the right president and the right movement.”
(the right radical roots)

Rahm Emanuel: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. What I mean by that is [its] an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”

This is not about conflict resolution this is about conflict proliferation.

It was always fairly clear what they were talking about when they said bottom up or top down – Van Jones said they needed the presidency. But it was always more vague what inside out really meant — maybe inside anger acting out, turmoil or chaos itself? Now we see more of what really “inside out” looks like within the government.

That is government turned inside out, against itself, when undesirable power to radicals is in control. Of course this wouldn’t happen under Obama. Where government is used against itself to bring down an opposed power. And it is rolling out of the left right now.

See all the obfuscation, obstruction to allow nominees to get through. You have all the Dems, in minority, functioning in lockstep to use any of their power to oppose and sabotage the majority. Now the radical remnant within is in rebellion.Then you have the phony grass roots AstroTurf acting in concert calling for obstruction.

The first thing liberals did post election was demand Dems obstruct and do anything possible to prohibit everything the new administration tried to do. Hence, resistance.

At the moment, all three parts seem to be fully activated with one added caveat, the media. It is nicely cooperating with their strategy. Money was never a problem with Soros, Dem orgs etc. Then all they need do, collectively, is project chaos everywhere they can.

So under those circumstances, the only way Repubs can get Dems to cooperate is to appease them somehow — what the left wants and expects. If the radical left cannot control government, they must at least exert force over those with levers of power.

And media is doing a marvelous job right now playing along. It’s almost too perfect for them. They have a former president now going back into politics, leading their movement. Democrat pols are all on board with the radical left’s agenda to disrupt, deny, and destroy anything opposing them. It’s basic radical ideology, and Dems are fully radicalized.

There is Move On, which was Clinton’s defense organization. Then there is Organizing for Action, Obama’s campaign organization. There is RevCom, a tool of Bernie’s. Along with other leftist groups, including the ACLU, BLM, environmentalists and the financiers like Soros glad to foot any bills. Couple it with Obama and his internal political machine of fellow travelers, and former staff. Eric Holder and then a crew of Obama’s lawyers challenging everything Trump is doing. Now it’s a strategy of inside out and upside down, too.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s information spreading campaign

Even before he made his grand exit, Obama did all he could to set the stage for Trump. It’s called sabotage most places. But it’s just a day in office for the radical-in-chief, Obama.

Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking

WASHINGTON — In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.

American allies, including the British and the Dutch, had provided information describing meetings in European cities between Russian officials — and others close to Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — and associates of President-elect Trump, according to three former American officials who requested anonymity in discussing classified intelligence.

Separately, American intelligence agencies had intercepted communications of Russian officials, some of them within the Kremlin, discussing contacts with Trump associates.
//…

At the Obama White House, Mr. Trump’s statements stoked fears among some that intelligence could be covered up or destroyed — or its sources exposed — once power changed hands. What followed was a push to preserve the intelligence that underscored the deep anxiety with which the White House and American intelligence agencies had come to view the threat from Moscow.

It also reflected the suspicion among many in the Obama White House that the Trump campaign might have colluded with Russia on election email hacks — a suspicion that American officials say has not been confirmed. Former senior Obama administration officials said that none of the efforts were directed by Mr. Obama.

Sean Spicer, the Trump White House spokesman, said, “The only new piece of information that has come to light is that political appointees in the Obama administration have sought to create a false narrative to make an excuse for their own defeat in the election.” He added, “There continues to be no there, there.”

MORE at NYT

The real story is there for all to see of Obama’s shadow government and its expansive influence. He would not be happy to give up power. And he isn’t finished.

Shadow government up and running

It may still be in the early, trial phase but the shadow government seems to be getting its feet on the ground as fast — or faster — than Trump can get his own administration up and running. Which is all probably their main objective. So here we are.

Loretta Lynch Played This Shocking Role In Setting Up A Coup Against Trump

American Patriot Daily News

The Trump administration has been plagued by leaks from the intelligence community.

Many believe these leaks were intended to destabilize the Trump Presidency and represent a soft coup.

And you won’t believe the role Loretta Lynch played in this plot.

Shortly before leaving office, Attorney General Loretta Lynch signed a directive loosening the rules on the NSA’s ability to share intercepted electronic communications with 16 other federal agencies, as well as their foreign counterparts.

The New York Times reports:

“In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.

The change means that far more officials will be searching through raw data. Essentially, the government is reducing the risk that the N.S.A. will fail to recognize that a piece of information would be valuable to another agency, but increasing the risk that officials will see private information about innocent people.

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch signed the new rules, permitting the N.S.A. to disseminate “raw signals intelligence information,” on Jan. 3, after the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr., signed them on Dec. 15, according to a 23-page, largely declassified copy of the procedures.”

Now some critics are arguing this new order was the driving force behind the leaks that took down National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

Jay Sekulow, the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, is one of those critics.

In an interview with Sean Hannity, he argued that this order created a “shadow government” by expanding the pool of people able to access intercepted communications which would otherwise be classified.

Zero Hedge reports on his remarks:

“There was a sea-change here at the NSA with an order that came from president Obama 17 days before he left office where he allowed the NSA who used to control the data, it now goes to 16 other agencies and that just festered this whole leaking situation, and that happened on the way out, as the president was leaving the office.

Why did the Obama administration wait until it had 17 days left in their administration to put this order in place if they thought it was so important. They had 8 years, they didn’t do it, number one. Number two, it changed the exiting rule which was an executive order dating back to Ronald Reagan, that has been in place until 17 days before the Obama administration was going to end, that said the NSA gets the raw data, and they determine dissemination.

Instead, this change that the president put in place, signed off by the way by James Clapper on December 15, 2016, signed off by Loretta Lynch the Attorney General January 3, 2017, they decide that now 16 agencies can get the raw data and what that does is almost creates a shadow government. You have all these people who are not agreeing with President Trump’s position, so it just festers more leaks.

If they had a justification for this, wonderful, why didn’t they do it 8 years ago, 4 years ago, 3 years ago. Yet they wait until 17 days left.”

Obama supporters within the intelligence community have waged what some believe is a coup against Trump by using cherry-picked leaks to frame the information in the most damaging light possible.

Was this coup ultimately enabled by Loretta Lynch?

At least one expert is saying “yes.”

Original article at http://www.americanpatriotdaily.com/latest/loretta-lynch-shocking-role-setting-up-coup-against-trump

But it is not just the shadow government concerns at issue, it also enables the deep state that seems perpetually plotting against Trump. We have a real problem there.

It’s strange(not) that information was a rare commodity in the Obama adminstration. Now they spread information everywhere, leaks abound. No leaks and whistle blowers under Obama. Now, with their loyal allies in the media, they’ve become the angry yet powerful and permanent opposition. That is why the leaks need serious investigation.

All this information flowing, but yet we still do not even know the whereabouts of Obama during the Benghazi attack. How’s that?

Realted: https://www.americanpatriotdaily.com/latest/investigation-bring-down-obamas-shadow-government/

Brennan no saint has dirty hands

Report: Muslim Sympathizers at CIA Behind Trump Leaks

Obama loyalists still at CIA fuel radical Islam
Jerome R. Corsi | Infowars.com – February 16, 2017 | Infowars

WASHINGTON, D.C. – It’s time to “drain the swamp” at the CIA, as former CIA Director John Brennan, a clear Muslim sympathizer, packed the agency with Obama loyalists determined to bring down the Trump administration.

Looking for anti-Trump leakers, President Trump needs to be as concerned about the CIA as the NSA.

Few remember that it was John Brennan’s private security company that was responsible for the breach of State Department files which sanitized the passport records (still never seen by the public) of presidential candidate and then-Sen. Barack Obama prior to the 2008 presidential election.

On March 21, two unnamed contract employees for the State Dept. and a third were disciplined for breaching Obama’s passport files. Two were found to be employees for Stanley, Inc., a security firm based in Arlington, Virginia, that was headed by former CIA agent John Brennan, who was then serving as an advisor on intelligence and foreign policy to Sen. Obama’s presidential campaign.

Brennan was an undergraduate at the American University in Cairo in the 1970s, where he studied Arabic. In 1976, he voted in the presidential election for Communist Party USA candidate Gus Hall. He speaks Arabic fluently, having served in the CIA as station chief in Saudi Arabia.

On Feb. 13, 2010, as President Obama’s chief counterterrorism advisor in the White House, Brennan hosted a public forum, co-hosted by the White House Office of Public Engagement and the Islamic Center at New York University, where he quoted a lengthy statement in Arabic which he didn’t translate for his English-speaking audience.

More: http://www.infowars.com/report-muslim-sympathizers-at-cia-behind-trump-leaks/

Darkness can’t understand the light

As the Inauguration came and went, sliding into the sunset, the media took to their standard talking points. (now as old as some redwoods in CA) “Dark.”

So they wasted no time applying their favorite term to Trump’s inaugural address, “dark”. I thought it rather uplifting and encouraging myself. Well, what does it matter what most people thought of his speech, while liberals scramble to define it? Even their adjectives are old — as old as darkness itself.

All of a sudden everything is dark. All of a sudden it is a divided nation. What has Obama done for a divided nation? He caused it then ran off the stage, only to crawl back on as the nations Chief Critic. His self-serving lectures only added to the division. Divided yes.

As the song says, “Stop Draggin’ My Heart Around.”

Baby, you keep knocking on my front door
Same old line you used to use before

But the left has it exactly the other way around. Darkness is their cause.

How about that darkness?

John 1:4- (KJ21)4 “In Him was life, and that life was the Light of men. 5 And the Light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.”

Is it any wonder we have division in the world?

John 3:1 “9And this is the verdict: The Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness more than light, because their deeds were evil.”

Job 24:13 “Others have been with those who rebel against the light; They do not want to know its ways Nor abide in its paths.”

Darkness does not comprehend, but dark is an epidemic on the left. What has been pretty dark is the last eight years of ignorance and failed leadership. It became a dark reality.

When anyone talks about Obama’s Presidency, we are called dark. Supreme irony.

And what’s been dark is the media. They did their best to paper over a dark reality. Media became a tool to justify that dark reality. And now they portray darkness everywhere.

RightRing | Bullright

Stranger than fiction, looks like a series

We have now entered that special place called the Twilight Zone.

I think we need a memory enhancement therapy for liberals Something needs to bring us back to reality.

The Whip for the minority in the House, Steny Hoyer, went to the floor ranting that everyone, every person in America will be negatively affected by a repeal of ACA/Obamacare. Everyone will be harmed! Read, absolutely no exceptions.

I guess he was not listening or paying attention to all those lies in the passing of ACA, when Obama declared if you like your plan you can keep it; if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. In fact, they promised it would not affect you if you had other care. Now we know it did. By design, everyone paid the price.

So Hoyer now declares every man, woman and child in this country will be impacted by the repealing of the Act. His emphasis on every person, no matter who, would be affected just broke the hypocrisy meter.He yelled “everyone” to the House floor.

If only they had thought of all those compounding, ‘every man,woman and child’-effects before.

No Russian love — the affair is over, flexibility has turned frigid.

The media now got a bad case of Russia-phobia. Who knew they could catch that, after all that flexibility awarded to Russia. For all the criticism MSM had for Trump over birtherism or other issues Trump took on as wild theories, they now see a Russian monster everywhere.

For all the talk of Obama about talking to our enemies, now the entire left says we should have nothing to do with Russia. I even wrote my concerns, for years, about dismissing Russia as irrelevant. Now they found a deep-seeded fear of anything to do with Russia.

CNN now gets the stupid award. A dossier surfaced about Trump. But where it came from and how it got there adds more questions to the mix. It is filled with sordid details about Trump. CNN credits itself with breaking the story, though refusing to publish the thing — which is not classified. So CNN runs a talkathon thing about the nature of the accusations without saying what they are.

Then Clapper comes out in an official statement to say the dossier was not a product of our intelligence community. Ya think? It seems McCain had gotten a copy of the info earlier and took it to the FBI. Then in the high profile briefings that were occurring, they bundled the information as an addendum giving it to POTUS, the VP and Trump and Pence. Now that seemed to add more legitimacy to it because they handled it. Hence Clappers’ not-ours disclaimer. Some members of Congress were also briefed on it.

CNN is left with egg on its face because they wanted credit for not releasing or publishing the report, but yet takes credit for breaking the story. Buzz Feed did publish it, which caused CNN to blame them. Then Kellyane Conway goes on CNN to be bashed for blaming CNN as part of the public release. CNN denied it. CNN’s Carl Bernstein called Conway a propaganda minister.

Wolf Blitzer, the following day, said CNN did “very precise reporting on our part”. CNN said they stand on their story. And two days later, they are still continuing their “story”.

Meantime, Trump has a press conference and CNN disrupts the whole thing trying to ask Trump a question on the unsubstantiated “story.” He called them fake news refusing to take their question regarding their story they broke while not publishing the report. How exactly do you break a story on a report without divulging the report. It wasn’t classified.

At least other media did criticize publishing it. Since it was published, CNN jumped to take credit for the story. Er until Kellanne Conway came on when they refused credit for the story. Got it? CNN actually calls itself legitimate top news organization.

So the Fourth Estate is now morphing into a fifth column.

Now news breaks that the IG will investigate the FBI and Comey’s statements on the Clinton server investigation. Dems applaud it. However, much like the failed recount rollout, where does it stop…. and what might simple inquiry reveal about Democrats? Careful, it could be inconvenient time. What else will we learn? (Blame Russians)

Of course Dems see this as a way to investigate the election, whatever the IG says. They are not done politicizing things yet. And they’ll want full breakout investigations into Russia conection. Robby Mook accused Trump of treason. No rhetoric shortage. But investigating all that is only part of the story. We should have an investigation into media’s role in the election too.

Libs, thanks, you made a complete mockery of our process any way you could.

Confirmation hearings…hashtag Russia. Nearly every nominee was plastered with questions about Russia. In the Sec of State hearings for Rex Tillerson, they upped the ante to any threat around the world. They tried to get Tillerson to label all their countries of concern. Call Putin a “war criminal.”

Obama sends troops to Poland in a defensive posture to set the stage for Trump’s inauguration, while making a show of force to Moscow. Add that to the dialogue about Russia from a president who promised to be more flexible with Russia. Obama wants to create a confrontation between Trump and Putin.

Obama’s reset has gone to Red Scare.

Back to Tillerson having everything thrown at him all at the same time. No hearing on foreign policy would be complete without a hissy fit from Marco Rubio, and he did not disappoint. He attacked Tillerson for not labeling his list of countries. Tillerson said he would base it on the facts and information and Rubio balked. Then Rubio left the hearing to have an impromptu press conference about it, which stopped CNN from covering the hearing to cover the Rubio presser. So you can expect the Sunday shows to include Rubio, in dissent of Tillerson, and McCain for his tale with the Russia information.

It’s a little surreal to see and hear Carl Bernstein back fiercely attacking Trump after swimming in the Left’s sewer. Do they have any cred on ethics? Even better Robert Reich is back and attacking Trump. (old Leftists never go away) So you want to run for president or elected office, give up your business and your assets. It doesn’t end there.

The family members need to give up their business and livelihood too. Do we ever see that on the Left? John Kerry is married to Teresa Heinz, one of the richest women in the world. With her foundations and influence, and these people want to look at Rex Tillerson’s ranch and financial records of his family. And we know what Hillary did, and got away with.

Not to be too liberal, they bring on Richard Painter, ethics guru under GW Bush, to rail almost daily against Trump on ethics. And they sure use him. According to Painter, he has to sell of everything he has, screw the kids, and lock all his money away. That’s paraphrasing it but that’s the simple view. If he wants to be president, he can’t own anything. So we have the full spectrum of problems from everywhere. It’s a minefield. Cut….

 

Yes, we have entered the Twilight Zone: that special place where all laws seem fungible and meaningless, especially if you are in disagreement with “unpopular” power. But a place where you make one undesired move and all the elite ethics police are all over you, if you support it. Four years ago, none of this mattered at all. Now ethics governs everything, except the corrupt. You’ve got a one way ticket. Enjoy the ride.

Update: I think I found a name for their new series, “Days of Our Pathetic Lives.”

RightRing | Bullright

Little people’s info doesn’t matter

This is to all the people who have had their personal information hacked, stolen, pilfered or used by foreign state hackers. My sympathies to you. (including anyone who worked for the federal government.) You’ve been used and abused in more than one way.

Now we know the real truth. Your privacy, security and personal information mean nothing to Obama’s administration or even Congress. Let’s be honest, you are not Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, or the DNC. Your shit doesn’t matter — only theirs does.

They proved this with the hacking narrative they and the media have elevated to the top national security issue. Obama called for an investigation of Russia on the election.

When did they call for an investigation, let alone consequences, for those who did the hacking of all that government and personal information? Where is that national debate and outrage? Where is all the media coverage about it? Where are the demands to do something? They didn’t want to acknowledge the story or comment on it when the hacks happened. Where is the CIA and FBI reports, and 17 intelligence agencies? — MIA

RightRing | Bullright

Jarrett continues the Scandal-Free lie

From the you’ve got to be kidding section of fake news.

Valerie Jarrett: Obama’s White House Has Been Scandal-Free

Breitbart via NYP

The president prides himself on the fact that his administration hasn’t had a scandal and he hasn’t done something to embarrass himself.

Jarrett said of both the Obamas, “I think that they behave as the people who they are. What you see in public is the same thing I see in private. Do they feel responsibility because they’re historic figures? Yes, they do. But I don’t think it has made them be different than who they are. The president prides himself on the fact that his administration hasn’t had a scandal and he hasn’t done something to embarrass himself. That is not because he is being someone other that who he is. That’s who he is. That is who they are. And that is what really resonates with the American people.”

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/01/02/valerie-jarrett-obamas-white-house-has-been-scandal-free/

What really resonates with the American people:

The manure is really getting deep. The king of scandal, next to the Clintons, has not a modicum o of honesty. The fruits of the Obamas don’t lie — but they sure do. From Benghazi to the “not a smidgen of corruption” IRS, to his DOJ scandals. Legacy of lies.

Obama has politicized every department, including intelligence. It would be impossible to even get a clear audit on it all, since his administration was so corrupted. If these were not scandals, then why did they spend so much time trying to blame Republicans for it?

They elevated “racism” to their excuse de jure for everything.

What was not a scandal in his administration starting with the stimulus and his signature Obamacare (lying) bill, to EPA and election meddling around the world? He went MIA on the second 9/11 terrorist attack in Benghazi. He promised Russia more “flexibility after my last election.” Putin collected. Even worse, Obama was never held accountable for any of his scandals. (that’s what she should have said, never accountable.)

shove-it-tour

America loves a good fiction story.

Dear Jeh Johnson

You bitch and moan about the Russian hacking threat while saying nothing about countless death threats to electors around the country. Or all the assassination threats aimed at Trump, or the hyperbolic fake stories on Islamophobia, or the cop-hating agenda. Very selective outrage.

Jeh, you’re colder and more calculated than a Russian bear. Who needs a Russian threat when we got you? There’s a bear in the woods alright, closer to home than we’re told.

RightRing | Bullright

Comey turning Explainer-in-Chief?

Sticking to news you wish was fake and the inauguration, the Comey factor is back. Just a cameraman short of a reality show in Washington, Comey weighs a public explanation for his actions during the campaign. Then a generous side-order of Clintons’ explanations.

Add some gasoline to that fire, why don’t you? Democrats are already furious with Comey, claiming he caused them to lose along with the Russian hacking. That is a wild conspiracy: the FBI and Russians in tandem took Hillary down. Does that mean we should be grateful to them both for the election results? I think so.

The Comey explainer would be an inaugural fiasco

Ed Morrissey | December 21, 2016 | Hot Air

Which Inauguration Day event tickets will be tougher to get? An official President Donald J. Trump Ball, or an excruciating exercise in which James Comey tries to “prove” he wasn’t acting in a partisan manner? The latter might hold more promise for history, actually:

/…

Certainly Comey can step through his actions and demonstrate how he wanted to be completely transparent no matter what action he was taking, and that’s at least defensible. His July statement recommending no action on Hillary Clinton took place in the context of a very public investigation, and the FBI faced accusations of partisanship no matter what decision was reached. The only option Comey really had was to offer a thorough public explanation of the conclusion the FBI reached.

http://beta.hotair.com/archives/2016/12/21/new-event-on-the-inauguration-schedule-the-comey-explainer/

Comey seems to be considering it. That would just further ignite all the Left’s conspiracies. Bad enough what Comey did, it only adds more bricks in Hillary’s wall of blame.

More stupidity from Bill and Hillary

On the day of the electoral college vote, Bill Clinton explained their loss: Hillary just could not overcome “the Russians and the FBI deal.” Here comes the victim card.

She could not prevail against them.

CBS

“I’ve never cast a vote I was prouder of,” [Bill] Clinton told reporters after voting for Hillary Clinton in Albany, New York on Monday as one of the state’s Democratic electors. [Bill Clinton continued:]

“You know, I’ve watched her work for two years. I watched her battle through that bogus email deal, be vindicated at the end when Secretary Powell came out. She fought through that. She fought through everything. And she prevailed against it all but at the end we had the Russians and the FBI deal, and she couldn’t prevail against them,” he said. “She did everything else and still won by 2.8 million votes.”

Start with “bogus email deal”. Considering it grew out of the Benghazi investigation, which was her doing, it was her own server “deal.” She had it for four years and never stopped it. Then she said it was a mistake — one that lasted four long years, meanwhile 4 Americans were killed in a terrorist attack. But nothing bogus about it all.

Yet Hillary prevailed? Well, if you mean she beat being indicted. Even though America lost, big time, and it put our government at risk. But who cares about that? “She prevailed.” Then Colin Powell vindicated her? No he didn’t.

Hillary told her donors:

“He [Putin] is determined to score a point against me which he did. But also undermine our democracy.”

That would make Putin stronger than our democracy. Hillary gave him the propaganda win, along with validating his election influence. Except that Hillary’s campaign were the ones actually playing the Russian card on Trump 24/7 — with a big assist from media .

Another explanation from Comey for his actions?
Well, what difference at this point does it make?

What’s next, an official independent investigation into why Hillary lost? They might as well start the next election on inauguration day. “Viva la 20, stupid.”

The Left: hypocrisy is thy name

I always stand prepared to be outraged at the depth of hypocrisy on the left. Then I am not really. But this issue is deeper than that. I’ve come to believe there are two kinds of hypocrisy at work. There is a standard blatant hypocrisy and then there is a more sinister, fundamental hypocrisy. The latter is what I see more and more of.

The election highlighted it. During the debates before the election, there were all the calls of Trump to accept the results of the election. All those now discredited polls had showed Trump losing and Hillary the unchallenged winner. It was obvious they said. Media had pointed out daily that there was no chance for Trump to win. They asserted that the election was not based on a popular vote, whether you like it or not, but on the electoral system. That system favors Clinton, they said. They told us it was all about getting over 270 in the electoral college.Again, that would put Hillary in the White House and makes it albeit impossible for Trump to meet that daunting uphill task.

Then there was Larry Sabato going from network to network telling us there really was no way for Trump to win. He would not say zero chance but he gave him very little chance. There were all those polls, which never seem to put Hillary down by much. They mostly had her with around a six point lead in states. Closer to election it was 3 or 4 points. (I know I am generalizing but it doesn’t matter — they gave her a heavy advantage)

So everywhere they could, they were looking for concessions from Trump. “Will you accept the results of election” system? Trump just refused to play their submission game. Hillary even said she was outraged saying that, for the first time in history, we have someone unwilling to say he would accept the results. At the time, I thought it would be ironic if he won and Dems refused to accept the results. But they kept repeating it was Trump who would not accept results and the rules, as they were laid out.

Then we had the election and people were surprised. First, surprised by the results; then by the denial and refusal to accept the results as they happened. Media did report it because they really had no choice. When AP declared the winner, they could not disagree. But almost immediately it became about the popular vote.

Democrats said we don’t know the final tally of the popular vote, and it went from there. They became obsessed with the popular vote count. Before the election, they said that regardless of popular vote count the results would be determined by the electoral college. So much for that.

Now that we have the results, this fits with all their other hypocrisy. They really don’t care about that; it doesn’t bother them. However, when you notice how rooted hypocrisy is in their DNA, you see the bigger problem. It is who they are, say one thing do another.

They make a big issue about something — digging in their heels — until it is inconvenient for them to hold that position. Then they turn on a dime to support the opposite position. That’s just the way it is with the left. They are always prepared to be hypocrites because it doesn’t matter to them. Their blatant hypocrisy means nothing to them because it is a fundamental tenant of their ideology, politics rules to the left. They will do and say anything to justify their political position at the time. (subject to revision)

This is the same type of fundamental hypocrisy we see in their foreign policy positioning. They were against warring mentality. Democrats stood for Libyan intervention and then Benghazi, right up to the minute they had to take responsibility for it. Then they were AWOL about it.

All along, Democrats played with the notion of Russian involvement and sorted ties to Russia. We heard these claims from everywhere. Hillary supporter. and confident, Mike Morell took to the editorial page calling Trump an unwitting agent of the Russia federation. Charges were fierce. They even accused Trump of encouraging espionage.

“It’s pretty clear you won’t admit that the Russians have engaged in cyberattacks against the United States of America, that you encouraged espionage against our people, that you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do, and that you continue to get help from him, because he has a very clear favorite in this race,” Clinton said to Trump at the third presidential debate in October. — Politifact

Putin had also blamed Hillary for intervening in their election and stirring dissent afterward, a subject completely lost in the media. Yet Obama and his cohorts had been dabbling in other countries’ elections throughout both his terms, even in Israeli.

They went all-in behind the rise of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. Has Obama even visited Egypt since the coupe stabilized the situation? No, sort of odd considering he started out his apology tour with a Cairo speech.

Here starts the big story: blame Russia for the election results. Which is really funny because Dems claim Russians’ objective was to influence the election and undermine the integrity of our system. Mission accomplished. Democrats certify that Russia did influence the outcome, despite lack of proof. Since the election is over, given the results, Dems claim our electoral college system is not so great. Undermine the integrity of our election? Mission accomplished. How many ways can one challenge an election?

The very thing Dems accused Russia of trying to do, they willingly did themselves. No one can undermine our process as well as Democrats, when they set their minds to it. They embarked on a recount program and questioned the legitimacy of the electoral college. They tried to undermine that system by influencing the electorates, to get them to switch allegiance from Trump.

But Obama previously mocked the Russian geopolitical threat. Obama promised Russia and Putin he would be more “flexible” after his last election. Putin is still collecting.

If all Russia was trying to do was undermine the integrity of the process, then count Democrats in for that. But earlier they stood on the platform of integrity, declaring our example to the world of peaceful power transfer and our long established history of accepting election results — whether we like them or not. Scratch that!

First NYT reported:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said on Friday that despite Russian attempts to undermine the presidential election, it has concluded that the results “accurately reflect the will of the American people.”

The statement came as liberal opponents of Donald J. Trump, some citing fears of vote hacking, are seeking recounts in three states — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — where his margin of victory was extremely thin.

In its statement, the administration said, “The Kremlin probably expected that publicity surrounding the disclosures that followed the Russian government-directed compromises of emails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations, would raise questions about the integrity of the election process that could have undermined the legitimacy of the president-elect.”

But wait, Democrats were all about undermining the legitimacy of Trump even as a candidate. It was a personal thing to Obama, who declared Trump was unqualified from the presidential podium. Hillary and her operatives questioned Trump on nuclear codes.

“Nevertheless, we stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people,” it added.

They “stand behind the results?” Well, that is until they don’t. Democrats started a hashtag #AuditTheVote. Which is it, they stand behind the resuts or they don’t?

Independent Journal Review

Obama’s counterterrorism and homeland security adviser Lisa Monaco told reporters on Friday:

“We may have crossed into a new threshold and it is incumbent upon us to take stock of that, to review, to conduct some after-action, to understand what has happened and to impart some lessons learned.”

Added White House spokesman Eric Schultz at the daily press briefing:

“This will be a review that is both broad and deep at the same time.”

“Obviously, you can imagine a report like this is gonna contain highly, you know, sensitive and even classified information….[We’ll] make public as much as we can.”

So now they aren’t sure they will disclose the results. But isn’t doing an investigation an attempt to reassure the public and restore credibility in our system? Yet they let it be known, beforehand, that they are going to selectively report the results. Uh?

First Obama had claimed that he did not want to get involved in presidential election politics. Now he goes all in to investigate presidential election, questioning foreign involvement in our election process. See how this Hypocrisy thing works? First Obama lectured, and mocked, Trump on questioning our rigged system or the outcome of our election as ridiculous. Now he is the chief tin-foil hat in the process questioning the integrity of our election.

But then this is the same president who is claiming his administration is scandal free, too. I guess there is time enough to start one more scandal over the results of the election.

Funny how before the election, who cared? But we had how many hackings all over our government. One report is anyone who ever worked in government has had their personal information stolen. Did we hear Obama’s outrage about that? How about Democrats’ outrage calling for us to do something about it? We do know nothing stopped Obama, who could have taken action on any one of these hacks. But yet, he hasn’t. (at least that we know of, and we probably would know if they did)

Obama now tees up a Russia conflict for Trump, when he would do nothing on cyber warfare before. And he now warns Trump about the immediate “near term” North Korea threat. So all problems become elevated to red alert when Trump is sworn in. Media to follow suite. But hypocrisy? — Not a problem.

RightRing | Bullright

NYT Dismissing Hillary’s Scandal Palooza

The old, outdated Thomas Friedmanin NY Times was making a sales pitch to Trump people. (or was he saying that to try to attract some readers?) Here’s his buildup:

NYT Opinion

This is my last column until after the election, so I’d like to address the people least likely to read it: Donald Trump voters. Who knows? …/

Yes, Hillary Clinton is a flawed leader — but in the way so many presidents were. We know her flaws: She has a weakness for secrecy, occasionally fudges truths, has fawning aides and a husband who lacks discipline when it comes to moneymaking and women. But she is not indecent, and that is an important distinction. And she’s studious, has sought out people of substance on every issue and has taken the job of running for president seriously.

Read:http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/opinion/donald-trump-voters-just-hear-me-out.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

So he called Trump indecent. You know, indecent trumps corruption for a disqualifier. The other problem is you cannot call Hillary a leader. She has lead nothing, except the path to corruption. She has actually taken responsibility for nothing, though she claimed to. And her Legacy of Lies just doesn’t stop – Bosnia to Benghazi to servers in her basement.

She is an expert at deleting things and coverups, if that is a prerequisite for president. How can anyone marginalize and minimize Hillary’s faults and corruption?

America, turn the page

Hearing Democrats stand on the tired old talking points is like the smell of pissing on a fire. You don’t want to be downwind. They just keep repeating their failures to cheers.

Is moving away from their recent scandal the only kind of ‘move on’ Democrats understand? Yes it is.

It’s time to remove this cancer from our politics and public office. Obama has politicized every department in government. He made dysfunction the norm and injustice the cause celeb. All delivered on a steaming hot shit platter to us with a message that we cannot refuse to accept it. Now he says: please, have more…you’ll love it.

How about a change? I was flabbergasted to hear Hillary say she would be real change. You cannot believe anything she promises but she has the gall to call herself change.

Hillary calls a rogue server, pay to play, lying, Benghazi, failure and never ending coverups “strong leadership.” Then she lectures us about healing and division. Where’s she get the chutzpah?

Here’s to the forgotten voter.

RightRing | Bullright

The Swamp, Hillary, Creatures, Corruption, Oh My

Obama hits the trail for Hillary. A lot has happened in 8 years and a lot hasn’t happened. The campaign difference between then and now is stark and Obama is caught in his hypocrisy. “Come on, man!”… as Obama repeats in his mocking way.

How can Hillary have been so wrong in 08 be so right for president today? Come on, man. So after setting up a server to avoid the public, those pesky citizens, and exploiting the office in a pay to play scheme never before seen, Hillary is suddenly ready for the White House. In fact, Obama says she is the most qualified person ever. So he was wrong then, and that was before her most recent scandals: servergate, pay to play and Benghazi.

Draining the Swamp is a great metaphor for Washington. Hillary is its ultimate poster child. Her sole identity is the Queen of the Swamp and the greatest single creature in it. Hillary is the metaphor for the Swamp metaphor. According to their rules for radicals, the Aliskyites’ goal is to personalize the issue. And Hillary Clinton personalizes the Swamp perfectly. She is the Swamp creature. Hillary is the bin Laden of the Swamp.

Obama said premiums are only going up for a handful of people who are not subsidized by government, so apparently it is a non-problem. Right, who cares about people that are not subsidized? I guess that was never a concern for Obamacare. Gruber admitted that they lied to get it passed. What happened was a lot of people wrongly believed that Obamacare would not affect them or their own plans. So all Obama had to do was fool deceive enough people that it would not affect them. Who cared about the truth volcano to follow?

Forget about all the real national security threats, the greatest national threat besides Obama is now Hillary Clinton. We cannot Drain the Swamp if we don’t keep Hillary out of the White House.

Yet Obama says Hillary Clinton is just picture perfect for the job, and she’ll focus on protecting kids and families. That is really not just a little green algae in the water.

Come on, man.

RightRing | Bullright

What Difference At This Point Does It Make? — Plenty and she’s not done

Below are two informative videos. First one is the abbreviated biography background on Huma Abedin. The bottom one is like a dossier of Hillary’s scandalous record: from cattle futures to her Senate, to her term as Secretary of State. Scandal should be the Queen of Corruption’s middle name. Consider the first only a primer, and a partner in crime.

Any Senate campaign that is kicked off by Peter Paul and Hsu is probably not going in the right direction. From there it only got worse. She was brought in front of the ethics committee on various things. She then took her national bid for president in 2008 in much the same spirit. Then on to scheming her server to avoid FOIA as Secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton is running on her record of running from her record.

Think up a scandal and it’s probably in her dossier because that’s just how Hillary rolls.

Even William Safire, in his 1996 “Blizzard of Lies” essay in NY Times, branded Hillary Clinton a “congenital liar”. Now she is running on her record of “fighting for kids” and families as the heart of her focus. Give me a break. As Bill Clinton said, “this whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.” Or as Hillary could admit — if she actually had a shred of conscience — that she “requires the willing suspension of disbelief.”

As Safire put it in ’96:

“Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar.

Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.”

Does all that sound familiar? Pack on top of Safire’s list everything she has done since, adding a mountain of new lies to the old. How about pulling 900 FBI files on her enemies for an appetizer? Smell that abusive power. It eventually comes to her real record, even if you could put aside her trail of scandals, which basically leads to a long Legacy of Lies.

H/T to see Political Insider

Clinton’s web of investigation problems

What a tangled web she weaves, when at first she practiced to deceive. Hillary has had a few encounters with reality along her campaign trail in the last year and half. But at every one she took the road not traveled to obfuscate it. Then she blamed others for her own scandalous behavior. Yet she always says she is claiming responsibility. Lie.

She wants to create the illusion of accountability.

Hillary claims she apologized for the server mishap. Well, she said it was a mistake. A four year long, two-year investigative one. That didn’t stop or curtail her lying about it. The people found out just weeks before the Democrat convention that she was not being charged for anything. Surprise!

June 9, 2016

BREAKING: After Endorsing Clinton, Obama Admin Calls FBI’s Email Investigation ‘Criminal’

The Politistick [excerpt]

[Josh earnest said] “They don’t have political jobs. They have career jobs as law enforcement officers and as prosecutors and investigators. That’s what their responsibility is. And that’s why the President when discussing this issue in each stage has reiterated his commitment to this principle that any criminal investigation should be conducted independent of any sort of political interference and that people should be treated the same way before the law regardless of their political influence, regardless of their political party, regardless of their political stature and regardless of what political figure has endorsed them.

Clinton has worked to downplay the seriousness of the investigations since the earliest days of questions concerning allegations that she maintained the email account in order to obscure shady dealings with foreign nationals to sell them influence in exchange for contributions that would help finance her inevitable bid for the presidency.

However, Clinton has augmented her denial efforts in recent weeks after the release of a damning Inspector General (IG) report that maintains that Clinton did, in fact, break federal law in refusing to “comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act.“

In essence, the report clarifies that whatever the DOJ decides to do, the evidence shows unambiguously that Clinton had pledged to conduct State Department business in accordance with the department’s policies for protecting sensitive materials and that she failed to do so thousands of times.

In this matter, intent is irrelevant. Even if we accept that it was a supposed mistake, the end result is the same: she violated the law and has continually insisted that she did not, in fact, violate the law. Her actions were not merely violations of the Federal Records Act, but also of the Espionage Act’s 18 USC 793, known by many as the “gross negligence” statute.

See: http://politistick.com/breaking-endorsing-clinton-obama-admin-calls-fbis-email-investigation-criminal/#

There we have Obama defending that investigations should move forward irregardless of politics, and not be swayed by politics, as professionals.

Federal Records Act — this is something that apparently seems to be lost on Democrats and many in MSM.

What are records?

Records include all books, papers, maps, photographs, machine-readable materials, or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by an agency of the United States Government under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of the Government or because of the informational value of the data in them (44 U.S.C. 3301).

44 U.S. Code § 3101 – Records management by agency heads; general duties

The head of each Federal agency shall make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency’s activities.
(Pub. L. 90–620, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1297.)

44 U.S. Code § 3301 – Definition of records

a) Records Defined.—

(1)In general.—As used in this chapter, the term “records”—

(A) includes all recorded information, regardless of form or characteristics, made or received by a Federal agency under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of the United States Government or because of the informational value of data in them; and
(B) does not include—
(i) library and museum material made or acquired and preserved solely for reference or exhibition purposes; or
(ii) duplicate copies of records preserved only for convenience.

(2)Recorded information defined.—

For purposes of paragraph (1), the term “recorded information” includes all traditional forms of records, regardless of physical form or characteristics, including information created, manipulated, communicated, or stored in digital or electronic form.

Then further guidelines and description. And it does include email and has for years.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Remember the famous Nixon quote?

People have got to know whether or not their president is a crook.”

And the people do know in Hillary Clinton’s case. She is a crook. Nixon resigned, Hillary Clinton is running for president.

H/T ref: National Review column

Newt on the Fundation case

On a The Laura Ingraham Show, Newt Gingrich said:

“[Lifezette] The Clintons run what is in effect the equivalent of organized crime,” [Gingrich] said. “They had methodically figured out every way to fleece people. They did so at the expense of the people of Haiti. They did so at the expense of poor people everywhere.”

“It is astonishing to me that the level of corruption is so deep that neither the FBI nor the IRS nor anyone has taken apart this whole operation,” [Newt] said. “The more we learn from WikiLeaks, the clearer it is that these people engaged in routine, illegal behavior for personal enrichment. ”

Read More: http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/gingrich-clinton-foundation-equivalent-organized-crime/

Good for Newt stating the obvious. Why not call the Clintons’ Cosa Nostra what it is?

Personal enrichment is the name of the game. Cha ching. I am so done questioning why Hillary does what she does. It’s enough to know this is just the way she is. That is what we have to expect if she gets into the Oval Office. What ways could she abuse more power? I don’t know if I can count them all.

CNN, Wolf Blitzer want Trump to tone down attacks on the press

Here’s Wolf Blitzer, who says he is on a steering committee and he believes in the Freedom of the press. Fine Wolf, but we the people believe very much in free speech. That includes the right to call you out for your blatant bias.

I have an idea. Maybe if you weren’t so bias, and colluding with political allies the way you’ve been, then you might receive different treatment. Dial that in Wolf.

Wolf Blitzer pleads with Trump’s campaign manager to dial back attacks on reporters

By Christina Manduley, CNN

Washington (CNN)CNN’s Wolf Blitzer pleaded Tuesday with Donald Trump’s campaign manager for her to ask the GOP nominee to dial back his harassment against the media, saying it endangers reporters.

Kellyanne Conway responded by saying that part of the responsibility lies with reporters who tweet “negative” against Trump.

Throughout his campaign, Trump has lashed out at the media during his rallies, calling reporters a variety of insults including “dishonest,” “sick,” and “corrupt.”

More: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/26/politics/wolf-blitzer-donald-trump-kellyanne-conway/

Now let’s talk about all the reporters taking to the front pages to attack Trump and his supporters too — that’s us. And the closer it gets to election the worse. Just look at all the things he’s been called and the fear mongering about him. Oh Wolf calls that business as usual, and that’s to be expected. Well, Wolfy, I hope you get used to it.

The problem is that this time there is finally someone willing to fire back and Wolf doesn’t like it. Are we now like other countries where press is just another arm of the political power, and where it does the handiwork for the power brokers? It looks like it is.

Notice how Wolf calls criticism “attacks” on the press. But their bias and selective editorial control delivers attacks on Trump and the people every day. They even nuclearized the threat adding Russia and the nuclear arsenal into the mix.

Since people are now protesting CNN and others by saying “CNN sucks,” they don’t like the idea of protesting or our freedom of speech anymore. But they are all for the protestors of BLM and others in what media labels “mostly peaceful protests,” even when they end in burning property or violence. Just like they treated Tea Party protests, painting them all as sccary, angry, crazies — with liberals like the SPLC sounding terrorist warnings.

Now that Trump is in their sights, the same thing applies to him and his supporters. But mainstream media’s problem is people criticizing the media. That’s so not fair!

MSNBC on Rigged Elections

From the oddest source on the topic, in MSM, even Morning Joe attacks phony media hype about Trump’s reference to rigged elections. What a collection of truth.

Well, and they didn’t even mention the Al Franken race that went on for how long? (I think he gets some kind of record)

MSNBC for one said it. They decided right away they didn’t want to die on that lie.

H/T to Conservative Tribune

Comey guarded, then flushed the toilet

FBI, DOJ roiled by Comey, Lynch decision to let Clinton slide by on emails, says insider

The decision to let Hillary Clinton off the hook for mishandling classified information has roiled the FBI and Department of Justice, with one person closely involved in the year-long probe telling FoxNews.com that career agents and attorneys on the case unanimously believed the Democratic presidential nominee should have been charged.

The source, who spoke to FoxNews.com on the condition of anonymity, said FBI Director James Comey’s dramatic July 5 announcement that he would not recommend to the Attorney General’s office that the former secretary of state be charged left members of the investigative team dismayed and disgusted. More than 100 FBI agents and analysts worked around the clock with six attorneys from the DOJ’s National Security Division, Counter Espionage Section, to investigate the case.

Read more http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/13/fbi-doj-roiled-by-comey-lynch-decision-to-let-clinton-slide-by-on-emails-says-insider.html

The FBI investigators all thought, unanimously, that her security clearance should have been yanked. Thanks, Comey — the ballyhooed ambassador of integrity — you torched FBI’s cred too.

Should’ve, would’ve, could’ve… America lost. Snake eyes.
Take your parlor game with you.