Just freaking incredible.
Okay, now that is about right, not so bad.
Say what? Welcome to that strange place that Twilight Zone never found.
Just freaking incredible.
Okay, now that is about right, not so bad.
Say what? Welcome to that strange place that Twilight Zone never found.
It has come down to the wire and now there are several (Republican) congressmen calling for Sessions to step down. Tough times demand tough measures.
It is clear that the recusal has really hurt the administration. But aside from that, I know exactly what voters did not vote for and want. That is for the Deep State to run the DOJ and put everything on auto-pilot under the DOJ. That is just what we have – a DODS.
Now we have lost a year. It is great they are picking up the investigation on the Clinton Foundation, Uranium One, and Hillary Clinton scandals. But it is a little late.
We had the DOJ politicized and radicalized in Obama’s term. We had the FBI politicized under Obama. And Sessions, or anyone else for that matter, has done precious little to end or fix that. The Russia witch hunt has been a cover up for all the Obama era corruption.
I like Sessions but he neutered himself and the DOJ. And like Trump’s first year in office, we cannot get it back. Sessions let the hacks and Deep State have their way, He isn’t one who can fix it now. Sad day. Adios Sessions.
Right Ring | Bullright
Oh, it’s another little helpful warning from Obama’s bully police. Something to take very seriously, har har.
Obama, who was interviewed by Prince Harry for the BBC, did not mention Trump by name, though his comments appeared to be directed at Trump who frequently takes to Twitter to express himself.
“One of the dangers of the Internet is that people can have entirely different realities,” Obama said. “They can be cocooned in information that reinforces their current biases.”
“The question has to do with how do we harness this technology in a way that allows a multiplicity of voices, allows a diversity of views, but doesn’t lead to a Balkanization of society and allows ways of finding common ground.”
Mr. Irresponsibility himself lectures us. I don’t know about everybody else, but I’m sick of his lectures.
From the guy who it turns out did absolutely nothing in response to all the dangers on social media and threats he was supposedly seeing.
A serious WaPo story had the rundown of the timeline where Obama didn’t seem to care much about any of that.
Closer to home for Americans, Russian government trolls in 2012 went after a U.S. ambassador for the first time on social media, inundating his Twitter account with threats.
But for U.S. officials, the real wake-up call came in early 2014 when the Russians annexed Crimea and backed separatists in eastern Ukraine. An intercepted Russian military intelligence report dated February 2014 documented how Moscow created fake personas to spread disinformation on social media to buttress its broader military campaign.
Imagine this lecture coming from the guy who never got any real opposition on anything? The guy who used social media as his personal playground for all his drooling sycophants to dominate the airwaves. The Obama that couldn’t get him enough FB attention — with his hordes of fake followers on social media. Sickening to listen to this crap he spews.
What about the dangers from what he did? The danger of his 20 trillion dollar debt? The danger of ignoring the largest crime-terrorist organization to get some phony deal with Iran? His web of deceit really has no ends.
We had 8 years of this threat-in-chief in the White House undermining government, weaponizing information and their politicization of every department. Now, he is worried about social media — very dangerous. Balkanization? Surely you are joking. That’s why he came out talking about dangers of our social media, to divert from his record.
And, by the way, all of those things well before Donald Trump ever appeared on the scene. Now all their fingers point to Trump. What hubris, deflection and deception. Now they need to have an investigation into Trump! Really, absurd.
In Obama’s second term, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach argued why Rice should be kept from Sec of State, but because of Rwanda.
“But what is not arguable is that she deserves to be denied the post for a different reason [than Benghazi] altogether: Rwanda. What emerges when taken together — Rice’s weak response in Benghazi, blaming the murder of four Americans on a stupid video, and her shameful lack of action in the Rwandan genocide — is a career diplomat of singular weakness, lacking the spine or muscularity to assert American moral influence in the world.
Rice was part of Bill Clinton’s National Security Team that in 1994 refused any involvement whatsoever in the Rwanda genocide, leaving more than 800,000 men, women, and children to be hacked to death by machete in the fastest genocide ever recorded.”
Both events argue against any noble-good notion, when she was involved in both.
Rice now writes in a NYT op-ed article: “Susan Rice: When America No Longer Is a Global Force for Good”
“President Trump’s National Security Strategy marks a dramatic departure from the plans of his Republican and Democratic predecessors, painting a dark, almost dystopian portrait of an “extraordinarily dangerous” world characterized by hostile states and lurking threats. There is scant mention of America’s unrivaled political, military, technological and economic strength, or the opportunities to expand prosperity, freedom and security through principled leadership — the foundation of American foreign policy since World War II.
In Mr. Trump’s estimation, we live in a world where America wins only at others’ expense. There is no common good, no international community, no universal values, only American values. America is no longer “a global force for good,” as in President Obama’s last strategy, or a “shining city on a hill,” as in President Reagan’s vision. The new strategy enshrines a zero-sum mentality: “Protecting American interests requires that we compete continuously within and across these contests, which are being played out in regions around the world.” This is the hallmark of Mr. Trump’s nationalistic, black-and-white “America First” strategy.”#
America is no longer “a global force for good,” as in President Obama’s last strategy. So she claims Obama’s strategy, or policy, was “a global force for good.” Fancy that when it was exactly the opposite in action. It consistently stood in the face of a good legacy.
The ME and their Muslim Brotherhood obsession, then the anti-Israel platform, the Benghazi debacle — with or without the gun running — botched with mistakes and denials from the beginning, the Syrian issue of mixed messages and disappearing red lines, Russian influence throughout, the bad Iranian deal at all costs to us, ignorance on N Korea, and ISIS sprouting an official Caliphate in Syria and Iraq, reactionary spiteful withdrawal from Iraq, depleting our military, politicizing military intell and rules of engagement, not enforcing laws here in this country and politicizing the DOJ and intelligence.
Add to it the radicalization of government at home, with a war on energy, and lies about current events that were impossible to ignore. (the media really tried their best) I won’t even get into the racism for lack of space.
So we’re to infer all that was part of a “global force for good. If it was, then I’d like to know what a global force of empowering evil would look like? So all the above were part of the force for good? But now she has the arrogance and audacity to call Trump basically a force for bad. Here fellow comrades like Rhodes and Pfeiffer were on social media calling for the obituaries of current leadership. I hate to rain on her parade — or march — but the last 8 years was no picnic or vacation from evil. In fact, it was awash in it and corruption. Yet hearing her call it a force for good is hilarious.
This week we confirmed that Obama’s administration was so eager to get an Iran deal at any cost that they stood down on actions against Hezbollah’s international crime and terrorism operation. Let’s forget the Uranium deal for the moment. Politicizing and weaponizing government made it a force for good?
Now that all the skeletons are falling out of the closets (there aren’t enough closets) she is pointing fingers at the Trump administration, like her comrades. That rapid, immediate withdrawal from Iraq set off a chain of events. At home, Obama was so worried about his scummy legacy that he couldn’t have events called terrorism.
But all of that was part of some “global force for good.” What’s her definition of good?
Then back up a moment. She also called Trump’s policies a zero sum game that requires everyone else lose in order for us to win. We haven’t seen anything like that. Trump hasn’t called for that. Actually, he holds that they are winning while we are winning. But contrast that with Obama where we constantly lost on the deals and the world, or others, always won. That was more the zero-sum game. We weren’t really meant to win in Obama’s view.
She then goes for “enshrining Mr. Trump’s harsh anti-immigration policies, from the border wall to ending family preferences and limiting refugee admissions.” Again, contrast that with Obama’s mixed signals about border control, catch and release, and unconstitutional DACA program, and opening us to external threats in wartime. Refugees that were at least partly created by his own policies of complicit ignorance.
The perpetual do-gooder also made a policy of ignoring Christian persecutions while favoring Muslim refugees. He could only point to one major accomplishment of getting Osama bin Laden, but allowed a caliphate to form and spread, referring to it as JV. Yet he didn’t really take on that JV squad. Instead, he simply said it was not Islamic. Imagine that, a caliphate that is not Islamic? Oh, he banned using accurate terms to describe that caliphate of terrorism.
Enough contradictions in there to show she is shoveling more bullshit? What’s worse is they know, but have a constant need to deceive, try to control the narrative and revise Obama’s entire legacy. The people didn’t see it his way either, which showed in the election. Again, argue against the results and legitimacy of the election. Now…. they are going to lecture us on being a do-gooder? How about people just do what is right, and forget this false do-good narrative? Although I used to think that doing the right thing was being a force for good!
Right Ring | Bullright
Some things defy words. So here is Exhibit A of the resistance – opposition operation. First, Eric Holder claims to represent the vast majority of Americans.
Then he goes all in on resist and sedition.
Since when does Eric Holder “speak on behalf of the vast majority of Americans”??? Who elected Holder? NO ONE! Not a single person went to a poll and voted for him, much less elected him.
Yet he is organizing calling for protests against a sitting president. Former AG calls for protests? Are these elitists or what? Who are the people that take marching orders from Eric Holder? Obamfiles are radicals, pure radicals.
A while back I was watching Tucker’s show on something about the Clintons and Hillary. Well, he ended with a disclaimer that he hoped this was the end of the Clintons and this would be his last reporting about her. He was sick of the Clintons. That is because she should just go away…. and presumably be forgotten.
Well, I took issue with that when he said it. I said no, we need to keep her alive in news and I, for one, don’t want to forget her and the damage she did. Same with Obama. We need to remember that horror, so that history does not repeat itself.
The real danger is we do forget what they did to this country. It must be memorialized, this poison to the root of our republic. And too, how it was all maliciously mishandled.
Fast forward to his latest show where he talked to Alan Dershowitz. If people remember, Alan has defended the Clinton legacy of crime to some extent. No need to investigate it all. But Carlson agreed with him in the end that we should not criminalize certain actions like emails etc. as a means of going after her or, to be fair, the Trump things.
Well, why should Clinton’s scandal get off the hook of accountability? It is the conduct and rule of law not the position of the person that is the problem. Carlson seemed to think we should just let it go, even though it continues. Just for the sake of ridding ourselves.
There are still thousands of Hillary’s records we haven’t gotten from the State Department. Huma Abedin carried out boxes of documents from State claiming they were personal. That is a lie, no doubt about it. Communications on Muslim relations and records of gifts received and/or to the Clinton Foundation. (some of these gifts can be very valuable) Government also has strict guidelines to deal with gifts.
But once again, she interrupts any proper process. And once again it is records. Hillary doesn’t have a great record on records. She can just whisk them away. She was planning on having all that sealed when she became president. She was always fighting transparency. Does Sandy Berger ring a bell?
Now Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch said that the DOJ is actually defending Hillary from transparency. What the hell is going on? Why does she need government to defend her? She and Obama seem to have enough defenders or operators in the Deep State.
So Tucker Carlson goes along with the liberals in suggesting it doesn’t matter anymore. Really? He just takes the bait.
But they can probe back years or decades with Trump in a Special Counsel investigation. And Lois Lerner also applied to have her records sealed. The whole damn cabal of characters needs investigated, along with Obama and his dep of injustice. Now is not the time to delete our memory.
I know exactly the right place for them. And it’s not just for weekend visits.
But let it go? I don’t think so. We let it go for way too long already.
Right Ring | Bullright
Obama running around the country warning about Nazi Germany is really rich. The guy has no shame or conscience. He hasn’t gone rogue, he’s been rotten from the start.
“The danger is growing complacent. We have to tend to this garden of democracy or else things could fall apart quickly.”
That’s what happened in Germany in the 1930s, which despite the democracy of the Weimar Republic and centuries of high-level cultural and scientific achievements, Adolf Hitler rose to dominate. “Sixty million people died, so, you’ve got to pay attention. And vote.”
Does he mean fall apart quickly like they did under Obama?
Sarah Huckabee Sanders was asked on Fox about Obamas remarks and said maybe he could reconsider, and hoped he might realize how distasteful those inflammatory comments were. No, Sarah, that is exactly why he said them. It is his intent to inflame. That’s his purpose. But retract them? No chance. He thought it was a home run.
With what Rev Wright has preached in Chicago, with Obama in the pew, that could be considered temperate. Anything in any way condemning America would be an easy par for the course.
Take his words “garden of democracy” though. I guess he hasn’t accepted that the Garden just chose its leader despite the Resistance, opposition from every corner. If democracy worked for him, I don’t know why he cannot accept it when it doesn’t go his way? He is just like Hillary, he can’t deal with the democratic results. He cannot take rejection.
That Garden doesn’t just take its cues from its office holders and the establishment. That is what unnerves him. We didn’t listen to his insidious threats or Hillary’s. We didn’t buy his nuclear fear mongering from the White House podium. It was just as rich when Obama declared that Trump was not fit or qualified for the office. He’s a hypocrite in search of a new word. Bombasticrite maybe?
Actually, Obama’s radicalized government was a threat to the people, Germany move on over. And we found it was a threat to the very democracy he used to create it. We were only lucky to pivot from it, though we have not recovered yet.
Then imagine the irony of him in Chicago saying his biggest regret was not getting gun control through. (He should lecture the gangs) Oh that sweet smell of arrogance.
Hey, I guess he had to sharpen his venomous rhetoric since Nancy Pelosi had already said ‘this is Armageddon.’
Pelosi said on the tax bill:
“It is the end of the world. The debate on health care is life/death. This is Armageddon.” […] [She then had another swig and came back to say] “The only reason it isn’t the end of the world is because America is a great country… and the greatness of America, and the fact that God is always with us is what gives us hope. But it’s very important for the people to know how adversely they will be affected by all of this.”
Well, it is a little hard to come back from Armageddon. I mean once you’re there…
That’s just the way it goes, one day you are in Armageddon and the next you are in the Weimar Republic with Hitler on the doorstep.
Right Ring | Bullright
By CNSNews.com Staff | December 9, 2017
California Gov. Jerry Brown, who favors the legalized killing of unborn children, told CBS’s “60 Minutes” that he does not believe President Donald Trump “has a fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God” based on the fact that Trump removed the United States from the Paris climate change agreement.
The “60 Minutes” episode will air tomorrow. On its website, CBS News reported this about it:
“Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. ‘That’s a preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that statement,” Brown said. “I don’t think President Trump has a fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads one to more humility… and this is such a reckless disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences that can be unleashed.’” [……./]
Well, since Jerry Brown is now a member of the Inquisition — no, he may be running it — I guess that is supposed to be the final verdict. At least Hugo Chavez sprinkled his rhetoric with the “smell of sulfur” coming from the UN podium after Bush left it. The latest charge is God opposes Trump. Just imagine that being an official position on Obama?
Recently Alan Dershowitz called out Laurence Tribe to a debate on the Constitutionality of leftists’ obstruction of justice charge. He demurred, so far. He struggles to defend it.
But Tribe did lash out at Dershowitz for “defending” the legitimacy of the “Devil Incarnate” who is president, Donald Trump. So Tribe has turned theologian, too.
Yet all because Dershowitz appealed to the Constitution. Tribe asserts that he cannot debate it now, before Mueller’s investigation is concluded. (hoping he can find something to hang his unconstitutional hat on and stretch the document into play doh)
And just days ago, Nancy Pelosi played the God card. Oh yes she did! Ah, Nancy takes the path to say that God is on the side of Democrats and their amnesty strategy for DACA and illegal aliens. Pelosi must be the chosen prosecutor for the Inquisition.
Following her lead, am I to infer that if the government does shutdown, it must be divine intervention in favor of the Democrats’ lawless positions? Well, it is the message.
Gateway Puntdit | December 8, 2017 by Jim Hoft
While the mainstream media (MSM) focuses on the fake news Trump-Russia collusion farce, the US is engulfed in the most corrupt event in its history and all roads lead back to former President Obama.
As a matter of fact, the fake Trump investigation is a major piece in the attempted coup d’état currently in place and the MSM’s fake news reporting is part of the Coup.
Just this past week former UN Ambassador John Bolten stated that this is the “First Attempted Coup D’état in US History” –
As a bonus prediction, I’d say if it is Friday, then it is time for some sort of leak on Trump/Russia from the Mueller Special Counsel, planted in media, meant to drive the weekend anti-Trump narrative. I could be wrong but…. And all of it intentionally looking at the wrong people and events. Guess who they aren’t investigating?
My editorial juices have been running a little low lately, and I have been tapped out of ideas feeling, as Solomon said, that there is really “nothing new under the sun.”
My friend Pepp recently wondered if Shakespeare was alive today, what he would say? That got me thinking with all that is going on today, he would have a field day or go crazy. One or the other.
Then I saw this article in the Federalist by someone that caught my attention. It was sincere, only by a self-described liberal who had awakened to the media bias during the election. I hope you check it out. From that point of view it is informative.
Up until now I figured it was mostly a lost cause, but this person gives me a little hope that there is life out there after the liberal bubble. (her own term) Though it made me think of the countless others I see on social media. I could almost write one profile to include them all. These are your typical liberals from not-so informed to hard line Marxists. And there often is not that much that separates them.
Anyway, so predictable that you can expect their words. I’m beyond, way beyond, feeling sympathy. I mostly accept that they are not reachable anyway, which seems a fool’s errand to try convincing them of anything. It is what it is, as they say.
But this piece gave me renewed hope for some of them. (I am not going soft or gushy) For a moment, I considered their point of view, or perspective. I know what they think. I may not know the why in many cases. I know the what though.
Their view of the media, their positions, their favorite candidates and policies, even their dislikes, and best what sets them off. Maybe that is a study in psychology in itself. Considering their perspective did reveal something I hadn’t thought much about.
One of the triggering things to them is always conservative media. Fox News is akin to poison to them. More than anything else they love to bash Fox, almost as much as Trump. That is the key.
Now think for a minute what that person thinks and feels, not their ideas. Well, Fox is the worst thing that came along. And if you were they, it is Faux News and always lying or agenda driven. However, it is the central problem. That means all other mainstream media is okay but Fox is the problem.
So that presents a simple view. One just has to believe Fox is wrong and everything else is, well, right. It is not hard to take that there is only one enemy, maybe a few marginal others, while everything else is friendly and honest to you. They don’t try to lie to you.
Doesn’t that make things so much easier thinking only Fox News is wrong? Sure, then you accept everything else as authentic at face value. You can accept it. You don’t have to be suspicious and question what comes from Mainstream Media.
Go a step further and you can accept all our institutions as good, except on their structural racism thing. Other than that everything is on the up and up and the media all have pure motives because, after all, they agree with most everything you think and believe.
It’s much easier and simpler that way. They are on your side. Everyone is looking out for you too. No, they don’t really like America, or that antiquated patriotism. The government is your friend, or should be. The government shouldn’t even believe in an exceptional America or us first. Blame America first is cool.
But then there is always world globalism which is basically on your side too. It’s a rosy-eyed view but the enemies are caricatures backed into corners. They are the flat-earthers and the like. But the general “mainstream” (i.e. liberal stream) all thinks and believes much like you. And those are the people who get to authority, because we stick together and get them there.
I figure that is so much simpler, it’s an easy way out, and lazy. In that backdrop you’d have to think that coming out of that la la land would be a challenge. It’s much easier to stay and believe in that illusion. Or keep believing, as Obama said. You don’t need critical thinkers, you just need lock-steppers.
So now isn’t that a crazy way to look at things? But you don’t have to think or worry about things except those creatures in the corner infringing on your paradise. Then there was Obama who confirmed to them all that they owned this phony paradise. Now they are flailing at anything that might distrurb those happy thoughts. They’ve already infested everything and everywhere of importance so that they are embedded and radicalized. All of it is based on your ideological worldview that you all accept, voluntarily of course.
I followed it out because it really makes the case of an easier less-complex way of looking at things. Well, you can be suspicious of those outside that bubble. You may question their motives all you want. Make fun of them, mock them, call them names, they are like animals anyway.
Still it is an easier lifestyle. Corporations and even markets should be in your favor. Everything should be in your favor because your are the ideal people. And within being a member of that society you can do anything. Those outside it should be questioned and accused on every little thing. You have an exemption card. You don’t want to leave.
It just gets me that all you have to know is that Fox is wrong. Everything and the media is right. They are the intellectual betters so don’t need to question anything except Fox. And in that situation it seems the only way to change that thinking would be on their own. You or I could probably not convince them. So they have to see it. It must be their doing.
Right Ring | Bullright
Read and weep. It is coming to a head only about 5 years too late.
In the days after the 2012 attack, Obama administration officials initially said it was related to spontaneous Muslim anger over an anti-Islam video tape and not a planned-out act of terrorism.
DeSantis argued the example highlights the politicization of the FBI.
“What operational reason would there be to issue an edict to agents telling them, in the face of virtually conclusive evidence to the contrary, not to categorize the Benghazi attack as a result of terrorism? By placing the interests of the Obama administration over the public’s interests, the order is yet another data point highlighting the politicization of the FBI,” DeSantis said.
DeSantis and several other lawmakers say they plan to press Wray at a hearing Thursday before the House Judiciary Committee about growing concerns that certain FBI supervisors allowed political bias to cloud judgments or decisions.
We may have known but all this needs to be flushed out like toxic poison. Obama and Hillary’s legacy is as bad as it can get. But the people need to know their government was corrupt and nothing more than hacks were running it. And still on life support behind the curtains. Their next best hope is mainstream media to help them.
Forces are going after revenue streams of enemies and terrorists like the Taliban. US military, and others, attacked opium laboratories using air strikes in Afghanistan.
(CNN)Under the previous administration the US could only target the Taliban under certain specific circumstances.
“The new authorities allow me to go after the revenue streams of the enemy,” [Gen. John, commander of US forces in Afghanistan] Nicholson said Monday.
According to Gen. Nicholson, the new policy refrains from attacking the poppy fields because, it said, farmers are often forced “to grow the illicit crop.”
The article says it is “estimated that opium production in Afghanistan had increased by 87% in 2017” – which supplies “85% of the world’s opium.”
CNN has put on its thinking cap again, or not, in reporting this about Russia’s agenda.
(CNN)A former National Security Council employee who served in the White House under President Barack Obama has issued a harsh rebuke of Russia President Vladimir Putin, saying his actions during the 2016 election amount to “21st-century information warfare.”
Responding to reports that 126 million Americans saw Russian-linked Facebook content during and after the 2016 presidential campaign, Samantha Vinograd told CNN anchor Chris Cuomo on “New Day” Tuesday that “Putin is engaging in digital psyops, or psychological operations.”
She continued, “He’s using misinformation to try to sow divisions in the United States. His view is, the more divided we are here at home, the weaker we’re going to be.”
Information warfare, really, from the folks who weaponized everything against the people, including information. And they did it with the help of the media. Remember those polls, reports, dirty dossier and accepting results? The more divided the weaker? Digest that.
From the mouths of babs. (Obama babs) Lets review this because some media are super-thick. If the objective was sowing division in the US, then clear the deck media has done a bang up job. It doesn’t need Russia’s interference for that — thank you very much.
It’s a laugh to hear them worried and warning about division. From people who boycotted Trump’s inauguration and emotionally crumbled when Hillary lost. And they haven’t accepted it any better since. But listen to them talk about Putin sowing division in the US, using an Obamafile to do it. It’s laughable. Then media carries their narrative as if they are a credible authority. Talk about psy-ops, that is rich.
I’d also like to remind them that the electorate decides elections, not Facebook ads.
But then who needs Facebook when we have a candidate and DNC to create a dirty dossier, with Russian sources, and then inject it into the bloodstream of media and government?
After Entering the Sphere of Influence in Investigation comes this second installment.
I think this is a big story. And I think Trump was right that it is a big story, bigger than people know. Home run, we got us a story here.
Rice denies engaging in improper political spying
BY: Bill Gertz | September 19, 2017 | Washington Free Beacon
Former Obama administration National Security Adviser Susan Rice told a House committee this month she requested the identities of Trump transition aides that were hidden in sensitive intelligence reports to protect Americans’ privacy rights.
Rice testified before a closed session of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Sept. 6 that she asked U.S. intelligence agencies for the names of Trump advisers to be unmasked in transcripts of communications intercepts.
Rice asked for names to be unmasked in a transcript of an electronic intercept involving a meeting between three senior Trump aides and a United Arab Emirates official who had traveled to the United States for an informal visit.
The three officials included candidate Donald Trump’s national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn; presidential campaign chief executive Steve Bannon; and Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law, according to CNN, which first reported on Rice’s closed-door testimony.
Details of Rice’s testimony on the unmasking of Trump aides were made public Sept. 14, quoting unidentified government sources, and included comments from members of Congress who did not dispute the closed-door testimony.
Rice’s disclosures before the intelligence panel appear to contradict earlier statements she made asserting that she had no knowledge of the unmasking of Americans, the process of identifying the names of Americans who are protected by privacy laws and who are incidentally spied on during sensitive foreign electronic intelligence operations. …/
“I think the Susan Rice thing is a massive story. I think it’s a massive, massive story. All over the world,” Trump said, adding cryptically, “it’s a bigger story than you know.”
Rice’s testimony before the House committee is part of a committee investigation into allegations of improper intelligence gathering by the Obama administration, as well as Russian influence operations targeting the 2016 election.
“We know the unmasking investigation is moving forward, and that the intel committee has amassed a lot of information about it,” said one congressional official. “It seems like you had Obama officials doing this and thinking they wouldn’t get caught.”
Maybe we knew or heard most of that before. The difference is context. No, it isn’t in the reporting or events. It seems the momentum has changed. Now, with Rice’s testimony, it is hard to overlook the obvious: that there was some surveillance at Trump Tower and that the names were suspiciously unmasked around the events of the campaign. So there was a meeting with a Saudi prince, which supposedly tripped Rice’s trigger to have to know everyone who was there. Or that is her excuse. Why? Your guess.
They only know everyone that was there, who is masked, because of surveillance. It is so blatantly political you cannot deny it, even if you wanted to. Then Rice refuses to say why she needed to know, saying it would involve classified information. If this is not worthy of investigation — why they were worried about all this — then what is worthy to know?
And now the people know too. See what changed was we were not supposed to get caught up in the how or why they got the information. We were just supposed to hear it trickled out from the Obama perspective, unquestioned. We were supposed to concentrate on their intentional outcome — not the means to it. Get it?
That makes all this smell more like the set up that it is. My explanation:
Maybe this investigation was loosely planned or not? At the least, the information was supposed to come out, somehow, at some point, to make Trump look bad. But it was to be by slight of hand, then passed right through so we couldn’t really question where it came from or how. Then we would be so busy in looking at its implications on Trump, shocked, to be bothered with the questionable means and/or their motives.
This, I believe, was cooked up some time ago. Before or right after election makes little difference. It may have been the ‘just in case plan.’ (JICP) Call it an insurance policy. In fact, they could have discovered enough info on the way they thought could be useful blackmail material. Maybe not a lot, just enough to cause major discomfort, or at least keep people answering questions as a distraction or diversion. But any information found along the way could be useful. The damage is in how the information is used, not whether it is damning or not. That is the weaponizing part. The time and purpose they used it for, the goal, would be up to them. But we would not be able to track down exactly where the information came from — not for a long time with a lot of effort.
That is where there was a problem. It didn’t unfold just the way it was supposed to. When Trump shot off a tweet about being wiretapped at the Trump Tower, it was like a canon going off around the world. We didn’t know why that was such a big deal, since it was obvious to most of us that there was some type of surveillance around Trump and the Trump Tower. We knew enough already. Maybe we didn’t know how deep it went, or who was involved, but we knew it took place. It interrupted the plot. Any incoming Republican would have faced the same thing.
Their problem was Trump pulled the trigger calling it out, untimely as it was, which set off a sequence of events and reactions to his accusation. That began the ball rolling, even though they mocked and attacked him for having said it.
He was not to be so bold as make that claim. It didn’t fit their plans. Then, surely, no one was supposed to believe it anyway. So it went on for weeks, as they tried to put Trump’s charge to bed quickly and permanently. (they: Democrats, Left, media and Obamafiles) It mostly did work; they tamped it down where only people brought it up to mock Trump’s ridiculous assertion. even demanding apologies. That started to screw things up.
That was about the time we were hearing Obama was traveling the globe and kite surfing somewhere in the Caribbean. So statements came out from Ben Rhodes and others calling wiretapping preposterous. But why wouldn’t Obama and his cronies be willing to spy on Trump, especially after he won, when they had been willing to do most anything during the campaign to aid Hillary? Why stop now when it is even more critical to them?
SO their loose plans were interrupted, inconveniently. And they couldn’t put the lid back on it. Suddenly the public outrage kicked up saying ‘wait a minute, he was under some kind of surveillance.’ We already knew that much. Remember how nasty they got in denials?
Now people were questioning the means of the information, not just whether Trump did something. Ah oh. People wanted that investigated with the other. Well, that wasn’t in the script at all. Actually, that was the one thing that could not be worked into their script. It messed everything up when it looks as if there was some agenda all along against Trump. No, they wanted us to only see a Russia agenda. (just as they did during the campaign.)
Anything else was very inconvenient. Must demonize Trump. Put him down and keep him down. Delegitimize him. But do not expose their creative, political, informational techniques. It usually does come down to narrative to the left. When they can control the narrative, they are ahead. But interrupt or change their narrative, they have a problem.
This was a big shift exposing the corrupt means, machinery, behind their Russia narrative. Like in Wizard of Oz, we weren’t supposed to see that part. That changes their whole story line. We were supposed to see the what, not the how or why. It blew up their plot.
The same applies to the Mueller and company. The investigation was to justify itself. The fact that they got a special counsel established — not the how or why — was supposed to convey legitimate authority for it and perception of “must be some wrong doing” then. Democrats and media touted that it exists therefore is justified — or else it wouldn’t.
The same rules, or lack of, also applied to Manafort’s no-knock raid. “If they got that warrant then it was justified.” If FISA or any judge issued it, there were legitimate grounds. And we certainly need not know why. The process is supposed to justify itself.
The same faulty premises applied to the surveillance. If there was surveillance, then obviously it must have been (a)legal and (b) justified by its existence alone. Never mind the reason. Which, in the case of Democrats, an outgoing president, a radicalized administration and party, after a terrible election loss, is entirely questionable.
Especially if the entire basis for said investigation is due to Democrats losing the election — or Trump winning. Never mind all the shenanigans that happened repeatedly on the left.
Therefore, it makes it easy for them to say any surveillance would have to be justified — or it wouldn’t have happened. See this is the way of using the process, corrupted as it is, to justify all their misconduct. That process and their creativity using it, is not to be questioned in any way, according to Dems. ‘Trust us.’ Then, as a backdoor guardian, if anyone can explain or sell this way of thinking, it would be media — their chief ally.
Meanwhile, let’s also pretend not to have noticed what is really taking place in front of us: the complete litigation of the election and outcome of it.
Right Ring | Bullright
Why? Wait, is someone playing a sick joke? Alice just stepped through the looking glass.
Breitbart — by Neil Munro | 8 Sep 2017
Republicans slammed the Friday announcement by President Donald Trump’s justice department that it will not investigate the official who allegedly oversaw the IRS’ secret sabotage of Americans’ civic groups before the 2012 election.
“This is a terrible decision,” said a statement from Texas Rep. Kevin Brady, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees taxes and the IRS. His statement continued:
It sends the message that the same legal, ethical, and Constitutional standards we all live by do not apply to Washington political appointees – who will now have the green light to target Americans for their political beliefs and mislead investigators without ever being held accountable for their lawlessness. Not only has the Department of Justice chosen not to hold [IRS manager] Lois Lerner criminally liable for obstructing an official investigation by the Inspector General, the Department continues to defend the Internal Revenue Service’s unconstitutional actions against taxpayers in ongoing civil litigation.
“The decision not to prosecute Lois Lerner is a miscarriage of justice,” said an accompanying statement from the chairman of the tax policy subcommittee, Illinois Rep. Peter Roskam. He continued:
On top of Ms. Lerner’s actions against taxpayers – denying tax-exempt status to groups for political gain and failing to protect taxpayer information – the Department’s response blatantly ignores our most troubling finding: that Ms. Lerner intentionally misled federal investigators in a flagrant violation of the law. This is unacceptable and Ms. Lerner must be held accountable. Our democracy is injured when those who taxpayers entrust with great authority ignore the law to advance their own political agenda without repercussion.”
Tom Fitton, head of the Watchdog law firm Judicial Watch, joined the criticism, saying:
The scandal has been underway since 2013 when the IRS admitted that its officials had slow-rolled and blocked routine requests for tax-exempt status from conservative Tea Party groups while giving quick approval to liberal groups. That obstruction of tax-exempt status made it difficult for the conservative groups to raise funds needed to campaign against then-president Barack Obama during the 2012 election. Under Obama, the IRS and the justice department stonewalled and blocked subsequent investigations, via many tactics such the destruction of email records.
GOP officials and members of the non-profit groups hoped that Trump’s deputies would investigate and prosecute the wrongdoing.
But the September 8 letter from the Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Justice Department said it would not even reopen the investigation because officials require “proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a government employee intentionally discriminated against an applicant for a tax-exempt status based on viewpoint.”
Prior investigations had found mismanagement that disproportionately hurt conservative groups, and the recently appointed department officials reviewed the new reports and concluded that “reopening the criminal investigation would not be appropriate based on the available evidence,” said the Friday letter from Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd.
That answer was a response to an April 12 letter from the two GOP leaders on the tax committee, which included more information about Lerner’s activities, and a request that the department “take a fresh look at the evidence presented in the attached referral.” The referral is provided here.
“I have the utmost respect for Attorney General Sessions, but I’m troubled by his Department’s lack of action to fully respond to our request and deliver accountability,” Bray said in his Friday statement. “Today’s decision does not mean Lois Lerner is innocent. It means the justice system in Washington is deeply flawed.”
My outrage meter shattered. When WTF becomes the only viable response to events….
Oh, so there is not enough things going on now at present that we have to import a scandal from Julio Obama’s residency. Like didn’t Obama cronies run out of free passes long ago?
And while they are at it, maybe someone should explain to all of us why Obama’s lying John Koskinen is still Commissioner of IRS?
Par for the course on the left. They are letting this one fly to fill the the October air in The Atlantic, explaining why being white — or whiteness — is all you really need to know about Trump. That on the heels of the eight-year reign of Obama. Well, sample or check it for yourself. In keeping with liberal orthodoxy, it is lengthy.
Here are a few of the more graceful excerpts. Who says the left doesn’t dabble in conspiracies? (how many times has that been disproved?)
“Barack Obama delivered to black people the hoary message that if they work twice as hard as white people, anything is possible. But Trump’s counter is persuasive: Work half as hard as black people, and even more is possible.”
I heard the first message a lot, but no, it was from Trump. All through his campaign. But that was not enough for the race-baiting hustlers, who wanted some type of guarantee.
“Replacing Obama is not enough—Trump has made the negation of Obama’s legacy the foundation of his own.”
Sure just pave over that whole Barack Obama projection/blame and, while at it, the diaspora-pushing meme thing.
“And so it will not suffice to say that Trump is a white man like all the others who rose to become president. He must be called by his rightful honorific—America’s first white president.”
But contrary to this alternative reality, what Obama ran on or did in office was use George Bush as a voodoo pincushion for every alleged thing wrong with America and its policies. Thus, Obama blamed Bush for all ills, including his own failures. He set any bar.
That is what happened for eight years. Not to mention running against Bush who wasn’t on the ballot. And that was all before Obama’s world-apology tour and radicalism in tow which followed. All which Americans were supposed to accept and celebrate due to white guilt.
It is interesting at times to know just how the the leftists think. (we already know what) This would be a classical type screed or rant by any measure, though it whistles by the political graveyard. What he refuses to do is apply his standard, racial critique to Obama. He may be horrified at what he finds. But that would require some honesty.
It’s okay For Democrats to fundraise off of redacting DACA but it is so wrong to tie future legislation to funding the wall and border security. What a heap of manure.
Now which two of those things are part of the illegal immigration issue?
Obama said Tuesday, after the decision:
“And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future.”
“What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals…”
“That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union.”
“Shifted responsibility” from the White House? It was him that put it there when it belongs in Congress. He’s completely reversing it and then expects people to believe him.
Those ideals. “Reach our more perfect union”… by illegally making unconstitutional, fiat law? That is not an ideal America stands for. But then the guy who created this mess would have to be so far out there to justify it.
Those “Dreamers” must really be dreaming if they would rather have their status subject to a president’s Unconstitutional, fiat law. That is defending Unconstitutionality.
Obama even knows it. So he is probably laughing real hard to have them all defending his Unconstitutional actions thinking “those morons don’t even know it.”
Once again, here we are dealing with another disaster Obama created — while he is cruising in some yacht, writing revision history standing American rule of law on its head.
I’m tired of the protest crap. Protest this, protest that, boycott this, trying to shut down free speech. And there is one person still at the center of it all, Obama.
One protest sign from Dreamers says “Support DACA Not Walls.” Failure to build a wall helped create DACA. It was lack of border enforcement that caused the problem in the first place. Are these Leftists just mentally-challenged or do they really expect people to believe their contemptible BS? America doesn’t buy it.
Right Ring | Bullright
I’ll take Dep of Injustice for 500… who is Elizabeth Carlisle?
Lynch’s code name was Elizabeth Carlisle.
Kim Dotcom’s reports not only show that the emails were forwarded to Lynch’s Elizabeth Carlisle account, but that a Twitter account bearing the name Elizabeth Carlisle regularly posted anti-Trump, pro-Hillary Clinton articles.
The use of aliases seems to have been common in the Obama White House. Lynch’s predecessor, Attorney General Eric Holder, used a grand total of three aliases during his tenure.
While using fake news is not a crime in and of itself, it does set off alarms when one considers the various malpractices, and possible violations, that Lynch currently stands accused of.
What is it with democrats and all their aliases? And these people are honestly worried about Russian “bots”? I wonder if her alias persona ever interacted with Carlos Danger?
I feel like I am in a modern sequel to Cool Hand Luke. “What we’ve got here is failure to communicate.” In fact, communication as we know it is not working. Like the Tower of Babel, language is being deliberately confused except not for any good reason.
Genesis 11:5 “But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”
But here liberals are deliberately confusing the language to obfuscate the truth about what they are doing. And it is not a noble endeavor. The deception is part and parcel of their agenda to deter the law, justice and is pretty much their entire agenda.
Actually, the voting booth process doesn’t seem to be working either. When a person wins, his opponents feel entitled to take over claiming victory and pushing the ‘winner’ out of the job. We must get used to the new rules. Sort of a right of loser ascension — if you can. So the real winner is the loser, get it? The two problems go together, rules and language.
How is that our process?
Now when a person loses a presidential election, the consolation prize is that all pending investigations or charges are dropped. How is that right? How is that equal justice for all? Why should someone get off the hook for losing an election? Bernie and his wife are trying to apply the same rule — call it an entitlement right.
So let’s write that right into Article II; section 1 — Loser’s Rights.
Needless to say, the same entitlement right to immunity shall also apply to the DNC, or party apparatus that lost. Got that? Sure, it is perfectly logical then that the scandal which swept up not one but two DNC chairs, and their candidate, should be exempt from any investigation. It’s just not fair that they even have to answer questions about it.
Even those IT guys who were working for it shall get an exemption — at least so far. Are we going to have to repeal this law they seem to be asserting to get to the bottom of it, and hold those accountable who engaged in this activity? Maybe so, if I can just find it first. It’s called the “but Hillary lost law” or the “but Hillary is not the president exemption.”
Language has no interpretation; or language can be interpreted any way you want.
To the best of my knowledge, I thought we were going to drain the swamp not expand it. But the people now positioned — or embedded — in the White House seem hell bent on keeping the Swamp thriving and fertilizing their Deep State roots. Drain = “pump it up.”
And those Obama or Clinton holdovers, who I thought are a major problem, and a source of leaks, are now being enshrined into the new administration. Particularly into the National Security Council, thanks to a Trump appointee. Say what? Call me baffled. I know it is not on Trump’s order but the vague open language of the winner is now liberally reinterpreted to the “protection of swamp creatures” — must be evolving language.
Worse, it seems said appointee has now taken over and has veto power over Trump people. Yeah, that language again must be causing the problem. Still, when Trump supporters point out our grievance, it is interpreted as an “attack on McMaster.”
Trump seems to be surrounded now by the enemy insurgency. Wait, I thought we were the insurgency? This is the Swamp insurgency. The Deep State has spread its tentacles as far as it can, right through the current White House as if it owned the Oval Office — which it doesn’t. The Swamp is not ceding ground but gaining it.
To further erode the fairness in draining the swamp, one of the chief offenders of the Obama administration in unmasking individuals (identifying them), Susan Rice, is now assured a permanent security clearance to classified information. Likely her future career has become dependent on it. Language must be the culprit. Are we seeing a pattern?
Words also get in my way, lately.
One sentence keeps on popping into my head at least a couple times a day. That is “I have never in my life seen anything like this!” But of course I haven’t, because it has never happened before. Period! One cannot go back in history because it is not there.
You would think with the new emphasis on the problems of Sanctuary Cities we need a change. But low and behold the Sanctuary cities — one and more to follow — are now suing the federal government to preserve their lawless activities that we must fund. Yet the people support a new change. But lawlessness is enshrined as the law of the land.
Sound like progress? It would if you were progressive. In fact, the steady leaking of information would sound like a wonderful “whistle blower” thing; rather than undermining a new sitting president, his agenda, and obfuscating the voting process of the people.
Welcome to the new language era where: winning means losing, losing means winning, wrong means right, loyalty means disloyalty, disloyalty gets accolades, doing what you promised is treason, and treason means respecting the will of the voters. Criminals have protected status and Drain the Swamp means create more Swamp Gas.
Stay in your own lane and respect the signs or boundaries, however you interpret them.
‘Swamp Busting’ may yet catch on. But so far it is still a quirky, little understood fad.
Right Ring | Bullright — what better anonymous source on The Swamp?
This is one of the biggest statements of Obama apologists to validate his “legacy” of lies that still echoes across media in America.
” Improved America’s Image Abroad
With new policies, diplomacy, and rhetoric, reversed a sharp decline in world opinion toward the U.S. (and the corresponding loss of “soft power”) during the Bush years.
Favorable opinion toward the United States rose during Obama’s first term in ten of fifteen countries surveyed by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, with an average increase of 26 percent, and have stayed high ever since.” – Washington Monthly
You’d have to give that one 5 giant Pinocchios. 10 of 15 countries surveyed? Really, that’s proof positive — 2-thirds, 66% of their countries surveyed. No sense in repeating the nonsense of this basic claim. It is debunked by flat history.
Anyone watching in the last 8 years, who wasn’t in a coma, can clearly tell you that is a lie, and that world opinion of the US suffered not improved. There were a whole lot of reasons for it. That is simply Obama’s claim, nothing more.
Even if it were true, it proves what exactly? Seems the world has funny reasons for liking us, like when they are rolling us or it is to their advantage. We should celebrate that?
I would bet, like his ballyhooed approval polls, that most of it is based on a personal like of Obama. Did countries, even in Africa, appreciate Obama lecturing and trying to force gay marriage on them? Leading from behind must have turned them on.
How about the countries where he meddled in their affairs and elections: Egypt, Israel, Canada, Russia? Then lighting the Middle East on fire, they must have loved that part? Or the refugee crisis he promoted across the globe. ‘Give us more, please.’
His severe bias against Christians was definitely a winner, with the Christian persecution he ignored. Love is in the air. Seems more like an abusive relationship with ‘we the people’ to me, but they probably liked that. When the world likes you, just consider the source. Then ask why? Brace yourself for the answers. So it didn’t take long to unlike us?!
RightRing | Bullright