Obama lets the cat out of the bag: He's got plans to make Joe Biden his stooge
"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now." ---- Patricia McCarthy
THE DEMOCRATS' WAR ON LIVING WAGES FOR AMERICANS (LEGALS
His shrewd critique of identity politics and the diversity, equity, and inclusion industry exposes mechanisms by which the highly educated and prosperous divide and delegitimize the working class. Patrick J. Deneen
“The Democrats had abandoned their working-class base to chase what they pretended was a racial group when what they were actually chasing was the momentum of unlimited migration”. DANIEL GREENFIELD
The number of foreign nationals holding jobs in the United States has hit the highest level since the Labor Department began tracking the data in 1996 as the employment of native-born Americans declines, a trend under President Joe Biden.
In 2022, foreign-born workers saw their share of the labor market hit the highest level in almost 30 years at more than 18 percent, with close to 30 million now holding U.S. jobs, according to data published in the Wall Street Journal.
Even though it has gone virtually unreported by corporate media, Breitbart News has extensively documented the Clintons’ longstanding support for “open borders.” Interestingly, as the Los Angeles Times observed in 2007, the Clinton’s praise for globalization and open borders frequently comes when they are speaking before a wealthy foreign audiences and donors.
Globalism: Google VP Kent Walker insists that despite its repeated rejection by electorates around the world, “globalization” is an “incredible force for good.”
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times
“Make no mistake about it: the Latino community holds this election in your hands. Some of the closest contests this November will be in states like Florida, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico -- states with large Latino populations.” PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA
“I know how powerful this community is. Just think how powerful you could be on November 4th if you translate your numbers into votes.” PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA
THE U.S. TAX DOLLAR SUPPORTED MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA “The Race” IS NOW CALLING ITSELF UNIDOSus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5_u62dhkjQ
Obama Funds the Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “The Race”
FIFTEEN THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT LA RAZA “THE RACE”
by Michelle Malkin
Only in America could critics of a group called "The Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in redefining all opposition as "hate."
Both Barack Obama and John McCain will speak this week in San Diego at the annual conference of the National Council of La Raza, the Latino organization whose name is Spanish for, yes, "The Race." Can you imagine Obama and McCain paying homage to a group of white people who called themselves that? No matter. The presidential candidates and the media have legitimized "The Race" as a mainstream ethnic lobbying group and marginalized its critics as intolerant bigots. The unvarnished truth is that the group is a radical ethnic nationalist outfit that abuses your tax dollars and milks PC politics to undermine our sovereignty.
Here are 15 things you should know about "The Race":
15. "The Race" supports driver's licenses for illegal aliens.
14."The Race" demands in-state tuition discounts for illegal alien students that are not available to law-abiding U.S. citizens and law-abiding legal immigrants.
13. "The Race" vehemently opposes cooperative immigration enforcement efforts between local, state and federal authorities.
12. "The Race" opposes a secure fence on the southern border.
11. "The Race" joined the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in a failed lawsuit attempt to prevent the feds from entering immigration information into a key national crime database -- and to prevent local police officers from accessing the data.
10. "The Race" opposed the state of Oklahoma's tough immigration-enforcement-first laws, which cut off welfare to illegal aliens, put teeth in employer sanctions and strengthened local-federal cooperation and information sharing.
9. "The Race" joined other open-borders, anti-assimilationists and sued to prevent Proposition 227, California's bilingual education reform ballot initiative, from becoming law.
8. "The Race" bitterly protested common-sense voter ID provisions as an "absolute disgrace."
7. "The Race" has consistently opposed post-9/11 national security measures at every turn.
6. Former "Race" president Raul Yzaguirre, Hillary Clinton's Hispanic outreach adviser, said this: "U.S. English is to Hispanics as the Ku Klux Klan is to blacks." He was referring to U.S. English, the nation's oldest, largest citizens' action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. "The Race" also pioneered Orwellian open-borders Newspeak and advised the Mexican government on how to lobby for illegal alien amnesty while avoiding the terms "illegal" and "amnesty."
5. "The Race" gives mainstream cover to a poisonous subset of ideological satellites, led by Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA). The late GOP Rep. Charlie Norwood rightly characterized the organization as "a radical racist group … one of the most anti-American groups in the country, which has permeated U.S. campuses since the 1960s, and continues its push to carve a racist nation out of the American West."
4. "The Race" is currently leading a smear campaign against staunch immigration enforcement leaders and has called for TV and cable news networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the airwaves -- in addition to pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up their foes. The New York Times reported that current "Race" president Janet Murguia believes "hate speech" should "not be tolerated, even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights."
3. "The Race" sponsors militant ethnic nationalist charter schools subsidized by your public tax dollars (at least $8 million in federal education grants). The schools include Aztlan Academy in Tucson, Ariz., the Mexicayotl Academy in Nogales, Ariz., Academia Cesar Chavez Charter School in St. Paul, Minn., and La Academia Semillas del Pueblo in Los Angeles, whose principal inveighed: "We don't want to drink from a White water fountain, we have our own wells and our natural reservoirs and our way of collecting rain in our aqueducts. We don't need a White water fountain … ultimately the White way, the American way, the neo liberal, capitalist way of life will eventually lead to our own destruction."
2. "The Race" has perfected the art of the PC shakedown at taxpayer expense, pushing relentlessly to lower home loan standards for Hispanic borrowers, reaping millions in federal "mortgage counseling" grants, seeking special multimillion-dollar earmarks and partnering with banks that do business with illegal aliens.
1. "The Race" thrives on ethnic supremacy -- and the elite sheeple's unwillingness to call it what it is. As historian Victor Davis Hanson observes: "[The] organization's very nomenclature 'The National Council of La Raza' is hate speech to the core. Despite all the contortions of the group, Raza (as its Latin cognate suggests) reflects the meaning of 'race' in Spanish, not 'the people' -- and that's precisely why we don't hear of something like 'The National Council of the People,' which would not confer the buzz notion of ethnic, racial and tribal chauvinism."
The fringe is the center. The center is the fringe. Viva La Raza.
IT WAS HILLARY WOULD WAS SUCKING BRIBES FROM PUTIN!
TALKS ABOUT THE GUTTED AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton
Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA
BIDEN PENN CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER
LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden
family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES,
FRANK) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power
and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as
Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in
Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government
corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER
LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER
CHUCK SCHUMER). BRIAN C JOONDEPH
Two enduring aphorisms emerged from the Watergate affair, both directed at then-president Richard Nixon. The one at the outset of the investigation was delivered in the form of a question: “What did he know and when did he know it?” The second came at the end in the form of a warning to future presidents: “The cover-up is worse than the crime.”
Thanks to the Durham report, we know the date that then-president Barack Obama learned about what John Durham calls the “Clinton Intelligence plan.” If CIA Director John Brennan’s notes are to be believed, that date was August 3, 2016.
This was the day Brennan briefed Obama and other key players about the “alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 26 July of a proposal from one of her [campaign] advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services."
To be fair, Barack Obama likely had no more role in the orchestration of the Clinton Intelligence plan than Richard Nixon did in the 1972 bugging of the DNC headquarters at the Watergate. Obama did, however, play the critical role in the cover-up of the Clinton Intelligence plan. It could not have happened without him.
This past Sunday, former congressman Devin Nunes raised the cover-up issue on Maria Bartiromo’s show. Said Nunes, “We now know from Durham that Obama knew and his team knew that in August 2016 this was a dirty trick from the Clinton campaign.”
So what did Obama do with this information? Right after the November election, said Nunes, “He got all the intelligence agencies involved and they leaked out to the fake news media that, ‘Oh, the Russians must have done something and they were trying to help Trump.’
Had Nixon blamed Watergate on Cuba -- several Cubans were, in fact, arrested -- he would have been laughed out of office. Unlike Obama, however, Nixon did not have an obsequious media eager to ignore his mischief nor to explain away that which could not be ignored. With the FBI and the intelligence community in his pocket, Obama executed the most elaborate -- and destructive -- political cover-up in American political history.
Peter Strzok, the FBI agent heading “Crossfire Hurricane,” the FBI investigation into Trump’s apocryphal collusion with Russia, confirmed Obama’s role on August 5, two days after the August 3 meeting. Texting with his FBI lover Lisa Page, Strzok quoted an unnamed bigwig, likely Brennan, as saying, “The White House is running this.”
Strzok wasn’t happy. He believed the White House was intruding on FBI turf. On August 15, Strzok memorably signaled the shared motive of all the conspirators. “There’s no way [Trump] gets elected -- but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” he texted Page. “It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.” On September 2, Page confirmed Obama’s involvement. “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing,” she texted Strzok.
The insurance policy proved insufficient. Shocked and understandably frightened by Trump’s victory, the conspirators got more methodical in their plotting. As part of the plot, Obama was to keep his hands clean -- or at least appear to. In his 2018 memoir, The World As It Is, intimate Obama adviser Ben Rhodes makes a claim so deep in exculpatory BS it needs to be read in full:
Of course, we had no idea -- Obama had no idea -- at the time that there was an FBI investigation into the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia; that information was walled off from the White House, and I wouldn’t even learn about it until long after I left government, in the press.
The “time” in question was two weeks before Election Day 2016, nearly three months after the initial August meeting. In Rhodes, Obama had found just the right person to move this hogwash forward, but then again Obama had a gift for choosing the unscrupulous. In nominating John Brennan first as deputy national security advisor and later as director of the CIA, Obama picked the rare American intel chief openly fond of Marxism.
From the beginning, Brennan served as Obama’s fixer. He came to the job well prepared, having written in his graduate thesis, “The democratic process may involve, at some point, the violation of personal liberties and procedural justice.”
Brennan met at least one potential fellow traveler in Obama’s inner intelligence circle. In 2013, the same year Brennan was named director of the CIA, Obama chose the seemingly apolitical James Comey to head the FBI. Like Brennan, however, Comey had a past. In 2003, he acknowledged his leftist roots in a New York magazine interview, telling reporter Chris Smith, “I’d moved from Communist to whatever I am now.”
A globalist and a cradle progressive, National Security Advisor Susan Rice shared with Brennan and Comey a penchant for situational ethics. She proved her mettle in 2012 telling the same Benghazi lie on five different shows one Sunday morning. She upped her game following a meeting that took place in the White House on January 5, 2017.
In conference with Obama was his national security team including all the usual suspects: Comey, Brennan, Biden, Rice, James Clapper, and acting attorney general Sally Yates. After the meeting, Obama asked Yates and Comey to stick around along with Rice, his trusted scribe and factotum.
Obama had a reason for singling out Comey and Yates. Unlike the others, they were staying on in their jobs. On the very day at the very moment Trump was being inaugurated, the soulless Rice sent to “self” a peculiar email. It read:
President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book.” The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.
There is no “book” that justifies what Comey and pals did in the weeks immediately following this meeting while Obama was still president. The next day, January 6, 2017, the conspirators released the declassified version of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA).
Commissioned a month earlier by Obama, the ICA was John Brennan’s way of welcoming the president-elect to Washington. Titled “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections,” the report concluded that Putin “ordered” an influence campaign, the goal of which was “to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.”
The “Obama dossier,” as Nunes called the ICA, reads like one of my college term papers, filled with sundry bits of information gathered from here and there just hours before the due date. Although Christopher Steele had conspicuously failed to corroborate any of his alleged evidence against Trump, Comey lobbied to have the Steele dossier included in the body of the text. He settled for the appendix. On January 10, BuzzFeed published the entire dossier.
Given what we know now, the ICA’s bold-faced claims -- “Putin Ordered Campaign To Influence US Election” or the “Influence Effort Was Boldest Yet in the USA" -- seem laughably crude. Lacking human intelligence in the Kremlin, the conspirators had no idea what Putin did or did not order, but facts no longer mattered.
By the time he left office on January 20, 2016, Obama had all his cucks in a row -- prominent sycophants in every branch of the government and in every major newsroom prepared to ruin Donald Trump’s presidency in service to a lie.
“He weaponized information and showed a willingness to lie,” Ben Rhodes writes about Putin, “using traditional media like television, and new media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, to spread disinformation into open, Western societies like a virus.”
I imagine Obama reading this and saying, “Vladimir, hold my beer.”
Jack Cashill’s newest book, Untenable: The True Story of White Ethnic Flight from America's Cities, is available for pre-order in all formats.
Our 44th president was still operating behind the scenes -- scheming with his old cronies to blunt Trump’s effectiveness, to pack the media with lies about him, to keep the violent far-left wing of the Democratic Party in a constant state of anti-Trump outrage, to engineer his impeachment, and much more; and since Trump’s departure from the White House, Obama has, at the very least, been one of those who have been pulling the strings of the current puppet-in-chief.
Obama’s threat took two presidential terms to gather momentum; former President Trump temporarily stalled its course, but then Obama managed to get a shot at a third term in 2020 – vicariously through his former Vice President Joe Biden.
JOE BIDEN = BARACK OBAMA'S PATHWAY TO A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE
WHICH IS THE GREATEST DANGER TO AMERICA? JOE BIDEN, BARACK OBAMA OR THEIR PAYMASTER GEORGE SOROS???
“To understand the crisis of the Biden administration,” observes Daniel Greenfield, “we have to go back to its origins in the Obama administration.”
Victorious Democrats would also end congressional investigations into the Hillary-Deep State-DNC-Russian-Clinton Foundation collusion and corruption. All the players in these massive, sordid affairs will be deemed “too big to jail” – and too closely tied to the Democratic Party to be investigated further. Paul Driessen
His (BILLARY CLINTON) wife is equally and personally
devious and corrupt; she had the fake “dossier” concocted she
was certain would take Trump out of the running for president
in 2016. Hillary used her position as Secretary of State to rake
in millions of dollars to her phony Clinton Foundation, much of
that money from other nations that sought to benefit from her
largesse when President. PATRICIA McCARTHY
Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect
encapsulation of the Clinton
Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS)
(WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN
CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER
LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then
there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER
LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES,
FRANK) corruption, followed closely behind
by similar abuses of power and office by the
Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders
families, as Peter Schweizer described in his
recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These
names just scratch the surface of government
corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA
HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND
AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY,
LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER).
BRIAN C JOONDEPH
DYNAMICS OF A SOCIOPATH:
Patriots rot in jail for meandering around the Congress for a couple of hours two years ago while young people are encouraged by their teachers to celebrate Antifa and BLM thugs who have burned houses down. Blacks who love liberty are smeared as “white supremacists” while Muslims who love jihad are depicted as virtuous victims.
Not so long ago, America had a great economy, the lowest unemployment ever for a range of demographic groups, energy independence, an increasingly secure southern border, a strong international profile, and no new wars. It had freedom. It had national pride. And all because it had a highly skilled president of unabashed patriotism who was devoted to the best interests of his people.
Now we’re being readied to eat bugs while our overlords dine on steaks. To live in “fifteen-minute cities” while they fly to conferences in Fiji. To tighten our belts to prevent rising sea levels while they luxuriate in sea-level mansions in Malibu and Martha’s Vineyard. In a direct challenge to parental authority, common-sense values, and sensible pedagogical priorities, government schools indoctrinate children in Critical Race Theory and transgender ideology. To shatter our sense of security and restrict our freedom of movement, Soros prosecutors turn major cities over to violent felons. Patriots rot in jail for meandering around the Congress for a couple of hours two years ago while young people are encouraged by their teachers to celebrate Antifa and BLM thugs who have burned houses down. Blacks who love liberty are smeared as “white supremacists” while Muslims who love jihad are depicted as virtuous victims.
Then there’s what happened during the pandemic. Churchgoing was banned, violent street protests permitted. Small businesses were forced to close and went bankrupt; giant chain stores stayed open and reaped record profits. Americans, but not illegal immigrants, were ordered to mask and vaccinate. Gavin Newsom and Nancy Pelosi, with imperial condescension, violated their own lockdowns.
In this new world order, “our democracy” means the tyranny of the unelected (including the FBI, CIA, DHS, and DoJ), propped up by a Pravda-like corporate media. Their message? If we want to be known as supporters of equality, models of compassion, and friends of the planet, we’ll knuckle under, obey them, and parrot their progressive creed -- as spelled out in that chilling Independence Hall speech in which Joe Biden, against a Bismarckian blood-red backdrop, demonized MAGA voters as enemies of freedom.
Of course, this dystopia in the making didn’t begin with Biden. It’s a carry-over from the Obama years, interrupted by that Belle Époque, the Trump interregnum. “To understand the crisis of the Biden administration,” observes Daniel Greenfield, “we have to go back to its origins in the Obama administration.” This statement appears in Greenfield’s introduction to an engaging and definitive new collection of essays, Barack Obama’s True Legacy. How He Transformed America, which, under the editorship of Jamie Glazov, does precisely that: it ponders Obama and his appalling presidential tenure from a number of angles, and in doing so gives us what seems to me the most comprehensive and penetrating account yet of who Obama really is, what he did to America, and why.
Political scientist John Drew recalls the Obama whom he met in 1980 when they were both students dreaming of Communist revolution. At first glance, Obama struck Drew as a child of “wealth and privilege”: he “carried himself with the dignity and poise of a model,” he “talked like a white guy,” he came off “like a foreign prince visiting the United States.” Drew also thought Obama was gay -- an impression later confirmed, sort of, by a letter in which Obama wrote: “I make love to men daily, but in the imagination.” Politically, soon enough, both Drew and Obama shifted to “a more practical view,” deciding that politics, not revolution, was “the preferred route to socialism”; Drew eventually left the Left entirely, but, as we know, alas, Obama did not.
New Zealand author and filmmaker Trevor Loudon also reaches some distance into the past, tracing Obamacare to the 1930s, when Quentin Young, a young Communist doctor in Chicago, first began thinking about socialized medicine. In the 1990s he advised Hillary Clinton on health care; later still (he lived until 1992), he collaborated with Bernie Sanders and Ted Kennedy. As it happens, Young shared his medical practice for two decades with Obama’s personal physician, David Scheiner, and was present at the meeting, hosted by former terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, at which it was announced that Obama, also present, would be running for Congress. Along the way, he played a huge role in shaping Obama’s views on health-care coverage.
Glazov’s book includes several contributions on Islam and the Middle East. Highlighting Obama’s hideous 2012 statement at the UN criticizing “those who slander the prophet of Islam,” counterintelligence expert Stephen C. Coughlin recounts the Obama Administration’s purging of counterterrorism pros (largely in response to pressure from terrorist-linked CAIR) and reports that Muslims at DHS, founded to combat Islamic terrorism, shifted its focus 180º to target “Islamophobes” -- that is, American patriots who dare to worry about terrorism. In other essays, former Knesset member Dov Lipman corrects “historical inaccuracies” about Israel in Obama’s memoir A Promised Land, and Greenfield and Clare M. Lopez supply cogent takes on Obama’s treachery toward Israel and championing of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Then there’s Raymond Ibrahim on Obama’s abominable treatment of Middle East Christians: his refusal to use U.S. leverage on their behalf, his resistance to Capitol Hill pressure to address religious freedom, his prioritizing of Muslim over Christian refugees, and his denial that Muslim-on-Christian violence in Nigeria had a religious basis. (Ibrahim quotes Newt Gingrich: “This is an administration that never seems to find a good enough excuse to help Christians, but always finds an excuse to apologize for terrorists.”) And in three trenchant pieces, Robert Spencer studies Obama’s refusal to label the Fort Hood massacre as a terrorist act (thus denying certain benefits to victims and their families), his insistence that the Islamic State had nothing to do with Islam, and his attitude, at the time of the Iran deal, that “the side that needed to show a good faith commitment to peace was not Iran, but the United States.”
There are two strong items on immigration: Loudon considers Obama’s desire to bestow citizenship on millions of illegals, and Matthew Vadum ponders Obama’s view “that immigration…was a right.” And J.R. Nyquist tackles Obama and Russia, pointing out in his opening sentences that Obama’s parents met in a Russian-language class. Why, he wonders, were they there? We know they hated capitalism; did they love the USSR? Certainly, Obama’s Russia policy, posits Nyquist, was “exactly what one might expect from a president who was born of pro-Soviet parents and mentored by a likely KGB agent (i.e., Frank Marshall Davis).” Nyquist also serves up a couple of fascinating anecdotes that, if true, would fill in a big piece of the Obama puzzle: in 1983, a Communist speaker at UC Irvine reportedly said that his fellow Reds were “infiltrating the left wing of the Democratic Party”; in the 1990s, American physicist Tom Fife claims to have encountered Obama at a social event in Moscow where the later was described as being groomed by the Soviets to be America’s first black president.
The closing pages of Barack Obama’s True Legacy take us to the end of Obama’s presidency and beyond. Greenfield reflects on the truly tragic way in which Obama’s “naked racial rhetoric… transformed America” from an essentially post-racial country into the present “war-torn nation deeply divided by race.” In three incisive essays, Joseph Klein indicts Obama for his persecution of General Michael Flynn (who, by the way, contributes a solid foreword to this book); argues that Obama should have been impeached for what Andrew McCarthy has rightly called his singular pattern of “presidential lawlessness” (which Klein catalogs at illuminating length); and details Obama’s nefarious and unprecedented attempt, after his own presidency was over, “to sabotage the legitimacy of his duly elected successor.”
When Donald Trump took the oath of office, most of us thought the Obama era was over. We were wrong. Our 44th president was still operating behind the scenes -- scheming with his old cronies to blunt Trump’s effectiveness, to pack the media with lies about him, to keep the violent far-left wing of the Democratic Party in a constant state of anti-Trump outrage, to engineer his impeachment, and much more; and since Trump’s departure from the White House, Obama has, at the very least, been one of those who have been pulling the strings of the current puppet-in-chief. But of course, all this malicious mischief was nothing new for the man who once said that “the sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer”: as Spencer puts it in his savvy afterword, Obama was, from the beginning of his term until, well, this present moment, “actively working against the interests of the United States.” That he managed to do so much damage to this country and its people is breathtaking to behold -- as is the fact that there remains a large cohort of low-information Americans who actually revere this traitor as a paragon of virtue and wisdom.
Image: Republic Book Publishers
DIVIDING AMERICA WAS OBAMA AND GEORGE SOROS' GAMEPLAN FOR OBOMB'S PATH TO A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE.
THERE HAS PROBABLY NEVER BEEN A GREATER DANGER TO AMERICAN THAN OBAMA, UNLESS ONE CONSIDERS JOE BIDEN AND HILLARY CLIONT
“Before Obama,” writes Greenfield, “71 percent of Americans had thought that relations between black and white people were generally good.” A year after the Ferguson riots in 2014, “more than half the country thought relations were bad.” It was the Obama administration that had “started the fires and then led the fire brigade, but instead of water, its hoses were filled with oil.” Upon Obama’s departure from office, Donald Trump inherited a country that wasn’t healed but primed for an even more heated racial conflagration.
[Order Jamie Glazov’s new book: Barack Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America.]
On the cusp of the 2008 presidential election, then-candidate Barack Obama galvanized an ecstatic crowd at Missouri University by claiming that he and his supporters were “five days from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” Not making America great again, but fundamentally transforming her. This unsettling vow, from the man who would later declare that American exceptionalism was no more valid than British or Greek exceptionalism, promised not restoration, but revolution. It made clear that his incoming administration intended to toss the greatest country in the world onto the trash heap of history to make way for a Progressive utopia centered on social justice and on the dismantling of American power.
Obama’s threat took two presidential terms to gather momentum; former President Trump temporarily stalled its course, but then Obama managed to get a shot at a third term in 2020 – vicariously through his former Vice President Joe Biden. Under the decrepit figurehead Biden, Obama and his muses Susan Rice and Valerie Jarrett could accelerate the fundamental change he promised. Indeed, it has been cascading to fruition so rapidly that one is reminded of a Hemingway character’s explanation about how he went bankrupt: “Gradually, then suddenly.”
The Biden administration is already securing its place in history as the most disastrous American presidency to date. In less than two-and-a-half years, the angry Divider-in-Chief Biden has presided over more domestic and foreign policy debacles than Barack Obama could ever have hoped for. As General Michael Flynn catalogs in the foreword to a brand new book titled Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America, our nation now faces
chronic unemployment and inflation, a border crisis, grave threats to our constitutional liberties, increased violence and lawlessness from the leftist groups Antifa and Black Lives Matter, a weakening dollar, the emboldening of our enemies worldwide, and even worse on the horizon… This is the world Barack Obama has made. This is his legacy.
All of this and more is addressed in Obama’s True Legacy, a collection of eighteen original essays edited by FrontPage Magazine’s longtime editor Jamie Glazov, and featuring numerous FrontPage Mag regulars such as Daniel Greenfield, Robert Spencer, Joseph Klein, Matthew Vadum, and Raymond Ibrahim, among other contributors.
“To understand the crisis of the Biden administration, we have to go back to its origins in the Obama administration,” writes Shillman Fellow Daniel Greenfield in his introduction to the book, because the latter’s “impact is not past tense. It is present tense… [W]e are still living through the Obama nightmare.” And that is what these eighteen essays analyze and illuminate. From political scientist (and former Marxist) John Drew’s fascinating account of his college days with the fellow radical in “Obama: The Young Communist I Knew,” to Knesset member Dov Lipman’s closing critique of the anti-Israel lies in Obama’s memoir A Promised Land, Barack Obama’s True Legacy is the definitive one-volume guide to the catastrophic influence on U.S. and world politics of Barack Hussein Obama.
The anti-colonialist Obama waged war against America on a broad range of fronts, and they are seemingly all covered in this book. New Zealand author and filmmaker Trevor Loudon traces “The Marxist Origins and Goals of Obamacare” and “Obama’s Illegal Marxist Immigrant Amnesty Movement.” Middle East expert Raymond Ibrahim explains “How Obama Enabled the Persecution of Christians.” Jihad Watch Director Robert Spencer focuses on “Obama’s Enabling of Jihad and Stealth Jihad” in addition to his empowering of the monstrous terror group ISIS and his balance-of-power-altering nuclear deal with Iran. Journalist Joseph Klein exposes “Obamagate: The Coup Attempt Against President Trump” and makes the case for “Why Obama Should Have Been Impeached.”
There is much more in Barack Obama’s True Legacy. Award-winning journalist Matthew Vadum lays bare the damage Obama wreaked on America’s border security. Author and former military intelligence analyst Stephen Coughlin details the “Muslim Brotherhood’s Penetration of the US Under Obama.” Clare Lopez, founding member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi, explicates Obama’s “Benghazi Betrayal and the Brotherhood Link.” Political analyst J.R. Nyquist shines a light into the dark corners of “Obama’s Russia collusion.”
No account of Barack Obama’s legacy would be complete without addressing, as Freedom Center Shillman Fellow Daniel Greenfield puts it, his “enabling of racial strife and domestic terror.” Though Obama surfed into the White House on a wave of hope that the nation’s first black president would bring long-awaited racial healing and unity, Greenfield calls the intentional shattering of race relations in America under his watch “Obama’s true enduring legacy.”
“Before Obama,” writes Greenfield, “71 percent of Americans had thought that relations between black and white people were generally good.” A year after the Ferguson riots in 2014, “more than half the country thought relations were bad.” It was the Obama administration that had “started the fires and then led the fire brigade, but instead of water, its hoses were filled with oil.” Upon Obama’s departure from office, Donald Trump inherited a country that wasn’t healed but primed for an even more heated racial conflagration.
“But Obama wasn’t done once he finally left the White House,” writes Joseph Klein in his essay about the Radical-in-Chief’s “Post-Presidential War on America.” Klein details how the ex-President went on to spread disinformation in an attempt to delegitimize his successor Trump, to foment generational war by nurturing “the next generation of community-organizing Obama mini-mes,” to discredit Fox News – the only mainstream cable outlet that leaned right – and to turn Netflix into his own private propaganda mill, all while hypocritically amassing a personal fortune that contradicted his socialist assertion, “At a certain point, you’ve made enough money.”
Obama’s corrosive impact wasn’t limited to our shores. On an international level, for example, Daniel Greenfield addresses, in “Obama’s Betrayal of Israel,” the breakdown in relations between the United States and our close ally in the Middle East. That alliance fractured thanks to a “total divergence of worldviews” – “moral, cultural, and strategic” – between Obama and Biden on the one hand, and Benjamin Netanyahu on the other. “Previous administrations had viewed Islamic terrorists and the Iranian regime as threats. The Obama administration, however, saw them as victims of American foreign policy… Obama believed that Israel, like America, and other allies in the region, was part of the problem.”
And our current administration, of course, shares and perpetuates that anti-Israel perspective. The result is that the entire volatile Middle East is once again a tinderbox, even as that administration exacerbates tensions in other parts of the world too, such as Ukraine, where we risk tumbling headlong into a world war that could have been averted had Donald Trump been elected in 2020.
But the chaos is all part of the plan. As Robert Spencer reminds us in his epilogue to Barack Obama’s True Legacy, Obama was photographed in 2008 clutching a copy of Fareed Zakaria’s book The Post-American World, a finger keeping his place in the pages. Spencer writes,
Zakaria’s book predicting America’s inevitable decline turned out to be a veritable blueprint for Obama’s presidency. Throughout his eight years in office, as this present book abundantly illustrates, Obama seemed determined to make Zakaria’s “post-American world” a self-fulfilling prophecy. Obama went to work from his first day in office to make Zakaria’s wishful thinking about America’s decline become a reality.
Now, in his de facto third term, the shadowy radical continues to exert his subversive influence on the Constitution, the citizens, and the country he is committed to destroying. Barack Obama’s True Legacy could not be a timelier and more important read. As Spencer concludes,
This book stands as a warning and as a primer on just how devastating Obamaism was for the United States and will be again unless vigilant, courageous, and patriotic American citizens stand, determined to employ all lawful means to defend freedom.
Mark Tapson is the Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, focusing on popular culture. He is also the host of an original podcast on Frontpage, “The Right Take With Mark Tapson.”
In late 2016, Obama was angry.
Oh, not about the election of Donald Trump, of course, if his public statements were any indication.
He was supposedly angry, so angry, at Russia and its supposed interference in our 2016 election that he got out his pen and phone and expelled 35 Russian diplomats.
Here is what the New York Times reported:
WASHINGTON — President Obama struck back at Russia on Thursday for its efforts to influence the 2016 election, ejecting 35 suspected Russian intelligence operatives from the United States and imposing sanctions on Russia’s two leading intelligence services.
The administration also penalized four top officers of one of those services, the powerful military intelligence unit known as the G.R.U.
Intelligence agencies have concluded that the G.R.U. ordered the attacks on the Democratic National Committee and other political organizations, with the approval of the Kremlin, and ultimately enabled the publication of the emails it harvested to benefit Donald J. Trump’s campaign.
The Hill reported that it was quite an array of sanctions at the time:
The measures include a slate of economic sanctions, diplomatic censure, and public “naming and shaming.” The president also hinted at possible covert cyber measures but did not provide details.The president also announced that the State Department will expel 35 Russian intelligence operatives and shutter two Russian compounds, in Maryland and New York, used by Russia for intelligence purposes.
The Times added:
Taken together, the sweeping actions announced by the White House, the Treasury, the State Department and intelligence agencies on Thursday amount to the strongest American response yet to a state-sponsored cyberattack. They also appeared intended to box in President-elect Trump, who will now have to decide whether to lift the sanctions on Russian intelligence agencies when he takes office next month.
Obama even amended his own executive order to extend his powers to sanction, with travel bans and asset freezes on some Russian officials.
Just one problem: The Russians didn't do what the embittered Democrats claimed they were doing -- to Get Trump.
Nothing. They didn't hack the DNC and they didn't collude with Donald Trump to get him elected to the presidency. The charges, the expropriations, the sanctions -- were all for innocent people. Even the Russian state was innocent.
That was what Sundance at The Conservative Treehouse found buried at the bottom of the Durham report.
Sundance laid it out with these details:
♦ First, John Durham clearly shows in his 306-page report with a 48-page classified appendix, that Russia did nothing to interfere in the 2016 election. The entire Russian Interference operation was a Clinton fabrication, later enhanced by a Federal Bureau of Investigation who used the fabrication as a cover-up justification to hide their surveillance of the Trump campaign.
♦ Second, accepting the empirical, factual, and inherently true reality of the first point – consider that President Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats to retain the Clinton fabrication and FBI lies. Think about this one carefully, the Obama administration expelled Russian diplomats in order to retain a domestic political ruse! President Obama did this *after* CIA Director John Brennan briefed him about the Clinton fabrication.
There were no Russian diplomats involved; there was no Russian election interference; there was no Russian hacking of the DNC; it was all a fraud created by the intelligence community (IC), FBI and Main Justice to support Hillary Clinton’s lies and then cover their own targeting tracks.
♦ Third, Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann, with the full support of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, indicted 14 Russian entities under completely bogus pretenses. All of that effort was done to assist the Clinton narrative, cover for Obama and then use the special counsel to cover up the Trump targeting operation. The totally bogus construct explains why the fabricated indictments were sealed in the DOJ National Security Division in perpetuity, thereby keeping the fraudulent construct hidden from public review forever.
So Obama's wrath was nothing but a fiction to protect the partisan Democrat narrative that they had been promoting about Trump and the Russians, which originated from the embittered political camp of losing Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton.
How would you feel about that if you were a Russian, especially now, reading that it was all a political hoax with you the one chosen to be the whipping boy? You got sanctioned, you got kicked out, you got travel bans, you incurred costs, and some "name and shame" all based on lies.
Might you start thinking of the U.S. as kind of a sleazy, dishonest player on the world scene? Would you have problems trusting them? Might you step up your activities against it? It would seem natural.
The Russians, remember, had already calculated by their own devices that Hillary Clinton would win the 2016 election and the Kremlin was planning for that, so they were as surprised as anyone that the American voters thought otherwise when the election results came in in November 2016.
That they were blamed for the result and sanctioned for hacking and colluding they didn't do, and knew they didn't do, and knew that Obama knew they didn't do, surely must have made them angry.
Russian President Vladimir Putin initially adopted a wait-and-see attitude to see if Trump would set things back to rights, but by March of 2017, three months into his term, Trump had appointed Democrat ally Fiona Hill to be his Russia advisor, and although she was smart enough to generally pooh-pooh the Russia collusion claims in her statements, apparently nothing was done to restore the Russia relations after Obama's partisan fit of pique at Russia's expense.
Net result: By May, Putin expelled 755 American diplomats and staff and expropriated two American properties in retaliation. That was to get the numbers of embassy personnel even, as the U.S had a much bigger official diplomatic presence in Russia than the Russians had in the U.S. That certainly didn't serve U.S. interests to say the least, given that the U.S. must have had a much bigger spy operation going on against Russia than Russia did against the U.S., or, at the least official one which seems most likely.
In other words, how did it serve U.S. interests to falsely accuse and sanction Russia for something it didn't do?
Stuff like that makes countries mad, and fosters considerable distrust. Was that in the U.S. interest? Did that raise our standing and reputation in the world or did it contribute to emerging problems? The Russians were remarkably patient for a while as the accusations were leveled but the lies kept coming and then things got ugly.
It's horrible stuff when we consider the bigger picture, and the picture we see today. Right now, the U.S. and Russia are in a proxy war against one another over Ukraine, with several hideous sideshows involving cowardly and let-the-Americans-do-it allies, as well as huge amounts of money spent at a time of high inflation with little accountability. Our military readiness has been affected just on the supply front. There are odd fires at U.S. food factories over here even as we read reports of strikes at strategic assets inside Russia. The Nordstream II gas pipeline somehow got blown up and somehow nobody knows who did it.
And as this unwelcome, unpopular, and costly entanglement with Russia goes on, China is on the rise, with increasingly aggressive actions amid reports out there that they could beat us in a shooting war. Another inconvenient development: Russia has allied with China.
The worst of this is that it need never have happened. Foreign policy should always be off limits to partisan disputes, but apparently not by Obama. Relations with Russia could have been good and ties friendly. Russia could have advanced economically and moved closer to the West had these sleazy Obama fictions never happened.
Russia has always been torn between leaning east or leaning west, and for most of the 21st century has leaned westward. Keeping Russia friendly to the U.S. would have been a boon for keeping China in check and Russia peaceable. Instead, the Russians were a convenient target for abuse by Democrats and were thrown to the wolves, all to promote the lie that Democrats were "victims" of Russian machinations instead of simply rejected by U.S. voters for their utterly repellent agenda.
That's been an expensive lie for us in the aftermath because any smart superpower should go out of its way to keep as many friends as it can, especially among the those with nuclear weapons. Making Russia an enemy for nothing more than partisan political purposes is not the act of someone who represents America. It's the act of a community organizer, a partisan political hack, a creep who shouldn't be anywhere near the levers of power, owing to an inability to distinguish the national interest from the partisan interest.
That's the old Obama we know however, and now he's disgraced us on the world stage as a dishonest sleazeball country, not a nation founded on fairness and democracy. His act and the acts of the Deep State were not only detrimental to democracy here, they were very detrimental to foreign policy abroad. False charges open the door to harsher spying, retaliation, and belligerent actions. It was yellow journalism and other schemings on the American side that got us into the Spanish-American war of 1898 when Spain was baselessly blamed for blowing up an American ship in the Caribbean. Any questions as to why Brittney Griner got such a harsh sentence for such a piddly crime in Russia? Or why a young Wall Street Journal reporter sits in some Russian prison on phony espionage charges? What on earth do the Russians think? And how can anyone fail to understand them at least for whatever they are doing with this blotch on our nation's record? Who started this garbage? How do the decent among us make it right?
Image: Pixabay / Pixabay License
OF COURSE OBOMB KNEW!
HE ENABLED, ABETTED AND CONDONED HILLARY CLINTON'S SELL OUT TO PUTIN AND THE MUSLIM DICTATORS TO FUND HER PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION FAMILY SLUSH FUND,
CLINTON WAS ENABLED BY NOT HAVING TO REPORT THE BRIBES AS SEC. OF STATE.
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES, FRANK) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER). BRIAN C JOONDEPH
House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) suggested Friday that former President Barack Obama knew of the Biden family’s foreign deals with adversaries of the United States.
Speaking with Lou Dobbs on the Great America Show, Comer said Obama must have known about the Biden family business.
“I believe, Lou, that it’s because he knew what Joe Biden was doing the last year of his vice presidency,” Comer said in reference to payments worth millions the family’s business collected.
Comer revealed Wednesday that over the course of several years the family business received over $10 million from schemes in Romania and China in return for what appears to be influence peddling.
“He knew his son [Hunter Biden] was no good, and he knew this was nothing but a political liability not just for our country, not just for the democrat party, but for Obama’s legacy,” Comer added. “Because a lot of this happened during the Obama administration.”
Comer also believes Obama’s knowledge of the family’s business informed his opposition to Joe Biden’s 2020 candidacy.
“So, I think that’s why Obama didn’t want Joe Biden to run for president. I think they knew about this,” Comer said about the business. “And remember, a lot of these coverups would have happened during the Obama administration with Obama appointees in these deep state bureaucracies.”
Comer said an establishment media journalist should ask Obama if Comer’s hunch is true: “This would be a great question for Obama: Were you aware of what was going on with Joe Biden with respect to foreign policy and some of these ragtag countries around the world?”
Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.
Friday on FNC’s “Hannity,” Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) blasted the FBI and the Department of Justice for how it has handled the investigation into possible wrongdoing of the Biden family while attempting to indict former President Donald Trump for misdemeanors.
The South Carolina lawmaker said her track record showed she wasn’t in the tank for Trump and asserted the amount of evidence against first son Hunter Biden was “ridiculous.”
“I will tell you, this is, as you say, Sean — everything you said was a hundred percent true, and this is just the tip of the iceberg,” she said. “And here we have a DOJ and FBI, who are who are indicting Trump on misdemeanors and then will not investigate Biden for betraying his country. And I have to tell you, absolutely, no one can accuse me of being hyper-partisan or being in the tank for Donald Trump. But good lord, the amount of evidence, in this case, is ridiculous. They weren’t hiring Hunter Biden for his brains. They weren’t hiring certainly Hunter Biden for his brawn. They were hiring him to pay for access to the White House, and we see this pattern repeat itself over and over and over again.”
“The reports that we saw at the Treasury would appear to be racketeering,” Mace added. “That comes to mind money laundering, wire fraud. Why were they able to enrich themselves with tens of millions of dollars, including as you say, a grandchild, nieces and nephews, current wives, ex-wives, a brother, a son, you name it, and the list goes on? That family tree is very, very big, and they made a lot of money off of Joe Biden.”
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES, FRANK) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER). BRIAN C JOONDEPH
PARASITE GAMER LAWYER OR JUST A TRAITOR WHO SHOULD BE TRIED AND EXECUTED?
Instead, the Biden family name has really stood for only two things: buffoonery and corruption. For fifty years, Joe Biden has managed to hold onto some slice of power in D.C. as a senator, vice president, and Oval Office stooge not because he is renowned for his erudition or virtue but rather because his doltish behavior and venal character make him ideal for others to control. Perhaps no other Washington relic has accomplished so little for the American people over such a prolonged government career or managed to harness those defects for lucrative advancement more successfully than China Joe.
American people deserve to know what China was up to with Joe Biden, especially when Beijing had already shelled out millions of dollars to Biden family members — including millions in set-asides for “the big guy.” What else is on that infamous Hunter Biden laptop? The conflicted Biden Justice Department cannot be trusted to engage in any meaningful oversight on this issue. We need a special counsel now.
TOM FITTON - JUDICIAL WATCH
Joseph Klein is a Harvard-trained lawyer, and the author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom and Lethal Engagement: Barack Hussein Obama, The United Nations & Radical Islam.
On the other hand, Schweizer and Eggers note that Hillary Clinton actually violated federal election rules in 2016, in a case directly related to the work of G-A-I. Schweizer’s 2015 book, Clinton Cash, exposed Hillary Clinton’s involvement with the takeover of an American uranium mining company by Russia. That revelation so terrified Clinton’s presidential campaign they decided to pay for the infamous Steele Dossier, with its lurid, unsubstantiated claims that Donald Trump was a Russian stooge. Hillary’s campaign essentially accused the Trump campaign of doing what they were, in fact, guilty of themselves.Peter Schweizer
His (BILLARY CLINTON) wife is equally and personally devious and corrupt; she had the fake “dossier” concocted she was certain would take Trump out of the running for president in 2016. Hillary used her position as Secretary of State to rake in millions of dollars to her phony Clinton Foundation, much of that money from other nations that sought to benefit from her largesse when President. PATRICIA McCARTHY
Durham, in his report detailing the Trump/Russian collusion, the Trump obstruction of justice, the Steele Dossier as an actual document, and all other things which would 'hopefully' find Donald Trump to be at best a vulgarian who abuses the nation's trust, and at worst a traitor, instead found great fault with our federal agencies. The DoJ and the FBI "failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law."
In our partisan world, truth and politics are seemingly incompatible. As a nation, we have grown so accustomed to the lies and spin of our politicians that we likely would not recognize an objective truth coming out of the mouth of any elected official.
Surely, there are exceptions, but we have been so manipulated by politicians and a complicit media that an honest politician would likely go unrecognized. As a conservative, I find this to be especially true of Democrats. My liberal friends, of which I still have more than a few, would say it is the Republican party that is most guilty of deception and dishonesty. So here we are, a nation that seems hopelessly divided. We have been tribalized, balkanized, sliced and diced in so many ways that agreement on any issue seems highly unlikely, if not downright impossible.
Now we are presented with just such an objective truth: the Durham Report. John Durham is a man of unquestioned integrity who possesses a willingness to go after the FBI, the CIA, or any federal agency that exceeds its authority or betrays its public trust. Throughout the years, he has shown himself to be an honest and thorough investigator
He has exposed the FBI's criminal handling of the Whitey Bulger affair as well as revealing the misdeeds of the CIA in destroying tapes of criminal interrogations of terrorist prisoners.
Durham, in his report detailing the Trump/Russian collusion, the Trump obstruction of justice, the Steele Dossier as an actual document, and all other things which would 'hopefully' find Donald Trump to be at best a vulgarian who abuses the nation's trust, and at worst a traitor, instead found great fault with our federal agencies. The DoJ and the FBI "failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law."
From the reaction of the mainstream media like the New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Atlantic, you would think that the report not only lent credence to Trump's claims that the Democrats were obsessed with him and would do anything, legal or not, to bring him down and that the media would do everything in its considerable power to aid in that task. Well, as it turns out, you'd be right to think just that.
If strict fidelity to the law ceases to be of utmost importance to the highest law enforcement agencies of this country, then the progressives have won. People like George Soros and his acolytes like Alvin Bragg and other district attorneys that he has inserted in blue jurisdictions will be left to do their dirty work with no fidelity whatsoever to the law. We will cease to be a nation. We would be no more than a hollow shell of our former greatness, destroyed from within by the rot of a progressive agenda.
On the other hand, if we accept the Durham Report as a thorough and honest appraisal of the evil done by Hillary Clinton and her ilk, and we find the will to act to see that this kind of perverted deceit is never again propagated upon the country, then we stand a chance. People like Hillary Clinton, Adam Schiff, and Nancy Pelosi must pay the price for the outright lies they told the American public.
Bill Hansmann is a dentist and dental educator with over fifty years in the profession. He continues to teach and write political blogs and semi-mediocre novels while living with his wife and cats in Florida.
Image: US Attorney's Office, Sate of Connecticut
THE PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION FAMILY SLUSH FUND POCKETED $160 MILLION FROM PUTIN. WHY?
Blackburn: It Was Hillary Clinton Who Was Close To The Russians All Along
His (BILLARY CLINTON) wife is equally and personally devious and corrupt; she had the fake “dossier” concocted she was certain would take Trump out of the running for president in 2016. Hillary used her position as Secretary of State to rake in millions of dollars to her phony Clinton Foundation, much of that money from other nations that sought to benefit from her largesse when President. PATRICIA McCARTHY
Special Counsel John Durham’s highly-anticipated report on the origins of the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign in 2016 revealed that top leaders at the Bureau shut down four criminal investigations into Hillary and Bill Clinton.
In 2014, the FBI investigated a “well-placed” confidential source’s claims that an unnamed foreign government intended to “contribute to Hillary Clinton’s anticipated presidential campaign, as a way to gain influence with Clinton should she win the presidency,” the report said.
The field office investigating these claims “almost immediately” sought a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant, but it remained “in limbo” for approximately four months, primarily due to Clinton’s then-expected presidential campaign.
As stated in Durham’s report:
According to another agent, the application lingered because “everyone was ‘super more careful’” and “scared with the big name [Clinton]” involved. 321 “[T]hey were pretty “tippy-toeing’ around HRC because there was a chance she would be the next President.”
Durham’s report also revealed that three separate FBI field offices in Washington, DC; Little Rock, Arkansas; and New York City, New York, opened investigations into “possibly criminal activity involving the Clinton Foundation” less than one year before the November 2016 presidential election.
One of these investigations was spawned by Breitbart News contributor Peter Schweizer’s book, Clinton Cash, which exposed the Clinton Foundation’s global nexus of influence peddling.
As Durham’s report detailed:
Beginning in January 2016, three different FBI field offices, the New York Field Office (“NYFO*), the Washington Field Office (“WFO*), and the Little Rock Field Office (“LRFO**), opened investigations into possible criminal activity involving the Clinton Foundation. The IRFO case opening communication referred to an intelligence product and corroborating financial reporting that a particular commercial “industry likely engaged a federal public official in a flow of benefits scheme, namely, large monetary contributions were made to a non-profit, under both direct and indirect control of the federal public official, in exchange for favorable government action and/or influence.” The WFO investigation was opened as a preliminary investigation, because the Case Agent wanted to determine if he could develop additional information to corroborate the allegations in a recently-published book, Clinton Cash by Peter Schweizer, before seeking to convert the matter to a full investigation. Additionally, the LRFO and NYFO investigations included predication based on source reporting that identified foreign governments that had made, or offered to make, contributions to the Foundation in exchange for favorable or preferential treatment from Clinton.
Speaking with the DailyMail, Schweizer said he received “a call from somebody from the New York FBI office after the book came out.”
“There was a New York Times piece on Uranium One. It was kind of confirming what we had in the book. That’s what I think triggered the interest,” Schweizer said. “With the Clinton Foundation, you have the transfer of large sums of money, you had policy positions that were affected, and you had certifiable evidence.”
“I’m not a lawyer, so I can’t say what was illegal. But there was definitely a there there, with all the speeches, donations, and policy effects, and nobody’s ever really disputed that,” he added.
Ultimately, FBI leadership held a joint meeting with the three field offices, FBI Headquarters, and appropriate United States Attorney’s offices. The first joint meeting occurred on February 1, 2016. However, the Department of Justice Public Integrity Section Chief, Ray Hulser, said the FBI briefing at that meeting was “poorly presented,” and saw “insufficient predication for at least one of the investigations.”
A second joint meeting occurred on February 22, 2016, which former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe chaired.
McCabe “initially directed the field offices to close their cases,” but later agreed to “reconsider the final disposition of the cases,” Durham’s report noted.
Paul Abbate, who was the FBI Washington Field Office’s Assistant Director-in-Charge at the time, described McCabe’s demeanor during the joint meeting as “negative,” “annoyed,” and “angry.”
As the report detailed:
According to Abbate, McCabe stated “they [the Department] say there’s nothing here” and “why are we even doing this?” At the close of the meeting, Campbell directed that for any overt investigative steps to be taken, the Deputy Director’s approval would be required.
Durham’s report also revealed that former FBI Director James Comey demanded, through an intermediary, the New York Field Office “cease and desist” their Clinton Foundation investigation.
Earlier in the week, McCabe claimed the Durham report was “never a legitimate investigation.”
“We knew from the very beginning exactly what John Durham was going to conclude, and that’s what we saw today. We knew from the very beginning this was never a legitimate investigation,” McCabe said. “This was a political errand to exact some sort of retribution on Donald Trump’s perceived enemies and the FBI.”
Durham’s report highlighted the FBI’s different approaches regarding their investigations into Clinton and former President Donald Trump.
“The use of defensive briefings in 2015 contrasts with the FBI’s failure to provide a defensive briefing to the Trump campaign approximately one year later when Australia shared the information from Papadopoulos,” the report stated.
Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee’s Weaponization of the Federal Government subcommittee, told the DailyMail that Durham’s report warrants “additional exposure and review.”
“The Clintons had a team of people at the FBI running interference for them to avoid criminal culpability,” Gaetz told the outlet. “These matters absolutely warrant additional exposure and review.”
Former Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said the FBI’s investigations into the Clintons “were shut down by the higher-ups who had an obvious political desire to see Donald Trump lose and Hillary Clinton win.”
“It’s disgusting really. Absolutely these investigations should be revisited,” he told DailyMail. “There’s no reason why Congress can’t have a series of hearings with the field agents who were pursuing the Clinton Foundation, and public interviews with them as well.”
Jordan Dixon-Hamilton is a reporter for Breitbart News. Write to him at jdixonhamilton@breitbart.com or follow him on Twitter.
The main objective of “political animals” like Obama and the Clintons is to get elected; it’s not to fix a broken America, nor to protect her. There are people who govern and there are people who campaign; Obama and the Clintons are the latter. Just look at the huge Republican electoral gains under Obama and the Clintons. It’s amazing that Democrats who still care about their party still support the very people who have brought it down.
Jesse Watters: The Clintons' crooked connections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnPSvkxKuLg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rTyFs8gbpU
HILLARY CLINTON: THREAT TO AMERICA!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hb-fQTm_fP0
Victorious Democrats would also end congressional investigations into the Hillary-Deep State-DNC-Russian-Clinton Foundation collusion and corruption. All the players in these massive, sordid affairs will be deemed “too big to jail” – and too closely tied to the Democratic Party to be investigated further.
By Jack Hellner
As the media and other Democrats salivate about Trump being charged with a crime in one of the many witch hunts, they should be asked some questions. They say he must be charged because we need election fairness and no one is above the law.
So here is a sample of what politicians and bureaucrats have done in the last 12 years, and I wonder what people think is the bigger threat and who was actually above the law.
The Obama IRS targeting political opponents in an effort to silence them before elections.
It was a clear violation of the First Amendment, yet every participant of the government was above the law. They destroyed computers and lied to Congress, but the Justice Department let them off.
The U.S. Justice Department has reached a settlement with dozens of conservative groups that claimed the Internal Revenue Service unfairly scrutinized them based on their political leanings when they sought a tax-exempt status, court documents showed.
The documents prove that Lois Lerner met with DOJ’s Election Crimes Division a month before the 2010 elections.
It has to be embarrassing to the DOJ, which may not be the most impartial one to be investigating the IRS. In fact, the DOJ withheld over 800 pages of Lerner documents citing "taxpayer privacy" and "deliberative privilege." Yet these internal DOJ documents show Ms. Lerner was talking to DOJ officials about prosecuting tax-exempt entities (yes, criminally!) two years before the IRS conceded there was inappropriate targeting.
It sure helps a criminal when a biased political supporter conducts the pretend investigation.
It looks like the Biden IRS is still targeting political enemies instead of doing their job. I have been a CPA for 46 years and not once have I seen a house call. Should we trust the IRS with 87,000 more agents?
Hillary and her aides actively destroying documents and equipment, as they violated several laws according to James Comey. Yet they all were above the law.
Comey: "No reasaonable prosecutor...." (YouTube screengrab)
Hillary selling access to foreign parties after taking massive amounts of money for her Foundation and family.
More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation
Hillary and the DNC paying over $10 million to a foreign national to create a fictitious dossier to destroy Trump.
Hillary and the DNC lying to the FEC that the payments for the dossier were for legal fees. The lies were obviously meant to mislead and hide the truth, yet no DA in New York investigated.
Numerous FBI officials lying to the FISA court to get permission to illegally spy on associates of Trump.
The perjurers have been above the law and yet we don't see the media and other Democrats demanding they be prosecuted.
Fake stories and witch hunts on Russian collusion.
The media and other Democrats knew there was no evidence of illegality or collusion, yet the stories persisted for years for the sole purpose of destroying a President whom they disagreed with.
The government, journalists, and former intelligence officials colluded to bury the story of Biden family corruption specifically to hide the truth before an election. Biden didn't pay anybody to squelch the story. They did it because they were actively campaigning for him.
Hunter's business partner visited the White House sixteen times while Joe was VP yet somehow the media, who say they care about facts and corruption, still don't care. Democrats also pretend that Joe is telling the truth when he said he never had anything to do with Hunter's business deal and that he and his family never received money from foreign sources.
Isn't it time that journalists and other Democrats stopped intentionally misleading the public that they believe the Justice Department is impartial and that no one is above the law. It is such an obvious lie -- yet none of the people pretending to be fact checkers call them out because they are just as dishonest.
We can only wonder at the question: do the last two generations know who Benedict Arnold was? Most likely not; they’ve not been taught legitimate American history for decades. To the young of today, Arnold might be a hero for betraying his country.
Polls show our young people do not respect or even like this country. Arnold, who had been a good soldier, was angry at being passed over for promotion and so began colluding with the British. He was an 18th century. Mark Felt. His name is (or was) interchangeable with the word “traitor.”
Bill Clinton was generally known as a brazen liar about the Lewinsky affair and all that it entailed; a tawdry, unseemly affair that he lied about incessantly until he couldn’t. He paid Paula Jones a court-ordered $800k but was never prosecuted for his loathsome behavior and gross dishonesty.
His wife is equally and personally devious and corrupt; she had the fake “dossier” concocted she was certain would take Trump out of the running for president in 2016. Hillary used her position as Secretary of State of State to rake in millions of dollars to her phony Clinton Foundation, much of that money from other nations that sought to benefit from her largesse when President.
That couple’s corruption was and is a blight on America’s history. They made LBJ seem like an amateur. The Clintons were criminals and they delighted in their criminality; they knew they were untouchable. They were a greedy couple, and their illicit machinations made them fabulously rich.
The Obamas learned their lessons well and also became fabulously rich by perfidious means. It’s likely that Biden has based his corruption on the Clinton model.
Joe Biden has been a pathological liar for all his years in Congress, as a representative and then as a senator. He can’t open his mouth without lies spewing forth; there are far too many to list. From his early support of segregation to his later denial; his plagiarism, his lies about his academic record, etc., etc.
In truth, Biden has always been a racist, a rather vicious one at that. See his attempt to humiliate Clarence Thomas at his SCOTUS confirmation. The man is one of the most greedy, corrupt politicians ever to steal the presidency, which he did, and to end up in the Oval Office.
He is entirely without “knowledge” now; he is obviously in the throes of dementia. How else to explain his shocking inappropriate jollity when he was sent to a podium to speak about the Nashville murders of six people, three of them aged nine?
Biden has always been a liar; he became a traitor when he began using his position, his son, and brother to sell influence to China, Russia and Ukraine for millions of dollars. Given the damage he’s done to the country in two years, it is safe to assume he is a controlled asset of China. They own him, which is why he has allowed the destruction of the dollar as the global currency.
Every American surely knows by now that the Democrat party is pro-criminal, anti-dissent. In blue states across the nation, criminals are routinely allowed onto the streets without bail to commit more crime. Innocent people are being attacked with impunity on a daily basis in DC, in NY, Chicago, SF, and LA, etc.
If the perpetrators are caught, they are often released onto an unsuspecting public by Soros-funded DAs to repeat and escalate their criminal behavior. Our Marxist left relies on chaos, on the calculated destruction of the family, on the thorough indoctrination of our children.
How do they go about this decades-old plan? They advocate for the normalization of homosexuality, transgenderism and the genital mutilation that comes with that particular form of mental illness. The pro-trans activists encourage doctors to remove the breasts of girls as young as thirteen, even hysterectomies.
Who are the doctors that perform these procedures? They are purely evil, traitors to the Hippocratic Oath they may have sworn to uphold. The lies that undergird the ideology of transgenderism are not only appalling but provable. There are only two sexes. It is tragic that there is a Supreme Court justice that does not know what every three-year-old knows.
The appearance of Alejandro Mayorkas before the Senate on Tuesday was the height of prevarication. The man did not answer a single question. He stonewalled, dissembled and flat-out lied. He claimed not to know how many migrants have died on their journey to our southern border. He did not know how many children have been trafficked.
When Senator Cruz showed him pictures of the wrist bands that all migrants wear as ordered by the cartels, Mayorkas pretended not to know what they were. The bands indicate how much money each migrant owes the cartels for getting them across the border. There is no way Mayorkas does not know what they are, what they mean; the children especially will be slaves to the cartels. This man is truly abhorrent, another enemy of America in a position of undeserved power.
That the Republicans in congress have not impeached him is a testament to their culpability, their slavish cowardice. But they’ve also done nothing about the unconstitutional abuse of the J6 prisoners, so what more can we expect? The uniparty is the uniparty. The few who do remember and revere the Constitution are too few and their meek colleagues offer no support. They too, like the doctors who mutilate kids confused about their gender, have forgotten their oath. They too are liars and traitors.
In short, we are being governed by a host of Benedict Arnolds, liars and traitors who have done far less for the nation than even Benedict Arnold did. The Biden cabinet is an assemblage of incompetents, people chosen for their skin color or sexual orientation, not any particular skill or expertise. Consider Defense Department boneheads, Austin and Milley. Apparently there are drag queen performances for children on our military bases around the world! They each claimed not to know this! How is that possible?
Unless all Republicans step up to the plate to save the nation, we are well and truly done; over.
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rutling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. Marcus Tullius Cicero
Graphic credit: public domain
One topic that Hillary is quick to criticize President Trump on is his relationship with Saudia Arabia. It’s ironic given the Clinton Foundation’s refusal to state that they will no longer accept financial donations from The Kingdom as others have.
But the Clinton Foundation, to which donations declined dramatically after Clinton’s 2016 defeat, has taken multi-million dollar contributions from Saudi Arabia in the past and isn’t ruling out continuing to accept them.
The Clinton Foundation accepted between $10 and $25 million from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, with donations coming as late as 2014. A now-defunct group named “Friends of Saudi Arabia,” which was reportedly co-founded by a Saudi Prince and often worked as a PR front for the kingdom, also donated between $1 and $5 million.
Qatar's longstanding efforts to buy influence in the United States have, quite unsurprisingly, included substantial donations to the Clinton Foundation. In 2011, for example, the foundation accepted a $1 million gift from Qatar in honor of former president Bill Clinton's 65th birthday. Hillary was serving as secretary of state at the time, but failed to disclose the massive donation to the State Department despite her pledge to keep the agency apprised of the foundation's foreign donors.
Special Counsel John Durham’s report largely confirmed what Republicans have said for years about the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign. Durham found the FBI opened the probe, known as Crossfire Hurricane, with flimsy evidence, and detailed the FBI’s mishandling of the infamous Steele dossier, which falsely claimed the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin.
Durham laid out in painstaking detail the FBI’s misstatements to a federal surveillance court to obtain warrants to surveil Trump campaign aide Carter Page and the Clinton campaign’s hand in spreading false information to smear former president Donald Trump as a Kremlin stooge. Much of that has been laid out in previous investigations and through reports by conservative media outlets.
But there are some surprises in the 320-page report. Here are eight of Durham's most illuminating discoveries:
In late July 2016, CIA director John Brennan received an intelligence report that Hillary Clinton personally approved a plan on July 26, 2016, to link Trump to Russia in order to distract from the controversy surrounding her emails. Brennan shared the intelligence with then-president Barack Obama, FBI director James Comey, and other government officials.
According to Durham, the FBI should have seen the intelligence report as a "clear warning sign" that the Clinton campaign may try to "manipulate or influence" the 2016 election. Instead, the FBI failed to factor the plan into its decision making for Crossfire Hurricane, the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign.
Indeed, the Clinton campaign was behind two schemes to publicly portray Trump as in bed with Russia. The campaign funded the discredited Steele dossier and fed reporters with a false claim that Trump’s companies had secret communications with Russia’s Alfa Bank. The FBI investigated both threads. The information was also fed to establishment news outlets, fueling years of conspiracy theories that Trump conspired with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
Durham blasted the FBI for its "startling and inexplicable failure" to take the "Clinton plan" into account.
Director Comey and deputy director Andrew McCabe ordered three FBI field offices to close their preliminary investigations into whether foreign governments and businesses donated to the Clinton family charity in order to influence Hillary Clinton.
According to Durham, McCabe ordered the field offices to close their investigations during a Feb. 22, 2016, meeting at FBI headquarters. Attendees said McCabe asserted that "there’s nothing here" and asked "why are we even doing this?" FBI agents left the meeting frustrated with McCabe’s decision. In May 2016, Comey ordered the New York field office to "cease and desist" from its Clinton Foundation investigation because of an undisclosed counterintelligence issue.
Durham highlighted Comey and McCabe’s intervention in the Clinton Foundation probe to contrast the FBI leaders’ aggressive approach to Crossfire, which the bureau opened based on a single unverified tip from an Australian diplomat regarding a conversation he had in London in May 2016 with Trump aide George Papadopoulos.
"Once again, the investigative actions taken by FBI Headquarters in the Foundation matters contrast with those taken in Crossfire Hurricane," Durham said.
Democrats repeatedly defended Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe against allegations of anti-Trump bias. Never mind that one of Mueller’s top prosecutors, Andrew Weissmann, attended Hillary Clinton’s ill-fated victory party on Election Night 2016.
According to Durham, two members of the Mueller team expressed concern that an investigation into the Steele dossier was shut down for political reasons.
A special agent and analyst on the Mueller team told Durham’s office that they were prevented from investigating Charles Dolan, a Democratic operative who was a source for the dossier. The Mueller staffers believed Dolan would help settle lingering questions about the dossier, but leaders of the Mueller team blocked the idea. Dolan also had extensive ties to the Kremlin, which might prove embarrassing for investigators focused on Republican ties to Russia.
According to Durham, the Mueller team analyst speculated "that the decision not to open on Dolan was politically motivated." The analyst said that information about Dolan "ran counter to the narrative that the Mueller Special Counsel investigators were cultivating given that Dolan was a former Democratic political operative." Dolan had advised Clinton’s 2008 campaign and was a volunteer for her 2016 venture.
The Mueller special agent "discussed whether the decision not to open on Dolan was politically motivated, given Dolan's extensive connections to the Democratic Party." The agent said that while she did not believe the decision was political, "she did worry about the optics of the decision, given that Dolan was a prominent Democrat."
The Mueller investigators also expressed concern to Durham that senior Mueller prosecutor Jeannie Rhee ordered them to shut down their investigation of the Steele dossier because it was "not within the scope" of Mueller’s investigation. This puzzled the Mueller team members because investigators had that same month interviewed dossier author Christopher Steele, the report says. Rhee contributed $5,400 to Clinton’s 2016 campaign.
The FBI investigated Igor Danchenko, the primary source for the discredited Steele dossier, as a possible Russian spy in 2010. That has previously been disclosed, but Durham’s report sheds new light on what information the FBI had about Danchenko’s alleged Russian ties.
Danchenko’s classmates at Georgetown University told Durham’s team that Danchenko claimed that he had served in the Russian military and had worked on "special" projects. Danchenko told a classmate that his Russian passport listed him as a member of the GRU, Russia’s military spy service. In 2008, Danchenko allegedly told a colleague at the Brookings Institution, where he was an analyst, that he missed work "because he had been in South Ossetia fighting Georgians." And Danchenko bragged to the colleague "about vandalizing the Georgian embassy in Belarus."
The Durham report lays out a litany of evidence that links Danchenko to Russian spies. The FBI learned that Danchenko informed a Russian intelligence officer in 2006 that he was interested in entering Russian diplomatic service. Danchenko provided documents to the Russian intelligence officer that were to be placed in the Russian embassy’s "diplomatic mail pouch."
The FBI’s Trump team investigators were aware of this when they interviewed Danchenko in 2017 about his role in the Steele dossier. But still, FBI agents recruited Danchenko as a confidential human source (CHS) and paid him $220,000 through October 2020.
Durham said the arrangement was problematic because the FBI was unable to assess whether the information that Danchenko gave to Steele "was, in whole or in part, Russian disinformation."
Investigators obtained a foreign surveillance warrant on Danchenko in 2010 but shut it down the next year after they "mistakenly" believed Danchenko left the country. In reality, Danchenko and his wife purchased a one-way ticket to London but never boarded the flight. They remained in the Washington, D.C., area.
The FBI did not reopen its investigation into Danchenko even after an FBI analyst figured out that he was in the United States.
Durham raises major concerns that a top analyst on Crossfire Hurricane, Brian Auten, was involved in the initial Danchenko investigation but did not notify others on the Crossfire Hurricane team that the dossier source was a suspected Russian spy.
Peter Strzok, the former deputy chief of FBI counterintelligence, opened the probe into the Trump campaign on July 28, 2016, after receiving the tip from Australian diplomats about Papadopoulos. Strzok would oversee Crossfire Hurricane and later serve on the Mueller team before being fired because of his anti-Trump text messages.
But Strzok expressed early reservations about the basis for the investigation.
During a trip to London in early August 2016 to interview the Australian diplomats, Strzok told an FBI colleague on Aug. 3, 2016, that "there's nothing to this, but we have to run it to ground."
Durham provides other evidence that FBI employees and British diplomats thought the evidence to open Crossfire Hurricane was flimsy. An FBI employee said the FBI’s evidence to launch the probe "was thin." The employee said his counterparts in British intelligence "could not believe" that the FBI did not have more evidence to open the probe.
Despite those concerns, Strzok would direct the major investigative steps in Crossfire Hurricane, including oversight of analysis of the Steele dossier.
Stefan Halper, a longtime confidential FBI source, gave his FBI handlers false information about Trump aide Carter Page, according to Durham.
Halper secretly recorded conversations with three Trump campaign aides at the behest of the FBI: Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, and Sam Clovis. The FBI extensively cited the conversations in applications for warrants to surveil Page, a volunteer foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign.
Durham describes an incident on Dec. 15, 2016, in which Halper falsely claimed to his FBI handler that Page admitted he met with Russian official Igor Sechin during a trip to Moscow. If true, the admission would have validated a crucial Steele dossier detail about Trump-Russia collusion.
But according to Durham, a transcript of Halper’s conversation with Page showed that Page actually denied meeting with Sechin.
Durham said he "examined" whether Halper made a false statement, but that prosecutors were "unable to establish" whether Halper intentionally lied.
The Durham report shows that Comey pushed aggressively for the faulty Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants against Page.
Comey repeatedly asked his deputy, Andrew McCabe, "Where is the FISA, where is the FISA?"
Going after Page was "a top priority" for Comey, an intelligence agent told Durham. An attorney who wrote one of the FISA applications on Page said they were "being constantly pressured" to move forward by FBI management.
The Justice Department inspector general found that the FBI under Comey’s watch made 17 significant omissions in the surveillance warrants, including failures to disclose major inconsistencies in the Steele dossier.
Key players in the Durham investigation refused interviews with the special counsel. The list includes:
• James Comey
• Andrew McCabe
• Peter Strzok
• Former FBI counterintelligence chief Bill Priestap
• Marc Elias, Clinton campaign attorney who funded the Steele dossier
• Glenn Simpson, cofounder of Fusion GPS, the firm behind the Steele dossier
• Rodney Joffe, a tech executive who pushed the Alfa Bank allegations
• An unnamed "senior FBI national security agent"
RUSSIA GATE WAS PERPETRATED BY TWO GAMER LAWYERS: OBAMA, CLINTON.
The original Supervisory Special Agent on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation had never seen a CIA memo pointing to a Clinton campaign plan to tie former Pres. Donald Trump to Russia – and became “visibly upset and emotional” when Special Counsel John Durham’s office showed it to him.
On Friday, Special Counsel John Durham released a report on his investigation of the FBI’s handling of its Operation Crossfire efforts to prove Pres. Trump was colluding with Russia in order to further his 2020 reelection campaign.
In his report, Durham explains that the FBI’s treatment of Trump’s campaign was “markedly different from the FBI's actions with respect to other highly significant intelligence it received from a trusted foreign source pointing to a Clinton campaign plan to vilify Trump by tying him to Vladimir Putin so as to divert attention from her own concerns relating to her use of a private email server.”
The FBI “never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical personnel, or produced any analytical products” to look into the purported Clinton Plan – even though the CIA Director thought it was so troubling that he sent a formal memo to the FBI Director and briefed the White House:
“This lack of action was despite the fact that the significance of the Clinton plan intelligence was such as to have prompted the Director of the CIA to brief the President, Vice President, Attorney General, Director of the FBI, and other senior government officials about its content within days of its receipt.
“It was also of enough importance for the CIA to send a formal written referral memorandum to Director Comey and the Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI's Counterintelligence Division, Peter Strzok, for their consideration and action. The investigative referral provided examples of information the Crossfire Hurricane fusion cell had ‘gleaned to date.’”
The Referral Memo, which mentioned the Clinton Plan intelligence, stated, in part:
“Per FBI verbal request, CIA provides the below examples of information the CROSSFIRE HURRICANE fusion cell has gleaned to date [Source revealing information redacted]:
“An exchange ... discussing US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's approval of a plan concerning US presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering US elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server.”
“None of the FBI personnel who agreed to be interviewed could specifically recall receiving this Referral Memo, nor did anyone recall the FBI doing anything in response to the Referral Memo,” Durham’s investigation found.
Most of those actively involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation said they had never seen the Clinton Plan intelligence – and some “expressed surprise and dismay” when Durham’s office told them about it.
One FBI special agent became so “visibly upset and emotional” when shown the Clinton Plan intelligence that he left the interview with his lawyer, then returned to “emphatically” deny any previous knowledge of either the Clinton Plan intelligence or the CIA memo, Durham reports:
“The original Supervisory Special Agent on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, Supervisory Special Agent-1, reviewed the intelligence during one of his interviews with the [Durham Special Counsel’s] Office.
“After reading it, Supervisory Special Agent-1 became visibly upset and emotional, left the interview room with his counsel, and subsequently returned to state emphatically that he had never been apprised of the Clinton Plan intelligence and had never seen the aforementioned Referral Memo.”
“Supervisory Special Agent-1 expressed a sense of betrayal that no one had informed him of the intelligence,” Durham reports:
“Supervisory Special Agent-1 responded firmly that regardless of whether its contents were true, he should have been informed of it.”
Former FBI General Counsel James Baker also claimed in his interview to have “neither seen nor heard of the Clinton Plan intelligence or the resulting Referral Memo.”
If he had, Baker said, he would have been “much more skeptical” of the Trump-Russia Collusion investigation:
“He acknowledged the significance of the reporting and explained that had he known of it during the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, he would have viewed in a different and much more skeptical light (i) information the FBI received from Steele concerning Trump's purported ties to Russia and (ii) information received from attorney Michael Sussmann that purported to show a secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank.”
Then-President Barack Obama and then-Vice President Joe Biden were personally briefed by then-CIA Director John Brennan in 2016 that the CIA had evidence of Hillary Clinton planning to falsely link then-presidential candidate Donald Trump to Russia, according to a report by Special Counsel John Durham released Monday.
The report said the intelligence came from a “highly significant intelligence” from a “trusted foreign source pointing to a Clinton campaign plan to vilify Trump by tying him to Vladimir Putin so as to divert attention from her own concerns relating to her use of a private email server.”
Brennan briefed Obama, Biden, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey, and other senior government officials “days” after the tip was received.
There were handwritten notes from Brennan that showed he briefed about the “alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services,” the report said.
Brennan briefed them on August 3, 2016 in the White House Situation Room, the report said. That meeting was to brief relevant intelligence known to date on Russian election interference, the report said.
The report said the CIA even sent a formal written referral to Comey and then-Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division, Peter Strzok, for their consideration and action, but that the FBI took no steps to investigate the intelligence on Clinton’s plan.
“Unlike the FBI’s opening of a full investigation of unknown members of the Trump campaign based on raw, uncorroborated information, in this separate matter involving a purported Clinton campaign plan, the FBI never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information,” the report said.
The revelation suggests that although Obama and Biden knew that the origins of the Trump campaign Russian collusion allegations was part of a plan by Clinton, they said nothing or did nothing and even perpetuated the idea that Russians were interfering in U.S. elections.
On July 25, 2019, after Biden had begun his presidential campaign, he tweeted, “Russia undermined our democracy by interfering in the 2016 election. That’s a fact. We need a President who will stand up to the Kremlin, push back against Putin, and take immediate steps to ensure the security of our elections.”
Biden also pushed the false accusation that Trump had colluded with Russia in October 2019, tweeting Trump’s comment on the campaign trail, “Russia if you’re listening,” which was a joke regarding Clinton’s missing emails from her private server.
Follow Breitbart News’s Kristina Wong on Twitter, Truth Social, or on Facebook.
GLOBAL BRIBES SUCKER
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sakOcd12Zw
Special Report: The Hillary Clinton Problem
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WywjHtIzNVU
Tuesday on FNC’s “Hannity,” former Rep Devin Nunes (R-CA), also a former House Intelligence Committee chairman, said despite its shortcomings, the Durham report issued earlier this week showed how “hopelessly corrupt” the FBI was.
“I think everybody just has to take a step back here and look at what really happened,” he said. “You have a corrupt DOJ, corrupt FBI that worked with the Clinton campaign to launch this — to launch this hoax that still continues today. They got away with it then, and they’re getting away with it now, and I think it’s getting worse and worse. And you see it, and it’s sad because you would hope that those guys that got spared you were playing them, some of the FBI guys that were involved in this hoax, you see them.”
“You see what they’re saying,” Nunes continued. “You would think this would be a time to take a step back and notice, hey, Durham didn’t call me. Durham didn’t even subpoena me. I never had to answer any questions, but instead, they’re doubling down. They show no remorse. And I think that’s why you see many people in the United States Congress and many people all over America saying, look, the FBI is hopelessly corrupted, and I think that’s where it’s at now.”
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor
Both the far-left New York Times and Washington Post refuse to return Pulitzers for spreading the lie former President Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election.
Would Hitler return a fake Pulitzer?
Now that the Monday release of the Durham Report has debunked every facet of the Russia Collusion allegation and proved the whole thing was a politically-motivated smear campaign invented by Hillary Clinton, blessed by Barack Obama, and furthered by the FBI, there have been numerous calls for these left-wing outlets to return their fake Pulitzers.
Why should someone be rewarded for spreading a hoax? the thinking goes. Well, I will and have argued that these corporate news outlets knew all along it was a hoax.
Of course, they did.
The corporate media knew it was being lied to by the FBI and wanted to be lied to by the FBI.
In other words, the media’s goal had nothing to do with the truth and everything to do with coordinating a coup with the FBI against a legally-elected American president.
The Daily Mail asked both the New York Times and Washington Post if they intend to return their fake Pulitzers. The Times didn’t respond. The financially failing Post said, “The Post stands by its reporting.”
Of course, the Post stands by its lies. Like the New York Times and CNN, the lies were the point. Why would the Post or Times return a fake Pulitzer for lying? Why would CNN retract its lies when the point of the lies stands: work with the FBI to formulate a coup against a sitting president?
Retractions and returning fake Pulitzers are acts of contrition, an acknowledgment you did something wrong.
The Times, Post, and CNN will never admit to doing anything wrong because, in their corrupt eyes, they did nothing wrong. Spreading bald-faced lies to rid the country of Trump is seen by the corporate media as virtuous, not shameful.
FLASHBACK: McEnany — Time for New York Times, Washington Post to ‘Hand Back Their Pulitzers’
White House / YouTubeIn the fascist eyes of the news media, they earned these awards. They worked hard to conspire with the FBI to come up with these lies, so they had damn well better see something for it, preferably something shiny and hollow.
You have to understand what has happened to the left in this country, which includes the corporate media…
To them, the goal of an America living under centralized government fascism is so moral that anything done to further that goal is moral.
It is insane to believe that news organizations championing burning black neighborhoods to the ground, the execution of police officers, the underage sex trafficking and poison of drugs pouring over our border, children mutilated forever with sex surgeries, and babies aborted after they are born, would even consider returning a fake Pulitzer over a little thing like lying.
I’ll ask again: Would Hitler return a Pulitzer?
Oh, you think that’s going too far…? These Nazis are mutilating children, butchering born-alive babies, spying on presidential campaigns, encouraging their Brownshirts in Black Lives Matter and Antifa to terrorize and destroy cities, and turned a mostly-peaceful anti-vote fraud protest at the U.S. Capitol into a 21st Centrury Reichstag Fire.
If you handed this media a red button that would give every Trump voter stomach cancer, the ensuing stampede to be the first to hit it would rattle the planet.
Return a fake Pulitzer? Wake up. Do you have any idea about the monsters we are dealing with?
Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.
“If the Constitution did not forbid cruel and unusual punishment, the sentence I would like to see imposed would place both Bill and Hillary Clinton in the same 8-by-12 cell.” ROBERT ARVAY
Obama’s Democratic Party administration launched a furious salvo of denunciations, with then Vice President Joe Biden calling Assange a “high-tech terrorist” and Hilary Clinton reportedly asking, “Can’t we just drone this guy?” This opened the floodgates to a torrent of demands from Republicans and the right-wing media for his assassination.
The Russiagate Players Got Rich and Escaped Consequences
Peter Strzok, the man of a thousand sneers, reacted to the release of the Durham report by screenshotting the report’s footnote of his own book and recommending people buy it.
Despite being fired from the FBI, the disgraced former agent got a book deal, “Compromised: Counterintelligence and the Threat of Donald J. Trump” as well as co-hosting a podcast with ‘Mueller, She Wrote’s Allison Gill and scoring an adjunct professorship at Georgetown University.
The Russiagate investigation has been discredited, but the Russiagate grift is alive and well. And none of the participants have any regrets or expect there to be any consequences.
Strzok and fellow agent Lisa Page, with whom he had an affair, are suing for wrongful termination from the FBI, and they’ve been fighting to depose former President Trump.
Their former boss, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe secured a settlement for his benefits including back pay from the Biden Justice Department. There’s little doubt that Attorney General Merrick Garland will eventually arrange for a settlement as a reward for Strzok and Page.
McCabe, who received a gig as a CNN analyst, went on his own news network to dismiss the Durham report. Even though the report clearly demonstrated that the FBI had violated its own rules in opening the investigation, the former FBI boss bragged that “I stand by the investigative decisions that we made to open the investigation first on the Trump campaign “ and insisted that, “the Russians did, in fact, influence the campaign”.
The disgraced FBI bigwig shows up all the time on CNN to bash Trump and to claim that this time the walls are closing in. Like Strzok, his former boss also has an academic gig as a distinguished visiting professor at George Mason University.
If Strzok works hard enough, maybe Georgetown will make him a “distinguished” academic too.
Lisa Page appears to have taught a class at Yale on Cybersecurity Law and Policy and was hired by NBC News and MSNBC as a legal analyst, but hasn’t been all that visible otherwise.
Bruce Ohr, a DOJ official whose wife, Nellie Ohr, worked for Fusion GPS, left a day before he was fired. The Durham report reveals that Nellie Ohr may have produced some of the key Russiagate material even before Steele. Bruce Ohr aggressively pitched his wife’s Fusion GPS smears and promoted an investigation.
Like McCabe, Ohr is also teaching at George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government. His class is on “transnational crime and corruption”. Nellie Ohr works as an intelligence analyst dealing with Russia for Accenture: the world’s largest consulting firm.
Strzok, Page, McCabe and Ohr are “academics” now and the consequences are academic.
The parallel career tracks, media contracts, book deals and academic gigs, are no coincidence. Some of the key FBI figures in Russiagate are being rewarded and financed by the same media and academic government establishment that fed this monster. Strzok, Page and McCabe have lucrative careers doing what they were doing at the FBI: attacking political opponents. They’ll just be doing it outside the anonymity and without the power of their government positions.
But there will be plenty of others to take their place. And for any FBI or DOJ personnel worried about breaking the rules to go after Republicans, the book deals, academic gigs, podcasts and general celebrity for Strzok, McCabe and Page reassure them that they don’t have to worry.
Justice will not be served.
Kevin E. Clinesmith, the former FBI lawyer who pleaded guilty to faking an email used for a FISA warrant, was the only figure in the Durham investigation to face any criminal consequences. He got probation and served no time. His license was only suspended and afterward he can go on practicing law.
Durham’s charges against Michael Sussmann and Igor Danchenko never got past a D.C. jury.
After his acquittal, Sussmann became a partner at Fenwick & West focusing on “privacy and cybersecurity”. Fenwick & West may need some help in that area considering its FTX role.
Sussmann’s new firm has been hit with a class action lawsuit accusing it of covering up Sam Bankman-Fried’s abuses. One lawsuit alleges that, “Fenwick & West created fake entities that Bankman-Fried and FTX employed as fronts through which to launder customer funds and helped FTX to dodge regulatory scrutiny while maintaining a veneer of full compliance.”
Clearly the right place for a former Clinton campaign lawyer.
Igor Danchenko, perhaps not being quite as much of an inside man, hasn’t been as lucky and posted a message, “I am looking for a new role and would appreciate your support. Thank you in advance for any connections, advice, or opportunities you can offer.”
He does not seem to have found any takers.
Charles Dolan Jr, Durham’s likely next target, had the Sussman and Danchenko cases succeeded, no longer seems to be listed with any of the firms he was working for, but apparently still sits on the board of the International Foundation for Electoral Systems and on the advisory board of the University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Christopher Steele, of the infamous eponymous dossier, continues to head up Orbis Business Intelligence and another consultancy calling itself Magic Strand. In his interviews, he has expressed no regret over his actions.
Michael Isikoff, who used Yahoo News to launder the Steele dossier’s smears and whose reports were abused as a basis for FISA warrants, continues in his role as Chief Investigative Correspondent. David Corn, the Washington D.C. bureau chief for Mother Jones, who played a similar role, only briefly got in trouble over reports of rape jokes and inappropriately touching female staffers, before going back to work.
Ben Smith, BuzzFeed News‘ former editor-in-chief, has written pieces titled, “I’m Proud We Published the Trump-Russia Dossier” and “I Would Publish the Steele Dossier Again”. While BuzzFeed News was shut down due to unprofitability, Smith got a job at the New York Times and became the co-founder of a new media site: Semafor.
The New York Times and the Washington Post received Pulitzers for pushing the Russiagate hoax. Last year, the Pulitzers insisted that, “The separate reviews converged in their conclusions: that no passages or headlines, contentions or assertions in any of the winning submissions were discredited by facts that emerged subsequent to the conferral of the prizes.”
The Pulitzers have also refused to revoke the 1932 award of New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty for serving as a Stalinist propagandist and lying about genocide in the Soviet Union. The leftist organization falsely claimed that “there was not clear and convincing evidence of deliberate deception”. If mass murder can’t get the Pultizers to revoke a lefty media liar’s award, the Durham report certainly won’t.
And so they got away with it.
The media made hundreds of millions of dollars pushing Russiagate. Publishers, editors and journalists made names for themselves, won awards and got book contracts for their lies. Lawyers, experts and consultants faced some discomfort, but emerged on the other side. Some FBI and DOJ officials lost their jobs, but are likely to come away with full benefits and are building careers as media analysts and Beltway law school academics. The only Russiagate figure who still doesn’t have a job is Igor Danchenko.
The Durham report’s account of abuses is devastating, but has been brushed aside by the media, former government officials and the rest of the Russiagate network. Unable to get D.C. juries to convict the accused, the investigation stalled and has dissolved into little more than an accounting on the various players but without the connective tissue of the network behind them.
Nobody went to jail, hardly anyone even suffered lasting career consequences and the Washington D.C. network they were part of stepped in to protect and reward the Russiagaters.
The lack of any meaningful consequences means that Russiagate will happen again.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
Maybe the IRS should spend their time administering the tax code instead of targeting people they don't like and protecting criminals whose policies they like.
These days, it is no different than when the IRS targeted Tea Party members for the sole reason that they did not like President Obama's big government and high-tax policies.
Biden compared Tea Party members to domestic terrorists back then, just like he compares MAGA Republicans to domestic terrorists today.
It is Democrats who continually gin up racial hate and division while they pretend they want unity and most of the media cheers.
Why should we hire 87,000 more IRS agents when the ones we have are more interested in protecting themselves instead of doing their job?
Look at this news here:
IRS Axes 'Entire Investigative Team' Probing Hunter Biden Taxes: Report
According to an exclusive report late Monday night from The New York Post, the IRS "removed the 'entire investigative team' from its long-running tax fraud probe of first son Hunter Biden in alleged retaliation against the whistleblower who alleged a coverup."
Biden's latest financial disclosures are out and he showed no gifts. What about the gifts when Hunter uses kickbacks to pay Daddy's bills? I bet those gifts have never been shown on any gift tax return. I bet IRS agents don't care.
What about all the times Joe and his family spend vacations at a billionaire's house for free? Where are the gift tax returns?
The leftist media has been spending lots of time trying to destroy Clarence Thomas for free vacations, even though that is not a violation, but they actively support Biden no matter how corrupt he is and how many ethical violations he has.
It is so hard to spot the bias:
Royalties from a pair of books he published years earlier: $2,933. Interest from one bank account: $15,000 or less. Gifts to declare: none
Meanwhile, Special Counsel John Durham's report shows how corrupt and politicized the Justice Department has become. They have interfered in all elections since at least 2016 with endless witch hunts. The corruption by the Obama and Biden Justice Department dwarfs Watergate.
There have been endless witch hunts seeking to destroy Trump and associates yet the corrupt Justice officials remain free.
It is a joke when the Justice Department says the reforms they have put in place will stop this. They are targeting Catholics, parents, pro-life people, and trespassers with no regard for equal justice or the truth.
The corruption in 2020 was as bad as 2016 when they colluded with the media to bury the truth about the Biden family corruption.
And the media cheers and continues to intentionally lie to the public that the 2020 election was clean.
If the media and other Democrats dispose of Trump, they will go after Florida's Gov. Ron DeSantis or whoever else is the Republican candidate. They also trashed Reagan, Bush, McCain, and Romney. The only Republicans they pretend to support are Republicans when they are attacking other Republicans.
Is the media going to call out Rep. Adam Schiff for all his intentional lies? Nope, they will continue to have him lie about Comey's and Jordan's investigations into the massive corruption of Joe Biden. The truth hasn't mattered for a long time to the sycophant media. They only care about power.
The swamp must be drained before the U.S. collapses. The younger generation is being indoctrinated with garbage, like the lies about climate change and white privilege.
There is nothing progressive about the media and other Democrats that call themselves progressive. They are intentionally moving the country backwards. They should be referred to as depressives, oppressives, destructives, or regressives.
Image: Pixabay / Pixabay License
AT readers know well the array of dementia signs in the current occupant of the White House. I’m sure most would contend that Biden is not mentally capable of the office. And yet, how many AT essays and comments decry this or that policy of Biden or this or that statement that he manages to utter as if they were his policies and statements? One of Biden’s chief functions for the left is his role as Straw Man in Chief. If you attack him, you’re not attacking them. (Leftist) Mission accomplished. Conservatives/patriots set themselves up here in what will be an exceedingly adept ploy from the left. Once the left gets rid of Biden, their minions will claim “problem solved.” Now let’s all Hail our new (Democrat) President ___________ [fill in the blank].
So, what is the proper approach that conservatives/patriots should take? Utter dismissiveness! Refuse to engage with any argument that centers on Biden. Refuse to acknowledge him. It will drive his minions crazy but, much more importantly, it will remind AT readers that Biden is merely the tip of the pimple that sits atop the festering subdermal abscess that is Democrat leftism. Eliminating Biden will accomplish nothing except proceeding to the next chapter that the left has written.
So how am I so sure that other hands man the steering wheel in our headlong plunge over the abyss? Little things. The mighty get tripped up so many times by just that, little things.
Image: Biden (cropped). YouTube screen grab.
For example, Biden did not bother attending the coronation of the monarch of perhaps our closest ally. The estimable Mrs. Biden did. I’m not a partisan of Charles, but I do respect the British people. Biden’s actions are inexcusable in that regard. And the petty meanness of the swipe seems odd. What exactly in Biden’s Senate or Vice Presidency past betokens his antipathy to the British or their monarch? In truth, nothing. That his mother didn’t like the British is not relevant to him in his role as White House occupant and the American people’s representative.
And then there’s this: Remember that bust of Winston Churchill that Barry Obama had summarily removed from the WH after his inauguration? The one that President Trump put back in place? Well, it seems (from none other than CNN) that Biden had it removed again.
Now we know that Biden can be petty and vindictive (ask Hunter’s disowned daughter), but even the petty and vindictive need a motive. Only one person would have the pettiness, vindictiveness, and the hatred to troll that low. And that would be Barack Hussein Obama.
So, with Susan Rice’s recent stint in the Biden White House as further argument about the real power behind the Oval Office chair (not to mention the estimable Merrick Garland as AG,) it really does appear that the Transformation of America is proceeding apace with the same cast of characters leading the way (where are Valerie Jarrett and Eric Holder these days btw?).
Now this begets yet another question: How can a guy not bright enough to write his own autobiography lead a transformative revolution—both cultural and political—that has enveloped the U.S.? Like a series of infernal nesting dolls, we will likely find that the ultimate fingers working the strings belong to someone(s) still as yet uncovered, but not Barry.
But back to our theme here, don’t believe for a second that Joseph Robinette Biden pulls his own strings. That mirage only favors the left’s goals. And besides, he is about to be thrown under their bus anyway. They just await the moment of maximum gain.
It is very true that, to defeat your enemy, you must first know them. Just realize, it isn’t Biden. If someone shoots you, you don’t take it out on the bullet. You go after the shooter! (Except if your name is Alec Baldwin, of course). So, with us, don’t waste time on Biden. Focus on one row back. Biden is about to be history, courtesy of his current masters. But we will get only more of the same or worse.
THERE IS NO GREATER DANGER TO AMERICA THAN JOE BIDEN!
Durham's 'Russiagate' Report Is
Damning for the Media, Too
Special Counsel John Durham dropped a bombshell on Monday. "Russiagate"—the biggest media story on the planet for four years—was never justified by the evidence.
According to Durham's scathing report, the FBI initiated its investigation of former president Donald Trump's 2016 campaign without sufficient proof of collusion and then ignored mounting contrary evidence. Durham criticized the FBI for relying on the later-debunked Steele dossier to get a warrant to surveil Trump's campaign; for coziness with Hillary Clinton, Trump's Democratic opponent; and for repeatedly accepting information from anti-Trump sources, if not showing the same bias itself.
Each of Durham's findings of FBI misconduct could be—and have been—applied to the corporate press, which breathlessly reported each twist in the FBI's false narrative and helped to drive American politics off a cliff.
Reliance on the Steele dossier: Like the FBI, media outlets touted the most salacious allegations compiled by former British spy Christoper Steele on behalf of the Clinton campaign. They did so, to borrow a term of art, "without evidence."
Even after the dossier and Steele himself were discredited, the media insisted the FBI's investigation of Trump was super serious.
Prominent journalists earnestly discussed the possibility that Trump was a Manchurian candidate, recruited by Russia three decades earlier.
Coziness with Clinton: While the FBI ignored concerns about alleged election interference regarding Hillary Clinton's campaign, according to Durham, the media let the Democrat spout off, largely unchallenged, about her supposed certainty that the 2016 election was rigged against her. (The reaction was a little different when Trump questioned his loss in 2020.)
Bias against Trump: Agents deemed too biased or unprofessional by the FBI were welcomed on the airways to pontificate on the investigation they had compromised. Peter Strzok—a senior FBI agent who oversaw both the Trump and Clinton investigations until he was fired for anti-Trump texts in 2018—immediately became a regular on-air contributor for MSNBC. And former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, who was pushed out for leaking, landed a similar gig at CNN.
After seven years of experience, and a pseudo-reckoning, has the corporate press learned anything? Let's see whom CNN brought on to discuss the Durham report.
In a statement Monday, the FBI said its leadership has "already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time," in response to the problems highlighted by Durham. "Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented."
Published under: 2016 Election , Donald Trump , Durham investigation , FBI , Hillary Clinton , Media , Media Bias , Russia Collusion , Steele dossier
It's currently unknown whether he met with foul play or voluntarily dropped out of sight. However, what is well established is that since that fateful interview with the FBI in March 2019, Luft has made powerful enemies in both Chinese and American intelligence and, of course, in the Biden syndicate.
Clinton Foundation Put On Watch List Of Suspicious ‘Charities’
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2015/04/charity-navigator-clinton-foundation.html
"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now." ---- Patricia McCarthy
GRIFTER AND PHONY CHARITY FOUNDATION FRAUDSTER HILLARY CLINTON’S LONG SERVICE TO AMERICA’S MOST EVIL BANKSTERS
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2019/08/the-democrat-party-grifter-and-pay-to.html
“Clinton also failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after his presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street bankers.”
VIDEO:
THE FRAUDULENT CLINTON FOUNDATION EXPOSED.
PAY-TO-PLAY FROM THE FIRST DAY!
Is it a signal that she's back in the game because she's selling her president-ability to the world's global billionaire crowd and laying the groundwork for more funds? There are all kinds of ways for foreign billionaires to get money to the U.S. without consequences, after all. What's more, it's pretty much the biggest base of support she has, which is at least one reason why she lost the 2016 election.
“The couple parlayed lives supposedly spent in “public service”
into admission into the upper stratosphere of American wealth, with incomes in the top 0.1 percent bracket. The source of this vast wealth was a political machine that might well be dubbed “Clinton, Inc.” This consists essentially of a seedy money-laundering operation to ensure big business support for the
Clintons’ political ambitions as well as their personal fortunes.
The basic components of the operation are lavishly paid speeches to Wall Street and Fortune 500 audiences, corporate campaign contributions, and donations to the ostensibly philanthropic Clinton Foundation.”
"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they
do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now." ---- Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com
By Monica Showalter
Joe Biden, who couldn't even get President
Obama's endorsement during the primaries, now
has word that Obama may well use him as his
marionette stooge for what's in fact a third Obama
term.