Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘corruption’

Special Counsel Must Choose: Risk A Russia Hoaxer’s Second Acquittal Or Expose More Deep-State Dirt


BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | SEPTEMBER 06, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/09/06/special-counsel-must-choose-risk-a-russia-hoaxers-second-acquittal-or-expose-more-deep-state-dirt/

Special Counsel John Durham news on MSNBC

Author Margot Cleveland profile

MARGOT CLEVELAND

VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

MORE ARTICLES

Crossfire Hurricane agents never intended to drop their investigation of Donald Trump, and therefore any lies he told the FBI did not affect their decision-making, Igor Danchenko argued in a motion filed on Friday seeking dismissal of the criminal charges pending against him in a Virginia federal court. With the trial set to start next month, Special Counsel John Durham must now decide whether to acknowledge the deep state’s complicity or risk a second acquittal.

Durham charged Danchenko last year with five counts of making false statements to the FBI related to Danchenko’s role as Christopher Steele’s primary sub-source in the fake dossier the Hillary Clinton team peddled to the FBI and the media. According to the indictment, Danchenko lied extensively when he provided Steele with supposed intel, and then later made false representations to the FBI during a series of interviews. 

One count of the indictment concerned Danchenko’s denial during an FBI interview on June 15, 2017, of having spoken with “PR Executive-1” about any material contained in the Steele dossier. According to Durham’s team, “PR Executive-1,” who has since been identified as the Clinton and DNC-connected Charles Dolan, Jr., told Danchenko that a “GOP friend” had told him Paul Manafort had been forced to resign from the Trump campaign because of allegations connecting Manafort to Ukraine.

“While Dolan later admitted to the FBI that he had no such ‘GOP friend’ and that he had instead gleaned this information from press reports, Dolan’s fabrication appeared in the Steele dossier.” But according to the indictment, when the FBI asked Danchenko whether he had talked with Dolan about that and other details included in Steele’s reports, Danchenko lied and said he hadn’t. 

The four remaining counts of the indictment concerned Danchenko’s alleged lies during questioning by the FBI on March 16, May 18, October 24, and November 16, 2017, concerning conversations he supposedly had with Sergei Millian, who was the then-president of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce. According to the indictment, Danchenko told FBI agents during those interviews that he believed Millian had provided him information during an anonymous phone call, including “intel” later included in the Steele dossier that there was “a well-developed ‘conspiracy of cooperation’ between the Trump Campaign and Russian officials.” However, no such call ever occurred, Durham’s team charged. 

In seeking dismissal of these five counts, Danchenko’s attorneys argued in the motion to dismiss they filed on Friday that the government’s false statement charges failed as a matter of law because ambiguity in the FBI’s questions and in his own answers make it impossible to show he knowingly lied to the government. What proved more intriguing, however, was Danchenko’s second argument based on “materiality.” Here, in essence, Danchenko argued that his statements, even if knowingly false, could not create criminal liability because they were immaterial to the FBI’s investigation. 

To support this argument, Danchenko notes that the FBI was already investigating Millian’s “potential involvement with Russian interference efforts long before it had ever interviewed or even identified Mr. Danchenko,” apparently based on Steele’s claim that Millian served “as the source of relevant information.” Accordingly, Danchenko maintains his supposed lies were not the reason the FBI targeted Millian.

Danchenko further emphasizes in his brief that Steele had falsely told the FBI that “Danchenko had reported meeting with [Millian] in person on multiple occasions.” Danchenko exposed Steele’s own lies by telling the FBI he had never met with Millian “and could not be sure he ever spoke to him,” Danchenko’s attorneys stress in their motion to dismiss, thus calling Steele’s “statements, and portions of the Company Reports, into question.” Yet, even after learning of Steele’s apparent lies, the FBI did not alter the course of the investigation and, in fact, continued to rely on Steele’s reporting to seek renewals of the FISA surveillance orders, Danchenko’s brief underscores to argue that nothing Danchenko said during his interviews really mattered to the FBI.

Because Danchenko’s statements failed to change the trajectory of the government’s investigation into Millian and more broadly Trump and his associates, Danchenko posits that “it is difficult to fathom how the government would have made any decision other than to continue investigating [Millian] … regardless of what Mr. Danchenko told them.” In other words, Danchenko’s alleged lies were immaterial.

As a matter of law, Millian’s materiality argument is weak, but as a matter of defense-attorney rhetoric, it holds the potential to score Danchenko an acquittal. 

Potential for Acquittal

The legal standard for materiality requires a false statement to have “a natural tendency to influence, or [be] capable of influencing, either a discrete decision or any other function of the agency to which it is addressed.” Further, “the falsehood need not actually influence the agency’s decision-making process, but merely needs to be ‘capable’ of doing so.” Thus, legally speaking, that the Crossfire Hurricane team, and later Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office, seemed unconcerned with what Danchenko said, as shown by their continued reliance on Steele and his dossier, is irrelevant. The question is whether the lie was capable of influencing how a hypothetically “objective” government official would have acted had they known the truth.

While Durham’s team will argue to the jury — assuming the district court denies Danchenko’s motion to dismiss the indictment — that the alleged lies were capable of influencing several decisions of the FBI agents, the reality is that the jurors will have a hard time buying that proposition unless Durham exposes the malfeasance of the Crossfire Hurricane agents and the members of Mueller’s team. In short, Durham needs to tell the jury that Danchenko’s alleged lies did not actually influence the government’s investigation because the agents were out to get Trump.

If the Special Counsel’s office does not take this tack, what the jury will hear is the story Danchenko previewed in his motion to dismiss: 

“During the course of its investigation into the [Steele dossier], the FBI determined that the defendant, Igor Danchenko, was a potential source of information contained in the [dossier]. In order to assist the FBI in its investigation of the accuracy and sources of the information in the [dossier], Mr. Danchenko agreed to numerous voluntary interviews with the FBI from in or about January 2017 through November 2017. He answered every question he was asked to the best of his ability and recollection. As part of the 2017 interviews, FBI agents asked Mr. Danchenko to review portions of the [dossier] and describe where he believed the relevant information had derived from and to explain how any information he had provided to [Steele] may have been overstated or misrepresented in the [dossier].”

Danchenko did as the FBI asked, his defense will argue to the jury, before stressing that even after Danchenko highlighted Steele’s lies to the bureau, agents continued to investigate Millian. This fact will serve as a lynchpin for Danchenko to argue that his statements, even if false, were immaterial.

A Likely Argument

In his motion to dismiss, Danchenko previewed another argument likely to be repeated at trial, namely that no one thought Danchenko lied until the appointment of a second special counsel. “The Special Counsel’s office closed its entire investigation into possible Trump/Russia collusion in March 2019,” Danchenko noted in his motion, stressing that while “approximately thirty-four individuals were charged by Mueller’s office, including several for providing false statements to investigators. Mr. Danchenko was not among them. To the contrary, not only did investigators and government officials repeatedly represent that Mr. Danchenko had been honest and forthcoming in his interviews, but also resolved discrepancies between his recollection of events and that of others in Mr. Danchenko’s favor.”

While these arguments are currently aimed at the court, a repeat will surely follow during next month’s trial, and unless Durham provides the jury with an explanation for the FBI and Mueller’s lack of concern over Danchenko’s statements to investigators, an acquittal seems likely.

Durham’s Strategy

We won’t have to wait until the start of the trial to learn Durham’s likely strategy, however, as the government’s response to Danchenko’s motion to dismiss will likely provide some strong hints, especially given some of the assertions included in Danchenko’s brief. For instance, in his summary of the facts, Danchenko claimed, based on the DOJ’s inspector general report, that there was an “articulable factual basis” to launch Crossfire Hurricane based on “information received from a Friendly Foreign Government.” The “information received from a Friendly Foreign Government” refers to then-Australian diplomat Alexander Downer’s claim that Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos made suggestions that the Russians could assist the Trump campaign with the release of damaging information about Clinton. 

Those well-versed in the Russia-collusion hoax will remember that Durham has already publicly pushed back against the Inspector General’s claim that Downer’s tip prompted the launching of Crossfire Hurricane. Durham released a statement following the publication of the IG report contradicting the IG’s assertion and revealing that “based on the evidence collected to date,” his team had “advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”

Another passage in Danchenko’s brief could similarly prompt pushback by Durham. Relying again on the inspector general’s report on FISA abuse, Danchenko asserts that there is “no evidence the [Steele] election reporting was known to or used by FBI officials involved in the decision to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.” 

Two years have passed since the IG issued its report, however, and during that time Durham has been continuing to investigate the claimed predication of Crossfire Hurricane. If his team found evidence that Steele’s reporting prompted the launch of Crossfire Hurricane, Danchenko’s motion provides a perfect opportunity for Durham to publicly reveal that evidence.

Whether Durham will reveal these details and others remains to be seen. And while the special counsel’s office used pretrial court filings in the criminal case against former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann to pepper the public with new revelations about the Russia-collusion hoax, the lead prosecutor in that case, Andrew DeFilippis, is no longer prosecuting the case against Danchenko. We should know soon whether Durham, who is now personally involved in the Danchenko prosecution, will use the case to expose more details about SpyGate. 

Durham has already filed his first motion in limine, or a pretrial request for the court to rule on the admissibility of evidence, in the Danchenko case. That motion, however, concerns classified information and was thus sealed. The special counsel will likely be filing several more motions in limine in the weeks to come, with the court last week entering an order encouraging the parties to file those motions “as early as possible,” but no later than October 3, 2022, absent good cause. 

Those motions, as well as Durham’s response to Danchenko’s motion to dismiss, will provide some insight into the special counsel’s planned strategy in the Danchenko case and specifically whether the special counsel will highlight the complicity of the deep state in the Russia-collusion hoax. If Durham doesn’t, it might cost his team a second loss.


Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

    5 Times The Anti-Trump FBI’s ‘Trust Us’ Promise Fell Apart


    BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | SEPTEMBER 02, 2022

    Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/09/02/5-times-the-anti-trump-fbis-trust-us-promise-fell-apart/

    former FBI Director James Comey

    Author Margot Cleveland profile

    MARGOT CLEVELAND

    VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

    MORE ARTICLES

    The Biden administration and the corporate media continue to assure Americans that the FBI’s raid on former president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home was both legally justified and of the utmost necessity. But the deep-state cabal and the leftist media cartel provided similar assurances about Crossfire Hurricane and Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s targeting of Trump, with the assurances later proving worthless. 

    Here are five times SpyGate taught Americans to distrust and disprove accusations leveled at Donald Trump.

    1. Devin Nunes’ Memo Exposing FISA Abuse

    On February 2, 2018, the House Intelligence Committee, then-chaired by Republican Rep. Devin Nunes, released a four-page memo detailing abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by the FBI. 

    Before the memo’s release, the FBI publicly opposed the move, claiming in a public statement that the bureau had “grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.” Justice Department officials likewise opposed releasing the memo, warning that “doing so would be ‘extraordinarily reckless.’”

    The then-ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, also sought to scuttle the release of the memo — or at least preempt the detailed revelations of FISA abuse — by calling the memo a “conspiracy theory” in an op-ed for The Washington Post. In it, Schiff condemned the release, saying the memo was “designed to suggest that ‘a cabal of senior officials within the FBI and the Justice Department were so tainted by bias against President Trump that they irredeemably poisoned the investigation.’”

    Nancy Pelosi, who is now speaker of the House, likewise attacked Nunes, demanding in a letter to then-House Speaker Paul Ryan that Nunes be removed as Intelligence Committee chairman. Nunes “disgraced” the committee with his “dishonest” handling of the committee’s review of the Russia collusion problem, Pelosi wrote. Nunes’ committee, Pelosi claimed, had become a “charade” and a “coverup campaign … to hide the truth about the Trump-Russia scandal.” 

    In response to the Nunes memo, former FBI Director James Comey told the country the memo was “dishonest and misleading.” Comey further claimed it “wrecked the House intel committee, destroyed trust with Intelligence Community, damaged relationship with FISA court, and inexcusably exposed classified investigation of an American citizen.”

    Former CIA Director John Brennan also attacked Nunes, calling his exposure of the FISA abuse “appalling” and an abuse of his chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee.

    Of course, years later, Nunes was proven correct, as the inspector general’s report confirmed, establishing that the Republican House Intelligence chair had, if anything, understated the FISA abuse. 

    For all the assurances the DOJ, FBI, their former leaders, and top politicians provided the American public, they were either lying or wrong — or both because there was “a cabal of senior officials within the FBI and the Justice Department … so tainted by bias against President Trump that they irredeemably poisoned the investigation.”

    2. Surveillance Warrants Are Hard to Get

    In addition to wrongly condemning Nunes’ memo, government officials attempted to calm concerns over the FISA surveillance by assuring the public that the process of obtaining a surveillance warrant was “rigorous” and that to obtain surveillance of American citizens, a court must find “probable cause” that warrants the wiretap.

    Adm. Michael Rogers, then a commander of United States Cyber Command, testified about the FISA process during a March 2017 congressional hearing. In response to a question posed to eliminate “confusion in the public” about the collection of personal data, Rogers confirmed that the National Security Agency “would need a court order based on probable cause to conduct electronic surveillance on a U.S. person inside the United States.” 

    During the same hearing, the then-recently fired former FBI Director Comey expanded on the surveillance process. “There is a statutory framework in the United States under which courts grant permission for electronic surveillance either in a criminal case or the national security case based on the showing of probable cause,” Comey testified before Congress. “It is a rigorous, rigorous process, involving all three branches of government,” the former FBI director stressed, noting it must go through an application process and then to a judge who must approve the order.

    The IG report on FISA abuse proved the promised rigor didn’t exist. And the later conviction of Kevin Clinesmith for “falsifying a document that was the basis for a surveillance warrant against former Trump campaign official Carter Page,” punctuated that reality. The facts revealed in the IG report further established that Americans’ faith in the FISA Court to serve as a check on the government was misplaced, with the judges serving as but a rubberstamp of the DOJ’s surveillance applications. So much for those assurances.

    3. Don’t Worry, ’Merica, No Spying on Trump Took Place

    A third assurance Americans received from the powers-that-be was that no spying on the Trump campaign occurred. The inspector general’s report on FISA abuse disproved those reassurances as well, revealing that the “Obama Administration Spied on the Trump Campaign Big Time.”

    This reality pushed Russia-collusion hoaxers into esoteric discussions on the true meaning of “spying.” Even the United States Senate played the “it depends what the meaning of spying is” game, with New Hampshire Democrat Sen. Jeanne Shaheen quizzing FBI Director Christopher Wray on whether he would agree with then-Attorney General William Barr’s use of the word “spying.”

    “I was very concerned by his use of the word spying, which I think is a loaded word,” Shaheen bemoaned. “When FBI agents conduct investigations against alleged mobsters, suspected terrorists, other criminals, do you believe they’re engaging in spying when they’re following FBI investigative policies and procedures?” the senator asked Wray.

    “That’s not the term I would use,” Wray replied, before noting that different people use different colloquialisms. 

    The discussion did not end there, however, with Shaheen pushing Wray on whether he had seen “any evidence that any illegal surveillance into the campaigns or the individuals associated with the campaigns by the FBI occurred.”

    “I don’t think I personally have any evidence of that sort,” Wray replied.

    But even sidestepping the silly debate over what “spying” means, the guarantee Shaheen provided the American public — that no illegal surveillance into the Trump campaign or individuals associated with the Trump campaign had occurred — proved worthless. 

    The Department of Justice has since admitted that it illegally surveilled former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and that such surveillance reached Trump campaign documents. So, yes, our federal government illegally surveilled the campaign of a presidential candidate.

    4. Redactions Are Necessary to Protect Sources and Methods

    A fourth key commitment conveyed to Americans throughout the multi-year unraveling of the Russia collusion hoax concerned the need to redact details in the publicly released documents. Such redactions were necessary to protect sources and methods, our overlords assured us.

    For instance, in a December 9, 2019 press release Wray issued in conjunction with the DOJ’s inspector general’s report on FISA abuse, Wray “emphasized that the FBI’s participation in this process was undertaken with my express direction to be as transparent as possible, while honoring our duty to protect sources and methods that, if disclosed, might make Americans less safe.” Wray further promised that the FISA abuse report presented all material facts, “with redactions carefully limited and narrowly tailored to specific national security and operational concerns.” 

    Republican Sens. Ron Johnson and Chuck Grassley challenged that portrayal of the redactions, suggesting in a letter to then-Attorney General William Barr that several footnotes “were classified in the IG report only because they contradict certain claims made in the public version of the inspector general’s report on FISA warrants documenting misconduct in the FBI’s spying operation of the Trump campaign.”

    “We are concerned that certain sections of the public version of the report are misleading because they are contradicted by relevant and probative classified information redacted in four footnotes,” Grassley and Johnson wrote. “This classified information is significant not only because it contradicts key statements in a section of the report, but also because it provides insight essential for an accurate evaluation of the entire investigation.”

    The Republican senators then asked for the four footnotes to be declassified, stressing that “the American people have a right to know what is contained within these four footnotes and, without that knowledge, they will not have a full picture as to what happened during the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”

    In April of 2020, Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell declassified the footnotes. And, as Grassley and Johnson had represented, the redactions weren’t necessary to protect “sources and methods.” Rather, the blacked-out lines were essential to distorting portions of the FISA report and to keeping the public in the dark about the full scope of the Spygate scandal.

    Another document declassified by Grenell exposed that Mueller’s team falsely represented to a federal judge (and the American public) the substance of Michael Flynn’s December 2016 telephone conversation with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. 

    As I reported following Grenell’s declassification of the transcript of the call between Flynn, Trump’s then-incoming national security adviser, and Kislyak, Mueller’s office deceived the country and a federal court when prosecutors claimed Flynn had discussed U.S. sanctions with his Russian counterpart. The transcripts established that, contrary to court filings, Flynn never raised the issue of sanctions with the Russian ambassador.

    The release of the Flynn transcript did reveal, however, the FBI’s secret “sources and methods” — but the sources and methods were those of deep-state actors seeking to rid themselves of the president’s chosen national security adviser by launching a perjury trap and then lying about what Flynn said.

    5. Crossfire Hurricane Was Properly Predicated 

    To this day, both DOJ’s Inspector General Michael Horowitz and Wray maintain that the FBI’s launch of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was properly predicated. Publicly released FBI documents say otherwise. 

    Former FBI agent Peter Strzok explained the supposed predicate for launching Crossfire Hurricane on July 31, 2016, in the opening “Electronic Communication” that he both prepared and approved. According to Strzok, the FBI opened the umbrella investigation into the Trump campaign after the government had “received information” “related to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s website/server.” 

    But Strzok’s summary of the information received made no mention of any intel obtained by the FBI related to the DNC hacking. Rather, the supposed intel “consisted of information received from an unnamed representative, now publicly known to be Alexander Downer, a then-Australian diplomat” stationed in London. The opening memorandum explained that Downer had relayed “statements Mr. [George] Papadopoulos made about suggestions from the Russians that they (the Russians) could assist the Trump campaign with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton.”

    The opening document then asserted that Papadopoulos “also suggested the Trump team had received some kind of suggestion from Russia that it could assist this process with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Mrs. Clinton (and President Obama.).” The electronic communication added a caveat, though, noting that it was unclear whether Papadopoulos “or the Russians were referring to material acquired publicly of [sic] through other means. It was also unclear how Mr. Trump’s team reacted to the offer.”

    Thus, while Strzok framed the information received by the FBI as evidence “related to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s website/server,” the remainder of the Electronic Communication contradicted that claim and in fact acknowledged that the material might refer to “publicly acquired” information.

    What the FBI did — or rather didn’t do — after the launch of Crossfire Hurricane further confirms the sham predicate set forth by Strzok in the Electronic Communication. 

    While Papadopoulos’s statements to Downer supposedly prompted the FBI to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, agents failed to question Papadopoulos for six months. The FBI also put little (or no) effort into determining who purportedly told Papadopoulos that the Russians had dirt on Hillary. The supposed source of that statement, Joseph Mifsud, could have been easily located soon after the launch of Crossfire Hurricane if the FBI genuinely believed Russia had conspired with the Trump campaign to hack and release the DNC emails.

    Agents pursuing a legitimate investigation “would have immediately scoured Papadopoulos’s London-based connections and discovered he was associated with the London Centre of International Law Practice around the time he met with Downer. From there, the FBI could have easily fingered Mifsud as a possible source for the information, since he was listed as a board advisor and public source searches would show Mifsud had connections to Russia. (The intelligence community would have also hit on Mifsud’s many connections to Western intelligence agencies.)”

    But the FBI did none of this, waiting instead until late January 2017 to quiz Papadopoulos on the source of the supposed inside information coming from Russia. Yet, Wray and the DOJ’s inspector general want Americans to trust them when they say that agents launched Crossfire Hurricane based on Papadopoulos’s London chat with Downer over drinks. 

    Special Counsel John Durham, however, says otherwise, having released a statement following the DOJ’s report on FISA abuse that informed the public that, “based on the evidence collected to date,” his team had “advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”

    The special counsel’s public statements prove significant for two reasons. First, Durham’s comments refute the inspector general’s conclusions regarding the predication of Crossfire Hurricane. But beyond that, the fact that Durham needed to correct the record shows the lack of trust due the DOJ and even the inspector general’s office — something further confirmed during the special counsel’s prosecution of former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann. 

    Each of these five falsehoods peddled by the government to the public during the Russia collusion hoax has a clear corollary in the current scandal involving the FBI’s raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home. And after the lies, pretext, and political warfare exposed during the unraveling of SpyGate, the DOJ and FBI’s current entreat to an angry public to “trust them” will be ignored — as it should.


    Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

      Feds’ Routine Tyranny Suggests They Aren’t as Afraid of the American People as They Should Be


      BY: J.B. SHURK | AUGUST 16, 2022

      Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/16/feds-routine-tyranny-suggest-they-arent-as-afraid-of-the-american-people-as-they-should-be/

      The exterior of the Internal Revenue Service Building

      Author J.B. Shurk profile

      J.B. SHURK

      MORE ARTICLES

      Alan Moore, author and social critic, asserts in “V for Vendetta” that “People shouldn’t be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people.” When a young director in Karachi, Pakistan, adapted “Vendetta” for a live theatrical performance 10 years ago, he repeated the line during the play’s curtain call to raucous applause from the audience. Moore’s simple words reflect poignantly the human desire to be free from government tyranny.

      Moore’s statement is widely embraced in the United States, where “the people” are constitutionally vested with power over government. It is doubtful, however, that today’s permanent bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., would concur. 

      This philosophical divide between the American people and their government is an important one. Should the American people be afraid of the U.S. government? Of course not. Yet a new army of IRS agents that will be used to audit middle-class Americans and a partisan DOJ and FBI that routinely ignore leftist violence while throwing the book at MAGA voters strongly suggest otherwise. 

      Does the federal government still work for American citizens, or have American citizens become nothing more than subjects expected to obey Washington’s bureaucratic regime? For many Americans, the answer to that question is glaringly obvious. 

      After Chris Wray’s FBI launched an unprecedented raid of President Trump’s private residence at Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8, the director’s immediate concern was not his agency’s appearance of impropriety but the denouncement of his lackeys’ behavior by the American public. 

      “I’m always concerned about threats to law enforcement,” Wray declared while saying nothing of threats to Americans from federal law enforcement. Who is more of a threat to American liberty: citizens using their constitutionally protected free speech to criticize the FBI or wayward FBI agents acting under the color of law? 

      Clearly, those with great power represent the greatest threat to freedom. For those such as Wray, who believe the FBI is the real victim, it is the citizen expressing himself who must be held accountable.

      Wray’s decision to shield his agents from criticism while obliquely intimidating citizens is hardly a departure from the federal government’s standard operating procedure. Before the Democrats’ recent addition of 87,000 new prying IRS agents to hound American taxpayers, including the hiring of agents who will “carry a firearm and be willing to use deadly force,” Barack Obama’s IRS was already targeting and harassing conservative organizations. 

      Why should Americans expect a greatly expanded and well-armed IRS to behave any differently this time?

      A similar abuse of power during Obama’s presidency occurred when his Environmental Protection Agency released “sensitive, private, and personal materials on more than 100,000 farmers and ranchers” to outside environmental groups in what was seen as an intentional effort to promote “eco-activist tyranny.” It was not enough for the EPA to harass America’s farmers with endless agricultural, livestock, and water regulations; the agency decided to permit outside “help” to further its interests in enforcing “green” regulations. 

      Now that congressional Democrats have succeeded in finding a path for greatly expanding the Green New Deal “climate change” agenda, it is likely that the EPA’s harassment of farmers will continue in the future. 

      The FBI, the IRS, and the EPA are but three agencies with tremendous powers that can be used to intimidate or imperil Americans. There are more than 400 departments, agencies, and sub-agencies within the federal government, and “no one knows definitively how many agencies, components, and commissions exist.” 

      Each of these authorities is constantly issuing rules, regulations, and guidelines that affect Americans’ rights and liberties without their knowledge. Each of those bodies exercises jurisdiction over the American people in ways that most don’t even realize. Does this sound like a government afraid of its citizens or tyranny?


      J.B. Shurk is a freedom-minded, anti-establishment, sometimes unorthodox, committed generalist and a proud American from Daniel Boone country.

      This Insane 2020 Time Magazine Article Explains Exactly Why the Left Fears Losing Twitter


      REPORTED BY: DAN O’DONNELL | APRIL 28, 2022

      Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/28/this-insane-2020-time-magazine-article-explains-exactly-why-the-left-fears-losing-twitter/

      Twitter app on phone

      An astonishing but largely forgotten story in Time Magazine explains why there is so much leftist concern today about Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter.

      Author Dan O'Donnell profile

      DAN O’DONNELL

      MORE ARTICLES

      Of all the hysterical leftist reactions to Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter on Monday, MSNBC host Ari Melber’s was easily the most revealing.

      “If you own all of Twitter or Facebook or what have you, you don’t have to explain yourself,” he gravely intoned during his show Monday evening. “You don’t even have to be transparent. You could secretly ban one party’s candidate or all of its candidates, all of its nominees, or you could just secretly turn down the reach of their stuff and turn up the reach of something else, and the rest of us might not even find out about it ‘til after the election.”

      You don’t say. This was in fact the way the left used social media to win the 2020 presidential election. They even admitted it openly in a stunning yet largely forgotten February 2021 article in Time magazine entitled “The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign that Saved the 2020 Election.”

      “For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President,” wrote reporter Molly Ball. “Their work touched every aspect of the election.”

      And they wanted credit for it, Ball continued, “even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream — a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information.”

      Their aim, they insisted, wasn’t to rig the election but to “fortify” it against then-President Donald Trump and his allies, whom they believed to be a threat to democracy itself.

      “Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears.”

      The final piece was critical, especially in the waning days of the campaign, when an October surprise in the form of Hunter Biden’s laptop threatened to derail his father’s candidacy and undo the organized left’s hard work.

      The New York Post’s exclusive story dropped like a grenade less than a month before Election Day, providing “smoking-gun emails” showing that the younger Biden introduced his father “to a top executive at a Ukrainian energy firm less than a year before the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor who was investigating the company.”

      The emails, the Post explained, were obtained from a computer dropped off and apparently forgotten at a repair shop in Delaware. Under the terms of the repair agreement, the store’s owner took possession of the laptop when it was deemed to be abandoned. Twitter and Facebook, though, determined without any evidence that the emails were actually “hacked materials” and thus distributed in violation of their terms of use agreements.

      Facebook quickly acted to limit the reach of the story, while Twitter took the extraordinary step of locking the Post’s account and preventing other users from sharing its story or even pictures from it. Neither Hunter Biden nor the Joe Biden presidential campaign denied that the laptop was Hunter’s, and the younger Biden’s business partner, Tony Bobulinski, went on the record a few days later with documents that confirmed the Post’s reporting, which seemed to uncover an international bribery scheme.

      It didn’t matter. Once 50 obviously partisan intelligence officials issued an evidence-free statement calling the laptop materials “Russian disinformation,” it was determined that they would be censored in both legacy and social media.

      Of course, more than a year after Biden was safely elected, both The New York Times and Washington Post confirmed that the laptop was genuine, but the censorship did its job: A Media Research Center poll of swing state voters confirmed that 16 percent of Biden supporters would have changed their votes had they heard of the laptop story, including 4 percent who would have switched their vote to Trump. This obviously would have swung the entire election to Trump, but that would have been an unacceptable result for the leftist cabal intent on “fortifying” democracy by stacking the deck against him. In light of the Media Research Center’s findings, social media censorship was very possibly the most effective way they did it. And naturally they had to brag about it in Time.

      “Trump’s lies and conspiracy theories, the viral force of social media and the involvement of foreign meddlers made disinformation a broader, deeper threat to the 2020 vote,” Ball reported. “Laura Quinn, a veteran progressive operative who co-founded Catalist, began studying this problem a few years ago. She piloted a nameless, secret project, which she has never before publicly discussed, that tracked disinformation online and tried to figure out how to combat it.”

      She ultimately concluded that engaging with this supposedly “toxic content” or trying to debunk it was ineffective, so “the solution, she concluded, was to pressure platforms to enforce their rules, both by removing content or accounts that spread disinformation and by more aggressively policing it in the first place.”

      This research armed liberal activists to pressure social media companies like Twitter and Facebook to far more aggressively and creatively enforce their rules, prompting a crackdown on “disinformation” that was in fact completely accurate. Because it was harmful to the effort to “save democracy” and defeat the “autocratic” Trump, it was censored.

      “Democracy won in the end,” Ball concluded. “The will of the people prevailed. But it’s crazy, in retrospect, that this is what it took to put on an election in the United States of America.”

      This reveals the real threat of Musk’s Twitter takeover: If it is no longer possible to suppress factual information in the name of rescuing democracy from its alleged enemies, then those enemies (read: Republicans) might start winning more elections. And that is simply unacceptable.


      Dan O’Donnell is a talk show host with News/Talk 1130 WISN in Milwaukee, Wis. and 1310 WIBA in Madison, Wis., and a columnist for the John K. MacIver Institute.

      Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


      A.F. Branco Cartoon – Media Protection Program

      A.F. BRANCO | on April 16, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-media-protection-program/

      The mainstream media continue to protect Left-wing politicians constantly deflecting our attention to other things.

      Media Hiding Corruption
      Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022

      A.F. Branco Cartoon – Wheel of Misfortune

      A.F. BRANCO | on April 18, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-wheel-of-misfortune/

      Unlike President Truman, the buck never stops with Biden as he’s ready to blame everyone but himself.

      Biden’s Buck Stops Wheel
      Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022.

      DONATE to Branco Toons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

      A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Donald Trump.

      Hunter Biden’s Laptops Are Now An Active National Security Threat


      REPORTED BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | MARCH 28, 2022

      Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/28/hunter-bidens-laptops-are-now-an-active-national-security-threat/

      Joe Biden

      Author Margot Cleveland profile

      MARGOT CLEVELAND

      VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

      MORE ARTICLES

      On Friday, The Daily Mail reported that emails recovered from Hunter Biden’s laptop show he helped an infectious disease research company pursue projects in Ukraine. Those emails confirm portions of charges Russia made the previous day that an investment group run by the now-president’s son had funded a company conducting research at biological laboratories in Ukraine. While these developments add another scandal to the long list of Biden family dirty laundry, the more urgent concern for the country should be the continuing threat to our national security posed by a compromised President Biden and the possibility that Russia has access to the catalog of compromising material contained on Hunter’s laptop.

      Mere weeks before then-President Donald Trump and Joe Biden faced off in the November 2020 presidential election, The New York Post published emails obtained from a laptop Hunter Biden had abandoned at a repair shop in Delaware. Those emails revealed that during the elder Biden’s time as Barack Obama’s vice president, Hunter engaged in a pay-to-play scandal, trading off his father’s position to strike deals with players in Ukraine and China. The venture was a family one, with Joe “the Big Guy” Biden listed in one email as set to receive a 10 percent cut of one pending deal and Hunter telling his daughter in another message that “pop” took half of his earnings.

      Even after a former business partner of Hunter Biden’s confirmed the authenticity of the emails, the supposed standard-bearers of journalism buried the scandal and social media outlets censored both the story and The New York Post. Worse still, “more than 50 former senior intelligence officials” signed a letter framing the Hunter Biden emails as Russian disinformation. Among others, former CIA directors or acting directors John Brennan, Leon Panetta, Gen. Michael Hayden, John McLaughlin, and Michael Morell signed the letter. In doing so they gave then-candidate Joe Biden cover to lie to the American public, which he did when Trump confronted him about the scandal during a presidential debate.

      Are you saying the “laptop is now another Russia, Russia, Russia hoax?” Trump asked Biden.

      “That’s exactly what [I] was told,” Biden countered. “There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plant,” Biden professed to the American public before they went to the polls and elected Biden our commander in chief.

      But even The New York Times has finally admitted the laptop was real and the emails were legitimate. Initially, that admission proved significant because it likewise legitimizes the scandals spawned from the documents recovered from Hunter’s abandoned laptop. However, the trajectory of the scandal changed Friday with The Daily Mail’s exclusive.

      “Emails from Hunter’s abandoned laptop show he helped secure millions of dollars of funding for Metabiota, a Department of Defense contractor specializing in research on pandemic-causing diseases that could be used as bioweapons,” The Daily Mail announced last week. The article continued: “[Biden] also introduced Metabiota to an allegedly corrupt Ukrainian gas firm, Burisma, for a ‘science project’ involving high biosecurity level labs in Ukraine. And although Metabiota is ostensibly a medical data company, its vice president emailed Hunter in 2014 describing how they could ‘assert Ukraine’s cultural and economic independence from Russia’– an unusual goal for a biotech firm.”

      The Daily Mail added more details about Metabiota and Hunter Biden’s role in brokering relationships for the research company in Ukraine. Included throughout the article were copies of the emails ostensibly obtained from Hunter’s laptop that confirmed The Daily Mail’s reporting. The article also added details shedding light on Hunter’s “business” dealings in Ukraine during the time his father served as vice president and America’s point person on issues related to that country. Friday’s exclusive is not the first time The Daily Mail has published never-before-seen material from Hunter Biden’s laptop. Last August, the outlet published “unearthed footage” of Hunter Biden telling a prostitute that, in the summer of 2018, another laptop went missing and he believed Russia had stolen it. At the time, Hunter also expressed concern that the laptop might prove fodder for blackmail since it contained compromising material.

      What distinguishes the emails contained in last week’s Daily Mail article from those published last year is that the most recent release came the day after Russia’s State Duma speaker, Vyacheslav Volodin accused President Biden with being “involved in the creation of bio laboratories in Ukraine,” with Volodin claiming that “an investment fund run by his son Hunter Biden funded research and the implementation of the United States’ military biological program.”

      Soon after Volodin made the charge on Thursday, the Telegraph called Russia’s accusation of Hunter Biden funding Ukrainian biological laboratories an “unsubstantiated claim” “designed to build on negative coverage about [the] president’s son in Right-wing US media.” But with Friday’s release of previously undisclosed emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop, Russia’s claim, at least concerning Hunter Biden’s connection to Ukrainian biological laboratories, appears accurate.

      While none of the emails released on Friday support Russia’s claim that the Ukrainian labs were used to research or create bioweapons, propaganda need only hold a sliver of truth to serve its purpose. And the cache of emails contained on Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop provides Putin and his comrades enough evidence to seemingly confirm the Russian government’s earlier claim that Hunter Biden helped implement a bioweapon program in Ukraine. This false framing also provides Russia ammunition to justify its attack on its neighbor to the west.

      Russia’s ability to point to the Hunter Biden emails as confirmation of its claims of a biolab in Ukraine raises a serious question with huge national security implications: How did Russia know the day before The Daily Mail’s exclusive that the Hunter Biden’s investment fund, Rosemont Seneca, had invested in Metabiota and been involved in Metabiota’s operations in Ukraine? The timing of events last week suggests Russia has access to the same emails as The Daily Mail or that Vladimir Putin’s agents might well have obtained access to Hunter Biden’s first laptop—the one the president’s son believed Russians had stolen in 2018. In either case, the Biden family corruption documented on the laptops has gone from a potential national security risk to a real one—and in the midst of a war launched by Russia on a country bordering North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies.

      Together, the Biden family, the intelligence agencies, and the corrupt media—social and legacy—hold full responsibility for the danger Americans now face. Biden knew full well how compromised his family was, and that there were two laptops, not one, with evidence of the corruption floating about. Yet Biden lied to the American public, with an assist from the former high-level members of the intelligence community who signed the letter suggesting the laptop scandal represented Russian disinformation.

      Then there is the FBI which, by December 2019, had access to the abandoned laptop and thereby also knew that Hunter believed Russians had stolen his laptop in summer 2018. To date, there has been no indication that the FBI provided Joe Biden a defensive briefing on the national security risk posed by those laptops. Or if FBI agents did brief Biden on the risks in a timely manner, that means he nonetheless lied to the American public and ran for president knowing the propaganda at Putin’s fingertips.

      Even when coupled with the complicity of former members of the intelligence community, all of Joe Biden’s lies would mean nothing if the media had done its job and reported the story when it still matter. It’s too late now, however: Biden is our commander in chief and Putin potentially holds a cache of compromising information perfect for propaganda purposes.


      Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

      Did The New York Times Admit Joe Biden Is Corrupt So Democrats Can Get Rid of Him?


      REPORTED BY: JOY PULLMANN | MARCH 23, 2022

      Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/did-the-new-york-times-admit-joe-biden-is-corrupt-so-democrats-can-get-rid-of-him-2657022515.html/

      Joe Biden and Kamala Harris wearing facemasks

      It is painfully obvious, as was predictable, that Joe Biden’s presidency is a dumpster fire. As demonstrated by the party’s destructive callousness towards children, the elderly, and the poor during their Covid lockdown frenzy, Democrats care about none of these real-world results of their policies. But they do care about polling, and Joe Biden’s is abysmal.

      According to even heavily politicized polls, Biden is at least performing as badly as Donald Trump. Biden is between the third- and fifth-most ratings-underwater president ever in American history at this point in his first term.

      Biden of course also has the advantage of a wildly favorable press and social media monopoly while Trump had the strong headwind of a wildly negative one. That factor obscured for a great many of American voters actions that easily demonstrated long before his election that Biden was unfit for the presidency.

      Now that he’s president, however, and very publicly bungling essentially every major issue all the way up to U.S. national security, Biden’s weakness and incompetence have been impossible for the corrupt media to entirely cover up. Biden’s appalling withdrawal from Afghanistan may have been the first major blow to public confidence in his governing ability, and it’s been followed by blow after blow: the repercussions of ending U.S. energy independence, historic inflation caused by massive government spending, aggression by America’s foreign foes, a tacitly open border with human trafficking of historic proportions, not to mention fueling America’s legalized mass killings of unborn infants and forcing schools to inflict gender dysphoria on the children in their care.

      So yes, the polls look bad. That’s why Democrat officials suddenly switched away from their Covid mania, lifting mask mandates in blue states, ending the daily falsified “body counts” on TVs and newspapers, and jumping immediately into European war hysteria. But that’s not been enough to turn those polls around. Historic indicators presently suggest a “red wave” in the upcoming midterms.

      That brings us to The New York Times’s recent limited hangout“: its highly suspicious, very late acknowledgment that, hey, that laptop containing evidence that Joe Biden is just as corrupt as his son Hunter Biden told Russian prostitutes — that laptop is real, and so is its data. Yes, the United States’s top foreign adversaries likely have blackmail material on the U.S. president, and likely paid him some very big bribes.

      Oh, and yes Twitter and Facebook did use their global communications monopolies to rig the election for Joe Biden by hiding this information (and who knows what else).

      Why would The New York Times do this — and Facebook and Twitter not ban this information release just like they did before? Well, one explanation is hierarchy reinforcement. As I wrote Monday, like forcing their “minions” to wear face masks, the ridiculously belated laptop confirmation also equals the ruling class “flexing their power to say things they won’t allow their political opponents to say.”

      There’s another explanation, though. It’s that Joe Biden is no longer useful to the ruling class. After being used to win an election, he’s now making it impossible for them to credibly foist on Americans the idea that his party could win another one with him on their masthead. The donkey is showing through the lion skin, and so they need a new donkey.

      So while it seems utterly legitimate to insist on accountability such as appointing a special counsel to investigate the Biden family’s apparent corruption, that also could relieve the Democrat Party of their greatest liability. They’d probably deeply appreciate that, in fact. Biden got the ruling class what they wanted, and they don’t need him any more. Getting rid of him now would in fact be highly convenient for maintaining their power.

      There’s only one problem with that. Kamala isn’t at all going well for them either.

      Enjoy that bed you made for yourselves, Democrats. I hope it’s at least as uncomfortable as that bed you’ve made for all the Americans whose long-term outlook is more suffering, thanks to Democrats’ criminal prioritization of power for themselves above all else.


      Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Sign up here to get early access to her next ebook, “101 Strategies For Living Well Amid Inflation.” Her bestselling ebook is “Classic Books for Young Children.” Mrs. Pullmann identifies as native American and gender natural. She is also the author of “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books. In 2013-14 she won a Robert Novak journalism fellowship for in-depth reporting on Common Core national education mandates. Joy is a grateful graduate of the Hillsdale College honors and journalism programs.

      8 Joe Biden Scandals Inside Hunter Biden’s MacBook That Corporate Media Just Admitted Is Legit


      Reported BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND MARCH 22, 2022

      Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/22/8-joe-biden-scandals-inside-hunter-bidens-macbook-that-corporate-media-just-admitted-is-legit/

      Biden speaking to reporters

      Last week, The New York Times quietly acknowledged that the emails recovered from the MacBook Hunter Biden abandoned at a Delaware computer store were authentic. The admission came nearly a year-and-a-half late, after the corrupt media — legacy and social — buried the scandal the New York Post broke just weeks before the November election.

      Merely admitting the laptop is legitimate is not enough. Rather, by concurring in the authenticity of the laptop and the emails, the supposed standard-bearers of journalism have also implicitly acknowledged the validity of the scandals spawn by the porn-filled MacBook. And notwithstanding the salacious source of the documentary evidence of the scandals, the scandals are not about Hunter Biden: They are about now-President Biden.

      Here are the eight Joe Biden scandals deserving further coverage.

      1. Pay-to-Play in Ukraine

      The most obvious scandal bared by the emails and text messages contained on Hunter’s laptop concerns the influence profiteering Joe Biden apparently participated in during his eight years as Barack Obama’s vice president, with Ukraine featuring heavily in the pay-to-play scheme.

      The New York Times, in its likely “get ahead of the story,” coverage from last week, touched on the Ukrainian angle by noting Hunter’s connection to Burisma and then quoting emails recovered from the laptop indicating the younger Biden leveraged his dad’s position — then as vice president. But the Times’ surface coverage of the Burisma scandal doesn’t nearly suffice.

      Surface it was: The Times made no mention of Hunter’s appointment to Burisma Holdings Board of Directors at a reported salary of $50,000 per month during his dad’s time as vice president. Hunter Biden had no experience in energy. So, a deep-dive on the entire Biden-Burisma connection is a first step.

      2. China Gets in the Game

      Ukraine is but a patch on the influence-peddling undertaken by Hunter on behalf of “the big guy,” as the younger Biden referred to his dad. China also played a large role in the family enterprise, as demonstrated by, again, passing coverage in November 2021. Then, the Times reported, in brief, that Hunter Biden’s joint global equity firm, the Bohai Harvest Equity Investment Fund, had helped coordinate the purchase by a Chinese mining company of the world’s largest cobalt source in the Congo.

      That deal gave China control over a huge chunk of the world’s known cobalt supplies — an ingredient necessary to make electric car batteries. And the role of Hunter Biden’s company, Bohai, in the transaction again connects directly to Joe Biden, as Hunter reportedly launched that new joint enterprise with Chinese business partners less than two weeks after he traveled to China on Air Force Two with his then-vice president father.

      In exploring this scandal, the press needs to push beyond the emails recovered from Hunter’s abandoned laptop, and do what Tucker Carlson did when the pay-to-play scandal first surfaced: talk to Hunter’s former business partner Tony Bobulinski. Bobulinski provides further proof that this scandal reaches the top of the Biden family.

      3. Moscow, Kazakhstan, and More

      While Ukraine and China likely hold the most significant revelations, once those threads are pulled, investigators should move on to Moscow, which according to a Senate report, holds another possible scandal. That report documents that Hunter also received a combined $3.5 million from the wife of the former Moscow mayor, a Kazakhstan investor, and several other individuals. After all, there is no reason to think that a person willing to let his son sell access to the vice president of the United States would close the money train to just a few countries.

      4. Ukraine’s Firing of the Prosecutor Investigating Burisma

      With the elite media now deigning coverage of Hunter’s laptop appropriate, the public knows the Burisma scandal was real and threatened to be spectacularly devastating to the elder Biden. That makes questions concerning then-Vice President Joe Biden’s demands that Ukraine fire the state prosecutor who was reportedly investigating Burisma ripe to revisit.

      That prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was fired, according to statements Joe Biden made during a 2018 event, after Biden threatened to withhold a billion-dollar loan guarantee if the Ukrainian government refused to ax Shokin. A video of the event captured Biden recounting the event:

      I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours.’ If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a b-tch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.

      While the Obama administration attempted to spin Biden’s push for the firing of Shokin, by claiming the international community had demanded Ukraine terminate the state prosecutor, a State Department official contradicted that claim during congressional testimony. George Kent, who worked on issues related to Ukraine at the State Department, reportedly told lawmakers it was the Obama administration that “spearheaded the efforts to have Shokin removed from his position as the top federal prosecutor in Ukraine.”

      Biden needs to answer questions anew over his threats to withhold money from Ukraine unless the country removed the state prosecutor responsible for investigating Burisma. Democrats have impeached a president for less.

      5. Obama-Biden Administration Ignoring Conflicts of Interest

      Biden also needs to answer questions about his decision to ignore the clear conflicts of interest involved with him negotiating with the same countries Hunter was shaking down. Of course, since “the big guy” was in on the scam, bowing out over conflicts of interest is the lesser of the evils, but it is still worth investigating to assess how Biden handled the concerns raised by the Obama administration’s State Department.

      Here, the testimony of the State Department official charged with issues related to Ukraine again proves significant. Kent told lawmakers that after learning Hunter sat on the board of Burisma, he raised concerns with the vice president’s office about the relationship.

      “I raised my concerns that I had heard that Hunter Biden was on the board of a company owned by somebody that the U.S. Government had spent money trying to get tens of millions of dollars back and that could create the perception of a conflict of interest,” Kent testified before House members in October of 2019. “The message that I recall hearing back was that the vice president’s son Beau was dying of cancer and that there was no further bandwidth to deal with family-related issues at that time … That was the end of that conversation.”

      The question for now-President Biden, then, is whether anyone in his office raised concerns about the clear conflicts-of-interest with him personally, and if so, why did Biden ignore the problem?  

      6. The Intelligence Community’s Briefing of Biden

      Another scandal reaching President Biden concerns his interactions with the intelligence community after the FBI, and presumably the CIA and other such agencies, learned in December of 2019, that Hunter Biden believed Russians had stolen Hunter’s laptop, rendering the Bidens susceptible to blackmail.

      Here, it is important to understand that there are two separate Hunter Biden laptops at issue. The most-discussed laptop was actually the second laptop. That laptop was the one Hunter had abandoned at the Delaware repair shop. Then, after the repair shop owner discovered concerning material on the MacBook, the store owner handed it to the FBI in December of 2019. The owner of the repair shop, however, had first made a copy of the hard drive, which resulted in The New York Post’s coverage in October 2020.

      But there was another laptop — one Hunter believed Russians had stolen from him when he was binging on drugs with prostitutes in the summer of 2018 in Las Vegas. While the public did not learn about the existence of this earlier laptop until August of 2021, the FBI knew about it as early as December 2019, when they took possession of the second laptop Hunter had left at the repair store.

      Among other material contained on the second laptop was a video of Biden recounting the circumstances of his first laptop disappearing with some Russians. Significantly, on that video Hunter Biden said his first laptop contained a ton of material leaving him susceptible to blackmail, since his father was “running for president” and Hunter talked “about it all the time.”

      It is inconceivable that the FBI and the intelligence communities did not brief Biden on this discovery and the risk of blackmail, given that former FBI Director James Comey briefed Trump on the fake Steele dossier. On second thought, that is the initial question reporters should ask the president: “Did the FBI brief you, Mr. President, on the fact that Hunter believed Russians had stolen a laptop containing compromising information?”

      From there, an inquiring press should investigate to ensure that Joe Biden did not direct the intelligence community to bury this national security risk to protect himself or his son.

      7. Possible Collusion to Interfere in the 2020 Election

      An honest press should also investigate whether now-President Biden or anyone connected to his then-presidential campaign pressured reporters, media outlets, or companies such as Twitter and Facebook to censor the Hunter Biden story. And what about the “fifty former intelligence officials” who publicly declared the laptop resembled a Russian disinformation campaign—something clearly untrue? Did Biden or his campaign coordinate with those individuals, several of whom had endorsed the Democratic candidate, in the release of the letter?

      Given that polls show that 17 percent of Joe Biden voters would not have voted for him in 2020, if they had known about the Biden family scandals, the collective burying of the laptop scandal represents the most significant interference in elections ever seen in our country. So, “Did Biden or his campaign have anything to do with the decision to kill the New York Post’s reporting on Hunter’s MacBook?” And “What about the ‘fifty former intelligence officials?’”

      From there the follow-ups flow quickly: “Who was involved in the push to silence the story and who were the executives or ‘journalists’ who bowed to the demands?” “Who coordinated with the intelligence officials?” “Were any threats or promises made?” “What were they?” “What did Joe Biden know?” “What about other Democrats and the Democratic National Committee?”

      8. Joe Biden Is a ‘Lying Dog-Faced Pony Soldier’

      The final Joe Biden scandal the press should push President Biden to answer concerns his lies to the American public. While there are too many to count, two merit further questioning.

      First, the media should demand Biden answer for lying to the country when he seethed, “I have never discussed, with my son or my brother or with anyone else, anything having to do with their businesses. Period.” The evidence overwhelmingly shows that Biden not only knew of the family business deals but was part of them.

      The second bold-faced fabrication from Biden came during his pre-election debate with Trump, when Trump raised “the laptop from hell.” When Trump asked Biden if he was saying the “laptop is now another Russia, Russia, Russia hoax?” the then-Democratic candidate replied, “That’s exactly what [I] was told.”

      Unlikely. Biden also countered with this doozy, which again raises the question of whether Biden had a role in the intelligence officials’ statement:

      There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plant. They have said that this has all the … five former heads of the CIA, both parties, say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage. Nobody believes it except him and his good friend, Rudy Giuliani.

      We can now add The New York Times to Giuliani. It remains to be seen, though, whether the Old Grey Lady and the other legacy outlets will report on the further scandals the laptop revealed—the ones that reach the president of the United States.


      Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

      The New York Times Doesn’t Care If You Know That Big Tech Helped Rig Joe Biden’s Election


      REPORTED BY: JOY PULLMANN | MARCH 21, 2022

      Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/21/the-new-york-times-doesnt-care-if-you-know-that-big-tech-helped-rig-joe-bidens-election/

      Joe biden and hunter biden

      On March 17, 2022, The New York Times stated it had verified the authenticity of a laptop and its data as belonging to the president’s son, Hunter Biden. This was the same laptop holding information that Twitter, Facebook, and other corporate media immediately suppressed when The New York Post, a right-leaning competitor of The New York Times, reported on it three weeks before the 2020 presidential election.

      If they had known about one of the Biden family scandals, such as the Hunter Biden laptop information, 17 percent of Joe Biden’s voters wouldn’t have voted for him, found a 2020 post-election poll. This means big tech’s suppression of this story likely made enough difference to tip Joe Biden into his low-margin win in the Electoral College.

      Back in October 2020, Twitter and Facebook immediately responded to The New York Post’s publication of information from Hunter Biden’s laptop by effectively banning it from their platforms that effectively monopolize public discussion. Twitter punished the Post for reporting the repeatedly authenticated laptop information by suspending its account for two weeks.

      “What this means is that, in the crucial days leading up to the 2020 presidential election, most of the corporate media spread an absolute lie about The New York Post’s reporting in order to mislead and manipulate the American electorate,” commented independent investigative reporter Glenn Greenwald.

      Major National Security Implications

      That laptop provides evidence Joe Biden was involved in Hunter Biden’s pay-for-play schemes with foreign oligarchs, an obvious national security risk. Some of these corrupt deals involved Ukraine, a notoriously corrupt country that is currently petitioning the Biden administration to engage militarily with Russia on their behalf.

      Russia also has blackmail material on Hunter Biden, according to videos from his laptop, and the FBI knew about this as early as 2019, according to Federalist reporting: “This explosive revelation establishes that either Joe Biden lied to the American public, or the intelligence community lied to him,” wrote Federalist Senior Contributor Margot Cleveland in 2021.

      Other Hunter Biden business deals involved China, the United States’ top security threat. Texts between business partners indicate Joe Biden was financially involved in Hunter Biden’s China deals, contrary to Joe Biden’s public claims.

      China also has blackmail material on Hunter Biden and possibly on Joe Biden. All of this means major conflicts of interest for the president’s foreign policy at a time of significant global instability. It also was deliberately hidden from the voting public by collusion between big tech companies and the Democrat Party.

      Hiding Democrats’ Dangerous Scandals

      The same presidential administration that benefitted from Big Tech hiding damning true information is openly colluding with Big Tech to maintain and expand these information operations. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters in July 2021, “We’re flagging posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.” Soon after, Psaki confirmed, “We’re in regular touch with social media platforms…about areas where we have concern.” You might call it a public-private partnership.

      Democrats have demanded that the Biden administration create a task force to suppress “misinformation” and “disinformation.” What did corporate media and big tech call the laptop information they suppressed in 2020, only for The New York Times to confirm in 2022? That’s right: Disinformation.” In fact, as Greenwald notes, intelligence operatives immediately enacted a real disinformation campaign against the New York Post reporting in 2020, pushing the false narrative that the Hunter Biden laptop was “disinformation.”

      That’s called projection, and you should assume that’s one of the things going on every time the media runs some wild news cycle—such as accusing the Republican president of treasonous collusion with Russia when it’s actually the Democrat presidential candidate who did that.

      Reinforcing the Power Hierarchy

      This New York Times article, after all the lies and manipulations about the Hunter Biden laptop, is also a chilling public affirmation that the ruling class believes Americans are helpless to choose their own government. They’re even bold enough to confirm their power openly.

      Just like requiring only the hired help and those under the thumb of government agencies to wear masks while their masters wine and dine mask-free, The New York Times openly revealing that corporate media including itself, Twitter, and Facebook lied and got away with it is a hierarchy flex. It’s a display of their power. They are saying, “We can lie to Americans and get away with it.”

      They’re also flexing their power to say things they won’t allow their political opponents to say. Again, Covid is another clear example, as when Trump advisors such as Scott Atlas faced vicious media smears for pointing out facts that The New York Times finally acknowledged months later, such as that kids don’t need to wear masks and it’s perfectly safe for them to go to school. In the intervening time, children needlessly suffered, but The New York Times doesn’t care. They owned the rubes, and that matters more to them than truth or children’s suffering.

      People this corrupt don’t deserve to have media platforms, control of the presidency, or any power of any kind. At the very least, those who use their power this cynically should be respected by absolutely no one.

      Big Tech Is a Threat to Democracy

      Big Tech is also clearly manipulating public discourse for highly partisan ends. Social media has become what the “big three” cable news networks were decades ago: falsely “nonpartisan” manipulators of elections. Like ABC, CBS, and NBC, Twitter and Facebook’s ability to control culture and politics through brain drips feeding lies into millions of Americans’ minds needs to end, yesterday. This is not a pissing contest. It’s about our continued existence as a nation.

      Greenwald notes the corporate press and big tech “all ratified and spread a coordinated disinformation campaign in order to elect Joe Biden and defeat Donald Trump.” That’s not a democracy, no matter how many slogans about that word propaganda outlets put out. It’s tyranny.

      When elections are an elaborate charade and their outcomes are openly manipulated by giant special interests, we don’t have self-government, self-determination, democracy, constitutional government, representation, or any of the above. For those of us who love these things because we believe they are our God-given and precious rights and responsibilities, this is a dark reality to behold.

      One might call this world the left wants to live in Chinese communism with American characteristics. Well, I don’t want to live in that world, and neither do at least 74 million other Americans. We’re not going to keep being abused by our own government quietly. And we’re not going to believe these liars, no matter what they say.

      The top names on everyone’s mind when they hear the word “disinformation” ought to be The New York Times, Twitter, Facebook, The Atlantic, and all their corrupt, self-congratulating Aspen Institute friends. That’s something we can all work to help our neighbors see.


      Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Sign up here to get early access to her next ebook, “101 Strategies For Living Well Amid Inflation.” Her bestselling ebook is “Classic Books for Young Children.” Mrs. Pullmann identifies as native American and gender natural. She is also the author of “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books. In 2013-14 she won a Robert Novak journalism fellowship for in-depth reporting on Common Core national education mandates. Joy is a grateful graduate of the Hillsdale College honors and journalism programs.

      Op-ed: Flynn Exposes Truth About Putin’s Real Plan – Says It’s Time to Pray


      Commentary By Michael Flynn | February 24, 2022

      Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/breaking-flynn-exposes-truth-putins-real-plan-says-time-pray/

      With the price of oil pushing above $100 per barrel, the U.S. stock market opening with heavy losses, more global economic challenges looming, the real potential for significant loss of life, and the international community in complete disarray with feeble attempts to condemn what was totally avoidable, we face the onset of another very grave and historic period of tension between competing ideologies and worse, the onset of WWIII.

      This “invasion” was totally avoidable.

      As one friend told me, President Joe Biden and his failed foreign policy team set the table and sent the invitation and Russian President Vladimir Putin came and spoiled the dinner party.

      Clearly, there are fault lines on both sides, but for now, we must pray that those affected, without the ability to decide their fate, are able to survive this extraordinary period of world history unfolding (for many, unraveling) on the world stage. Civilians and military forces will be killed, wounded and displaced; those are the real consequences of war.

      Pray that this conventional war is limited in scope, purpose and intent.

      Yes, there were gross violations of previous agreements due to incompetence, arrogance and ignorance that got us to this point. Beyond this, what happens next is anyone’s guess, but Putin (and Xi — Taiwan?) just laid down a new world order marker.

      That said, it is doubtful that the U.S. administration will change its failed foreign policy, and instead, it will make weak attempts to triple down on leveraging this extremely serious situation in Europe to continue to distract from problems here at home.

      Given the shutting down of the Keystone pipeline and America’s energy independence while also enabling Russia and Germany (read: Europe) to reopen the Nordstream pipeline, one has to wonder about the discussions in the Oval Office that came to these conclusions.

      This is the Biden administration: describing America as a systemically racist nation; appointing Marxists and other radical ideologues to positions of power; allowing millions to surge across our southern border; attempting to federalize our election systems and processes; implementing racist critical race theory in our schools, military and government; and all along, raising the national debt until it is closing in on $30 trillion — spending us toward extinction, all for left-wing causes.

      Let us not forget the Afghanistan disaster, the myriad lies about COVID, a certain Biden-owned laptop, a complete refusal to investigate allegations of election irregularities … all while China gets a pass.

      It is extremely difficult to trust this administration when they lie with a straight face to the American people daily.

      Anyone who questions these rotten foreign and domestic policies is demonized as a racist. We see the unleashing of the federal government on citizens who are simply exercising their constitutional rights and the establishment media covers all this incompetence with a fake smile due to their own deep corruption.

      Our president rarely entertains questions or takes responsibility for his tone deafness and failures. The White House ignored — even laughed at — Putin’s legitimate security concerns and ethnic unrest in the Ukraine.

      We have yet to hear from the president of the United States an explanation of U.S. national security interests in the region.

      Instead, we continue to demonize Russia — reminiscent of the fake Russia-collusion hysteria we now know was perpetrated against the Trump administration by elements of the Clinton campaign  and Obama administration (among others).

      President Putin calculated this strategic, historic and geographic play and made the decision to move.

      And he did.

      All that given, there will never be justification for this invasion or any other form of invasion. However, never forget that war results when diplomacy fails.

      May God watch over and protect those in harm’s way and may God continue to bless and protect the United States of America.

      Michael Flynn

      Retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn served as national security advisor to President Donald Trump. Headshot photo credit: Jewel Samad / AFP via Getty Images.

      COMMENTARY: State Residents Rip Back Power from Governor, Enact Two Constitutional Amendments to Keep COVID Power Grab from Ever Happening Again


      Demonstrators rally outside the Pennsylvania Capitol Building to protest the continued closure of businesses due to the coronavirus pandemic on May 15, 2020, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.Demonstrators rally outside the Pennsylvania Capitol Building to protest the continued closure of businesses due to the coronavirus pandemic on May 15, 2020, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. (Mark Makela / Getty Images)

      Commentary by Elizabeth Stauffer| May 20, 2021

      Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/state-residents-rip-back-power-governor-enact-two-constitutional-amendments-keep-covid-power-grab-ever-happening/

      In one of the first signs that American citizens are cognizant of the country’s dangerous descent into a one-party rule, residents of Pennsylvania sent a powerful message to those responsible on Tuesday: Stop!

      The pandemic provided governors, mayors and other local leaders with extraordinary opportunities to expand their influence over the citizens in their states. Nowhere were these emergency powers more egregiously abused than in states, cities and towns governed by Democrats. By all measures, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf was one of the worst offenders.

      WHYY-TV reported that two constitutional amendments passed statewide referenda that will provide the state’s General Assembly with “more power to block emergency declarations.”

      The amendment to Article III, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution grants the legislature the ability to “terminate the Governor’s Covid-19 disaster emergency declaration without presenting it to the Governor for his approval.”

      Prior to this amendment, measures passed by both the state House and Senate required the approval of the governor. Needless to say, all of the Republican-controlled legislature’s attempts to end or minimize Wolf’s orders ended in vetoes which required a two-thirds vote in both chambers to override. With the passage of this resolution, a simple majority vote in the state House and the Senate is all that is necessary. Veto power is no longer available to the governor.

      Under the old law, the governor had the authority to issue an emergency order which would remain in effect for 90 days, at which point he or she could either renew it or end it. The new amendment stipulates that a “disaster emergency declaration will expire automatically after 21 days, regardless of the severity of the emergency, unless the General Assembly takes action to extend the disaster emergency.”

      WHYY noted that a COVID-19 emergency order is currently in effect and is set to expire on Memorial Day. If Wolf chooses to renew it, a simple majority vote in the state House and Senate could end it in 21 days.

      Democrats are reportedly worried that the legislature will act “to cancel COVID-19 emergency declarations without considering public health or consulting with the Governor’s office.”

      State House Majority Leader Kerry Benninghoff and Speaker Bryan Cutler, both Republicans, sought to reassure them in a joint statement which said, “We stand ready to reasonably and responsibly manage Pennsylvania through this ongoing global pandemic, the scourge of opioid addiction, and other long-term challenges that may come to face this Commonwealth.”

      State Republican lawmakers Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward and Senate President Jake Corman were more direct. In a joint statement, they wrote, “This decision by the people is not about taking power away from any one branch of government. It’s about re-establishing the balance of power between three equal branches of government as guaranteed by the constitution.”

      Gov. Wolf, unsurprisingly, vehemently opposed these amendments. According to The Morning Call, the governor said in January that “Republicans were injecting partisan politics into emergency disaster response in a ‘thinly veiled power grab.’ Just last week, he warned that the provisions were a threat to a functioning society that must respond to increasingly complicated disasters.”

      A thinly veiled power grab? I’m practically speechless. What stunning hypocrisy coming from a man who used the COVID-19 pandemic to trample all over his constituents’ rights by shutting down businesses, halting participation in high school sports, closing schools and mandating mask-wearing outside the home.

      Anyway, the governor held a news conference on Wednesday in Pottstown, Pennsylvania. He said he’d spoken to leaders of both parties in the legislature to discuss “a path forward,” the Morning Call reported.

      “We’re starting that conversation. You can’t just flick a switch and make the change,” he told reporters. “But the voters have spoken, and we’re going to do what I think the voters expect us to do and make the best of it.”

      WHYY reported the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency expressed its disappointment with the election results in a statement which read, “The constitutional amendments have the potential to politicize future disasters and their management. PEMA always stands ready to respond to any situation but we’re extremely disappointed that our efforts, and the efforts of our other state agencies, could be constrained by partisan politics, which has no place in emergency response efforts.”

      The passage of these amendments was a victory for those with whom the principles of liberty and freedom still have meaning. In an email provided to The Western Journal, Commonwealth Foundation President and CEO Charles Mitchell reacted to the passage of these amendments with tremendous joy and relief. He called Tuesday a “momentous day in the history of Pennsylvania and the United States” and wrote that “voters have defended some of our most important founding principles, including the separation of powers between branches of government and the fundamental importance of each citizen’s liberty.”

      Many governors “saw their emergency powers laws as a vehicle for them to act in contradiction to their own state constitutions and the U.S. Constitution for as long as they’d like.” Most of us would agree with that statement.

      Mitchell quoted James Madison in Federalist Paper No. 51: “But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department, the necessary constitutional means, and personal motives, to resist encroachments of the others … it may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.”

      “Two hundred and thirty-three years after Madison wrote that statement, voters in Pennsylvania reaffirmed its truth,” Mitchell concluded.

      May Pennsylvania voters be the first of many states in the nation to impose restrictions on a governor’s authority under an emergency disaster declaration.

      ABOUT THE COMMENTATOR:

      Elizabeth Stauffer, Contributor, Commentary

      Elizabeth is a contract writer at The Western Journal. Her articles have appeared on many conservative websites including RedState, Newsmax, The Federalist, Bongino.com, HotAir, Instapundit, MSN and RealClearPolitics. Please visit Elizabeth’s new conservative blog: TheAmericanCrisis.org

      @StaufferVaughn

      Daily Beast: Isn’t It Odd That The Hunter Biden Money-Laundering Probe Went “Largely Unnoticed” Until Now?


      Reported by ED MORRISSEY | Posted at 11:15 am on December 10, 2020

      Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/daily-beast-isnt-it-odd-that-the-hunter-biden-money-laundering-probe-went-largely-unnoticed-until-now-2649440096.html/

      Largely unnoticed,” purposely ignored, or actively suppressed? The Daily Beast’s reporting team on Hunter Biden’s legal woes sound somewhat surprised that the FBI’s money-laundering probe didn’t get noticed before the election:

      The Justice Department’s announcement on Wednesday that it was investigating Hunter Biden, for what he deemed to be “tax affairs,” took root several years ago with a much broader inquiry that included possible money laundering, according to a report by CNN.

      That inquiry reportedly fizzled, leading instead to a probe on tax matters that is now being led by the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware. But evidence of the larger probe was apparent in the markings on a series of documents that were made public—but went largely unnoticed—in the days leading up to the November election, according to two individuals familiar with the matter.

      The word “unnoticed” is doing an awful lot of heavy lifting in this sentence. Not only did it get noticed, it got reported by Sinclair TV’s James Rosen a few days before the election. A large number of online outlets — mostly conservative — picked up on Rosen’s report about the FBI’s criminal probe of Hunter Biden, including us. Rosen reported that Tony Bobulinski had cooperated in the probe, and that its focus was money laundering:

      A U.S. Justice Department official has confirmed to Sinclair Broadcast Group that a 2019 FBI investigation into Hunter Biden, son of Democratic nominee Joe Biden, is still active.

      The 2019 criminal investigation looks into Hunter and his associates on allegations of money-laundering.

      Sinclair investigative reporter James Rosen spoke with a central witness in these allegations, who suggested that former vice president Joe Biden knew more than he has acknowledged about his son’s overseas dealings.

      That witness was Bobulinski, who went public about Hunter’s business dealings after the Biden campaign tried sloughing him off as a malcontent business partner. Rosen himself addressed this last night:

       

      This didn’t go “largely unnoticed.” It was widely noticed, everywhere except in the mainstream media. Why? It started with the New York Post exposé of Hunter’s laptop, which Biden’s team claimed was Russian disinformation and social media platforms actively suppressed:

      MacIsaac also said he copied the contents of one of the laptops for Giuliani. And, sure enough, those contents quickly made their way to conservative media personalities and outlets. Giuliani and others, including Steve Bannon, appeared on network television, stirring conspiracy theories and pushing unsubstantiated claims about Hunter’s overseas business dealings.

      One of the main outlets pushing emails and pictures from the hard drive was the New York Post. And for one of its stories, the paper published what appeared to be federal law enforcement documents given to MacIsaac in return for his handing over the Biden laptops.

      One of those documents—from the FBI— included a case number that had the code associated with an ongoing federal money laundering investigation in Delaware, according to several law enforcement officials who reviewed the document. Another document—one with a grand jury subpoena number—appeared to show the initials of two assistant U.S. attorneys linked to the Wilmington, Delaware, office.

      Gee — you mean if media outlets had actually checked the details, they might have found a real story about corruption around Joe Biden? As in, acting like real journalistic organizations and speaking truth to power? The deuce you say. The excuse in this article for failing to report on this — even with Rosen’s report already made public — was that law enforcement wouldn’t comment and the Biden team stonewalled the Daily Beast. But the documents themselves apparently left that very big clue two months ago that they’re reporting …. now.

      [Update: That’s too harsh in regard to the Daily Beast, actually. They did try to follow up. That puts them head and shoulders above other media outlets … like, for instance …]

      As Glenn Greenwald says — memories …

      It’s not just media outlets that should get the heat, either. Twitter and Facebook actively suppressed the New York Post article — and the New York Post itself — for days. Democrats called it Russian disinformation, and both Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey nearly twisted their ankles in a rush to suppress it. Now, and only after Hunter Biden issued a press release acknowledging the accuracy of Rosen’s reporting, have all of these “institutions” suddenly cured their myopia.

      The clear conclusion is that the national media didn’t want to report anything detrimental to Joe Biden, no matter how accurate it might have been. Now that the election is over, they’ll tell their readers and viewers that the story went “largely unnoticed” [see update above as to TDB, which did at least notice it] as a passive-voice dodge to avoid responsibility for their active decision to ignore and in some cases suppress it. It’s an utter disgrace.

      I Was In Philadelphia Watching Fraud Happen. Here’s How It Went Down


      Reported by Jerome M. Marcus NOVEMBER 10, 2020

      Legacy media are lying when they claim that all of President Trump’s allegations of voter fraud are baseless. I know, because I argued a case on the president’s behalf in federal court in Philadelphia.

      At issue was President Trump’s request for an order changing the way Pennsylvania absentee and mail-in ballots are being reviewed at the Philadelphia Convention Center. CNN and others claim he “lost.” That’s false: he won. As I made that argument on behalf of the president’s campaign, I can tell you what really happened.

      President Trump went to court about two problems: First, only a handful of Republican observers—substantially fewer than the Democrats had there—were being admitted to the room at the Philadelphia Convention Center where inspections were being conducted. Second, the few who could get in weren’t permitted to get close enough to see what was actually happening. The most important questions all have to ask are: Why all the hiding? What’s being hidden?

      At the Convention Center counting location, I personally observed dozens of Trump campaign volunteers being barred from the counting room even though they’d been properly registered as observers. That’s why I urged Pam Bondi and Corey Lewandowski, who were on the scene, to authorize the filing of a request that a federal court order the Board of Elections to stop this nonsense.

      More hiding: despite a binding order of the state’s Commonwealth Court, the handful of Republican observers who could get into the room weren’t being allowed up to the barrier set at six feet from the closest tables where work was being done. So even though they were in the room where it was happening, they had no way to tell what was happening. If there’s no fraud, why is the Democrat-controlled Board of Elections unwilling to let people get close enough to actually see what its people are doing?

      So on a borrowed laptop at around 2 p.m. on election day, I typed up a very short document to start a federal lawsuit and to request that the federal court intervene to prohibit these unfair practices. At about 4:30 p.m., its filing was authorized by the campaign.

      The federal judge ordered a hearing that began at 5:30 p.m. and went for two hours. In open court, the  judge compelled the Board of Elections to agree that the Republicans could have up to 60 representatives in the room. That was a huge victory, not only for Republicans but for anyone who actually wants to have a vote tabulation worthy of belief.

      He also compelled the board to agree that all observers, Democrat or Republican, could get up to the six-foot barrier. While the Democrats claimed that of course, of course, they had always been letting people in and letting them up to the barrier, I had a long list of witnesses who were prepared to testify that this was false. The judge told the defendants pointedly that if they didn’t do what they’d promised in his courtroom they would, he had plenty of authority to make them keep their word.

      Having secured this agreement from the Board of Elections, the court dismissed the president’s motion for court-ordered relief as moot. Courts often do that when they secure an agreement between the parties. It means the court doesn’t have to issue an order, which would be appealable, granting or denying the motion, and it means the court doesn’t have to write an opinion. What it doesn’t mean is that the request made on behalf of President Trump to stop the election fraud was moot, despite the false spin CNN and other mainstream media put on it. All of this was a victory for President Trump and anyone else who believes in open government.

      I’m no longer surprised by anti-Trump non-news coming from the likes of CNN. But I cannot imagine why Pennsylvania Republican leaders have suggested there’s no reason to think that anything wrong or fraudulent is going on in the counting of Pennsylvania’s votes.

      If that were true, why in the world would the Democratic-controlled city government be working so hard to keep Republicans out of the room where those votes are being counted? In a world where every car that drives down the street is on video, why isn’t all of this counting being conducted in broad daylight, under watchful eyes? What do they have to hide?

      Other people have gathered substantial evidence that there are indeed things to hide, including this video showing, among other things, footage of government officials wearing Joe Biden facemasks filling in blanks in already-submitted mail-in votes. The hearing I attended wasn’t about that, but it was about the conditions that make that possible.

      No one who wants a legitimate vote count should be working to keep observers out of the room where the votes are counted. Yet for some reason the City of Philadelphia sent three lawyers, including the city solicitor himself, to a hearing to try to persuade a federal judge that he shouldn’t even bother addressing President Trump’s request.

      Fortunately, the federal judge didn’t take that advice, and he forced the Board of Elections to do the right thing. I call that a solid victory for everyone—except for those with something to hide. For some reason, all of this hiding was being done by Democrats, for Biden.

      Jerome M. Marcus is an attorney in private practice in Philadelphia.

      Never Forget the Time Joe Biden Said ‘Don’t Assume I’m Not Corrupt’


      Commentary By Kipp Jones | Published October 27, 2020 at 4:59pm

      An old clip of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden discussing whether he could be corrupted by power has taken on new significance with less than a week before the Nov. 3 election.

      The Democrats’ lone shot at seizing power from the American people next week is currently embroiled in controversy surrounding reports that he used his son to peddle his influence while he served as the country’s vice president.

      Contents discovered on a laptop that reportedly belonged to his son Hunter Biden continue to bring up questions about Biden’s alleged involvement in the younger Biden’s international business dealings.

      Numerous and credible reports that Biden himself was involved in making money from Hunter Biden’s business in ChinaRussiaKazakhstan and Ukraine have also not been challenged on substance.

      But they portray a political family rooted in corruption, and they make a case that Biden himself allegedly guided American foreign policy while serving as VP with his own financial interests in mind.

      Due to these and other reports, a decades-old unearthed clip of Biden speaking about political corruption are more important now than ever.

      This past week, an old Biden interview shows Biden discussing corruption as a side-burned and fast-talking young senator from Delaware.

      In 1974, during his second year in the Senate, Biden appeared on the weekly PBS program “The Advocates.”

      He was asked, “As the youngest member of the Senate, the one therefore who may expect the longest career there, I wonder if you’d say to us since it’s clear that you’re not corrupt and you got elected, why should people think that the system produces corrupt results when there you are?”

      READ THE REST OF THIS REPORT AT https://www.westernjournal.com/never-forget-time-joe-biden-said-dont-assume-not-corrupt/

      Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


      A.F. Branco Cartoon – Buyers Remorse

      Folks are asking how they can change their vote after recent revelations of Biden corruption.

      Biden Voter RemorsePolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
      Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

      A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.

      Biden Whistleblower Emails: Chinese Energy Company Gave $5 Million Non-Secured, Forgivable Loan to Biden ‘Family’


      Reported by MATTHEW BOYLE | Washington, DC

      Read more at https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/22/biden-whistleblower-emails-chinese-energy-company-gave-5-million-non-secured-forgivable-loan-biden-family/

      US Vice President Joe Biden (C) buys an ice-cream at a shop as he tours a Hutong alley with his granddaughter Finnegan Biden (R) and son Hunter Biden (L) in Beijing on December 5, 2013. Biden said on December 5 China’s air zone had caused “significant apprehension” and Beijing needed … ANDY WONG/AFP via Getty Images

      The email, sent to SinoHawk Holdings CEO Tony Bobulinski, shows how a top official with CEFC Energy — a now bankrupt and defunct energy company based in China — offered to wire $10 million into an account to begin operations, $5 million worth of which would be a non-secured forgivable loan to the “BD Family,” which means the Biden family.

      Breitbart News senior contributor Peter Schweizer spent four and a half hours with Bobulinski before he went public, and discussed these communications in particular regarding this loan during that meeting. According to Schweizer, the Chinese energy company officials were going to put $10 million into an account, $5 million of which was designated as a non-secured forgivable loan to the Biden family. Schweizer said this would constitute significant leverage the Chinese energy company officials would have over the Biden family.

      “In a way, this would give CEFC greater leverage over the Biden family than simply giving them a gift or bribe because if they were dissatisfied with what the Bidens were doing they could ask for their money back,” Schweizer told Breitbart News when asked about the arrangement upon the public release of Bobulinski’s emails.

      The email also says that $5 million loan is “interest free” and asks how that $5 million would be used, and if used up, whether CEFC should lend more money to the Biden family.

      This email further fleshes out details surrounding the controversial arrangement first uncovered by U.S. Senate investigators in a recent Homeland Security Committee report, and later further uncovered by a bombshell New York Post story on emails retrieved from Hunter Biden’s laptop.

      Bobulinski’s new emails add to the story by including terms of the financial arrangement behind the wire transfer that CEFC officials made into a firm aligned with the Bidens that then made significant payments to Hunter Biden’s own firm, a wire transfer and financial payments that were first exposed by Senate investigators. The New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop emails added more information to this questionable arrangement by revealing emails that showed how Biden associates intended to divvy up the cash from the Chinese investors.

      These new emails from Bobulinski add more to the picture by showing that the agreement was that this payment would serve as a non-secured forgivable loan, and that the CEFC side of the arrangement understood that the then-forthcoming payment — which Senate investigators confirmed was made just two weeks after these discussions —would serve as a loan to the Biden “family,” not just to Hunter Biden.

       

      This email is part of a broader trove of documents that Bobulinski provided to U.S. Senate investigators with the Homeland Security and Finance Committees, and also to media outlets including Breitbart News. Other media outlets are reporting on the emails as well.

      According to the Senate Homeland Security Committee’s recent report, $5 million was wired directly into the account in question two weeks later — and then Hunter Biden’s firm spent the next year wiring $4.8 million from there into his own firm’s account:

       

      CEFC was a controversial energy company, as Breitbart News has reported. “The owner of CEFC, Ye Jianming, was among the most ambitious of Chinese tycoons before his business empire collapsed and he vanished into the Communist nation’s shadowy prison system,” Breitbart News’ John Hayward wrote earlier this week. “Ye was once portrayed as one of China’s greatest rags-to-riches stories, a humble park ranger who began making successful oil investments in his twenties and became a billionaire before he hit 40. He was marketed as an affable businessman foreigners could feel safe making deals with, well-connected but not an obvious tool of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).”

      CEFC is at the center of the burgeoning Biden scandal. When Bobulinski went public on Wednesday night, he was the first source on one of the emails that the New York Post published from Hunter Biden’s laptop retrieved from a computer repair store in Delaware. One such story that the Post published was about Hunter Biden and the Biden family seeking a deal with CEFC, and in those original emails James Gilliar of J2cR emails Bobulinski about “remunerations packages” related to the CEFC deal.

      “I am the recipient of the email published seven days ago by the New York Post which showed a copy to Hunter Biden and Rob Walker. That email is genuine,” Bobulinski said in his statement issued publicly.

      Bobulinski had been, sources familiar with the matter told Breitbart News, cooperating with the Wall Street Journal for an investigation it is working on. But since the Journal has not published its story several days later after its staff had indicated it would, Bobulinski decided to go public on his own on Wednesday night — and made clear he is cooperating with Senate investigators.

      In the original email, published by the New York Post, from Hunter Biden’s laptop, Gilliar references a breakdown of how money acquired would be distributed throughout the firm of which Bobulinski was CEO. The email says at one point that “10 held by H for the big guy.”

      In his nearly 700-word statement, Bobulinski confirmed the authenticity of that email and further explained its meeting including that “the big guy” was a reference to former Vice President Joe Biden, the 2020 Democrat presidential nominee, himself.

      “What I am outlining is fact. I know it is fact because I lived it. I am the CEO of Sinohawk Holdings which was a partnership between the Chinese operating through CEFC/Chairman Ye and the Biden family,” Bobulinski said. “I was brought into the company to be the CEO by James Gilliar and Hunter Biden. The reference to ‘the big guy’ in the much publicized May 13, 2017 email is in fact a reference to Joe Biden. The other ‘JB’ referenced in that email is Jim Biden, Joe’s brother. Hunter Biden called his dad ‘the Big Guy’ or ‘my Chairman,’ and frequently referenced asking him for his sign-off or advice on various potential deals that we were discussing. I’ve seen Vice President Biden saying he never talked to Hunter about his business. I’ve seen firsthand that that’s not true, because it wasn’t just Hunter’s business, they said they were putting the Biden family name and its legacy on the line.”

      Second Video with Major Ilhan Omar Voter Fraud Allegations Released as Minneapolis Police Investigate


      Reported By Jack Davis | Published September 29, 2020 at 7:48am

      The drumbeat of voter fraud allegations against Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota grew stronger Monday with the release of a second video from Project Veritas purporting to show ballot harvesting being conducted.

      The release of the second video in two days came as Minneapolis police said they were investigating the situation.

      “The MPD is aware of the allegations of vote harvesting. We are in the process of looking into the validity of those statements. No further information is available at this time on this,” the department tweeted Monday.

      On Sunday, Project Veritas released a video allegedly exposing an apparent sophisticated ballot-harvesting scheme targeting mostly Somali-born seniors in Minneapolis.

      Those who spoke in the video alleged there are exchanges of cash for mail-in ballots in many cases.

      In response to the initial video, Omar’s senior communications director, Jeremy Slevin, told Newsweek: “The amount of truth to this story is equal to the amount Donald Trump paid in taxes of ten out of the last fifteen years: zero. And amplifying a coordinated right-wing campaign to delegitimize a free and fair election this fall undermines our democracy.”

      Then on Monday, Project Veritas released a second video:

      “Your focus is winning, no matter what you do. You ignore the rules and regulations,” Omar Jamal, a Somali community member, said in the new video. “There’s no moral and ethics here. It’s just the end will justify the means.”

      “I think Ilhan Omar is one of the people behind all this mess,” he said. “And they have a lot of people that work for them that make sure that tasks get carried out, ballots collected. This is the cash money exchanging hands.”

      “It’s an open secret that everybody knows it but they don’t talk about it.”

      Advertisement – story continues below

      “Nobody would say that Ilhan Omar isn’t part of this,” Jamal added in an accompanying news release on the Project Veritas website. “Unless you’re from a different planet, but if you live in this universe, I think everybody knows it.”

      The video showed a source appearing to link Omar to the alleged ballot harvesting operation.

      READ THE REST OF THE REPORT AT https://www.westernjournal.com/second-video-major-ilhan-omar-voter-fraud-allegations-released-minneapolis-police-investigate/

      ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

      MUST READ: Fired and Disgraced Former ICIG Atkinson Left Behind a Trail of Lies and Corruption


      Reported By Jim Hoft | Published April 6, 2020 at 7:59am

      This guy should be locked up.  Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) Michael Atkinson left behind a trail of lies and corruption from his days at the DOJ and as ICIG.  Even his wife is connected to the Deep State.

      Here is the President’s letter to the US Senate announcing the move:

      Atkinson was identified in the most recent FISA abuse report by the DOJ IG Horowitz as one of the individuals who was involved in FISA abuse which provides President Trump cover for firing Atkinson:

      …The recent IG report that outlines Atkinson’s gross incompetence in the FISA scandal, vis-a-vis the 42 DOJ-NSD Accuracy Reviews, is the atomic shield against the political narrative….

      But corrupt politicians like lying Adam Schiff, who pushed forward the unconstitutional and criminal impeachment of President Trump are up in arms about the President’s action:

      Prior to becoming IC Inspector General, Michael Atkinson was the Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division, Mary McCord.
      It is very safe to say Mary McCord and Michael Atkinson have a working relationship from their time together in 2016 and 2017 at the DOJ-NSD. Atkinson was Mary McCord’s senior legal counsel; essentially her lawyer.
      McCord was the senior intelligence officer who accompanied Sally Yates to the White House in 2017 to confront then White House Counsel Don McGahn about the issues with National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and the drummed up controversy over the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak phone call.
      Additionally, Mary McCord, Sally Yates and Michael Atkinson worked together to promote the narrative around the incoming Trump administration “Logan Act” violations. This silly claim (undermining Obama policy during the transition) was the heavily promoted, albeit manufactured, reason why Yates and McCord were presumably concerned about Flynn’s contact with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. It was nonsense.

      McCord and Atkinson were involved also in the bogus FISA warrants recently investigated by the DOJ IG. We also know that two lovebirds who worked for Atkinson during his time were involved in doctoring the DOJ FISA warrant obtained to spy on candidate, and President, Trump.

      The individual (or individuals) were soon identified as Kevin Clinesmith who worked with his reported lover Sally Moyer.

      We reported previously that Atkinson took the ICIG position after working for McCord at the DOJ. McCord, on the other hand, found a position working for lying Adam Schiff.

      We then reported that Atkinson changed the IC whistleblower form in September of 2019 shortly after a CIA Agent, who was spying in the Trump White House, drafted a complaint on President Trump. Atkinson saw to it that the whistleblower form was updated to allow for second hand information, which the ‘whistleblower’ (believed to be Eric Ciaramella) provided in his complaint. Although, the form should not have been accepted based on second-hand information and because it was about the President of the United States (who is not a member of the IC), Atkinson accepted the complaint.

      Margot Cleveland at the Federalist notes the following about the timing of when Atkinson changed the form and requirements that complaints be based on first hand information:

      As Davis noted, the revised form “was uploaded on September 24, 2019, at 4:25 p.m., just days before the anti-Trump complaint was declassified and released to the public. The markings on the document state that it was revised in August 2019, but no specific date of revision is disclosed,” and the whistleblower’s complaint was dated August 12, 2019.
      It is unclear whether the whistleblower submitted a form with his nine-page dossier, and if so what form, as none was declassified. One suggestion that a form was submitted is the OIG’s summary of the complaint: “According to the ICIG, statements made by the President during the call could be viewed as soliciting a foreign campaign contribution in violation of the campaign-finance laws.”
      Yet nothing in the whistleblower’s complaint mentioned potential foreign campaign contributions. Was that the ICIG’s gloss of the complaint, or was that the summary the whistleblower used on the form?
      Frankly, it does not matter which, if any, form the whistleblower used: What matters is whether the ICIG changed its position on accepting complaints under the ICWPA. If, prior to this charge against Trump, the ICIG refused to accept complaints based on second-hand information, but altered its procedure to trigger the ICWPA for the president, that is a huge scandal and implicates many besides the so-called whistleblower.
      While the whistleblower’s plot to manipulate the ICWPA is obvious from the complaint, and so is his inaccurate partial quote of the statutory definition of “urgent concern,” the change in the form suggests complicity in the ICIG’s office. The director of national intelligence, who oversees the ICIG, should immediately investigate the investigator and determine whether there was a change in policy, when it occurred, why it occurred, and who initiated the change.

      President Trump spoke about Atkinson over the weekend and he said that the White House offered to provide a copy of the discussion the President had with the newly elected President of the Ukraine, which was the object of the ‘whistleblower’s’ complaint, but instead Atkinson went to Congress with the application:

      The whistleblower attempted to edit the form he originally provided. The original form stated that the whistleblower did not talk to Congress before filing the form but after it was discovered that he had met with Adam Schiff’s team in Congress, the whistleblower attempted to edit his form.

      President Trump, in his comments over the weekend, questions what about the leaker who was on the call and who provided the whistleblower with the bogus story about President Trump.  President Trump also asks, what happened to the second whistleblower which was discussed right before the President released the transcript of the call with the Ukraine.  Why did Atkinson not bring this individual forward?  The President indicates that the second whistleblower could be the corrupt and dishonest Adam Schiff!

      Representative John Ratcliffe discussed this in the House impeachment sham but the Democrats ran ahead with their unconstitutional act anyways:

      The most repulsive action by the Democrats and the Deep State is withholding ICIG Atkinson’s testimony in the House basement during the Schiff impeachment sham. This testimony is reportedly damning and will exonerate President Trump while highlighting the criminal activities of Schiff, Ciaramella, Atkinson, McCord and other crooks in the Deep State.

      The Conservative Treehouse noted that the President has recommended Ratcliffe for the ODNI role but corrupt Republican Senator Burr won’t take this up in the Senate:

      Intelligence Committee member John Ratcliffe has been nominated for the permanent ODNI role, but his nomination has not been taken up by corrupt Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) Chairman Richard Burr. Ironically, Senator Burr is now under investigation for insider trading related to his divestiture of Wall Street investments prior to the financial collapse due to the coronavirus pandemic.
      Former ICIG Atkinson’s wife is even connected to the Deep State, as she was connected to Fusion GPS and Mary Jacoby, the wife of one of its founders.

      It is very clear that former ICIG Atkinson is involved in some of the most corrupt actions in US history.  He should have been fired.  He should also be prosecuted for his actions to remove the President of the United States from office for made up crimes.

      Watch Clapper Squirm When He Learns He’s A Target In Criminal Investigation By Durham


      Written by daniel | October 28, 2019

      https://freedomheadlines.com/the-latest/watch-clapper-squirm-when-he-learns-hes-a-target-in-criminal-investigation-by-durham/

      James Clapper was speaking with Anderson Cooper shortly after learning about the criminal investigation by U.S. Attorney John Durham when Cooper asked him about it. You can clearly see that Clapper is very unsettled and nervous about the whole thing, which he should be. He knows that he did wrong and he knows that he’s about to get caught. His behavior and body language says it all. You begin hearing a lot more ‘uhs’ and is constantly moving in his seat, and seems to avoid looking straight into the camera.
      The video is down below.

      Red State reports,

      The idea that this investigation is politically timed is nonsense. Clapper makes that assertion and Cooper offers zero push back because of course he doesn’t. The reality is that the Durham investigation started long before impeachment fever 2019. And the escalation to a criminal investigation follows the finishing of a years in the making IG report, not the impeachment inquiry. If anything, the timing of the whistle-blower and Schiff’s circus seem far more politically timed than the investigations that predate it.
      Two, Clapper knows exactly why he’s under investigation. He has always been suspected of leaking the classified briefing given to Donald Trump on the Steele dossier to CNN. I wrote an entire piece several months ago about Jake Tapper’s denials not adding up on the matter. There are some serious questions and inconsistencies there. There’s also the fact that Clapper probably lied about his knowledge of the investigation. The idea that he didn’t even know it existed prior to Trump taking office doesn’t begin to pass the smell test. We have texts from Peter Stzok and Lisa Page saying that everything was being run from the White House. Clapper was the ODNI in that administration. He knew.

      The status of the new investigation means Durham can now subpoena witnesses and file charges. The probe’s expansion to a criminal investigation was based on new evidence that was found during a recent trip to Rome with Attorney General Bill Barr.

      Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


      A.F. Branco Cartoon – Witches Hunting

      Schumer said the intelligence community has six ways from Sunday to get President Trump and we are seeing it in action, another coup.
      Six Ways From SundayPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
      More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

      Branco’s Faux Children’s Book “APOCALI” ORDER  HERE

      Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

      take our poll – story continues below
      • Has Adam Schiff committed fraud and treason concerning the Trump probe?

      A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

      Ex-Ukraine prosecutor said he was told to back off probe of Biden-linked firm, files show


      Reported By Brooke Singman | Fox

      URL of the original posting site: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ukraine-prosecutor-biden-burisma-back-off-state-department-files

      The fired prosecutor at the center of the Ukraine controversy said during a private interview with President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani earlier this year that he was told to back off an investigation involving a natural gas firm that was linked to Joe Biden’s son, according to details of that interview that were handed over to Congress by the State Department’s inspector general Wednesday.

      Fox News obtained a copy of Giuliani’s notes from his January 2019 interview with fired Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin in which he claimed that his “investigations stopped out of fear of the United States.”

      “Mr. Shokin attempted to continue the investigations but on or around June or July of 2015, the U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey R. Pyatt told him that the investigation has to be handled with white gloves, which according to Mr. Shokin, that implied do nothing,” the notes from the interview stated. The notes also claimed Shokin was told Biden had held up U.S. aid to Ukraine over the investigation.

      Then-Prosecutor-General of Ukraine Viktor Shokin speaking at a news conference in Kiev, Ukraine, November 2, 2015.

      Shokin was fired in April 2016, and his case was “closed by the current Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko,” according to the notes. Despite his claims, Shokin, on both sides of the Atlantic, had been widely accused of corruption.

      But Biden’s role is back in the spotlight after Democrats launched an impeachment inquiry over Trump’s efforts to convince Ukraine to look into Biden’s actions.

      Biden, who has been seeking to unseat President Trump in 2020, once famously boasted on camera that when he was vice president and spearheading the Obama administration’s Ukraine policy, he successfully pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin who was the top prosecutor at the time. He had been investigating the founder of Burisma Holdings, where Hunter Biden had a lucrative role on the board.

      Allies of the Democrat, though, maintained that his intervention prompting the firing of Shokin had nothing to do with his son, but rather was tied to the corruption concerns. The Biden campaign has also slammed Giuliani and blasted media outlets for giving him air time. The campaign wrote to NBC News, CBS News, Fox News and CNN to voice “grave concern that you continue to book Rudy Giuliani on your air to spread false, debunked conspiracy theories on behalf of Donald Trump.”

      “The substance of President Trump and Rudy Giuliani’s claims has been roundly discredited,” Biden Deputy Campaign Manager Kate Bedingfield said last week. “This is not a claim from the campaign or Joe Biden. This is an irrefutable fact.”

      The Wall Street Journal reported last week that by the time of Biden’s intervention, the Burisma probe had been dormant.

      However, Shokin, at the time, according to the interview, was investigating Mykola Zlochevsky, the former minister of ecology and natural resources of Ukraine — also the founder of Burisma. Hunter Biden was appointed to the board of the firm, which Shokin claimed was an appointment made by Zlochevsky “in order to protect himself.”

      The interview purportedly conducted by Giuliani took place on Jan. 23, 2019 at an office on Park Avenue in New York City. Shokin was interviewed over the phone, and interpreters were used — one in Ukraine and one in New York, according to the notes obtained by Fox News.

      In a statement to Fox News after this report was first published, Giuliani said the details were gathered before Biden announced his presidential run and the allegations were brought to him.

      “I explored them as part of my duty as an attorney to show that the crimes committed, were not by my client, but by Democrats. I was not seeking to investigate Joe Biden. I was not investigating Joe Biden,” Giuliani said.

      He also confirmed that he brought the documents to the State Department, saying that he was disappointed they had not been investigated.

      “Maybe they will now,” he said.

      The new documents were shared with Fox News by sources familiar with the “urgent” briefing held by State Department Inspector General Steve Linick on Wednesday.

      Linick gave a closed-door briefing on Ukraine to aides from the Senate committees on Intelligence, Foreign Relations, Appropriations and Homeland Security, as well as aides from the House committees on Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, Appropriations and Oversight. The briefing lasted over an hour and took place in a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) on Capitol Hill Wednesday afternoon.

      Linick shared a file with those who attended the briefing, containing multiple folders with the Trump Hotel logo on them. Inside the folders were notes from an interview conducted by Giuliani in January 2019 with Shokin, as well as Lutsenko. Another folder contained news clips, as well as several timelines about investigations related to Burisma.

      A State Department spokesman on Wednesday confirmed to Fox News that the “relevant” materials Linick shared with Congress “were provided by the Department to the Inspector General on May 3, 2019 for his review and for such action as the Inspector General deemed appropriate.”

      Linick told aides in the meeting that he received the package of information in the spring but did not know the sender. Linick sent it to the FBI because it included allegations of improper activities in Ukraine that were outside of his jurisdiction, according to sources familiar with the meeting. Last week, though, Linick was given permission by the FBI to share the files with Congress and said they were relevant to the congressional interviews being conducted, according to sources.

      The documents came amid the uproar surrounding Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which he sought an investigation into Biden’s Ukraine dealings, as well as his son’s. That phone call sparked a formal impeachment inquiry in the House of Representatives and had the Trump administration facing a new round of subpoenas.

      Amid the rapidly moving impeachment inquiry being led by House Democrats, the details included in the folder turned over by the State Department inspector general could be used by the Trump administration to fuel its claim that the real scandal surrounded the Bidens. However, Democrats already have cast the files as “debunked conspiracy theories” and “propaganda.”

      “The briefing and documents raise troubling questions about apparent efforts inside and outside the Trump Administration to target specific officials, including former Vice President Joe Biden’s son and then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Masha Yovanovitch, who was abruptly removed as Ambassador in May after a sustained campaign against her by the President’s agent, Rudy Giuliani,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., and Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, D-Md., said in a statement late Wednesday.

      “The documents provided by the inspector general included a package of disinformation, debunked conspiracy theories, and baseless allegations in an envelope marked ‘White House’ and containing folders labeled ‘Trump Hotel.’ These documents also reinforce concern that the president and his allies sought to use the machinery of the State Department to further the president’s personal political interests.”

      Meanwhile, the sources also shared pages of the Shokin interview with Fox News which revealed that in February 2016, prior to his firing, there were warrants placed on the accounts of “multiple people in Ukraine.”

      “There were requests for information on Hunter Biden to which nothing was received,” Shokin said, according to the notes. “It is believed that Hunter Biden receives a salary, commission plus one million dollars. There were no documents or information on Hunter Biden, and Mr. Shokin stated he was warned to stop by Ambassador Geoffrey R. Pyatt.”
      The notes add that “President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko told Mr. Shokin not to investigate Burisma as it was not in the interest of Joe and/or Hunter Biden. Mr. Shokin was called into Mr. Poroshenko’s office and told that the investigation into Burisma and the Managing Director where Hunter Biden is on the board, has caused Joe Biden to hold up one billion dollars in U.S. aid to Ukraine.”
      Shokin then told Giuliani, according to the notes, that “in or around April of 2016” Poroshenko “told him he had to be fired as the aid to the Ukraine was being withheld by Joe Biden.

      Biden reportedly threatened to withhold $1 billion in critical U.S. aid if Shokin was not fired.

      Shokin also claimed, according to the notes, that Ambassador Marie L. Yovanovitch denied him visa travel to the U.S., and claimed it was because “she is close to Mr. Biden.”

      Meanwhile, Trump is facing a rapidly escalating House investigation after an intelligence community whistleblower filed a complaint regarding his call with Zelensky, claiming he had solicited a foreign power to help influence the 2020 presidential election.

      Democrats have claimed that the Trump-Zelensky call revealed a quid pro quo, saying Trump tied his request to investigate the Bidens to military aid. Trump reportedly even ordered his staff to freeze nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine a few days before the phone call with Zelensky, a detail that fueled impeachment calls.  However, the call transcript did not show Trump explicitly mentioning the aid as a bargaining chip.

      As part of the impeachment inquiry, House Democrats have subpoenaed Giuliani for key documents related to the Ukraine controversy. They also have subpoenaed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and are expected to receive depositions from nearly half a dozen State Department officials named in the whistleblower complaint.

      One source told Fox News that prior to the “urgent” briefing Wednesday, it was reported that Linick would discuss alleged retaliation against those State Department officials ahead of their depositions, but the source told Fox News that Linick said that there had been no complaints of retaliation filed with his office.

      Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


      A.F. Branco Cartoon – Sloppy Joe

      Democrats and the media falsely accuse Trump of what Biden and the Democrats actually did and that threatens Ukraine with quid pro quo.
      Ukraine ShakedownPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
      See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

      An adult children’s Book for all ages APOCALI NOW! brilliantly lampoons the left order  HERE

      A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

      BOOM!… Breaking Report: VP Joe Biden Specifically Set Up Scenario for Meeting Between Top Ukrainian Officials and His Son [VIDEO]


      Posted by |

      URL of the original posting site: https://steadfastandloyal.com/politics/boom-breaking-report-vp-joe-biden-specifically-set-up-scenario-for-meeting-between-top-ukrainian-officials-and-his-son-video/

      This is huge.

      The newest revelation from investigative journalist John Solomon that Joe Biden actually set up the meeting between his son Hunter and people associated with Burisma.

      Biden claimed he knew nothing about Hunter and his business with Ukraine but now, we find out that he actually set the whole thing up. That changes everything. Biden lied and now everyone should know he lied.

      And what about China?

      Did he also conspire with China?

      Let’s face it, companies do not hire you and throw tons of money at you when you have zero experience and you were just thrown out of the service for doing drugs.

      From The Gateway Pundit

      John Solomon: Let me add a new fact that I just learned tonight. While talking to US diplomats today overseas in Europe I learned that on April 22, 2014 less than three weeks before the Burisma Holdings announced that Hunter Biden was joining their board, Vice President Joe Biden met with the Prime Minister of Ukraine and in that meeting, according to a transcript that I obtained tonight, Joe Biden specifically encouraged the Ukrainians to expand natural gas production with the help of Americans coming to the country. He set up the exact scenario that Hunter Biden just a few weeks later cashed in on.

      Sean Hannity: Whoa! This now takes it to a whole new level. Because now he’s basically doing the bidding for his own son’s wealth creation. Maybe even his son would share with his father?

      John Solomon: Those were the questions Ukrainians were trying to answer back in 2016 before the prosecutor was fired Sean… I do think that the evidence that the Ukrainians possess and would like to give to the US Department of Justice it is sitting there to be handed over.

      And after that meeting U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden’s American-based firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers into one of its accounts — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Vice President Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine and its tense relations with Russia.

      Nadler Announces House Committee Investigation Underway After Mueller Report Shows No Collusion


      Reported By Jack Davis | Published March 25, 2019 at 7:38pm

      House Democrats are not letting the conclusions of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report impede them from further investigations of President Donald Trump. “We’re going to move forward with our investigations of obstruction of justice, abuses of power, corruption, to defend the rule of law, which is our job,” House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, said Sunday, according to Bloomberg.

      Nadler insisted his wide-ranging probe, which he has already begun, is not a rehash of the Mueller report.

      “It’s a broader mandate than the special prosecutor had,” he said.

      Mueller was initially charged with investigating allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in 2016. As noted by Attorney General William Barr in a note to Congress, those allegations have been proven false.

      “The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US Presidential Election,” Barr said in a letter to Congress.

      But Nadler is now digging into the gray area in the Mueller report — whether Trump obstructed justice.

      Barr’s letter said the report “leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as ‘difficult issues’ of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that ‘while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.’”

      Nadler said that he wants to put Barr in the hot seat to determine how Barr decided not to pursue an obstruction case against Trump.

      “Attorney General Barr, who auditioned for his role with a memo saying that it was almost impossible for any president to commit obstruction, made a decision in under 48 hours,” Nadler said Sunday, according to CBS.

      He referenced a 2018 memo Barr wrote that said “Mueller’s obstruction theory is fatally misconceived” and based “on a novel and insupportable reading of the law.”

      Mueller said Barr needs to better explain himself.

      “Given what Barr found on obstruction of justice, I think all of us should be very concerned about the even-handedness,” Nadler said Monday. “The American public needs to know how exactly did he conclude there is no obstruction of justice.”

      Nadler issued a statement co-authored with fellow Democrats House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff of California and House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings of Maryland that gave Barr a zinger for not charging Trump.

      “It is unacceptable that, after Special Counsel Mueller spent 22 months meticulously uncovering this evidence, Attorney General Barr made a decision not to charge the President in under 48 hours. The Attorney General did so without even interviewing the President. His unsolicited, open memorandum to the Department of Justice, suggesting that the obstruction investigation was ‘fatally misconceived,’ calls into question his objectivity on this point in particular,”the statement said.

      The three Democrats maligned Barr’s impartiality.

      “The only information the Congress and the American people have received regarding this investigation is the Attorney General’s own work product,” the chairmen said.

      “The Special Counsel’s Report should be allowed to speak for itself, and Congress must have the opportunity to evaluate the underlying evidence,” the statement said.

      It is unclear yet whether the full Mueller report will ever be released. Both Trump and his Democratic critics, however, have said it should be released in full.

      ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

      Summary

      More Info Recent Posts Contact

      Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.

      Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


      Bull Sessions

      A.G. Sessions says he won’t allow the D.O.J to be politically influenced while appearing blind to the major influences of the Left.

      Sessions DOJ Political InfluencePolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
      See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

      A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

      Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

      A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

      Libs Use Cohen to Push Guilt by Association, But Forget 5 Obama Pals Who Were 10x Worse


      Reported By Lisa Payne-Naeger | August 22, 2018 at

      2:37pm

      It didn’t take long for liberal spin to conjure up the specter of guilt by association as the media  tried to build a case for impeachment of President Donald Trump due to the latest developments in the Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort cases.

      On Tuesday Michael Cohen, the president’s former attorney, pleaded guilty to eight charges of felony fraud and campaign finance law violations. In doing so, he also implicated the president, who he claims directed him to pay off porn star Stormy Daniels as well as a former Playboy model to buy their silence for alleged sexual encounters.

      That alone would have made liberals happy. But the anti-Trump crowd was also crowing that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort was convicted on the same day of eight charges of tax and bank fraud brought by special counsel Robert Mueller as part of his investigation of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

      A lot of nonsense takes place on social media, but sometimes bits of wisdom shine through. These particular comments put the spotlight on liberal hypocrisy that has no problem with smearing Trump with guilt by association, but was mysteriously blind when it came to former President Barack Obama.

      Liberal memories are short when it comes to liberal sins, but author and conservative Twitter user Thomas Wictor reminds us all that guilt by association was — or should have been — a much bigger issue in the Obama administration.

      He listed at least five egregious instances where guilt by association could be argued in relation to Barack Obama, and he starts with Obama associate Tony Rezko.

      “(3) Obama fundraiser and member of his U.S. Senate campaign finance committee Tony Rezko. Sentenced to over ten years for public and private corruption. Served four.”
      “(4) Obama fundraiser Courtney Dupree. Convicted of bank fraud.”
      “(5) Obama bundler Willie Shepherd. Pleaded guilty to third-degree assault on his wife in exchange for dropping negligent child-abuse charges.”
      “(6) Rod Blagojevich, Illinois governor. Doing 14 years in the federal pen for trying to sell Obama’s vacated seat.”

      And he caps it off with this closing tweet.

      To be fair, longtime Barack Obama buddy Bill Ayers was never implicated in murder during his spree as a bomber for the domestic terrorist group the Weather Underground.

      It’s also worth pointing out that Ayers’ girlfriend at the time, Diana Oughton, died in 1970 when a nail bomb she was helping to build exploded in a house in Grennwich Village. A Vanity Fair article from 2015 claims Ayers and his Weather Underground terrorists never intended to hurt people, but it’s safe to wonder if they were worried about who would be on the receiving end of those nails flying through the air with deadly, explosive force.

      The Daily Caller points out some clarifying factors on the the guilt-by-association accusations against Trump.

      In the Manafort case, even though Manafort spent a short time with the Trump campaign to work specifically on the Republican National Convention, the media will fail to mention he was “fired over questions of his work as a lobbyist for foreign governments years earlier,” and all charges were related to actions of Manafort long before he ever joined Trump’s presidential run.

      As The Daily Caller put it: “It’s guilt by association coupled with omission of relevant facts to paint the president as somehow associated with a guilty person’s actions.”

      As far as Cohen is concerned, and as conservative radio host Mark Levin has pointed out, the charges of payoffs to two women for alleged sexual encounters are still not proven to be illegal. It is not not illegal for to pay for non-disclosure agreements in politics or any other sphere of the law.

      Liberals have once again cast stones from their own glass houses. They should really think twice before they invent false scenarios.

      Some sharp-minded Twitter members might just throw a litany of facts on their feed that blow their latest spin out of the water.

      Summary

      An enthusiastic grassroots Tea Party activist, Lisa Payne-Naeger has spent the better part of the last decade lobbying for educational and family issues in her state legislature, and as a keyboard warrior hoping to help along the revolution that empowers the people to retake control of their, out-of-control, government.

      Appalachian Justice: Here’s How WV Handles an Out-of-Control Supreme Court


      Reported By Ben Marquis | August 8, 2018 at 1:31pm

      The issue of corruption among elected officials is one that enrages many American citizens as far too often it seems that the “powers that be” are willing to let suspected corrupt officials slide or slink away quietly without ever being held accountable to the people. However, in at least one instance it appears that won’t be the case. The four sitting justices on West Virginia’s state Supreme Court are collectively facing 14 counts of impeachment for alleged corrupt activities, according to the Charleston Gazette-Mail.

      The 14 articles of impeachment against the justices were approved on Tuesday by the West Virginia House Judiciary Committee and include such charges as corruption, neglect of duty and “unnecessary and lavish” spending of taxpayer money, among other allegations.

      The articles of impeachment will soon be submitted to the House for a vote, and if they obtain a majority will then proceed to the Senate. If two-thirds of the senators approve the impeachment articles, a trial will commence that would require another two-thirds majority for conviction, at which point the justices would be removed from the bench and barred from ever seeking public office in the state again.

      “It’s a sad day, and it certainly isn’t a cause for celebration,” Judiciary Chairman John Shott said Tuesday, according to the Gazette-Mail.

      The four justices charged under the articles of impeachment, which stem from violations of the impeachable offenses listed in Section 9, Article 4 of the West Virginia Constitution, include

      • Chief Justice Margaret Workman (four counts)
      • Justices Robin Davis (four counts),
      • Allen Loughry (eight counts)
      • Beth Walker (two counts).

      All four justices face charges of “unnecessary and lavish” spending of taxpayer money to renovate their offices. They’re also accused of failing to develop and maintain court policies with regard to the use of state resources.

      Davis, Loughry and Workman also face a charge of signing documents that authorized pay for senior status judges in excess of what was allowed by law. Loughry faces additional charges that include allegedly using a state vehicle for personal travel, using state-owned computers and furniture in his home and using taxpayer money to have artwork, documents and personal photos framed.

      Former Justice Menis Ketchum, who resigned from his seat on the bench last month, escaped being named in the articles of impeachment by virtue of his recent resignation, which removed him from the oversight of the Judiciary Committee. It is worth noting that Ketchum just pleaded guilty to one count of federal wire fraud. Loughry was also recently hit with a 23-count federal indictment that included 16 counts of mail fraud, three counts of making false statements to federal investigators, two counts of wire fraud and one count each of obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

      On top of that, Loughry — who was suspended from the bench without pay on June 8 — has also been charged with 32 counts of violating state’s Code of Judicial Conduct by the West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission for similar charges included in the articles of impeachment, as well as for lying to lawmakers, the media and the public about his alleged conduct.

      Of course, there were several lawmakers who opposed the articles of impeachment, not necessarily because they believed the justices were innocent of the charges against them, but because taking out all of the sitting justices in one fell swoop would allow Republican Gov. Jim Justice to appoint their replacements, most likely for at least a two-year term, given the close proximity and limited time-frame between now and November’s elections.

      Such was the argument put forward by Democrat Del. Mike Pushkin, who said he didn’t like the fact that all four justices were grouped together in the articles of impeachment, as well as by Democrat Del. Barbara Fleischauer, minority chairwoman of the committee, who likened the move to an attempted “coup” against an entire branch of the state government by Republicans.

      “We said this to our committee when we started, this was a no-win situation,” Chairman Shott said of those accusations. “Especially in an election year, there’s going to be people who will spin it however it creates the most advantage to them. That’s just part of the process.”

      While impeaching all of the sitting justices on the state’s Supreme Court at once does seem rather drastic — and certainly opens the door to partisan complaints — it nevertheless also appears to be the correct remedy in this case for holding apparently corrupt elected officials accountable for their actions. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few weeks and months.

      Thank You For Spying


      Drawn and Posted by Chip Bok | May 24, 2018

      URL of the original posting site: http://bokbluster.com/2018/05/24/spying/


      spying

      Eric Holder’s Justice Department threatened Fox News Reporter James Rosen as a co-conspirator under the espionage act. Except Holder never really intended to charge Rosen. It was all a pretext to spy on his phone calls and emails to find out who in the government was leaking information to him.

      The Obama administration also spied on the phone records of Associated Press journalists.

      More Spying

      And of course they lied about spying on us too.

      This week Joy Behar, of all people, outed James Clapper for spying on the Trump campaign. Clapper claimed Trump should be happy about this because his agent was really spying on Russians.

      The Washington Post and New York Times find this explanation perfectly reasonable.

      Michael Cohen Swamp Fox


      Drawn and Posted by Chip Bok | May 17, 2018

      URL of the original posting site: http://bokbluster.com/2018/05/17/swamp-fox/

      swamp fox

      Looks like Michael Cohen could afford to pay Stormy Daniels $130,000. Though, based on past behavior, I wonder if he first tried to sell her access to the president for a future “encounter.”

      Swamp Fox

      According to The Hill he tried to hit up the Qatari government for a cool million in exchange for access. Also on Cohen’s client access list were Novartis and ATT.

      It’s the way of the swamp. But not illegal.

      Democrat Mega Scandal: NYC Mayor De Blasio Office Involved in Bribery, Prostitution and Illegal Weapons!


      Reported |

      NYC’s Liberal Mayor Bill De Blasio has found himself in a mess as three separate scandals hit his office, including bribery, prostitution and an illegal weapons arrest! In addition, a local businessman claims he raised $80,000 for the De Blasio campaign in exchange for various deals. As well, a prostitute is testifying a major de Blasio donor “watched and directed” her sex games with members of the NYPD.

      Democrat Mega Scandal: NYC Mayor De Blasio Office Involved in Bribery, Prostitution and Illegal Weapons!

      Rev-In Article

      Reagan Stevens, the deputy director for Mayor De Blasio’s Office of Criminal Justice, was arrested Saturday for illegal weapons possession while sitting in a car that ‘reeked of weed’ near the scene of a Saturday night shooting. Stevens was charged with two counts of criminal possession of a weapon. A 9mm gun with the serial number scratched off and a shell casing were found in the glove compartment. Cops noticed there was a “strong odor of marijuana” wafting from the SUV.

      She was arrested with two men, Montel Hughes, 24, and driver Caesar Forbes, 25. They are also accused of gun charges as well as of carrying knives at the time of their arrest. Cops also found five Ziploc bags of pot in Hughes’ coat pocket. A gravity knife was also recovered from the pocket of his pants. Cops found the loaded handgun in the car. When no one claimed ownership, police took the three of them into custody.

      The trio’s arrest followed a burst of five gunshots that activated an NYPD “ShotSpotter” device in Jamaica at 9:42 p.m. Saturday. The five shots fired from the car were caught on surveillance cameras. Moreover, the gun found in the car has an eight-round magazine and had three rounds left in it. A spent round was found on the driver’s side floor.

      Stevens managed youth and strategic initiatives.

      Her main job is implementing a 2017 state law that will raise the age at which kids can be prosecuted as adults for non-violent crimes from 16 to 18. Prior to her current position, Stevens served as the Deputy Director of the Mayor’s Action Plan’s Behavioral Health and the Criminal Justice System Task Force. She also spent 15 years implementing crime prevention, adolescent diversion programs and alternatives to incarceration at the Kings County District Attorney’s office.

      De Blasio is notoriously pro strict gun control:

      Just last month he joined a student walkout in Brooklyn. He told students: ‘You are making so clear to this whole country that you are sick of the violence, you’re sick of the madness, you’re sick of the slaughter and you won’t stand for it.’

      The city’s Office of Criminal Justice suspended Stevens without pay from her job.

      ‘We take these allegations very seriously,’ said the statement.

      But this is the third high profile scandal for Democrat De Blasio this year.

      Harendra Singh, a Long Island restaurateur, raised as much as $80,000 for De Blasio in exchange for various deals. He pleaded guilty earlier this year to trying to bribe the mayor in hopes of getting a better lease.

      Singh testified under oath on Thursday that he steered tens of thousands of dollars to Mayor Bill de Blasio’s political campaigns in return for favorable treatment by the city. Singh also claims that De Blasio not only knew of the illegal arrangement, but encouraged it and actively helped the restaurateur.

      “He made many phone calls,” Mr. Singh said of the mayor. “His office was working very hard, from his deputy mayor to his assistant to his intergovernmental affairs person. Everyone was working.”

      A one-time high-end hooker at the center of an NYPD corruption scandal is expected to testify that a major de Blasio donor “watched and directed” her alleged sexcapades with cops.

      Former prostitute Gabi Grecko traveled to Las Vegas in early 2013 with Jeremy Reichberg and Jona Rechnitz. They were both major contributors to Bill de Blasio’s mayoral campaign. She claims Reichberg supervised the trysts.

      During the private flight to Sin City, Grecko also performed “services” for the duo’s guests. They included retired NYPD Deputy Inspector James Grant, the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s Office has charged.

      Grecko will discuss the mile-high hookups on the stand during the trial.

      Reichberg’s lawyers have pushed to block prosecutors from bringing up “any evidence” Grecko and Reichberg had a sordid tryst mid-air. They claim that would have “the potential for unfair prejudice.”

      DOJ Inspector General Opens Investigation Into Obama Administration’s FISA Abuse


      Reported |

      Department of Justice inspector general Michael Horowitz opened an investigation Wednesday into possible FISA abuses by the Justice Department and FBI officials and the nature of contacts between the FBI and a confidential source.

      Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who operates independently from Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the Trump administration, announced Wednesday afternoon he will launch an investigation into alleged FISA abuse during the Obama administration.

      “Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz announced today that, in response to requests from the Attorney General and Members of Congress, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) will initiate a review that will examine the Justice Department’s and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) compliance with legal requirements, and with applicable DOJ and FBI policies and procedures, in applications filed with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)  relating to a certain U.S. person,” the DOJ Office of the Inspector General released in a statement Wednesday. “As part of this examination, the OIG also will review information that was known to the DOJ and the FBI at the time the applications were filed from or about an alleged FBI confidential source.  Additionally, the OIG will review the DOJ’s and FBI’s relationship and communications with the alleged source as they relate to the FISC applications.”

      DOJ spokesman John Lavinsky said in a statement accompanying the announcement.

      Lavinsky explained that “as part of this examination, the OIG also will review information that was known to the DOJ and the FBI at the time the applications were filed from or about an alleged FBI confidential source.”

      Lavinsky noted that the investigation was prompted by requests from several members of Congress and Attorney General Jeff Sessions. House Republicans recently released a memo claiming widespread abuse of the FISA process on the part of the DOJ and FBI in order to obtain a surveillance warrant on former Trump campaign associate Carter Page.

      The timing of the investigation and the reference to members of Congress point to Page as the U.S. person. The statement’s reference to a confidential source similarly floats concerns found in the Republican memo which found that the FBI and the DOJ did not disclose the political origins of the Steele dossier in its FISA application and revealed previously undisclosed testimony from former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe that an investigation into Page would not have occurred without Steele’s dossier.

      The nature of contacts between DOJ officials and Steele during the opening of an investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign has been the nature of some controversy. The Republican memo especially expressed concern over the nature of meetings between Steele and DOJ official Bruce Ohr, whose wife worked for Steele for some time.

      “If circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider including other issues that may arise during the course of the review,” the statement continues.

      Michael Isikoff@Isikoff

      Breaking: In response to requests from AG and members of Congress, DOJ IG Horowitz says he will investigate the FBI’s request for FISA warrant on “a U.S. person”– a reference to Carter Page. Probe will include role of “confidential FBI source”-a reference to Christoper Steele.

      Horowitz has also been investigating for months potential misconduct at the FBI during the criminal investigation into Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information. That report is due any day.

      About a month ago, The Hill reported, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Tuesday that the Justice Department will investigate potential abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). “Yes, it will be investigated,” Sessions told reporters at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees FISA warrants, according to the Washington Examiner. He said looking into any abuses is the “appropriate thing” to do.

      Trump has publicly pressed Sessions to open up an investigation into potential abuses of the program, which allows U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies to obtain secret surveillance orders on individuals in the U.S. suspected of being foreign terrorists or spies.

      The president claimed last year that the Obama administration improperly wiretapped members of his presidential campaign and transition team, though the White House has not provided any evidence to support that claim.

      Allegations of FISA abuses surfaced again last month, when Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee released a controversial memo alleging that FBI and Justice Department officials misused their authority to obtain a surveillance order on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser.

      It’s about time the Obama administration and those in it paid the price for all their shenanigans. Personally, I hope all those involved including Yates, Mueller, Comey, Rosenstein, Page and Strzok and others all rot in jail. It’s time to let the Americans know that just because you are employed and work in the “high levels” of government that does not excuse you from the law. No one is about the law.

      Isn’t that right, Hillary?

      Resources: Townhall, Daily Caller, The Hill

      More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons and More for February 28, 2018


      Developing: Broward County Sheriff Ordered Deputies Not to Arrest


      Reported By Rebekah Baker | February 27, 2018 at 1:42pm

      URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/broward-county-sheriff-ordered-deputies-not-arrest/

      Just when it seemed like the government incompetence surrounding the events leading up to the Parkland, Florida high school massacre couldn’t get any worse, new information reveals that political motivations and bad policy in the leadership at the sheriff’s office had a pivotal role in failing to prevent the shooting.

      First, it was the FBI. A tip that outlined the shooter’s “gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting,” was given to the FBI only six weeks before the deadly massacre occurred, NBC reported. The FBI failed to follow up.

      Then, it was local law enforcement. Multiple agents within the Broward County Sheriff’s department cowered in the face of danger, and waited outside the Stoneman Douglas high school as innocent students were killed inside.

      And there’s more: According to CNN, “Records obtained from the sheriff’s office by CNN show the law enforcement agency received at least 45 calls for service relating to Cruz or his brother from 2008 to 2017, before the attack at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland on Feb. 14.

      So was it pure incompetence, or was something more sinister at play? It may have been both.

      According to a report from RedState, a deeply embedded system of public corruption at the sheriff’s department may be to blame for the murderous shooter slipping right through the sheriff department’s fingers. As reported by CNN, dozens of calls were made to local law enforcement about Nickolas Cruz with descriptions such as “mentally ill person,” “child/elderly abuse,” “domestic disturbance,” “missing person,” and more. Most of those warning calls resulted in “no written report.”

      What in the world would have motivated an “oversight” like that? According to RedState, it all comes back to Sheriff Israel.

      First elected as sheriff in 2012, Israel’s run for re-election in 2016 was highly criticized and controversial, according to an August 2016 report from Sun Sentinel.

      “Sheriff Scott Israel has hired from the ranks of his political supporters, building a community outreach wing his critics say doubles as a re-election team,” the Sentinel explained. “Israel’s opponents say he’s built a publicly funded political machine, paying back supporters with jobs and using them to keep him in office. They say the money could be better spent, particularly after the sheriff complained about not having enough funding to secure the county courthouse, where a murder suspect recently escaped.”

      In other words, Israel rewarded his political supporters with high-paying cushy jobs within the sheriff’s office. The outreach manager position, for example, earned a $78,489 salary. That position was held by the husband of Israel’s campaign manager, the Sentinel reported.

      So, a group of unqualified people filled the positions at the sheriff’s office. And we wonder why they failed to stop Nickolas Cruz?

      It gets worse. An ominous foreshadowing of the deadly shooting was revealed in the form of a 2016 sheriff re-election campaign questionnaire. “Why are you running and what gives you an edge over your opponents?” the questionnaire asked Israel.

      See Israel’s answer below:

      I am the incumbent Sheriff for the past four years, and a career law enforcement officer with over three decades in the profession.  The results speak for themselves. As our sheriff, I successfully implemented new policies and approaches to public safety that sharply reduced violent crime and burglary rates – the sharpest declines in the entire State of Florida. My innovative initiatives also helped keep children in school and out of jail, greatly expanding the juvenile civil citation program and making issuance of civil citations mandatory for BSO deputies. I worked to combat gun violence by openly lobbying legislators to curtail Stand Your Ground, block open carry legislation, and block legislation allowing concealed guns on school campuses. 

      (Emphasis added.)

      You read that right. Policies put into place within the sheriff’s department by Israel Scott discouraged arresting or expelling juveniles, apparently even if their behavior was violent or threatening.

      Cruz had a history of violence at school and was never officially expelled. He had a history of violent behavior at home but was never arrested. And one day, he stormed into a school building and murdered 17 innocent people — but it was too late.

      When pressed for answers on allegations about his alleged public corruption, Israel deflected. “Lions don’t care about the opinions of sheep,” he reportedly said at the time.

      And lions apparently care more about their own interests than the lives of those they swore to protect.

      Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoons


      More Poliotically INCORRECT Cartoons for Wednesday November 15, 2017


      Today’s Ann Coulter Letter: New Democratic Spin Cycle: Launders Money, Gets Out The Toughest Sleaze!


      Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

      The Democrats have two very different profiles. One is their public face of absolute moral purity. They’re just better people than Republicans. That’s what you’re buying when you walk into the Democratic store: pure virtue. They’ve got nothing else on the shelves. No beef jerky, no wiper fluid, no Gatorade. 

      The other profile is reality: In the backroom, where the employees eat lunch, the Democrats and their fat-cat donors are committing unspeakably sleazy and immoral acts. Everyone on the left knows this. That’s why, the moment Harvey Weinstein was exposed as a sexual predator, his reflexive response was not to apologize. Accused of the kind of rapes you’d usually need a gang to commit, he put up a virtue shield by attacking the National Rifle Association.

      As we recently discovered, first with Weinstein and then with the Hillary campaign paying for the Russian dossier, the left has an all-new trick that exponentially multiplies the Democrats’ sleaze factor. It used to be that Democrats like Bill Clinton would deploy FOBs — Friends of Bill — like James Carville and Sidney Blumenthal to smear his victims. Now, they run their Watergate-style “ratf—ing” through law firms.

      Ronan Farrow writes in this week’s New Yorker that Weinstein deployed a raft of spies to befriend and deceive his accusers in order to collect information that could be used against them. A spy with the Israeli private investigations firm Black Cube used a fake name and fake foundation to meet actress Rose McGowan. Then, pretending to be a deeply sympathetic women’s rights advocate, the agent secretly tape-recorded the actress, hoping to get incriminating evidence against her. At a minimum, this is unspeakably repellent and possibly illegal.

      And who hired the spies? Not Weinstein! The law firm of David Boies, prominent Democratic attorney.

      Using a law firm as a cut-out between the client — an alleged sexual predator — and the people stealthily recording his accusers has one very useful purpose: It places the spy agency’s work behind the protection of attorney-client privilege.

      Boies pretends to be steeped in the ethics of his profession, flying to California to argue against the “hate” of Proposition 8 and rushing to Florida after the 2000 election to defend Al Gore’s rightful claim to the presidency.

      But now we find out he’s been harassing and intimidating a rape victim on behalf of his client (the rapist) with private eyes who lie about their identity and motives, wasting hours of the victim’s time with false promises of support for her cause — a cause she has taken up precisely because of her alleged rape by the lawyer’s client. Whether or not this violates any bar association ethical canons, it’s certainly despicable.

      Two weeks ago, we found out that the law firm cut-out maneuver was the exact same technique used by Hillary’s campaign to obtain damaging information on Donald Trump from the Kremlin — the infamous Russian dossier. The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee shelled out $12 million seeking incriminating information on Trump from Russian government officials.

      Just like Weinstein, the Democrats funneled money for a nefarious purpose through a law firm. To wit: The Democrats paid a law firm (Perkins Coie), which paid a private investigations firm (Fusion GPS), which in turn paid a spy (Christopher Steele), and Steele paid Russian government officials for dirt on Trump.

      When the media found out that Donald Trump Jr. had taken a meeting with a friend of a friend, because she claimed to have incriminating information from Russia on Hillary, the word “treason” filled the airwaves.

      Hillary’s vice presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine (D- Va.), called Don Jr.’s pointless meeting “potentially treason.”

      MSNBC’s favorite former Bush official, lunatic Richard Painter, said anyone who “wanted to help the Russians (disrupt our election process) engaged in treasonous conduct.” Al Sharpton said that the willingness to accept “information to discredit your potential opponent in an American election from Russia — from what is supposed to be an enemy state” — raised the prospect of treason.

      If that’streason,” then what is it when the Democrats reach out to the Russians and pass them money for dirt on Hillary’s opponent in a presidential election? Wasn’t that dossier an attempt to discredit her opponent and disrupt the election?

      Remember: Don Jr. didn’t seek a meeting with any Russians to get compromising information on Hillary, nor did he receive any. The Russian woman was using the pretense of having dirt on Hillary as a ruse to get a meeting, so that she could lobby Don Jr. on the Magnitsky Act.

      Unlike Don Jr., the Democrats didn’t wait to be asked! They paid $12 million, funneled through a law firm, seeking information on Trump from Russian government officials.

      But we’re not allowed to mention it because the Clinton campaign and DNC used Weinstein’s money laundering technique.

      The attorney-client privilege is intended to ensure that people are completely truthful with their attorneys. It is not supposed to be a shelter for any sordid, and possibly illegal, behavior by liberals. 

      Convenient: Mueller Nails Manafort Right After Hillary – Uranium One Scandal Explodes


      Reported By Martin Walsh | October 30, 2017 at 4:48pm

      URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/mueller-nails-manafort-hillary-scandal/?

      Shortly after several reports have linked both former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State/failed Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to the Uranium One scandal, Democrats are trying to shift everyone’s attention.

      As reported by the Daily Mail, Trump’s former campaign manager from the 2016 presidential election, Paul Manafort, and his partner, Rick Gates, surrendered on Monday morning following an indictment from special counsel Robert Mueller in the Russia probe.

      The news comes just days after the Justice Department announcement Thursday that it would lift a gag order on a secret FBI informant who has firsthand knowledge of the Uranium One deal involving the Clintons.

      According to Townhall, the informant’s identity will remain anonymous, but they will be speaking with the Senate Judiciary Committee on how the Clintons benefited from selling U.S. uranium to a company connected to Russia.

      Mueller’s indictments of former Trump officials come just days after an explosive report from The Hill, which detailed how Clinton approved the partial sale of Canadian mining company Uranium One to Russian nuclear company Rosatom, giving Russia 20 percent of the United States’ uranium.

      Both The New York Times and New York Daily News reported that officials associated with the sale donated a reported $145 million to the Clinton Foundation, and Bill Clinton was given $500,000 from a bank with ties to the Kremlin for giving a single speech in Moscow.

      As detailed by a report from The Hill, the FBI had collected a plethora of documents showing that Russia officials involved with the Uranium One deal were engaged in extortion, bribery, kickbacks, and money laundering prior to the Obama administration — with Clinton’s help at the State Department — approving the deal in 2010.

      The FBI agents also supplanted a U.S. witness to work closely with the Russian nuclear industry to gain inside access to financial records, collect emails, and make secret recordings on how Moscow violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

      And yet, the Obama administration approved the sale and agreed to do business with the corrupt Russia company to sell 20 percent of the U.S.’ uranium.

      Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said last week he wanted the Department of Justice to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Uranium One sale and the Obama administration’s involvement with the deal.

      In light of the bombshell report exposing Obama and Clinton for carrying out a shady deal with Russia, Mueller conveniently decided to announce indictments that would move the spotlight back to someone else.

      Grassley’s call for a special prosecutor into the Clinton Foundation allowing foreign governments to influence American policy while the Clintons gained personally is a bombshell story the must be investigated, but the mainstream media conveniently distracted everyone from this corruption with Mueller’s recent announcement.

      H/T Townhall

      More Obama Corruption Revealed: Overtly Excluded Conservatives from $1 Billion Settlement


      Reported By Warner Todd Huston October 27, 2017

      As the nation awakes to more news on the corruption of the Democrats and their Russian collusion with the fake Trump “dossier,” there is also other news of the corruption endemic in the Obama administration.

      There is much corruption to write about with the Obama administration, sadly. Indeed, Obama’s regime was one of the most corrupt in American history. But the latest news is that of Obama’s scheme to enrich far left organizations at the expense of U.S. corporations, even as conservative groups were purposefully excluded.

      At issue is a scheme that forced companies about to be sued by the Department of Justice to donate billions of dollars to left-wing causes and organizations as a payoff to avoid prosecution. It was little else but an elaborate extortion scheme for the liberal groups that benefitted from the policy. And, naturally, only left-wing groups benefitted from Obama’s kickback scheme. No conservatives groups were the recipient of any of these corporate “donations.”

      According to a report by government watchdog group Judicial Watch, “The new records demonstrate a collaborative effort among high-level officials in the Office of the Assistant Attorney General (OAAG) and the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) to ensure conservative groups did not receive any settlement cash.”

      Judicial Watch has more:

      The operation is known as a DOJ “slush fund” that filled the coffers of Obama-allied nonprofits such as the National Council of La Raza, Urban League and National Community Reinvestment Coalition. Earlier this year Judicial sued the DOJ for records relating to the problematic Obama administration policy of settling government lawsuits against corporate defendants by requiring that the corporations make “donations” to leftwing interest groups. Back in 2010 Judicial Watch sued the DOJ over a similar program in which the agency’s Civil Rights Division directed large sums of cash settlements in discrimination lawsuits to organization that were not officially connected to the lawsuits. Recipients were also leftist groups that aligned with Obama’s ultra-liberal agenda. 

      The story is not a new one, of course. Obama’s scheme has not gone unnoticed. But this week the House Judiciary Committee revealed what is being termed a “smoking gun” proving the whole thing.

      “It is not every day in congressional investigations that we find a smoking gun,” Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., said Tuesday, according to Fox News. “Here, we have it.”

      Republican lawmakers have logically dubbed the scheme a “slush fund” for liberal organizations who raked in one billion dollars from Obama’s extortion plan.

      Fortunately, the Trump administration put an end to the extortion policy but not before liberals everywhere benefitted from Obama’s corruption.

      While Obama’s operatives insisted that there was nothing at all wrong with the program, the newly released records proves that Obama’s DOJ operatives not only made sure that the corporations paid money to the favored lefty organizations, but they also made double sure that no conservative group benefitted from the scheme.

      One Obama administration email, for instance, told Citigroup to be sure that no funds go to “conservative property-rights legal services.”

      As Fox reported:

      “Concerns include: a) not allowing Citi to pick a statewide intermediary like the Pacific Legal Foundation (does conservative property-rights legal services),” the official, whose name is redacted in the email, wrote under the title of “Acting Senior Counselor for Access to Justice.”

      The official added that “we are more likely to get the right result from a state bar association affiliated entity.” 

      “Aiding their political allies was only the half of it,” Rep. Goodlatte said. “The evidence of the Obama DOJ’s abuse of power shows that Tony West’s team went out of its way to exclude conservative groups.”

      Goodlatte celebrated the Trump administration’s move to end the forced donations, but said that Congress needs to act to prevent this sort of extortion from ever occurring again.

      This is but a single tale of the sort of corruption that plagued the country with Barack Obama at the head of our government.

      ABOUT THE AUTHOR:  Warner Todd Huston

      Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com and BigJournalsim.com along with all Breitbart News sites, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, and many, many others. He has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs across the country to discuss his news stories and current events and has appeared on TV networks such as CNN, Fox News, Fox Business Network, and various Chicago-based news programs. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

      GREAT NEWS: DOJ Lifts Gag Order, Frees Informant to Speak to Congress on Russia Bribery Case With Ties to Clintons


      Reported By Andrew Kerr | October 26, 2017 at 8:45am

      URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournalism.com/doj-lifts-gag-order-frees-informant-to-speak-to-congress-on-russia-bribery-case-with-ties-to-clintons/?

      The Justice Department lifted a gag order Wednesday that will allow a former FBI informant to speak with Congress about information he uncovered involving a Russian bribery scheme linked to a controversial uranium deal in 2010.

      The move comes as Congress renews its focus on the Obama administration’s approval of Russian-owned energy company Rosatom’s purchase of Uranium One, a company based in Canada that controlled 20 percent of U.S. uranium.

      Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton led the State Department when it approved the deal back in 2010. Eight other U.S. government agencies also approved the deal.

      Three congressional committees launched investigations into the deal last week after The Hill reported that the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that the Russian nuclear industry officials involved in the deal were involved in a racketeering scheme as early as 2009.

      However, the Department of Justice waited until 2014 to bring any charges on the evidence first gathered in 2009 and 2010.

      The CEO of Tenex, a subsidiary of Rosatom, pleaded guilty to money laundering in 2015.

      Congressional Republicans now seek to discover who knew what, and when. Republicans have also expressed concerns about Clinton’s connection to the interested parties in the nuclear deal. The Clinton Foundation reportedly received millions of dollars in contributions from interested parties in the transaction, and former President Bill Clinton received $500,000 for a speech in Russia around the time of the deal.

      The FBI informant, who hasn’t been identified by name, went undercover for five years to obtain intelligence on Russia’s efforts to acquire a share of the U.S. uranium market.

      Justice Department spokesman Ian Prior said the DOJ would cooperate with the three open congressional investigations.

      “As of tonight, the Department of Justice has authorized the information to disclose to the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, as well as one member of each of their staffs, any information or documents he has concerning alleged corruption or bribery involving transactions in the uranium market,” Prior said in a statement Wednesday, according to The Washington Free Beacon.

      Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores confirmed to The Hill that the undercover FBI informant is cleared to disclose to Congress “any information or documents he has concerning alleged corruption or bribery involving transactions in the uranium market, including but not limited to anything related to Vadim Mikerin, Rosatom, Tenex, Uranium One, or the Clinton Foundation.”

      The informant’s lawyer, Victoria Toensing, told The Hill her client has information relating to “the Russian nuclear bribery case and the efforts he witnessed by Moscow to gain influence with the Clintons in hopes of winning favorable uranium decisions from the Obama administration.”

      “He is now able and willing to talk with the congressional committees seeking his testimony, though I will be working with all parties to ensure his identity remains confidential to ensure his safety,” she added.

      But some high-ranking Democrats have called foul on the Republican’s renewed focus on the 2010 uranium deal.

      California Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Wednesday the investigations are a “partisan effort to distract” from the real issue at hand — special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into President Donald Trump’s alleged collusions with the Russians during the 2016 election.

      Trump told reporters Wednesday he believes the uranium investigation will quickly swell to Watergate proportions.

      The uranium sale to Russia and the way it was done was so underhanded. With tremendous amounts of money being passed, I actually think that’s Watergate: modern age,” Trump said, as reported by the New York Post.

      DOJ Lifts Gag Order on Uranium One Informant, Hillary and Obama Feeling the Heat

      URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/doj-gag-order-informant-hillary/?

      The Justice Department announced Wednesday night that it had lifted a gag order on a former FBI informant who could provide testimony to Congress about an inquiry linked to a 2010 Obama-era deal that transferred ownership of a uranium mining firm to a Russian-owned company.

      Fox News reported the department said it authorized the informant to speak to the Senate Judiciary Committee, House Oversight Committee, and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, as well as select staffers.

      The Justice Department said the informant could provide “any information or documents he has concerning alleged corruption or bribery involving transactions in the uranium market,” including Russian company Rosatom, its subsidiary Tenex, Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation.

      The FBI said in court documents and in interviews that they had gathered enough evidence to prove that Rosatom-connected officials were engaged in a bribery scheme that included kickbacks and money laundering in 2010, Circa reported.

      Despite that little tidbit, the U.S. government approved the sale. Not surprising considering who was in office. Now we have a chance to know what really went down.

      The informant’s attorney, Victoria Toensing, told Fox Business Network Monday that her client could “tell what all the Russians were talking about during the time that all these bribery payments were made.”

      Toensing said her client, an American businessman who reportedly worked as an undercover FBI confidential witness, was prevented from testifying by former attorneys general Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch after having signed a non-disclosure agreement, according to Fox News.

      Circa reported that Toensing also said the informant has pertinent information regarding Russia’s attempts to gain access to former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to influence the Obama administration’s decision on the purchase of Uranium One.

      After the sale of Uranium One to Rosatom was completed, millions of dollars flowed to the Clinton Foundation from Russian officials, as reported by The Hill.

      This FBI informant can also testify about comments made by FBI agents that suggested “political pressure was exerted during the Justice Department probe of the Russia corruption case and that there was specific evidence that could have scuttled approval of the Uranium One deal if it became public,” according to The Hill.

      There is little doubt that if Clinton had won the presidency, this gag order would still be enforced.

      Thus, the truth about who really colluded with the Russians would likely never be known. Hopefully, the informant’s testimony will shed some light on what happened during these deals and the truth behind them can come out. You can bet this news has former President Barack Obama and Clinton sweating bullets.

      You can also bet the mainstream media will take its sweet time covering this news because it doesn’t fit their Trump-hating agenda.

      H/T American Military News

      The Big Nothing Burger


      Reported by Walker Wildmon | Assistant to the President | Wednesday, June 14, 2017 @ 1:32 PM

      The Big Nothing Burger

      The recently released book Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes reveals that Hillary Clinton’s two trusted advisers, John Podesta and Robby Mook, conspired the day after the election to blame Russia for their campaign’s failure. The authors write:

      That strategy had been set within twenty-four hours of her concession speech. Mook and Podesta assembled her communications team at the Brooklyn headquarters to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up. For a couple of hours, with Shake Shack containers littering the room, they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.

      It appears that rather than looking internally at why their campaign/candidate lost, they decided to collude with the media to blame Russia.

      Since then, the media and Democrats have accused President Trump’s campaign of colluding with the Russian government to sabotage America’s election system ultimately affecting the outcome of the election. Let’s look at this one piece at a time.

      When was the Russian hacking accusation first launched? In June of 2016 the Washington Postreported that Russian governmental hackers gained access to DNC data. The next day a private cyber security firm whom the DNC hired to investigate this matter released a blog that confirmed the Washington Post story. Nearly a month later the FBI confirmed that it had opened an investigation into the matter. The most important thing to note here is that the DNC used a private firm to investigate the alleged hacking and they never allowed the FBI access to their servers. FBI director James Comey admitted in an open Congressional hearing that his agency has never accessed the DNC server.  Instead, the FBI relied solely on the private firm for evidence.

      All the Russian hacking accusations are based on one blog post released by a private firm in California. To my knowledge, the FBI and other agencies have built the bulk of their investigation around this one blog post.

      Assuming that this private firm’s assessment is accurate and it was the Russians who hacked the DNC, how did President Trump and his campaign get in the mix? On December 9, 2016 the Washington Postpublished a story claiming that the CIA had concluded that Russia hacked the DNC to help Mr. Trump win the election. Do you notice who is perpetuating the narrative? The Washington Post.

      Once again, the FBI has not independently confirmed who hacked the DNC yet the intelligence community is able to conclude the motive of the alleged hackers? Where is the CIA getting its information?

      Let’s err on the side of respect for the FBI and CIA and grant legitimacy to their claim that Russia hacked the DNC. Why are these agencies bringing up President Trump’s name in their reports? Clearly, President Trump and his associates were pulled into this investigation in an attempt to discredit their reputation and ultimately undermine President Trump’s election victory. They want you to believe that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to win the election.

      Proponents of the alleged Russia collusion story will say that former campaign advisers such as Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn and Carter Page have connections to the Russian government. It is true that each of these gentlemen gave speeches in Russia, had business dealings in Russia and at times dealt with Russian officials for various reasons. These gentlemen also had dealing with other countries. This is typical for advisers and private businessmen who work for various governments to represent their interests in the U.S. and other countries.

      According to a story at investors.com:

      There may be no Clinton Foundation office in Moscow or St. Petersburg, but it is not for lack of trying. Bill Clinton received half a million dollars in 2010 for a speech he gave in Moscow, paid by a Russian firm, Renaissance Capital, that has ties to Russian intelligence. The Clinton Foundation took money from Russian officials and oligarchs, including Victor Kekselberg, a Putin confidant. The Foundation also received millions of dollars from Uranium One, which was sold to the Russian government in 2010, giving Russia control of 20% of the uranium deposits in the U.S. —  the sale required approval from Hillary Clinton’s State Department. What’s more, at least some of these donations weren’t disclosed. ‘Ian Telfer, the head of the Russian government’s uranium company, Uranium One, made four foreign donations totaling $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons; despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all such donors…’

      The article goes on to say,

      In March — that is, long after the election was over — it was revealed that Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman had failed to disclose the receipt of 75,000 shares of stock from a Kremlin-financed company — Joule Unlimited — for which he served as director from 2010 to 2014, when he joined the Obama White House in 2014. Podesta apparently had a large chunk of the shares transferred to “Leonidio Holdings, a brand-new entity he incorporated only on Dec. 20, 2013, about 10 days before he entered the White House…

      Lastly, it says,

      Mr. Podesta’s brother, who has close personal and business relations with Mrs. Clinton, was ‘key lobbyist on behalf of Sberbank, according to Senate lobbying disclosure forms. His firm received more than $24 million in fees in 2016, much of it coming from foreign governments, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics’…The bank was ‘seeking to end one of the Obama administration’s economic sanctions against that country.’ The report goes on to note that ‘Podesta’s efforts were a key part of under-the-radar lobbying during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign led mainly by veteran Democratic strategists to remove sanctions against Sberbank and VTB Capital, Russia’s second largest bank.’ Mr. Obama imposed the sanctions following the Russian seizure of the Crimean region of Ukraine in 2014…In March, Mr. Putin’s spokesman said that Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak met with members of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign several times while she was running for president in 2016. Further, the campaign never disclosed the number or nature of these secret meetings.

      It appears as though the Clinton campaign colluded with the Russian government rather than the Trump campaign.

      Is it accurate to say the Russians hacked the DNC in July of 2015? Yes, if you trust a blog post from a private cyber security firm in California. Is it accurate to say that President Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russian government to win the election? No, because evidence of such does not exist. 

      Tag Cloud

      %d bloggers like this: