Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Andrew McCarthy on Dem Campaign Corruption: In Politicized Justice, Desperate Times Call for Disparate Measures

From his article at the National Review:

We wuz robbed. That’s the theme Democrats and their media allies are working hard to cement into conventional wisdom. And robbed in a very specific way: The 2016 presidential election, we’re to believe, was stolen from Hillary Clinton by disparate treatment. As Democrats tell it, the FBI scandalized their candidate while protecting Donald Trump.

You might think peddling that story with a straight face would be a major challenge. But they figure it may work because it was test-driven by the FBI’s then-director, James Comey, in his now infamous press conference on July 5, 2016 — back when the law-enforcement and intelligence apparatus on which we rely to read the security tea leaves was simply certain that Mrs. Clinton would win.

If you or I had set up an unauthorized private communications system for official business for the patent purpose of defeating federal record-keeping and disclosure laws; if we had retained and transmitted thousands of classified emails on this non-secure system; if we had destroyed tens of thousands of government records; if we had carried out that destruction while those records were under subpoena; if we had lied to the FBI in our interview — well, we’d be writing this column from the federal penitentiary in Leavenworth. Yet, in a feat of dizzying ratiocination, Director Comey explained that to prosecute Mrs. Clinton would be to hold her to a nitpicking, selective standard of justice not imposed on other Americans.

So it was that the New York Times, in this week’s 4,100-word exposé on the origins of the FBI’s Trump–Russia probe, recycled the theme: Government investigators were savagely public about Clinton’s trifling missteps while keeping mum about the Manchurian candidate’s treasonous conspiracy with Putin.

As we contended in rebuttal on Thursday, the Times’ facts are selective and its narrative theme of disparate treatment is hogwash: Clinton’s bid was saved, not destroyed, by Obama’s law-enforcement agencies, which tanked a criminal case on which she should have been indicted. And the hush-hush approach taken to the counterintelligence case against Donald Trump was not intended to protect the Republican candidate; it was intended to protect the Obama administration from the specter of a Watergate-level scandal had its spying on the opposition party’s presidential campaign been revealed.

But let’s put that aside. Let’s consider the disparate-treatment claim on its own terms.

The DNC Server
It has now been confirmed that the Trump campaign was subjected to spying tactics under counterintelligence law — FISA surveillance, national-security letters, and covert intelligence operatives who work with the CIA and allied intelligence services. It made no difference, apparently, that there was an ongoing election campaign, which the FBI is supposed to avoid affecting; nor did it matter that the spy targets were American citizens, as to whom there is supposed to be evidence of purposeful, clandestine, criminal activity on behalf of a foreign power before counterintelligence powers are invoked.

But what was the rationale for using these spying authorities?

The fons et origo of the counterintelligence investigation was the suspicion — which our intelligence agencies assure us is a fact — that the Democratic National Committee’s server was hacked by covert Russian operatives. Without this cyber-espionage attack, there would be no investigation. But how do we know it really happened? The Obama Justice Department never took custody of the server — no subpoena, no search warrant. The server was thus never subjected to analysis by the FBI’s renowned forensics lab, and its evidentiary integrity was never preserved for courtroom presentation to a jury.

How come? Well, you see, there was an ongoing election campaign, so the Obama Justice Department figured it would be a terrible imposition to pry into the Democrats’ communications. So, yes, the entire “Russia hacked the election” narrative the nation has endured for nearly two years hinges on the say-so of CrowdStrike, a private DNC contractor with significant financial ties to the Clinton campaign.

In Investigations 101, using foreign-intelligence authorities to spy on Americans is extraordinary, while taking custody of essential physical evidence is basic. By the way, the government’s failure to ensure the evidentiary integrity of the DNC server by taking possession of it and performing its own rigorous testing on it makes it practically impossible to prosecute anyone for “colluding” in Russia’s cyber-espionage. It’s tough to prove that anyone conspired in something unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the something actually happened the way you say it happened. To do that in a courtroom, you need evidence — a confident probability analysis by your intelligence agencies won’t do.

The Espionage Act v. the Logan Act
Here is then-director Comey’s explanation of why Mrs. Clinton should not be indicted for patent felony violations of the Espionage Act’s provisions on mishandling classified information:

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.”

This statutory analysis is gibberish. Notwithstanding that Mrs. Clinton’s actions were intentional and willful, the Espionage Act does not require proof of that mental state. Despite considerable evidence that she obstructed investigations, it’s not necessary to prove that either. Nor to establish disloyalty or any intent to harm the United States. To avoid indicting Mrs. Clinton, the FBI and Justice Department ignored the statute that has been on the books for a century and substituted an impossible-to-prove statute of their imagination.

……Despite the absence of any evidence that the Trump campaign conspired in Russia’s espionage, the Obama Justice Department — led by then–acting attorney general Sally Yates — relied on the Logan Act to conduct a criminal investigation of General Michael Flynn, a 30-year decorated combat veteran. A key Trump campaign adviser who played a central role in the Trump transition and was designated as the incoming national-security adviser, it was Flynn’s job to communicate with such foreign counterparts as Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, a Washington fixture whose dance card has never been short on Democrats. Flynn was also an intense Obama critic, and the outgoing administration understood that he was preparing to reverse Obama policies.

The Obama Justice Department and FBI investigated Flynn — including an ambush interview — on the theory that his discussions with Kislyak and other diplomats violated the Logan Act. Currently codified as Section 953 of the federal penal code, this statute purports to criminalize “any correspondence or intercourse” with agents of a foreign sovereign conducted “without authority of the United States” — an impossibly vague term that probably means permission from the executive branch. The Logan Act is patently unconstitutional, but no court has had the opportunity to invalidate it because, to borrow a phrase, no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. As our Dan McLaughlin has explained, the Act dates to 1799, a dark time for free-speech rights during the John Adams administration. Never in its 219-year history has it resulted in a single conviction; indeed, there have been only two indictments, the last one in 1852.

By contrast, there have been several prosecutions under the Espionage Act, including several convictions of military personnel prosecuted under the same provisions at issue in Mrs. Clinton’s case — although their misconduct was far less extensive…..

Truth or Consequences
Speaking of lying to the FBI, Mrs. Clinton — during the brief interview the FBI conducted after Director Comey’s speech exonerating her was already written — told agents she did not know what the designation “(C)” in classified documents meant. She claimed to have assumed it might have had something to do with putting paragraphs in alphabetical order, notwithstanding the absence of any (A), (B), or (D) paragraphs.

Patently, this was a false statement: Mrs. Clinton, who was in the Senate for eight years, was indoctrinated in classified-information practice on becoming secretary of state, a position in which classified documents abound. She signed an acknowledgment that she understood her obligations and had read the relevant executive orders on classification — the main one had been issued by her husband. (C), which stands for confidential, the lowest level of classification, is a ubiquitous marking in classified documents, well known to officials with security clearances. But Mrs. Clinton had falsely told the public she had never sent or received any documents “marked classified,” so she needed to pretend that she didn’t know what the classified markings meant.

She wasn’t prosecuted, of course. She got to run for president. Her underlings weren’t prosecuted either — Clinton confidants Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin both told the FBI they were unaware that Clinton was using a private server while they worked for four years as her top State Department staffers; as the Daily Caller’s Chuck Ross points out, Mills explicitly asked Abedin about the server in a 2010 email.

Paul Combetta, the Platte River Networks technician who serviced Clinton’s homebrew server and applied the “BleachBit” program to destroy tens of thousands of her emails, lied to the FBI in his initial interviews; far from being prosecuted in order to squeeze him for cooperation, he was given immunity. With no fear that there was any interest in prosecuting him, Combetta proceeded to tell a risible story about why he destroyed the emails, transparently protecting Clinton and her subordinates.

That’s not quite the way things go in the Trump–Russia investigation. General Flynn and three other subjects — George Papadopoulos, Richard Gates, Alex van der Zwaan — have been prosecuted for making false statements in FBI interviews. None of the false statements alleged had anything to do with Russia’s cyber-espionage attack on the 2016 election, the ostensible subject matter of Mueller’s investigation. (Unlike the Clinton probe, where the defense lawyers worked closely with the Justice Department, the defense lawyers in the Trump probe are not allowed to know the scope of Mueller’s investigative authority.)

 

 

Hillary deliberately used an illegal, unsecure server to store and transmit classified information, tampered with evidence, deleted incriminating emails, and lied before Congress. It’s right in front of everyone’s face.  She knew that it was a national security violation, but did it anyway.

All kinds of federal laws were broken.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton on board her private jet in what was clearly a conflict of interest and a conversation on whether or not the DOJ would indict Hillary for her crimes.

After that, the fix was in.

Comey gave immunity to five Clinton State Department aides and IT experts.  Those aides include Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s former chief of staff, along with two other State Department staffers, John Bentel and Heather Samuelson, Bryan Pagliano, Clinton’s former IT aide, and Paul Combetta, an employee at Platte River networks, the firm hired to manage her server after she left the State Department.

Combetta, who went on Reddit requesting technical advice on how to strip a “VIP (VERY VIP)” email address from archives stored on a server he has “full access to“, posed as ‘Stonetear’ on the site, and the ‘VIP’ was indeed Hillary. Combetta used the computer program “Bleachbit” to destroy Clinton’s records, despite an order from Congress to preserve them, and Samuelson also destroyed Clinton’s emails.

Obama also knew about Clinton’s clandestine email server and participated in the email exchange.

Pagliano created Hillary’s email server over a series of months while working in a room on K Street in D.C.  After he constructed the server, Pagliano stated that he “rented a minivan and drove to Chappaqua New York to install the email server in the Clinton residence.”

Hillary gets away with her bullshit, but a General who served this country, gets raked over the fucking coals for a security violation that was far less severe.

Not to mention the money-laundering Clinton Foundation.

The DOJ has all the evidence they need to prosecute the bitch, but the Dems will never prosecute one of their own and the GOP-led Congress doesn’t have the balls.

As for the investigation set-up against President Trump:

The leftwing Deep State really didn’t believe Trump would win the election. As an ‘insurance policy‘ during the campaign, the FBI, James Comey, the Hillary campaign, a reprobate former MI6 agent, and the Obama regime all had a hand in producing and paying for a lurid, fabricated dossier which was then used to secure a warrant from the FISA court under fraudulent claims, to spy on the Trump campaign.

Former MI6 operative, Christopher Steele, was hired by Fusion GPS, a corporate espionage firm, to dig up dirt on Trump but came up with a fabricated smear instead. Not deterred by the total implausibility of the story described in the dossier, GPS shopped the dossier to the liberal media and paid journos to feed the fake story to the press with predicable results; the left wing morons at Buzzfeed and  CNN  jumped at the chance to print the fake news.  The FBI even offered $50,000 to Steele for information.

The Obama regime paid almost one million dollars to the same law firm that funneled money to GPS.  Somewhere in that mess is RINO John McCain,  who received the dossier from a former British ambassador to Moscow.

Glenn Simpson, GPS co-founder,  was questioned in a closed door hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The Mueller clusterfuck is two fold: The fake dossier was tried and failed, then they used the planted story about the Trump campaign having inside knowledge of the Russians possessing Hillary’s emails.  They also inserted a mole into the Trump campaign.

The more that comes out about these anti-Trump Deep State douchebags, the worse it gets.

 

Advertisements

WaPo Identifies FBI Spy Who Infiltrated Trump Campaign as ‘Retired Professor’ (UPDATED)

UPDATE:

Confirmed:

A Cambridge professor with deep ties to American and British intelligence has been outed as an agent who snooped on the Trump presidential campaign for the FBI.

Multiple media outlets have named Stefan Halper, 73, as the secret informant who met with Trump campaign advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos starting in the summer of 2016. The American-born academic previously served in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations.

……The Halper revelation also shows the Obama administration’s FBI began prying into the opposing party’s presidential nominee earlier than it previously admitted.

Halper’s sit-downs with Page reportedly started in early July 2016, undermining fired FBI Director James Comey’s previous claim that the bureau’s investigation into the Trump campaign began at the end of that month.

Halper made his first overture when he met with Page at a British symposium. The two remained in regular contact for more than a year, meeting at Halper’s Virginia farm and in Washington, DC, as well as exchanging emails.

 

From Twitchy:

According to the Post, the source is:

“A retired American professor in 2016 began working as a secret informant for the FBI as it investigated Russia’s interference in the U.S. presidential campaign, and he contacted three Trump advisers in the summer and fall of that year, according to people familiar with his activities.”

The paper is not naming the retired professor at this time:

“The role played by the source is now at the center of a contentious battle that has pitted President Trump against his own Justice Department and fueled the president’s attacks on the special counsel investigation. The Washington Post has confirmed the informant’s identity with multiple people familiar with his role but is not reporting his name following warnings from U.S. intelligence officials that exposing him could endanger him or his contacts.”

OK, so how many “retired American professors” were talking to Trump advisers? We’ll no doubt know his identity shortly.

It’s most likely a Oxford/Cambridge professor named Stefan Halper, who was part and parcel to the Deep State conspiracy to undermine the 2016 election.

And WaPo’s excuse for the spying is one for the shit pile:

 

Where’s the Leftwing Media Over the Nutbag Who Shouted Anti-Trump Rants and Shot at the Doral Golf Resort?

Crickets….

From Breitbart

Police say they shot and wounded a man “ranting” about President Donald Trump inside the lobby of the Trump National Doral Miami resort at around 1:30 am EST Friday morning.
“The man — who was not a guest at the resort — waited in the lobby for police officers to arrive before luring them into a gunfight, authorities said. During the gunfight, the unidentified man was struck several times in the lower body. No workers at the resort or guests were injured. A Doral cop hurt his wrist,” reports the Miami Herald.

Miami Police have identified the suspect as Jonathan Oddi, 42, of Doral, Florida.

“We are not saying this is terrorism … we are not discounting anything at this point,” Juan Perez, director of the Miami-Dade Police, told reporters.

“We still have a lot of work to do,” added Perez.

Secret Service says agents from its Miami Field Office are on scene at the resort and “working closely with our law enforcement partners.”

Footage obtained by CBS4 shows the suspect being transported to Kendall Regional Medical Center.

“They confronted the subject immediately upon arrival and exchanged gunfire with him,” Doral Police Chief Hernan Organvidez told reporters.

According to the Left’s set of rules, some are more deserving of the Second Amendment than others, and they certainly know how to selectively exploit and politicize gun-related crimes.  Not a peep out of them If the perp is one of their own.

Clapper: ‘If FBI Spied On Trump It Was A ‘Good Thing’

Violating the law and the Constitution is always a good thing as long as you’re a Dem.

Via The Daily Wire

On Thursday night, CNN’s Don Lemon interviewed Barack Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, who insisted that if the FBI indeed spied on the Trump campaign in 2016, it was a “good thing” for America.

Lemon stated, “Here’s what the president tweeted this morning. He said, ‘Wow, word seems to be coming out that the Obama FBI spied on the Trump campaign with an embedded informant. Andrew McCarthy says, ‘There’s probably no doubt that they had at least one confidential informant in the campaign.’ If so, this is bigger than Watergate!’”

Lemon continued, “That is an extraordinary claim, and based on your experience, what is the likelihood that it’s true?”

Clapper answered, “Well, I think this is hyperbole. They may have someone who was talking to them in the campaign, but the focus here, as it was with the intelligence community, is not on the campaign, per se, but what the Russians were doing to try to instantiate themselves in the campaign or to influence it or leverage it.”

Then Clapper made his outrageous statement: “So, if there was someone that was observing that sort of thing, that’s a good thing because the Russians pose a threat to the very basis of our political system.”

He continued, “And I think it’s hugely dangerous if someone like that is exposed, because the danger to that person, not to mention the reluctance of others to be informants for the FBI and the FBI gains a lot of valuable information from informants. So to me, this is incredible.”

As The Daily Wire has reported, Clapper reportedly manipulated the intelligence community’s assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election in a partisan way to damage Donald Trump.

 

Here’s what’s been exposed: Obama weaponized the intelligence agencies in a conspiracy.  There was all out sedition on part of the FBI leadership and the Obama regime to undermine the election and overthrow Donald Trump if he became president.

Clapper was one of the most corrupt douchebags in Obama’s White House, and that’s saying a lot. He lied his ass off under oath before Congress about blanket surveillance.  He was part and parcel to Obama’s violation of the Constitution.

The Russian aren’t threat to our political system; the Dems and the Deep State are.

 

 

 

Related posts

https://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2018/02/02/house-memo-outlines-corruption-and-surveillance-abuse-of-weaponized-government-agencies-by-obama-regime-against-trump-campaign/

https://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2017/05/27/obama-used-the-nsa-fbi-to-illegally-spy-on-americans-for-years-tried-to-hack-election/

 

Dems, Leftwing Media Defend MS-13 Because, ‘Racism’

They commit atrocities that rival muzzie terrorists, but don’t you dare call them animals.

Via Breitbart

“If the media and liberals want to defend MS-13, they’re more than welcome to,” White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters during Thursday’s briefing after media attempts to frame President Trump’s comments from the previous day as insulting to “some immigrants.”
“I don’t think the term that the president used was strong enough,” she said.

One reporter had asked Sanders about the president’s use of the word “animals” to describe members of the vicious MS-13 transnational gang but, instead, framed the question by saying Trump used the term to describe “some immigrants.”

Sanders sharply corrected him by saying, “The president was very clearly referring to MS-13 gang members who enter the country illegally and whose deportations are hamstrung by our laws.” She described the gang as “one of the most vicious and deadly” and operates using rape, control, and killing.

“If the media and liberals want to defend MS-13, they’re more than welcome to,” said Sanders. “Frankly I don’t think the term that the president used was strong enough.”

She then described some of the “heinous acts” the gang has executed:

“It took an animal to stab a man a hundred times and decapitate him and rip his heart out. It took an animal to beat a woman they were sex trafficking – with a bat 28 times, indenting part of her body. And it took an animal to kidnap, drug, and rape a 14-year old Houston girl.

Frankly, I think that the term “animal” doesn’t go far enough.

And I think that the president should continue to use his platform and everything he can do under the law to stop these types of horrible, horrible, disgusting people.”

Trump used the term “animal” to describe MS-13 gang members during a Wednesday afternoon White House roundtable with stakeholders in the fight against California’s sanctuary state laws.

Fresno Sheriff Margaret Mims described to Trump the struggle her region faces in notifying Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of an illegal alien MS-13 gang member. Trump responded by calling those gang members “animals,” a term he has used in the past to describe the murderous criminal organization.

A host of media personalities, Hollywood celebrities, and Democrats deceptively framed his comments as referring to “some immigrants,” a narrative continued in the Thursday briefing question.

“There’s a spark of divinity in every person on earth and that we all have to recognize that,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said as she slammed Trump for calling MS-13 members “animals.” Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom said Trump is like a “slave owner” or “Nazi” for Trump’s description of the murderous gang members.

The Associated Press issued a tweet correction on Thursday admitting it had incorrectly framed Trump’s comment: “AP has deleted a tweet from late Wednesday on Trump’s “animals” comment about immigrants because it wasn’t made clear that he was speaking after a comment about gang members”.

 

Yeah, let’s not refer to murderous cutthroat MS-13s as ‘animals’. It might offend their sensitivities. MS-13s are rapists, murderers, and child-slaughtering psychopaths. Thay ARE animals.

Of course Leftie turds love to fling the ‘animal; label when it suits them:

Capture.PNG576866

President Trump will not back down:

President Donald Trump responded to the ongoing controversy of his use of the word “animals” to describe MS-13 gang members on Thursday.

“When the MS-13 comes in, when the other gang members come into our country, I refer to them as animals and guess what, I always will,” Trump said when reporters asked about the controversy on Thursday afternoon at the White House.

Trump reminded reporters that he was talking about MS-13 on Wednesday when he was using the word “animals,” despite being taken out of context by the mainstream media. His use of the word was featured on cable news reports for the past 24 hours as Democrats accused him of accusing all immigrants of being animals.

But Trump pointed to the context of his words.

“If you look a little bit further on in the tape you’ll see that,” Trump said to reporters. “So I’m actually surprised that you’re asking this question ’cause most people got it right.”

Trump repeated his use of the word “animals” to describe MS-13, noting that law enforcement officials were “getting them out by the thousands.”

He called for the country to pass stronger immigration laws, to keep more gang members out of the county and to prevent them from coming back in.

 

Conservatives slammed liberals on Twitter for this latest pile of stupid:

 

 

The Sean Spicier parody triggered the leftie moonbats into a frenzy. Hilarity ensued:

 

 

 

There’s lots more comedy gold at the thread.

They’re illegals, regardless of what politically-inspired label they assign.  They pour in and commit more crimes after they get here. They shouldn’t be here in the first place. We have  laws, but the  DemProg-created “sanctuary cities” keep breaking them.

Illegals have been receiving benefits like food stamps, welfare, free educationtax creditsmedical care, and housing  for years. Enough.

The U.S. has the right to control who enters the country. There is no Constitutional or legal right for a foreigner to enter the U.S.  It’s a privilege. Every country has immigration laws, travel laws, and borders.

Pregnant illegal alien females will often cross the border and drop “anchor babies” to further violate the immigration and citizenship laws. HR 1868 the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009 was introduced to stop them, but as of this date, no action has been taken.

I like how Dwight Eisenhower handled the illegal alien problem;  a military-directed operation with a no-nonsense approach to kicking out and keeping out illegal aliens. Round them up, send them home.

 

Related articles:

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/05/18/nancy-pelosi-rips-donald-trump-animals-criticism-ms-13-have-compassion-kate-steinle

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2018/05/17/journalists-admit-trump-called-ms-13-animals-still-declare-label-racist/

https://patriotpost.us/articles/54169-the-lefts-loathsome-indifference-toward-ms-13