Government Corruption | |
McCabe memos show how disgraced FBI leader kept Trump-Russia collusion hoax alive in 2017 | |
2025-04-25 | |
Newly-declassified memos written by disgraced FBI official Andrew McCabe shine new light on how he kept the Trump-Russia collusion hoax investigation alive during a critical period in the first half of 2017 before he got it handed off to a special counsel. The eight memos penned by McCabe, most of which had never been released until earlier this month, span his discussions and meetings (including with President Donald Trump) held from January 24, 2017 to May 21, 2017 — a critical time period ranging from just before the FBI sprung an interview on retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn to just after Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel. The memos were more fully declassified through efforts by Trump and FBI Director Kash Patel earlier this month. McCabe was a stalwart ally of since-fired FBI Director James Comey, coordinated closely with since-fired FBI special agent Peter Strzok on the launch and the conduct of the flawed and politicized Crossfire Hurricane investigation, and relied heavily upon disgraced FBI lawyer Lisa Page as his close confidante. Pushed the Steele dossier McCabe and Comey had pushed in December 2016 to include British ex-spy Christopher Steele's debunked dossier in the body of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment on alleged Russian meddling, but they were thwarted by the NSA and CIA. The dossier was eventually included in an annex to the assessment. By early 2017, McCabe and the FBI knew that the Steele dossier was baseless. The FBI had offered Steele an “incentive” in October 2016 of up to $1 million if he could prove the allegations in his discredited anti-Trump dossier, but the former MI6 agent was unable to back up his claims. An FBI spreadsheet from December 2016 showed nothing of any substance from the dossier could be verified. The FBI had unearthed nothing derogatory on Flynn. And an early 2017 interview of Steele’s main source — Igor Danchenko — undercut the dossier’s collusion claims. Yet despite the huge setbacks for Crossfire Hurricane, McCabe’s newly-declassified memos show how McCabe facilitated the FBI’s targeting of Flynn, met with Vice President Mike Pence and other White House officials about the Flynn allegations, refused to publicly shoot down false media stories on collusion, opened a collusion investigation into Trump himself after Comey was fired, kept the Trump-Russia investigation alive and escalated it as the acting FBI director, helped successfully push for a special counsel to take the reins, and more. McCabe did not respond to a request for comment sent to him by Just the News through his LinkedIn. January 24, 2017 — Mike Flynn’s call with McCabe McCabe created his first memo related to a discussion he had with Flynn just before he was interviewed by FBI agents on January 24, 2017. Versions of the memo were previously released with various redactions in 2019 and 2020, but the version released this month has the fewest redactions yet. The FBI had been plotting how to potentially prosecute Flynn related to his December 2016 call with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, including potentially under the Logan Act. McCabe said that “I told LTG Flynn that I had a sensitive matter to discuss. I explained that in light of the significant media coverage and public discussion about his recent contacts with Russian representatives, that Director Comey and I felt that we needed to have two of our agents sit down with the General and hear from him the details of those conversations. LTG Flynn asked if I was referring to his contacts with the Russian Ambassador to the United States, and indicated that I was.” McCabe said in his memo that Flynn explained that he had been trying to "build relationships" with the Russians, and that he had calls in which he "exchanged condolences." McCabe said Flynn then stated that McCabe probably knew what was said in these calls because "you listen to everything they say." McCabe said of his talk with Flynn that “I reiterated that in light of everything that has been said about these contacts, the important thing now was for us to hear directly from him what he said and how he felt about the conversations.” Comey later admitted in 2018 that he took advantage of the chaos in the early days of Trump’s administration when he sent FBI special agents Peter Strzok and Joseph Pientka to talk to Flynn. “I sent them,” Comey said to MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace, prompting laughter in the audience. “Something I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in … a more organized administration. In the George W. Bush administration, for example, or the Obama administration.” “In both of those administrations, there was process, and so, if the FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official, you would work through the White House counsel, and there’d be discussions and approvals and who would be there, and I thought, it’s early enough — let’s just send a couple guys over,” Comey added. STRZOK OVERJOYED THAT FLYNN CASE NOT CLOSED The Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the Flynn case in May 2020 stated that Strzok learned in early January 2017 that the Flynn case had not been closed despite the lack of evidence for keeping it open, and relayed the “serendipitously good” news to McCabe's special assistant Lisa Page, with whom Strzok was having an affair. Strzok remarked that “our utter incompetence actually helps us.” Strzok then instructed FBI agents to “keep it open for now” at the behest of “the 7th Floor” of the bureau. The DOJ said that “the FBI kept open its counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn based solely on his calls with Kislyak — the only new information to arise since the FBI’s determination to close the case.” McCabe did not tell Flynn that he was being interviewed by the FBI as part of an investigation targeting the Trump campaign. McCabe said in his memo that “LTG Flynn questioned how so much information had been made public and asked if we thought it had been leaked” and “I replied that we were quite concerned about what we perceived as significant leaks and that we were in the process of completing a referral to the Department of Justice requesting authority to initiate a leak investigation.” McCabe said that “I further indicated that these cases were hard to prove but that we thought the significance of this situation demanded a thorough review.” | |
Link |
Government Corruption |
FBI-approved book manuscript supports Kash Patel's Benghazi narrative challenged by NY Times |
2025-01-28 |
[JustTheNews] Former lead agent in case confirms frustration among investigators, lack of pursuit of some terrorists. The FBI approved a book manuscript in 2023 from its lead investigator in the Benghazi terror attack probe that confirms frontline agents and prosecutors believed politics kept the Justice Department from approving operations to capture several conspirators, supporting a key part of FBI Director-nominee Kash Patel’s account of events that was recently challenged by The New York Times. In his yet to be published book, retired FBI Special Agent Michael Clarke chronicles the frustrations he and other law enforcement officials experienced at the end of President Barack Obama’s administration when their Joint Terrorism Task Force had identified several conspirators in the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the State Department special mission compound in Benghazi but could not get a memo signed that would have sent the Pentagon in action to round up the alleged suspects. Specifically, Clarke raised concerns that in 2016 then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe – whose wife had recently run for political office as a Democrat and received large donations from a Hillary Clinton ally – would not approve an “executive memo” clearing the way for the Pentagon to plan the capture of key suspects in the attack on the Benghazi consulate. The deadly terror attack proved to be a black eye for Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State. ONLY ONE DEFENDANT The lead agents and prosecutors “could accept a reality where the White House may elect to postpone an operation based on political considerations - this was always their prerogative, however distasteful,” Clarke wrote. “What none of us ever fathomed was that a small number of FBI higher ups would consider politics in making an operational decision.” Clarke, who led the FBI’s investigation of Benghazi from the start until his retirement in 2020 and received top DOJ and FBI awards for his work in the probe, declined comment when contacted by Just the News, referring reporters to the FBI-approved approved language in his manuscript. McCabe did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent Tuesday to his email address at George Mason University, where he is a distinguished visiting professor. The FBI declined to comment. But in 2017 testimony to Congress, McCabe acknowledged the FBI had managed to bring only one defendant, Ahmed Abu Khatallah, to justice, blaming it on the complexity of the investigation. "So Mr. Khatallah was one of the few people that we have been able to hold responsible for the attack on our special mission facility in Benghazi, Libya," he testified. "I oversaw the development of that operation and the very significant and complicated partnership relationships that enabled us to bring Mr. Khatallah to Justice." "Was that a difficult case?" he was asked. "Yes, sir, it was," McCabe answered. But other government officials told Just the News that Clarke’s team in concert with other U.S. agencies and foreign allies had identified dozens of suspects and potential defendants but only two ultimately went to trial. The current and former officials said Patel, then the coordinating lawyer in main DOJ’s counterterrorism office, supported frontline agents but that others blocked the team from succeeding as Clarke alleged in his manuscript and Patel claimed in the 2024 book titled "Government Gangsters" was accurate. “By the time the D.O.J. was moving in full force to compile evidence and bring prosecutions against the Benghazi terrorists, I was leading the prosecution’s efforts at Main Justice in Washington, D.C.,” Patel wrote in the book. After experiencing lengthy foot-dragging from the leadership, Clarke’s team spent years working with DOD and other agencies to find other solutions for the unpunished suspects, often drone strikes, to ensure some form of justice and ensure Benghazi participants posed no further threat to the Western world, current and former officials told Just the News, stressing the investigation still continues today. The delays were also criticized by Patel in his book and in media appearances following his service in the first Trump administration. “Despite the fact that we had reams of evidence against dozens of terrorists in the Benghazi attack, Eric Holder’s Justice Department decided to only prosecute one of the attackers,” Patel wrote in his book, "Government Gangsters". MOTIVATED BY POLITICS He also said bureau and department leadership were motivated by politics in their decision to delay pursuing other Benghazi attack suspects in 2016. “I remember this meeting with then-A.G. Holder. And we had a deck of like 19 guys we wanted to prosecute. You know, JSOC had them rolled up and we wanted to get them all. They killed four Americans. You know, it’s a legit terrorist attack. And the basic general response from the F.B.I. and D.O.J. leadership was ‘it’s only politically convenient to get one guy,’” Patel said on The Shawn Ryan Show in September. In December, the New York Times challenged Patel’s account of events basing its reporting on several anonymous sources. According to those anonymous sources, Patel’s statements inflated his role and was, in reality, only in a supporting role to the overall investigation. However, in the book and interview excerpts cited by the Times, Patel never claimed that he led the overall, interagency investigation into the Benghazi attacks. The Times also challenged Patel’s contention that the government had “rolled up” 19 suspects in the Benghazi attack, citing the government’s failure to capture a vast majority of the suspects. But Patel’s account about frustrating efforts to take into custody and prosecute the several suspected attackers is supported by Clarke’s manuscript, which chronicled how senior FBI leadership delayed the Pentagon to begin its planning to locate and capture the remaining individuals. The Times did not respond to a request for comment from Just the News. According to Clarke, in March of 2016 both the Department of Defense and the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, D.C. were supportive of the plan. The Pentagon began to draw up plans to apprehend the suspects immediately and identified a small window of opportunity that would allow U.S. forces to apprehend the suspects in war-torn Libya. Clarke wrote, because of the risk of employing U.S. forces in the war zone, the Pentagon wanted a reassurance from the FBI and DOJ that the suspects would be prosecuted in the form of an “executive memo.” The memo, according to Clarke, was delayed by McCabe at the senior level. After repeatedly asking for updates and an explanation, the then-Special Agent in Charge of the New York counterterrorism division indicated that the memo was being held up for political reasons. Clarke wrote that his FBI boss “pulled me aside and with a disgusted look on his face said, ‘nothing is going to happen until after the election in November.’” “The Benghazi Team should focus strictly on the upcoming trial of Khatallah and stop looking at capture options. ‘It was politics,’” Clarke wrote. He also stated a top federal prosecutor also confirmed to him that McCabe was part of the holdup. The criminal division chief at the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, D.C. “advised me the log jam regarding the issuing of an executive session memo remained between the Deputy Assistant Attorney General at DOJ National Security Division and with FBI Deputy Director,” Clarke wrote. In his manuscript, Clarke raised concerns about the former FBI deputy director’s political ties. Multiple news reports confirmed McCabe’s wife had received financial assistance in 2015 from then-Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a close Clinton ally, to run for state Senate. Just the News reported that internal FBI documents showed the financial and political ties between McAuliffe and the McCabe family raised red flags. Clarke wrote he shared in those concerns, especially as it related to Benghazi. “In late October 2016, the Wall Street Journal reported Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton confidant, helped steer hundreds of thousands of dollars to the election campaign of the wife of Deputy Director Andy McCabe who was heading the probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email system,” he wrote. “The political action committee of McAuliffe, a Clinton loyalist, gave the contribution to the state Senate campaign of Jill McCabe, the wife of the Deputy Director. The report stated Jill McCabe received an additional two-hundred-thousand-plus from the Virginia Democratic Party, which is heavily influenced by McAuliffe. “When the article broke in the Wall Street Journal, the obvious questions immediately surfaced. From the beginning of the case in 2012, Andy McCabe had an influential role to the Benghazi investigation while serving at a variety of positions at FBIHQ,” he added. McCabe has acknowledged the donations his wife received but insisted they did not affect his work decisions. Related: Benghazi: 2025-01-02 2024's Biggest Loser Was Barack Obama Benghazi: 2024-12-19 Trump wipes the smile off Obama's face - Washington Examiner Benghazi: 2024-12-15 Tampon Tim to Tampon Times Related: Michael Clarke 10/09/2022 Russian man named as owner of truck in Crimea bridge blast — but says relative was driving it Michael Clarke 06/09/2022 From the Russian Perspective: Operation on Denazification of Ukraine: operational summary June 8th (updated) Michael Clarke 08/15/2018 Family of the late Michael Clarke Duncan suspicious of fiancée Omarosa in 2013 Related: Ahmed Abu Khatallah 08/21/2019 Federal Judge Orders FBI to Search for More Christopher Steele Docs Ahmed Abu Khatallah 06/28/2018 Ahmed Abu Khatallah - Accused leader of Benghazi attack sentenced to 22 years Ahmed Abu Khatallah 11/29/2017 Ahmed Abu Khatallah cleared of murder over 2012 attack |
Link |
Government Corruption |
DOJ Lawyer Who Demanded the FBI SWAT Raid on Mar-a-Lago Decides to Spend More Time Doing Something Else |
2025-01-06 |
[RedState] Asshole will need to prepare for depositions The Department of Justice official who pushed for the armed raid on Mar-a-Lago, which ended up with documents that were available for the asking and a chance to riffle through Melania's underwear drawer, has retired. Jay Bratt, a 30-plus-year veteran of the Department of Justice, has tendered his resignation, saying staying on "wasn't worth it." But three sources familiar with the move described it to SpyTalk as a significant and even chilling event previewing a potential exodus of seasoned government lawyers and FBI agents who fear the wrath of Pam Bondi, Trump ’s pick for attorney general, Kash Patel, his intended nominee for FBI Director, and their expected army of MAGA loyalists in line to fill out top posts. According to the report, Bratt, a senior executive service member, expected to be fired by incoming Attorney General Pam Bondi, and he would face a long-running and expensive "wrongful dismissal" lawsuit to be allowed to retire a la Andrew McCabe. According to books and reporting on the issue, the FBI did not want to conduct a SWAT-style raid with shoot-to-kill orders on Mar-a-Lago, but Bratt insisted; see The Battle Over Raiding Mar-a-Lago: Some FBI Officials Were Concerned About the DOJ's Ultimate Goal. After obtaining evidence that Trump employees at Mar-a-Lago may have been moving boxes that hadn’t been returned, Bratt later pushed for a warrant to search the president’s home—a move that was resisted by Steven D’Antuono, the top FBI agent overseeing the case, who viewed the Justice prosecutor as being overly "aggressive," according to Where Tyranny Begins: The Justice Department, the FBI and the War on Democracy, a book by veteran journalist David Rhode. But D’Antuono’s objections were overruled by senior FBI officials, resulting in the August 2022 FBI search of Mar-a-Lago that recovered another 102 documents with classified markings. The search enraged Trump and put both Bratt and FBI Director Wray in the cross-hairs of the former president and his lawyers. Bratt was also credibly accused of pressuring the attorney of Trump's Mar-a-Lago valet into getting his client to testify against Trump in exchange for a federal judgeship. In addition, Stanley Woodward, a lawyer representing Walt Nauta, a co-defendant in your classified documents case against President Trump, accused you of improperly pressuring him by implying that the Biden Administration would look more favorably on Mr. Woodward’s candidacy for a judgeship if his client cooperated with the Office of the Special Counsel.10 According to Mr. Woodward, you advised him that you "wouldn’t want [him] to do anything to mess that up," in reference to Mr. Woodward’s judgeship application, and your desire to turn his client into a government cooperator. Somehow, we're all supposed to be concerned about the mass exodus of "seasoned government lawyers and FBI agents" who engaged in lawfare against President Trump and members of his 2017-2021 team. They could have learned a valuable life lesson by watching the HBO series "The Wire" before engaging in political warfare against the once and future president. The more people who resign, the less drama will take place, and more slots can be filled with people who just want to do their jobs and have no interest in eliminating political figures or engaging in a soft coup against the White House. Related: Jay Bratt 05/09/2024 FBI Admits to Bringing Props to Stage Crime Scene Photos at Mar-a-Lago Jay Bratt 08/26/2023 Biden staffers met with Special Counsel Jack Smith's aides before Trump indictment Jay Bratt 07/10/2023 If Alleged DOJ Misconduct Is True, A Judge Could Dismiss The Whole Case Against Trump Related: Pam Bondi 12/17/2024 Kunstler: US Gubmint ‘dunno nuffins ‘bout no drones’ Pam Bondi 12/06/2024 Trump gears up to deliver on promise to curb anti-Israel campus protests Pam Bondi 12/01/2024 Trump nominates Florida sheriff Chad Chronister to lead the DEA Related: Kash Patel 01/03/2025 FBI releases video showing January 2021 pipe bomb suspect planting device outside DNC, RNC offices in DC Kash Patel 01/03/2025 Biden to bestow Presidential Citizens Medal on J6 committee heads Liz Cheney, Bennie Thompson Kash Patel 12/31/2024 Nunes vows oversight of U.S. intel from White House panel Related: Steven D’Antuono 05/15/2024 FBI lost count of how many paid informants were at Capitol on Jan. 6, and later performed audit to figure out exact number: ex-official Steven D’Antuono 09/20/2023 FBI lost count of how many paid informants were at Capitol on Jan. 6 ‐ later performed audit to figure out exact number: ex-official Steven D’Antuono 06/10/2023 FBI Official In Charge Of Mar-A-Lago Raid Said Feds Breached Protocol In Repeat Russia Collusion Hoax Fashion |
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Bill Barr Inadvertently Makes the Case for Kash Patel As FBI Director While Left-Wingers Go Into Shock |
2024-12-02 |
[RedState] Reactions have come fast and hard following Kash Patel's nomination to lead the FBI. Donald Trump made the selection amid years of corruption and abuse within the nation's top law enforcement agency, citing Patel's role in uncovering the Russian collusion hoax. To be sure, though, his resume extends much further, having held numerous high-level positions in the Pentagon, DOJ, and NSC. Anyone claiming he's not "qualified" is simply not telling the truth. Still, some are trying to make that case by sharing a quote from Bill Barr's 2022 tell-all book in which he trashed Patel as having "virtually no experience that would qualify him to serve at the highest level of the world’s preeminent law enforcement agency." At the time, Barr was referring to the possibility of Patel becoming deputy director at the FBI. I categorically opposed making Patel deputy FBI director. I told Mark Meadows it would happen "over my dead body." In the first place, all the leadership positions in the bureau, except the director, have always been FBI agents. They've all gone through the same agent training and have had broad experience in the field and at headquarters. Someone with no background as an agent would never be able to command the respect necessary to run the day-to-day operations of the bureau. Furthermore, Patel had virtually no experience that would qualify him to serve at the highest level of the world’s preeminent law enforcement agency. If I could only write one more sentence for this article, it would be this: I can't think of a better endorsement for Patel to serve as FBI director than that. Fortunately, I can write a few more, and I've got just a few things to say. First, the idea that the FBI should perpetually staff itself is exactly how it became a corrupt agency more intent on protecting "the shield" and damaging its political enemies than serving the American people. The bureau is not a fourth branch of government, free from the confines of the accountability of voters. Trump was not elected to keep the status quo rolling, and those using Barr's 2022 quote to try to attack Patel's nomination should realize they are irrelevant. No one cares about "norms" when those norms have produced the targeting of Christians, the arrest of pro-lifers for expressing free speech, and the surveilling of parents at school board meetings. Never mind the litany of FBI figures such as Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok, who have been exposed as corrupt partisans who abused their power to try to take down Trump. To put it frankly, the FBI has forfeited any right to claim sovereignty and "independence." Too much has transpired, and if any of the rank-and-file have a problem with the coming reforms, they are welcome to quit. Further, the fact that so many left-wingers are freaking out only serves as more evidence that Patel is the right man for the job. No, we aren't heading for a "constitutional crisis" because the FBI is not a constitutional agency. It is a bloated, corrupt bureaucracy under the direct leadership of the president and one in desperate need of a house cleaning. It is not in question whether the bureau has abused its power to go after the political enemies of the left. That demands a reckoning, and a reckoning is coming whether the Beltway elites like it or not. Related: Kash Patel 12/01/2024 Trump nominates Florida sheriff Chad Chronister to lead the DEA Kash Patel 12/01/2024 Trump nominates Kash Patel to serve as FBI director: 'Advocate for truth' Kash Patel 11/17/2024 From Dinner With Donald Trump: We have not forgotten you. Hold on. Justice is coming |
Link |
Government Corruption |
HPSCI report concluded Russian government wanted Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, to win 2016 election and that CIA Director John Brennan had manipulated 2017 "Intelligence Community Assessment," or ICA, |
2024-02-19 |
[Townhall] This week has been hellacious. And there was more damning evidence released regarding the Russian collusion hoax, where Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger, and Alex Gutentag unearthed new details showing how this scheme was hatched long before disgraced FBI officials Peter Strzok, James Comey, and Andrew McCabe greenlit the counterintelligence probe that was once considered the starting point for this corrupt wild goose chase. The CIA already had over two dozen Trump associates pegged for surveillance illegally, and they roped in the intelligence services of our top allies to help. Now, we have a former White House staffer who alleges he read the intelligence report compiled by House investigators, which shredded the core of the Russian narrative. This individual also divulged two possible locations for this report since there’s now a treasure hunt to find these incriminating documents that the spook community has tried to keep buried. The trio wrote about how the CIA cooked the books for the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) to pivot away from what the evidence was concluding, which was that Moscow wanted Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 election, not Donald Trump (via Public) [emphasis mine]: Around 10 a.m. on a Saturday in August 2018, someone made the extraordinary decision to show a White House staff member a top-secret report written by investigators working for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), which is universally pronounced as “hip C.” There’s a binder that airs all the dirty laundry regarding this rogue operation out there, compiled during the Trump administration by House investigators. That file is missing, but it’s keeping the IC up at night. Some sources told this trio of reporters—Gutentag, Taibbi, and Shellenberger—that the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid might have been influenced by this document, with federal agents speculating that it might have been stored at the former president’s Florida residence. The staffer also said this unreleased HPSCI (“hip C”) report did include that the ICA, which was taken as gospel by the CIA, Democrats, and the liberal media, relied heavily on the Steele Dossier, an opposition research project funded by the Clinton campaign and compiled by a former MI6 spook. It was a document that was also brimming with Russian disinformation and bad intelligence. It also said, unsurprisingly, that the intelligence for the CIA’s Trump-Kremlin narrative was weak, and it was forced into the final draft by Brennan despite objections from other CIA officers. The rushed product—the CIA wanted this report released before Obama left office—did not follow department protocols. Related: Matt Taibbi: 2024-02-15 CIA's Brennan got allied countries to spy on 26 Trump associates for him Matt Taibbi: 2024-01-09 Host Mehdi Hasan announces exit from MSNBC after final broadcast Matt Taibbi: 2023-10-14 JPMorgan boss Jamie Dimon sounds alarm on 'the most dangerous time the world has seen in decades' as Israel-Gaza war sparks economy fears |
Link |
Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
Israel will be forced to pay and repent |
2023-10-24 |
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Victoria Nikiforova The Atlantic magazine, one of the most influential political publications in the United States, published an instructive article by the notable fighter of the information front, Anne Applebaum, “Netanyahu’s attack on democracy left Israel unprepared. ”Summary: the “authoritarian” Benjamin Netanyahu is to blame for Israel’s problems in general and the Hamas attack in particular. The main message is that until Israel gets rid of this “authoritarian”, it will not see victory. Sounds quite unexpected, doesn't it? Israel has not yet recovered from the shock. Joe Biden promised his ally help - he sent an entire aircraft carrier to the region and is even trying to extort billions of dollars from Congress so that Tel Aviv could use this money to purchase weapons from American corporations. And then there’s this stab in the back. In theory, Washington should now treat the Prime Minister of Israel in the same way as it treats Zelensky. Receive him in Congress, kiss his hands, praise him, make aunts, load all your information guns on his PR. Moreover, Ukraine is still a young partner (or partner?) of the White House. And Israel is our oldest and most devoted ally. But something went wrong. We must understand that Applebaum is not just an ordinary propagandist. She is married to a prominent Polish politician Radoslaw Sikorski , she is a Pulitzer laureate, a member of various editorial boards and influential organizations, the author of endless discussions about how to end Russia . Her career in the field of Russophobia began with a monumental work about the Gulag, and continued with collaboration with Navalny. Applebaum’s ancestors at one time moved to the United States from Belarus - for some reason this motivates her to fight us to the bitter end. In 2007, the propagandist gave a lecture in Russian in Moscow entitled “Repentance as a Social Institution.” She demanded that we repent for the Gulag, similar to how the Germans repent for the Holocaust, and to carry out “adequate, normal lustrations” in the country. Apparently, Netanyahu’s “authoritarianism” in Applebaum’s understanding is a refusal to follow the openly hostile anti-Russian course of the United States. Israel has not joined the sanctions regime, is not waging an information war against us, does not boast of supplies to Ukraine, the country has remained open to the Russians. The Hamas attack on October 7 gave the United States excellent leverage to put pressure on Tel Aviv. If the IDF does not avenge its defeat, Netanyahu will collapse. To take revenge, we need US help - not only with money and weapons, but also with information, diplomatic and political support. And all this help comes in a package with demands to change policy in relations with Russia. Hence the parallels between Hamas and Putin that Joe Biden persistently draws. Cynically? But it works. Americans are great pragmatists, although they do not forget to wrap their business logic in rhetorical candy wrappers such as defending democracy. In order to put more pressure on their ally, the American media are promoting the topic of pro-Palestinian protests in the United States. A new seizure of the Capitol was shown on all screens - this time it was stormed by anti-Israel protesters, who were freely allowed inside by the police and filmed by television cameras from all points. The number of pro-Palestinian sympathizers among US Democratic voters is widely debated. Approval of Israel among their ranks has declined radically in recent years. According to a Gallup poll , only 38 percent of Democrats support the Jewish state, while 49 percent sympathize with the Palestinians. Support for Israel in the United States remains high among Republicans and “independent” nonpartisan voters. However, the ruling US party can at any moment refer to a split in its ranks and turn off the valve for “aid” to Israel. The results of the Gallup study were published back in March, when mass protests against judicial reform began in Israeli cities. Evil tongues in Israel then said that it was beneficial for the Americans to support these protests. Anne Applebaum speaks with great sympathy in her article about the protesters. In the summer, at the height of the rallies, she herself traveled to Israel, spoke with demonstrators, and now uses her interviews to accuse Netanyahu. But even more profitable for the United States was the Hamas attack on Israel. It ensured Washington's return to the Middle East as a decision maker and allowed it to put pressure on Tel Aviv, which dared to have its own opinion on foreign policy issues. Years ago, Senator Biden said, “If Israel didn’t exist, it would have to be invented.” To paraphrase Sleepy Joe, if the October 7 attack had not happened, the Americans should have made it up. I wouldn’t like to go into conspiracy theories, but the failure of the legendary Iron Dome, the suddenly open border with the Gaza Strip, and the amount of top-secret information that Hamas fighters were able to somehow obtain in order to plan and successfully carry out such a thing look extremely strange. large-scale invasion. The Israeli military is openly talking about the many misunderstandings of this story. I would not like to think that Washington is capable of such a provocation against its closest ally. Perhaps the original idea was less bloody, but then everything didn’t go as expected. But even if the Americans are not involved here, they are trying to make the most of the current situation. The pressure on Israel is so palpable that a member of the ruling Likud party , Amir Weitman, understanding what his overseas patrons demand, has already launched threats against Russia. His sudden hysteria would have been as incomprehensible as Applebaum's article. But if the US goal in the Palestinian-Israeli aggravation is to force Israel into confrontation with Russia, then the puzzle fits together. And everything falls into place. Another thing is that the deterioration of relations with our country makes Israel’s loneliness absolutely comprehensive. A country surrounded by enemies has no one left at all. But isn't that what they are trying to achieve in Washington? |
Link |
Government Corruption |
How To Create Conspiracy Theories |
2023-07-24 |
![]() All that is required is chronic government stonewalling of reasonable requests for transparency. Then add in high officials serially lying under oath, along with the blatantly unequal application of the law. Institutionalize arguments from authority of politicians and bureaucrats who refuse to adjudicate arguments empirically. Include the weaponization of investigatory and intelligence bureaucracies. Finish with the transformation of an obsequious media into a mouthpiece of the state. And presto, you end up with a skeptical, cynical public that learns to believe the very opposite from what it is told by elites. JANUARY 6th Curiously. some conservative politicians, media and politicos often remark of their surprise that so many of the Trump base insists that the January 6 riot at the Capitol was in part a federally driven conspiracy, or perhaps just a mere "demonstration" gone awry. But whether true or not, why would some not believe that—given the efforts of the state to hide and warp facts? Consider what drives rational people to embrace supposed "conspiracy" theories around the so-called "insurrection?" One reason, of course, is that there was evidence of FBI informants present on January 6. Do not take the word of conservatives for such suppositions. Instead, remember what award-winning New York Times’s reporter and keen follower of right-wing political activity, Matthew Rosenberg said of January 6, albeit in an ambush interview conducted by Project Veritas: The left’s overreaction — the left’s reaction to it in some places was so over the top. They were making it too big a deal ... that gave the opening for lunatics in the right to be like, ’Oh, well, nothing happened here. It was just a peaceful bunch of tourists,’ you know, and it’s like, but nobody wants to hear that." Rosenberg then remarked that he spotted numerous FBI informants among the crowd milling around the Capitol. Or as he put it, "There were a ton of FBI informants among the people who attacked the Capitol." Cannot the FBI refute such allegations? Apparently not. Given such speculation, one would expect that FBI Director Christopher Wray might at least categorically deny such inflammatory accusations. Yet in congressional testimony when asked whether the FBI had inserted informants among the protestors, sphinxlike Wray merely shrugged, "So I really need to be careful here talking about where we have or have not used confidential human sources." Then there is the mysterious case of Ray Epps, initially sought by FBI "as a person of interest" for allegedly inciting demonstrators to break the law and enter the Capitol. But then oddly Epps was de facto exempted for some 30 months from arrest—even as hundreds who urged no such action were indicted and convicted of "illegal parading" or unlawfully "demonstrating in front of the Capitol"—misdemeanors that ended up resulting in felony-type sentencing. In one video clip, as Epps attempts to gin up the stationary crowd to move illegally into the Capitol, he is met with "conspiratorial" accusations from skeptical bystanders calling out: "Fed! Fed! Fed!" Epps filed suit against Fox News for defamation on grounds that anchor Tucker Carlson had tied him to efforts to incite January 6 violence. Yet then suddenly Epps announced that he believes he will soon be charged, after all, by the government for his role in the January 6 protests. If true, such an arrest was long anticipated, since Epps is caught on tape, unambiguously, on more than one occasion, urging demonstrators to enter the Capitol unlawfully (e.g., "We need to go to the Capitol"). If one would like to hatch an Epps conspiracy theory, then one could do no better than quoting another Ray Epps braggadocious claim that he had texted to his nephew: "I orchestrated it." It did not help the Left’s construction of a January 6 "insurrection" theory that it serially misled the country about the actual loss of life. At first, Democrats insisted, falsely, that Officer Sicknick’s tragic death was due to protestor violence. Yet an autopsy revealed that he died a day later from a stroke. Then Democrat leaders pivoted to claim that any law enforcement officer present on January 6, who for any reason subsequently committed suicide, was to be counted a victim of protestor violence. All the while, the media kept largely quiet about the fact that the only unambiguously violent death that day was that of military veteran Ashli Babbitt. She was unarmed as she was shot unlawfully entering the Capitol through a broken window. The name and identity of the officer, remember, were suppressed for months—a protective protocol unlike any other accorded law enforcement officers in the country who lethally shoot unarmed suspects. ASYMMETRIES If all that was not enough to create suspicion about media and political narratives, then there was the asymmetrical media coverage and the reaction of the Justice Department to the 2020 summer riots. Touch an officer on January 6, and one sat in jail for months. Club an officer in summer 2020, and the offender was likely to become certified as a member of the Antifa or BLM resistance, albeit acting up a bit during the "summer of love." Unlike January 6, the violence of arsonists, murderers, rioters, and Antifa and BLM mobs resulted in 1,500 injured law enforcement officers, more than 35 violent deaths, nearly $2 billion in property damage, and 14,000 arrests. Yet most of the indictments were dropped, or plea bargained down to minor misdemeanors by sympathetic leftwing city and state prosecutors. Note that the 2020 rioters also targeted iconic and government buildings. Rioters attempted to burn down a federal courthouse, a police precinct headquarters, an historic Washington D.C. church—all topped off by the mob’s nocturnal effort to stampede into the White House grounds to get to the president. That failed assault precipitated a hasty Secret Service effort to put Trump and his family in a secure subterranean bunker. Again, why was such violence aimed at the White House largely unpunished given its intensity matched or exceeded that of the Capitol riot? Even more importantly, the investigatory January 6 committee also fed rather than quieted conspiracy theories. The Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives first denied nominated Republican representatives any seats on the select committee. Instead, they cherry-picked just two Republicans—on the apparent requisite that both Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger were a) die-hard Trump haters, and b) politically inert and headed for forced retirement. The committee neither called any contrarian witnesses nor subpoenaed documents and videos felt to be antithetical to their narrative of a rightwing violent and armed "insurrection." Yet, again, they did not produce evidence that anyone arrested inside the Capitol was in possession of a firearm. Nor were any plans found of "insurrectionists" planning to occupy government property for any length of time—in the fashion of, say, Seattle’s "Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone" (CHAZ) or (CHOP) "Capitol Hill Organized Protest." In that case, rioters simply annexed government space as their own for over three weeks, ran the sanctuary-like mini-revolutionary state, forbid the police to enter, and were granted exemptions from city and state authorities. The January 6 narrative of continuous threats of an armed revolution was leveraged to justify deploying 20,000 armed soldiers —the largest militarization of Washington D.C. since Jubal Early’s Confederate raid of 1864. Again, such use of federal troops stood in dire contrast to the abject appeasement of the far more violent 2020 rioters, when sympathetic mayors and governors resisted calls to deploy federal troops to their jurisdictions. Recall that the suspicions arising around January 6 followed a long series of revelations about government misconduct that confirmed the suspicions of once reviled "conspiracists." In numerous cases, the wild charge of conspiracists eventually were proven, while the sober and judicious defense narratives of government officials were exposed as outright lies, and occasionally themselves conspiracies. THE TRUE CONSPIRACISTS There was no "Russian collusion" conspiracy. There was a Clinton conspiratorial effort. It sought to hide campaign money through three paywalls to hire Christopher Steele to add to his ad hominem lies and to ensure that they were disseminated throughout the media and government. The point was solely to emasculate her opponent, Donald Trump. As far as the first Trump impeachment phone call, given the multimillion-dollar corruptions abroad of the Biden family syndicate, and the boasts of Joe Biden about his past interference in Ukraine politics to fire a bothersome prosecutor, any president would have warned Ukraine to clean up its act with the Bidens or face holds on American largess. The Covid-19 virus did escape from a nearby Chinese virology lab. It was a media and government fed lie that it was birthed naturally in the wild by a bat or pangolin, part of a three-year long effort to appease the Chinese communist party. And there was a clear role of the NIAID and NIH in funding dangerous gain-of-function research under the auspices of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. Most of what the government assured about the quarantines and vaccinations proved eventually to be wrong or only half-true. That reality proved ironic when those who warned of lockdown dangers were eventually vindicated, but never received apologies from their accusers. Given the blanket exemptions provided to Hillary Clinton for unlawfully destroying subpoenaed material and using a home server to transmit classified information, and the reduction of Hunter Biden’s numerous felonies to minor misdemeanors, and the likely exemption given Joe Biden for storing classified files for years at his various homes and offices, why would anyone not believe that the government and the media work hard to suppress the truth? And why would any citizen believe the government or the media after the Biden campaign solicited "51 intelligence authorities" to swear falsely that the genuine Hunter Biden laptop was likely a product of "Russian disinformation." The entire concocted lie was a Biden-campaign effort to use the gravitas of former government officials and the complicity of the media to promote a fantasy to influence the impending presidential debate. And it worked to a tee. Note as well that the FBI hired out Twitter employees to suppress information concerning the Biden laptop. The truth was deemed "disinformation" in order to mislead voters on the eve of the 2020 election. Normally, distinguished government heads of hallowed bureaus carefully weigh in on investigations to warn against idle speculations and convulsed conspiracies. But who currently in Washington could be sure of any such voice since our most esteemed intelligence and investigative directors are admitted liars? Former FBI Director James Comey feigned amnesia in congressional testimony. He passed off a dossier he knew to be fallacious as genuine evidence to a FISA court. His successor Andrew McCabe lied on four occasions to federal investigators. Current Director Christopher Wray has continually stonewalled congressional oversight committees. Special counsel and former FBI Director Robert Mueller preposterously claimed he knew nothing of the Steele dossier or Fusion GPS. Both John Brennan, former CIA Director, and James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, admittedly lied under oath to Congress. None of these liars faced any legal consequences. Anthony Fauci’s incriminating emails keep appearing in the public domain, making a mockery of his earlier, ludicrous claim that he had not channeled U.S. dollars to the Wuhan lab to ensure the continuance of outlawed gain—of-function research. Worse still, so often those screaming "conspiracy theory" are conspiracists themselves. Hillary Clinton schemed with dark money and paywalls to smear her 2016 opponent. As election denialists Hillary Clinton ("He knows he’s an illegitimate president") and Jimmy Carter ("He [Trump] lost the election and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf") refused to accept the 2016 verdict, projecting such denialism onto others. So how does the government abort a conspiracy theory? Simple: Quit the chronic lying and for once tell the truth. |
Link |
Government Corruption |
John Durham Gives Chilling Response to Harriet Hageman Question About Two-Tiered Justice System: ‘The Nation Can't Stand' (VIDEO) |
2023-06-23 |
She excoriated the Democrats and their deep state allies for using a lie to try to destroy Trump’s candidacy and then his presidency, noting that they knew it was a lie and didn’t care, as long as it was effective. She then asked Durham if he believed the country could survive a two-tiered justice system. Transcript via RedState: Nothing — and I repeat, nothing — that the FBI did was designed to show that Donald J. Trump was a Russian asset. That wasn’t the purpose of the entire charade. How do I know this is true? Because they told us so. The very people who cooked this up, and the ones who ran this entire operation: Strzok, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe, Clinesmith, Steele, the DNC, Perkins Coie. This was Durham’s response: I don’t think that things can go too much further with the view that law enforcement, particularly the FBI or Department of Justice, runs a two-tiered system of justice. The nation can’t stand under those circumstances. Watch the clips below: |
Link |
Government Corruption |
VDJ - Indict Walt Nauta? Why Not the Biggest Liars First? |
2023-06-17 |
[The Blade of Perseus] Walt Nauta is a 10-year-Navy veteran and served as an aide to former President Trump both in and out of office. Special Counsel Jack Smith has now indicted him for allegedly "making false statements in interviews with the FBI." The indictment’s subtext is that Nauta refused to cooperate with, and turn state’s evidence to, the special counsel in its efforts to convict the former president. But why stop the indictments with a man who loyally served and followed the orders of the former president of the United States, was a Navy veteran, and a hard-working immigrant from Guam? Are there not far bigger fish to fry to remind Americans that justice is blind? After all, when Special Counsel Smith announced his indictments of Trump, he lectured America on the rule of law and the cherished notion that no one is above it. So let us start with the former interim director of the FBI itself, Andrew McCabe. McCabe admittedly lied four times about his illegally leaking sensitive information to witnesses and mishandling classified information. Have those crimes suddenly ceased being felonies? Or is it now the policy of the United States government that an FBI director can lie with impunity, and leak, and mishandle sensitive classified information? Yet Walt Nauta may be sent to prison while McCabe will continue to earn a fine salary at CNN as a paid "expert" to deplore . . . what exactly? What McCabe knows best from his own experience with the deed—the "mishandling of classified information"? |
Link |
-Short Attention Span Theater- |
Trump Critics Worried About DA's Charges |
2023-04-06 |
![]() "And I just what I understood the District Attorney to say that he thinks there’s a New York election law involved here. All I can say is the Federal Election Campaign Act [of 1971] absolutely preempts any state or local law to the contrary. How could it be otherwise? You’ve got one law governing corporate finance and a presidential election at the federal level. You’re gonna have 50 state laws interfering with it, so he’s just wrong on the applicability of the New York statute," Bolton said Tuesday. Other Trump critics have raised questions about the viability of Bragg’s indictment. Among them, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe claimed to CNN that Bragg is haphazardly trying to elevate a misdemeanor offense to a felony. "It’s disappointment. I think everyone was hoping we would see more about the direction that they intend to take this prosecution. What is the legal theory that ties that very solid misdemeanor case, 34 counts of misdemeanors, to the intent to conceal another crime, which is what makes it a felony?" he told CNN. "It simply isn’t there." Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who voted to impeach Trump twice and has frequently criticized him, stated that he wasn’t impressed with the charges Bragg laid out on Tuesday. "I believe President Trump’s character and conduct make him unfit for office," Romney said Tuesday. "Even so, I believe the New York prosecutor has stretched to reach felony criminal charges in order to fit a political agenda." Related: Bolton: 2023-03-18 The secret of the Andromeda yacht. Why did the US tie up Ukraine and the terrorist attack on Potoki? Bolton: 2023-02-01 Nikki Haley to announce 2024 presidential run in February: report Bolton: 2023-01-31 West intends to overthrow Erdogan Related: Andrew McCabe: 2023-01-04 Retired FBI boss says agency has lost independence, been co-opted by liberal DOJ ideologues Andrew McCabe: 2022-12-07 WSJ: Musk's Twitter files shows real 'disinformation' threat is America's former intel leaders Andrew McCabe: 2022-11-30 Frank Hawkins - The 10 Most Destructive Americans of My 8 Decades |
Link |
Government Corruption |
Retired FBI boss says agency has lost independence, been co-opted by liberal DOJ ideologues |
2023-01-04 |
[JustTheNews] Former Assistant Director Chris Swecker says bureau has been pressured into improper domestic spying, censorship. In a stunning rebuke, the FBI's retired chief of criminal investigations says his old agency has yielded the independence Congress gave it under the law and is now subservient to a group of liberal ideologues inside the Justice Department who have pressured agents to stray into unwarranted domestic spying and censorship. Ex-FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker on Tuesday became the latest law enforcement or political figure to support creating an independent commission modeled after the U.S. Senate's 1970s Church Committee to investigate the FBI's practices and impose reforms on the storied law enforcement agency. He told Just the News that the bureau's problems start with the politicization of its ranks by DOJ. "What I see is that it's basically a wholesale takeover by the Department of Justice, which is filled with political appointees in every top position, and then by extension, right into the administration," Swecker said in a wide-ranging interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast. "You see DOJ people — and many of the top executive positions inside the FBI now — you see people that have made a career out of bouncing in and out of silk-stocking law firms between the Department of Justice and then these law firms. And I have to say they are incredibly liberal in their politics. And that has now sort of taken over the FBI, and they are inserting that ideology into their high-profile investigations." Swecker, a lawyer himself, said one of the many tell-tale signs that the FBI has lost its independence is the bureau's relationship with Big Tech firms, as exposed by recent internal file releases by Twitter and a lawsuit filed by the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri. The original partnerships, he said, were designed to legitimately counter foreign influence operations on U.S. social media but have since evolved into spying and censorship operations impacting Americans. "The FBI has an industry outreach program to help exchange information with industry, helping in the counterintelligence efforts of the FBI. This has gone well beyond that," he said. "This is nothing but domestic spying, and this is nothing but suppression of First Amendment rights and ideas." He said the bureau's role in pressuring Twitter and other social media and search sites to censor Americans "needs to be the first line of inquiry" in a new Congress. A growing number of prominent figures — including House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, incoming House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and retired FBI intelligence chief Kevin Brock — have embraced the idea that Congress should create a blue-ribbon panel modeled after the 1970s Church Committee to probe where the FBI has gone astray and to craft meaningful reforms. Swecker said he believes that is a good approach, noting that while he remains friends with Christopher Wray, the current FBI director has allowed his agency to lose significant public trust. "The Church Committee was a full inquiry into what were perceived to be some very serious abuses by the FBI in the domestic surveillance area, in terms of watching U.S. citizens doing things involving U.S. citizens that were considered to be abuses of their power," he said. "And I think we've come full circle here." Swecker said the FBI's involvement in labeling school parents "domestic terrorists," and its "bare-knuckles" pursuit of Donald Trump contrasted with its "kid gloves cases" against Hillary Clinton, Andrew McCabe and Hunter Biden have not only shaken public trust but also the internal confidence of the FBI. "I'm telling you the retired agent community and many agents inside the FBI on active duty are saying this needs to be looked at," he said. "I'm not big fan of congressional inquiries, but they need to shine some light on this." Swecker has some experience in independent inquiries: he chaired the independent commission that investigated the culture at the U.S. Army Fort Hood that led to the murder of a female soldier. Swecker, who retired as the assistant director for criminal investigations after 24 years inside the FBI, said the bureau's problems have been long in the making, beginning near the end of Director Robert Mueller's term and accelerating under his successors, James Comey and Christopher Wray. "I think there's a cultural shift that started late in Mueller's term and then we got into sort of full stride in Comey's term, and is now being sort of perpetuated under Chris Way's term, and that is that DOJ has basically taken over the FBI," he said. "They were supposed to have some independence despite being a Bureau under the Department of Justice." Related: Chris Swecker: 2018-03-17 Former FBI Deputy Director: 'I think you're going to see some pure TNT come out in this IG report' Chris Swecker: 2018-02-05 Head of Charlotte FBI Verbally Drop Kicks James Comey for Ruining Bureau (VIDEO) Chris Swecker: 2005-09-09 Massive international sting nets 660; goal is to wipe out MS-13 |
Link |