Title :
link :
http://ift.tt/2t3211e
.BLOGSPOT. COM.
For Sun. Oct.29, 2017
~All Gave Some~Some Gave
All~God Bless America
Hey CNN, You Should Probably Pull This Post About The Trump Dossier
|
CNN prides itself apparently in being a facts first organization. There’s that idiotic apple ad they’ve been running. This is what CNN’s Chris Cillizza wrote on October 19, which pretty much slams President Trump for suggesting that the FBI, the Democrats, and Russia might be conspirators with these files. It was in reaction to a tweet in which the president said, “Workers of firm involved with the discredited and Fake Dossier take the 5th. Who paid for it, Russia, the FBI or the Dems (or all)?”
Workers of firm involved with the discredited and Fake Dossier take the 5th. Who paid for it, Russia, the FBI or the Dems (or all)?
7:56 AM - Oct 19, 2017
He is suggesting that a dossier prepared by a former member of British intelligence has not only been totally discredited (it hasn't -- more on that in a minute) but that it might have been funded by some combination of Russia, the Democratic Party and, wait for it, the FBI!
Let's start with the facts.
At issue is a dossier prepared by Christopher Steele, a former British spy, which details explosive allegations about potential ties between Trump's campaign and Russia. The dossier's more salacious elements regarding Trump have drawn most of the attention -- and remain totally unproven. But it appears as though US intelligence officials do take some chunk of what Steele found quite seriously.
[…]
The bigger issue -- at least to me -- is that Trump is suggesting that the dossier itself was funded by some combination of a foreign power, the opposition political party and a federal law enforcement agency.
It's easy to roll your eyes at the very suggestion and dismiss that idea as just Trump being Trump. "You guys always take him literally," Trump's supporters will say. "You shouldn't!"
OK. But here's the thing: President Trump is, um, the President. Which means he is held to the same standard every past president is held to. And by that standard, this tweet is crazy.
[…]
The point here is that it is deeply irresponsible for a president of the United States to even flirt with this sort of conspiracy talk. You can love Donald Trump and still believe that the idea that the Russians, the Democrats and the FBI co-funded a dossier designed to discredit Trump's 2016 campaign is totally bonkers.
He is suggesting that a dossier prepared by a former member of British intelligence has not only been totally discredited (it hasn't -- more on that in a minute) but that it might have been funded by some combination of Russia, the Democratic Party and, wait for it, the FBI!
Let's start with the facts.
At issue is a dossier prepared by Christopher Steele, a former British spy, which details explosive allegations about potential ties between Trump's campaign and Russia. The dossier's more salacious elements regarding Trump have drawn most of the attention -- and remain totally unproven. But it appears as though US intelligence officials do take some chunk of what Steele found quite seriously.
[…]
The bigger issue -- at least to me -- is that Trump is suggesting that the dossier itself was funded by some combination of a foreign power, the opposition political party and a federal law enforcement agency.
It's easy to roll your eyes at the very suggestion and dismiss that idea as just Trump being Trump. "You guys always take him literally," Trump's supporters will say. "You shouldn't!"
OK. But here's the thing: President Trump is, um, the President. Which means he is held to the same standard every past president is held to. And by that standard, this tweet is crazy.
[…]
The point here is that it is deeply irresponsible for a president of the United States to even flirt with this sort of conspiracy talk. You can love Donald Trump and still believe that the idea that the Russians, the Democrats and the FBI co-funded a dossier designed to discredit Trump's 2016 campaign is totally bonkers.
Flash-forward to October 24, that unverified Trump dossier was a Democratic-funded operation. Marc Elias, a lawyer with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, retained Fusion GPS who then paid former MI6 operative Christopher Steele to gather information on Donald Trump. This dossier serves as one of the reasons why we have a special counsel investigating possible collusion between the Trump team and the Russians. The Washington Post had the scoop—and they noted that this was solely a Democratic-funded event. It’s true that this effort started out as an opposition research event by an anti-Trump Republican, but the Democrats only paid Steele:
Some of the pushback on the left has focused on the fact that a still-unidentified Republican client retained Fusion GPS to do research on Trump before the Clinton campaign and the DNC did. Thus, they argue, it's wrong to say the dossier was just funded by Democrats.
But The Post is reporting that the dossier's author, Steele, wasn't brought into the mix until after Democrats retained Fusion GPS. So while both sides paid Fusion GPS, Steele was only funded by Democrats.
Some of the pushback on the left has focused on the fact that a still-unidentified Republican client retained Fusion GPS to do research on Trump before the Clinton campaign and the DNC did. Thus, they argue, it's wrong to say the dossier was just funded by Democrats.
But The Post is reporting that the dossier's author, Steele, wasn't brought into the mix until after Democrats retained Fusion GPS. So while both sides paid Fusion GPS, Steele was only funded by Democrats.
And here’s the rest:
The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous dossier containing allegations about President Trump’s connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin, people familiar with the matter said.
Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.
After that, Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, according to those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the company in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Before that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by an unknown Republican client during the GOP primary. The Clinton campaign and the DNC, through the law firm, continued to fuFusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.
The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous dossier containing allegations about President Trump’s connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin, people familiar with the matter said.
Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.
After that, Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, according to those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the company in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Before that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by an unknown Republican client during the GOP primary. The Clinton campaign and the DNC, through the law firm, continued to fuFusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.
Oh, and about the FBI:
After the election, the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence about Trump and Russia, but the bureau pulled out of the arrangement after Steele was publicly identified in news reports.
After the election, the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence about Trump and Russia, but the bureau pulled out of the arrangement after Steele was publicly identified in news reports.
So, yeah, it’s Trump. It’s rough around the edges. Some of it is still unverified, like the dossier, and there is no evidence that this was a conspiracy between Democrats, Russia, and the FBI. It does pave the way for more questions about this whole Russia collusion story in general, which I have maintained was a bunch of bunk. Overall—it looks like the essence of what Trump suggested wasn’t insane.
Questions for Comey: Did he know? If not, why didn't he ask? Did FBI rely on a Democrat-funded oppo document to get warrants on Trump folk? https://twitter.com/ChanceBGardener/status/922993095343575040 …
Fallon: “My bosses commissioned a doc that might have been manipulated by Russians. Wish I’d helped”. And folk say Trump is unhinged. https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/922990478387183616 …
10:39 PM - Oct 24, 2017
Actually, no. GOP supposedly funded stateside research into Trump (tho still don't know that). Ds paid for the Russian dossier. https://twitter.com/CjMonde1/status/923251388020412416 …
JFK Files Released: Former CIA Director on the Most Likely Oswald-Russia Theory
Former CIA Director James Woolsey revealed today the theory he deems most likely when it comes to the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
Woolsey sat down with Dana Perino following the highly-anticipated release of long-secret documents detailing the investigation.
He explained that it seems most likely that assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was at first recruited by the Soviet KGB to kill Kennedy.
Woolsey said many Eastern-bloc intelligence officials believed Russian leader Nikita Khrushchev became furious at Kennedy for making him "look bad" during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and ordered the murder.
Woolsey, CIA director from 1993-95, cited a trip to Mexico by Oswald where he is suspected to have met with a KGB operative in the months before the assassination.
He explained that it appears Khrushchev "got cold feet" and called off the operation, fearing a war with the U.S. He said "everyone did call it off, except Oswald" who had become a devoted Marxist-Leninist.
"This is one theory. It's one that I tend toward but I'm still willing to listen to other possibilities," said Woolsey, adding "we'll have to wait and see" what the full range of documents reveal.
JFK Files are being carefully released. In the end there will be great transparency. It is my hope to get just about everything to public!
President Trump on Thursday released the trove of records, however, the collection was incomplete, with some records being held back. Trump cited “potentially irreversible harm” to national security if he were to allow all records to come out now. He placed the remaining files under a six-month review, but released 2,891 others, racing to honor a deadline mandating their release.
The release is providing fresh fodder for those who have long questioned whether Oswald acted alone.
'We didn't ask questions': Fusion GPS link to Dems murky by design
Podesta, Wasserman Schultz deny knowledge of dossier funding
Clinton campaign chairman and the former DNC chairwoman told Congress they were unaware of payments to Fusion GPS for anti-Trump dossier.
The confusion surrounding who pulled the strings on the Democrat-funded research resulting in the controversial Trump dossier has only emboldened Republicans looking to cut through the fog, amid signs the connections between the project and its overseers were murky by design.
The head of the Democratic Party suggested as much during a forum at the University of Chicago earlier this week.
While defending the Fusion GPS dossier as standard opposition research, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez maintained he only learned about the dossier “a few days ago” – before explaining how his predecessors at the DNC could have set up such a project.
“You hire a lawyer – and we hire lawyers all the time who hire third-party vendors to do their work – and so we knew that we were paying for opposition research at the DNC, but we didn’t ask questions about who they’re hiring in the context of doing their research,” Perez told The Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty, when asked to explained how he could have been in the dark.
Perez, who was not at the DNC at the time, went on to defend the party’s efforts, saying “we had very strong reason to believe that Donald Trump and the Donald Trump campaign and the Russians were potentially conspiring to affect the election.”
The confusion surrounding who pulled the strings on the Democrat-funded research resulting in the controversial Trump dossier has only emboldened Republicans looking to cut through the fog, amid signs the connections between the project and its overseers were murky by design.
The head of the Democratic Party suggested as much during a forum at the University of Chicago earlier this week.
While defending the Fusion GPS dossier as standard opposition research, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez maintained he only learned about the dossier “a few days ago” – before explaining how his predecessors at the DNC could have set up such a project.
“You hire a lawyer – and we hire lawyers all the time who hire third-party vendors to do their work – and so we knew that we were paying for opposition research at the DNC, but we didn’t ask questions about who they’re hiring in the context of doing their research,” Perez told The Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty, when asked to explained how he could have been in the dark.
Perez, who was not at the DNC at the time, went on to defend the party’s efforts, saying “we had very strong reason to believe that Donald Trump and the Donald Trump campaign and the Russians were potentially conspiring to affect the election.”
DNC Chairman Tom Perez was not in charge when the Trump dossier was commissioned, but is defending it as standard opposition research. (AP)The controversial dossier contained unverified and lurid allegations about dirt the Russians had on then-candidate Donald Trump and his campaign’s possible connections to Moscow.
The Washington Post reported this earlier week — and Fox News confirmed — that the political consulting firm Fusion GPS was retained last year by Marc E. Elias, an attorney representing the DNC and the Clinton campaign. The firm then hired former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to write the now-infamous dossier.
According to the report, the Clinton campaign and DNC paid more than $9 million to Elias’ firm Perkins Coie that, in turn, retained the political consultants who commissioned the research. Before that, the research was backed by an unknown Republican client.
But it’s unclear how much of that $9 million went toward the dossier. And it’s unclear who exactly at the Clinton campaign and DNC might have known how it was being spent.
Issa: American people deserve clarity on Russia uranium dealPerez and then-DNC leader Debbie Wasserman Schultz have denied knowledge. So have Hillary Clinton's former campaign chairman John Podesta and spokesman Brian Fallon. And while Clinton herself has not spoken publicly on the matter, sources have sought to distance her from the dossier in news reports.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., told Fox News’ “Outnumbered Overtime” that the careful distance between the research and the political entities that helped fund it only underscores the need to “connect the dots.”
“There were so many in-between groups used to sort of shield direct control that it’s very clear that people on the one end, Russia, and on the other end, the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign – they obviously wanted to create the inability to connect the dots. And when somebody goes through so many efforts through so many surrogates to keep that from happening, you have a special reason to want to connect the dots,” he said Thursday.
To what extent Russia might have been involved is unclear.
But more details could emerge soon, as Fusion GPS fights in court to keep its bank records on lockdown.
Wall Street Journal editorial board member Kimberley Strassel wrote that the disclosure of the DNC-Clinton connection suggests “there's something Fusion cares about keeping secret even more” in those records.
“If the House wins, don't be surprised if those records include money connected to Russians. In the past Fusion has worked with Russians, including lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who happened to show up last year in Donald Trump Jr.'s office,” Strassel wrote.
President Trump has reveled in the recent revelations – including renewed scrutiny of a 2010 Obama-era uranium deal involving a Russian firm – using them to fuel his claims that the investigations into Russian collusion with his campaign are baseless.
“It is now commonly agreed, after many months of COSTLY looking, that there was NO collusion between Russia and Trump. Was collusion with HC!” Trump tweeted Friday.
It is now commonly agreed, after many months of COSTLY looking, that there was NO collusion between Russia and Trump. Was collusion with HC!
Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said on “Fox & Friends” that she doesn’t know which GOP candidate started backing Fusion but said Steele only got involved after the Democrats stepped in.
“Democrats have not been transparent or honest about how this started,” she said Friday.
In another twist, CNN reported that former Clinton campaign chairman Podesta privately denied any knowledge of the payment arrangement in recent interviews with congressional investigators. According to the report, sitting next to Podesta during that September interview was his attorney Marc Elias – who retained Fusion.
It’s Normal America vs. The Swamp
By Angela Box
America’s current political cluster can no longer be categorized as conservative vs. liberal. No: it’s Normal America versus The Swamp.
The drip drip drip of revelations continue to emerge about possible and actual collusion between Russia’s Uranium One deal and Hillary Clinton, the Obama administration, Robert Mueller, James Comey, Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch. These are details that in a long-ago America would’ve already resulted in indictments for one or more parties.
Unfortunately, we no longer live in those times.
In our current Newspeak, Memory Hole, post-truth, leftist status quo morass, the media has surrendered its role as the watchdog of the Establishment. Now, they are here to protect the Establishment. (As long as the Establishment is a liberal or a milquetoast, play-the-game Republican, naturally.)
Hillary et al are accused of ponying up 20 percent of America’s uranium (which is used to make nuclear weapons) and selling access to the Obama administration in exchange for $145 million to the Clinton Foundation and exorbitant speaking fees to an impeached former president who has been accused of being a sexual predator. This should be emblazoned on every paper and in news outlet in the country.
We aren’t even referring to Hillary’s 33,000 classified emails she destroyed or the private server she installed in her home—this Uranium One deal (detailed in Peter Schweitzer’s book “Clinton Cash”) is a whole other animal.
However, because the cultural Left (and The Swamp in general) control 95 percent of all media, it’s like the old adage of that tree in the forest with nobody around to hear it fall.
Part of me believes eventually the slow but unyielding trickle of damning information will cause even the most hardened liberals to sit up and take notice. After all, they are also Americans.
But a bigger part of me believes these people are already lost. No longer Americans, they are instead — first and foremost — progressive leftists. The goals of leftism and statism are all that matters. Therefore, whoever embraces and promotes those ideals will always get a pass.
The dirty little secret: the endgame of the Left is entirely anti-American and anathema to the ideals upon which our country was founded.
The laughable notion that somehow Donald Trump was in deep collusion with Vladimir Putin to rig the 2016 election has been exploded as a hoax and a detestable lie. Robert Mueller’s investigation now looks like it covering up the cover-up of what Democrats are doing. This includes his own involvement in knowledge of Uranium One when he was FBI director, in addition to a multitude of other issues.
There is a former FBI employee who is chomping at the bit to testify about the bribery and the pay-to-play that Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration engaged in with Russia. So far, his testimony is being prevented by a previous non disclosure agreement.
But, as they say: Tick-Tock.
The Trump Justice Department have removed the whistleblower’s NDA, and hopefully he will be testifying soon. That is, unless he mysteriously “suicides” himself—as so many people connected to the Clintons seem to do.
Trump is the guy at the The Swamp Family Reunion who strides in and overturns all the picnic tables filled with food.
The same people who don’t understand how Trump got elected and do not grasp that normal Americans are 100 percent fed up with the cultural and political Gomorrah we are currently experiencing will also never willingly expose one of their own.
Of course, The Swamp is not without its duped Useful Idiots. During a feted speech last week, George W. Bush made several veiled swipes at President Trump–therefore solidifying his role in The Establishment.
The same media which had called Bush a war criminal, celebrated plays calling for his assassination, and continually mocked his intelligence and honor suddenly applauded our former President for ripping Trump a new one.
The next day, Barack Obama also publicly slammed President Trump — while, like Bush, never actually saying his name.
They are all in one big club—and that club’s number one item in its charter is to protect its power, money, and influence by any means necessary. The truth be damned!
So, going forward, when the Vast, Right-Wing Conspiracy — as Hillary likes to refer to People Telling the Truth — really ramps up, just remember: The Swamp is here to protect their own.
Like Revolutionary times, it will take the committed 30-40% of the country to stand up and demand equal justice under the law.
Donald Trump did not collude with Russia. Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration did. The truth, no matter how ugly, will always surface. And when it does, this scandal (and the people it ensnares) will make Soviet spy Alger Hiss’s actions look like the musings of a misunderstood choir boy.
Pretty soon, not even the hacks of the godless alt-left media will be able to ignore the avalanche. ‘
I can’t wait.
Orchestrating The Greatest Cover-Up Of All Time
Genuine scholars know that the past informs the future, which is why history is one of the most important subjects taught in school and is so important to our educational system. Without a clear understanding of the past, society moves forward in time like a ship moving through the water without a rudder, aimlessly weaving all about uncontrollably and ending up on the rocks and reefs, repeating the same disastrous mistakes over and over. Learning from the past helps keep society from repeating our greatest mistakes.
As a result of the recent failed elections by Democrats and with that the setback of the Globalism agenda, it seems that now the progressive Democrats realize they have been found out and are looking to find a new wrapper for the same old nasty product, which had resulted in a train wreck of human horror and tragedy related to their own past. They are now desperate to firewall themselves from their own past, since that ugly past clearly affects how their new narratives are received.
As seen in the recent violence on and off campuses across America, progressive Democrats are vexed and haunted by their own very embarrassing and horrific past. Democrats were the political party of slavers in America and the supporters of segregation (Jim Crow) up until recent history, and that is just an ugly fact of their foundation. Democrats fought in the Civil War to preserve Democrat rights to own other human beings!
Are these the kind of people we want running America today? I don’t think so, and they are clearly aware of how America now views their political party, so it’s time for a makeover, for putting the wolf into sheep’s clothing.
Progressive Democrats realize that their political party needs to somehow bury its past forever in an attempt to hide a scandalous body of evidence related to the foundational beliefs of the Democrat Party. Hence they have quietly undertaken a complete rewriting and revision of history in the United States.
And part of that makeover is the destruction of all artifacts that may illuminate any of their past activities, including the statuary of all historic Democratic slave owners, like Robert E. Lee. Of course then we have the modern-day Democrat, Robert Byrd.
“Robert C. Byrd, a Democrat, was a recruiter for the Klan while in his 20s and 30s, rising to the title of Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops of his local chapter. After leaving the group, Byrd spoke in favor of the Klan during his early political career. Though he claimed to have left the organization in 1943, Byrd wrote a letter in 1946 to the group’s Imperial Wizard stating, ‘The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia.’ Byrd attempted to explain or defend his former membership in the Klan in his 1958 U.S. Senate campaign when he was 41 years old. Byrd, a Democrat, eventually became his party leader in the Senate”
Of course covering up truth is the Democrats’ modus operandi, as we saw with Hillary Clinton, who tried to conceal some of her own underhanded and illegal activities by crushing hard drives and other devices with a hammer and then allegedly lying to Congress. This is how they do business: lies, deceptions and cover-ups.
In the meantime, on liberal college campuses across America, many progressive-democratic history professors are quietly rewriting the history books and courses to reflect a more lovable Democratic party.
Now, as a part of a well-orchestrated deception of many Americans, and using many media outlets (CNN is just a shill for these new fascists) controlled by progressives, Democrats are engaging their thugs to enforce their will upon the people as did Hitler prior to the outbreak of World War II. America may now be witnessing its own destruction from within. And when peer pressure and psychology fail, without any hesitation they resort to unbridled violence against anyone who opposes their views. So who are the real fascists?
Barack Obama may have been the beginning of the end for the America that most Americans love.
Using Saul Alinsky tactics to attack the best traditions and values in America, which are what made her great, these subversive leftists, led most recently by Obama (and still allegedly led by him), launched the initial volley against America to dilute traditional values and traditions, using a massive infiltration of foreigners who have diametrically different values and belief systems from the vast majority of Americans.
Obama imported Muslims in massive numbers over a very short period of time, flooding many cities with fundamentalist Islamists, who quickly organize into enclaves without any intention of assimilating. Anyone who has watched what that has done in Europe knows without any doubt that the Muslim influx into Europe has decimated societies there. Violence, rape and terrorism are now the daily norms there as Muslims take hold of those governments And we are now beginning to see instances of that same ugly evolution here in America.
But there is a method to the madness: The Muslims perform an importantly critical tactical distraction from progressive Democrats and their own fascist thugs, the antifa, which seem to have aggregated many of the America-haters into their own ranks, including those from the likes of Occupy. And they are well organized, even allegedly having their own antifa operations manual.
Like the desperate Germans of the 1930s who fell for the political elixir of Adolf Hitler, struggling Americans sucked up the Obama lies and allowed him to fundamentally transform America. This decimating transformation was begun by the wholesale dilution and disparagement of time-honored American values and traditions, which may now be at risk of being lost forever.
By his actions, we see that President Trump is trying to undo that damage while concurrently working to fulfill his campaign promises, all the while having to fend off leftist attacks coming from Democrats and their surrogates.
American patriots must be on guard at all times in these troubled times. We must support the leaders who walk the talk, and forgo supporting anyone who merely poses and gives lip-service. And we must do this from the ground up, starting with local city and county governments, which are also being infiltrated by sneaky left-wing politicians who pose as conservatives. Do your own due diligence and speak out against anyone you find to be carrying water for the leftist-progressive Democrats.
Gowdy Gives Comey The Bad News, It’s Finally Happening
By Ben Baker
The House Oversight & Government Reform Committee has opened an investigation that could spell more trouble for Former FBI Director James Comey.
According to The Washington Examiner, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), is heading the investigation and has decided to sit with Comey for a private interview regarding the DOJ’s decision about the Hillary Clinton private email scandal. Gowdy wants to grill Comey personally as to why he seemingly planned to exonerate Hillary Clinton before the investigation was finalized.
Gowdy maintains that the investigation will remain bipartisan, but questions need to be answered. Specifically regarding, “the decision to charge or not charge [Clinton] was made before all the witnesses were interviewed.”
According to Fox News, the FBI released evidence that former-FBI Director James Comey had seemingly planned to exonerate Clinton before the investigation was over. Months before the public announcement that Clinton would not face criminal charges, and before all witnesses were questioned, Comey drafted a letter of Clinton’s exoneration.
Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray expressing their concerns, “It appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton. That was long before FBI agents finished their work.”
They say that such a conclusion should not have been made until all the facts were gathered and that jumping to such a conclusion may have altered the results, stating, “The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.”
While some on the Left may criticize the investigation as a partisan distraction, Rep. Gowdy maintains that the questions the investigation seeks to answer will benefit both Republicans and Democrats, “Of the six things we listed with specificity, three of them are things Democrats gave a big damn about last fall. So, the question is, do they still? And three of them are things that Republicans cared about a lot last year, and the question is, do they still?”
He continued by clarifying that investigators plan to go where the evidence takes them, “Gather documents, gather access to witnesses, do your due diligence, and your investigation and see where it takes you.”
Interestingly, Rep. Gowdy says the investigation wouldn’t change whether Clinton was found guilty of criminal activity, “No, not at all, any more than James Comey can unsend a letter that he sent in October.”
But the investigation would provide a necessary review for the questionable decisions made during the investigation, “All of them are things that have caused people to lose confidence in the Department of Justice, on one side or the other, and there may be an eminently plausible explanation,” Mr. Gowdy said. “Comey may have a really good explanation for why he felt like he had to send a letter in October and there was no other means of notifying Congress, but we need to hear it.”
Mr. Gowdy says Comey will not face a public hearing, but instead a private interview, which should be much faster, “I’m not a hearing guy. I’m a five hours guy, not a five minutes guy, so, not a hearing.”
Whether or not this investigation will have a domino effect on the initial determination that Clinton was innocent of any criminal wrongdoing is debatable. It could, however, prove disastrous for Comey if he planned to exonerate her before all the facts were in.
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN Published on DickMorris.com
Oomgalagala at its level best...
Hillary Clinton has said nothing whatsoever about the shocking revelation that it was her campaign that secretly commissioned and paid for a phony dossier compiled by a former British spy for the sole purpose of humiliating and embarrassing Donald Trump and, ultimately destroying his candidacy.
Her campaign funneled the payments to a law firm, where the specifics of the work being done were carefully kept from public view. The firm's FEC disclosure doesn't mention the payments for the ex-spook's dossier.
She's too busy selling books to pay attention to the annoying story about how she paid for the dirt but pretended not to know a thing about it.
Her campaign funneled the payments to a law firm, where the specifics of the work being done were carefully kept from public view. The firm's FEC disclosure doesn't mention the payments for the ex-spook's dossier.
She's too busy selling books to pay attention to the annoying story about how she paid for the dirt but pretended not to know a thing about it.
She hasn't denied that her campaign orchestrated the dossier.
But two of her "associates" told the New York Times -- anonymously, of course -- that she knew nothing about the dossier until it was published by BuzzFeed.
That's impossible to believe for a number of reasons.
First, this is how Hillary Clinton operates. She hires private eyes to dig up dirt about anyone who gets in her way and she pays them through law firms so they are unknown and kept quiet.
This is her signature play.
Does she really expect us to believe that her lawyer, Marc Elias, would take it upon himself to unilaterally hire the smear organization Fusion GPS and then simply approve large payments to a foreign national ex-intelligence agent to dig up anti-Trump? Without telling Hillary or her campaign chiefs? This was a risky thing to do and way beyond the scope of a hired election law specialist.
No way.
The money had to come to the law firm from the campaign. No doubt the invoices from Perkins Coie to the Clinton campaign would be illuminating. Who were they sent to and what work was described?
No lawyer has the authority to take on this kind of a project. Someone in the Clinton campaign had to approve the payment to Elias' law firm, Perkins Coie. We don't know exactly how much Steele was paid, but it was substantial.
Second, the dossier was passed all over Washington for months before Election Day. In the campaign by Fusion GPS to make the material public and hurt Trump, the dossier went to members of Congress and to mainstream journalists. There was a buzz about it. And Hillary loves gossip -- especially about her opponents. She and/or her "associates" had to know. She would have heard about it and demanded a copy.
But she didn't have to do it, because her campaign was given the Steele memos as they were written. She must have seen them. They certainly weren't simply filed in a drawer.
As we wrote about in Rogue Spooks: The Intelligence War On Donald Trump, Hillary began to focus on Trump and Russia at the time that the reports began to flow from the ex-spook to his paymaster -- the Clinton campaign. She mirrored some of the charges in her public criticism about Trump.
It was Hillary who orchestrated the whole thing,
No one can possibly believe otherwise.
She's up to her old tricks. And her financing of the dossier certainly eliminates any consideration that it was an unbiased compilation of facts.
She got what she paid for -- a smear job. She and her lawyers have a lot to explain.
That's impossible to believe for a number of reasons.
First, this is how Hillary Clinton operates. She hires private eyes to dig up dirt about anyone who gets in her way and she pays them through law firms so they are unknown and kept quiet.
This is her signature play.
Does she really expect us to believe that her lawyer, Marc Elias, would take it upon himself to unilaterally hire the smear organization Fusion GPS and then simply approve large payments to a foreign national ex-intelligence agent to dig up anti-Trump? Without telling Hillary or her campaign chiefs? This was a risky thing to do and way beyond the scope of a hired election law specialist.
No way.
The money had to come to the law firm from the campaign. No doubt the invoices from Perkins Coie to the Clinton campaign would be illuminating. Who were they sent to and what work was described?
No lawyer has the authority to take on this kind of a project. Someone in the Clinton campaign had to approve the payment to Elias' law firm, Perkins Coie. We don't know exactly how much Steele was paid, but it was substantial.
Second, the dossier was passed all over Washington for months before Election Day. In the campaign by Fusion GPS to make the material public and hurt Trump, the dossier went to members of Congress and to mainstream journalists. There was a buzz about it. And Hillary loves gossip -- especially about her opponents. She and/or her "associates" had to know. She would have heard about it and demanded a copy.
But she didn't have to do it, because her campaign was given the Steele memos as they were written. She must have seen them. They certainly weren't simply filed in a drawer.
As we wrote about in Rogue Spooks: The Intelligence War On Donald Trump, Hillary began to focus on Trump and Russia at the time that the reports began to flow from the ex-spook to his paymaster -- the Clinton campaign. She mirrored some of the charges in her public criticism about Trump.
It was Hillary who orchestrated the whole thing,
No one can possibly believe otherwise.
She's up to her old tricks. And her financing of the dossier certainly eliminates any consideration that it was an unbiased compilation of facts.
She got what she paid for -- a smear job. She and her lawyers have a lot to explain.
A little more Hillary bashing follows - if you can stand it…
Concern Troll: No, Hillary Clinton, The GOP Is Not 'Imploding'
Matt Vespa
If there’s one thing that Hillary Clinton should stay away from, it’s political forecasts. She’s a two-time loser. Period. Winning in New York is not a political accomplishment, especially against a lightweight like former Rep. Rick Lazio. I say this because the former first lady, who will never be president of the United States, said that the Republican Party is “imploding,” and that she’s very, very worried about it (via The Hill):
ABC News Politics ✔@ABCPolitics
.@HillaryClinton: "The Republican Party is imploding." http://abcn.ws/2i5ehuk
4:56 PM - Oct 25, 2017
You know, we've seen in the last week, we've seen Bob Corker, we've seen Jeff Flake ... there are a lot of other people in the Republican Party who feel exactly the same way," Clinton said Wednesday.
"And I think when they appear on TV, or they are interviewed, they need to be pressed," Clinton added.
Clinton says that the future of the Republican Party is one of her greatest worries now that she is off the campaign trail.
"I mean, there are a lot of things that I worry about, this is actually on my list, of what I worry about. The Republican Party is imploding," Clinton continued.
"It is becoming a far-right, captive party to ideological religious and commercial interests. It is at the mercy of its financial backers and a cabal of leaders who are doing things like shrinking the electorate, gerrymandering, and taking every step they can to maintain power for themselves and those who are like-minded."
Okay—let’s back up a bit. The Democrats don’t gerrymander (they do)? The Democrats don’t have big moneyed interests? The Democrats aren’t a far left party? A small, insufferable urban-based professional left wing elite doesn’t dominate Democratic politics? Only Republicans do this. We all know that's crap; Democrats probably have just as many if not more so-called big moneyed interests in their rolodex. And they're everything else as well. In fact, their far left lurch on cultural issues is exactly what's keeping them from a successful revival, but that's a story for another time. Yeah, I know the double standard, but it’s somewhat funny coming from a woman who was too stupid to campaign in Wisconsin and Michigan, too aloof to truly explain why she had a private email server that was not allowed under the State Department, and too snobby to even reach out to rural voters. Yeah, the GOP is imploding alright—they only control the White House, Congress, two-thirds of the governorships, and 69/99 state legislatures. They’re at the height of their political power, and they’re the dominant political force in the country. The Democrats are now a regional and urban-based party that is in no shape to be a governing force. They’ve lost 1,000 seats since 2009.
"And I think when they appear on TV, or they are interviewed, they need to be pressed," Clinton added.
Clinton says that the future of the Republican Party is one of her greatest worries now that she is off the campaign trail.
"I mean, there are a lot of things that I worry about, this is actually on my list, of what I worry about. The Republican Party is imploding," Clinton continued.
"It is becoming a far-right, captive party to ideological religious and commercial interests. It is at the mercy of its financial backers and a cabal of leaders who are doing things like shrinking the electorate, gerrymandering, and taking every step they can to maintain power for themselves and those who are like-minded."
Okay—let’s back up a bit. The Democrats don’t gerrymander (they do)? The Democrats don’t have big moneyed interests? The Democrats aren’t a far left party? A small, insufferable urban-based professional left wing elite doesn’t dominate Democratic politics? Only Republicans do this. We all know that's crap; Democrats probably have just as many if not more so-called big moneyed interests in their rolodex. And they're everything else as well. In fact, their far left lurch on cultural issues is exactly what's keeping them from a successful revival, but that's a story for another time. Yeah, I know the double standard, but it’s somewhat funny coming from a woman who was too stupid to campaign in Wisconsin and Michigan, too aloof to truly explain why she had a private email server that was not allowed under the State Department, and too snobby to even reach out to rural voters. Yeah, the GOP is imploding alright—they only control the White House, Congress, two-thirds of the governorships, and 69/99 state legislatures. They’re at the height of their political power, and they’re the dominant political force in the country. The Democrats are now a regional and urban-based party that is in no shape to be a governing force. They’ve lost 1,000 seats since 2009.
Citing the departures of Bob Corker (R-TN) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ), two senators who are quitting because of Trump or the state of the GOP, is hardly indicative that the party is imploding. Also, it’s a bit odd, given that Corker and Flake find Trump so awful that they’re probably going to support his massive tax reform package, which just adds to the notion that they’re a bunch of quitters. Hillary thinks the Republicans are splitting into factions. There’s really no evidence to suggest the party is heading for the 1968 crackup that engulfed the Democratic Party.
G’ day…Ciao…Helen and Moe Lauzier
Thus Article
That's an article
This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.
You are now reading the article with the link address https://capitalstories.blogspot.com/2017/10/httpift_28.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment