By Rick Wells
Dossier author Christopher Steele was, like the Russians indicted by Mueller, a foreigner engaged in political activity within the United States. He and his accomplices, Clinton, DNC…
The latest, made for TV, episode of the Mueller inquisition is an obvious political ploy intended to benefit those engaged in the attack on President Trump and our nation.
But beyond simply the efforts to create insulation from repercussions of their criminality and abuse, the indictments by Mueller and his pet weasel, Rod Rosenstein, offer support for the immediate indictment of prominent Democrats involved in the 2016 campaign and their tools, both inside and outside of government. That includes the untouchable Hillary Clinton.
Attorney Robert Barnes noted in an article on the Law and Crime website that “Mueller indicted foreign citizens for trying to influence the American public about an election because those citizens did not register as a foreign agent nor record their financial expenditures to the Federal Elections Commission.”
He then logically applies those same justifications for prosecution to others involved in the witch hunt against President Trump. He asks when Grand Inquisitor Mueller will indict Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS, Perkins Coie, the DNC and the Clinton Campaign.
Barnes points out that the Mueller indictment against 13 Russian “trolls” for their social media posts and political activities were based upon four key factors. They were all foreign citizens, they attempted to influence an election, they were not registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and had not reported the funding of their activities to the FEC.
He goes on to assert that if Steele is a criminal for his activities, then Fusion GPS is a co-conspirator with knowledge that Steele was a foreigner, whom they paid to influence an election and whom they knew had not reported the funding he received from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton Campaign to the FEC.
Likewise Perkins Coie is complicit as well, for the same reasons, with the added deception of disguising their financial receipts as legal expenses. The DNC is guilty too, for the same reasons but with the financial transaction that is lied about being a payment to Steele laundered through Perkins Coie. The Clinton campaign and Hillary Clinton are also in violation of the same laws as the DNC and for the same reasons.
Of course, Barnes knows better than to expect equal justice and an indictment of any of these DC swamp creatures, noting that Mueller chose his targets precisely because they are impossible to prosecute and because they support the Democrat “Russia interfered with our elections” narrative. Doing so also makes it appear as if he’s accomplished something, there really was some fire under all of their canned smoke and our millions of dollars to fund his political hit job were money well spent.
He points to the “novel” and weak positions underpinning the indictments. Mueller makes the presumption that one must register under the Foreign Agents Act in order to speak out about American politics and that a foreigner thus speaking must list their source and expenditure of funding to the Federal Election Commission. Speech police, grab your guns and duct tape.
He also questions the Mueller position that mistakes on visa applications constitute “fraud” being perpetrated against the State Department.
Barnes says, “All appear to borrow from the now-discredited ‘honest services’ theories Mueller’s team previously used in corporate and bribery cases, cases the Supreme Court overturned for their unconstitutional vagueness.” He contends there are legitimate concerns with the indictment violating the First Amendment and the due process protections of the Fifth Amendment.
But Mueller got the headlines and the spin opportunity he wanted and Democrats and their media colleagues can point to the indictments while falsely claiming to their ignorant supporters and MSM viewers that they were right all along. There won’t be any prosecutions of any Russians. No prosecutions were ever intended beyond the Trump administration.
Mueller just proved one thing beyond the shadow of a doubt, that his critics, who have decried his “investigation” as a political stunt, have been right all along.
by AWR HAWKINS 20 Feb 2018
On February 19 the New York Times suggested banks can go around Congress on gun control by refusing finances to stores and companies that deal in “assault weapons.”
A similar approach, Operation Choke Point, was used by the Department of Justice during Barack Obama’s second term in office and has been targeted for closure under the Trump administration.
On August 17, 2017, Politico quoted House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlette describing Operation Choke Point as “a misguided initiative.” Goodlette observed, “Law abiding businesses should not be targeted simply for operating in an industry that a particular administration might disfavor.”
But NYT says banks and credit card companies could continue such policies by simply banding together against certain aspects of the firearms industry.
NYT reports: “PayPal, Square, Stripe and Apple Pay announced years ago that they would not allow their services to be used for the sale of firearms.”
They floated this possibility:
Visa, which published a 71-page paper in 2016 espousing its “corporate responsibility,” could easily change its terms of service to say that it won’t do business with retailers that sell assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and bump stocks, which make semiautomatic rifles fire faster. (Even the National Rifle Association has said it would support tighter restrictions on bump stocks.)
They continued, “If Mastercard were to do the same, assault weapons would be eliminated from virtually every firearms store in America because otherwise the sellers would be cut off from the credit card system.”
The message is clear–if Senators and House Members stand for the Second Amendment instead of gun control, then circumvent those Senators and House Members via a monolithic approach to banking that omits any financial opportunity related to “assault weapons.”
Questions swirling around teen activist as odd videos surface
David Hogg Can’t Remember His Lines When Interviewed for Florida school shooting
FEBRUARY 20, 2018
Multiple videos featuring David Hogg, a survivor of the mass shooting in Parkland, Fla., have surfaced amidst his rise to prominence as an anti-gun activist that have raised questions, including a television news report in California last year.
CBS Los Angeles featured Hogg as the eyewitness and videographer of a testy encounter between Hogg, a veteran Redondo Beach, Calif., lifeguard and a surfer, who was reportedly Hogg’s friend, in August of 2017.
Hogg claimed the lifeguard accosted his surfer friend over the issue of resting a sandy bodyboard on a beach trash can.
Interestingly, Hogg has reconnected with CBS for an appearance on CBS This Morning as the mainstream media unabashedly features high school students as figureheads for a new anti-gun push.
A CBS employee posted a photo of Hogg with fellow teen activists and CBS reporter Gisela Perez, which was later taken down after Lucian Wintrich of The Gateway Pundit reported on the photo shoot and how strange it seemed that all parties looked so cheerful and enthusiastic in the wake of such a tragedy.
“These photos were taken over the weekend on the set of an interview taped for broadcast Monday morning,” Wintrich wrote. “This means the students were only three or four days out from surviving a massacre in their school. In just a few days they have become celebrated heroes of the anti-Trump resistance and are acting and being feted like rock stars.”
Additionally, another video has surfaced that appears to show Hogg being walked through rehearsed lines in an interview after the shooting.
David Hogg Can’t Remember His Lines When Interviewed for Florida school shooting
Some have wondered if Hogg and fellow activist Emma Gonzalez were being coached through this strange interview on CNN in which both teens demanded the abolition of the National Rifle Association:
Hogg and company will be holding a town hall this week, which will be broadcast by CNN and moderated by Jake Tapper.
Hogg has become an overnight celebrity, appearing on international media outlets and television shows, vehemently calling for strict gun control, regularly slamming President Trump, and defending the FBI – of which his father is a retired agent, which many have found to be a peculiar coincidence as the FBI has come under fire for not preventing the Parkland massacre despite being warned about suspected killer Nikolas Cruz repeatedly beforehand.
“The retired FBI dad is very significant,” asserts former Navy SEAL and commentator, Matt Bracken. “The FBI has been hiring SJW’s for years. It’s not just the 7th Floor of FBI HQ. It’s endemic.”
Published on Feb 19, 2018
Published on Feb 20, 2018
By Paul Bridge
Even before Donald Trump set foot in the White House, loveless liberals were busy pushing the narrative that Russia meddled in the elections. But could this claim be – just maybe – a dastardly ploy to hide some unsavory truths?
Pass the popcorn, the theater of the political absurd known as ‘Russiagate’ continues without so much as an intermission. And with 13 Russian nationals now being indicted without rhyme or reason, perhaps it’s time to pause and reflect on the question the mainstream media conspicuously ignores: was the real meddlesome actor in the 2016 presidential election not the perennial bogeyman known as ‘Putin’s Russia’, but the Democratic Party itself?
Indeed, some highly questionable moves on the part of the Democrats before, during and after the elections go far in exonerating the Russian fall guy from any and all charges. You be the judge.
The FISA fail
In a memo declassified by the White House and released to great fanfare by the House Intelligence Committee on February 2, it was alleged that on October 21, 2016, the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ) – armed with the notorious Trump dossier – secured a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to conduct surveillance on Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser.
But something looks rotten in Denmark. As it turned out, the explosive Trump dossier, compiled by former MI6 spy Christopher Steele, was bought and paid for by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Clinton campaign. In other words, this represents – at the very least – a very big conflict of interest.
At the same time, in the their application for the FISA warrant, the FBI and DOJ “cited extensively” a Yahoo News article by one Michael Isikoff, which discusses Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow.
As it turned out, however, there were serious problems with that article. As the Nunes memo states, Isikoff’s article “does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself…”
Indeed, Steele admitted that he met with Yahoo News “at the direction of Fusion GPS,” the firm that organized the dossier, in September 2016. Meanwhile, the mainstream media has largely played down these glaring violations of FISA protocol, as it continues to heap scorn on Russia.
“Putin’s KGB-inspired maneuvering of the United States via Donald Trump and the Republican Congress has all the earmarks of a carefully planned, professionally executed war game in which Trump, congressional Republicans and some in right wing media are his comrades,”wrote Cheri Jacobus in USA Today.
The specter of the Russian bogeyman is truly the gift that keeps giving.
Clinton’s email scandal
In March 2015, the news broke that Hillary Clinton, while serving as secretary of state, had used her home computer while handling classified government documents. An assortment of experts and politicians accused Clinton of violating State Department protocol.
On July 5, 2016, following an investigation, FBI Director James Comey said Clinton had been “extremely careless” in handling her email correspondences. He added that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
That statement did little to calm the critics, however, as Clinton was haunted by the ghosts of emails past right up to the eve of the elections.
On October 28, 2016, the FBI said it was reopening its investigation into Clinton’s private email server after messages were discovered on the computer of top aide Huma Abedin’s husband, Anthony Weiner, who was then embroiled in a sexting scandal. Comey announced just before the elections that nothing had changed in the Clinton case, which had been closed four months earlier without criminal charges.
However, the email saga refuses to go away as the DOJ once again reopened its investigation into Clinton’s email server in January.
To this day, Hillary Clinton has been able to divert attention away from the very serious charge of handling classified government emails over her private server thanks to a giant smokescreen known as Russia, the bogeyman that conveniently explains every transgression and setback by the Democratic Party.
Operation Sink Sanders
In July 2016, the DNC suffered a broadside after WikiLeaks released a batch of emails purporting to show that Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the body, was actively conspiring against the campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders. Naturally, this news had a way of upsetting those donors who contributed funds to the Sanders campaign. Wasserman Schultz resigned in disgrace following the revelations.
Despite there being a deliberate effort to undermine the Sanders campaign, that disturbing news was sidelined by the conspiracy theory that a Russian army of apparatchiks hacked the DNC computers, turning over the information to Julian Assange. To this day, no evidence has been provided to support that claim.
Meanwhile, Wasserman Schultz was eventually cleared of rigging the Democratic primary in favor of Hillary Clinton, while Russia continues to suffer from mainstream media mudslinging.
Clinton cheated in debates
One of the most shocking revelations to come from the leaked/hacked DNC emails was the claim that Donna Brazile, interim chairperson of the DNC who once worked at CNN, used her inside connections to feed Hillary Clinton the questions to several of her public debates against Donald Trump.
Following the DNC debacle, Brazile hoped to cash in on the scandal by publishing a tell-all book entitled, ‘Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns that Put Donald Trump in the White House.’
In one particularly candid part, Brazile said she was secretly concerned about Clinton’s health as Election Day drew closer. This comment did not sit well with Brazile’s former colleagues. Clinton’s staffers published an open letter in response to the book, saying, “It is particularly troubling and puzzling that she would seemingly buy into false Russian-fueled propaganda, spread by both the Russians and our opponent, about our candidate’s health.”
Once again, Russia was used and abused as the convenient 11-time-zone Band-Aid that can cover any political wound, whatever the size. What is the most surprising about this tactic is that anybody still falls for it.
Given Hillary Clinton’s past track record for advocating on behalf of military adventures, most memorably in Iraq and Libya, the tall tale of Trump-Russia collusion appears to have been a desperate effort on the part of the establishment to get their candidate into office and the military industrial complex into another war.
According to the Center for Public Integrity’s review of Federal Election Commission data, over a 14-month period (January 2015 through February 2016), Clinton and Sanders jointly received at least $765,049 from employees of major defense contractors – more than twice the $357,775 sum received by the Republican Party presidential candidates.
To prove the liberal media’s (and by extension, the establishment’s) apparent desire for military conflict, consider how it lavished praise on Trump after he attacked Syria’s Shayrat Airbase on April 7, 2017, America’s first unilateral military act aimed at the Syrian government forces (not the terrorists).
CNN analyst Fareed Zakaria waxed poetically, “I think Donald Trump became president of the United States,” he saiddreamily. “I think this was actually a big moment.” On MSNBC, Nicholas Kristof, a regular Trump critic, said the Republican leader “did the right thing.” Elliott Abrams could barely contain his newfound enthusiasm for Trump: “…the Trump administration can truly be said to have started only now. The president has been chief executive since January 20, but this week he acted also as Commander in Chief. And more: He finally accepted the role of Leader of the Free World.”
Judging by such comments, had Trump continued bombing Syria, and thereby pacifying the hawks in Washington, there is a very good chance that Russiagate would have been quietly swept under the media’s carpet.
It would be difficult to name another US president who has suffered the slings and arrows of media scorn more than Donald J. Trump. And he’s only been in office for just over one year. Indeed, no sooner had his Inauguration finished there were already calls for him to be impeached. In fact, the subject has become so popular among the Democrats that there is even a special Wikipedia page dedicated to the relentless campaign.
Although the clamor to impeach the Republican leader has subsided of late, when the idea does raise its head, the empty claim that Russia influenced the elections ranks high among the reasons.
Clinton Foundation ‘pay to play’
Another reason why the Democrats would need to push the anti-Russia narrative is to protect the Clinton family from allegations that they personally profited from donations to the Clinton Foundation.
In January 2017, it was reported that the FBI opened an investigation into whether the Clinton Foundation accepted donations in exchange for political favors while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state in the Obama administration, the Los Angeles Time reported, citing two anonymous sources.
“Critics have accused the Clinton family of using the foundation to enrich themselves and give donors special access to the State Department when Hillary Clinton was its head,” the article said.
The LA Times said that the Democrats have rejected the claims, saying that “Trump is trying to steer attention away from investigations examining…Russian attempts to influence the 2016 election.”
Nunes Memo, Part 2
If anybody thought the Trump administration would just release the Nunes memo and drop it, think again. In fact, Trump’s legal team backs the idea of a second special counsel to investigate the FBI and Justice Department
White House Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah told reporters on Air Force One Monday that Trump’s attorneys have given the green light to starting the process of appointing a second special counsel to investigate the FBI and Justice Department’s behavior during the 2016 presidential campaign, according to a report by Axios.
In other words, expect a lot more anti-Russia outbursts from the Democrats in the days and weeks to come.