There Can Only Be One America


When you see the American Left deliver unproven propaganda against President Trump or violent riots against a Conservative voice or fake police accusations, more than likely there is some form of a Communist agenda behind it.

 

Justin Smith breaks down the obvious.

 

JRH 4/25/17

Please Support NCCR

*************

There Can Only Be One America

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 4/23/2017 2:18 PM

 

America is at a dangerous crossroads, and all normal Americans, who love God, their families and their unalienable rights and Liberty, are necessarily going to have to eventually fight and decisively defeat the American totalitarian Left, that seeks our silence, obeisance and submission to their Marxist vision by any means necessary. The Left’s recently renewed ready use of violence to achieve their goals and their calls for the violent overthrow of our republic, as they riot and throw bricks, glass bottles containing M-80s and Molotov cocktails and attempt to burn our cities, leaves little choice. Either our government stops them, or it will fall to millions of armed American patriots defending their homes, their families and their lives, because the Leftist ideology only ensures that freedom is replaced with tyranny.

 

Although the Left constantly claims President Trump and his administration and supporters are “fascists”, Americans saw real live fascists, every bit as despicable and violent as the Brown Shirts of Nazi Germany, prior to Trump’s nomination and after the election. Various groups have gathered under the banner of Antifa, so-called “anti-fascists”, and they have prevented free speech on campuses and in cities across America, through riots and organized and George Soros-funded acts of violence, often incited by university professors who spread their hate for conservative America, from the University of Washington and Sacramento State to Clemson, Cal State Fullerton, UC Berkeley and points beyond.

 

[Blog Editor supports petition: Declare ANTIFA a terrorist organization

 

VIDEO: What is Antifa?: Antifa Exposed

 

Posted by Jason Kessler

Published on Mar 13, 2017

 

The left-wing terrorist organization Antifa explained: from the masks they wear, the belief systems they follow, to the tactics they employ to enforce their agenda. Know their plans and be prepared to defend yourself with the knowledge you gain in this video.

Support my work through READ THE REST]

 

It was Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda minister, who noted: “History is made in the street.” Get enough Brown Shirts to silence your opponents, and you can seize power.

 

Our side is growing and also prepared to be more politically militant …”, Yvette Felarca, of the Antifa terrorist organization By Any Means Necessary, told Al Jazeera, and she added, “If the movement continues building as large and powerfully in this direction, we can defeat Trump, his racist agenda, and get him out without waiting for the next election.”

 

A howling mob of Leftists stopped Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking at the University of Washington on Inauguration Day 2017, and later that month a Black Lives Matter “activist” spoke to an anti-Trump protest in Seattle and advocated for “killing the White House”.

 

On February 1st 2017, Occupy Oakland organized 1500 protesters to stop Yiannopoulos from speaking at the University of California at Berkeley, and even after they succeeded, they rioted. Black clad domestic terrorists threw bricks, beat suspected conservatives and Trump supporters, smashed windows and set fires.

 

Occupy Oakland later proclaimed: “We won this night. We will control the streets. We will liberate the land. We will fight fascists. We will dismantle the state. This is war.”

 

Does anyone recognize the irony at this point? Occupy Oakland stopped free speech where anti-war leader Mario Savo and his followers started the Free Speech Movement in 1964. Savo wanted a ban on campus political activities lifted, and he demanded freedom of speech and academic freedom.

 

Next in Antifa’s sights is Ann Coulter, a highly acclaimed journalist and an American patriot. Ms. Coulter plans to honor an invitation from the Young Americans Foundation to speak at UC Berkeley on Thursday April 27th, despite the speech being canceled by UC Berkeley. Antifa is threatening to do anything it can to prevent Ms. Coulter from speaking.

 

It is worth noting that during the April 15th free speech event at Berkeley, which was organized by independent journalist Lauren Southern, Antifa’s tactics didn’t work so well. They were promptly whipped by some anti-communist Freedom Loving Oath Keepers and bikers, honest-to God red-blooded Americans, who showed up ready for the fight.

 

These throngs of criminals and domestic terrorists clad in black use their signature chaos and havoc-laden paramilitary “Black Bloc” tactics to give the appearance of solidarity for any cause they support, and while they claim to be anarchists, they are not. Ideologically they are the descendants of the New Left uprisings of the 1960s, the Weather Underground [Bill Ayers] and the Black Panthers. They love the authoritarian State, as long as it is used to advance a Marxist agenda and browbeat the people into submission to achieve their desired goals. They are Marxists.

 

This rabble in the streets function as the strong-arm wing of the heavily left-leaning Progressive Democratic Party, whose own vitriol gave rise to much of this violence. The Democratic Party and its apologists aren’t too bothered by the riots, just as long as it’s only conservatives, Christians and Republicans who are harmed. If violence is what it takes for them to prevail, they have no problem resorting to it. This is their message to conservative America on the price of dissent where Leftists hold sway.

 

Matthew Vadum, author of Subversion, Inc, stated: [Antifa] “are nihilistic thugs who want to destroy everything that is good in America. They’re a leftist counterpart to skinheads and neo-Nazis. They call themselves anti-fascists but they use fascistic tactics against their targets. Just as Hitler’s Sturmabteilung, or SA, beat up and terrorized political opponents …”.

 

After the Berkeley riots, Yiannopoulos lamented: “America, of all places, now, is seeing political violence in response to ideas … Is this the new normal? Riots in the streets …?”

 

The Left hates conservative America and the U.S. Constitution, because we have prevented them from dictating every minute detail of our personal lives. We prevented these anti-American communists and militant leftists from fundamentally transforming this wonderful and exceptional America of ours into the hellish utopian totalitarian order of their fevered imaginings, and for our defiance we must be broken, beaten or even killed.

 

For those of us who oppose Leftist nihilism, it is impossible to reconcile with those who seek control over each individual’s life completely. No argument they present justifies eradicating capitalism. Must we accept their assertion that the greatest problems for black Americans are caused by white racism and white privilege? We have nothing in common with those who label us misogynistic and homophobic over our concerns for the traditional American family, and we certainly will never accept the notion that America is imperialistic and immoral simply due to Her defense of the country.

 

How can America avoid conflict, when the New Left — the real fascists — view everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders as racists and fascists? This is the Left’s Bolshevik moment as they attempt to gain momentum for a revolution.

 

There can only be one America, a country that respects everyone’s rights and individual liberty. There will be no truce with domestic terrorists, who act violently towards innocent men, women and children, young and old, for the sake of altering our government. They have not any right to exist in a free society, and they must be dealt with accordingly, or matters will only become worse. Normally peaceful Americans, millions who swore oaths to protect and defend the Constitution and America, will not allow these outrages to continue, and they will not see our God-given rights undone by Leftist thugs and a failed communist vision.

 

By Justin O. Smith

________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links, photos (placed) and text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

How Long will U.S. Law Ignore Obama Admin. Corruption?


John R. Houk

© April 20, 2017

 

Back in March I was extremely upset that Fox News had suspended (two posts: HERE & HERE) Judge Andrew Napolitano for breaking the news that British Intel organization Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) was spying on President Donald Trump during his campaign run and during the Obama lame duck period prior to the Trump inauguration on January 20, 2017.

 

There was no surprise that Leftist MSM called the Judge’s report fake news, but many Conservative news outlets also threw the Judge under the bus just like Fox News. Fox News anchor totally discredited Andrew Napolitano the same day that the Judge was on Fox and Friends. Very disconcerting to me was the way typically Conservative RedState reported on Napolitano’s GCHQ exposé:

 

Judge Andrew Napolitano is back on Fox News after reports that he was suspended temporarily because he openly promoted an internet hoax about the British intelligence community surveilling Donald Trump’s team, at the behest of former President Obama.

 

His poorly sourced story was used by the president as “proof,” but otherwise discounted by others at Fox, such as Shepard Smith, who said Fox News had seen nothing to back up Napolitano’s claims. (Back On The Air With Fox News, Judge Napolitano Stands By His Claims Of British Spying; By Susan Wright; RedState; 3/29/17 6:30 pm)

 

Susan Wright uses words like “internet hoax” and “discounted by others at Fox” which in my opinion unjustly impugns Andrew Napolitano’s reputation.

 

I found a couple of articles that amplify the Andrew Napolitano GCHQ exposé, yet lends a huge amount credence to the Judge’s reporting. The articles are both by the Daily Wire. The articles refer to Obama’s Administration gathering intel on Trump:

 

1. By gathering Intel on Trump not only from the UK, but also several other American ally foreign Intelligence services. HELLO JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO!

2. The other Daily Wire story is about then CIA Director John Brennan actively working with foreign Intelligence services to “Falsify Trump-Russia Connections”.

 

How does this not incriminate Barack Hussein Obama, American Intelligence service officials and probably numerable top Executive Branch officials in felonious crimes that must be tried in Court before a jury?

 

YES, THAT INCLUDES FORMER PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!

 

AllenWestRepublic.com Intro:

 

It is bad enough that candidate and now President Donald Trump had to run the gauntlet of the Obama administration plotting against him. It is a whole new ball game when you find out that most of the world’s intelligence agencies were feeding data to the Obama Camp. If this is true, then there is no way that President Trump or his team can ever trust any of these perpetrators.

 

JRH 4/20/17

Please Support NCCR

****************

BOMBSHELL Report: Entire Western World Helped Obama WIRETAP Trump

 

By JOHN NOLTE

APRIL 17, 2017

Daily Wire

 

If you are wondering why our national media has pretty much dropped the whole Trump-Is-A-Russian-Manchurian-Candidate thing, it is because the naked truth about the Obama administration’s chilling spying — something the media has covered up for months — is finally coming to light. Last week, both The Washington Post and The New York Times quietly reported that the Obama administration had “wiretapped” (their word, not mine) a Trump staffer.

 

The Trump-hating Guardian then dropped another bombshell, the news that pretty much every Western intelligence agency in the world was aiding and abetting the Obama administration’s unbelievable and unprecedented (Nixon only wanted to do this) abuse of power against a political opponent:

 

Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.

 

The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland. Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.

 

Another source suggested the Dutch and the French spy agency, the General Directorate for External Security or DGSE, were contributors.

 

Q: So what exactly is this “sigint”?

 

A: It perfectly meets the modern definition of — you ready for it? — wiretapping!

 

Signals intelligence (SIGINT) is intelligence-gathering by interception of signals, whether communications between people (communications intelligence—abbreviated to COMINT) or from electronic signals not directly used in communication (electronic intelligence—abbreviated to ELINT). Signals intelligence is a subset of intelligence collection management.

 

This next bit from the Guardian report is important because it appears to vindicate Fox News commentator Judge Napolitano, who was widely-ridiculed in the political media, and then suspended by Fox News, for reporting something very close to this back in March:

 

Britain’s spy agencies played a crucial role in alerting their counterparts in Washington to contacts between members of Donald Trump’s campaign team and Russian intelligence operatives, the Guardian has been told.

 

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.

 

No one better summed up what was going on here better than PowerLine’s John Hinderaker:

 

The blindingly obvious point that the Guardian tries to obscure is that the combined assets of all of these agencies failed to find any evidence of collaboration between the Trump campaign and Russia. We know this, because the Democrats have pulled out all the stops. Both before the election, and especially after the election, they have leaked furiously to try to discredit President Trump. If there were any evidence of collusion between Trump (or even obscure, minor “advisers” like Carter Page) and Russia, there would have been nothing else in the Washington Post or the New York Times for the past five months. But they have nothing.

 

In other words, the whole world was spying on Trump, not just the Obama administration, and even with all of these resources the Democrats and their media got exactly squat. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing between Team Trump and Russia. There is, however, a growing pile of evidence that Team Barry needs to be investigated by Congress and the Justice Department.

 

Hinderaker’s second point is that everyone in the world was so sure Hillary Clinton was going to beat Trump that all of these countries believed it was safe to “curry favor with the new administration” by spying on her opponent, by offering her intelligence-oppo during the campaign that was then leaked to a MSM that was 100% complicit in this illegal behavior — because leaking intelligence is a felony.

 

If this is not scary enough, try to imagine what Hillary’s administration and the MSM would be doing to Donald Trump right now if he did not have the power of the presidency to defend himself. As it is, the media have been lyingsmearing, and slandering him without any evidence.

 

The only weapon Trump has had to fight back with is his access to truth about Obama’s spying, access he would not have had had he not won the presidency.

 

We have already seen the terrifying lengths Hillary and Obama will go to as a means to cover up their lies, we have already seen the violence our media (especially CNN) is willing to gin up in order to protect a Narrative. There is no doubt in my mind that with the help of their media pals, had Hillary won the presidency, Trump would right now be in federal prison for a crime he did not commit.

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

 

+++

Report: Former CIA Director Colluded With Foreign Spies to Falsify Trump-Russia Connections

 

By JOSEPH CURL

APRIL 20, 2017

Daily Wire

 

There were dueling headlines this week, one from a liberal British newspaper, the other from a conservative U.S. magazine.

 

“British spies were first to spot Trump team’s links with Russia,” wrote The Guardian. Well, bother, that’ll put the prezzy in a bit of a spot.

 

But wait, there was this other headline — same story, just a different headline, from The American Spectator: “Confirmed: John Brennan Colluded With Foreign Spies to Defeat Trump.”

 

Well dang, now we don’t know what to think.

 

The Guardian painted the “facts” in dull hues:

 

The Guardian has been told the FBI and the CIA were slow to appreciate the extensive nature of contacts between Trump’s team and Moscow ahead of the US election. This was in part due to US law that prohibits US agencies from examining the private communications of American citizens without warrants. “They are trained not to do this,” the source stressed.

 

“It looks like the [US] agencies were asleep,” the source added. “They [the European agencies] were saying: ‘There are contacts going on between people close to Mr Trump and people we believe are Russian intelligence agents. You should be wary of this.’

 

Thank God for British intelligence, or we surely would’ve missed this massive Trump-Russia collusion.

 

But The Spectator shined the spotlight into the dark crevasses of the story:

 

Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, [John] Brennan teamed up with British spies and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Hillary supporters, to spy on Trump and his people.

 

John Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Hillary campaign, leaking out mentions of this bogus investigation to the press in the hopes of inflicting maximum political damage on Trump. An official in the intelligence community tells TAS that Brennan’s retinue of political radicals didn’t even bother to hide their activism, decorating offices with “Hillary for president cups” and other campaign paraphernalia.

 

Huh. What a very different story.

 

What’s important from the U.S. side, of course, is what our own CIA director did.

 

Says The Spectator: “The Guardian says that British spy head Robert Hannigan ‘passed material in summer 2016 to the CIA chief, John Brennan.’ To ensure that these flaky tips leaked out, Brennan disseminated them on Capitol Hill. In August and September of 2016, he gave briefings to the’“Gang of Eight’ about them, which then turned up on the front page of the New York Times.”

 

Funny, it was all right there in The Guardian report — Brennan was the center of the storm. “The matter was deemed so sensitive it was handled at ‘director level.’ After an initially slow start, Brennan used GCHQ information and intelligence from other partners to launch a major inter-agency investigation.”

 

But The Guardian sought to play up the roles of British and European agencies.

 

 Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.

 

The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland. Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.

 

But The Spectator cuts to the point far more succinctly:

 

Were the media not so completely in the tank for Obama and Hillary, all of this political mischief would make for a compelling 2016 version of All the President’s Men. Instead, the public gets a steady stream of Orwellian propaganda about the sudden propriety of political espionage. The headline writers at Pravda couldn’t improve on this week’s official lie, tweeted out by the Maggie Habermans: “Susan Rice Did Nothing Wrong, Say Both Dem and Republican House Aides.”

 

_______________

How Long will U.S. Law Ignore Obama Admin. Corruption?

John R. Houk

© April 20, 2017

_____________

BOMBSHELL Report: Entire Western World Helped Obama WIRETAP Trump

 

AND

 

Report: Former CIA Director Colluded With Foreign Spies to Falsify Trump-Russia Connections

 

© COPYRIGHT 2017, THE DAILY WIRE

 

Irony – Napolitano Vindicated by CNN


John R. Houk

© April 15, 2017

 

Judge Andrew Napolitano said he had sources the British GCHQ was helping Obama spy on Donald Trump. The irony is Left Stream media CNN found the same info from their sources. I wonder if the Judge’s sources and CNN’s sources were the same.

 

There is one egregious lack of Mainstream Media (MSM) that bothers me and should bother you immensely as an American citizen. The MSM is in full cover Barack Hussein Obama’s gluteus maximus for spying on President Donald Trump before and directly after he won POTUS on November 2016. This includes a host of Crooked Hillary acolytes.

 

What do these Leftist Dems have in common:

 

Hillary, Barack, Biden (in his own insane way), Jarett, Rice, Rhodes, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, Podesta, Brazile, Mook, Palmieri, Wasserman-Schultz and other similar deviant political operatives”.

 

You should be astonished, rather you should be thinking – “I KNEW IT!”

 

My sources tell me there was a clear conspiracy to spy on the Trump camp to steal the presidency. … deviant political operatives who were working overtime to steal the election. Not Trump colluding with Russia.” (Obama Spygate: How Obama And Hillary Almost Stole The American Presidency; By Bill Robinson, WESTERN JOURNALISM; ISRAPUNDIT; 4/15/17)

 

I am quite gratified that one of the Leftist cover-ups has found a MSM reversal. CNN (in jest – Communist News Network) has released some information that confirms Judge Andrew Napolitano’s assertion that Obama was also using British Intelligence to spy on Trump. If you recall, Fox News actually suspended Napolitano for exposing this. The good Judge has since had his suspension lifted.

 

The Blaze points out the Left will claim was mere incidental Intelligence gathering. But you have to realize that is a load of horse pucky if you realize the so-called incidental gathering included Trump info. Why would British Intelligence gathering merely share incidental intel or even incidental intel that specifically looked Trump?

 

The answer: Obama was spying!

 

Here’s The Blaze reporting on the CNN revelation of Obama/British Intelligence sharing on Spygate-Trump.

 

British GCHQ building nick-named The Donut

 

JRH 4/15/17

Please Support NCCR

******************

[Blog Editor: I found the story originally at AllenWestRepublic.com which was only an excerpt of the The Blaze reporting on CNN’s Spygate revelation. I am the AWR opening paragraph as an intro to The Blaze.]

 

In an astonishing turn of events, CNN has reported that the Obama administration did, in fact, receive intelligence reports from British Intelligence concerning Trump aide’s communications with Russia. Whether or not these reports will pass the litmus test for collusion is yet to be determined. What has been determined is that the Obama administration was in fact spying on Americans.

 

CNN: British intelligence provided Trump-Russian intercepts to US agencies

 

By Carlos Garcia

Apr 13, 2017 8:16 pm

The Blaze

 

CNN reported Thursday that their sources indicate British intelligence services provided U.S. agencies with intercepts they obtained between Trump campaign associates and the Russian government. They say it was “incidental collection,” much like the kind that was captured by U.S. agencies on Trump associates.

 

The communications were captured during routine surveillance of Russian officials and other Russians known to western intelligence. British and European intelligence agencies, including GCHQ, the British intelligence agency responsible for communications surveillance, were not proactively targeting members of the Trump team but rather picked up these communications during what’s known as “incidental collection,” these sources tell CNN.

 

The Trump administration had previously denied a report that they apologized to the British government for including the GCHQ in a list of agencies that former President Obama used to spy on Trump.

 

In March, Fox News’ Judge Napolitano claimed that he had sources telling him Obama had asked foreign intelligence services to spy on Trump.

 

“Three intelligence sources have informed Fox News that President Obama went outside the chain of command. He didn’t use the NSA, he didn’t use the CIA, he didn’t use the FBI and he didn’t use the Department of Justice,” said Judge Napolitano. “He used GCHQ.”

 

The United Kingdom denied it, Fox News denied they had knowledge of these sources, and they suspended Judge Napolitano, who maintained the truth of his assertion.

 

Trump cited Napolitano’s claim as evidence that he had been surveilled by the Obama administration before the election, an accusation he fired off in a tweet that spurred a congressional investigation into the matter.

 

Trump allies will likely use this report to bolster his claim that he was being surveilled by the prior administration, while critics of the president will point to this as more circumstantial evidence that there was collusion between the Trump camp and the Russians.

 

__________________

Irony – Napolitano Vindicated by CNN

John R. Houk

© April 15, 2017

_____________

CNN: British intelligence provided Trump-Russian intercepts to US agencies

 

The Blaze

 

True – Crooked Hillary, so also Crooked Obama


John R. Houk

© April 12, 2017

 

President Trump clearly and accurately branded Hillary Clinton as “Crooked Hillary” during his winning campaign for POTUS. Then voters in a majority of States were wise enough to understand Crooked Hillary cover-ups of Classified data on a private email server was occurring. I am convinced the FBI, the Intel Community and Obama Administration operatives aided in that cover-up.

 

THEN Wikileakswhether with Russian help, private hackers or insider whistleblowers – exposed the crookedness of the Hillary campaign in her staff and in the Dem Party itself.

 

Then a release of a book exposing Pay for Play money scandal from foreign donors to Clinton family charitable foundation for political favors while Crooked Hillary was Secretary of State.

 

One could also meld all the scandals that slipped mysteriously away like Teflon associated with both Bill and Crooked Hillary as a taint to her 2016 candidacy.

 

ALL this put together I find it incredulous that the popular vote spread (officially yet suspiciously) favored Crooked Hillary! Thank God for the Founding Fathers’ wisdom of the Electoral College levelling the play field between populous States and less populous States!

 

AND SO, it is also becoming clearer – to the horrified denial of Dem rank-and-file – that President Barack Hussein was also spying on pre-election Trump, post-election (lame duck period) and on other Americans. To what end? OBVIOUSLY to manipulate a Crooked Hillary victory to maintain the nefarious fundamental Obama-transformation of America into an unconstitutional Leftist Living Constitution nation with socially liberal values.

Obama/Trump Photo @ Palin Facebook Alert

 

Fox News’ Adam Housley brings the clarity on Obama spying. I first read of Housley’s report from a Sarah Palin Facebook alert and then I found some added info from the Young Conservatives website that has similar yet expanded info of SarahPalin.com. Both sites use a video of Housley on the O’Reilly Factor. In the cross post (of both) I am only using the Palin version of the video and Housley Tweet.

 

JRH 4/12/17

Please Support NCCR

**************

Obama Spying Investigation Just Took A STUNNING Turn

 

By Andrew Mark Miller

April 12, 2017 10:06am

SarahPalin.com

 

It appears that Congress has expanded the Obama spying investigation and they are possibly looking into whether or not Obama spied on more people than just the Trump team.

 

Adam Housley

@adamhousley

 

House sources say investigation into unmasking is looking into the possibility that more evidence than just the Trump Team was collected

 

8:34 PM – 11 Apr 2017

 

Here is Housley with more information…

 

VIDEO: What Is The Status Of The Susan Rice Investigation?


 

Posted by Tea Partier

Published on Apr 11, 2017

 

The O’Reilly Factor’ examines the surveillance controversy latest. Adam Housley, Malia Zimmerman.
BillOReilly.com
http://www.billoreilly.com/
Fox News: The O’Reilly Factor
http://www.foxnews.com/shows/the-oreilly-factor.html
Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/
Fox Nation
http://nation.foxnews.com/

 

This story seems to get worse and worse for the Obama Administration as each day goes by.

 

H/T Weasel Zippers 

+++

Report: Congress EXPANDING Obama Spying Case, Looking If People Other Than Trump Team Spied On

 

 

 

By Nickarama

April 12, 2017 12:43am

Young Conservatives

 

Adam Housley, who broke the major Fox report on the surveillance of the Trump team by the Obama administration, is now dropping some more information.

 

Check this tweet out.

 

What he’s saying is that Congress is investigating whether other people, and not just the Trump team, were being spied on by the Obama administration.

 

Who might that include?

 

Adam Housley was on The O’Reilly Factor this evening. He said that the Congressional investigation is expanding. He said they are looking into who else the Obama administration may have unmasked, “Including politicians,” and how their information may have been collected.

 

O’Reilly Video: What Is The Status Of The Susan Rice Investigation?

 

Housley reported that Congress is upset with the FBI and the NSA because they haven’t been turning over the information that Congress has requested. It’s been four weeks and they have not responded to 100 questions submitted to both FBI Director James Comey and NSA Director Mike Rogers. Nor has Comey returned to the Congress to testify.

 

He also noted the Congress members are saying that the FBI and the other intelligence agencies better comply or the 702 program which allows them to be able to do surveillance is not going to be authorized by Congress.

 

_______________

True – Crooked Hillary, so also Crooked Obama

John R. Houk

© April 12, 2017

______________

Obama Spying Investigation Just Took A STUNNING Turn

 

Copyright ©2017. SarahPalin.com. All rights reserved.

______________

Report: Congress EXPANDING Obama Spying Case, Looking If People Other Than Trump Team Spied On

 

Copyright © Young Conservatives LLC – All Rights Reserved

 

Young Conservatives About Page

 

Founding

 

YoungCons.com was created by David Rufful and Josh Riddle in their freshmen dorm room at Dartmouth College in May 2009.

 

Without any funding or support, Josh and David have built one of the largest websites in the world through their hard work and determination. The site receives 75 million page views per month and 25 million unique visitors per month. The site is consistently ranked among the Top 100 Desktop Sites and Top 25 Mobile Sites, according to Quantcast rankings.

 

 

Josh and David maintain exclusive ownership and control of the website as well as their company, Young Conservatives LLC. YoungCons.com has been profitable throughout its entire history.

 

Mission

 

As defenders of freedom in our constitutional republic, it is our mission and duty to steer the country away from the false promises of progressivism and advocate a smaller government of moral absolutes and individual responsibility.

 

In a technological era driven fiercely by the mainstream media, we believe that those who vocalize a true conservative message are slanted as intolerant, racist, bible and gun clinging, corporate fat cats who could not care less about the environment nor the well being of their fellow man. Young Conservatives offers articles and videos that prove otherwise. We have a mission to spread the love and logic surrounding true conservatism.

 

In a day where conservatives are seen as close-minded and archaic, Young Conservatives bring a new perspective to a long-standing philosophy. Our generation will — one way or another — make decisions that will directly affect a rapidly aging and needy population and an exploding, unsustainable national debt.

 

We feel the moral obligation to intervene against those who abandon our founding principles and embrace the comfortable, but deceptive ideals of moral relativism, victim identification and outcome equivalence. Instead of sinking into the assemblage of the self-satisfied, Young Conservatives challenges the hearts and minds of Americans with content that exposes the false promises of progressivism and the utopian state. This problem is real, and the fight for freedom has READ THE REST

 

 

Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections


Intro to ‘Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections’

Blog Editor John R. Houk

By Fred Fleitz

Posted 4/6/17

 

The Dems and the Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) have been hell-bent to disqualify President Trump since election day 2016. All disqualification agendas seem to gravitate around President Trump colluded with Russia to win over Crooked Hillary.

 

It is my belief the “collusion” accusation is horse pucky, but Russian attempts to manipulate the American voter is very possible. AND if POSSIBLE turns into reality, Russia needs to suffer any kind consequences the Trump Administration is willing to inflict. By inflict I mean at least with a Cold War-style agitation to see how far the Russians are willing to confront the still most powerful nation in the world which of course is the United States of America.

 

That being said, the continuous disparaging of President Trump should be examined by the Trump Administration Department of Justice for crimes by Dems, the Left MSM, current government civil servant lifers loyal to BHO AND former Obama Administration Officials INCLUDING the treasonous former President Barack Hussein Obama.

 

My thoughts on American collusion with evil leads me to a Fred Fleitz article entitled, “Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections”.

 

JRH 4/6/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

Was Obama’s White House Politicizing Intelligence To Influence The 2016 Elections

 

By Fred Fleitz

April 6, 2017

The Federalist

 

The truth is that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies did not conclude that Russia tried to interfere in the election or help Trump win. Not even close.

 

Although there are strong indications the Obama administration abused intelligence collection by U.S. agencies to gather information on the Trump campaign to leak to the news media, it also appeared to abuse another U.S. intelligence mission: intelligence analysis.

 

Congressional Democrats and the mainstream media consider it gospel truth that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies unanimously concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump win. But should we treat this assessment as true in light of major errors in U.S. intelligence analysis in the past and its politicization? Is something gospel truth just because U.S. intelligence agencies say it is?

 

The truth is that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies did not conclude that Russia tried to interfere in the election or help Trump win. Not even close.

 

What Intelligence Has Really Confirmed About Russia

 

U.S. intelligence agencies issued two assessments on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The first was an October 7 statement by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that said WikiLeaks disclosures of Democratic emails during the election were “consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts” but did not say there was any evidence of Russian involvement.

 

Moreover, although this statement said the U.S. intelligence community held this position, the memo was issued by only two agencies, and was called a “Joint DHS and ODNI Election Security Statement.” Hillary Clinton seized on this statement in the last presidential debate on October 19 by inaccurately claiming “We have 17, 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyber attacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin.”

 

The fact that this memo was not an intelligence community document issued by all agencies with equities in this issue was very unusual. It also was suspicious that an unclassified intelligence analysis so advantageous to one presidential candidate was issued just before the election and only two weeks before the last presidential debate. In my view, this looked like looked like a clumsy attempt by the Obama White House to issue an intelligence assessment to boost Clinton’s presidential campaign and hurt the Trump campaign.

 

The second intelligence assessment on this question, issued on January 6, 2017, I believe represents a serious instance of a presidential administration manipulating U.S. intelligence analysis to issue a politicized analysis to sabotage an incoming president from a different political party. The January 6 analysis found that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election and hurt Hillary’s candidacy to promote Trump. The assessment said this interference came at the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

 

What About All the Missing Intelligence Agencies?

 

Like the October memo, congressional Democrats and the news media have said this was the unanimous conclusion of all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies. But also like the October memo, this was not the case. The January 6 assessment was an “Intelligence Community Assessment.” Such analyses are usually issued and cleared by most if not all U.S. intelligence agencies and have a statement on the first page that usually reads “this is an IC-coordinated assessment.”

 

The January 6 Intelligence Community Assessment lacked such a statement because it reflected the views of only three U.S. intelligence agencies: Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and National Security Agency. The CIA and FBI concluded with high confidence that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win. NSA concluded this with moderate confidence.

 

Why did other U.S. intelligence agencies with major equities in this issue not participate in the January 6 assessment? Why were the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security part of the October assessment but not the January one? Where were the Defense Intelligence Agency, the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and the military intelligence agencies?

 

The January assessment also was very unusual because it was such a conclusive analysis of a very controversial subject with no dissenting views. Based my CIA experience, this is unprecedented and makes me wonder whether intelligence agencies that may have dissented were deliberately excluded.

 

There also is the question as to whether this assessment was written to conform to a predetermined conclusion by the Obama White House to undermine the Trump administration. The U.S. intelligence community has played political games like this before with interagency assessments to promote political agendas. One of the most notorious examples of this was the controversial 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear program that was intended to undermine President Bush’s Iran policy.

 

There Are Indications Intelligence Has Been Politicized

 

CIA Director John Brennan’s role in approving this assessment raises serious questions about whether it was manipulated for political reasons. Brennan has been heavily criticized for politicizing intelligence for the Obama administration. This includes the role he played in the 2012 CIA talking points on the Benghazi terrorist attacks. He also has been openly and extremely hostile toward Trump before and after the election.

 

Given FBI Director James Comey’s statements at a recent House Intelligence Committee hearing that the conclusion in the January 6 assessment that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump was based on logic and not evidence, it is hard to believe this was not a pre-cooked conclusion driven by the highly partisan Brennan.

 

I strongly believe that if there were any evidence that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win, or that Russia and the Trump campaign collaborated to affect the outcome of the election, this intelligence would have been leaked by Obama holdovers in government and the so-called “Deep State” to The New York Times long ago. The fact that Comey could not point to such evidence and this information has not been leaked suggests there is no such evidence because this didn’t happen.

 

The current congressional investigations of possible Russian interference in the election and the Obama administration’s misuse of U.S. intelligence collection to surveil the Trump campaign must also include whether intelligence analysis was politicized to damage Trump’s candidacy and presidency. These investigations must look at how the above analyses were drafted, who drafted them, and why some agencies did not participate. The committees also need to uncover any evidence of the White House trying to influence the outcome of these assessments or excluding certain agencies from participating.

 

It is time to call out Democrats and reporters who portray the idea that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win as established truth because it is the unanimous assessment of all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies. I expect the congressional investigations will conclude this claim is false and actually represented a deliberate effort to manipulate intelligence analysis to undermine the Trump presidency.

 

________________

Fred Fleitz is senior vice president for policy and programs with the Center for Security Policy. He worked in national-security positions for 25 years with the CIA, the State Department, and the House Intelligence Committee. Follow him on Twitter @fredfleitz.

 

Copyright © 2017 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

 

Do YOU Trust Benghazi/Bergdahl Liar?


John R. Houk

© April 5, 2017

 

Susan Rice is a typical lying Dem that unmasked Trump campaign staff names that did NOTHING illegal while using an investigation of Russian collusion/voting interference as a MERE excuse to politically impugn Donald Trump during the 2016 election and during the Obama lame duck period leading President Trump’s inauguration!!!!

 

AND even more reprehensible is the Left Stream Media either didn’t report on Ly’n Rice or defended her for doing nothing wrong while simultaneously still stick to the UNPROVEN – ergo lie – accusation the President Trump colluded with the Russians to defeat Crooked Hillary in the 2016 election cycle.

 

Susan Rice Lying to Americans on 5 MSM Networks

 

 

For any American to believe Rice’s words that she “leaked nothing to nobody,” were also duped by her lies about Benghazi and her lies the traitor Bergdahl was an upstanding loyal American: “He served the United States with honor and distinction …”

 

VIDEO: Susan Rice: Bergdahl Served With ‘Honor and Distinction’

 

Posted by PoliticalTurkey1

Published on Jun 2, 2014

 

Hmm … IF SUSAN RICE SAYS SHE DIDN’T UNMASK TRUMP SURVEILLANCE FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES, I CAN CONFIDENTLY SAY “I DON’T BELIEVE HER!”

 

I have found loads of articles that question the veracity of Susan Rice and Barack Obama. The Left Stream Media will not take up the question of reliability because they are essentially a propaganda of Obama, The Dems and the Left in general.

 

I am cross posting two articles. One from The Federalist posted today and another from Fox News’ Adam Housley post on April third. At the end, I will provide some links (perhaps some excerpts) from other sources that pretty much have the same opinion about Susan Rice but may add some details lacking between each article.

 

JRH 4/5/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

Why Susan Rice’s Role In The Obama Spying Story Is A Big Deal

 

By Mollie Hemingway

April 5, 2017

The Federalist

 

Susan Rice was one Obama official who requested the unmasking of Trump associates’ information that was widely disseminated. Here’s why that’s significant.

 

Since Donald Trump won the election for president in November, U.S. media outlets have received and eagerly published selective, damaging leaks about him from anonymous intelligence officials. The general effort, which appeared highly coordinated, was an effort to delegitimize Trump’s election and paint him as a stooge of Russia or otherwise unfit for office.

 

The media outlets claimed their information came from very highly placed officials in the Obama administration. Even if they hadn’t claimed their anonymous sources were Obama officials, the information they were leaking, such as the name of a U.S. citizen caught up in surveillance by the Obama administration, would have been known only by highly placed intelligence officials.

 

As the publishers of the information that was illegally disclosed, many media outlets weren’t keen to make a story, much less a big story, about the leak campaign by Obama officials. This despite the fact that the same Obama officials who had run the infamous Iran Echo Chamber operation, in which reporters were duped into reporting the Obama administration’s spin on the Iran deal, had bragged that they’d continue a highly developed communications operation in the Trump era.

 

In early March, Donald Trump tweeted out a series of unsubstantiated claims:

 

Trump Tweets on BHO Wiretapping

 

 

Two weeks ago, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Devin Nunes, revealed that he’d seen dozens of reports featuring unmasked information on Trump and his associates and family members. He said these reports arose out of incidental collection during FISA surveillance, had nothing to do with Russia, were disseminated widely throughout the intelligence agencies, and contained little to no foreign intelligence value.

 

It should go without saying that the country’s powerful surveillance capabilities are not to be used against American citizens so that such unmasking should be exceedingly rare, be done for only the strongest reasons, and make pains to avoid the appearance of politicization. Nunes said the incidental collection might be legal but the unmasked dissemination of information about political opponents was disconcerting.

 

Despite the bombshell allegations, many in the media responded by downplaying or denigrating his news, distracting with process complaints, or quickly thrown-together stories from anonymous sources with no evidence claiming more breathless wrongdoing with Russia.

 

On Monday, Eli Lake of Bloomberg Views reported that sources said “Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.” Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the National Security Council’s senior director for intelligence, was conducting a review of unmasking procedures when he “discovered Rice’s multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities.”

 

Susan Rice was Obama’s National Security Advisor for his second term.

 

Again, many in the media are attempting to downplay, denigrate and distract, some are doing so shamelessly. Here are five reasons why this is a story worth covering:

 

1) Susan Rice’s Story Changed Dramatically From Two Weeks Ago

 

Two weeks ago, PBS’ Judy Woodruff asked Rice a very general question about Nunes’ claims:

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: I began by asking about the allegations leveled today by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes that Trump transition officials, including the president, may have been swept up in surveillance of foreigners at the end of the Obama administration.

 

SUSAN RICE, Former U.S. National Security Adviser: I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today.

 

I know nothing about this, she said.

 

Yesterday, in a damage control interview with prominent Democratic journalist Andrea Mitchell, Rice admitted her unmasking efforts and said they were routine. Mitchell’s 16-minute interview involved no tough questions. Mitchell asked, “Did you seek to unmask the names of people involved in the Trump transition?” Rice responded in the Clintonian fashion, “Absolutely not for any political purposes.” A natural follow-up would have been if she requested the unmasking for any other purpose. It didn’t occur to Mitchell. Instead she followed-up with the related question, “Did you leak?” to which Rice responded, somewhat confusingly, “I leaked nothing to nobody.”

 

Somehow Rice tried to claim later that her initial statement of having no clue about Nunes’ earlier claim was not at odds with her 16-minute answer about her unmasking efforts.

 

Rice has a reputation for dishonesty, most notably for her claim that a September 11, 2012, attack in Libya that killed four Americans was a spontaneous result of anger at a video critical of Islam. At the time she said this, the State Department knew well that it was a coordinated terrorist attack.

 

Rice also falsely claimed that Bowe Bergdahl “served the United States with honor and distinction,” when critics began raising questions about why President Obama traded high-value Taliban detainees and a ransom for the Army deserter. Bergdahl is expected to face a court-martial in August for desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. His desertion was already known at the time Rice made her comments.

 

2) The Unmasking Was Related To Political Information

 

When Nunes first alerted the public about his concerns over the unmasking and dissemination, he noted that the information had nothing to do with Russia and had little to no intelligence value. Lake reported that Rice’s multiple unmasking requests were related to reports on Trump transition activities. She is said to have requested the identities of Americans in reports of monitored conversations between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition and in surveilled contact between the Trump team and monitored foreign officials.

 

“One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration,” according to Lake.

 

When Rice gave her interview to the friendly journalist Mitchell, she gave a hypothetical example of when it would be appropriate to request an unmasking of a U.S. citizen’s name that was caught up in foreign surveillance. She said that if two foreigners were talking about a terrorist attack to be committed with a U.S. citizen, she would seek out that name. That’s a great hypothetical. And no one is making the claim that Susan Rice sought to unmask a Trump family member or transition member’s name because she believed they were about to set off a bomb. They are making the claim that the information in the reports was politically valuable and related to the Trump transition.

 

3) Susan Rice Worked In The White House

 

Rice was known as Obama’s “right-hand woman,” “like a sister,” and was his National Security Advisor throughout his second term.

 

Weeks ago, diplomat Richard Grennell said that if Rice were involved, that would implicate President Obama:

 

‘But within that realm there could have easily been a political calculation to listen in, and then to take those transcripts and the summaries of those transcripts, make sure that those in the NSC and the political people – like Ben Rhodes and Susan Rice – make sure that they have them so they can leak them to reporters.’

 

‘I think that it would be easy to figure out if Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes knew about this,’ he added, ‘because if they did, clearly President Obama knew about it.’

 

Even if Rice wasn’t working with Obama on this effort or informing him of her activities, her role as National Security Advisor means her unmasking request in this instance doesn’t make sense, according to Andrew McCarthy. If the identities of U.S. citizens had intelligence value, it would have been unmasked by agencies that conduct investigations, he wrote:

 

Consequently, if unmasking was relevant to the Russia investigation, it would have been done by those three agencies. And if it had been critical to know the identities of Americans caught up in other foreign intelligence efforts, the agencies that collect the information and conduct investigations would have unmasked it. Because they are the agencies that collect and refine intelligence ‘products’ for the rest of the ‘intelligence community,’ they are responsible for any unmasking; and they do it under ‘minimization’ standards that FBI Director James Comey, in recent congressional testimony, described as ‘obsessive’ in their determination to protect the identities and privacy of Americans.

 

Understand: There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies. The national-security adviser is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.

 

It is unclear what President Obama knew about Rice’s successful request to unmask information on Trump transition members.

 

4) This Substantiates Nunes’ Claim

 

When Nunes told the public that information about the Trump team had been collected, unmasked, and widely disseminated, many media figures questioned the legitimacy of his claim. With the news that no less than Susan Rice requested unmasking of political operatives, it appears that Nunes was onto something.

 

Also of note, Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking Democratic member on the committee, had been very upset with Nunes for telling the public and the White House about the reports he’d seen before briefing the committee. However, after Schiff saw the information, he more or less went quiet. He didn’t say the reports were a distraction or unimportant, unlike other Democratic operatives.

 

5) Civil Liberties Questions Remain

 

The most frequent defense of the Obama administration’s unmasking efforts is that incidental information collection on U.S. citizens is routine, and that requests to unmask that information about U.S. citizens is also routine. When we learn more about the widespread dissemination of such information, we can anticipate that the media and other Democrats will say that such dissemination is more than routine.

 

When Nunes revealed the collection, unmasking, and dissemination news, he specifically referenced the incidental information collection on members of Congress during the Iran deal. The U.S. spies on foreign leaders, including Benjamin Netanyahu and his advisors. As a result, the Obama administration picked up information on politically valuable information:

 

White House officials believed the intercepted information could be valuable to counter Mr. Netanyahu’s campaign. They also recognized that asking for it was politically risky. So, wary of a paper trail stemming from a request, the White House let the NSA decide what to share and what to withhold, officials said. ‘We didn’t say, ‘Do it,’ ‘a senior U.S. official said. ‘We didn’t say, ‘Don’t do it.’ ‘

 

Stepped-up NSA eavesdropping revealed to the White House how Mr. Netanyahu and his advisers had leaked details of the U.S.-Iran negotiations—learned through Israeli spying operations—to undermine the talks; coordinated talking points with Jewish-American groups against the deal; and asked undecided lawmakers what it would take to win their votes, according to current and former officials familiar with the intercepts.

 

The Bush administration also collected and used information on members of Congress this way.

 

In some ways, this “routine” defense of collecting and disseminating information on political adversaries is the most disconcerting. The federal government’s surveillance powers are intense, from metadata collection to surveillance of communications. Such information is easily weaponized and exceedingly difficult to oversee for accountability purposes.

 

As one journalist who used to be worried about such things wrote a few years ago:

 

Instead, the NSA’s approach of grabbing up every bit of information that it can guarantees that the metadata and sometimes even the content of legislator communications are swept up, and will continue to be available to a secretive class of executive branch employees for years to come. There is obvious potential that this will be exploited with abusive intent–it isn’t like we’ve never had a president try to spy on his political opponents before! But even absent any nefarious motives, incidentally collected data could damage the integrity of our political system.

 

Members of the media should try to cover, rather than cover up, this aspect of the story. The civil liberties of U.S. citizens are of vital importance and the unmasking of information on them should not be routine, not regular, and not a light matter.

 

The media have thousands of questions to force answers on regarding this important story. As Ari Fleischer wrote on Twitter:

 

About Susan Rice: The President’s National Security Advisor has authority to request unmasking of American names from intel agencies.

 

But in this instance, I am stunned by the lack of curiosity most media have shown about the facts and circumstances present here.

 

This is a good example of media giving soft coverage to President Obama while they’re hard on the GOP in general & Trump in particular.

 

Bear in mind, Rice is the official who praised Bowe Bergdahl for his ‘honorable service’ & claimed he was captured ‘on the battlefield.’

 

She also said two weeks ago in a TV interview that she didn’t know anything about the unmasking.

 

I would have thought the media would ask tough questions. There is no reason this should be a FOX News and conservative press issue only.

 

If I were a reporter, I would want to know why Rice sought the unmasking. The FBI is investigating possible Trump collusion, not the WH.

 

How often did she ask? What reasons did she give? (Each request is tracked and catalogued in writing by the NSA. A procedure exists.)

 

The info would have been provided ONLY to her as the requester. It is highly classified. Did she share it? With whom? Why?

 

If she shared it with anyone, why did she do so? What did they do with it? Did they give it to the media or tell media about it?

 

One of the reasons we live in a polarized era is because too many reporters look the other way at issues like this. Bias is real.

 

It’s not too late. The press knows how to dig and get answers. I hope they do so.

 

It’s not just Rice. She wasn’t the only person to request the unmasking of Trump officials regarding politically sensitive operations, and she wasn’t the person who requested that Flynn’s name be unmasked, meaning she requested at least one other Trump associate’s unmasking. We still don’t know who committed the crime of leaking Flynn’s name to the Washington Post. It’s time to start working on covering this story, rather than running interference for anonymous sources.

 

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is a senior editor at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter at @mzhemingway

 

+++

Susan Rice requested to unmask names of Trump transition officials, sources say

 

By Adam Housley

April 03, 2017

Fox News

 

Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former national security adviser under then-President Barack Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump transition officials caught up in surveillance.

 

The unmasked names, of people associated with Donald Trump, were then sent to all those at the National Security Council, some at the Defense Department, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA Director John Brennan – essentially, the officials at the top, including former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes.

 

The names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to him, including family members, for up to a year before he took office.

 

It was not clear how Rice knew to ask for the names to be unmasked, but the question was being posed by the sources late Monday.

 

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

 

Such amazing reporting on unmasking and the crooked scheme against us by @foxandfriends. “Spied on before nomination.” The real story.

 

5:15 AM – 3 Apr 2017

 

“What I know is this …  If the intelligence community professionals decide that there’s some value, national security, foreign policy or otherwise in unmasking someone, they will grant those requests,” former Obama State Department spokeswoman and Fox News contributor Marie Harf told Fox News’ Martha MacCallum on “The First 100 Days. “And we have seen no evidence … that there was partisan political notice behind this and we can’t say that unless there’s actual evidence to back that up.”

 

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, asked about the revelations at Monday’s briefing, declined to comment specifically on what role Rice may have played or officials’ motives.

 

“I’m not going to comment on this any further until [congressional] committees have come to a conclusion,” he said, while contrasting the media’s alleged “lack” of interest in these revelations with the intense coverage of suspected Trump-Russia links.

 

When names of Americans are incidentally collected, they are supposed to be masked, meaning the name or names are redacted from reports – whether it is international or domestic collection, unless it is an issue of national security, crime or if their security is threatened in any way. There are loopholes and ways to unmask through backchannels, but Americans are supposed to be protected from incidental collection. Sources told Fox News that in this case, they were not.

 

This comes in the wake of Evelyn Farkas’ television interview last month in which the former Obama deputy secretary of defense said in part: “I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill – it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before President Obama leaves the administration.”

 

Meanwhile, Fox News also is told that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes knew about unmasking and leaking back in January, well before President Trump’s tweet in March alleging wiretapping.

 

Nunes has faced criticism from Democrats for viewing pertinent documents on White House grounds and announcing their contents to the press. But sources said “the intelligence agencies slow-rolled Nunes. He could have seen the logs at other places besides the White House SCIF [secure facility], but it had already been a few weeks. So he went to the White House because he could protect his sources and he could get to the logs.”

 

As the Obama administration left office, it also approved new rules that gave the NSA much broader powers by relaxing the rules about sharing intercepted personal communications and the ability to share those with 16 other intelligence agencies.

 

Rice is no stranger to controversy. As the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, she appeared on several Sunday news shows to defend the adminstration’s [sic] later debunked claim that the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on a U.S. consulate in Libya was triggered by an Internet video.

 

Rice also told ABC News in 2014 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl “served the United States with honor and distinction” and that he “wasn’t simply a hostage; he was an American prisoner of war captured on the battlefield.”

 

Bergdahl is currently facing court-martial on charges of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy for allegedly walking off his post in Afghanistan.

 

Adam Housley joined Fox News Channel (FNC) in 2001 and currently serves as a Los Angeles-based senior correspondent.

 

+++

SOURCES: SUSAN RICE BEHIND UNMASKING OF TRUMP OFFICIALS

White House counsel reportedly ID’d former national security adviser

 

By GARTH KANT

Updated: 04/03/2017 at 11:05 PM

WND

 

WASHINGTON – Multiple reports indicate former National Security Adviser Susan Rice was the Obama administration official who requested the unmasking of incoming Trump administration officials.

 

Mike Cernovich broke the story in an article in Medium on Sunday that said, “The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person responsible for the unmasking after examining Rice’s document log requests.”

 

Unmasking is the revealing of names within the intelligence community of U.S. citizens whose communications were monitored during foreign surveillance.

 

According to Fox News, the unmasked names of people associated with Donald Trump were sent widely to top officials in the Obama administration.

 

That is a potential felony.

 

The unmasked names were reportedly sent to every member of the National Security Council, former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, then-CIA Director John Brennan and some officials at the Defense Department.

 

The NSA is required to remove the names of Americans incidentally collected during foreign surveillance before sharing intelligence with other agencies unless there is an issue of national security, but Rice reportedly requested the unmasking of the identities of Trump associates.

 

Sources said …….

 

+++

BOMBSHELL REPORT: Obama National Security Advisor SUSAN RICE Behind Unmasking Of Trump Transition Team

 

By BEN SHAPIRO

APRIL 3, 2017

Daily Wire

 

In a massive scoop, on Monday morning Eli Lake of Bloomberg reported that Barack Obama’s national security advisor, Susan Rice, repeatedly requested information from the intelligence community on members of the Trump transition team and campaign, unmasking them to an audience beyond the intelligence community in the process. Normally, raw intelligence masks the identity of American citizens caught up in legal surveillance of other targets.

 

Here’s Lake:

 

In February [National Security Council senior director for intelligence] Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice’s multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities. He brought this to the attention of the White House General Counsel’s office, who reviewed more of Rice’s requests and instructed him to end his own research into the unmasking policy. The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations – primarily between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition, but also in some cases direct contact between members of the Trump team and monitored foreign officials. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration. 

 

Rice denied that she knew anything about members of the Trump transition caught up in incidental intelligence gathering last month. As Lake also points out, the revelation that Rice requested the documents would explain House Intelligence Chair Devin Nunes’ trip to the White House two weeks ago – he needed to go there to view Rice’s missives. It would also explain why Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the most ardent Trump critic on wiretapping and leaks, suddenly went silent over the weekend after seeing documents the White House presented to him.

 

This is indeed a huge story for the Trump White House. It doesn’t change the inaccuracy of Trump’s accusations that he was wiretapped by the Obama administration – there is still zero evidence to support that claim. But it demonstrates that the Trump team was not only targeted by members of the Obama intelligence community for unmasking and likely leaking, but that such unmasking went to the very top of the Obama administration.

 

And here’s another inconvenient fact …

 

+++

Benghazi Liar Susan Rice’s Treachery Continues

 

By Daniel John Sobieski

April 4, 2017

American Thinker

 

Call it the tale of two National Security Advisers, Michael Flynn and Susan Rice. As much as Flynn has taken fire as being an architect of unspecified “collusion” with the Russians, Susan Rice has been like the iceberg that sank the Titanic — barely visible above water but dangerous enough to threaten the Trump administration’s ship of state.

 

As reported by Circa News, Rice, while serving as Obama’s National Security Adviser, requested the unmasking of the names of Team Trump officials mentioned in the so-called “incidental” surveillance  of the Trump transition team:

 

Computer logs that former President Obama’s team left behind in the White House indicate his national security adviser Susan Rice accessed numerous intelligence reports during Obama’s last seven months in office that contained National Security Agency intercepts involving Donald Trump and his associates, Circa has learned.

 

Intelligence sources said the logs discovered by National Security Council staff suggested Rice’s interest in the NSA materials, some of which included unmasked Americans’ identities, appeared to begin last July around the time Trump secured the GOP nomination and accelerated after Trump’s election in November launched a transition that continued through January.

 

The intelligence reports included some intercepts of Americans talking to foreigners and many more involving foreign leaders talking about the future president, his campaign associates or his transition, the sources said. Most if not all had nothing to do with the Russian election interference scandal, the sources said, speaking only on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the materials.

 

Ordinarily, such references to Americans would be redacted or minimized by the NSA before being shared with outside intelligence sources, but in these cases names were sometimes unmasked at the request of Rice or the intelligence reports were specific enough that the American’s identity was easily ascertained, the sources said.

 

Well, isn’t that special? While Trump’s pick for this sensitive post was under scrutiny, Obama’s adviser was doing opposition research which involved data mining classified intelligence reports. Rice requested the unmasking of names, something only three people, according to Circa, were authorized to do:

 

Dozens of times in 2016, those intelligence reports identified Americans who were directly intercepted talking to foreign sources or were the subject of conversations between two or more monitored foreign figures. Sometimes the Americans’ names were officially unmasked; other times they were so specifically described in the reports that their identities were readily discernible. Among those cleared to request and consume unmasked NSA-based intelligence reports about U.S. citizens were Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice, his CIA Director John Brennan and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

 

If Susan Rice had worked for Richard Nixon, she could have been one of his Watergate “plumbers”, perhaps retiring as plumber emeritus. We are all familiar with Susan Rice’s tour of the Sunday talk shows after the Benghazi terrorist attack. That was no accident, but a calculated part of the Obama administration’s disinformation campaign to protect President Obama’s reelection chances and …

 

+++

‘Absolutely false’: Top Obama adviser denies she ‘unmasked’ Trump associates for political purposes

 

By Natasha Bertrand

April 4, 2017

Business Insider

 

Former national security adviser Susan Rice told MSNBC on Tuesday that allegations she “unmasked” associates of Donald Trump for political reasons while she served in the Obama administration were “absolutely false.”

 

Bloomberg and Fox on Monday reported that Rice had tried to unmask, or learn the identities of, officials on Trump’s transition team whose conversations with foreign agents — or conversations those agents were having about the transition officials — were incidentally collected during routine intelligence-gathering operations. The Daily Caller then reported that Rice had created a “spreadsheet” with the names she had unmasked.

 

“The allegation is that somehow Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes,” Rice told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. “That’s absolutely false. [Yeah right, & she never lied about Benghazi either]

 

“I was the National Security Adviser.  My job is to protect the American people and the security of our country.  That’s …

 

+++

Rand Paul calls for Susan Rice to testify on unmasking Trump officials

 

By Juliegrace Brufke, DCNF

April 4, 2017 

BizPAC Review

 

GOP Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said he believes former National Security Advisor Susan Rice should testify before Congress on her request to unmask the names of Trump transition officials collected during routine intelligence-gathering operations.

 

Paul argued the situation should not be downplayed, saying reforms need to be made to prevent individuals from being blackmailed on personal aspects of their lives through unmasking. He noted there was nothing stopping the former administration from looking through Trump officials and national security advisors’ conversations during the transition window.

 

“If it is allowed, we shouldn’t be allowing it, but I don’t think should just discount how big a deal it is that Susan Rice was looking at these,” he told reporters Monday. “And she needs to be asked, ‘Did President Obama ask her to do this? Was this a directive from President Obama?  I think she should testify under oath on this.”

 

Paul said he has long thought there are too many people with the ability to unmask individuals.

 

“The law says you can’t reverse target people, but how would you know that once you get inside the brain and the people that are unmasking people,” Paul continued. “So, what if I decided to unmask and I’m there and I only unmask the conversations of my Democrat opponents — shouldn’t there be more restrictions for unmasking people in the political process?”

 

He said he believes there should be …

++++++++++

VIDEO: Susan Rice Requested Intel to Unmask Names of Trump Transition Officials

 

Posted by Lionel Nation

Published on Apr 3, 2017

 

BloombergView’s Eli Lake reports that White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The pattern of Rice’s requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like “U.S. Person One.” Not this time. It was Suzie, kids.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel

The Official Lionel READ THE REST

 

+++

FORMER US ATTORNEY JOSEPH DIGENOVA: SUSAN RICE ORDERED SPY AGENCIES TO PRODUCE ‘DETAILED SPREADSHEETS’ INVOLVING TRUMP

 

By ALICIA

APRIL 4, 2017

Patriot Tribune

 

I CAN’T SAY I’M REALLY SURPRISED CONSIDERING THIS IS THE SAME LYING FRAUD WHO GOT HER JOB AS NSA ADVISER AS A POLITICAL FAVOR FROM OBAMA/CLINTON FOR BEING THE FRONT-PERSON IN THE BENGHAZI VIDEO LYING SCHEME.

 

And she did this all on her own, huh? Do you believe that?

 

Daily Caller:

 

Former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice ordered U.S. spy agencies to produce “detailed spreadsheets” of legal phone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides when he was running for president, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova.

 

“What was produced by the intelligence community at the request of Ms. Rice were detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals,” diGenova told The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group Monday.

 

“The overheard conversations involved no illegal activity by anybody of the Trump associates, or anyone they were speaking with,” diGenova said. “In short, the only apparent illegal activity was the unmasking of the people in the calls.”

 

Other official sources with direct knowledge and who requested anonymity confirmed to TheDCNF diGenova’s description of surveillance reports Rice ordered one year before the 2016 presidential election. More

 

VIDEO: Hannity: Susan Rice has a lot of explaining to do

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Apr 3, 2017

 

Multiple reports reveal the former Obama adviser requested the names of Trump transition team members be unmasked.

 

+++

Former US Attorney: Susan Rice Ordered Spy Agencies To Produce ‘Detailed Spreadsheets’ Involving Trump

 

By Richard Pollock

04/03/2017 10:08 PM 

Daily Caller

 

Update: In response to a question Tuesday from NBC News reporter Andrea Mitchell, former Obama White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice denied that she “prepared” spreadsheets of surveilled telephone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides. The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group, however, reported that Rice “ordered” the spreadsheets to be produced.

 

In addition, former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova, one of TheDCNF’s sources, said Tuesday in response to Rice that her denial “would come as quite a surprise to the government officials who have reviewed dozens of those spreadsheets.” 

 

 

+++

No Proof of Trump-Russia Collusion but Lots of Evidence of Obama Spying

 

By Onan Coca

April 4, 2017

Constitution.com

 

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson ripped the national media to shreds while condemning the Obama era White House for wrongfully spying on American citizens for political purposes.

 

Carlson argued that while media continues to focus in on some phantom collusion between President Trump and the Russian government, something for which they have NO PROOF, they are actively ignoring the real scandal unfolding before their eyes. Susan Rice, one of President Obama’s closest advisors, has been caught wrongfully unmasking members of the Trump campaign and transition teams for what seem to be nakedly political purposes. How do we know she did it for political purposes? Many of the reports now being produced show that the data that Rice was collecting had nothing to do with Russia or other national security issues, meaning that she unmasked the names of members of the Trump team without cause.

 

This fact is what Carlson finds most disturbing because it means that civil libertarians were right all along – there really is NOTHING we can do to stop the government from spying on us.

 

 

VIDEO: Tucker: Susan Rice revelation more disturbing than Russia

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Apr 3, 2017

 

Carlson then transitioned into a conversation with former Obama advisor David Tafuri, a conversation that grew quite heated when Tafuri argued that the Russia story was the real issue here. Carlson pressed, as he has done time and again with liberals and journalists, for Tafuri to present ANY EVIDENCE that there was collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Or, for that matter, for Tafuri to present any evidence that Russia had any impact on the recent election. Of course, Tafuri could provide none, nor has any liberal politician or liberal member of the media been able to show a tangible connection between Russia and recent events.

 

 

VIDEO: Rice unmasked as Team Trump unmasker: What it really means

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Apr 3, 2017

 

+++

FAKE-NEWS GIANTS CLAIM SUSAN RICE SPY SCANDAL IS ‘FAKE’

Chorus of legacy media: Nothing to see here

 

By ALICIA POWE

April 4, 2017

WND

 

WASHINGTON – Is it a real story, or is it fake news?

 

That’s the raging debate about the exploding scandal over Susan Rice’s “unmasking” of incoming Trump administration officials when she served as President Barack Obama’s national security adviser.

 

Despite some likening the White House use of classified leaks for political purposes to a scandal bigger than Watergate, media outlets Tuesday were shooting down – or flat-out ignoring – the blockbuster report that verified the Obama administration surveilled the Trump team.

 

 

+++

Susan Rice Responds To Trump Unmasking Allegations: “I Leaked Nothing To Nobody”

 

By Tyler Durden

Apr 4, 2017 9:47 PM

ZeroHedge

 

If anyone expected former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, the same Susan Rice who “stretched the truth” about Benghazi, to admit in her first public appearance after news that she unmasked members of the Trump team to admit she did something wrong, will be disappointed. Instead, moments ago she told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that she categorically denied that the Obama administration inappropriately spied on members of the Trump transition team.

 

[Several MSNBC Tweets of Mitchell/Rice interview]

 

We doubt that anyone’s opinion will change after hearing the above especially considering that, in addition to Benghazi, Rice is the official who praised Bowe Bergdahl for his “honorable service” and claimed he was captured “on the battlefield”, and then just two weeks ago, she told PBS that she didn’t know anything about the unmasking.

 

Unfortunately, Mitchell’s list of questions did not go so far as to ask about her false claim in the PBS interview, in which she said “I know nothing about unmasking Trump officials.”

 

It is thus hardly surprising that now that her memory has been “refreshed” about her role in the unmasking, that Rice clearly remembers doing nothing at all wrong.

 

On Monday night, Rand Paul and other Republicans called for Rice to testify under oath, a request she sidestepped on Tuesday. “Let’s see what comes,” she told Mitchell, when asked if she would testify on …

______________

Do YOU Trust Benghazi/Bergdahl Liar?

John R. Houk

© April 5, 2017

___________

Why Susan Rice’s Role In The Obama Spying Story Is A Big Deal

 

Copyright © 2017 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved

____________

Susan Rice requested to unmask names of Trump transition officials, sources say

 

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2017 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

 

[Blog Editor: FYI, I did not get Fox News permission to cross post. If requested, this cross post will be removed.]

The Deceitful Misinformation that Created a TRO


Intro to Sutliff ‘The Deceitful Misinformation that Created a TRO’

By Paul Sutliff

Intro by John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Posted 4/4/17

 

Does anyone notice that activist Judges and Dem Party House and Senate members cry that President Trump’s travel ban Executive Orders are unconstitutional BUT don’t actually cite where in the Constitution they base that accusation?

 

They CAN NOT because NO such citation will be found. When the Left screams unconstitutional it typically is based on Leftist ideology and a false premise that Leftist values are American values. For that matter, there is not one iota of Left Wing values that can be supported in the Original Intent of the Founding Fathers’ eventual ratified document called the U.S. Constitution or the first 10 Amendments labeled the Bill of Rights!

 

I have little doubt a Lefty will fabricate some kind of Living Constitution as if it was in the U.S. Constitution; however, note that such a citation will have little to do with the Constitution and more to do with the Dem view that current environment and Activist Judge case law is the Constitution.

 

With this Living Constitution baloney in mind, Hawaiian US District Judge Derrick Watson amended his mid-March original Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against the latest Trump Executive Order (EO) to fit the Hawaiian Attorney General’s idiotic Living Constitution objections to extend the judicial order longer than the original:

 

HONOLULU — A federal judge in Hawaii decided Wednesday to extend his order blocking President Donald Trump’s travel ban.

 

US District Judge Derrick Watson issued the longer-lasting hold on the ban just hours after hearing arguments.

 

Hawaii says the policy discriminates against Muslims and hurts the state’s tourist-dependent economy. The implied message in the revised ban is like a “neon sign flashing ‘Muslim ban, Muslim ban'” that the government didn’t bother to turn off, state Attorney General Douglas Chin told the judge.

 

Extending the temporary order until the state’s lawsuit was resolved would … READ THE REST (Hawaii judge extends temporary restraining order against Trump’s revised travel ban; By Jennifer Sinco Kelleher, Associated Press; Business Insider; 3/29/17 11:14 PM)

 

Paul Sutliff believes the Hawaiian AG fed Judge Watson a pack of lies. That is significant because this Judge based his ruling on AG Chin’s information. Below is Paul’s analysis.

 

JRH 4/4/17

Please Support NCCR

**************

The Deceitful Misinformation that Created a TRO

 

By Paul Sutliff 

April 3, 2017 5:24 PM

Paul Sutliff on Civilization Jihad

 

AG Chin Misinforms Federal Judge

 

When evidence exists to prove a state attorney general purposefully misinformed a federal judge whether IN COURT or through paperwork as to what evidence exists to support a stand against the President of the United States what is this called? Is it perjury?

 

Hawaii AG Doug Chin was not under oath, but there is an expectation of professionalism and truthfulness when presenting before a judge whether through passing of papers OR standing and presenting a case! So why did he misinform Judge Derrick Watson about the statistics related to the University of Hawai’i.

 

AG Chin claimed that if Trump’s order restricting travel of those from 6 countries were to be enforced, the University of Hawai’i would suffer financially.

 

… that any prospective recruits who are without visas as of March 16, 2017 will not be able to travel to Hawaii to attend the University. As a result, the University will not be able to collect the tuition that those students would have paid. (http://www.hid.uscourts.gov/docs/orders/DKW_order.pdf)

 

Judge Watson’s TRO cited AG Douglass Chin’s additional claim that if the ban goes into effect it will likely cause the closing of the Persian Literature, Language and Culture Program.

 

So what are the actual statistics? I filed a FOIA request with the University of Hawai’i to find out.

 

According to the University of Hawai’i the entire University system has 13,352 students. Of those 13,352 students only, 43% of the student body as a whole were Iranian. One student came from Libya. One from Somalia and one from Yemen. In all 61 students at the University of Hawai’i would be effected through President Trump’s Executive Order. IF THEY WERE NOT ALREADY HERE!

 

Banned Countries by Trump EO Total # of Students in UH System Percentage of Student Body
Iran 58 0.43%
Libya 1 0.01
Somalia 1 0.01
Sudan 0 0.00
Syria 0 0
Yemen 1 .01
TOTAL 61 .46

 

Attorney General Douglass Chin made a claim that a drop in these students’ ability to attend classes would likely close the Persian Language, Linguistics and Culture Program courses.  Only 52 students in total are enrolled in these courses taught by two professors. If AG Chin had a chance to find a negative effect against the University of Hawaii this was it. In all 4 students would be effected. Those four are from Iran, bringing the percentage of students effected of those that attend to 8%.

 

This brings us to asking simple and important questions. How could Hawaii State Attorney General not have access to this information? It took me one week to obtain it and I live in New York. This brings us back to, is it allowable for an attorney to purposefully withhold information for the purpose of misinforming a judge.

 

Attorneys Joel Cohen and Danielle Alfonso Walsman wrote about just this type of thing in the New York Law Journal on June 1, 2009 in an article entitled Asking for Trouble: When Lawyers Lie to Judges.

 

One of the first and most obvious things we learn as lawyers, and, indeed, the disciplinary rules make clear, is that lawyers must follow the same instructions given to clients in preparation for testimony: You cannot ever lie in court! And if a false representation is made to the court, even unintentionally, a lawyer who later realizes his error is affirmatively required to take reasonable measures to remedy the statement.

 

I do not know if Attorney General Douglass Chin considers his filing for a TRO against President Trump’s executive order a place he should be allowed to create misinformation to prove his point, but in either case these statistics prove that the TRO is at least partially established on false and misleading information. If the Judge had not bothered to pre-write his decision, he could have easily verified the information I am sharing and in so doing exposed AG Chin as not being wholly truthful in court.

 

The sad truth then is that this is likely evidence of collusion between the Hawaii AG and the Judge Derrick Watson. If Judge Derrick Watson had not come to the bench with a pre-judgment, he likely would have checked the statistical claims of the AG.

_____________

Edited by John R. Houk

 

About Paul Sutliff

 

I am writer and a teacher. Here is a link to my latest book portraying the truth about Civilization Jihad