Hannity Outline of Dossiers & Memos


John R. Houk

© February 6, 2018

 

Sean Hannity’s show was awesome last night (2/5/18). Hannity’s opening monologue outlines (he even provides lists as he speaks) how the Memo constructed by the GOP members of the House Intel Committee demonstrates how Crooked Hillary’s campaign used the FBI and Christopher Steele creating lies to harm President Trump before and after his election.

 

The Dems led by liar Adam Schiff have constructed a Minority-Dem Memo claiming the GOP Memo is filled with political duplicity. Although President Trump hasn’t decided to release the Dem Memo, many pundits expect him to do so. Yet rumor has it that the Dem Memo does not contradict the GOP Memo one iota. Rather the Dem agenda is to discredit the GOP Memo by attacking Intel Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and prominent Intel Committee member – Trey Gowdy.

 

Attacking the messenger to discredit facts and truth is the standard method utilized by Alinsky, Obama and Crooked Hillary.

 

To drive Hannity’s opening monologue home, the show has who Hannity calls “The Great One” – Mark Levin. Levin corroborates everything Hannity lined out but emphasizes one key feature – Crooked Hillary paid for it all.

 

Below are the two videos from the same show.

 

JRH 2/6/18

Please Support NCCR

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

VIDEO: Hannity: Second memo exposes deep state corruption

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Feb 5, 2018

 

Former British spy Christopher Steele was working on a second anti-Trump dossier that contained allegations that were fed to him by Clinton associates and the Obama State Department.

 

FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most watched television news channel for more than 15 years and according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll, is the most trusted television news source in the country. Owned by 21st Century Fox, FNC is available in more than 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.

 

READ THE REST

 

++++++++++++++++

VIDEO: Mark Levin talks about the memo madness

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Feb 5, 2018

 

Upcoming host of ‘Life, Liberty & Levin’ sounds off on ‘Hannity.’

 

READ THE REST

 

2nd Steele Dossier, Dems & FISC Judges American Traitors


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© February 6, 2018

 

Two posts (BPR & CFP) are telling their readers that more and more corruption is being exposed. Showing again that Dems LIE and the former Obama Administration is riddled with a load treasonous Deep State Comrades to the Constitution.

 

The BPR post is about two Senators (Grassley & Graham) of the Senate Judiciary Committee have sent a criminal referral to the FBI to investigate Christopher Steele lying under oath. A second deceitful memo authored by Steele evidently was fed “allegations” by Clinton associates against President Trump.

 

Judi McLeod has an interesting article at CFP indicating the black robed FISC Judges may have been in on Obama Administration, FBI-Leadership & DOJ-Leadership coup agenda to prevent or impeach President Trump depending on the November 2016 election results.

 

Talk about a swamp needing drained. These nefarious actions if ever successful renders our Constitutional Republic null and void!

 

JRH 2/6/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Second memo triggers ’emergency review’ request: Hillary’s people were ‘feeding’ info to dossier author

 

By Luis Miguel 

February 5, 2018 

BizPac Review

 

Christopher Steele isn’t getting off the hook so easily.

According a memo released by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, Steele, the former British MI6 agent who compiled the Trump dossier commissioned by Fusion GPS, was fed allegations from Clinton associates during his research on President Trump, Fox News reports.

 

Fox News VIDEO: Criminal referral says Clinton associates fed info to Steele

http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=5726475066001&w=466&h=263Watch the latest video at foxnews.com
The Monday memo is an unclassified, redacted version of a criminal referral filed on Jan. 4 by Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) that suggests Steele lied to the FBI about his contacts or that the FBI misrepresented Steele’s statements.

 

Grassley and Graham wrote to the Justice Department in January, requesting an investigation of Steele. The Senators now ask the FBI for an emergency review of their criminal referral so that it can be made public with limited redactions.

 

In the memo, the lawmakers state “there is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility.”

 

Christopher Steele. (Photo by Victoria Jones/PA Images via Getty Images).

 

One portion of the heavily-redacted memo claimed that Steele received information from “a foreign sub-source who ‘is in touch with (redacted), a contact of (redacted), a friend of the Clintons, who passed it to (redacted).”

 

“It is troubling enough that the Clinton Campaign funded Mr. Steele’s work, but that these Clinton associates were contemporaneously feeding Mr. Steele allegations raises additional concerns about his credibility,” Grassley and Graham wrote to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in January.

 

The Grassley-Graham memo says that Steele used the information from the “foreign sub-source” to write an additional document related to President Trump’s ties to Russia that was not included in the infamous dossier published by BuzzFeed in January 2017, the Washington Post reports.

 

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA). (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite).

 

According to the memo, Clinton associate Cody Shearer was in contact with Steele about anti-Trump research. Jonathan Winer, an Obama State Department official, was a connection between Steele and the State Department during the 2016 election.

 

A House Intelligence Committee memo declassified on Friday revealed that the largely unverified Steele dossier, which was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign through the law firm Perkins Coie, was used by the FBI to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on Trump associate Carter Page.

 

Friday’s memo showed that the FBI was aware of the dossier’s origins but did not disclose that information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court when applying for a FISA warrant.

 

The FBI opposed the release of the Grassley-Graham referral, saying the Bureau “respects” the committee’s desire for transparency but that it “cannot and will not weaken its commitment” to protecting classified information.

 

Sens. Grassley and Graham said the FBI’s remarks “mischaracterize and misstate” the amount of classified information in the document, and have asked the Bureau and Justice Department to “immediately review the classified referral in light of [Friday’s] declassification and provide the Committee with the declassified version by no later than February 6, 2018.”

 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik).

 

Despite Democrats’ best efforts, the Clintons’ full role in the Russia-Trump investigation is coming to light.

 

+++++

Obama’s FISA Men In Black Played Key Role in Russian Election Conspiracy

 

By Judi McLeod

February 5, 2018

Canada Free Press

 

FISC Membership – CFP

 

Add Barack Obama-appointed Foreign Intelligence Court (FISC) members to the braggadocio list of the “17 intelligence agencies” that Hillary Clinton openly bragged about at the Oct. 19, 2016 presidential debate when she told debate host Chris Wallace that “17 of our intelligence agencies have confirmed”, the highest levels of the Russian government, including Putin himself had been caught up in “an effort to influence our election”.

 

What Clinton was, in essence saying, was that the fix was in; that Candidate Donald Trump would have zero chance of beating the rap of colluding with the Russians because “17 intelligence agencies”, including FISA judges, were at the ready to smear him as a Russian spy to discredit, first his candidacy, and then his unwanted and unexpected presidency.

 

Clinton’s admission made on national television during the University of Nevada presidential debate was jaw-dropping in its breath-taking brazenness for any who were aware.

 

Now that it’s out there, heads should roll. (video 25:16 mark)

 

CFP VIDEO: Third and final Presidential Debate (Trump/Clinton – 1:37:27)

http://players.brightcove.net/1155968404/r1WF6V0Pl_default/index.html?videoId=5178362196001
Up to the present, millions suspected the FBI, the DoJ, Jim Comey and Robert Mueller of foul play.

 

FISC sat quietly back in obscurity with no one noticing the key role it played in the Hillary Clinton/DNC-manufactured ‘Russians-stole-the-election’ conspiracy.

 

But Obama’s Men in Black were onboard from the get-go:

 

“Is it surprising that nearly all of the judges who serve on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA)– the court that gave the go-ahead to wiretap the Trump campaign–were appointed by Barack Obama? (Media Equalizer, Feb. 5, 2018)

 

According to Media Equalizer, in fact 10 of the 11 judges were Obama appointees,  including Rudolph Contreras who was recused from the Michael Flynn case for undisclosed reasons, and granted the warrant based on fake material provided by the Clinton campaign after another judge denied it.

 

“Trial lawyer Robert Barnes notes that the FISA court does not operate like other courts. Because the court’s jurisdiction is limited to legitimate security threats, its judges are supposed to hold the evidence they consider to a much higher standard.

 

 

 

 

 

“As NPR noted in 2013, the FISA court has not really functioned like a typical federal court since 2008 when Obama took office.

 

“It “became less a court than an administrative entity or ministerial clerk,” said William Banks, director of the Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism at Syracuse University. “They weren’t reviewing law anymore; they were simply sort of stamping papers as approved or filed.”

 

“That a DNC sponsored document that was poorly written and riddled with spelling errors was considered to meet the court’s high standard raises serious concerns. It is also important to recognize the damage caused by the judges at the FISA court when they used their secretive status to influence America’s most important political election.”

 

In order to keep presidential election campaigns safe from the sabotage of Hillary Clinton’s boasted “17 intelligence agencies”, patriots must learn to see through major media distractions.

 

During the 2016 election campaign Clinton tore a page from Obama’s stylebook.

 

Barack Hussein Obama wasn’t kidding when he boasted just five days before the 2008 presidential election that he intended to “fundamentally transform America”.  People were too caught up in the media hype that presented him as the Messiah to take the radical Marxist at his word.

 

Hillary Clinton wasn’t kidding when she outed the 17 intelligent agencies at the last presidential debate before election at the University of Nevada debate.

 

She counted on people being too caught up in her health issues, including her could- have-been-staged faint routine which televised her being shoved like a side of beef into a parked van on the 15th anniversary of 9/11.

 

Time for patriots to return presidential election campaigns to We the People.

 

Boot spy agencies out of the American election campaign process.

 

(#BootSpyAgenciesOutOfTheAmericanElectionCampaignProcess)

__________________

2nd Steele Dossier, Dems & FISC Judges American Traitors

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© February 6, 2018

__________________

Second memo triggers ’emergency review’ request: Hillary’s people were ‘feeding’ info to dossier author

 

Luis Miguel is a South Florida-based writer covering politics, society, and culture.

 

© 2018 BizPac Review. All Rights Reserved.

__________________

Obama’s FISA Men In Black Played Key Role in Russian Election Conspiracy

 

Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com. Older articles by Judi McLeod

 

Copyright © Canada Free Press

 

Liberty’s Worth


Justin Smith writes about how FISA warrants violate the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment:

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

Justin is absolutely correct. On a personal level, I feel during war that security overrides Rights. Friends we have been in a state of war with Islamic terrorists since September 11, 2001.

 

NOW! I have found myself modifying my perspective of the Patriot Act and FISA warrants. Once it has become apparent that Executive Administration of President Barack Hussein Obama weaponized FISA warrants in an effort to maintain a Left-Wing government under Crooked Hillary, I have begun to re-think my concept of the usage of FISA warrants used without probable cause against U.S. citizens. Incidentally, FISA Warrants were not designed for U.S. citizens but rather against non-citizens that might pose a terrorist threat against Americans.

 

In FISA abuses the FBI, Intelligence Agencies, the State Department and probably more from the Executive Branch; used back door unmasking to spy on American citizens as well as potential dangerous foreign entities.

 

These FISA abuses under Obama (who also weaponized the IRS and what else?) have made America a Leftist police state with the full cooperation of the MSM that pro-Leftist in influencing America.

 

Well that is enough of me. Read Justin Smith’s take on how the Fourth Amendment has been unconstitutionally annulled.

 

JRH 2/4/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Liberty’s Worth

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 2/3/18 3:34 PM

 

One’s liberty is the most precious thing next to life itself, and Americans must stop standing in silence, while Presidents, past and present, and Congressmen erode and trample our Fourth Amendment Right, no matter their intentions, through Orwellian legislation that directly contravenes it. Everyone must vociferously and fiercely oppose and counter these so-called “leaders” and their illegal violations of the Constitution, by replacing all those, who recently voted for the FISA Reauthorization Act of 2017, because no one, even in the name of national security, has any right or authority to take our liberty.

 

The FISA Reauthorization Act passed in the House, 256 to 164, on January 11th, and it passed by 65 – 34 vote [Blog Editor: Justin’s original text said the FISA reauthorization succeeded by only one vote. I did not find that vote, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t occur. Many votes often occur until a final vote is taken which often appears different than previous votes for constituents who agree with the majority vote.] in the Senate [S. 139], on January 18th; and, through the House vote on Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, the House rejected the USA Rights Act, 233 to 183, and its requirement that officials must obtain warrants before searching and reading Americans’ emails, after they are acquired in any surveillance operation.

 

Bulk surveillance on all Americans without a warrant, heretofore known to be unConstitutional, is now deemed acceptable by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and the U.S. Congress, but incredulously, they do make one exception. A warrant is required for the emails of the subject in an open criminal investigation, where no national security concerns exist, thus providing criminals more rights than normal, law-abiding everyday U.S. citizens.

 

One must also be shocked by House Joint Resolution 76, which was passed by this Congress and signed by President Trump on August 22, 2017. It allows the searches of homes and businesses without any warrant, in areas adjacent to the Washington [D.C.] Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and extending miles outward in all directions, and far into nearby regions of Maryland and Virginia.

 

All of the aforementioned goes against the Fourth Amendment, which states that Americans’ rights “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.”

 

In a ninety-nine page opinion for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Judge Rosemary Collyer had many harsh terms for the Obama Administration. She noted that the Obama administration had ignored Section 702 procedures designed to ensure Americans’ civil rights were safeguarded, as any administration performs the necessary work to provide for our national security. Collyer charged that Obama’s administration had violated Section 702’s requirements and created a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

 

The serious nature of these developments is further highlighted by new evidence exposed by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, who has deep insight through a “top secret” clearance. He charged on January 18th, that seen through the prism of overt pro-Hillary bias and anti-Trump prejudice exhibited by the CIA, FBI and other agencies and their use of National Security Agency secret information for political purposes, they were all untrustworthy with our information and the nation’s intelligence secrets. The many abuses under the Obama Administration exposes the danger of giving too much power to our intelligence agencies, who seem far too willing to use stored metadata for harassment, blackmail and to further their own political agendas.

 

FBI Director Christopher Wray viewed Nunes’s classified House Intelligence Memo on Sunday January 21st. The next day Deputy Director Andrew McCabe announced his “retirement”. McCabe was named in the memo, as the person who used the unverified Steele Dossier to illegally obtain a FISA warrant against President Trump.

 

The House Intelligence Committee Memo released on February 2nd shows that a presidential campaign was spied on. An unverified dossier, that nobody will stand by under oath was used in an illegal manner to obtain a FISA warrant. And yet, with this knowledge in hand seven days before the House vote, Representative Nunes and twenty-one other House committee members kept over five-hundred of their colleagues in the dark, about domestic spying abuses, while the debate on that very issue was ongoing, and they voted to expand the power of those who abused it.

 

Surely the expansion of FISA would never have passed the Senate, if the damning information contained in the House Intelligence Committee Memo had been released seven days earlier. If just one conscientious senator had known of the NSA and FBI abuses concealed by the House Intelligence Committee, and changed his vote, the expansion would have failed.

 

Any American paying attention is now asking, “What is going on with our government?” They know that the Fourth Amendment has been abrogated, gutted, by the very representatives and senators who swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend our U.S. Constitution.

 

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) had vowed to fight reauthorization of Section 702 without reforms. Just prior to the vote on the USA Rights Act, he stated: “Our Founders gave us the Fourth Amendment to prevent a tyrannical government from invading our privacy, and we are fools to relinquish that hard-won right because of fear. The Founders did not include the Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights as a suggestion.”

 

Significantly, on January 11th, President Trump noted that Section 702 was used to “badly surveil and abuse the Trump campaign“, as he expressed skepticism regarding FISA. At the very least, this should have withheld his signature, until FISA was reformed. He would have served America better, if he had followed his initial gut instinct.

 

After signing the bill, President Trump falsely told America that it only targeted foreigners. Is this another case of Trump being easily manipulated by his advisors, or is it one more instance of his own lack of knowledge and preparation on an issue?

 

The FISA Reauthorization Act is now in place until 2024. Each day from this point on, all of us must demand it be rescinded, and before we allow its renewal, it must be reformed.

 

Liberty is the essence of our natural state, so when Congress acts to limit our liberty in favor of greater security, obtained through a FISA operation with highly questionable results in the war on terrorism, they are philosophically, historically and constitutionally wrong. Our liberty is of infinitely greater worth to us, than the security we have instructed Congress to ensure.

 

Congress’s recent actions are moves to permanently destroy our right to privacy, exalting safety over liberty and providing neither. And in the process, limited government is being undone, right before our eyes.

 

As Ludwig von Mises reminds us, government is essentially the negation of liberty. If anyone truly believes that monitoring everyone in America is the least restrictive way to keep us safe, let that person surrender his own privacy. The rest of us will retain ours and provide for our own safety.

 

I did not consent to the abrogation of my Fourth Amendment Right, and I don’t imagine most of America did either. Our rights are inalienable and cannot be separated from us, not by Congress, not by anyone.

 

By Justin O. Smith

________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text embraced by brackets and all source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

True Election Collusion – THE MEMO:


Dems, FBI Leadership & DOJ Leadership

John R. Houk

© February 2, 2018

 

Donald on releasing the FISA Memo (though updated to make the FBI happy) for public consumption:

 

[A] lot of people should be ashamed of themselves.” (quote from BPR)

 

VIDEO: TRUMP REACTS TO FISA MEMO: “I Think It’s Terrible. I Think It’s a Disgrace”

 

Posted by james hoft

Published on Feb 2, 2018

 

TRUMP REACTS TO FISA MEMO: “I Think It’s Terrible. I Think It’s a Disgrace What’s Happening in Our Country”

 

When you read the FISA Memo you must realize it was sanitized to allegedly protect sources and methods of investigation. Even so, it is not a difficult stretch to understand the nefarious nature that Donald Trump was targeted before and after the November 2016 election by Obama Administration leadership (probably including Obama himself). The weaponized police state of Obama, the Dems AND Crooked Hillary tried to feloniously steal the election and failing that, STILL use false and/or fake data to impeach a duly elected President.

 

AND the American free press (aka the Leftist MSM) have been full participants in disseminating the falsified/fake data to an American public of which many believe the Mainstream Media is still a credible source of news.

 

So, this is what I’m going to do for my blog readers. First, I am posting a Fox News’ Catherine Herridge report. Second, the FISA Memo sourced from the Western Journal. WJ leaves out the intro on the original Memo so I am extracting from a pdf downloaded from SCRIBD courtesy of the fake news channel CNBC.com. Last but not least – third, BPR review article entitled, “7 biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just released”.

 

JRH 2/2/18

Please Support NCCR

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

VIDEO: ITS FINALLY HAPPENING!! 4 PAGE FISA MEMO DECLASSIFIED #TRUMP RELEASES 4 PAGE FISA MEMO

 

Posted by wikileaks tv

Published on Feb 2, 2018

 

ITS FINALLY HAPPENING!! 4 PAGE FISA MEMO DECLASSIFIED #TRUMP RELEASES 4 PAGE FISA MEMO

 

SHOCKING revelations

 

Credits: fox news

+++++

THE WHITE HOUSE

WASHINGTON
February 2, 2018

 

The Honorable Devin Nunes

Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
United States Capitol

Washington, DC 20515

 

Dear Mr. Chairman:

 

On January 29, 2018, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (hereinafter “the Committee”) voted to disclose publicly a memorandum containing classified information provided to the Committee in connection with its oversight activities (the “Memorandum,” which is attached to this letter). As provided by clause 11(g) of Rule of the House of Representatives, the Committee has forwarded this Memorandum to the President based on its determination that the release of the Memorandum would serve the public interest.

 

The Constitution vests the President with the authority to protect national security secrets from it disclosure. As the Supreme Court has recognized, it is the President’s responsibility to classify, declassify, and control access to information bearing on our intelligence sources and methods and national defense. See, e.g., Dep’t of Navy v. Egan, 484 US. 518, 527 (1988). In order to facilitate appropriate congressional oversight, the Executive Branch may entrust classified information to the appropriate committees of Congress, as it has done in connection with the Committee’s oversight activities here. The Executive Branch does so on the assumption that the Committee will responsibly protect such classified information, consistent with the laws of the United States.

 

The Committee has now determined that the release of the Memorandum would be appropriate. The Executive Branch, across Administrations of both parties, has worked to accommodate congressional requests to declassify specific materials in the public interest.1 However, public release of classified information by unilateral action of the Legislative Branch is extremely rare and raises significant separation of powers concerns. Accordingly, the Committee’s request to release the Memorandum is interpreted as a request for declassification pursuant to the President’s authority.

 

The President understands that the protection of our national security represents his highest obligation. Accordingly, he has directed lawyers and national security staff to assess the

_________________________________

1 See, e.g. S. Rept. 114-8 at 12 (Administration of Barack Obama) (“On April 3, 2014 . . . the Committee agreed to send the revised Findings and Conclusions, and the updated Executive Summary of the Committee Study, to the President for declassification and public release”); H. Rept. 107-792 (Administration of George W. Bush) (similar); E.O. 12812 (Administration of George H.W. Bush) (noting Senate resolution requesting that President provide for declassification of certain information Via Executive Order).

_________________________________

 

declassification request, consistent with established standards governing the handling of classified information, including those under Section 3.1(d) of Executive Order 13526. Those standards permit declassification when the public interest in disclosure outweighs any need to protect the information. The White House review process also included input from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice. Consistent with this review and these standards, the President has determined that declassification of the Memorandum is appropriate.

 

Based on this assessment and in light of the significant public interest in the memorandum, the President has authorized the declassification of the Memorandum. To be clear, the Memorandum reflects the judgments of its congressional authors. The President understands that oversight concerning matters related to the Memorandum may be continuing. Though the circumstances leading to the declassification through this process are extraordinary, the Executive Branch stands ready to work with Congress to accommodate oversight requests consistent with applicable standards and processes, including the need to protect intelligence sources and methods.

 

Sincerely,

Donald F. McGahn II

Counsel to the President

 

Here’s the Full Text of the FISA Memo Written by Rep. Devin Nunes

 

By George Upper 
February 2, 2018 at 12:05pm

The Western Journal

 

In all cases, any typographical emphasis — whether bold type, italics or underline — is original to the memo. Our goal here was to provide as accurate a representation of the original document as possible while still making it a little easier to read than the facsimile versions currently available online. — Ed. Note

 

January 18, 2018

To: HPSCI Majority Members

From: HPSCI Majority Staff

Subject: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation

 

Purpose

 

This memorandum provides Members an update on significant facts relating to the Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) during the 2016 presidential election cycle. Our findings, which are detailed below, 1) raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.

 

Investigation Update

 

On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a U.S. citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General (DAG), or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division.

 

The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50 U.S.C. §,1805(d)(l)), a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause. Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Then-DAG Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ

 

Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence activity, FISA submissions (including renewals) before the FISC are classified. As such, the public’s confidence in the integrity of the FISA process depends on the court’s ability to hold the government to the highest standard—particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens. However, the FISC’s rigor in protecting the rights of Americans, which is reinforced by 90-day renewals of surveillance orders, is necessarily dependent on the government’s production to the court of all material and relevant facts. This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.

 

1) The “dossier” compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.

 

a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.

b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of—and paid by—the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.

2) The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News — and several other outlets — in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele’s initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington D.C. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed.

 

a) Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jonesarticle by David Corn. Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts with Yahoo and other outlets in September— before the Page application was submitted to the FISC in October — but Steele improperly concealed from and lied to the FBI about those contacts.

b) Steele’s numerous encounters with the media violated the cardinal rule of source handling — maintaining confidentiality — and demonstrated that Steele had become a less than reliable source for the FBI.

 

3) Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” (Emphasis Nunes’.) This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files — but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.

 

a) During this same time period, Ohr’s wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife’s opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Ohrs’ relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC.

 

4) According to the head of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its “infancy” at the time of the initial Page FISA application. After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele’s reporting as only minimally corroborated. Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was — according to his June 2017 testimony — “salacious and unverified.” While the FISA application relied on Steele’s past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations. Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.

 

5) The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel’s Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an “insurance” policy against President Trump’s election.

 

+++

7 biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just released

 

By Luis Miguel 

February 2, 2018

BizPac Review

 

By declassifying the memo, President Trump just blew up Washington, D.C.

 

The controversial FISA memo, released by the House Intelligence Committee to the public on Friday, contains a number of bombshell revelations related to the FBI’s surveillance on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

 

At least one Republican, Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona, concluded that the document shows “clear and convincing evidence of treason.”

 

Here are the biggest takeaways.

 

  1. Andrew McCabe admitted the dossier was used as the justification to secure a FISA warrant on Carter Page

 

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon).

 

“Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] without the Steele dossier information.”

 

  1. The FBI’s probe into the Trump campaign was triggered by aide George Papadopoulos

 

Former Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos.

“The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok.”

 

  1. The FBI had no evidence of a connection between Papadopoulos and Page

 

Former Trump adviser Carter Page. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite).

 

“The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos.”

 

  1. The FBI knew the DNC and Clinton campaign were behind the dossier–but didn’t disclose that knowledge to the FISA court

 

Former FBI Director James Comey. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File).

 

“Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or. any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials.”

 

“The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named US. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a US. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOI at the, time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier).”

 

  1. The FBI paid Christopher Steele to work on the dossier

 

Christopher Steele, the former MI6 agent who compiled the Trump dossier. (Photo by Victoria Jones/PA Images via Getty Images).

 

“The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of – and paid by – the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.”

 

  1. Top DOJ official Bruce Ohr met with Steele in 2016 and told the FBI the British spy had an anti-Trump bias

 

Glenn Simpson, co-founder of Fusion GPS, which paid for the dossier on behalf of the DNC and Clinton campaign. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais).

 

“Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein.

 

“Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he ‘was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.’

 

“This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files, but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.”

 

  1. The memo reveals which officials green-lighted surveillance on Carter

 

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik).

 

“As required by statute, a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause.

 

“Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ.”

 

In response to the memo, President Trump said “it’s a disgrace what’s happening in our country” and that “a lot of people should be ashamed of themselves.”

 

ABC VIDEO VIA TWITTER: A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves

“A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves,” Trump said over the revelations.

 

The president couldn’t have put it any better.

____________________

True Election Collusion – THE MEMO:

Dems, FBI Leadership & DOJ Leadership

John R. Houk

© February 2, 2018

_______________

ITS FINALLY HAPPENING!! 4 PAGE FISA MEMO DECLASSIFIED #TRUMP RELEASES 4 PAGE FISA MEMO

 

Youtube Channel wikileaks tv

_______________

Here’s the Full Text of the FISA Memo Written by Rep. Devin Nunes

 

Copyright ©2017 Liftable Media Inc. All rights reserved.

 

The Western Journal

________________

7 biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just released

 

© 2018 BizPac Review. All Rights Reserved.

 

Trump Hot-Miked After SOTU on FISA Memo


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Posted January 31, 2018

 

After the State of the Union speech last President Trump was caught on mike telling South Carolina GOP Rep. Duncan that he is 100% behind releasing the FISA Memo to the American people. Whether that Presidential answer was the desire of the President’s heart or an actual made decision, only time will tell.

 

VIDEO: Trump caught on hot Mic guaranteeing GOP rep he’ll release Nunes memo ‘100 percent’

 

Posted by Real News Network

Published on Jan 30, 2018

 

President Trump caught on hot Mic on Tuesday after state of the union speech, He guaranteed Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) he’ll release a controversial memo by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA).

 

Below is a Fox News report on the hot mike and that is a computer-generated voice from Youtube channel Today News including the description.

 

JRH 1/31/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Trump overheard saying he is ‘100 percent’ behind releasing surveillance memo

 

By Lukas Mikelionis

January 31, 2018 [circa midnight]

Fox News

 

FOX VIDEO: Trump assures Rep. Duncan that the GOP Memo will be release[d]

Rep. Jeff Duncan urges President Trump to ‘release the memo’ as he exits the House chamber following the State of the Union address.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=5723029867001&w=466&h=263
President Donald Trump was overheard telling a GOP lawmaker Tuesday night that he’s “100 percent” behind releasing a classified Republican intelligence memo detailing alleged surveillance abuses.

 

“Don’t worry,” the president reportedly told U.S. Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., on the House floor after delivering his first State of the Union address. “One hundred percent.”

 

Duncan asked Trump to “release the memo,” a controversial document drafted by U.S. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

 

The House panel voted Monday along party lines to release the memo, prompting a political fight between Republicans and Democrats and pitting Congress against the FBI and the Department of Justice, which object to the release of the four-page document.

 

Republicans said the memo reveals alleged abuses of government surveillance powers in the investigation into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Democrats said the document is selectively edited in an attempt to thwart the investigation.

 

House Speaker Paul Ryan came out Tuesday in support of releasing the memo, but warned against using it to attack special counsel Robert Mueller. “This is a completely separate matter from Bob Mueller’s investigation and his investigation should be allowed to take its course,” he said.

 

FOX VIDEO: Trump reportedly wants FISA memo out now that SOTU is over
http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=5723250745001&w=466&h=263
Ryan added that the memo shows “there may have been malfeasance at the FBI by certain individuals” and raise questions “about whether an American’s civil liberties were violated by the FISA process,” referring to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was extended for an additional six years earlier this month.

 

The Justice Department called the Republican staff memo’s release “unprecedented” and “reckless.” Assistant Attorney General Stephen E. Boyd wrote in a Jan. 24 letter that “Though we are currently unaware of any wrongdoing relating to the FISA process, we agree that any abuse of that system cannot be tolerated.”

 

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray reportedly advised White House Chief of Staff John Kelly against releasing the memo, saying such action would set a dangerous precedent and would not accurately characterize the FBI’s investigative practices, the Washington Post reported.

 

But two senior FBI officials – one from the bureau’s counterintelligence division and the other from the legal division – who reviewed the memo said they “could not point to any factual inaccuracies,” Fox News reported Tuesday.

 

The White House has five days to review the content of the memo and decide whether to release the memo. It said Tuesday that it would conduct a legal and national security review before making the decision.

 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

Lukas Mikelionis is a reporter for FoxNews.com. Follow him on Twitter @LukasMikelionis.

 

++++++++++++++++

VIDEO: After SOTU, Trump Says 5 Words To Congressman That Has Democrats FREAKED OUT

 

Posted by TODAY NEWS

Published on Jan 31, 2018

 

After President Donald Trump gave his brilliant State of the Union address, he was stopped and asked a question about the FISA memo. His five-word answer has Democrats freaked out, and for good reason.

 

The House Intelligence Committee voted on Monday, January 29, 2018, to release the FISA memo which many have said will shake the political world to the core. The damning memo has already claimed one deep state operative, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. Now, all eyes are on President Trump to see what he will do next with the FISA memo, and the video clip of his departure from the State of the Union address reveals exactly what that is.

 

According to The Gateway Pundit, President Trump was stopped by Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) on his way out of the House of Representatives building. The first thing on Duncan’s mind was the FISA memo and making sure the President knew that he and others want it released as soon as possible.

 

In the clip, Duncan can be heard asking Trump if he would release the FISA memo. Trump’s five-word answer is enough for the Democrats to start panicking. “Oh yeah, don’t worry, 100%,” Trump responded. Reportedly, Trump has five days from Monday to decide to release the memo after review. According to comments made by Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) during an interview on Fox & Friends, Trump is not likely to take all five days.

 

CLIP: As President Trump exits the House Chamber, @RepJeffDuncan asks him to #ReleaseTheMemo. #SOTU #SOTU2018 pic.twitter.com/O1hHYFdPxM

 

— CSPAN (@cspan) January 31, 2018

 

In addition to Gowdy’s comments, White House Legislative Director Marc Short spoke with veteran journalist Stuart Varney Tuesday, discussing the most recent developments on the secret FISA memo. “Stuart, I think the president sides on the side of transparency so I think if there were abuses he wants the American people to know it,” he explained.

 

“But let me be clear that the president can do this in a responsible fashion. We only received the document last night. White House counsel began to review it last night. The National Security Council will be leading the inter-agency process here to make sure no secrets were divulged and no methods were divulged. And, so, it will be done in a very responsible manner,” added Short.

 

I don’t think President Donald Trump wants to waste any time getting the FISA memo out. Many Republicans have already viewed the memo and urged the President to release it to the public. It’s understandable that, after a year of waiting, American patriots are a little anxious to see heads start to roll within our corrupt government agencies and departments.

 

For those who thought that President Trump might read the FISA memo during the SOTU, that’s not quite his style. Trump’s first SOTU was unifying and brilliant. The contents of the FISA memo would have had quite the opposite effect and worked against the message that Trump wanted to deliver. In addition, I think President Trump wanted to give officials from the FBI time to review the material before going public with it.

 

According to Fox News, two high-level officials at the FBI have reviewed the FISA memo and even they could not point out any factual inaccuracies. One of the FBI officials is from the bureau’s counterintelligence division, and the other one is from the legal division. They reportedly looked at the FISA memo after FBI Director Christopher Wray viewed it on Sunday, January 28, 2018.

 

Now that a total of three officials from the FBI have viewed the FISA abuse memo, the bureau has been strangely quiet about it and has yet to even release a statement on the departure of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. In my opinion, McCabe was just a good start, but many others within the FBI’s top ranks need to be dismissed and then prosecuted for their crimes.

 

◆ Latest news videos: https://goo.gl/KQEyLw

 

◆ Twitter: https://goo.gl/xLBdTz

◆ Google+: https://goo.gl/qXwdWc

◆ Email: info.khung@gmail.com

_____________________

Trump overheard saying he is ‘100 percent’ behind releasing surveillance memo

 

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed [Blog Editor: Sorry about that Fox, too good a report to pass up.]. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

___________

After SOTU, Trump Says 5 Words To Congressman That Has Democrats FREAKED OUT

 

About Today News

 

TODAY NEWS CHANNEL dedicated to sharing the latest news around the world.

 

With the above criteria, if there is any breach of the principles of Community, law on copyright then please comment on the video or send my message, and then i will delete that video.

 

With sharing, we always respect the source should each video, written source of it. Over here, we have contributed to support the electronic page get backlink.

 

READ THE REST

 

Dems Want Social Platform Censorship by Blaming Russians – AGAIN


John R. Houk

© January 25, 2018

Yesterday I stumbled upon a Fox News story in which Dems Senator Feinstein and Rep. Schiff have publicly called for Twitter, Facebook and now I read – Google, to investigate Russian bots spreading the meme #ReleaseTheMemo. My least favorite Fox host Shepherd Smith seemed to move story to agree with the Dems. Here’s the 4:30 minute segment on Youtube:

 

VIDEO: Top Democrats claim Russian bots are pushing #ReleaseTheMemo

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Jan 24, 2018

 

Rep. Schiff and Sen. Feinstein say the classified memo prepared by staffers working for Devin Nunes is misleading and is being pushed online as part of a smear campaign against law enforcement officials investigating Team Trump; insight from Axios reporter Alayna Treene.

 

FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as READ THE REST

 

In essence my first reaction the Dems were trying to get off the hook about corruption among Obama/Hillary cadres in the FBI and DOJ. Indeed, after Googling “Russian Bots,” I found MSM after MSM site pushing the Dem meme of Russian Bots. Just like loyal Leftist Pravda spreading Communist propaganda, the MSM pushed the Dem assertion Russia was involved in the American legal system to taint the FBI and the Mueller investigation purportedly investigating the Trump Campaign for President colluded with Russia to win said Campaign.

 

I felt the Dems were pulling the Russia-Russia-Russia load of crap to deflect from the real collusion story of Dems and Dem-favoring FBI and DOJ trying to discredit President Trump for an idiotic excuse to impeach him on FALSE evidence.

 

It turns out I am CORRECT! The Daily Caller picked up on a story from the Left-leaning Daily Beast which substantiates that an overwhelming majority of the viral message of “#ReleaseTheMail” was driven by red-blooded Americans rather than Russian Bots:

 

DC VIDEO: No Russian Bots …

http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/23/no-russian-bots-note-behind-releasethememo/

 

 

According to The Beast:

 

A knowledgeable source says that Twitter’s internal analysis has thus far found that authentic American accounts, and not Russian imposters or automated bots, are driving #ReleaseTheMemo. There are no preliminary indications that the Twitter activity either driving the hashtag or engaging with it is either predominantly Russian.

 

In short, according to this source, who would not speak to The Daily Beast for attribution, the retweets are coming from inside the country. (No, Russian Bots Weren’t Behind The #ReleaseTheMemo Hashtag; By Chuck Ross; Daily Caller; 1/23/18 6:27 PM)

 

Now you realize that Twitter management is not exactly a Right-leaning Social Platform, right? Ergo, you must understand that the Dems – particularly Senator Feinstein and Rep. Schiff – are calling for Twitter, Facebook and Google to censor Conservative dialog on the Social Platforms used by Americans.

 

The best details I have found pertaining to the Dem Fake News propaganda trying to Censor my fellow Conservatives is at The Federalist.

 

JRH 1/25/18

Please Support NCCR

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

The Russia ‘Fake News’ Scare Is All About Chilling Speech

 

By David Harsanyi

JANUARY25, 2018

The Federalist

UNITED STATES – JUNE 16: Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., speaks during a news conference in the Capitol on Democratic on gun control measures, June 16, 2016. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

Last week Republicans began to call for the release of a memo authored by House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes that purports to lay out a series of abuses connected to the FBI surveillance of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. As often happens these days, a Twitter hashtag evolved around the effort, #ReleaseTheMemo, and was widely retweeted by Republicans and elected officials.

 

It didn’t take long for a report to emerge claiming that Russian-sponsored Twitter accounts and bots were the real driving force behind the viral call for the release of the memo. Without worrying about the veracity of this convenient claim, all the usual suspects giddily spread the story across social media — probably because they have such a deep reverence for truth in the Era of Trump.

 

The report also prompted Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Adam Schiff, both Democrats, to pull out every fearmongering catchphrase available to demand that Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg perform an “in-depth forensic examination” on the “ongoing attack by the Russian government through Kremlin-linked social media actors directly acting to intervene and influence our democratic process.”

 

It’s difficult, it seems, for some people to embrace neutral principles nowadays. But if you genuinely believe that Donald Trump’s distasteful tweets are attacks on the foundations of free expression, how can you not be alarmed by a pair of powerful elected officials demanding social media companies hand over information about their users? What would they say if the president had sent a letter to Google insisting they give the executive branch an “in-depth forensic examination” of his political opponent’s searches?

 

As it turns out, reports today say that Twitter’s internal analysis found that it was mostly Americans, not creepy Slavic mind-control robots, who were behind the hashtags. Not that it really matters, anyway. If a group of Americans have a legitimate issue to rally around, how are they supposed to control what outsiders do? It’s not as if #ReleaseTheMemo was a secret or illegal. Republican politicians were openly using it.

 

Yet, if Feinstein and Schiff had their way, Twitter and Facebook would have moved to quash the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag for what turned out to be apparently solely partisan reasons. Sounds like a power that can be abused. Even if the two had been genuinely troubled by Russian hashtags — yes, suspend your disbelief — the source of fake news is not always easily discernible. Sometimes it comes to you from an anonymous Russian bot, and sometimes it’s retweeted by a prominent journalist.

 

Democrats have manufactured panic over amateurish Russian propaganda to not only claim that Vlad Putin was “meddling” in the election, but also to argue that interference had the power to turn the election to Trump. With this risible idea in hand, they have created paranoia about social media interactions and rationalized infringements on expression.

 

Not long before demanding forensic investigations into hashtags, Feinstein was demanding Twitter, Facebook, and Google more tightly restrict its content, threatening, “Do something about it — or we will.” Democrats have attempted to control interactions through Fairness Doctrines or the IRS, and now the Russia scare. Part of living in a free country is dealing with messy, ugly misinformation.

 

 

Lots of people in the United States seem pretty impressed by how they do things in Europe. In Britain, Prime Minister Theresa May is launching “a rapid response unit” run by the state to “battle the proliferation of ‘fake news’ online.” A “National Security Communications Unit” will be tasked to combat misinformation — as if it has either the power or ability to do so. In France, President Emmanuel Macron is working on a plan to combat “fake news,” which includes the power to “emergency block” websites during elections. What could possibly go wrong.

 

Me? I’d rather we live with Russian troll bots feeding us nonsense than authoritarian senators dictating how we consume news. I mean, has anyone yet produced a single voter who lost his or her free will during the 2016 election because he had a Twitter interaction with an employee of a St. Petersburg troll farm? Or do voters tend to seek out the stories that back their own worldviews?

 

If your argument is that American are uninformed and easily misled, I’m with you. Just look at all the people who believe that a $46,000 buy on Facebook by the Russians was enough to destroy the pillars of our democracy. But if you want to live in a free and vibrant nation, you have to live with the externalities of that freedom.

 

David Harsanyi is a Senior Editor at The Federalist. Follow him on Twitter.

________________

Dems Want Social Platform Censorship by Blaming Russians – AGAIN

John R. Houk

© January 25, 2018

__________________

The Russia ‘Fake News’ Scare Is All About Chilling Speech

 

Copyright © 2018 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

 

The Great Negotiator


Justin Smith and many Conservatives looking at President Trump’s willingness to negotiate on allowing illegal aliens to remain in America is viewed as a betrayal of one his campaign promises.

 

In my humble opinion some kind of give and take is necessary to end legislative gridlock. So, if illegals are proven working individuals that pay taxes, I don’t have a problem with amnesty. HOWEVER, if illegal aliens are living on taxpayer social programs, those illegal aliens need to receive the boot.

 

ALSO, if the Dems will not negotiate on effective border control – e.g. A WALL – Then blame the Dems and give all illegal aliens the boot. If illegal aliens cry racism, they should direct their anger toward recalcitrant Dems.

 

Thus, I am not totally on board with Justin, but in some ways, I am willing to be harsher with the blame falling squarely on the Dems.

 

JRH 1/14/18

Please Support NCCR

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

The Great Negotiator

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 1/13/2018 4:28 PM

 

The negotiations on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), opened under a false sense of urgency by President Trump, the “stable genius” and “great negotiator”, and sixteen senators and seven House members, on Tuesday January 9, 2018 in an ineffectual move to protect 800,000 DACA recipients from potential deportation, once DACA ends on March 5th. These negotiations represent the lowest moment of the Trump presidency, nothing more and nothing less than another amnesty for illegal aliens and the Democrats’ first step towards a full amnesty for nearly forty million illegal aliens (government stats 11 to 12 million), a betrayal of America.

 

If the proposed Dream Act of 2017, the replacement bill of choice, introduced by Senators Dick Durbin (D-ILL) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is any indication of the legislative “solution”, America will be forced to give 3.3 million illegal aliens a conditional lawful permanent resident status. Roughly 1.8 million would certainly become naturalized citizens over the next decade, if not sooner, with voting rights.

 

What happened to President Trump’s 2016 campaign promise to deport all illegal aliens?

 

The switch came after his advisors told him that this DACA amnesty is popular with both Democrats and liberal Republicans. He probably also noted left-leaning polls, like in Politico, that show 54 percent of Americans want to give the “Dreamers” a path to citizenship.

 

I stated in October 2015, that “Trump’s values shift like the changing of one’s underwear from day to day, depending on his personal agenda and who had his ear at the moment”. Ann Coulter, a conservative journalist, seemed to concur, as she recently stated, “The president cares only about his press, has no grasp of details of policy, and simply agrees with the last person to speak.”

 

Under no illusions, one might wish to see our leaders vote to deport all illegal aliens, but the reality of the matter suggests some form of amnesty will be passed eventually, unless there is a loud and massive opposition immediately voiced. While House Republicans are forcefully pushing President Trump’s demands on the wall and heightened security, along with the addition of thousands of federal immigration enforcement officers and judges and E-Verify, through the Goodlatte-McCaul bill, the Senate is prepared to give amnesty in exchange for nothing.

 

The Goodlatte-McCaul bill also ends chain migration and the diversity visa lottery, which allowed the last two Islamic terrorists into the country and the attacks on New York City. It allows the Justice Department to withhold grants from sanctuary cities too.

 

It should also be noted, that after the Department of Homeland Security detained a DACA recipient with gang ties, early in 2017, it acknowledged revoking the DACA status of over 1500 recipients, due to criminal conviction or gang affiliation. How many other criminals have evaded the department’s scrutiny?

 

To his credit, President Trump stated: “It has to be a bill where we’re able to secure our border. Drugs are pouring into our country at a record pace. A lot of people coming in that we can’t have.”

 

Congress could accomplish the same things, without granting a blanket amnesty, if they really wanted to do so, couldn’t they? But the liberals of both parties aren’t working for America, are they?

 

Curiously, the Great Negotiator’s negotiating skills are less than impressive, given Republicans hold the House, the Senate and the presidency. It is the Democrats, not the president, who are driving a hard bargain.

 

The Dreamers have no right to be here in the first place, since they or their parents broke U.S. law, and they deserve that right even less, when they display 1794 maps of Mexico and wave the Mexican flag in our streets. They have no say over anything America chooses to grant them; and yet, these Dreamers beseech our Congress for America’s solicitude and benevolent care, while standing on the steps of our state houses and at the Capital in D.C. and demand that any DACA replacement legislation be a “clean” bill.

 

During the meeting, when Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) asked President Trump if he would “be agreeable” to a “clean” bill, it was obvious that he didn’t understand that meant leaving out his demands, like more border security and the wall, because he replied: “Yeah … I would like to do that. Go ahead. I think a lot of people would like to see that, but I think we have to do DACA first.”

 

Representative Kevin McCarthy, a liberal Republican, interceded, fortunately. He clarified for the President that he was, in fact, acquiescing to an amnesty bill absent any border security provisions.

 

Later, flanked by Senator Dick Durbin (D-ILL) and Representative Steny Hoyer (D-MD), President Trump said: “We’ll do DACA and we can certainly start comprehensive immigration reform the following afternoon. Okay? We’ll take an hour off and then we’ll start.” Whether the president understood it or not, “comprehensive immigration reform” stands for amnesty.

 

To be clear, Congress has no moral or legal obligation or responsibility to grant amnesty to anyone who violated our immigration laws or knowingly put their children in an awful legal predicament. Let the March 5th deadline pass, let deportations proceed, and let the Dreamers sort it out, case by case, in immigration court, like they should have done over all these years.

 

Complicating negotiations further is a decision by a liberal activist judge in San Francisco on Tuesday evening, January 9th, that temporarily banned the Trump administration from ending DACA. Until Congress takes immigration policy matters out of the Courts’ jurisdiction, invoking that right under Article III of the Constitution, our borders will never be fully secured and illegals will continue to arrive at our borders en masse.

 

This DACA bill and any general amnesty for the total millions of other illegal aliens helps and benefits the illegal alien population and the Democratic Party only. Within a year of being granted residency or a path to citizenship, activist judges will grant full citizenship, and the bulk of these illegals will expand the Democratic voter base, setting aside all of Trump’s “wins” and border security gains; and Democratic Socialists will get to take permanent control of U.S. elections, laws and governments, for decades to come.

 

A recently leaked memo from the Center For American Progress reads, in part: “The fight to protect Dreamers is not only a moral imperative, it is also  a critical component to the Democratic Party’s electoral success … “.

 

An attempt to destroy our borders forever more is still underway as “elite” liberals from both parties, backed by U.S. and global billionaires, seek to force American citizens towards a regional and then global governance. They present America a false solution, in these DACA proposals, on the pretext it serves America’s interests and does not harm our society at large, for their own self-interest, and these members of Congress, who are supposed to represent Americans, not illegal aliens, are eroding and undermining the sanctity of the entire legal system and, by extension, our Republic.

 

By Justin O. Smith

__________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith