SPECIAL EDITION Lankford Letter – Impeachment Conclusion


I currently reside in the great State of Oklahoma (that may or not change for me in coming weeks). As such as an Oklahoma voter I am on Senator James Lankford email list. I am reading the email he sent out on 2/11/20 and it is about the Dem Party Impeachment debacle.

 

Senator Lankford is quite diplomatic yet precise in his summary of events. What the Senator could not say diplomatically is that clearly the Dems in the House operated a Soviet-Communist style show trial and attempted to intimidate the GOP Senate majority to further the Soviet show trial. The Dems utterly failed and President Trump was acquitted – FOREVER.

 

JRH 2/12/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

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

SPECIAL EDITION Lankford Letter – Impeachment Conclusion

 

By Senator James Lankford

Sent 2/11/2020 10:39 AM

 

Dear Oklahoma friends and neighbors:

The country is deeply divided on multiple issues right now. The impeachment trial is both a symptom of our times and another example of our division. At the beginning of our nation, we did not have an impeachment inquiry of a president for almost 100 years with the partisan impeachment of Andrew Johnson. After more than 100 years, another impeachment inquiry was conducted when the House began a formal impeachment inquiry into President Nixon in an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote of 410-4. Within a period of weeks, President Nixon resigned before he was formally impeached. Then, just over two decades later, President Clinton was impeached by the House, on another mostly partisan vote leading to a partisan acquittal in the Senate.

This season of our history and has been referred to as the Age of Investigations and the Age of Impeachment. We have had multiple special counsels since 1974 over multiple topics. This is more than just oversight; it has been a unique time in American history when the politics of the moment have driven rapid calls for investigation and impeachment. Over the past three years, the House of Representatives has voted four times to open an impeachment inquiry: once in 2017, once in 2018, and twice in 2019. Only the second vote in 2019 actually passed and began a formal inquiry.

The Mueller investigation that consumed most of 2018 and 2019 answered many questions about Russian attacks on our voting systems—though no votes were changed—but it was also a $32 million investigation that took more than two years of America’s attention. For the last four months the country has been consumed with impeachment hearings and investigations. The first rumors of issues with Ukraine arose August 28 when Politico published a story about US foreign aid being slow-walked for Ukraine, and then on September 18 when The Washington Post published a story about a whistleblower report that claimed President Trump pressured an unnamed foreign head of state to do an investigation for his campaign.

Within days of The Washington Post story on September 24, Speaker Pelosi announced that the House would begin hearings to impeach the President, which led to the formal House vote to open the impeachment inquiry on October 31 and then a vote to impeach the President on December 18th. But after the partisan vote to impeach the President, Speaker Pelosi held the articles of impeachment for a month before turning them over to the Senate, which began the formal trial of the President of the United States on January 16, 2020. After hearing hours of arguments from both House Managers and the President’s legal defense team and Senators asking 180 questions to both sides, the trial concluded February 5, 2020.

 

Key Dates to Know 

 

  • April 21, 2019 – President Zelensky is elected President of Ukraine.

 

  • May 21 – President Zelensky sworn in. After the ceremony, President Zelensky abolishes Parliament and calls for quick (snap) elections on July 21.

 

  • July 21 – Ukrainian Parliamentary elections. President Zelensky’s party wins a huge majority.

 

  • July 25 – President Trump calls President Zelensky to congratulate him and his party.

 

  • August 12 – An unnamed whistleblower working in the US intelligence community filed a complaint that he had heard from others that the President of the United States had tried to pressure President Zelensky of Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden on an official phone call July 25, 2019.

 

  • August 26 – The Inspector General for the Intelligence Community declares the whistleblower report “an urgent matter” and asks for its release within seven days. The Justice Department looks over the report and notes that though it was written by a person in the intelligence community, it is not related to intelligence matters, so it does not fall within the Inspector General’s jurisdiction and it is forwarded on to the Department of Justice for review.

 

  • August 28Politico publishes a story that the annual military aid for Ukraine is currently being slow-walked.

 

  • September 9 – The Inspector General contacts the House Intelligence Committee to let them know that he has not been able to release the whistleblower report to their committee.

 

  • September 13 – The House Intelligence Committee subpoenas the whistleblower report.

 

  • September 18The Washington Post prints a story with “unnamed sources” that there is a whistleblower report about the President talking with a foreign leader about a campaign matter.

 

  • September 24 – The House began an informal impeachment inquiry after Speaker Pelosi announced it at a press conference in the US Capitol.

 

  • September 25 – President Trump released the official unredacted “read out” of the phone call with President Zelensky from July 25.

 

  • September 26 – The whistleblower report is declassified and released publicly.

 

  • October 31 – The House formally votes along party lines for an impeachment inquiry.

 

  • December 18 – The House votes to impeach the President with two articles—Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress

 

  • January 15 – Speaker Pelosi releases the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate

 

  • January 16 – Senate trial on impeachment begins.

 

  • February 5 – Senate trial concludes with acquittal on both articles.

 

Important Context of What Was Happening in Ukraine

Ukraine became independent in 1991 when it broke away from the Soviet Union, but the Ukrainians have faced constant pressure from Russia ever since. In 2014 Ukraine forced out its pro-Russia president, and Moscow retaliated by taking over Crimea (and stealing the Ukrainian Navy), then rolling tanks into eastern Ukraine and taking all of eastern Ukraine by force. Russian and Ukrainian troops continue to fight every day in eastern Ukraine.

The people of Ukraine face an aggressive Russia on the east and pervasive Soviet era corruption throughout the government and the business community. President Trump met the previous President of Ukraine in 2017 to talk about other countries helping Ukraine with greater military support funds and to ask how Ukraine could address corruption on a wider scale. The two Presidents also spoke about lethal aid (allowing the Ukrainians to buy sniper rifles, anti-tank javelin missiles, and other lethal supplies) to help them fight the invading Russians. The US also started sending a couple hundred American troops to train Ukrainian soldiers in the far west of Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Zelensky

On April 21, 2019, President Zelensky was overwhelmingly elected as the new President of Ukraine. He was a sitcom actor/comedian who had no political experience, but was well known for his television show in which he played the part of a corruption-fighting teacher who was elected as President of Ukraine. His television popularity helped him win the election, but when he was sworn in on May 21, he was relatively unknown to most of the world.

On the same day as his inauguration, May 21, President Zelensky abolished Parliament and called for snap elections to put his party in power. With a new president in place and parliamentary elections in Ukraine coming, starting in June of 2019, the President ordered foreign aid to Ukraine to be held until the end of the fiscal year, but agencies were informed that they should do all the preliminary work needed before the aid was sent, so it would be ready to release at a moment’s notice. The leadership in Ukraine was not notified that there was a hold on their foreign aid.

The new Parliament was elected on July 21, and President Zelensky’s party won by a landslide. By mid-August, the new Parliament was working on anti-corruption efforts and trying to establish a High Court on Corruption, which they put in place September 5, 2019. There was a tremendous amount of uncertainty in the early days of the new administration, but by mid August there was clear evidence of actual change in a country that desperately needed a new direction from its corrupt past.

President Trump’s Phone Call to President Zelensky

On July 25, when President Trump called President Zelensky, the President congratulated President Zelensky for the big win in Parliament and talked about “burden-sharing” (other nations also paying their share of support for Ukraine). The two presidents talked about their disapproval of the previous ambassadors to each other’s countries. But instead of following all the staff preparation notes written by Lt. Col Vindman, the National Security Council staffer assigned to Ukraine, and just talking about “corruption” in general, the President brought up a question about Ukraine and the 2016 election interference, which I will note below. President Zelensky also brought up to President Trump that his staff was planning to meet with Rudy Giuliani, President Trump’s personal attorney, in the coming days, which led to a conversation about Joe Biden and the firing of the previous prosecutor in Ukraine.

After the call, Lt. Col Vindman contacted an attorney at the National Security Council to express his “policy concerns” about the call. It is interesting to note that Lt. Col. Vindman’s boss, Tim Morrison, was also on the call, but he did not see any problems or concerns with the call according to his own testimony in the House impeachment inquiry. Within a month a whistleblower filed a report about the call, saying he heard about the call second-hand and was concerned about the implications of a conversation about elections on a head-of-state call. To keep the July 25th call in context with other news, the day before it took place—July 24—Robert Mueller had testified before Congress as the last official act to close down the two-and-a-half-year Mueller investigation and clear the President and his campaign team of any further accusation of election interference.

During the impeachment trial in the Senate, the House Managers repeated over and over that the President was planning to cheat “again” on the next election, but the final conclusion of the Mueller Report was “ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the (Trump) Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.”

This is especially notable, because for years a rumor circulated that Ukraine was part of the 2016 election interference and that someone in Ukraine was hiding the Democratic National Committee (DNC) server that was hacked by the Russians in 2016. As the conspiracy theory goes, it was actually the Ukrainians that hacked the DNC, not the Russians. This is the “Crowdstrike” theory that President Trump asked President Zelensky to help solve during the call.

Agencies of the US Intelligence Community have stated over and over that they did not believe that Ukraine was involved in the Russian election interference from 2016. I personally agree with the Intelligence Community assessment. But Rudy Giuliani, and multiple others around President Trump believed there was a secret plan in 2016 to hurt President Trump’s election from Ukraine. This accusation was amplified by bits of truth, including that the Ukrainian Ambassador to the US wrote an editorial in support of Hillary Clinton in 2016 right before the election, and several other Ukrainian officials publicly spoke out against candidate Trump in 2016.

There is nothing illegal about a foreign nation speaking out for or against a presidential candidate, whether Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump in 2016, or anyone else in the future. It may not be wise to take sides before an election, but it is not illegal. Just because some Ukrainian officials took sides, does not mean that the whole Ukrainian government worked on a cyberattack on our elections. But since this rumor had persisted, and it was a new administration now in Ukraine, President Trump asked President Zelensky to help clear up the facts if he could. That is certainly not illegal or improper, and it is certainly not something that could help the President in the 2020 election, especially since the 2016 Russian election accusation had just been closed the day before.

The 2016 “Crowdstrike” theory is the issue that President Trump asked President Zelensky to “do us a favor” about, not the Biden’s or Burisma. During the July 25 call after the question about “Crowdstrike,” President Zelensky mentioned to President Trump that one of his advisers would be meeting with Rudy Giuliani soon. Then, President Trump affirmed that meeting and encouraged them to talk about the Biden investigation and the firing of the Ukrainian Prosecutor.

That may seem out of the blue, but in Washington, DC, that week, the city was buzzing about a Washington Post article that had been written three days before (July 22, 2019) detailing Hunter Biden’s giant salary ($83,000 per month) for doing essentially nothing for a corrupt Ukrainian natural gas company and how it undercut Vice President Biden’s message on corruption.

It is important to get the context of that week to understand the context of the phone call that day. I have no doubt that the story was just as big of news in Kiev, Ukraine as it was in Washington, DC, that week. President Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, had been in and out of Ukraine since November 2018, meeting with government officials and trying to find out more about the “Crowdstrike” theory or any other Ukrainian connection to the 2016 election. During that time Rudy Giuliani met several former prosecutors from Ukraine who blamed their departure on Vice President Biden. It is clear that Rudy Giuliani was working to gain information about both of these issues in his capacity as President Trump’s private attorney.

It is not criminal for Rudy Giuliani to work on opposition research for a presidential campaign or to work on behalf of his client to clear his name from any issues related to the 2016 campaign, which he had done since November 2018. Some have stated that since this was “foreign information,” it is illegal. That is absolutely not true. In fact, Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee in 2016 paid a British citizen, Christopher Steele, to work his contacts in Russia to create the now debunked “Steele Dossier” which the FBI used to open its investigation into President Trump, leading directly to the appointment of Special Counsel Mueller. That “Dossier” was opposition research done in Russia by a British citizen, paid for by the Clinton campaign team. Their opposition research was not illegal, but the use and abuse of that document by the FBI to start an investigation was certainly inappropriate and is most likely illegal. But, the FBI warrant issue is still being investigated by the ongoing Durham probe.

During the July 25 call, when President Zelensky brought up the issue of Rudy Giuliani and President Trump replied to his statement. You can argue that President Trump should not have discussed the issue with President Zelensky when he brought it up, but it is certainly not illegal or impeachable to talk about it, especially when there are serious questions about Hunter Biden’s work with Burisma. That is not a conservative conspiracy theory; the issue of Hunter Biden’s employment in Ukraine was a problem for years at the State Department. It had been raised to Vice President Biden when he was still in office. Every State Department official interviewed for the Trump impeachment investigation noted that at best it was a clear conflict of interest and it was the center of a huge story on corruption in the Washington Post on July 22, 2019. It had the appearance of high-level corruption by using a well-placed family member on the board of a known corrupt gas company in Ukraine to shelter it from prosecutors. Hunter Biden had only resigned from the Burisma board a few months before the July 25 phone call, just prior to when his dad announced his run for the Presidency in 2019.

After the July 25 phone call, Attorney General Barr did not have any follow up meetings or calls with Ukrainian officials. Rudy Giuliani did have additional conversations with Ukrainian officials, which are legal to do since he is a private attorney representing the President.

Text of July 25, 2019 Phone Call between Presidents Trump and Zelensky:

 

The President: Congratulations on a great victory. We all watched from the United States and you did a terrific job. The way you came from behind, somebody who wasn’t given much of a chance, and you ended up winning easily. It’s a fantastic achievement. Congratulations.

President Zelensky: You are absolutely right Mr. President. We did win big and we worked hard for this. We worked a lot but I would like to confess to you that I had an opportunity to learn from you. We used quite a few of your skills and knowledge and were able to use it as an example for our elections and yes it is true that these were unique elections. We were in a unique situation that we were able to achieve a unique success. I’m able to tell you the following; the first time you called me to congratulate me when I won my presidential election, and the second time you are now calling me when my party won the parliamentary election. I think I should run more often so you can call me more often and we can talk over the phone more often.

The President: (laughter) That’s a very good idea. I think your country is very happy about that.

President Zelensky: Well yes, to tell you the truth, we are trying to work hard because we wanted to drain the swamp here in our country. We brought in many many new people. Not the old politicians, not the typical politicians, because we want to have a new format and a new type of government. You are a great teacher for us and in that.

The President: Well it is very nice of you to say that. I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time. Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are. Germany does almost nothing for you. All they do is talk and I think it’s something that you should really ask them about. When I was speaking to Angela Merkel she talks Ukraine, but she ·doesn’t do anything. A lot of the European countries are the same way so I think it’s something you want to look at but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine. I wouldn’t say that it’s reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine.

President Zelensky: Yes you are absolutely right. Not only 100%, but actually 1000% and I can tell you the following; I did talk to Angela Merkel and I did meet with her I also met and talked with Macron and I told them that they are not doing quite as much as they need to be doing on the issues with the sanctions. They are not enforcing the sanctions. They are not working as much as they should work for Ukraine. It turns out that even though logically, the European Union should be our biggest partner but technically the United States is a much bigger partner than the European Union and I’m very grateful to you for that because the United States is doing quite a lot for Ukraine. Much more than the European Union especially when we are talking about sanctions against the Russian Federation. I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost. ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike. I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

President Zelensky: Yes it is very important for me and everything that you just mentioned earlier. For me as a President, it is very important and we are open for any future cooperation. We are ready to open a new page on cooperation in relations between the United States and Ukraine. For that purpose, I just recalled our ambassador from United States and he will be replaced by a very competent and very experienced ambassador who will work hard on making sure that our two nations are getting closer. I would also like and hope to see him having your trust and your confidence and have personal relations with you so we can cooperate even more so. I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine. I just wanted to assure you once again that you have nobody but friends around us. I will make sure that I surround myself with the best and most experienced people. I also wanted to tell you that we are friends. We are great friends and you Mr. President have friends in our country so we can continue our strategic partnership. I also plan to surround myself with great people and in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly.. That I can assure you.

The President: Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me.

President Zelensky: I wanted to tell you about the prosecutor. First of all, I understand and I’m knowledgeable about the situation. Since we have won the absolute majority in our Parliament, the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, who will be approved, by the parliament and will start as a new prosecutor in September. He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation of the case. On top of that, I would kindly ask you if you have any additional information that you can provide to us, it would be very helpful for the investigation to make sure that we administer justice in our country with regard to the Ambassador to the United States from Ukraine as far as I recall her name was Ivanovich. It was great that you were the first one who told me that she was a bad ambassador because I agree with you 100%. Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous President and she was on his side. She would not accept me as a new President well enough.

The President: Well, she’s going to go through some things. I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it. I’m sure you will figure it out. I heard the prosecutor was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor so good luck with everything. Your economy is going to get better and better I predict. You have a lot of assets. It’s a great country. I have many Ukrainian friends, their incredible people.

President Zelensky: I would like to tell you that I also have quite a few Ukrainian friends that live in the United States. Actually last time I traveled to the United States, I stayed in New York near Central Park and I stayed at the Trump Tower. I will talk to them and I hope to see them again in the future. I also wanted to thank you for your invitation to visit the United States, specifically Washington DC. On the other hand, I also want to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation. As to the economy, there is much potential for our two countries and one of the issues that is very important for Ukraine is energy independence. I believe we can be very successful and cooperating on energy independence with United States. We are already working on cooperation. We are buying American oil but I am very hopeful for a future meeting. We will have more time and more opportunities to discuss these opportunities and get to know each other better. I would like to thank you very much for your support.

The President: Good. Well, thank you very much and I appreciate that. I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call. Thank you. Whenever you would like to come to the White House, feel free to call. Give us a date and we’ll work that out. I look forward to seeing you.

 

President Zelensky: Thank you very much. I would be very happy to come and would be happy to meet with you personally and get to know you better. I am looking forward to our meeting and I also would like to invite you to visit Ukraine and come to the city of Kyiv which is a beautiful city. We have a beautiful country which would welcome you. On the other hand, I believe that on September 1 we will be in Poland and we can meet in Poland hopefully. After that, it might be a very good idea for you to travel to Ukraine. We can either take my plane and go to Ukraine or we can take your plane, which is probably much better than mine.

The President: Okay, we can work that out. I look forward to seeing you in Washington and maybe in Poland because I think we are going to be there at that time.

President Zelensky: Thank you very much Mr. President.

The President: Congratulations on a fantastic job you’ve done. The whole world was watching. I’m not sure it was so much of an upset but congratulations.

President Zelensky: Thank you Mr. President bye-bye.

 

Based on a whistleblower report about the July 25 call, the House Intelligence Committee subpoenaed the report on September 13 and started its impeachment inquiry on September 24.

Senate Trial

House Managers’ Case for Impeachment

In the Senate impeachment trial, House Managers stated their belief that the President had carried out a “scheme to cheat in the 2020 election” by withholding financial aid to Ukraine and withholding a White House meeting with the new President of Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine announcing it would investigate Joe Biden, Burisma, and 2016 election interference.

Let’s discuss the facts of both.

White House Meeting

There is no question that President Trump had offered a White House meeting to President Zelensky three times: once in May on a phone call after President Zelensky won his election, once in June in a letter, and finally in the July 25th call after President Zelensky’s party won the parliamentary elections. But Tim Morrison (a State Department official called as a witness by the House) also testified that they were working on heads-of-state meetings with twelve other heads of state during that same time period. Many nations were trying to line up meetings in the White House during the summer of 2019.

During the July 25 call, President Zelensky offered to instead move their meeting from a White House meeting to a face-to-face meeting in Warsaw, Poland, when they would both be there on September 1, 2019. The Presidents agreed, and planning began on the meeting in August. By August 22, the meeting planning was in full swing as noted by emails in the House hearing’s evidence. However, Hurricane Dorian slammed into the US in the hours leading up to the September 1 meeting, causing a last-minute shift to the Vice President traveling to Poland so the President could stay in the US to monitor hurricane relief.

We know that Vice President Pence met face-to-face with President Zelensky, and they spoke about other nations paying their fair share to help Ukraine and the issue of corruption across Ukraine. We know from the preparation materials and the meeting notes themselves that during the meeting the Vice President did not bring up or discuss the issue of Burisma, Joe Biden, or any other campaign conversation with President Zelensky.

The White House found the next available time when President Trump and President Zelensky would both be in the same place at the same time to set up a face-to-face meeting: September 25 at the UN Assembly in New York. That meeting was set up, and it took place as scheduled.

In the Senate impeachment trial, the House managers maintained that only a White House meeting was sufficient and that it was being withheld, but the facts show that President Zelensky himself floated the idea of a meeting in Poland and that the meeting was not barred or withheld.

In the early months of President Zelensky’s term, there was a great deal of concern about him, his staff, and his plans because he was an unknown political figure. Until more was known about him, it was entirely appropriate to show caution in coordinating a meeting, but once his nationwide anti-corruption efforts began in August, it was clear that face-to-face meetings were planned and carried out.

There was no withholding of a face-to-face meeting with President Trump and President Zelensky. There cannot be a quid pro quo if the meeting was not withheld from Ukrainian officials.

Foreign Aid to Ukraine

The House Managers claimed that there was a secret plot to “extort” or “bribe” the leadership of Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden in exchange for around $400 million of US aid. The aid was State Department and foreign military aid that had been provided for the past four years, since Ukraine had been in a war with Russia.

After the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014 and its occupation of Crimea and the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine, the US started sending aid to help the Ukrainian government. Congress allowed lethal and non-lethal aid to support Ukraine, but during the previous administration, only non-lethal aid was sent. Under President Trump’s administration, it was determined that the United States would give the leadership of Ukraine lethal aid to help them fight off Russian tanks, which was President Zelensky’s reference to “javelins” in the July 25th phone call and his gratitude to President Trump for allowing those tank killing rockets to flow to Ukraine.

To be clear, the theory of funds being withheld from Ukraine in exchange for an investigation does not originate from the July 25 call read out. There is nothing in the text of the call that threatens the withholding of funds in exchange for an investigation.

The theory originates from the fact that aid was held back by the Office of Management and Budget, headed by the President’s Acting Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney, and the “presumption” of US Ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, that the aid must have been held because of the President’s desire to get the Biden investigation done, since the President’s attorney, Rudy Giuliani was working to find out more about the Biden investigation.

Ambassador Sondland told multiple people about his theory, but when he finally called President Trump and asked him directly about it, the President responded that he did not have any quid pro quo, he just wanted the President of Ukraine to do what he ran on and “do the right thing.” Obviously, people who assume the worst about President Trump take this as a secret message that there actually was a quid pro quo, but the most important fact is that Ambassador Sondland did not read it that way after his call with the President. Ambassador Sondland believed that the President was serious. Unfortunately, the White House Counsel was never allowed to cross examine Ambassador Sondland during the House investigation to get the facts about who he talked to and why he came to believe for a while that there was an effort to push for investigations in exchange for money.

During the Senate trial, I listened closely to the facts surrounding the withholding of aid money to Ukraine. This was by far the most serious charge against the President. Two key questions had to be answered for me: why was the aid held, and why was the aid released. There was no question the aid was held for a couple of months.

The question was why?

Statements from the House witnesses during the House impeachment inquiry answered the two key questions: the aid was held because there was a legitimate concern about the new President of Ukraine and his administration in the early days of his presidency and the aid was released on time when the new Ukrainian Parliament starting passing anti-corruption laws in August and after Vice President Pence sat down face to face with President Zelensky on September 1 in Poland to discuss their progress on corruption.

We should not lose track of what was happening in Ukraine in 2019. A new President was elected who was a TV actor with no political experience and no record on how he would handle Russia or the issue of widespread national corruption in Ukraine. He ran on a platform of anti-corruption at all levels, but no one knew how he would govern. His campaign was funded by a Ukrainian oligarch who owned a major media outlet, and one of his first advisers was the former attorney for that oligarch.

I personally spoke to many of the State Department officials in Ukraine in May of 2019 and heard their concerns about the new government. Then, newly elected President Zelensky used his power to dissolve their Parliament the day he was sworn in and called for “snap elections” in which the vast majority of the newly elected leaders were from his newly formed party. To our State Department and the White House, this was either a really a good sign or a really bad sign. Either Ukraine was about to take a major change for the better with new leadership, or this new young leader was about to assume real centralized power. No one knew for certain in May, June, and July of 2019. Within a few weeks in August, the new Parliament got to work passing anti-corruption laws and making significant changes in their accountability and for the country. This was a very good sign.

When Vice President Pence met face to face with President Zelensky September 1, both sides had confidence the country was taking a new direction. On September 10 Vice President Pence and Senator Rob Portman met with President Trump to tell him about the progress that had been made, and both advised lifting the hold on aid. The aid was lifted the next day, September 11. No investigation into Hunter Biden or Burisma was ever done by Ukraine, and no part of the US Department of Justice was ever involved in any investigation of Hunter Biden or Burisma.

Though the aid was frozen in June, there was no public announcement of the hold, as explained by the White House Counsel, to keep this from becoming a public issue while the White House monitored the progress and status of the transition in Ukraine.

On August 27, Politico published an article that noted that the foreign aid had been held by the US. This caused President Zelensky’s office to reach out to the State Department and ask why. During the House impeachment proceedings, four of the House witnesses (Ambassador Voelker, Ambassador Sondland, Ambassador Taylor, and Tim Morrison) all testified that the Ukrainian leadership learned about the temporary hold in aid after the Politico article was published.

The issue of the hold was also the first question from President Zelensky to Vice President Pence when they met September 1 in Poland. The idea that the leadership in Ukraine had pressure placed on them to do an investigation fails the most essential test, did the leadership of Ukraine even know that the aid was being held? The answer from multiple American and Ukrainian leaders was no, they did not know there was a hold on the aid from the White House. You cannot have pressure to act on an investigation, if they did not even know the aid was being held.

It is interesting to note, when I researched the records of past foreign aid payment dates and times to Ukraine, I found the 2019 aid was in line with the date the 2016, 2017, and 2018 aid was sent. The vast majority of the military aid to Ukraine was obligated in August or September for the past four years. Though the aid was ready to go out the door a couple months earlier in 2019, it was certainly not late, based on the record of the previous three years. In fact, the State Department aid was obligated September 30 in 2019, but it was obligated September 28 in 2018. As quoted by the Ukrainian Minister of Defense, “the aid was held such a short time, we did not even notice.”

During the two days of question-and-answer time, I asked a specific question related to this issue because I felt it was important to get the context of the aid, since there had been so much made of the issue during the trial. Here is the full text of my question to the White House Counsel:

House Managers have described any delay in military aid and state department funds to Ukraine in 2019 as a cause to believe there was a secret scheme or quid pro quo by the President. In 2019, 86% of the DOD funds were obligated to Ukraine in September, but in 2018, 67% of the funds were obligated in September and in 2017, 73% of the funds were obligated in September. In the State Department, the funds were obligated September 30 in 2019, but they were obligated September 28 in 2018. Each year, the vast majority of the funds were obligated in the final month or days of the fiscal year. Question: Was there a national security risk to Ukraine or the United States from the funds going out late in September in the two previous years? Did it weaken our relationship with Ukraine because the vast majority of our aid was released in September each of the last three years? 

In response to my question, White House Counsel detailed the fact that military aid from the US was not for immediate use. It was designed to help the Ukrainian military buy materials for the next year, so it was common for the aid to be obligated at the end of the fiscal year (September 30), and it was also common for some money to be left unobligated and carried over into the next fiscal year, as it was in 2019.

While it is easy to create an intricate story on the hold placed on foreign aid to Ukraine, it is also clear that President Trump has temporarily held foreign aid from multiple countries over the past two years, including: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, Lebanon, and others. There is no question that a President can withhold aid for a short period of time, but it must be released by September 30, the end of the fiscal year, which it was in this instance.

Constitutional Issues Around This Impeachment

Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution grants the US House of Representatives “the sole power of impeachment,” while Article I, Section 3 states that “the Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.”

The Constitution is clear that the House does not control the Senate process and the Senate does not control the House process. However, during the impeachment trial of President Trump, the House tried repeatedly to dictate to the Senate how it should conduct its trial.

The “sole power to try” means laying out rules for the trial, including when and if to call additional witnesses or request more documents.

In addition to laying out roles and responsibilities for impeachment, our Constitution also provides basic rights for the accused. The Fifth Amendment ensures due process. However, the receipt of due process is not contingent upon waiving another right, like immunity or executive privilege. But that is exactly what the House tried to force President Trump to do.

The President is not above the law, but neither is the House of Representatives. If there was a question as to the scope and proper use of the President’s right to assert immunity or executive privilege regarding conversations he had with his closest advisers, that question is proper for a court to determine, not Congress, and surely not the House on its own accord. To put this in constitutional terms, the Legislative Branch cannot prevent the Executive Branch from having access to the Judicial Branch. The House wanted to move quickly and prevent the President from ever going to court to resolve any issue. That has never been done for a good reason, the separation of powers. In previous legal battles with the President, it has taken months to resolve critical issues, like Bush v. Gore in 2000 or even in the Clinton impeachment trial, when the House took two months to resolve an issue with witnesses in court. It does not have to drag on for years.

The House also wanted the Chief Justice of the United States to “rule on” any issue quickly, instead of allowing the President to go through the courts. This would have created a new judicial executive branch by putting all the judicial power of the nation in one person, not in the Judicial Branch, as is stated in the Constitution. It would have also ignored the text of the Constitution where it notes that the Chief Justice “presides” in the court of impeachment, not “decides.” The sole power of impeachment is in the Senate, not the Senate, plus the one Justice. The Chief Justice keeps the trial moving along, based on the rules of the trial, but he or she is not a decider of fact, that is reserved to the Senate. The House Managers wanted to ignore that part of the Constitution to move the trial faster for expedience. We cannot ignore the Constitution or create bad precedent, no matter which party is being tried for impeachment.

Further, the Sixth Amendment guarantees that the accused has the ability to both confront the witnesses against him and to have the assistance of counsel. The majority of the impeachment inquiry in the House was done without a meaningful opportunity for the president to participate and administration witnesses were denied the ability to have counsel present for depositions.

The Constitution lays out a clear separation of powers, but importantly also provides a system of checks and balances. For something as important as impeachment, it is imperative that the process be one that is squarely within the bounds of the Constitution and is one that the American people can trust. Unfortunately, the process undertaken by the House to impeach President Trump falls wildly short of the standards put in place by our Founders.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states that “the President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

During the trial of President Trump, there was a lot of conversation about what constitutes a “high crime” or “misdemeanor.” Notably, the House did not charge the President with any crimes. Rather, the House chose to impeach the President for “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress.”

The House theoretically could have chosen to file articles of impeachment for crimes such as bribery, extortion, solicitation of interference in an election, or violations of the Impoundments Clause Act. For any of these crimes, the House would have had to prove specific elements of each. Since they couldn’t prove any of those crimes, they chose to charge the President with “abuse of power.” As was noted in the trial, forty Presidents have faced accusation of “abuse of power” going back as far as George Washington.

The abuse of power charge for President Trump was based on allegations that he improperly withheld aid to Ukraine and conditioned a meeting with President Zelensky at the White House in exchange for an investigation into former Vice President Biden and his son Hunter. Over the course of the last four months, we heard the term quid pro quo used over and over again but the facts do not show criminal quid pro quo. As previously mentioned, President Zelensky asked to meet with President Trump in Poland and that meeting was set up. Further, while the aid to Ukraine was delayed, it wasn’t delayed more than it had been the previous two years, and the aid was released without an investigation (or even an announcement of one) into the Biden’s.

The second article of impeachment, Obstruction of Congress, had an even weaker constitutional foundation. The investigation was announced September 24, but did not officially begin until October 31. The impeachment vote in the House was December 18. This very short time table and the accusation that the President refused to follow the law, honor the courts and that he acted like a “King” did not meet even the most basic constitutional standards for justice.

For example, during the Mueller investigation, the President’s team fully cooperated with the investigation that included over 2,000 subpoenas and 500 witnesses, including the President’s Chief of Staff, multiple cabinet officials and many lower-level officials that were all made available. It was clear throughout the investigation that the President did not like or agree with the Mueller investigation, but he also fully cooperated with every subpoena, each witness and every document. In fact, they released over a million pages of documents to the Mueller team.

President Trump also made his disagreement with the courts very clear on issues like the census, whether travel restrictions can be put in place to ensure national security, or whether particular funds can be used to secure our southern border. But, each time the President lost in court, his Administration complied with orders from the Judiciary. That is how our system of government is supposed to work.

When disagreements happen between the Legislative Branch and the Judicial Branch, they usually lead to resolution, not impeachment. The Fast and Furious investigation, which lasted more than three years in the Obama Administration, led to a vote in the House to hold then-Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt, but it never led to an impeachment inquiry, even though there was a clear and consistent refusal to cooperate with Congress or turn over key documents for three years.

In this case the accusation that President Trump ignored subpoenas or refused to follow the law is not correct. The President’s team made it very clear that they would cooperate during the impeachment inquiry with properly authorized and issued subpoenas, but the House refused to issue subpoenas that were consistent with the law to seek resolution for documents and witnesses. The House was focused on speed, not legal process.

The House, in a rush to impeachment last fall, issued multiple subpoenas for documents and testimony before the House had given authority to the committees to issue subpoenas for an impeachment inquiry, which happened October 31. Since there was no authority to issue the subpoenas, they were not duly authorized. The House also demanded testimony from the President’s inner circle without working through the legal questions and the House demanded Executive Agency witnesses appear without allowing them to bring Agency counsel with them. All of those issues created very real legal and constitutional problems. Agency individuals have always been allowed to have legal counsel with them when they are deposed, except this time.

As a Member of Congress, I cannot demand the President turn over documents or give testimony in any fashion that I would prefer, just because I have oversight responsibilities. In the same way, the President or other Executive Branch officials cannot demand I turn over my notes or provide my staff for testimony without going through the courts and gaining a legal subpoena. Congress has vigorously and rightfully protected its rights from unwarranted investigations from any president. And presidents have done the same. But in all cases, the law must be followed and the proper process must be pursued to get the information in a legal way.

Additional Witnesses

From the very first moments of the Senate trial, the House Managers fought for additional witnesses and documents from the President. Their argument, and justification for the second article of impeachment, centered on the White House’s refusal to turn over documents and make every witness available without going through the normal legal process.

Per the resolution adopted by the Senate, the House record was part of the trial record. The Senate had the testimony of the witnesses the House chose to question as part of the overall information of the trial. The House already had 28,000 pages of documents that were part of the evidence they submitted to the Senate. Although, the House Managers admitted during the Senate impeachment trial that they still have not released all of the documents and witness testimony that they had gathered in their investigation to the White House Counsel or to the Senate. We do not fully know why the House held back some of its witness testimony and released others.

The House witness testimony was used extensively in the Senate trial.

 

Witnesses who testified live or via video in the House and Senate Impeachment:

 

  • David Holmes, Political Counselor, US Embassy Ukraine, State Department

 

  • Fiona Hill, White House Adviser, National Security Council

 

  • David Hale, Undersecretary for Political Affairs, State Department

 

  • Laura Cooper, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense

 

  • Gordon Sondland, US Ambassador to the European Union

 

  • Tim Morison, Former White House Advisor

 

  • Kurt Voelker, Former Special Envoy for Ukraine

 

  • Col Alexander Vindman, National Security Council

 

  • Jennifer Williams, Aide to the Vice President

 

  • Marie Yovanovitch, Former Ambassador to Ukraine

 

  • George Kent, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State

 

  • Bill Taylor, Former United States Ambassador to Ukraine

 

The House Managers repeated over and over that additional witnesses would only take a week to depose, which is a clearly false statement. New witnesses took longer than a week to depose in the House inquiry, clearly it would take just as long or longer in a Senate trial. The remaining “wish list” of witnesses all had clear issues that needed to be resolved in the courts, which would take a couple of months to resolve, which is why the House Managers did not push for their testimony in the House impeachment process, they valued speed more than legal process.

House Managers repeatedly stated that witnesses only took a week to depose in the Clinton Senate impeachment trial, but they know that during the Clinton Senate trial all three called witnesses previously deposed in the House inquiry or in the Grand Jury investigation and all issues of Executive privilege had already been decided through the courts. There were no new witnesses in the Senate trial of President Clinton. Also, the Clinton White House had already had the opportunity to cross examine witnesses or the investigators in the Clinton impeachment inquiry; this time the Trump White House had been denied that right. So, if new witnesses would be added for the Senate trial, the White House should have the right to also cross examine the previous House witnesses that they had been denied the right to cross examine in the past. This would all take much longer than a week and the House Managers knew that.

During the Clinton Impeachment trial in the Senate, there were no additional documents requested, only previously deposed witnesses. The House Managers did not go through the legal process to get documents, like the Mueller investigation had done, so all of the new document requests from the House Managers would take at least three to five weeks to complete, once a legal subpoena is delivered. It takes time to search all databases, review the documents for classified materials, determine any legal issues, and release them to the investigation. Once the documents are turned over, both legal teams need time to review the documents. Again, the House Managers knew these facts, but they continued to repeat over and over that it would only take a week to get all the documents.

The first question for the Senate trial was: do we have enough evidence and testimony to answer the questions the House presented in their articles of impeachment? If the answer is yes, then we do not need additional witnesses or documents. If the answer is no, then we do need additional information. There were many leaks and newspaper stories during the trial designed to push the Senate to vote to ask for more testimony, but that did not change the primary question. We already knew from evidence that there was no quid pro quo, no Ukrainian investigations and no withholding of a public meeting with President Trump.

The New York Times story on January 26 and again on January 31 are clear examples of an attempt to bring doubt on the information and witness testimony. Both stories stated that someone had read the pending John Bolton book manuscript and that in the book Bolton stated that President Trump had talked about investigations in exchange for aid funding for Ukraine. The New York Times also wrote that the book would state that Acting Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney, and White House Counsel, Pat Cipollone, were also a part of the scheme. I looked at both stories closely and noticed that the reporters had not read the manuscripts or quoted the manuscripts; they were reports from someone who stated that they had read the manuscripts. Both stories took significant liberties to describe the intent in the manuscripts, but the reporter had apparently also not spoken to John Bolton.

On January 23, 2020, the National Security Council lawyers sent a letter to the legal team handling the book publishing for John Bolton to inform him that the manuscript contained some classified information and it would need have some edits before publication in March. Then, on January 26, the New York Times published a story that someone had leaked some of the details of the book, but they had not released the actual manuscript. While I am interested in seeing the actual manuscript, I am also very aware that this selective leak was designed by The New York Times and whoever leaked the information to influence the ongoing trial.

It was clear from the earliest days of the trial that the House had a clear political strategy as well as a court-room strategy. During the trial I had the responsibility to hear the facts but also to separate the politics from the facts. Politically, it was best for the House to move as quickly as possible through impeachment so that vulnerable Democratic members could vote for impeachment, and then move quickly to other topics. But since the presidential election is in full swing, it was politically better for Democrats to make the Senate trial move as slow as possible to hurt the President during the campaign. That explains why the House did not take the time to formally request documents or testimony from many individuals; they needed to move fast and try to force the Senate to move slowly. It also explained why the House passed impeachment on a party line vote, then held the articles of impeachment for a month before delivering them to the Senate to start the trial. The House Managers said repeatedly that the evidence was clear and that they had proved their case. But, if that was true, why would the Senate need to call additional witnesses? I think the reason is that the witness process was about delay, more than facts.

Final Thoughts

The facts do not support the accusation in the Trump impeachment, and it certainly did not need to come to this moment of national division. While, it was clear that the House Managers wanted to drag the trial on for months in the Senate, through the primary election season, their case consisted of hypothetical story lines and “presumptions” more than facts that warrant the removal of a President. This does not meet what Alexander Hamilton in Federalist, No. 65 described as the “due weight” for the arguments.

But impeachment has certainly created the division in our society that Alexander Hamilton predicted. Over 200 years ago he wrote, “The prosecution [of impeachments], will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused.” This has been an incredibly divisive season in our nation. It is not about one person, it is about all of us. We individually choose how we handle disagreements with family, friends, and people on the other side of particular issues. Our government represents us, so it is up to us to model for our government how to handle disagreements.

We are now past impeachment, and it’s time to work on the issues that matter most to the American people. As we move forward, every American should speak out on the issues that are important to them and the voices that speak for their point of view. But, we should remember that we have much more in common than we have that divides us. It is my hope that our nation does not go through a season like this again for a very long time and that we can move past this age of impeachment to an age of oversight and accountability.

I appreciate all the engagement with our office during the impeachment proceedings. We had thousands of calls and emails over the past month. We had hundreds of thousands of views on the nightly Facebook Live updates each day during the trial. While not every Oklahoman agrees with every decision I make on behalf of our state, I am grateful most choose to be respectful in expressing their points of view. At the end of the day, we are Oklahomans. We may not all agree on each issue, but we can be respectful of each other in our disagreement.

I am honored to serve our state and nation. We have many important issues to address in the coming days, I pray we can work on them together for the future of our state and nation.

 

In God We Trust,

 

James Lankford
United States Senator for Oklahoma

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

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

___________________________

If you would like more information on these topics or any other legislation currently before the US Senate, please do not hesitate to call my DC office at (202) 224-5754. My Oklahoma City office can be reached at (405) 231-4941 and my Tulsa office at (918) 581-7651. You can also follow me on Facebook or Twitter or Instagram for updates on my work in Congress.

America Is Being Destroyed


Justin Smith reminds readers again that today’s America would cause our Founding Fathers to turn in their graves if such activity was ever monitored.

 

Both American Leftists and Conservatives pretending to be rational would tell you an imminent Civil War is the stuff of Conspiracy Theories. I say, “PAY ATTENTION!” I watched a Dem supporter verbally freak out on Fox News over the acquittal by the Senate of Donald Trump. The freaker spoke words like slash President Trump’s throat and his Republican supporters too.

 

Justin’s sentiment (of which I concur) is that the Left has flushed the Founders’ America down the crap hole with Leftist transformation politics.

 

IF YOU THINK these two political stands will not clash in eventual violence, I’m afraid your head is with the ostriches in the sand of delusion.

 

JRH 2/11/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

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

America Is Being Destroyed

America and Lives of Controlled Servitude

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 2/8/2020 10:17 PM

 

“The barbarian hopes — and that is the mark of him, that he can have his cake and eat it too. He will consume what civilization has slowly produced after generations of selection and effort, but he will not be at pains to replace such goods, nor indeed has he a comprehension of the virtue that has brought them into being.”  ~ Hilaire Belloc [Quote from The BarbariansWikipedia Bio]

 

Conservative Americans and everything righteous and decent, every Founding Principle including Christianity, has been under attack very nearly from the beginning of the nation, but from the first days of the Marxist ideology being introduced into America after 1848, something much more evil has grown within our country.  America is being destroyed more rapidly than ever today, yes, even under Trump, by Democratic Party communists and Republicans-In-Name-Only [RINOs], as so many on both sides of the political aisle are responsible for buying into the globalists’ worldview, essentially a far left communist worldview, and they use planned conflict, fear, control of education, the dependence built into the welfare system and dominant control in states, corporations and academia to achieve their ends.

 

[Blog Editor – Of interest: Marxism and the Manipulation of Man; By Ludwig Von Mises; Mises Institute; Part of lecture series from 6/23 to 7/3/1952 – extracted from “Marxism Unmasked” published by FEE © 2006 – Reprinted as Lecture 5 this title Mises Institute © 2019]

 

The Left seeks to destroy our nation’s Founding, the Constitution and Christianity in America, because those entities impede and obstruct their goals of total control of every individual and their ability to rewrite history in order to create a logic that aligns only with their twisted, evil ideology. To be blunt, they seek the destruction of America’s traditional culture and even the traditional family. Essentially they want to see all Conservatives dead, so the conservative ideology and the Founding will die along with us.

 

The Conservative Philosophy and the Founding Father’s Judeo-Christian and Western Principles are bitterly assaulted regularly by the Left who condemn them largely due to the moral restraints they place on their desire to follow any lewd immoral practice in society, of their own choosing, regardless of how debasing, dehumanizing, demented, perverted and deviant it might be, as currently witnessed in the LGBTQ movement. Rather than seeking equality under the law, they seek to restrain Christian morality, and, in so doing, our God-given Rights and the Bill of Rights too. They seek the submission of true republicans to the arbitrary decisions of men and to deny all Americans actual free will and freedom of choice, that the power brokers fear and despise, when in the hands of ‘We the People’ and the Great Unwashed Masses, the Deplorables, and so they offer miniscule financial gains to the ignorant masses, who were successfully brainwashed in public education, and call it a  “great transfer of wealth”, in order to keep them disciplined and content, even as they regularly suppress and subvert their Constitutional rights.

 

The traditional core nuclear American family too —  represented by one man married to one woman and raising their children together over their lifetime —  is now misrepresented as something bad, by the Left. Rather than being supported as the most important entity of society for a child that helps a child learn right from wrong through loving parents, the Leftist Democrats and Communists want us to believe that it is a stifling, controlling patriarchy that is designed to prevent one from attaining their full potential to become the weak, simpering, cowed, cowardly, spineless State Serfs and proles, “yes men”, they were meant to be.

 

When the average American protests against gun control legislation, in Virginia in numbers estimated to be between 60,000 to 80,000, and the State’s Democratic Party legislators, tyrants one and all, still pass seven illegitimate, unconstitutional gun control laws, similar to laws passed in Colorado, and under consideration in New Hampshire, New Mexico, Hawaii and other states, that have already been upheld in Appeals Courts in Connecticut and Indiana, he understands that oligarchs are attempting to rule over him.

 

And the point is driven further home, upon discovering that some major banks, such as CitiCorp and Bank of America are refusing loans to firearm manufactures for semi-automatic weapons and if they sell their goods to adults under the age of twenty-one.

 

More and more, we even hear so-called “leaders” from the city commissioner level, in towns like Fargo, ND, to mayors like Ted Wheeler in Portland, Oregon, right on up to Governors, like Howard Dean (former Vermont Governor) and on to the U.S. Congress suggesting and even presenting despicable, reprehensible European Union style “hate speech” ‘law’ as we find in France, Germany and the United Kingdom. Whether these illiberal petty tyrants acknowledge the fact or not, so long as speech isn’t threatening or harassing, “hate speech” — which is subjective and dependent on who is listening or on the receiving end — is just as protected under the First Amendment as any other speech, and anyone is free to condemn Islam, Muslims, Jews, blacks, whites, Hispanics, illegal aliens, Americans, Democrats and communists or Republicans and conservatives.

 

[Blog Editor: If you are a Biblically minded Christian, you moral stand expressed in speech WILL be labelled Hate Speech in Europe. That mentality is being brainwashed into Americans via multiple forms of media and the Education system. If YOU as a Christian don’t stand now, YOU WILL be incarcerated for Christian morality and faith.

 

 

 

 

 

Millions of Americans despised NAFTA during all the years since the Clinton presidency and they recently rejected the Trans-Pacific Partnership, only to see President Trump sign something much worse through the illegitimate, unconstitutional United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, that damages and erodes U.S. sovereignty and individual liberty.

 

As J.W. Bryan, a 93 year old former U.S. Marine, notes in his ‘Open Letter to President Donald J. Trump’ on February 8th 2020: “I am very favorable to what you have accomplished and are trying to accomplish. However, I fear that you are being deceived by the very members of the (Council on Foreign Relations) within your administration.” Mr. Bryan understands that the goal of the CFR has always been the convergence of capitalism and communism and the creation of a one world government, a new world order, and the USMCA fits perfectly into that plan, a plan that was driven and facilitated by our “trade representative” Robert Lighthizer, who is a longtime member of the globalist CFR and an advocate of Obama’s badly flawed Trans-Pacific Partnership.

 

[Blog Editor: I understand Justin Smith’s difficulties with USMCA; however tossing in traditional bad guy globalists of the CFR, it becomes more difficult for me to pinpoint Justin’s mind on just where the CFR is on the nefarious scale. That scale is long and wide ranging from the Antisemitic ridiculous to the very credible Marxist-like One World Government. I used Duck-Duck-Go to search a phrase in this essay. Click this phrase to see what I mean: “Council on Foreign Relations: convergence of capitalism and communism and the creation of a one world government”]

 

Both of the aforementioned leave most of America understanding that there isn’t any real freedom or free market in America any longer. And they are right. Americans now live lives of controlled servitude under a fascist oligarchy that operates through the cooperation of governments, both federal and state, and our nation’s corporations, which has made our political and economic situation and environment much more dire today, than if left to the more pure capitalist system that existed prior to 1913.

 

In his morning soliloquy, my fine friend, Jeremy Deeter, reminded me of a point I used to often address in past years. Nearly every American family man in the 1950s could work his 40 hour a week job and still pay for a house, groceries and clothes, for himself and the wife and children, an automobile and still have a bit left over to take in a night out at a movie or dinner with his family. Then the Harvard boys stepped in and looked at the numbers, especially after seeing that women were well capable of working during the war effort of WWII, and the finance manipulations, in place since the Federal Reserve Act and the Income Tax Act (16th Amendment) of 1913,  began in earnest and at lightning speed, raising prices and manipulating the currency to put more money in the landlord’s, corporations’ and bankers’ pockets. And now, just to survive and pay rent, we see both parents must work, and very often, one or more of the children.

 

The 1950s was one of the last decades before the social situation in America started sliding downhill. The Left is especially hard on this era, since things were good, and it represents the high point in the life of the American family. Aside from the wages of one man being sufficient to support a family and raise children:

 

*Postwar prosperity led to nearly universal employment.

 

*Less than three percent of children were born to single mothers [Stats I located varied yet similar. For example: Page search “1950” on NCBI page – 4% and fas.org “1950” under topic “Number of Nonmarital Births” – 5.6%] .

 

*Violent crime was less than half of today’s crime rate.

 

*The salary gap between a high school and college graduate was three times less than it is today.

 

*Ninety percent of Americans attended church, compared to only forty percent today [Graph].

 

Largely due to the actions and machinations of the Federal Reserve Bank, the same bank that enriched J.P. Morgan, the Roosevelt Family, the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds through the 1929 Stock Market Crash, a monopoly of power has grown in the hands of the few. They wield power over the rest of society, like a club using threat of violence, i.e. the National Guard in Virginia and other means of coercion — using millions of dollars from Michael Bloomberg and George Soros; and, they also offer a plum of economic largesse in the auto industry while inserting anti-American, anti-sovereignty treaties into the fine print of the USMCA, in their ultimate desire for total control of all the nation’s resources and all the individuals themselves, who will be left little choice but to comply to their demands, or fight for resources, their private property and their absolute right to live free and in Liberty.

 

The Far Left Democratic Party Communists are making continuous gains through thousands of lies propagated, facilitated and advanced through John Dewey’s public education system that paved the way for the indoctrination of generations of Americans into the Marxist philosophy. Dewey himself was an admirer of the Bolshevik experiment and an admirer of Leon Trotsky, although he disagreed with him on some points; but suffice it to say that Dewey subscribed to the same mob rule that always comes from pure democracy, a mob rule that now manifests itself in today’s ANTIFA, Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter movements and the nihilism they direct at America’s Founding.

 

The Left offers the fictions of their multiculturalist global narratives designed by society’s power players, that promote and seek more Big Government and power for the already powerful and less freedom and liberty for the rest of us, through numerous lies focused on climate change and the Cap and Trade taxes and redistribution of wealth, fiat debt, open borders, free migration, central economic planning, socialized medical care — contained in the USMCA too, in some form or fashion — in plans designed to subjugate us all in the lowest common denominator in poverty and policies that absolutely and completely destroy national sovereignty. Just listen to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren long enough and you will hear of a utopia for all, paid for by the government, that costs upwards of forty to fifty-seven trillion dollars and destroys real wealth, destroying America in the process.

 

[Leftists Lie to Brainwash:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, based on a plethora of faulty white papers coming out of the Campus propaganda mills, such as reports presented to the World Economic Forum, in 2002 and 2015 by Professor Richard Tol of the University of Sussex, the Democrats and RINOs of America expect fly-over rural and suburban America to reduce our standard of living, embrace radical, costly and potentially deadly changes in the energy generation industry, food consumption, modes of travel and the economy; they also demand we hand ourselves and our futures to the controls of multilateral and global institutions, which is supposedly part of the solution required to save us from ourselves. And in the meantime, Al Gore jets around the globe doing his “Chicken Little” bit on global warming, as he leaves his 10,070 square feet Bell Meade Mansion in Tennessee for weeks at a time with all its lights burning bright and burning up an average of 220,000 kilowatt hours a year.

 

These dangerous people do not have one bit of standing to tell You or me or anyone how we should or must be living our lives. They are the morons who we must sift out of government as one sifts chaff from the wheat, so that we may minimize their collective deranged, irrational ideas impact on our culture and our society, however, if they insist and continue to force the issue and their contention that all Americans must live according to their dictates, at the expense of our own freedom and liberty, violent conflict will be inevitable.

 

Americans and their progenies are facing the most dangerous times to be an American, since 1861 and the spawning of incremental tyranny, that I have witnessed in my sixty-three years on earth, as a trend continues and grows today towards tyranny across all fronts of U.S. government, and the tyrants are closer than ever to gaining the total control they seek and a top-down hierarchy of control by the few. The situation has arisen through careful planning, and it is gaining momentum due to an apathetic, complacent, indoctrinated, ignorant and blind general population, and if we who have clear vision wish to stop the advancing new world order and the end of liberty in America, each and every Free Born American who loves God, Family, Country and Liberty must be prepared to take up arms against a ruling class that has gone too far and exceeded all bounds of accepted power, in order that all Americans may once again control their own destiny.

 

God ultimately controls my destiny, but I intend to control my own destiny here on earth as much as humanly possible, through my own free will, so long as breath remains in my body.

 

By Justin O. Smith

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

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

___________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text enclosed by brackets and source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

If Bolton testifies, so should Schiff, the Bidens, the ‘whistleblower,’ and the fired Ukrainian prosecutor


It is apparent that John Bolton – a person whose hawkish views I once admired – is intent on stabbing President Trump in the back to the glee of coup-minded Dems and RINOs. I like the musing of Rick Manning the leader of Americans for Limited Government; viz., if Bolton is a witness the entire Pandora’s Box of witnesses that undoubtedly incriminates Dem crimes must also testify.

 

JRH 1/27/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee. 

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protestor restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

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

If Bolton testifies, so should Schiff, the Bidens, the ‘whistleblower,’ and the fired Ukrainian prosecutor

 

By ALG press

January 27, 2020

Americans for Limited Government

 

Jan. 27, 2020, Fairfax, Va.—Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement regarding the leak of portions of John Bolton’s book:

 

“The leak of parts of John Bolton’s book out of the National Security Council is clearly designed to impact the impeachment trial. No matter what the book claims, the facts remain the same. The Ukrainian government had zero knowledge that the funds were being held until a story ran on August 28.  Senator Ron Johnson, who was meeting with the Ukrainians on September 1 along with Vice President Pence, called President Trump about what they should ask for in exchange for the aid being released, to which the President replied, ‘No way. I would never do that. Who told you that?’ And, that he would likely be happy with the decision that was made: ‘We’re reviewing it now, and you’ll probably like my final decision.’

 

“No matter what any witnesses say about the President’s internal thoughts or even complaints about the unfairness of a system that spent three years investigating him when he did nothing and closes its eyes to obvious abuses of power and corruption by the Clintons and Bidens, the bottom line fact is that the Ukrainians were never told by U.S. officials that aid was being withheld prior to the Politico story, and that the aid was released two weeks after the hold was reported, three weeks prior to the deadline.

 

“Facts matter.  The actions taken were perfectly legal and the impeachment continues to be nothing more than a continuation of the three-year coup against the duly-elected President of the United States.  And given the persistent leaks from the National Security Council staff, it is clear that the only people seeking to have an undue influence on the 2020 U.S. election are the Obama holdovers in the White House and their ongoing efforts to knee-cap President Trump.  The Senate needs to take the evidence that is being laid before them and acquit the President, rather than being buffeted by the same kind of campaign of disinformation that the nation endured throughout the Mueller investigation.  Dragging out this trial for any longer does a grievous disservice to our nation, as fairness would dictate that if witnesses are allowed to be called, then any and every witness the President wishes to bring forward should be allowed including the so-called whistleblower, Adam Schiff, the Schiff staff that colluded with the ‘whistleblower’, Clinton operatives who worked the Ukraine for cash, the Ukrainian prosecutors who investigated Biden corruption and the New York Times reporters who received the selective leaks of the Bolton book.  Let’s hear the NY Times reporters claim source protection privilege when the President is not afforded the basic Executive Privileges that every Chief Executive has had and defended since George Washington.”

 

“The Senate has a choice.  Either end this fraudulent impeachment, or open it up into a free for all.  After three years of being ‘prosecuted’ in the press and three months of the House ‘impeachment’ hearings, mostly held in secret, the President deserves to be able to completely and fully make his case if additional House witnesses are allowed to be called.  If the Senate doesn’t have the stomach for opening the door to a full inquiry into the corruption of the Ukrainian involvement on behalf of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, the Bidens money grab and the shady Schiff House process, then they should not open the door to any additional witnesses.”

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

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protestor restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

_____________________________

Interview Availability: Please contact Americans for Limited Government at 703-383-0880 ext. 1 or at media@limitgov.org.

 

©2020 Americans for Limited Government. All rights reserved.

 

Personal Thoughts Leading to B.D. Wright Deep State Interview


Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © January 26, 2020

Frank Camp in a Daily Wire interview with a former CIA employee Bryan Dean Wright about the machination of an America Deep State. Wright self-describes himself as a lifelong Dem which for me has become a dirty word in the English language.

 

In the part one of the interview he describes Dems of his admiration in the past contrasted with present day Dems epitomized by AOC and Bernie Sanders. A point I can relate to because I grew up in a Dem Party family hailing from the Pacific Northwest just as Wright.

 

My Dem family’s devotion to Dems was due to their perception it was the Franklin Roosevelt Dems that saved Americans from starvation resulting from joblessness of the Great Depression. (I have since learned my family’s perception was probably misplaced of actual facts were more public in 1930s, 40s, 50s and right into the 60s. BUT that’s another story.) The Dem Senators of my childhood and early teen years were Henry (Scoop) Jackson and Warren Magnuson. Both Jackson and Magnuson were old fashioned Americans more concerned about benefitting the State of Washington they represented than the USA at large. Jackson in his day was considered a Liberal yet extremely Anti-Communist to the point of committing the U.S. Military to confront Communist expansionism. In essence Jackson was a motivated Anti-Communist Hawk more than he was a Liberal. It is this personal memory of Jackson I have that convinces me the Jackson of yesteryear would have deserted the Democratic Party of today because of that political Party’s lurch toward Marxist Socialism.

 

WELL … Back to Pacific Northwest exposer of the Deep State Dem Bryan Dean Wright. Wright is going out on limb exposing how the Deep State is operating ergo I half-way suspect a tragic accident, mysterious suicide or unexplained homicide might be in his future. I pray not.

 

Below is a cross post of The Daily Wire interview that was posted on 1/25 and 1/26/20.

 

JRH 1/26/20 (Hat Tip NWO Report)

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protestor restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

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

INTERVIEW (Part I): Former CIA Officer Explains The Shocking Details And Dangers Of The ‘Deep State’

 

By  Frank Camp

January 25, 2020

The Daily Wire

 

Bryan Dean Wright – Photo by Molly Condit

 

Over the last several years, the term “Deep State” has been used frequently by both President Trump, during speeches and on social media, as well as by some Trump-supporting pundits. President Trump and the commentators who support him often use the term to describe a group of bureaucratic insiders who want the president out of office.

 

These individuals represent a loosely-connected web of unelected bureaucrats, often left over from previous administrations, who allegedly utilize their intel and reach in order to disrupt the agenda of the president and his allies.

 

But what exactly is the Deep State? Who exactly are the Deep State players? What damage can they do? And what can be done to stop them?

 

On Wednesday, I had the opportunity to speak with Bryan Dean Wright, a former CIA officer who now serves as a contract instructor for the military. Wright, a self-described “lifelong Democrat,” was not only able to answer my questions about the Deep State, but provide incredible insight into this not-so-well-understood world of leakers and bad actors.

 

In part one of this interview, Wright discusses his own background in the CIA, the origins of what we would call the modern “Deep State,” the bad actors operating from the inside, the damage they have done, and much more.

 

DW: What was your former job at the CIA?

WRIGHT: I first served as an operations officer. These are the folks that, in short, go abroad to recruit spies and steal secrets. I did that for a number of years, then transitioned to the private sector and did some work in New York. I went back into the agency after a hiatus and served as what’s called a targeting officer. That role finds the people and organizations that can fill in the gaps of our understanding of particular adversaries, specifically their leadership and their plans and intentions. I developed targeting packages of how to get in front of those people and recruit them as clandestine sources.

DW: Why did you decide to leave the agency?

WRIGHT: The original reason back in the mid-2000s was because my brother needed to go into rehab for his alcohol addiction, and unfortunately my family didn’t have the money to send him. So, I had to go in the private sector and earn it. Once I was able to do that – after my brother achieved his sobriety – I got back into the agency.

And then in December of 2015, I left for the second and final time. The reason I left then was more out of sorrow and anger for what I saw happening. And it really gets to the issue of the “Deep State.” I met with a bunch of people that were tied-in to some of our covert action operations – I was reviewing and auditing them – and these senior executives weren’t taking it seriously or tried to hinder my efforts. A lot of people didn’t want to have accountability for their failures. Or, secondarily, they didn’t want to have to go back to the National Security Council or even the President or Vice President and say, “Actually, what we’ve been telling you was wrong, or it wasn’t quite true.” And so I became very frustrated and I just didn’t see myself being complicit with that degree of unprofessionalism at a minimum or flat out treachery at worst. So, I transitioned out.

DW: What is your primary job now?

WRIGHT: I serve as a contract instructor for the military – and some of those details I can’t dive into at present – but that’s part of what I do. And I spend a lot of time writing and going on different TV outlets, Fox in particular, to talk in part about national security-related issues.

I also write and talk a lot about politics. As a lifelong Democrat, I share with my readers and audiences what I see as this horrific drift by the party away from what I grew up with in the Pacific Northwest: a moderate, sensible Democratic Party. For instance, I remember men like Tom Foley, former Speaker of the House, who was from rural Eastern Washington. Or a guy like Cecil Andrus, a sensible, no-nonsense Democratic Governor of Idaho. These folks are the Democrats who I grew up with, and my family was a part of. But that is no longer the party that we see. Instead, we see the party of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Tom Perez, and it’s these absolute bonkers elements that I don’t identify with, are horrifying, and I think ultimately will bring the entirety of the Democratic Party down. And if that’s what has to happen, well, I hope the Republicans can keep a light on for me.

DW: So, what is the “Deep State?” We hear it all the time in conservative media, especially on outlets like Fox News. But what is the “Deep State” really?

WRIGHT: To understand the Deep State, you have to understand a man named Aldrich Ames. He was a CIA officer who, in the 1980s, decided to commit treason and work for the Soviet Union, and his treachery cost the lives of many of our Soviet agents. When Ames was asked why he did it, his response was this, “I know what’s best for foreign policy and national security … and I’m going to act on that.” That’s the definition and the ethos of the Deep State. It’s an unelected group of men and women with profound powers of the surveillance state who use those powers to advance their own interests, whether it be personal or partisan.

And that last bit I think is important. Why do they do it? In the distant past, guys like Aldrich Ames, they’d leak to our enemies because of ego and for money. But in the recent past, like what we’ve seen with Former FBI Director James Comey, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former Director of the CIA John Brennan, they’re leaking to The New York Times or CNN because, yes ego and money, but clearly a sense of partisan warfare. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t discount their ego and monetary motivations. I mean, look, they’ve taken paid media contributorships and I’m sure it makes them feel very important. But what we’re seeing is more than that. It’s partisan, and it’s personal. I think that’s different and that’s frightening. I would say that, in essence, is the “Deep State,” and that is what’s driving Deep State actors today.

DW: This may be a bit of a redundant question, but who are the Deep State? Who would you identify as major Deep State actors?

WRIGHT: In the recent past, Comey, Brennan, Clapper are the most obvious, big names. But based on the IG reports, we’re also seeing more mid-level bureaucrats, like the Lisa Pages and the Peter Strzoks and the Bruce Ohrs. These are Deep Staters: folks who are unelected and frankly unaccountable to anyone, using their power and knowledge to satisfy a personal agenda, irrespective of the law. That’s certainly what we’ve seen in the IG reports regarding Crossfire Hurricane, and it’s clear that these bureaucrats had no problem executing their own partisan or personal agendas believing their relative anonymity would hide them from accountability.

I think that those individuals are just the ones we know about. And I think, God willing, Attorney General Bill Barr and United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut John Durham are going to flush out other actors and bring them to account, and lead to further clarity on if indeed the Comeys and Brennans and Clappers of the intelligence community can be brought forward on charges. That’s certainly the hope if the facts allow.

DW: In what malign activities specifically have members of this Deep State participated?

WRIGHT: Let’s start with Comey. We know that he was leaking to The New York Times, and he wasn’t leaking because he had any reasonable belief that President Trump was up to no good. I mean, the IG has shown conclusively that he was leaking to advance his own personal interests. In fact, [it] labeled Comey as a dangerous example to the tens of thousands of current and former FBI employees. So, that opens up this horrific floodgate of the Aldrich Ames ethos that, if you think that you know best for national security or foreign policy, that you, FBI employee, can damage whomever you’d like. You, Mr. FBI or CIA employee, who has access to secret human or signals intelligence – emails, phone calls – you get to decide what material should be leaked to kneecap politicians you don’t like. Oh, and you will face no consequences for it! That, I think, is the horrific legacy that Comey leaves behind.

And again, let’s emphasize something here: Comey knew early on that Trump was not going to be found guilty of having engaged in impropriety with the Russian government. Comey had participated with others in the intelligence community to investigate these allegations. He and the others knew, in early 2017 if not before, that there was nothing there. Think of this: if the intelligence community had any information in 2016 or 2017 that Trump was a Russian spy, they wouldn’t have sat on it. They would have immediately gotten it to Mueller or folks on Capitol Hill, and they would have rightfully brought that forward to the American people and removed the president. But that didn’t happen.

So, certainly Comey has a very clear record, demonstrated record, of doing a number of things that weren’t just atypical, but that were wrong. And again, I think that’s what AG Barr and John Durham are trying to fully flush out.

I think that the other characters – John Brennan especially, but also Comey and Clapper – used the dossier and Christopher Steele as pawns in a political game. Both Steele and his dossier were known to be unreliable in the fall of 2016. Indeed, by mid January 2017, Brennan was specifically on record as saying he gave the dossier no particular credence, according to The Wall Street Journal. Well, that’s amazing. Because they included that dossier in a brief to not only then President-elect Trump, but to then President Obama and Joe Biden and, of course, the principals on Capitol Hill. Why would they have done that? There was no legal or intelligence value. They knew Steele and the dossier were verified garbage. But they briefed it anyway. To lots of people.

As a former intelligence officer, I can tell you that this isn’t normal operating procedure. At all. You don’t brief an unvetted document like the dossier to the president-elect and tell him that he’s a corrupt Russian traitor. And you certainly wouldn’t do it if you had already done a degree of investigation and found that there was no veracity to any of the claims. I mean, hell, you don’t even have to be an intelligence officer to understand that.

But what Steele and his dossier lacked in legal or intelligence value, both more than made up for it in political value. And Brennan, Comey, and Clapper knew it. They knew how damaging it would be to Trump if America were to believe the dossier’s allegations. They just needed to give the news media a hook to run with the claims, which were widely known in Washington but went unreported because they were unverified. So their solution, it turns out, was to make themselves the media’s necessary hook. By their simple act of briefing the dossier to so many, it gave credence to the claims and that in fact the dossier existed. Naturally, the Resistance Media – which went all in against President Trump – was happy to distribute their propaganda.

Let me emphasize: the dossier had been refuted by the intelligence community after considerable investigation. There was no legal or intelligence value to briefing the dossier. In fact, the CIA at the time was calling it “internet rumor.” But Brennan, Comey, and Clapper clearly didn’t care. Why? Because they had an end goal: if they could get the media to report on this dossier, then that would be effectively the end of the Trump presidency, or certainly put the president on his heels for a couple of years. They would utterly kneecap him. At least that was their hope.

So, I think that that is the gravest example of Deep State treachery.

DW: To what extent does the media participate in enabling these Deep State actors to do what they want and feel they need to do, and how should that be approached?

WRIGHT: The most obvious and demonstrable connection between these Deep State actors and the media is that guys like Comey, Brennan, and Clapper now, to varying degrees, have paid contributorships with media outlets. Think of it: we know that they were leaking classified information to these outlets when they were government employees, and now they have jobs with them. I mean, my god, what does that tell other intelligence community professionals? What are the consequence for breaking the law? Because, as of today, my former colleagues can apparently leak based on their own personal or partisan agenda to the media, and then, in turn, can get a great, cushy job from that same media outlet when they quit or retire. That’s a horrifying example with profound consequences to our Republic because you’re incentivizing intelligence professionals to leak or kneecap people they don’t like. If that takes root, what in the hell will prevent us from becoming Pakistan or Egypt? These countries, by the way, are run by the intelligence or military communities, sprinkled with a veneer of democracy.

Is that what we are to become? Because that really is the end result of allowing a politicized intelligence community to go unchecked. And that’s why Barr and Durham’s work is so important. These people have to be held to account.

Now at the same time, it’s not just the media who are gaining from this. They’re also being manipulated by the Brennans, the Comeys, and the Clappers. In March of 2018, for example, The Daily Beast reported that Brennan and Clapper were doing a roadshow around the country to various elite groups and big money people, and they stopped by Hollywood. Brennan told them that Trump would not finish out the year (2018) as President of the United States; he would be removed because of his treacherous relationship with Vladimir Putin and the Russians.

Clapper was also there, and they were doing this to both create and then fan the flames of hysteria. Remember that their audience was made up of the Hollywood elites, the very individuals who control or contribute mightily to the public sphere, create narratives, create truth. So, it is not an accident that Brennan and Clapper would be there in Hollywood in March of 2018 spreading these lies. Again, they knew that the Trump/Russia narrative wasn’t true but, as with the dossier, they needed the media to continue to manipulate the American people to achieve their political end. And who better to have in their back pocket than those Hollywood executives who have our eyeballs and our ears, whether it be on movie screens or television screens. Brennan and Clapper needed them because they needed hysteria. And that’s precisely what they’ve been committed to. Virulently and unapologetically so.

DW: There are criticisms, mostly from the Left, that the “Deep State” is blamed for every bad thing that surrounds the Trump presidency and the administration. It’s almost like a joke to many people on the Left. “Oh, the Deep State! It must be the Deep State!” Is the idea of the Deep State in any way overblown? And if so, to what degree?

WRIGHT: You know, in 2017, when Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, was being interviewed by Rachel Maddow, she was telling him about Trump’s taking on the CIA or the intelligence community, and his response, then and now, was so illustrative and so jaw dropping.

If you recall, he said, “If you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday to get back at you.” So, Chuck Schumer recognizes that the Deep State is real, and that they will exact revenge at a time and a place and on people of their choosing.

Let’s pause for a second and really think about the modern Left’s response to the fact that the Deep State is real, and that these intelligence officials will decide our nation’s political winners and losers. Really consider Chuck Schumer’s flippant acceptance of it all. I can’t imagine a more horrifying thing for any person of any party to say ever – because think of the consequence of that. The modern American Left is basically saying, “You know, we love those Deep State guys. They’re real, and we love it because Orange Man Bad. And they’ll take this guy out for us. Because we just don’t like him.”

I mean, they’re incentivizing a bunch of people to continue to break the law because it fits their temporary, short-term partisan goals. Never mind the fact that they’re setting a brush fire to the Republic. I mean, it’s amazing to me knowing how many folks on the Left who have been so virulently opposed to the CIA and FBI, given some of the sins, unquestionable sins – starting in the 40s and ramping up through the Cold War in the 50s, through the 70s and 80s – to now see that our own “progressive” leadership is somehow winking and nudging with our good friends like John Brennan and the rest because they’re taking on Orange Man. So, this suggestion by the people on the Left, my fellow Democrats, who would say, “Well, that’s just silly. It’s a conspiracy…” Well, they need to take it up with Chuck Schumer because he thinks the Deep State is real, too. And he fears them.

DW: Is this type of behavior something that has gone on for a long time?

WRIGHT: The short answer is yes. There is a history of individuals who get this profound power when working for the FBI or the CIA or NSA and abuse it. I can tell you, I worked with individuals who used their abilities to tap phone calls and emails to look after ex-boyfriends or ex-spouses. And those individuals were eventually found out and rightfully fired. In other words, human frailty – or the part of the human condition that is indeed so frail as to be given profound powers and then use them for ill – that has always existed, and that will always exist. That’s why it’s so important to conduct oversight of law enforcement and intelligence, and indeed military communities.

The difference, though, from that unfortunate low level abuse of power is that the treachery of modern Deep State actors – Comey, Brennan, and Clapper – is that they wanted to overrule the American voters. They wanted to upend the free and fair election of Donald Trump. They wanted to choose a different leader to run the nation. Their purpose in leaking to the media was to take out a duly-elected president because they either didn’t like the guy or they wanted Hillary Clinton to win. Many of them, I suspect, liked Clinton because they knew that they were going to have positions of authority or influence in her administration.

That degree of audacity I think is new, and I think that it is incredibly dangerous. And the lack of focus on that treachery is one of the profound lost opportunities of our political class, particularly on the Left, of the past few years. They could have said, “The actions of Comey, Clapper, and Brennan were horrifically wrong and they should face justice. And, meanwhile, we oppose the president on X, Y, and Z policies.” That would have been the right thing to do. As an opposition party, you can do both of those things, but that’s not what the Left has done. That’s certainly not what Pelosi and Schumer and our friends Rep. Adam Schiff and Rep. Jerry Nadler are doing right now with the impeachment.

All of this has been 100% focused on bringing down the president from day one, instead of having a much more balanced, nuanced approach to his presidency. And I think, and frankly I hope, that that’s why the Democratic Party loses in 2020. I don’t know of any other way to get rid of the rot that is in Washington, and within the leadership of the Democratic Party. Because if a progressive wins – Sen. Elizabeth Warren or, God forbid, Sen. Bernie Sanders – or even if Joe Biden wins, the lesson for the Democratic leadership, the lesson for the media, will not be that their treachery was bad, but that it worked.

In part two of this interview, which will be released on Sunday, Wright talks about what the Deep State would look like if a Democrat wins in 2020, what can be done to root out these malign actors, what the media can do, the dangers of normalizing socialism, and more.

 

I’d like to thank Bryan Dean Wright for taking the time to speak with me about such an important issue. For more, you can follow Wright on Twitter, and check out his official website.

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

INTERVIEW (Part II): Former CIA Officer On What The ‘Deep State’ Looks Like If A Democrat Wins In 2020, And What Can Be Done To Recover

 

By Frank Camp

January 26, 2020

The Daily Wire

 

Bryan Dean Wright – Photo by Molly Condit

 

Over the last several years, the term “Deep State” has been used frequently by both President Trump, during speeches and on social media, as well as by some Trump-supporting pundits. President Trump and the commentators who support him often use the term to describe a group of bureaucratic insiders who want the president out of office.

 

These individuals represent a loosely-connected web of unelected bureaucrats, often left over from previous administrations, allegedly who utilize their intel and reach in order to disrupt the agenda of the president and his allies.

 

But what exactly is the Deep State? Who exactly are the Deep State players? What damage can they do? And what can be done to stop them?

 

On Wednesday, I had the opportunity to speak with Bryan Dean Wright, a former CIA officer who now serves as a contract instructor for the military. Wright, a self-described “lifelong Democrat,” was not only able to answer my questions about the Deep State, but provide incredible insight into this not-so-well-understood world of leakers and bad actors.

 

In part one of this interview, which you can read here, Wright discussed his own background in the CIA, the origins of what we would today call the “Deep State,” the bad actors operating from the inside, the damage they have done, and more.

 

In part two below, Wright talks about what the Deep State might look like if a Democrat wins 2020, what can be done to rein in the Deep State, what the media can do, as well as the way President Trump has brought this bureaucratic monster into the light.

 

DW: Do you believe that if a Democrat is elected in 2020, the Deep State actors will continue to disseminate information, but for the other side? Are there proportionate actors on both sides, or is it disproportionate leaking on one side?

WRIGHT: You are out of your mind if you think there aren’t Trump supporters within the intelligence community, and that if he loses in 2020, won’t be absolutely outraged that Trump was, in their eyes, taken down because of the media and because of the Deep State actors. And you’re equally foolish to think that they won’t use their knowledge and their influence to kneecap the next Democratic president – President Sanders, President Warren, President Biden. Of course there will be people in the conservative world who work in the intelligence community who will find ways to strike back, and that is something that I have been warning about for years. Once you start this process of politicizing the intelligence community, when does it stop? We are marching down a very dangerous road where each side is so hellbent to exact revenge, and we get these political blood feuds that are wildly difficult to stop.

So, I would not be surprised at all if there were attempts by Trump supporters within the intelligence community to strike back at a progressive or otherwise Democratic president in 2020 and beyond because if we are looking at the example of Comey, Clapper, and Brennan as of today, what consequences would they face? What consequences did James Comey face when he unquestionably leaked to The New York Times to force the appointment of special counsel? He leaked classified information. What were the consequences that James Comey has had to face? He got a professorship at William and Mary University teaching ethics, he’s gone on a nationwide book tour, and he has a movie coming out based on his life and times. I mean, are you f***ing kidding me? That’s the consequence that the intelligence community is now looking at if they leak classified information. So you tell me, are we setting up the Republic for a problem? The answer is absolutely yes.

DW: You mentioned AG Bill Barr several times, but what can be done at this point to reign in the Deep State? Not only by the government and people like the attorney general, but by everyone else who has some sort of power?

WRIGHT: Let’s start first with the CIA. Gina Haspel, who’s the CIA director, she can start change. She is in control of the culture of her senior intelligence service, her senior executives, and they are the ones who engage directly with her and the White House, the National Security Council, on a regular basis. She can make sure that these folks understand there are in fact consequences for their behavior, remind them of things like the Hatch Act, what they can and can’t do. She can also, if she has suspicions or wants to make an example of someone, pull those individuals in for re-investigations and have them polygraphed for connections to the press.

She also has that same ability with her mid-level or junior staff, to pull them in on an ongoing basis to remind them of the same things, like the Hatch Act, and that what is happening in the public sphere is wrong; that while they absolutely have an opportunity, a right, to engage in our political process, they certainly should not be emulating the behavior of James Comey. She can use her leadership and her platform to do that.

She can also work with the human resources folks when they’re bringing people on board, to talk about building a new culture within the CIA that reminds people that they are subservient to the President and ultimately subservient to the American people; that it is an honor and a privilege to work at the agency, and if they are found to be abusing the profound powers that they are given, they will be held to account.

Now, that becomes a much more difficult message to sell when James Comey gets away with it. And that’s why the work of Attorney General Barr and John Durham is so important. Gina Haspel has to have concrete examples of consequences for this Deep State treachery. There are other modest things you can do, like stripping security clearances of former professionals who leave and no longer use them on a daily basis, or a project basis – but that stuff is ultimately not as important as changing the culture for why intelligence professionals, law enforcement professionals should not be leaking, A) at all, and B) classified information, and that there will be consequences if they do.

DW: Is there anything the media can do? I mean, responsible media.

WRIGHT: One of the things that I think would be very helpful is if we understood the bias of a particular reporter or media outlet, and then grade that severity of bias with each story that’s aired or published. For instance, I’d love to hover my cursor over a reporter’s name and have a bubble pop up that rates likely bias, with links to examples of said bias. Yes, I recognize the tricky nature of what I’m suggesting – who ranks the bias? But I think there’s a market-based solution to be found.

Another way we consumers ought to flag biased or untrustworthy reporting is when a reporter or outlet uses unnamed sources. Given that Comey has now admitted to being an anonymous media source, it should tell Americans that they should be very suspicious about the motivations of these mysterious people making allegations. And, frankly, it says a lot about the lack of moral character by these sources. They should stand up and say the right thing on the record if they suspect fraud, waste, and abuse, for example. Because that’s how it’s supposed to be done. If you are within the intelligence community and you have problems with your leadership, even the president themself, there are ways that you address that, and it’s not leaking to the press.

So, I think because of our beautiful Constitution, we give our media a lot of leash to report on the facts. But without understanding the bias of the outlet and the reporter, we don’t know if we’re really getting facts, but rather spin. I believe that there’s some good work that could be done on this thorny issue, and on a self-regulating basis. I’m not sure that it’s the government’s role to do that, but nevertheless, a more honest accounting of bias, I think, would be a really critical step to restoring people’s belief and faith in the media. The goal is giving the American people a way to read or watch something and say, “Oh, that reporter is biased, and I’m going to discount this report or give it much less weight than I otherwise would have.”

DW: Which would require self-reflection by individual members of the media to assess their own biases.

WRIGHT: Yeah.

DW: I know that you’re a self-professed “lifelong Democrat,” but what is your political ideology, and has the Trump presidency and the seemingly steroidal Deep State shaped your opinions in a new way that perhaps you hadn’t thought of before?

WRIGHT: Well, I think that like many Americans, I was trepidatious about President Trump, certainly in 2015 and 2016, as the noise was getting louder that he would be a viable candidate and then indeed the President of the United States. But what I have seen over the past three years is that’s he’s playing a very important, a vital role in fact, of blowing up the status quo, of blowing up a system that fundamentally wasn’t working. I’ve come to appreciate that his presidency could be used by the people to create the kind of country, the kind of Republic, that we deserve, which is one that’s accountable to people, that actually gets stuff done, that doesn’t focus on partisanship as much. At least that is, I think, the promise that I have begun to see in President Trump.

And I certainly would say that his positions are reflective of most Democrats, certainly ten years ago. On the border issues, on immigration, he’s saying the exact same things the Democrats were saying not long ago. In 2008, if you looked at the DNC’s platform, Obama was not a hell of a lot different than President Trump on this issue.

So, I think that he represents a lot of common sense on a number of issues that I’ve come to appreciate. Most especially, I think that he’s exposed this Deep State garbage that would have never, ever been exposed under a President Clinton. James Comey would likely still be the FBI director. Think about that. All these others, the McCabes and the Brennans and the Comeys, would all still be in D.C. with their hands on the levers of power.

I think that Trump’s service to this country, of exposing that Deep State, may be one of his greatest legacies.

Depending on how the China issue shakes out, I think that he could be a monumental president regarding how we take on the Chinese. Again, we’ll see.

I’ve really appreciated his approach to the War on Terror. What he has done with Soleimani in Iran, for instance. Under Bush and Obama, Soleimani and the Iranians basically had us buffaloed into a corner, and we wouldn’t take them on because we feared World War III. Well, Trump just gave that a gigantic middle finger and reminded them that they are the junior partner in this relationship, and that we would be setting the agenda. That’s precisely what needed to happen for over 16 years under two different administrations from two different political parties, and Trump finally did the right thing.

And I will tell you, from people that I know who worked the Iran issue inside the intelligence community, they were absolutely elated with Trump’s decision to kill Soleimani.

So overall, I think that the president is doing much better than many of us may have been concerned about, and he deserves a very serious consideration of our vote in 2020.

As it relates to my own personal ideology or philosophy, I would like to say I’m an old school Democrat of the Kennedy/Foley ilk, a Democrat who understands that America was and remains exceptional, and that we have a critical role to play in the world, and that it’s a role that will be respected by our partners even when they don’t like it. It’s leadership through unabashed strength. Trump has restored some of that which was lost under Bush and Obama, contrary to the media hype that would tell you otherwise. I think that’s lost on the modern American Left.

On domestic policies, I think that I believe the same things that I did ten years ago, like the importance of controlled immigration, that we have to have borders. I don’t see that as something that is part of the modern Democratic Left. Trump’s brought that out in stark relief.

But this schism within the Democratic Party isn’t because of Trump. It’s a fight that’s been had over many decades, in fits and starts. We dealt with this desire to unreasonably expand the state, for example, back in the 60s and 70s. Meanwhile, I thought we had put the socialist genie back in the bottle and marginalized those radical leftist elements around that same time. But very clearly, as the DNC declares Ocasio-Cortez the future of the Democratic Party, I think these dark forces are at play again. And we have a huge problem – we being the party, and the nation. It’s a problem that would leave people like Jack Kennedy and Tom Foley rolling over in their graves.

I don’t know where people like me go if a progressive wins the Democratic nomination or the presidency. Polling shows that moderate and conservative Democrats make up anywhere from 35% to 50% of the party. I think our vote will be up for grabs. I think many of us will gravitate to a new Republican Party.

DW: Is there something that you would want our readers to know that you and I haven’t touched on, or perhaps that you think is important that hasn’t been really talked about in the various interviews in which you’ve engaged?

WRIGHT: I don’t think that most Americans understand what the socialist movement in this country is up to. I think many people understand that socialism is bad, although a shocking number of Democrats, particularly younger voters, don’t think it’s a bad thing at all. Still, people don’t appreciate appreciate what Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are doing with the Democratic Party, and I don’t think that most people appreciate why that’s bad, not just for the Democratic Party, but for the country. And ultimately the world.

Let me explain.

Our Republic requires multiple parties to hold each other to account. We have to have multiple voices at the table to challenge each other, to question each other. Our Republic thrives or falls based on that broad contribution and debate, and right now, the Democratic Party is becoming a movement that doesn’t warrant consideration. The reason is its embrace of socialists and their wicked ideology.

The Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders movement – Democratic Socialists of America, or DSA – started many years ago, of course. But their plans really morphed and solidified in 2012, as the DSA put forward a strategy document that basically said to its members, “Look, as socialists, we know that we can’t win in this country running as the Socialist Party. We have to rebrand ourselves. That means we register as Democrats, we run as Democrats, and then push the party so far to the Left as fast as we can that the party fissures into progressives vs. moderates and conservatives. We will then break off, taking with us the bulk of the party, the base. Then and only then can we revive the Socialist Party. Because then we won’t be scary anymore. We will have normalized the socialist agenda.” It’s an agenda, of course, that has been rightfully smeared by its decades of mass death and destruction in every country that has adopted it. So, no wonder they’re trying to rebrand it.

That’s where we’re at. And that’s what Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie are doing. So, when you hear them talk about “free stuff” – education, housing, health care, jobs – know that they’re rebranding themselves with unserious policy proposals that they can’t possibly afford not because they’re being serious, but only trying to make the Socialist Party less scary.

It’s all in the 2012 DSA strategy document, all available on the DSA website for anyone to read. I wish more Americans took the time to review it, understand it, and grasp the treachery of Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders. They’re using the Democratic Party as though it’s a host to be invaded and occupied by a socialist virus. The only aim is to strip the Democratic Party down to nothing, destroy it, and then leave with the voters who would serve their revived Socialist Party.

If that were to happen, think of the consequences not just for the Democratic Party or even America. What would happen to the world? What would happen to humanity if, somehow, the United States were to succumb to socialism?

Who would step into that vacuum of global leadership that for so long has defended liberty and freedom? The clear answer is China, a country that persecutes its people, that embraces murderous concentration camps for the Uighur people. That is the government that would be controlling humanity’s future.

That is what’s at stake. That’s what happens to liberty, to freedom, if the United States, imperfect as we are, is no longer on the scene because we embrace socialism.

And for those who argue that Russia might step up, count me skeptical. With an economy the size of Italy and a leadership that enjoys oppression as much as the Chinese, these are not the people we want to lead humanity.

So, if the Democratic Party falls to the socialist wing with all their horrific values, and the United States is handicapped and is no longer able to play the role that it does in the world, imperfect as we may be, we will jeopardize all the progress that we have fought so hard for, certainly since World War II, to create a more just and a more peaceful world.

That’s really what is at stake for me as I watch the Democratic Party fall into the socialist trap, as I watch Chuck and Nancy and the DNC embrace Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders as the future of the Democratic Party. I watch in horror as progressives in the media fawn over Ocasio-Cortez. People like Rachel Maddow and Joy Behar package her as some fun, dance-on-the-roof kind of girl that’s just a lovely representation of womanhood or being black or brown.

If that bologna salesmanship convinces enough Americans that socialism isn’t so bad after all, and we start going down that path, then we will lose everything that we have fought for over the past 100 years. So we have to get this right. We have to self-correct – as a Democratic Party, as a country – because so much is at stake.

 

I’d like to thank Bryan Dean Wright for taking the time to speak with me about such a monumental issue. For more information, you can follow Wright on Twitter, or check out his official website.

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

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protestor restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

________________________________

Personal Thoughts Leading to B.D. Wright Deep State Interview

Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © January 26, 2020

___________________________

INTERVIEW (Part I & II): Former CIA Officer On What The ‘Deep State’ Looks Like If A Democrat Wins In 2020, And What Can Be Done To Recover

 

© Copyright 2020, The Daily Wire

 

When So Few Defend Liberty


A little over two weeks ago Justin Smith penned “Liberty Violated” to quite angrily protest the USMCA mirror of NAFTA. In that submission I concurred with Justin that the USMCA was just as wicked for America as NAFTA was but I was defensive for President Trump so I entitled the piece “An Intro to ‘Liberty Violated’” to include my Pro-Trump stance. If you wander into the comment section, you will discover Justin was quite a bit less than pleased with my Pro-Trump commentary.

 

I learned today that both the House and Senate have overwhelmingly passed USMCA legislation that merely awaits a Trump signature to become law. THAT SADDENS ME! Because I still believe the plusses outweigh the minuses when it comes to Trump versus the Commie Dems. BUT Justin is correct, the USMCA will challenge U.S. sovereignty and the U.S. Constitution when the long run comes into view.

 

I am amazed on the blindness of pundits and legislators who call themselves Conservative yet are quite supportive of the USMCA. A good example of this blindness can be read at The Epoch Times of all places which lists all the short term benefits economically benefitting various Americans but totally ignoring the long term pitfalls the USMCA holds for the USA. The article is entitled, “Senate Passes USMCA Deal, Sending It to Trump’s Desk”.

 

ALSO Justin touches on the Counter-Constitutional gun-grabbing efforts proceeding in Virginia and Colorado.

 

Justin is correct in his belligerence in that the America envisioned by our Founding Fathers is disappearing. We Americans are like frogs placed in a pot of water not realizing that as the water begins to boil, we will be dead to Freedom and Liberty already.

 

JRH 1/17/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

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

When So Few Defend Liberty

When No One Else Will …

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 1/16/2020 8:17 PM

 

Freedom and liberty no longer matter to Democrats or Republicans, both of whom are showing themselves all so willing, all the more willing, to sell America piece by piece to the highest bidder, and individual liberty and national sovereignty be damned, as they collect their 30 pieces of silver at the expense of the American people.

 

You get the government You vote for, and our society is so damned CORRUPT that all we have today is RAMPANT CORRUPTION Throughout States and Federal Government DESPITE ANY “GOOD INTENTIONS” of the Trump Administration — some of which one must certainly doubt given recent developments and the continued massive spending bills, among other items.

 

The U.S. House of Representatives led by the Democrat Majority passed the national sovereignty killing United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement [USMCA text dated 12/13/19] created by the same Obama negotiation team that attempted to pawn off the terrible Trans-Pacific Partnership on America, and just today, the U.S. Senate Republican Majority passed it.

 

All that remains is President Trump’s signature, which is sure to follow, since, for inexplicable reasons other than he just wanted to see something “Big” pass, he has touted and backed this miserable bill from the start.

 

Now we see an anti-American and tyrannical Democratic Party led majority in the Virginia State Legislature ramming anti-Second Amendment legislation — UNCONSTITUTIONAL Firearm Bills and “rules” — through the legislature against the will of the majority of Virginians, in a manner that can only be described as tyrannical.

 

And similarly, we also are witnessing similar “gun control laws” either passed, as in Colorado, or moving in many states like Georgia and Florida, “laws” that penalize normally good and decent Americans, while making matters better for criminals.

 

More and more often, We — the American People — are put upon, lied to and abused by elected officials who act more like Iran’s Supreme leaders, like absolute rulers held unaccountable and answerable to no one, and if no one else is sick of it, I’m here to say that I’m damn good and sick of it.

 

Between these self-important self-aggrandizing petty tyrants and the all-powerful black robed tyrants who are even worse, VIOLATING the Constitution at will with impunity and no repercussions or consequences, our freedom and liberty is slowly being ripped away from us all, little by little, step by step.

 

Each of You is free to follow Your own conscience, and I intend to follow mine, but I absolutely will not obey ANY illegitimate UnConstitutional law handed down from any government entity or agency or bureau, whether anyone fights it and repeals it or not. If they get repealed, GREAT! If they don’t, I don’t give a good damn, since I don’t answer to tyrants and their arbitrary fiats colored as “law”.

 

I aim to do just exactly as I please from this point on, and the government can go to hell. They’ve broken any semblance of a “social contract” too many times over to the point that the Constitution no longer limits, controls or impedes their arbitrary and dangerous assaults against the U.S. Bill of Rights and Our God Given Rights. And, I will set out each day meaning no harm and doing no wrong, and as such, a Free Born American, I will expect to be left alone and to my own devices, free from any government contact.

 

Some will call me “outlaw”. I name myself a “Free Born American” fully entitled to hold, protect and defend my God Given Rights WHEN NO ONE ELSE WILL, or at least so few in government are barely even trying to defend them.

 

When the system fails us, when elections no longer matter, and tyranny is gaining ground and taking the day, it’s past time to Water the Tree of Liberty with the Blood of Tyrants.

 

God Bless the American Patriots and Their Families and God Damn the United States Government, as it currently stands. May He Damn America’s Enemies Both Foreign and Domestic to the Hell They Have Earned and So Richly Deserve.

 

And May God Help the American Patriots to Keep America Free for All Eternity.

 

de Oppresso Liber ___ Deus Vult ___ In Liberty ~ Justin

 

By Justin O. Smith

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

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

_______________

Edited by John R. Houk

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

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Tucker Carlson Nails It! All You Need to Know About GOP Governors Who Turned on Trump!


Ann Corcoran endorses Tucker Carlson’s 1/3/20 broadcast as an expose of treasonous GOP Governors welcoming American-hating Muslim refugees. BUT Tucker begins with speaking of American enemy Iranian general Qasem Soleimani being killed by an American air strike.

 

Tucker doesn’t question that Soleimani was an evil Islamic terrorist, but openly wonders if Iranian retaliation will lead to open war between the USA and Iran. I for one am weary of American invasions; HOWEVER I am all in to bomb the crap out of anything that provides an economic/military benefit for the Iranian regime. Take out oil, nuclear and military capacities with American technology less soldiers’ boots. AND keep on crippling the regime until a surrender or collapse.

 

The GOP Governors ignoring a majority of American wishes on refugees while siding with Dem Multiculturalists begins at about the 30 minute mark of a 39:33 length video. EIGHTEEN GOP Governors giving go ahead for American-hating Muslim Refugees in so-called Christian Charities are making a buck.

 

Other topics: China, 2nd Amendment stops Church shooting in Texas, Homelessness in San Francisco and Boeing financial woes.

 

JRH 1/4/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

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

Tucker Carlson Nails It! All You Need to Know About GOP Governors Who Turned on Trump!

 

By Ann Corcoran

1/4/2020

Frauds, Crooks and Criminals

 

In just a little over 5 minutes last night Tucker Carlson in a segment on the US Refugee Admissions Program and the President’s efforts to reform it, explains exactly what we have been saying for weeks in dozens of posts.

 

Especially interesting is the focus on phony Christian charity as Carlson’s millions of viewers learn that it is federal contractors masquerading as charitable religious groups that have successfully lobbied Republican governors—18 so far—to thumb their noses at Trump and ask for more refugees for their states!

 

It is vitally important that you send this far and wide. Hat tip: Brenda.

 

The segment begins here:

 

VIDEO: Tucker Carlson Tonight 1/3/20 FULL | Tucker Carlson Fox News January 3, 2020 [GOP Governor/Muslim Refugee segment begins about 30 minute mark]

 

 

[Posted by valdilene pessoa

44.2K subscribers – Jan 3, 2020]

 

Don’t miss my post yesterday about CAIR sending wet kisses to Maryland Governor Larry Hogan when he became the 18th governor to say his state welcomes more poverty from the Middle East, Africa and Asia.

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

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

__________________________

About Frauds, Crooks and Criminals

 

During the next two years Americans will be bombarded by the media with news about the joys of diversity and the economic boom ‘New Americans’ are bringing to the US.

 

However, it’s important that the voting public sees the full picture.

 

Yes, there are deserving immigrants arriving in America, and then there are those who are frauds, crooks and criminals.

 

And, of course, there are American criminals as well.

 

I’ll mention some of those too. In fact, I will have to because most law enforcement and the media rarely report the immigration status of crooks and criminals!

 

Ann Corcoran

 

An Intro to ‘Liberty Violated’


Intro by John R. Houk

By Justin O. Smith

Posted January 3, 2020

 

I am still a huge Trump supporter! Nonetheless President Trump has supported and/or signed some anti-Conservative legislation lately. This has given rise to anger by many all-or-nothing Conservatives particularly in the areas of National Sovereignty and Spending (can you bursting out of control National Debt?).

 

My primary blog contributor Justin Smith appears to have joined the ranks of Conservatives with frankly legitimate concerns of recent Trump-supported legislation. I am in the camp where Trump pro-Patriot actions still outweigh the recent stupid Trump decisions. NEVERTHELESS, Trump support of globalist USMCA will quite probably lead to National Sovereignty and Rule of Law problems to our U.S. Constitution in the long run from an Originalist perspective (probably less concerns from Republic-destroying supporters of a Living Constitution perspective). A fantastic Originalist discourse is HERE.

 

On a personal level I’m not ready to toss President Trump under the bus for policy errors – YET. The source links that support Justin Smith’s commentary will show my support of Trump more than my disappointment. If Trump’s trend continues with bad decisions Impeachment will not be the solution. Rather your votes for Representatives and Senators will decide America’s fate. I for one will be voting Trump in 2020. Hopefully a 2024 Conservative POTUS candidate emerges supporting the Trump good actions while reversing any bad Trump decisions.

 

ANY election of the Dem Party’s current Left-Wing Globalist candidates in Congress or POTUS will doom the American Republic to a government telling people how to live whether they like it or not.

 

JRH 1/3/20

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

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

Liberty Violated

The Constitution Has Been Perverted and Bastardized – Could this Lead to the End of Liberty?

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 1/1/2020 12:28 AM

 

In an ever-changing, incomprehensible world the masses had reached the point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and nothing, think that everything was possible and that nothing was true. The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.” ~ Hannah Arendt

 

President Donald J. Trump has done some fine things in the domestic and foreign policy arenas, but even so, despite what the nearly 63 million Americans who voted for him believe, President Trump is not the best thing in America to have come along since sliced white-bread. Unfortunately, with each passing day, he has proven himself to be the Big Spending, Big Government fascist that I knew him to be in 2015. Regardless of his “good deeds”, any American, who stays silent in the face of this president’s current harmful executive orders and signed pieces of legislation, such as the recent Omnibus bill that he signed on December 20th 2019, is not a conservative or a patriot, and their silence does the nation a great disservice, no matter how “great” anyone may view Trump at this moment in history, and no matter Trump’s claim of the “conservative mantel”.

 

America has also just witnessed the passage of the worst so-called “trade agreement” ever negotiated in U.S. history on December 19th 2019 — the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement [USMCA] — with President Trump’s enthusiastic support, even though it was negotiated by Obama era bureaucratic holdovers, the same exact negotiators responsible for the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The USMCA kills individual liberty in America, facilitates Open Borders and subverts our Constitution and national sovereignty, as it also coincides nearly verbatim with approximately seventy percent of the TPP, an agreement that Trump once called “a fraud” and “one of the worst trade deals”.

 

If this is an example of President Trump’s great negotiating skills, America’s confidence in him is misplaced.

 

America was so focused on all the Congressional impeachment drama, that nobody seemed to notice when the so-called “good guys” and “bad guys” sat down to carve up another great portion of America’s wealth. After the House voted completely along party lines to impeach President Trump and the historic dust settled, both the fraudulent champions of Conservatism in the GOP and the Democratic Party Progressives, the mortal enemies of America’s Founding, set aside all differences to pass another record breaking spending bill, with a mere 24 hours of review and “discussion”, that is so massive, its 2100 pages had to be split into twelve packages — gifts, if you will — to conceal the fact that President Donald J. Trump, the “Conservative”, has just signed the two largest spending packages in United States History, totaling $1.4 trillion dollars.

 

Not one Congressman could have had the time to properly review this albatross in a 24 hour period. It isn’t any wonder that so much that is so detrimental to America’s well-being was allowed to creep into U.S. law via this outrageous act.

 

Although President Trump eradicated thousands of federal regulations, upon taking office, the results of many of his most recent bills are adding thousands more. Some of the detrimental effects will arise in the same way we saw through the struggle over property rights between the Hammond and Bundy Families and the Bureau of Land Management [BLM], since both the USMCA and this recent Omnibus bill undermine private property rights.

 

[Blog Editor: The BLM has been a tool of globalism and Marxist Environmentalists:

 

 

 

 

 

Excerpt:

 

 

As neighboring Wyoming’s economy, dependent on open pit coal mining, is perched on the edge of a free fall as the market for coal shrinks, Gianforte and Daines, the self-described high-tech mavens, seemed to have learned nothing.

 

Both are avidly supportive of not only Trump Administration attacks on environmental protection but some of the President’s political appointees whose ideology is sympathetic to selling off public lands and making them available to the equivalent of 21stcentury robber barons who again will treat the West as a natural resource colony.

 

 

Also in that list come all of the natural resource industries—timber, precious metals, coal, and to some degree, grazing. You may have heard how Acting Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt, in what can only be seen as a second tier appointment, recently named William Perry Pendley acting Director of the Bureau of Land Management. The move required no approval from the Senate and Pendley’s appointment may last only until this autumn.

 

Daines claims concerns about Pendley are “overblown” but how can he ignore the symbolism of the move, putting an anti-public lands ideologue in place to oversee public lands that figure at the heart of Western identity?

 

Historically, Pendley hostile attitude toward public land and federal land management has been demonstrated over years, as a force with the Mountain States Legal Foundation, which has advocated for getting rid of our federal public patrimony.  Recently, in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, an op-ed written by Ben Gabriel of the Montana Wilderness Association and Dave Chadwick of the Montana Wildlife Federation came with this headline: “Would we put an arsonist in charge of fire department?”

 

In a separate piece, New York Times columnist Timothy Egan wrote an essay titled “The Great Western Public Land Robbery” and subtitled “Trump’s pick to be the steward of America’s public lands doesn’t believe in public lands.”

 

 

“But you have to go pretty deep into the ranks of the Worst People to find someone equal to the man Donald Trump has now put in charge of your public lands — William Perry Pendley. The man now overseeing 245 million acres owned by every American citizen is a mad-dog opponent of the very idea of shared space in the great outdoors. He has spent his professional life chipping away — in court, in public forums, in statehouses — at one of the most cherished of American birthrights.”

 

… YOU CAN READ the whole anti-Trump Leftist diatribe HERE

 

Sounds like President Trump is still irking enviro-Marxists to me with the appointment of William Pendley.]

 

U.S. Map of Federal owned-controlled land

 

The Environmental Protection Agency received $9 billion, a $240 million increase over last year, and the Bureau of Land management received a two percent increase. And the Land and Water Conservation Agency received a whopping $500 million, no doubt so they can continue to tell Americans they can’t collect rain-water in barrels, as they have been aligned with UN Agenda 21 mandates for many years, advocating for the same “sustainable development” and the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, also a UN creation, that killed jobs and farming for decades in any area that utilized these policies; these policies are also currently a part of the anti-sovereignty, anti-American USMCA.

 

John Adams, the second U.S. President, once proclaimed: “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist.”

 

Exuding an abundance of brilliance and wisdom, James Madison asserted: “Government is instituted to protect property of every sort …. (including personal firearms) …. this being the end of government, that alone is not a just government, …. nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest.”

 

In light of the Democratic Party majority in Virginia recently stating their intentions to confiscate their citizens’ firearms through newly proposed illegitimate legislation and “law”, all Americans who value freedom and liberty should be highly alarmed by their statements, when viewed in conjunction with two sections of the December 20th Omnibus. In the name of fighting “gun violence”, this bill robs the American taxpayers’ and their grandchildren of $22.5 billion. This money is set aside for the FBI, ATF, DEA and the US Marshall Service, so they can target our right to keep and bear arms.

 

Neatly hidden within this 2100 page [217 page summary] monstrosity are a few lines with ominous implications. Along with granting the ATF and FBI greater finances to “combat gun violence”, the Center for Disease Control and the National Institute of Health are receiving $25 million for their new mission to gather data on gun violence as if it were an epidemic or national health crisis, in order to justify any future advocacy for stricter gun control initiatives and measures. And as the Democrats are salivating and wetting their pants over this new good fortune that’s dropped in their laps, the ATF — the militant branch of firearm control — receives nearly one billion dollars, an increase of $50 million over last year, to target “criminal firearm possession”, something that is ever increasingly becoming more subjective; the FBI will receive $131 million to run background checks, which sounds like far too much to just field calls on firearm purchases.  All of this aligns with Trump’s criminalization of bumpstocks and his amenable attitude to the circumvention of “due process” and “red flag laws”, as these federal agencies are receiving a pretty vague mandate from the Trump White House to “find illegal guns and take them”.

 

One should also note, although President Trump has been extremely successful at manipulating the economy and keeping America safe from her foreign enemies, he has violated the 4th Amendment by signing H.R. 76, that granted warrantless searches of houses and businesses in proximity to the D.C. Metrorail [Blog Editor: Justin is quite in HR 76 violates the 4th Amendment. Ergo I expect a SCOTUS challenge more than likely by a monied criminal caught in an HR 76 crime search], and by way of his signature on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Reauthorization, which now allows all U.S. citizens to be placed under NSA surveillance, along with the foreign nationals it was originally created to address, among several other failures regarding the Bill of Rights.

 

Among many other detrimental edicts, this albatross bill hands the Department of Energy three billion dollars to research more efficient means of producing renewable energy. It also pays additional funds to NASA, the Department of Transportation and the Department of Indian Affairs to purchase the less efficient options already available, in order to give further credence and legitimacy to the bunk science of “climate change”.

 

Please take note that on March 23rd 2018, after signing his first massive $1.3 trillion Omnibus bill, President Trump stated: “There are a lot of things I’m unhappy about in this bill. There are a lot of things that we shouldn’t have had in this bill, but we were in a sense forced if we want to build our military …. I said to Congress, I will never sign another bill like this again.”

 

In a manner reminiscent of President George H.W. Bush’s “read my lips, no new taxes” moment and seeming to make peace with The Swamp, President Trump issued the following statement on December 20th 2019, after signing the $1.4 trillion Omnibus: “Taken together, the government funding bills guarantee that critical priorities — investing in the military, ensuring Americans are more prosperous and healthy, delivering border security, engaging in criminal justice reform, and defending life — will be met in the upcoming year …”

 

It’s funny how fallin’ can feel like flying for a little while. [Blog Editor: This line was a part of many Justin Smith suggestions for a title. 😊]

 

Far too many Americans are cheerleading for Trump, when he has actually failed on several of his key campaign promises, such as securing the border and building the wall and ending Obamacare, with one key promise to reduce deficit spending. He could have accomplished all of this, when he had a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate; however, today, only work replacing 60 miles of old wall and 98 miles of new wall has been completed, and the American taxpayer is still paying for Obamacare taxes and subsidies for the uninsurable, even though the individual mandate was eradicated. And in the meantime, President Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act lowered taxes by trillions of dollars without reducing a dime of spending, and as a result, this administration has already added $5.6 trillion to the national debt.

 

[Blog Editor: To contrast Justin’s dour outlook President Trump failures:

 

 

 

 

Where is the fight for fiscal restraint? It never existed in the Democratic Party and it certainly no longer can be found in the Republican Party. The vote on this last Omnibus was 89 to 8, with three abstentions.

 

The “Great Economy” isn’t all a lie, but neither is the underlying truth being told about it. Many ordinary Americans are doing fairly well, as far as it goes, and as America is being hollowed out. Real economic decline is concealed by institutions that measure only areas that can be manipulated to give a positive result, such as the Consumer Price Index, the unemployment rate, Gross Domestic Product, and hundreds of financial numbers associated with net wealth and bank loans among other items.

 

Does everybody really not see the rise in childcare expenses, college tuition, and rent? They have risen at double-digit rates, while shrinkflation has reduced the quality and quantity of goods, even as the price has remained unchanged, or, in some cases, seen an increase. My own daughter, my youngest, makes a decent salary as an office manager for a great company, but she now pays a hefty $700 per month for daycare for my grandson, in order to be able to work, a significant cut to her salary.

 

Essentially, official statistics are manipulated to give a rosy picture of the economy, even as the nation’s treasury and the U.S. taxpayer are being robbed blind. Americans everywhere sense the disconnect, however, since significant factors aren’t measured, few objective indicators are documenting the decline all Americans experience in their everyday life.

 

And so, Americans are regularly told that they are doing fine, with manageable debt and rising incomes, when in the real world, their auto loan defaults are soaring, forty percent of America’s cancer patients are wiped out by the co-pays, and most “middle-class” households are one layoff or job loss away from default and going broke and to the poor house. [Blog Editor: THESE ARE LEGITIMATE concerns every American should take note! These should be at least a part of the issues in seeking a 2024 POTUS candidate. Depending on the Trump DOJ to hold crooked Dems accountable in 2020 and a Trump reelection, a law and order equal application to crooked Dems may also be a 2024 POTUS campaign issue. OTHERWISE an American Civil War might initiate between 2020 and 2024.]

 

In the fiscal year for 2019, the federal government spent $660 billion on interest payments. This amount very nearly equals the U.S. budget for Medicare, and it is more than what the U.S. spends on education, transportation, housing and agriculture combined. Federal debt held by the public is projected to double between today and 2049, rising from 78 percent of the gross domestic product to 144 percent. So, if fancy accounting is all that is hiding negative growth in the U.S. economy, times can’t be all too good.

 

The Trump tax cuts have really helped big corporations, by granting them subsidies, to help keep them healthy and solvent. This, in part, has benefited ordinary workers by ensuring companies can keep their jobs in place, but salaries have not increased to any significant level over the past decade. This is outrageous, once one considers that in each of the past two years, the U.S. Treasury has written checks of over $100 million checks to Amazon out of our tax dollars. [Amazon—and 56 Other Corporations—Took Your Tax Dollars; By Leo Gerard; Common Dreams; 4/19/19 – Do a page search for “Amazon” for the details.]

 

This helps President Trump grow his political power, because these windfall tax benefits received by large public companies like, Apple, Microsoft and Amazon translate directly into higher stock prices, and in Trump’s own words, “the stock market is my report card”. One can argue whether or not the economy is really doing great, but one can’t argue with a new high for the Dow Jones.

 

Therein lies the problem. Gradually over time, the American people have come to accept the redefining of “capitalism”, by the “elite” oligarchs, to mean “the stock is up”, through indoctrination and propaganda disseminated in the public education and university systems. Capitalism is no longer associated with Adam Smith’s invisible hand or Joseph Schumpeter’s risk-taking investments in the real economy, but simply reduced to only financial asset price inflation in real time, by any means necessary. And so, from the White House to the Federal Reserve Bank to corporate management, in the endless present, America is handed an endless series of policies and decisions in service to capitalism-as-financialization [Blog Editor: So far the closest I could find to the phrase is a reverse order such as “Financialization of Capitalism”. The term implies political power is in the hands of a few Corporate Finance companies ending the individualism of a Market Economy by which American Capitalism had its beginnings. From my brief reading Market Capitalism is transformed more akin to Market Communism with old terminology utilized to mislead the working common man. Example reading below this paragraph], where capital markets are operated as a political organization.

 

[Pro-Globalist/Socialist economic governance publications I gets the idea I believe Justin Smith is trying to alert readers that very well lead to the end of American Liberty if unaddressed:

 

 

 

A quote that should blowup the hairs on neck from the Communist mind-speak using the brainwashing term “Democracy” to justify Socialist-Marxist Globalization governance via a snake in grass economy:

 

Blinded by their own propaganda, theorists, politicians and the general public have embraced a course that threatens the stability and sustainability of Western society. Globalization, financialization, global mergers and acquisitions, shadow banking, international tax havens, the policy bias favoring energy-intensive automation, maximizing share-holder value, state capture, oligarchy and plutocracy have fueled soaring levels of economic inequality and insecurity. More importantly, they have shaken the roots of the social consensus that is the foundation of modern liberal democracies: polarizing and destabilizing society and throwing political processes into chaos. The notion that economics can be divorced and insulated from politics is an illusion. There is no economy without politics and law. A return to unbridled capitalism is threatening the culture of liberal values and the functioning of democratic institutions. … (The Political Economy of Neoliberalism and Illiberal Democracy; By Garry Jacobs; CadmusJournal.org; Volume 3 Issue 3 10/2017 – 20 page pdf)]

 

There isn’t any free market in this nation, using honest money on a level field, as educators and media would have one believe, and there hasn’t been a free market, since 1913 and the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank. Americans live and work in what can only be described as a fascist oligarchy, that relies on the premise of state and corporate partnership, managed trade for special interests. This is what is exacerbating our current economic situation, and taken in conjunction with massive bills that leave the growth of government unchecked, growing the power associated with large government at the expense of individual liberty, Congress is also undermined, while the Executive grows stronger.

 

[Blog Editor: Prior to election as President, Donald Trump’s international interests definitely placed him among international finance. BUT this makes him an enigma as an individual who donates his POTUS salary and has divested control of his international businesses to Make America Great or Keep America Great. At this point in Trump’s life bettering Americans appears more important than his place among the fascist oligarchs. BUT Trump’s recent legislative signatures reverse the MAGA course. If so, I’ll have to listen to Justin Smith say, “Told ya so”.]

 

And in the meantime, the Federal Reserve Bank is still flooding the repurchasing markets with cash and preparing to deliver bailouts of other markets, too. This is a sure sign that the nation is on the path to another economic crisis created by the Federal Reserve Bank’s manipulations of the economy.

 

Reckless policies have created trillions of dollars of bad investments, that will inevitably be liquidated and lead to an economic disaster. This disaster will make the Great Depression seem like a mild event, as our paper currency becomes worthless. Already the signals are rippling across the global markets, as the Euro and the Japanese yen have crashed in value, along with the Canadian dollar losing 26 percent of its value since 2013. The U.S. dollar is currently just the healthiest currency on its way to a death-bed.

 

Designed for a moral society, the imperfect Constitution has been repeatedly dealt thousands of hammer blows on its imperfections by America’s enemies, to the point it is ready to crack and fail. The Constitution has been perverted and bastardized by the nation’s communists, anarchists [Thoughts on Anarchism: HERE, HERE & HERE], Muslims, activist black robes, globalists [Globalist issues examples affecting the Constitution: HERE, HERE & HERE] and statists [Perspectives about Statists: HERE & HERE], all for “the general welfare” of America’s ruling class oligarchs. Its inherent negative power over learned and moral citizens has been fully subverted to the positive endorsement of the whims of those who would be kings and tyrants, incompetents one and all.

 

Americans must find a way back to the moral underpinnings that first led the way for the country, those self-evident truths and the knowledge that God-Given Rights and the Bill of Rights are not to be subverted, that they are inalienable [Blog Editor: To the nitpickers of the usage of unalienable or inalienable, my frame of thought is they are the same]. And as such, refuse to be led any longer by men who would rule over us rather than serve us. Trumpet one’s refusal to obey any rogue government seeks to keep us enslaved at the altar of the state through a fiat currency, financial system and debt Ponzi scheme that is a criminal fraud stealing money from hard-working Americans, and refuse to obey any and all who seek to disarm us by coercion and force.

 

Most of the aforementioned facts could have seen completely different results that supported liberty in every way, if only America had a leader at Her helm who truly loved Liberty and understood its principles, as the Founders understood them. Some of this, people will suggest, was due to opposition in his own party, which is only true in regard to Obamacare’s survival. The rest has been enthusiastically advocated and facilitated by President Donald J. Trump, who never was a conservative and never will be a true conservative, as he continues to have his love affair with the progressive globalist views he held so close in his youth, while Democrats and RINOs make America pay the price in Her slow death by a thousand cuts from anti-American policy, treachery, and treasonous bills. [Blog Editor: The last sentence was also a part of a title suggestion by Justin Smith]

 

Today, America and Her people are facing their most dangerous times, as the far left is positioning themselves for a hard tyrannical push to control all, resources, wealth and people, by a select few, who see themselves as “experts, after President Trump’s second term, utilizing the current existing system. These are the advocates of controlled allocation for society, centrally planned socialism, commanded by a top-down Bolshevik-style Central Committee controlled by the few. And should the ranks of Liberty loving American Patriots keep decreasing, as in recent decades, and fail to halt the Democratic Party communists’ success, it will mark the start of a thousand years of darkness and the end of liberty.

 

By Justin O. Smith

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

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

_____________________

An Intro to ‘Liberty Violated’

Intro by John R. Houk

By Justin O. Smith

Posted January 3, 2020

_____________________

Liberty Violated

 

Edited by John R. Houk

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

 

© Justin O. Smith