The Greatest Danger


Benedict Arnold Years From Now - More Dems can be Counted as Traitors

The House Dems setting themselves in the position to impeach President Trump out of Leftist hate rather than any identifiable crimes is indeed a great danger to the American Republic. Justin Smith elucidates below.

 

JRH 12/15/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy 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.

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

The Greatest Danger

The Democratic Party’s Illegitimate Use of Impeachment

 

By Justin O. Smith
Last update sent 12/14/2019 12:01 AM

 

The House Judiciary Committee, led by the majority Democratic Party, voted 23 to 17 along party lines to impeach President Donald J. Trump on Friday December 13th 2019, and the Democratic Party is moving full steam ahead with its lies and the weaponized impeachment process, that is an extremely flagrant, unacceptable and odious act, ignoring the truth. This exercise in evil, based on a deep hatred for the President and for America, is so devoid of sense and prudence that it would embarrass all the kangaroos ever assembled in the courts of legend, since it issues two articles of impeachment, two articles of fiction, that charge “abuse of power” and “contempt of Congress”. These charges are dubious at best, as they project the Democratic Party’s own offenses, and even have many members of the greater Democrat caucus in the House nervous over staking their political futures on a vote for this idiocy.

 

On December 10th, Representative Lee Zeldin (R-NY) exclaimed, “With this disgusting impeachment charade, House Democrats have proven themselves guilty of Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress.”

 

According to the New York Times, as of December 13th, one hundred and fifty-five of 235 House Democrats have expressed their support for the impeachment of President Trump. [Blog Editor: My brief efforts could not locate Justin’s NYT data, but NYT data on Impeachment Inquiry dated 10/10/19 has 227 Dems supporting Impeachment. BUT that was long before the GOP confronted Schiff, Nadler & Pelosi with facts vs hearsay.] Twelve representatives are still undecided or unclear on their decision, and sixty-six have not responded yet. One, Rep. Jeff Van Drew (D-NJ), appears to be a solid “No”.

 

However, a point made by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in November still holds true going into 2020, when he told reporters, “It is inconceivable to me that (the Senate vote) would be 67 votes to remove the president from office.”

 

During the airing of Meet the Press on December 8th, that highlights the hypocrisy and double-standards utilized by Democrats, host Chuck Todd noted that 21 years ago, as the impeachment of President Bill Clinton unfolded, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler [is quoted to have] stated: “Impeaching a president, when you have not got a broad consensus of the American people, a broad agreement of almost everybody that this fellow has to go, because he’s a clear and present danger to our liberty and to our Constitution, without that, you cannot and should not impeach a president. Because to do so is to call into question the legitimacy of all our political institutions.” Obviously, Nadler has departed a great distance from his former beliefs, as he invents new standards for impeachment.

 

On December 9th, former Independent Counsel Ken Starr, of Watergate fame, told Tucker Carlson at Fox News: “Impeachment should be the last resort and now it’s just a political tool.”

 

Since the 2016 elections, misusing the impeachment process, these Democratic Party traitors to America, such as Maxine Waters, Steve Cohen, Jim Cooper and Al Green, have attempted to impeach President Trump over everything imaginable, from his tax returns and the Emoluments Clause to Russian collusion, Ukrainian quid pro quo and on to obstruction of justice, obstruction of Congress and bribery. They have wasted weeks in formal impeachment proceedings that more closely resembled a Lefortovo Soviet style sham, where they unilaterally declared that President Trump’s intent was to harm Joe Biden’s bid for the Democratic Party presidential nomination; however, the facts do clearly exhibit, President Trump was actually more focused on seeing the Democrats’ real corruption and criminal acts, pertaining to kickback payments from Ukraine to Hunter Biden exposed and investigated.

 

[Blog Editor: Dem corruption pooh-poohed and/or ignored by Dem propaganda machine Mainstream Media:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dem Desperation 2020 toon

On December 5th, during an interview at the Women’s Leadership Summit, Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked, “Was there an ‘aha’ moment for you personally, a piece of evidence or testimony that swayed you now to take this step (forward with the rapid impeachment of President Trump)?” Pelosi answered this and two follow-up questions, with the following:  “… all I hear from the press is that I move so swiftly that it’s like a blur going by. This has been a couple of years — two and a half — since the initial investigation of the Russian involvement in America’s election, which started much of this and led to other things. … So all along, I have said for two years, this is an impeachment … We don’t take any glee in this at all. It is heartbreaking.”

 

So how could all of the current impeachment talk really be about Ukraine and an innocent phone call, when Ukraine wasn’t on the agenda two years ago, especially when all parties concerned, including Chairman Jerrold Nadler have admitted there wasn’t any quid pro quo? Even if there had been a quid pro quo, it wouldn’t have constituted an abuse of power,  since America has never just handed foreign nations money without any expectations. And as far as  President Trump’s instructions to White House staff not to honor Congressional subpoenas, rather than an “obstruction of Congress”, this is simply a classic struggle and an exertion of rights between co-equal branches of government; most certainly President Trump cannot allow a rogue House to trample, thwart and usurp the White House.

 

“We don’t take any glee in this at all” …? Like hell they don’t.

 

A few days after Pelosi’s revelation, House Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins suggested America should look at the Articles of Impeachment. He observed that the term “abuse of power” is so ambiguous and so vague” that it’s hard to even define, and they use its ambiguity to make it mean whatever they want it to mean. And Alan Dershowitz, a civil libertarian professor of law at Harvard University and a Democrat opponent of President Trump, essentially agrees with that assessment in his December 10th article, as he noted that abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are not mentioned in the Constitution and neither one is a high crime and misdemeanor. Dershowitz focused on Alexander Hamilton’s position that “vague criteria would allow a majority of the House to impeach a president from the opposing party just because they had more votes than the president’s party”, which Hamilton called ‘the greatest danger”.

 

The Democrats are abusing their power and weaponizing impeachment, dividing the nation, because if the early hearings had utilized due process addressing the issue and the President’s alleged wrongdoing, the entire process would have already ended, since President Trump has absolutely done nothing wrong. The Democrats simply fear the coming 2020 elections and they wish to be able to repeat over and over the words “impeach, impeach … President Trump was impeached” in hopes of smearing him enough to make a difference.

 

From November to the present, President Trump has exuded a “bring it on” attitude, stating “Frankly, I want a trial.”

 

Only one attempt to impeach the president was seen in the first 184 years of our nation’s existence, and in the last 45 years our nation has witnessed three, with President Trump well on his way to be the third U.S. President in American history to be impeached, before the Christmas holidays, although it is highly unlikely that the Senate will also vote to remove President Trump, as the sham proceedings head into next year. The larger question will be whether or not the issue even gets more than 50 votes to remove President Trump, since some Democrats, such as Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and all the Republicans, with the possible exceptions of Senators Lisa Murkowski and Mitt Romney, will vote against removing President Trump. [Blog Editor: As in RINO alert!]

 

A trial in the senate would be quite a circus and it would reveal the Democrats for the real fools they are each and every day. It would reveal that Eric Ciaramella is a rogue CIA agent, not a “whistleblower”, aiding and abetting the implementation of a seditious conspiracy, who should be forced to testify along with his co-conspirator Michael Atkinson — Intel Community Inspector General — and former assistant attorney general John Carlin, one of the perpetrators of the “Crossfire Hurricane” prelude to RussiaGate. And it would also be most interesting to hear from Gina Haspel, the current CIA Director, in order to discover just what she might know of Ciaramella’s role if this entire sordid, so far as to who were his associates in this treasonous affair.

 

And every cogent thinking, logical freedom loving American would certainly want to hear testimony from Representative Adam “Shifty” Schiff — UNDER OATH — who engineered Ciaramella’s entrance into this Ukrainian imbroglio and sequel to the Russiagate hoax. Schiff will certainly stay true to his immoral character and lie about his involvement and his actions, and any such perjury regarding such a serious matter before all America should result in his expulsion from Congress in disgrace. Bring in all the bad actors with pertinent knowledge on the allegations and the plot against the President, from crack-cocaine smoking Hunter Biden to Lt Colonel Vindman, U.S. Army, U.S. National Security Council Director for European Affairs and a de facto Ukrainian agent, and on to Daniel Goldman, the attorney and director for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and compel them all to testify under penalty of perjury.

 

Each time I hear Nadler and Pelosi, or any other Democrat,  attempt to equate their treasonous impeachment tactic to “service to our duty to the Constitution and our country”, a white-flash passes through my eyes, bile fills my mouth and hot anger courses through my blood. In the end, the Democratic Party has provided all freedom and liberty loving Americans with more than ample reason to never vote for any Democrat ever again, as we join hands to right our country and renew and restore our Constitutional Republic.

 

This marks the first time in U.S. history that an impeachment has proceeded to a vote of the full House, without any clear criminal act and on the slimmest of “evidence” of any wrongdoing. Not only is this the most un-American act I have witnessed in my lifetime, it is a gross violation of the rule of law and the Constitution by Democratic Party petty tyrants, who have illegitimately changed the rules, manipulated our Supreme Law, and used any means at hand, both legal and illegal, in their numerous attempts to fully attain their endgame of ousting President Trump. And in the process, these traitors have subverted the will of the people and the U.S. Constitution, stopping at nothing in the pursuit of power, and created a Constitutional crisis that strikes at the heart of America’s society and Her Republic, deepening and widening our political divides and pushing America closer to a point of no return.

 

[Blog Editor: And I add: The actions the Dem Party is an open example of the Founding Fathers’ fear of the tyranny of the majority and the reason for the existence of the Electoral College in the election of POTUS.]

democracy-vs-republic

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

 

Before Crossfire Hurricane: Devin Nunes asks the essential question…


J.E. Dyer examines Horowitz’s Report on Crossfire Hurricane FISA abuses (a better word – CORRUPTION) in Devin Nunes questioning of pre-operation beginnings by the FBI. VERY IMPORTANT READ and you’ll want to read a few times to digest the info.

 

The first paragraph has a link to the 480-plus page IG Report.

 

JRH 12/11/19 (H/T:  J.e. Dyer  at Facebook Group Patriot Action Network)

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy 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.

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

Before Crossfire Hurricane: Devin Nunes asks the essential question after release of DOJ IG report

 

By J.E. Dyer

December 11, 2019

Liberty Unyielding

 

Devin Nunes (Image: Screen grab of Fox News video, YouTube)

 

Analytical revelations from the Justice Department Inspector General’s report on the conduct of the “Russia-Trump” investigation won’t end any time soon.

 

The highlights have come out quickly, such as the startling count of 51 procedural violations by the FBI just in forwarding the FISA applications on Carter Page, and the fact that nine of those 51 involved making false statements to the FISA court.  In light of these and other findings, the IG report’s conclusion that all this troubling conduct didn’t amount to “bias” on the part of the FBI seems rather … beside the point.  Pick another measuring stick, folks.  That one is about as useful to our public purpose as Gloria Steinem’s famous bicycle was to a fish.

 

Whatever we label it – and “bias” is an unimpressive scare word to begin with – a federal law enforcement undertaking so full of violations and false statements is a problem of the highest priority.  So call it Petunia, for all I care.  Just don’t have the crust to call it something that frames it to be written off.  Real, live Americans have to live every day with what we suffer the FBI to do in the name of law and order.

 

And if the senior officials at headquarters are allowed to misbehave themselves so badly, it doesn’t much matter how honorable the rank and file are.

 

In any case, although there is surely a lot more to come as the IG report gets its public walk-through, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) bore-sighted Monday evening on the question that must propel us forward.

 

The IG report only takes us so far.  That’s because it accepts the start date of its investigative charter as the day Operation Crossfire Hurricane was launched by the FBI: 31 July 2016.

 

We’ll learn a lot from looking at the period after that.  But the operations of U.S. agencies against (or, if you like, “involving”) members of the Trump campaign were underway well before that.  Even if we use the friendlier-sounding term “involving” here, it’s still the case that agencies and personalities that engaged with Trump campaign members after 31 July 2016 were also involved with them before 31 July 2016.

 

Devin Nunes called that out on Monday.  He’s brought this up previously, and didn’t elaborate at length in his segment with Sean Hannity (whose audience wouldn’t need a lengthy explanation).  But that’s what he’s referring to here.

 

And his question is the essential one.  The DOJ IG report looked at the conduct of the FBI and DOJ in Crossfire Hurricane.

 

But who was coordinating what was being done before Crossfire Hurricane started?

 

That question gets to the fundamental mystery of how the counter-Trump operation was started, and who was behind it.  The motive for the operation can only be ascertained fully by answering these questions.  The FBI was a late-comer to the game.  It wasn’t “the” string-puller (which was probably a small group, rather than a single individual).

 

If nothing else, Peter Strzok’s affect in 2016 tells us that.  He doesn’t text like someone who has known for months – or years – that Stefan Halper was set onto LTG Michael Flynn back in 2014, or that Carter Page has been working with the FBI since 2013 to take down Russian agents in the United States.

 

And that’s really the point about the IG report too.  The report is framed as if it’s kind of no big deal that there was prior engagement by the actors in its own drama with the Crossfire Hurricane targets:  Paul Manafort, Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn.

 

The IG report accepts at face value the narrative that Crossfire Hurricane was initiated on 31 July 2016, based on the nugget from Australian diplomat Alexander Downer that in May 2016, George Papadopoulos had told him something about the Russians and incriminating information on Hillary Clinton.

 

Yet within two weeks of 31 July 2016, this new operation had turned unerringly to a confidential source (Stefan Halper) who had known Paul Manafort for years, had engaged with Michael Flynn back in 2014, and had invited Carter Page to a conference at Cambridge in July 2016 (where Halper and Page happened, according to Halper, to discuss the possibility of Halper joining the Trump campaign), before Crossfire Hurricane started.

 

Meanwhile, the FBI had had Manafort under investigation several years earlier, and had electronic surveillance of him since 2014 (up through probably March of 2016, when reporting suggests the FISA authority for that surveillance expired).

 

The FBI had been receiving cooperation from Carter Page in interdicting Russian agents in the U.S. who were trying to recruit Americans.

 

And Stefan Halper, whom the IG report refers to as Source 2 (with a number of allusions that make Halper the only viable candidate for that designation), had been involved in an apparent attempt to pin the appearance of improper Russian connections on Michael Flynn in 2014.

 

Papadopoulos, on the other hand, while he had not been approached by Halper before 31 July 2016, had been approached in March 2016 by the Maltese professor, Joseph Mifsud, who was well known to the U.S. State Department and ran tame among the top officials of the British and Italian intelligence organizations.  Papadopoulos was subsequently approached by Alexander Downer, the Australian diplomat with extensive links to the same UK intelligence officials Stefan Halper hosted conferences with at Cambridge multiple times each year.

 

There are a couple of passages in the IG report that afford an intriguing look at how these remarkable coincidences were accounted for in testimony to the IG.

 

We are given a little background on Stefan Halper’s (Source 2’s) checkered history as a confidential source (p. 313 as page-numbered in the IG report document):

 

Source 2 was closed by the FBI in 2011 for “aggressiveness toward handling agents as a result of what [Source 2] perceived as not enough compensation” and “questionable allegiance to the [intelligence] targets” with which Source 2 maintained contact. However, Source 2 was re-opened 2 months later by Case Agent 1, and was handled by Case Agent 1 from 2011 through 2016 as part of Case Agent 1 ‘s regular investigative activities at an FBI field office.

 

Case Agent 1 remains anonymous in the report and has not been firmly identified by blogosphere analysts.  He is referred to as male in the report, however, and was working Crossfire Hurricane in 2016.*  He is described as having an extensive history with Source 2 between 2011 and 2016.

 

Therefore, we get the following characterization a couple of paragraphs later (on p. 314):

 

Source 2 ‘s involvement in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation arose out of Case Agent 1’s pre-existing relationship with Source 2. Case Agent 1 told the OIG that when he arrived in Washington, D.C. in early August 2016 to join the Crossfire Hurricane team, he had never previously dealt with the “realm” of political campaigns. He said he lacked a basic understanding of simple issues, for example what the role of a “foreign policy advisor” entails, and how that person interacts with the rest of the campaign. Case Agent 1 said he proposed meeting with Source 2 to ask these questions because Case Agent 1 knew that Source 2 had been affiliated with national political campaigns since the early 1970s.

 

Case Agent 1 seems to have known the source he had been handling since 2011 reasonably well.  So this passage in the middle of p. 315 comes across as a bit puzzling:

 

Source 2 told the Crossfire Hurricane team that Source 2 had known Trump’s then campaign manager, Manafort, for a number of years and that he had been previously acquainted with Michael Flynn. Case Agent 1 told the OIG that “quite honestly … we kind of stumbled upon [Source 2] knowing these folks.” He said that it was “serendipitous” and that the Crossfire Hurricane team “couldn’t believe [their] luck” that Source 2 had contacts with three of their four subjects, including Carter Page.

 

It strains credulity just a bit, that Case Agent 1, who’d been handling Source 2 since 2011, found it mere “luck” to discover that Source 2 knew Manafort, whom the FBI had investigated intensively since 2011, and had contacted Carter Page, with whom the FBI had worked since 2013, only a couple of weeks before Case Agent 1 joined Crossfire Hurricane.

 

Perhaps Case Agent 1 had no reason, at least, to know about Source 2’s connection with Michael Flynn.  But as for the rest, it sounds for all the world as if Case Agent 1 read a Wikipedia entry on Source 2 to get his background information, and then was disingenuously astonished to find out how relevant to Crossfire Hurricane Source 2’s history would actually be.

 

Case Agent 1’s protestations sound, in other words, less than credible.

 

His and the Crossfire Hurricane team’s reported disbelief in their “luck” requires accounting for, given the extensive history of the FBI with everyone that “luck” applied to.

 

That’s where Devin Nunes’s question comes in.  If it wasn’t the FBI that assembled all that “luck” prior to 31 July 2016 – who was it?  And was it, as we would reasonably assume, the same maker of “luck” that manufactured a series of contacts in early 2016, and then handed George Papadopoulos to the FBI, tied up with a bow?

 

Obviously, readers will be waving their hands in the air at this point calling out “Brennan!”  But it’s equally obvious John Brennan couldn’t do this alone.  Just for starters, the Steele dossier was a key component of the anti-Trump operation, and there is neither need nor evidence for connecting it to Brennan’s instigation (at least not directly).

 

Moreover, the collaboration that may have come from foreign intelligence agencies (e.g., in Italy and the UK, as well as the notorious grab-bag of other European sources, like Estonia, supposedly plying Brennan with information in early 2016) would have had motives other than merely helping Brennan out with a personal project.  For those sources, motives related to their own perceived interests had to be in play.

 

There are probably reasons the public will never be cleared for why Brennan would have taken a set against Michael Flynn.  We know of one reason why senior personnel at the DOJ might have.

 

Meanwhile, the odd centrality of Ukraine and Paul Manafort to the Russiagate drama seems to have had its origins and motives from other actors: in the State Department, in the Democratic Party, in at least one of the Democrats’ major funders, George Soros.  And those origins and motives appear, like the animus against Flynn, to have predated even Donald Trump’s candidacy for president.

 

Nunes is right.  This is what we need to get to the bottom of.  All that “luck” the Crossfire Hurricane team stumbled into: who authored it?  Will John Durham be able to dig that out?  Is he making the attempt?

 

William Barr’s comments this week, which include a reference to looking at the activities of other agencies (besides the FBI and DOJ), suggest that at least some version of that attempt may be underway.  But we don’t know its scope or quality.

 

If we get a few indictments for things done by DOJ and FBI personnel after 31 July 2016, and if Trump weathers the impeachment frenzy unscathed – and if we complacently accept never knowing the answer to Nunes’s question – we remain at grave risk for something like this happening again.  We remain at risk for not understanding the alarming power our government’s intelligence and law enforcement tools can wield over our nation’s future.

 

That’s why one of the most important things the IG report can do is point us not only to opportunities for indictment, but to discrepancies in testimony and narrative that set channel markers: buoys we can navigate by in chasing down Nunes’s question.

 

The alarm he raised in early 2017 is what cued both his committee and an interested public to demand the exertions that got us to the DOJ IG report.  In his excellent new book The Plot Against the President, journalist Lee Smith recounts much that was previously unreported about Nunes’s efforts and the centrality of his role.  Without Nunes, we wouldn’t have the broad public understanding we have today of the truth about Russiagate and Spygate, as opposed to the script written by Fusion GPS and pounded in the media.

 

I suggest trusting Nunes one more time: that we cannot rest until we know how and with whom this whole business really started.

 

* Regarding the identity of Case Agent 1, Internet sleuths are lobbying for one of two FBI agents who have spoken at Halper-organized events at Cambridge in the last decade.  This tweep suggests one of them (who was an FBI attaché at the U.S. embassy in London from 2012 to early 2016).  That agent has been a speaker for Halper at least twice.  In an article for The Federalist, Mollie Hemingway had a list of three names – including the one suggested by @TheLegalBrain1 – of FBI agents who appeared at a Halper conference in Cambridge in 2011.  Other analysts are partisans of the third name in the 2011 list for Case Agent 1.

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

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.

_________________________

J.E. Dyer is a retired Naval Intelligence officer who lives in Southern California, blogging as The Optimistic Conservative for domestic tranquility and world peace. Her articles have appeared at Hot Air, Commentary’s Contentions, Patheos, The Daily Caller, The Jewish Press, and The Weekly Standard.

 

Copyright © 2019 Liberty Unyielding. All rights reserved.

 

ABOUT Liberty Unyielding

 

Promoting and defending liberty, as defined by the nation’s founders, requires both facts and philosophical thought, transcending all elements of our culture, from partisan politics to social issues, the workings of government, and entertainment and off-duty interests. Liberty Unyielding is committed to bringing together voices that will fuel the flame of liberty, with a dialogue that is lively and informative.

 

Wrong Wray — It’s NOT the Whole FBI


Current FBI Director Christopher Wray views FBI exoneration of targeting President Trump before and after election in 2016 in the IG Michael Horowitz Report. President Trump should view another firing of another Deep State FBI Director AND replace Wray with someone willing to drain the swamp stench of Dem influence in that Agency.

 

JRH 12/11/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy 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.

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

Wrong Wray — It’s NOT the Whole FBI

The vast majority of the 12,484 special agents and 2,950 intelligence analysts in the FBI steadfastly abide by their oaths.

 

By  Mark Alexander

Dec. 11, 2019

The Patriot Post

 

On Tuesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray issued his response to the Justice Department’s FISA report, concluding: “Finally, we will review the performance and conduct of certain FBI employees who were referenced in the Report’s recommendations — including managers, supervisors, and senior officials at the time. The FBI will take appropriate disciplinary action where warranted. Notably, many of the employees described in the report are no longer employed at the FBI.”

 

But in a follow-up interview, when asked if he had any evidence that the FBI unfairly targeted Trump’s campaign, Wray replied, “I don’t.” If his response was specifically related to the FISA report evidence that was limited in its scope, then Wray’s comments are in line. But if he was suggesting that there is no evidence of bias among “managers, supervisors, and senior officials at the time,” that assertion is ludicrous and earned this response from Donald Trump: “I don’t know what report [Wray] was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me.”

 

Moreover, Director Wray was asked a leading question as to whether he was offended by suggestions that the FBI is part of the “deep state.”

 

He took the bait on a broad question: “I think that’s the kind of label that is a disservice to the 37,000 men and women who work at the FBI who I think tackle their jobs with professionalism, with rigor, with objectivity, with courage … so that’s not a term I would ever use to describe our workforce and I think it’s an affront to them.”

 

Wrong, Wray — the question asked was absurd and disingenuous. He knows better and should have chosen his words much more carefully. The “deep state” assertions have always been limited to a handful of FBI personnel Wray identified in his response — those high-ranking “managers, supervisors, and senior officials” with strong bias in favor of Hillary Clinton. This has never been about the FBI at large.

 

Almost two years ago, in “The FISA Memo and the Demos’ Deep-State Operatives,” I noted:

 

Democrats and their Leftmedia outlets are promoting the diversionary false narrative that serious questions about the political motives of those who seeded the FISA warrants are a “broad assault on the Department of Justice and FBI” by President Trump and Republicans. According to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), “This wasn’t about oversight. This is about … attacking the DoJ and FBI, a transparent attempt to discredit these institutions.”

 

As I noted then, in fact, it is Democrats like Schiff who are broad-brushing the FISA memo inquiry to include “institutions” rather than “individuals.” The memo names a handful of corrupt Democrat deep-state operatives in the DoJ and FBI who colluded to help Hillary Clinton defeat Donald Trump and who, after his stunning upset, sought to undermine the legitimacy of Trump’s presidency.

 

As I also noted then: “The vast majority of the 12,484 special agents and 2,950 intelligence analysts in the FBI steadfastly abide by their oaths ‘to support and defend’ our Constitution. They also strive to live up to the FBI motto: Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity. Indeed, most FBI agents, whose reputations are being sullied by the corrupt actions of a few high-ranking officials, are both personally and professionally offended by that corruption.”

 

Again yesterday in “The DoJ FISA Report — Trump Was Right,” I noted that “Hillary Clinton’s backers were high-ranking FBI bureaucrats” — as Wray identified in his report.

 

For the record, it was and remains Democrats who, by advancing this charade to take Trump down, have cast a cloud over the entire FBI — a cloud that will take years to dissipate. When Wray answers loaded media questions without redress, he also throws his whole agency under the bus.

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

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.

__________________________

Support The Patriot Fund

 

Our Mission

 

The Patriot Post is steadfast in our mission to extend the endowment of Liberty to the next generation by advocating for individual rights and responsibilities, supporting the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and promoting free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. We are a rock-solid conservative touchstone for the expanding ranks of grassroots Americans Patriots from all walks of life. We are not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we do not accept advertising to ensure our advocacy is not restrained by commercial influence. Our mission and operation budgets are funded entirely by the contributions from Patriots like you. Please support The Patriot Fund today!

 

The Patriot Post is protected speech, as enumerated in the First Amendment and enforced by the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, in accordance with the endowed and unalienable Rights of All Mankind. Copyright © 2019 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

 

Impeachment Smoke & Biden-Ukraine Corruption


What Are the Dems Really Hiding?

When Ukraine Smoke Clears - Biden Corruption. Ben Garrison toon 

An intro by John R. Houk

© December 10, 2019

 

As the Dems read off and eventually lead the House of Representatives Articles of Impeachment based on hate-inspired Trump Derangement Syndrome more than verifiable facts, watch this video.

 

The video examines Quid Pro Quo Joe Biden & son Hunter corruption that more documentation exists than any faux-corruption President Trump is accused. Things to note is the incredulous corruption inherent in Ukraine that the video hosts speculates (due to connections) quite probably includes the current Ukrainian President Zelensky.

 

If Ukraine is so corrupt even under Zelensky, should the U.S. abandon involvement with whoever leads the Ukraine government? My guess is PROBABLY NOT. That is as long as a Ukraine government defies Russia, Ukraine makes a great foil against any Russian interests that conflict American Interests.

 

So what does that mean for Trump and Biden?

 

Americans NEED to know if Biden corruption enriched his family and/or bilked American taxpayer dollars. AND if any of that Biden corruption discussed in the video was connected in anyway to Crooked Hillary working with corrupt Ukrainian entities to frame Trump and get a Crooked Hillary election victory in 2016 (which thank God did not occur).

 

As speculated in the video, Americans NEED to know just how much the Dem-darling Obama knew and did about said Biden corruption.

 

JRH 12/10/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy 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.

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

VIDEO: The Full Extent of Joe Biden’s Corruption (26:25)

 

 

Posted by Mr Reagan

196K subscribers – Dec 10, 2019

 

Over the past few days, I dug into Biden’s history in Ukraine. What I found was astonishing. Watch the video to see the full extent of Biden’s corruption.

 

Mr Reagan Support Promotional Reading

_____________________________

Impeachment Smoke & Biden-Ukraine Corruption

What Are the Dems Really Hiding?

 

An intro by John R. Houk

© December 10, 2019

___________________________

The Full Extent of Joe Biden’s Corruption

 

Mr Reagan About Page

 

Hello, I’m Mr Reagan. My mission is to spread reason and rationality throughout the world. I don’t believe in petty motivations, envy, hate, resentment, or greed. I believe in rational solutions to real problems. I believe that we have an obligation to help the less fortunate where they already live. And I believe in judgment, not based on the color of one’s skin, but by the content of one’s character.