Wednesday, December 13, 2017

Bogus Tax Bill Follows Bogus Alabama Election





GaryVarvel.com

click here for related story
The Post & Email
By: Ron Ewart

More news on the bogus Tax Bill process.


The RepubliCrats are seeking a way to kill it before they take their Christmas Recess, so, having succeeded with the GOP/DNC collusion to give Sessions' seat to a Democrat, the end-game now continues.

As Stalin noted:
"It is enough that the people know there was an election.  The people who cast the votes decide nothing.  The people who count the votes decide everything."



The Senate margin is now razor-thin, but, surprise -- McCain has suddenly taken ill and has taken up residence in Walter Reed Military Hospital and will be "unable" to vote on the Tax bill; that "brain cancer" thing is a terrible burden.  

We salute the good senator since most people enduring brain cancer  deteriore quickly and have long since passed away, but, he seems spry as a new rooster.  
Is it cancer, or just a deformed brain.


So, essentially, the Bill will now take one of two paths:
1) It will fail to pass because the GOP now has no clear majority
2) In order to pass, the Bill will have to undergo considerable compromise with the Democrats, and the newly unacceptable Tax Bill will be sent over to Trump for signature.

-- Either way, we lose!

Pass or not, both Parties will walk away with plenty of pork, and the tax breaks we anticipated will now be corrupted so that deductions and credits will be replaced with new scales and add-ons.  It looks as if the AMT [Adjusted Minimum Tax] has already crept back into the Bill, and we're certain many of the tax hikes buried in ObamaCare will be revived.

You jerks in Congress
screwed up my Tax Reform
The end result will be that both Parties will then attack Trump for HIS inability to get the Tax Bill through as promised in his campaign.

This will annoy the voters, and distract the voters from the current scandals implicating Schumer for his involvement in sex scandals, and the overwhelming evidence being presented indicating the absolute corruption of Deep State politicians now resigning in noticeable numbers.



Note to Congress and the Senate:
2018 is an election year, 
and we'll identify and evict you bastards who sabotaged this tax bill!


Draining the Swamp is tough business;

I'd suggest to Mr Trump that he speed up the process with a little napalm.



"I love the smell of napalm in the morning"

Thursday, December 7, 2017

Trump's Secret Spy Network

Can Trump Neutralize Obama
s Intelligence Community?



Click here for related stories
[NY Post: Joe Tacopino]
[The Intercept:  Matthew Cole, Jeremy Scahill]

Intelligence Community Elements



According to the NY Post, President Trump is considering the creation of an independent global spy network apart from the Intelligence Community, which currently has several spy agencies which have been gutted and politicized by the past several administrations, each of which conducts a unique type of espionage.

[CIA, DIA/Clandestine Service, State INR, Commerce, Treasury, Coast Guard, NSA, Military Services, NRO, FBI, etc]






Now why would Trump want to eliminate a technically proficient Intelligence Community adept at spying?

Short Answer:  The spying against US enemies was too difficult, so Clapper and Obama turned the American Citizen into the enemy -- being much easier to spy upon and control to achieve a Socialist/Communist society within the US, and achieving the ultimate goal of a New World Order. [a goal of Presidents Carter, Bush-1, Clinton, Bush-2. and Obama]; Wikileaks outed them.  They created false Intelligence which was completely unreliable and conducted operations AGAINST President Trump as their targeted adversary.

The Intelligence Community had become a tool of the Deep State.

Long Answer:

[Grab a beer; this will take a while!]

By now, most informed readers are aware that most of the  Intelligence Community [IC] which Trump inherited from Obama was politically tainted and packed with Obama operatives who have been working night and day to undermine Trump with false intelligence, or, according to Sebastian Gorka, have been deliberately withholding or manipulating Intelligence to cause Trump to fail, and end the draining of the swamp for the preservation of the Deep State.

Now,  CIA is quite adept at disinformation or false/manipulated intelligence. followed by DIA, both of which were infiltrated by communist agents generations ago.

Of note was CIA Director Brennan who is a self-avowed Muslim and suspected Communist sympathizer/adherent [he voted for Gus Hall of the Communist Party of America] -- and a long string of communist operatives within, while DIA has a history of communist and other spies operating from within [Ana Montes, Jonathon Pollard], while the FBI had its own share of infiltrators bringing down the Bureau.

Now, the CIA was begun with great hopes for success given its legacy in the OSS [Office of Strategic Services] which produced superb spies during the World War Two; most of them came from the Private Sector international business community, or, they had family connections abroad.  They were highly educated, multi-lingual, sophisticated, and could move about in all realms of society.

At the end of the War, most of these operatives returned to their Private Sector jobs and became what was known as "The Company" -- which provided non-official cover and support to future CIA operatives [generally, the identity of The Company operatives were unknown even to local CIA station chiefs as a means of compartmentation; only the Director of Operations had that knowledge.  Most of these operatives died of old age so The Company is a near forgotten memory now as these support mechanisms rarely exist now.]

But, we digress.


Once the OSS operatives departed, the Second String stepped in, some of whom were competent, but most of whom were OSS/James Bond Wannabes, but could not really cut the mustard.  Lacking clandestine operational skills, the CIA became the tool of the Deep State and turned to covert ops responding to the likes of Henry Kissinger who directed them to eliminate inconvenient foreign leaders.

Many of these Executive Action ops were exceptionally messy and left nasty paper trails, such as the  JFK assassination [which many attribute to the Deep State and the CIA].

All too often, the CIA would recruit Military Special Operations troops to conduct covert operations, managed by CIA operatives with virtually no Military experience.  In one Central American country, the Chief of Station was a former USAF Security Police NCO who had never fired a weapon other than a .38 caliber [police special] pistol.  His role?  Training/advising Contras in para-military operations.  To complete the picture, he grew a Fidel Castro style beard which became the object of ridicule by all.

Generally, CIA operatives would rotate assignments in countries in which they had no cultural or linguistic training, causing disastrous operational results [the Thailand Sakhon Nakhon Letter] and Executive Actions leaving a distinct trail to the CIA [e.g.,  Egyptian Presidents Nasser [heart stoppage (NFI) and Anwar Sadat [Heart Stoppage (via "terrorist" bullet)].

Following the Church and Pike Committee hearings, Congress cut funding and ordered the extreme shrinking to near dissolution of the CIA and Military Intelligence, supplemented by Kissinger's abusing his position as Nixon spokesman to eliminate clandestine operations worldwide.  The result was an evaporation of global HUMINT operations, and empty CIA stations throughout the world.  Worse yet was the extreme and thoughtless effort to fill these vacancies from law enforcement agencies so the new station chief was likely to be an ex-ATF or ex-DEA agent, or, even a state trooper -- none of whom had real HUMINT clandestine experience and all of whom regarded clandestine operations as simply recruiting snitches.

Subsequently, CIA's bumbling of both clandestine for espionage and covert operations to overthrow national leaders who offended the Deep State caused a rebellion by Military Intelligence officers who tired of CIA's amateurish operations and inability to grasp the military threat of terrorism and insurgent growth in developing countries; this outrage led to the development of the Defense Clandestine Service {DCS] -  created from the merging of the clandestine services of the Army, Navy, and Air Force in 1984.


Like the OSS, DCS case officers were recruited from the top echelons of achievers, sophisticated and complete with advanced degrees, extensive area knowledge and existing reporting networks in foreign countries where they were assigned, plus combat experience in a variety of scenarios.


These were the types of officers the CIA had previously "borrowed" from the Military, although, for covert ops, the CIA had gone directly to Military commanders without coordination with the Pentagon to "borrow" uneducated, expendable, ground soldiers whom they could claim committed suicide or had accidental deaths during misguided covert operations.




The DCS evolved from a number of Military Intelligence officers who were fluent in multiple foreign languages and area studies, and were able to converse intelligently and expertly with military leaders in foreign countries -- an attribute lacking in the CIA except for the few who had served briefly in the US Military.  Eventually, the opportunity to create the DCS presented itself via Plan Green, a strategic document to establish HUMINT operations in Latin America, blessed by USSouthCom and then by Congress [Senators Goldwater and Helms led this effort on the Hill].  Plan Green then became the template for global operations, overturning the CIA's dominance of the Clandestine environment.

LTG Mike Flynn
The DCS became an exceptionally effective organization, producing superb Intelligence, and promoting case officers to senior intelligence positions.  But, as with all good things in the Military, the DCS was nearly destroyed under Clinton, with an occasional sop by G W Bush.  Under Obama, Clapper "reorganized" it, and later fired General Flynn for attempting to revive the DCS to its original stature and adding Special Operations to its mission.  It still remains, but with CIA dominance.

As for the military subsets of the NSA, many of those continue to be independently operational and accurate in their reporting, but that reporting is subject to political editing by the senior levels of the NSA bureaucracy which was outed and disgraced by revelations of spying on US citizens -- to include spying against President Trump, LTG Flynn, and various Trump Administration functionaries -- as well as minor figures such as ourselves who find this offensive.

Notably, Congress, having been blackmailed by CIA and Clapper's stooges, authorized these illegal actions after-the-fact to ensure the NSA leadership and Obama functionaries would not be accused of wrongdoing.  We assume that, given the opportunity, many in Congress will testify behind closed doors that they were blackmailed by Obama's IC representatives.  In the meantime, it appears Clapper covered the illegal tracks by obtaining FISA warrants on baseless grounds; these are now becoming public, and we suspect, there will be many an awkward moment ahead for Clapper's minions.

So now, where does the Intelligence Community stand.

Once composed of a relatively small community of professionals in every specialty, and even a CIA element recognized for a number of specialties supporting clandestine operations, we have a completely politicized IC with a leadership intent on ignoring the directives of the President of the United States, and operating in direct opposition to the President.  In the past, we would regard this as Sedition and even Insurrection, if we include the BLM violence which some link to the CIA and elements of the DOJ following Trump's election.

Interestingly, there were recent rumors [unconfirmed] that President Trump had, employing the Insurrection Act of 1807, sent in a large force of armed Marines into the CIA's headquarters at Langley to seize control and arrest much of the hierarchy on grounds of sedition.  This event followed rumors [equally unconfirmed] that the CIA was preparing a coup against President Trump.  We've noted the sounds of silence from Langley of late, and trust that the reported lockdown authorized occasional shipments of toilet paper and Big Macs.


So, how would this new Intelligence element work.

Reportedly, Mike Pompeo has met with considerable resistance by the CIA's embedded bureaucracy, much the same as Porter Goss encountered when he took office under George W Bush; CIA bureaucrats eventually dislodged Goss using standard blackmail techniques and personal threats, protecting their bureaucracy and keeping their allegiance to the Deep State.

John Maguire
Oliver North

Erik Prince

As of this writing, it appears the new Intelligence program will by privately directed by Erik PrinceOliver North, and CIA [trusted] veteran John R. Maguire [VP, Amyntor Group] who have recruited their  own network of trusted Intelligence operatives with successful backgrounds in both the IC as well as the Private Sector.  None are beholden to the Government paycheck.


Each, in his own right, has developed and inherited networks of well-placed persons with direct or indirect access to elements of interest and people of power around the world.  They are knowledgeable of the technical elements of the US Intelligence Community and are fully capable of directing the efforts of these technicians to supplement the information they seek and acquire.  To the amazement of some, there are still plenty of professional Intelligence officers ready, able, and willing to serve their country using their skills and experience in a variety of Intelligence specialties.

One of the first results of this new operation was the penetration of an Obama Shadow Government company [NOS] and the discovery and dismissal of three legacy operatives who served as agency directors under Obama and have reportedly been supplying inside information as well as sitting in on "Deep State" meetings.  [so far, there has been no confirmation of this information, but it would tie to Trump's program of ferreting out the Obamanite operatives, one by one.

For the first time in US history, we have a former President actively seeking to destroy the Administration of his successor. -- using the tools of the Intelligence Community as a means of Sedition.  This needs to stop.

Will this new re-organization succeed.

Coming from a background of having served in Military Intelligence, the CIA, the DIA, and, with operational tasking control over the various Intelligence agencies while serving two Secretaries of State and several Directors of Central Intelligence, we agree that the Intelligence Community needs not only new and professional leadership, be it is sorely in need of a sizable reduction in force [RIF].

We would recommend the CiA be retained, but strongly urge the dissolution of the Directorate of Operations, leaving the Directorate of Intelligence and Support functions.  DIA's DCS can function quite well with the more sophisticated  DCS since it has close oversight by not only the Director of DIA, but also by the Secretary of Defense.  We would strongly recommend that no current or recent employees of CIA be allowed to matriculate into the DCS [a process which undermined the DCS in the 1990s].

We would also strongly recommend the dissolution of the DCS which ostensibly gained efficiency by consolidating a variety of law enforcement elements, but, other than creating superfluous jobs for 250,000 employees with a budget of $40 Billion, it seems to serve no legitimate purpose.  It is inefficient and has undermined local law enforcement agencies and created massive financial burdens for them by encouraging the creation of paramilitary forces. Return the components to independent status so they can function properly.

As for the NSA, it needs strict supervision.
It has conducted unlawful surveillance of US citizens for no other reason than it has the capability -- with the excuse it is seeking "terrorists". -- with no positive results.  The technical capabilities far exceed the need, and the potential for abuse has long been annoyed -- with alarm.

The FBI needs a complete overhaul, from the top down, to remove perhaps the senior 50% of the hierarchy and upper level management.  It is chock full of superb special agents, and some spectacular analysts; however, the analyst element which was formed from the NSA several years back amounts to overkill and should be returned to the NSA, or eliminated.

We won't discuss the remainder of the Intelligence Community as we have confidence [pretty much] in their professionalism.  We hope they will live up to our trust.

So there it is, folks.

Can we improve the moral fiber of our country by reviving our Intelligence Community leadership and direction? Only time will tell; but, this is the first positive shift since the Reagan Adaministration.


















Olympic Stupidity




Click here for related story 
NY Times: Rebecca Ruiz/Tariq Panja

Russia’s Olympic team has been barred from the 2018 Winter Games in Pyeongchang, South Korea. The country’s government officials are forbidden to attend, its flag will not be displayed at the opening ceremony and its anthem will not sound.

"Any athletes from Russia who receive special dispensation to compete will do so as individuals wearing a neutral uniform, and the official record books will forever show that Russia won zero medals."



Oddly, the IOC is now joining the anti-Russia movement by suddenly discovering that Russian athletes have been using performance enhancing drugs. 

So, the IOC bars ALL the athletes vs simply conducting standard testing to disqualify using athletes?




"Keep your Friends close; your Enemies closer!"
We are not a fan of Russia, having been engaged in the Cold War for decades; Russia falls into the category of "Potential Adversary", [a term we coined in 1976 training the Army National Guard] along with China, Syria, Iran, and North Korea -- all of which are potentially guilty of doping their athletes to enhance their performances.

However, we are intimately familiar with the horror of having President Jimmy Carter stupidly block US athletes from competing in the 1980 Olympics because Russia had invaded Afghanistan.

This singularly stupid action of Carter's ideological grandstanding destroyed the careers of countless young athletes.

The Olympic Games were created a few thousand years ago as a diplomatic process by which enemies could all participate in a colloquial setting even though they hated each others' guts and would, in other circumstances, have killed each other.

However, the Games allowed for a temporary truce where adversaries could enjoy athletic competition and perhaps resolve a few differences.


This worked quite well until the last half century when greed became the dominant philosophical trend in the Olympic Committee,



Reform should originate at the International Olympic Committee level, and we have to assume it is replete with Swamp vermin who need to be removed so we can enjoy watching young athletes perform, no matter what the political persuasion/ orientation, or philosophy of their leaders.

Sunday, October 22, 2017

Federal Computer System at Risk?

Sabotaging the federal computer system can paralyze the entire government


We were recently speaking with a senior federal employee and learned that the IT department of one agency had reprogrammed the servers to fail in the near future, which would have caused that agency to lose its computer capability -- pushing it into collapse. 

The failure would have amounted to administrators and citizenry trying to open emergency websites, only to find that  the sites no longer working -- and without a redirect to a new site.

This is one agency, and we are certain that such sabotage is now rampant in this bureaucracy that Trump inherited, and that the government faces severe degradation from within; this would include normal [e.g., FAA Air Traffic Control], Emergency Response systems, as well as many DOD and Intelligence Community defense and monitoring systems, to include critical surveillance systems, such as the ones keeping an eye on North Korea nuclear developments.

This again appears to be an Obama/Soros-inspired sabotage effort.
Obama likely began his sabotage ops on 7 Nov 2016, when Trump won, surprising the Deep State.

He completed his sabotage preparations by depleting the Presidential Discretionary Fund [PDF], paying out all the funds between 1 January - 19 Juanuary 2017 to the cronies he had appointed during his Administration.

"The purpose of the PDF is/was to facilitate the easy transition of a new Administration to hire the 4,000 new appointees in every new Administration so that the new President will be able function with a fully developed Cabinet. 

Without those funds, Trump has been hamstrung and able to appoint only his Cabinet officers, but no staffs. Thus, Trump has not been able to fire the top tier in agencies like DOJ, FBI, CIA etc.  

Worse, Attorney General Sessions has come under considerable criticism for not firing [and arresting] senior Obama holdovers for their criminal activities.

So, why has Trump not fired all the Obamanite hold-overs remaining at the top tier of the federal bureaucracy?


Better to keep the Obamanites employed and monitored rather than to set them free to attack via the stay-behinds.      [Keep your friends close; and your enemies closer - Sun Tzu]

[Ultimately, laws of Sedition and Treason remain in place as a threat to keep the Obamanites in check; allowing the Administration to compile evidence of the wrong-doing of these perpetrators and for their eventual prosecution.] 

As background, Obama's key appointees were creating the mechanism for a mass failure of federal computer systems several years ago when a senior official at Treasury developed and planned the implementation of a new, REPLACEMENT, system to manage all acquisitions,procurements, and administrative spending for routine operations, to include salaries and expenses.  

This system would have, without parallel testing, replaced the existing system, and likely would have failed without adequate testing.

Keep in mind that the Obama Administration was not put in place to strengthen America, but to destroy it from within. Now that Obama is out of office, he has created a Shadow Government of violence and insurrection to bring down the Trump Administration.

To strengthen the Anti-American agenda, we now have a coalition of former Presidents, several of whom we used to trust, but, we realize now that they were all essentially puppets, each enabling the further erosion of the Constitution [e.g., Bush's Patriot Act, and Obama's unconstitutional Executive Orders].

Currently, Obama has recruited the Bush family, Clinton, and Jimmy Carter to attempt to maintain the continuity of the Deep State and to reinforce Obama's Shadow Government which will be funded by another Cllintonesque-style Relief Effort -- titled One America Appeal [to counter Trump's Make America Great Again (MAGA)].

All One America Appeal donations will be funneled into "... a 'special account' at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library Foundation, a tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization. Since it is a Presidential Library Foundation, audits will have to go through a special access process which will likely take years due to special barriers designed to keep official Presidential materials secret from the public. Other Presidential Libraries are notable for their secrecy and prurient interests [e.g., the Clinton Library housed a top floor bordello].  

We would not be surprised if this foundation were to be administered by our dearly beloved Hillary Clinton, whose Clinton Foundation laundered hundreds of billions of dollars in the name of "... helping Haiti's disaster recovery..." and which the President of Haiti announced was a sham since Haiti saw little, if any of those "disaster relief" funds.

This "ex-President Coalition" will enable the structuring of a clandestine communication among these gentlemen who have joined together to undermine President Trump in any manner possible.  In developing countries, we would refer to this organization as a Junta, designed to overthrow a duly elected government -- commonly referred to as Treason.

We fear for the future of our country as we see these five puppet President's create an anti-Administration effort to prevent President Trump from 'Draining the Swamp'!

They did what they were told, and We, The People, have suffered.

Friday, October 6, 2017

Why Congress does nothing

Congressman Buck reveals the Corruption on Capitol Hill
and explains the unwritten rules


We continue to find and share articles of interest to our followers.
This interview provides an inside look at Congress and the 
political machinations which put money first, leaving the 
wishes of the voters and constituents in the dust.

This explanation makes one of the strongest cases we've seen yet for term limits!

For Congressional Representatives:  Six terms of two years each.
For Senators,                                      Two terms of six years each

[Congresspersons could extend their influence by running for the Senate]


Click here for full article


Congressman Ken Buck is interviewed by    and discloses all the dirty tricks on Capitol Hill, and how it is that Congresspersons and Senators start off by pinching pennies but end their careers as multimillionaires.  

A former federal prosecutor, Buck has been in Congress less than three years. He says his education from Washington DC’s school of hard knocks began right after his election during his orientation trip to the Capitol. 

Republican Congressman Ken Buck speaks out of school about the shocking, transactional nature of Washington politics. About Party elites he says, "live like kings and govern like bullies." And he's lifting the curtain on why he says nothing gets done in Congress, describing collusion between Democrats and Republicans to fleece taxpayers on behalf of special interests. 

For students of politics, think of this as an advanced course in PoliSci 400.
----------------

Representative Ken Buck:
The game here is not to take a tough vote.
Nobody wants to take a tough vote, Democrats and Republicans, there’s a quiet conspiracy going on that
If you don’t make me take a tough vote I won’t make you take a tough vote.

He says a “tough vote” means anything that cuts spending or programs that benefit political and corporate interests, and the result is that the ability to cut federal programs or to reduce spending in other ways, or to get our tax structure under control- simplify the tax structure is very, very difficult. And that results in higher spending.  He says it’s why Congress consistently spends wildly more money than it receives from taxpayers: $600 billion last year alone.

And, why the federal debt has been allowed to balloon to record levels:
the US owes about $20 trillion dollars it doesn’t have on hand.

Sharyl Attkisson [Interviewer]:
Is there an element of that Democrats and Republicans may appear to disagree with things in public and yet privately agree because sometimes they cater to the same interests?

Buck:
Sure, I think Democrats and Republicans disagree on some social issues and make a big deal out of that, and disagree on some other major issues. But for the most part, there’s agreement behind-the-scenes not to make waves and to get things done quietly. Not good things, but things that involve spending more money. If I scratch your back you’ll scratch my back.

Sharyl: 
Is what you describe what some Americans might call ‘The Establishment’?

Buck:
Absolutely. The Establishment consists of the Republican leadership and the Democrat leadership getting along and pretending not to. But clearly getting along.

And that’s when a lot of the rules were explained to us about the dues to the NRCC other requirements.[
[Buck said he was stunned to find the NRCC [National Republican Congressional Committee] just like its counterpart for Democrats,; it requires hefty party dues, especially if members hope to aspire to meaningful committee positions.

Ryan: Republican or Democrat


Rep. Paul Ryan comments on fund raising:
Talk about a record $30.1 million right here in this room. 
Give yourself a big round of applause. 

Buck:
It’s mildly offensive to think that to serve on a committee in Congress you need to pay a private political organization dues, and that’s what they were asking for.




Sharyl:
Did you have any idea before you were elected that that was the case?

Rep. Buck:
I did not know that there were mandatory dues here, no.

Sharyl:
How did they tell you?

Buck: 
Ah, well it’s not a big secret. They have a big chart in the National Republican Congressional Committee offices, and you can see everybody’s name and the dues that they owe and how much they’ve paid.

Sharyl:
What was going through your mind when you started to hear this news?

Buck:
Well, as Freshmen we have to raise $200,000 and that’s a lot of money. You know I just finished campaigning and raising money, and now I had to go back to donors and ask them for money again.  Rep. He says to meet fundraising quotas, members of Congress spend hour upon hour of public work time asking for money from the very interests they’re supposed to oversee, ending up beholden to them instead of the public at large.

Sharyl: 
For people who really have no idea how things work up here, can you tell us how the special interests and corporate interests, for example, actually influence members? How does that happen? R

Buck:
It starts with committee assignments.
If you’re on the transportation and infrastructure committee, the transportation bill will come before your committee and all over town there will be receptions and the members on the Transportation Committee will be invited to those receptions, expected to attend those receptions and receive donations as a result of that.
They know the easy money, the low-hanging fruit, is gonna be at receptions that are given right before a major piece of legislation goes to committee.

Everything is called ‘across the street’ because at the Capitol behind me, you can’t accept money there. You can’t give money there, but once you walk across the street, then the bags open up.

Sharyl Attkisson: 
Restaurants around here?

Buck:
Restaurants: the Republicans, the Capitol Hill Club has a lot of different receptions and dinners. Industries paying for those receptions and dinners include tobacco, telecommunications, pharmaceutical, TV broadcasting, beer and wine, defense and Hollywood.
Democrats have their own fundraising hangout nearby: The National Democratic Club.

I’ve attended receptions where I’ve had 10, 12 corporations represented and they have made their case to me on why they need me to vote a certain way on a piece of legislation. And I know that if I accommodate them, I will have a reception later on where they will support me.

Sharyl Attkisson: 
You’re describing an entire system where almost every consideration that ought to be for constituents is instead about special interests and corporate interests and donations.

Buck: 
It surprised me when I got here and I’ve been involved in politics since I was a teenager, and getting to this place is really shocking to see the influence that money has in politics.

[Early on, Buck challenged GOP leadership on a vote he felt would give President Obama too much power on trade issues.  Republican leaders retaliated by trying to oust him as president of his freshman class. But he went on a public offensive and survived. He says he’s watched colleagues get punished for doing what they think is right instead of what party bosses demand; booted from committee positions and even denied dining room privileges.] 

Buck: 
The incentive structure right now is to vote for more money.
You never vote for less money, because someone’s gonna get mad if you vote for less money. And so as long as the American public doesn’t stand up and demand that members of Congress are accountable, Congress will continue acting the way it does.

Sharyl: 
Do you think a lot of people come to Washington really hoping it will be different and planning to work for their constituents and just find out it can’t be done?

Buck: 
I absolutely think most members come here with the best intentions. And I think within a year or two they realize that there is no hope of changing this place. And a lot of them leave fairly early on. Others become disillusion
ned and some others just settle into the swamp and enjoy it.

Sharyl Attkisson: 
I’ve not heard another sitting member of Congress talk about these things.
What happens to you now because of this?

Buck:
 You know I didn’t come here with any friends, Sharyl, and I’m not leaving with any friends and I’m okay with that. I didn’t come here to make friends. And so, if I’m gone in a couple of years, I did what I came here to do and that’s hopefully make Americans aware that this place is broken.
--------------

Buck says solutions include requiring a balanced budget meaning Congress wouldn't be able to spend more money than it has and they'd be forced to make the tough choices they now avoid and term limits to restrict the number of years people can serve in Congress.
-------------

Buck reveals the unwritten rules and outlines the allegations in his book: 
Drain the Swamp: How Washington Corruption is Worse than You Think.
----------------

[Will Congressman suffer the fate of House Majority Whip, Steve Scalise, who chairs the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations - and perhaps, investigated a bit too closely for comfort?]

Tuesday, September 26, 2017

Deep State Collusion with Russia


This is another of our guest posts which 
we publish based on relevance and accuracy.



It Was the Deep State that Colluded with the Russians, Not Trump
By Clarice Feldman American Thinker September 24, 2017

As more and more leaks about the ongoing “Russian collusion” witch hunt by Robert Mueller appear in print, it seems to me that if Russia had been trying to erode our faith in our institutions, the Deep State is accomplishing what Russia failed to do.
The Obama claque’s efforts were initially intended to help Clinton when they thought she would win and no one would know about their crimes. Then they continued the unlawful spying to cover up their role in the worst case of misuse of federal power in our history, i.e.to effect the removal or emasculation of Trump, the newly elected President; and  now they are desperate to cover up their illegal actions when all that failed.
A. Where we are today on “Russian collusion”?
Instapundit tweeted the answer succinctly: 
“The election was hacked!” turns out to mean, 

Facebook is now turning over ads presumably purchased by Russians during the campaign.  Good -- let’s see them. 
As the article notes:
The announcement that Facebook would share the ads with the Senate and House intelligence committees came after the social network spent two weeks on the defensive. The company faced calls for greater transparency about 470 Russia-linked accounts  -- in which fictional people posed as American activists -- which were taken down after they had promoted inflammatory messages on divisive issues. 

Facebook had previously angered congressional staff by showing only a sample of the ads, some of which attacked Hillary Clinton or praised Donald J. Trump.

As Tom Maguire reminds us, it would be unwise to assume this was a one-sided campaign: 
Let's see all the ads and find out whether Russia was winding up both sides. Back in the day it was believed Russia backed anti-fracking groups in Europe. Why not also in the US?

Best of the Web’s James Freeman thinks that, in any case, the notion that these ads swung the election is ridiculous on its face: 
So the spending on fake Russian political ads identified by Facebook amounted to around 1/7,000th of what Mrs. Clinton spent on advertising. And of course these fake ad buys were not material in the context of Facebook’s total advertising revenues, which amounted to nearly $27 billion last year.
Is a $150,000 ad buy even big enough to require sign-off from Mr. Putin? 

If, as some believe, Russian meddling was simply intended to discredit the likely winner, some poor Russian agent may now be headed to Siberia for engineering the election of a US President who seems determined to drive down the price of oil and challenge Russia instead of taking bribes. 

Let’s hope Congress gets to the bottom of this. If $150,000 amounts to the entire iceberg, and it still managed to sink the S.S. Clinton, marketing majors will be studying these ads for years to come. 

B. Using the Full Force of FISA to spy on a political opponent
Rubber Stamp for Illegal Surveillance
Obama has a long history of spying on his opponents and releasing information damaging to them. It’s a lifelong pattern. 

He got two opponents’ sealed divorce records unsealed in order to use unsubstantiated claims in pleadings by estranged spouses against them. As President, he continued this practice. 

By way of example, the Obama Administration used the IRS to collect information about the activities and donors of conservative and pro-Israel citizen groups while it refused to grant them the tax-exempt status to which they were entitled. The EPA collected private information from farmers and ranchers and released it to environmental groups to help them in their battles against those farmers and ranchers. 

There’s no reason to suppose that this pattern didn’t carry over to the 2016 election, and plenty of evidence that it did. 

As Sharyl Attkisson points out, they did it with reporters and Congressmen.

Nobody wants our intel agencies to be used like the Stasi in East Germany; the secret police spying on its own citizens for political purposes. The prospect of our own NSA, CIA and FBI becoming politically weaponized has been shrouded by untruths, accusations and justifications.
You’ll recall DNI Clapper falsely assured Congress in 2013 that the NSA was not collecting “any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.”  
[Which turned out to be perjury]
Intel agencies secretly monitored conversations of members of Congress while the Obama administration negotiated the Iran nuclear deal.
Watch my fingers, not my words
In 2014, the CIA got caught spying on Senate Intelligence Committee staffers, although CIA Director John Brennan had explicitly denied that.
There were also wiretaps on then-Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) in 2011 under Obama. The same happened under President George W. Bush to former Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-Calif.).
Journalists have been targeted, too. 
The government subsequently got caught monitoring journalists at Fox News, The Associated Press, and, as I allege in a federal lawsuit, my computers while I worked as an investigative correspondent at CBS News. 
[They also spied on journalists at the National Press Club!]
As Attkisson reminds us, other Trump associates General Michael Flynn and Carter Page were also under government surveillance. As bad as that was, it was discovered that multiple Trump “transition officials” were “incidentally” captured during government surveillance of a foreign official. 

We know this because former Obama adviser Susan Rice reportedly admitted “unmasking”, or asking to know the identities of, the officials. 

Spying on US citizens is considered so sensitive their names are supposed to be hidden or “masked” even inside the government, to protect their privacy.   [It is also illegal!]

Rice also specifically unmasked Steve Bannon, who met in the transition period with a UAE official, so it’s altogether possible they were spying on him generally as well. 

If so, that would mean that four Trump associates had been spied on, multiplying the number of conversations with the President these people were listening in on.

Even more “unmasking
-- revealing the names of those innocents scooped up in this broad surveillance -- about 300 people, had their privacy violated when [then]  UN Ambassador Samantha Power was revealed to have made almost one unmasking request a day, rapidly adding to the list as the inauguration approached.
Samantha Power was 'unmasking' at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day in 2016 -- and even sought information in the days leading up to President Trump’s inauguration, multiple sources close to the matter told Fox News. 
Two sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, said the requests to identify Americans whose names surfaced in foreign intelligence reporting, known as unmasking, exceeded 260 in 2016. One source indicated this occurred in the final days of the Obama White House.

C. The FISA Court surely was misled in order to get information to surveil and to continue surveilling Trump and his associates.

FISA (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) permits blunderbuss intelligence gathering. It’s not designed to gather information on crimes in general, but only to act as a tool of counterintelligence or counterterrorism. And it certainly would be suspicious if efforts were made to misuse it to conduct domestic political spying. 

There’s only one legitimate reason to conduct surveillance on a US citizen under FISA -- to find out more about the activities of a foreign power or terrorist organization. 
Since in the process of scooping up so much information, other matters might be revealed, “minimization” procedures are used to mask the identities of those caught up in the sweep who are not involved in such activities.

CNN reported -- with some obvious omissions and errors of law -- that former FBI director James Comey secured secret FISA orders to wiretap Paul Manafort, who briefly served as Trump’s campaign manager, and that having received nothing from that order, then secured another FISA warrant in 2016 (after Manafort joined the Trump campaign) and continued that surveillance into 2017, after the election.

Further, CNN reported that two attempts were made in the summer of 2016 to obtain a FISA order, both of which were rejected, and an order was issued only after the third try. FISA rarely rejects such requests, so I think it fair to assume the court was suspicious of these requests, which smelled like political, not national security matters. I think it almost a certainty that the final request received the personal imprimatur of Comey (as Director of the FBI) and Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

And what, you may ask, was different about the third and ultimately successful third attempt? I suggest it was the phony Steele dossier, which credible reports indicate was partially financed by Comey’s own FBI.  

The House Intelligence Committee’s investigation took a sharp and notable turn on Tuesday, as news broke that it had subpoenaed the FBI and the Justice Department for information relating to the infamous Trump “Dossier”, the allegations of which appear to have been fabricated, was commissioned by the opposition-research firm Fusion GPS and then developed by a former British spook named Christopher Steele
[Ed: Sources for the most scurrilous allegations in it were from unnamed sources in Russia, most likely Russian government intelligence agents or liars working on a pay for dirt basis.]

The Washington Post reported in February that Mr. Steele “was familiar” to the FBI, since he’d worked for the Bureau before. The newspaper said Mr. Steele had reached out to a “friend” at the FBI about his Trump work as far back as July 2016. The Post even reported that Mr. Steele “reached an agreement with the FBI a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him to continue his work.

Who was Mr. Steele’s friend at the FBI? Did the bureau influence the direction of the Trump dossier? Did it give Mr. Steele material support from the start? The timing matters because it could answer the vital question of why the FBI wanted the dossier. 

Here’s one thought: Warrants.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees spying activities, is usually generous in approving warrants, on the presumption law-enforcement agencies are acting in good faith. When a warrant is rejected, though, law enforcement isn’t pleased.
Perhaps the FBI wanted to conduct surveillance on someone connected to a presidential campaign (Carter Page?) but couldn’t hit what was -- and ought to be -- a supremely high bar for getting such a potentially explosive warrant. A dossier of nefarious allegations might well prove handy in finally convincing the FISA court to sign off. The FBI might have had a real motive to support Mr. Steele’s effort. It might have even justified the unjustifiable: working with a partisan oppo-research firm and a former spook to engineer a Kremlin-planted dossier that has roiled Mr. Trump’s entire presidency.

True Pundit claims that FBI connivance with GPS Fusion to create the dossier was not all it did to secure the final 2016 FISA warrant -- it also set up a meeting in Trump Tower and used information gleaned from Britain’s GCHQ in NSA headquarters to unlawfully gather information on US citizens.

From the beginning it was a set-up to find dirt on Trump campaign insiders and if possible to topple Donald Trump’s presidential aspirations.

Before and after the 2016 election. And while this operation had many moving parts and alternating players, the mission to unseat Trump never changed. And it remains ongoing.

 And none of it was very legal.

Six US agencies [the FBI, NSA, CIA, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Treasury financial crimes division under DHS, Justice Department]created a stealth task force, spearhead by CIA’s Brennan, to run domestic surveillance on Trump associates and possibly Trump himself.
To feign ignorance and to seemingly operate within US laws, the agencies freelanced the wiretapping of Trump associates to the British spy agency GCHQ.
The decision to insert GCHQ as a back door to eavesdrop was sparked by the denial of two FISA Court warrant applications filed by the FBI to seek wiretaps of Trump associates.
GCHQ did not work from London or the UK. In fact the spy agency worked from NSA’s headquarters in Fort Meade, MD with direct NSA supervision and guidance to conduct sweeping surveillance on Trump associates.

The Justice Department and FBI set up the meeting at Trump Tower between Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner with controversial Russian officials to make Trump’s associates appear compromised.
Following the Trump Tower sit down, GCHQ began digitally wiretapping Manafort, Trump Jr., and Kushner.
After the concocted meeting by the Deep State, the British spy agency could officially justify wiretapping Trump associates as an intelligence front for NSA because the Russian lawyer at the meeting, Natalia Veselnitskaya, was considered an international security risk and prior to the June sit down was not even allowed entry into the United States or the UK, federal sources said.
By using GCHQ, the NSA and its intelligence partners had carved out a loophole to wiretap Trump without a warrant. While it is illegal for U.S. agencies to monitor phones and emails of U.S. citizens inside the United States absent a warrant, it is not illegal for British intelligence to do so. Even if the GCHQ was tapping Trump on U.S. soil at Fort Meade.
The wiretaps, secured through illicit scheming, have been used by U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 election, even though the evidence is considered “poisoned fruit.”
Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer who spearheaded the Trump Tower meeting with the Trump campaign trio, was previously barred from entering the United Sates due to her alleged connections to the Russian FSB (the modern replacement of the cold-war-era KGB).
Yet mere days before the June meeting, Veselnitskaya was granted a rare visa to enter the United States from Preet Bharara, the then U.S. Attorney for the southern district of New York. Bharara could not be reached for comment and did not respond the a Twitter inquiry on the Russian’s visa by True Pundit.
(More on the unusual visa granted to Veselnitskaya here. More on GCHQ operating from NSA headquarters here.)
In July, Bharara's former associate US Attorney Andrew Goldstein was added to Mueller’s army of largely Clinton backers and contributors to the special counsel’s enormous team.
In sum, the contention by True Pundit is that the government first spied on Trump and then concocted a national security ruse and desperately sought a FISA warrant to cover up the political spying which occurred before the FISA warrant was ever issued.
The editors of the Wall Street Journal also suspect that the dossier was used to obtain the FISA warrant, and, if so, that requires a congressional investigation:
The FISA court sets a high bar for warrants on U.S. citizens, and presumably even higher for wiretapping a presidential campaign. Did Mr. Comey’s FBI marshal the Steele dossier to persuade the court? 
All of this is reason for House and Senate investigators to keep exploring how Mr. Comey’s FBI was investigating both presidential campaigns. Russian meddling is a threat to democracy but so was the FBI if it relied on Russian disinformation to eavesdrop on a presidential campaign. The Justice Department and FBI have stonewalled Congressional requests for documents and interviews, citing the “integrity” of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
But Mr. Mueller is not investigating the FBI, and in any event his ties to the bureau and Mr. Comey make him too conflicted for such a job. Congress is charged with providing oversight of law enforcement and the FISA courts, and it has an obligation to investigate their role in 2016. The intelligence committees have subpoena authority and the ability to hold those who don’t cooperate in contempt.
I agree with Daniel Greenfield. Based on what I’ve read and observed, while the initial surveillance was to stop Trump and help Clinton, Obama used FISA to provide a “national security” cover for politically spying on Trump right up to the inauguration. As he notes, the first 2016 application was made the month after Trump obtained the nomination and the second in October, the month before the election.
As the unmasking picked up pace after the election, the reasonable assumption is that its purpose was to undo the results of the election or hamstring the incoming President.
Now Obama and his allies are or should be terrified that the scope of the illegal surveillance is revealing their criminal acts.
This is why I believe Mueller is growing increasingly desperate to find one crime by one person he can force by threat of jail to provide any shred of anything that might be used to justify their illegal espionage. Greenfield’s conclusion is apt: “The left is sitting on the biggest crime committed by a sitting president. The only way to cover it up is to destroy his Republican successor. A turning point in history is here. If Obama goes down, the left will go down with him. If his coup succeeds, then America ends.”

Why do I say that Mueller seems increasingly desperate? How else does one explain a middle-of-the-night pick-lock armed entry (and the search of his bedclothes-garbed wife) into the home of a man who by all accounts had been fully cooperating and turning over all requested documents? How else to explain requesting a court grant such a necessary special warrant on the ground that otherwise documents evincing a purported eleven-year-old crime would suddenly be destroyed? How else to explain the effort by Mueller to find out client information from the Skadden Arps and Akin Gump law firms, materials probably covered by attorney-client privilege? With each leak of his conduct – designed, I suppose, by his team to terrify honest men into lying to redeem the special counsel’s misbegotten efforts -- Mueller looks more and more like a petrified enlistee in  the secretive repressive state force -- the Stasi -- as the wall is coming down and their conduct made public.