Clinton Conspiracy

I just finished reading the DOJ Inspector General report on FBI Operation CROSSFIRE HURRICANE, the investigation of an alleged conspiracy between members of the Donald Trump campaign team – George Papadopolous, Carter Page, Paul Manafort and Lt. General Michael Flynn – and Russia. After reading the report, I read Papadopolous’ book of his experiences, which included twelve days in a minimum security Federal prison for “lying to the FBI,” a charge he was coerced into pleading guilty too. I was also reminded of The Intelligence Farce report put out by the outgoing Obama Intelligence Community just before Donald Trump took office as President of the United States. As I read the DOJ IG report, it became more and more obvious that the entire Russia hoax was another Clinton conspiracy,

Although Democrats claimed the report “exonerated” the FBI, IG Michael Horowitz said it didn’t. During a Senate hearing, he said the report “doesn’t vindicate anybody” when asked if the report vindicated FBI leadership as disgraced former FBI director James Comey had claimed. Democrats and the media (which are basically one and the same) seized on the statement that the IG found no testimonial or documentary evidence of political bias as dismissal of the claim. However, all that statement says is that the IG didn’t find evidence to support it, not that it didn’t occur. In fact, one FBI lawyer who was heavily involved in the FISA Court applications was found to have altered an Email that proved that Carter Page, himself a former intelligence officer, was a source for another intelligence agency. This particular attorney had sent out text messages expressing his dismay at Hillary Clinton’s loss. Peter Strozk, who initiated CROSSFIRE HURRICANE, and attorney Lisa Page, who was involved in the investigation, had exchanged text messages in which they expressed their disdain for Donald Trump and support for Hillary Clinton.

To understand the report, it is important to understand the role of a government inspector general. As the term implies, inspector generals were initially established in military organizations to ensure that regulations, policies and procedures have been followed. An office of the inspector general has been established in all Federal government departments and agencies. State and local governments also often include an inspector general. The IG does not conduct criminal investigations, but in the event criminal activity is found, it is referred to the appropriate agency for investigation and prosecution. This occurred in the case of the FBI attorney who was found to have altered a document to change its meaning. The recently released report focuses solely on CROSSFIRE HURRICANE and actions taken in conjunction with applications for FISA authorization for initial and continual surveillance of Carter Page. The IG determined that there were no less than 17 improper actions by FBI personnel in regard to the four FISA court applications. Be advised that a criminal investigation led by US attorney John Durham is underway.

CROSSFIRE HURRICANE was opened after the FBI received information from a “friendly foreign government,” in this case the Australian government, that George Papadopoulous, a young energy expert who had joined the Trump campaign as a volunteer policy advisor, had told an Australian diplomat, one Alexander Downer, that Russia had information on Hillary Clinton. Papadopolous, who met Downer at the suggestion of an Australian acquaintance, denies any recollection of any such statement. Papadopolous contradicts the media claim that the encounter was an accidental meeting at a bar and states that he had an appointment to meet Downer and that rather than being drunk, he only had one gin and tonic. He also states that Downer expressed admiration for Hillary Clinton and admonished him for his views on energy in Northern Cyprus and for Donald Trump’s criticism of British Prime Minister David Cameron. The operation was opened as a “full investigation” by Peter Strozk, who was later fired for inappropriate text messages regarding Donald Trump and his supporters to FBI lawyer Lisa Page, with whom he was involved in an illicit relationship. FBI agents in Chicago went to Papadopolouos’ Chicago home. During the questioning, they asked when Papadopolous met one Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese professor who told him that the Russians had dirt on Clinton. Relying solely on memory of an event that occurred a year before, Papadoplous said that it was before he joined the campaign. Actually, it was just after that when he met Mifsud, who later told him about the Russian claims. The FBI used the mistake as an excuse to charge the young man with “lying to the FBI,” a charge the agency will use when they have nothing else to charge a suspect with. (They also charged Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn with the same charge.)

Immediately after (or perhaps before) Strozk opened CROSSFIRE HURRICANE, a British operative named Christopher Steele presented documents he had compiled for Fusion GPS, a US firm that had been hired by the Clinton campaign to dig up dirt on Trump. Steele was a former agent for MI6, the prestigious British intelligence agency popularized in the novels written by former British naval intelligence agent Ian Fleming and the subsequent James Bond movies. Although Steele was represented by the FBI as a “senior intelligence” official, he was actually midlevel. Steele had been contracted as an FBI Confidential Human Source, a paid informant. However, he did not inform his FBI handler of his efforts on behalf of Fusion GPS and his handler was not aware of his efforts. He told the IG that had he known, he’d have told the FBI that Steele was not reliable and that, contrary to assertions made by the FBI in FISA applications, none of his information had been used in criminal investigations. Steele’s status as an FBI CHS was revoked after he was found to have provided information to the media. However, even though he was no longer considered reliable by the FBI, he continued to provide information through Bruce Ohr, a senior official with the DOJ. Ohr and Steele had known each other for several years. In fact, it was Ohr who recommended Steele as a CHS. Ohr did not reveal his actions to his superiors and would later be disciplined for his failures. Ohr did inform the FBI that Steele had developed a hatred for Trump. In fact, Steele became frustrated because the FBI didn’t seem to be acting on his information.

As it turned out, Steele’s information was found to be from sub-sources, and that the information was suspect. When interviewed by the IG, Steele’s principle sub-source claimed the report was essentially bogus. The CIA had already classified it as “internet rumor.” The source revealed that the infamous “Golden Showers” story had been concocted by people who were drinking at a bar as a joke. Yet even though the FBI discredited the dossier, FBI personnel continued to use it as justification for surveillance of Carter Page.

Carter Page is an American businessman, a graduate of the US Naval Academy and former naval intelligence officer. His business dealings with Russia led to him being monitored by US intelligence agencies. The IG report reveals that Page was a source for another intelligence agency (probably CIA), but this information was deliberately withheld from the FISA Court. Although there are claims that a FISA warrant was opened on him as far back as 2014, it is definite that a warrant was opened in October 2016, after he had left the campaign. The IG report reveals that a CHS who had some ties with the Trump campaign suggested that he be monitored. (That there were CHSs in the Trump campaign is eyebrow-raising. The IG claims that none were affiliated with CROSSFIRE HURRICANE but that doesn’t mean they weren’t feeding information to the FBI.) Page, like millions of other Americans, was opposed to the anti-Russia policies of the US government and was outspoken in his views. Papadopolus was also pro-Russia to some extent, but his main philosophy was opposition to the Erdogan government of Turkey. He believes that Erdogan is a radical Islamist who believes in the establishment of Shari Law. His main focus was on the establishment of a coalition made up of Cyprus, Egypt, Greece and Israel to distribute energy found in Northern Cyprus rather than Turkey, which invaded the island in 1974 and continues to occupy the northern third of the island. It was apparently his position on Cyprus that provoked the ire of Australian High Commissioner Alexander Downey as he berated the young American for his and Donald Trump’s views during their brief meeting at a posh London watering hole for the elite, that and Downer’s preference for and connections to Hillary Clinton – Downer had engineered a massive Australian government contribution to the Clinton Foundation ($25 million) to allegedly combat AIDS.

While serving as an FBI CHS, Steele made several appearances in front of US media in which he advanced his “findings” about candidate Trump. His appearances were engineered by Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS, who was working for the Clinton campaign. His appearances were obviously intended to hurt candidate Trump, which raises a question: Christopher Steele is British and is a former member of MI6. Why doesn’t his reporting constitute “foreign influence” on a US election? The same can be said for Alexander Downer, an Australian politician/diplomat who made the (allegedly) initial report to the FBI that served as the basis for CROSSFIRE HURRICANE? The answer is obvious – both Steele and Downer are Clinton supporters and in Steele’s case for sure, were desperate to prevent the election of Donald Trump.

Definitely a Coup

It’s been awhile since I’ve posted anything, primarily because things have been changing so quickly that it’s difficult to keep up. However, I feel it’s time to make my feelings more widely known.

To begin with, let’s take a look at the document on which this country’s government is based – The US Constitution. Note that the Constitution establishes three separate, but equal, branches of government – Legislative, Executive and Judicial. The Constitution makes clear that the three branches are equal and that none is superior to the other two branches – period. The role of the Legislative Branch, Congress, is to legislate, the Executive is to execute, meaning to govern, and the Judicial Branch is to judge, particularly disputes between the other two branches in regard to the Constitution. The only exception is impeachment, which the Founders gave to Congress. (It is important to remember that political parties are not mentioned in the Constitution at all. There were none at the time. Political parties, which developed in the new nation, are a function of free speech.)

The effort to impeach President Donald Trump began immediately after Democrats realized that he had defeated the favored Hillary Clinton (a crook if there ever was one) and that he was going to be the new president. Black Congressman Al Green, who represents a low-income, mostly black district on the south side of Houston, began calling for impeachment almost as soon as the new president was inaugurated. The current effort, which at the time of this writing is in the “investigative stage”, is based on a “complaint” filed by a whistleblower in the “intelligence community.” The IC whistleblower act is described in this Federal publication – https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R45345.pdf.

As it turns out, the particular complaint was NOT relevant to an intelligence complaint as it does not pertain specifically to intelligence or the intelligence agencies. In fact, the actual complaint is nothing but the complainer’s opinion. The whistleblower, who is believed to be a CIA analyst named Eric Ciaremalla, who worked in the Obama White House and was carried over into the Trump White House, did not have firsthand knowledge of the alleged violation, as was required by the policy that existed at the time. (The policy was changed AFTER the complaint was made.) In fact, the Acting Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Joseph McGuire, informed Congress that the complaint – which had been made public by Congressman Adam Schiff – was not covered by the Intelligence Whistleblower Act as determined by the legal departments at both his office and the DOJ. It was later learned that the whistleblower had talked to someone on Schiff’s staff, or possibly Schiff himself, even though the Act requires that a whistleblower file a complaint PRIOR to advising anyone in Congress. Schiff has since refused to name the whistleblower EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO SUCH REQUIREMENT!

Schiff’s complaint is that President Trump violated some non-existent regulation by advising Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky that he would appreciate assistance by Ukraine in investigating actions taken by former Vice President Joe Biden in the firing of a Ukraine general prosecutor who says he was in the process of investigating Biden’s son Hunter, who had been hired by Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, as a member of it’s board. The president also asked for assistance in the investigation of a company called CrowdStrike, a company started by a Russian expatriate, which determined that the Democratic National Committee’s computers were hacked by Russian intelligence. Apparently, intelligence has learned that the infected computers somehow ended up in Ukraine. There is also an investigation of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 presidential election but Mr. Trump does not refer to it in the transcript of the phone call.

Schiff, Democrats and their lackeys in the media are incensed that there would be an investigation of Biden, who was/is their frontrunner for the 2020 nomination. However, just because a person is running for office does not exempt them from official scrutiny of their past actions, which in this case Biden has proudly proclaimed. He has publically bragged of his role in the firing of Ukraine general prosecutor Viktor Shokin prior to releasing a $1 billion loan guarantee to the Ukraine government. That the Obama Administration insisted on a Quid Pro Quo in return for the loan is questionable, but that Biden may have had an ulterior motive raises it to criminal level. Incidentally, although Biden likes to paint himself as “the middleclass” candidate, he actually has a history of questionable behavior. For example, the self-proclaimed “devout Catholic” engaged in an adulterous relationship with his wife Jill. She was still married when they began their relationship. Biden’s son Hunter was rewarded with high paying jobs with various companies, apparently because of who his father is. Rudy Giuliani claims he has a safe full of files chronicling Biden’s corruption going back forty years.

That the “impeachment” is actually a coup becomes apparent when considering the relationships between the whistleblower, Schiff and some of the witnesses Schiff called to appear before his House Intelligence Committee. By the way, the role of the committee is to oversee the various intelligence agencies, not the President. First, the whistleblower contacted Schiff’s office BEFORE he filed his complaint. Then Schiff lied about it. The intelligence IG revealed that the whistleblower had a relationship with a presidential candidate, who turned out to be Biden. It turns out that Eric Ciraemalla worked for Biden when he was vice president. There also appears to be a relationship between the whistleblower and Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a Ukrainian immigrant who is a low-level analyst with the National Security Council. Instead of appearing in civilian clothes, his normal attire in the White House, he wore his dress blue uniform and was hailed as a decorated hero because he was awarded a Purple Heart. However, it turns out that his wounds came from an improvised explosive device that exploded near a truck he was riding in. The severity of his wounds is unknown, but they were evidently not severe enough to justify air evacuation from the combat zone. During questioning by a Republican Congressman, Vindman started to comment on who he talked to about the phone call between Presidents Trump and Zelensky but was interrupted and Schiff advised that he did not want to reveal the identify of the whistleblower – which raises a question.

There is no regulation requiring that the identity of whistleblowers not be made public, none. Whistleblowers are protected from retaliation by their employers but their identity is NOT protected. This leads me to believe that it’s not the whistleblower Schiff is trying to protect, it’s his own relationship with the man who is attempting to bring down the President of the United States. That, folks, is called a coup.

The Travesty of Obamagate

A second prominent Democrat, one Mary Anne(a) Marsh, a consultant and activist, has admitted on national television that the Trump Administration spied on Donald Trump.  Marsh appeared on Judge Janine’s program on Fox recently and stated that not only did the Obama Administration began spying on Donald Trump “in the spring of 2015,” it is a well-known fact. Now, just who is supposed to have known this fact is NOT known, but it obviously means it was known within not only the Trump Administration, but also within the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign. Marsh’s comments confirm what former DOD under secretary Evelyn Farkas admitted a month ago, and which Farkas has been trying to say she didn’t say. (Farkas apparently realizes she was confirming an illegal act but Marsh apparently doesn’t realize it.

There are a number of issues in play. For one thing, surveillance of US citizens without authorization by a court is illegal and even if such surveillance is conducted, the information is classified. That means that if it is “well known” as Marsh claims, someone was disclosing classified information to people who had no “need to know.” That in itself is felony. It also indicates that the information was used for political purposes; both Farkas and Marsh were involved with the Clinton campaign. It also means that a lot of Democratic politicians, including Congressman Adam Schiff and Senator Mark Warner, know the surveillance took place – AND THAT IT WAS ILLEGAL! It also implicates a lot of people high up in the Obama Administration, INCLUDING OBAMA HIMSELF! It has already been revealed that the individual who unmasked members of the Trump team, and now it appears, Trump himself, was very high up in “the intelligence community,” and that it was not Director Comey of the FBI. That leaves former Director of Intelligence General James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan – and former President Barack Obama himself.

The admission of spying on Donald Trump raises a lot of questions. For example, who else was spied on? President Trump didn’t declare his presidency until June, and Marsh indicated that the spying took place “in the spring.” (Granted, June is partly in the spring.) It’s likely that Obama and the Democrats were so confident that Hillary Clinton was going to win that they’d never be found out, which seems to be what Evelyn Farkas indicated in her fear that the Trump Administration would learn “what we knew and how we knew it.”

Regardless, #Obamagate is just beginning!

 

 

The Russian “Intelligence” Farce

Our country is in crisis. For the first time in American history, the losing political party in the presidential election is making every possible effort to delegitimize the new president. The effort centers around the two most prominent, at least in their own minds, newspapers in the United States, the New York Times and the Washington Post. Both papers came out vigorously against Donald Trump before the election and now that he’s president, they’re doing everything they can to oppose him. It’s no accident – both papers, particularly the New York Times, have long been propaganda outlets for the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Party. Neither paper – or any other media outlet – has an inside track on government and the White House but they try to give the impression that they do. They publish “breaking news” based on “information” provided by “sources” who go largely unidentified. Neither paper can be believed but they serve as the basis for most of the national political news published in the United States.

Having a dishonest media is a major part of the problem but there’s also another. Thanks to books and movies, many Americans have a misperception of the abilities of the various “intelligence” agencies of the Federal government. Thanks to James Bond and other such fictional heroes, they think that intelligence agents – spies – know everything about other governments. In fact, “intelligence” is actually speculation. How do I know this? For two reasons – first, I spent twelve years in the military and was briefed by intelligence officers and, second, I have more than a passing interest in history, particularly military history, and know more than a little about the role played by military intelligence over the past century and a half. I know that “intelligence” is actually supposition based on information that has been obtained by a variety of sources and which may or may not be valid.

“Intelligence,” which is actually a misnomer, has been a function of military forces and governments for many centuries, but it has become more refined since the 1930s due to the development of new methods of obtaining the information that constitutes what the military, and now government, refers to by that term. In the United States, Army and Marine Corps general staffs, at levels ranging from their general headquarters down to the battalion level, the Intelligence function is referred to as G-2. The Air Force and Navy refer to the same functions as simply “intelligence.” Their function is to obtain information to provide to commanders to allow them to make command decisions, information that can be anything from enemy troop strengths and positions to secrets.  In addition to military information, intelligence includes economic, agricultural and civilian education and morale information, among many things. This information may be collected by simply reading newspapers, but can also include interrogation of prisoners of wars or defectors as well as interception of enemy dispatches. It might also be derived by agents working undercover, or from paid sources inside enemy camps or countries. Since the 1930s, intelligence has also been derived by intercepting communications, including telegraphs, telephones and radio. With the advent of the internet, it also includes digital information obtained by breaking into servers used by the target government or military force. In recent years, there has been much talk of “cyberwar,” which is nothing more than interfering with internet communications in some way. However, there is a difference between electronic eavesdropping and hacking into a server in order to disrupt communications. Eavesdropping is passive while hacking is aggressive.

Prior to 1947, intelligence in the United States was primarily a military function. It still is to a large extent, with the various intelligence “agencies” depending to a large extent on the military for it’s intelligence-gathering functions. For example, the National Security Agency (which was often referred to as “No Such Agency” in the 50s and 60s), depends heavily on the Air Force, Army and Navy for its intelligence collection. All three services have special units whose role is monitoring of communications of foreign governments and military forces by recording transmissions. All told, there are now sixteen or seventeen intelligence-gathering agencies in the United States government and all but four are either part of or directly involved with the military, and with good reason because it is the military – and the military’s commander-in-chief, the president – who are in most need of intelligence. It is important to understand that every single one of the sixteen or seventeen intelligence agencies are all part of the Executive Branch of government and, as such, are ultimately responsible to the President of the United States.

“Raw intelligence” is meaningless because it can be interpreted in various ways, and may or may not be valid. Therefore, intelligence has to be analyzed and interpreted and turned into a report, which is then passed to the commander who needs it. A failure to properly interpret intelligence can change the course of history, and can lose battles and wars, as happened in the European Theater of Operations in World War II when General Dwight Eisenhower’s vast intelligence staff failed to detect the massive buildup of German troops in the Ardennes in preparation for their attack on inexperienced American divisions that became the famous Battle of the Bulge. Fortunately, the German attack stalled when their vehicles ran out of fuel and the surrounded 101st Airborne Division was kept in the fight by aerial resupply. Even more important, General George Patton’s own G-2 had correctly predicted the attack and his Third Army was able to break away and rush to the aide of the beleaguered paratroopers.

The claim that “the Russians” were behind the hacking of the Democratic National Committee Emails was made immediately after WikiLeaks released the Emails by Robby Smook of the Hillary Clinton Campaign, which is a good indication that the claim was a fabrication designed to lessen the effect of the revelations. The allegation is based on claims by a computer security firm called CROWDSTRIKE the DNC had contracted to monitor it’s network. However, when the FBI looked into the claim, it was not allowed to look at the DNC’s computers but instead relied solely on information provided by CROWDSTRIKE, a company founded by a Russian émigré named Dmitri Alperovitch who came to the United States as a teenager when his father took a job with the Tennessee Valley Authority, after emigrating to Canada on a visa.  Alperovitch has a connection to Hillary Clinton dating back to when she was Secretary of State.

In January, the Obama Administration released an “intelligence assessment” of Russian hacking efforts. However, the “report” really doesn’t say anything and offers nothing other than supposition. The report was made public largely thanks to the outgoing director of the CIA, James Brennan, who has strong leftist beliefs and admittedly once voted for the Communist Party, USA candidate for president because he “didn’t agree” with the other two parties. Although Director Comey of the FBI strongly agreed with the analysis, Admiral Mike Rogers of the NSA was less in agreement and only expressed moderate agreement. In fact, all that has been heard about the claim are allegations, with one of the most recent coming from a former NSA director who retired before Donald Trump announced his candidacy for president.

A new twist came about back on March 2 when former Deputy Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas made a startling admission that she had encouraged the Obama Administration to leak classified information to “the Hill.” Farkas made her statement on March 2, two days before President Trump tweeted that Barack Obama had Trump Tower “wiretapped” but the media failed to pick up on it. Her comments came to light thanks to conservative bloggers who had seen the segment. Farkas, who served as an advisor to the Hillary Clinton campaign, is now downplaying the significance of her comments, claiming that she did not have access to classified information even though her words plainly indicate that she did. Farkas, who is alleged to be an “expert” on Russia, was not in intelligence and only had access to reports, not to the actual intelligence on which they were based. In fact, Farkas shot her mouth off about Donald Trump’s alleged “ties” to Russia all through the campaign and is often quoted by leftist journalists in articles on the subject. She was a member of the Obama administration and has no credibility as an impartial observer (nor does Brennan.) It is no wonder that many conservative journalists such as Tucker Carlson and Britt Hume believe that Democrats invented the story because they still can’t understand how Trump won the election.

Last week the House Intelligence Committee had a “hearing” with FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers and this week the Senate Intelligence Committee got in the act. I watched the House hearing in its entirety but have no intention of watching the Senate hearing after seeing Virginia Senator Mark Warner claim that Russian intelligence “paid 1,000 hackers” to put out “fake news” against Hillary Clinton just before the election. Now, where did the 1,000 number come from? In fact, it was the Clinton campaign that was using paid trolls to post anti-Trump and pro-Clinton screeds in comment sections on news sites. Warner, whose entire adult life has been spent in Democratic Party politics, is coming out to be just as much of a snake oil salesman as Congressman Adam Schiff. The reality is that there is plenty of information available about the Clintons, so much that there’s no need for “fake news” about them.

There is one thing that needs to be addressed, and that is that even if there is “intelligence” that members of the Trump campaign and even the administration have “ties” to Russia, this is not reason for concern. The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and since then Americans have been doing business in Russia. Paul Manafort, for example, is a political consultant who did work, not in Russia, but in Ukraine. Former EXXON CEO Rex Tillerson was head of a large corporation that has been engaged in oil exploration in Russia since the 1990s. Donald Trump held the 2013 Miss Universe Contest in Moscow. Those are all legitimate business interests and they are but three of literally tens of thousands of Americans who have done business with or in Russia over the past three decades. Some, in fact, were associated with the Clinton campaign. For that matter, former President Bill Clinton gave a speech in Moscow. He also accepted a $500,000 payment from a Russian bank and his wife approved the sale of an American uranium company to Russia.

It’s all a farce and the American people are once again getting the shaft by the Democratic Party.