Sunday, August 13, 2017

The Nation left-wing magazine agrees with this blog !

The Nation is a socialist magazine that I read once in a while to see how the "progressives" think. 

A recent The Nation article backs up something I've been saying here since Fall 2016: There's no independent evidence that the Democrat National Committee (DNC) was hacked, the hackers were Russians, and WikiLeaks received hacked eMails (WikiLeaks claimed the eMails came from a DNC insider angry that Bernie Sanders was not being treated fairly, and The Nation agrees!).

I have explained in many posts here (starting November 7, 2016, with a Julian Assange of WikiLeaks interview) why the Russian hacking story was a lie.

I later explained why the Trump-Russian collusion story was a lie too. 

I'm not a political genius -- I just know politicians lie most of the time, and I know Hillary Clinton is a world class liar (by "world class", I mean there's never any punishment). 

Let me add that Donald Trump is a liar too, but his specialty was grossly over promising what he could deliver as President.   

It is now a year since the DNC Email system was compromised, and quickly attributed to Russian hackers acting in behalf of Donald Trump. 

President Trump, members of his family, and people around him, now stand falsely accused of collusion with Russians. 

In my July-August 2017 economics newsletter I said this about Trump's first six months in office: "There is actually anti-RUSSIA bias."

Trump has been unfriendly with the Russians -- he recently signed legislation imposing severe new sanctions on Russia and European companies working with it on pipeline projects vital to Russia’s energy sector. 

In retaliation, Moscow just announced that the United States must cut its embassy staff in Russia by roughly two-thirds. 

All of this started when the DNC’s mail server was violated in 2016, described as a Russian hack on July 5. 

Quotes in red from The Nation with spaces added between sentences:
article written by Patrick Lawrence

"The evolution of public discourse in the year since is worthy of scholarly study: 

Possibilities became allegations, and these became probabilities. 

Then the probabilities turned into certainties, and these evolved into what are now taken to be established truths.

By my reckoning, it required a few days to a few weeks to advance from each of these stages to the next. 

This was accomplished via the indefensibly corrupt manipulations of language repeated incessantly in our leading media."

" ... we are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception."

"Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year."

"There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. 

Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. 

In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. "

"This article is based on an examination of the documents these forensic experts and intelligence analysts have produced, notably the key papers written over the past several weeks, as well as detailed interviews with many of those conducting investigations and now drawing conclusions from them." 

"Under no circumstance can it be acceptable that the relevant authorities—the National Security Agency, the Justice Department (via the Federal Bureau of Investigation), and the Central Intelligence Agency -- leave these new findings without reply. 

Not credibly, in any case. "

"Qualified experts working independently of one another began to examine the DNC case immediately after the July 2016 events." 

"Prominent among these is a group comprising former intelligence officers, almost all of whom previously occupied senior positions." 

"Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), founded in 2003, now has 30 members, including a few associates with backgrounds in national-security fields other than intelligence." 

"The chief researchers active on the DNC case are four: 
William Binney, formerly the NSA’s technical director for world geopolitical and military analysis and designer of many agency programs now in use; 

Kirk Wiebe, formerly a senior analyst at the NSA’s SIGINT Automation Research Center; 

Edward Loomis, formerly technical director in the NSA’s Office of Signal Processing; and 

Ray McGovern, an intelligence analyst for nearly three decades and formerly chief of the CIA’s Soviet Foreign Policy Branch." 

"Most of these men have decades of experience in matters concerning Russian intelligence and the related technologies." 

"This article reflects numerous interviews with all of them conducted in person, via Skype, or by telephone."

"In a letter to Barack Obama dated January 17, 2017, three days before he left office, the group explained that the NSA’s known programs are fully capable of capturing all electronic transfers of data. 

“We strongly suggest that you ask NSA for any evidence it may have indicating that the results of Russian hacking were given to WikiLeaks,” the letter said. 

“If NSA cannot produce such evidence—and quickly—this would probably mean it does not have any.”

A day after this letter, Obama gave his last press conference as president, and he said: 
“The conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking were not conclusive.” 

"The group (VIPS) knew that (1) if there was a hack and (2) if Russia was responsible for it, the NSA would have to have evidence of both. Binney and others surmised that the agency and associated institutions were hiding the absence of evidence behind the claim that they had to maintain secrecy to protect NSA programs."

" ... until recently the VIPS experts could produce only “negative evidence,” as they put it: The absence of evidence supporting the hack theory demonstrates that it cannot be so."

"Research into the DNC case took a fateful turn in early July (2017), when forensic investigators who had been working independently began to share findings and form loose collaborations wherein each could build on the work of others. In this a small, new website called proved an important catalyst."

"... Binney and the other technical-side people at VIPS had begun working with a man named Skip Folden.  Folden was an IT executive at IBM for 33 years, serving 25 years as the IT program manager in the United States." 

"... first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate—the time a remote hack would require. 

The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: 

On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds. 

This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second."

"These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. 

No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed."

“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, especially if we are talking about a transoceanic data transfer,” Folden said. 

“Based on the data we now have, what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” 

"Time stamps in the metadata provide further evidence of what happened on July 5. 

The stamps recording the download indicate that it occurred in the Eastern Daylight Time Zone at approximately 6:45 pm." 

"It is not yet clear whether documents now shown to have been leaked locally on July 5 were tainted to suggest Russian hacking ... "

"The Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), the supposedly definitive report featuring the “high confidence” dodge, was greeted as farcically flimsy when issued January 6. 

Ray McGovern calls it a disgrace to the intelligence profession. 

It is spotlessly free of evidence, front to back, pertaining to any events in which Russia is implicated."

"James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, admitted in May that “hand-picked” analysts from three agencies (not the 17 previously reported) drafted the ICA."

"The FBI has never examined the DNC’s computer servers—an omission that is beyond preposterous. 

It has instead relied on the reports produced by Crowdstrike, a firm that drips with conflicting interests well beyond the fact that it is in the DNC’s employ. 

Dmitri Alperovitch, its co-founder and chief technology officer, is on the record as vigorously anti-Russian."

"The investigators deserve a response, the betrayed professionals who formed VIPS as the WMD scandal unfolded in 2003 deserve it, and so do the rest of us."

"I concluded each of the interviews conducted for this column by asking for a degree of confidence in the new findings. 

These are careful, exacting people as a matter of professional training and standards, and I got careful, exacting replies."

"All those interviewed came in between 90 percent and 100 percent certain that the forensics prove out (their conclusions are correct)."

Friday, August 4, 2017

Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz ... is suddenly quiet

The FBI seized a number of "smashed hard drives" and other computer equipment from the residence Imran Awan, the former Drmocrat Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz information technology aide.

Awan was captured at the Dulles airport while attempting to flee the country.  

He has been charged with bank fraud.

Pakistani-born brothers Abid, Imran, and Jamal Awan are part of a criminal investigation by U.S. Capital Hill Police and the FBI.  

Allegations range from overcharging taxpayers for congressional IT equipment to blackmailing members of Congress with secrets captured from their emails.

The Awan brothers are Pakistani IT specialists.

They worked for more than 30 house and senate democrats, including  Schultz. 

FBI agents seized a number of "smashed hard drives" and other computer equipment from their former residence in Virginia.

Pakistani-born Imran Awan and three of his relatives had access to the emails and files of the more than two dozen House Democrats who employed them on a part-time basis.

Imran was first employed in 2004 by former Democrat Rep. Robert Wexler (FL) as an “information technology director”, before he began working in Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s office in 2005.

The family was paid extremely well, with Imran Awan being paid nearly $2 million working as an IT support staffer for House Democrats since 2004. 

Abid Awan and his wife, Hina Alvi, were each paid more than $1 million working for House Democrats. 

Since 2003, the family has collected nearly $5 million.

On March 22, 2016, eight democrat members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence issued a letter requesting that their staffers be granted access to Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI). 

Signers included representatives Jackie Speier (CA) and Andre Carson (IN), the second Muslim in Congress, both of whom employed the Awan brothers.

The brothers were also employed by members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, such as: Jackie Speier (D-CA), Andre Carson (D-IN), Joaquín Castro (D-TX), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Robin Kelly (D-IL), and Ted Lieu (D-CA). 

Lieu has since openly called for leaks by members of President Trump's administration -- not exactly a Trump supporter !

Imran Awan had access to Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s iPad password, so the brothers most likely had direct access to the allegedly "hacked" DNC emails.

The brothers are accused of removing hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment from congressional offices, including computers and servers.

They are also accused of a procurement scheme buying equipment, and then overcharging the House administrative office that assigns such contractors to members.

Some other congressional information technology aides believe that the Awan’s are blackmailing representatives based on the contents of their emails and files.

They point out these representatives have had unusual intense loyalty towards the former aides.

Bank fraud was the stated charge on which Awan was arrested at Dulles Airport this week, trying to flee the United States for Pakistan, via Qatar

That was the route taken by Awan’s wife, Hina Alvi, in March 2017, when she suddenly fled the country, with three young daughters yanked out of school, mega-luggage, and $12,400 in cash.

By then, proceeds of the fraudulent $165,000 loan they’d gotten from the Congressional Federal Credit Union had been sent ahead. 

It was part of a $283,000 transfer that Awan wired from Capitol Hill by pretending to be his wife in a phone call with the credit union. 

Told that his proffered reason for the transfer (“funeral arrangements”) wouldn’t fly, “Mrs.” Awan then claimed “she” was “buying property.” 

Asking no more questions, the credit union wired the money to Pakistan.

Awan and his family had access for years to the e-mails and other electronic files of members of the House’s Intelligence and Foreign Affairs Committees. 

They were accessing members’ computers without their knowledge, transferring files to remote servers, and stealing computer equipment — including hard drives that were later smashed.

They were fired in February 2017, except Awan.

Awan continued in the employ of Wasserman Schultz, the Florida Democrat, former DNC chairwoman, and Hillary Clinton crony. 

She kept him at work for the United States Congress right up until he was nabbed at the airport.

At the time of his arrest, the 37-year-old Imran Awan had been working for Democrats as an information technologist for 13 years. 

He started out with Representative Gregory Meeks (D., N.Y.) in 2004. 

The next year, he landed on the staff of Wasserman Schultz, who had just been elected to the House.

Congressional-staff salaries average about $40,000. 

Awan was paid about four times as much. 

He also got his wife, Alvi, on the House payroll . . . and then his brother, Abid Awan . . . sand then Abid’s wife, Natalia Sova. 

Awan’s brother Jamal, came on board in 2014, as a 20-year-old with an amazing annual salary of $160,000. 

Some Awans were rarely seen around the office.

The Capitol Police and FBI are exploring widespread double-billing for computers, other communication devices, and related equipment.

Why were they given access to highly sensitive government information? 

That requires a security clearance, awarded only after a background check that peruses ties to foreign countries, associations with unsavory characters, and vulnerability to blackmail.

These characters could not possibly have qualified. 

The family controlled several properties and was involved in various suspicious mortgage transfers. 

Abid Awan, while working “full-time” in Congress, ran an auto-retail business called “Cars International A” (yes, CIA), through which he was accused of stealing money and merchandise.

In 2012, he discharged debts with a bankruptcy (while scheming to keep his real-estate holdings). 

Congressional Democrats hired Abid despite his drunk-driving conviction a month before he started at the House, and they retained him despite his public-drunkenness arrest a month after. 

Beyond that, he and Imran both committed many vehicular offenses. 

In civil lawsuits, they are accused of life-insurance fraud.

Democrats now say access to sensitive information was “unauthorized.” 

But how hard could it have been to get “unauthorized” access when House Intelligence Committee Dems they wrote a letter to an appropriations subcommittee seeking funding so their staffers could obtain “Top Secret — Sensitive Compartmented Information” clearances? 

TS/SCI is the highest-level security classification. 

Awan family members were working for a number of the letter’s signatories.

The ranking member on the appropriations subcommittee to whom the letter was addressed was Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Why were Wasserman Schultz and her fellow Democrats so indulgent of the Awans?

A probe began in late 2016.

The Awans started arranging a fraudulent credit-union loan in December 2016, and the $283,000 wire transfer occurred on January 18, 2017. 

In early February 2017, House security services informed representatives that the Awans were suspects in a criminal investigation. 

investigators found stolen equipment stashed in the Rayburn House Office Building, including a laptop that appears to belong to Wasserman Schultz that Imran was using. 

Although the Awans were banned from the Capitol computer network, Wasserman Schultz kept Imran on staff for several additional months, and Meeks retained Alvi until February 28, 2017 — five days before she fled to Lahore.

On March 5, 2017, the FBI and Capitol Police got to Dulles Airport in time to stop Alvi before she embarked. 

She was carrying $12,400 in cash. 

It is a felony to export more than $10,000 in currency from the U.S. without filing a currency transportation report, and Alvi did not file one.

The FBI submitted to the court a complaint affidavit that describes Alvi’s flight but makes no mention of a currency transportation report. 

Agents permitted her to board the plane and leave the country, in spite of their stated belief that she has no intention of returning.

No arrests were made when the scandal became public in February. 

For months, Imran has been strolling around the Capitol. 

Wasserman Schultz has been battling investigators: demanding the return of her laptop, invoking a constitutional privilege (under the speech-and-debate clause) to impede agents from searching it, and threatening the Capitol Police with “consequences” if they don’t relent. 

Only last week, according to Fox News, did she finally signal willingness to drop objections to a scan of the laptop by federal investigators. 

Schultz's stridency in obstructing the investigation has been very suspicious.

As evidence mounted none of the Democrats for whom the Awans worked have expressed alarm. 

We have heard suspicions that the investigation is a product of “Islamophobia.” 

Samina Gilani, the Awan brothers’ stepmother, begs to differ. 

Gilani complained to Virginia police that the Awans secretly bugged her home and then used the recordings to blackmail her. 

She averred in court documents that she was pressured to surrender cash she had stored in Pakistan. 

Imran claimed to be so powerful he could order her family members kidnapped.

Did the Awans send American secrets, and hundreds of thousands of American dollars, to Pakistan?

Democrats are in yet another actual scandal, with actual crimes, where people have actually been arrested by the FBI while actually trying to flee the country.

None of these actual crimes seem to be of any interest at all to traditional media outlets.

Imran Awan was arrested by the FBI after wiring $300,000 to Pakistan and misrepresenting the purpose.

He had previously wired money to the country.

He was frantically liquidating multiple real estate properties on the day he was arrested, The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group has learned.

Imran’s real estate properties provide money that could be sent directly to Pakistan when two upcoming home sales close. 

Prosecutors have since filed paperwork saying they fear “the dissipation of the proceeds of the fraud and destruction of evidence in other locations.”

Imran was arrested July 24, 2017 — four months after the FBI says his wife Hina Alvi moved to Pakistan after learning the family was the subject of a criminal investigation into their work as IT administrators for House Democrats. 

On the day of Imran’s arrest, the couple accepted a buyer for one house owned by Hina with an asking price of $618,000 (Hawkshead Dr.) and listed another property for sale at $200,000 (Pembrook Village), real estate records show.

On June 20, 2017, a third house his wife owned was “sold” to his brother-in-law for $360,000 (Sprayer St.). 

In November 2016, a fourth home his wife owned was “sold” to his brother Jamal for $620,000 (Linnett Hill Dr.). 

In both cases, the bank financed nearly all of the purchase.

Title companies can wire large sums of money to international bank accounts without arousing the suspicions of federal investigators.

In addition to the three houses sold or slated to be sold since June 20, 2017, Imran’s lawyer Chris Gowen told The New York Times that the $283,000 wire in January was preceded by other similar transfers to Pakistan. 

“Gowen said the transfer represented the latest payment by his client for a piece of property he was buying in the country,” The NY Times reported.

Gowen would not say whether the proceeds of the $360,000 June 20 home sale were wired to Pakistan, nor where the income from the two upcoming home sales would go. 

The value of the known homes that have been sold since November or are currently being sold is $1.8 million. 

There is also the $283,000 January wire transfer from the Congressional bank, in addition to previous wires of unknown amounts that Imran’s lawyer acknowledged.

Since Imran’s lawyer said the January wire of $283,000 was the latest in a series of wires, or transfers.

The most intriguing question is why former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz decided to keep Imran on her taxpayer-funded payroll right up until his arrest, and whether that decision had anything to do with the whole DNC / Hillary email scandals that erupted last summer.

A preliminary hearing for Awan is scheduled for August 21, 2017.

Lt. Colonel Tony Schaffer alleged on Fox News (Tucker Carlson) that the Awan brothers may have aided Debbie Wasserman-Schultz in making voice modulated phone calls to the offices of attorneys pursuing a class action lawsuit against Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and the DNC. 

If substantiated, the claims add to the growing controversy surrounding the recent arrest of Imran Awan on bank fraud charges.

Jared Beck is an attorney litigating the DNC Fraud Lawsuit.

Disobedient Media‘s coverage of the DNC fraud lawsuit discussed ominous phone calls received by the Becks’ offices. 

The individual called the Becks using a voice modulator with a caller ID corresponding to the Aventura offices of Debbie Wasserman Schultz. 

This came after a string of events surrounding the lawsuit which resulted in  the Becks unsuccessfully seeking legal protection for themselves and others involved in the lawsuit. 

The the former DNC chairwoman’s representatives denied the call had been made by Schultz or any associated party.

Such phone calls were one in a string of apparently threatening conduct by Schultz and her associates. 

The former DNC chair was reported to have threatened the U.S. Capital chief of police with “consequences” in a heated exchange after he refused to surrender a laptop seized from Imran Awan.

Schaffer also discussed concerns regarding sensitive information that the Awans were privy to during their employment by the DNC. 

Schaffer added that the sensitive information the Awans had access to were stored in a third database, which he said is now being called a “breach.”

Schaffer alleged that a “foreign intelligence service” may have been the recipient of the leaked information, referring specifically to the Muslim Brotherhood, which he speculated was what had prompted FBI involvement in the case beyond the initial wire fraud charges.

Monday, July 17, 2017

US Media vs. Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton & Donald Trump Jr.

Hillary Clinton Collusion with Russia ?

Hillary Clinton claimed Russian hacking and election meddling caused her unexpected loss. 

Donald Trump was supposedly a puppet of Putin. 

A Trump dossier prepared by a London opposition research firm, Orbis, was paid for by unidentified Democrat donors.

The dossier claimed Trump’s sexual and business escapades in Russia had made him a hostage of potential Kremlin blackmail.

The Clinton campaign was connected with an unregistered foreign agent of Russia headquartered in DC (Fusion GPS), and the Christopher Steele Orbis dossier. 

Did the Kremlin prepared the dossier as part of a disinformation campaign?

If the dossier was ordered and paid for by Hillary Clinton associates, there could have been collusion between Clinton operatives and Russian intelligence. 

Two op-eds have appeared in the Wall Street Journal on this subject (Holman Jenkins and David Satter). 

Possible Russian-intelligence origins of the Steele dossier have been raised only in conservative publications, such as the National Review.

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) sent a letter to the Justice Department on March 31, 2017 demanding for his Judiciary Committee all relevant documents on Fusion GPS, the company that managed the Steele dossier against then-candidate Donald Trump. 

Grassley writes: 
“The issue is of particular concern to the Committee given that when Fusion GPS reportedly was acting as an unregistered agent of Russian interests, it appears to have been simultaneously overseeing the creation of the unsubstantiated dossier of allegations of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians.”

Former FBI director, James Comey, refused to answer questions about Fusion and the Steele dossier in his May 3 testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. 

Comey responded to Lindsey Graham’s questions about Fusion GPS’s involvement “in preparing a dossier against Donald Trump that would be interfering in our election by the Russians?” with “I don’t want to say.” 

The role of Fusion GPS and one of its key associates, a former Soviet intelligence officer, must raise the question if the dossier was a plant by Russian intelligence to harm Donald Trump?

The ‘Trump dossier, full of unverified sexual and political allegations, was published in January 2017 by BuzzFeed, despite having hallmarks of Russian spy agency ‘creativity.’ 

The dossier was prepared by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer. 

Much of the credibility of the Orbis dossier hinges on Steele’s reputation as a former M15 intelligence agent. 

After the publication of the Trump dossier, Mr. Steele went into hiding, supposedly in fear for his life. 

On March 15, however, Michael Morell, the former acting CIA director, told NBC that Mr. Steele had paid Russian intelligence sources who provided the information and he never met with them directly. 

If Steele disappeared for fear of his life, the only secret he might have had would be knowledge that Russian intelligence prepared the dossier.

According to a Vanity Fair article, Fusion GPS was first funded by an anti-Trump Republican donor, but, after Trump’s nomination, Fusion and Steele were paid by Democratic donors whose identity remains secret. 

The Steele dossier consists of raw intelligence from informants identified by capital letters, who claim (improbably) to have access to the highest levels of the Kremlin. 

The dossier was not, as the press reports, written by Steele. 

In Stalin's day, some of the most valued KGB (NKVD) agents were called "novelists," for their ability to conjure up fictional documents --  the Steele dossier could be written by Russian intelligence "novelists" to defame Trump and add chaos to the American political system.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s assignment – to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election – requires him to consider “matters” that Democrats would prefer be left alone.

Mueller has been given a broad charge and no deadline -- a formula for trouble. 

On the Clinton / Democrat side, there are a number of unanswered questions related to Russian electoral intervention. 

(1) Whether “wiped clean” Clinton e-mails are in Russian hands (as asserted by the Steele dossier), 

(2) Whether  the tarmac meeting of Bill Clinton and the Attorney General Loretta Lynch quashed the investigation of Hillary’s e-mails, 

(3) Whether the Clinton Foundation and Russian uranium interests engaged in quid pro quo and “pay to play” operations, and 

(4) Whether the Clinton campaign funded the Orbis Trump smear campaign, which may have involved Russian intelligence?

The Fusion-Steele matter is explosive because it suggests Russia’s most damaging intervention in the 2016 campaign may have been its creation of the Steele Dossier, paid for by the Clinton campaign! 

If so, the Clinton campaign was the prime sponsor of Russia’s intervention in the 2016 election.

Another Clinton-related mysterious death

Klaus Eberwein was a former Haitian government official expected to expose Clinton Foundation corruption and malpractice next week.

He has been found dead in Miami at the age of 50.

The official cause of death is “gunshot to the head.“ 

Eberwein’s death has been registered as “suicide” by the government. 

But not long before his death, he said his life was in danger because he was outspoken on criminal activities of the Clinton Foundation. 

Eberwein was a critic of the Clinton Foundation’s activities in the Caribbean island, where he served as director general of the government’s economic development agency, Fonds d’assistance économique et social, for three years. 

“The Clinton Foundation, they are criminals, they are thieves, they are liars, they are a disgrace,” Eberwein said at a protest outside the Clinton Foundation headquarters in Manhattan last year. 

Eberwein was due to appear on Tuesday before the Haitian Senate Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission where he was widely expected to testify that the Clinton Foundation misappropriated Haiti earthquake donations from international donors. 

Eberwein was only 50-years-old and reportedly told acquaintances he feared for his life because of his fierce criticism of the Clinton Foundation.  

His close friends and business partners were taken aback by the idea he may have committed suicide. 

During and after his government tenure, Eberwein faced allegations of fraud and corruption on how the agency he headed administered funds. 

Among the issues was FAES’ oversight of the shoddy construction of several schools built after Haiti’s devastating Jan. 12, 2010, earthquake.  

According to Eberwein, it was the Clinton Foundation who was deeply in the wrong – and he intended to testify and prove it on Tuesday.

Eberwein claimed only 0.6% of donations granted by international donors to the Clinton Foundation for assisting Haitians actually ended up in the hands of Haitian organizations. 

9.6% ended up with the Haitian government. 

89.8% – or $5.4 billion – was funneled to non-Haitian organizations. 

Eberwein was expected to testify against the Clinton Foundation in court and ends up committing suicide shortly before?  

The mainstream media is silent about this death.

Monday, July 10, 2017

Update on DNC Hacking and Loretta Lynch

Hardware sitting at the Democrat National Committee (DNC) contained the emails that were stolen and subsequently shared with WikiLeaks.  

WikiLeaks claims a DNC insider handed the files to a WikiLeaks representative. 

A WikiLeaks representative stated he was the person who was handed the stolen information in Washington DC, I assume on  a flash drive or memory card.

The DNC has never allowed anyone in the Obama Administration to examine their server -- I've mentioned that here many times.

The DNC is now completely refusing to cooperate with the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and Robert Mueller's independent investigation.  

Cyber security firm CrowdStrike, headed by Russians who hated Putin, is the only organization the DNC to inspect their email server.

That inspection which quickly resulted in the very 'convenient' conclusion that Russia hacked the DNC.

Minimal details supporting that conclusion were ever revealed to Obama Administration authorities.

The key piece of forensic evidence in Russia’s suspected efforts to sway the November presidential election has only been seen by CrowdStrike, the Irvine, California-based private company that the DNC hired to investigate the hack.

Critics say CrowdStrike’s evidence for blaming Russia for the hack is thin. 

The server is a key “witness” in the political scandal, yet remains beyond the reach of all investigators not hired by the DNC.

CrowdStrike is the very same 'cyber security' firm that attributed the huge Sony hack to North Korea...

That 'hack' was subsequently revealed to have been perpetrated by a Sony insider.

Crowdstrike's Mr. Alperovitch is also a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based think tank focused on international issues that is partially funded by Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk, who reportedly has donated at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Late last year the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a respected British think tank, disputed CrowdStrike’s analysis of a Russian hack during Ukraine’s war with Russian-backed separatists. 

CrowdStrike later revised and retracted portions of its analysis.

Can you say to the American people, unequivocally, that you did not get this information about the DNC, John Podesta's emails, can you tell the American people 1,000 percent that you did not get it from Russia or anybody associated with Russia?

Yes. We can say, we have said, repeatedly that over the last two months that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party... Obama is trying to say that President-elect Trump is not a legitimate President.

Both Republicans and Democrats say the DNC’s reaction to the hacking is troubling.

Jeh Johnson, Homeland Security Secretary under President Obama, told the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence last month that his department offered to assist the DNC during the campaign to determine what was happening, but was rebuffed:

    “The DNC did not feel it needed DHS’ assistance at that time. I was anxious to know whether or not our folks were in there, and the response I got was the FBI had spoken to them, they don’t want our help, they have CrowdStrike.”

In January, FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that the FBI issued “multiple requests at different levels” to assist the DNC with a cyber forensic analysis. Those requests were also denied.

If the DNC has the only evidence that could prove Russians hacked their servers, and attempted to undermine the campaign of Hillary Clinton, why not share that evidence with Obama Administration or Trump Administration or independent council Robert Mueller investigators?

Might it have something to do with this "purely coincidental' meeting oBill Clinton - Loretta Lynch meeting on the tarmac in Phoenix ... and/or Loretta Lynch's 'assurances' that the FBI's investigation (or, "matter") of Hillary Clinton "wouldn't go too far." 

According to an article in the New York Post, some testimony that Loretta Lynch offered under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee last year could come back to haunt her.  

Lynch said that she had "not spoken to anyone on either the campaign or transition or any staff members affiliated with them."

That statement seems to contradict reports that Lynch personally assured members of Clinton's campaign, potentially Amanda Renteria, that the FBI's investigation "wouldn't go too far".

The Senate Judiciary Committee launched a bipartisan investigation into Lynch for possible obstruction of justice, recently learned of the existence of a document indicating Lynch assured the political director of Clinton’s campaign she wouldn’t let FBI agents “go too far” in probing the former secretary of state.

Renteria, who has been identified in the document as the senior Clinton campaign aide with whom Lynch privately communicated, has also been asked to testify.

And then there is that inconvenient Comey testimony in which the former FBI director says that he was instructed by Lynch to refer to the Clinton investigation as a "matter" rather than what it actually was, an investigation. 

The Post points out new developments which would suggest that Comey confronted Lynch about her alleged communication with Amanda Renteria and was promptly asked to leave her office.

Why did she reportedly ask former FBI Director James Comey to leave her office when he confronted her with a document?

And then there is that Loretta Lynch meeting with Bill Clinton on that Phoenix tarmac, that just happened to get noticed by a local reporter, who just happened to be on scene.

The Clinton destruction of over 60,000 emails, after ordered preserved by a Congressional subpoena, was handled by a fake FBI investigation that included multiple people being offered immunity for nothing in return, and numerous federal crimes committed by Hillary Clinton, and several people on her staff, for which not one person received even a slap on the wrist.

US Constitution versus Muslim Qur'an

What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur’an 
-A History of Islam & the United States 
By William J. Federer

President Barack Obama stated in 
Cairo, Egypt, June 4, 2009: 
“When the first Muslim American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the Holy Qur’an.”

The dilemma is, how can one swear to defend something upon a book that promotes the opposite?

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion, 
     yet Mohammed said 
“Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.” 
(Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 84, No. 57). 

Islamic law relegates non-Muslims to “dhimmi” status, where they are not to propagate their customs amongst Muslims and cannot display a Cross or Star of David.

The First Amendment states Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech,” yet Islamic law enforces dhimmi status on non-Muslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells.

The First Amendment states Congress cannot take away “the right of the people to peaceably assemble,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims cannot build any new places of worship or repair any old places which Muslims have destroyed, they must allow Muslims to participate in their private meetings, they cannot bring their dead near the graveyards of Muslims or mourn their dead loudly.

The First Amendment states Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility towards the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government

The 2nd Amendment states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims cannot possess arms, swords or weapons of any kind.

The 3rd Amendment states one cannot be forced to “quarter” someone in their house, yet Islamic law states non-Muslims must entertain and feed for three days any Muslim who wants to stay in their home, and for a longer period if the Muslim falls ill, and they cannot prevent Muslim travelers from staying in their places of worship.

The 4th Amendment guarantees “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures,” yet Islamic law states if a non-Muslim rides on a horse with a saddle and bridle, the horse can be taken away.

The 5th Amendment states that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime...without due process of law,” yet Mohammed said “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).” (Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, No. 50).

The 6th Amendment guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury” and the 7th Amendment states “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved,” yet Islamic law does not give non-Muslims equal legal standing with Muslims, even prohibiting a non-Muslim from testifying in court against a Muslim.

The 8th Amendment states there shall be no “cruel and unusual punishments inflicted,” 
yet the Qur’an states:
'Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done—a deterrent from Allah.' (Sura 5:38)

       A raped woman is punished with the man:
The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication-
Flog each of them with a hundred stripes. (Sura 24:2)

The 13th Amendment states there shall be no “slavery or involuntary servitude,” yet the Qur’an accommodates slavery as Mohammed owned slaves.

The 14th Amendment guarantees citizens “equal protection of the laws,” yet the Qur’an does not consider non-Muslims equal to Muslims.

The 15th Amendment guarantees “the right of the vote shall not be denied...on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude,” yet strict interpretation of Islamic law does not allow voting, as democracy is considered people setting themselves in the place of Allah by making the laws.

The 16th Amendment has some similarities with Islamic law, as “Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived.”     Mohammed said 
“Fight those who believe not in Allah...until they pay the jizya [tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Sura 9:29)

The 19th Amendment allows women to vote, yet in strict Islamic countries women cannot vote.

The 21st Amendment allows for the sale of liquor, yet Islamic law states non-Muslims are not to sell or drink wine and liquor openly."