ECONOMIC LOGIC
" ... "I'm in my 30th year of covering national news and I've learned a hard truth about the federal government under numerous administrations. It's a culture where truth-telling is frowned upon; cover-up is rewarded and encouraged."
Sharyl Attkisson op-ed, in The Hill
Below is the full report
from the May-June 2019
ECONOMIC LOGIC,
with ten minutes
of typing
minor revisions:
- Typos that I found were corrected.
- A few words were changed, when the sentence was confusing as typed.
- But redundant thoughts that were in "conclusion" chapters, and in "details" chapters, were not deleted.
The Mueller Team's Report
Ignored Everything Important !
What Would You Expect from a Team of Angry Democrats, Investigating Only Republicans?
Sections (1) through (10) are at a higher level
Sections (11) through (24) are mainly details
“The conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking (of the DNC) were not conclusive.” Barack Obama, in his last press conference as president.
LATEST NEWS
(1) Attorney General William Barr, James Clapper, and the CIA's former chief of counterintelligence (among others) believe the Obama Administration spied on Donald Trump and his campaign.
(2) President Trump asserted executive privilege over the un-redacted Mueller Report, and all its underlying evidence, to prevent Democrats from obtaining it.
(3) Smarmy House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler (D-NY) held Attorney General William Barr in contempt, for failing to turn over the full Mueller report, and its underlying evidence. Meanwhile, not one Democrat in Congress looked at the 99.9% un-redacted Mueller 'volume 2' section made available to Congress by the Department of Justice, which specifically covers the obstruction portion of Mueller's investigation (Section "A" of the report covering alleged conspiracy with Russia was offered 98.5% un-redacted). Attorney General Barr has actually been following the law, referring to a recent ruling by a federal judge which requires that Barr redact grand jury material included in the Mueller report. Jerry Nadler is asking the Attorney General to break that law, by giving him information that Nadler has no legal authority to have.
(4) "People are horrified by the idea that you could put someone in jail for obstructing justice on something where you didn’t commit the crime.", said Senator Rand Paul, to George Stephanopoulos, on ABC's 'This Week', May 12, 2019 ... "I think since the very beginning this (Mueller probe) all has been politically motivated. Now both sides are doing it. I think it goes back even to the Clintons. This is why we shouldn't have special prosecutors".
(5) May 13, 2019: Attorney General Barr appointed U.S. Attorney John Durham (CT) to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation. So there's still hope that James Comey, and others, will serve some time in prison.
The Democrat "war" on President Trump will continue to block, or delay, everything Trump wants to do. That won't help the US economy. And pressure will remain on Trump to continue his harsh Russian foreign policy, for fear of being accused of being easy on Russia. That doesn't promote world peace.
From a CNN online op-ed, by contributor Scott Jennings:
"The partisan warfare over the Mueller report will rage, but one thing cannot be denied: Former President Barack Obama looks just plain bad. On his watch, the Russians meddled in our democracy while his administration did nothing about it. The Mueller Report flatly states that Russia began interfering in American democracy in 2014. Over the next couple of years, the effort blossomed into a robust attempt to interfere in our 2016 presidential election The Obama administration knew this was going on and yet did nothing."
"In 2016, Obama's National Security Adviser Susan Rice told her staff to "stand down" and "knock it off" as they drew up plans to "strike back" against the Russians, according to an account from Michael Isikoff and David Corn in their book "Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump".
This report will fill you in on what is known as of May 13, 2019. More information is being revealed every week. I'll add new information I consider important, to my politics blog, at www.ElectionCircus.Blogspot.com ... This is a huge expansion of my last article there on this subject, on April 27, 2019. I'll eventually add a portion of this report on that blog, probably just sections (5) through (8).
This is an unusually long report for a "four page newsletter". It can be considered to be a summary of everything published on my Election Circus politics blog since 2016. Plus a lot of "new" information only published in this report. Very little of this information has been reported by the primarily pro-Democrat-biased mainstream media. For them, anything that reflects poorly on Democrats is not news.
The pro-Democrat-biased mainstream media seemed to love Mueller's bizarre statement that he did NOT exonerate President Trump of obstruction of justice. Robert Mueller seems to have completely forgotten that Americans are considered innocent, until proven guilty in court. He seems to think one American citizen, named Donald Trump, had to be "exonerated" of obstruction of justice charges. This creates what is an impossible task for any person whose reputation has been smeared -- proving that you DIDN'T commit a crime. Mueller and his Team were Trump's employees. He could have fired them. He should have fired them right away. The Mueller Team of 18 angry Democrats was obviously not capable of an unbiased investigation. But Trump did not fire any of them, and allowed them to work for 22 months.
I'm not a Trump fan, but I can't tolerate the evidence-free political attacks on Trump since mid-2016. My primary motivation is to refute the incessant lying in Washington, DC. This report is not about the most serious lying by US politicians in recent decades (which was the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, a lie that cost thousands of American lives). But in 2020, the "Deep State" could try to change the results of a presidential election again, and they might succeed on their second try.
(1) ATTORNEY
GENERAL
BILL BARR
Barr said spying on the Trump campaign “did occur”, and in his mind, that's “a big deal”. He said he would thoroughly investigate if the spying was adequately “predicated”. Barr is also aware the Obama FBI used information they knew was false to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. Barr's determination to “get to the bottom of this” is a threat to Democrats from the Obama Administration, who conducted an illegal domestic espionage operation, including the CIA, the NSA, the DOJ, the State Department, and probably the Obama White House. Barr appears to be very serious about finding out why. And Democrats are very serious about attacking Barr before he does.
They want to throw Barr in jail for refusing to break a federal law, by demanding that he deletes Mueller Report redactions of secret information provided to a grand jury.
(2) HOROWITZ
IG REPORT
COMING SOON
Recently, "new" Peter Strzok texts revealed Obama's intelligence people were involved in spying on Trump before the 2016 election. I'd have been surprised if that wasn't true. The word "spying" certainly applies to them.
Justice Department’s inspector general Michael Horowitz will soon release an internal review on the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation. He's expected to determine “whether there was sufficient justification, under existing guidelines, for the FBI to have started a Trump investigation in the first place.” I believe there was never probable cause that a crime had been committed.
(3) JOHN BRENNAN -- CIA
Former CIA Director John Brennan has been the public figure from the Obama Administration who has expressed the greatest personal hostility towards Donald Trump. And he had a lot of competition. That makes me suspicious.
One important unanswered question is who led the collusion within the Obama Administration that attempted to keep Donald Trump out of the Presidency. These were not just random, unconnected events. My most likely suspects are President Obama, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former FBI Director James Comey, and former CIA Director John Brennan.
The most visible of the four was former FBI Director James Comey. He leaked confidential information to the press -- distortions about a private meeting with President Trump that soon launched the Mueller Team. Robert Mueller happened to be a friend. But Comey also managed to ruin the fake FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton, when he went on TV to be the judge and jury on July 5, 2016.
The result of Comey's TV "Hillary Exoneration Speech", first draft written in late April 2016, was that Hillary was guilty of espionage, didn't "intend" to do anything wrong (but espionage doesn't require intent), obstructed justice, but was getting preferential treatment, not even a slap on the wrist. American prosecutors are not supposed to talk about people who were not charged with a crime.
Then, not long before the election, Comey announced the Hillary investigation was being reopened, due to a huge number government e-mails found on the private laptop computer of Hillary's top aide, Huma Abadin -- a computer she shared with her weird husband Anthony Weiner, who was being investigated too.
Democrats hated Comey (until Trump fired him). Democrats claimed he ruined Hillary's campaign (while actually trying to help her). Comey didn't seem smart enough to lead the effort to get Trump. As for Hillary Clinton, the fact that she was being investigated by the FBI, for just cause, is ultimately why she lost the election.
I suspect the leader of the Obama Administration attack on Trump had to be Obama's director of national intelligence, or the CIA director, or the Attorney General. The "spying" was by Stefan Halper, his attractive aide, only known as "Azra Turk", the mysterious Joseph Mifsud, and ex-British spy Christopher Steele. "Azra Turk" is a mysterious “government investigator” posing as Halper’s assistant, who was cited in a The New York Times article. There were probably others.
Brennan “hand-picked” the analysts who created the questionable Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of the stolen DNC e-Mails. Brennan persuaded Harry Reid to petition James Comey to open an FBI investigation in the first place. And the CIA may have assisted in the obtaining of FISA warrants on Trump campaign aides.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courts refused to approve several requests by the FBI to initiate wiretaps on Trump associates, and Trump Tower, because there was no probable cause to do so. But British and other European intelligence services were legally able to intercept communications linked to American sources.
Brennan was able to use his connections with those foreign intelligence agencies, primarily the British GCHQ, to make it look like the concerns about Trump were coming from friendly countries, and were received as part of routine intelligence sharing. As a result, Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Gen. Michael Flynn were all wiretapped. And probably others too. This happened during the primaries, and after Trump became the GOP nominee.
Consider this email from the FBI’s chief Hillary Clinton, and Russian Collusion, investigator Peter Strzok, to his fellow agents in April 2017: “I’m beginning to think the agency (CIA) got info a lot earlier than we thought and hasn’t shared it completely with us. Might explain all those weird/seemingly incorrect leads all these media folks have. Would also highlight agency (CIA) as source of some leaks.” Peter Strzok.
(4) THE BIG PICTURE
Based on publicly available Peter Strzok texts, President Obama was kept informed. Obama certainly influenced the exoneration of Hillary Clinton, by repeatedly saying in public that she didn't "intend" to break any laws, and he "expected" her to be exonerated. Those were clear orders to his Justice Department -- blatant obstruction of justice -- and the Obama FBI did exactly what Obama said he "expected" them to do.
There was a broad, coordinated effort by high level members of the Obama Administration, with the help of foreign governments, to target Donald Trump, and paint him as a stooge of Russia. Nothing was done "by the book" in the Obama FBI, and Justice Department, in the year before the 2016 election. If they had found any "dirt" on candidate Trump, we could now have President Hillary Clinton. Her lifetime of lying, cover-ups, obstruction of justice ... with husband Bill Clinton earning millions of dollars from overseas speeches, while raking in millions of dollars of foreign donations for the family's Clinton Foundation, all WHILE Ms. Clinton was the Secretary of State ... would have paid off.
Obama's people say it was am "investigation" of candidate Trump -- I call it spying. A real investigation is based on credible evidence of a crime. There is still no credible evidence of a crime, three years later. They say the FBI "used informants", I say they were spies. Informants don't feed false information to innocent people, trying to entice them to do, or say, something that suggests, or could be misinterpreted, as a crime.
(5) INTRODUCTION
What do you call a country where the Democrat leader uses his police and intelligence agencies to try to destroy the reputation of a Republican candidate? What do you call a country where the almost entirely pro-Democrat media acts as cheerleaders for Democrats, while viciously attacking a Republican president, as a colluder with an enemy country -- with no evidence that was true -- for almost three years?
What do you call a country that uses a lie about a confidential FBI Director Comey meeting with President Trump, leaked to friendly media by the FBI Director, to justify creating a prosecution team? What do you call a country that created The Mueller Team of 18 angry Democrats, who only investigated Republicans? The best term I can think of is a 'Banana Republic". What do you call a banana republic that does everything they can to influence an election, but fails, resulting in many former high level liars and law breakers being fired? I'd call that an Incompetent Banana Republic. Welcome to the world of Barack Obama's Incompetent Banana Republic -- the highlight of his second term!
The corrupt Obama Administration weaponized the government (aka "deep state") in a failed attempt to change the results of an election. The start date for an unjustified investigation of candidate Trump probably began before the sham Obama FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton concluded on July 6, 2016. I say "sham" because the "no punishment for Hillary" result was decided at the beginning of the "investigation".
The FBI's James Comey began working on his first draft of his July 5, 2016 Hillary exoneration speech in Late April 2016. This was before 17 important FBI interviews were done. No honest prosecutor would do that. Comey's subordinates began tweaking his words, to benefit Hillary, in early May 2016. Hillary's husband Bill Clinton confirmed the planned result in what was intended to be a secret meeting with Loretta Lynch on a private plane, sitting on the airport tarmac. No honest Attorney General would have met with the husband of a woman being investigated by the FBI for felonies, for 20 to 30 minutes. Or one minute.
The real collusion was among high level personnel in the Obama Administration. The Trump Dossier disinformation smeared candidate Donald Trump, implying he would be subject to Russian blackmail, if he won the election. The "Dossier was fiction, but no one in the Obama Administration tried to verify it.
Instead, the Dossier was leveraged to "justify" spying (or more spying) on the Trump campaign. Three spies are already known -- one woman just by her alias -- call them paid informants if you want, but they were spying. There were probably more spies who are not yet known. And there was at least one unjustified FISA wiretap on Trump advisor Carter Page.
While exonerating Hillary Clinton, with his July 5, 2016 "TV speech", the FBI's James Comey unintentionally managed to make Hillary appear guilty of every charge Republicans had made against her (she was guilty), and also made it obvious that Hillary was getting preferential treatment (because it obviously was preferential treatment).
Hurting the Hillary Clinton campaign as little as possible was the intended goal of the sham FBI investigation, with grants of immunity for Hillary's staff and her internet server manager, requiring nothing in return. The FBI's Comey failed to help Hillary enough, and she lost the election. That's why Democrats hated Comey in 2016.
You can be confident President Obama was NOT out of the loop during the "weaponization" of his Administration, intended get a Democrat elected in 2016. Obama gave us much more than the slowest economic growth in modern American history -- averaging only +1.5% annually over eight years. He gave us this scary story about high level Democrats, inside the federal government, repeatedly abusing their power. And not even one spent a day in jail as punishment.
(6) WHY IS THIS
SUBJECT IMPORTANT ?
Most important: To meet their political power goals, truth does not matter to Democrats, which is typical of leftists. I've observed this characteristic of leftists, in my climate science reading, since 1997. The fake, evidence-free, Russian Collusion Delusion, makes the American people look like fools to the rest of the world. Well, at least the Democrats look like fools.
And this can happen again -- next time an unjustified "Deep State" investigation might keep a Republican out of the White House. High level Obama Administration Democrats "weaponized" the US government against Republican candidate Donald Trump in 2016, maybe starting in 2015. This does not become meaningless simply because the effort failed. It will happen again. And the next time the "Deep State" may succeed.
The Democrats' original goal was Republican voter suppression in the 2016 election. That started with the evidence-free, fake Russian collusion charges, months before the election. After the election, their revised goal was disenfranchising the 63 million Americans who had voted for Trump, by forcing President Trump out of office, through his resignation, or impeachment and conviction. If that goal is not achieved, the next goal is to smear Trump's character, and embarrass him so much, that he will not be reelected in 2020. All this is being done from WITHIN the US government.
Democrats in Congress are currently ramping up attacks on Donald Trump. And I see no end to Democrat attacks while Trump is president. When Trump fights back, the Democrats ramp up their offensive. Democrats in the House are led by Nasty Nancy Pelosi and her three stooges -- three Democrat House Committee leaders. All of them are from urban, heavily Democrat districts, where they are very safe for the next election, even if Trump wins in 2020.
Democrats in the House are acting like a Democrat Party opposition research firm, on behalf of the Democrat presidential nominee for the 2020 election, not as elected legislators. House Democrats could not care less about new 2019 or 2010 legislation to benefit the American people.
This is a vicious political "civil war", with Democrats in the government trying even harder to overturn the results of the 2016 election. There has already been gun violence. Republican legislators were shot at on a softball field, by a lunatic Bernie Sander's supporter. One Republican Congressman, Steve Scalise, House Minority Whip, was hit by a bullet, and almost died.
Republicans wearing red MAGA baseball caps get assaulted in public. Congressional Democrats talk about President Trump as if he has broken some (imaginary) law every other week. Democrat "comedians" are in a contest to see who can insult our president the most. In summary, angry Democrats have made our nation an unpleasant place to live. And they have done so by following the leftist mantra: Getting more political power is more important than telling the truth.
Obama Administration agents and officials never thought they’d be held accountable for their crimes. I hope they were wrong. My greatest disappointment is that some former Obama Administration senior personnel have not received prison sentences. Especially James Comey. Losing their jobs was not enough punishment. This could happen again.
It might work the next time. Perhaps prison sentences might prevent future weaponizing of our government to destroy a political opponent.
(7) CONCLUSION ABOUT
THE MUELLER TEAM
Robert Mueller’s 448-page “Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election” ignored everything important. What do you call it when a "prosecution team", investigating a Republican president, includes only Democrats? What do you call a Democrat Team that investigated ONLY Republicans? What do you call an investigation launched after no evidence of any crime found in a nine month (at least) FBI investigation?
What do you call it when the Team is told to investigate President Trump and his associates for ANY crime, and to squeeze associates hard, with harsh threats of imprisonment? And that even included an unprecedented raid of President Trump's lawyer's (Michael Cohen's) home and office -- whatever happened to lawyer-client privilege? What do you call a Team that presented a biased 448-page report -- ten to twenty times longer than necessary -- which deliberately ignored the most important collusion, and the most important Russian interference, in the 2016 election?
I call the Mueller Team "incredibly biased".
I call the Mueller Investigation a "witch hunt".
I call the Mueller Report a "hatchet job".
I call Robert Mueller a "political hack".
Robert Mueller must be investigated to determine why he hired only Democrats, investigated only Republicans, ignored the most effective Russian election interference, and ignored collusion within the Obama Administration -- high level government officials, paid by the taxpayers, working hard during business hours, in an unjustified attempt to defeat Trump in the 2016 election.
(8) CONCLUSION ON
DEMOCRAT WAR ON TRUMP:
Senior members of the Obama FBI and Intelligence Community created a false narrative about the Trump campaign colluding with Russians, and misled the American people for years. Donald J. Trump was framed by his own government, because of who he was, not what he did.
Trump was framed by Democrats, leveraging a fraudulent "Trump Dossier", paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign. The Fusion GPS - Christopher Steele "Trump Dossier" was filled with disinformation, supplied by Russians, Steele claimed. The Dossier was never verified. No fact checking at all. It was more valuable without fact checking, so why check anything? That Dossier, based primarily on an ex-British spy colluding with Russians, was paid for by Hillary Clinton, and spun into a fake Trump Russia Collusion charge.
The false narrative about Trump has lasted almost three years so far -- evidence free -- and will never stop, among Democrats. This Democrat political attack was intended to defeat Trump in 2016, but failed. After the election, the Democrat political attack was used to disrupt the Trump Administration, and deflect attention from corruption in the Obama Administration. Corruption that no one would have known about, if Hillary Clinton had won.
An unofficial FBI investigation of candidate Trump probably started long before July 2016. There was certainly an FBI investigation in progress after Hillary Clinton, the "Queen of Obstruction of Justice", was excused from any punishment, for multiple felonies, by the FBI's James Comey, on July 5, 2016.
High level members of the Obama Administration colluded in an an effort to misinform the American people, justify FISA spying, and justify an FBI counterintelligence investigation of Trump, starting at least four months before the 2016 election.
The claim that the Democrat National Committee was hacked? No independent proof. The Obama FBI was denied access to DNC computers. A DNC-hired, Democrat-led company, CrowdStrike, led by ex-Russians who hated Vladimir Putin, came to that decision in one day. They blamed Russians, without persuasive proof. The source countries of computer hacks, if not caught when the hacking is in progress, are almost always a guess. CrowdStrike was already infamous for their false claim of being able to determine where a computer hack originated.
The claim that Trump and his campaign associates colluded with Russians? No proof, after four investigations. The claim of significant Russian interference in the 2016 election? No proof that anything Russians did -- lame attempts to stir up trouble -- added even one vote in favor of Trump. The false "Trump Dossier" claims of Trump's ties with Russians, however, was used by the Hillary Clinton campaign to smear candidate Trump, deflect attention from the stolen DNC e-mails, and had to help vote count.
(9) DEMOCRAT COLLUSION
WITH RUSSIANS
Democrats weaponized disinformation from "Russians". Several Russians were claimed to be the sources of "Trump Dossier" disinformation on candidate Donald Trump, assembled by ex-British spy Christopher Steele, who hated Donald Trump with a passion.
Two ex-Russians, who were Democrats, and hated Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, owned CrowdStrike. That firm was hired by the DNC for a sham investigation of Democrat National Committee servers and computers -- the company falsely claimed the hackers were Russians, after only one day on the job, without persuasive proof.
(10) MUELLER VS. REAL RUSSIANS
The Mueller Report claimed: “First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released stolen documents.” The weaponization of the "Trump Dossier", paid for by Hillary Clinton, and filled with Russian disinformation, was practically ignored.
The Russian "spies" indicted by the Mueller Team must have been picked out of a Russian phone book. No evidence has been offered they were really spies, or of their guilt -- the charges are a fabrication -- there will be no trial -- and a conviction would not have been possible at a trial. Mueller indicted 12 Russians he alleges are Russian GRU (like our CIA) agents responsible for the DNC “hack”. The majority of them are people who have full time jobs that have nothing to do with the GRU.
Mueller was surprised when some of them sent representatives to a U.S. court to fight the charges and demand discovery -- disclosure of Mueller's evidence. Mueller asked for an immediate adjournment when the case opened, Then he fought to limit disclosure of his alleged evidence. He submitted repeated motions to limit disclosure, individual by individual, to ensure that the accused Russians can be convicted without ever seeing, or being able to reply to, the evidence against them. That's how Mueller treated all evidence contrary to what was included in his Report -- he either ignored it, or kept it hidden from the public.
The Russian internet trolls indicted by Mueller had no obvious connection with Vladimir Putin. Evidence: Their alleged $45,000 of Facebook ads placed before the election (versus $4 billion spent on the election by the two campaigns) were too few, and were lame ads, reflecting a poor command of English, which made them ineffective.
If Putin had been involved, the spending would have been much more than $100,000, the ads would have been persuasive, using perfect English, and all would have been placed BEFORE the election, rather than spending a majority of the alleged $100,000 ($55,000) for ads AFTER the election. Democrats were in shock after the election, and so were many Republicans -- what difference could a few Facebook ads make after the election?
Mueller's 20-plus page recounting of the "Trump Tower Meeting" never mentioned the two Russians present were on the payroll of Hillary Clinton contractor Fusion GPS, and met with its principal, (Democrat) Glenn Simpson, before and after the Trump Tower meeting. That sure has the scent of Democrats “colluding with Russians to set up members of the Trump campaign.” But that fact would have made Democrats look bad, so Mueller ignored it.
REPORT DETAILS
(11) THE DEMOCRAT'S WAR
ON DONALD TRUMP
Donald Trump has been the most investigated president in US history. By far. And what was found? Nothing. No collusion with Russians. No obstruction of justice by any honest definition of the crime. In fact, not one American cooperated with the lame Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election.
The Mueller Investigation found: No collusion. No meaningful obstruction, unless an innocent man protesting a harsh investigation has committed a crime! Full cooperation by President Trump. But half the nation is refusing to move on -- Trump will always be guilty to them. Just like they have predicted a climate change catastrophe is coming ... for over 60 years, so far!
The leftist-biased US mainstream media got away with years of false allegations linking Trump with Russia. The "sources" were anonymous. No proof, and no honest evidence, were ever presented to the public ... because such evidence did NOT exist.
The Mueller Report ignored evidence that Russia interfered in the 2016 election mainly by feeding disinformation to Christopher Steele for a Dossier intended to smear Trump. If Steele invented the multiple Russian sources claimed for his "Trump Dossier", then he should have been charged with lying to the FBI. Steele was not charged with lying.
Collusion within the Obama Administration, with the goal of derailing the Trump campaign, consisted of lying, law breaking, and a fixed Hillary Clinton investigation (most likely fixed by Loretta Lynch and/or Barack Obama). The law breaking should have earned prison terms for a few Obama officials. With Bill Barr as U.S. Attorney General, there's still hope for justice.
We have a new Attorney General, and an old Justice Department Inspector General, both investigating former members of the Obama Administration. And that's why House Democrats will do everything possible to attack, and investigate, Republicans. A strong offense, they believe, is their best defense. If you thought the Democrat - Republican "war" ended with the Mueller Report, think again. I believe this is a "permanent" Democrat - Republican "civil war" that could only affect the economy in a negative way.
(12) WHY DID THIS HAPPEN ?
Why would Obama Democrats break laws, and government rules, to investigate Trump, his family, and everyone working on his campaign? My best guess involves these words: Corporation, CEO, billionaire, and Donald Trump.
In the minds of most Democrats, any billionaire corporate CEO got that rich by screwing people. Especially a coarse "salesman" like Donald Trump. Democrats believe the private sector can't be trusted. That's obvious among Democrats currently running for president in 2020. Starting in 2016, perhaps earlier, Democrats were confident "dirt" would be found, and that "dirt" would destroy the Trump campaign. Democrats are still looking for the "dirt".
(13) CARTER PAGE IS SPIED ON
The Carter Page FISA warrant story has changed repeatedly -- only liars do that: Obama's people first admitted the Carter Page FISA warrant was based primarily on the "Trump Dossier". Then they claimed their FISA warrant application had a (unclear) footnote suggesting the "Trump Dossier" might be biased.
Then they admitted the FISA warrant application claimed it was based on "verified information". Then they admitted no one ever verified the Trump Dossier. Then they changed their story again, and said the Trump Dossier had nothing to do with that FISA warrant. And Carter Page, by the way, was never charged with any crime, because he didn't commit a crime. In fact, in the past, Carter Page voluntarily helped the FBI concerning another incident.
(14) ANDREW WEISSMANN
Mueller appointed a Team of all Democrats, with lead prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, one of the worst prosecutors in American history. I immediately knew Mueller was heavily biased against Republicans. In the past Andrew Weissmann put the Arthur Anderson accounting firm out of business, losing 80,000 jobs, by stretching the legal definition of obstruction into a brand new definition, far from the actual law. His prosecution was reversed by the Supreme Court, 9 to 0, a year later ... but that was too late for Arthur Anderson's 80,000 former employees. ... Weissmann also put four Merrill Lynch executives in jail for a year, until the Supreme Court reversed that prosecution, 9 to 0 -- but the four men lost a year of their freedom. Andrew Weissmann should have at least lost his law license, and spent a few months in prison, but instead, he was made Mueller's lead prosecutor!
(15) GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS
George Papadopoulos ("Papa-D") was vacationing with his then-fiance, Simona Mangiante, during summer 2017, in Greece. He was approached by someone claiming to be impressed with his credentials, who wanted to do business with him. The individual allegedly talked the then-29-year-old into traveling to Israel to make a deal, and invited him to his hotel room.
On the bed was a suitcase holding $10,000 of US dollars. Papa-D took the money and gave it to his lawyer in Athens, Greece, who still has it. Papa-D was arrested at Dulles International Airport on a return trip from overseas on July 27, 2017, according the Daily Caller. FBI agents already had his baggage from the plane. The $10,000 cash was a "set up". The FBI already knew that he hadn’t declared that he had $10,000 cash. They planned to find the undeclared cash, arrest him, and get him to "squeal" about President Trump. One of the FBI agents allegedly said to him, ‘This is what happens when you work for Donald Trump.'”
The acting director of the FBI at the time, from May 9, 2017 to August 2, 2017, was Andrew McCabe, who was fired in March 2018. McCabe is currently under investigation by federal prosecutors for leaking to the media and lying to investigators. Unfortunately, there were no whistleblowers about this incident in the FBI, or the Department of Justice. But this seemed like an FBI set-up to me.
David Ha’ivri, an Israeli political strategist, told the Daily Caller’s Chuck Ross in August 2018 that he introduced a man named Charles Tawil to Papa-D on his “own initiative” to work on a business deal “involving an oil and gas project in the Aegean and Mediterranean seas.” Ha’ivri said that he was under the impression that the former Trump aide had “good connections” in the Middle East.
Papa-D wants Congress to investigate: “They are marked bills. They remain with my lawyer in Athens,” he said.
(16) RUSSIA'S RESPONSE
TO THE MUELLER REPORT
From page 119 of the 121-page pdf Russian Embassy response to the Mueller Report, titled: "THE RUSSIAGATE HYSTERIA: A CASE OF SEVERE RUSSOPHOBIA ", published April 18, 2019:
"After three years, more than 8,000 publications in just four main outlets (Washington Post, New York Times, CNN and MSNBC), endless congressional inquiries, 22 months of the work of Robert Mueller that cost taxpayers an estimated $32 million, more than 2,800 subpoenas, 500 witnesses interrogated, and as many search warrants, an obvious conclusion is reached – there was no collusion"
from page 5 of the 121-page pdf: "The Democrats have done their best to use the Russian card so as to do maximum damage to the current administration. When a great nation spends three years speculating about foreign interference that allegedly predetermined the outcome of its presidential elections, we see this as disrespect for the great American people."
(17) THE FAKE INVESTIGATION
OF HILLARY CLINTON
Obama Administration lawbreakers faked a real FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton, and exonerated her with no punishment, after her very obvious obstruction of justice. Tens of thousands (we'll never know the correct number) of her e-mails under Congressional subpoena were destroyed, and an illegal private server was wiped clean with "BleachBit". Phones were destroyed with hammers! Aides received immunity, with nothing required in return. The first draft of the Comey July 5, 2016 "Hillary exoneration speech" was written in late April 2016, before 17 important FBI interviews were conducted! Including the FBI's interview of Hillary Clinton!
For Hillary's FBI interview, her lawyer was allowed to attend (unprecedented), dozens of questions were answered with "I don't recall", no video recording was made, no transcript was made, and James Comey did not bother to attend. A honest FBI investigation does not operate that way.
(18) DNC "HACKING
BY RUSSIANS"
NOT PROVEN
Robert Mueller started with the prejudice that it was “the Russians” and he deliberately excluded from evidence everything that contradicted that view. Mueller did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview VIPS' Bill Binney or read the VIPS report (see next section of this report). He did not interview Julian Assange.
No US law enforcement ever did a forensic examination of the DNC servers, despite the fact the claim those servers were hacked is the very heart of the entire investigation. Instead, the Obama Administration simply accepted the “evidence” provided by the DNC’s own IT security consultants, CrowdStrike, a company politically aligned to the Clintons, and headed by ex-Russians who hated Vladimir Putin. Mueller also simply accepted what CrowdStrike claimed.
The Trump Russian collusion claim started right after stolen Democrat National Committee (DNC) e-mails were published in WikiLeaks. The source of the e-mails, according to WikiLeaks, was a DNC insider angry that Bernie Sanders was treated unfairly. That DNC insider allegedly handed the information to a WikiLeaks representative, on a flash drive, in a Washington, DC metro area park. Bernie Sanders fans within the DNC were very disappointed that the DNC was making sure Sanders was not going to be the 2016 nominee.
Almost immediately after the WikiLeaks publication, the Hillary Clinton campaign claimed "Russians" hacked the DNC, and Donald Trump was colluding with them. In reality, the actual location of hackers not caught in the act, is almost always a guess. There was no proof ever provided to the public to show that WikiLeaks got any DNC e-mails from Russians. You can be confident no such proof existed. The Obama FBI was mysteriously denied access to all DNC computers and servers.
Only one company was ever allowed to "investigate" the DNC computers and servers -- CrowdStrike. The company had a bad reputation in their industry for an ongoing scam of claiming to be able to identify the nation where hackers had been operating from. Which is almost impossible to do. After only one day of work, CrowdStrike declared DNC hacks were done by Russians. That's exactly what Hillary Clinton wanted to hear. The unproven, and most likely false, claim was immediately weaponized to attack Trump.
(19) VIPS CHALLENGES
RUSSIAN HACKING CLAIM
Bill Binney was the former Technical Director of the NSA, the USA’s $14 billion a year surveillance organization. Binney's team, VIPS, is a world leader in cyber surveillance -- independent, and more qualified than CrowdStrike, who was hired by the DNC. Binney claims the download rates for the “DNC hack” given by CrowdStrike are at a speed that could not be attained remotely at the location -- the information must have been downloaded to a local device, a memory stick. Binney has further evidence regarding formatting, which supports this.
Mueller’s identification of “DC Leaks” and “Guccifer 2.0” as Russian security services is something Mueller attempts by simple assertion -- no evidence is presented. His identification of the Guccifer 2.0 persona with Russian agents is flimsy. There's no evidence of a specific transfer of leaked DNC emails from Guccifer 2.0 to WikiLeaks. Binney asserts, that if this had happened, the packets would have been instantly identifiable to the NSA. Did Mueller call Binney as a witness? No. Nor did he consider the VIPS team's evidence. Mueller already had the "Russians did it" conclusion he wanted. An honest prosecutor would never start with his conclusion.
A prior WikiLeaks "Vault 7" release of CIA materials, is where the CIA outlined their capacity to “false flag” hacks, leaving behind misdirecting clues, including scraps of foreign script and language. This is precisely what CrowdStrike claims to have found in the “Russian hacking” operation. But malware code is often shared among hackers. Code originally developed by Russians could be used by non-Russian hackers located anywhere in the world.
The Nation is a socialist magazine that I read once in a while to see how the "progressives" think. They were Bernie Sanders fans. They hated Trump. They had no bias to ever publish anything negative about Hillary Clinton. But they did, in 2017, concerning the "DNC hacks":
"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 (VIPS) 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."
"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."
"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.”
"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."
"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 www.disobedientmedia.com 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. ... the 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 (2017). 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 are correct)."
The Mueller Team ignored William Binney and the VIPS report, and did not interview any VIPS team members. William Binney was the former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; and co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
(20) CHRISTOPHER STEELE’S
"TRUMP DOSSIER"
The Trump Dossier included false statements, such as:
-- Trump lawyer Michael Cohen traveled to Prague to meet with Russians;
-- Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort owed the Russians $100 million, and was the “go-between”, from Russian President Vladimir Putin to Trump;
-- Trump advisor Carter Page met with senior Russian businessman tied to Putin;
-- Russians secretly communicated with Trump through a computer system.
Notes and testimony from senior Justice Department official Bruce Ohr make clear Steele admitted he was “desperate” to get Trump defeated in the election, was working in some capacity for Trump's opponent, and considered his "intelligence" to be raw and unverified. Ohr testified that he alerted the FBI and other senior Justice Department officials of his concerns in August.
The Mueller Report found no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. They ignored the fact that Democrats paid for a document created by a foreign national, who claimed his sources were Russians. The Mueller Team failed to consider whether the Trump Dossier, compiled by former British MI6 spy Christopher Steele, was filled with Russian disinformation.
Steele's firm, Orbis Security, was a subcontractor to Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS was paid at least one million dollars by Hillary Clinton, though a lawyer, for "opposition research". Steele claimed his sources were various Russians, and they must have been, because he was never charged with lying to the FBI about that claim. That means Russians interfered in the 2016 election by feeding Steele disinformation about Trump.
Steele sent a summary of his Trump Dossier to the FBI, in June or July 2016, when he met with Rome-based FBI agent Mike Gaeta. In September 2016, Gaeta provided the dossier to FBI agents working on the FBI's Trump-Russia counterintelligence investigation in Washington D.C.
Steele also shared Trump Dossier details with reporter Michael Isikoff, who reported at Yahoo! News that “(Carter) Page met with Igor Sechin, a longtime Putin associate and former Russian deputy prime minister,” and discussed the lifting of Russian sanctions. Isikoff later wrote, “Senate minority leader Harry Reid wrote FBI Director James Comey, citing reports of meetings between a Trump advisor (Carter Page) and ‘high ranking sanctioned individuals’ in Moscow over the summer as evidence of ‘significant and disturbing ties’ between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin that needed to be investigated by the bureau.”
Former British spy Christopher Steele admitted something important during an October 11, 2016 meeting with Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec, 10 days before the FBI used his now-discredited Trump Dossier as the primary evidence to get a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to spy on Trump campaign aide Carter Page.
A two and one-half year effort to hide Kathleen Kavalec's meeting notes about her contact with Steele, has been ended by a Freedom of Information Act request. But the FBI recently (retroactively) classified Kavalec's notes on 4/25/2019, despite the fact they were originally marked unclassified in 2016. They are now set to "Declassify on 12/31/2041.
One year ago, State Department officials finally acknowledged receiving a copy of the Trump Dossier in July 2016, got a detailed briefing in October 2016, and referred the information to the FBI. Kavalec's notes contain information on Steele's leftist politics and his connection to Hillary Clinton. Kavalec's notes suggest there was an illegal effort to "frame" Trump with bogus collusion allegations. Two days after the meeting with Steele, Kavalec sent an email alerting others about Hillary Clinton's role in hiring Steele.
Kavalec's notes, even with redactions, are proof the US government had full knowledge that the foundation of their FISA warrant on Carter Page (who was never charged with any crime, because he never committed a crime) had a political bias, and was likely to be fiction. We also know this information was transmitted, before the Page FISA warrant, to people whose identities were redacted.
Documents and testimony from Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr, whose wife Nellie worked for Fusion GPS, prove he told high level FBI officials in August 2016 that Steele was “desperate” to defeat Trump, and his work had something to do with Hillary Clinton’s campaign. These's little chance the FBI didn’t know that Steele, an FBI informant, went to the State Department hoping to make his Dossier public.
The DOJ later cited Isikoff’s article, based on Steele's leaks, to support its FISA application to surveil Carter Page. The application said: “Based on statements in the September 23, [Yahoo!] News Article, as well as in other recent articles published by identified news organizations, Trump’s campaign repeatedly has made public statements in an attempt to create the appearance of distance between Page and [Trump’s] campaign.”
I doubt if Trump ever met, or talked to, Carter Page.
According to the Mueller Report: “The Steele dossier detailed intelligence claimed to be provided by a variety of Vladimir Putin-connected sources. For instance, Steele identified Source A as “a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure” who “confided that the Kremlin had been feeding Trump and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents, including Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.” Source B was identified as “a former top-level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin”; Source C, a “Senior Russian Financial Officer”; and Source G, “a Senior Kremlin Official.”
Either Russia fed Steele disinformation, or Steele lied to the FBI about his Russian sources. The Trump Dossier appeared to be the most effective Russian intervention in the 2016 election. The "Trump Dossier" was a collection of unverified "dirt" paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign. Steel claims he got most of the disinformation from Russians ... who lived in Russia. The GRU, the Russian version of the CIA, is known for the most effective disinformation campaigns in the world. They were a likely source of the disinformation.
The existence of the Trump Dossier was revealed before the election. Then the mainstream media implied that Russia had "dirt" on Donald Trump. But Dossier details were not made public until January 2017. I imagine the Democrats thought the Access Hollywood "Billy Bush Bus Video" was their best October surprise to sink the Trump campaign. I thought so too.
The Billy Bush Bus Video "dirt" was on videotape, showing Trump, and including his voice, so it couldn't be refuted. Leaking the entire Trump Dossier to the public might have backfired. It would have diverted attention away from the convincing Billy Bush Bus Video. And perhaps some Trump Dossier claim would have been quickly and effectively refuted, before the election, implying the whole Dossier was fiction (which it was)?
Russians disinformation pleased the Democrats so much, it appears no one bothered to fact check. Perhaps out of incompetence. Or no one fact checked because they did not want to find out the "facts" they loved were not true. The Dossier was used to get at least one FISA warrant on Trump campaign advisor, Carter Page, and to justify the launch of the official July 2016 FBI counterintelligence investigation of Trump, and anyone who supported his campaign. That investigation started no later than July 2016, probably right after Hillary Clinton was exonerated in early July. There's some evidence an unofficial FBI investigation of Trump began in spring 2016, or even earlier.
Christopher Steele admitted in a British courtroom that he had no idea if any of the claims in his Trump Dossier were true. Democrats leveraged his disinformation into a huge investigation of the Trump campaign. It was used to justify spying, wiretapping, and multiple attempts to trap Trump campaign associates into saying anything about Russia that could justify prosecution.
Mueller’s conclusion was that no one connected to the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to interfere with the election. But how about the Hillary Clinton campaign? Either Russia fed Steele disinformation that was weaponized by Democrats, or Steele lied to the FBI about having Russian sources.
The Mueller Report acknowledged that the Steele dossier, and leaks about it, affected the Trump campaign. For instance, Mueller noted that “on October 11, 2016, Podesta stated publicly that the FBI was investigating Russia’s hacking, and said that candidate Trump might have known in advance that the hacked emails were going to be released.” Additionally, Mueller highlighted the media’s questioning of vice presidential candidate Mike Pence, concerning “whether the Trump Campaign was ‘in cahoots’ with WikiLeaks in releasing damaging Clinton-related information.”
(21) WIKILEAKS and JULIAN ASSANGE
The claim that Russians hacked the DNC, and then fed the stolen e-mails to WikiLeaks? No proof. Julian Assange denied that any government was the source of the DNC e-mails. He actually revealed too much about his source by saying it was a DNC insider.
Assange probably regretted saying that -- he later totally confused the subject by publicly offering a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of the person who murdered DNC insider Seth Rich, on a Washington DC street, late at night, and didn't take his money, watch, or phone. I suppose that means we can rule out Seth Rich as the DNC e-Mail thief, because WikiLeaks has never said anything that would reveal the identity of their actual sources.
Mueller gives no evidence to support his assertion that the DNC's Seth Rich was not the source of the DNC e-mail leak. He accuses Julian Assange of “dissembling” by referring to Seth Rich’s murder. The FBI showed no interest in examining Seth Rich’s computers. Just like the FBI had no interest in examining the DNC computers. Few resources were used to find Seth Rich's killers.
Mueller condemns Julian Assange for allegedly exploiting the death of Seth Rich. That would be more convincing if the official answer to the question “Who murdered Seth Rich?” was not: “Who cares?”
Julian Assange had preliminary plans for discussions with the Trump Department of Justice, but they were killed in early 2017, by then FBI head James Comey. Ex-US government-staffed computer crime investigators (VIPS), based on the fast download speed for the stolen DNC data, also said there was no DNC hack.
The Mueller Report section called: “The (Russian) GRU’s Transfer of Stolen Material to WikiLeaks” claimed internet contacts between WikiLeaks and persons not proven to be Russian, transferring material not proven to be the DNC leaks. Mueller added: “The office cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred by intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016”. He names Mr. Andrew Muller-Maguhn as a possible courier. Yet Mueller did not give Mr. Muller-Maguhn any opportunity to answer his accusations.
Based on no evidence, Mueller accused Julian Assange of receiving hacked DNC e-mails from Russians. Mueller did not give Assange any opportunity to answer his accusations. Declaring somebody guilty, without giving them any opportunity to tell their side of the story, is not the American way. The Mueller Report quotes a media report of Assange stating he had “physical proof” the material did not come from Russia. But Mueller simply dismissed that media report, without any attempt to ask Assange himself.
Julian Assange was held incommunicado with no opportunity to go outside. Assange repeatedly declared the material did not come from the Russian state, or from any other state. He was very willing to give evidence to Mueller, by video-link, by interview in the Embassy, or by written communication. But Mueller was unwilling to accept any evidence which might contradict his predetermined narrative.
Mueller had to let go of the “Russia collusion” accusation, for lack of evidence. But he let the “Russian meddling aided and abetted by Julian Assange” narrative stand. Mueller didn’t provide any proof of that -- he didn't communicate with any Russians, or the VIPS computer analysis team, or with Julian Assange of WikiLeaks (who had been in exile, silenced).
The Mueller Team refused to see evidence from two organizations, WikiLeaks and the VIPS, who certainly would have had information he did not have. Why did the Mueller Team do that? Most likely because they didn’t want to know.
Both WikiLeaks and the VIPS insisted the DNC emails didn’t come from “the Russians”. If true, the only Russia interference left would have been Russian internet trolls buying $100,000 in Facebook ads -- $55,000 allegedly spent AFTER the election. And that claim may not even be true. We don’t really know if it was Russians who purchased the ads -- that’s just another story coming from Obama's unreliable with the truth intelligence organizations.
(22) THE MYSTERIOUS
PROFESSOR MIFSUD:
The Mueller Report portrayed Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud as a Russian agent – when evidence suggests he may have been a Western agent. Weeks after returning from Moscow, Mifsud – a self-described Clinton Foundation member – ‘seeded’ the rumor that Russia had ‘dirt’ on Hillary Clint, to set up Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos on April 26, 2016, according to the Mueller Report. Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA) said: "... in the Mueller Report, they use a fake news story to describe Mifsud. -- In one of those stories, they cherry- pick it.”
MARIA BARTIROMO: " ... how come this London Center of International Law reached out to Papadopoulos on LinkedIn to go work there, after Ben Carson withdrew? (Papadopoulos had been working for Ben Carson's campaign)"
DEVIN NUNES: "And I think a better question is ... Papadopoulos claims that he was quitting this London Center. So how many companies or agencies that you know of, when you say, hey, I'm quitting, and they say, hey, what about a free four-to-five-day vacation in Rome? We're going to fly you there. We're going to put you up for free. We're going to give you food... And all you have to do is meet this guy Mifsud? ... "
(23) OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE ?
Let's start with the most important fact, never mentioned in the leftist-biased mainstream press: Collusion itself is not a crime. Therefore, obstruction of justice, related to a non-criminal collusion investigation, could not be a crime.
18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), specifies that someone is guilty of obstruction as follows: “…obstructs, influences or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.” An “official proceeding” means things happening inside courtrooms, with one or more judges presiding. To launch such a proceeding requires evidence that a crime has been committed. No such evidence existed. If there’s no crime, then there’s no court proceeding, and nothing to obstruct, influence or impede.
The Mueller Team of 18 angry Democrats was allowed the 22 months they "needed" to prosecute people, notably for tax evasion well before 2016, and complete their final Report. So there was no obstruction by President Trump.
The lack of evidence does not seem to matter to Democrats. Or to most so-called "journalists". Real journalism is actually almost dead in America. That's why this article is necessary. Activists for the Democrat Party pretend to be journalists. They have attacked Trump for two and half years, with the false charge of collusion with Russians to win the 2016 election. Most Democrats still believe that. Some Democrats also believe voting counts were hacked and changed by Russians too.
We saw unprecedented openness by Donald Trump, setting a bad precedent for future presidents:
- Trump did not fire Mueller, even after Mueller hired a team of only Democrats, led by smarmy Andrew Weissmann, one of the worst prosecutors in American history, which guaranteed the final report would be a "hatchet job",
- Trump never claimed "executive privilege", unlike Nixon, Reagan and Bill Clinton.
- Trump voluntarily surrendered over 1.4 million pages of documents to the Mueller Team.
- Trump held back no witnesses, and even (foolishly) allowed his White House attorney, McGahn, to participate in an unbelievable 30 hours of Mueller Team, which were summarized using only a few paragraphs in the Mueller Report's 448 pages !
- Trump answered all Mueller Team questions, in writing.
The Mueller Report was not a legal report. It was a political report. The goal was to provide excuses for Democrats in Congress to ramp up investigations of Trump, his family, and the family businesses.
Part 1 should have been well under 50 pages. Part 2 was a 100% political document, and not necessary at all. It includes no evidence of any criminal action, needed very few redactions, and was intended only as "bait" for a "fishing expedition" by three Democrat-led committees.
After the election, the FBI's James Comey told Trump three times that he was not personally the subject of any FBI investigation, but refused to tell that to the public. The biased Mueller Team was launched in early 2017. By early 2018 it had to be obvious there was no evidence of collusion. But biased Mueller just sat on that important information through the 2018 election, helping Democrats win control of the House.
James Comey's lies, and leaked confidential documents, were used to get a Special Prosecutor appointed, after the election. The existence of the Mueller investigation allowed the mainstream media to smear Trump's reputation by continuously speculating that 'Trump was nearing impeachment' ... for almost two years!
The separation of powers in the US Constitution allows the president to avoid Congressional investigations -- but Democrats don't care about the Constitution, a document intended to limit government power.
(24) ADDITIONAL DETAILS:
Part 2 of the Mueller Report was not written for the Trump Justice Department. That's why there were so few redactions. It was written for Democrats in the House, and the leftist-biased mainstream media. It was bait for House committee fishing expeditions (further investigations and possible impeachment proceedings) -- filled with innuendo and speculation, but no evidence of any crimes committed.
