Category: Obama


Via WikiLeaks: Pelosi May Have Known About Imran Awan

Time to get beyond fake news and White House turmoil.  There is one serious issue that needs to be addressed. Don’t count on the MSM to do it!
Some Democrats have apparently been engaged in highly questionable activities, and the Soros dominated MSM will not cover their most egregious actions which border on treaso.
The first post below is and excerpt from the latest regarding the scandal of the century that the MSM refuses to cover. It is followed by segments from just a few of the many articles authored by others who have been heralding what the MSM ignores.

From The Daily Caller:
Establishment Media Refuse To Cover House IT Scandal Rocking Democrats
Leading members of the establishment media are ignoring the months-long House IT scandal rocking congressional Democrats, even after the FBI’s investigation into the matter became public, and even after Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s top IT aide was arrested trying to flee to Pakistan after wiring almost $300,000 to the country.
As of Thursday morning, both the New York Times and Wall Street Journal have yet to report on the growing scandal surrounding several IT staffers employed by House Democrats, including Wasserman Schultz’s top IT aide, Imran Awan.
Other establishment media outlets are similarly refusing to tell the public about the growing scandal. MSNBC has given zero on-air coverage to the scandal. ABC News and NBC News’ national broadcasts have similarly given zero coverage to the scandal. CNN’s only on-air coverage of the scandal so far was a brief mention during the 6 a.m. ET hour Thursday.
As reported by The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Luke Rosiak — who for months has extensively covered the growing scandal — Awan was arrested on Monday as he attempted to flee the country to Pakistan after wiring almost $300,000 to the country. The FBI seized smashed hard drives from Awan’s home as part of the ongoing investigation. (RELATED: FBI Seized Smashed Hard Drives From Wasserman Schultz IT Aide’s Home)
The Pakistani-born Awan attempted to flee the country shortly after Rosiak’s report that he was the subject of an FBI investigation. Awan’s wife, who was also on congressional Democrats’ payroll, previously fled to Pakistan, as first reported by Rosiak. continue

From Powdered Wig Society:
If this case, which begins with the Awan brothers and goes to the highest levels of Congress, is pursued with a fraction of the energy and resources that have been expended on the Russian fairy tale, then I believe many people are going to jail and some of them are high-profile Democrat members of Congress.
We are just beginning to scratch the surface, but so far we know that there are ties between some of those involved and the Muslim Brotherhood, and that Top Secret national security information may well have been, and very likely was, compromised… FrontPage Magazine.
The signatories to the letter were Andre Carson, Luis Guiterez, Jim Himes, Terri Sewell, Jackie Speier, Mike Quigley, Eric Swalwell and Patrick Murphy.

Pamela Geller has written extensively on this issue: below is an excerpt on one of many of her articles.
Rep Steve King: Democrat Muslim IT spy ring is “an enormous act of treason, a lot of people complicit” had access to “all the communication of the Foreign Affairs Committee”
There is a reason the fake newsmedia is filling the airwaves with Trump/Russia bunk. It’s the old sleight of hand. Don’t look there, look here?
Where’s Jeff Sessions? Where the hell is everyone?
The scandal goes all the way to the top – Clinton and Pelosi. The list of those reportedly employing the Awans and their associates includes these 23 current or former Democrats in Congress, including: Andre Carson, Luis Guiterez, Jim Himes, Terri Sewell, Jackie Speier, Mike Quigley, Eric Swalwell, Patrick Murphy, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Joaquini Castro, Lois Frankel, Ted Lieu, Robin Kelly, Tammy Duckworth, Mark Takano, John Sarbanes, Diana DeGette, Cedric Richmond, Charlie Crist, Jacky Rosen, Sandy Levin, Karen Bass and Marcia Fudge… continue At the end of this post are links with many more alarming details on the matter.

Daily Caller:
Chris Gowen, Imran Awan’s lawyer, is a long-time campaigner for former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and a member of an attorney team that brought a fraudulent lawsuit against energy giant Chevron.
Pakistani-born Awan was arrested late Monday at Dulles Airport in Northern Virginia before he could board a flight to Qatar and then Pakistan on bank fraud charges. Awan, his younger brothers, Abid and Jamal, his wife, Hina Alvi, and Rao Abbas, his best friend, have been subjects of a federal criminal investigation led by the U.S. Capitol Police and including the FBI since February 2017. more

Gateway Pundit
Via WikiLeaks: Pelosi May Have Known About Imran AwanJ 
Don’t look to the mainstream media to tell you how troubling the situation with the Awan brothers is. It’s worse than you think. After Imran Awan was arrested this week for trying to flee the country, WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange reminded his 279,000 Twitter followers of an email link between Imran Awan and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. (emphasis mine)  continue
There appears to be a more horrendous scandal in association with the above discussed one–the blatant refusal of the Democrats and the MSM to acknowledge, much less investigate such an obvious act of betrayal and possible treason against America.
The Democrat leadership does not serve this nation. Apparently they serve and protect not only themselves, but also the elites and globalists—- which includes many of them.

As usual the bought and paid for lapdog MSM & previous administration ignored these findings because they would have wrecked the very foundation of the Russiagate narrative.

NSA Officials and Computer Expert: Forensic Evidence Proves DNC Emails Were LEAKED, Not Hacked

Preface by Washington’s Blog: We asked top NSA whistleblower Bill Binney what he thought about a report claiming that the DNC emails were transferred too quickly to have been accessed by a hacker, and could only have been copied by a DNC leaker. This article is his response.   Background here and here.
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Was the “Russian Hack” an Inside Job?
Executive Summary
Forensic studies of “Russian hacking” into Democratic National Committee computers last year reveal that on July 5, 2016, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computers, and then doctored to incriminate Russia.
After examining metadata from the “Guccifer 2.0” July 5, 2016 intrusion into the DNC server, independent cyber investigators have concluded that an insider copied DNC data onto an external storage device, and that “telltale signs” implicating Russia were then inserted.
Key among the findings of the independent forensic investigations is the conclusion that the DNC data was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack. Of equal importance, the forensics show that the copying and doctoring were performed on the East coast of the U.S. Thus far, mainstream media have ignored the findings of these independent studies [see here and here].

Independent analyst Skip Folden, a retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US, who examined the recent forensic findings, is a co-author of this Memorandum. He has drafted a more detailed technical report titled “Cyber-Forensic Investigation of ‘Russian Hack’ and Missing Intelligence Community Disclaimers,” and sent it to the offices of the Special Counsel and the Attorney General. VIPS member William Binney, a former Technical Director at the National Security Agency, and other senior NSA “alumni” in VIPS attest to the professionalism of the independent forensic findings.
The recent forensic studies fill in a critical gap. Why the FBI neglected to perform any independent forensics on the original “Guccifer 2.0” material remains a mystery – as does the lack of any sign that the “hand-picked analysts” from the FBI, CIA, and NSA, who wrote the “Intelligence Community Assessment” dated January 6, 2017, gave any attention to forensics.
NOTE: There has been so much conflation of charges about hacking that we wish to make very clear the primary focus of this Memorandum. We focus specifically on the July 5, 2016 alleged Guccifer 2.0 “hack” of the DNC server. In earlier VIPS memoranda we addressed the lack of any evidence connecting the Guccifer 2.0 alleged hacks and WikiLeaks, and we asked President Obama specifically to disclose any evidence that WikiLeaks received DNC data from the Russians [see here and here].
Addressing this point at his last press conference (January 18), he described “the conclusions of the intelligence community” as “not conclusive,” even though the Intelligence Community Assessment of January 6 expressed “high confidence” that Russian intelligence “relayed material it acquired from the DNC … to WikiLeaks.”
Obama’s admission came as no surprise to us. It has long been clear to us that the reason the U.S. government lacks conclusive evidence of a transfer of a “Russian hack” to WikiLeaks is because there was no such transfer. Based mostly on the cumulatively unique technical experience of our ex-NSA colleagues, we have been saying for almost a year that the DNC data reached WikiLeaks via a copy/leak by a DNC insider (but almost certainly not the same person who copied DNC data on July 5, 2016).
From the information available, we conclude that the same inside-DNC, copy/leak process was used at two different times, by two different entities, for two distinctly different purposes:

-(1) an inside leak to WikiLeaks before Julian Assange announced on June 12, 2017, that he had DNC documents and planned to publish them (which he did on July 22) – the presumed objective being to expose strong DNC bias toward the Clinton candidacy; and
-(2) a separate leak on July 5, 2016, to pre-emptively taint anything WikiLeaks might later publish by “showing” it came from a “Russian hack.”
*  *  *
Mr. President:
This is our first VIPS Memorandum for you, but we have a history of letting U.S. Presidents know when we think our former intelligence colleagues have gotten something important wrong, and why. For example, our first such memorandum, a same-day commentary for President George W. Bush on Colin Powell’s U.N. speech on March 5, 2003, warned that the “unintended consequences were likely to be catastrophic,” should the U.S. attack Iraq and “justfy” the war on intelligence that we retired intelligence officers could readily see as fraudulent and driven by a war agenda.
The January 6 “Intelligence Community Assessment” by “hand-picked” analysts from the FBI, CIA, and NSA seems to fit into the same agenda-driven category. It is largely based on an “assessment,” not supported by any apparent evidence, that a shadowy entity with the moniker “Guccifer 2.0” hacked the DNC on behalf of Russian intelligence and gave DNC emails to WikiLeaks.
The recent forensic findings mentioned above have put a huge dent in that assessment and cast serious doubt on the underpinnings of the extraordinarily successful campaign to blame the Russian government for hacking. The pundits and politicians who have led the charge against Russian “meddling” in the U.S. election can be expected to try to cast doubt on the forensic findings, if they ever do bubble up into the mainstream media. But the principles of physics don’t lie; and the technical limitations of today’s Internet are widely understood. We are prepared to answer any substantive challenges on their merits.
You may wish to ask CIA Director Mike Pompeo what he knows about this. Our own lengthy intelligence community experience suggests that it is possible that neither former CIA Director John Brennan, nor the cyber-warriors who worked for him, have been completely candid with their new director regarding how this all went down.
Copied, Not Hacked
As indicated above, the independent forensic work just completed focused on data copied (not hacked) by a shadowy persona named “Guccifer 2.0.” The forensics reflect what seems to have been a desperate effort to “blame the Russians” for publishing highly embarrassing DNC emails three days before the Democratic convention last July. Since the content of the DNC emails reeked of pro-Clinton bias, her campaign saw an overriding need to divert attention from content to provenance – as in, who “hacked” those DNC emails? The campaign was enthusiastically supported by a compliant “mainstream” media; they are still on a roll.
“The Russians” were the ideal culprit. And, after WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange announced on June 12, 2016, “We have emails related to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication,” her campaign had more than a month before the convention to insert its own “forensic facts” and prime the media pump to put the blame on “Russian meddling.” Mrs. Clinton’s PR chief Jennifer Palmieri has explained how she used golf carts to make the rounds at the convention. She wrote that her “mission was to get the press to focus on something even we found difficult to process: the prospect that Russia had not only hacked and stolen emails from the DNC, but that it had done so to help Donald Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton.”
Independent cyber-investigators have now completed the kind of forensic work that the intelligence assessment did not do. Oddly, the “hand-picked” intelligence analysts contented themselves with “assessing” this and “assessing” that. In contrast, the investigators dug deep and came up with verifiable evidence from metadata found in the record of the alleged Russian hack.
They found that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 was not a hack, by Russia or anyone else. Rather it originated with a copy (onto an external storage device – a thumb drive, for example) by an insider. The data was leaked after being doctored with a cut-and-paste job to implicate Russia. We do not know who or what the murky Guccifer 2.0 is. You may wish to ask the FBI.
The Time Sequence
June 12, 2016: Assange announces WikiLeaks is about to publish “emails related to Hillary Clinton.”
June 15, 2016: DNC contractor Crowdstrike, (with a dubious professional record and multiple conflicts of interest) announces that malware has been found on the DNC server and claims there is evidence it was injected by Russians.
June 15, 2016: On the same day, “Guccifer 2.0” affirms the DNC statement; claims responsibility for the “hack;” claims to be a WikiLeaks source; and posts a document that the forensics show was synthetically tainted with “Russian fingerprints.”
We do not think that the June 12 & 15 timing was pure coincidence. Rather, it suggests the start of a pre-emptive move to associate Russia with anything WikiLeaks might have been about to publish and to “show” that it came from a Russian hack.
The Key Event
July 5, 2016: In the early evening, Eastern Daylight Time, someone working in the EDT time zone with a computer directly connected to the DNC server or DNC Local Area Network, copied 1,976 MegaBytes of data in 87 seconds onto an external storage device. That speed is many times faster than what is physically possible with a hack.
It thus appears that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 (the self-proclaimed WikiLeaks source) was not a hack by Russia or anyone else, but was rather a copy of DNC data onto an external storage device. Moreover, the forensics performed on the metadata reveal there was a subsequent synthetic insertion – a cut-and-paste job using a Russian template, with the clear aim of attributing the data to a “Russian hack.” This was all performed in the East Coast time zone.
“Obfuscation & De-obfuscation”
Mr. President, the disclosure described below may be related. Even if it is not, it is something we think you should be made aware of in this general connection. On March 7, 2017, WikiLeaks began to publish a trove of original CIA documents that WikiLeaks labeled “Vault 7.” WikiLeaks said it got the trove from a current or former CIA contractor and described it as comparable in scale and significance to the information Edward Snowden gave to reporters in 2013.
No one has challenged the authenticity of the original documents of Vault 7, which disclosed a vast array of cyber warfare tools developed, probably with help from NSA, by CIA’s Engineering Development Group. That Group was part of the sprawling CIA Directorate of Digital Innovation – a growth industry established by John Brennan in 2015.
Scarcely imaginable digital tools – that can take control of your car and make it race over 100 mph, for example, or can enable remote spying through a TV – were described and duly reported in the New York Times and other media throughout March. But the Vault 7, part 3 release on March 31 that exposed the “Marble Framework” program apparently was judged too delicate to qualify as “news fit to print” and was kept out of the Times.
The Washington Post’s Ellen Nakashima, it seems, “did not get the memo” in time. Her March 31 article bore the catching (and accurate) headline: “WikiLeaks’ latest release of CIA cyber-tools could blow the cover on agency hacking operations.”
The WikiLeaks release indicated that Marble was designed for flexible and easy-to-use “obfuscation,” and that Marble source code includes a “deobfuscator” to reverse CIA text obfuscation.
More important, the CIA reportedly used Marble during 2016. In her Washington Post report, Nakashima left that out, but did include another significant point made by WikiLeaks; namely, that the obfuscation tool could be used to conduct a “forensic attribution double game” or false-flag operation because it included test samples in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi.
The CIA’s reaction was neuralgic. Director Mike Pompeo lashed out two weeks later, calling Assange and his associates “demons,” and insisting, “It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is, a non-state hostile intelligence service, often abetted by state actors like Russia.”
Mr. President, we do not know if CIA’s Marble Framework, or tools like it, played some kind of role in the campaign to blame Russia for hacking the DNC. Nor do we know how candid the denizens of CIA’s Digital Innovation Directorate have been with you and with Director Pompeo. These are areas that might profit from early White House review.
Putin and the Technology
We also do not know if you have discussed cyber issues in any detail with President Putin. In his interview with NBC’s Megyn Kelly, he seemed quite willing – perhaps even eager – to address issues related to the kind of cyber tools revealed in the Vault 7 disclosures, if only to indicate he has been briefed on them. Putin pointed out that today’s technology enables hacking to be “masked and camouflaged to an extent that no one can understand the origin” [of the hack] … And, vice versa, it is possible to set up any entity or any individual that everyone will think that they are the exact source of that attack.”
“Hackers may be anywhere,” he said. “There may be hackers, by the way, in the United States who very craftily and professionally passed the buck to Russia. Can’t you imagine such a scenario? … I can.”
Full Disclosure: Over recent decades the ethos of our intelligence profession has eroded in the public mind to the point that agenda-free analysis is deemed well nigh impossible. Thus, we add this disclaimer, which applies to everything we in VIPS say and do: We have no political agenda; our sole purpose is to spread truth around and, when necessary, hold to account our former intelligence colleagues.
We speak and write without fear or favor. Consequently, any resemblance between what we say and what presidents, politicians and pundits say is purely coincidental. The fact we find it is necessary to include that reminder speaks volumes about these highly politicized times. This is our 50th VIPS Memorandum since the afternoon of Powell’s speech at the UN. Live links to the 49 past memos can be found at https://consortiumnews.com/vips-memos/.
FOR THE STEERING GROUP, VETERAN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR SANITY
William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center
Skip Folden, independent analyst, retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US (Associate VIPS)
Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
Michael S. Kearns, Air Force Intelligence Officer (Ret.), Master SERE Resistance to Interrogation Instructor
John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)
Lisa Ling, TSgt USAF (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Edward Loomis, Jr., former NSA Technical Director for the Office of Signals Processing
David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst
Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA
Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)
Cian Westmoreland, former USAF Radio Frequency Transmission Systems Technician and Unmanned Aircraft Systems whistleblower (Associate VIPS)
Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA
Sarah G. Wilton, Intelligence Officer, DIA (ret.); Commander, US Naval Reserve (ret.)
Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat

Source:Zero Hedge 

Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.

If you weren’t certain that the people behind the infamous dossier on Donald Trump and Russia were hiding something before, their actions in the past week should put it beyond a certainty. The Senate Intelligence Committee sent a request to Glenn Simpson, the co-founder of opposition research firm Fusion GPS to testify before them this week. Simpson, through his lawyer, released a statement on Friday declining the invitation…supposedly because he is “on vacation.” Of course, that it not the only reason he’ll be unavailable to speak in Washington. His lawyer also said that “partisan agendas” were taking root in congressional investigations, causing Simpson to grow “profoundly disturbed” with the direction of the inquiry.

Perhaps because that inquiry is getting closer and closer to the truth?

In any event, the statement irritated Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, who subsequently issued a subpoena demanding that Simpson appear in Washington on Wednesday. Citing the charge that Simpson may have failed to register as a foreign agent in his work for Fusion GPS, Grassley said he would expect to see the opposition researcher in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee. His lawyer once again declined, insisting that while Simpson may appear, he will only do so to invoke his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.

“This hearing’s purported focus on FARA [the Foreign Agents Registration Act] is pretext for an exploration of Fusion GPS’ reported work, on behalf of other clients, to investigate the ties of Donald J. Trump, his campaign and their associates to Russia,” said Simpson’s lawyer.

Yes, well, that’s probably true to an extent. The problem is that Simpson’s lawyer presents this scenario as though there’s some epic Republican ruse going on here to drag his client’s good name through the mud. The reality is quite a bit more nuanced. As all sides agree, the Russians had some degree of involvement in meddling in the 2016 election. And there’s no question that Fusion GPS and the dossier they produced through their funding of former British spy Christopher Steele played a part in that meddling to one degree or another. Therefore, it is very much a direct aspect of the Senate’s investigation into those matters for them to get to the bottom of that dossier, figure out who was ultimately paying Fusion GPS for their work, and even determine how and why Fusion was involved in setting up that controversial meeting between Donald Trump’s campaign team and that Russian lawyer last June.

The very existence of the dossier – much of which has been discredited by the U.S. intelligence community – is proof that Fusion GPS, their clients, and the Russians were out to destroy Trump in some form or fashion. It’s not beyond the scope of Congressional investigation to demand some answers about that sensitive topic.

Organizing for Anarchy
His party may be falling apart, but Obama’s community organizing group is going strong.

by Mathew Vadum

Former President Obama’s army of community organizing thugs shows no signs of slowing down efforts to protect Obama’s policy legacy and undermine the Trump administration.

Obama directs Organizing for Action, a huge, well-funded 501(c)(4) nonprofit with more than 30,000 volunteers nationwide that doesn’t have to disclose its donors and that is at the head of Obama’s network of left-wing nonprofit groups. OfA, which grew out of Obama’s electoral campaigns, has upwards of 250 offices across America. His other nonprofit, the Barack Obama Foundation, is building Obama’s $675 million presidential library in Chicago. The library is slated to be a hub of left-wing activism.

Obama now owns and lives in a $8.1 million, 8,200-square-foot, walled mansion in Washington’s Embassy Row that he is using to command his community organizing cadres in the war against President Trump. Obama’s alter ego, Valerie Jarrett, has moved into the house to help out. Jarrett also resided in the White House when Obama was president.

No ex-president has ever stuck around the nation’s capital to vex and undermine his successor. Of course, Obama is unlike any president the United States has ever had. Even failed, self-righteous presidents like Jimmy Carter, who has occasionally taken shots at his successors, didn’t stay behind in the nation’s capital to obstruct the policy-making of the new administration.

OfA, which functions as a kind of shadow government, has been on the front lines attacking President Trump in order to defend the Obama administration’s awful legacy. Both OfA and George Soros-funded MoveOn.org have been leading the way in packing town hall meetings with unruly protesters. Many protests OfA has been involved in have turned into riots.

In 2013, Michelle Obama appeared in a video introducing the group to the public. She said OfA was “the next phase of our movement for change,” and that it would help Obama supporters “finish what we started and truly make that change we believe in.” She congratulated supporters for having “already begun to change our politics,” and declared that “the mission of Organizing for Action” is to “change our country” in accordance with her husband’s vision of how to “bridge [the] divide” between “the world as it is and the world as it should be.”

In the early days of the Trump administration, Organizing for Action activists organized protests across the country. After President Trump issued an executive order temporarily banning visitors from seven terrorism-plagued Muslim countries, OfA organized “spontaneous” demonstrations at airports.

OfA has been moving forward on many policy fronts in recent months. The group has been defending Obama-era climate change measures, oppressive gun control laws, Obamacare, Obama’s various attempts at immigration amnesty, and so-called net neutrality rules, to name just a few.

Organizing for Action developed a training manual for protesting President Trump and disrupting Republican events. Activists used tactics from the manual earlier this year to wreak havoc at GOP lawmakers’ town hall meetings. Working with MoveOn.org and a group called Indivisible, OfA has developed tools to help protesters locate town hall meetings to disrupt. Talking points and scripts for question-and-answer sessions are provided.

The manual advises activists on how to intimidate GOP office-holders into withdrawing support for Obamacare repeal, cutting immigration from terrorist-prone Muslim nations, and constructing a wall on the nation’s southern border with Mexico.

In the group’s teleconference for supporters on May 25, OfA policy and campaigns director Jack Shapiro summarized issues of importance to the group and how to apply pressure to those in Congress.

During the then-approaching congressional recess, OfA members were urged to take action to stave off the repeal of Obamacare. They were asked to “hold the House members that voted ‘yes’ accountable for their vote, and push senators to oppose any health care bill that reduces coverage or takes away protections,” and “visit the offices of your senators and make phone calls to them.”

To fight efforts to secure the nation’s borders and keep the welcome mat out for Muslim terrorists, OfA asked members to “host a film screening of The Dream Is Now to bring together people to discuss the impact of the administration’s immigration policies in your community.” MSNBC describes the film as “an interactive documentary advocating the passage of the federal DREAM Act.” OfA also asked members to press lawmakers “to reject any bill that appropriates funds for the wall, or further expands deportation forces or detention facilities.” Because a new bill funding the government will be needed by the fiscal year end on Sept. 30, “we have a few months to organize, build our teams, and get our representatives on the record.”

OfA warned at the time – presciently as it turned out – that the Trump administration was considering renouncing the Paris Climate Agreement. The group encouraged members to make noise at lawmakers’ town hall meetings to “help defend the progress we’ve made–and stress the need to protect ourselves from a changing climate before it’s too late.”

Using the left-wing euphemism “gun violence prevention,” OfA urged members to attend rallies and sponsor events aimed at promoting gun control and indicated it was partnering with Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action. Specifically, OfA asked members to pay attention to three pieces of legislation. One bill would loosen the regulation of silencers. Another would “allow anyone who has been issued a permit from one state to carry a concealed gun anywhere in the country–including in states where concealed carry is not the law.” And a third possible bill could abolish gun-free school zones.

The Rubber Stamp Reps campaign targets 34 House members “whose districts didn’t support this White House’s agenda, yet are voting repeatedly for some of its most dangerous policies.” OfA vows to hold these members’ feet to the fire so they “they don’t get away with rubber stamping this administration’s agenda.” How the lawmakers would be held accountable wasn’t explained.

OfA has aligned itself with left-wing pressure group Fight for the Future and major pornography websites to fight the Federal Communications Commission’s push to undo Obama-era net neutrality rules.

The FCC voted in May to begin the process of reversing Obama-era Title II net neutrality rules, which for the first time in history classified internet service providers as public utilities, rather than information services. The rules subjected ISPs to broad government regulation and rules for how companies can manage traffic over their own networks. The Obama administration’s FCC began investigating Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T under the rules for offering packages that allowed customers unlimited data streaming.

These left-wing inquisitions were ended after President Trump’s inauguration.

Obama’s activism seems to be sucking up donations that otherwise might have gone to the Democratic National Committee.

Despite President Trump’s weak public approval numbers, the DNC achieved a record low in May fundraising this year, bringing in just $4.29 million, the weakest take since May 2003. It also reported being in debt to the tune of $1.9 million in May.

At the same time the Obama Foundation has been raking in the dough. Its website disclosed a few days ago that at least eight donors had given the foundation donations of more than $1 million each.

Barack Obama and Organizing for Action have much more in store for America.

 

 

Written three years ago and continues to be spot on:
The following post discusses the three major points with a clarity that will enlighten those who marvel at the hatred  and venom spewed against the opposition, none of which has any basis in reality. The enumeration and further discussion of these points are halfway through the post but preceded by cogent observation.

Reason #1: Utopianism You’re in their way
Reason #2: Fantasyland vs. Reality The WORLD is in their way
Reason #3: Preening Narcissism They are beautiful, so you must be ugly

 The Top Three Reasons Why Liberals Hate Conservatives

Posted: September 21, 2014 at 1:19 pm   /   by

“Conservatives see liberals as misguided; liberals see conservatives as evil.”
—Original source unknown

Are you a conservative, a libertarian, or a Republican? Have you ever been verbally assaulted by someone on the political left with a ferocity you didn’t quite understand? Have you seen it happen to friends and colleagues, or watched in horror as the media establishment does it to a public figure?
Of course you have. At some point or other, nearly everyone on the political right has witnessed or been the victim of an attack designed not to elucidate facts, but rather to paint him or her as a villain.
My attention was recently drawn to a typical such calumny from a Facebook exchange:

Republicans hate anything that isn’t white, wealthy, and christian at least in appearance. They hate the poor, women, and minorities. They hate science and don’t believe that the global warming we clearly are experiencing is man made. They hate any government programs that help the poor and minorities, and the (sic) particularly despise immigrants, particularly the illegal kind. They love programs that line the pockets of oil companies, mining companies, and are willing to export jobs with wild abandon.
They hate public education, and they despise public schools and the public school teachers and public university professors. And since the (sic) do not respect the market place of ideas, they hate tenure (that gives teachers academic freedom) because it prevents them from firing teachers who are Democrats and who might infect some student with their liberal ideas. They want insurance companies to make a maximum of profit, and are perfectly willing for the health insurance companies to kill people by refusing service to anyone that might cost them a buck more than the median expense. They don’t care about clean food because it might cost the food corporation a little money, and they don’t care about clean water because cleaning up the waste will cost their precious corporate persons a little money.

This is not a recitation of facts; it is a series of smears. It is the construction of a giant cartoonish super-villain, made of straw and woven together with calumny. The giant straw villain is then publicly burned, in a narcissistic orgy of self-adulation. Of course, the torches of the “best” people burn the brightest.
Another way of looking at it is this: It is the modern-day version of a witch trial. The charges are utterly farcical and cartoonish. “I saw her dancing with demons in the pale moonlight.” “She looked at me and I sneezed, and the next day, I had a terrible cold.” “She turned me into a newt.” But they are stated with great conviction and repeated incessantly, and they establish the unassailable collective will of which the accused has run afoul. The witch is made into the auslander, and the good people of the community show how “good” they are by shouting their accusations the loudest.
Either way, whether the wicker man or the witch, the effigy goes up in flames and the community is purged—for the moment—of its evil. Moral annulment now achieved, the villagers walk away feeling good about themselves. Feeling superior.
Facts are also unimportant in this perverse passion play. Like the slavering, semi-psychotic Facebook rant above, most such assaults aren’t a series of accusations backed up by facts, they are a series of character assassinations, most of which are contradicted by the facts.

The most salient example today is the charge that people of the right (conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, tea partiers) oppose Obama out of pure racism—simply because he is black. Though this charge is easily refuted—by common sense, widespread evidence, and actual studies—it is repeated incessantly by the media, the left’s foot-soldiers . . . even the president himself.
When actual studies are done (as opposed to just restating what the leftist imagines to be so as if it were actual fact), we learn that real racism is distributed fairly evenly among the population without regard to political affiliation.  In 2008, a survey was done that showed similar numbers of Republicans (5.7) and Democrats (6.8) would not vote for a black presidential candidate. Such a question gives us one of the clearest possible tests of raw racism. A loaded question like, “Do you feel blacks receive too much welfare?” might confuse attitudes about race with attitudes about government welfare programs. But this gives us apples to apples: All things being equal, would you refuse to vote for someone solely because of race?
In the 2008 survey, Democrats were slightly (1.1%) more likely to show racist thinking than Republicans, though this is well within the margin of error. A similar study on senatorial candidates was far more damning to Democrats. Bottom line: there is little evidence that Republicans oppose Obama or any candidate on the basis of race to any greater degree than Democrats.
But this should be obvious based on other facts and indicators as well. Take Mia Love. If you are on the political left, you may not have heard of her, but she is a rising star on the right. She quotes Bastiat, she believes in core principles such as subsidiarity—she is dynamic, successful, and hits all the right notes. She is a black woman, and I have not met or heard of a single conservative, Republican, or tea partier who wouldn’t be delighted to support her. (Deep down, many of the left know this, which is why they have been so vicious to her.) I have worked alongside or come in contact with hundreds of activists and partisans on the political right over the last 15 years, and I cannot think of a single one who would not exult at a Mia Love victory. If she were elected president, I myself would do the happy dance on top of the tallest mountain in my area every November!
The reason is obvious: we agree ideologically. Race is unimportant. Barack Obama is, it can be fairly argued, further to the political left than any previous president. And people on the right oppose him so virulently for that very reason—not because of his race, but because of the huge ideological gulf that lies between. Imagine that.
The other painfully incessant canard is the notion that people on the right “hate the poor.” In fact, the evidence shows the opposite. Conservatives are more charitable than liberals by fairly significant margins, even when you adjust for a variety of factors. Rich, middle-class, and poor conservatives are all more charitable than their liberal counterparts.  It’s not that conservatives are wealthier overall, either—liberal households are 6% wealthier on average. (I bet you never heard that little fact on MSNBC.) It is also not that conservatives are more religious: new data indicate that secular conservatives give more than secular liberals. These conservatives are voluntarily helping the poor with their own money, in greater numbers than their liberal counterparts in every cohort. Conservatism is a greater predictor of charity.
Leftists (they hardly deserve the term “liberal”), by contrast, are more “charitable” with other people’s money. Leftist A votes for Politician B to take money (by force) from Taxpayer C to give it to Recipient D. A and D give more support and power to B, who continues to take more and more from C, in a perverse and ever-increasing form of economic bondage. Then, A, B, and D get together and say that C hates the poor. Lather, rinse, repeat.

But we are getting dragged into the weeds here. We could go on and on refuting fact after fact, but the facts are unimportant. The leftist is creating a narrative. As a marketing guru will tell you, Facts tell, but stories sell. It’s a lesson the leftist has learned well.
Even more disturbing, in recent years, this method of “argumentation” has increasingly become the first tool pulled out of the toolbox. No longer does the leftist feel as compelled to make real arguments. All he needs to do now is shout “Racist!” or “War on Women!” and his job is done. He walks away feeling smugly satisfied of his own politically correct superiority, and the untrained observer is left addled at best, and possibly even swayed by the narrative.
So why they are so vicious?  Why do people who self-describe as “compassionate” direct such vitriolic hate and assaults at their ideological opponents? How they can justify painting you as such a monster?
Simple: To them, you are a monster. You must be.

Reason #1: Utopianism
You’re in their way

Strip everything away, and the fundamental trait of all leftists is this: They believe that through the state, they can build paradise on earth. They believe that with enough tinkering, coercion, and rule by “experts,” they can eliminate all hard choices and competing goods, perfect human nature, and bring all good things to all people.
To someone of the political right—defined by our belief in human freedom, private solutions, and individual sovereignty—this is just the modern re-telling of the age-old story: that some men should rule over other men. Ancient despotism, monarchy, fascism, totalitarianism, modern progressivism—they’re all just different flavors, and different degrees of application, of the same basic philosophy. But the person on the left does not see it that way. He wants perfection. He believes it is possible. And by gum, he’s going to get it.
This utopian thinking quickly leads to an unavoidable conclusion, echoed from the French Revolution to Lenin and Stalin to Mao to the Progressives of the modern era: “On ne fait pas d’omelet sans casser des oeufs.” (You can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs.) To the utopian statist, “process costs” are entirely acceptable. They are building paradise, after all.
That’s why you see so much more toleration by the left’s rank and file of corruption and bad behavior by their leaders. What’s a little lying here, a little corruption there? They are building paradise. What’s a little cheating in the face of all they intend to accomplish?
That is also why you see such a prevalence of cult-of-personality adulation for strong leaders. Strong leaders resolve contradictions and sweep away the opposition. Strong leaders have the will to get the job done. Strong leaders get the trains running on time. Next stop, paradise.
But most importantly . . . these utopians—both the leaders and the rank and file—are so convinced of the nobility of their intentions that they believe that anyone who stands in their way must, by definition, have evil intentions. After all, who but a monster would stand in the way of paradise? And what consideration do monsters deserve? Why none at all, of course—they’re monsters.
That is why they do not simply disagree with you. That is why they calumniate you and attribute the worst motives to you. That is why they hate you.

Reason #2: Fantasyland vs. Reality
The WORLD is in their way

The world refuses to conform to their utopian vision. The world isn’t the neat and tidy place they want it to be. They still hold onto the childlike belief that there can be goods with no tradeoffs, and this world of endless tradeoffs proves them wrong every day, mocking their childishness in the process. That makes them very angry.
Someone once said, “Conservatives believe what they see; liberals see what they believe.” Leftists hate you for the fact that you see the world as it is, rather than as it should be. You accept the facts of reality as they truly are, and you try to make the best of it. They believe that they can make reality conform to their vision of it. (That this effort always requires massive application of force against other human beings doesn’t bother them. It’s just another process cost.)
Your acceptance of reality as it is is pedestrian and troglodytic. Their vision of how reality should be makes them noble and romantic. They hate you for not living in the same fantasy land that they do. They hate you for recognizing that life is filled with tradeoffs. They don’t see the tradeoffs, so when you point them out, it’s as if you are the one that is making the tradeoff exist. La-La-La . . . I can’t hear you! Stop making bad things happen.
Your acceptance of reality makes them so angry, in fact, that they have convinced themselves that you must be suffering from some sort of psychological malady. Over the last century, dozens of self-reinforcing  junk-science books and studies have been published labeling “conservatism” (once called “classical liberalism”) as a mental disorder. Like the mental patient permanently lost in a psychotic world of his own creation . . . he’s normal, it’s the rest of you who are nuts.

Reason #3: Preening Narcissism
They are beautiful, so you must be ugly

The ideas of the political left produce failure at best and misery, oppression, and democide at worst. In spite of this, I had long clung to the belief that at least people on the political left “mean well.”
But do they? Or do they simply want to feel as though they mean well?
Author Robert Bidinotto asks (and answers) the same question:

Have decades upon decades of liberal policy failures deterred liberals from being liberals? Have the trillions of dollars blown on welfare-state programs since the “New Deal” and the “War on Poverty” made a damned bit of difference in curing poverty? And has that failure convinced “progressives” that there is something fundamentally wrong in their worldview and approach? Have the horrendous historical consequences of appeasement policies stopped today’s politicians from appeasing international thugs and terrorists? No?
Then why does anyone assume that liberals gauge the value of their worldview by the standard of its PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES?
Practical consequences are ALWAYS trumped by the advancement and protection of one’s core Narrative: the fairy tale that gives one’s life meaning, coherence, and moral justification. [ . . . ]
Doing that makes them feel good about themselves. And they would far rather feel good about themselves than actually achieve any of their stated practical objectives. It’s not about the objectives at all. It’s about THEM.

John Hawkins is just as unequivocal:

3) Liberals emphasize feeling superior, not superior results. Liberalism is all about appearances, not outcomes. What matters to liberals is how a program makes them FEEL about themselves, not whether it works or not. Thus a program like Headstart, which sounds good because it’s designed to help children read, makes liberals feel good about themselves, even though the program doesn’t work and wastes billions. A ban on DDT makes liberals feel good about themselves because they’re “protecting the environment” even though millions of people have died as a result. For liberals, it’s not what a program does in the real world; it’s about whether they feel better about themselves for supporting it.

If this is true, then for many, utopianism isn’t about what they think they can achieve, it’s about their own self-image.
So is it true?
The persistence of this vision in the face of centuries of evidence would seem to indicate that it may be. We know that maximizing human freedom is more moral and produces better results—the last two centuries have made that clear. And on the flip side, we know that maximizing government at the expense of the individual produces a parade of horribles. And yet, again and again, we are told that it simply wasn’t done correctly before, or by the right people.
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all?
Why you are, my dear—you are so compassionate and fair and noble in every way.
The leftist looks at herself in the mirror and sees that she is one of those “right people,” because that is how she wants to see herself.
And if she is so beautiful and noble and fair . . . then how ugly you must be for standing in her way.

The leftist—the utopian, the statist—sees himself as on noble quest. He is the embodiment of everything good, simply because that is how he sees himself. How he wants to see himself. In order to maintain this self-image, he must make you the embodiment of everything horrible. He must make you ugly.
To statists, you are just another process cost. Their willingness to accept process costs on the road to their utopia is limited only by national context. In the United States, an exceptional nation where we still have some rule of law, they will certainly calumniate you, and they may decide to harm your finances, career, or reputation. In less exceptional countries where there is less rule of law, the harm is often to people’s freedom or even their very lives, as more than 100 million poor souls discovered in the 20th century.
The typical leftist in America, ignorant of his own philosophical pedigree, will protest this characterization. Do not let their protestations sway you. The degree to which they will treat you—the monster standing in the way of their utopia—as a disposable process cost is limited only by the degree of power they have. For your own safety, do not let them get more.
You are in the way of the utopia they are trying to create. You are in the way of the power they need to do it.
You. Are. In. Their. Way.
mob, wicker man, effigy, mob mentality
“The conservative “thinks of political policies as intended to preserve order, justice, and freedom. The ideologue, on the contrary, thinks of politics as a revolutionary instrument for transforming society and even transforming human nature. In his march toward Utopia, the liberal ideologue is merciless.”

Western Free Press 
Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.


The following article speaks the truth and echos exactly what legions of Americans think.The nation had enough of and saw through the Hope and Change meme. Hillary lost, not only because she was a bad candidate, but because the non-elites, aka deplorables, did not want a continuation of the failed policies of the previous occupant of the Oval Office.
Yes indeed, he was a factor in her loss!

Obama’s Ignominious Legacy
Preamble: The purpose of this blog is to highlight some of the most egregious goals and actions that underpin Obama’s ignominious legacy and betrayal of America. They were malicious and intended to destroy America’s well respected international standing as well as her traditions, culture and values. There is not a doubt in my mind that Obama is a radical black activist and most likely Muslim to whom America and Whites have always been anathema. The presidency provided him with the power to seek vengeance.

Smoke and Fire: The old adage, ‘where there’s smoke there’s fire’ is perfectly exemplified by Obama. He is a proven corrupt pathological liar who, among other things, has used multiple names, passports and social security numbers. Every meaningful record of his past has been permanently sealed and his birthplace is highly suspect. To be succinct, Obama is a fraud: He represents a catastrophic fire in America and a malignant cancer metastasizing through the civilized world.

Common Goal of U.S. Presidents: Throughout modern history, and most likely since Washington, I sincerely believe that every United States President loved America and endeavored to make her the greatest country the world had ever known. Their respective results notwithstanding, I am confident that each also wanted to leave America in a better place at the end of their term than when it began.

Regardless of party affiliation, these men were instrumental in enabling the creation of our great country as well as providing freedom and incredible opportunities for her citizenry. In part, their collective efforts facilitated a more peaceful world, as well as established America as an internationally recognized, trusted, and respected leader consistently representing a bastion of strength.

The Obama Years and Betrayal: Obama’s tragic election commenced eight years of his relentless attempts to destroy America’s long established greatness. I cannot think of one contribution he made to enhance America in the international community or to maintain her culture, traditions, values, and lives of the citizenry. To the contrary, Obama vowed to fundamentally transform America and every one of his actions was intended to militate against her best interests.
Below are some of the more abominable goals Obama sought and actions he initiated in attempting to transform and irreparably damage America.

  • Destroy her long standing, well established international leadership, trust, prestige and respect
  • Alienate her most significant allies
  • Consistently disparaged her to the world as being a racist country and apologized for her proud past
  • Bowed to and otherwise subordinated the office of President to leaders of foreign countries, particularly those with interests directly opposed to America
  • Entered into international agreements, e.g., TPP & Paris Climate, specifically intended to destroy her economy and cede her sovereignty to foreign nations
  • Appointed corrupt radical racist AGs, Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, to effectuate his anti-American goals
  • Created more national debt than the aggregate of all previous presidents
  • Swelled welfare rolls to historic highs to create a ‘nanny state’ ala ‘Cloward-Piven’
  • Displayed total indifference towards and trashed the U.S. Constitution on a regular basis
  • Implemented an open border policy enabling massive immigration of and financial support for the world’s non-white tribal indigents without concern for applicable U.S. laws, IDs, background, and health checks
  • Waived the requisite pledge of allegiance to America for all Muslims allegedly seeking asylum and citizenship
  • Supported and funded sanctuary cities to protect illegal aliens regardless of criminal records
  • Attempted to rule as a monarch through Executive Orders
  • Enabled voting without any form of ID or proof of citizenship
  • Prohibited law enforcement from asking for ID or proof of citizenship
  • Threatened to indict people for speaking freely about Muslims and Blacks to prevent them from being ‘offended’
  • Catalyzed and fueled the fires of racial tension that created a hate filled chasm between Whites and Blacks that had not existed for over 70 years
  • Impliedly declared war on law enforcement that emboldened thugs by providing groups e.g., BLM, free reign to commit chaos and systemic disruption without meaningful consequences
  • Fostered a culture of corruption and pathological lying throughout his administration as evinced by major scandals in the DOJ, CIA, FBI, IRS, VA, and EPA involving cover ups, massive fraud, and perjury
  • Fired a significant number of experienced high ranking members of US armed forces because they wanted to perform their jobs
  • Ordered major reductions in U.S. advanced weaponry while China, Russia, and Iran aggressively enhanced their capabilities
  • Was complicit in the VA intentionally delaying appointments to and treatment of veterans
  • Lied about and shared responsibility with vile Hillary Clinton for the needless murders of 4 Americans in Benghazi
  • Fraudulently misrepresented Obamacare, Omnibus Spending Bill, and TPP
  • Publicly extolled the virtues of his ‘peaceful Islam’, its clerics who openly preach death to America and infidels, and its barbaric prophet, Muhammad
  • Routinely welcomed known radical Islamists who hate America and condone terrorism to the White House
  • Referred to Islamic terrorists/ jihadists as ‘freedom fighters’ and blamed their barbaric acts on poverty
  • Supported and funded Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood
  • Released 5 high value Al Qaeda prisoners from Gitmo in trade for a worthless US deserter who was an Islamic convert
  • Provided $Billions towards Iran’s nuclear program and secretly released multiple high value Iranian prisoners while dropping fugitive warrants on 14 Iranian terrorists
  • Destabilized the Middle East, particularly Libya and Iraq, which effectively spawned ISIS
  • Destroyed and impeded small to medium sized businesses with volumes of needless and expensive regulations
  • Drove major manufacturers out of America with confiscatory tax and onerous environmental policies
  • Mandated transgender bathrooms in public schools
  • Directed his admin staff and intel community to illegally tape, record, and advantageously leak conversations of Trump and his transition team prior to leaving office
  • Currently attempting to subvert Trump’s presidency while continuing to destroy traditional American culture and values through his shadow government – details Here

A Change for The Worst: America significantly changed for the worst during Obama’s stint in office. In addition to the short term effects of the foregoing acts, she lost international respect and trust, and was no longer viewed as a powerful, engaged allay firmly standing as a bastion of peace. To the contrary, America was perceived as weak, untrustworthy, and internationally disengaged except for relations with Islamic countries sponsoring terrorism, e.g., Iran, and those ruled by ruthless dictators.

The domestic and international ramifications of this perception were an increased sense of instability, chaos, systemic disruption, and omnipresent danger. This pervasive condition did not exist prior to Obama’s presidency, but he facilitated it to become the norm. The coup de grace was the proliferation and brazenness of Islamic terrorism along with the rise of ISIS…all thanks to Obama’s effluvium and tacit acquiescence.

It is abundantly clear that Trump did indeed inherit the mess Obama intentionally created as he betrayed America. It is also crystal clear that Obama is a malignant cancer metastasizing through our country in his malevolent quest to destroy her traditions, customs, and values.

View archived blogs here
Source: General Robert E Lee
Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.

While many Democrats are seeing the light and want to move on, there remains a hardcore group that simply will not let go. It continues to demand investigation after investigation as well as endless calls for the impeachment of the current duly elected President, with no proof of any wrong doing to warrant such a move.

Now we have a push to remove him from office on the grounds of his being mentally ill, unfit, etc. So, who was the certified congressional psychiatrist who evaluated him?

Many of those who continually berate, vilify, and demand his removal, with no evidence that would warrant such an undertaking, are beginning to look somewhat mentally disturbed themselves.

The following post discusses a new straw for the apparently unhinged to grasp.

In case you missed this:
They STILL Have NO Proof That Trump Campaign “Colluded” With Russia
By : shawn
The latest so-called bombshell in the Russia/Trump investigation was reported by the Wall Street Journal, a paper that has been relatively sane in a media landscape that has completely lost its collective mind. And while there’s nothing wrong with their reporting – at least, as far as we know so far – the rest of the media took the story and ran with it as far as possible, claiming that it was the most damning evidence yet that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian hackers behind the DNC invasion last year. Unfortunately, despite all the juicy headlines, the story provides exactly zero evidence that this is the case.
 
The WSJ story reports that a now-deceased Republican oppo research strategist named Peter W. Smith had a theory that the Russians probably had hacked Hillary Clinton’s basement server and, therefore, probably had the 33,000 missing emails she never turned over to the feds. He had no evidence of this; it was purely based on his own reckoning. Reckoning, you may recall, that most of the conservative news media had indulged in last year and that even then-candidate Donald Trump alluded to in a press conference last summer where he supposedly encouraged the Russians to keep hacking.

According to the Journal, Smith was on a mission to obtain the emails last September as the 2016 election was drawing to its conclusion. But while the media has tried to make it seem like Smith was working directly for the Trump campaign, he wasn’t. He wasn’t even working for someone working for the campaign. And he apparently had no particular inroads into Russian sources, either. He was just an interested participant looking for the hacked emails, and you can bet that he wasn’t the only one.

So where’s the story? Well, while Smith was on his wild goose chase after the emails, he apparently told some hacker groups that he was “talking” to Michael Flynn. And…that’s about it. Smith never got the emails, and never even – as far as we can glean from the story – necessarily spoke to any hacker groups actually associated with Russia. And in his interview with the Journal before his death, he assured them that he had not been working for or with Mike Flynn.

Now, is it possible that Flynn expressed interest in the emails if Smith had been able to come up with them? Perhaps! And if so, who cares? Every journalist and oppo researcher in the country wanted to get their hands on those emails, to say nothing of federal investigators. How in the world does that prove that Trump colluded with the Russians? Even if Trump himself was out there scouring the hacker community for the emails, it wouldn’t prove anything other than that he was willing to get dirty to win the election. Which, frankly, was not a fact he ever tried to hide.

You know, it gets overlooked, but there would BE no Russia scandal if it weren’t for Hillary Clinton’s original crime! And the weaker the stories, the more the media blows them out of proportion. Soon, we’ll be reading “blockbuster” scoops telling us that Trump cheered for Ivan Drago when he watched Rocky IV in 1985.

Sooner or later, this is all going to blow up in the face of the Democrats. And in the meantime, they – not Trump – are doing Russia’s bidding by weakening trust in the American president. (emphasis mine)

Source: The Unfiltered Patriot

Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.

Nothing like a festering personal grudge to wreak an entrenched swamp denizen’s ire. Oh, the sleaze…
Excerpt:”By all appearances, Andrew McCabe took down Michael Flynn as a personal vendetta for Flynn’s support of a female FBI agent who had implicated McCabe in a sexual discrimination investigation, which led to the now universally debunked Trump/Russia fairy tale.”

The following article gives many more interesting details on the matter.

Swamp critter alert! The whole Russia fairy tale apparently began as a personal vendetta by FBI’s Andrew McCabe against General Flynn
by Thomas Madison

Deputy FBI Directory Andrew McCabe has been under a great deal of scrutiny lately and the subject of three separate federal “administrative inquiries,” one of which is an apparently egregious violation of the Hatch Act, forbidding FBI employees from involvement in partisan politics.
Now, a report is circulating that may implicate McCabe in an even more serious “matter,” to quote Loretta Lynch.
By all appearances, Andrew McCabe took down Michael Flynn as a personal vendetta for Flynn’s support of a female FBI agent who had implicated McCabe in a sexual discrimination investigation, which led to the now universally debunked Trump/Russia fairy tale.
McCabe should have, without hesitation, recused himself from the investigation of General Flynn due to his well-known animosity towards the general. The fact that he didn’t speaks volumes about his intent to take Flynn down, which eventually happened when Flynn was dismissed from President Trump’s cabinet.
McCabe also appears to be a very partisan liberal Democrat with ties to the Clintons, and his apparent hatred for President Trump is no secret.
According to direct sources at a social/professional function, “McCabe, the second highest ranking FBI official, emphatically declared at the invite-only gathering with raised voice: ‘Fuck Flynn and then we Fuck Trump.’ Many of his top lieutenants applauded and cheered such rhetoric. A scattered few did not.”

Andrew McCabe is obviously a swamp critter of the first rank and is EXACTLY the sort of vermin President Trump must remove from the beltway swamp before he can destroy even more lives.
From Circa
The FBI launched a criminal probe against former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn two years after the retired Army general roiled the bureau’s leadership by intervening on behalf of a decorated counterterrorism agent who accused now-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and other top officials of sexual discrimination, according to documents and interviews.

Go here for much more

Source: The Powdered Wig Society

Continue reading

Much of the below may already be known to the reader, but a great deal may not be. It is lengthy but highly informative. The sections highlighted below the text give the timeline of Comey’s career and many questionable actions that scream “corruption”.

Trump Has Dirt on Comey: STRATEGIC FIRING of Swamp Rat James Comey
by Kevin Jackson | Jun 1, 2017

The narrative of the Left is that former FBI Director James Comey is a good guy caught in bad circumstances.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Comey was a leftist plant, and President Trump knew it.

As Mark Howard Lewis writes:

There are very few crime/mystery novels that approach this true story for compelling drama, intrigue and brinkmanship (with the nation in the balance).
James Comey is a poisonous snake of the highest order.
He is a deep-water Swamp Denizen who has been highly paid to deliberately provide cover for high-level corruption by the Clintons and Obama. He has been central to trying to destroy the Trump campaign and then the Trump administration from the start. He is as dirty as they come in DC.

Comey had highest-level cover (the FBI no less) and was deep into an effort to eliminate Trump. Trump had to move hard, fast, and at exactly the right time to cut the head off the snake without getting bitten by the snake or being finished by the other swamp denizens.

Notice that the President fired Comey when Comey was 3,000 miles away from his office…
The swamp is on notice that the president is on to them.
They are sweating bullets because their criminal games of corruption are being pursued and they know it. They are screaming and ranting because they are desperate denizens of the swamp who are beginning to realize they are roadkill.

THIS IS WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE COMEY SCAM. 

Taken from credible public sources (readily available if you want to look or want me to send them to you), with a few reasonable “fill in the blank” conclusions of my own.

The Highlights:
Comey was a minor assistant US attorney in the late ’90s. He only gained power and money by being the DOJ official who “investigated” and cleared Bill Clinton of any wrong-doing in Clinton’s totally corrupt pardon (for huge payoffs) of criminal financier Marc Rich as Clinton was leaving the presidency. This is how Comey began his career as a creature of the “swamp” years ago, as a servant of the Clintons.

Comey provided “cover” for the Clintons in their gaining incredible power and wealth after leaving office through pardoning a billionaire money-launderer, arms dealer, and criminal. Comey was a key piece in how the Clintons upped their corruption game and gained incredible wealth through their foundation after leaving the White House. A huge part of the scheme was giving Marc Rich a free pass when he should have spent life in prison, and that is what Comey covered up for the Clintons. This set up Comey to be part of the corruption machine, making him powerful and wealthy.

For more eye opening details on the following highlights and the entire article,  go here

Sections discussed:

  • Lockheed connection
  • Comey goes to HSBC
  • Comey appointed to the FBI with no experience in law enforcement
  • Covering for The Clinton Foundation…again
  • No one in Congress or federal law enforcement was intending to actually pursue the Clintons.
  • Originally, Comey’s job was simply to totally botch the Hillary investigation.
  • Enter Loretta Lynch
  • Comey once again stepped in to cover Hillary.
  • BUT TRUMP WON.
  • The scheme is to smear Trump with Russian “connections,” through a fake FBI “investigation.”
  • Direct attack on President Trump
  • This is a two-pronged attack.
  • Trump knows everything I have gone through above about Comey.
  • Trump seizes the moment and acts.
  • Comey learns he has been fired when the media broadcasts it in California.
  • The whole Russia interference scheme crashes and burns.
  • AG Sessions and his Deputy AG use the Comey trove of information to determine who has been part of the Comey Syndicate at the FBI.

The above will provide an astounding picture worthy of a well crafted suspense novel.

Source: The Black Sphere

Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.

Chris Gaubatz

Excellent information and contains many links. At the end of the this post  is a link from the original article to Gaubatz’s interview with Jamie Glazov.

Man who infiltrated ‘Muslim Mafia’ speaks out
‘They are incredibly organized, and they’re at this day in and day out’ 

by Art Moore 
He prayed alongside well-known Muslim Brotherhood figures, including the leaders of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR.
But his objective was not worship. In fact, he was not even a Muslim. Chris Gaubatz grew a beard, went through a “conversion” ceremony at a notorious Northern Virginia mosque and became an intern for CAIR — ultimately gathering first-hand documentation of the group’s subversive aims — because he believes the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots in the U.S. are a threat to the nation’s security.

“I was just young and in my 20s, and I was more than happy to serve my country,” he told Jamie Glazov in an interview on “The Glazov Gang.”
“We have men and women overseas who are getting shot at. From my perspective, the least that I could do is go into a mosque and pretend to be a Muslim,” he said.

Asked about his personal safety, Gaubatz said his faith in Jesus Christ has enabled him to “put any fear and anxiety aside.”
“What I’m worried about is doing the right thing and protecting this country,” he said. “And I know there are patriots all over the country that would be willing to do the same thing.”

Serving as an intern, Gaubatz gathered some 12,000 pages of CAIR documents that were headed for a shredder at the organization’s national office in Washington, just three blocks from the U.S. Capitol building. Information from the documents, as well as from audio and digital recordings of conversations, was published in “Muslim Mafia,” co-authored by his father, David Gaubatz, and investigative journalist Paul Sperry. The book demonstrated CAIR’s connection to the Muslim Brotherhood, the group that spawned al-Qaida and Hamas and stated in writing its intent to put America under Islamic law and the authority of the Quran.

CAIR responded to the book with a lawsuit in 2009 against Chris and David Gaubatz and others that only now is set to go to trial, likely in the fall.
Noting Islam dictates the penalty for abandoning the faith is death, Glazov asked whether someone who pretended to be a Muslim and “betrayed” Islam might be in even more jeopardy.

“From their perspective, this is a jihad, and if they’re willing to blow up children in Manchester, then, of course, they’re willing to go after someone like myself,” said Gaubatz, who now is vice president of the nonprofit Understanding the Threat, which provides training and consulting on the “threat of the global Islamic movement.”

But he said that from a security standpoint, going public with his story “was actually safer thing to do.”
“The last thing they want to do is bring any attention to this,” he said.
Islam the problem
Interviewed in the wake of the Manchester terrorist attack, Gaubatz said he witnessed first-hand how CAIR orchestrates the response of the Muslim community to such incidents to curb any negative publicity for Islam and make Muslims out to be the victims of a “backlash.”

CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad with Chris Gaubatz
CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad with Chris Gaubatz at CAIR headquarters in Washington, D.C.

“They work closely with their media contacts in the mainstream media, so that as soon as something like this happens, they’re the ones setting the narrative,” Gaubatz told Glazov.

He said the United States must stop approaching the threat “as though it is just people that are killing people, shooting things and blowing things up.”
“That is barbaric, it is savage, it is evil, but that is not how we’re going to lose this war,” he said of the tactic of terrorism.

“We crush the enemy when we face them on the battlefield. The way we’re going to lose this war is in the information battle space.

He emphasized that American is engaged in a “war of narratives.”
“And as long as we’re not having a discussion about Islam being the problem, we will never defeat that ideology,” he said.

Gaubatz said CAIR is working with “hard-left, Marxist and socialist groups” because they share the same short-term objective, “which is to tear down American society and rebuild it in their utopian worldview.”

In the long-run, their visions for the future obviously differ, but Muslims and the left work together in the mean time, Gaubatz said, “because they know that once they get the U.S. out of the way, there is nothing stopping them.”

Chris Gaubatz testifies before Congress on June 28, 2016
Chris Gaubatz testifies before Congress June 28, 2016

One year ago, as WND reported, Gaubatz testified before a hearing of a Senate Judiciary subcommittee chaired by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, titled “Willful Blindness: Consequences of Agency Efforts To Deemphasize Radical Islam in Combating Terrorism.”

In his prepared testimony, Gaubatz said that when his group, Understanding the Threat, offers training to federal, state and local law enforcement, Muslim Brotherhood groups “work to intimidate the hosts of the training venues into canceling the training by threatening them with cries of ‘Islamophobia’ or ‘racism.’”

He pointed out that a document the FBI entered into evidence in the Holy Land Foundation terror-funding trial in Texas, in which CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator, declares the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America.

The document says the Muslim Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

‘Side by side’ with CAIR
Gaubatz grew a beard and converted to Islam at the Dar al Hijrah mosque near Washington, D.C., where previously the imam was Anwar al-Awlaki. The Washington Post had called al-Awlaki the face of modern Islam before he turned up in Yemen working with al-Qaida.

Ibrahim Hooper
Ibrahim Hooper

Gaubatz recalled praying “side by side” with CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad and spokesman Ibrahim Hooper.
He recalled hearing Hooper frequently use the phrase “those right-wingers.”

“He just absolutely despised anybody that was on the right side of the aisle,” Gaubatz told Glazov.
CAIR has a training program, he said, in which they teach Muslims how to respond to anything negative that is said about Islam by spinning the narrative and inserting the term “Islamophobia” into the conversation.
“They are incredibly organized, and they’re at this day in and day out,” he said.

He met Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., a Muslim, and was at the Capitol when the first Muslim elected to Congress, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., was leading prayers.

“I used to go to mosques on behalf of CAIR and hand out literature,” Gaubatz said. “So, I lived this day in and day out, Monday through Friday for six months straight.”

In his travels to mosques across the country, he said, “one thing I noticed was Islam is Islam.”

“Those aren’t my words. Those are the Islamic scholars, whether you’re in Atlanta or Northern Virginia, or you’re reading literature out of Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia. It’s all the same Islam, and they’ll be the first to tell you that,” he said.

Trump and naming the enemy
Glazov asked Gaubatz his view of how the Trump administration is handling the threat.

President Donald Trump speaking in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on May 21, 2017.
President Donald Trump speaking in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 21, 2017.

He said he is supportive of the president and understands there is a battle within his party and even within his administration over how to frame the threat with regard to Islam.

President Trump, he said, is fully aware of the role of Islam, “but the establishment Republicans are fighting him tooth and nail.”

“If he were to actually come out right now and say the problem is Islam and we’re going to deal with this,” he said, “it would be Republicans that would fight him just as much as the left.”

The FBI cut off ties to CAIR in January 2009 after the group was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case, the largest terrorism-finance case in U.S. history.

More than a dozen CAIR leaders have been charged or convicted of terrorism-related crimes.
FBI wiretap evidence from the Holy Land case showed CAIR’s Awad was at an October 1993 meeting of Hamas leaders and activists in Philadelphia. CAIR, according to the evidence, was born out of a need to give a “media twinkle” to the Muslim leaders’ agenda of supporting violent jihad abroad while slowly institutionalizing Islamic law in the U.S.

A federal judge later determined that the Justice Department provided “ample evidence” to designate CAIR as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator, affirming the Muslim group had been involved in “a conspiracy to support Hamas.”

In addition, CAIR leaders have made statements affirming the aim of establishing Islamic rule in the United States.

The Islamic organization long had accused WND and others of “smearing” the Muslim group by citing a newspaper account of CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad telling Muslims in Northern California in 1998 that they were in America not to assimilate but to help assert Islam’s rule over the country. But WND caught CAIR falsely claiming that it had contacted the paper and had “sought a retraction,” insisting Ahmad never made the statement. Three years later, the issue arose again, and WND found CAIR still had not contacted the paper.

CAIR spokesman Hooper also has expressed a desire to replace the U.S. system of government with an Islamic state.

“I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future,” Hooper said in a 1993 interview with the Minneapolis Star Tribune. “But I’m not going to do anything violent to promote that. I’m going to do it through education.”

Hooper, in an interview on Michael Medved’s radio show in October 2003, stated: “If Muslims ever become a majority in the United States, it would be safe to assume that they would want to replace the U.S. Constitution with Islamic law, as most Muslims believe that God’s law is superior to man-made law.”

Video: Glazov asked Gaubatz his view of how the Trump administration is handling the threat. Go to WND.com for the complete interview

Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
[ Back to top ]