First conviction in Obamagate. Many more need to come.

 

Today was the first indictment by John Durham’s investigation into the Obama administration and Deep State’s illegal spying on the Trump campaign.  An Obama-era FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, hired by the FBI in July 2015, is expected to plead guilty to a charge of making a false statement in connection with the FBI’s application for a fourth FISA warrant to continue spying on Carter Page, a member of Trump’s campaign team.  Let me explain why this is a BIG DEAL.

 

First, what did Kevin Clinesmith do?  The context will be explained below, but Kevin Clinesmith took an email he had received from the CIA that said Carter Page had been a source of intelligence information for the CIA, doctored the email from the CIA to say that Carter Page was “not a ‘source,’” and forwarded that doctored email to a Supervisory Special Agent within the FBI in order to obtain a FISA warrant to continue spying on Carter Page.

 

Second, who is Carter Page?  Carter Page is a former Navy officer and was affiliated with Trump’s campaign as a foreign policy advisor in 2016.  Carter Page’s career had involved “ties” to Russia.  Duh.  That’s what foreign policy people do – talk to foreigners.  In the foreign policy business, foreign countries try to recruit Americans to turn traitor and spy for them.  Of course Russia does this.  Russia tried to recruit Carter Page in 2013.  However, Carter Page was actually a CIA asset and reported to the CIA on Russian intelligence actions against the United States between 2008 and 2013.

 

To spy on an American citizen, you must have probable cause of a crime.  See U.S. Constitution, Fourth Amendment.  Having no probable cause Carter Page committed any crime, the Obama Administration alleged Carter Page was suspected of being a traitorous spy working for Russia.  That way, they could get a warrant from the “FISA” court, i.e., “Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,” to spy on Carter Page and, hence, within the Trump campaign (i.e., tap his phones, bug his office, use his cellphone with the cooperation of Google and Apple to record without his knowledge, etc.). 

 

You still need evidence to present to the FISA court, the “FISC,” to support the government’s suspicion that Carter Page was a Russian agent.  Carter Page being a foreign policy expert had, of course, been to Russia and talked with Russians.  He did so in patriotic duty to the United States.  Obama’s FBI spun these Russia contacts into suspicion that Carter Page had turned traitor.

 

The FISA court is secret.  The suspect doesn’t get a say in whether a warrant issues.  This imposes upon the government seeking a FISA warrant a duty of complete candor to the FISC judge, to provide all material information, including evidence that contradicts or exonerates the suspicion that an American is a foreign agent. 

 

Obama’s FBI knew that Carter Page was in fact a CIA source providing the United States with intelligence on Russian agents working against the United States.  The CIA told Obama’s FBI that Carter Page was in fact an American CIA source of intelligence in a written memo in August 2016. 

 

Nonetheless, Obama’s FBI sought a FISA warrant to authorize spying on Carter Page in October 2016.  The FISA warrant application omitted the fact that Carter Page had worked for the CIA, providing the CIA with intelligence against Russia, from 2008 to 2013.  This fact would explain Carter Page's contacts with Russians as opposed to leaving the FISC judge with no other explanation.  The FBI filed three more FISA warrant applications seeking to continue spying on Carter Page, both before and after Trump’s inauguration.  None of these FISA applications disclosed to the FISC judge that Carter Page was in fact an American source providing intelligence to America against Russia.   Who signed these FISA applications?  James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates, Dana Boente and Rod Rosenstein.

 

Now to today’s indictment.  Obama-era FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was part of the process within the FBI to obtain the fourth and final FISA warrant against Carter Page.  By that time, June 2017, the Muller Investigation was in full swing.  Carter Page had publicly announced that he had been an intelligence source for the United States.  This public announcement caused the FBI to once again ask the CIA whether Carter Page had ever been a CIA source. 

 

Kevin Clinesmith’s supervisor, a so-called “Supervisory Special Agent” (“SSA”) that the criminal information doesn’t name, asked him to confirm with the CIA whether Carter Page had ever been an intelligence source for the CIA.  Kevin Clinesmith then emailed the CIA and asked them.  In this email, Kevin Clinesmith acknowledged, “There is an indication that [Carter Page] may be a ‘[digraph]’ source.  This is a fact we would need to disclose in our next FISA renewal.”  (A “digraph” is a two-letter acronym the CIA uses to describe what type of intelligence source a person is.  The public criminal information against Kevin Clinesmith doesn’t specify the two-letter acronym, which is apparently super-secret CIA code.)  The CIA emailed Kevin Clinesmith back and said Carter Page was a former CIA source, and referenced the earlier August 2016 memo the CIA had provided to the FBI when it opened the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation against the Trump campaign.

 

Kevin Clinesmith then exchanged a series of text messages with his SSA.  In these texts, Kevin Clinesmith said that the CIA confirmed Carter Page was merely a “subsource,” “was never a source” and “CIA confirmed explicitly he was never a source.”  The SSA asked whether Kevin Clinesmith got that from the CIA in writing.  Kevin Clinesmith texted back that the CIA did put it in writing, and forwarded the email he had received by the CIA to the SSA.  Kevin Clinesmith doctored that email.  We all know that when you forward an email using Outlook, you can edit the text of the email you are forwarding.  Kevin Clinesmith inserted the words “and not a ‘source’” into the CIA’s email to him, then forwarded that doctored email to the SSA after falsely telling him the CIA had confirmed Carter Page was never a CIA source.  Because of this doctored email, the FBI SSA believed the CIA had confirmed Carter Page was not an intelligence source for the United States, despite his public pronouncements.  Thus, the fourth and last FISA application seeking an extension of the warrant to continue spying on Carter Page omitted the fact that Carter Page had been a CIA source of foreign intelligence information against Russia.

 

Who is Kevin Clinesmith?  A flat-out traitor.  After Trump’s election, he texted another FBI lawyer, Sally Moyer,

·         “I’m just devastated. I can’t wait until I can leave today and just shut off the world for the next four days.”

·         “I just can’t imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress we made over the last 8 years. ACA is gone. Who knows if the rhetoric about deporting people, walls, and crap is true. I honestly feel like there is going to be a lot more gun issues, too, the crazies won finally. This is the tea party on steroids. And the GOP is going to be lost, they have to deal with an incumbent in 4 years. We have to fight this again. Also Pence is stupid.”

·         “Plus, my god damned name is all over the legal documents investigating his staff.”

·         When asked by Moyer, “Is it making you rethink your commitment to the Trump administration?” Kevin Clinesmith replied, “Hell no.” and then added, “Viva le resistance.”

 

In sum, a traitorous Obama-era FBI lawyer intentionally doctored an email he received from the CIA in order to continue illegally spying on a member of Trump’s campaign team.  He is about to plead guilty to this heinous crime.  Yahoo! and CNN are not covering the story, but to their credit, MSNBC and the New York Times do have this story on their front web pages.

 

Hillary for Prison!

This is from a recent Congressional hearing with Trey Gowdy asking FBI Director Comey why he did not recommend indicting Hillary:

Comey:  “I think we’d have to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a general awareness of the unlawfulness of your conduct; you knew you were doing something you shouldn’t do.”

Gowdy:  “The way to prove that is whether or not someone took steps to conceal or destroy what they’ve done.  That is the best evidence you have that they knew it was wrong – that they lied about it.”

Comey:  “It’s awfully…it’s very good evidence.  I’ll always want to look at what the subject said about their conduct.”

Now, you have to be a complete moron not to believe that Hillary knew what she was doing was illegal.  Or, alternatively, you must believe that Hillary is a complete moron who somehow served as a U.S. Senator for eight years and was approved by the same Senate as Secretary of State without knowing basic classified information and e-security protocols, let alone laws on simply maintaining government records.

Under the relevant statutes, she didn't even have to know for sure she was breaking the law, she just had to have a "general awareness of the unlawfulness of [her] conduct."  Given the evidence, Hillary's "general awareness" is utterly certain, easily proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  Comey knows this.  Everyone knows this.

Hillary is guilty as sin.  The system is corrupt through and through.  The elites are no longer bound by the rule of law and they know it.  The whole rotten structure needs gutting.  If Hillary gets to the White House and pays nothing for her felonies, guess what will happen?

Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is not "science" - yet

A friend of mine posed the following question on Facebook:


"So, an honest favor request for climate change skeptics, non-believers, deniers, however you choose to self identify... I ask this out of true curiosity. I ask in the spirit of honest debate.

A topic exists that in your mind is still open for debate... Ok, I get that. I even lived there for a while.

The question is this: Is there any authority that could sway your position on climate change? Who could speak out (publish, document, whatever) and what would they say to change your mind on this topic?"


I responded with the correct answer, which I now post below:

"Extremely simple. It doesn't matter who says what. It only matters that someone makes a prediction and that prediction comes to pass, and is repeatably confirmed by subsequent observations that I myself may observe. A patent clerk from Switzerland said light would bend around a massive object because gravity warps space, and predicted the resulting observation of distant stars' light bending around the sun during an eclipse. It didn't matter what credentials Einstein had. His theory made a testable prediction that was verified by observation, and has continually been re-verified by subsequent observations. Catastrophic AGW proponents have NEVER made a prediction that was confirmed via a testable observation. Until someone does, nothing any of them says holds any weight whatsoever. In fact, the opposite is true: every prediction the catastrophic AGW crowd has made has not been observed - no theory predicted the 18-hear hiatus on rising global temperatures - and thus every theory thus far hypothesized has been falsified. The motto of the very first scientific society, The Royal Society of which Isaac Newton was a founding member, is "Nullius in Verba" - take nobody's word for it. Any scientific theory must be demonstrated by actual observation of phenomena predicted by the theory. That is science. The question you have posed - whose word will skeptics accept - is anti-science. Practicing scientists know this, so if any of them ever pose the same question, or makes any appeal to authority - i.e., asks us to trust someone's word - they are willfully anti-science and necessarily fraudulent. So I now turn around and pose to you this scientific question: what potential observation will disprove the catastrophic AGW hypothesis? I have NEVER heard any catastrophic AGW adherent answer that question. If someone has, please direct me to it."

Let me append to this an additional comment.  With Einstein's Theory of Special (or General) Relativity, many if not most testable observations are beyond the every day experience of the average person as they only differ in predictions from Newton's laws (which are easily testable by the average person) at extreme (short or long) distances and/or velocities.  To observe the differences in predictions between Einstein and Newton's theories, one generally needs special equipment.  So most of us, including me, generally take the scientific consensus' word for it, knowing we could test these predictions ourselves if need be, and glory and fame would come to us if we discovered Einstein was wrong.  Any AGW theory is making a testable prediction about the weather, which anyone can observe by walking outside, which means no one has to take the word of scientists to observe an AGW theory's predictions.  The sea level rises or it doesn't (it hasn't).  The weather outside one's house gets progressively hotter every year (on average) or it doesn't (for 18 years, it hasn't).

Ann Barnhardt's burning of the Koran needs to be linked to today

Watch and learn.

RIP Charlie Hebdo martyrs

"Narrative Collapse" is the point

Though there have been many instances of “narrative collapse” in the last few months, I haven’t seen anyone express the truly cynical view for the cause of these instances. 

The charitable explanation is that our leftist overlords are just stupid, and too wishful to excoriate the Great White Defendant, for doing things the “narrative” says are common, but in reality hardly ever occur.  Accordingly, because they believe the “narrative,” they are too gullible to doubt or even casually investigate the initial reports by “victims” or bystanders who proclaim some “crime” that fits the “narrative.” 

This is becoming too common in my view to be chalked up to stupidity – or at least the stupidity of the Cathedral.  No, it is much more sinister.  I believe these “narrative collapse” incidents are manufactured precisely because those pushing the initial story know the facts will not match the initial reports. 

This makes sense when you understand the people for whom these “narrative collapse” events are manufactured are not the public at large, but the various "victim" groups under the Democrat/leftist umbrella.  Those groups – made up of gullible people who are fundamentalist believers of the “narrative” – will religiously believe the initial reports because they believe the “narrative” and will not believe the true facts when they come out, no matter how overwhelming the evidence.  Thus, when “the system” fails to convict or punish the accused, this will prove (to the gullible/fundamentalist "victim" groups) the “system” is broken and in need of radical change.  This is the true goal.

The hive-mind media is still run by a few elites at the top that can kill – or manufacture – any story they wish.  These elites count on the gullibility of their on-the-street (or more accurately, either “drive-by” or staring at a computer screen) foot-soldier media to believe and push a story the elites know will ultimately be proven false.  The elites only push stories that will eventually result in “narrative collapse” because if they pushed a true story that fit the narrative, the “system” would likely result in a conviction and justice.  That would be worse for the “narrative.”

In other words, if a story came out of a racist white cop killing an unarmed black man with his arms up saying “don’t shoot” and that cop was tried and convicted by the system, the “system” obviously isn't broken and is in no need of change.  Whites in general will be shown to disapprove of this behavior and capable of punishing the wrongdoer.  Thus, the behavior of this one racist white cop, who was appropriately punished by the "system," will not advance the “narrative” that all whites are secretly racists, plotting the oppression of the “other.”  Democrat "victim" groups might question the "narrative" that all whites are racists and the "system" is a construct to perpetuate "white privilege."

But if the “system” fails to punish the allegedly racist white cop, who is obviously guilty based on the initial reports that the Democrats’ "victim" groups believe without question, only then does the incident become proof of the “narrative” and keep those deliberately enstupidated Democrat voters on the plantation.

To believe the MSM is not liberal one must have a mental disorder

From my mom (Hi mom!), I was provided a link to the following Daily Kos article:  15 things everyone would know if there were a liberal media.  These 15 things are all either untrue, repeatedly covered by the Cathedral, so obscure or out dated as to be un-newsworthy.  I can only adequately respond to it here, so here we go:

1.  Where the jobs went – A simple Google search of “lost manufacturing jobs” brought up articles by US News, LA Times, CNN Money, NBC, and many others within the past year. Would a liberal media really want to highlight lost low-skill jobs while Obama is pushing for amnesty for 20 million low-skill illegal immigrants?

2.  Upward wealth distribution and/or inequality – Did Daily Kos forget the Occupy Wall Street/We are the 99% nonsense that the MSM covered day and night for a year?

3.  ALEC – Liberals have their special interest groups that draft proposed legislation and hand it to legislators, who then submit it and vote on it without reading it (e.g., Obamacare). They have way more than conservatives.  I know this first hand as I saw it while working for the Pete Wilson administration.

4.  The number of people in prison – Coming to a street corner near you: http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/02/justice/california-inmates-release/index.html

5.  The number of black people in prison – A liberal media would conceal this fact, not heavily report it. Reporting it would lead people to believe hate facts.

6.  U.S. health costs are the highest in the world – As if PBS never reported this OECD study: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/10/health-costs-how-the-us-compares-with-other-countries.html. Second, the idea is false. To take the average per capita spent on health care and say the “costs” equal that amount is nonsense. U.S. car purchase costs are the highest in the world. Why? Because we’re wealthier so purchases of super cars raises the average, and the average American can afford a better car, so they but a better car. Of course Somalia spends next to nothing on health care. They have crappy health care. Other western nations ration health care so their citizens get less of it, and at worse quality.

7.  Glass-Steagall – As if Dodd-Frank never passed.

8.  Gerrymandering – Both sides do it shamelessly. Note California isn’t on dipshit’s list. Jerry Brown beat Meg Whitman 54% to 41%, yet Democrats hold over 66% of the state assembly and senate offices.

9.  The number of bills blocked by Republicans in Congress – How often did the MSM report that the Democrat-controlled Senate and House failed to pass a budget in 2010 and the Democrat-controlled Senate simply refused to take up Republican-controlled House budget resolutions in 2011 and 2012? That’s right. Never.

10.  The Citizens United Supreme Court decision – The MSM heavily reported it when it came out – three and a half years ago. Obama mentioned it in his State of the Union Speech, to which Justice Alito responded (quite correctly) “Not true.” Within the past year, multiple MSM news sources reported Nancy Pelosi’s vow to seek a constitutional amendment overturning the decision. Will the MSM run similar stories on the Liberty Amendments? Of course not.  [UPDATE:  The Liberty Amendments is the #1 book on Amazon.  A simple Google search shows that no MSM outlet has published a story or reviewed the book.]

11.  Nixon’s Southern Strategy – The MSM doesn't adequately report on the Presidential election of 1968? Are you kidding me?

12.  Tax cuts primarily benefit the wealthy – To accurately report this fact, the MSM would also have to report that the “rich” – which I’ll call the wealthiest 10% – pay more than 70% of all income taxes, and that this percentage has grown over the past 30 years. Also, the bottom 47% don’t pay any income tax whatsoever (another “hate fact” accurately stated by Mitt Romney). When you only tax the productive, a cut in the tax necessarily only benefits the productive.

13.  What’s happening to the bees? – Are honey prices sky high? Are agriculture product prices sky high? Is this really one of the top 15 facts the world must know now? The MSM demonizes bees? Bee Movie?

14.  The impact of temporary workers on our economy – Does this moron mean illegal immigrants? Or perhaps the fact that 77% of new jobs created in 2013 were part-time in order to escape Obamacare regulations? Yea, a liberal media would totally do an in depth report on that. Not.

15.Media consolidation – Liberals like big media conglomerates that are too big to fail. Liberals like the cozy relationship between the government and General Electric, the parent company of NBC, CNBC and MSNBC.  And as if the MSM never, ever mentions the media empire of Rupert Murdoch, or the Koch brothers, or Sheldon Adelson.


The inescapable conclusion is that Daily Kos thinks the media isn’t liberal because it reports liberal lies slightly less often as Daily Kos would like.

The LA Times is right. The Zimmerman verdict should be a wake-up call to the black community.

Just not how the LA Times, or NAACP, understand it.  And that is the problem.  (Necessary caveat: when I refer to "blacks" or the "black community" I am obviously not referring to all blacks; rather, I am using the term in the same sense as Martin Luther King III is in his speech to the NAACP.)

The black community needs to learn they cannot act like thug gangstas without consequences.  Black parents need to learn they must do something to prevent their children from embracing the thug/gangsta lifestyle of drugs and violence, starting with having children only after getting married and then staying married to raise them.  

The black community needs to learn that when a child is given multiple school suspensions for violence and burglary, that child needs to be carefully watched and disciplined   Black parents need to learn that, when a "troubled" youth like Trayvon moves to a new neighborhood because of multiple school suspensions, they should alert the neighbors to his presence and specifically ask the neighbors to watch him and report back to his parents if they see Trayvon misbehaving.  

Trayvon's parents should then have told Trayvon they asked for their neighbors' help keeping Trayvon out of trouble.  This is how CIVILIZED people and communities behave.  It is entirely Trayvon and his parents' fault that this incident occurred.  The black community needs to realize this if future incidents are to be avoided.

Black "leaders" are telling the "black community" the exact wrong lesson to be learned from this incident, and that is a shame.  It is also intentional, because those black "leaders" have a financial incentive to make their community believe nothing is their fault, but is solely the fault of white racism, for which they must give money and power to black "leaders" to combat.