Categories
Corruption Democrats Elections Truth

Turns Out California Democrats Used Illegals For Ballot Harvesting

Rod Thomson

Sometimes a clueless leftist media is a conservative’s best friend.

The Los Angeles Times published a big mushy kiss of a puff piece on New Year’s Day about how Dreamers got deeply involved in the 2018 midterm elections that turned so many red Congressional seats blue — particularly in the days after the election through ballot harvesting.

Nowhere were the Dreamers more active than in California, where the almost entirely Republican blue Orange County flipped to 100 percent Democrat red and where these DACA beneficiaries were very active.

Here’s the story’s lead:

“Gabriela Cruz, who was brought to the U.S. illegally when she was 1, couldn’t vote, but in the final hours before the Nov. 6 election, she was making one last run to get people to the polls.

The sun was setting in Modesto when she found Ronald Silva, 41, smoking a cigarette on a tattered old couch behind a group home. He politely tried to wave her off until she reminded him he had a right that she as an immigrant without citizenship didn’t have.

“It could really make a change for us,” said Cruz, 29.

Half an hour later, she was helping Silva look up candidates as he filled out his ballot by the light of her phone. “I’m glad you guys came,” he said. “I was going to leave it in my drawer.”” (Emphasis added)

The notion of an ethnic “us” in America has always been poisonous. It requires the opposite and equal reaction of a different ethnic “them.” Divisive poison that the LA Times flatters.

Stand with us!

So a foreigner, a non-citizen of the United States, was openly working to affect the outcome of our elections. In another context, this is a scandal of enormous proportions. In this context, it is a wonderful of example of immigrant civic involvement.

More from the L.A. Times’ story:

“In California, Dreamers like Cruz phoned voters, walked precincts and protested outside Republican lawmakers’ offices, reaching people who had not been called or visited by either party. Their efforts helped boost turnout among Latinos in this year’s midterm election — 29 million nationwide were eligible to vote, according to the Pew Research Center — which is projected to surpass levels higher than in past presidential election years, political analysts said.

An analysis of data from eight states by the Latino Policy and Politics Initiative at UCLA found the Latino vote grew by an estimated 96% from 2014 to 2018, compared with 37% among non-Latinos. The surge, researchers said, helped move 20 House districts held by Republicans to Democratic control in California, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, New Mexico, Florida, New Jersey and New York.

In another study, the political research firm Latino Decisions found that an increase in Latino voter turnout contributed to flipping six GOP-held congressional seats in California — four in the once conservative bastion of Orange County and two in the Central Valley that have long eluded Democrats.”

In eight states, the Hispanic vote doubled in four years? Does that in any way seem legitimate, in a real sense?

Let’s be clear. The Democratic Party employed the manpower of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of foreigners living in the United States to effect the outcome of an election. And the media applauds. Further, there were no controls on the actions of those involved with ballot harvesting — whether legal or illegal — in how they handle ballots.

Is there really any doubt that the Time’s example, Gabriela Cruz, or other Democrat ballot harvesters, would be highly incentivized to “help” these indifferent and obviously politically ignorant “voters” in how they should vote? Remember her comment about “us.” She was pursuing Hispanics to vote in Democrats to help other Hispanics like her in the country illegally become legalized.

In most states, laws require political activity at polling places to be a certain distance from where voters are actually voting to limit undo political pressure.

But in ballot harvesting, there is no such thing. Quite the opposite, with people hunting down registered voters who had not voted because they want specific votes to be cast. They are not looking to simply turn out voters. They are turning out Democrat votes by people too indifferent to know the issues, the candidates or even vote until someone knocks on their door and essentially does it for them.

And in 2018, in California, a lot of the people doing that were not even American citizens.

Rod Thomson is an author, host of Tampa Bay Business with Rod Thomson on the Salem Radio Network, TV commentator and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod also is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


 

Categories
Corruption Elections

RECOUNT DRAMA: Broward Supervisor Mixed Rejected And Valid Ballots

Rod Thomson

In a twist almost too incredible to believe, Broward County Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes late Friday mixed rejected ballots with valid ballots and no one, on either side of the races, has any idea what to do about it. Apparently, there is no controlling statute.

The numbers are not large. Apparently there are about 20 rejected provisional ballots that were mixed in with 205 valid provisional ballots. But considering the level of corruption and mistakes, one begins to wonder if any of the election results out of Broward can be trusted.

The media are calling it “accidental” and a “mistake,” and it may be in this case just gross incompetence on the part of Snipes. But she has such a long history of violating election laws while continuing to be re-elected in Broward, it’s difficult not to be suspicious of this particularly when she intended to do it in secret and this was only found out after Republican lawyers forced her to do it publicly.

Republican Manatee County Supervisor of Elections Mike Bennett has seen too much of Snipes’ shenanigans over the years. “She has never run a good election,” he diplomatically told SRQ Magazine.

The problem is Snipes’ history. The Miami Herald published a story Nov. 2 on the terrible history of Broward and Snipes, in the lead-up to the Midterm elections:

“Following a court ruling in May that Broward Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes had illegally destroyed ballots from a 2016 congressional race, the governor’s office announced the Florida Department of State would send election experts to Snipes’ office during this year’s election “to ensure that all laws are followed” and “to observe the administration of the election.”

Even beyond her own reprimand for authorizing the destruction of ballots, Snipes cannot deny the department’s patchy track record. In 2016, early voting results for Broward were posted a half hour before polls closed, in violation of election law. Her office was sued unsuccessfully because a constitutional amendment was missing from some mail-in ballots…On multiple occasions, there have been problems with printing mail ballots. And in the August primaries, Broward was the last county to post election results. The department cited reasons from unexpected recounts, delayed jump drive delivery — rumor was they were temporarily lost — to a late influx of mail-in ballots that were still being counted the next day, leaving the results of several races unclear.”

Further, as Marc Caputo reported in Politico in August, just before the Florida primaries, that a court handed down an injunction that “prevents Broward County Election Supervisor Brenda Snipes from opening the mail-in ballots in secret or before the county’s three-member Canvassing Board meets to determine the ballots’ validity. The board can begin meeting Monday to handle absentee ballots, more than 75,000 of which have been cast in Broward ahead of the Aug. 28 primaries.”[emphasis added]

More Truth On Patreon

Now in this election, four days after polls closed, it is not clear Broward or Snipes have any idea what is going on. She does not know know how many ballots are left to be counted; she did not report hourly or regularly as required; she has several times since the election dumped thousands of additional votes late at night that benefited Democrats.

As Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted: “A U.S. Senate seat & a statewide cabinet officer are now potentially in the hands of an elections supervisor with a history of incompetence & of blatant violations of state & federal laws.”

That is a factual statement. So this last “mistake” could be just the rampant incompetence that is part of Snipes’ office. Or it could be more of the illegalities that also are part of Snipes’ office.

The mixing of the ballots was discovered after Snipes was forced to present 205 provisional ballots to the Broward County canvassing board for inspection. She had originally planned to handle the ballots administratively (presumably, in secret again) but agreed to present them to the canvassing board after Republican attorneys objected.

“We have found no clear authority controlling the situation faced by the board,” said Broward County Attorney Andrew Meyers.

Broward County received more than 600 provisional ballots by the end of Nov. 6. The vast majority were declared invalid by the county’s canvassing board for causes such as registering to vote too late, previously voting, voting at the wrong precinct and so on.

More Truth On Facebook

But a couple hundred provisional ballots were held in limbo because of what appeared to be technical snafus in the precinct ID system. On Election Day, Broward opened and removed those 205 anonymous ballots from their signed envelopes and counted them. Snipes was not originally going to have the canvassing board review those. But challenges from lawyers for the Republican Party forced her to give them to the board. Of course, they had already been opened, which makes their legitimacy more questionable.

About 20 of those ballots were declared illegal (that is the correct term by law) because they had mismatched signatures. But then they were mixed into the anonymous pile of 205 that had been declared valid.

“The ballots cannot be identified,” Snipes said after a Republican Party lawyer asked.

Republican Party lawyers immediately pressed Snipes about what she intended to do with those 205 votes, and if they’d be counted, which she refused to answer. Lawyers on neither side can find a controlling statute for this situation.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


 

Categories
Corruption Politics Special Counsel Truth

Robert Mueller Is Following The Infamous Playbook of Patrick Fitzgerald

Rod Thomson

We’ve seen this before, just on a smaller scale.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is following the infamous playbook of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, who managed to convict an innocent man while the guilty one walked free — and Fitzgerald knew it.

They both went after and indicted people who either did not commit any crimes or were indicted for things unrelated to the purposes for which they were appointed. Both were in hotly political environments with supportive media. Both were open-ended investigations. And, it seems, both were hungry for convictions for the sake of convictions — not truth or justice.

Fitzgerald is the special counsel appointed in 2003 to investigate the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame (who it turns out was a desk jockey in the D.C. area, not an undercover agent who was endangered by the outing as the media liked to imply.) Nonetheless, there was a leak that identified her.

At the time it was thought this was done by the Bush Administration, and specifically Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, in retaliation for Plame’s husband writing an op-ed in the New York Times saying he doubted Saddam Hussein had bought uranium in Africa before the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. The purchase, along with other intelligence, was part of the case for invading Iraq. Two weeks later, Plame was outed.

Fitzpatrick was appointed to find out who did it, and soon fixed his eyes on Cheney and his staff, for what appeared to be political reasons. In the end, he wrongly identified the leaker as Scooter Libby, Cheney’s Chief of Staff. Libby’s crime? Not being the leaker, but providing false or misleading information to the special counsel, for which he actually went to prison.

Support Our Fight For Traditional American Values

So we can draw a lot of comparisons between Mueller’s current investigation and Fitzgerald’s four-year-long investigation — it can take a long time to get someone to even accidentally contradict themselves. The one comparison that is not there is that Fitzgerald had an actual crime he was investigating in the illegal uncovering of a CIA agent, whereas Mueller’s original appointment was to investigate collusion, which is not a crime. So from the start, there was more legitimacy to the Fitzgerald appointment than to Mueller’s.

However, both prosecutors are following a similar path.

Fitzgerald’s long investigation came up with one indictment, that against Libby. Libby was not charged with leaking, the actual crime Fitzgerald was investigating, but with a “process” crime of misleading the FBI. That is exactly what Mueller charged Gen. Michael Flynn with. Not Russian collusion or really anything related to Russian collusion, but lying to the FBI (or not correctly remembering) about the timing of an event for which there was also no underlying crime. So it was a clever form of entrapment.

The tragedy of the Libby case is that apparently, Libby didn’t even lie or mislead. Much of his convictions were based on the testimony of New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who testified that she believed it was Libby who told her about Plame. Her testimony was the key to convicting Libby. However, after Miller read Plame’s autobiography “Fair Game” she realized that she had been misled by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald.

In April 2015, Miller published an autobiography in which she, “now concluded, after reviewing old notes, that her testimony about her conversations with Libby that led to his conviction may have been false … Had I misconstrued my notes? Had Fitzgerald’s questions about whether my use of the word Bureau meant the FBI steered me in the wrong direction?”

Like Us On Facebook

She realized that she was wrong and her testimony “made no sense.” However, her recantation meant nothing to Libby’s conviction during Obama’s presidency and was roundly ignored by the media.

In the same way, Flynn pleaded guilty to making statements inconsistent with tapped and taped conversations he had with Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak during the transition. However, Flynn’s conversation was legal. He was not charged with the content being illegal, or even having the conversation with Kislyak. He was charged with giving the FBI the wrong time for the conversation, and part of his reason for the plea was because the investigation was bankrupting him personally. He has had to sell his house to pay his legal bills. But why was the FBI even questioning Flynn when they had the entire transcript of a conversation that they knew contained nothing illegal, and that conversation took place legally? Because they were looking to entrap him in a process crime, just as Libby was entrapped.

Worse yet, we later found out that it was Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage that actually outed Plame. Apparently he did accidentally in a long interview about the intelligence leading up to the invasion of Iraq. Many news outlets thought they knew it was Armitage, not Libby. Fitzgerald also knew it was Armitage, but was going after Libby for lying under oath, and asked Armitage not to go public with the information. But Armitage, who had testified to the grand jury that indicted Libby, asked Fitzgerald again if he could go public and on Sept. 5, 2006, Fitzgerald relented. Two days later, Armitage admitted publicly to being the source in the CIA leak.

On March 6, 2007, six months later, a jury convicted Libby and to this day many people think that Libby was the one who leaked.

That’s why Trump rightly pardoned Libby, although even pardon seems like the wrong word.

Both investigations were also broad and open-ended, meaning the prosecutors could go after about anyone or anything. We see that with Libby, who had nothing to do with the outing and was charged relating to nothing to do with it.

Join Our Revolutionary Channel

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was so negligent drafting the appointment of Mueller that he failed to limit the investigation in either scope or time. Totally open-ended. It appears that Mueller can investigated Trump until he dies. This resulted in Paul Manafort, former chairman of the Trump presidential campaign, being indicted for alleged financial crimes that happened years before he was on team Trump. Both the Flynn and Manafort charges have zippo to do with Russian collusion, just as Libby’s had nothing to do with leaking Plame’s identity — and he didn’t even do what he was charged with.

Another comparison is that they were and are both all political. There is no search for truth or justice. There is a search for political targets. Fitzgerald knew it was Armitage who leaked, but he accepted it was just an accident, but after four years, he had to show something. And so Libby.

But look at the comments from Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame on the pardon of Libby:

Wilson told the Huffington Post:

“Libby’s problem was with the Justice Department. He was indicted, tried and convicted on obstruction of justice and perjury charges for basically violating the national security of the United States of America…Now he’s being pardoned for it, which suggests of course that Mr. Trump is willing to allow people to violate the essence of our defense structure, our national security, our intelligence apparatus and essentially get away with it.”

Plame told MSNBC that “you can commit crimes against national security and you will be pardoned.”

There is no way that Wilson and Plame don’t know that Libby neither lied nor was the leaker. They are both misleading, shall we say, to make Trump look bad just as Wilson maneuvered with the New York Times to make Bush look bad.

In the same way, we see Mueller’s investigation going far and wide to get indictments for people that have nothing to do with the original charge he was given. And they all make Trump look bad.

Finally, the man who had oversight of Patrick Fitzgerald was none other than James Comey, a close friend and confidant of Mueller.

None of these comparisons bode well for actually getting to the truth of Russian collusion. Just as Fitzgerald let the actual leaker off the hook, it seems Mueller is not interested in the actual colluder, which resides in the Clinton campaign, DNC and the Russian dossier.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.


Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy. Whatfinger.com  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


 

Categories
Constitution Corruption Deep State Democrats FBI Trump Truth

“Let It Play Out” Advice Regarding Mueller Investigation May Be Wrong

Rod Thomson

As far as the American people are concerned, the country seems to be in an almost no-win situation when it comes to the nation’s future. This is driven not by President Trump’s style so much as the dangerous response to his style by the liberal establishment and what is known as the “Deep State.”

The advice to not fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller, but let his investigation “play out” has long seemed the prudent path, and has been encouraged by many conservatives and Trump supporters. After all, firing Mueller is guaranteed to set off a series of events that will be politically problematic for Republicans in November and the President in 2020. And to the point of the specific Mueller investigation and the reason for appointing him, there appears to be no Russian collusion with the Trump campaign and certainly not with Trump.

However, the raid on the offices, home and hotel room of the President’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, changes the calculus by opening up an entirely new realm of threat to the democratically elected president of the United States. Yes, the raid itself and the line it crosses that has never been crossed regarding an American president is very treacherous territory. Never has such a raid been conducted on a sitting president’s lawyer. The FBI better have rock-solid reasons for this raid — not just more of a fishing expedition based on thin evidence — or there will be hell to pay.

There may be anyway.

Because the deeper problem is that the Mueller investigation is metastasizing into an investigation of the life and times of Donald Trump and everyone ever associated with him. And that is an existential threat to democracy and the rule of law and order in this country.

Mueller did not conduct the raid or order the raid. But in the course of his very wide-ranging investigation into all things Trump, he apparently came across information regarding Trump’s attorney, Cohen, that could be criminal. Apparently, Mueller “referred” that information to prosecuting attorneys in New York, who then used it to obtain the search warrant and conduct the raid.

So this is how a fishing expedition expands, and how another level of the Deep State, for lack of a better term, can work against a president who is perceived as a threat to it. The Deep State in this case might be described as those benefitting or otherwise supporting the Washington status quo. Donald Trump most certainly does not represent the status quo way of doing business.

Please Support Our Efforts Fighting For Traditional American Values

Mueller is someone who seems to have benefitted and supports the status quo in D.C. The range of his investigation until the Cohen raids was already well beyond the outlines set by Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s original appointment of him. But now sharing, involving and encouraging the expanded circle of federal prosecutors around the country to target Trump associates represents a dangerously broadened scope.

Further, what those prosecutors find in their investigations can be referred to or shared with Mueller’s team. So in a sense, Mueller doesn’t just have the team of Democratic investigators and a compromised FBI at the top, he has the entire national law enforcement apparatus of the United States at his disposal to damage and bring down the President.

So “letting it play out” is looking like a recipe for investigations that will last as long as Trump remains in office. In the short-term, this is more ammunition for Democrats in 2018. In the longer term, this is aimed at Trump being politically crippled for 2020.

But in the longest term, this is a cannonball across the bow of any future President of the United States who dares to go after the beneficiaries of the Deep State status quo in Washington.

Like Us On Facebook

And it is all done outside the confines of the United States Constitution, which makes no allowances for an independent prosecutor answerable to no one, is unaccountable to any branch of the federal government and completely out of the reach of the American people.

And that is a threat that perhaps cannot be allowed to “play out.”

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.


Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy. Whatfinger.com  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


 

Categories
Corruption Obama Politics Trump Truth

Forget Trump — Depose Obama, Rice, Clinton And The Rest

by Rep. Julio Gonzalez, M.D., J.D.

In an unusual development casting further shadows on the motives and dealings of the Obama Administration, Sen. Chuck Grassley released a partially redacted email written by President Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and sent to herself, documenting a meeting with Obama where he allegedly stressed “his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect” of the investigation regarding Russian hacking during the 2016 Presidential election is handled “by the book.”

This is a revealing letter in many respects, and suggests the question of whether to depose or not depose President Trump is the wrong one.

Unquestionably, the planks on the bridge leading to Hillary Clinton and her involvement in the FISA affair and with Russian activity designed to influence the outcome of an American presidential election are multiplying and becoming sturdier with every week that passes, while the ones leading to Donald Trump are rapidly crumbling.  

But there also appears to be a new extension emanating from the Hillary Bridge, one leading to former President Obama himself, and one that was just made stronger by the hapless and unwitting actions of the dishonest and often bumbling Former National Security Adviser, Susan Rice.

The mere fact that that Rice would write an email to herself makes the communication unusual, but there is so much more that raises questions.

First, the letter was sent on Jan. 20, 2017, at 12:15:32 PM, from, and to, an official government email address. Of course, this is the date of the new President’s inauguration marking the peaceful transfer of power from the Obama Administration to the Trump team. Although the date of the letter is indeed striking, even more surprising is the time, as it was sent after President Trump had been sworn into office at approximately 11:47 a.m. By 12:15 p.m., the time the email was sent, both President Obama and his White House team, inclusive of Rice, were out of office.

Our Revolutionary Youtube Channel

Why would Susan Rice be sending an email containing classified information and detailing certain aspects of a meeting with the Immediate Past President of the United States using an official government email less than 30 minutes after the new President had been sworn in when she was no longer National Security Adviser? And does the act of handling classified information less than an hour after the expiration of her term in office make Susan Rice criminally liable? After all, she was no longer in any official capacity.  

Equally as intriguing, Rice is actually not the only recipient of her self-sent email as she copied one of her staffers, a young man named Curtis Ried, who according to his very scant twitter feed worked for Ambassador Rice for seven years. Why cc Curtis Ried? Did he have a need to know about this meeting? Was the email solicited by Ried? Did someone else ask Rice to send it, and if so, who?

This brings us to the substance of the Jan. 5 meeting documented in the email. Why would the President of the United States, in the last fortnight of his tenure, need to remind the FBI Director, the Deputy Attorney General, the Vice President, and the National Security Advisor, of the need to carry out an investigation regarding suspected Russian hacking “by the book”?

Adding to the incongruity is Rice’s problems with her candor and her lack of credibility. Recall, this is the same Susan Rice that The Washington Times’ David Keene called the Obama Administration’s “go-to liar” largely because of her multiple attempts to sell a fake story to the American people linking the attack on our embassy in Benghazi to a ridiculous and inconsequential movie. She is also the same Susan Rice who called Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl a hero. One must strongly consider that Rice’s email represents another messaging mission given to her by the President Obama.

Admittedly, the public is not in possession of sufficient information to answer the myriad of questions posed by Rice’s actions.  But here’s what we do know.  

Along with the texts sent by Lisa Paige to her FBI lover and coworker, Peter Strzok, there are now at least two known references regarding the possible direct involvement of President Obama in the covert and illegal investigations of American citizens with the intent to dig up dirt on his party’s political opponent, more than enough to depose the President’s potential direct role in this latest example of the federal government’s abuse of power.

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is an orthopaedic surgeon and lawyer living in Venice, Florida. He is the author of The Federalist Pages and serves in the Florida House of Representatives. He can be reached through www.thefederalistpages.com to arrange a lecture or book signing.

 

Categories
Corruption FBI Media Obama Truth

How The Media Buries The Real Collusion Scandals

Rod Thomson

This is pretty simple from a journalistic perspective. But it’s important, even to those who get their news from non-mainstream media sources because it goes to the growing “two worlds” divide in the nation over what people think is really going on.

The broad arc of the story is fairly well known now — well, to conservative readers who consume news sources outside the mainstream media: The Trump-Russian collusion story continues to disintegrate, being replaced with a competing narrative that turns the original story on its head.

That’s tricky business for the people, including most of the Washington media corps, who have totally vested themselves in the original narrative of Trump-Russia.

What we have are investigations by five congressional committees into apparently irregular, unprofessional and possibly criminal actions by federal investigators in probably the two most sensitive political inquests since Watergate: Hillary Clinton’s dangerous and probably illegal handling of classified information while Secretary of State, along her 30,000 missing emails; and now the probe into the Trump campaign’s alleged ties to Russian bad guys to influence the election, which is netting a second narrative.

Further, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice has been running its own investigation of these alleged improprieties within the FBI and DOJ and has come out with more incriminating evidence.

The result so far has been the reassignment, demotion and firing of at least six mid- to high-ranking FBI and DOJ officials. All of these relate to the second narrative of collusion against Trump.

Our Revolutionary Youtube Channel

In recent weeks, well-sourced, named documents have been released that are condemning of the FBI and dramatically build the narrative that far from being the perpetrator of Russian collusion, the Trump campaign may well have been the victim of it.

At the same time, Trump-Russia collusion has gone virtually dormant even in the media that will take any anonymous source to run stories and reactions for 48 hours.

Now, see what happens in this atmosphere when two blockbuster stories on apparent FBI malfeasance come up in the same day that further expands the narrative of government officials working to overtly undermine President Trump, possibly with Russian help.

One of the leading, experienced, careful voices analyzing this issue, former Assistant United States Attorney Andrew McCarthy, wrote in National Review:

“The Grassley-Graham memo corroborates the claims in the Nunes memo: The Obama Justice Department and FBI used anonymously sourced, Clinton-campaign generated innuendo to convince the FISA court to issue surveillance warrants against Carter Page, and in doing so, they concealed the Clinton campaign’s role. Though the Trump campaign had cut ties with Page shortly before the first warrant was issued in October 2016, the warrant application was based on wild allegations of a corrupt conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Moreover, the warrant meant the FBI could seize not only Page’s forward-going communications but any past emails and texts he may have stored — i.e., his Trump campaign communications.

With its verification by the Grassley-Graham memo, the Nunes memo now has about a thousand times more corroboration than the Steele dossier, the basis of the heinous allegations used by the Justice Department and FBI to get the FISA warrants.”

The Nunes memo and the Grassley-Graham memo with its boatload of information are one set of major explosions inside the FBI pointing to high-level collusion. Mammoth stories by any standards — and in this case, the standards are much higher, and met, than the tenuous and fleeting possibility of Trump-Russia collusion. Grassley and Graham (both of them long-time, play-by-the-rules Senators) had to fight tooth and nail to get the FBI to allow the release of the information. And for obvious reasons. The FBI looks terrible in these reports.

So, as a former long-time journalist, I could see tons of juicy news angles on top of the banner stories. Award-winning material to be digging into and investigating. The Grassley-Graham memo is particularly blockbuster-heavy.

Well, let’s look at the big three in national political coverage on the collusion angle where Trump is the victim.

The “all the news that’s fit to print” New York Times did manage to fit one story to print on Page 19A of the newspaper under the snoozy headline, “2 Senators Issue Letter To Support House Memo.” It mostly focused on the Democrats’ response, while glossing over the actually meat of the memo.

The Washington Post never ran a story on it. A Post blogger partisanly mischaracterized the memo, calling it “an effort to breathe life into the deflating Nunes effort.” It was literally a Democratic talking point.

Politico didn’t even bother to have a blogger write something partisan. Just nothing. It’s not news if it’s not reported. (Which is why alternative news sources are just so critically important. Maybe the best aggregator of those sources for conservatives is www.whatfinger.com, an excellent alternative to Drudge.)

In the same day last week, there was the little incident of more texts being discovered and released between the disgraced top FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page that “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing” in regards to the Clinton email investigation. This, despite Obama, on the record on video, saying he never asked the FBI about the investigation.

This is another huge story in the unfolding narrative of corruption in the Obama administration, providing more evidence that the President himself was not just aware of the unethical and illegal activities, but perhaps actively a part of them.

But again, it was snoozeville for the media. A few national political reporters tweeted about the “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing” text. And those were mostly questioning the validity of the report or using what sure sounded like more Democrat talking points.

Virtually no coverage by the old media of Obama clearly caught lying on what the old media itself considers the biggest story of 2017.

A good way anyone can gauge the media coverage quickly is by doing a Google search of the relative news terms. In this case, a quote of the text shows every news story in the first pages are conservative sites. One exception, NBC News did a minimal story for online, but not on the air. Conversely, a story furthering the slim-picking Trump-Russia narrative will be a flip on coverage. All of the old media outlets will show up in a Google search, but few conservative ones.

This is driving the two worlds narrative. And more than anything, it rests on the old mainstream media by dishonestly telling their consumers they are providing fair and objective news. Most of us on the right understand there are two sets of competing news options and if we choose the conservative ones, we aren’t getting the other. But those consuming only the old media, think they are getting the full truth.

And we end up with Americans living side by side but in two worlds.


Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy. Whatfinger.com  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


 

Categories
Corruption Deep State FBI Scandals Truth

As D.C. Corruption Mounts, Here’s How The American People Can Get Justice

Rod Thomson

Unfolding events in Washington, D.C. are leaving a lot of Americans wondering where they can turn in such a deeply corrupted, self-absorbed government to get justice and protect the republic. There are actually a few options in these new and uncharted times, and at least one would be groundbreaking.

But first, here’s the corruption we now know was going on in the Obama Administration and during the presidential election:

➜ The Obama Administration clearly weaponized the most fearsome of government agencies, the Internal Revenue Service, against individual Americans and American companies who were political opponents of President Obama. The targeting of conservative and Tea Party groups by the politicized Internal Revenue Service was an explosive scandal that somehow most of the media dozed through, disinterested in pursuing. Democrats worked to obfuscate and dilute the scandal and at that point, the media woke up and helped in reporting the talking points. And all this began after a top IRS official admitting exactly what they had done. And yet, no consequences. Not one person lost their job or a penny of income.

➜ The Fast and Furious gun-running scandal to Mexican cartels was bad enough. But then Obama Attorney General Eric Holder took another step in corruption by so completely refusing to cooperate with Congress, that he was found in criminal contempt. Holder was the first member of a president’s cabinet in history to be held in contempt. Democrats of course circled the wagons and protected him while the media played it as nothing more than partisan “political theater” — helpfully using Holder’s phrase. Nothing ever happened to Holder as the White House played defense for him.

Try Our Youtube Channel

➜ There are half a dozen other major corruption scandals during the Obama years that would warrant mention but have already been meticulously covered by the conservative media. The mainstream media is happy to blather about the most scandal-free presidency in history. The point is made that during those eight years, there were several scandals for which there was never an accounting. And of course, there is no oversight (and cannot be any oversight) of the media, even a dishonestly partisan media. That’s the First Amendment.

➜ In December, Politico published a strong piece of investigative journalism that was not only astonishing in the news it broke, but was robust with sources. The story exposed how the Obama administration had secretly dumped U.S. law enforcement efforts to nail a drug-trafficking ring run by the terrorist group Hezbollah. Hezbollah is an ally of Iran and one of the reasons the country is considered a terrorist nation. Killing the American action was done to placate the Iranians to help get the awful nuclear deal in place. But the same formula applied. Democrats played defense and the remainder of the media ignored. Like, really ignored. Several days after the Politico story, neither ABC News, CBS News or NBC News had done one second on the story. Major newspapers ignored it, also. Good for Politico, but a pox on the rest of them. Of course, no consequences from this horrible betrayal of us and our ally, Israel.

➜ This brings us to the most recent breathtaking revelations of high-level FBI corruption during the 2016 presidential campaign and after President Trump’s inauguration through coordinated actions with the DNC, a British spy and Russians to deceive a FISA judge repeatedly to obtain eavesdropping warrants on members of the Trump campaign. This one continues to unfold, but even considering how bad some of the others are, this is the worst and most dangerous if it is as it looks to be. And it looks very much like leading portions of the FBI, we know some but we may not know all, were actively working with one political party and a foreign power, through a Washington opposition research firm, to influence an American election and later undermine the winner of that election.

This level of corruption is a direct assault on our democratic republic, on the freedoms enshrined in the Constitution and on the American people.

Based on the ongoing revelations in the growing dirty laundry list, and on Americans’ dwindling sense of trust in our own government, a basic question arises:

Where do the American people go to get justice?

This is actually really difficult to answer. The frontline agency that should be tasked with the investigations is the FBI, which is part of the Department of Justice within the presidential executive branch. But the FBI, or some parts of the FBI, are compromised and so entrusting the agency with an investigation that includes and centers on investigating itself, seems like a non-starter.

• The obvious possibility is appointing one or more Special Counsels to investigate the investigators. This has the inherent downside of relying on the FBI as the investigative arm, plus they are constitutionally dubious and it would be cast as just Trump politics. Still, it is a possibility.

• Another possibility is that perhaps a special task force from the federal government’s various Inspector Generals’ offices could be created and augmented by private investigators who obtain the proper security clearances. Or Congress could create a task force itself using private investigators in the same way.

Or, perhaps there is at least one more option.

• A consortium of states. This goes old-school Constitution, but originally, the idea was that the federal government would be kept in check by the various states, to whom it was beholden.

In Federalist 39, James Madison wrote regarding the approving the Constitution:

“It is to be the assent and ratification of the several States, derived from the supreme authority in each State, the authority of the people themselves. The act therefore establishing the Constitution, will not be a national but a federal act.”

This view, representative of the founders, was that the states had the authority and responsibility to check the federal government. Of course, it has been turned on its head, but compared to most countries, the individual states making up the United States still hold considerable autonomy and authority.

If multiple federal agencies, including the leading investigative federal agency, are corruptly infested, then really the only outside solution lies with the states. They could create a unified investigative task force, obtain security clearances through the White House, conduct in-depth, investigations using their own and Congressional subpoena powers and bring charges to the Department of Justice to decide if indictments were warranted. There could potentially be dozens of states with the political gumption to undertake this.

This is way outside the box. But probably not unconstitutional. We are in uncharted territory and the house needs to be cleaned. It might be just the solution needed.

But regardless of the direction taken, the American people can no longer stand to the side and watch the country be undone by a mischievous, nefarious deep state working against the nation’s interests. Such corruption cannot stand.


Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy. Whatfinger.com  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


 

Categories
Corruption Politics Trump Truth

Manafort Indictment: Nothing New. Not A Big Deal. Yet.

Rod Thomson

The indictment of Paul Manafort, President Trump’s one-time, brief campaign chairman, is the only news happening in the world right now, apparently. So let’s do a quick sort-out.

Manafort being indicted is important, because he really was Trump’s campaign manager for a bit. But in the bullets below, I’ll explain why there is a big asterisk to this.

The asterisk helps us digest what is happening and all of the media blather that will be surrounding this and smothering all other news — not coincidentally, the DNC and Clinton campaign paying for the Trump dossier and the very questionable Uranium One deal.  

So here’s some context for this, to keep from freaking out, or overly downplaying it:

  • From back during the campaign, it seemed clear that Paul Manafort was probably a dirty guy and according to media reporting, had been for decades. This was the lowest hanging, easiest fruit for prosecutors and looked pretty obvious all along. Frankly, it’s not clear why he wasn’t under investigation long ago, except Manafort may have Clinton ties also, although they appear more tangential.
  • Trump made a big mistake hiring Manafort on to the campaign. He obviously was not properly vetted. However, when Trump realized Manafort’s dirty side, he fired him. So it was probably just lack of experience in the D.C. cesspool. But it was a mistake and the title of campaign manager is irrevocably attached to Manafort.
  • All of the charges stem from 2014 back more than 10 years — ironically, the same Mueller was head of the FBI and Obama was in the White House. So what was happening then is a worthwhile question, but not really pertinent to what this means at the moment.
  • This is not the time for conservatives to dismiss this because, Hillary! DNC! Uranium! Fusion! These are two different issues. Maybe three. And it is possible the Democratic ones are worse. But, and this is important, Manafort is easily tied to the President of the United States, during the campaign, and he has been indicted, including for colluding against the United States. That is real and it is not good. But is it Trump collusion? There is still no evidence so far. Let’s see where it all goes.
  • FYI, the leaks Friday to CNN, the NYT and BuzzFeed on the indictments coming today were a violation of federal law, apparently by the team investigating violations of federal law. There won’t be any prosecutions of that. So, D.C. cesspool remains D.C. cesspool.
  • The timing of today’s indictment after all these months is suspicious. It was just last week that the The Hill and then the Washington Post broke the stories about the DNC and Clinton campaign funding Fusion GPS, which created the apparently largely fictional Trump dossier, which formed part of the basis for this entire special investigator action. The news also broke that there are now straightforward connections between the Uranium One deal and Russian money flowing to the Clinton Foundation. Those are huge scandals. So it is quite — um, coincidental — that suddenly the grand jury is impaneled and the indictments come out. Considering the cesspool where this is operating, it’s hard not to be suspicious.
  • It’s also hard not to be suspicious about the Mueller team investigating this when possibly all of the 17 lawyers leading the charge are donors or known supporters of Obama and Clinton. That is a pretty stacked deck of hired guns. Still, hopefully there will be actual, honest evidence at the end of the day.
  • It’s worth noting that it appears that all of the charges against Manafort stem from the time before he was on Trump’s campaign for a brief period. Some of them go back many years. That doesn’t exonerate any connection, but it also does nothing to bolster any relevance to Trump colluding with Russia. 
  • In normal prosecutions, the first and easiest indictments are often on those that prosecutors want to flip to get the bigger prize. Manafort is no small fish. But Mueller’s team will definitely try to flip him to get Trump. They want him to cut a deal to testify against someone else in return for leniency. A reasonable concern is that if Manafort is as bad a dude as he looks, and he is facing life in prison, then what might he say, or even make up, to avoid that fate? Now, Trey Gowdy, a former prosecutor and smart, level-headed Congressman, cautions not to get too worried about that because these tend to rely more on evidence than testimony. We’ll see. The problem is, that this is no normal prosecution, so…
  • However, Mueller flipping George Papadopoulos, an obscure, very low-level foreign-policy aide to the Trump presidential campaign, could be. Papadopoulos pleaded guilty Oct. 5 to making false statements to the FBI. That’s very weak charge — but its a plea deal, meaning Papadopoulos is going to testify against someone. What will Mueller get him to say? That’s no small thing. If Papadopoulos cops to there being some sort of collusion, then Mueller has the case and it’s only a matter of connecting more of the Trump campaign.

Unfortunately, this is going to go on for a long time. Certainly it will be around still as the midterm elections ramp up. None of that is coincidental. The entire purpose of the left since the election of Trump almost a year ago has been to either remove him from office — election rigged; lost the popular vote; not my president; resist!; Russia, Russia, Russia — or at the very least cripple his presidency. There’s been a fair amount of success on the latter.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act.