Category Archives: L0

Origin of Operation “Crossfire Hurricane”

2018-09-18. It’s possible that the DNC and/or Hillary campaign started preparing the “Russian collusion” story immediately after the initial attribution of the DNC network breach to Russia by CrowdStrike on May 6 (rather than on June 12, as assumed in the article.) That better explains the hiring of Christopher Steele in early June, the issuing of a visa to Natalia Veselnitskaya on June 1, the strange text of the email introducing Veselnitskaya to Trump Jr., and the meetings between Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS with her immediately before and after her meeting with Trump Jr.  Continue reading Origin of Operation “Crossfire Hurricane”

Robert Mueller – More Conflicts of Interest

Update, 2018-08-28: four days ago, the NY Times published an article Kremlin Sources Go Quiet, Leaving C.I.A. in the Dark … If this is true, Mueller might have burnt those sources by publishing his throwaway indictment, as described in the original post. Only one or two names of the “indicted” GRU officers were publicly known before Mueller’s indictment. This said, the NY Times became a worthless tabloid. It seems to consider non-existent sources of Christopher Steele as”informants close to President Vladimir V. Putin and in the Kremlin who provided crucial details.”

Robert Mueller has multiple conflicts of interest stemming from his relationships with James Comey and from him being a Democrat partisan.  Here, I show two other conflicts of interest, a disclosed and an undisclosed one. Each of them is sufficient to terminate him.

Conflict #101: Robert Mueller represented Facebook

In February 2018, Robert Mueller made a ridiculous indictment of Russian citizens and corporations in Russia for Facebook posts intended to sow division and interfere with the 2016 elections (USA v. Internet Research Agency et al).  The IRA paid Facebook and entered posts into its database. Facebook received money from the indicted and non-indicted foreign persons, selected recipients and shown them those posts.  Facebook is the only entity that can be held accountable for the alleged misconduct. Why didn’t he indict, or, at least, investigate Facebook as a possible co-conspirator, accessory, or enabler? A hint: Facebook was one of Mueller’s clients in the Wilmer-Hale law firm, as he disclosed when he accepted an appointment as a special counsel. Robert Mueller was making about $3.5M a year by representing Facebook, Apple, Intel, etc. Robert Mueller also holds a small investment in Facebook according to the same disclosure.

Conflict #102: Robert Mueller is Connected to CrowdStrike

Continue reading Robert Mueller – More Conflicts of Interest

Big Tech is the new Big Tobacco, plus …

Big Tech is the new Big Tobacco!

In fact, it is much worse. Big Tech has committed much worse fraud on its consumers than the Big Tobacco has been accused. Worse, Big Tech funded groups intimidating its opponents, and even lawmakers and government officials. Big Tech also uses its control of the communications line to silence its critics.


Jun 4, 2018 – Google (GOOG, GOOGL), Facebook (FB), and Twitter (TWTR) use their internet gatekeepers’ positions to manipulate (inflate) their stock prices. Continue reading Big Tech is the new Big Tobacco, plus …

Why has FBI Accepted DNC’s “Russian Hacking” Claims?

The conservative media keeps tripping itself over lies invented by the left-stream media. I cannot blame it.  People know the left-stream media lies, but still read it and take in much of what is written there.  This time, conservatives fell for the fake news that Guccifer 2.0 (who took credit for release of the damning internal DNC documents) revealed as a GRU officer.

On or around March 21, 2018, The Daily Beast, a leftist tabloid on the lower end of the spectrum, published an “exclusive”: “‘Lone DNC Hacker’ Guccifer 2.0 Slipped Up and Revealed He Was a Russian Intelligence Officer.”  Continue reading Why has FBI Accepted DNC’s “Russian Hacking” Claims?

Obamanet vs Freedom of Press

This article continues Obamanet vs. Net Neutrality, published in the American Thinker.  It is about how Obamanet (incorrectly called net neutrality) all but destroyed the freedom of press.  The new FCC, chaired by Ajit Pai, voted to repeal and replace it. The repealing order has not been published yet, but already encounters fierce resistance.  Thus, we will live under Obamanet for months or years.  It is important to understand it in depth, because it is much worse than thought even by conservatives.

The announcement that the FCC would regulate the internet under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act caused righteous outrage (for example: Like Obamacare? You Will Love ObamaNet, NRO, February 2015).  The full text was published weeks later and probably went unnoticed.  It’s a pity because saddling the internet with antiquated regulations was peanuts compared to its other effects:  Continue reading Obamanet vs Freedom of Press

Repeal of Fake Net Neutrality aka Obamanet

“Two and a half years ago, I said that net neutrality was ‘Obamacare for the Internet.’  At the time, the Obama administration, in its typically deceptive manner, had conflated net neutrality — a worthy idea, as originally defined, to protect an open internet — with reclassifying the internet as a public utility under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, a burdensome, behemoth of a law that gives all sorts of authority to the government …” – Senator Ted Cruz, May 1, 2017

On December 14, the Federal Communications Commission chaired by courageous Ajit Pai voted to repeal another Obama legacy: the Orwellian-named “Open Internet Order” FCC-15-24, or Obamanet.  Contrary and opposite to the fake news media’s claims, the Obamanet order weakened or eliminated net neutrality, which had been established as FCC regulatory policy in 2005 by the Bush administration. Continue reading Repeal of Fake Net Neutrality aka Obamanet

Heidelberg Appeal’s Anniversary – 4,000+ scientists, 70 Nobel Laureates

June 2, 2017 (four months from today) will be the 25 year anniversary of the Heidelberg Appeal.  This historical document signed by more than 4,000 distinguished scientists, including 70 Nobel Laureates, was released in the beginning of the infamous “Earth Summit” (Rio de Janeiro, 1992) to oppose environmental obscurantism, including climate alarmism. Among other things, the Heidelberg Appeal said:

We want to make our full contribution to the preservation of our common heritage, the Earth.

We are, however, worried at the dawn of the twenty-first century, at the emergence of an irrational ideology which is opposed to scientific and industrial progress and impedes economic and social development.

We contend that a Natural State, sometimes idealized by movements with a tendency to look toward the past, does not exist and has probably never existed …

We intend to assert science’s responsibility and duties toward society as a whole.

We do, however, forewarn the authorities in charge of our planet’s destiny against decisions which are supported by pseudoscientific arguments of false and nonrelevant date.

The greatest evils which stalk our Earth are ignorance and oppression, and not Science, Technology, and Industry …

These wise words by the most distinguished scientists in the world Continue reading Heidelberg Appeal’s Anniversary – 4,000+ scientists, 70 Nobel Laureates

Richard Lindzen on the Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus (1992)

Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus – an article by Richard Lindzen from 1992, still relevant today! Some quotes (emphasis is mine):

“By early 1989 the popular media were declaring that “all scientists” agreed that warming was real and catastrophic in its potential. By the fall of 1989 some media were becoming aware that there was controversy. Cries followed from environmentalists that skeptics were receiving excessive exposure. – Same as today,  except that the “skeptics” are  called “deniers” now. Continue reading Richard Lindzen on the Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus (1992)

Richard Lindzen on the Climate of Fear, 2006

On the persecution of scientists dissenting from con science of climate alarmism.  Excerpts from Climate of Fear, Wall Street Journal, 2006.

Ambiguous scientific statements about climate are hyped by those with a vested interest in alarm … Indeed, the success of climate alarmism can be counted in the increased federal spending on climate research from a few hundred million dollars pre-1990 to $1.7 billion today. [In 2006 – AH] Continue reading Richard Lindzen on the Climate of Fear, 2006

Prof. Fred Singer on Suppression of Science by Al Gore

As U.S. senator and later as vice president, Al Gore successfully imposed climate alarmism on scientific institutions and suppressed dissent. But, he had few failures and only some of them became publicly known. This book chapter by Professor Fred Singer tells about one of them, when Al Gore targeted him personally.  Excerpts from it follow.  Links in the excerpts are mine. Continue reading Prof. Fred Singer on Suppression of Science by Al Gore