My article How the Tech Giants Contributed to the Coup against Trump was published in the American Thinker on May 15. The main points: Continue reading How the Big Tech Aided the Coup
Secretary Hillary Clinton (2010): “Our Goal Is To Help Strengthen Russia”
(National Review, How the Clintons Sold Out U.S. National Interests to the Putin Regime)
Why would Putin meddled in the 2016 elections against Hillary Clinton, when she was the architect of the greatest Reset with Russia? But that is off topic here. The NR article contains a link to the YouTube video of this interview (https://youtube.com/watch?v=zulHX5jO1yY), posted by veteran broadcaster Vladimir Pozner in 2014. Now the video is gone. Google has deleted the video and terminated Pozner’s account (now he has a new one without this interview). The last time the video’s page was saved on archive.org is October 2017, when it had ~75k views. In this case, Google was not fully successful in re-writing history. This interview fragment can be found on smaller channels, sometimes with comments like: “this is very hard to find, and I found it on a channel with only 333 subscribers! thanks! SUBBED!“
Google regularly deletes YouTube videos linked to from conservative and libertarian websites. It deleted a Fox News video in which Pete Hoekstra was debunking Clapper’s claptrap about the so-called Intelligence Community Assessment. This video was referred to in a Fox News opinion piece Was Friday’s declassified report claiming Russian hacking of the 2016 election rigged? by former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz (2017-01-08). Fred Fleitz and Pete Hoekstra debunked this so-called Intelligence Community Assessment, leaked to the media by Clapper and released (in a redacted form) a few hours before Congress certified Trump as the next President of the United States. Continue reading Google Deletes Conservative Clips on Youtube, Creates Alternative Reality
May 10, 2019 update: Robert Mueller might be not the bad guy. Obviously, he started the investigation convinced that there was Russian interference and Trump – Russia collusion. But such belief on his part was justified. He trusted Brennan and Comey. He trusted the FBI, which he headed for 12 years. He could not imagine what Comey has done. Comey has elevated the hyper-partisan pro-Hillary troika McCabe-Strzok-Page to the top of the FBI, and let it to move from clearing up Hillary (the “Mid-Year Exam“) to framing up Trump. The Mueller report was written as an indictment, probably over months. Likely in early March, Mueller changed the main conclusion, and admitted: “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government.” This was a brave act of an honest man. The rest of the report remained as it was. Regarding his transaction with IDG Enterprise, Mueller might have agreed to deliver the speech before January 19, 2017, when the IDG Group was still American company, and didn’t check on its status later.
Missing from the Mueller Report was #1 bestseller in multiple categories on Amazon for some time. The full Mueller report confirms and reinforces in the book, so far.
|My book Missing from the Mueller Report (Edition 1.5) is updated and available on Amazon in paperback and e-book formats. The most important part of the Mueller Report is not what it contains, but what it omits. The report has not been made public yet, but the conduct of the investigation combined with the AG summary provide enough information to answer this question. There has never been an investigation more absurd, corrupt, or harmful to the nation than that of Mueller’s against President Trump.|
You know what was fake news? Most of the Russiagate story. There was no Trump-Russia conspiracy, that thing we just spent three years chasing. The Mueller Report is crystal clear on this.
He didn’t just “fail to establish” evidence of crime. His report is full of incredibly damning passages, like one about Russian officialdom’s efforts to reach the Trump campaign after the election: “They appeared not to have preexisting contacts and struggled to connect with senior officials around the President-Elect.” Not only was there no “collusion,” the two camps didn’t even have each others’ phone numbers!
Have you heard that Trump intended to build a Trump Tower in Moscow? Fake news! In 2015, a Russian firm negotiated with Trump to license his brand for use in a development project in Russia. Nothing came out of it. Taibbi:
The report shows the whole episode was a joke. In order to further the Trump Tower project-that-never-was, Cohen literally cold-emailed the Kremlin. More than that, he entered the email incorrectly, so the letter initially didn’t even arrive. When he finally fixed the mistake, Peskov didn’t answer back. That was “the most direct interaction yet of a top Trump aide and a senior member of Putin’s government”!
In most cases when Mueller et al. successfully forced their targets to confess to imaginary crimes or to appear guilty in the court of the MSM, they did so by manipulating the most sacred of any citizens’ feelings: the desire to aid their country against a foreign adversary. Everybody knows the magic phrase to say when contacted by a federal agent: “Give me your business card, my lawyer will be in touch with you,” thus, invoking the VI Amendment. But General Michael Flynn, Carter Page, and George Papadopoulos didn’t invoke it; instead they talked, thinking that Mueller and Obama holdovers in the FBI were engaged in a legitimate counterintelligence investigation. General Michael Flynn talked to Strzok, whom he thought was his colleague in national security. Carter Page, a former Navy officer, who assisted the FBI counterintelligence for many years, recently rejected a recruiting attempt by the Russian intelligence and helped the FBI in apprehending and convicting a Russian spy, talked to the FBI from 2016. Mueller was unable to stick anything to him. George Papadopoulos talked to the FBI and Mueller in early 2017.
Little did they know that Mueller and those FBI figures were seditious conspirators, readying a coup d’etat against the elected President!
The Mueller Report is opposition research on steroids. It is like an expanded edition of the “Steele dossier” – a collection of falsehoods and trivialities, assembled in a way to hurt the President as much as possible. And even this collection of falsehoods falls short of creating mere suspicion of “collusion”!
A one sided focus on someone’s imperfections and an endless repetition thereof might create the illusion that its target is horrible. If Mueller had focused on Trump using a bathroom, he could have easily filled in those 200+ pages (Volume I), and Trump would look even worse than in the actual report. Especially if Mueller had written that the investigation identified no similar activities by Hillary Clinton — the comparison it made regarding alleged “connections” between the IRA and the Trump campaign (the Mueller Report, p. 33).
“In late July 2016, soon after WikiLeaks ‘s first release of stolen documents, a foreign
government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump Campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of that foreign government … That information prompted the FBI on July 31, 2016, to open an investigation into whether individuals associated with the Trump Campaign were coordinating with the Russian government in its interference activities.” (TMR, p. 1)
This is an admission that the FBI opened an investigation against the Trump campaign after a solicitation from a foreign government! This should be enough to charge Mueller, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, and other investiGATERs with aiding foreign governments to interfere in the US elections, espionage, and a dozen other crimes. Continue reading Notes on the Mueller Report
Missing from the Mueller Report book was written before the release of the full Mueller report, based on the conduct of the investigation and AG Barr’s summary. Now, the published Mueller report confirms the initial assessment: from the start, Robert Mueller accepted allegations made by the DNC and the Clinton campaign, Obama appointees in the intelligence and security agencies, and even foreign governments allied with them, as the truth. The Mueller investigation was one-sided, aimed at accusing the Trump campaign and clearing the DNC and spygate perpetrators. Failing to find any wrongdoing by Trump, it exonerated him. The most important quote from the report: “… the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its [imaginary] election interference activities.” Nevertheless, the one-sidedness is fully reflected in the report. It really sounds like written by an attorney for the Democratic party and its operatives in the government. Continue reading Partisanship in the Mueller Report
The latest analysis of the WikiLeaks DNC emails by TheForensicator tends to confirm the opinion that at least the emails, published by WikiLeaks in July 2016, were leaked by a DNC insider who was an unhappy Bernie supporter.
- The emails were apparently extracted from a Microsoft Exchange email server on May 23-25. This was the time when Hillary’s victory became obvious, and the Bernie supporters were angry at the DNC for supposed cheating. (Sample media reporting: https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-clinton-sanders-democrats-20160516-snap-story.html)
- Only emails from seven accounts were extracted and transferred to WikiLeaks. Five out of seven were finance directors’. That suggests that the leaker was not only a DNC insider, but a high placed insider with confident knowledge of the DNC’s internal workings.
… Trump’s longtime habit of operating on two levels. On the surface, Trump sets off controversies, often using Twitter to say something outrageous that sets the media agenda and leaves some commentators with their hair on fire. At the same time, below the surface, Trump is actually taking steps to get a particular job done.
… Behind the scenes, Trump was cooperating [with Mueller] and making sure his staff did the same. The Trump White House offered everyone (except, of course, the president himself) to be interviewed, and reams and reams of documents that other White Houses might have withheld on the grounds of executive or other privilege. So Trump simultaneously attacked and cooperated.
“Early on, when the president started teeing off on Mueller, Mueller indicated to me that he was worried that some people might not cooperate,” Dowd said. “I said, well we’ve encouraged everyone to cooperate, and if you want me to say something publicly about that, and the president, we’re happy to do it. And we did. We encouraged everyone who was asked to cooperate … Bob [Mueller] was satisfied with that. It never came up again.”
In the end, Dowd said, Mueller “acknowledged that all the [Trump connected] witnesses told the truth, all the documents were there, there was nothing missing, no documents destroyed.” The level of cooperation, Dowd said, was “truly remarkable,” all while the president distracted the world with his tweets.
This article was published in the Washington Examiner on April 3. The Trump lawyer is John Dowd. Funny, Mueller also had a conflict with Trump’s golf club over fees in Virginia in 2011.
If the FBI had suspected that certain Trump campaign associates were Russian agents, it had to tell him their names in defensive briefings that presidential candidates regularly received. The FBI and ODNI failed to tell Trump about any concerns regarding his campaign staffers, as noticed by Lindsey Graham.
Thus, either the FBI didn’t really suspect Trump campaign staffers and just used those names as an excuse to spy on Trump, or it intentionally kept Trump in the dark about suspected Russian spies nearby. Either way, the FBI, Brennan, and Clapper didn’t just spy on candidate Donald Trump but attempted to sabotage him and the whole Republican party in the elections.
Generic information like “potential interference by foreign actors, including Russia,” or an allegation that the “Russian government was trying to meddle in the election” (http://archive.is/UkuDq) cannot be considered a warning or notice. If defensive intelligence briefings have any purpose, this purpose is to let the candidate know about the specific threat.