WSJ: Was John Brennan The One Who Actually Engaged In “Treason”?

 
 
 
 
 
 
1 Vote

Tim Brown uses an article by the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel to extrapolate the notion former CIA Director John Brennan (See Also HERE) was an Obamunist traitor. The notion arises because Brennan accused President Trump of Treason for merely meeting with Putin in Helsinki.

JRH 7/22/18
********************
WSJ: Was John Brennan The One Who Actually Engaged In “Treason”?
When men like John Brennan point their finger at others and cry “treason,” they are attempting to pin the very crime they are guilty of on someone else.

JULY 21, 2018

Well, Sebastian Gorka has been upfront that former Obama CIA Director John Brennan is both a “Communist” and a “traitor.”  Now, it appears that the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel may be following that path without coming right out and saying it.

In a recent column, Strassel seems to take issue with Brennan’s tweets from earlier this week when he tore into President Donald Trump over his actions in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes & misdemeanors,’” tweeted Brennan.

“It was nothing short of treasonous,” added Brennan, who worked for what could be argued was the most treasonous person to sit in the Oval Office.  “Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???”


According to Ms. Strassel, “This is rough stuff, even for an Obama partisan.”

She then wrote:

That’s what Mr. Brennan is—a partisan—and it is why his role in the 2016 scandal is in some ways more concerning than the FBI’s. Mr. Comey stands accused of flouting the rules, breaking the chain of command, abusing investigatory powers. Yet it seems far likelier that the FBI’s Trump investigation was a function of arrogance and overconfidence than some partisan plot. No such case can be made for Mr. Brennan. Before his nomination as CIA director, he served as a close Obama adviser. And the record shows he went on to use his position—as head of the most powerful spy agency in the world—to assist Hillary Clinton’s campaign (and keep his job).

Mr. Brennan has taken credit for launching the Trump investigation. At a House Intelligence Committee hearing in May 2017, he explained that he became “aware of intelligence and information about contacts between Russian officials and U.S. persons.” The CIA can’t investigate U.S. citizens, but he made sure that “every information and bit of intelligence” was “shared with the bureau,” meaning the FBI. This information, he said, “served as the basis for the FBI investigation.” My sources suggest Mr. Brennan was overstating his initial role, but either way, by his own testimony, he as an Obama-Clinton partisan was pushing information to the FBI and pressuring it to act.

More notable, Mr. Brennan then took the lead on shaping the narrative that Russia was interfering in the election specifically to help Mr. Trump—which quickly evolved into the Trump-collusion narrative. Team Clinton was eager to make the claim, especially in light of the Democratic National Committee server hack. Numerous reports show Mr. Brennan aggressively pushing the same line internally. Their problem was that as of July 2016 even then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper didn’t buy it. He publicly refused to say who was responsible for the hack, or ascribe motivation. Mr. Brennan also couldn’t get the FBI to sign on to the view; the bureau continued to believe Russian cyberattacks were aimed at disrupting the U.S. political system generally, not aiding Mr. Trump.

Think about that just a moment because on Saturday I reported on the fact that sources have claimed that former FBI attorney Lisa Page has begun to testify under oath that there was absolutely no basis for the Mueller investigation into Trump.  In that report, I referenced John Solomon’s claim that:

For any American who wants an answer sooner, there are just five words, among the thousands of suggestive texts Page and Strzok exchanged, that you should read.

That passage was transmitted on May 19, 2017. “There’s no big there there,” Strzok texted.

The date of the text long has intrigued investigators: It is two days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named special counsel Robert Mueller to oversee an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and the Russia campaign.

Since the text was turned over to Congress, investigators wondered whether it referred to the evidence against the Trump campaign.

This month, they finally got the chance to ask. Strzok declined to say — but Page, during a closed-door interview with lawmakers, confirmed in the most pained and contorted way that the message in fact referred to the quality of the Russia case, according to multiple eyewitnesses.

The admission is deeply consequential. It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was “there.”

Strassel continues:

The CIA director couldn’t himself go public with his Clinton spin—he lacked the support of the intelligence community and had to be careful not to be seen interfering in U.S. politics. So what to do? He called Harry Reid. In a late August briefing, he told the Senate minority leader that Russia was trying to help Mr. Trump win the election, and that Trump advisers might be colluding with Russia. (Two years later, no public evidence has emerged to support such a claim.)

But the truth was irrelevant. On cue, within a few days of the briefing, Mr. Reid wrote a letter to Mr. Comey, which of course immediately became public. “The evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign continues to mount,” wrote Mr. Reid, going on to float Team Clinton’s Russians-are-helping-Trump theory. Mr. Reid publicly divulged at least one of the allegations contained in the infamous Steele dossier, insisting that the FBI use “every resource available to investigate this matter.”

The Reid letter marked the first official blast of the Brennan-Clinton collusion narrative into the open. Clinton opposition-research firm Fusion GPS followed up by briefing its media allies about the dossier it had dropped off at the FBI. On Sept. 23, Yahoo News’s Michael Isikoff ran the headline: “U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin.” Voilà. Not only was the collusion narrative out there, but so was evidence that the FBI was investigating.

In their recent book “Russian Roulette,” Mr. Isikoff and David Corn say even Mr. Reid believed Mr. Brennan had an “ulterior motive” with the briefing, and “concluded the CIA chief believed the public needed to know about the Russia operation, including the information about the possible links to the Trump campaign.” (Brennan allies have denied his aim was to leak damaging information.)

Clinton supporters have a plausible case that Mr. Comey’s late-October announcement that the FBI had reopened its investigation into the candidate affected the election. But Trump supporters have a claim that the public outing of the collusion narrative and FBI investigation took a toll on their candidate. Politics was at the center of that outing, and Mr. Brennan was a ringmaster. Remember that when reading his next “treason” tweet.


When men like John Brennan point their finger at others and cry “treason,” they are attempting to pin the very crime they are guilty of on someone else.  Ms. Strassel, while not being as forthright as Gorka about Brennan’s treason, nevertheless, seems to be saying just that in what she wrote.  America would do well to listen and bring justice to bear upon this traitor and the traitors surrounding him, but I have my doubts that anyone in this life will actually hold him accountable.

Article posted with permission from The Washington Standard
__________________________
Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com, SonsOfLibertyMedia.com, GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com. He is husband to his “more precious than rubies” wife, father of 10 “mighty arrows”, jack of all trades, Christian and lover of liberty. He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina. . Follow Tim on Twitter. Also check him out on Gab and Steemit


Tony Podesta offered immunity to testify against Paul Manafort

 
 
 
 
 
 
Rate This

Tony Podesta

In this article you will see Dem/Clinton/Obama justice in all its corrupt operation.

JRH 7/21/18
*********************
Tony Podesta offered immunity to testify against Paul Manafort

By  Amy Lieu
July 20, 2018

Exclusive: Two sources tell ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has offered lobbyist Tony Podesta immunity to testify against Paul Manafort. #Tucker


[Posted by Fox News
Published on Jul 19, 2018

Exclusive: Two sources tell ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has offered lobbyist Tony Podesta immunity to testify against Paul Manafort. Fox News [#Tucker FOX] Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most watched television news channel for more than 15 years and according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll, is the most trusted television news source in the country. Owned by 21st Century Fox, FNC is available in more than 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.]

Tony Podesta has been offered immunity by Special Counsel Robert Mueller to testify against Paul Manafort, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson reported, citing two unnamed sources.

Podesta is the founder of the Podesta Group and brother of John Podesta, who was chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

The Podesta Group reportedly worked with Manafort — a former chairman of Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign — to lobby on behalf of Ukrainian interests in the United States, without properly registering at the time under the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA), Carlson said.

Manafort and the group worked on a campaign called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, the Washington Times reported.

“In other words, for a near identical crime, Bill and Hillary’s friend could escape and emerge completely unscathed while Paul Manafort may rot in jail,” Carlson said.

Podesta did not register as a foreign agent under FARA, Carlson said in a segment last October.


[Posted by Fox News
Published on Oct 31, 2017

Tony Podesta reportedly tells his staff he will fight the allegations; reaction from Rep. Doug Collins, vice chair of the House Republican Conference and a member of the Judiciary Committee.]

Mueller is also offering immunity to five potential witnesses in the upcoming trial of Manafort, the Washington Examiner reported.

Mueller’s team is requesting “use immunity,” which is a limited type of immunity, the publication reported, citing court documents filed Tuesday.

The five people have not been charged or identified publicly with the case, prosecutors for Mueller’s team said, according to the Examiner.

Tony Podesta resigned from his lobbying group in October in response to Mueller’s investigation of the firm, the report said.
The firm was reportedly closed by the end of last year.

The special counsel’s office did not immediately respond for comment.

Manafort is accused of multiple financial crimes in connection with lobbying work he performed in Ukraine. The first of his two upcoming trials, in Virginia, is scheduled to begin next week.

Fox News’ Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this story.
_______________________
Amy Lieu is a news editor and reporter for Fox News.

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

Who is betraying America?

 
 
 
 
 
 
1 Vote

Caroline Glick has written an outstanding essay relating to former Obama comrades, Dems and the Leftist MSM are losing their minds on who can accuse President Trump louder of treason. In wondering who was more actually treasonous, Glick goes on to list Obama actions that actually benefitted Russian National Interests.

JRH 7/20/18
********************
Who is betraying America?
 Pelosi & Schumer

By Caroline Glick
07/20/2018

Did US President Donald Trump commit treason in Helsinki when he met Monday with Russian President Vladimir Putin? Should he be impeached?

That is what his opponents claim. Former president Barack Obama’s CIA director John Brennan accused Trump of treason outright.
Brennan tweeted, “Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki [with Putin] rises to and exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors.’ It was nothing short of treasonous.”

Fellow senior Obama administration officials, including former FBI director James Comey, former defense secretary Ashton Carter, and former deputy attorney general Sally Yates parroted Brennan’s accusation.

Almost the entire US media joined them in condemning Trump for treason.

Democratic leaders have led their own charge. Democratic Congressman Steve Cohen from Tennessee insinuated the US military should overthrow the president, tweeting, “Where are our military folks? The Commander-in-Chief is in the hands of our enemy!”

Senate minority leader Charles Schumer said that Trump is controlled by Russia. And Trump’s Republican opponents led by senators Jeff Flake and John McCain attacked him as well.

Trump allegedly committed treason when he refused to reject Putin’s denial of Russian interference in the US elections in 2016 and was diffident in relation to the US intelligence community’s determination that Russia did interfere in the elections.

Trump walked back his statement from Helsinki at a press appearance at the White House Tuesday. But it is still difficult to understand what all the hullaballoo about the initial statement was about.

AP reporter John Lemire placed Trump in an impossible position. Noting that Putin denied meddling in the 2016 elections and the intelligence community insists that Russia meddled, he asked Trump, “Who do you believe?”

If Trump had said that he believed his intelligence community and gave no credence to Putin’s denial, he would have humiliated Putin and destroyed any prospect of cooperative relations.

Trump tried to strike a balance. He spoke respectfully of both Putin’s denials and the US intelligence community’s accusation. It wasn’t a particularly coherent position. It was a clumsy attempt to preserve the agreements he and Putin reached during their meeting.

And it was blindingly obviously not treason.

In fact, Trump’s response to Lemire, and his overall conduct at the press conference, did not convey weakness at all. Certainly he was far more assertive of US interests than Obama was in his dealings with Russia.

In Obama’s first summit with Putin in July 2009, Obama sat meekly as Putin delivered an hour-long lecture about how US-Russian relations had gone down the drain.

As Daniel Greenfield noted at Frontpage magazine Tuesday, in succeeding years, Obama capitulated to Putin on anti-missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic, on Ukraine, Georgia and Crimea. Obama gave Putin free rein in Syria and supported Russia’s alliance with Iran on its nuclear program and its efforts to save the Assad regime. He permitted Russian entities linked to the Kremlin to purchase a quarter of American uranium. And of course, Obama made no effort to end Russian meddling in the 2016 elections.

TRUMP IN contrast has stiffened US sanctions against Russian entities. He has withdrawn from Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. He has agreed to sell Patriot missiles to Poland. And he has placed tariffs on Russian exports to the US.

So if Trump is Putin’s agent, what was Obama? [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

Given the nature of Trump’s record, and the context in which he made his comments about Russian meddling in the 2016 elections, the question isn’t whether he did anything wrong. The question is why are his opponents accusing him of treason for behaving as one would expect a president to behave? What is going on?

The answer to that is clear enough. Brennan signaled it explicitly when he tweeted that Trump’s statements “exceed the threshold of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors.’” The unhinged allegations of treason are supposed to form the basis of impeachment hearings.

The Democrats and their allies in the media use the accusation that Trump is an agent of Russia as an elections strategy. Midterm elections are consistently marked with low voter turnout. So both parties devote most of their energies to rallying their base and motivating their most committed members to vote.

To objective observers, the allegation that Trump betrayed the United States by equivocating in response to a rude question about Russian election interference is ridiculous on its face. But Democratic election strategists have obviously concluded that it is catnip for the Democratic faithful. For them it serves as a dog whistle.

The promise of impeachment for votes is too radical to serve as an official campaign strategy. For the purpose of attracting swing voters and not scaring moderate Democrats away from the party and the polls, Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer say they have no interest in impeaching Trump. Impeachment talk, they insist, is a mere distraction.

But by embracing Brennan’s claim of treason, Pelosi, Hoyer, Schumer and other top Democrats are winking and nodding to the progressive radicals now rising in their party. They are telling the Linda Sarsours and Cynthia Nixons of the party that they will impeach Trump if they win control of the House of Representatives.

The problem with playing domestic politics on the international scene is that doing so has real consequences for international security and for US national interests.

Consider, for instance, Europe’s treatment of Trump.

Europe is economically dependent on trade with the US and strategically dependent on NATO. So why are the Europeans so open about their hatred of Trump and their rejection of his trade policies, his policy towards Iran and his insistence that they pay their fair share for their own defense?

Why did EU Council President Donald Tusk attack Trump with such contempt and condescension in Brussels? Tusk, who chairs the meetings of EU leaders, is effectively the EU president. And the day before last week’s NATO conference he chided Trump for criticizing Europe’s low defense spending.

“America,” he said with a voice dripping with contempt, “appreciate your allies. After all you don’t have that many.”

That of course, was news to the countries of Asia, Africa, Latin America, Europe and the Middle East that depend on America and work diligently to develop and maintain strong ties to Washington.
Leaving aside the ridiculousness of his remarks, where did Tusk get the idea that it is reasonable to speak so scornfully to an American president?

Where did EU’s foreign policy commissioner Federica Mogherini get the idea that it is okay for her to work urgently and openly to undermine legally constituted US sanctions against Iran for its illicit nuclear weapons program?

The answer of course is that they got a green light to adopt openly anti-American policies from the forces in the US that have devoted their energies since Trump’s election nearly two years ago to delegitimizing his victory and his presidency. Those calling Trump a traitor empowered the Europeans to defy the US on every issue.

Trump’s opponents’ unsubstantiated allegation that his campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 elections has constrained Trump’s ability to perform his duties.

Consider his relations with Putin.

If there is anything to criticize about Trump’s summit with Putin it is that it came too late. It should have happened a year ago. That it happened this week speaks not to Trump’s eagerness to meet Putin but to the urgency of the hour.

After securing control over the Deraa province along Syria’s border with Jordan last week, the Assad regime, supported by Iranian regime forces, Hezbollah forces and Shiite militia forces began its campaign to restore regime control over the Quneitra province along the Syrian border with Israel.

As Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and all government and military officials have stated clearly and consistently for years, Israel cannot accept Iranian presence in Syria. If Iran does not remove its forces from Syria generally and from southern Syria specifically, there will be war imminently between Israel, Iran and its Hezbollah, Shiite militia and Syrian regime allies.

Israel prefers to fight that war sooner rather than later to prevent Iran and its allies from entrenching their positions in Syria and make victory more difficult. So, in the interest of preventing such a war, Trump had no choice but to bite the political bullet and sit down to discuss Syria face to face with Putin to try to come up with a deal that would see Russia push Iran and Hezbollah out of Syria.

From what the two leaders said at their joint press conference it’s hard to know what was agreed to. But Netanyahu’s jubilant response indicates that some deal was reached.

Certainly their statements were strong, unequivocal signals to Iran. When Trump said, “The United States will not allow Iran to benefit from our successful campaign against ISIS,” he signaled strongly that US forces in eastern Syria will support Israel in a war against Iran and its allied forces in Syria just as it fought with the Kurds and its other allies in Syria against ISIS.

When Putin endorsed Israel’s position that the 1974 Syrian-Israeli disengagement agreement must be implemented along the border, he told the Iranians that in any Iranian-Israeli war in Syria, Putin will not side with Iran.

Time will tell if we just averted war. But what we did learn is that Israel’s position in a war with Iran is stronger than it could have been if the two leaders hadn’t met in Helsinki.

And this is exceedingly important.

Trump is being condemned for adopting a conciliatory tone towards Putin while employing a combative tone towards the Europeans and particularly Germany at the NATO summit. This criticism ignores how Trump operates in the international arena.

Trump views his exchanges with foreign leaders as separate engagements. He has goals he wishes to advance with China; with North Korea; with Russia; with Canada; with Mexico; with Europe; with Britain; with US Arab allies. In each separate engagement, Trump employs a combination of carrots and sticks. In each engagement he adopts a distinct manner that he believes advances his goals.

So far, unlike Obama’s foreign policy by this point in his presidency, none of Trump’s exchanges have brought disaster on America or its allies. To the contrary, America and its allies have much greater strategic maneuver room across a wide spectrum of threats and joint adversaries than they had when Obama left office.

Trump’s opponents’ obsession with bringing him down has caused great harm to his presidency and to America’s position worldwide. It is a testament to Trump’s commitment to the US and its allies that he met with Putin this week. And the success of their meeting is something that all who care about global security and preventing a devastating war in the Middle East should be grateful for.

__________________
John R. Houk, Blog Editor

@ 2013 All Rights Reserved to Caroline Glick

About Caroline B. Glick
 
Caroline B. Glick is a senior columnist at Breitbart News and the senior contributing and chief columnist for The Jerusalem Post. She is also a senior columnist for Maariv. She is the author of The Israeli Solution: A One State Plan for Peace in the Middle East, (Crown 2014) and of Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad (Gefen 2008). The Israeli Solution was endorsed by leading US policymakers including Vice President Mike Pence, Senator Ted Cruz and National Security Advisor John Bolton. Shackled Warrior was endorsed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former CIA director James Woolsey.

Glick is the adjunct senior fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and directs the Israeli Security Project at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. She travels frequently throughout the world to brief policymakers on issues related to Israel’s strategic environment and other related topics. She lectures widely on strategic and political issues affecting global security, Israel and the Jewish people, US-Israel relations, Israel-Diaspora affairs and Israel’s changing strategic landscape.

In 2008 Glick founded Latma, the Hebrew language satirical media criticism website. She served as editor in chief of the site until it ceased operations in 2015.

Latma changed the face of Israel’s social media and revolutionized the Israeli entertainment industry by bringing an alternative voice to the popular culture. Latma launched “Hakol Shafit,” a primetime, half hour satirical newscast on Israel television Channel 1. Glick served as the editor in chief of the program.

Glick was born in Houston, TX and grew up in Chicago, IL. She moved to Israel in 1991, two weeks after receiving her BA in Political Science from Columbia University. She joined the Israel Defense Forces that summer and served as an officer for five and a half years.

From 1994-1996, as an IDF captain, Ms. Glick served in the Defense Ministry as a core member of Israel’s negotiating team with the Palestinians.

In 1997 and 1998 Ms. Glick served as Assistant Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

From 1998-2000 Ms. Glick studied at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and received a Master’s in Public Policy in June 2000.

In the summer of 2000 Ms. Glick returned to Israel and began …READ THE REST

Former CIA Agent Kevin Shipp: ‘Indictments Are Coming…Trump Cannot Be Bribed’

 
 
 
 
 
 
1 Vote

Kevin Shipp is a former CIA Officer. Why should you care? I found an interview in which Shipp is confidant an indictment is in the works that implicates Crooked Hillary and others.

As a Conservative who believes the Clintons have escaped justice for decades, this welcome news. As a person that observed all elitist Dems skate away from even the most obvious crimes, I’ll believe it when I see it.

And yet Shipp’s credentials lend some hope he is correct:

Kevin Shipp is a retired CIA spook and whistleblower. He has exposed the US deep state and charged the CIA with systematically use of unconstitutional and illegal measures to terrorise employees to prevent them from becoming whistleblowers. He has also charged that “Hillary Clinton was running and is running a global financial criminal syndicate. She was using these secret servers to conduct Clinton financial moneylaundering business.”[1]

Background

Shipp was born in Laramie, Wyoming, but his family moved to Falls Church, Virginia, where he has spent most of his subsequent life. He studied at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia, where studied biology. Later he also obtained a master’s degree in forensic psycho physiology at the Department of Defense Academy for Credibility Assessment.[citation needed]

Career

“Kevin Shipp, former CIA Officer and Anti Terrorismexpert, held several high level positions in the CIA. He was assigned as a protective agent for the Director of Central Intelligence, a counterintelligence investigator, team leader protecting sensitive CIA assets from assassination, manager of high risk Counter Terrorism Center protective operations, lead instructor for members of allied governments, internal staff security investigator and a polygraph examiner tasked with protecting the CIA from foreign agent penetration. He is the recipient of two CIA Meritorious Unit Citations, three Exceptional Performance Awards and a Medallion for overseas covert operations. Shipp also supervised the Department of State Anti Terrorism Assistance program and managed the protective detail assigned to the president of Afghanistan following the US invasion.”[2][3]

… READ THE REST (Kevin Shipp; WikiSpooks; last modified 4/26/18 02:34)

JRH 7/19/18
******************
Former CIA Agent Kevin Shipp: ‘Indictments Are Coming…Trump Cannot Be Bribed’

By  MAC SLAVO
JULY 17, 2018

Shipp says that what Hillary Clinton did with her charity and Uranium One while she was Secretary of State was a crime for the history books.  Shipp explains, “Hillary Clinton used this to launder money in foreign banks so it wasn’t subject to U.S. laws, congressional subpoenas, or FOIA demands for the evidence.  This was done to launder this money globally into the Clinton Foundation so the U.S. government could not examine it at all.”
++++++
Whistleblower and former CIA officer Kevin Shipp stated clearly that indictments are coming for Hillary Clinton and the deep state because Donald Trump cannot be bribed.  In an interview with USA Watchdog‘s Greg Hunter, Shipp says this deep state espionage will eventually be exposed to the public.

During his discussion with Hunter, Shipp says that what Hillary Clinton did with her charity and Uranium One while she was Secretary of State was a crime for the history books.  Shipp explains, “Hillary Clinton used this to launder money in foreign banks so it wasn’t subject to U.S. laws, congressional subpoenas, or FOIA demands for the evidence.  This was done to launder this money globally into the Clinton Foundation so the U.S. government could not examine it at all.”


[Posted by Greg Hunter
Published on Jul 14, 2018

How did Hillary Clinton get away with obvious crime with her unprotected server and the shady Uranium One deal? Shipp says, “The most bizarre thing is the people who protected her from clear felonious activity and violations of the Espionage Act. James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, was protecting her and leaking things to the media and lying. You had John Brennan, Director of the CIA, protecting her by starting a false investigation (on Trump) and stirring things up with this (false/unverified) dossier. You had James Comey, Director of the FBI, protecting her. . . . Then, you’ve got Peter Strzok protecting her, and now it appears the United Kingdom GCHQ was using NSA information to target Donald Trump and protect Hillary Clinton. You have to ask yourself … READ THE REST]

“Obviously [Hillary’s]  not stupid, she is diabolical,” says Shipp of Hillary Clinton’s decision to have an unsecured server as Secretary of State. “She knew darn well what she was doing…the Clinton Foundation is a global crime syndicate.”

Shipp continued saying, “we just found out recently that…at least 30,000 of her emails went to a foreign entity that was not on any of the distribution lists…they’re trying to figure out who that is now…this reeks of espionage to me.”

“The most bizarre thing is the people who protected her from clear felonious activity and violations of the Espionage Act.  James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, was protecting her and leaking things to the media and lying.  You had John Brennan, Director of the CIA, protecting her by starting a false investigation (on Trump) and stirring things up with this (false/unverified) dossier.  You had James Comey, Director of the FBI, protecting her. . . . Then, you’ve got Peter Strzok protecting her, and now it appears the United Kingdom GCHQ was using NSA information to target Donald Trump and protect Hillary Clinton.  You have to ask yourself what kind of power or connections does this woman have to get all of these members of the Deep State, Shadow Government to risk their own criminal penalties to protect her and try to get her elected?  That is the Shadow Government.  That is the Deep State.  That is what is so chilling about this whole thing. . . . This is deep.  This is dark.  This is as dark as it gets, and this is the biggest espionage case involving government officials in the history of this country.” -Kevin Shipp

Hunter then brings up the concerns most Americans have: no one will go to jail because the government will never implicate themselves. In response, Shipp points out that, this time, it will not be business as usual for the “Deep State and Shadow Government.”  It is possible that the people involved in this massive espionage case will charges. They are going to be brought to justice because Shipp says, “indictments are coming because of Donald Trump coming into the White House from the outside.  Trump cannot be bribed.”

Article posted with permission from Mac Slavo
_____________________
Mac Slavo is the Editor of SHTFPlan.com


About Freedom Outpost

FreedomOutpost.com is owned and operated by Bravera Holdings.

Bravera Holdings was founded by Gary DeMar and Brandon Vallorani in 2011 for the purpose of disseminating political news via a network of websites.

Tim Brown is the current editor-in-chief of FreedomOutpost.com.

FreedomOutpost was started in 2012 and has reached millions of people with political news and commentary, as well as other news from both the US and around the world.

12 Indicted Russians, Helsinki and Russian Conspiracy

 
 
 
 
 
 
1 Vote

John R. Houk
© July 18, 2018

On July 13, Special Counsel Robert Mueller signed off on an Eleven Count Indictment against these Russian nationals purportedly to be members of Russian military Intelligence (aka GRU – MORE DETAIL):

  • VIKTOR BORIS OVICH

  • BORIS ALEKSEYEVICH ANTONOV

  • DMITRIY SERGEYEVICH BADIN

  • IVAN SERGEYEVICH YERMAKOV

  • ALEKSEY VIKTOROVICH LUKASI

  • SERGEY ALEKSANDROVICH MORGACHEV

  • NIKOLAY YURYEVICH KOZACHEK

  • PAVEL VYACHESLAVOVICH YERSHOV

  • ARTEM ANDREYEVICH MALYSHEV

  • ALEKSANDR VLADIMIROVICH OSAD CHUK

  • ALEKSEY ALEKSANDROVICH POTEMKIN

  • ANATOLIY SERGEYEVICH KOVALEV

The Eleven Counts:

  • COUNT ONE: Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States

  • COUNTS TWO THROUGH NINE: Aggravated Identity Theft

  • COUNT TEN: Conspiracy to Launder Money

  • COUNT ELEVEN: Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States

After each count there are alleged details of the alleged crimes – 29 pages worth.

Isn’t it interesting Mueller doesn’t use some form of legalese claiming there was a conspiracy to hack the 2016 election with the cooperation with the Trump Campaign?

Kim DotCom claims the allegations in the indictment are very flimsy. The Gateway Pundit claims Kim DotCom said this:

In late May 2017 internet entrepreneur Kim DotCom claimed to have evidence that former DNC worker Seth Rich was involved in the leaked emails released by WikiLeaks.

Kim DotCom shared that he was willing to come to the US and give testimony if it is required.

Then Kim DotCom’s lawyers sent a letter to Robert Mueller saying he would come testify in the US and would provide evidence to the Investigation.


Kim DotCom later said trusting Mueller was a mistake and that the special counsel was out to destroy President Trump.

On Friday Kim DotCom responded to the latest Mueller indictments of another 12 Russian operatives.

Kim DotCom says the evidence in the indictment doesn’t survive a giggle test. Kim DotCom added today’s indictment confirmed that Mueller cannot be trusted.

Kim DotCom: Deep State indictment against Russian DNC hackers is so light on evidence that the DOJ should place a Weight Watchers logo on the front page. #ZeroCalories
Mueller knows that his PR stunt will never be tested in Court. The ‘Russian Conspirators’ will never see a US Court room.


Kim DotCom’s maintains DNC servers weren’t so much hacked but shared by Crooked Hillary campaign staffer Seth Rich. Rich was mysteriously murdered on the DC streets.

The Mueller indictments are the basis for the Leftist MSM and many Republicans are screaming and Crying President Trump has committed treason by meeting with Putin. After all, the indicted GRU Officers were under the direction of Vladimir Putin, right?

What really chapped the Trump-haters hide was not only did President Trump meet with Putin, but said he believed the Russian thug’s claim Russia did not interfere in the 2016 election cycle.

In all honesty, my gut tells me Putin is pitching a load of crap, ergo I am not pleased with Trump’s agreement with Putin. On the other hand, I believe President Trump did not want insult Putin publicly out of the hope he could work out some kind of geopolitical deal with Russia that would benefit the USA.

I believe Trump wheeling and dealing with Putin blew up in President Trump’s face, misjudging the stakes of any deal. Is a mistake an act of treason? HECK NO!

Indeed, President Trump the next day wisely walked back not pointing a finger at Russia. In a public statement on Tuesday the President admitted he erred in has grammar. Here’s the statement explaining his verbal error:


Posted by NBC News
Published on Jul 17, 2018

During a meeting with members of Congress, President Trump clarified his statements during his summit with Russian President Putin in Helsinki when he cast doubt on the findings of U.S. intelligence agencies on Russian election interference. Trump said he misspoke and assured that he has “full faith and support” in American intelligence. He said he accepts the conclusion of Russian interference, but also diverted the blame to “other people” as well. … READ THE REST

Mueller is closer to committing treason by obstructing Congressional inquiries into his Special Counsel team’s motives of trying to create evidence – NOTHING THERE – to form the basis for impeachment proceedings. Faking evidence is in essence the actions of coup against the Executive Branch of Trump’s Administration. AGAIN, giving credence of a Deep State operating in our government’s Executive Branch.

Here are some legit investigative reporting excerpts the Leftist MSM is still completely ignoring:

Former FBI Director James Comey asserted Thursday evening that he did not know beyond news reports that Hillary Clinton‘s campaign had paid for research that led to a dossier of unverified allegations about President Trump‘s ties to Russia.

“When did you learn that the [Democratic National Committee] DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign had funded Christopher Steele’s work?” Fox News anchor Brett Baier asked Comey on “Special Report,” referring to the dossier compiled by Steele, a former British spy.

“I still don’t know that for a fact,” Comey responded. “I’ve only seen it in the media. I never knew exactly which Democrats had funded. I knew it was funded first by Republicans.”

“That’s not true,” Baier interjected, referring to funding by Republicans.

“My understanding is that his work started … as oppo research funded by Republicans,” Comey maintained, adding the activity was “then picked up by Democrats opposed to Donald Trump.”

The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication, confirmed to the House Intelligence Committee in October that it originally funded the Trump project through the opposition research firm Fusion GPS.

The project until that point had focused on researching multiple Republican presidential candidates and was not looking at collusion with Russia, the Free Beacon said.

The Free Beacon maintained that none of the work product it received from Fusion GPS appeared in the dossier and the publication said it did not pay for any work performed by Steele, suggesting he became involved after the publication stopped funding the project. (Comey on Clinton camp paying for Trump dossier: ‘I still don’t know that for a fact’; By JULIA MANCHESTER; The Hill; 4/26/18 08:31 PM EDT)

Follow the money:

Steele — a former British spy and a Russia expert — was working on contract to Fusion GPS, a Washington-based public-relations firm, which, in turn, was on contract to a D.C. law firm, which, in turn, was on contract to the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC. Steele, that is to say, was working for Hillary Clinton. His job, among other things, was to collect opposition research on Trump from his network of Russian sources.

When Steele arrived in Rome, his famous “dossier” did not exist. The dossier, as we have come to know it, is some 17 reports that he compiled between June and December 2016. In early July, Steele had been working on the Clinton account for only a few weeks and had written but one report, dated June 20. (The Real Collusion Story; By MICHAEL DORAN; National Review; 3/13/18 6:30 AM)

Dems and Crooked Hillary Fingerprints:

A significant part of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s basis for investigating the Trump campaign’s Russia ties is looking more and more like a political hit job carried out by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign. Her campaign’s fingerprints are on at least three separate pieces of information fed to the FBI, including the Christopher Steele dossier Republicans say formed the basis of a secret warrant obtained to spy on Trump campaign associate Carter Page.

A former State Department official confirmed on the record Thursday that Clinton associates were funneling information to Steele as he was compiling a dossier commissioned and paid for by the Clinton campaign and DNC. That’s on top of the recent revelation that a top Department of Justice official fed the FBI information compiled by his wife, who was working for the firm Clinton and the DNC were paying to dig up dirt on Trump, Fusion GPS.

…

“It is troubling enough that the Clinton Campaign funded Mr. Steele’s work, but that these Clinton associates were contemporaneously feeding Mr. Steele allegations raises additional concerns about his credibility,” Sens. Chuck Grassley, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, and Lindsey Graham wrote in the letter referring Steele to the FBI for a criminal investigation. (Hillary Clinton’s Fingerprints Are All Over The FBI’s Investigation Into Trump’s Russia Ties; By Rachel Stoltzfoos; The Federalist; 2/10/18)

If Mueller was truly a neutral Special Counsel, he would not only focus on the Trump Administration and Campaign in a conspiracy with Russians to win the election. There is plenty of evidence suggesting Crooked Hillary’s campaign committed conspiracy with Russian government to sway the election.

There is certainly the appearance that Crooked Hillary solicited Trump dirt from Russian operatives. Christopher Steele alleges the information on his discredited Dossier had Russian sources. Crooked Hillary’s campaign paid for that Dossier making that an act of conspiracy that involved the Russian government.

I am confidently certain Putin is a thuggish liar in proclaiming no meddling in the U.S. election process (and other American National Interest agendas). Nonetheless Putin threw a Russian monkey wrench at the Leftist MSM and the Democratic National Committee. He accused the DNC of receiving $400 MILLION contribution from nefarious Russian sources:

While the mainstream media, Democrats and the Never-Trump crowd clutched their pearls over President Trump and Vladimir Putin’s summit on Monday, a major bombshell was overlooked.

During the highly publicized joint press conference the Russian President not only called US. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s bluff on the indictment of 12 Russian officials, but blasted former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton for nefarious activities.

Putin said that he’d welcome U.S. officials to Russia to probe further into alleged Russia-Trump collusion. He also referenced Bill Broward, a U.S. born, London-based banker who’s been accused of improper donations to Democrats.

Putin suggested that perhaps, the Russians need an investigation of their own in regard to Broward:

For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder, in this particular case.  Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia and never paid any taxes neither in Russia or the United States and yet the money escaped the country.

They were transferred to the United States. They sent [a] huge amount of money, $400,000,000, as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton.  Well that’s their personal case.
  
Well that’s their personal case.  It might have been legal, the contribution itself but the way the money was earned was illegal.

 So we have solid reason to believe that some [US] intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions.  So we have an interest in questioning them.
Broward has a complicated history with Fusion GPS, the group hired by the DNC and Hillary Clinton to concoct the now infamous Trump dossier.

… READ ENTIRETY (Putin’s explosive claim US intelligence helped drop $400,000,000 Russian-linked money into Hillary campaign; By Renee Hayes; BizPac Review; 7/17/18)


Finally, after Mueller indicted 12 Russian spies in an obvious propaganda campaign to make the dump Trump crowd happy, Rep. Devon Nunes had some relevant insight about Mueller and the FBI:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) slammed Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of 12 Russians accused of hacking activities during the 2016 presidential election because it only focuses on efforts to disrupt operations of Democratic Party campaign apparatuses.

Appearing on Fox News Nunes told host Maria Bartiromo that his House committee learned of the Russian meddling found in the Mueller indictments over a year ago and was included in his committee’s report months ago.

“It’s great that they indicted Russians — yes, they did bad things. They’re always up to bad things. We know that. They have very sophisticated intelligence capabilities in Russia. And they’re always — they’re constantly attacking the United States and our allies. However, in the indictment, they leave out some really important people that they also went after, so the indictment plays like they are only going after the Democrats, when Bob Mueller and all his investigators and his lawyers know for a fact that they also targeted Republicans. Why is that not in the indictment? It makes the indictment look ridiculous.”

…

Watch the interview here:



—READ ENTIRETY (Nunes: ‘Ridiculous’ Mueller indictment ignores Russian efforts to hack GOP; By Larry O’Connor; Washington Times; 7/16/18)

You know, I’ve had a great respect for the FBI apart from the DOJ. I’ve listened to Conservative commentators repeat over and over how the FBI rank-and-file are law enforcement with integrity and all the existing corruption has been inherent in the FBI management/leadership. I gotta tell ya though, I beginning to think leadership corruption has been so pervasive that I gotta believe the corruption has filtered down to the rank-and-file.

If there hasn’t been any filter-down corruption, where in the heck is the mountain of integrity coming as one-voice to spill the beans on crooked leadership?

Especially since the Obama years, law enforcement and Intelligence operations in the Executive Branch have become so politicized, it is no wonder that Conservatives as myself are seeing the manifestation of a rogue Deep State in operation. A Deep State concept is something that had been relegated to fringe Conspiracy Theory like the Illuminati.

Not anymore. It is becoming obvious there is a corrupt government within the government.

JRH 7/18/18
****************
Other related News of possible interest:






In case WaPo takes down their PDF of the Mueller Indictment against 12 Russians (sourced in 1st paragraph), HERE’S A GOOGLE DRIVE VERSION

NATO and Russia’s Naked Aggression

 
 
 
 
 
 
1 Vote

Intro to ‘NATO and Russia’s Naked Aggression’
Intro by John R. Houk, Blog Editor
July 16, 2018
In case you were unaware, during the 2016 election cycle I was a Cruz for President kind-a-guy. After Trump sewed up the GOP nomination, I placed all my efforts behind his candidacy.

Nonetheless I was certain Crooked Hillary would win. Why? Because the Dem nomination was fixed and EVEN THOUGH she obviously committed felonies with an unsecured private email server, the Deep State showed the depth of its power by exonerating her of any crimes. The same kind of crimes that past Republican government officials were prosecuted, found guilty or pled guilty.

Even with my hesitation to support Trump anyway, he won. Then President Trump began unravelling Obama’s misdeeds except where the Dems and Never-Trumper Republicans have stalled the Trump agenda to Make-America-Great-Again.

And so, I have been willing to wait and see how some of controversial policy plans were rolled out even though those policies may look foolish on the outside.

Justin Smith addresses one of those uncertain policies in relation to Foreign Policy. Specifically President Trump’s plans to negotiate something with very untrustworthy Vladimir Putin and his Russia.

JRH 7/16/18
*************************
NATO and Russia’s Naked Aggression
America’s Most Dangerous Adversary 

By Justin O. Smith
Sent 7/15/2018 2:42 AM

President Trump has been right all along to harshly castigate our NATO allies for falling short of their duty and responsibility for their own defense contingencies and all associated expenses, but his suggestion that he could pull out of NATO unilaterally, a fact, is dangerous to the free world and serves to undermine NATO and play into Putin’s hands. Putin would love nothing better than to succeed in weakening the NATO alliance, and President Trump must always remain cognizant of the fact that, as long as Putin is in charge of the Kremlin, Russia will be a threat to the U.S. and its allies, a fact Trump seems to acknowledge on some levels and deny on others, in a curious schizophrenic sort of foreign policy.

As Europe has grown stronger, since WWII, it has never been a good financial partner to the United States, in the support of NATO, which was created 69 years ago for the defense of Europe. Our NATO allies have consistently handed the major burden to America, while the European Union runs trade surpluses at our expense, in excess of $100 billion a year.

Germany pays only 1.2 percent of its Gross Domestic Product on defense, while America spends 3.57 percent. And incredibly, the European Union collectively have a GDP that is tenfold larger than Russia’s. So why do we continue to pay the lion’s share of the free riders’ defense?

Before leaving, President Trump demanded all NATO members pay 4 percent, in order to meet present threats from Russia. One should note, its 1946 charter states that NATO decisions be consensus based. That means one member-state can block NATO’s entire agenda.

On the first day of the NATO summit, President Trump was most correct along a certain vein of thought, sitting down to breakfast with NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, [President Trump] was particularly harsh with Germany, as he remarked: “I have to say … it’s very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia where we’re supposed to be guarding against Russia. We’re supposed to protect you against Russia but they’re paying billions of dollars to Russia, and I think that’s very inappropriate … Germany, as far as I’m concerned, is captive to Russia.”

However, neither the U.S. or its NATO allies can lose sight of the fact the Putin is in fact an evil, murderous tyrant seeking the restoration of the Old Czarist Empire, more so than the communist era, and a regional hegemony and a set of buffer states in eastern Europe and central Asia that can add to Russia’s strategic depth. Putin is responsible for 298 murdered people aboard flight MH17 that Russia shot down over Ukraine in July of 2014. Let’s also not forget that Putin has invaded Georgia, annexed Crimea and invaded Ukraine, where a hot war is ongoing, not to mention Russia’s violations of the Open Skies and Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaties.

Additionally, Russia has violated several international agreements affecting European security, including the 1994 Budapest Memorandum that guaranteed Ukraine’s territorial integrity in exchange for its nuclear weapons; the 2008 Medvedev-Sarkozy ceasefire agreement, removing Russian troops from Georgia; and the September 2014 and February 2015 Minsk agreements, whose ceasefire provisions are regularly violated, as demonstrated by 80 Ukrainians killed and over 500 wounded in 2017 alone, and with 10,000 killed thus far in this conflict.

By and large, given that North Korea and Kim Jong Un benefited more from the one-on-one with President Trump and is currently intransigent and reneging on the so-called “agreement”, one should not look for anything to be different with Putin who holds many more cards than little Kim did. And yet, Trump has shown a willingness to abandon Georgia, Ukraine, and Crimea and granting concessions to Putin, in order to develop a better relationship with Russia. President Trump even went so far as to suggest at the recent G-7 meeting, that Putin and Russia should be allowed to return to the “G-8”, somehow oblivious to the fact that this would reward Putin’s bad behavior and ensure no future forthcoming change.

In asinine fashion, President Trump shocked the world and the G-7 officials in June, arguing that the Crimean peninsula should belong to Russia, because “people there speak Russian“. The assertion contradicted international law and longstanding U.S. and transatlantic policy of not recognizing the seizure of sovereign territory by force. Using Trump’s logic, Brighton Beach should belong to Russia too.

“Kiev’s main concern is that President Trump will unilaterally recognize Russia’s annexation of Crimea”, effectively selling Crimea out to the Kremlin, said Daragh McDowell, senior Russia analyst at Verisk Maplecroft. Legally questionable, this would certainly demoralize U.S. allies and trigger greater domestic instability in Ukraine.

It’s no wonder that  NATO members Denmark, Norway, Iceland, Finland and Sweden, the Nordic Defense Cooperation nations, hardened their commitment to combat what they see as an escalation of naked Russian aggression. In 2015, Russia feigned an air assault against the Danish island of Bornholm, which served as a major intelligence outpost during the Cold War; and, according to Commodore Hans Helseth, a senior Norwegian defense official, these nations association with NATO has lowered the threshold of an armed Russian aggression against these nations.

In the meantime, Air Force General John Hyten, America’s top nuclear commander, warned the Senate Armed Services Committee in March, that Russia was sprinting to deploy a hypersonic nuclear weapon, a new breed of high-speed threats that the U.S is currently incapable of countering or defending against.

Although President Trump’s administration is keeping intense economic sanctions on Russia, and it has armed Ukrainian troops and expelled a number of Russian diplomats, Trump’s words vitiate these measures, when he says he “respects” Putin and places the violence of our country in the defense of other nation’s freedom, and for the greater moral good, on the same moral plane as Russian malevolent and naked aggression. In 2017, when asked by Fox News about Putin’s role in the murders and disappearances of so many journalists and opposition members, President Trump responded, “You think our country’s so innocent?”

Regardless of President Trump’s ahistorical perspective of NATO, less than half of NATO’s members are exerting much effort to dispel the notion that they are “free riders” who won’t properly defend and protect their own citizens. As Trump speaks about the NATO alliance, as though it’s a big confidence scam, and he accurately illuminates their financial malfeasance and negligence, if ever there was a time for NATO members to increase their defense spending, this is it.

Some have suggested the combination of a high-stakes NATO summit and a one-on-one meeting between Trump and Putin, in Helsinki, could bring about the most dramatic geopolitical shift since the end of the Cold War, and it just might, to our detriment, if Trump fails to recognize Putin as a foe. Most of NATO’s European members, such as Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, see Russia as one of the world’s most pressing security threats, and they are concerned that Trump might make undue concessions to Russia, like he recently did with North Korea. Whether it’s Helsinki or elsewhere, President Trump must show real determination and strength in the face of America’s most dangerous adversary.
_________________
Edited by John R. Houk
Any text enclosed by brackets as well as well as source links are by the Editor.

© Justin O. Smith