Monday, May 21, 2018

EMPRESS of the SWAMP HILLARY CLINTON DECRIES 'POLARIZED AMERICA' AND FLIPS ON A RUSSIAN HAT..... AS BILLARY SUCKS IN SPEECH BRIBES FROM PUTIN FOR SERVICES RENDERED BY HILLARY AS SEC. OF STATE

Leaked Julian Assange Message: 


Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected, Sadistic Sociopath’

"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now."  ----  Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com

Hillary Clinton Decries a ‘More Polarized Than Ever’ America; Whips Out Russian Hat





By Patrick Goodenough | May 21, 2018 | 4:25 AM EDT


Hillary Clinton addresses Yale University’s graduating students on Sunday. (Screen capture: YouTube)
(CNSNews.com) – America is “more polarized than ever,” with deep political, racial and religious divisions, Hillary Clinton said Sunday, pointing a finger of blame squarely at one side of the political spectrum.
Without mentioning President Trump by name the former secretary of state and Democratic presidential hopeful, addressing Yale University’s graduating class, also said there was a “full-fledged crisis in our democracy.”

“Now, there are not tanks in the streets, but what’s happening right now goes to the heart of who we are as a nation, and I say this not as a Democrat who lost an election but as an American afraid of losing a country,” she said.
“There are certain things that are so essential they should transcend politics,” Clinton continued. “Waging a war on the rule of law and a free press, delegitimizing elections, perpetrating shameless corruption, and rejecting the idea that our leaders should be public servants, undermines our national unity. And attacking truth and reason, evidence and facts, should alarm us all.”
On the divisions in America, Clinton said there are more conservatives and more liberals than before, on either side of a shrinking center ground.
“And the divides on race and religion are starker than ever before,” she added.

“Now I’m not going to get political here, but this isn’t simply a both-sides problem,” she said. “The radicalization of American politics hasn’t been symmetrical.”
“There are leaders in our country who blatantly incite people with hateful rhetoric, who fear change, who see the world in zero-sum terms – so that if others are gaining, well, they must be losing,” she said. “That’s a recipe for polarization and conflict.”
Clinton went on to say that healing the nation would require “radical empathy.”
“This is a moment to reach across divides of race, class, and politics to try to see the world through the eyes of people very different from ourselves and to return to rational debate.”
Clinton began her address with a dig at Trump – still without naming him – noting the Yale Class Day tradition of donning amusing headgear and then whipping out a Russian fur hat.
“I mean,” she said over the applause, “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.”
Clinton also said she was still “not over” her 2016 election defeat.
“Let me just get this out of the way. No, I’m not over it,” she said, smiling. “I still think about the 2016 election. I still regret the mistakes I made. I still think, though, that understanding what happened in such a weird and wild election in American history will help us defend our democracy in the future,” she said.



Judicial Watch Obtains Emails Showing Podesta Group’s Work for Pro-Russia Ukrainian Political Party



Emails show then-Obama White House Counselor John Podesta Lobbying on behalf of the Podesta Group
(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch today released new documents from the U.S. Department of State showing the Podesta Group working on behalf of the pro-Russia Ukrainian political group “Party of Regions.” The new documents also show then-Obama White House Counsel John Podesta lobbying on behalf of his brother’s firm.
Judicial Watch obtained the documents in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the State Department filed on November 20, 2017, (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:17-cv-02489)). The lawsuit was filed after the State Department failed to respond to a September 13, 2017, FOIA request for:
·         All records of communication between any official, employee, or representative of the Department of State and any principal, employee, or representative of Podesta Group, Inc.
·         All records produced related to any meetings or telephonic communications between any official, employee, or representative of the Department of State and any principal, employee, or representative of Podesta Group, Inc.
·         All records regarding the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine.
·         The FOIA request covers the timeframe of January 1, 2012 to the present.
A March 28, 2013, email from now-Deputy Executive Secretary in the Office of the Secretary of State Baxter Hunt shows the Podesta Group, led by Tony Podesta, a Clinton bundler and brother of Clinton’s 2016 campaign chairman John Podesta, represented the Party of Regions, a pro-Kremlin political party in Ukraine.
In the March 2013 email, to a number of officials including then-U.S. Foreign Service Officer John Tefft (who would go on to be U.S. Ambassador to Russia in 2014) and State Department director for the Office of Eastern Europe Alexander Kasanof, Hunt writes:
See below, I also stressed to them the need for GOU to take concrete steps to get new SBA with IMF and avoid PFC/loss of GSP. Podesta Group is noted among host of Ukraine lobbyists in article I’ll forward in article on low side.
·         Ben Chang and Mark Tavlarides of the Podesta Group, which is representing the Party of Regions, told us they were working with Klyuyev on a visit he plans to make to Washington in early May. They are working to broaden the POR’s contacts on the Hill, including setting up a meeting for Klyuyev with Chris Smith, and have advised Kyiv to stop trying to justify their actions against Tymoshenko in Washington. They also noted that during his recent meeting with former EC President Prodi, HFAC Chairman Ed Royce said that Congress would not be enacting sanctions legislation against Ukraine.
The Party of Regions served as the pro-Kremlin political base for Ukraine’s former President Viktor Yanukovych, who fled to Russia in 2014.
Like Paul Manafort, who is currently under indictment in the errant special counsel Russia investigation, the Podesta Group had to retroactively file Foreign Agent Registration Act disclosures with the Justice Department for Ukrainian-related work. The filing states that the Podesta group provided for the nonprofit European Centre for a Modern Ukraine “government relations and public relations services within the United States and Europe to promote political and economic cooperation between Ukraine and the West. The [Podesta Group] conducted outreach to congressional and executive branch offices, members of the media, nongovernmental organizations and think tanks.” Unlike Manafort and his partner Rick Gates, the Mueller special counsel operation hasn’t indicted anyone from the Podesta Group.
Also, the new emails show then-Obama White House Counselor John Podesta, lobbying on behalf of the Podesta Group’s efforts to secure a maintenance facility from Jet Blue and Lufthansa for Puerto Rico.
In a June 27, 2013, email former U.S. Ambassador to Germany and current New Jersey Gov. Philip D. Murphy writes to John Podesta, Minister-Counselor for Economic Affairs at the American Embassy in Berlin Seth Winnick, and others:
Jet Blue and Lufthansa are considering 2 locations for a maintenance center – Puerto Rico or Mexico. The Governor of PR wants this badly. The question is can we get to LH at the right levels to make the case. Either John or colleague OR John’s brother Tony or colleague will get to us with more details.
Winnick then writes to John Podesta: “Washington alerted us to this advocacy issue and we are on it. Phil will try to connect in the next few days and we will follow up.”
Later that day, in an email sent to his brother Tony Podesta and Winnick, John Podesta writes: “Thanks Seth. The Governor is a friend of mine. My brother Tony represents Puerto Rico and will follow up with details.”
Winnick replies to John and Tony Podesta: “Happy to help on this one. I think we have the details we need for now from SelectUSA at Commerce but will come back if any issues arise.”
Puerto Rico was selected by the airlines for the facility to service A320s in 2014.
Judicial Watch is waiting to hear on any additional documents the State Department may produce in response to the FOIA lawsuit about the Podesta Group.
“By the standards of the Mueller special counsel operation, these emails alone would have been enough for the Podestas to have been hauled before a grand jury or worse,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These emails are a stark reminder that the Mueller’s special counsel operation seems more interested in the alleged foreign ties of the Trump team, rather than Hillary Clinton’s (and Barack Obama’s) associates.”





For the past two years, the media and Dems have relentlessly attacked President Trump, claiming he "colluded" with the Russians to beat Hillary.  They cannot accept that President Trump beat Hillary and is dismantling the Obama "legacy."  Mueller and his staff of Hillary-Obama contributors disguised as attorneys have wasted over one year on this investigation.
One principal premise of the so-called "collusion" is that the Trump campaign met with and contacted Russians to obtain "dirt" on Hillary and the DNC emails.
The logical questions are, what dirt could the Russians possibly provide that we do not already know about Hillary, and how could it be worse than the truth about Hillary?
Think about it: dirt on Hillary.  Why would we need Russians, or anyone else, to inform us about dirt on Hillary?
All you have to do is honestly examine Hillary's and Bill's shenanigans since their days in Arkansas.  This does take some time and attention, given the complex, corrupt history of Hillary and Bill.  It is essentially lying, greed, and abuse of power.
We already know the dirt about Hillary: Whitewater, missing billing records, selling pardons, selling uranium to the Russians, stealing White House silverware, FBI files on Republicans, covering up Bubba's rape and sexual harassments, the email scandal, destroying emails under subpoena, Travelgate, attacking the women harassed by Bill, and more.  I am sure I missed some.
The problem is not getting dirt on Hillary.  We have the dirt on Hillary.  There is so much dirt that it is mindboggling for anyone who cares, which excludes Democrats and the media.
But none of the real dirt about Hillary mattered to the Dems who nominated Hillary and the media that promoted her campaign.  What could the Russians possibly have on Hillary that is worse than what we know about her?  Even if the Russians have worse dirt than what we know about Hillary, it would not matter to Hillary-supporters and the anti-Trumps and NeverTrumps.  They still would have voted for Hillary.
Simply stated, the charge that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to obtain dirt about Hillary is ridiculous and falls apart when one honestly examines Hillary's record.  Hillary had to pay Steele to make up dirt on President Trump.  But the dirt on Hillary is there for anyone who cares to know.


SPIES LIKE OBAMA?


The treachery of “Crossfire Hurricane” comes into the light.





On Sunday a justifiably outraged President Trump called for the former Obama administration to be investigated for its unprecedented and profoundly un-American spying and sabotage operation against the 2016 Trump campaign.
“I hereby demand, and will do so officially tomorrow, that the Department of Justice look into whether or not the [Federal Bureau of Investigation/Department of Justice] infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for Political Purposes – and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama Administration!” Trump tweeted Sunday at 1:37 p.m.
Just the day before, President Trump had written on Twitter, “If the FBI or DOJ was infiltrating a campaign for the benefit of another campaign, that is a really big deal.”
The presidential demand for action comes after days of dramatic, detailed revelations about the plot to undermine the Trump campaign, transition team, and presidency began surfacing in news accounts.
On Thursday it was revealed that the FBI illicitly put together a spy ring as part of something called Operation Crossfire Hurricane and that at least one informant was a member of the Trump campaign.
On Friday the New York Times reported the campaign-embedded snitch was an American teaching in the United Kingdom.
By Saturday, media reports indicated the rat-fink in question was Stefan Halper, who is currently Director of American Studies in Cambridge University's Department of Politics and International Studies and a research professor at the Institute of World Politics in Washington, D.C. Halper served in the White House during the Nixon and Ford administrations. Halper hates Trump. How he got on Trump’s campaign staff is not clear.
“Unless WaPo & NYT articles are wrong, it seems that an informant (spy) for the Obama administration (paid tax payer dollars?!) kept tabs (spied) on the Trump campaign,” tweeted Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). “Of all the disturbing revelations about the deep state in the last 2 years, I find this one most disturbing.”
On cue, Never Trumpers, establishment crybabies, and left-liberal talking heads started whining in unison about Halper the stool pigeon – they laughingly call this agent in a massive criminal conspiracy an “intelligence source” – being identified in an effort to draw attention away from the treachery of the spying operation they support.
“We've basically crossed the line into treason now -- and a whole party is acquiescing[,]” tweeted make-believe economist Paul Krugman about the Republican Party.
Benjamin Wittes of the left-wing Brookings Institution blame-tweeted the victim, maintaining the laughable fiction that what was done to the Trump campaign was part of a legitimate national security-related investigation.
“I have a whole lot to say about how the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and the President of the United States teamed up to out an intelligence source who aided our country in a properly predicated counterintelligence investigation against a hostile foreign power.”
With the flood of new evidence from recent days, it is becoming increasingly difficult to deny that President Obama – undeniably the most pro-Russian president in American history – and his men abused the powers of their offices not only to spy on then-candidate Donald Trump but also to undermine and lay the foundation for the overthrow of Trump’s administration.
No matter how many idiots and liars from both parties embarrass themselves by blathering on about the Left’s utterly insane conspiracy theory by which Russia and Trump are said to have engaged in electoral collusion, whatever that may be, we now know there was a conspiracy born in the summer of 2016 – and that Trump and his people had nothing to do with it.
This shameful real-life conspiracy is called Operation Crossfire Hurricane. Crossfire Hurricane is the codename for the FBI’s now-confirmed spying on the Trump campaign, which included placing at least one infiltrator within the campaign apparatus.
Incredibly, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said on CNN Thursday that it was “a good thing” the FBI had an informant embedded in the Trump campaign.
After admitting the FBI “may have had someone who was talking to them in the campaign,” Clapper said that person was there to find out “what the Russians were doing to try to instantiate themselves in the campaign or influence or leverage it.”
“So, if there was someone that was observing that sort of thing, that’s a good thing.”
Clapper was corroborating what the New York Times reported deep down way near the end of a lengthy recent article:
The F.B.I.’s thinking crystallized by mid-August, after the C.I.A. director at the time, John O. Brennan, shared intelligence with Mr. [James] Comey showing that the Russian government was behind an attack on the 2016 presidential election. Intelligence agencies began collaborating to investigate that operation. The Crossfire Hurricane team was part of that group but largely operated independently, three officials said.
As the American Spectator’s George Neumayr observes,
Contained in that oh-so-nonchalant line — “Intelligence agencies began collaborating to investigate that operation” — is one of Obamagate’s biggest ticking time bombs. When it blows, John Brennan, whose demented partisanship led him to run an anti-Trump spying operation straight out of CIA headquarters, will feel much of the blast.
Neumayr is right.
As I wrote 14 months ago here at FrontPage,
Now the outlines of a Watergate-like conspiracy are emerging in which a sitting Democrat president apparently used the apparatus of the state to spy on a Republican presidential candidate. Watergate differed in that President Nixon didn’t get involved in the plot against the Democratic National Committee until later as an accomplice after the fact. Here Obama likely masterminded, or oversaw someone like the diabolical Benghazi cover-up artist Ben Rhodes, masterminding the whole thing.
Now we have more than mere outlines. After a year of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s reign of terror, complete with a rotten, corrupt FBI at his service that since the closing days of the Obama administration has become a secret police agency more like the KGB, the Stasi, or the Gestapo, than the supposedly most respected law enforcement agency in the world, routinely committing outrages against America’s free institutions that would have made J. Edgar Hoover blush.
Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz may soon recommend criminal charges in the handling of the Clinton investigations by the department and the FBI, reports investigative journalist Paul Sperry.
“Those invited to review the report were told they would have to sign nondisclosure agreements in order to read it, people familiar with the matter said. They are expected to have a few days to craft a response to any criticism in the report, which will then be incorporated in the final version to be released in coming weeks,” the Wall Street Journal reported.
As former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy said on Sean Hannity’s TV show Thursday, the plotters in Mueller’s office “bent over backward not to make the case against Mrs. Clinton, but then scorched the earth to make it against Trump.”
Who in the upper echelons of the FBI is guilty of participating in this rolling coup attempt hardly seems relevant anymore. The only question is, who among senior FBI officials isn’t an enemy of We The People.
The speech-writing fabulist Ben Rhodes likely played a role in all of this but now evidence suggests the lead conspirators against the American democratic process may have been no less than the endlessly publicity-seeking former FBI Director James Comey and the soulless Brennan, the traitorous Communist-loving hajji whose emetic, sanctimonious tweets are loaded with rhetorical overkill that can be measured in megatons.
“The gathering winds for Crossfire Hurricane,” emanated from the mouth of the CIA blowhard, Neumayr continues:
Panicking at the sight of Donald Trump’s Super Tuesday wins in March 2016, Brennan had by the following month formed the beginnings of a spying operation against him, and managed to enmesh a bunch of other agencies in it, thinking that would keep the outside of the CIA’s cup clean. How do we know this? Because a “senior” member of the intelligence community — back when such a figure thought talking out of school about such matters would serve the cause of delegitimizing Trump — leaked the existence of the operation to the BBC in January 2017[.]
Information was illicitly passed on to a state in the Baltics, because, as Neumayr reminds us, the Obama-led Deep State was forced to create a joint counter-intelligence taskforce because the CIA is not chartered to act domestically against U.S. citizens.
On the domestic side, there was the FBI, Treasury Department, and Justice Department. On the foreign and intelligence-related side, there was the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the National Security Agency.
Based on little more than a directive from Brennan, these agencies spied on Hillary Clinton’s opponent in an operation that “makes Watergate look like a tenth-rate burglary,” as Neumayr puts it.
Readers may be wondering at this point about the origin of the “Crossfire Hurricane” codename.
Perhaps it is a jab at Trump for his unrequited love of the Rolling Stones whose song, “You Can’t Always Get What You Want,” is often played at the end of Trump events.
The mixed military-meteorological phrase appears in the 1968 song “Jumpin’ Jack Flash,” which was co-written by Stones guitarist Keith Richards. The song begins:
I was born in a crossfire hurricane
And I howled at the morning driving rain
But it's all right now, in fact, it's a gas
But it's all right. I'm Jumpin' Jack Flash
It's a gas, gas, gas
As Richards has acknowledged, “crossfire hurricane” is a reference to his birth, Dec. 18, 1943, at Dartford, England, outside London, during a series of German air raids in the Second World War, according to Keith Richards, The Unauthorised Biography, by Victor Bockris.
“Hitler had me marked,” Richards quipped years later.
Richards’ contempt for Trump is no secret. During the “Steel Wheels” tour date in Atlantic City in 1989, Richards reportedly was so angry with Trump that he was moved to property destruction, People reports.
The band had arrived to see a concert billed as “Donald Trump presents the Rolling Stones” with the band’s name in a much smaller font than Trump’s. “I got out my trusty blade, stuck it in the table and said: ‘You have to get rid of this man!’ ” told an interviewer.
“Now America has to get rid of him,” Richards added. “Don’t say I didn’t warn you!”
As Richards and all the anti-Trump plotters ought to know, you can’t always get what you want.
Despite years of relentless attacks, the Constitution and the rule of law aren’t quite dead yet.

Democrats wake up to what indulging the Clinton corruption has brought them




Leftists haven't stopped yelling about the 2016 election, but at least some of them are starting to wake up and smell the coffee they brewed themselves.
Josh Barro, a prominent and respected writer on the far left, has written a widely circulated article with this nut graf:
Here's one reason the Trump corruption scandals aren't connecting as much as they should: Before Democrats spent the past 18 months telling everyone this is not normal, they spent years reassuring voters that this was normal.
While I am a bit baffled about his claims of 'Trump corruption scandals' (what is he talking about?) the second half of his statement is dead on. Two can play that game. Or more accurately, the Clintons lowered the bar.
Up until now, this phenomenon has been quite opaque to leftists, who have repeatedly dismissed Clinton (and Obama) behavior as business as usual. Spying on political opponents, spying on the press, taking cash for foundation donations in exchange for policy decisions, was all claimed to be nothing, just as 'it's just about sex' had been. Democrats systematically corrupted the system with their 'we'll just have to win it, then' mentality, courtesy of the Clintons, and now have to contend with a rigged Democratic Party, they can't even blame Republicans for that one, it's all their own doing. Their Alinskyite 'by any means necessary' mentality has come back to bite them in the butts now. And now they have Trump to deal with. The very Trump of rising poll numbers, so lucky them.
What they did through this short term gain was open the door for someone else to take obvious transgressions that should have been nipped in the bud to ever greater extremes. The Stormy Daniels controversy, for instance, is a nothingburger to us now, because Bill Clinton and several Democrats before him already lowered the bar, thinking that if Democrats do it, it's all O.K.
Net result, voters just don't care.
Pat yourselves on the back for that, Democrats, because you are living in a 'new normal' of your own making.
Image credit: Democracy Chronicles, via Flickr // Creative Commons SA 2.0




THE MANY CRIMINAL LIVES OF BARACK OBAMA AND HILLARY CLINTON






The thuggishness of Barack was clear early on.  There was his land deal, wherein he enriched himself with Tony Rezko in Chicago.  All his political wins came by nefariously taking out his political opponents rather than beating them fairly in the arena of ideas.  Everyone should have known.


THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S LEADING LAP DANCERS:

Hillary, Billary, Cosby, Buttman Affleck, Oliver Stone, Harvey Weinstein and their boy Obomb….. new definitions of
degradation and sleaze.                            


Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom


The Clinton reckoning is tiptoeing in





This is a historic moment of bated breath and tight sphincters all over Clintonworld.  After decades of skating on their grifts, abuses, and outright crimes, a reckoning is coming.  And not just for the Hillary Clinton, but for her enablers.  The leaks begin about the I.G. report on the Hillary Clinton email investigation
Until Wednesday, there had been virtually no genuine leaks coming out of the inspector general's office at the Department of Justice – the sign of a probe with integrity. But that silence ended when the I.G.'s office circulated relevant portions of its report to people named in it, for their comments, which would be included when the report is published.

"With a cloth?"
The first sign was the now-infamous New York Times article, "Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation," in which, all of a sudden, it was officially admitted that the Trump campaign was spied on by the Obama intelligence apparatus and that at least one secret agent was employed.  Clearly, a major spin operation was underway in which damning facts to be revealed in an I.G. report are presented in the most favorable light possible and then can be dismissed as "old news" when the report is published.
But not everyone who now has seen portions of the report is playing defense.  Sara Carter is one of the key investigative reporters covering the biggest political scandal in American history.  She writes:
Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report, which is expected to be released within the next three to four weeks to the public, has been turned over to current and former officials for review, as first reported in The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post.
The draft, however, does not include any recommendations for criminal prosecution.  If there was any evidence collected by the Inspector General's office of criminality, Horowitz would then refer the matter to the Department of Justice and submit a criminal referral to prosecutors.
"It would be up to the Inspector General to make the recommendations but there is an expectation that there will be at least one referral for prosecution," said a source familiar with the findings, who added that it is not conclusive as the Inspector General's office never discusses ongoing investigations.
In other words, so far, nobody outside the tightly controlled I.G. office knows the nature of any criminal referrals resulting from the inquiry.  But the history of the investigation into Andrew McCabe, already made public before he was able to retire and collect extra retirement income, suggests that the I.G. is far from reluctant to make such referrals:
As for the criminal referrals, it would be similar to the outcome of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who was fired by Attorney General Jeff Sessions after Horowitz's explosive first report released in April found that he lied multiple times about authorizing a leak to The Wall Street Journal.  In McCabe's case, Horowitz referred his findings to Sessions, who fired him several days before he was set to retire.  Horowitz also submitted a criminal referral on McCabe to the DOJ for possible criminal prosecution, as reported.  It would be up to Washington prosecutors to determine whether or not to move forward with the referral and it elevated the possibility that McCabe would be charged with a crime.  Horowitz's report concluded that McCabe had lied to then-FBI Director James B. Comey, as well as his investigators and others regarding his authorization of the leak.  McCabe lied on four occasions, three of those were under oath.
A.G. Sessions already revealed that John Huber, a U.S. attorney in Utah, has been charged with investigating scandals relating to Justice Department investigations of President Trump, and the U.S. attorney in Little Rock has a grand jury investigation underway.  So the pieces are in place for action on any referrals that may result.
It is important to remember that the I.G. report currently in the review and comment stage is but the second (McCabe was the first) of three, as Carter notes:
The report [under review and comment now] is expected to focus solely on the Clinton investigation and not on the 2016 Russia election meddling investigation, according to sources. ...
The Clinton report is expected to be followed by a third report on the IG's investigation into the FBI and DOJ's handling of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application on Carter Page, a former volunteer for the Trump campaign. The IG announced this investigation in March.
The "Crossfire Hurricane" story in the New York Times was playing defense on the FISA application investigation, it seems.  My speculation is that both phases of the I.G. report are close to being released.  Or else, the email investigation report makes reference to the counterintelligence investigation of Trump.  Because of the integrity of the I.G. office, we don't really know, but we will be finding out soon.



Leaked Julian Assange Message: Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected, Sadistic Sociopath’






A former Wikileaks volunteer has leaked private messages sent between Julian Assange and a group of his supporters to the Intercept. The messages, 11,000 in all, were sent privately on Twitter and stretch from mid-2015 to November 2017. The Intercept correctly points out that a lot of the points Assange made privately to the group he also made publicly in various interviews. What’s different about the messages is that they provide an “unfiltered window” into his thinking.
For instance, it’s no secret that Assange is not a fan of Hillary Clinton. In 2016 he said the pro-Clinton media was erecting a “demon,” one that would “put nooses around everyone’s neck” if Clinton were elected (video below). Still, in private, Assange was far less kind in his assessment of Hillary [emphasis added]:
“We believe it would be much better for GOP to win,” he typed into a private Twitter direct message group to an assortment of WikiLeaks’ most loyal supporters on Twitter. “Dems+Media+liberals woudl then form a block to reign in their worst qualities,” he wrote. “With Hillary in charge, GOP will be pushing for her worst qualities., dems+media+neoliberals will be mute.” He paused for two minutes before adding, “She’s a bright, well connected, sadistic sociopath.
Assange’s thinking appeared to be rooted not in ideological agreement with the right wing in the U.S., but in the tactical idea that a Republican president would face more resistance to an aggressive military posture than an interventionist President Hillary Clinton would.
A few more months into the primary season, after Super Tuesday, Assange decried the idea of Clinton in the “whitehouse with her bloodlutt and amitions of empire with hawkish liberal-interventionist appointees like [Anne-Marie] Slaughter and digital expansionists such as Google integrated into the power structure. Then the republicans and trump in opposition constantly saying she’s weak and not invading enough.”
Another 2016 mini-scandal mentioned in the message archive is the claim, by Roger Stone, that he had advance notice of material Wikileaks planned to release:
In the final months of the 2016 election, Stone repeatedly claimed that he had insider knowledge about WikiLeaks’ upcoming release of hacked emails. In early August 2016, Stone told a Florida Republican Party group, “I actually have communicated with Assange, including tweeting that ‘it will soon the [sic] Podesta’s time in the barrel’ before WikiLeaks published its cache of Podesta emails.” In the private Twitter group, WikiLeaks dismissed Stone’s claims, just as it had publicly. “Stone is a bullshitter,” Assange posted. “Trying to a) imply that he knows anything b) that he contributed to our hard work.”
There’s more in the article including Assange trash-talking one of the attorneys representing a woman who made sexual assault allegations against him and some comments about Chelsea Manning (Assange supports using Chelsea’s chosen pronouns but suggested a statue depicting Manning as a male might avoid offending audiences in some countries).
I didn’t read through the entire chat history but if what the Intercept published is the best/worst of it I don’t think Assange has too much to worry about. His dislike for Hillary was already evident and I’m sure she’s said the same or worse about him in semi-private.









600x300
Clinton Campaign Funneled $150,000 To Hillary Clinton’s Personal Company
Source: Daily Caller
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has transferred nearly $150,000 of leftover campaign funds to a company she solely owns in the months following her election defeat, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).






For some reason, despite the disgrace and career defenestration visited on other liberal icons like Charlie Rose and Harvey Weinstein, Bill Clinton is still able to cash in in a big way, and enjoy the company and implicit endorsement of major media companies and personalities. Yesterday, Jennifer Wright put into context the weird immunity granted to him, in the New York Post:
It’s 2018. One of the world’s most powerful married men had a 22-year-old intern perform oral sex on him in his office. He’s been accused of sexual assault by three other women. One claims, as is the case with so many of the men who have fallen from positions of power as a result, that he exposed himself to her (which always makes me, at least, pause and wonder why on earth so many men seem to want to do this). We know, too, that he lied about his tryst with the intern.
So why is Bill Clinton still presiding over glamorous parties? (snip) he’s almost certainly guilty of actions that would be categorized as harassment in 2018. The fact that the Lewinsky affair happened as long ago as 1995 is no matter.
Charlie Rose is accused of harassment by several employees dating back to the late 1990s — and he lost his job in November.
People seem curiously willing to hold Clinton to a different standard than other men accused of sexual harassment. Many don’t seem especially bothered by his actions at all and lay the blame for the scandal squarely on Lewinsky. In a 2014 Economist/YouGov poll, 58 percent of those surveyed had a favorable opinion of Bill Clinton. Meanwhile, 48 percent had an unfavorable opinion of Lewinsky.
Bill Clinton is once again cashing in on a scale that dwarfs the income possibilities of ordinary Americans.  Isabel Vincent laid it out yesterday, also in the New York Post:
Bill Clinton will spend his summer rolling in dough.
Next month the former president is scheduled to crisscross the US and Canada in a promotional tour for his new novel, in some cases charging $1,500 a ticket for on-stage events, dubbed “A Conversation with President Bill Clinton.”
Clinton, already a best-selling author for his 2004 autobiography “My Life,” began raking in the cash for the fictional thriller that he wrote with mega-bestselling novelist James Patterson, before the book was finished. He and his co-author reportedly signed a seven-figure deal with Showtime last year for the rights to turn “The President is Missing” into a TV series.
Showtime is a subsidiary of Viacom, as is CBS, which fired Charlie Rose. Why the disparate standards? Are politicians (or at least Democrat presidents)  granted some sort of droit du seigneur over vulnerable and comely young interns and assistants that doesn’t apply to Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer, and other media grandees?
I wonder what Barack Obama has to say?
Oh, wait a minute: he already said it: “At some point, you’ve made enough money.”
PS: James Patterson, I am done with you. I will never buy or read another book written by you.



Democrats wake up to what indulging the Clinton corruption has brought them




Leftists haven't stopped yelling about the 2016 election, but at least some of them are starting to wake up and smell the coffee they brewed themselves.
Josh Barro, a prominent and respected writer on the far left, has written a widely circulated article with this nut graf:
Here's one reason the Trump corruption scandals aren't connecting as much as they should: Before Democrats spent the past 18 months telling everyone this is not normal, they spent years reassuring voters that this was normal.
While I am a bit baffled about his claims of 'Trump corruption scandals' (what is he talking about?) the second half of his statement is dead on. Two can play that game. Or more accurately, the Clintons lowered the bar.
Up until now, this phenomenon has been quite opaque to leftists, who have repeatedly dismissed Clinton (and Obama) behavior as business as usual. Spying on political opponents, spying on the press, taking cash for foundation donations in exchange for policy decisions, was all claimed to be nothing, just as 'it's just about sex' had been. Democrats systematically corrupted the system with their 'we'll just have to win it, then' mentality, courtesy of the Clintons, and now have to contend with a rigged Democratic Party, they can't even blame Republicans for that one, it's all their own doing. Their Alinskyite 'by any means necessary' mentality has come back to bite them in the butts now. And now they have Trump to deal with. The very Trump of rising poll numbers, so lucky them.
What they did through this short term gain was open the door for someone else to take obvious transgressions that should have been nipped in the bud to ever greater extremes. The Stormy Daniels controversy, for instance, is a nothingburger to us now, because Bill Clinton and several Democrats before him already lowered the bar, thinking that if Democrats do it, it's all O.K.
Net result, voters just don't care.
Pat yourselves on the back for that, Democrats, because you are living in a 'new normal' of your own making.
Image credit: Democracy Chronicles, via Flickr // Creative Commons SA 2.0




THE MANY CRIMINAL LIVES OF BARACK OBAMA AND HILLARY CLINTON






The thuggishness of Barack was clear early on.  There was his land deal, wherein he enriched himself with Tony Rezko in Chicago.  All his political wins came by nefariously taking out his political opponents rather than beating them fairly in the arena of ideas.  Everyone should have known.


THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S LEADING LAP DANCERS:

Hillary, Billary, Cosby, Buttman Affleck, Oliver Stone, Harvey Weinstein and their boy Obomb….. new definitions of
degradation and sleaze.                            


Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom


The Clinton reckoning is tiptoeing in





This is a historic moment of bated breath and tight sphincters all over Clintonworld.  After decades of skating on their grifts, abuses, and outright crimes, a reckoning is coming.  And not just for the Hillary Clinton, but for her enablers.  The leaks begin about the I.G. report on the Hillary Clinton email investigation
Until Wednesday, there had been virtually no genuine leaks coming out of the inspector general's office at the Department of Justice – the sign of a probe with integrity. But that silence ended when the I.G.'s office circulated relevant portions of its report to people named in it, for their comments, which would be included when the report is published.

"With a cloth?"
The first sign was the now-infamous New York Times article, "Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation," in which, all of a sudden, it was officially admitted that the Trump campaign was spied on by the Obama intelligence apparatus and that at least one secret agent was employed.  Clearly, a major spin operation was underway in which damning facts to be revealed in an I.G. report are presented in the most favorable light possible and then can be dismissed as "old news" when the report is published.
But not everyone who now has seen portions of the report is playing defense.  Sara Carter is one of the key investigative reporters covering the biggest political scandal in American history.  She writes:
Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report, which is expected to be released within the next three to four weeks to the public, has been turned over to current and former officials for review, as first reported in The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post.
The draft, however, does not include any recommendations for criminal prosecution.  If there was any evidence collected by the Inspector General's office of criminality, Horowitz would then refer the matter to the Department of Justice and submit a criminal referral to prosecutors.
"It would be up to the Inspector General to make the recommendations but there is an expectation that there will be at least one referral for prosecution," said a source familiar with the findings, who added that it is not conclusive as the Inspector General's office never discusses ongoing investigations.
In other words, so far, nobody outside the tightly controlled I.G. office knows the nature of any criminal referrals resulting from the inquiry.  But the history of the investigation into Andrew McCabe, already made public before he was able to retire and collect extra retirement income, suggests that the I.G. is far from reluctant to make such referrals:
As for the criminal referrals, it would be similar to the outcome of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who was fired by Attorney General Jeff Sessions after Horowitz's explosive first report released in April found that he lied multiple times about authorizing a leak to The Wall Street Journal.  In McCabe's case, Horowitz referred his findings to Sessions, who fired him several days before he was set to retire.  Horowitz also submitted a criminal referral on McCabe to the DOJ for possible criminal prosecution, as reported.  It would be up to Washington prosecutors to determine whether or not to move forward with the referral and it elevated the possibility that McCabe would be charged with a crime.  Horowitz's report concluded that McCabe had lied to then-FBI Director James B. Comey, as well as his investigators and others regarding his authorization of the leak.  McCabe lied on four occasions, three of those were under oath.
A.G. Sessions already revealed that John Huber, a U.S. attorney in Utah, has been charged with investigating scandals relating to Justice Department investigations of President Trump, and the U.S. attorney in Little Rock has a grand jury investigation underway.  So the pieces are in place for action on any referrals that may result.
It is important to remember that the I.G. report currently in the review and comment stage is but the second (McCabe was the first) of three, as Carter notes:
The report [under review and comment now] is expected to focus solely on the Clinton investigation and not on the 2016 Russia election meddling investigation, according to sources. ...
The Clinton report is expected to be followed by a third report on the IG's investigation into the FBI and DOJ's handling of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application on Carter Page, a former volunteer for the Trump campaign. The IG announced this investigation in March.
The "Crossfire Hurricane" story in the New York Times was playing defense on the FISA application investigation, it seems.  My speculation is that both phases of the I.G. report are close to being released.  Or else, the email investigation report makes reference to the counterintelligence investigation of Trump.  Because of the integrity of the I.G. office, we don't really know, but we will be finding out soon.



Leaked Julian Assange Message: Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected, Sadistic Sociopath’






A former Wikileaks volunteer has leaked private messages sent between Julian Assange and a group of his supporters to the Intercept. The messages, 11,000 in all, were sent privately on Twitter and stretch from mid-2015 to November 2017. The Intercept correctly points out that a lot of the points Assange made privately to the group he also made publicly in various interviews. What’s different about the messages is that they provide an “unfiltered window” into his thinking.
For instance, it’s no secret that Assange is not a fan of Hillary Clinton. In 2016 he said the pro-Clinton media was erecting a “demon,” one that would “put nooses around everyone’s neck” if Clinton were elected (video below). Still, in private, Assange was far less kind in his assessment of Hillary [emphasis added]:
“We believe it would be much better for GOP to win,” he typed into a private Twitter direct message group to an assortment of WikiLeaks’ most loyal supporters on Twitter. “Dems+Media+liberals woudl then form a block to reign in their worst qualities,” he wrote. “With Hillary in charge, GOP will be pushing for her worst qualities., dems+media+neoliberals will be mute.” He paused for two minutes before adding, “She’s a bright, well connected, sadistic sociopath.
Assange’s thinking appeared to be rooted not in ideological agreement with the right wing in the U.S., but in the tactical idea that a Republican president would face more resistance to an aggressive military posture than an interventionist President Hillary Clinton would.
A few more months into the primary season, after Super Tuesday, Assange decried the idea of Clinton in the “whitehouse with her bloodlutt and amitions of empire with hawkish liberal-interventionist appointees like [Anne-Marie] Slaughter and digital expansionists such as Google integrated into the power structure. Then the republicans and trump in opposition constantly saying she’s weak and not invading enough.”
Another 2016 mini-scandal mentioned in the message archive is the claim, by Roger Stone, that he had advance notice of material Wikileaks planned to release:
In the final months of the 2016 election, Stone repeatedly claimed that he had insider knowledge about WikiLeaks’ upcoming release of hacked emails. In early August 2016, Stone told a Florida Republican Party group, “I actually have communicated with Assange, including tweeting that ‘it will soon the [sic] Podesta’s time in the barrel’ before WikiLeaks published its cache of Podesta emails.” In the private Twitter group, WikiLeaks dismissed Stone’s claims, just as it had publicly. “Stone is a bullshitter,” Assange posted. “Trying to a) imply that he knows anything b) that he contributed to our hard work.”
There’s more in the article including Assange trash-talking one of the attorneys representing a woman who made sexual assault allegations against him and some comments about Chelsea Manning (Assange supports using Chelsea’s chosen pronouns but suggested a statue depicting Manning as a male might avoid offending audiences in some countries).
I didn’t read through the entire chat history but if what the Intercept published is the best/worst of it I don’t think Assange has too much to worry about. His dislike for Hillary was already evident and I’m sure she’s said the same or worse about him in semi-private.








600x300
Clinton Campaign Funneled $150,000 To Hillary Clinton’s Personal Company
Source: Daily Caller
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has transferred nearly $150,000 of leftover campaign funds to a company she solely owns in the months following her election defeat, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
13x13x1READ MORE
Background Notes from Judicial Watch



180x150x1
03/22/2016
Clinton Documents Raise Questions on Benghazi, Clinton Foundation
Source: Judicial Watch
An August 2009 email chain including Hillary Clinton’s then- Chief of Staff Huma Abedin shows that the State Department coordinated with Clinton Foundation staff on how Mrs. Clinton to thank Foundation supporters/partners for their “commitments.”

































13x13x1
READ May 20, 2018

Bill Clinton escaping the #MeToo standards and cashing in (again)

For some reason, despite the disgrace and career defenestration visited on other liberal icons like Charlie Rose and Harvey Weinstein, Bill Clinton is still able to cash in in a big way, and enjoy the company and implicit endorsement of major media companies and personalities. Yesterday, Jennifer Wright put into context the weird immunity granted to him, in the New York Post:
It’s 2018. One of the world’s most powerful married men had a 22-year-old intern perform oral sex on him in his office. He’s been accused of sexual assault by three other women. One claims, as is the case with so many of the men who have fallen from positions of power as a result, that he exposed himself to her (which always makes me, at least, pause and wonder why on earth so many men seem to want to do this). We know, too, that he lied about his tryst with the intern.
So why is Bill Clinton still presiding over glamorous parties? (snip) he’s almost certainly guilty of actions that would be categorized as harassment in 2018. The fact that the Lewinsky affair happened as long ago as 1995 is no matter.
Charlie Rose is accused of harassment by several employees dating back to the late 1990s — and he lost his job in November.
People seem curiously willing to hold Clinton to a different standard than other men accused of sexual harassment. Many don’t seem especially bothered by his actions at all and lay the blame for the scandal squarely on Lewinsky. In a 2014 Economist/YouGov poll, 58 percent of those surveyed had a favorable opinion of Bill Clinton. Meanwhile, 48 percent had an unfavorable opinion of Lewinsky.
Bill Clinton is once again cashing in on a scale that dwarfs the income possibilities of ordinary Americans.  Isabel Vincent laid it out yesterday, also in the New York Post:
Bill Clinton will spend his summer rolling in dough.
Next month the former president is scheduled to crisscross the US and Canada in a promotional tour for his new novel, in some cases charging $1,500 a ticket for on-stage events, dubbed “A Conversation with President Bill Clinton.”
Clinton, already a best-selling author for his 2004 autobiography “My Life,” began raking in the cash for the fictional thriller that he wrote with mega-bestselling novelist James Patterson, before the book was finished. He and his co-author reportedly signed a seven-figure deal with Showtime last year for the rights to turn “The President is Missing” into a TV series.
Showtime is a subsidiary of Viacom, as is CBS, which fired Charlie Rose. Why the disparate standards? Are politicians (or at least Democrat presidents)  granted some sort of droit du seigneur over vulnerable and comely young interns and assistants that doesn’t apply to Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer, and other media grandees?
I wonder what Barack Obama has to say?
Oh, wait a minute: he already said it: “At some point, you’ve made enough money.”



Democrats wake up to what indulging the Clinton corruption has brought them



Leftists haven't stopped yelling about the 2016 election, but at least some of them are starting to wake up and smell the coffee they brewed themselves.
Josh Barro, a prominent and respected writer on the far left, has written a widely circulated article with this nut graf:
Here's one reason the Trump corruption scandals aren't connecting as much as they should: Before Democrats spent the past 18 months telling everyone this is not normal, they spent years reassuring voters that this was normal.
While I am a bit baffled about his claims of 'Trump corruption scandals' (what is he talking about?) the second half of his statement is dead on. Two can play that game. Or more accurately, the Clintons lowered the bar.
Up until now, this phenomenon has been quite opaque to leftists, who have repeatedly dismissed Clinton (and Obama) behavior as business as usual. Spying on political opponents, spying on the press, taking cash for foundation donations in exchange for policy decisions, was all claimed to be nothing, just as 'it's just about sex' had been. Democrats systematically corrupted the system with their 'we'll just have to win it, then' mentality, courtesy of the Clintons, and now have to contend with a rigged Democratic Party, they can't even blame Republicans for that one, it's all their own doing. Their Alinskyite 'by any means necessary' mentality has come back to bite them in the butts now. And now they have Trump to deal with. The very Trump of rising poll numbers, so lucky them.
What they did through this short term gain was open the door for someone else to take obvious transgressions that should have been nipped in the bud to ever greater extremes. The Stormy Daniels controversy, for instance, is a nothingburger to us now, because Bill Clinton and several Democrats before him already lowered the bar, thinking that if Democrats do it, it's all O.K.
Net result, voters just don't care.
Pat yourselves on the back for that, Democrats, because you are living in a 'new normal' of your own making.
Image credit: Democracy Chronicles, via Flickr // Creative Commons SA 2.0



THE MANY CRIMINAL LIVES OF BARACK OBAMA AND HILLARY CLINTON






The thuggishness of Barack was clear early on.  There was his land deal, wherein he enriched himself with Tony Rezko in Chicago.  All his political wins came by nefariously taking out his political opponents rather than beating them fairly in the arena of ideas.  Everyone should have known.

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S LEADING LAP DANCERS:

Hillary, Billary, Cosby, Buttman Affleck, Oliver Stone, Harvey Weinstein and their boy Obomb….. new definitions of
degradation and sleaze.                            


Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom

The Clinton reckoning is tiptoeing in




This is a historic moment of bated breath and tight sphincters all over Clintonworld.  After decades of skating on their grifts, abuses, and outright crimes, a reckoning is coming.  And not just for the Hillary Clinton, but for her enablers.  The leaks begin about the I.G. report on the Hillary Clinton email investigation
Until Wednesday, there had been virtually no genuine leaks coming out of the inspector general's office at the Department of Justice – the sign of a probe with integrity. But that silence ended when the I.G.'s office circulated relevant portions of its report to people named in it, for their comments, which would be included when the report is published.

"With a cloth?"
The first sign was the now-infamous New York Times article, "Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation," in which, all of a sudden, it was officially admitted that the Trump campaign was spied on by the Obama intelligence apparatus and that at least one secret agent was employed.  Clearly, a major spin operation was underway in which damning facts to be revealed in an I.G. report are presented in the most favorable light possible and then can be dismissed as "old news" when the report is published.
But not everyone who now has seen portions of the report is playing defense.  Sara Carter is one of the key investigative reporters covering the biggest political scandal in American history.  She writes:
Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report, which is expected to be released within the next three to four weeks to the public, has been turned over to current and former officials for review, as first reported in The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post.
The draft, however, does not include any recommendations for criminal prosecution.  If there was any evidence collected by the Inspector General's office of criminality, Horowitz would then refer the matter to the Department of Justice and submit a criminal referral to prosecutors.
"It would be up to the Inspector General to make the recommendations but there is an expectation that there will be at least one referral for prosecution," said a source familiar with the findings, who added that it is not conclusive as the Inspector General's office never discusses ongoing investigations.
In other words, so far, nobody outside the tightly controlled I.G. office knows the nature of any criminal referrals resulting from the inquiry.  But the history of the investigation into Andrew McCabe, already made public before he was able to retire and collect extra retirement income, suggests that the I.G. is far from reluctant to make such referrals:
As for the criminal referrals, it would be similar to the outcome of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who was fired by Attorney General Jeff Sessions after Horowitz's explosive first report released in April found that he lied multiple times about authorizing a leak to The Wall Street Journal.  In McCabe's case, Horowitz referred his findings to Sessions, who fired him several days before he was set to retire.  Horowitz also submitted a criminal referral on McCabe to the DOJ for possible criminal prosecution, as reported.  It would be up to Washington prosecutors to determine whether or not to move forward with the referral and it elevated the possibility that McCabe would be charged with a crime.  Horowitz's report concluded that McCabe had lied to then-FBI Director James B. Comey, as well as his investigators and others regarding his authorization of the leak.  McCabe lied on four occasions, three of those were under oath.
A.G. Sessions already revealed that John Huber, a U.S. attorney in Utah, has been charged with investigating scandals relating to Justice Department investigations of President Trump, and the U.S. attorney in Little Rock has a grand jury investigation underway.  So the pieces are in place for action on any referrals that may result.
It is important to remember that the I.G. report currently in the review and comment stage is but the second (McCabe was the first) of three, as Carter notes:
The report [under review and comment now] is expected to focus solely on the Clinton investigation and not on the 2016 Russia election meddling investigation, according to sources. ...
The Clinton report is expected to be followed by a third report on the IG's investigation into the FBI and DOJ's handling of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application on Carter Page, a former volunteer for the Trump campaign. The IG announced this investigation in March.
The "Crossfire Hurricane" story in the New York Times was playing defense on the FISA application investigation, it seems.  My speculation is that both phases of the I.G. report are close to being released.  Or else, the email investigation report makes reference to the counterintelligence investigation of Trump.  Because of the integrity of the I.G. office, we don't really know, but we will be finding out soon.



Leaked Julian Assange Message: Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected, Sadistic Sociopath’






A former Wikileaks volunteer has leaked private messages sent between Julian Assange and a group of his supporters to the Intercept. The messages, 11,000 in all, were sent privately on Twitter and stretch from mid-2015 to November 2017. The Intercept correctly points out that a lot of the points Assange made privately to the group he also made publicly in various interviews. What’s different about the messages is that they provide an “unfiltered window” into his thinking.
For instance, it’s no secret that Assange is not a fan of Hillary Clinton. In 2016 he said the pro-Clinton media was erecting a “demon,” one that would “put nooses around everyone’s neck” if Clinton were elected (video below). Still, in private, Assange was far less kind in his assessment of Hillary [emphasis added]:
“We believe it would be much better for GOP to win,” he typed into a private Twitter direct message group to an assortment of WikiLeaks’ most loyal supporters on Twitter. “Dems+Media+liberals woudl then form a block to reign in their worst qualities,” he wrote. “With Hillary in charge, GOP will be pushing for her worst qualities., dems+media+neoliberals will be mute.” He paused for two minutes before adding, “She’s a bright, well connected, sadistic sociopath.
Assange’s thinking appeared to be rooted not in ideological agreement with the right wing in the U.S., but in the tactical idea that a Republican president would face more resistance to an aggressive military posture than an interventionist President Hillary Clinton would.
A few more months into the primary season, after Super Tuesday, Assange decried the idea of Clinton in the “whitehouse with her bloodlutt and amitions of empire with hawkish liberal-interventionist appointees like [Anne-Marie] Slaughter and digital expansionists such as Google integrated into the power structure. Then the republicans and trump in opposition constantly saying she’s weak and not invading enough.”
Another 2016 mini-scandal mentioned in the message archive is the claim, by Roger Stone, that he had advance notice of material Wikileaks planned to release:
In the final months of the 2016 election, Stone repeatedly claimed that he had insider knowledge about WikiLeaks’ upcoming release of hacked emails. In early August 2016, Stone told a Florida Republican Party group, “I actually have communicated with Assange, including tweeting that ‘it will soon the [sic] Podesta’s time in the barrel’ before WikiLeaks published its cache of Podesta emails.” In the private Twitter group, WikiLeaks dismissed Stone’s claims, just as it had publicly. “Stone is a bullshitter,” Assange posted. “Trying to a) imply that he knows anything b) that he contributed to our hard work.”
There’s more in the article including Assange trash-talking one of the attorneys representing a woman who made sexual assault allegations against him and some comments about Chelsea Manning (Assange supports using Chelsea’s chosen pronouns but suggested a statue depicting Manning as a male might avoid offending audiences in some countries).
I didn’t read through the entire chat history but if what the Intercept published is the best/worst of it I don’t think Assange has too much to worry about. His dislike for Hillary was already evident and I’m sure she’s said the same or worse about him in semi-private.









600x300
Clinton Campaign Funneled $150,000 To Hillary Clinton’s Personal Company
Source: Daily Caller
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has transferred nearly $150,000 of leftover campaign funds to a company she solely owns in the months following her election defeat, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
"Hillary’s over 700 member campaign staff and the media must remake Hillary’s image for the umpteenth time after forty years in public life because the truth is so unattractive."

THE UGLY, SORDID, CORRUPT AND SLEAZY LIFE OF BILLARY AND HILLARY CLINTON:


THIRTY REASONS FOR THIRTY YEARS IN PRISON


July 27, 2016

Thirty reasons not to vote for Hillary



She would make a terrible president and Bill an equally terrible “First Gentleman” for these thirty reasons.
  1. She repeatedly denied requests from Ambassador Stevens to provide more security in Benghazi, and now he and three others are dead due to her indifference. Their names, for posterity: Ambassador Stevens; Information Officer Sean Smith; and two CIA operatives, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, both former Navy SEALs. 
  2. During the attack, which lasted over a day, she refused to send reinforcements, but instead watched Obama get on Air Force One to raise money at a fundraiser in Nevada.
  3. She lied to the families of the dead heroes about a video provoking the attack, and not her indifference.
  4. She said the reset button with Russia was effective, but after its attack on Georgia, Russia has reconstituted its military and fielded new medium-range missiles.
  5. She was a cheerleader in the overthrow of friendly governments, such as Egypt, along with the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi, who had previously given up his nuclear weapons program, promising an Arab Spring in Libya. Now ISIS-style militants are fighting in the country and wreaking havoc.
  6. In Syria, hundreds of thousands of civilians have died and millions have been forced to flee as refugees. Her negligence disqualifies her from being commander-in-chief.
  7. She did not see the growing threat of radical Islam, but believed in an “Arab Spring.”
  8. She advocates for admitting more refugees from troubled Arab countries, despite the growing number of attacks in Germany and France (and no doubt elsewhere).
  9. She pushed for the Iran deal, which gives them $100-150 billion and no real incentive to stop its nuclear program.
  10. In 2009, three opponents of then-president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the election was fraudulent, so masses of people took to the street, yet Clinton and Obama affirmed the election results. The Green Revolution was suppressed brutally.
  11. Until recently and only under pressure, she has refused to say “radical Islam,” and still believes terror has nothing to do with Islamic jihad / qital against the infidel, described in the Quran itself.
  12. She may have partly opposed the withdrawal from Iraq, but as Secretary of State she should have negotiated a better Status of Forces Agreement that would have allowed our military presence in Iraq to keep things stable.
  13. She affirmatively rejected efforts to give her a state.gov email account. A reasonable person, particularly a senator and Secretary of State, should have known that a private email was not the proper conduit to receive and send classified emails.
  14. She lied about sending classified information, including classified information not being marked “classified.”
  15. She lied about all work-related emails being returned to the State Department, and about herself or anyone else not deleting work-related emails from her personal account.
  16. She lied about her lawyers reading every one of the emails.
  17. She destroyed public records over a long period of time.
  18. She was “extremely careless” (= grossly negligent) in her use of classified information through her private email account.
  19. Russia and any number of friendly and unfriendly nations hacked her email account and the Clinton Foundation, so now they have classified information.
  20. She couldn’t pass a background check to work for the government, let alone become president.
  21. She benefitted from a “double-track” justice system that allowed her to escape prosecution.
  22. The Clinton Foundation has welcomed donations from foreign countries with an interest in US foreign policies: the foundation failed to report $500,000 from Algeria for relief toward the earthquake in Haiti. It’s unclear how the foundation could help in Haiti.
  23. Shortly after other donations from various sources, the donor received favorable treatment or policy.
  24. From 2010 to 2012 there were errors in how the foundation reported donations from foreign sources in Form 990.
  25. Bill Clinton’s speaking fees doubled at tripled after Hillary became Secretary of State, e.g. $500,000 for speaking at a Russian investment bank and $750,000 to address a telecom conference in China.
  26. While her “husband” was president, she pushed for “Hillarycare,” which was worse than or as bad as Obamacare.
  27. She would continue Obama’s terrible economic policies, since they are both leftists.
  28. She is indifferent to the national operating debt of over $19 trillion.
  29. She is an enabler of a serial adulterer.
  30. She is an unlikeable person, while Bill’s character is a laughingstock.
Let’s hope Bernie’s supporters stay home in November, and moderate Republicans don’t vote for her either.

Let’s hope Bernie’s supporters stay home in November, and moderate Republicans don’t vote for her either.

James Arlandson’s website is Live as Free People.


Read more:



September 24, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s ‘unethical amnesia’


The late New York Times columnist William Safire famously called Hillary Clinton a “congenital liar.”  Others have called her a “pathological” liar.  Maybe what really ails her is what two researchers are calling “unethical amnesia.”
Maryam Kouchaki of Northwestern University and Francesca Gino of Harvard describe this phenomenon as a defense mechanism that helps our minds by “forgetting about the times we’ve acted unethically.”  In other words, when we cheat, lie, and act in other dishonest ways, our minds try to erase that behavior from our memories in order to protect ourselves from ourselves.
Blocking out the truth makes people prone to believe their own lies.  Were it not for the video proving otherwise, Clinton might still be telling the story of her courage in the face of heavy sniper fire on a tarmac in Bosnia.
Over nearly three decades of public life, Hillary Clinton’s lies have been numerous and varied.  A veritable cottage industry has sprung up documenting them, not only from conservative sources.
Long before she lied about Colin Powell advising her to use private email for State Department business, about having only one mobile device, and about turning over all her email, Hillary Clinton was a prolific teller of tales.  From suspicious profits garnered through cattle trades to the whereabouts of missing records to defending her husband’s lies with lies of her own, the range of prevarication is vast.
But ethical amnesia makes remembering lies difficult.  A decade ago she accused U.S. generals of lying about Iraq, calling for “a willing suspension of disbelief” when General David Petraeus spoke, and at least tacitly endorsed MoveOn.org’s “General Betray Us” advertisement.  But ethical amnesia kicked in on September 8, when she berated Donald Trump for “trash-talking American generals.”
Clinton’s amnesia concerning the Libya policy she oversaw is an acute case.  At first she took credit for toppling Moammar Gaddafi.  A 2011 interview on CBS was interrupted when Huma Abedin walked in and handed Clinton a BlackBerry (one of her 13 mobile devices, contrary to the lie she told about having only one).  Learning that Gaddafi was dead, she engaged in some impromptu Julius Caesar pilfering: “We came.  We saw.  He died.”  It was an odd moment of triumphalism she would soon forget while portraying herself as a back-seat player in the ever worsening Libya situation.
Her Libyan lies began when she said the Benghazi attack was a spontaneous protest over an obscure YouTube video.  She repeated that lie to the parents of those killed.  And then she lied again by implying that those parents were lying.
Recently, defending the Libya mission, Clinton actually asserted that “we did not lose a single American in that action.”  What else but ethical amnesia could cause her to forget her friend Christopher Stevens, and Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods, the three men who died protecting him?
Bill Clinton seems to have a touch of his wife’s disease, too.  Recently he chided Trump for using the phrase “Make America Great Again.”  The former president, a white Southerner, revealed his own thoughts when he said: “If you’re a white Southerner, you know exactly what it means, don’t you?”  Was it the fog of unethical amnesia that caused him to forget the many times he used the slogan, both while running for president in 1991 and 1992 and while campaigning for his wife in 2008?
Kouchaki’s and Gino’s research suggests that as people get away with behavior others are punished for, their memories of that behavior fade.  Predictably, those “given latitude” to violate ethical standards are more likely to do so than those who are not.  Has anyone in modern political history been given more ethical latitude than the Clintons?
Hillary Clinton’s gravest unethical act is selling access to the office of secretary of state for personal gain.  Creating a way to hide that dishonesty, via her private server, came next.  Her lies about the whole arrangement cannot end so long as she seeks public office.  The more lies she gets away with, the more she forgets the truth and believes her own lies.
Whether she’s a congenital or pathological liar, or suffering from unethical amnesia, Hillary Clinton will surely continue to lie if elected president of the United States.


A video captured by a memorial attendee shows Clinton appearing to collapse, requiring the help of several aides to place her in the vehicle.

HOW CLOSE IS HILLARY CLINTON TO THE ANTI-CHRIST?
“While most Democrats are dismissing Donald Trump's claim that Hillary Clinton is the devil, a new poll shows that some of Clinton's supporters aren't sure if she has some ties to the devil, and a few Democrats think Clinton and the devil are linked somehow.”    --- WASHINGTON EXAMINER



Why should I believe what Bill said about Hillary at the DNC?



Why should I believe a serial sexual predator, congenital liar, serial adulterer, seller of the Lincoln bedroom, seller of pardons, and releaser of Puerto Rican Terrorists and good buddy of convicted pedophile billionaire Jeff Epstein? Why would I believe someone who jacked up his speech prices when his wife became Secretary of State and someone who would just lie about Hussein having WMD’s?

Bill said he was going to correct the cartoonish depiction the Republicans gave of his wife but I believe I have spotted some things he must have left out inadvertently. 

He forgot that she took $100,000 in kickbacks on cattle futures, that she pretended not to know about the Jennifer Flowers affair on Sixty Minutes, that she misplaced the Rose Law firm billing records, that somehow 900 FBI files showed up at the White House, that she fired the travel office and then she continually lied about it, that they trashed Billy Dale, that she falsely blamed a right wing conspiracy for that pesky Monica Lewinsky thing, that she trashed women who dared tell the truth about Bill’s habits, that she lied when she claimed Hussein had WMD’s in order to vote for the Iraq war, that she lied about her email system, (willingly violating national security laws and the Freedom of Information Act, that she didn’t lift a finger to save lives in Benghazi and falsely blamed a video, lying to Congress, the public and to the family of those that died. 

Maybe he could have pointed out that she said she had absolutely no responsibility for security at our overseas facilities and that she didn’t send or receive one classified document in her four years as Secretary of State.

Maybe Bill could have explained where the world is better off after the last 7½ years of Hillary, Obama and Kerry.  When people say that she is the most qualified person ever to run for President they could possibly list accomplishments.  Traveling, holding a title, knowing peoples’ names and being born a woman are not actual accomplishments. 

Bill could explain how the smartest woman in the World didn’t understand security laws, the Freedom of Information Act and the Inspector General Laws and what perjury is. 

Possibly Bill could explain why it is so important to continue and expand on Obama’s policies, which have given us one of the slowest economic recoveries in history, pension- and savers-punishing interest rates, $9 Trillion in new debt, a 38 year low in the labor participation rate, a 48 year low in home ownership rates, stagnant median income (although Washington DC residents have done very well), record food stamp usage, bankrupt coal companies and people losing their doctors and health care plans they liked. 

Hillary’s and the Democrats’ proposed policy to expand on this fantastic record is to take more money and power from the public and give it to DC.  Hillary also seems to have comprehension problems concerning the Constitution and Separation of Powers because she wants to expand on Obama’s abuse of executive power, especially on immigration and guns. 

Maybe Bill should have bragged that while median family income is flat at around $50,000, Hillary has been able to use her public service to get over $250,000 for less than one hour speeches (which we aren’t allowed to see) from colleges and businesses.  I am sure the poor and middle class will know how much Hillary cares for them. 
And since $250,000 for a twenty-minute speech is not enough, I know the poor, middle class, seniors and minorities will appreciate how much Hillary works for them when she asks for the following additional perks when she gives a speech. 

A chartered Jet, (Gulfstream 450 or Larger), Round trip business class tickets for two advance staffers who will arrive three days prior to speech, Hotel accommodations which should be a Presidential suite and three adjoin rooms, ground transportation and all Phone, Cell usage and meals. 

Hillary and Bill truly care about the poor and how much they worry about their carbon footprint. 

Isn’t it interesting that Hillary will not hold press conferences because that is not what she is good at but that she supposedly is an expert on policy and somehow is worth $250,000 per short speech Companies and countries wouldn’t be buying access and favors would they?

We can expect a husband to enhance his wife’s accomplishments, especially one to whom he has been unfaithful for forty years.  It would be nice if the media were honest instead of repeating the fictional glorified account. 
It is also fictional to believe Hillary had no knowledge that the DNC was trying to stack the election in her favor.  Instead of being interested in the contents of the emails, most of the media is just repeating the Democrat talking points that the Russians were responsible and they want Trump. 

Why did the Obama controlled FBI wait until now to investigate the hack since the DNC knew about it in April?

Hillary’s over 700 member campaign staff and the media must remake Hillary’s image for the umpteenth time after forty years in public life because the truth is so unattractive.


Read more: 




Billary, Obomb and Hillary….. always the same cronies! Banksters, LA RAZA 

Mexican fascist and generous Muslim dictators!


THERE IS A REASON WHY OBAMA'S CRONY BANKSTERS AND 

CRONY  MUSLIM DICTATORS HAVE SO HEAVILY INVESTED IN 

HILLARY  CLINTON!

Clinton also failed to mention how he and 

Hillary cashed in after his presidential tenure 

to make themselves multimillionaires, in part 

by taking tens of millions in speaking

fees from Wall Street bankers.








Donald Trump Orders Justice Department to Investigate Obama Surveillance



DACA
AP Photo/Susan Walsh

President Donald J. Trump announced his decision to demand an official investigation of former President Barack Obama’s administration on Sunday for infiltrating or surveilling his presidential campaign for political reasons.

“I hereby demand, and will do so officially tomorrow, that the Department of Justice look into whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for Political Purposes – and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama Administration!” Trump wrote on Twitter on Sunday afternoon.
Trump frequently blames investigations of his campaign on Obama, suggesting that politically motivated investigators were unfairly targeting his campaign.
He spent most of Sunday morning sharing his thoughts on Twitter about the ongoing Russia investigation, suggesting that the ongoing “witch hunt” was out of control. “Things are really getting ridiculous,” Trump wrote, noting that so far there was no collusion found by special investigators.
He criticized Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team as “13 Angry and heavily conflicted Democrats” who were part of the Obama administration.
“STOP!” he wrote. “They have found no collusion with Russia, No obstruction.”
Trump again redirected the continuing investigation towards failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Democrats, Tony Podesta, the DNC, and politically biased FBI officials.
“Republicans and real Americans should start getting tough on this Scam,” he wrote.

I hereby demand, and will do so officially tomorrow, that the Department of Justice look into whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for Political Purposes - and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama Administration!