Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon unleashed a stream of indignation at failed presidential candidate Mitt Romney after Romney impugned West Point-grad and Vietnam veteran Roy Moore’s “honor and integrity” Tuesday.
“What did [Mitt Romney] say yesterday? … That judge Moore lacked honor and integrity and that’s why he couldn’t vote for him?” Bannon asked the audience in a packed Fairhope, Alabama barn who had come to support Judge Moore’s U.S. Senate bid.
Despite currently holding no elected office or position in the Republican Party, Romney jumped into the Alabama U.S. Senate race Monday to undermine Moore’s campaign, tweeting, “Roy Moore in the US Senate would be a stain on the GOP and on the nation. Leigh Corfman and other victims are courageous heroes. No vote, no majority is worth losing our honor, our integrity.”
The tweet incensed Bannon. “Judge Moore is a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point,” he said. “Judge Moore served his country in one of the toughest wars we ever had, in Vietnam.”
In a textbook example of denial and projection, Trump foes in and out of government wove a sinister yarn meant to take him down.
Barack Obama keeps a close watch on his emotions. “I loved Spock,” he wrote in February 2015 in a presidential statement eulogizing Leonard Nimoy. Growing up in Hawaii, the young man who would later be called “No-Drama Obama” felt a special affinity for the Vulcan first officer of the U.S.S. Enterprise. “Long before being nerdy was cool, there was Leonard Nimoy,” the eulogy continued. “Leonard was Spock. Cool, logical, big-eared and level-headed.”
It is the rare occasion when Obama lets his Spock mask slip. But November 2, 2016, was just such a moment. Six days before the presidential election, when addressing the Congressional Black Caucus, he stressed that the Republican candidate, Donald Trump, threatened hard-won achievements of blacks: tolerance, justice, good schools, ending mass incarceration — even democracy itself. “There is one candidate who will advance those things,” he said, his voice swelling with emotion. “And there’s another candidate whose defining principle, the central theme of his candidacy, is opposition to all that we’ve done.”
The open display of emotion was new, but the theme of safeguarding his legacy was not. Two months earlier, on July 5, in Charlotte, N.C., Obama delivered his first stump speech for Hillary Clinton. He described his presidency as a leg in a relay race. Hillary Clinton had tried hard to pass affordable health care during Bill Clinton’s administration, but she failed — and the relay baton fell to the ground. When Obama entered the White House, he picked it up. Now, his leg of the race was coming to an end. “I’m ready to pass the baton,” he said. “And I know that Hillary Clinton is going to take it.”
But he was less certain than he was letting on. Hillary Clinton was up in the polls, to be sure, but she was vulnerable. Three weeks earlier, on June 15, a cyberattacker fashioning himself as Guccifer 2.0 had published a cache of emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee (DNC). They proved, as supporters of Vermont senator Bernie Sanders had long alleged, that the DNC had conspired with the Clinton campaign to undermine their candidate. Sanders was still withholding his endorsement of Clinton for president, even though her nomination as the Democratic candidate was now a foregone conclusion. At the very moment when Clinton had expected the Democratic party to unite behind her, its deepest chasm seemed to be growing wider. In contrast to Clinton, Obama held some sway over the Sanders insurgents. He came to Charlotte to urge them to support Clinton against their shared enemy, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, Donald Trump.
The insurgency was not the only Clinton vulnerability on Obama’s mind. He had come to Charlotte, in addition, to deflect attention from the news conference that James Comey, the director of the FBI, had held that morning in Washington, D.C. The investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server was complete, Comey announced. The FBI would recommend no criminal charges — that was the honey. But Comey administered it with a dose of vinegar. He dwelled on Clinton’s mishandling of classified material in such detail that it sounded as if he was laying the foundation for an indictment. The decision not to charge Clinton, his statement signaled, was an exercise in prosecutorial restraint, not a true exoneration.
From the perspective of the voters, Clinton’s twin email travails — the hack of the DNC and the investigation into her server — were two faces of a single problem. Call it “Clinton, Inc.” Sanders and Trump were painting Clinton as Wall Street’s darling, the establishment candidate. She was the greatest defender and a prime beneficiary of a rigged political and financial system. Comey’s statement had played directly into the hands of the Sanders insurgents. It left the distinct impression that laws are for the little people; they simply don’t apply to Hillary Clinton, because, well, she’s Hillary Clinton.
Which points to Obama’s third and final job at Charlotte: humanizing the queen. “I saw how she treated everybody with respect, even the folks who aren’t, quote/unquote, ‘important,’” Obama testified. He enlarged Clinton’s humility before the crowd, because it was invisible to the naked eye. With his jacket and tie off, the cuffs of his sleeves turned, and a winning smile spread from ear to ear, Obama came to loan Hillary Clinton his common touch.
Passing the baton to her was a team effort, however. It demanded hard work from countless enablers. These included not just Democrats but also many Republicans, who shared the conviction that Trump represented an extraordinary threat to our democracy. Desperate times call for desperate measures. To block Trump, Clinton’s supporters bent rules and broke laws. They went to surprising lengths to strengthen her while framing him — both in the sense of depicting him in a particular light and of planting evidence against him.
When it comes to ongoing FBI criminal investigations, presidents typically refrain from describing their preferred outcomes. They fear the appearance of exerting undue influence over Lady Justice. But in the case of Hillary Clinton’s email abuses, Obama made an exception. “She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy,” he remarked in a TV interview in April 2016. She has displayed “a carelessness in terms of managing emails,” he allowed. “But I also think it is important to keep this in perspective.”
Well-intentioned but careless, said the commander in chief. Three months later, the FBI finished its investigation, and James Comey arrived at an identical conclusion. “Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information,” he said in his July 5 statement, “there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” Well-intentioned but careless — Comey was locked in a Vulcan mind-meld with his boss.
As a political move, highlighting Clinton’s intentions was astute. It had a commonsense feel. Americans instinctively take intentions into account when determining guilt. As a strict matter of law, however, it was vapid. The mishandling of classified information falls into the category of a “non-intent crime.” It’s a type of objective recklessness, like running over a pedestrian while blowing through a red light. Violations of this sort trigger criminal liabilities regardless of the offender’s state of mind.
But let’s assume that some clever lawyer in the Department of Justice discovered a very learned and superficially compelling rationale for applying Obama’s fictive standard of intent. Even so, Hillary Clinton couldn’t clear the hurdle. The sheer volume of classified material the FBI recovered from her server constituted proof of intent. “Fifty-two email chains . . . contain classified information,” Comey said.
Particularly damning was the form this material took. It is impossible to paste a classified document into an unclassified email accidentally, because the three computer systems (Unclassified, Confidential/Secret, and Top Secret) are physically separate networks, each feeding into an independent hard drive on the user’s desk. If a classified document appears in an unclassified email, then someone downloaded it onto a thumb drive and manually uploaded it to the unclassified network — an intentional act if ever there was one.
One of Clinton’s emails suggests that downloading and uploading material in this fashion was a commonplace activity in her office. In June 2011, a staffer encountered difficulty transmitting a document to her by means of a classified system. An impatient Clinton instructed him to strip the classified markings from the document and send it on as an unclassified email. “Turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure,” Clinton instructed.
On three separate occasions staffers got sloppy and failed to strip the “nonpapers” of all markings that betrayed their classified origins. The FBI recovered one email, for example, that contained a “C” in parenthesis in the margin — an obvious sign that the corresponding paragraph was classified “Confidential.” When an agent personally interviewed Clinton, on July 2, he showed her the document and asked whether she understood what the “C” meant. For anyone who has ever held a security clearance, “C’s” in the margins are more ubiquitous than “C’s” on water faucets — and no more baffling. But Clinton played the ditzy grandmother. She had simply assumed, she said, that the “C” was marking an item in an alphabetized list.
In the 2,500-year life of the alphabet, this was a first: a list that started with the third letter and contained but a single item. The explanation was laughable, but any sensible answer would have constituted an acknowledgement of malicious intent. Her only out was the “well-intentioned but careless” script that Obama had written for her. In other words, she lied to the FBI — a felony offense.
Before she ever told this howler, however, Comey had already prepared a draft of his statement exonerating her. The FBI let Hillary Clinton skate.
But give Comey his due. If he had followed the letter of the law, the trail of guilt may have led all the way to Obama himself. As Andrew C. McCarthy has demonstrated at National Review Online, Obama used a dummy email account to communicate with Clinton via her private server. Did this make Obama complicit in Clinton’s malfeasance? Anyone in Comey’s position would have thought twice before moving to prosecute her — and not only because the case might have ensnared the president himself. The FBI must enforce the law, but it must also be seen to be enforcing it. As a rule, these two imperatives buttress each other. During the 2016 election, Comey faced extraordinary circumstances. If he had followed the law to the letter, he would have toppled the leading candidate for president and decapitated the Democratic party. Clinton’s supporters, more than 50 percent of the electorate, would have erupted in outrage, screaming that a politicized FBI had thrown the election to Donald Trump.
Guarding the bureau’s reputation for impartiality is a serious concern. But it is nevertheless a thoroughly political concern. Comey would have us believe that it was a unique moment in his career, the singular entry into the political arena of an otherwise apolitical servant of the law. Truth be told, Comey loves being in the thick of it, but not because he is a partisan brawler. He is not. It is the drama that he relishes — the grand stage. His favorite role is that of Joe Friday, the no-nonsense lawman, the guardian of legal processes before the encroachments of dirty politicians.
Joe Friday, however, was a simple detective, a confirmed bachelor, content to live quietly with his mother and his parakeet. And, of course, he was a TV fiction. In real life, humble straight shooters get clobbered with a brick before they ever reach the limelight. In real life, snagging the big part often requires the equivalent of leaving a bloody horsehead in the producer’s bed.
MCCABE AND THE LOVERS
And it requires a supportive staff. Midyear Exam, the codename for the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails, relied on a team of men and women with the right stuff — a quality that is hard to define but easy to recognize.
The right stuff did not require strong Democratic credentials, but they certainly helped. Andrew McCabe, the deputy director of the FBI, led the team. McCabe was not your FBI gumshoe of old. He spent no time in his younger days chasing bank robbers in Des Moines. He was part of a new breed — the post-9/11 FBI leadership, for whom the career fast track was counterterrorism. He came of age at the intersection of law enforcement with national security, shuttling between D.C. and New York. Along the way, he developed a valuable personal network. His wife, Jill, ran as a Democrat for a Virginia state-senate seat in 2015. The political organization of Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe, one of Hillary Clinton’s very closest associates, gave her nearly $500,000.
Perhaps more important than having Democratic credentials was having a heightened understanding of the needs of senior leadership — in the FBI, certainly, but also in the DOJ. Right across the street from the J. Edgar Hoover Building sat Attorney General Loretta Lynch. She would be scrutinizing Midyear Exam in every detail. And not just Lynch. Hillary Clinton herself would be watching closely — and would be brought in for questioning, too. Being willing and able to treat her with kid gloves was essential. She “might be our next president,” team member Lisa Page reminded Peter Strzok, the agent in charge of Midyear Exam. Referring to Clinton’s upcoming FBI interview, Page wrote, “The last thing you need us going in there loaded for bear.”
Like McCabe, Strzok had pursued a career at the nexus of law enforcement and counterterrorism. But he was less overtly political. A John Kasich sympathizer, he was by nature a middle-of-the-roader, and a Republican-leaning one, at that. Clinton left him cold. But Trump left him even colder — and his active personal life helped concentrate his mind on that antipathy. Strzok was having an affair with Page, who was an FBI lawyer on McCabe’s staff. Both were married. Page’s politics were typical of highly educated people in D.C.: She detested Trump and his supporters. He is “a loathsome human being,” she texted to Strzok, who readily agreed. After Trump captured the nomination, hostility to him quickly became part of their private idiom.
If “the ultimate aphrodisiac,” as Henry Kissinger famously claimed, is power, then wielding it together with an illicit lover must be the pinnacle of eroticism. Together, Strzok and Page explored the power of secrets, routinely leaking to the press to shape political outcomes. “Still on the phone with Devlin,” Page texted to Strzok, referring to former Wall Street Journal national-security reporter Devlin Barrett. Big news about the Hillary Clinton email story was breaking when Devlin and Page were on the phone together. “You might wanna tell Devlin he should turn on CNN, there’s news on,” Strzok texted back.
Page: He knows. He just got handed a note.
Strzok: Ha. He asking about it now?
Page: Yeah. It was pretty funny.
Influencing the nation’s politics was routine. And ridiculously easy: one quick call to “Devlin,” and boom! The world changed.
Why can’t the Liberals talk about anything without constantly mentioning race?
Kathleen Wynne has sparked outrage after racially divisive comments.
Speaking to reporters, Wynne said that when she talks to young people who don’t think voting makes a difference, she tells them that “if you don’t vote, then somebody who looks like me is going to vote, some senior person, older than me, some white person, you know the reality is that that’s the demographic that’s going to get out and vote so we need you to be engaged.”
Imagine if Wynne said this, but instead substituted ‘white’ for ‘brown’ or ‘black.’
She would have already been forced to resign.
Wynne is supposed to be the leader of all Ontarians, yet she clearly thinks the votes of “senior people”and “white people” need to be counteracted.
This is yet another example of the Liberals dividing people by race. It would have been easy for Wynne to say that young people should vote because it’s important to exercise our democratic rights.
But instead, she brought up age and race.
Listen to Wynne’s disgraceful comments with Youtube video at top:
Twenty-Eight Counts of Treason When you say the Mueller Investigation, please remember it is actually the Comey Investigation to Impeach as it was called by Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, two of the key FBI members of a team that Comey led through Bill Priestap’s counterintelligence department which is protected by a “National Security” blanket that allows them to conduct top secret “operations.” From July, 2016, on to this day, Trump has been under attack from the small group, the Trump operation, the secret society, the investigation to impeach, the Carter Page Dossier group, the George Papadopoulos FBI Counterintelligence operation, as it was called by Peter and Lisa in the 372 of the 50,000 text messages released so far. Peter and Lisa went on to lead the Mueller Investigation which was also aided and supported by other members of the Investigation to Impeach, which essentially became a group we call The Leaders of the Coup d’eat, or the Treasonous Traitors.
The mysterious death of famed investigative journalist Michael Hastings took a surprising turn this week when it was revealed that the target of his latest expose was CIA Director John Brennan.
Hastings was killed in a fiery car crash in the Hancock Park neighborhood of Los Angeles about 4:25 a.m. on June 18, of this year. Witnesses described his speeding Mercedes coup as creating sparks and flames before it fish-tailed into a palm tree and exploded. Hastings’ body was burned beyond recognition.
Earlier that day, Hastings had sent an email to his editor at the website Buzzfeed alerting him that ‘the Feds are interviewing my “close friends and associates.” Perhaps if the authorities arrive “BuzzFeed GQ,” er HQ, may be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news-gathering practices or related journalism issues.’
He added that ‘Also: I’m onto a big story, and need to go off the radat for a bit.’
Hours later, Hastings was dead.
The big story he was working now appears to be about spy chief Brennan, who has been described in secret emails from the President of CIA contractor Stratfor, Fred Burton – and released by Wikileaks -as being on a ‘witch hunt’ of investigative journalists.
Hastings’ wife, Elise Jordan, revealed on Piers Morgan’s show on CNN earlier this month that the story Hastings was working on at the time of his death was about Brennan. The CIA confirmed Jordan’s claim to San Diego 6 News, which says that when they brought the information – as well as a leaked email from Stratfor – to Brennan’s spokesperson, he responded ‘with lightning speed.’
An investigation by the US Department Of Justice Office of the Inspector General found that McCabe “lacked candor – including under oath – on multiple occasions.”
Jeff Sessions has fired Andrew McCabe.
McCabe was the former deputy director of the FBI, and had long faced serious questions after it was revealed that his wife Jill (who ran for office as a democrat) received a large donation from a group closely tied to Hillary Clinton at the same time he was involved in the investigation into Hillary Clinton.
In a statement, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions said “After an extensive and fair investigation and according to Department of Justice procedure, the Department’s Office of the Inspector General provided its report on allegations of misconduct by Andrew McCabe to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility. The FBI’s OPR then reviewed the report and underlying documents and issued a disciplinary proposal recommending the dismissal of Mr. McCabe. Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor — including under oath — on multiple occasions.”
McCabe would have turned 50 on Sunday, making him eligible for over $1 million in retirement
The vast majority of NYPD cops hate Mayor de Blasio, according to a police-union survey.
An overwhelming 96 percent of the 6,000 cops who responded to the poll have unfavorable opinions of Hizzoner, with 88 percent holding “very unfavorable” opinions of him, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association survey found.
As for specific complaints against the mayor, 97 percent said de Blasio has created an environment where criminals feel emboldened, while 95 percent said he has established an environment that is combative to police.
When asked what they liked “most” about de Blasio, 66 percent responded, “nothing.”
Very important information you will hear nowhere else! Joe Imbriano discusses the plan to microwave all of us and how it eventually will result in forced vaccinations unless we thwart their evil plans for culling humanity. www.5gdangers.com
(By next year, Ontario PC leader Doug Ford, right, could be teaming up in the fight against carbon taxes not just with Saskatchewan’s Premier Scott Moe, centre, but likely Jason Kenney, left, in Alberta.Canadian Press)
A growing number of provinces are girding for battle in what could be a federal-provincial showdown for the ages
By Kevin Libin
March 16, 2018
Things have turned very much Jim Karahalios’s way lately, and they might not be done yet. If you haven’t heard of Karahalios, he was the noisy member of the Ontario Progressive Conservatives persecuted by his own party for refusing to let former leader Patrick Brown get away with making carbon taxes an official policy. Although Karahalios clearly spoke for most members, Brown was determined to stick with his carbon tax — and to muzzle Karahalios and his “Axe the Tax” campaign, which has since expanded to every province. Karahalios was even tossed out of PC events and stripped of his PC membership.
With Doug Ford now leading the party into a spring election, the Ontario PC party looks less like Brown’s than it does Karahalios’s, who got his official apology (and the lawsuit appeal dropped) earlier this month from the party. And with Canada’s largest province looking like it might soon be on the same warpath as other provinces against the federal Liberals over the carbon tax, the whole country could soon look more like Karahalios’s sort of place than Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s.
Trudeau feels entitled to spending our money without any transparency or accountability.
Justin Trudeau is on another vacation.
Apparently, his disastrous vacation in India was too tiring, so he’s taking more time off on the taxpayers dime.
And yet – acting with the arrogance of someone who thinks they are a king rather than a public servant – the PMO is refusing to give details.
As reported by the National Post, “On Thursday, officials in the prime minister’s office would say only that Trudeau is “spending private time with his family in Florida,” but would not elaborate on what he’s doing or with whom. “When they are having private time, that’s as far as we go,” said spokesman Cameron Ahmad. “I know it’s different when he’s out of the country, but it is similar to him spending private time with his family on a weekend. We don’t delve into the details of what he’s doing, where he’s going or who he’s with.”
Basically, Trudeau expects us to pay his travel bills, while he doesn’t even think he should tell us what he’s doing.
Website for California South University claimed its president is Justin Trudeau
A fake university in Irvine, Calif. has stolen the University of Alberta’s identity.
The now-inactive website for California South University claimed the institution’s campus “consists of 150 buildings covering 50 city blocks.” Similar wording is used on Wikipedia to describe the U of A’s North Campus in Edmonton.
The CSU website also stated “39,000 students from United States and 150 other countries participate in 400 programs in 19 faculties” — again, just like a description of the U of A on Wikipedia, if you swap the U.S. for Canada.
But those similarities aren’t a coincidence. The information on the CSU website was stolen from the U of A.
So were some of the campus names. The CSU website said the university has “five distributed campuses including, in addition to the North Campus, two auxiliary satellites: Campus Saint-Jean in southeast Edmonton, and Augustana Campus in Camrose.”
(The website for the fictitious California South University said it has five campuses, including Campus Saint-Jean in Edmonton and Augustana Campus in Camrose. (California South University)
Most of the content on the website was plagiarized from the U of A’s Wikipedia page — not exactly demonstrating the academic integrity post-secondary institutions try to promote.
The plagiarism is near-verbatim, only with the words “Edmonton” and “Alberta” replaced with “Irvine” and “California.” The plagiarizers didn’t bother to swap out the word “province” for “state,” meaning California is often referred to as a province.