THE OBAMA CABAL SNOOPING TIME LINE STARTING IN 2009.
Now you know... the FBI and the CI have been exposed. They were spying since the Obama Cabal came into office. That is what a Paranoid Oligarchy does.
H/T Sharyl Attkisson
January 21, 2009:
President Obama takes office; pledges unprecedented transparency. A TAQUIYA LIE
April 2009:
Someone leaks the unmasked name of Congresswoman Jane Harmon to the press. According to news reports, the Bush administration NSA incidentally recorded and saved Harmon’s phone conversations
with pro-Israel lobbyists who were under investigation for espionage.
The story is first broken by Congressional Quarterly’s Jeff Stein.
December 17, 2009:
The Obama administration prosecutes FBI contractor Shamai Leibowitz
for leaking documents to the media in April 2009. Leibowitz says he
leaked because he felt FBI practices were “an abuse of power and a
violation of the law” which he reported to his superiors at the FBI “who
did nothing about them.” (According to the ACLU: “Amazingly, the
sentencing judge said, ‘I don’t know what was divulged other than some
documents, and how it compromised things, I have no idea’.”)
2010:
The IRS secretly begins “targeting” conservative groups that are
seeking nonprofit tax-exempt status, by singling out ones that have “Tea
Party” or “Patriot” in their names.
Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning begins illegally leaks classified information to WikiLeaks revealing, among other matters, that the U.S. is extensively spying on the United Nations.
Obama Attorney General Eric Holder renews a Bush-era subpoena of New York Times reporter James Risen in a leak investigation.
Obama administration pursues espionage charges against NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake. (According to the ACLU:
spy charges were later dropped and Drake pled guilty to a misdemeanor.
The judge called the government’s conduct in the case “unconscionable.”)
May 28, 2010:
The government secretly applies for a warrant to obtain Google email information of Fox News reporter James Rosen in a leak investigation, without telling Rosen.
James Rosen of Fox News
September 21, 2010:
Internal email
entitled “Obama Leak Investigations” at “global intelligence” company
Stratfor claims Obama’s then-Homeland Security adviser John Brennan is
targeting journalists.
“Brennan is behind the witch hunts of
investigative journalists learning information from inside the beltway
sources,” writes one Stratfor official to another.
The email continues: “Note — There is specific tasker from the [White
House] to go after anyone printing materials negative to the Obama
agenda (oh my.) Even the FBI is shocked. The Wonder Boys must be in meltdown mode…”
“The Wonder Boys” reportedly refers to the National Security Agency (NSA). Brennan later becomes President Obama’s CIA Director.
John Brennan, former CIA Director and Homeland Security Adviser
Early February 2011:
After receiving an anonymous tip, CBS News investigative
correspondent Sharyl Attkisson begins researching the Department of
Justice “gunwalking” operation nicknamed “Fast and Furious” that
secretly let thousands of weapons be trafficked to Mexican drug cartels.
One of the “walked” guns had been used by illegal aliens who murdered
U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December 2010.
U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry
February 22, 2011:
CBS’ Attkisson breaks news about “Fast and Furious” on The CBS Evening News.
After the story airs, the government issues an internal memo that seeks to “push positive stories” to contradict the news.
Given the negative coverage by CBS Evening
News last week…ATF needs to proactively push positive stories this week,
in an effort to preempt some negative reporting, or at minimum, lessen the coverage of such stories in the news cycle by replacing them with good stories about ATF.
March 4, 2011:
CBS News’ Attkisson exclusively
interviews sitting ATF special agent John Dodson. He gives a firsthand
account contradicting government denials re: Fast and Furious.
ATF Special Agent John Dodson
May 2011:
White House recruits democratic operative Eric Schultz to spin on
Fast and Furious and to counter the House Oversight Committee’s
investigative work on the case. (Schultz previously served as intern to
Sen. Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton.)
Former Obama operative Eric Schultz
Spring 2011:
Obama intel officials capture and record incidental private communications between Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat, and a Libyan official. The recordings are later leaked to the press.
2011:
Fox News reporter Mike Levine is subpoenaed by the Department of
Justice regarding a story he reported about a federal grand jury’s
indictments of terrorism suspects. The subpoena is later dropped.
June 2, 2011:
Republican Mitt Romney announces he’ll challenge President Obama in campaign 2012. SNOOPING STARTS ON ROMNEY AND HIS CAMPAIGN
June 28, 2011:
Obama U.S. Attorney for Arizona Dennis Burke secretly leaks sensitive government information
to Fox News, allegedly to retaliate against ATF whistleblower John
Dodson in the Fast and Furious case. (Burke is former chief of staff
to former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano.)
August 2011:
U.S. Attorney Burke resigns while under investigation for the improper leak of sensitive information about Dodson. The Inspector General later confirms the leak and Burke apologizes.
September 2011:
White House operative Schultz invites Attkisson and several other
national journalists to off the record backgrounder about Fast and
Furious documents subpoenaed by Congress. Later, on the phone, Shultz
screams and cusses at Attkisson as she asks questions raised by the Fast
and Furious documents.
October 3, 2011:
Obama administration secretly changes longstanding policy. The change creates a “loophole” that Sen. Ron Wyden would later say allows the NSA to conduct “backdoor searches” of “incidental collection” of U.S. citizens’ domestic communications.
The same day, CBS News airs Attkisson’s report on newly-uncovered memos that contradict Attorney General Eric Holders’ denials about Fast and Furious.
Former Attorney General Eric Holder
October 4, 2011:
In an internal email, Attorney General Eric Holder’s top press aide Tracy Schmaler emails White House operative Schultz calling Attkisson “out of control.” Schultz replies, “Her piece was really bad for the AG.”
November 2011:
CIA Director Gen. David Petraeus, who’s married, allegedly begins an
affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell. (The FBI would later say it
“stumbled” upon evidence of the affair incidentally during an
unspecified, much broader investigation.)
December 2011:
Amid much criticism, Justice Department finally, officially retracts the
false letter it had submitted to Congress in February. The letter had
stated that the Fast and Furious allegations of gunwalking were untrue.
February 13, 2012:
At approximately 10:30pm, remote intruders secretly download new spy software proprietary to a federal agency
onto Attkisson’s CBS work computer. (The software was secretly attached
to a legitimate Hotmail email and downloaded in the background after a
pop-up ad appeared).
April-May 2012:
The Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI publicly announce vast
expansion of cyber related efforts to address alleged “national
security-related cyber issues.”
In violation of longstanding practice, DOJ secretly and without notice seizes personal and phone records of journalists from Associated Press from this two-month period in a leak investigation.
June 2012:
Attorney General Holder secretly initiates investigations into AP and the New York Times regarding government leaks.
June 28, 2012:
The House of Representatives holds Attorney General Holder in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over subpoenaed documents related to Fast and Furious.
July 2012:
The Department of Justice designates U.S. Attorneys’ offices to act
as “force multipliers” in further stepped-up cyber efforts in the name
of national security.
Intruders remotely “refresh” ongoing surveillance of Attkisson’s CBS News Toshiba laptop.
Summer 2012:
The FBI incidentally stumbles across emails
revealing CIA Director Petraeus’ affair with his biographer Broadwell.
FBI Director Robert Mueller is notified of the affair on a date the
government will not disclose. The FBI later says it interviewed Petraeus
and Broadwell, and concluded national security hasn’t been
breached. The FBI keeps all of this information secret.
In late summer, on a date the government won’t reveal, the FBI notifies Attorney General Holder of the Petraeus affair.
September 11, 2012:
Four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens are
murdered in Benghazi, Libya during attacks by Islamic extremist
terrorists. Despite internal communications that acknowledge the
terrorist nature of the attacks within minutes, the Obama administration
falsely reports to the public that the attacks were instead a protest
gone awry after an anti-Islamic YouTube video.
Some Obama officials become frustrated with CIA Director Petraeus and
his post-Benghazi attack behavior, as he opposes efforts to edit out
mentions of terrorism from the public Benghazi talking points. Petraeus
deputy Mike Morell is given authority over the edits, and aligns with
Hillary Clinton’s State Department against Petraeus’s desires.
October 2012:
CBS begins airing Attkisson’s Benghazi stories which rely on whistleblowers
and numerous government-linked confidential sources. These sources
report that the Executive Branch is clamping down on leaks to reporters
re: Benghazi.
DOJ continues its stepped-up National Security Division cyber
efforts, holding specialized training at DOJ headquarters for the
National Security Cyber Specialists (NSCS) network and the Criminal
Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS).
President Obama issues top secret presidential directive on Oct. 16
ordering intelligence officials to draw up a list of overseas targets
for cyberattacks. According to The Guardian, the directive also
“contemplates the possible use of cyber actions inside the US.”
As CIA Director Petraeus’s interagency relationships become increasingly strained over his stance on Benghazi, unnamed FBI agents reach out to Republicans in Congress to tell about Petraeus’s affair.
They eventually land at the office of Republican majority leader Eric
Cantor. With the presidential elections about a week away, Cantor stays
mum on the Petraeus rumors and instead contacts the FBI about them.
The FBI interviews Petraeus and Broadwell a second time.
November 2, 2012:
The FBI questions President Obama’s vice chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff James Cartwright in a leak investigation
regarding material in a book written by a New York Times reporter.
Cartwright denies being the source (but later admits he was, and is
convicted in the case).
November 6, 2012:
President Obama defeats Mitt Romney in Campaign 2012.
CIA Director Petraeus is scheduled to testify to Congress next week about the Benghazi attacks.
Officials claim this day is the first time Director of National
Intelligence Clapper is notified about the Petraeus affair by an
unspecified official at the Justice Department. Clapper calls Petraeus
and urges him to resign.
November 7-9, 2012:
Attorney General Holder hosts a national training conference at
DOJ headquarters for the expanded efforts of DOJ’s National Security
Cyber Specialists (NSCS).
The Obama administration says somebody unspecified notifies someone
at the White House about the Petraeus affair on Nov. 7. The President is
reportedly looped in for the first time on Nov. 8 and accepts Petraeus’
resignation on Nov. 9. Petraeus’ planned appearance before Congress to testify on Benghazi is canceled.
November 13, 2012:
The F.B.I. initiates a body of cyber security case investigations that would later relate to Attkisson’s computer intrusions.
December 2012:
Two intelligence-connected sources separately suggest to Attkisson that she’s likely under government surveillance
due to her reporting. One source tells her the government has pushed
the envelope like never before and that public would be shocked to
“learn the extent that the government is conducting surveillance of
private citizens.”
As Attkisson arranges a forensic exam of her computer, evidence later
shows the intruders then attempted to cover their tracks and to erase
evidence of their intrusion. However, the erasures leave additional
forensic evidence.
December 27, 2012:
Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.), who have
classified knowledge as members of the Senate Intelligence Committee,
publicly warn of the “back-door search loophole” or searches of incidental collection of innocent Americans.
As it is written, there is nothing to
prohibit the intelligence community from searching through a pile of
communications, which may have been incidentally or accidentally been
collected without a warrant, to deliberately search for the phone calls
or e-mails of specific Americans.—Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colorado
Sen. Mark Udall
2013:
Obama administration brings court martial against Army intelligence
analyst Bradley Manning, who has changed his name to Chelsea, for a 2010
leak of classified information to WikiLeaks that revealed American
military and diplomatic activities across the world. Manning is sentenced to 35 years in prison, the longest punishment ever given in a U.S. leak case.
January 2013:
Two forensics examinations confirm unauthorized remote intrusions and monitoring of Attkisson’s work and personal computers. The information is not publicly reported at this time.
January 23, 2012:
The Obama administration prosecutes CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou for leaks to a reporter
as he blew the whistle on the CIA’s secret torture program. He’s the
first CIA officer convicted of providing classified information to a
reporter.
March 12, 2013:
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testifies to Congress, falsely stating that intelligence officials are not collecting mass data on tens of millions of Americans.
April 12, 2013:
The government Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Agency (FISA) court secretly approves the latest FBI request
to continue obtaining daily telephone records of millions of U.S.
Verizon customers. The judge orders Verizon to turn over the information
to the National Security Agency (NSA). This directly contradicts
Clapper’s March 12 testimony to Congress.
April 2013:
A secret government memo
later exposed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden discusses how the
U.S. is collecting information “directly from the servers of …Microsoft,
Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.”
May 10, 2013:
After longstanding denials, the IRS admits to and apologizes
for targeting Republican Tea Party groups for mischief, which included
discussing developing pretenses for prosecution, leading up to the 2012
election.
May 13, 2013:
The Associated Press (AP) publicly announces that it has learned of the Justice Department’s secret subpoena
of phone records for 20 AP reporters, in a leak investigation. Attorney
General Holder personally approved the subpoenas, which were issued to
Verizon rather than AP. AP calls it a “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into news-gathering operations.
May 17, 2013:
Fox News learns that the Justice Department secretly labeled reporter James Rosen a possible “criminal co-conspirator”
and “flight-risk” in obtaining warrants to monitor Rosen’s State
Department movements, phone records and emails in a leak investigation
starting in 2011.
June 2013:
The FBI secretly opens a case on Attkisson’s computer
intrusions under the auspices of a national security issue. The FBI
contacts CBS without Attkisson’s knowledge, but fails to contact
or interview Attkisson. (The FBI later withholds Attkisson’s FBI file in
its entirety without explanation, and other documents, despite multiple
Freedom of Information Act requests.)
News of the FBI case involving Attkisson’s computer intrusions is
circulated internally to the Justice Department’s national cyber
security group, and grouped with a set of cases opened in November 2012.
June 2013:
Former National Security Agency NSA contractor Snowden begins releasing documents showing extensive efforts by the government to surveil and collect information on U.S. citizens.
Snowden is charged with three felonies in his absence from the U.S.
NSA Whistleblower Edward Snowden. Photo by Laura Poitras
June 6, 2013:
At a hearing, Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Illinois, asks Attorney General Eric Holder if the NSA spies on members of Congress. Holder answers that the NSA has no “intent” to spy on Congress, but that the issue is better addressed in private.
August 6, 2013:
Armed Coast Guard agents under the Department of Homeland Security
raid the home of reporter Audrey Hudson at 4:30am with a search warrant
for her husband’s firearms. As they searched the house, they read Hudson
her Miranda rights and confiscated documents that contained
“confidential notes, draft articles, and other newsgathering materials”
belonging to Hudson including the identities of whistleblowers at the
Department of Homeland Security. (Hudson sues and later receives a settlement from the government.)
July 2, 2013:
Director of National Intelligence Clapper apologizes to Congress for his false testimony in March regarding widespread collection of data on Americans.
August 7, 2013:
CBS News publicly announces confirmation of Attkisson’s computer intrusions.
“Attkisson’s computer was accessed by an
unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions late in
2012…This party also used sophisticated methods to remove all possible
indications of unauthorized activity, and alter system times to cause
further confusion.—CBS News
September 19, 2013
The Obama Justice Department charges
FBI agent and contractor Donald Sachtleben with leaking to an AP
reporter details of disrupted terrorist bomb plot. He’s sentenced to 43
months in prison.
January 23, 2014:
Sen. Bernie Sanders asks the NSA if it spies on members of Congress. The NSA does not provide a direct answer and states that Congress is afforded “the same privacy protections as all U.S. persons.”
March 2014:
Congress accuses the CIA of improperly accessing Senate Intelligence committee computers. CIA Director Brennan denies it.
Director of National Intelligence Clapper bans intelligence community officials from unauthorized contact with reporters.
April 2, 2014:
Former state department contractor Stephen Jin-Woo Kim is sentenced to prison for disclosing classified information to Fox News reporter James Rosen.
July 31, 2014:
CIA Inspector General reveals that five CIA officials improperly accessed Senate Intelligence Committee computers
and searched certain staff emails. The findings contradict denials made
in March by CIA director Brennan. Brennan apologizes to Senate staff.
October 2014:
The government pays a settlement to reporter Audrey Hudson after the 2013 Coast Guard raid of her home during which her work notes were improperly seized.
December 2014:
Attorney General Holder seeks to subpoena a 60 Minutes producer in connection with a terrorism trial, but pulls back the request after public criticism.
Spring 2015:
The Obama administration finishes secretive negotiations of an Iran
nuclear deal that will return billions of dollars in frozen funds to the
world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism in return for
assurances from that country. It’s later reported that Obama intel
officials have been incidentally capturing communications
of U.S. members of Congress and organizations in the U.S.
while secretly recording Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s
discussions about the Iran deal, which he opposes.
As of now, the New York Times reports
“since 2009, six current or former government employees and two
government contractors have been indicted or prosecuted under the
Espionage Act for leaking information to the public. There were only
three such prosecutions under all previous U.S. presidents combined
since 1917.”
May 2015:
Former CIA employee Jeffrey Alexander Sterling is convicted on espionage charges for leaks to New York Times reporter James Risen. He’s sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison.
December 2015:
The Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) passes.
It requires private Internet companies to “transmit cyber-threat
indicators” to the Department of Homeland Security and granting the
companies immunity from prosecution for sharing customers’ personal
data in those cases.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the Obama administration incidentally collected private communications by members of Congress while it spied on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.
The NSA sweeping up “private conversations
with U.S. lawmakers and American-Jewish groups… raised fears [of]—an
‘Oh-s— moment,’ one senior U.S. official said—that the executive branch
would be accused of spying on Congress.”–Wall Street Journal, December
29, 2015
July 2016:
Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination for president.
According to later news reports, after Trump’s nomination, internal
White House logs show Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice begins
to show increased interest in National Security Agency (NSA)
intelligence material that included “unmasked” Americans’ identities.
Former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice
Summer 2016:
The FBI reportedly obtains a secret FISA court order to monitor communications of Trump adviser Carter Page,
convincing a judge there’s probable cause to believe Page is acting as a
Russian agent. Surveillance of Page theoretically allows government
officials to “incidentally” collect communications of Trump associates
(or Trump himself) if they communicate with Page. Read: When “Incidental” Intel Collection Isn’t Incidental
Former Trump adviser Carter Page
Fall 2016:
Trump opponents “shop” to reporters a political opposition research
“dossier” alleging Trump is guilty of various inappropriate acts
regarding Russia. The information is unverified (and some of it is
false) and the press doesn’t publish it, but a copy is provided to the
FBI.
September 26, 2016:
It’s not publicly known at the time, but the government makes a proposal
to the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) court
to allow the National Counter Terrorism Center to access “unmasked”
intel on Americans acquired by the FBI and NSA. (The Court later
approves as “appropriate”.)
October 7, 2016:
Former vice chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff James Cartwright
pleads guilty in a leak investigation to lying to the FBI about his
discussions with reporters regarding Iran’s nuclear program.
October 26, 2016:
At closed-door hearing before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the Obama administration disclosed that it had been violating surveillance safeguards, according to Circa. It disclosed that more than 5 percent of its searches of the NSA’s database violated safeguards promised in 2011.
November 8, 2016:
Donald Trump is elected President.
November 2016-January 2017:
News reports claim Rice’s interest in the NSA materials accelerates
after President Trump’s election through his January inauguration.
Surveillance reportedly included Trump transition figures and/or foreign
officials discussing a Trump administration.
December 2016:
FBI secretly monitors and records communications between Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak and Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who later became President Trump’s national security adviser.
Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak
After Trump’s election, Obama officials take steps to ensure certain intelligence gathered regarding Trump associates is “spread across the government.”
One Obama official would later say it’s because they were afraid once
Trump officials “found out how we knew what we knew,” the intelligence
would be destroyed. However, Obama critics later theorize Obama
officials were working to mount opposition to Trump’s presidency.
January 10, 2017:
The media reports on the leaked anti-Trump “dossier” compiled by a
political opposition research group containing unverified and at least
partly untrue allegations of misconduct involving Trump and Russia.
January 12, 2017:
The Obama administration finalizes new rules
allowing the National Security Agency (NSA) to spread certain
intelligence to 16 other U.S. intel agencies without the normal privacy
protections.
President Obama commutes all but the last four months of Manning’s sentence for leaking intelligence information to WikiLeaks.
February 2, 2017:
The news reports that
five information technology (IT) computer professionals employed by
Democrats in the House of Representatives are under criminal
investigation for allegedly “accessing House IT systems without
lawmakers’ knowledge.” The suspects include three brothers identified as
Abid, Imran and Jamal Awan “who managed office information technology
for members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and
other lawmakers.” The brothers were said
to have been employed by three Democrats on the Intelligence Committee
and “five members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs which deal
with with many of the nation’s most sensitive issues and documents,
including those related to the war on terrorism.”
February 9, 2017: News
of the FBI recordings of Lt. Gen. Flynn speaking with Russia’s
ambassador is leaked to the press. The New York Times and the Washington
Post report that Flynn was captured on wiretaps discussing current U.S. sanctions, despite Flynn’s earlier denials.
The Washington Post also reports the FBI reviewed Flynn’s calls with Russian ambassador and “found nothing illicit.”
Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn
Feb. 13, 2017:
Trump National Security Adviser Flynn resigns, acknowledging he had misled Vice President Pence about his Russia conversations.
March 2017:
The House Intelligence Committee requests a list of unmasking
requests made during a certain time period by Obama officials. The
intelligence committee does not provide the information, prompting a
June 1 subpoena.
March 1, 2017:
The Washington Post learns and reports that Trump Attorney General
Jeff Sessions has met with the Russian ambassador twice in the recent
past. Sessions had told Congress he didn’t communicate with the Russians
during the campaign. (The Russian ambassador had sought out and met
with numerous high-ranking Democrat and Republican officials.)
Attorney General Jeff Sessions
March 2, 2017:
In an interview on MSNBC, Obama Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
Evelyn Farkas says that once President Trump was elected, she urged her former colleagues to “get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can [about Trump and his associates] before President Obama leaves the administration” and get it to “people on Capitol Hill.”
Former Obama Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Evelyn Farkas
Trump Attorney General Jeff Sessions recuses
himself from any Trump campaign-related investigations after
backtracking on earlier statements that he had not met with Russian
officials prior to the election.
March 4, 2017:
President Trump tweets: “Is it legal for a sitting President to be
‘wire tapping’ a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by
court earlier. A NEW LOW!” and “How low has President Obama gone to
tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is
Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”
March 10, 2017:
Former Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat, steps forward to support Trump’s wiretapping claim, revealing that the Obama administration recorded his (Kucinich’s) communications with a Libyan official in Spring 2011.
March 20, 2017:
At a hearing, lead House Intelligence Committee Democrat Adam Schiff
places Trump adviser Carter Page at the center of a theoretical alleged
collusion with Russia. (It’s not yet publicly known that the FBI has
been surveilling Page.) Some critics see Schiff’s storyline as an
attempt to establish public justification for the Obama administration
intel community’s controversial surveillance of the Trump adviser during
the 2016 political campaign.
Rep. Adam Schiff
March 22, 2017:
Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes publicly
announces that he has reviewed evidence of U.S. citizens associated with
Trump being “incidentally” surveilled by Obama intelligence officials,
and that the names and information of the Trump associates were
illegally leaked and/or used, mostly in November, December and January.
Nunes attends a meeting at the White House to discuss. He’s criticized
for viewing the evidence and speaking of it publicly.
In an interview on PBS, former Obama
National Security Adviser Rice says “I know nothing about this…I really
don’t know to what Chairman Nunes was referring.”
Rep. Devin Nunes
March 24, 2017:
The political firm that compiled the Trump “dossier” that was leaked
to the press, Fusion GPS, declines to answer questions or document
requests from Sen. Charles Grassley.
March 31, 2017:
Democrat Schiff is invited to the White House to review intel material Republican Nunes saw earlier.
April 3, 2017:
Multiple news reports state that prior to the election, Rice had requested and reviewed “unmasked” intelligence on Trump associates whose information was “incidentally” collected by intelligence agencies.
April 4, 2017:
In an interview on MSNBC, Rice seems to reverse
herself (having earlier said she knew “nothing” about unmasking of
surveilled Trump associates) and admits having asked for names of U.S.
citizens previously masked in intelligence reports. Rice says her
motivations were not political or to spy. When asked if she leaked names
of U.S. citizens,
Rice replies, “I leaked nothing to nobody.”
April 6, 2017:
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Nunes recuses himself from the Russia part of his committee’s investigation.
April 11, 2017:
Someone leaks to the Washington Post, and the Post reports, that the FBI secretly obtained a FISA court order
last summer to monitor Trump campaign associate Carter Page. Trump
critics say the existence of the order proves there was possible
criminal activity by Trump associates. However, Trump supporters say the
leak is an attempt to frame damning revelations as they are coming to
light: that the Obama administration was, indeed, surveilling the
political campaign of at least one opponent.
April 28, 2017:
The NSA announces it “will no longer collect certain internet communications that merely mention a foreign intelligence target.” This after it secretly disclosed mass violations to the FISA court last October.
The NSA also begins deleting prior collected data. It says it’s doing this to avoid further violations.
May 2, 2017:
Members of Senate Intelligence Committee go to CIA headquarters to
get briefed on Russia-Trump connections. The following day, CNN asks
Senate Intelligence Committee member Dianne Feinstein if there is
evidence of “collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the
campaign.” “Not at this time,” replies Feinstein.
May 3, 2017:
Obama’s former National Security Adviser Susan Rice declines
Republican Congressional request to testify at a hearing about the
unmasking and surveillance.
May 4, 2017:
It’s revealed
that in the election year of 2016, the Obama administration vastly
expanded its searches of NSA database for Americans and the content of
their emails and phone calls: From 9500 searches involving 198 Americans
in 2013 to 30,355 searches of 5,288 Americans in 2016.
May 5, 2017:
Senator and former Presidential candidate Rand Paul (R-KY) formally asks the White House and intelligence community whether he was surveilled under the Obama administration.
May 14, 2017:
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and ex-Deputy
Attorney General Sally Yates, Obama administration officials, admit
to reviewing “classified documents in which Mr. Trump, his associates
or members of Congress had been unmasked.” They won’t provide further
details in public.
May 31, 2017:
Document is disclosed
to Justice Department in a lawsuit claiming the NSA engaged in “blanket
surveillance” of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah,
collecting and storing “virtually all electronic communications going
into or out of the Salt Lake City area, including the contents of emails
and text messages” to “experiment with and fine tune a new scale of
mass surveillance.” Former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden has
denied such a program existed.
June 1, 2017:
House Intelligence Committee issues 7 subpoenas including
for information related to unmaskings requested by ex-Obama officials
national security adviser Susan Rice, former CIA Director John Brennan
and former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power. Chairman Devin
Nunes says the intelligence community has been stonewalling the
committee’s March request for a list of all the unmaskings that occurred
during a certain time period.
Behind the Obama administration’s shady plan to spy on the Trump campaign
There is no doubt that the Obama administration spied on the Trump
campaign. As Barr made clear, the real question is: What predicated the
spying? Was there a valid reason for it, strong enough to overcome our
norm against political spying? Or was it done rashly? Was a politically
motivated decision made to use highly intrusive investigative tactics
when a more measured response would have sufficed, such as a “defensive
briefing” that would have warned the Trump campaign of possible Russian
infiltration?
Last year, when the “spy” games got underway, James Clapper, Obama’s
director of national intelligence, conceded that, yes, the FBI did run
an informant — “spy” is such an icky word — at Trump campaign officials;
but, we were told, this was merely to investigate Russia. Cross
Clapper’s heart, it had nothing to do with the Trump campaign. No, no,
no. Indeed, the Obama administration only used an informant because —
bet you didn’t know this — doing so is the most benign, least intrusive
mode of conducting an investigation.
Me? I’m thinking the tens of thousands of convicts serving lengthy
sentences due to the penetration of their schemes by informants would
beg to differ. (Gee, Mr. Gambino, I assure you, this was just for you
own good . . .) And imagine the Democrats’ response if, say, the Bush
administration had run a covert intelligence operative against Obama
2008 campaign officials, including the campaign’s co-chairman. Surely
David Axelrod, Chuck Schumer, The New York Times and Rachel Maddow would
chirp that “all is forgiven” once they heard Republicans punctiliously
parse the nuances between “spying” and “surveillance”; between “spies”
and “informants”; and between investigating campaign officials versus
investigating the campaign proper — and the candidate.
The “spying” question arose last spring, when we learned that Stefan
Halper, a longtime source for the CIA and British intelligence, had been
tasked during the FBI’s Russia investigation to chat up three Trump campaign advisers:
Carter Page, George Papadopoulos and Sam Clovis. This was in addition
to earlier revelations that the Obama Justice Department and FBI had
obtained warrants to eavesdrop on Page’s communications, beginning about three weeks before the 2016 election.
The fact that spying had occurred was too clear for credible denial.
The retort, then, was misdirection: There had been no spying on Donald
Trump or his campaign; just on a few potential bad actors in the
campaign’s orbit.
It was nonsense then, and it is nonsense now.
The pols making these claims about what the FBI was doing might have
been well served by listening to what the FBI said it was doing.
There was, for example, then-Director Comey’s breathtaking public
testimony before the House Intelligence Committee on March 20, 2017.
Comey did not just confirm the existence of a counterintelligence probe of Russian espionage
to influence the 2016 election — notwithstanding that the government
customarily refuses to confirm the existence of any investigation, let
alone a classified counterintelligence investigation. The director
further identified the Trump campaign as a subject of the probe, even
though, to avoid smearing people, the Justice Department never
identifies uncharged persons or organizations that are under
investigation. As Comey put it:
“I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that
the FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating
the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential
election and that includes investigating the nature of any links between
individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian
government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign
and Russia’s efforts . . .”
The FBI was spying, and it was doing so in an investigation of the
Trump campaign. That is why, for over two years, Washington has been
entranced by the specter of “Trump collusion with Russia”
— not Page or Papadopoulos collusion with Russia. Comey went to
extraordinary lengths to tell the world that the FBI was not merely
zeroing in on individuals of varying ranks in the campaign; the main
question was whether the Trump campaign itself — the entity — had
“coordinated” in Russia’s espionage operation.
In the months prior to the election, as its Trump-Russia investigation ensued, some of the overtly political, rabidly anti-Trump FBI agents
running the probe discussed among themselves the prospect of stopping
Trump, or of using the investigation as an “insurance policy” in the
highly unlikely event that Trump won the election. After Trump’s
stunning victory, the Obama administration had a dilemma: How could the
investigation be maintained if Trump were told about it? After all, as
president, he would have the power to shut it down.
On Jan. 6, 2017, Comey, Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan and
National Security Agency chief Michael Rogers visited President-elect
Trump in New York to brief him on the Russia investigation.
Just one day earlier, at the White House, Comey and then–Acting
Attorney General Sally Yates had met with the political leadership of
the Obama administration — President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and
national security adviser Susan Rice — to discuss withholding
information about the Russia investigation from the incoming Trump
administration.
Rice put this sleight-of-hand a bit more delicately in the memo about
the Oval Office meeting (written two weeks after the fact, as Rice was
leaving her office minutes after Trump’s inauguration):
“President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the
incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that
we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia. [Emphasis
added.]”
It is easy to understand why Obama officials needed to discuss
withholding information from Trump. They knew that the Trump campaign —
not just some individuals tangentially connected to the campaign — was
the subject of an ongoing FBI counterintelligence probe. An informant
had been run at campaign officials. The FISA surveillance of Page was
underway — in fact, right before Trump’s inauguration, the Obama
administration obtained a new court warrant for 90 more days of spying.
In each Page surveillance warrant application, after describing
Russia’s espionage operations, the Justice Department told the court,
“The FBI believes that the Russian Government’s efforts are being
coordinated with Candidate #1’s campaign[.]” Candidate #1 was Donald
Trump — now, the president-elect.
The fact that the Trump campaign was under investigation for
collaborating with Russia was not just withheld from the incoming
president; it had been withheld from the congressional “Gang of Eight.”
In his March 2017 House testimony, answering questions by Rep. Elise
Stefanik (R-NY), then-director Comey acknowledged that congressional
leadership was not told about the Trump-Russia probe during quarterly
briefings from July 2016 through early March 2017, because “it was a
matter of such sensitivity.” Let’s put aside that the need to alert
Congress to sensitive matters is exactly why there is a Gang of Eight
(comprised of bipartisan leaders of both chambers and their intelligence
committees).
Manifestly, the matter was deemed too “sensitive” for disclosure
because that would have involved telling Republican congressional
leadership that the incumbent Democratic administration was using
foreign counterintelligence powers to investigate the Republican
presidential campaign, and the party’s nominee, as suspected clandestine
agents of the Kremlin.
How to keep the investigation going when Trump took office? The plan
called for Comey to put the new president at ease by telling him he was
not a suspect. This would not have been a credible assurance if Comey
had informed Trump that (a) his campaign had been under investigation
for months, and (b) the FBI had told a federal court it suspected Trump
campaign officials were complicit in Russia’s cyber-espionage operation.
So, consistent with President Obama’s instructions at the Jan. 5,
2017, Oval Office meeting, information about the investigation would be
withheld from the president-elect. The next day, the intelligence chiefs
would tell Trump only about Russia’s espionage, not about the Trump
campaign’s suspected “coordination” with the Kremlin. Then, Comey would
apprise Trump about only a sliver of the Steele dossier — just the lurid
story about peeing prostitutes, not the dossier’s principal allegations of a traitorous Trump-Russia conspiracy.
This strategy did not sit well with everyone at the FBI. Shortly
before meeting with Trump on Jan. 6, Comey consulted his top advisers
about the plan to tell Trump he was not a suspect. In later Senate
testimony, Comey admitted that there was an objection from one FBI
official:
“One of the members of the leadership team had a view that, although
it was technically true [that] we did not have a counterintelligence
file case open on then-President-elect Trump[,] . . . because we’re
looking at the potential . . . coordination between the campaign and
Russia, because it was . . . President-elect Trump’s campaign, this
person’s view was, inevitably, [Trump’s] behavior, [Trump’s] conduct
will fall within the scope of that work.”
Note that Comey did not refer to “potential coordination” between,
say, Carter Page or Paul Manafort and Russia. The director was
unambiguous: The FBI was investigating “potential coordination between
the Trump campaign and Russia.”
Perspicaciously, Comey’s unidentified adviser connected the dots: (a)
because the FBI’s investigation focused on the campaign, and (b) since
the campaign was Trump’s campaign, it was necessarily true that (c)
Trump’s own conduct was under FBI scrutiny.
Then-director Comey’s reliance on the trivial administrative fact
that the FBI had not written Trump’s name on the investigative file did
not change the reality that Trump, manifestly, was the main subject of
the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation.
Remember last year’s hullabaloo over special counsel Robert Mueller’s demand to interview the president?
What need would there have been to conduct such an interview if Trump
were not a subject of the investigation? Why would Trump’s political
opponents have spent the last two years demanding that Mueller be
permitted to complete his probe of collusion and obstruction if it were
not understood that the investigation — including the spying, or, if you
prefer, the electronic surveillance, the informant sorties, and the
information gathered by national-security letter demands — was centrally
about Donald Trump?
That brings us to a final point. Congressional investigations have
established that the Obama Justice Department and the FBI used the
Steele dossier to obtain FISA court warrants against Page.
The dossier, a Clinton campaign opposition research project
(again, a fact withheld from the FISA court), was essential to the
required probable-cause showing; the FBI’s former deputy director,
Andrew McCabe, testified that without the dossier there would have been
no warrant.
So . . . what did the dossier say? The lion’s share of it alleged
that the Trump campaign was conspiring with the Kremlin to corrupt the
election, including by hacking and publicizing Democratic Party e-mails.
This allegation was based on unidentified Russian sources whom the FBI
could not corroborate; then-director Comey told Senate leaders that the
FBI used the information because the bureau judged former British spy
Christopher Steele to be credible, even though (a) Steele did not make
any of the observations the court was being asked to rely on, and (b)
Steele had misled the FBI about his contacts with the media — with whom
Steele and his Clinton campaign allies were sharing the same information
he was giving the bureau.
It is a major investigative step to seek surveillance warrants from
the FISA court. Unlike using an informant (a human spy), for which no
court authorization is necessary, applications for FISA surveillance
require approvals at the highest levels of the Justice Department and
the FBI. After going through that elaborate process, the Obama Justice
Department and the FBI presented to the court the dossier’s allegations
that the Trump campaign was coordinating with Russia to undermine the
2016 election.
To be sure, no sensible person argues that the government should
refrain from investigating if, based on compelling evidence, the FBI
suspects individuals — even campaign officials, even a party’s nominee —
of acting as clandestine agents of a hostile foreign power. The
question is: What should trigger such an investigation in a democratic
republic whose norms strongly discourage an incumbent administration’s
use of the government’s spying powers against political opponents?
The Obama administration decided that this norm did not apply to the
Trump campaign. If all the Obama administration had been trying to do
was check out a few bad apples with suspicious Russia ties, the FBI
could easily have alerted any of a number of Trump campaign officials
with solid national-security credentials — Rudy Giuliani, Jeff Sessions,
Chris Christie. The agents could have asked for the campaign’s help.
Instead, Obama officials made the Trump campaign the subject of a
counterintelligence investigation.
Fired Anti-Trump Ukrainian Ambassador Was Monitoring Communications of John Solomon and US Journalists Prying into Ukraine!
Last week House Democrats called in fired US Ambassador Marie Yovanovich to testify in their sham impeachment proceedings.
Ambassador Yovanovich is a noted Trump-hater who blocked Ukrainian
officials from traveling to the United States to hand over evidence of
Obama misconduct during the 2016 election to President Trump.
Yovanovich was US ambassador to Ukraine during the 2016
election when the Ukrainian government was colluding with the DNC and
Hillary Campaign to undermine the US presidential election.
Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenkoko told journalists in March that Yovanovitch gave him a “do not prosecute” list during their first meeting.
The president ordered her removal from her post in Ukraine in May 2019.
She was openly anti-Trump. Starting in 2018 Yovanovich denied Ukrainian officials visas
to enter the United States to hand over evidence of Obama administration
misconduct to Trump administration officials.
Wednesday night on Hannity John Solomon announced that the former
Ambassador Yovanovich was monitoring the reporters digging into
Ukrainian lawlessness. There is evidence now that Yovanovich was spying on John Solomon.
What a crook. UPDATE– We heard from a trusted source that this is much broader than is being reported and that the ambassador is out of her mind. This is going to be a really big story!
WHY DID THEY DO ALL THIS ??
BECAUSE BEHIND IT ALL IT WAS ALL ABOUT GEORGE SOROS TRANSFORMING AMERICA AND THE THE OBAMA CABAL GETTING RICH WHILE MOVING THE GOAL POST TOWARDS THE SOCIALIST OLIGOPOLY !
OBAMA CABAL SNOOPING STARTED IN 2011 AGAINST MITT ROMENY AND PAUL RYAN. Those 2 Cowardly Stooges had no clue! THE OBAMA CABAL ACTED WITH IMPUNITY. THE OBAMA CABAL WEAPONIZED THE IRS THE NSA THE COURTS TO FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORM AMERICA. THEY WERE RELENTLESS.
.. IN
Yes 2011...National Security Agency’s incidental intercepts of Americans, taking advantage of rules their boss relaxed started in 2011. They claimed it was to help the government better fight terrorism, espionage by foreign enemies and hacking threats.
Hidden in this "noble agenda" was the real reason they did it. TO SPY ON THEIR POLITICAL ENEMIES! 2011 It started in 2011... peel back the Onion.. Insidrs are leaking to us that the Obama Cabal with the same cast of characters spied on Romney and Ryan.
Those poor fools did not know why they were one step behind on all issues!
They blackmailed the both of them. Paul Ryan is still being blackmailed. Now you can figure why Romney slunk away after FRAUD WAS EXPOSED IN THE 2012 OBAMA VOTE RIGGING. THEY HAD SHIT ON THIS SORRY AS MAN SHITT ROMNEY!
Those intelligence reports identified Americans who were directly
intercepted talking to foreign sources or were the subject of
conversations between two or more monitored foreign figures. Sometimes
the Americans’ names were officially unmasked; other times they were so
specifically described in the reports that their identities were readily
discernible. Among those cleared to request and consume unmasked
NSA-based intelligence reports about U.S. citizens were Obama’s national
security adviser Susan Rice, his CIA Director John Brennan and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
News agencies who are not afraid to talk the Truth have reported facts:
Circa news http://circa.com/politics/barack-obamas-team-secretly-disclosed-years-of-illegal-nsa-searches-spying-on-americans Reports leaked show that there was a three-fold increase in NSA data searches
about Americans and a rise in the unmasking of U.S. person’s identities
in intelligence reports after Obama loosened the privacy rules in 2011. NOW YOU KNOW WHY!! Officials
like former National Security Adviser Susan Rice have argued their
activities were legal under the so-called minimization rule changes
Obama made, and that the intelligence agencies were strictly monitored
to avoid abuses. GUESS WHAT HAPPENED IN 2011? Obama Campaign for reelection. THEY TARGETED MITT ROMNEY AND PAUL RYAN;
The intelligence court and the NSA’s own internal watchdog found that not to be true. “Since
2011, NSA’s minimization procedures have prohibited use of U.S.-person
identifiers to query the results of upstream Internet collections under
Section 702,” the unsealed court ruling declared. “The Oct. 26, 2016
notice informed the court that NSA analysts had been conducting such
queries inviolation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency
than had been previously disclosed to the Court.”
Speaking
Wednesday on Fox News, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said there was an apparent
effort under the Obama Administration to increase the number of
unmaskings of Americans. "If we determine this to be true, this is an enormous abuse of power," Paul said. “This will dwarf all other stories.” “There are hundreds and hundreds of people,” Paul added.
The
American Civil Liberties Union said the newly disclosed violations are
some of the most serious to ever be documented and strongly call into
question the U.S. intelligence community’s ability to police itself and
safeguard American’s privacy as guaranteed by the Constitution’s Fourth
Amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure. “I
think what this emphasizes is the shocking lack of oversight of these
programs,” said Neema Singh Guliani, the ACLU’s legislative counsel in
Washington.
“You
have these problems going on for years that only come to the attention
of the court late in the game and then it takes additional years to
change its practices. “I think it does call into question all
those defenses that we kept hearing, that we always have a robust
oversight structure and we have culture of adherence to privacy
standards,” she added. “And the headline now is they actually haven’t
been in compliacne for years and the FISA court itself says in its
opinion is that the NSA suffers from a culture of a lack of candor.”
The
NSA acknowledged it self-disclosed the mass violations to the court
last fall and that in April it took the extraordinary step of suspending
the type of searches that were violating the rules, even deleting prior
collected data on Americans to avoid any further violations. “NSA
will no longer collect certain internet communications that merely
mention a foreign intelligence target,” the agency said in the statement
that was dated April 28 and placed on its Web site without capturing
much media or congressional attention.
In
question is the collection of what is known as upstream “about
data”about an American that is collected even though they were not
directly in contact with a foreigner that the NSA was legally allowed to
intercept. The NSA said it doesn't have the ability to stop
collecting ‘about’ information on Americans, “without losing some other
important data. ” It, however, said it would stop the practice to
“reduce the chance that it would acquire communication of U.S. persons
or others who are not in direct contact with a foreign intelligence
target.”
The
NSA said it also plans to “delete the vast majority of its upstream
internet data to further protect the privacy of U.S. person
communications.” Agency officials called the violations
“inadvertent compliance lapses.” But the court and IG documents suggest
the NSA had not developed a technological way to comply with the rules
they had submitted to the court in 2011.
Officials
"explained that NSA query compliance is largely maintained through a
series of manual checks" and had not "included the proper limiters" to
prevent unlawful searches, the NSA internal watchdog reported in a top
secret report in January that was just declassified. A new system is
being developed now, officials said. The NSA conducts thousand of
searches a year on data involving Americans and the actual numbers of
violations were redacted from the documents Circa reviewed.
But
a chart in the report showed there three types of violations, the most
frequent being 5.2 percent of the time when NSA Section 702 upstream
data on U.S. persons was searched. The inspector general also
found noncompliance between 0.7 percent and 1.4 percent of the time
involving NSA activities in which there was a court order to target an
American for spying but the rules were still not followed. Those
activities are known as Section 704 and Section 705 spying.
The
IG report spared few words for the NSA’s efforts before the disclosure
to ensure it was complying with practices, some that date to rules
issued in 2008 in the final days of the Bush administration and others
that Obama put into effect in 2011.
“We found that the Agency
controls for monitoring query compliance have not been completely
developed,” the inspector general reported, citing problems ranging from
missing requirements for documentation to the failure to complete
controls that would ensure “query compliance.”
The
NSA’s Signal Intelligence Directorate, the nation’s main foreign
surveillance arm, wrote a letter back to the IG saying it agreed with
the findings and that “corrective action plans” are in the works.
Circa reported last week that Obama opened the door for his
political aides like Rice to more easily gain access to unmasked
Americans’ names in NSA intercepts through a series of rule changes
beginning in 2011. Obama's rule changes opened door for NSA intercepts of Americans to reach political hands
Then as the Inauguration drew closer and closer and they could not
dislodge Donald Trump by Recounts and Electoral College Vote count
scams.. They realized that they might be exposed.. so Obama signed
Executive Order 12333 Yes... in the Final days of the LAME DUCK ,
the Obama Administration, they expanded the power of the National
Security Agency (NSA) to "share" intercepted personal communication with
the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying any
privacy protections. The new rules were issued under section 2.3 of
Executive Order 12333 after approval by two Obama Administration
officials: Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Director of National
Intelligence Director, James Clapper. Think about it in the
context of why they did it. It could not be for National Security
reasons. They were leaving in 10 days. Was there something that needed
this rule 10 DAYS BEFORE THE END OF AN ADMINISTRATION ? The
Answer.. YES.. They needed to Cover their tracks so it could look like
others could have leaked or looked at the information they had secretly
been surveiling Donald Trump for over 12 months. They needed to create a
fake trail. There is no other logical explanation. see... the new
rules, which were issued in an unclassified document, entitled
Procedures for the Availability or Dissemination of Raw Signals
Intelligence Information by the National Security Agency (NSA),
significantly relaxed longstanding limits on what the NSA may do with
the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations.
These operations are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws.
Surveillances include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls,
and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between
people abroad that cross domestic network switches. All SET UP 10 DAYS
BEFORE LEAVING TO ATTEMPT TO COVER THE TRACKS OF THE OBAMA ADMIN
OPERATIVES. The changes initiated by the Obama Administration in
its waning days was a plan to empower a whole lot more agents and
officials to search and view raw intelligence data that the OBAMA
OPERATIVES HAD SURVEILED OVER THE PAST 6 MONTHS. The plan was to
make sure that intel leaks would possibly grow exponentially and so
dilute by expanding the number of people that could be implicated. This
allowed the Obama Operatives to hide like a needle in a larger haystack.
Obama Lackeys Attorney General Loretta Lynch signed the new rules
permitting the NSA to disseminate raw signals intelligence information
on January 3, 2017 after another Obama Lackey and proven Liar Director
of National Intelligence James Clapper signed them on December 15, 2016.
Ask yourself why the urgency ? Prior to these changes, the NSA
filtered information before sharing intercepted communications with
another agency such as the CIA or the intelligence branches of the FBI.
The NSA only passed on information deemed pertinent before the new order
screening out the identities of innocent people and irrelevant personal
information. Now intelligence agencies can search directly through raw
repositories of communications intercepted by the NSA and then apply
such rules as required for minimizing privacy intrusions. This allowed
oversight committees to be able to track the chain of control of any
data. With the new Rules the net was spread wide to COVER THE TRACKS OF
THE OBAMA OPERATIVES. Under the new rules, agencies and
individuals can ask the NSA for access to specific surveillance feeds
premised on the claim that they contain relevant information that is
useful to a particular mission. Then the NSA has the discretion to grant
such requests if it deems the request reasonable. Properly understood,
the contents of the conversations engaged in by members of the Trump
Administration and by President Trump himself are now under an
increasing risk that they will be exposed to the public for purposes of
embarrassing the Trump Administration and in order to impede the
effectiveness of his policies. The Obama Administration’s change
in policy has grave implications for former National Security Adviser
General Flynn and other Trump Administration officials. Under the new
Obama Administration rules, conversations were and are subject to being
shared with a wider network of individuals and operatives. This process
multiplies the likelihood of leaks and the number of people who could be
doing the leaking. Although proof of cause and effect may be difficult,
consider the following record, which appears to be far more than
coincidental. How Convenient eh ? They thought they had a foolproof way
to cover their tracks. Too many eyes saw the raw data so they could
blame it on "Rouge Agents of the Deep State" So Back to my Original premise...
This is an operation that went sideways because Hillary did not win.
They pinned all their hopes to MAINTAIN the DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA on
Hillary winning. When Donald Trump won... it messed up their
whole long game plan. George Soros and his Axis of Domestic Evil... were
forced to regroup. THEY WERE TRYING TO COVER THEIR TRACKS.
This ACT of SPYING ON THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION has the signature of all
Leftist and Islamic State actions. This is the way they play.
They infiltrate a Country using the rules of the State and then slowly
bend and manipulate a little piece at a time and the populace does not
notice that another little slice of their Republic has been chipped
away. Like the proverbial Frog in a pot of slow boiled water. Getting Hillary elected was to put the Final Nail in the Coffin of the Republic that our Founding Fathers created.
Now it is exposed that Susan Rice was the low level Lackey ... AGAIN!! who was ordered to put her signature to the spying. They higher ups need deniability. Obama spied on the Pope and got away with it Obama Spied on Angela Merkel of Germany and got away with it. Obama Attacked the Conservatives through the IRS .. and Got away with it Obama and Hillary were running guns through Benghazi and got away with it Coming to 2016...Susan Rice working for Obama White house now exposed as the Stooge who was asked to Spy on the Trump Campaign.
Why not.. she was a loyal stooge the first time with Benghazi. Hell she
was guaranteed that Hillary was going to win. So no one would ever find
out. IT WAS IN THE BAG! But Hillary lost so now Rice was ordered
to get more information on Trump so they could incriminate him in some
way and boot him from office. "Stoogey Susan" says OK and does some more spying!
The big mistake was Obama was a lazy President so he wanted all his
intelligence briefing in writing so he did not have it on his IPAD.. Bad Move..
Valerie Jarret and John Brennan and maybe even Clapper transcribed all
this stuff and put it in the President's Intelligence briefing file
daily... It remained in the White House! It seems like John
Brennan is also being fingered as the original source. This, in fact,
fits in very well with what we know. Brennan developed the well-leaked
paper that said Russia wanted Trump to win. When Comey initially refused
to sign on, Brennan seemed to strong arm him back into line. Brennan
has been the public face of the Russia allegations. Brennan has been
very coy and lawyerly in his denials of being a source of leaks. Rice is
a dopey puppet to the bigger fishes! She does what she is told.
Former Obama administration officials have boasted about how they spread
information they had gathered on Trump and his associates across the
intelligence community for the self-professed high minded purpose of
preserving it from destruction by the Trump administration. Key point #1.
Nunes has known about the unmasking controversy since January, when two
sources in the intelligence community approached him. The sources told
Nunes who was responsible and at least one of the Trump team names that
was unmasked. They also gave him serial numbers of reports that
documented the activity. This was long before Trump sent out his
now-infamous March 4 tweets claiming then-President Barack Obama
“wiretapped” Trump Tower during the 2016 election. Nunes had asked intelligence agencies to see the reports in question, but was stonewalled. Key point #2.
He eventually was able to view them, but there was only one safe place
to see the documents without compromising the sources’ identities — the
old executive office building on White House grounds, which has a
Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) required to view
classified or top secret reports. The White House did not tell Nunes
about the existence of the intelligence reports, but did help him gain
access to the documents at his request, the source said. SO HERE WE HAVE THE UNRAVELING OF THE SPYING CAPER THAT THE CABAL THOUGHT THEY WOULD GET AWAY WITH... ....
SOON IF WE HAVE EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW... WE SHOULD BE SEEING A
LOT OF HIGH POWERED LEFTIES AND FORMER ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS IN JAIL.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA MEDDLING.. THIS HAS EVERYTHING TO DO
WITH THE OBAMA/CLINTON/SOROS AXIS OF DOMESTIC EVIL.. MEDDLING 👮👮 Arrest the bastards!!
FACTS TO CONSIDER . FACEBOOK IS A MONOPOLY THAT MUST BE STOPPED SINCE IT HAS A LEFT WING BIAS! LOOK AT THE WORLD MAP BELOW! Please Read and Share!
We must ask Trump Admin Justice Department to file an Anti Monopoly Lawsuit against Facebook. Conservatives are being targeted. Just like the IRS and others. Facebook is a tool of the left that pretends to be a business working in the FREE MARKET! IT IS NOT.
The Sherman Act also makes it a crime to monopolize any part of interstate commerce. An unlawful monopoly exists when one firm controls the market for a product or service, and it has obtained that market power, not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anti competitive conduct.
Facebook has bought up all forms of Social media and dominates the space.
Anti Trust Laws and Monopoly was were written before the age of Social media and so they need to be amended.
In the age of Information coming via Social Media... we cannot let one LEFT LEANING PUNK LIKE ZUCKERBERG AND HIS GANG TO CONTROL THE FLOW OF INFORMATION TO A LARGE SEGMENT OF THE AMERICAN POPULATION.
Having read about the Facebook Team Conspiring like MTV did in the 1990's with the Left and Bill Clinton along with a heavily biased left leaning media, it is time for us to stop this infringement. So Law Professors have likened Facebook to the New York Times and its right to block and control and endorse whom ever they want. THAT IS WRONG.. because in Newspapers, Radio and TV there is competition. NOT IN THE WORLD OF FACEBOOK. LOOK AT THE MAP AGAIN!.
I CALL ON THE TRUMP JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO DO SO .
If they can dominate the space and censor the speech they do not like and influence Politics they are a Danger to AMERICA and must be stopped.
FYI.. Here are the Anti Trust Laws on the Books:
Many consumers have never heard of antitrust laws, but enforcement of these laws saves consumers millions and even billions of dollars a year. The Federal Government enforces three major Federal antitrust laws, and most states also have their own. Essentially, these laws prohibit business practices that unreasonably deprive consumers of the benefits of competition, resulting in higher prices for products and services.
The three major Federal antitrust laws are:
The Sherman Antitrust Act
The Clayton Act
The Federal Trade Commission Act.
The following information on these laws comes from the Antitrust Enforcement and the Consumer guide.
The Sherman Antitrust Act
This Act outlaws all contracts, combinations, and conspiracies that unreasonably restrain interstate and foreign trade. This includes agreements among competitors to fix prices, rig bids, and allocate customers, which are punishable as criminal felonies.
The Sherman Act also makes it a crime to monopolize any part of interstate commerce. An unlawful monopoly exists when one firm controls the market for a product or service, and it has obtained that market power, not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anticompetitive conduct.
The Act, however, is not violated simply when one firm's vigorous competition and lower prices take sales from its less efficient competitors; in that case, competition is working properly.
The Clayton Act
This Act is a civil statute (carrying no criminal penalties) that prohibits mergers or acquisitions that are likely to lessen competition. Under this Act, the Government challenges those mergers that are likely to increase prices to consumers. All persons considering a merger or acquisition above a certain size must notify both the Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission. The Act also prohibits other business practices that may harm competition under certain circumstances.
The Federal Trade Commission Act
This Act prohibits unfair methods of competition in interstate commerce, but carries no criminal penalties. It also created the Federal Trade Commission to police violations of the Act.
The Department of Justice also often uses other laws to fight illegal activities, including laws that prohibit false statements to Federal agencies, perjury, obstruction of justice, conspiracies to defraud the United States and mail and wire fraud. Each of these crimes carries its own fine and imprisonment term, which may be added to the fines and imprisonment terms for antitrust law violations.
BREAK UP FACEBOOK.. THEY ARE TOO BIG AND ARE NOW A MONOPOLY!
The fact that facebook has a liberal bias was proved after the leaking of a memo from Mark Zuckerberg, its chief executive, in which he called for employees to stop crossing out Black Lives Matter slogans on the walls of the company’s headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif.
https://www.theverge.com/2016/5/12/11665298/facebook-trending-news-topics-human-editors-bias
Here is some info hat conservative articles were suppressed, which were first reported by the website Gizmodo.
More Proof http://thefederalist.com/2016/05/09/former-facebook-workers-confess-we-routinely-suppressed-conservative-news/
This is an expose the logical explanation of why they did it!! Wire tapping, Eavesdropping, Surveilance of the Donald Trump Team. Dirty Tricks Campaign of THE OBAMA CABAL!
Obama and his White House surveiled the Trump Team starting in
June/July 2016. They used a covert team of embedded Intelligence Operatives
loyal to George Soros and the Axis of Domestic Evil.
They were
convinced at that time that Hillary would win so they did not cover
their tracks as efficiently as they would have in any other environment.
Hillary Lost, and the operatives continued under instructions from the
Obama Administration to surveil the Trump transition team to see if
there was anything that they could use to implicate the new
Administration and remove them.
Why you might ask? Think of the impending losses for the Axis of Domestic Evil. 3 Supreme Court Picks ... GONE.. Obama Care .. GONE.. The Immigration Policy to "Brown" America through open borders.. GONE.. Redistribution of Wealth .. GONE Climate Change .. GONE EPA and its anti energy Policy .. GONE XL Pipe Line block and the Fossil Fuel destruction.. GONE Pro Islam Policy .. GONE Gun Control Plans.. GONE They were in a panic.
Then as the Inauguration drew closer and closer and they could not
dislodge Donald Trump by Recounts and Electoral College Vote count
scams.. They realized that they might be exposed.. so Obama signed
Executive Order 12333
Yes... in the Final days of the LAME DUCK ,
the Obama Administration, they expanded the power of the National
Security Agency (NSA) to "share" intercepted personal communication with
the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying any
privacy protections. The new rules were issued under section 2.3 of
Executive Order 12333 after approval by two Obama Administration
officials: Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Director of National
Intelligence Director, James Clapper.
Think about it in the
context of why they did it. It could not be for National Security
reasons. They were leaving in 10 days. Was there something that needed
this rule 10 DAYS BEFORE THE END OF AN ADMINISTRATION ?
The
Answer.. YES.. They needed to Cover their tracks so it could look like
others could have leaked or looked at the information they had secretly
been surveiling Donald Trump for over 12 months. They needed to create a
fake trail. There is no other logical explanation. see... the new
rules, which were issued in an unclassified document, entitled
Procedures for the Availability or Dissemination of Raw Signals
Intelligence Information by the National Security Agency (NSA),
significantly relaxed longstanding limits on what the NSA may do with
the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations.
These operations are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws.
Surveillances include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls,
and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between
people abroad that cross domestic network switches. All SET UP 10 DAYS
BEFORE LEAVING TO ATTEMPT TO COVER THE TRACKS OF THE OBAMA ADMIN
OPERATIVES.
The changes initiated by the Obama Administration in
its waning days was a plan to empower a whole lot more agents and
officials to search and view raw intelligence data that the OBAMA
OPERATIVES HAD SURVEILED OVER THE PAST 6 MONTHS. The plan was to
make sure that intel leaks would possibly grow exponentially and so
dilute by expanding the number of people that could be implicated. This
allowed the Obama Operatives to hide like a needle in a larger haystack.
Obama Lackeys Attorney General Loretta Lynch signed the new rules
permitting the NSA to disseminate raw signals intelligence information
on January 3, 2017 after another Obama Lackey and proven Liar Director
of National Intelligence James Clapper signed them on December 15, 2016.
Ask yourself why the urgency ? Prior to these changes, the NSA
filtered information before sharing intercepted communications with
another agency such as the CIA or the intelligence branches of the FBI.
The NSA only passed on information deemed pertinent before the new order
screening out the identities of innocent people and irrelevant personal
information.
Now intelligence agencies can search directly through raw
repositories of communications intercepted by the NSA and then apply
such rules as required for minimizing privacy intrusions. This allowed
oversight committees to be able to track the chain of control of any
data. With the new Rules the net was spread wide to COVER THE TRACKS OF
THE OBAMA OPERATIVES.
Under the new rules, agencies and
individuals can ask the NSA for access to specific surveillance feeds
premised on the claim that they contain relevant information that is
useful to a particular mission. Then the NSA has the discretion to grant
such requests if it deems the request reasonable. Properly understood,
the contents of the conversations engaged in by members of the Trump
Administration and by President Trump himself are now under an
increasing risk that they will be exposed to the public for purposes of
embarrassing the Trump Administration and in order to impede the
effectiveness of his policies.
The Obama Administration’s change
in policy has grave implications for former National Security Adviser
General Flynn and other Trump Administration officials. Under the new
Obama Administration rules, conversations were and are subject to being
shared with a wider network of individuals and operatives. This process
multiplies the likelihood of leaks and the number of people who could be
doing the leaking. Although proof of cause and effect may be difficult,
consider the following record, which appears to be far more than
coincidental. How Convenient eh ? They thought they had a foolproof way
to cover their tracks. Too many eyes saw the raw data so they could
blame it on "Rouge Agents of the Deep State" So Back to my Original premise...
This is an operation that went sideways because Hillary did not win.
They pinned all their hopes to MAINTAIN the DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA on
Hillary winning.
When Donald Trump won... it messed up their
whole long game plan. George Soros and his Axis of Domestic Evil... were
forced to regroup.
THEY WERE TRYING TO COVER THEIR TRACKS.
This ACT of SPYING ON THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION has the signature of all
Leftist and Islamic State actions. This is the way they play.
They infiltrate a Country using the rules of the State and then slowly
bend and manipulate a little piece at a time and the populace does not
notice that another little slice of their Republic has been chipped
away. Like the proverbial Frog in a pot of slow boiled water. Getting Hillary elected was to put the Final Nail in the Coffin of the Republic that our Founding Fathers created.
WE THE PEOPLE MESSED IT UP... BY VOTING FOR DONALD TRUMP.
Now we need to eviscerate the Cabal. Find out who knew what .. and when
did they know it and once we prove the obvious.. PUNISH THEM. THIS IS
TREASON TO THE REPUBLIC.
FBI director James "slick" Comey received millions from Clinton Foundation. Why you ask ?? Well..his brother’s law firm does Clinton’s taxes!
Read up...
A review of FBI Director James Comey’s professional history and
relationships shows that the Obama cabinet leader — now under fire for
his handling of the investigation of Hillary Clinton — is deeply
entrenched in the big-money cronyism culture of Washington, D.C. His
personal and professional relationships — all undisclosed as he
announced the Bureau would not prosecute Clinton — reinforce bipartisan
concerns that he may have politicized the criminal probe.
These concerns focus on millions of
dollars that Comey accepted from a Clinton Foundation defense
contractor, Comey’s former membership on a Clinton Foundation corporate
partner’s board, and his surprising financial relationship with his
brother Peter Comey, who works at the law firm that does the Clinton
Foundation’s taxes.
Lockheed Martin
When President Obama nominated Comey to
become FBI director in 2013, Comey promised the United States Senate
that he would recuse himself on all cases involving former employers.
But Comey earned $6 million in one year
alone from Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin became a Clinton Foundation
donor that very year.
Comey served as deputy attorney general
under John Ashcroft for two years of the Bush administration. When he
left the Bush administration, he went directly to Lockheed Martin and
became vice president, acting as a general counsel.How much money did James Comey make from
Lockheed Martin in his last year with the company, which he left in
2010? More than $6 million in compensation.
Lockheed Martin is a Clinton Foundation donor. The company admitted to becoming a Clinton Global Initiative member in 2010.
According to records, Lockheed Martin is
also a member of the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt, which paid
Bill Clinton $250,000 to deliver a speech in 2010.
In 2010, Lockheed Martin won 17 approvals for private contracts from the Hillary Clinton State Department.
HSBC Holdings
In 2013, Comey became a board member, a
director, and a Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee member of the
London bank HSBC Holdings.
“Mr. Comey’s appointment will be for an
initial three-year term which, subject to re-election by shareholders,
will expire at the conclusion of the 2016 Annual General Meeting,”
according to HSBC company records.
HSBC Holdings and its various
philanthropic branches routinely partner with the Clinton Foundation.
For instance, HSBC Holdings has partnered with Deutsche Bank through the
Clinton Foundation to “retrofit 1,500 to 2,500 housing units, primarily
in the low- to moderate-income sector” in “New York City.”
“Retrofitting” refers to a Green
initiative to conserve energy in commercial housing units. Clinton
Foundation records show that the Foundation projected “$1 billion in
financing” for this Green initiative to conserve people’s energy in
low-income housing units.
Who Is Peter Comey?
When our source called the Chinatown
offices of D.C. law firm DLA Piper and asked for “Peter Comey,” a
receptionist immediately put him through to Comey’s direct line. But
Peter Comey is not featured on the DLA Piper website.
Peter Comey serves as “Senior Director of
Real Estate Operations for the Americas” for DLA Piper. James Comey was
not questioned about his relationship with Peter Comey in his
confirmation hearing.
DLA Piper is the firm that performed the
independent audit of the Clinton Foundation in November during
Clinton-World’s first big push to put the email scandal behind them. DLA
Piper’s employees taken as a whole represent a major Hillary Clinton
2016 campaign donation bloc and Clinton Foundation donation base.
DLA Piper ranks #5 on Hillary Clinton’s all-time career Top Contributors list, just ahead of Goldman Sachs.
And here is another thing: Peter Comey has a mortgage on his house that is owned by his brother James Comey, the FBI director.
Peter Comey’s financial records, obtained
by Breitbart News, show that he bought a $950,000 house in Vienna,
Virginia, in June 2008. He needed a $712,500 mortgage from First Savings
Mortgage Corporation.
But on January 31, 2011, James Comey and
his wife stepped in to become Private Party lenders. They granted a
mortgage on the house for $711,000. Financial records suggest that Peter
Comey took out two such mortgages from his brother that day.
This financial relationship between the Comey brothers began prior to James Comey’s nomination to become director of the FBI.
DLA Piper did not answer any question as
to whether James Comey and Peter Comey spoke at any point about this
mortgage or anything else during the Clinton email investigation.
DO YOU WANT TO KNOW WHY COMEY IMPLICATED INFO WARS?? WATCH THIS VIDEO CREATED BY INFO WARS THAT IMPLICATED COMEY IN 2016...
ITS PAYBACK FOR BEING EXPOSED.
SO LETS TIE IT ALL TOGETHER SHALL WE ?? The feds arrested an executive from the scandal-plagued global bank named HSBC.
Mark Johnson was arrested for conspiring to take advantage of insider information and other charges. HSBC has been hot water many times and paid billions of dollars to settle money-laundering charges and mortgage abuses.
They were also involved in a YUGE tax evasion scandal, where HSBC
enabled thousands of Americans and others – including drug traffickers,
arms dealers and “wealthy power players” around the world – to avoid
taxes by hiding their money in a Swiss bank they owned. These are unscrupulous people. So, of course, Hillary Clinton is tied to them.
However, not just Hillary, Loretta Lynch, James Comey and even Barack Obama, has ties to the criminal organization at HSBC.
Loretta Lynch’s Ties: Loretta Lynch – then the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Manhattan – reportedly brokered the deal with Holder, that allowed HSBC to pay fines instead of being criminally charged. The settlement was highly criticized,
and Lynch and Holder were accused of acting as if the bank was “too big
to prosecute,” and people likened the fine (without criminal charges)
to a parking ticket. James Comey’s Ties: James Comey was nominated by Obama for a post on HSBC’s Board of
Directors in June 2012, and he was subsequently appointed to the board
on March 4, 2013. He served on the HSBC’s Financial System
Vulnerabilities Committee. Comey’s appointment was for three years,
however, he resigned effective Sept. 4, 2013, following his confirmation to serve as FBI Director. Hillary Clinton’s Ties: Hillary Clinton also benefited from HSBC’s Swiss bank account
division during the same time period – leaked files revealed the
identities of at least seven donors who were HSBC clients and
contributed to the Clinton Foundation – to the tune of $81 million in total contributions. It seems like every time you turn around Hillary is tied to another scandal or unscrupulous organization.
THE NEW MEDIA IS WINNING SO THE LEFT HIRES COMEY AS A HITMAN!
Only a Hysterical Idiot would believe the FBI’s allegation that Infowars and Breitbart and RT could infiltrate the election system to swing the election to Donald Trump!
FBI = Fucked-up Bureau of Investigation
The FBI really knows who interfered in the election but the hired gun of the establishment is working to discredit the NEW MEDIA! WILL NOT WORK!
Let me list the real menace.. the list of pro Hillary ie., Pro George Soros anti Conservative Anti Israel anti American gaggle of Media and their cohorts Google Facebook Twitter New York Times Washington Post MSNBC CNN ABC CBS NBC LA TIMES GEORGE SOROS HUSSEIN OBAMA CARLOS SLIM THE HOLLYWOOD ELITE THE MOVIE SCRIPT WRITERS INSERTING NEGATIVE IDENTITIES ON CONSERVATIVE CHARACTERS.
OH THE LIST IS ENDLESS TRUTH BE TOLD these media outlets have blocked banned and harassed me for years because I am an ULTRA CONSERVATIVE.. I SURE AS HELL DO NOT WORK FOR ANY FUCKING RUSSIANS!
The revelation that the FBI is
investigating whether Infowars and Breitbart, assisted in helping Russian operatives
as part of a secret cyber operation to help Donald Trump win the
presidency is the ludicrous culmination of four months of wall to wall
leftist hysteria about Moscow “hacking” the election.
Federal investigators will probe
whether Russian operatives created bots to blitz social media with
pro-Trump stories that harmed Hillary Clinton’s campaign, including
links from Infowars, RT, and Breitbart.
“Investigators examining the bot
attacks are exploring whether the far-right news operations took any
actions to assist Russia’s operatives. Their participation, however,
wasn’t necessary for the bots to amplify their news through Twitter and
Facebook,” reports McClatchy.
Having failed to stymie our
accelerating growth for over a decade, long before “Russian hacking” or
“fake news” was even a thing, this partisan investigation is a
transparent attempt to silence and censor Infowars by ludicrously
impugning us as a conduit for Kremlin propaganda.
It’s also incredibly ironic given that
the only evidence of tech outfits interfering in the election to
deliberately help a certain candidate implicates Google, Facebook and
Twitter in manipulating their own algorithms to aid Hillary Clinton.
As we’ve seen from the establishment’s
fake news narrative, this is nothing less than a ruse to try to ban
legitimate news coverage and dissenting opinion, despite a Stanford University study which found that fake news had no impact on the outcome of the presidential election and if anything benefited Hillary Clinton.
By declaring Infowars to be little
more than a front for Russian bots, with no evidence whatsoever, this
provides Facebook, YouTube and Twitter a pretext with which to ban and
censor our content.
In reality, it’s these very companies,
cheered on by the left, that used techniques not too dissimilar to the
claims about Russian bots to game their own algorithms in a desperate
attempt to boost Hillary Clinton’s chances.
Two months before the election, psychologist Robert Epstein and SourceFeed’s Matt Lieberman both exposed
how Google was manipulating search results in relation to Hillary
Clinton to ensure “autocomplete suggestions were biased in favour of
Clinton”.
Typing in “Hillary Clinton is” to
Google only returned positive suggested results, whereas when users
searched identical terms in other search engines such as Bing or Yahoo,
the first results suggested were things like, “Hillary Clinton is a
liar,” or “Hillary Clinton is a criminal”.
This manipulation had the power to “shift as many as 3 million votes,” according to Epstein.
Wikileaks emails also revealed
that John Podesta, Hillary’s campaign manager, sought to have “discreet
conversations” with the likes of Apple, Facebook and Google.
Other emails reveal that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg wanted to meet with the Clinton campaign, while Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg did meet with Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills in 2015.
In May 2016, it was reported that
Facebook ordered its staff to suppress stories deemed of interest or
beneficial to conservatives by manipulating its “trending” section to
block them out.
Facebook staff also told Gizmodo that they were instructed to artificially “inject” subjects into the trending section that were not organically trending.
Twitter was also doing its best to bury negative information about Hillary. In February 2016, Vocative revealed how the company was censoring hashtags that made the Democratic candidate look bad.
The hashtags #WhichHillary and
#WhichHillaryCensored were removed from Twitter’s trends list despite
being considerably more active than other hashtags that were allowed to
trend.
The mainstream media’s constant
barrage of fake news which suggested Hillary was anything up to 98%
certain to win the presidency was also a deliberate attempt to
manipulate Trump supporters by convincing them their vote was worthless.
All of these examples of tech
companies deliberately gaming their algorithms to help Hillary are
documented, whereas conspiracy theories about Infowars working with
Russian bots are backed up by nothing but hot air.
We are being accused, with zero
evidence, of the exact kind of manipulation that Facebook, Google &
Twitter oversaw to help Hillary.
It’s also worth remembering that the ‘Russian bots control Infowars’
conspiracy originated from Louise Mensch, who also thinks Putin had
Breitbart murdered and was exposed in the Wikileaks release of John Podesta’s emails as being a Hillary Clinton sycophant.
Reminder: The 'Russian bots control Infowars'
conspiracy originated from Louise Mensch, who thinks Putin had Breitbart
murdered. pic.twitter.com/5sjpu2t0VJ
If the FBI really wants to get to the
bottom of who interfered in the election – we suggest they start by
investigating Google, Facebook and Twitter.
The only interference Infowars had in the election is to make the better arguments – for that we are guilty as charged.
Unfortunately for the left, their
obsession with baseless, paranoid delusions about vast Russian
conspiracies will continue to hinder any kind of real examination as to
why they lost – and that can only be a good thing for conservatives.
SO LETS CUT THE BULLSHIT... THIS IS A LAST DITCH ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE NEWS THAT THE LEFT DOES NOT WANT YOU TO GET INFO FROM.
THE LEGACY OLD ORDER LEFTY MEDIA IS TRYING TO PROTECT ITS DYING CARCASS.
DID YOU KNOW THAT THE UNITED NATIONS DECIDES MOSTLY WHO IS A REFUGEE AND WHERE THEY SHOULD BE RESETTLED ?
I have this novel idea. Read the whole post and tell me what you think. Understand the population concept please!
America needs to be repopulated with people who have the same cultural
values as we do. So we need to start a movement to take in European
"refugees".
They are from the same stock as most of you are. Now since
their countries are being over run by Muslim
Hordes who ghettoize their cities and rape and murder the local
population many are fleeing.
Why should refugees only be from Muslim or
3rd world countries? Look I am not saying we excluded other countries..
but we need to include the hardworking conservative middle class in
Europe that is being squeezed by the elites and the migrant refugees
there! Their forefathers came to America in the 18th and 19th century
and made America what it is TODAY!.
So... I call on all the Trump Administration to formulate an executive
order to allow displaced Europeans who do not feel safe in their
countries TO COME OVER TO AMERICA for asylum and Refuge from Muslims invading their homelands.
Bring your money, bring your families and bring your enterprises and
helps us repopulate AMERICA with people who will work hard and MAKE
America Great Again.
We have been told that we are a Nation of
Immigrants right ? No matter what the color of their skin ?? Right ?
Well Displaced European Caucasians can be REFUGEES TOO!
Look the
refugees coming would be hard core conservative types who are sick and
tired of their Liberal Socialist Leaders bringing in Refugees from the
3rd world and expecting them to foot the bill and destroy their own
culture.
America is being diluted of the original immigrants who
are hardworking and have almost the same values as we do. The reality is
that our European Population is being replaced by other races not just
because of immigration laws but because Whites have fewer children and
as this link to video I posted explains.. It takes 2.1 Kids per family
to just SUSTAIN A CULTURE!
What do you think people ?? I would like to hear your input! THIS IS NOT RACISM AS THE LEFT AND THE SOFTY REPUBS WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE.. ITS SURVIVAL!!
PATRIOTS READ THIS AN YOU WILL BE CONVINCED AS TO WHY THE LEFT CANNOT ALLOW DOCUMENTS TO BE EXPOSED!
Since the Left is so hell
bent on trying to de-legitimize Trump.... I call for a movement a
REVIVAL of the movement to prove once and for all that Obama was
illegally installed as President.
A SHADOW GOVERNMENT WORKING TO TOPPLE THE ELECTED GOVERNMENT IS TREASON. OBAMA AND THE LEFTIST CABAL IS GUILTY AS CHARGED!
U.S. Constitution Article III Section 3 Section 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war
against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and
comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony
of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. I AM WILLING TO BE A WITNESS IN OPEN COURT. I JUST NEED ONE MORE WITNESS!!
George Soros and Obama and his Thugs and the IslamoAfrocentric front
and the Anti American Hispanic Coalition are all in violation of the
Constitution.
The Constitution allows for change only through the passing of amendments that must be ratified. Any ACT to modify America through any other means including Judicial Activism or through Mob rule ARE ACTS OF TREASON. BASED ON THE FACTS SHOWN BELOW IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THERE IS NO DEFINITIVE PROOF OBAMA IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN:
OBAMA CAN PROVEN TO BE ILLEGALLY INSTALLED AND PROTECTED BY A CABAL.
Here are some facts from 2008 that have never been clarified or ruled on.
Nancy Pelosi and the DNC sent an Official Certification of Nomination
to the Secretary of State in each of the 50 states. Most of those
certifications merely certified that Obama and Biden had been
nominated. Hawaii is different. Hawaii requires that the party ALSO certify that the nominees are legally qualified, under the provisions of the United States Constitution, to serve in those offices. Here is what Nancy Pelosi and the DNC sent to the Hawaiian Secretary of State: OK, Speaker Pelosi, How Did the DNC Certify Obama’s Eligibility? The Constitution requires that Obama be a natural born citizen:
No person excepta natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;
§ 212. Citizens and natives. … natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.
… children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed
to all their rights. … The country of the fathers is therefore that of
the children … in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a
person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of
a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his
country. … § 215. Children of citizens born in a foreign country. It is asked whether the children born of citizens in a foreign
country are citizens? The laws have decided this question in several
countries, and their regulations must be followed.(59) By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers, and enter into all their rights (§ 212); the place of birth produces no change in this particular …
The 14th Amendment does not speak to who is a natural born citizen,
it only speaks to who is a citizen. Qualifying as a citizen under the
14th Amendment does not automatically qualify someone as a natural born
citizen. One must look at the citizenship of the parents, as well as
birth location, to determine if someone qualifies as a natural born
citizen. Divorce records show
that Barack Hussein Obama married Stanley Ann Dunham Obama on February
2, 1961 and Barack Hussein Obama II was born August 4, 1961. Barack
Hussein Obama was never a United States citizen. He was first a
British subject, and later a citizen of Kenya. By Natural Law, The Law of Nations, and The British Nationality Act
of 1948, British citizenship was passed from the father, Barack Hussein
Obama, to his son, Barack Hussein Obama II. Barack Hussein Obama II’s own campaign admits this at http://www.fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate
As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British
subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality
Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
Natural-born citizens are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. To be a natural born citizen of the United States, three conditions must be met:
1) Born “in the country” (on U.S. soil).
2) Born to a father who is a U.S. citizen.
3) Born to a mother who is a U.S. citizen. If any one of those conditions is not met, then the person is not a
natural born citizen of the United States, and they are not eligible to
hold the office of President of the United States and Commander in Chief
of all of our Armed Forces. John Sydney McCain III fails to meet the first condition
(he was born on Panamanian soil, not U.S. soil). It is a lie to say
that McCain was born at Coco Solo Naval Air Station in the Panama Canal
Zone. He was not. While the Certificate of Birth below says “The Panama
Canal Health Department”, it shows that McCain was born at Colón
Hospital in the city of Colón, Republic of Panama (R. P.). The city of
Colón was not in the Panama Canal Zone and was not U.S. soil. FACT:
Barack Hussein Obama II fails to meet the second condition
(his father was not a United States citizen). He may also fail to meet
the first condition (more evidence exists to show that he was born in
Kenya than exists to show he was born in Hawaii), but that is
superfluous. BHOII is already conclusively ineligible because he fails
to meet the second condition, regardless of whether or not he meets the
first condition.
SO... since the Left is so hell bent on trying to de-legitimize Trump.... I call for a movement a REVIVAL of the movement to prove once and for all that Obama was illegally installed as President.
