Facebook spying to collect your Data Long Term

💢💢💢🛑🛑📣📣📣🔈⛔⚠️⚠️⚠️❌❌❌❗

ATTENTION ALL AMERICANS!!

💢💢💢🛑🛑📣📣📣🔈⛔⚠️⚠️⚠️❌❌❌❗

WARNING! SHARE AND GET OUT QUICK..

Facebook is Stealing our DATA

Today its for Profit.. but Tomorrow it could be arrest us! ⚠️⚠️⚠️ PLEASE SHARE NOW !
YOU ARE BEING SPIED ON ON! ORDERED BY FACEBOOK. THE DATA MIGHT ALREADY BE IN THE HANDS OF GEORGE SOROS AND SOCIALIST OLIGARCHS!
Facebook Is now even Stealing Hospital Records of Their Users For Advanced Spying Programs
Facebook has asked several major U.S. hospitals to share data about their patients, such as illnesses and prescription info, for a proposed research project. Facebook was intending to match it up with user data it had collected, and help the hospitals figure out which patients might need special care or treatment. (Right !! )
Cambridge Analytica data leak scandal has raised public concerns over how Facebook and others collect and use detailed information about Facebook users.
But as recently as last month, the company was talking to several health organizations, including Stanford Medical School and American College of Cardiology, about signing the data-sharing agreement.
They claim that the data shared would obscure personally identifiable information, such as the patient's name, Facebook proposed using a common computer science technique called "hashing" to match individuals who existed in both sets. Facebook says the data would have been used only for research conducted by the medical community. If you believe that you probably believe Facebook is not Censoring Conservatives!
The project raised new concerns about the massive amount of data Facebook collects about its users, and how this data can be used in ways users never expected.
That issue has been in the spotlight after reports that Mark Zuckerberg gave the Obama Campaign massive amounts of data for Free in 2012 so that it could manipulate political discourse. It also has given Cambridge Analytica, a political research organization that did work for Donald Trump, Yes all kinds of detailed information about Facebook users without their permission. Remember facebook has asked for ID in the past.. particularly from users with large followings!
Facebook said on Wednesday that as many as 187 million people's data might have been shared this way. T
WHAT IS BUILDING 8?
The exploratory effort to share medical-related data was led by an interventional cardiologist called Freddy Abnousi, who describes his role on LinkedIn as "leading top-secret projects." It was under the purview of Regina Dugan, the head of Facebook's "Building 8" experiment projects group, before she left in October 2017. Now the whole project has gone underground.
Facebook's pitch, according to two people who heard it and one who is familiar with the project, was to combine what a health system knows about its patients (such as: person has heart disease, is age 50, takes 2 medications and made 3 trips to the hospital this year) with what Facebook knows (such as: user is age 50, married with 3 kids, English isn't a primary language, actively engages with the community by sending a lot of messages).
The project would then figure out if this combined information could improve patient care, initially with a focus on cardiovascular health. For instance, if Facebook could determine that an elderly patient doesn't have many nearby close friends or much community support, the health system might decide to send over a nurse to check in after a major surgery.
GET THE PICTURE ?
Then they can use that info any way they choose WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION !
Facebook gets your "anonymous medical data" from the Hospitals!
Then they can geo track to link you to the info.
You might have posted... "going in for Gall Bladder surgery".. then they track all those in your area that had the surgery to when you went to a Hospital in your area and connect the post with their snoop algorithm!
They can use this kind of information in many ways.
Then they can use that info any way they choose WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION !
YOU ARE BEING SPIED ON AND YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW IT!

THEIR ALGORITHM KEEPS US SEPARATE BY INTENT. SOMEONE WROTE THE ALGORITHM AND IT WAS APPROVED BY FACEBOOK.. SO THEY OWN IT!

Go back 4 years on my page and you will see that with far fewer Friends and Followers I had more that 1000 likes and shares per post!

We all need to be aware that FACEBOOK IS INTENTIONALLY CENSORING US!

The Algorithm sorts by sequential multiple factors.
1. Conservative.... Y or No
2. Pro Gun .. Y or No
3. Pro Life Y or No
4. Pro Legal Immigration Y or No
5.Pro Republican Y or No
6. Pro Trump Y or No
7. Large group of followers and Friends..
500-1000,
1000-5000
5000- 10,000
10,000- 20,000


Hell by the end of this sort... people like me have very little impact within this social Media program.

If it works and no one stops them then Twitter and Youtube and other Media will join the censorship and if we still do nothing I wager that they will finally shut down Trump and any Republican who dares to confront the ideology they support. Its comin if we do not have a Revolution. Its your choice! Fight now or lose it all!

IT IS VERY SIMPLE TO WRITE THIS KIND OF CODE!
FACEBOOK NEEDS TO BE EXPOSED FOR WHAT IT IS DOING!

It has stolen our data and they are now profiting on our information while the destroy our Republic!

THIS MUST STOP.

We need a Class Action Lawsuit against Facebook, Google and the FANGY'S now or it will be too late soon!

ATTENTION CONSERVATIVE AMERICA
ITS TIME FOR A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST THE "FANGS"!
Read Why! Then Share!
THEN JOIN US!

We going into scary and dangerous times. Some day soon unless we cat now they will become all powerful and become our rulers. They have all the Leftists politicians in their pocket. They are working with China and other Oligopolies to convert our beloved country in to a similar type of country.

 

To get there Facebook and Google and the other have defrauded America. They are guilty of "FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT"
We as Conservatives have the right to a Class Action Suit against them for benefiting from defrauding us!

Fraud in the inducement is contract fraud, occurring when one party uses trickery or deceit to persuade the other party to act to their own advantage.
When fraud in the inducement occurs, two things have happened:

• One party was misled about the facts; AND
• Those “facts” were used to make a decision.

You can join me on these Conservative alternative Social media.

www.mewe.com
www.gab.ai
www.proamericaonly.org 

SILICON VALLEY "FANGY"'s

F = Facebook

A = Amazon

N = Netflix

G = Google

Y = YouTube

Along with @Twitter and @Apple Have already set up the suffocation of conservative new pipelines to Affect the Midterm Elections Join alternative social media now

must pay the price and be monitored and regulated as "Monopolies". They defrauded us and have benefited from their FRAUD!

Let's stop pretending that they are "just free market businesses" that have a right to censor. The internet like the Airwaves are for the general good.

What they did was Illegal

Facebook induced me to join this media platform and made me sign a lengthy agreement 7 years ago. Their business model was to allow free access to the platform and share my thoughts and ideas with whom ever I chose. The promise was that my friends and followers would be able to do the same.

Based on this inducement I joined and connected with thousands of Friends and Followers over the years!

Once Facebook reached "critical Mass" to go public and make a ton of money for their Principles... they began changing the model without letting the consumer know.

‼️They began Censoring speech they did not subscribe to

‼️They created a NEW ALGORITHM that would Limit Conservative Member reach.

( My posts went from getting 1000's of likes and shares to less than 100 on most posts)

‼️They Started to harvest our information for political purposes

‼️They began tracking our movement in the real world

‼️They began secretly storing all our messages and Conversations

‼️They began taking MEDICAL records from Hospitals and using our data used artificial intelligence to know our Medical History.

‼️They sold or gave the data to the Obama Campaign in 2012

They sold or gave the data to people we did not consent our data be given to.

They claim its "Only for Advertising" But we know if History is any Teacher that once you have the data, if the Principles of Facebook decide to side with an Oligarch or a despot all the data is there for them to pass along.. so that they can Crack down on the opposition.

Remember

✅They know where you live,

✅They know your friends

✅They know your Medical History

✅They know if you have guns

✅They know where you work

✅They know where you travel

✅They know who your friends are

YES PEOPLE.. WE ARE BEING GATHERED AND SORTED!

THEY HAVE STOLEN YOUR IDENTITIES AND THEY PLAN TO USE IT FOR NEFARIOUS PURPOSES. THE PLAN IS ALREADY IN ACTION..

❓How many shares do you get a day?

I did NOT SIGN UP FOR THIS FACEBOOK.. I WANT ALL THE INFORMATION DESTROYED AND THIS MODEL OF FACEBOOK AND THE FANGY'S SHUT DOWN..

They are Silicon Valley’s Tax-Avoiding, Job-Killing, Soul-Sucking Machine

These companies dominate our daily lives unlike any other in human history: Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Google YouTube, Apple and Twitter . We love our nifty phones and just-a-click-away services, but these behemoths enjoy unfettered economic domination and hoard riches on a scale not seen since the monopolies of the gilded age. The only logical conclusion? We must bust up big tech.

Over the past decade, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google—or, as I call them, “the Four”—have aggregated more economic value and influence than nearly any other commercial entity in history. Together, they have a market capitalization of $2.8 trillion (the GDP of France), a staggering 24 percent share of the S&P 500 Top 50, close to the value of every stock traded on the Nasdaq in 2001.

THEY ARE WORKING TO CONTROL THE FUTURE.. AND JUST LIKE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.. ONCE THEY HAVE GOT THIS POWER THEY WILL NOT GIVE IT UP WITHOUT A FIGHT!

THE SOONER WE TAKE DOWN THIS  LEFT LEANING SOCIALIST OLIGARCHY SUPPORTING GANG OF THUGS.. THE EASIER IT WILL BE TO TAKE THEM DOWN!

Read More about these Gangsters here !

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a15895746/bust-big-tech-silicon-valley/

❓HOW ABOUT YOU ? READY TO TAKE YOUR LIVES BACK ?  FEELING CHEATED ?

WANT TO START A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT?

SHARE THIS NOW !

SHARE

Why Facebook, Twitter and Google among other Silicon Valley companies do not like The American Republic

I know why Facebook, Twitter and Google among other Silicon Valley companies do not like The American Republic! Here's why!

Reason: 

Most of these Companies were started up by a hodge podge of White and Brown guys.. but the majority hired below them are mostly immigrants and "third worlders" who have always had "America Envy". The envy manifests itself in trying to knock down what made America Great!

The Industrial Revolution was a European Phenomenon. It increased the wealth of working man in Europe and America!

This disparity with the rest of the world for over 50 years created "global envy" of Europe and America.

Then an immigrant class who were legally let into the Country as H1B Visa workers began to arrive in the US. They were smart, Mathematically Proficient and could write computer code etc. They were attracted to the wealth they were unable to make in their own countries so they came to America! These folks who arrived in the late twenties had already been indoctrinated by their countries to despise America but love its wealth. These folks despise The America we are! They are not used to free Speech and all the tenets of the Constitution that ascribed our rights as being given by God.

 

The simple common immigrant who buys a 7-11 or a Gas Station may have similar envy but they are the working class who came to America under a different set of circumstances and loved that America gave them the opportunity. They want a piece of the American dream. They work hard and do not in most cases try to tear down America.

There is also another group who came to America poor but educated with some kind of degree. Met a local immigrant with the same socio-economic back ground felt discriminated because of their looks and their inability to integrate and their accents and when they had kids they passed down this bias to their American Born Children who got good grades in school and worked to get a good job in the Silicon Valley but carried the roots of their parents bias. When they got the chance to get into positions of power in companies, they flexed their Anti America bias. 

And we also have the Programmer class who came in during the 1990's and 2000. The have envy and hate! They live on the Coasts in incubator bubbles of Leftist hate. Most of them are the people from India and Pakistan and the students let in from China. They lived in the Metro Melting pots!  

The Bay Area

Los Angeles

Seattle

New York

Massachusetts

Chicago

New Jersey

They are willing workers for their Silicon Valley masters.. the Socialist Oligopolists who feed them high salaries cushy lifestyles and the Bullshit on their over rated campuses and they become indoctrinated to replicate the Third World Censorship they were used to, in their Home Countries. Some are the children of hardworking immigrants who despised the fact that their parents struggled as have most immigrants and look back at the their childhood as one of having to work and scrimp and study to make it in America. The Programmer bubble was expanding and they took the ride and so many of them were absorbed into this faux world. Their psyche drives the Digital culture.

The Black/Brown Victim Whores feed the anger with their own sorry stories and so they all jointly believe that white is evil and are the face of the "Oppressor" and Brown and Black are the victims. That drives their ideology.

HOW SAD !

They cannot see beyond their little petty shells. They cannot see that the Opportunity of America is made of Building blocks of Ideas of past Generations of workers who brought America to this point not be torn down and re constituted.

We can either stop them or they will stop us! They will start by censoring FREE SPEECH for regular folks like me who do not have a Bully Pulpit but when the are empowered and if we do nothing they will escalate the censorship and take it all the way to the top. They will have the help of the Leftists Media who will make them darlings of the new world plan to tea America down. They will not stop until they use their power to censor the top of the conservative Movement. Hell they may even censor our President. Silence is consent.

Decide now! Fight back America! Tomorrow will be too late!

We are careening down a path to disaster and these immigrants are a weapon of the LEFT.

Robert Mueller Conspired with Hillary Obama Gang. Was a Secret Paid Uranium Mule

Mueller’s Role in Delivering Uranium to Russians Raises Questions. HE WAS THE CLINTON OBAMA URANIUM MULE

Julian Assange at WikiLeaks has exposed a 2009 State Department cable to the Russians raises fresh questions about the objectivity of Special Counsel Robert Mueller (shown), the man named to investigate any possible “collusions” between the presidential campaign of Donald Trump and the Russians.
In 2009, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton directed FBI Director Mueller to deliver a sample of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Russia. The uranium had reportedly been stolen. It seems particularly odd, considering that the FBI is not under the supervision of the State Department, and that the FBI director would personally make the transfer.

Assange released the controversial cable on May 17, the same day that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tapped Mueller as an “independent” counsel to investigate any supposed Trump-Russian ties.
#ROBERTMULLAH

HERE is STATE DEPT (under HRC) cable documenting MUELLER secret squirrel TRAITOR mission to MOSCOW on Sept 21 2009 to DELIVER URANIUM to Russia 

Here is the Leaked Cable. See Section 6.
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE85588_a.html

Uranium 1 sale to Russia  gave  $147 mill to Clinton Foundation;

ROBERT MULLAH Mueller net worth $ 32 million by 2011 ! Hmm!! How does that happen ?
Link for Source https://www.opensecrets.org/personal-finances/net-worth?cid=N99999908
 
As a Civil Servant all his Life !

ASK YOURSELF.. If it was a diplomatic mission, why was the FBI Director Robert Mueller involved? And if it was a law enforcement mission, why was Hillary Clinton involved?

If it was a Scheme to sell Uranium 1 to the Russians.. and everyone get rich doing it.. then it ALL MAKE SENSE!

 

Trump has expressed legitimate concerns about the personnel that Mueller has hired to conduct his work. They are practically all partisan Democrats, with seven staffers having contributed large sums of money to either Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or the Democratic National Committee. None donated any money to Trump, or to any other Republican presidential candidate in the last campaign.

Adding to that concern is the question as to what exactly was Mueller’s role in the deal between Russia and Uranium One, the company that Hillary’s husband, Bill Clinton, supported at the same time she was secretary of state. Hillary Clinton, in her role as secretary of state, voted to allow the Russian State Atomic Nuclear Energy Agency control of about 20 percent of all uranium holdings in the United States.

As revealed by WikiLeaks, Secretary of State Clinton sent a cable to John Beryle, who was U.S. Ambassador to Russia; the U.S. Ambassador to the Georgia Embassy; and U.S. ambassador to the Russian Embassy, on August 17, 2009. The cable read in part, “Action Request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives in Moscow on September 21.”

Shepard Ambellas, editor-in-chief of Intellihub.com, said in June 2017 that the classified cable indicated that the delivery of the 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources occurred during a secret “plane-side” meeting on the tarmac. (This brings up memories of Bill Clinton’s tarmac meeting in Arizona with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, where they said they just discussed their grandchildren.)

Not surprisingly, supporters of the Clintons, such as the Huffington Post, interpreted the cable in the most favorable light for Hillary and Bill Clinton. “The text and tweet released by WikiLeaks more than suggests Mueller is guilty of a serious crime, passing on nuclear material to the USA’s superpower rival. But,” the Post added, “the section it omitted from the tweet changes the entire context of Mueller’s actions.”

The portion the Post contended was not mentioned, but relevant, read, “Over two years ago Russia requested a ten-gram sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) seized in early 2006 in Georgia [the Russian territory, not the American state] during a nuclear smuggling sting operation … In response to the Russian request, the Georgian Government authorized the United States to share a sample of the material with the Russians for forensic analysis.”

The Post then laments, “WikiLeaks used to be a force for good in the world, playing a major role in revealing the inner workings of Guantanamo Bay and exposing events like the killing of journalists by U.S. forces in Iraq.” In other words, as long as WikiLeaks was producing negative material on a Republican president, it was a “force for good in the world.” Now that it is raising questions about the man investigating a different Republican president, not so much.
Actually, the fact that WikiLeaks appears to be nonpartisan in its activities should give it more credibility --- more so than the Huffington Post, well-known for its pro-Clinton bias.

In his highly-praised book Clinton Cash, Peter Schweizer discusses the famous “Russian Reset” initiated by Hillary Clinton when she took over the State Department. Relations between the U.S. and the Russians had degenerated during the last couple of years of the Bush administration, and Hillary publicly said she intended to reverse the worsened relations, complete with a “reset button.”

For their part, the Russians appeared pleased with her selection as secretary of state. Schweizer noted, “An important side note to the Russian reset was how it involved a collection of foreign investors who had poured vast sums of money into the Clinton Foundation and who continued to sponsor lucrative speeches for Bill. These investors stood to gain enormously from the decisions Hillary made as secretary of state.”

Schweizer explained why the Hillary “reset” was so important in the uranium deals. The Bush administration had pulled out of a uranium deal with the Russians after Russian forces went into Georgia in 2008, but the Obama administration (with Hillary taking the lead) reopened the negotiations. A deal was reached in 2010, and as Schweizer wrote, “Several multimillion-dollar Clinton Foundation donors were at the center of the deal.” In fact, “The Clinton Foundation also failed to disclose major contributions from entities controlled by those involved in the Uranium One deal. Thus, beginning in 2009, the company’s chairman, [Ian] Telfer, quietly started funneling what would become $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation through a Canadian entity he controlled.”

While the revelation of a secret meeting involving Robert Mueller in the delivery of uranium to the Russians, by itself, does not prove anything of a criminal or unethical nature, it does raise questions that merit an investigation. After all, when Mueller was FBI director under the Obama administration, he was trusted enough by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to carry out this mission. If it was a diplomatic mission, why was the FBI director involved? And if it was a law enforcement mission, why was Clinton involved?

So what do you think? Is Mueller sufficiently objective to conduct an impartial investigation of a Republican president ? And don't tell me he is a republican! That is not a defense. He is a compromised paid Whore for the Clinton Obama Thug enterprise!

He is desperately trying to find some connection between Trump and some Crime that they can then negotiate a truce deal that is structured that they stop investigating if the Clinton Obama Investigations stop as well.

FBI RETALIATED AGAINST GENERAL FLYNN FOR STANDING UP FOR A WOMAN WHO ACCUSED MCCABE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT

BREAKING:
FBI retaliated against Michael Flynn by launching a Russia probe because he was going to Testify against McCabe in a Major Sexual Harassment Case.

The FBI launched a criminal probe against former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn two years after the retired Army general roiled the bureau’s leadership by intervening on behalf of a decorated counterterrorism agent who accused now-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and other top officials of sexual discrimination, according to documents and interviews.

Flynn’s intervention on behalf of Supervisory Special Agent Robyn Gritz was highly unusual, and included a letter in 2014 on his official Pentagon stationary, a public interview in 2015 supporting Gritz’s case and an offer to testify on her behalf. His offer put him as a hostile witness in a case against McCabe, who was soaring through the bureau’s leadership ranks.

The FBI sought to block Flynn’s support for the agent, asking a federal administrative law judge in May 2014 to keep Flynn and others from becoming a witness in her Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) case, memos obtained by Circa show. Two years later, the FBI opened its inquiry of Flynn.

The EEOC case, which is still pending, was serious enough to require McCabe to submit to a sworn statement to investigators, the documents show.

The deputy director’s testimony provided some of the strongest evidence in the case of possible retaliation, because he admitted the FBI opened an internal investigation into Gritz’s personal conduct after learning the agent “had filed or intended to file” a sex discrimination complaint against her supervisors.

McCabe eventually became the bureau’s No. 2 executive and emerged as a central player in the FBI’s Russia election tampering investigation, putting him in a position to impact the criminal inquiry against Flynn.

Three FBI employees told Circa they personally witnessed McCabe make disparaging remarks about Flynn before and during the time the retired Army general emerged as a figure in the Russia case.

 

 

The bureau employees, who spoke only on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution, said they did not know the reason for McCabe’s displeasure with Flynn, but that it made them uncomfortable as the Russia probe began to unfold and pressure built to investigate Flynn. One employee even consulted a private lawyer.
“As far as the troops in the field, the vast-majority were disgusted with the Russia decision, but that was McCabe driving the result that eventually led [former FBI Director James] Comey to make the decision,” said a senior federal law enforcement official, with direct knowledge of the investigation.

FBI agents’ concerns became more pronounced when a highly-classified piece of evidence -- an intercepted conversation between Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak -- suddenly leaked to the news media and prompted Flynn’s resignation as Trump’s top security adviser.

“The Flynn leaks were nothing short of political,” one FBI employee said, noting the specific contents of the conversation were known by only a handful of government officials when they leaked. “The leaks appeared to be targeted to take Flynn out.” 

Eventually the probe on Flynn moved beyond Russia to questions about whether he properly disclosed foreign payments affecting his security clearance.

FBI officials declined to answer any questions from Circa, including whether McCabe ever considered recusing himself or has recused himself from the Flynn aspects of the Russia probe. McCabe declined comment via the FBI press office.

But one of the FBI’s most famous whistleblowers says McCabe has an ethical obligation to recuse himself in the Flynn probe to avoid the appearance of retribution or bias.

“I don't think they have any choice. He has to step aside,” said Frederic Whitehurst, who as an FBI special agent and forensic chemist blew the whistle on misdeeds inside the FBI crime lab two decades ago and prompted widespread reforms.

“If he stays involved, the case against Flynn has no credibility,” explained Whitehurst, now often called as an expert witness in court cases. “If there are criminal charges that could go against Flynn, that's got to go to court. And those agents at some point may be called before a grand jury and anything he (McCabe) said to them about Flynn could be used as exonerating information or evidence of misconduct.”

Whitehurst said he saw senior FBI officials, including then-Director Louis Freeh and then-General Counsel Howard Shapiro, recuse themselves in the 1990s from his whistleblowing case to avoid looking they were involved in retribution after he made allegations of wrongdoing by the bureau

“Louie and Howie did it, and that sets the precedent I think,” Whitehurst said.

Documents and memos obtained by Circa detail how Flynn and other top officials at other government agencies in 2014 and 2015 came to intervene in the EEOC case of Gritz, who rose over two decades to a supervisory special agent inside the FBI on the strength of her counterterrorism work.

For nearly a decade, Gritz worked with the intelligence community to help successfully track down global terrorists or rescue Western hostages, and was even occasionally called upon to personally brief then-Director Robert Mueller on sensitive cases like the disappearance of a retired agent Robert Levinson inside Iran, memos show.

But her career took a sudden downward turn after she went to work under McCabe and his leadership team in 2012, resulting in her first negative rating after years of outstanding performance reviews. She filed an EEOC complain inside the FBI against a handful of bureau executives in 2012, alleging her career was being derailed by sexual discrimination.

The FBI referred her for an Office of Professional Responsibility investigation for timecard irregularities. As hostilities rose between the two sides, emails and testimony showed senior FBI officials castigated Gritz for being too “emotional,” having a possible mental illness and sending inappropriate emails.

The FBI concluded there was no discrimination, arguing Gritz was referred to OPR for investigation on June 20, 2012 before she ever filed her EEOC complaint.

But McCabe’s sworn statement offered evidence that actually supported Gritz’s claim of retaliation and discrimination, recounting a conversation on June 19, 2012 in which he authorized the OPR investigation of Gritz after one of his deputies told him Gritz was about to file an EEO complaint, his sworn statement shows.
“I first learned of the issues that led to Ms. Gritz’s current OPR investigation during a telephone call with Deputy Assistant Director (DAD) Jennifer Ley on June 19, 2012,” McCabe testified.
“I recalled that during the course of our conversation DAD Ley mentioned to me that Ms. Gritz had filed or intended to file an EEO complaint against her immediate supervisor.”

The very next day, the FBI initiated the OPR investigation of Gritz, according to evidence in the FBI’s official personnel files. FBI records support McCabe’s version of events, showing Gritz had contacted FBI EEO officials in mid-June before the OPR probe was initiated, then filed her formal complaint a few weeks later. The FBI ‘s official report of investigation on Gritz’s EEO complaint, which absolved the FBI of any discrimination, omitted any mention that McCabe had been aware of the EEO complaint before the bureau filed its OPR action against Gritz.

Gritz’s initial complaint in 2012 named the FBI supervisor below McCabe. She chose to resign from the FBI in 2013, her case becoming the poster child for a National Public Radio story on the FBI’s allegedly hostile environment for women agents in 2015.
In 2014, Gritz amended her EEOC complaint to specifically name McCabe, alleging she suffered “a hostile environment, defamation of character through continued targeting by Andrew McCabe in official documents, and continuous patterns and instances of severe and excessive hostile behavior/attitude toward complainant. These actions have a negative impact on the complainant, professionally, financially, and personally.”

Flynn’s intervention in the case occurred around the time that McCabe’s name was added to the complaint. Flynn's first act was to write a letter of support in her case.

“SSA Gritz was well-known, liked and respected in the military counter-terrorism community for her energy, commitment and professional capacity, and over the years worked in several interagency groups on counter-terrorism targeting initiatives,” Flynn wrote May 9, 2014.

At the time, Flynn was an Army lieutenant general and the chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and he put his letter on official agency stationary to be submitted in Gritz’s case.

As soon as Gritz revealed to the FBI that Flynn and other top federal figures had written letters to support her case and likely would be called as witnesses, the bureau dispatched a lawyer to try to block the evidence from being included in the EEO case, documents show.
The FBI “has reviewed the letters submitted by the Complainant and objects to their inclusion in the record,” the bureau’s lawyer wrote. “They are selfserving letters, not part of any personnel file nor contemporaneous generated during the period of Ms. Gritz’s employment with the FBI, and which she has unilaterally solicited and obtained. They should be excluded.”

While the FBI argued Gritz’s had become underperforming, tardy to work, insurbordinate, possibly mentally ill or emotional and deserving of a poor performance review, Flynn argued just the opposite, saying he saw the agent excel while working with the DIA and other intelligence community agencies.

“Her work consistently made a positive difference,” Flynn wrote. “.Her tenacity and personal commitment consistently produced outstanding results in the most challenging environments.”

Flynn went further, offering an interview in 2015 with NPR in which he called Gritz one of the “bright lights and shining stars” in the intelligence community who “just kinda got it when it came to the kind of enemy that we were facing and the relationship that was necessary between law enforcement and the military.”

Flynn wasn’t alone among top officials who came to Gritz’s defense in her battle against the FBI.

“SSA Gritz was without question, the most energetic, most consistently engaged and prepared and single most effective member of this interagency group,” wrote Navy Rear Admiral B. L. Losey, who served both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama as the White House’s National Security Council Director for Combatting Terrorism.

Losey offered a most poignant endorsement of the female agent. “If I were taken hostage, I would hope that above all others SSA Robyn Gritz were assigned the task to track and recover me,” he wrote.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley also afforded Gritz support, asking federal authorities to investigate whether her case was emblematic of a hostile workplace for women inside the FBI.

In a brief interview this weekend, Gritz said she was mortified to think that her request to Flynn to help with her EEOC case in any way affected his relationship with the FBI or his current status as someone under investigation in the Russia case.

“Flynn was the first leader to defend me,” said Gritz. “He forwarded a letter to the FBI and I personally think that Comey did not receive it. McCabe knew Flynn and I were friends. I felt that from the beginning it was an issue.”

NOW YOU KNOW !

General Flynn also stood up to Obama. He had a Radical way to stop ISIS and the Obama Administration would not even say the words "RADICAL ISLAM!"

Here is the America Thinker Interview with General Flynn.

The Field of Fight by Lt. General Michael Flynn delves into the world of ISIS. American Thinker had the privilege of interviewing him.
Having been at the Republican convention, the general told of his dismay at those who concentrated on Melania Trump’s speech while there are so many important matters occurring in today’s world. He noted to American Thinker, “This shows you how petty the media will go to discredit Donald Trump. Since I was the next speaker, as I waited in the wings, I heard a woman who spoke from the heart about her love for this country and her husband. With all the complexities, threats, and challenges that the U.S. faces, for the media to harp on that is just ridiculous.”
The Democrats and media criticism emphasized the importance of words spoken in a certain context. Yet, President Obama will never utter the words Islamic Extremist or Radical Islam. Flynn points out the hypocrisy, “The president should clearly and unambiguously define the enemy that we face and the threat to our way of life. It is radical Islam… ISIS is a very determined enemy who wants to establish a global Caliphate. This political correctness of not naming our enemy is dangerous for the country. I am confident Americans can take the truth.”
Political correctness has also interfered in the way the U.S. conducts the war against terrorism. According to Flynn, “Using drones is a narrow strategy. We have to be able to capture guys and learn from them by getting the intelligence we need. We are not capturing anyone any more. Beyond that, apprehending individuals allows us to expose them instead of turning them into a martyr after being killed. By doing this we can show how their ideology is a disease that must by excised. The information warfare component of battle must discredit them. We show them as cowards and weak.” Exposure does seem to work if people think of how imbedded in their memory are the pictures of Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Saddam Hussein after their capture.
Flynn also debunks Democrats and some Republican pundits who say ISIS is being defeated. They point to the terrorist groups loss of land and that these recent attacks are acts of desperation. He strongly disagrees with “those people because that is actually false. We excised them from some village in Iraq like Fallujah, yet they are able to attack the international community in San Bernardino, Orlando, France, Germany, Bangladesh, and Turkey, all of these in recent months. The reason for this is that the enemy has doubled in size and grown in a global geographic footprint in the last six or so years.”
The blame lies squarely in the hands of the Obama administration, including Hillary Clinton. In the book, Flynn gives high marks to President Bush while lambasting President Obama, “He (Bush) realized the war was going badly, that we were losing, and our entire strategy needed to change. The mere fact that he recognized this and proceeded to make the difficult decisions he eventually made is a leadership characteristic our current president lacks.”
Directly commenting, “There is no enemy that is unbeatable. Even though President Bush was at the end of his administration he brought in the fresh leadership of General David Petraeus and Robert Gates. We were able to reverse the strategy and come up with a new one to win. Now we are at the end of President Obama’s term; yet, when 99% of President Obama’s advisors told him to keep 10,000 troops in Iraq to stop the rise of radical terrorism; he did not listen. He made a political decision rather than a decision for our national security. This is a weakness in his leadership style. His problem is that he refuses to recognize this strategy is not working and the enemy has grown in capacity.”
One of the problems is that the current president wants to be surrounded by yes men. In the book Flynn reconts how he was fired in 2014 because he went before Congress and spoke of how to keep America safe. When asked about this, he responded, “I was appointed by President Obama twice, as Assistant Director of National Intelligence and the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. I never met with the president once; imagine that. Why not ask to speak with me about our differences of opinion and my suggestions? To me, this is very disturbing.”
He suspects he was fired because “our agency was very brutally honest about our findings. I am not, nor have I ever been the type of person that will state what the boss wants to hear. I am always very blunt and say what I feel, including offering solutions. I was fired partially due to my honesty about the enemy we are facing, radical Islam. In complete contrast to the president who called ISIS the JV team, I told Congress they were dangerous and growing. Intelligence is about truth to power.”
Although he outlines extensive solutions, he summarized it for American Thinker, “In order to beat this enemy we need to discredit the ideology. Muslims need to take a more public international stand. To do it they will have to be helped, prompted, and pushed by the U.S., something we are not doing now. We need to depend on Middle East allies like Israel, Jordan, and Egypt. Finally, something that I have been criticized for is to get Russia involved. They should assume responsibility and pressure Iran to stop their proxy wars. As I show in the book the ties between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda have been a well-established fact.”
Since ISIS is a byproduct of al Qaeda does that mean Iran has ties to them as well? Flynn responded, “Dig deep down into the intelligence and you will find ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend.’ There are these funny relationships that exist. We have clearly seen with Iran and al Qaeda that a Shiite state nation and a Sunni organization have worked together. They do this because at the end of the day they hate the U.S. more than they hate each other.”
Americans should take solace in knowing that Lt. General Flynn is one of Donald Trump’s top foreign policy advisors. Obviously, Mr. Trump is not surrounding himself with yes people, but those who would not sit quietly back if he believes a “president” Trump has the wrong strategy.
When asked if he will be the next secretary of defense, and what type of leader would he be, Flynn commented, “I am confident in what I know but also what I do not know. I am willing to listen and learn. I believe we should never get involved in wars unless we have a clear unambiguous goal to win. America has forgotten how to win wars. I am not answering the question of my employment right now. Republicans must win many more battles before the war is won.”

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/07/a_conversation_with_michael_flynn.html