Title :
link :
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.
Sunday, May 27, 2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
Memorial Day weekend
*****
|
Only two life forces have offered to die for you - the American military and Jesus Christ.
|
Alan Bean passed away on May 26, 2018, at the age of 86.
His accomplishments with NASA helped lay the framework for a lot of what we now know about space.
Alan Bean...RIP
Barack Obama: "I didn't have scandals"
For our youngest daughter…
What Exactly Does Disrespecting The Flag At An NFL Game Have To Do With Fighting 'Injustice?'
|
“LET'S GET REAL: If you think kneeling respectfully to protest injustice is more egregious than cops gunning down 12-year-old #TamirRice for holding a toy or murdering #PhilandoCastile in his car with his young daughter, then you have no moral compass. NONE.”
– Peter Daou
– Peter Daou
I love that quote because it’s like saying, “LET'S GET REAL: If you think urinating respectfully on Ted Kennedy’s grave to protest injustice is more egregious than an illegal immigrant murdering Kate Steinle, then you have no moral compass. NONE.”
A reasonable person might ask, “What does urinating on Ted Kennedy’s grave or kneeling when it’s time to respect the flag have to do with what’s being protested?”
There is an answer to that question.
You see, there were a lot of ways Colin Kaepernick could have protested. He chose protesting the flag because he knew that doing something so incendiary would be extremely polarizing and would get a lot of attention, good and bad. Other NFL players saw what he was doing and copied him, not because they really care about the issue, but because they wanted attention for themselves.
However, it turned out that the protests were so polarizing that there were consequences. The protesting players cost the league enormous amounts of money and teams decided they didn't want to hire Colin Kaepernick because bringing him onboard would lead to more protests, which would cost them more money.
That’s when the argument became, "These players aren’t disrespecting the flag. Where do people get that from?" Well, of course the players are disrespecting the flag. That was the whole point of picking that form of protest. The disrespect of the flag was designed to get attention and it did. “Oh, but it’s a peaceful protest! That means it’s good!” The Westboro Baptist Church peacefully protest outside of funerals and that’s not good, right? There is a time and a place for everything and outside of a funeral or while your nation’s flag is being honored is the wrong time to protest.
Of course, the real surprise is that the NFL let its business be hijacked like this. After all, the NFL typically does not hesitate to crack down on players that get out of line in any way on the field. I can still remember Jim McMahon getting a $5,000 fine for wearing an Adidas headband. NFL players have also been fined for wearing special cleats to bring attention to breast cancer awareness and domestic violence. NFL players have been fined for touchdown celebrations, not talking to the media, wearing the wrong color socks and using a cell phone during a game. Yet, when it came to disrespecting the flag, the NFL was just fine with it until viewers started tuning out.
That was dumb. Very dumb. Why? Well, imagine you’re a restaurant owner who doesn’t care one whit about your employees’ political views. Then, one of your waiters starts wearing a button that says, “Barack Obama can kiss my butt” or alternately, a button that says, “Donald Trump can kiss my butt.” Assuming you don’t just fire him outright, do you tell him to knock that off? Of course, you do because if your business serves the general public, you don’t allow your employees to offend large portions of the general public while they’re on the job. If they want to argue on Twitter all day or work on political campaigns in their off time, that’s fine, but they shouldn’t be using your place of business to push out controversial and potentially offensive political messages.
It took the NFL losing enormous numbers of fans for it to realize that basic principle and now, it’s been decided that the NFL is going to levy out fines if players disrespect the national anthem. According to the NFL,
It was unfortunate that on-field protests created a false perception among many that thousands of NFL players were unpatriotic. This is not and was never the case.
This season, all league and team personnel shall stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem. Personnel who choose not to stand for the Anthem may stay in the locker room until after the Anthem has been performed.
We believe today’s decision will keep our focus on the game and the extraordinary athletes who play it—and on our fans who enjoy it.
Would this be happening if there wasn’t a boycott of the NFL that cost it enormous amounts of money? Absolutely not and smart conservatives shouldn’t forget that lesson. Of course, the NFL still hasn’t acted decisively. The owners should have made it absolutely clear that NFL games are no place for any kind of political statement and players that refuse to respect that decision can go somewhere else. That’s an entirely reasonable position, but the NFL didn’t have the guts to do that. Moreover, it let the inmates run the asylum for way too long. So now, it’s going to catch a lot of flak from the unpatriotic Left that wants to use the NFL’s product as another way to push its agenda.
Furthermore, the controversy is far from over. Players may choose to stay in the locker room en masse. Some teams, like the Jets, are already saying they will just eat the fines for unpatriotic players. Of course, liberals will be dying to praise any player who is willing to take a fine to disrespect America and the union is already upset that a NFL player’s right to be unpatriotic on the NFL’s dime might be abridged in any way. The NFL deserves this and the protesting players deserve the backlash they’ve gotten as well.
If NFL players had wanted to be a bridge between the community and the police, they could have done a lot of good, especially since there is at least some rare bipartisan agreement on issues like more police training and body cameras for officers. Instead they disrespected the country that gave them so many opportunities, created division and hatred and hurt the cause they claimed to help. If you start a conversation by being deliberately unpatriotic to get attention for your cause, a lot of Americans will respond by telling you and your cause to drop dead. If the NFL had respected its fans enough to keep politics off the field, it wouldn’t be in this mess and if these players cared about something other than “look at me,” they would have never engaged in such an offensive protest in the first place.
Trump Notices Something To His Right, Then IMMEDIATELY Runs Over And Does Something Amazing
A reasonable person might ask, “What does urinating on Ted Kennedy’s grave or kneeling when it’s time to respect the flag have to do with what’s being protested?”
There is an answer to that question.
You see, there were a lot of ways Colin Kaepernick could have protested. He chose protesting the flag because he knew that doing something so incendiary would be extremely polarizing and would get a lot of attention, good and bad. Other NFL players saw what he was doing and copied him, not because they really care about the issue, but because they wanted attention for themselves.
However, it turned out that the protests were so polarizing that there were consequences. The protesting players cost the league enormous amounts of money and teams decided they didn't want to hire Colin Kaepernick because bringing him onboard would lead to more protests, which would cost them more money.
That’s when the argument became, "These players aren’t disrespecting the flag. Where do people get that from?" Well, of course the players are disrespecting the flag. That was the whole point of picking that form of protest. The disrespect of the flag was designed to get attention and it did. “Oh, but it’s a peaceful protest! That means it’s good!” The Westboro Baptist Church peacefully protest outside of funerals and that’s not good, right? There is a time and a place for everything and outside of a funeral or while your nation’s flag is being honored is the wrong time to protest.
Of course, the real surprise is that the NFL let its business be hijacked like this. After all, the NFL typically does not hesitate to crack down on players that get out of line in any way on the field. I can still remember Jim McMahon getting a $5,000 fine for wearing an Adidas headband. NFL players have also been fined for wearing special cleats to bring attention to breast cancer awareness and domestic violence. NFL players have been fined for touchdown celebrations, not talking to the media, wearing the wrong color socks and using a cell phone during a game. Yet, when it came to disrespecting the flag, the NFL was just fine with it until viewers started tuning out.
That was dumb. Very dumb. Why? Well, imagine you’re a restaurant owner who doesn’t care one whit about your employees’ political views. Then, one of your waiters starts wearing a button that says, “Barack Obama can kiss my butt” or alternately, a button that says, “Donald Trump can kiss my butt.” Assuming you don’t just fire him outright, do you tell him to knock that off? Of course, you do because if your business serves the general public, you don’t allow your employees to offend large portions of the general public while they’re on the job. If they want to argue on Twitter all day or work on political campaigns in their off time, that’s fine, but they shouldn’t be using your place of business to push out controversial and potentially offensive political messages.
It took the NFL losing enormous numbers of fans for it to realize that basic principle and now, it’s been decided that the NFL is going to levy out fines if players disrespect the national anthem. According to the NFL,
It was unfortunate that on-field protests created a false perception among many that thousands of NFL players were unpatriotic. This is not and was never the case.
This season, all league and team personnel shall stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem. Personnel who choose not to stand for the Anthem may stay in the locker room until after the Anthem has been performed.
We believe today’s decision will keep our focus on the game and the extraordinary athletes who play it—and on our fans who enjoy it.
Would this be happening if there wasn’t a boycott of the NFL that cost it enormous amounts of money? Absolutely not and smart conservatives shouldn’t forget that lesson. Of course, the NFL still hasn’t acted decisively. The owners should have made it absolutely clear that NFL games are no place for any kind of political statement and players that refuse to respect that decision can go somewhere else. That’s an entirely reasonable position, but the NFL didn’t have the guts to do that. Moreover, it let the inmates run the asylum for way too long. So now, it’s going to catch a lot of flak from the unpatriotic Left that wants to use the NFL’s product as another way to push its agenda.
Furthermore, the controversy is far from over. Players may choose to stay in the locker room en masse. Some teams, like the Jets, are already saying they will just eat the fines for unpatriotic players. Of course, liberals will be dying to praise any player who is willing to take a fine to disrespect America and the union is already upset that a NFL player’s right to be unpatriotic on the NFL’s dime might be abridged in any way. The NFL deserves this and the protesting players deserve the backlash they’ve gotten as well.
If NFL players had wanted to be a bridge between the community and the police, they could have done a lot of good, especially since there is at least some rare bipartisan agreement on issues like more police training and body cameras for officers. Instead they disrespected the country that gave them so many opportunities, created division and hatred and hurt the cause they claimed to help. If you start a conversation by being deliberately unpatriotic to get attention for your cause, a lot of Americans will respond by telling you and your cause to drop dead. If the NFL had respected its fans enough to keep politics off the field, it wouldn’t be in this mess and if these players cared about something other than “look at me,” they would have never engaged in such an offensive protest in the first place.
Trump Notices Something To His Right, Then IMMEDIATELY Runs Over And Does Something Amazing
President Donald Trump attended a round table event on Wednesday in New York to discuss MS-13 and combating illegal immigration.
He spoke with and met families who have lost loved ones at the hands of the brutal gang, and spoke about the importance of law enforcement arresting and deporting the “animals” from the country.
When the event was over and Trump was walking back to board Marine One, he noticed a group of law enforcement officers to his right who wanted to meet him.
In a video clip posted on Twitter by Dan Scavino Jr., the Director of Social Media for the Trump administration, Trump can be seen breaking away from the group and literally running to greet the law enforcement officers.
Watch below:
Just let that soak in. The president of the United States stopped what he was doing and ran about 20 feet to shake the hands of every single police officer before he left.
When was the last time a president gave a spontaneous, genuine, and personal appreciation for the police? It has been many years.
Nice finally have a POTUS that respects Law Enforcement
— US Army Air Force (@point45percent) May 24, 2018
I wish there was a button stronger than love on this thing. Classy move Mr. President. Obama would have NEVER done this
— Ron (@Harris_NCpopo) May 24, 2018
— US Army Air Force (@point45percent) May 24, 2018
I wish there was a button stronger than love on this thing. Classy move Mr. President. Obama would have NEVER done this
— Ron (@Harris_NCpopo) May 24, 2018
It’s unclear what Trump said to he officers, but he was likely thanking them for their heroism, bravery, and everything they do to protect their communities.
The media will never report on or show the American people this amazing video, which shows how much our president loves our law enforcement officers.
Please share this post to show everyone how amazing it is to see our president show so much respect to our heroes in uniform.
The Important Questions About ‘Spygate’
-
There is a debate over whether former Cambridge professor Stefan Halper, who kept tabs on three Trump campaign advisers, was an FBI informant or a spy.
-
One of the key questions to the debate is: Who tasked Halper with contacting Trump campaign advisers Carter Page, Sam Clovis, and George Papadopoulos?
-
Carter Page holds the key to many questions surrounding Halper.
A battle of semantics has dominated the revelation that the FBI used a Cambridge professor named Stefan Halper to keep tabs on three Trump campaign advisers. The argument is over whether Halper was a mere FBI informant or a spy, as President Trump has asserted.
But the debate has overshadowed more important questions about Halper’s role in “Crossfire Hurricane,” the code name for the FBI’s investigation of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.
The core questions are: Who tasked Halper, a former University of Cambridge professor, with contacting Trump campaign advisers Carter Page, Sam Clovis, and George Papadopoulos? What did they tell Halper, and what did he in turn tell his FBI/CIA handlers? And how was that information used by government officials in their investigation of possible Russian meddling in the 2016 election? Was Halper a credible source?
Carter Page holds the key to many of those questions.
An energy consultant and former Naval officer, Page was the first Trump associate known to have made contact with Halper. He also stayed in touch with the 73-year-old the longest of any of the three Trump advisers — from July 2016 to Sept. 2017. The pair met multiple times, including at Cambridge and at Halper’s farm in Virginia.
That 14-month window leaves open numerous possibilities for Halper’s intelligence-gathering activities.
But Page tells The Daily Caller News Foundation that in his conversations with Halper, he never departed from what he has said publicly in response to the allegations made about him in the infamous Steele dossier.
“I never did anything even remotely wrong [or] similar to what’s alleged in the Dodgy Dossier,” Page says was his general message to Halper when the subject of collusion came up in conversation.
The dossier, written by former British spy Christopher Steele and funded by Democrats, accuses Page of being the Trump campaign’s main back channel to the Kremlin for the purposes of collusion. The dossier claims that Page met with two sanctions Kremlin insiders, Igor Sechin and Igor Diveykin. Page has vehemently denied the allegations.
Halper’s interactions with Clovis and Papadopoulos were more limited than those he had with Page. Clovis, the campaign’s national co-chairman, met with Halper once on Sept. 1, 2016 over coffee to discuss the campaign and their mutual interest in geopolitical issues.
The next day, Halper reached out to Papadopoulos through email — unbeknownst to Clovis — to offer to fly the young Trump aide to London to discuss writing an academic paper about Mediterranean energy issues. Papadopoulos accepted and flew to London on Halper’s dime. He was paid $3,000 for the paper, which he submitted in early October 2016.
During one dinner conversation, Halper asked Papadopoulos whether he was involved in Russian hacking of Democrats’ emails. Papadopoulos vigorously denied the allegation, much to Halper’s frustration.
Halper’s approach to Page was much softer, Page says. They met multiple times, and Page says he never felt that Halper was trying to pump him for information about the campaign.
But it is now clear that Halper was collecting some information on Page. And there has been speculation that whatever information he collected was provided to the FBI for use in Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants granted against Page.
During a press conference on Tuesday, Speaker Paul Ryan linked the issue of allegations about FISA abuse to the revelation of a Trump campaign informant.
“FISA abuse is a serious issue,” Ryan said when discussing House Republicans’ request for information about the FBI’s top-secret source.
The first FISA warrant authorizing surveillance on Page was granted on Oct. 21, 2016. Three renewals were granted in January, April and June 2017. They expired in September 2017, the same month that Page and Halper fell out of contact. As has been widely noted, FISA renewals require additional evidence showing probable cause that a surveillance target is acting as an agent of a foreign power.
What Page and Halper discussed in their encounters looms large over those FISA warrants as well as over “Crossfire Hurricane.”
Page says he can’t recall many details of what he and Halper discussed over their 14 month relationship. But he says that nothing he said would support the idea that he was involved in collusion on behalf of the Trump campaign with Russia.
“I’m not concerned about this other stuff,” Page told TheDCNF, referring to the Halper angle.
Though Page says he never had conversations with Halper in which he said anything that would support allegations in the dossier, what Halper may have relayed to the FBI is another matter. And Halper’s track record as an intelligence gather has already been called into question.
As TheDCNF reported, Halper has been accused in the past of making “absurd” and “false” claims about Russian infiltration at Cambridge, where he oversees the Cambridge Security Initiative, a group that brings together academics, businesses and former intelligence officials.
As The New York Times reported on May 18, Halper was who expressed concerns back in February 2014 about then-Defense Intelligence Agency Director Michael Flynn’s interactions at a Cambridge event with a Russian academic named Svetlana Lokhova.
Those concerns, which were that Flynn’s interactions with Lokhova suggested that he could be compromised by Russian intelligence, were also shared with American authorities. The entire saga was first reported on May 17, 2017 by The Wall Street Journal.
But Lokhova, a historian of Russian intelligence agencies, says that Halper was behind the “false allegations.” She has vigorously denied having anything close to an improper relationship with Flynn.
In December 2016, Halper also resigned from the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar after claiming he was worried about Russian infiltration of that program. But Christopher Andrew, the convener of the seminar and the chief of historian of Britain’s MI5 intelligence service, called Halper’s concerns “absurd.”
Asked whether Halper could have provided false information to the FBI about him, Page was open to the possibility.
“He may very well have,” he told TheDCNF.
“The reality is there are a lot of lies in there. So whether it was him or whoever, they came to the wrong conclusion.”
There is virtually no visibility into what information Halper collected on Page or any of the other Trump advisers. It’s also unknown what he passed to the FBI. But there is one piece of correspondence that suggests that Halper was sympathetic and supportive of Page and that he presented himself as critical of the collusion allegations.
“It seems attention has shifted a bit from the ‘collusion’ investigation to the ‘contretempts’ [sic] within the White House,” Halper wrote on July 28, 2017.
“I must assume this gives you some relief,” he continued, signing off with “be in touch when you have the time. Would be great to catch up.”
Page has discussed another encounter with Halper in which he says the professor seemed to dismiss the allegations of collusion.
It was Summer 2016 after then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid sent a letter to then-FBI Director James Comey accusing Page of being a Russian agent. The letter, it is now known, relied heavily on allegations from the Steele dossier.
Page said that when he and Halper discussed the letter, Halper “rolled his eyes” as if he disapproved of the Reid allegations.
Comey Brings Up Trump’s Grandkids, So Trump Returns the Favor… and Scorches Him
Comey Brings Up Trump’s Grandkids, So Trump Returns the Favor… and Scorches Him
BY BEN MARQUIS
As the Trump-Russia collusion narrative continues to unravel, allegations that the Obama administration’s FBI utilized “informants” or “spies” as part of their counterintelligence investigation into then-candidate Donald Trump’s campaign have entered the national discussion.
President Trump and his supporters have keyed in on those allegations as proof of what has now been scandalously dubbed “Spygate,” even as many elected Democrats and liberal media figures — who once scoffed at the notion of Trump’s campaign being spied upon — now say it was for the campaign’s own good.
One who has made such a ludicrous claim that spying on Trump’s campaign was a good and acceptable thing is fired FBI Director James Comey, who took to Twitter on Wednesday in an apparent attempt to defend the likely illegal and unethical actions.
Comey tweeted, “Facts matter. The FBI’s use of Confidential Human Sources (the actual term) is tightly regulated and essential to protecting the country. Attacks on the FBI and lying about its work will do lasting damage to our country. How will Republicans explain this to their grandchildren?”
Facts matter. The FBI’s use of Confidential Human Sources (the actual term) is tightly regulated and essential to protecting the country. Attacks on the FBI and lying about its work will do lasting damage to our country. How will Republicans explain this to their grandchildren?
President Trump was asked for his reaction to that particular tweet during an interview with “Fox & Friends” co-host Brian Kilmeade, and his response absolutely scorched the fired former director.
“How is he going to explain to his grandchildren all of the lies, the deceit, all of the problems he’s caused for this country?” replied Trump.
“I think a thing that I’ve done for the country — the firing of James Comey — is going to go down as a very good thing,” he continued. “The FBI is great, I know so many people in the FBI, the FBI is a fantastic institution.”
“But some of the people at the top were rotten apples — James Comey was one of them — I’ve done a great service for this country by getting rid of him, by firing him,” Trump added.
Kilmeade followed up and asked if the president would have any problems explaining all of this to his grandchild, to which Trump replied with a chuckle, “None.”
“No, we’re doing a great job, our country is coming back, our country is respected again, and what we’re doing over there is just another side of it, just one of many things,” stated Trump.
Trump then shifted gears and spoke about the economic renewal the country was experiencing, especially in terms of historic and record low unemployment numbers among various segments of the population.
The “Fox & Friends” crew noted afterward how interesting it was that despite all of the other major issues facing his presidency — most especially the Russian collusion allegations — the president still managed to shift the focus toward the steadily improving economy.
It was further pointed out that doing so was an incredibly smart move on Trump’s part, as the economy, jobs and more money in people’s pockets is always the biggest issue for a vast majority of voters, far more so than anything else the president’s many detractors and haters would prefer to focus the public’s attention on.
As to his scorching rebuttal of Comey’s sanctimonious remark about what people will tell their grandchildren, well, that is just the latest example of Trump’s classically devastating counter-punching ability against those who take a shot at him, one that will likely sting for quite some time.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.
Chicago: 6 killed, 32 wounded in weekend violence
Chicago: 6 killed, 32 wounded in weekend violence
Photo - Alan Cleaver via Creative Commons LicenseThe streets of Chicago continue to have blood flow down them.
During this past weekend, six more people were reportedly killed, with an additional 32 wounded in shootings throughout Chicago.
The Facts
Sadly, most of the victims in these shootings were not gang members fighting it out, but innocent bystanders caught in the disgrace that has become Chicago.
A 13-year-old boy was shot in the shoulder on Saturday night.
A 16-year-old boy was shot in the face on Sunday afternoon.
He would die later that day in the hospital.
Of course, there was also some gang violence.
A 21-year-old alleged gang member was shot twice on the street and is currently in critical condition.
The Mayor
The mayor presiding over this disgrace is Rahm Emanuel.
Mind you, this is one of the names that has been thrown out by Democrats as a possible presidential candidate in 2020 or 2024.
As these shootings were taking place, Emanuel was welcoming 100 new police recruits to the department.
It is shocking anyone would want to be a police officer in city overrun with undocumented immigrants and gang crime, so these officers truly deserve a pat on the back.
This is a mayor that has openly defied the President of the United States by making his city a sanctuary city.
This is a mayor that continuously puts the citizens of his city on the backburner to defend undocumented immigrants.
Emanuel did his best to deflect the violence as well as making it sound like he needed more police on his streets to control the violence.
Remember this guy, Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif? Here he was meeting with John Kerry in 2016 working on the Iran Deal.
Then this past month, shortly before President Donald Trump pulled out of the Iran Deal, it was reported that John Kerry had been holding secret meetings with the Iranians including Zarif as well as many European leaders interfering in American foreign policy. Among other things, he reportedly told them that Trump didn’t represent everyone and that he wasn’t likely to be president much longer.
The Iranians acknowledged that they met with Kerry and seemed to reiterate the script that Kerry had impressed upon him, that they didn’t believe that they had to listen to Trump, that there were other voices in America.
Kerry was essentially violating the Logan Act and undermining U.S. foreign policy to help the Iranians.
But here’s the extra kicker. Here’s ‘moderate’ Javad Zarif, that trustworthy soul, chanting ‘Death to America.’
Here is Iran's "moderate" Foreign Minister @JZarif CAUGHT chanting "Death to America, death to Britain."
Iran calls daily to annihilate other countries and sponsors terrorism worldwide.
As Iran's nuclear archives proved, it worked on developing nukes. Don't let Iran do that.
Not so fast Obama, your biggest scandal is unfolding before our eyes
Not so fast Obama, your biggest scandal is unfolding before our eyes
ANALYSIS/OPINION:
While speaking to a tech conference this week in Las Vegas President Obama repeated a claim he and many members of the media have made since his presidency came to an end.
“I didn’t have scandals, which seems like it shouldn’t be something you brag about,” Obama said. “But actually,” he said, “if you look at the history of the modern presidency, coming out of the modern presidency without anybody going to jail is really good. It’s a big deal.”
The notion is obviously absurd on the face of it, for anyone who paid unbiased attention over the eight years of his presidency. Mark Hemingway and Hans Von Spakovsky have gone through the labors of detailing many (but not all) of the scandals of the Obama years. The short list includes Fast and Furious, Benghazi, IRS targeting, Solyndra, the Veteran Administration… how much time do you have?
The fact that these troubling episodes have not risen (in some people’s minds) to the level of the multiple “Generic-Gate” scandals that crippled presidencies of the past is less a testament to Obama’s ethics than it is commentary on the two institutions charged with monitoring and exposing these dramas.
In the past, journalists have led the way in exposing and uncovering scandals, usually with the help of a disgruntled executive branch employee illegally leaking morsels of data for their own selfish purposes. The media churns the sea with chum, leading the DC sharks into a feeding frenzy until an administration can no longer function without a full-blown investigation.
That’s when the second institution steps in: The Justice Department. The DOJ will either directly (or through some form of independent inquiry) investigate the scandal and the issue will either result in convictions or with no charges being filed and only the reputation of the media’s target in the frenzy being damaged forever.
During the Obama years, both of these institutions were corrupted to such an extent that the multiple episodes of government incompetence or abuse went virtually ignored by the media or swept under the rug by a politicized DOJ.
But, not so fast.
Make no mistake, Spygate is an Obama scandal and it involves Barack Obama, himself, in a very personal way.
First, the Spygate story is inexorably linked with the Clinton email drama, another Obama-era scandal that for some reason he gets to duck any responsibility for. Andrew McCarthy has been very thorough in explaining these very important links.
The most damning aspect of Obama’s involvement in the Clinton email part of Spygate is the bald-faced lie he told at the height of the drama over Mrs. Clinton’s un-secure and unauthorized server. He claimed he knew nothing about it, yet he had sent and received emails on Mrs. Clinton’s server. It was a lie meant to cover-up his involvement and it is prove-able beyond any doubt.
It was so blatant that long-time Clinton consigliere Cheryl Mills raised alarms in an email to John Podesta as soon as she learned of Obama’s public obfuscation. “We need to clean this up — he has emails from her — they do not say state.gov,” Mills wrote to Podesta.
The politically charged environment in the Obama Justice Department may have allowed the temporary history books to pretend as though Obama’s years were scandal-free, but the Holder/Lynch era is now being fully exposed in the Spygate scandal. A scandal we were never supposed to learn about because President Hillary Clinton would have kept Attorney General Lynch in office.
After all, Lynch and expected First Dude Bill Clinton are old friends. They loved catching up in little tarmac chats about golf and grandkids. Remember?
But that plan didn’t work out. And the American people are, finally, learning just how political the Obama DOJ was. So political that no one seemed to blink an eye when the idea was floated to use electronic surveillance and a confidential human source (a spy) to eavesdrop and investigate the actions of the presidential campaign of Mrs. Clinton and President Obama’s political enemy, Donald Trump.
From everything we are learning (and we have just begun to scratch the surface) one of the most disturbing aspects of Spygate is that, it appears, at no time did anyone in any position of authority in the DOJ, the FBI, the White House or the intelligence community raise an objection or even a concern over the actions they were taking. This tells you just how programmed these stalwart institutions had been in their blind allegiance to the political goals of President Obama and the Democratic Party.
The question that needs to be asked - and still has not been - is what did President Obama know about the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into his political enemies presidential campaign and when did he know it?
-
If he didn’t, the scandal is that he was an aloof and disinterested executive as his DOJ, FBI and spy agencies ran amok with no oversight.
-
If he only knew the broad strokes and not the full extent of the surveillance, then the scandal is that his Attorney General, FBI Director and DNI felt emboldened under the political culture created by the Obama White House to take such unprecedented actions without needing any approval. A rogue DOJ and IC is not a good look for a president who projected stern control, integrity and transparency.
-
And if President Obama knew all there was to know about this scandal, well, he owns everything that comes of it. Including any crimes that might be prosecuted.
Of all of the scandals, abuses of power and miscarriages of justice seen during the eight years of Obama’s lackluster (and shockingly unmemorable) presidency, the biggest and most outrageous one is still in its infancy. Let’s let Spygate play itself out before we start polishing up the marble for President Obama’s monument.
7 Ways Spy-in-Chief Barack Obama Spied on Donald Trump
7 Ways Spy-in-Chief Barack Obama Spied on Donald Trump
Getty We now know for a fact that Spy-in-Chief Barack Obama weaponized the various intelligence agencies at his command to do something unprecedented: spy on a rival presidential campaign, specifically Donald Trump’s.
From what we know so far, Obama’s spies spied on Trump in seven spying ways. Just one of these seven items should make us gasp. Put together, they add up to something that makes Watergate look like a pillow fight.
-
Wiretaps
The Obama administration placed wiretaps all over the Trump campaign, and we are just now learning that it now appears as though wiretaps put in place by foreign countries were part of the operation.
2. FISA Warrants Obtained Using Lies
3. Sending Spies to Spy on the Trump Campaign
Obama’s FBI director, the disgraced James Comey, ran an all-out spying operation that even utilized spies to spy on the Trump campaign.
The Obama administration called this spying operation filled with spies to spy on Trump… “Crossfire Hurricane.”
4. Paid Foreigners to Gather Lies from Foreigners about Trump’s Peeing on Hookers
If you want to talk about foreign meddling in a presidential campaign, how about Obama’s FBI (along with the Hillary Clinton campaign) paying foreigner Christopher Steele, the English leftist who created the hoax dossier, to gather up lies from Russians about Trump’s peeing on hookers.
5. Unmasking
Another way the Obama administration “wiretapped” Trump was through an unprecedented unmasking operation that was basically a workaround to avoid the American courts. By wiretapping foreigners Trump officials were in contact with, the Obama administration effectively wiretapped Team Trump.
6. Illegal Media Leaks
The leaking of confidential and classified information out of the Obama administration, including the existence of the hoax-dossier, was all part of the infamous insurance policy.
7. National Security Letters
“The F.B.I. obtained phone records and other documents using national security letters — a secret type of subpoena — officials said. And at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos, current and former officials said,” reports the far-left New York Times.”
That has become a politically contentious point, with Mr. Trump’s allies questioning whether the FBI was spying on the Trump campaign or trying to entrap campaign officials.”
—
…and Trump still won.
Ciao…….Helen and Moe Lauzier
Thus articles
that is all articles
This time, hopefully can provide benefits to you all. Okay, see you in another article post.
You are now reading the article the link address https://fairyforreference.blogspot.com/2018/05/www_27.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment