original source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJI0h… Psychology Professor Jordan Peterson explains the clear documented science why it’s relative poverty and not poverty itself that causes crime. He goes on further explaining the role of the male dominance hierarchy in context of relative poverty and crime. Dr. Peterson’s new book is available for pre-order: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: http://amzn.to/2yvJf9L If you want to support Dr. Peterson, here is his Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson Check out Jordan Peterson’s Self Authoring Program, a powerful tool to sort yourself out: http://bit.ly/selfAuth (Official affiliate link for Bite-sized Philosophy
The 18-month Inspector General review of the DOJ/FBI investigation of the Hillary Clinton email is going to be made public tomorrow at 3:00pm EDT.
This IG inquiry is specifically looking into whether the FBI investigation was corrupted by political influence in their determination of the Clinton outcome. The preliminary investigative outcomes speak for themselves.
This following series of video reports provides background on the overall issues, the potential crimes; the subsequent coverup; and the corruption that infested the 2016 Department of Justice and the FBI.
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
.
The video below is the final installment of six segments. This report covers the Clinton and Abedin email that were discovered after the investigation was closed in July 2016. {Go Deep} The emails along with the fact that they were on Anthony Weiner’s laptop was kept secret and not investigated for four weeks (Sept 28th, through Oct 27th) by top officials at the FBI.
Who stalled the investigation and why? And what was in those emails? That’s the focus of this segment.
Following the traditional process for releasing high-profile reports the Department of Justice – Office of Inspector General (DOJ-OIG) report will be released tomorrow with a briefing to congress and the president happening around Noon, and a public release at 3:00pm. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will brief the President while senior officials from the DOJ will brief congress and their staff.
The 500-page report will cover the DOJ and FBI conduct surrounding the Clinton classified email investigation, and was originally commissioned during the Obama administration to review whether the FBI and DOJ politicized the Clinton investigation and subsequent outcome.
WASHINGTON – […] Inspector general spokesman John Lavinsky said in a statement that the office occasionally gives pre-release briefings to Congress and the media, adding that, “for the Justice Department to brief the White House in the same manner and at the same time as the OIG briefs Congress and the press is consistent with this process.”
OIG refers to the Office of Inspector General.
Lavinsky noted that Justice Department officials had similarly briefed the Obama White House in 2012 upon completion of its report on the gunrunning scandal known as Operation Fast and Furious. He added that “no changes are made to the OIG’s report on account of these briefings.” (read more)
In what can only be seen as a dubious political stunt, Andrew McCabe, through his attorney Michael Bromwich, is suing the DOJ and Inspector General for documents relating to his firing. Apparently the 39-page IG report, documenting the reasoning, along with the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) isn’t enough for McCabe.
WASHINGTON DC – Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the FBI, the Justice Department and its inspector general, alleging the Trump administration violated procedures when it fired him in March just hours before his retirement.
The Justice Department cited “lack of candor” for dismissing Mr. McCabe, who had worked at the FBI for more than two decades. The firing upended Mr. McCabe’s ability to collect his benefits and pension.
In the 36-page complaint filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. Tuesday, his attorneys argue the Justice Department is refusing to hand over documents relating to the policies and procedures for Mr. McCabe’s dismissal because it fears further litigation.
“We don’t create or adjudicate under secret law or procedure,” David Snyder, a lawyer for Mr. McCabe, told The Associated Press.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. (read more)
Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller has taken the concept of the Star Chamber to new levels of dangerous judicial prosecution. In a motion in Washington DC today Mueller’s team scramble to hide their invisible evidence after the people they indicted demand the right to see it.
“Muh beloved institutions”…
Everyone who has researched the actual substance behind the heavily promoted Russian indictments knows the underlying claims are centered on the thinnest of evidence. Given the nature of the politicization behind the Mueller investigation, many people even argue there is no actual evidence; it’s a manufactured ruse created only for purpose of advancing a necessary political narrative, an excuse for media column inches and pundit talks.
And there is a great deal of reason to believe the cynics are entirely accurate; particularly when you overlay the series of events that highlight the prosecution never thought anyone would actually show up in court and challenge their claims.
Greasy Bear hackers and Macedonian Bot Farms might sound like a good justification for a prosecution when pitched to an incurious media. However, when Greasy Bear and the accused Macedonian’s show up in court, well, the prosecutors might just have a problem.
That is the backdrop for this latest series of bizarre requests from the Special Prosecutor to seal the evidence against the accused:
BLOOMBERG – […] Mueller asked a federal judge in Washington for an order that would protect the handover of voluminous evidence to lawyers for Concord Management and Consulting LLC, one of three companies and 13 Russian nationals charged in a February indictment. They are accused of producing propaganda, posing as U.S. activists and posting political content on social media as so-called trolls to encourage strife in the U.S.
The threat of public or unauthorized disclosure of evidence would help foreign intelligence services, particularly in Russia, in “future operations against the United States,” Mueller’s prosecutors wrote in a filing Tuesday.
“The substance of the government’s evidence identifies uncharged individuals and entities that the government believes are continuing to engage in interference operations like those charged in the present indictment,” prosecutors wrote.
Improper disclosure would tip foreign intelligence services about how the U.S. operates, which would “allow foreign actors to learn of those techniques and adjust their conduct, thus undermining ongoing and future national security operations,” according to the filing. (read more)
Last month Robert Mueller attempted to get the trial delayed, and the judge rejected the arguments. Now Robert Mueller is attempting to get the judge to hide the mysteriously important evidence he claims to possess that underpins the entire case.
It appears Team Mueller is doing everything they can to avoid admitting there is no ‘there‘ there and this was all a political stunt. Such an admission would essentially destroy the entire Russian Election Interference narrative.
…. And so the saga of the ruse continues. Stay tuned.
In a tweet released today, President Trump took aim at #NeverTrump decepticon Mark Sanford:
Rep. Sanford is locked in a tight race against primary challenger Katie Arrington, a state lawmaker and relative newcomer to politics. However, she has rightly called out incumbent Sanford as a “career politician” and notes his consistent criticism of President Trump is a liability.
Polls opened this morning at 7 a.m. and close at 7 p.m. tonight. Voters standing in line when the polls close will still be able to cast a ballot. Get out there and support Katie Arrington.
Everyone knows I donated my time to try to reform Social Security and privatize it back in the 90s. I was even shuttling between the Chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, Bill Archer, and the House Majority Leader Dick Army. I argued for the privatization of Social Security to allow it to become a wealth fund allowing it to invest in equities.
The Dow Jones Industrials recently broke through the 4,000 level. The greatest obstacle was the Democrats. I had laid out the structure that we allocate money according to the track record of the manager. I was doing this because I had no interest in managing the money of this nature. The Democrats wanted to replace the fund managers at will when they retook the majority. I explained that this decision should not be political. I did not care if the fund manager voted Democrat or Republican. That just never sunk in.
The Democrats painted this private investment as “risky” and they would vote against it. So Social Security invests 100% in government bonds. Let’s see. The Fed lowered the interest rates to “stimulate” the economy. The net effect is that Social Security is simply a slush fund with no possible economic growth. The loss has come at the “opportunity risk” of leaving the money in bonds.
Had Social Security simply become a wealth fund as so many nations around the world have adopted, it would NOT be in danger of a financial crisis today. This is the result of the Democrats who always want to strangely keep the poor poor and punish the rich. They talk about income inequality and portray this as “unfair.” Yet, the very way the “rich” make their money is through investment, which the Democrats have rejected for more than 40 years.
As the stock market rises further and interest rates remain low, the disparity of income will expand rapidly because they are comparing profits on investment as income rather than wages. We should expect the Socialists to get a lot more vocal over the years ahead going into 2020. They will call for the heads of the “rich” rather than address the fact that they are the very people who prevent the poor from getting ahead.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, the congressional oversight representative closest to Inspector General Michael Horowitz, discusses the upcoming IG report.
As background, it is Chairman Goodlatte who personally selected (and selects) the lawmakers who questioned FBI Counterintelligence head Bill Priestap. Whereas HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes holds primary ‘intelligence’ oversight; Chairman Goodlatte holds primary Justice and Judiciary oversight.
It is worth noting that Goodlatte directs a great deal of attention to U.S. Attorney John Huber on the criminality behind the upcoming IG report. The report is scheduled to be made public on Thursday June 14th:
When we ended part I... A U.S. foreign policy that provides the opportunity for fully-realized national authenticity is a paradigm shift amid a world that has grown accustomed to corrupt globalists, bankers and financial elites who have established a business model by dictating terms to national leaders they control and influence.
When you take the influence of corporate/financial brokers out of foreign policy, all of a sudden those global influence peddlers are worthless. Absent of their ability to provide any benefit, nations no longer purchase these brokered services.
As soon as influence brokers are dispatched, national politicians become accountable to the voices of their citizens. When representing the voices of citizens becomes the primary political driver of national policy, the authentic image of the nation is allowed to surface.
In western, or what we would call ‘more democratized systems of government‘, the consequence of removing multinational corporate and financial influence peddlers presents two options for the governing authority occupying political office:
♦One option is to refuse to allow the authentic voice of a nationalist citizenry to rise. Essentially to commit to a retention of the status quo; an elitist view; a globalist perspective. This requires shifting to a more openly authoritarian system of government within both the economic and social spheres. Those who control the reigns of power refuse to acquiesce to a changed landscape.
♦The second option is to allow the authentic and organic rise of nationalism. To accept the voices of the middle-class majority; to structure the economic and social landscape in a manner that allows the underlying identity to surface naturally.
Fortunately we are living in a time of great history, and we have two representative examples playing-out in real time. •One example is the U.K. and voices of the British people who have voted to Brexit the European Union. •The second example is Mexico, and the upcoming July 1st election of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (aka AM LO), a national socialist.
In the U.K. we see the government turning more authoritarian and distancing itself from the voices of the majority who chose to rebuke the collective association of the EU. In recent decisions the government has taken a more harsh approach toward suppressing opposition, and as a consequence oppressing free speech and civil liberties.
This doesn’t come as a surprise to those who have followed the arc of history when the collective global elite are rejected. Globalism can only thrive amid a class structure where the elites, though few in number, have more controlling power over the direction of government. It is not accidental that the EU has appointed officials and unelected bureaucrats as the primary decision-making authority.
By its very nature collectivism requires a central planning authority who can act independent of the underlying national voice. As the Trump Doctrine clashes with the European global elite, the withdrawal of the U.S. financial underwriting creates a natural problem. Subsidies are needed to retain multiculturalism. If a national citizenry has to pay for the indulgent decisions of the influence class, a crisis becomes only a matter of time.
Wealth distribution requires a host. Since the end of World War II the U.S. has been a bottomless treasury for EU subsidy. The payments have been direct and indirect. The indirect have been via U.S. military bases providing security, and also by U.S. trade policy permitting one-way tariff systems. Both forms of indirect payment are now being reversed as part of the modern Trump Doctrine.
Similarly, in Mexico the Trump Doctrine also extends toward changed trade policies; this time via NAFTA. The restructuring of NAFTA disfavors multinational corporations who have exploited structural loopholes that were designed into the agreement.
With President Trump confronting the NAFTA fatal flaw, and absent of the ability of corporations to influence the direction of the administration, the trade deal ultimately presents the same outcome for Mexico as it does the EU – LESS DOLLARS.
However, in Mexico, the larger systems of government are not as strongly structured to withstand the withdrawal of billions of U.S. dollars. The government of Mexico is not in the same position as the EU and cannot double-down on more oppressive controls. Therefore the authentic voice of the Mexican people is likely to rise.
Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AM LO), is a nationalist but he is not a free-market capitalist. AM LO is more akin to a Hugo Chavez soft-Marxist approach with a view the central governing authority is the best structure to control the outputs of the production base and distribute equity.
The fabric of socialism runs naturally through the DNA strain of Mexico, and indeed much of South America. This is one of the reasons why the current Mexican government is so corrupt. Multinational corporations always find it easier to exploit socialist minded government officials.
When bribery and graft are the natural way of business engagement, the multinationals will exploit every opportunity to maximize profit. Withdraw the benefit (loophole exploitation) to the financial systems, and the bribery and graft dries up quickly. A bottom-up nationalist, albeit a soft-Marxist like AM LO, is the ultimate beneficiary.
The authentic sense of the Mexican people, rises in the persona of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador – who actually does personify the underlying nature of the classic Mexican class-struggle.
Thus we see two similar yet distinct outcomes of the Trump Doctrine. Within a highly structured U.K. parliamentary government the leadership becomes more authoritarian and rebukes the electorate; and in Mexico a less structured government becomes more socialist and embraces the underlying nature of the electorate.
It is not accidental the historic nature of the U.K. is a Monarchy, and the historic nature of Mexico is socialist. Revolution not withstanding, both countries are now returning to their roots.
We are indeed living in historic times.
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) – Leftist candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador extended his double-digit opinion poll lead to claim half of voter support ahead of Mexico’s July 1 presidential election, a voter survey showed on Monday.
Lopez Obrador, who has consistently ranked in the lead in major polls, has 50 percent of voter support, 26 percentage points ahead of his nearest rival, according to the poll published in newspaper El Financiero.
The former Mexico City mayor’s support rose from 46 percent in a May survey by the same pollster. (read more)
Journalist Paul Sperry dropped a bombshell tweet yesterday highlighting issues that have been longstanding within a senate investigation:
This is a BIG deal, obviously. However, it is actually an even bigger deal when put into context with prior inquiry by Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley about FBI manipulating FD-302’s, notes taken by FBI agents during interviews.
The current issue seems to align with Senator Chuck Grassley suspecting Andrew McCabe manipulated the FD-302 investigative notes from FBI Special Agent’s Peter Strzok and Joe Pientka, after they interviewed Mike Flynn. There is enough sketchy and contradictory information giving weight to a likelihood that Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe told FBI agents (Strzok and Pientka) to shape their FBI reports of the interview (FD-302’s) to assist a “Flynn lied” narrative.
On May 11th, 2018, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley dropped a sunlight grenade into the prosecution of Michael Flynn with a jaw-dropping request letter. [Pdf Here]
Within the letter Chairman Grassley outlines a prior briefing from fired FBI Director James Comey to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and contrasts the false presentations of Comey -regarding Michael Flynn- against recently known evidence.
Within the May 11 letter Senator Grassley requested: ♦the transcription of the phone call(s) intercepted by the FBI between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak; ♦the FD 302’s written by the FBI in their interview with Michael Flynn; and ♦testimony from Special Agent Joe Pientka, the second FBI agent who was partnered with Peter Strzok for the Flynn interview.
The name of the second FBI agent, Joe Pientka, was previously unknown, and it’s likely Chairman Grassley outed the name for a very specific reason. This was a BIG shot across the bow.
“In addition, please make Special Agent Joe Pientka available for a transcribed interview with Committee staff no later than one week following the production of the requested documents”…
Adding to evidence Deputy FBI Director McCabe told FBI agents (Strzok and Pientka) to shape their FBI reports of the interview (FD-302’s) to assist a “Flynn lied” narrative researcher Nick Falco pointed out text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok:
♦January 23, 2017, the day before the Flynn interview, Lisa Page says: “I can feel my heart beating harder, I’m so stressed about all the ways THIS has the potential to go fully off the rails.” Weird!
♦Strzok replies: “I know. I just talked with John, we’re getting together as soon as I get in to finish that write up for Andy (MCCABE) this morning.” Strzok agrees with Page about being stressed that “THIS” could go off the rails… (Strzok’s meeting w Flynn the next day)
♦Why would Page & Strzok be stressed about “THIS” potentially going off the rails if everything was by the book?
BECAUSE IT WASN’T!
It was a conspiracy to entrap Gen Mike Flynn. All Strzok needed was an excuse to speak w Flynn. Everything in the 302 was likely fabricated.
♦February 14th, 2017, there is another note about the FBI reports filed from the interview.
Peter Strzok asks Lisa Page if FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is OK with his report: “Also, is Andy good with F-302?”
Lisa Page replies: “Launch on F 302”.
And we know from their discussions of manipulating FBI reports a year earlier, inside the Hillary Clinton investigation, that Peter Strzok has withheld information, and manipulated information, through use of the 302 reports [LINK]:
On Wednesday June 6th, 2018, Senator Chuck Grassley sent another letter. This time he’s ANGRY about the initial response from the DOJ and FBI [pdf link]:
[…] “disclosing facts to the Committee could not possibly “interfere” with the case at this late date, assuming those facts are consistent with the representations that prosecutors arranged for Lt. General Flynn to swear to in federal court.”
“If the facts are inconsistent with the plea agreement, that would be an entirely different kettle of fish.” ~ Senator Grassley
There’s the implication.
If the “facts” of the Flynn case don’t match up with the details presented to the court (via “plea agreement”), it’s likely the underlying case evidence is fraudulent. ie. the FD-302’s were falsified.
However, Senator Grassley is not just relying on his research and investigative discoveries about the Flynn case. The Chairman also has prior knowledge of potentially falsified FBI statements to his oversight committee via. the Christopher Steele testimony.
At the beginning of the year Senator Grassley identified likely received false information from the FBI. He gave a critically important speech about it in January:
.
[…] “in the course of our review, Senator Graham and I came across some information that just does not add up. We saw Mr. Steele swearing one thing in a public libel suit against him in London.”
“Then we saw contradictory things in [FBI] documents that I am not going to talk about in an open setting. And from everything we’ve learned so far, we believe these discrepancies are significant.”
“The Special Counsel should be free to complete his work, and to follow the facts wherever they lead. However, that doesn’t mean I can ignore what look like false statements.”…
Then comes the key point:
“we start by assuming that government documents are true until we see evidence to the contrary. If those documents are not true, and there are serious discrepancies … then we have another problem—an arguably more serious one.”
What Senator Grassley is outlining in this speech is the conflicting statements by Chris Steele (under oath), and the information the FBI used to assemble the FISA application using the Steele Dossier. The FBI said they had no idea Steele was shopping his dossier to the media. Hence they felt confident using it in the FISA application.
However, Christopher Steele essentially said: “BULLSHIT”, the FBI (Peter Strzok) knew I was shopping the dossier to media, knew it was unverified raw intelligence, and should never have relied on it.
Under oath (in UK court), Chris Steele made statements so contradictory to the FBI – the interpretation could only be: the FBI lied to the FISA Court, and also lied to Senate Judiciary during oversight review.
In an effort to call the FBI’s bluff and discover the truth Grassley told the FBI if their FD-302 documented version of discussion with Steele was truthful, then PROSECUTE STEELE FOR LYING to the FBI [LINK]:
As the New York Times pointed out in January “Mr. Grassley’s decision to recommend criminal charges appeared likely to be based on reports of Mr. Steele’s meetings with the F.B.I., which were provided to the committee by the Justice Department in recent weeks.”
The “reports of Mr. Steele’s meetings with the F.B.I.” are the FD-302’s the FBI gave Chairman Grassley to back up their version of events.
The FBI is attributing claims to the meetings with Christopher Steele that do not match known evidence about the Steele Dossier and use therein; and do not match the statements by Mr. Steele given under oath.
Senator Grassley suspected, and likely knew, the motive to lie about the Steele Dossier *does not* belong to Christopher Steele. The motive to lie is within the corrupt FBI who were manipulating the validity of the Dossier to gain a FISA warrant.
And almost a year later the DOJ never filed charges against Steele for lying to the FBI because he didn’t. The FBI, through false documents, lied to the FISA Court (dossier) and also lied to Chuck Grassley (falsified FD-302’s).
Knowing the Comey/McCabe FBI has a history of falsifying FD-302 reports to achieve politically motivated investigative purposes, Senator Grassley is now going to highlight how the FBI falsified the Mike Flynn FD-302’s.
This is epic.
There are now three provable citations/examples showing evidence that James Comey’s FBI investigative units falsified FD-302 documents.
♦The first example is Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe and James Comey falsifying/manipulating Clinton investigation email 302’s submitted to congress.
♦The second example is the FBI falsifying/manipulating FD-302’s about contacts and interviews with Christopher Steele. [To create a FISC application and gain the FISA Title-1 surveillance warrant against U.S. person Carter Page]
♦The third example is now the FBI falsifying/manipulating FD-302’s surrounding the interview with Michael Flynn. Those falsified 302 FBI interview notes were then used by Deputy Attorney Sally Yates and head of the DOJ-NSD Mary McCord to inform White House Legal Counsel Don McGahn and frame Michael Flynn.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 