Facebook Ad Executive Rob Goldman Apologizes for having “Uncleared Thoughts”…


Good grief, I doubt there is a more apropos example of how liberal echo-chambers generate a sketchy group-think compliance mindset.

After President Trump re-tweeted a discussion thread from Facebook VP of Ads Rob Goldman, which cited analysis done last year of Russian ad purchases/engagement, the liberal hive instantly attacked the executive.

According to Wired.Com Rob Goldman quickly began apologizing for expressing “uncleared thoughts”, where those thoughts are actually based on facts – but run counter to the necessary liberal narrative – so they must be repelled at all costs.

This you have to read:

(Via Wired) On Friday morning, just before 10am on the West Coast, the office of special counsel Robert Mueller published his indictment of 13 Russian operatives for interfering in the US election. The document was 37 pages, and it mentioned Facebook 35 times. It detailed how Russian operatives used the platform to push memes, plan rallies, create fake accounts, suppress the vote, foment racism, and more.

[…] But then, roughly eight hours after the indictment appeared online, Rob Goldman, a VP for ads for Facebook, decided he had a few points to add to the debate. He was just freelancing, and had not cleared his thoughts with either Facebook’s communications team or its senior management.

[…] With Mueller’s indictment, according to multiple people at the company, everyone felt that Facebook had done something right. The 35 mentions clearly showed that Facebook had fully cooperated with authorities. Many of the details in the indictment, particularly from pages 25 to 30, which include details of messages sent between private Facebook accounts, were given to Mueller by Facebook. That could have been a good story. But then Rob Goldman decided to weigh in, using a rival platform. He now has 10,500 Twitter followers, but a few fewer friends at work.

On Sunday night, Joel Kaplan, the VP of Global Public Policy at Facebook, put out a statement saying “Nothing we found contradicts the Special Counsel’s indictments. Any suggestion otherwise is wrong.” Roughly translated, that meant, “We asked Rob Goldman to throw his phone in a river.”

[…]  Later that day, Rob Goldman seemed to come to the same understanding, and posted internally at Facebook a message that read as follows: “I wanted to apologize for having tweeted my own view about Russian interference without having it reviewed by anyone internally. The tweets were my own personal view and not Facebook’s. I conveyed my view poorly. The Special Counsel has far more information about what happened [than] I do—so seeming to contradict his statements was a serious mistake on my part.  (read more)

One of the more, well, hilarious and typically-left aspects to the sympathetic article about Rob Goldman’s wrong thinking comes from this paragraph (emphasis mine):

 […] Facebook has long had a vexed relationship with Donald Trump. It’s based in Silicon Valley, and most of the executives and employees are liberal Democrats. Mark Zuckerberg believes, to his core, that the point of his platform is to make the world more open and connected. Donald Trump’s campaign was built on tribalismdividing America against the world, and dividing American groups against each other.

Remember, this is Facebook.  A social media platform based entirely on ‘tribalism’.

That paragraph is what’s called hypocrisy wrapped up with a heaping dose of sanctimonious pretzel logic.   In the same article where the author is describing an executive’s apology for having “unapproved wrong thoughts”, the same author is decrying Trump’s “tribalism”.

Seriously, you can’t make this stuff up.

The executives in charge of a social media platform based on western free expression and communication with “friends”, ie. ‘your tribe’, are now stating “thoughts” must be pre-approved and “tribalism” is bad, bad ju-ju…

Resist We Much !

The Struggle is Realz !

 

President Trump Tweets Mitt Romney Endorsement…


President Trump tweets support for Mitt Romney. [Lumps Out]

(Tweet Link)

OK Utah, here’s your sign:

Brit Hume Discusses Possible Push for Gun Control Legislation…


If Nikolas Cruz had been arrested for his prior criminal behavior he would not have passed a background check for a firearm purchase.  The issue was/is not the background check; the issue was/is the lack of a prior arrest.  Hence, the Broward County school and law enforcement policy is ultimately what failed.

.

I don’t say this lightly, but the lawyers have the easiest case for ‘wrongful death’ lawsuits in the history of this type of litigation. The county policy constructed by public officials (School Board and Superintendent), and the county law enforcement policy that was specifically and intentionally designed to ignore unlawful behavior (Broward Sheriff), is the very definition of intentional gross negligence.

Gross negligence requires a pre-disposition to create a system that is inherently dangerous. That is exactly what happened in Broward County, Florida.

Despite specific warnings that unstable and/or violent students would likely slip through the system as a result of intentional ‘willful blindness’; and despite specific warnings by police officers that these policies were dangerous; community leaders, district school administration and local police officials executed those policies anyway.

The resulting loss of life was entirely predictable; and it was predicted.

It will be very important for the families to screen out the lawyers carefully.  Many of the top lawyers are aligned with high-ranking political Democrats.  Political lawyers like John Morgan (Morgan and Morgan) are part of the ideological alignment (with Democrat politicians) that created the system of policies – that led to the deaths of the students.  Morgan would be a terrible lawyer for the families because he, along with many others would hold conflicts.

In my humble opinion, the victim families need to get good lawyers who are not part of the political system within the state of Florida; and must not -EVER- hire Democrats.  There will be massive political pressure around the entire issue with all those who constructed the schemes being protected by the same system that needs to protect former President Obama.

ps. My apologies but my experience in trying to stop this years ago was met with hostility and the most intense political hate imaginable.  As a result, I dislike the characters and officials around this story immensely.  The Sheriff, the School Superintendent and every member of the Broward County School Board are complicit.  They deserve no quarter.

My prayers are for the victims, their families and those who are hostage to these policies.

The Process of Disproving a Negative Accusation…


Jeffrey Lord appears on NewsMax TV to discuss the Rod Rosenstein announcement yesterday, and also the larger discussion of how the Mueller investigation disproves a negative political claim.

Too Funny: Special Prosecutor Mueller Patched Together Much of His ‘Muh Russia’ Indictment from Old News Articles…


A large number of people who read the Mueller 13-person Russian Indictment released on Friday noted a transparent lack of actual substance.  Today the absence of substance turns toward the hilarious.

Much like the heavily touted sketchy 2017 Joint Analysis Report (the infamous “14 U.S. intelligence agencies report“) was really only three political intel agencies, FBI (Comey), CIA (Brennan) and ODNI (Clapper), Friday’s Russian indictment had a lot of pages and citations but in the aggregate was an assembly of nothing-burger reporting of various insignificant social media events.

Today the absurdity of the report becomes even more laughable.  As Gateway Pundit reports almost everything in the Mueller indictment was previously outlined in a Radio Free Europe report from 2015.   If that wasn’t funny enough, even the Washington Post finds the majority of the indictment was published last October in a Russian Business Magazine (RBC) article.

(WaPo) A 37-page indictment issued by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s team on Friday brings fresh American attention to one of the strangest elements of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election: The Internet Research Agency (IRA), a state-sponsored “troll factory” in St. Petersburg.

But much of the information Mueller published on Friday about the agency’s efforts to influence the election had already been published last October — in an article by a Russian business magazine, RBC.

In a 4,500-word report titled “How the ‘troll factory’ worked the U.S. elections,” journalists Polina Rusyaeva and Andrey Zakharov offered the fullest picture yet of how the “American department” of the IRA used Facebook, Twitter and other tactics to inflame tensions ahead of the 2016 vote. The article also looked at the staffing structure of the organization and revealed details about its budget and salaries.  (read more)

So what exactly is going on here?  Is this entire narrative really just creating the illusion of something, anything, simply because something began… continued… and was really nothing.

Well, essentially, YES.

The reality of the weak-sauce structure of the indictment reflects the abject absurdity of the two-year-long enterprise known as the vast Muh-Russia’ investigation.  Essentially, a joint collaborative effort between the political intelligence community and their codependent media narrative engineers to manufacture a false premise.

Everyone should have noticed the actual missing substance from the 2016 Joint Analysis Report as it was enhanced an presented in 2017.  It was a goofy assembly of odd data labeling Russian hackers and such as planetary arch-villains.

Hillary Clinton herself started pushing it on August 26th, 2016, with Pickle’s Vast Russian Planetary Conspiracy Theorem. REMINDER:

We all laughed at the time, but where we are today is nothing more than what happens when the media, then government officials, follows the Clinton campaign’s pied piper.  Madness.

Abject absurdity.

Mueller’s Tyrannical Indictment = the Very Reason We had a Revolution


The Grand Jury was supposed to protect citizens from political prosecutions determining only “probable cause” if the government presents their skewed side to claim a crime might have been made, but it has been completely undermined and serves nothing close to its constitutional purpose. The Grand Jury is just a political tool for they get to hear ONLY the evidence that the government selects. There is absolutely NO REQUIREMENT that a prosecutor must make a fair presentment of the facts and indeed they are NEVER true and correct for there is no obligation to present the alternative or the defense of the person being indicted.

The Supreme Court wrote quite eloquently what the Grand Jury was supposed to do. “The … grand jury … has the dual function of determining if there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and of protecting citizens against unfounded criminal prosecutions.” Branzburg v Hayes, 408 US 665, 686-687 (1972).

What has long been held as common practice, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976 ruled in Imbler v. Pachtman 424 U.S. 409 (1976), that prosecutors cannot face civil lawsuits for prosecutorial abuses, no matter how severe. Prosecutors have qualified immunity in other activities such as advising police and speaking to the press. This was the decision that means Mueller can say anything in an indictment for he is completely immune even if he is knowingly lying to the public. He gets to do what nobody else can do and this has undermined everything that the Constitution stood for.

There are no checks and balance in the American Justice System which flies in the face of the Declaration of Independence, which criticised the very same immunity the King provided to his prosecutors.

“He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone … He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance … For protecting (government agents) them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States”

Declaration of Independence

Prosecutors routinely mislead grand juries and provide only allegations to show guilt. An indictment is completely bogus and should NEVER be taken as fact for that violates the entire Constitution. The defendant has no right to present his side and the Supreme Court said that the trial jury will correct any injustice. This is what makes Mueller’s indictment fake news for he knows that there is zero chance of getting a trial so the indictment can say whatever he wants and CNN, New York Times, POLITICO etc., will all treat it as absolute proven fact.

In a decision by Judges Evans, Posner, and Easterbrook of the 7th Circuit (Chicago), they wrote in 2005 the truth about the Grand Jury process:

“Realistically, federal grand juries today provide little protection for criminal suspects whom a US Attorney wishes to indict. Nevertheless, that is not a realism to which judges are permitted to yield.”

US v Ross, 412 F3d 771, 774 (7th Circuit 2005)

The former Chief Judge of New York, Sol Wachtler, became famous for the modern legal comment on how bad the Grand Jury process had become. His comment became immortalized in the Tom Wolfe novel, Bonfire of the Vanities (1987). Judge Wachtler’s review of the Grand Jury became the famous phrase that a grand jury could “indict a ham sandwich,” if that’s what you wanted because the prosecutors are totally unsupervised in bringing indictments. He later said that he coined the phrase during a lunch interview with Marcia Kramer of the New York Daily News.

The Grand Jury has simply become the tyranny that has destroyed every Empire historically. There is no judge present so the proceeding is led by a prosecutor, in this case, Mueller. The defendant has absolutely no right to present his case or even to be informed that a prosecutor is conducting a Grand Jury proceeding at all. Court reporters usually transcribe the proceedings, but the records are sealed. The case for such secrecy was unanimously upheld by theSupreme Court in Douglas Oil Co. of Cal. v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 US 211 (1979). The rationale to support secrecy was explained that “if preindictment proceedings were made public, many prospective witnesses would be hesitant to come forward voluntarily”; “witnesses who appeared before the grand jury would be less likely to testify fully and frankly”; and “there also would be the risk that those about to be indicted would flee, or would try to influence individual grand jurors”.

The Venetian Mouth of Truth was precisely what the Supreme Court used to justify secrecy. Anyone could write an allegation against anyone else and they did not have to disclose who they were. They dropped the slip into the Mouth of Truth and that was enough to arrest the person and torture them until they confessed.

Once the person was arrested and crossed the Bridge of Sighs to the prison, they never again returned. The mere accusation was proof of guilt precisely as Mueller has just carried out.

On top of that, the hypocrisy, in this case, knows no bounds. The United States has interfered in just about everyone’s election. The Obama Administration interfered in the Canadian, British, and French elections to try to push for socialists to win and defeat BRXIT. Obama pissed-off the British by going of British TV and told them if they voted to leave the EU, then they should get to the “back of the queue” on trade agreement negotiations if they leave the EU.

The political propaganda team that got Bill Clinton elected was there in London helping Tony Blair get elected in Britain. The NSA was spying on Merkel and Merkel with the NSA was spying on France and the EU Commission.

Consequently, the strongest count in Mueller’s indictment is that the Russians failed to register and formally tell the US people they were acting politically within the US system. I find this very unethical when in fact the USA does this very same thing routinely to everyone else.

COUNT ONE:

“Grand Jury, knowingly and intentionally conspired to defraud the United States by impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of the Federal Election Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of State in administering federal requirements for disclosure of foreign involvement in certain domestic activities.”

Muellers Indictment

The Obama Administration came out and stated that despite Russian attempts to hack the election, the result was not altered. This has been a political witch hunt for there is nothing that took place that (1) altered the results, and (2) nothing that the US government does not do in other countries.

The ONLY way to secure our liberty is to overrule Prosecutorial Immunity and upon someone being indicted, the transcript MUST be made public. Otherwise, protecting the very people who appear before the Grand Jury to get an indictment remain in secret and can never be called by the defendant denying him the right to confrontation.

Mueller has proven we still live under Tyranny. The Grand Jury minutes MUST be made public since this is a political indictment and he knows there will NEVER be a trial. The American people and the world are entitled to the WHOLE TRUTH and NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH

The Russians Didn’t File a FISA Warrant…


Interesting interview.  The Russians didn’t keep Hillary out of Wisconsin; the Russians didn’t make Hillary use personal email; the Russians didn’t hire Fusion-GPS; the Russians didn’t pay Christopher Steele; the Russians didn’t make a dossier or deliver work product to the State Dept; the Russians didn’t do the unmasking of campaign officials.

The Russians didn’t apply for a FISA warrant; the Russians didn’t lie to a FISA court; the Russians didn’t leak Mike Flynn monitored phone calls; the Russians didn’t use DOJ and/or FBI databases to download FISA 702(16)(17) queries and extract the data to private contractors; the Russians didn’t hire Nellie Ohr and Russians didn’t approach president-elect Trump and warn him of politically weaponized intelligence surveillance…

The… wait…. then again, THAT’S ENTIRELY THE MOTIVE to blame the Russians:

.

Sharyl Attkisson Interviews Devin Nunes…


House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Chairman Devin Nunes sat down for an interview with Sharyl Attkisson for Full Measure News.  They discussed the HPSCI Russia probe, the FISA Court abuse and the ongoing investigative reviews of corruption within the DOJ and FBI.  [The VIDEO is Here]  The transcript is below.

Much of what Chairman Nunes outlines is a recap of current position; however, his response to the discussion of former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power is quite a shift. Mr. Nunes doesn’t see how it is possible -within the actual framework of the compartmented intelligence system- for anyone else to be using Power’s name for unmasking requests…..  {{{suspicious cat alert}}}

[Transcript] There are numerous investigations going on, but one of them, at least, is coming to a close. That is the House Intelligence Committee investigation into alleged Trump-Russia collusion. As of today, that Republican-led investigation hasn’t turned up any improper ties to Russia, but has revealed something perhaps larger and even more serious. We asked to sit down with both the top Democrat and Republican on the committee, only the Republican chairman Devin Nunes agreed.

Sharyl: What is the investigation that the House intelligence committee is covering?

Rep. Devin Nunes: Well we have a Russian Investigation going on whether or not there was collusion between any campaign and the Russians. That’s coming to a close. We’ve never had any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Sharyl: So you’re comfortable with saying at this point, you don’t see anything there?

Rep. Devin Nunes: No, There’s nothing there.

Sharyl: What else?

Rep. Devin Nunes: So in that investigation, we’ve unearthed things that are very concerning. We know that there are un-maskings that occurred and probably were leaked to the media. So this is, so these were, this is an intelligence products that were put together. The names or the names of the Americans were masked.

Sharyl: Because it’s so sensitive, Americans aren’t supposed to be spied on by our intelligence agencies. So when they are captured, their names are-

Rep. Devin Nunes: Are masked-

Sharyl: Right, Masked, inside the government.

Rep. Devin Nunes: And what we found was happening is, in the last administration, they were unmasking hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of American’s names. They were unmasking people for what I would say, for lack of a better definition, were for political purposes.

Sharyl: How could they use that information?

Rep. Devin Nunes: We have no evidence, that they leaked this information, okay. We only know that we only know this. That names were unmasked. And those names ended up in the newspaper.

Sharyl: In a derogatory sense, in terms of political enemies of the Obama Administration.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Right, it’s like political dirt to create a narrative and a spin with the mainstream media.

Sharyl: You reported what you learned early on, on the unmaskings to President Trump and were criticized by a Democrat counterpart of the committee, Adam Schiff. Who said you quote, Made a midnight run to the White House, where you misrepresented where you received the information. There was an ethics investigation into that, and you were cleared. But how would you answer Adam Schiff’s criticism that you behaved improperly?

Rep. Devin Nunes: Well most of the time I ignore political nonsense in this town. What I will say is that all of those stories were totally fake from the beginning. When I got that information okay, which was not at midnight. I didn’t jump out of any cars. That was totally fake. It was all made up nonsense. I went out and held a press availability, where I told the press, Look, I’ve, I found this information. It has nothing to do with Russia. I’m going to go explain this to the President of the United States. Because I’m the only one that really can do it. And then I went and did that. Briefed the President. Afterwards, I went and talked to the press at the White House. So my reward for transparency, total transparency with the with the media and everybody involved was to be brought up under a false ethics accusation. That has since everyone’s learned was total nonsense and it’s been dismissed.

Sharyl: On the unmaskings, one very tangible bit of evidence that to me looks like a crime. Is the fact that the US Ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power. It looked like she had made a masking request on a near-daily basis. Which is amazing in 2016. It’s pretty incredible. Yet she reportedly told Congress, most of those were not really her.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah.

Sharyl: Wouldn’t that mean somebody committed a serious National Security Crime if they used her name to request unmaskings of US Citizens?

Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah, so we don’t know what the truth is there. I think it would be, I think it’s highly unlikely that she was not the one who was giving permission to make those unmasking requests.

Sharyl: So you don’t believe her?

Rep. Devin Nunes: I just don’t know how that’s possible.

Sharyl: There appears to be a serious conflict of interest that the intelligence community, FBI, who are in charge of the investigation some of these things, are implicated in some of these alleged misdeeds. How do you get around that? How can this be investigated fairly, when the only prosecutorial authority really rests with the people accused of wrongdoing?

Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah and I think what you’re, and now what you’re getting into is the FISA abuse. So I want to, I think we want to make sure we make that change, the difference there. So there was unmaskings that we unearthed, then there are the FISA abuse that we’ve discovered.

Sharyl: That’s the secret court. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court, where intelligence officials can go to try to get wiretaps on US citizens or foreign actors.

Rep. Devin Nunes: That’s right. And so this is where the FBI and the Justice Department because they’re involved in this FISA Abuse. Because they’re the ones who make, to go before the secret court to get the warrants, they’re all involved, they’re all implicated in this.

Sharyl: But the most you can do about it to be clear, is to just raise the issue. Congress can’t prosecute or refer cases for prosecution.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Congress can, right. Congress can make criminal referrals. Congress can

Sharyl: To the people accused of wrongdoing in this case.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Right, right. So there’s really nowhere for it to go. And that’s I think a lot of people. We are a separate equal branch of government, but we don’t have the ability to prosecute people. And that’s the challenge.

Sharyl: Why is the Carter Page wiretap interview so important? Carter Page is the former Trump volunteer, advisor, who was wiretapped apparently, at least four times. Three times by the way, apparently after President Trump was elected. Why is that wiretap so important?

Rep. Devin Nunes: It really boils down to this. You had a campaign. The Hillary Campaign and the Democratic Party went out and paid for dirt. They got it from Russians by the way. Then they used that dirt and funneled it into the FBI. The FBI then used that dirt to get a warrant on a US citizen who was part of the other campaign. A limited role, yes. But still, to do that, it’s wrong.

Sharyl: We asked your Democrat counterpart Adam Schiff for an interview, but he wouldn’t do it. He said that the memo that you put out was misleading and omitted material facts.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Because we didn’t want to disclose any sources and methods. We tried to reduce the memo down to what we believed the American people needed to know. What was most important? So we put in the memo, the things that were used before the FISA court in order to justify the warrant. Was there other information? Sure. But it wasn’t, it wasn’t important in terms of the justification of the warrant.

Sharyl: Congressman Adam Schiff says, your goal is to put the FBI on trial, and to put special council Bob Mueller’s investigation on trial.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah, well FISA abuse has nothing to do with, with the Mueller investigation. As it relates to Department of Justice and the FBI, if they need to be put on trial, we will put them on trial. The reason that Congress exists is to oversee these agencies that we created. DOJ and FBI are not above the law. Congress created them, we oversee them, and we fund them. And if they’re committing abuse for a secret court, getting warrants on American citizens, you’re darn right that we’re going to put them on trial.

Sharyl: What would you say is the takeaway?

Rep. Devin Nunes: And I think people are just starting to learn now what really happened. Because as we peel more and more of this back, I think more and more Americans get educated. And I think that they’re gonna demand that changes are made. [Link to Transcript and Video]

Chris Wallace Interviews Rush Limbaugh…


The polished guardian of all things swamp sits down for the annual discussion of current terms with the self-appointed emissary of full-throated conservative thought.  You can decide which is which.

“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage, than the creation of a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institutions and merely lukewarm defenders in those who would gain by the new ones.”

Machiavelli

Sunday Talks: Maria Bartiromo Interviews Ken Starr…


Fox News host Maria Bartiromo interviews former Special Counsel Ken Starr surrounding the Mueller Trump/Russia investigation and the 36-page indictment surrounding Russian election interference. Ken Starr directs attention toward the OIG investigation by Michael Horowitz and the evidence of FISA court corruption.