Stunning Coverup Maneuver – Obama NSC Move All Intelligence Unmasking Material To Obama Library To Avoid Sunlight…


To understand the play at stake here, and the larger scheme to keep the Obama political surveillance from the sunlight of discovery, it is important to remember the only factually known illegal activity surrounding the entire Russian Election Conspiracy is:

  • A.) the illegal leaking of intelligence reports (Comey et al), or the weaponization of intelligence for political motives; and
  • B.) the illegal unmasking of names within U.S. intelligence reports by Obama White House officials (Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes), again for political motives.

The latest jaw dropping maneuver by the former Obama White House crew specifically targets how to cover-up the latter issue.

A FOIA request from Judicial Watch to the Obama NSC seeking information about the unmasking activities of National Security Advisor Susan Rice and the National Security Council receives a response that all documentation has been moved to the Obama Library.

The reason: All presidential library material is NOT subject to public scrutiny until FIVE YEARS after the administration ends.

(Via Judicial Watch) The NSC will not fulfill an April 4 Judicial Watch request for records regarding information relating to people “who were identified pursuant to intelligence collection activities.”

The agency also informed Judicial Watch that it would not turn over communications with any Intelligence Community member or agency concerning the alleged Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election; the hacking of DNC computers; or the suspected communications between Russia and Trump campaign/transition officials. Specifically, the NSC told Judicial Watch:

“Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library. You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, Presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.” (link)

Calling it specifically what it is: this is nothing short of a strategy to hide discovery of the illegal political surveillance scheme carried out by the Obama intelligence community (Brennan, Clapper and Comey Inc.) during the 2016 presidential race.

In the matter of the first known illegal action, fired FBI Director James Comey is currently working his angles to hide his upper level FBI team’s involvement in the leaking of intelligence and FBI (counterintelligence) operations to the media. All of Comey’s current activity is clearly targeted toward accomplishing this goal.

In the matter of the second known illegal action, former Obama officials are clearly working to hide their use of the intelligence community to spy on political opposition. As we stated back in April the fingerprints of this action were clearly established.

Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice only needed to confirm one aspect of the intelligence unmasking story for all of the dots to connect. She made that confirmation within two minutes of her interview with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell.

From the MSNBC transcript, emphasis mine:

Susan Rice @00:51 – …”Let me explain how this works. I was a National Security Adviser, my job is to protect the American people and the security of our country. That’s the same as the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and CIA Director.; and every morning, to enable us to do that, we receive – from the intelligence community – a compilation of intelligence reports that the IC, the intelligence community, has selected for uson a daily basis– to give us the best information as to what’s going on around the world.”

Note, right there. STOP. No need to go any further. There it is – Susan Rice is describing the Presidents’ Daily Briefing, aka the “PDB”. She continues:

“I received those reports, as did other officials, and there were occasions when I would receive a report in which, uh, a ‘U.S Person’ was referred to. Name, uh, not provided, just ‘U.S. Person’.

And sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance in the report – and assess it’s significance, it was necessary to find out or request, who that U.S. official was.”

This is the important detail. Susan Rice was requesting unmasking of U.S. person’s names, which she moments later describes as “U.S. official[s]”, to understand the context and importance for the intelligence being given within the Presidents’ Daily Brief.

Under President Obama’s communication and intelligence directives, the Presidential Daily Briefing was widely shared with dozens of administration persons in various agencies.

From a Washington Post story explaining the PDB and Obama’s use therein. (again, emphasis mine):

(Washington Post) […] It’s the president’s book. And indeed, it is tailored to each president’s individual needs. CIA officers in 1961 designed what was initially known as the President’s Intelligence Checklist specifically for John F. Kennedy’s tastes, using punchy words and phrases while avoiding clunky bureaucratic language and annoying classification markings. That checklist evolved into the President’s Daily Brief in late 1964 , as the agency reformatted and retitled the book of secrets to appeal to Lyndon Johnson’s preferences. While the name has stuck, the content and format have continued to evolve. President Obama receives his in digital form and reads it on a tablet .

But while through most of its history the document has been marked “For the President’s Eyes Only,” the PDB has never gone to the president alone. The most restricted dissemination was in the early 1970s, when the book went only to President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who was dual-hatted as national security adviser and secretary of state.

In other administrations, the circle of readers has also included the vice president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with additional White House staffers. By 2013, Obama’s PDB was making its way to more than 30 recipients, including the president’s top strategic communications aide and speechwriter, and deputy secretaries of national security departments. (link)

The post article was written December 26th 2016, after the election – and was presumably written due to post-election media reports the intelligence community had concerns over sharing information with President-elect Trump; this was the preferred, and false, anti-Trump narrative for a few weeks. I digress.

The important aspect two fold: #1) the PDB is electronic viewable by POTUS Obama on his iPad; and #2) how many people were getting the PDB information 30+, against the backdrop of Rice’s admitted unmasking of names within the raw intelligence for PDB user comprehension.

There you can see that “more than 30 recipients” would be privy to the unmasked information within the PDB as an outcome of the protocols instituted by the White House and President Obama’s National Security Advising team.

From Rice’s MSNBC interview the departments of “State (John Kerry et al) and Defense (Ash Carter et al)”, along with CIA (Director John Brennan), NSA (Director Mike Rogers) and ODNI James Clapper, all participated.

As such, and as outlined by the Washington Post on distribution, deputies within Defense and State, along with “other national security departments” would have access to the unmasked PDB information.

Here’s where you realize within those “more than 30 recipients” you find people like Secretary Hillary Clinton, Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy and various high level officials in the Office of the Secretary and its Executive Secretariat (S/ES) past and present. This is also where the Deputy Secretaries of Defense like Dr. Evelyn Farkas come into play. All of these officials would be accessing, or at least have access to, the President’s Daily Brief, and the unmasked intelligence within it.

When you recognize how widely the Obama administration disseminated the PDB you begin to realize how easy it was for any foreign entity, including the Russians, to have access to the EXACT SAME daily intelligence brief as President Obama and his National Security Adviser Susan Rice.

An additional character within this wide-dissemination construct would be John Podesta.

Remember, after Hillary Clinton stepped down from Secretary of State, she inserted, with Obama’s approval, John Podesta within the White House Senior Advisory staff to keep a communications line open with direct information. (As pictured below) Podesta remained in that position throughout 2013, 2014 and into 2015.

President Barack Obama, with Secretary of State John Kerry, participates in a secure video teleconference with Embassy Baghdad and Consulates General Erbil and Basrah, at the U.S. Department of State in Washington, D.C., Oct. 24, 2014.

Having a known entity like John Podesta with access to the PDB and the unmasked intelligence therein, puts the appropriate highlight on the risk carried by Russian hacking into Podesta’s electronic communications, stored data and email correspondence.

Is it any surprise Russian, or any foreign intelligence group, would then be making attempts to enter the unsecured private email accounts of Secretary Hillary Clinton and her top level staff?

And John Podesta is only one of numerous people who would have access to this PDB information. All of which would potentially be at risk of being read daily by enterprising hackers, or various spies, who would glean a gobsmacking level of information by actually reading the same unmasked intelligence as the President of the United States.

Oh, the angles are almost limitless.

Not only would President Obama and his entire NSC team be gathering operational political intelligence on their political adversaries to include President-Elect Donald Trump and his transition team, but they would also be gathering intelligence and unmasking it on other U.S. Officials…..

…..That same unmasked and widespread surveillance, under the auspices of intelligence gathering, was then shared with dozens of administration officials -beyond the likes of the National Security Council, Asst. Defense Secretary Farkas and politicos like John Podesta- which means it was more than likely reviewed, via hacking etc., by our most critical national enemies.

Follow that trail to where it leads and you’ll likely discover the real story that encompasses the motive to create the ‘vast Russian conspiracy‘.

It only took Susan Rice two minutes on MSNBC to highlight the entire motive.

Another March 2nd MSNBC interview with Evelyn Farkas takes a new context:

“I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.”

Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.

So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to the Hill. … That’s why you had the leaking”.

[Link to Farkas MSNBC Interview and Transcript]

if they found out HOW we knew … that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence “,

Indeed they would Dr. Farkas. Indeed they would.

And Post-election, and after people began asking questions about these “unmasking” revelations; and after the White House realized their initial cover story was only leading to more uncomfortable questions, the Obama White House shifted their approach:

(Via NBC) Obama administration officials were so concerned about what would happen to key classified documents related to the Russia probe once President Trump took office that they created a list of document serial numbers to give to senior members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, a former Obama official told NBC News.

The official said that after the list of documents related to the probe into Russian interference in the U.S. election was created in early January, he hand-carried it to the committee members. The numbers themselves were not classified, said the official.

The purpose, said the official, was to make it “harder to bury” the information, “to share it with those on the Hill who could lawfully see the documents,” and to make sure it could reside in an Intelligence committee safe, “not just at Langley [CIA hq].” (link)

There you see the deflection and cover story angle for the media. The reports themselves were classified intelligence; however, the numbers identifying the classified documents themselves were “not classified”. This provides the cover for all the Farkas-minded parties involved to say they were not actually spreading classified intelligence, they were just telling “people on the hill” the numerical identity of classified intelligence documents.

See how that works?

But that approach wasn’t going to work long-term, because pesky Devin Nunes (Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee)  began seeking the specific documents from the entire intelligence community, including the Obama NSC.   Remember, Nunes said repeatedly the Comey FBI was the organization refusing to comply with providing these documents; this was before Comey was fired.

As soon as Comey was fired, the Obama team’s ability to control the intelligence information was substantially lessened.  The risk gets larger without control.  As more of the remaining embeds of the Obama intel community were removed their cover-up strategy necessarily had to change.

Thus the latest response from those who were carrying out the illegal unmasking activity is to bury the information behind the protective walls of an Obama library:

“Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library. You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, Presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.”

.

Public Education Has Always Been a Weapon Employed by the State


COMMENT: I found your comment on public education fascinating. Has it been a tool for centuries to alter the minds of children?

ANSWER: Yes. There have been plenty of examples restricting what can be taught and what is prohibited. Joseph Stalin is famous for his state control of education. He boldly stated: “Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.”

The trial of Socrates (399 BC) was held to determine the philosopher’s guilt on two charges: (1) asebeia (impiety) against the pantheon of Athens, and (2) corruption of the youth of the city-state. He was charged with “failing to acknowledge the gods that the city acknowledges” and “introducing new deities” which corrupted the ideas of the youth.

Education has been a tool of government for a very, very long time.

The Right to Vote Should Attach to Only Those Who Pay Taxes


There is a rising tied that many people are not paying attention to. That is the rising unrest among the youth. The problem with allowing the youth to vote on economic issues is simply they want to rob others so they have their free world. In Britain, they have been fighting to bring the age to vote down to 16. How can someone make any intelligent decision concerning the fate of the nation before they even have a job and pay taxes?

When it comes to war and if they are to fight such a war, then absolutely, they should have a right to vote. But when it comes to economic policies, you should not be allowed to vote unless you pay taxes. If you do not have a job, it is always easy to demand socialism to go rob someone else who has what you want. If you walked down a street and you are grabbed and told you cannot leave until you hand over money, isn’t that a crime? Yet somehow we elect politicians who will do that exact thing under threat of imprisonment if you do not hand over whatever they demand.

 

Hoe can a man write a book and explain how it feels to go through childbirth? It’s impossible! The same applies to voting. If you want to vote on anything that involves economics, you should have a stake in the process by paying taxes. Otherwise, go to your party with friends and complain about the world until you are old enough to know what the world really is.

Allowing everyone who has no stake in the game vote against others who do, it not Social Justice – it is servitude. Sorry, it is not no vote no hope, it is no vote if not responsible.

Tiananmen – 28 Years Ago Today…


It was 28 years ago tonight when the Chinese government sent the Mongolian Army into Tiananmen Square to crackdown on the mostly student protestors.

It is against the law in China to recognize today, memorialize the dead, or even speak publicly of this bloody anniversary.   Few people know the short and long-term political ramifications to this event which extended far beyond the borders of China.

Many people are familiar with this image:

However, not as many people are as familiar with the wide shot.

That’s some serious courage right there.

The June 4th 1989 anniversary holds a great deal of personal significance for those who witnessed the events.

Few people even know how most of the regular Chinese military refused orders to open fire on the protesting crowd.   Hundreds of young Chinese military soldiers actually formed lines around the mostly student activists in an effort to protect them.  The Chinese government eventually bypassed the regulars and instructed the Mongolian military divisions who carried out the orders.

No-one really knows how many were killed, and even the families of the fallen were too scared to speak publicly.

Those who were lost live-on in whispered memories of lore.

So many.

So young.

We remember.

 

Corruption was Crazy during 19th Century


QUESTION: Marty, is this perhaps the most corrupt period in political history? I find Hillary’s comments outright offensive that she counts on the press to make the people as stupid as possible. Is this the worst of the worst?

Thanks

RG

ANSWER: Hillary is really detestable. But politics was exceptionally corrupt after the Civil War because there was no real effective opposition. The political scandals were just one after the other.

The scandals were so numerous that Puck Magazine ran this cartoon picturing the Grant Administration as just a circus.

The Whiskey Ring was diverting tax money on whiskey to private accounts shared by government officials. Can you imaging you owe $100,000 in taxes and the IRS Agent says here, wire the money to my account and we will call it just $50,000.

There were too many scandals all involving corruption that was off the charts. It was literally one scandal after another. Mark Twain’s book, The Gilded Age, was  a satire of greed and political corruption in post-Civil War era in America history.

I have given up any hope on career politicians. They cannot possibly represent the people for their votes are always for sale. Republics never last because they have always turned into Oligarchies. Hillary is filthy rich, yet she has worked only for government. Nobody asks how!

Sweden Begins Drafting for its Military


The Swedish government has declared that they will begin drafting those born in 1999 for military service. This reintroduction of military conscription is being blamed on Russia’s invasion of Eastern Ukraine. In fact, it also has a lot to do with the Refugee Crisis. The draft will being as of January 1st, 2018. Sweden had military conscription until 2010, but previously only men were drafted. I know of a number of young women in the United States who were against Hillary because she demanded equal rights for women and thus she supported drafting women into the military.

Most of the 28 EU member states have abolished military conscription and that included France and Britain. Germany suspended conscription in 2011, but interestingly enough, Greece has mandatory military service for all of the age of 19 who must serve for 9 months.

New Idea for Political Reform


The Belgian Historian and author David Van Reybrouck in his book latest book, “Counter-elections”, has made a very interesting suggestion. He too has concluded that career politicians are just hopeless. It is so nice to see I am not alone. Van Reybrouck has proposed that politicians to really cannot represent the people and perhaps the solution is to draft people to be in politics by lottery. This is an interesting proposition. I would ad that anyone who takes up a position should be at the END of their career, not at the beginning or middle. In this way they bring the wisdom of experience with them and to be the Secretary of the Treasury that had to be an international fund manager rather than a domestic banker. The Secretary of War should be only someone who military service. In other words, you have to be qualified for the job.

Our greatest problem is are just lawyers from Obama and Clinton to Nixon and Kennedy. Even Franklin Roosevelt went to Columbia University Law School. He was never a good student with just average grades. He dropped out after two years. Being a lawyer does not qualify you to fill every position in government. Van Reybrouck’s idea of a lottery is very interesting. If we merge that with one-time-in-and-out, all money to run is provided by government and ABSOLUTELY no private donations along with having to have worked in that field, they we just might have a blueprint for after the Crash and Burn.

Is it Time to Hold Journalists in Contempt of Court for National Security Reasons?


On Tuesday U.S. officials, under the guise of anonymity, leaked the name of the suicide bomber responsible for the attack at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester before the British police had officially named him causing greater skepticism for allies sharing intelligence with the United States. There is something seriously wrong in the intelligence community and it borders on TREASON.

American journalists published the name before the British journalists. The British police had not confirmed the identity of the attacker, Salman Abedi. Since it was an ongoing investigation, the British government had indicated it may not release the name at all and then the American press reported the name.

The case of Judith Miller, the New York Times journalist at the time, became embroiled in controversy after her coverage of Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction program both before and after the 2003 invasion. The New York Times later determined Miller’s stories published in the paper were inaccurate. She acknowledged in The Wall Street Journal on April 4, 2015 that some of her Times coverage was inaccurate, although she had relied on sources she had used numerous times in the past, and had won a Pulitzer Prize. Miller further stated that policymakers and intelligence analysts had relied on the same sources claiming that Iraq had huge stockpiles of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Some argue that it was her stories in the New York Times that supported the entire invasion of Iraq.

All of this aside, Miller was also involved in the Plame Affair where her status of a member of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) became widely known compromising her position. When Miller was asked to name her sources, she invoked reporter’s privilege, which does not exist in any absolute manner, and refused to reveal her sources in the CIA leak. The Supreme Court made it clear that testimonial privileges “are not lightly created nor expansively construed, for they are in derogation of the search for truth.” United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 710 (1974). She was held in contempt of court and spent 85 days in jail protecting her source, which turned out to be Scooter Libby who was the leak source. Miller later was forced to resign from her job at the New York Times in November 2005.

Libby went to trial and was convicted of one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury, and one count of making false statements. Between 2003 and 2005 Libby had “leaked” classified employment information about Valerie Plame to New York Times reporter Judith Miller and others. He then lied and tried to cover-up his leaks.

In the Grand Jury, Libby testified that he met with Judith Miller, a reporter with the New York Times, on July 8, 2003, and discussed Plame with her. He had signed a “blanket waiver” allowing journalists to discuss their conversations. Miller maintained that such a waiver did not serve to allow her to reveal her source to that grand jury. After refusing to testify about her July 2003 meeting with Libby, Miller was sent to prison on contempt of court on July 7, 2005. Her lawyer, Robert Bennett, told her that she already had possessed a written waiver from Libby all along and there was no privilege. Miller then agreed to testify and was released on September 29th, 2005. She then appeared before the grand jury. Miller produced a notebook from a previously undisclosed meeting with Libby on June 23, 2003. Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice and two counts of perjury in his grand jury testimony and one count of making false statements to federal investigators about when and how he learned that Plame was a CIA agent.

It seems that contempt sanction are now warranted as a matter of national security to get at those within the government as to who is leaking information about private conversations between world leaders all the way down to leaking names of terrorists to obstruct investigations. That is what the contempt power was really supposed to be – the refusal to comply when you can compl

Obama Administration Intervened in Canadian, British, and French elections


There is a very serious hypocrisy over this whole issue of Russia trying to influence the 2016 election when the Obama Administration directly intervened in Canada, Britain, and France and is expected to do so again in Britain and Germany. The New York Times, Washington Post, and just about every other mainstream media, are biased and are NOT REPORTING THE TRUTH. They act as if this is something unusual and sinister yet Obama has continued in this very posture even after leaving office with respect to the French elections. Obama also intervened to overthrow Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and failed as he did in BREXIT. The United States routinely interferes in foreign elections. So what is the big deal with Russia? Mainstream Media is not telling the truth that this is standard operational procedure. The United States has far too over stages coups to overthrow leaders they dislike. The propaganda about Iran and weapons of mass destruction is but a recent example. The Vietnam War was also a hoax with President Johnson is famous for saying in 1965: “For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there.” There never was any attack to start that war and Johnson made a very deceitful speech of August 4th, 1964, while New York Times editorial writers cheered and proclaimed that Johnson “went to the American people last night with the somber facts.” The recorded American soldier deaths for the Vietnam War was 58,220 U.S. military fatal casualties.

The New York Times has deliberately misled everyone with its latest story once again: “Top Russian Officials Discussed How to Influence Trump Aides Last Summer”. They wrote that two of Trump’s people “had indirect ties to Russian officials” and after all the ifs, possibilities, and perhaps, they conclude “It is unclear, however, whether Russian officials actually tried to directly influence Mr. Manafort and Mr. Flynn.”

We all know that Obama sought to influence the British BREXIT vote telling the British if they voted for BREXIT, they would have to get queque . We all have watched the video intervening in the French Election for Macron. However, what has not been widely know is that the Obama Administration intervened in Canada with operative and money to overthrow the conservatives.

The real question is what is going on with the New York Times and the Washington Post? They both endorsed Hillary and this seems like a desperate act to claim that Trump is not a legitimate president and he should be overthrown. In the years of research studying the economy and the press accounts over the centuries, I have never seen such a totally dishonest level of reporting than we see today. They have devolved into a biased media that withholding the truth to shape opinions as they desire. This, in my view, is the ultimate treason against the sovereignty of the people. The Washington Post boldly claims as their motto: “Democracy Dies in Darkness” which is exactly what they are doing. PRINT THE TRUTH!

Report: Murdered DNC Staffer Seth Rich Was in Contact With Wikileaks…


Fox5 is reporting that a private investigator has turned up tangible evidence that murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich was in contact with Wikileaks.  Which further provides more evidence he was most likely the source of the DNC leaks.  The same report points out the FBI have been trying to cover-up the discoveries.

The motive for the leaks was obvious, the collusion within the DNC, specifically with the U.S. media, to eliminate Bernie Sanders as a potential risk to Clinton’s ambitions. If proven accurate this would also further prove “the Russians” had nothing to do with the DNC leaks.  That’s the basis for the entire “muh russian conspiracy” narrative.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

WASHINGTON DC – […] Rod Wheeler, a private investigator hired by the Rich family, suggests there is tangible evidence on Rich’s laptop that confirms he was communicating with WikiLeaks prior to his death.

Now, questions have been raised on why D.C. police, the lead agency on this murder investigation for the past ten months, have insisted this was a robbery gone bad when there appears to be no evidence to suggest that.

Wheeler, a former D.C. police homicide detective, is running a parallel investigation into Rich’s murder. Wheeler said he believes there is a cover-up and the police department has been told to back down from the investigation.

“The police department nor the FBI have been forthcoming,” said Wheeler. “They haven’t been cooperating at all. I believe that the answer to solving his death lies on that computer, which I believe is either at the police department or either at the FBI. I have been told both.”

When we asked Wheeler if his sources have told him there is information that links Rich to Wikileaks, he said, “Absolutely. Yeah. That’s confirmed.” (read more)

Advertisements