Democrat Presidential candidates Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren unveil plans to tax wealth progressively to fund Medicare for All, and the valiant fight against man-made climate change. Sen. Sanders says, “Billionaires should not exist,” and brags that his plan would deplete their fortunes by half in just 15 years. Is the new populist majority, tapped by Donald Trump, ready to stick it to the billionaires in order to fund Utopian Progressive dreams? Can Bernie or Betsy ride this populist rage to the White House? Watch Bill Whittle’s classic video “Eat the Rich”: https://youtu.be/661pi6K-8WQ Bill Whittle Now with Scott Ott is a production of our Members. Join them now at https://BillWhittle.com/register/
Details are beginning to surface about the deep state Whistleblower complaint. It is possible in the next few days the 6-page complaint, which utilized media reports to construct the supportive evidence for the phone call accusation against President Trump, will be made public.
That said, within a heavy propaganda report from the New York Times there are details about the Intelligence Community Inspector General that show the tell-tale fingerprints of the ICIG supportive intent (emphasis mine):
[…] Mr. Atkinson, a Trump appointee, nevertheless concluded that the allegations appeared to be credible and identified two layers of concern.
The first involved a possible violation of criminal law. Mr. Trump’s comments to Mr. Zelensky “could be viewed as soliciting a foreign campaign contribution in violation of the campaign-finance laws,” Mr. Atkinson wrote, according to the Justice Department memo. (read more)
Does the “foreign campaign contribution” angle sound familiar? It should, because that argument was used in the narrative around the Trump Tower meeting with the Russian Lobbyist Natalia Veselnitskaya. More specifically, just like FARA violations the overused “campaign contribution” narrative belongs to a specific network of characters, Lawfare.
The center of the Lawfare Alliance influence was/is the Department of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD. It was the DOJ-NSD running the Main Justice side of the 2016 operations to support Operation Crossfire Hurricane and FBI agent Peter Strzok. It was also the DOJ-NSD where the sketchy legal theories around FARA violations (Sec. 901) originated.
The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) is Michael K Atkinson. ICIG Atkinson is the official who accepted the ridiculous premise of a hearsay ‘whistle-blower‘ complaint; an intelligence whistleblower who was “blowing-the-whistle” based on second hand information of a phone call without any direct personal knowledge, ie ‘hearsay‘.
Michael K Atkinsonwas previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD) in 2016. That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were the former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.
[Irony Reminder: The DOJ-NSD was purposefully under no IG oversight. In 2015 the OIG requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.]
Put another way, Michael Atkinson was the lawyer for the same DOJ-NSD players who: (1) lied to the FISA court (Judge Rosemary Collyer) about the 80% non compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors; (2) filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and (3) used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.
Yes, that means Michael Atkinson was Senior Counsel for the DOJ-NSD, at the very epicenter of the political weaponization and FISA abuse.
Immediately after the Carter Page FISA warrant is approved, in the period where DOJ-NSD head John Carlin has given his notice of intent to leave but not yet left, inside those specific two weeks, the National Security Division of the DOJ tells the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) they have been breaking the law. The NSD specifically inform the court they are aware of contractors who have been using FISA 702(16)(17) database search queries to extract information on political candidates.
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has looked into the FISA application used against U.S. Person Carter Page. Additionally, U.S. Attorney John Durham is said to be looking at the intelligence communities’ use of systems for spying and surveillance.
If the DOJ-NSD exploitation of the NSA database, and/or DOJ-NSD FISA abuse, and/or DOJ-NSD FARA corruption were ever to reach sunlight, current ICIG Atkinson -as the lawyer for the process- would be under a lot of scrutiny for his involvement.
Yes, that gives current ICIG Michael Atkinson a strong and corrupt motive to participate with the Schiff/Lawfare impeachment objective.
Atkinson’s conflict-of-self-interest, and/or possible blackmail upon him by deep state actors who most certainly know his compromise, likely influenced his approach to this whistleblower complaint. That would explain why the Dept. of Justice Office of Legal Counsel so strongly rebuked Atkinson’s interpretation of his responsibility with the complaint.
In the Justice Department’s OLC opinion, they point out that Atkinson’s internal justification for accepting the whistleblower complaint was poor legal judgement. [See Here] I would say Atkinson’s decision is directly related to his own risk exposure:
Oh how the controlled media don’t want people to share the message delivered by Rudy Giuliani Sunday during his interview with John Roberts. The thought police are out in full control operations today (long and familiar story), I digress. Now we share information with counter-control processes in place. Hat Tip Michael Sheridan for Video
Rudy Giuliani appeared Fox News this morning to once again discuss and outline the Joe Biden Ukraine issues with Maria Bartiromo. [Video and counter-control back-up below]
It does not seem accidental this Ukraine story is being hyped by interests in DC and their allies in the media at the exact time when DOJ-IG Michael Horowitz is set to release his extensive report on potential FISA surveillance abuses by the intelligence community.
Here’s the full backstory with back-up Giuliani interview below:
.
The government of Ukraine under both Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, and now President Volodymyr Zelensky, had been trying to deliver information about Obama officials and Democrat party officials (DNC on behalf of Hillary Clinton) requesting the government of Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 election.
Both Poroshenko and Zelensky administrations had tried, unsuccessfully, to get information to current U.S. officials. U.S. State Department officials in Ukraine were refusing to give visa’s to Ukrainian emissaries because they did not want the damaging information sent to the President Trump administration.
Failing to get help from the U.S. State Department, the Ukranians tried a workaround, and hired a respected U.S. lawyer to hand deliver the documentary evidence directly to the U.S. Department of Justice. The contracted American lawyer hand-delivered the information to the U.S. Department of Justice in New York.
However, after delivering the information and not hearing back from the U.S. government, the Ukrainian government, now led by President Zelensky, interpreted the silence as the Trump administration and U.S. government (writ large) being upset about the Ukraine involvement overall. Out of concern for a serious diplomatic breakdown, the Zelensky administration made a personal request to the U.S. State Department for assistance.
The U.S. State Department then reached out to Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani; and asked him if he would meet with Zelensky’s top lawyer, Andrei Yermak.
Rudy Giuliani agreed to act as a diplomatic intermediary and met with Yermak in Spain. After the meeting, Mr. Giuliani then contacted the State Department Officials in charge of Ukraine and Europe and debriefed them on the totality of the subject matter as relayed by Andrei Yermak.
All of this activity preceded the phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
President Trump and President Zelensky discussed the issues, and this phone call is the one now referenced by the concerned “whistleblower”. The “whistleblower” obviously had no knowledge of the background and why the subject matter discussed in the phone call was framed as it was.
Apparently in the phone call, President Zelensky was explaining what action the Ukranian government had already taken to try and get the information about corrupt U.S. officials, including former VP Joe Biden, to the U.S. government.
It was from this clarification of information that President Trump is reported to have told Zelensky it was OK to proceed with any internal investigation of corruption in Ukraine that might also encompass former U.S. officials. Yes, that would include Joe Biden.
From this context we can see how the “whistle-blower”, knowing only half of the information – would seek to weaponize the story with a false narrative. Additionally, there’s a possibility the “whistle-blower” may be ideologically aligned with the same government entities that were trying to block the Ukrainian government from delivering the information in the first place.
Beyond the media, pundits and democrat politicians making fools of themselves, four very significant questions/issues become obvious:
(#1) who in the U.S. State Department Ukraine embassy was blocking the visas of Ukrainian officials, and why?
(#2) Who was the official at the New York office of the DOJ who took custody of the records hand-delivered by the American lawyer working on behalf of Ukraine?…. and
(#3) why were those records never turned over to Main Justice?…. Or
(#4) if they were turned over to Main Justice, why didn’t they inform the Trump administration they had received them?
At the end of this fake news narrative parade, these will be the questions that remain.
Muh Russia – 2016 – To get impeachment, they needed obstruction. To get obstruction, they needed an investigation. To get the investigation, they needed evidence. To change the Steele dossier from oppo-research to evidence they needed a FISA. To get a FISA they needed a target. The target was Carter Page.
Muh Ukraine – 2019 – To get impeachment Schiff needs obstruction. To get obstruction, Schiff needs an investigation. To get an investigation Schiff needs evidence. To change political innuendo into evidence, Schiff needs a ‘whistle-blower’. To use a ‘whistle-blower’ they need a report… And guess where we are?
It should be emphasized the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG); the guy who accepted the ridiculous premise of a hearsay ‘whistle-blower‘ complaint, who was “blowing-the-whistle” based on second hand information of a phone call without any direct personal knowledge, is Michael K. Atkinson.
ICIG Atkinson’s self-interest: Michael K Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD). That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.
[Irony Reminder: The DOJ-NSD was purposefully under no IG oversight. In 2015 the OIG requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.]
Put another way, Michael Atkinson was the lawyer for the same DOJ-NSD players who: (1) lied to the FISA court (Judge Rosemary Collyer) about the 80% non compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors; (2) filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and (3) used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.
Yes, that means Michael Atkinson was Senior Counsel for the DOJ-NSD, at the very epicenter of the political weaponization and FISA abuse.
Immediately after the Carter Page FISA warrant is approved, in the period where DOJ-NSD head John Carlin has given his notice of intent to leave but not yet left, inside those specific two weeks, the National Security Division of the DOJ tells the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) they have been breaking the law. The NSD specifically inform the court they are aware of contractors who have been using FISA 702(16)(17) database search queries to extract information on political candidates.
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has looked into the FISA application used against U.S. Person Carter Page. Additionally, U.S. Attorney John Durham is said to be looking at the intelligence communities’ use of systems for spying and surveillance.
If the DOJ-NSD exploitation of the NSA database, and/or DOJ-NSD FISA abuse, and/or DOJ-NSD FARA corruption were ever to reach sunlight, current ICIG Atkinson -as the lawyer for the process- would be under a lot of scrutiny for his involvement.
Yes, that gives current ICIG Michael Atkinson a strong and corrupt motive to participate with the Schiff/Lawfare impeachment objective.
Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes appears on Fox News to discuss the Ukraine issues and Joe Biden’s corrupt 2015/2016 efforts to enhance his son’s bank account through Ukraine financing. President Trump tweeted in response to this interview:
Well, it’s official. According to the Des Moines Register/CNN Poll just released, Liawatha has taken the top spot on the totem leaping Joe by stealing Bernie’s thunder.
Amid the ‘dances-with-fools‘ primary, Warren tops the totem with 22% (+7); followed by Biden with 20% (-4); and a collapsing Bernie who drops to 11% (-5), barely atop Buttigieg with 9% (-6); while Kamala smokes out 6% to round out the top five.
(Via NBC) […] While there have been several other recent polls of the crucial first-in-the-nation caucus state, the Des Moines Register’s Iowa Poll, conducted by Des Moines-based pollster Ann Selzer, is widely considered to be the most accurate, so its Saturday night releases have become must-watch events for Iowa politicos.
The poll was released after the entire 2020 Democratic presidential field gathered in Des Moines Saturday for the annual Steak Fry, a fundraising event hosted by the local Democratic Party club.
Warren surged 7 points in the poll since the June survey, while Biden lost a bit of ground, putting them neck-and-neck inside the poll’s margin of error.
Sanders and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, both slipped significantly, down 5 and 6 percentage points, respectively, leaving Buttigieg at 9 percent, down from 15. (more)
CNN
✔@CNN
Elizabeth Warren surges and Joe Biden fades in close Iowa race, a new CNN/Des Moines Register poll of likely Iowa caucusgoers shows.
Elizabeth Warren surges and Joe Biden fades in close Iowa race, new poll shows
A surging Sen. Elizabeth Warren is challenging Joe Biden’s dominance in the race for the Democratic nomination, standing at 22% to the former vice president’s 20% in a new CNN/Des Moines Register/M…
Elizabeth Warren is the Democrat primary candidate with momentum. While the top five names have not changed, the support is firming up. Joe Biden remains at the top of the poll with 31 percent. Elizabeth Warren has now surged to second with 25 percent; and it appears most of angry Sanders loss in support has gone to ‘I’ma-git-me-a-beer‘ Warren.
NBC/WSJ Poll: Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren, holding distinctly different advantages, have separated themselves from the crowded Democratic presidential field, a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll shows.
In the survey, conducted after the third in the Democratic Party’s series of debate, the former vice president draws 31% compared to 25% for the Massachusetts senator. At 14%, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders trails Warren by a double-digit margin while 15 other candidates receive support of 7% or less.
Biden builds his edge on dominance among three chunks of Democratic primary voters. He commands 49% among African-Americans, 46% among senior citizens, and 42% among moderate and conservative Democrats.
But after months of steady progress, Warren boasts formidable strengths of her own. She leads Biden by roughly two-to-one among liberals and Democrats under 35, breaks even among whites, and holds a double-digit edge among those seeking large-scale change in the post-Trump era. That last group represents a majority of the Democratic electorate. (more)
Pete Buttigieg remains at 7% support. Kamala Harris drops to 5%. Andrew Yang has ticked up to 4%. Senators Cory Booker and Amy Klobuchar hold 2%. Seven others: O’Rourke, Delaney, Gabbard, Steyer, Bennet, de Blasio, and Castro, draw just 1%.
By now everyone is familiar with the Lawfare network; an alliance of ideological political interests inside and outside government who use the law to achieve their objectives. [Specific Example Here]
During the Obama administration the Lawfare group: (1) weaponized the IRS for political targeting; (2) weaponized the DOJ and FBI for political targeting; (3) weaponized the intelligence community for political activism; (4) created new legal theories around ‘disparate impact’ to weaponize the National Labor Relations Board; and generally used embedded officials to advance far-left political interests across the spectrum of govt.
After they lost the 2016 election the Lawfare group immediately: (1) worked to delegitimize the presidency of Donald Trump; (2) delegitimize National Security Adviser General Flynn; (3) target, disempower and isolate AG Jeff Session; (4) delegitimize AG Bill Barr and the institution of the FBI outside their control; (5) delegitimize DHS, Border Patrol and Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE); and (6) delegitimize any institution or office that would now be removing or overturning their former Lawfare constructs.
What we are seeing today from the Lawfare Alliance appears as a designed effort to continue this overall agenda; now focused on delegitimizing the Supreme Court of the United States.
In the last few months the Supreme Court has been moving toward eliminating the ability of Lawfare allied federal judges from ordering nationwide injunctions. The latest SCOTUS decision was 7-2 to stop this Lawfare practice. If activist judges are stopped from blocking executive branch policy, this creates a serious problem for the Lawfare Alliance.
Simultaneously, President Trump is filling vacancies on the federal bench at a strong rate. President Trump has now appointed 150 federal judges into the judicial bloodstream. This further impedes the ability of the ideological Lawfare Alliance to achieve their objectives.
With the Supreme Court tenuously holding a 5-4 conservative outlook, and the strong possibility the loss of Justice Ginsburg might create a 6-3 court, the Lawfare group is now lashing out and planning for ways to retain their position.
The next Supreme Court calendar is likely to be devastating to the ideological left. The court is scheduled to hear arguments on everything from gun rights cases to the Census citizenship question and a likely defeat over Obama’s unconstitutional DACA executive action. Losing on the DACA case would be a catastrophic defeat for the political left, who have weaponized open-immigration for maximum political value.
It’s the DACA ruling in combination with New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York [(arguments Monday, Dec. 2) whether the city’s ban on taking a handgun outside city limits violates the Second Amendment] that could lead to major trouble for the Lawfare Alliance.
Ideologically it is possible the Lawfare Alliance will attempt to ignore the Supreme Court DACA ruling by taking a similar approach to their Sanctuary City policies. That is to say the ultra-far-left political activists will demand ‘blue states’ do not comply with the Supreme Court decision and set up some internal sanctuary network that defies the SCOTUS ruling. You can imagine this approach would be a problem, as defiant states openly rebuke the Supreme Court.
….So following along with what we know about how Lawfare operates, the current attacks to delegitimize Justice Brett Kavanaugh really give the appearance of entreaties toward delegitimizing the rulings of the court. Rulings such as the pending DACA decision.
That appears to be the strategic purpose for the Lawfare Group to weaponize their ideological allies in the left-wing media, and to start hyping the SCOTUS antagonism now.
Creating a crisis to achieve their results, is simply how the Lawfare group work…
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 