The Deep State War Heats Up :ph34r:

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

This won't work. 

http://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/wireStory/texts-turned-fbi-agent-off-mueller-team-52502647

 

 

Five months of texts deleted? Hmm... Just so happens to be the months of the coup? 

 

 

What happened during those five months? 

 

-Dossier published

-Strzok interviewed Flynn

-Flynn fired

-Comey and Trump discuss Flynn

-Comey tells Congress abt Russia probe

-Comey fired

-Mueller appointed

 

Think there are nuggets from that time period that are relevant? 

[B-Man]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

What happened during those five months? 

 

-Dossier published

-Strzok interviewed Flynn

-Flynn fired

-Comey and Trump discuss Flynn

-Comey tells Congress abt Russia probe

-Comey fired

-Mueller appointed

 

Think there are nuggets from that time period that are relevant? 

 

Wow !

[Deranged Rhino]

This was always suspicious... wonder if we'll ever see this go public.

 

Quote

Install 'on team' SC justices> legal win(s) across spectrum of challengers (AS 187)

 

 

https://www.npr.org/2016/02/13/140647230/justice-antonin-scalia-known-for-biting-dissents-dies-at-79

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[3rdnlng]

2 hours ago, GG said:

 

 

Yeah, but does he know where the new stadium is going to be built?

Rumor has it they're looking at some nursery lands east of Springville. The owner has deep connections to the Bills.

[Deranged Rhino]

Linking this here too:

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

This also belongs in the deep state thread, but I'll put the original here: 

 

Is 45 lining up treason charges for 44?

 

A bold idea, certainly. But is there any substance to it? Let's dig into it a little deeper and find out.  

 

This story hasn't gotten nearly enough ink, though that's about to change since Sessions and the DOJ just opened a fresh investigation into this scandal:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/22/sessions-orders-doj-review-after-report-obama-administration-gave-hezbollah-pass.html

 

First, remember who Hezbollah is. They've been listed by the State Department as a terrorist organization since 1997. They are fanatically anti-American and, outside of AQ, have killed more Americans around the globe than any other terrorist outfit. The Americans killed include both civilians and military (1983 Berlin bombing). Their reach and power have grown through associations with a rogue's list of American enemies: Iran primarily, but also (at times) North Korea, Syria, Russia, Cuba and Venezuela. 

 

But don't be mistaken, Hezbollah is Iran. They consider the Mullahs to be their leaders, and are merely an extension of the Islamic state.

 

Even the loathsome former DNI Clapper agrees:  

http://www.dia.mil/News/Speeches-and-Testimonies/Article-View/Article/570863/statement-for-the-record-worldwide-threat-assessment/

(more background)

https://www.cfr.org/interview/hezbollah-connection-syria-and-iran

 

Iran has been on the State Department's list of terrorist sponsors since 1984. In June 2016 the State Department declared Iran to be the world's number one state sponsor of terrorism. Their number one target is Israel, followed closely by the United States. Iran has committed acts of terror and attacked America through Hezbollah and other Jihadi groups, including cyber attacks on American banks:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare_in_Iran#Attacks_by_Iran

 

The point is that both Iran and Hezbollah have been US enemies for decades, carrying out operations against civilian and military targets alike across the globe. But no one knew much about Hezbollah's operation inside the US until the brilliant (and shocking) politico article which started this thread:

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-drug-trafficking-investigation/

 

If you haven't read that, do. Sit down while reading. It's not only long, it's shocking. It lays out in detail how 44 was so obsessed with getting the Iran deal done, he was willing to allow Hezbollah to operate unchecked INSIDE the US, running drugs and human trafficking networks.

 

The article paints a vivid picture of 44 actively working to strengthen Iran's power in the Middle East as well INSIDE the United States through a drug trafficking network. Those drugs were being brought into the poorest and most vulnerable communities. The very ones who voted him into office. Yet, 44 felt it was more important to not piss off Iran and let Hezbollah flourish - US citizens be damned. 

 

The Iran deal was all 44, make no bones about it, even though it was framed as an international push. The details were finalized in April of '15 and signed in January '16. There was INTENSE opposition to this deal the entire time. Knowing this, 44's administration was spying on Americans illegally - domestic groups and members of Congress opposed to the deal. (sound familiar?) 

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/229062/did-the-obama-administrations-abuse-of-foreign-intelligence-collection-start-before-trump

 

One of the most vocal opponents to the deal was Trump: 

 

There is evidence that the deal itself violated the terms of other treaties the US was a part of, and was also unconstitutional. But 44's administration cared not for law, so they went ahead anyway: 

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/250793-how-the-iran-deal-violates-the-constitution

 

Due to the MSM doing 44's bidding, almost no details of the deal were known prior to 2017. And once those details started to come out, they were absolutely staggering. Here are just a few: 

 

* As part of the deal, 44 freed known spies and terrorists in US custody - as many as 35. The US got 4 citizens back. 

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/24/obama-iran-nuclear-deal-prisoner-list-details-237381

 

* 44 signed the deal while US prisoners were still being held hostage, rather than demanding their release first - not a violation of law but a disgrace and attack on long precedent. 

 

* The payout wasn't in dollars, but $400 million in Swiss Francs and 1.3b in European notes. 44 organized the swap of US dollars for these currencies to make the deal. 

 

* However, there was a difficulty with the $1.3b total, because of a long standing US gov't rule that limited a payout to $1b in total... so to avoid that, 44 and his team split the request into 13 separate requests of $999,999,999.99 each and a top out of $10,390,236.28. 

 

* Each time the payout was loaded onto pallets and onto a waiting, unmarked Iranian cargo plane which took it to Tehran. 44 sought no assurances that money would stay in Tehran, which is ASTONISHING  considering some of that money most certainly ended up in Hezbollah's and other terrorist outfits hands. 

 

* The deal gifted the Mullahs another $100b+ by lifting the sanctions (which as we've seen, did NOT trickle down to the people, hence the protests now)

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/3/iran-claims-100-billion-windfall-from-sanctions-re/

 

 

Those are just a few examples of how shockingly bad this deal was. And how badly 44 wanted to push it through. S. 110 of Article III of the Constitution & 18 U.S. Code 2381 are quite clear:

 

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere is guilty of treason."

 

Does this fit the bill? Let's see:

 

Did 44 owe an allegiance to the US? Yes. 

Are Iran and Hezbollah enemies of the US? Yes.

Did 44 adhere to them? Yes. 

Did he give them aid and comfort? Yes - even worse he actively sought to make them stronger. 

 

Will Trump actually try to charge 44 with this? Remember, Trump despises Obama. It really sounds personal with him: 

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-obama-isis-2016-6

 

Does that mean he'll actually try to indict a former POTUS for treason? I'm not sure. But the DOJ investigating this sure doesn't seem like a good sign for 44. 

 

[B-Man]

As we told you, the FBI apparently “failed to preserve” five months of text messages from anti-Trump agents.

 

Sharyl Attkisson is now reporting that newly turned over text messages show that former attorney general Loretta Lynch KNEW that no charges were going to be brought against Hillary Clinton.

 

 

Quote

 

Sharyl Attkisson

✔@SharylAttkisson

 

Newly turned over text messages suggest AG Lynch somehow already knew FBI would recommend no charges vs. Hillary Clinton when Lynch announced she would accept any FBI recommendation.

3:24 PM - Jan 21, 2018

 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2018 by B-Man

[Deranged Rhino]

30 minutes ago, B-Man said:

As we told you, the FBI apparently “failed to preserve” five months of text messages from anti-Trump agents.

 

Sharyl Attkisson is now reporting that newly turned over text messages show that former attorney general Loretta Lynch KNEW that no charges were going to be brought against Hillary Clinton.

 

 

 

 

 

[DC Tom]

52 minutes ago, B-Man said:

As we told you, the FBI apparently “failed to preserve” five months of text messages from anti-Trump agents.

 

Sharyl Attkisson is now reporting that newly turned over text messages show that former attorney general Loretta Lynch KNEW that no charges were going to be brought against Hillary Clinton.

 

 

 

 

 

Of course she new.  It was her decision to make.

 

Doesn't mean she knew what the FBI would recommend.  Just means she had every intention of ignoring the investigation.

[B-Man]

The Media’s Shameful Failure On #FISA702

U.S. Senator Rand Paul spent part of Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union talking with Jake Tapper about the problems of the FISA reauthorization. It was a good discussion with Paul saying President Donald Trump erred in signing the reauthorization bill into law. He also explained the problems with the FISA database, and how innocent Americans end up in it. The problem is this discussion came a week late.

 

The reauthorization of FISA was a blip on the radar in DC last week, with most of the media discussing the votes after the fact, or in reference to Sara Carter’s story on a possible House Intelligence report looking into FISA abuse. It’s an extremely frustrating and irksome reality for privacy advocates who have been discussing the problems with the spying program in the days leading up to the votes. Senators Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Elizabeth Warren, and Ron Wyden should have been all over the media on Monday and Tuesday explaining why it was awful Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wouldn’t allow amendments on the bill. The fact the Senate barely approved the legislation via procedural vote should have been the lead, or at least warranted greater discussion, especially since the White House had to send National Intelligence Director Dan Coats to Capitol Hill to twist arms.

 

But that didn’t happen. The focus Monday and Tuesday was on whether Trump actually said “sh*thole countries,” and then whether Trump was physically and mentally fit to be president. CNN had Dr. Sanjay Gupta discuss Trump possibly having heart disease, while Sean Hannity crowed on Fox News Trump was healthy and it was the media which needed to have its heads examined. The debate was on whether Trump weighed what he claimed to weigh, instead of issues which were more important. I saw one person say on Twitter the physical mattered because it was possible the White House doctor lied. That’s fine, but what happens when the entire government may be lying about the benefits of the FISA program. Let’s also not forget the coverage of New Jersey Senator Cory Booker’s treatment of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen during a Senate hearing. Why wasn’t Booker asked why he didn’t ask Nielsen about FISA, since she is the head of DHS? Why was Illinois Senator Dick Durbin not asked about FISA? Why was the focus on DACA, which expires in March, when FISA was scheduled to expire last week, before re-authorization. It just doesn’t make sense.

 

{snip}

 

 

One thing Cato’s Patrick G. Eddington told me was Bill of Rights issues really aren’t important, unless “it’s to attack law abiding gun owners whenever there’s a mass shooting by a random psycho,” and he’s right. The media is far more concerned with emotion or something which can get people talking. The idea of having a deep discussion on constitutional issues aren’t a thing unless there’s scandal involved, hence Hannity’s talk days later on possible FISA abuse.

 

The media should know better, but it’s not surprising. News outlets have long preferred the salacious instead of discussions of actual importance. George Washington was criticized for not getting involved in the French Revolution. The run up to the election of 1828 featured mudslinging of all kinds, with arguments Andrew Jackson’s wife was a bigamist, and John Quincy Adams’ alleged purchase of “gambling items,” for the White House with government money. The Meese Report in the 80’s studied pornography. Democrats these days like to say people are going to die, when something happens, whether it’s a government shutdown, Net Neutrality being repealed, or tax cuts.

 

Media outlets have every right to cover what they want, when they want. It’s the nature of the free press and the First Amendment. But it’s maddening when they decide to ignore constitutional issues to focus on issues which may or may not be important, like presidential physicals. It allows the government to get away with passing unconstitutional programs, like FISA.

 

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/01/21/medias-shameful-failure-fisa702/

[TtownBillsFan]

7 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

"Failed to preserve".  Are we expected to believe that BS?  This is the kind of stuff the general public, if it was reported at ALL, would NOT put up with.  Good grief, at some point, even the MSM has to report this kind of stuff, right?  I mean, even a 6-year-old knows that has to be BS.

[Nanker]

8 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Nothing to see here  so, move along people.  Trust us.

 

 

[DC Tom]

12 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

"Failed to preserve?  You mean, like, with a Ball Jar?" [/Hillary]

[Koko78]

3 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

"Failed to preserve?  You mean, like, with a Ball Jar?" [/Hillary]

 

The texts must have been lost when the cleaning guy wiped the server with his dust rag.

[Deranged Rhino]

4 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

The texts must have been lost when the cleaning guy wiped the server with his dust rag.

Update re the prisoners in KSA: 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-22/saudi-graft-settlements-may-top-100-billion-as-probe-nears-end-jcpp192u?utm_source=google&utm_medium=bd&cmpId=google

 

Quote

Billionaire Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, whose current status is unclear, was among those detained at the 492-room Ritz-Carlton, as was former Finance Minister Ibrahim Al-Assaf and Adel Al Fakeih, who was removed as minister of economy and planning on the eve of the arrests.

 

His status is NOT unclear. He's been moved to a high security prison (says a lot) and is being asked to pay 6b for his release. But, because of the EO on the 22nd of December (one that should be looked at closely if you haven't already), he doesn't have that cash. He'll die in prison, if he's not executed first.

[Tiberius]

12 hours ago, B-Man said:

The Media’s Shameful Failure On #FISA702

U.S. Senator Rand Paul spent part of Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union talking with Jake Tapper about the problems of the FISA reauthorization. It was a good discussion with Paul saying President Donald Trump erred in signing the reauthorization bill into law. He also explained the problems with the FISA database, and how innocent Americans end up in it. The problem is this discussion came a week late.

 

The reauthorization of FISA was a blip on the radar in DC last week, with most of the media discussing the votes after the fact, or in reference to Sara Carter’s story on a possible House Intelligence report looking into FISA abuse. It’s an extremely frustrating and irksome reality for privacy advocates who have been discussing the problems with the spying program in the days leading up to the votes. Senators Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Elizabeth Warren, and Ron Wyden should have been all over the media on Monday and Tuesday explaining why it was awful Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wouldn’t allow amendments on the bill. The fact the Senate barely approved the legislation via procedural vote should have been the lead, or at least warranted greater discussion, especially since the White House had to send National Intelligence Director Dan Coats to Capitol Hill to twist arms.

 

But that didn’t happen. The focus Monday and Tuesday was on whether Trump actually said “sh*thole countries,” and then whether Trump was physically and mentally fit to be president. CNN had Dr. Sanjay Gupta discuss Trump possibly having heart disease, while Sean Hannity crowed on Fox News Trump was healthy and it was the media which needed to have its heads examined. The debate was on whether Trump weighed what he claimed to weigh, instead of issues which were more important. I saw one person say on Twitter the physical mattered because it was possible the White House doctor lied. That’s fine, but what happens when the entire government may be lying about the benefits of the FISA program. Let’s also not forget the coverage of New Jersey Senator Cory Booker’s treatment of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen during a Senate hearing. Why wasn’t Booker asked why he didn’t ask Nielsen about FISA, since she is the head of DHS? Why was Illinois Senator Dick Durbin not asked about FISA? Why was the focus on DACA, which expires in March, when FISA was scheduled to expire last week, before re-authorization. It just doesn’t make sense.

 

{snip}

 

 

One thing Cato’s Patrick G. Eddington told me was Bill of Rights issues really aren’t important, unless “it’s to attack law abiding gun owners whenever there’s a mass shooting by a random psycho,” and he’s right. The media is far more concerned with emotion or something which can get people talking. The idea of having a deep discussion on constitutional issues aren’t a thing unless there’s scandal involved, hence Hannity’s talk days later on possible FISA abuse.

 

The media should know better, but it’s not surprising. News outlets have long preferred the salacious instead of discussions of actual importance. George Washington was criticized for not getting involved in the French Revolution. The run up to the election of 1828 featured mudslinging of all kinds, with arguments Andrew Jackson’s wife was a bigamist, and John Quincy Adams’ alleged purchase of “gambling items,” for the White House with government money. The Meese Report in the 80’s studied pornography. Democrats these days like to say people are going to die, when something happens, whether it’s a government shutdown, Net Neutrality being repealed, or tax cuts.

 

Media outlets have every right to cover what they want, when they want. It’s the nature of the free press and the First Amendment. But it’s maddening when they decide to ignore constitutional issues to focus on issues which may or may not be important, like presidential physicals. It allows the government to get away with passing unconstitutional programs, like FISA.

 

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/01/21/medias-shameful-failure-fisa702/

Good thing Hot Air, lol, is on the story! 

 

Hot air, they could not have chosen a better name! 

[TakeYouToTasker]

18 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Update re the prisoners in KSA: 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-22/saudi-graft-settlements-may-top-100-billion-as-probe-nears-end-jcpp192u?utm_source=google&utm_medium=bd&cmpId=google

 

 

His status is NOT unclear. He's been moved to a high security prison (says a lot) and is being asked to pay 6b for his release. But, because of the EO on the 22nd of December (one that should be looked at closely if you haven't already), he doesn't have that cash. He'll die in prison, if he's not executed first.

You mean EO 13818 on Dec 20?

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, TakeYouToTasker said:

You mean EO 13818 on Dec 20?

 

This one, on the 22nd. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-blocking-property-persons-involved-serious-human-rights-abuse-corruption/

 

I should break it down in more detail. It's directly tied into what's about to happen. Hold on, I'll write something up right now...

[TakeYouToTasker]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

This one, on the 22nd. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-blocking-property-persons-involved-serious-human-rights-abuse-corruption/

 

I should break it down in more detail. It's directly tied into what's about to happen. Hold on, I'll write something up right now...

Yeah, that's the one I'm talking about.  It's #13818 and was issued on the 20th.

 

https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/glomag_eo.pdf

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, TakeYouToTasker said:

Yeah, that's the one I'm talking about.  It's #13818 and was issued on the 20th.

 

https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/glomag_eo.pdf

I'm dumb. It was. Published on the 21st.