SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A Real American President: Donald Trump -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mrjns who wrote (184261)1/31/2020 8:56:28 AM
From: FJB3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
locogringo
Mrjns

  Respond to of 454068
 
Who Is Kevin Clinesmith?

Opinion |
wsj.com
James Freeman

It was an almost unbelievable story—fit for a spy novel, and among the most disturbing and consequential allegations of governmental abuse in recent history. The alleged abuse went right to the heart of our ability to participate in free and fair elections. But much of the U.S. media seems ready to forget about it.

On December 9 Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz reported that a critical piece of evidence used to obtain a warrant to spy on a Trump campaign associate in 2016 was falsified by an FBI lawyer.

Even before the release of the report, the New York Times had the scoop in November but buried it under a headline which suggested a sort of vindication for the FBI: “Russia Inquiry Review Is Said to Criticize F.B.I. but Rebuff Claims of Biased Acts; A watchdog report will portray the pursuit of a wiretap of an ex-Trump adviser as sloppy, but it also debunks some accusations by Trump allies of F.B.I. wrongdoing.”

“Sloppy” is a nice way of describing how a federal court was misled into turning surveillance powers against a U.S. citizen volunteering for the presidential campaign of the party out of power.

When the inspector general’s report arrived in December, it cast the falsified evidence as the most egregious on a long list of problems in the FBI’s Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant applications targeting Trump supporter Carter Page :

We identified significant inaccuracies and omissions in each of the four applications—7 in the first FISA application and a total of 17 by the final renewal application... All of the applications also omitted information the FBI had obtained from another U.S. government agency detailing its prior relationship with Page, including that Page had been approved as an operational contact for the other agency from 2008 to 2013, and that Page had provided information to the other agency concerning his prior contacts with certain Russian intelligence officers, one of which overlapped with facts asserted in the FISA application.
Mr. Page had been helping a U.S. intelligence agency collect information on the Russians. The FBI not only never told the court he was assisting the good guys—the bureau falsely presented some of his helpful activities as evidence he was helping the bad guys.

Before the last renewal for wiretap authority in 2017, after Mr. Page had disclosed his actual role in the press, Inspector General Horowitz reports that the FBI lawyer said Mr. Page had never had a relationship with the other U.S. government agency and “altered the email that the other U.S. government agency had sent” so that it appeared to state that Page had not been a source. The IG adds that the FBI lawyer then forwarded the doctored email to his supervisor. Shortly thereafter, the supervisor “served as the affiant on the final renewal application, which was again silent on Page’s prior relationship with the other U.S. government agency.”

Back in November, while leading with its absolution of FBI leadership, the Times reported that the FBI lawyer who allegedly altered the record is named Kevin Clinesmith. According to the Times:

... Mr. Clinesmith worked on both the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the Russia investigation. He was among the F.B.I. officials removed by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, after Mr. Horowitz found text messages expressing political animus against Mr. Trump.
Shortly after Mr. Trump’s election victory, for example, Mr. Clinesmith texted another official that “the crazies won finally,” disparaged Mr. Trump’s health care and immigration agendas, and called Vice President Mike Pence “stupid.” In another text, he wrote, in the context of a question about whether he intended to stay in government, “viva la resistance.”
Since then, the press pack seems to have lost interest. According to the Factiva news archive, in the last month only one story on Mr. Clinesmith has appeared in any of America’s 50 largest newspapers.

On December 31 Mr. Clinesmith made a brief appearance about a dozen paragraphs into a Washington Post report. The Post story featured an interview with a Times reporter attempting to explain why the Times presented the Horowitz report largely as a vindication of the FBI.

Mr. Clinesmith deserves the presumption of innocence just like every other American. Perhaps media outlets will decide he’s also deserving of a fraction of the coverage they devoted to promoting the FBI’s bogus claims.

Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer of the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court issued a public order on December 17 and noted the abuses described in the Horowitz report:

It documents troubling instances in which FBI personnel provided information to [the Department of Justice’s National Security Division] which was unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession. It also describes several instances in which FBI personnel withheld from NSD information in their possession which was detrimental to their case for believing that Mr. Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.
In addition, while the fourth electronic surveillance application for Mr. Page was being prepared, an attorney in the FBI’s Office of General Counsel (OGC) engaged in conduct that apparently was intended to mislead the FBI agent who ultimately swore to the facts in that application about whether Mr. Page had been a source of another government agency.
This column is struggling to recall a more serious allegation of abuse of our democratic process by officials of the federal government.

Others may have a different view, so perhaps a survey is in order. In the comments section below this column, readers are invited to opine on which one of the following scenarios represents the greatest threat to American liberty:

A) After identifying a U.S. citizen volunteering for the U.S. presidential campaign of the party out of power, the FBI makes false claims and persuades a federal court that the citizen may be a Russian agent and should be subjected to electronic surveillance.

B) After observing a U.S. citizen obtain a Ukrainian company board seat for which he was manifestly unqualified while his father was running Ukrainian policy for the U.S. government—and in which capacity the father would later demand the firing of a local prosecutor investigating the son’s business associates—the U.S. President urges the government of Ukraine to investigate.

***

Follow James Freeman on Twitter.



To: Mrjns who wrote (184261)1/31/2020 9:03:34 AM
From: FJB5 Recommendations

Recommended By
Bearcatbob
CF Rebel
Honey_Bee
locogringo
Thehammer

  Respond to of 454068
 
Liz Warren Finally Has a Good Idea

powerlineblog.com

Elizabeth Warren wants to jail fellow Democrats who spread the Russia collusion hoax and, more recently, the Ukraine impeachment fraud. That, at least, is how I read her latest proposal: “Elizabeth Warren proposes criminal penalties for spreading voting disinformation online.”

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Wednesday released a plan to fight disinformation and to hold tech companies accountable for their actions in light of the 2016 election.
***
Warren proposed to combat disinformation by holding big tech companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google responsible for spreading misinformation designed to suppress voters from turning out.

“I will push for new laws that impose tough civil and criminal penalties for knowingly disseminating this kind of information, which has the explicit purpose of undermining the basic right to vote,” Warren said in a release.

I assume she refers to Democrats who spread the ridiculous Russia collusion hoax, which was implausible on its face, in an effort to discourage Republican voters from turning out and to dissuade other voters from voting for Donald Trump. As to 2020, the most obvious targets of her proposed statute would be the Democrats who smeared President Trump on the basis of the Ukraine fraud.

I think that for once, Warren has a point. During his second term, President Trump and Attorney General Barr should look into criminal charges against Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and many more who spread disinformation online in an effort to influence election results by discouraging Republicans and others from turning out and voting for Donald Trump.



To: Mrjns who wrote (184261)1/31/2020 9:23:15 AM
From: FJB5 Recommendations

Recommended By
CF Rebel
Honey_Bee
locogringo
Mrjns
SirWalterRalegh

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 454068
 
‘Jerry. Jerry. Jerry!’

Schiff Tries in Vain to Stop Nadler from Historic Impeachment Moment



breitbart.com

Adam Schiff Tries to Stop Jerry Nadler from Historic Impeachment Trial Moment
Charlie Spiering

2


House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff tried to stop House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler from having the last word in the question and answer portion of the Senate impeachment trial on Thursday.

As Senators prepared to adjourn for the night, Sen. Amy Klobuchar tried to ask the last question with a question card that got lost in the shuffle, making the moment slightly awkward.

Klobuchar walked up to the desk and re-wrote the question for Chief Justice John Roberts, which asked the House managers to respond to President Donald Trump’s team of lawyers before the night ended.

Nadler jumped out of his seat and walked toward the podium microphone as Schiff was also preparing to stand.

Nadler beat Schiff out of his seat, leaving the standing Schiff protesting as he approached the mic.

“Jerry. Jerry. Jerry!” Schiff pleaded as Nadler took the podium.

Rep. Jerry Nadler got up to get the last word in for the night. Rep. Adam Schiff, the lead impeachment manager, got up and tried to get Nadler's attention: "Jerry. Jerry. Jerry." pic.twitter.com/M5K2OBXoK1

— Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) January 31, 2020
Slightly flustered, Nadler denounced the Trump lawyer response as “the usual nonsense.”

“Did the president abuse his power by violating the law to withhold military aid from a foreign country, to extort that country into helping him — into helping his reelection campaign by slandering his opponent?” he asked. “That’s the only relevant question for this trial. The House managers have proved that question beyond any doubt.”

After Nadler was finished speaking, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell adjourned the Senate until Friday afternoon at 1:00 p.m.

U.S. Senate

Nadler will go down in history as the House impeachment manager that concluded the question and answer period of the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.


The Trump campaign immediately seized on the moment, dubbing the Chariots of Fire soundtrack on the video and sharing it on social media:

Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff…

Two impeachment fanatics chasing dreams of glory…

???????? pic.twitter.com/v2GXdxswSY

— Trump War Room – Text TRUMP to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) January 31, 2020



To: Mrjns who wrote (184261)1/31/2020 10:12:58 AM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Mrjns

  Respond to of 454068
 



To: Mrjns who wrote (184261)1/31/2020 10:33:49 AM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Mrjns

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 454068
 
HUAWEI HAS PAID OFF ALMOST EVERYONE WHO USED TO BE IN GOVERNMENT IN THE UK SAYS NIGEL FARAGE