Category Archives: 2016 Election

Trump Fights Back on 3 Fronts: against Antifa, Democrats & Russian conspiracy theory

According to Joey Millar of Jews News, Aug. 17, 2017, Tony Schwartz, the ghost-writer of Donald Trump’s best-selling memoir The Art of the Deal, said President Trump could resign in a matter of weeks in exchange for immunity in the investigation into Russia’s alleged interfering with last November’s presidential election.

Schwartz, who has been a fierce critic of Trump throughout the first seven months of his presidency, said the situation is reaching boiling:

“The circle is closing at blinding speed. Trump is going to resign and declare victory before Mueller and Congress leave him no choice. Trump’s presidency is effectively over. Would be amazed if he survives till the end of the year. More likely resigns by fall, if not sooner. He has gone over the line of acceptability so far there is no return. The Russia stuff will be huge. He doesn’t want to go to jail.”

Really, Schwartz?

Instead of resigning, President Trump is fighting back.

Two days ago, Sean Hannity sent out a series of intriguing tweets:

“3 different fronts”? Um . . . .

Here are three possibilities.

Front #1: Trump DOJ declares war on Antifa

DisruptJ20, a coalition of Antifa groups, was among the communist organizations that planned activities, including terrorist activities, to disrupt the presidential inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20, 2017. (See “Video evidence of the Left’s terrorist plans for Trump inauguration”)

DreamHost, headquartered in Los Angeles, CA, is the firm that hosts DisruptJ20’s website, disruptj20.org.

The Trump administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) has formally requested that DreamHost turn over 1.3 million IP addresses and other information to “unmask” disruptj20’s subscribers, as part of the investigation into crimes committed on and around January 20 by rioters. 

On July 12, 2017, the DOJ served DreamHost a warrant, ordering the web-host “to assist” law enforcement’s search of its electronic files because the DOJ “has probable cause to believe that in the premises controlled by DreamHost Inc., there is now being concealed property, namely stored electronic communications including but not limited to digital files, records, messages and photographs” that are “in violation of D.C. Code § 22-1322 [on rioting or inciting to riot] involving the individuals who participated, planed, organized, or incited the January 20 riot”.

The warrant specifies that the property to be searched is any “information associated with http://www.disruptj20.org that is stored at premises owned, maintained, controlled, or operated by DreamHost”, including:

“all information in the possession of DreamHost that might identify the subscribers related to those accounts or identifiers, including names, addresses, telephone numbers…, e-mail addresses, business information, the length of service (including start date), means and source of payment for services (including any credit card or bank account numbers), and information about any domain name registration….”

DreamHost is challenging the DOJ warrant, on the grounds that the scope of data requested violates the first and fourth amendments because it is too broad. Interestingly, Goldman Sachs is a major investor in DreamHost. (ZeroHedge)

Front #2: GOP Meets with Wikileaks Julian Assange

On Wednesday, August 16, 2017, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange met with a U.S. government official for the first time.

GOP Congressman Dana Rohrabacher met with Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where Assange has been living in political asylum for the past 5 years. The meeting was reportedly set up by conservative journalist Charles C. Johnson, who claimed that Rohrabacher “would be the envoy in charge of bringing back a deal to the Trump White House.”

Rohrabacher said that in the meeting, Assange “reaffirmed his aggressive denial that the Russians had anything to do with the hacking of the DNC during the election. He has given us a lot of information. He said there’s more to come. We don’t have the entire picture yet.”

Rohrabacher said the information he received from Assange would have “an earth-shattering political impact” and that “It wouldn’t be so important if Democrats hadn’t focused so inordinately on the Russians. Democrats are creating a total upheaval over this. I have some information to give the president before I give information to anyone else.” (Breitbart)

That suggests to me that the “earth-shattering” information Assange gave Rohrabacher has to do with iron-clad evidence that, contrary to what the Democrats and their MSM mouthpieces keep insisting, Russia did not hack into the DNC emails nor interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

Rohrabacher is recommending that Assange be pardoned. He told The Daily Caller in an exclusive interview yesterday that Assange is hoping to leave the Ecuadorian embassy and that during the meeting they explored “what might be necessary to get him out.” Rohrabacher said: “if [Assange] is going to give us a big favor, he would obviously have to be pardoned to leave the Ecuadorian embassy.”

Front #3: Imran Awan Indicted

Yesterday, August 17, 2017, Imran Awan, 37, a former IT aide of former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was indicted by a grand jury on four counts including bank fraud and making false statements.

The indictment also includes Awan’s wife Hina Alvi.

Fox News reports that the grand jury decision in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia comes roughly a month after Awan was arrested at Dulles airport in Virginia trying to flee the U.S. by boarding a plane to his native Pakistan.

Awan and other IT aides for House Democrats have been on investigators’ radar for months over concerns of possible double-billing, alleged equipment theft, and access to sensitive computer systems. Most lawmakers fired Awan in February, but Schultz had kept him on even after Awan had been barred from the House IT network.

The indictment addresses separate allegations that Awan and his wife engaged in a conspiracy to obtain home equity lines of credit from the Congressional Federal Credit Union by giving false information about two properties – and then sending the proceeds to individuals in Pakistan.

Awan and other family members for years had a lucrative arrangement for IT-related work on Capitol Hill for House Democrats, from which the Awan family had made at least $4 million since 2009, according to The Daily Caller.

In a recent interview published in the Sun Sentinel, Wasserman Schultz blamed the “right-wing media circus fringe” for the attention on Awan, and that it’s all part of an effort to distract from the investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign and possible ties to President Trump’s team.

Her colleagues in Congress, though, say there are serious security implications in her former staffer’s case. “We have to investigate how our systems may have been compromised,” Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., recently told “Fox & Friends.”

In his IT work in Congress, Awan had access to all kinds of sensitive information. Expect him to sing like canary so as to cut a deal with prosecutors for a lesser sentence.

~Eowyn

Advertisements

Pennsylvania GOP committeeman executed point-blank by anti-Trump neighbor

Don’t buy into the new rhetoric of an Alternative Left.

While there is an Alt-Right, there is no Alt-Left.

The Left are and have always been vicious, malevolent and murderous.

Just ask the 85-100 million victims of the former Soviet Union and communist Eastern Europe; the People’s Republic of China, especially Maoist China; Cambodia; Vietnam; Cuba; and North Korea, which made the 20th century the bloodiest century in human history.

Nor are leftists in the United States any different.

Larry Grathwohl is a former FBI agent who infiltrated the Weather Underground (WU), a radical left group that originated in 1969 as a faction of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn were founders of the WU; both are Chicago pals of Obama.

Grathwohl said that members of the Weather Underground told him they had made plans to kill 25 million Americans who they expected would resist reeducation when the WU seized political power.

In a permanent rage because Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 presidential election to Donald Trump, despite the rigged polls and having the entire establishment (MSM, Hollywood, Wall Street) behind her, America’s Left finally took off their masks.

Every day, by their words and deeds, the Left show their true monstrous nature:

  • Issuing unending death threats against a duly-elected sitting President.
  • Violently protesting and rioting.
  • Plotting and scheming, by means legal (impeachment) and illegal, to take down President Trump.

The hate and venom inevitably take their toll, especially on already unbalanced minds.

In the early morning hours of August 8, 2017 in West Goshen, Pennsylvania, an anti-Trumper named Clayton Carter drove his car onto the lawn of his next-door neighbor G. Brooks Jennings. Carter shot Jennings once in the head, knocking him to the ground, then stood over Jennings’ body and shot him once more in the head — all witnessed by Mrs. Jennings from the window of their home.

In other words, Carter paused after the first shot, then shot Jennings a second time, execution style.

Police had arrested and charged Carter, 51, with multiple crimes including first-degree murder which makes him ineligible for bail in the state of Pennsylvania. Carter is currently being held at the Chester County Prison.

According to a report by ABC6,

“Shortly before 8 p.m. Monday, police responded to the 300 block of Box Elder Drive for a dispute between Carter and Jennings about cursing and video recording in the back yard. Police said they were able to resolve that dispute. Then at approximately 1 a.m. Tuesday, police say the neighbors got into another dispute. Carter told police that Jennings shined a light into his eyes while he was outside. Carter then allegedly pulled a car onto his lawn, shining the high beams of the car on Jennings’ property. Carter then allegedly retrieved a .380 semi-automatic handgun from his house and confronted the victim again outside. Officials say Carter shot Jennings once in the head, knocking him to the ground. Carter then allegedly stood over Jennings’ body and shot him once more in the head. The victim was on his own property, police said. […] Carter did not call police for help or render aid to Jennings. […]

Neighbor Brian Dougherty got emotional when speaking of Jennings. ‘You don’t want to sound cliche, you see this on TV all the time, but he is probably the nicest, best guy I’ve ever met in my whole life. Really, seriously,’ Dougherty said.

Police say Carter had disputes with a number of other neighbors, and even pulled a gun on Jennings during a past altercation. Neighbors say Carter was a quarrelsome, argumentative man. Court records claim Carter had a history of disputes with multiple neighbors. His front yard was crowded with cars and hand lettered anti-Trump signs.

[…] Neighbors say [Carter’s disputes] were fueled apparently by some unknown anger inside Carter’s head. ‘We steered clear of him. We were frightened of him because he’s so unpredictable,’ said Kathy Pratt.”

ABC6 claims that “the disputes along the block were not political, but personal.”

But what ABC6 and other news sites did not or refuse to report is that anti-Trumper Carter’s neighbor and victim, G. Brooks Jennings, was a Republican committeeman for Chester County — a fact pointed out by Jim Melwert of Philadelphia’s KYW News Radio.

See also:

~Eowyn

Out of the shadows, Hillary Clinton openly subverts President Trump with $800k donation to ‘resistance’ movement

No longer hiding in the shadows with her machinations, sole loser Hillary Clinton now openly opposes and subverts a duly-elected President of the United States of America by donating $800,000 of her failed presidential campaign’s funds to the “resistance” against Trump.

Joe Schoffstall reports for The Washington Free Beacon, August 14, 2017, that Hillary has donated $800,000 from her campaign funds to Onward Together — a new political action group that she formed three months ago in May which will fund a number of established “resistance” groups that counter President Trump with direct action and protests.

According to its mission statement, Onward Together is dedicated to “encouraging people to organize, get involved, and run for office” and advancing “progressive values and work to build a brighter future for generations to come.”

Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings show that on May 1, 2017, Hillary’s presidential campaign committee Hillary for America contributed $800,000 to Onward Together. In addition, Hillary also funded other “resistance” groups that have “impressed” her, including Swing Left, Run for Something, Emerge America, and Indivisible.

In an email to supporters in May, Hillary sanctimoniously wrote:

“From the Women’s March to airports across the country where communities are welcoming immigrants and refugees to town hall meetings in every community, Americans are speaking out like never before. I believe more fiercely than ever that citizen engagement at every level is central to a strong and vibrant democracy. In some cases, we’ll provide direct funding to these organizations. For others, we’ll help amplify their work and do what we can to help them continue to grow their audiences and expand their reach.”

Indivisible teamed up with Town Hall Project for raucous town hall events. Founded by Jimmy Dahman, a former Clinton campaign field organizer in Iowa, Town Hall Project is located at the same address as an organization funded by George Soros. Town Hall Project also partners with the Center for American Progress Action Fund, the advocacy arm of an organization founded by Hillary’s former campaign chair and “spirit cooker” John Podesta.

Onward Together is registered as a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, which means that donors can contribute unlimited sums of money while remaining anonymous. Throughout the 2016 election season, Hillary had railed against exactly that — unlimited and anonymous campaign donations.

Hypocrite!

See also:

~Eowyn

2016 Voter Fraud: VA university student convicted of registering dead Democrat voters

Virginia was a swing state in the 2016 presidential election. Hillary Clinton won Virginia with 49.75% of the votes, vs. Donald Trump’s 44.43%.

Its governor is a Democrat and rabid Clinton supporter, Terry McAuliffe.

Victor Skinner reports for EAGNews.org that on Aug. 8, 2017, a James Madison University student, Andrew Spieles, 21, received a 100-day prison sentence in federal court, after he pleaded guilty to registering dead voters for the Democratic Party during the 2016 election.

While working for the Democratic campaign during the voter registration drive, Spieles falsified at least 18 Virginia Voter Registration Forms that were submitted to the registrar’s office in Harrisonburg last August, WSET reports.

According to the Department of Justice’s news release:

“On August 15, 2016, an employee of the Registrar’s Office contacted law enforcement after another employee in the office recognized a registration form submitted in the name of the deceased father of a Rockingham County Judge. The Registrar’s Office discovered multiple instances of similarly falsified forms when it reviewed additional registrations. Some were in the names of deceased individuals while others bore incorrect middle names, birth dates, and social security numbers.”

Spieles admitted that he prepared the false voter registration forms by obtaining the name, age, and address of individuals from ‘walk sheets’ provided to him by the Virginia Democratic Party, and by fabricating social security numbers and a birth date based on the ages listed in the walk sheet.

Spieles told investigators that he alone was responsible for the fake voter registrations and that his antics were designed to help his co-worker reach a registration “quota,” The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported in June.

WHSV reports:

“Spieles, whose grandfather had died earlier that year, said he had no idea that three of the names he used on those forms were for people who had died. Choking back tears, he said he would have felt ‘hurt and angry’ if his family had received a letter about registering to vote addressed to his grandfather, and he wanted to apologize to the families.

He also apologized to the court and said he wanted to find a way to transform this situation into a way he can help people.”

Although Spieles’ voter fraud is punishable by up to a year in prison and a $100,000 fine, he reached a plea agreement with Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeb Terrien that reduced his sentence to between 100 and 120 days behind bars. A judge then waived the fine because Spieles couldn’t afford it and sentenced him to 100 days in prison.

The Times-Dispatch claims that “There is no indication any fraudulent votes were cast in November’s election as a result of the improper registrations.” How the newspaper knows that is not explained.

A James Madison University spokesman told The College Fix that Spieles already had graduated from the school before his misdemeanor conviction.

~Eowyn

House Judiciary Committee asks for second special prosecutor to investigate Clinton-Comey-Lynch

House Republicans are doing their utmost to bring Hillary Clinton to justice.

On July 26, 2017, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee ingeniously turned a Democrat resolution witchhunt (HRes. 446) of President Trump’s firing of FBI director James Comey inside out into an amended HRes. 446 calling for an investigation into Comey’s mishandling of the FBI’s criminal investigation into then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of an unauthorized private email server. (See “House Republicans are going after Hillary Clinton!”)

A day later, on July 27, Rep. Bob Goodlatte and other Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee redoubled their effort by sending a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein calling for the appointment of a second special counsel to investigate matters connected to the 2016 election which are not addressed by HRes. 446 or Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller, including many actions taken by Obama Administration officials like former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and FBI Director James Comey.

Below is the full text of the letter:

July 27, 2017

Dear Attorney General Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein:

We are writing to you to request assistance in restoring public confidence in our nation’s justice system and its investigators, specifically the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). We need to enable these agencies to perform their necessary and important law enforcement and intelligence functions fully unhindered by politics. While we presume that the FBI’s investigation into Russian influence has been subsumed into Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, we are not confident that other matters related to the 2016 election and aftermath are similarly under investigation by Special Counsel Mueller. The unbalanced, uncertain, and seemingly unlimited focus of the special counsel’s investigation has led many of our constituents to see a dual standard of justice that benefits only the powerful and politically well-connected. For this reason, we call on you to appoint a second special counsel to investigate a plethora of matters connected to the 2016 election and its aftermath, including actions taken by previously public figures like Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Many Democrats and members of the Washington media previously called for a “special prosecutor” to investigate Russian influence on the election and connections with the Trump campaign. Not surprisingly, once you actually made the decision to appoint a special counsel, the calls for further investigations by congressional committees continued, focused on allegations that have heretofore produced no evidence of criminality, despite the fact that over a year has passed since the opening of the original FBI investigation. Political gamesmanship continues to saturate anything and everything associated with reactions to President Trump’s executive decisions, and reveals the hypocrisy of those who refuse to allow the Special Counsel’s investigation to proceed without undue political influence. It is an unfortunate state of affairs.

Your stated rationale for recommending Director Comey’s termination as FBI Director was his mishandling of former Secretary Clinton’s email investigation and associated public disclosures concerning the investigation’s findings. We believe this was the correct decision. It is clear that Director Comey contributed to the politicization of the FBI’s investigations by issuing his public statement, nominating himself as judge and jury, rather than permitting career DOJ prosecutors to make the final decision. But many other questions remain unanswered, due to Mr. Comey’s premature and inappropriate decision, as well as the Obama Justice Department’s refusal to respond to legitimate Congressional oversight. Last week, the Republican Members of this Committee sent a letter to the Justice Department, asking for responses to those unanswered inquiries. These questions cannot, for history’s sake and for the preservation of an impartial system of justice, be allowed to die on the vine.

It is therefore incumbent on this Committee, in our oversight capacity, to ensure that the agencies we oversee are above reproach and that the Justice Department, in particular, remains immune to accusations of politicization. Many Congressional entities have been engaged in oversight of Russian influence on the election, but a comprehensive investigation into the 2016 Presidential campaign and its aftermath must, similarly, be free of even the suggestion of political interference. The very core of our justice system demands as much. A second, newly-appointed special counsel will not be encumbered by these considerations, and will provide real value to the American people in offering an independent perspective on these extremely sensitive matters.

Our call for a special counsel is not made lightly. We have no interest in engendering more bad feelings and less confidence in the process or governmental institutions by the American people. Rather, our call is made on their behalf. It is meant to determine whether the criminal prosecution of any individual is warranted based on the solemn obligation to follow the facts wherever they lead and applying the law to those facts.

As we referenced above, Democrats and the mainstream media called for a special counsel to be appointed to investigate any Russian influence on President Trump’s campaign. Their pleas were answered, but there are many questions that may be outside the scope of Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation. This was clear following Mr. Comey’s recent testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8, 2017, which ignited renewed scrutiny of former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and the actions she took to mislead the public concerning the investigation into the Clinton email investigation. Last year, this Committee inquired repeatedly about the circumstances surrounding that and other matters, but our inquiries were largely ignored.

During his testimony, Mr. Comey referenced a meeting on the Phoenix airport tarmac between Ms. Lynch and former President Bill Clinton. Mr. Comey raised concerns about Ms. Lynch’s conduct, and questioned her independence, stating:

At one point, the attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me. That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude, ‘I have to step away from the department if we’re to close this case credibly.’

In addition, in preparing to testify in front of Congress for a September 2015 hearing, Mr. Comey asked Ms. Lynch at the time whether she was prepared to refer to the Clinton investigation as just that, an “investigation.” Mr. Comey testified that Ms. Lynch said, “Yes, but don’t call it that, call it a matter.” Mr. Comey retorted, “Why would I do that?” Ms. Lynch answered, “Just call it a matter.” Mr. Comey stated that he acquiesced, but it gave him “a queasy feeling,” since it gave him the “impression that the attorney general was trying to align how we describe our work” with how the Clinton campaign was talking about it.

Notwithstanding the fact that the FBI is the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and not the Federal Bureau of Matters, one is hard-pressed to understand why Ms. Lynch directed then-Director Comey to call the Clinton investigation a “matter” unless she intended to use such deceptive language to help wrongly persuade the American people that former Secretary Clinton was not, in fact, the subject of a full-scale FBI investigation, or to otherwise undermine the integrity of the investigation.

Following Director Comey’s Senate Intelligence Committee testimony, Senator Dianne Feinstein was asked about the testimony while appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Senator Feinstein stated, “I would have a queasy feeling too, though, to be candid with you, I think we need to know more about that, and there’s only one way to know about it, and that’s to have the Judiciary Committee take a look at that.”

We share Senator Feinstein’s and Mr. Comey’s concerns – specifically, that during the midst of a contentious Presidential election, which was already rife with scandal arising from Secretary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information, that our nation’s chief law enforcement officer would instruct the FBI Director, her subordinate, to mislead the American public about the nature of the investigation. Following Ms. Lynch’s directive to downplay the Clinton investigation as a “matter,” Director Comey infamously terminated the Clinton investigation, stating, “[a]lthough there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”

Mr. Comey’s testimony has provided new evidence that Ms. Lynch may have used her position of authority to undermine the Clinton investigation. At any other point in history this accusation would entail a shock to the conscience of law abiding Americans who expect a DOJ free of political influence. We only have, however, an investigation into Russian influence on the 2016 election, including any ties to the Trump campaign. To limit our nation’s insight into just this this single component of the 2016 election will only cause the special counsel’s work to be derided as one-sided and incomplete. The special counsel’s work must begin and end unimpeded by political motivations on either side of the aisle. For these reasons, the following points must also be fully investigated – ideally, via a second special counsel. This is imperative to regain the cherished trust and confidence in our undoubtedly distressed law enforcement and political institutions.

We call on a newly appointed special counsel to investigate, consistent with appropriate regulations, the following questions, many of which were previously posed by this Committee and remain unanswered:

  1. Then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch directing Mr. Comey to mislead the American people on the nature of the Clinton investigation;
  2. The shadow cast over our system of justice concerning Secretary Clinton and her involvement in mishandling classified information;
  3. FBI and DOJ’s investigative decisions related to former Secretary Clinton’s email investigation, including the propriety and consequence of immunity deals given to potential Clinton co-conspirators Cheryl Mills, Heather Samuelson, John Bentel and possibly others;
  4. The apparent failure of DOJ to empanel a grand jury to investigate allegations of mishandling of classified information by Hillary Clinton and her associates;
  5. The Department of State and its employees’ involvement in determining which communications of Secretary Clinton’s and her associates to turn over for public scrutiny;
  6. WikiLeaks disclosures concerning the Clinton Foundation and its potentially unlawful international dealings;
  7. Connections between the Clinton campaign, or the Clinton Foundation, and foreign entities, including those from Russia and Ukraine;
  8. Mr. Comey’s knowledge of the purchase of Uranium One¹ by the company Rosatom, whether the approval of the sale was connected to any donations made to the Clinton Foundation, and what role Secretary Clinton played in the approval of that sale that had national security ramifications;
  9. Disclosures arising from unlawful access to the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) computer systems, including inappropriate collusion between the DNC and the Clinton campaign to undermine Senator Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign;
  10. Post-election accusations by the President [Trump] that he was wiretapped by the previous Administration, and whether Mr. Comey and Ms. Lynch had any knowledge of efforts made by any federal agency to unlawfully monitor communications of then-candidate Trump or his associates;
  11. Selected leaks of classified information related to the unmasking of U.S. person identities incidentally collected upon by the intelligence community, including an assessment of whether anyone in the Obama Administration, including Mr. Comey, Ms. Lynch, Ms. Susan Rice, Ms. Samantha Power, or others, had any knowledge about the “unmasking” of individuals on then candidate-Trump’s campaign team, transition team, or both;
  12. Admitted leaks by Mr. Comey to Columbia University law professor, Daniel Richman, regarding conversations between Mr. Comey and President Trump, how the leaked information was purposefully released to lead to the appointment of a special counsel, and whether any classified information was included in the now infamous “Comey memos”;
  13. Mr. Comey’s and the FBI’s apparent reliance on “Fusion GPS”² in its investigation of the Trump campaign, including the company’s creation of a “dossier” of information about Mr. Trump, that dossier’s commission and dissemination in the months before and after the 2016 election, whether the FBI paid anyone connected to the dossier, and the intelligence sources of Fusion GPS or any person or company working for Fusion GPS and its affiliates; and
  14. Any and all potential leaks originated by Mr. Comey and provide to author Michael Schmidt dating back to 1993.

You have the ability now to right the ship for the American people so these investigations may proceed independently and impartially. The American public has a right to know the facts – all of them – surrounding the election and its aftermath. We urge you to appoint a second special counsel to ensure these troubling, unanswered questions are not relegated to the dustbin of history.

Sincerely,

Bob Goodlatte, Chair
Jim Jordan
Lamar Smith
Matt Gaetz
Tom Marino
Steve Chabot
Blake Farenthold
Steve King
Louis Gohmert
Ted Poe
Doug Collins
Raul Labrador
Ron DeSantis
Andy Biggs
Mike Johnson
John Rutherford
Martha Roby
John Ratcliffe
Trent Franks
Karen Handel

###

Note¹: Uranium One is a uranium mining company, headquartered in Toronto,  Canada. It has operations in Australia, Canada, Kazakhstan, South Africa and the United States. In January 2013, Russian state-owned enterprise Rosatom, through its subsidiary ARMZ Uranium Holding, purchased Uranium One for $1.3 billion. For Bill Clinton and John Podesta’s involvement in Uranium One and Rosatom, click here.

Note²: Fusion GPS is a commercial DC-based intelligence firm that conducts opposition political research on political candidates, such as on Mitt Romney. The company was hired by Planned Parenthood (PP) to investigate pro-life activists who took a series of “sting” videos showing PP selling aborted baby parts to medical researchers. In the 2016 presidential campaign, Fusion GPS was first hired by Republicans to conduct “opposition research” on Donald Trump, which ended when Trump became the GOP’s presidential nominee. Hillary Clinton then became Fusion GPS’s client to dig up dirt on Trump. Fusion GPS hired former MI-6 agent Christopher Steele to compile a dossier on Trump, which became infamous for its entirely-fake allegation that Trump had hired Russian prostitutes to urinate (“golden shower”) on a Russian hotel bed supposedly used by Obama.

Send a “thank you” to Congressman Bob Goodlatte!:

~Eowyn

Hillary Clinton now wants to be a Methodist preacher

Losing the 2016 presidential election doesn’t mean Hillary Clinton will disappear.

On the contrary, it appears she will never go away.

In a fawning article in The Atlantic, Aug. 6, 2017, Emma Green reports that at a recent photo shoot for Shillady’s new book, Hillary Clinton told her Methodist pastor Bill Shillady that she wants to be a preacher:

“Scattered bits of reporting suggest that ministry has always been a secret dream of the two-time presidential candidate: Last fall, the former Newsweek editor Kenneth Woodward revealed that Clinton told him in 1994 that she thought ‘all the time’ about becoming an ordained Methodist minister….

Now, as Clinton works to rehabilitate her public image and figure out the next steps after her brutal November loss, religion is taking a central role. After long months of struggling to persuade Americans that she is trustworthy, authentic, and fundamentally moral, Clinton is lifting up an intimate, closely guarded part of herself. There are no more voters left to lose. In sharing her faith, perhaps Clinton sees something left to win, whether political or personal….

Given her depth of knowledge of the Bible and her experience of caring for people and loving people, she’d make a great pastor,’ Shillady told me. No, she probably won’t go to seminary, he said. No, she probably won’t pursue an official lay position in the Methodist church, like deaconess. (I reached out to Clinton’s spokespeople for comment, but didn’t hear back.) ‘I think it would be more of … her guest preaching at some point,’ he said. ‘We have a long history of lay preachers in the United Methodist Church.’”

“Trustworthy”, “authentic”, “fundamentally moral”, “caring for people”, “loving people” . . . .

“Trustworthy” — as in being a psychopathic liar, and using an unauthorized and illegal private email server while she was Secretary of State, including emails containing top secret national security information and names of CIA agents?

“Fundamentally moral” — as in using her Clinton Foundation to pay for her daughter Chelsea’s wedding and for millions in pay-to-play “donations” bribes from foreign governments and individuals in exchange for State Department favors, and stealing $2B in donations for Haiti’s earthquake relief?

“Caring for people” — as in trashing the women whom her husband raped, groped and harassed as “bimbos”; laughing about defending a man who raped a 12-year-old girl; leaving four Americans, including two of her State Department staffers, to die in Benghazi — then lie about Benghazi being a Muslim riot over a video; her Clinton Foundation working with Big Pharma to keep AIDS drug prices high; and advocating the legal murder of late-term pre-born babies?

“Loving people” — as in a woman whom her own campaign chair describes as “hates everyday Americans“; who treats the Secret Service agents who protect her with their lives, like crap; who trashes millions of Americans (whom she meant to rule over as their President) as “deplorables” simply because they disagreed with her?

A “lay preacher” with a filthy mouth and who stinks like sulfur?

Hillary and her pastor must live in an alternate Universe.

But then, given what the United Methodist Church has become, Hillary actually would fit right in as a preacher. See:

H/t FOTM‘s josephbc69

~Eowyn

Alt-Right: a new American political movement

The 2016 presidential election was unusual not just because Donald Trump is an unusual candidate who managed to win by seemingly breaking all the rules, the election also saw the rise of a new political movement – the Alt-Right.

Dissatisfaction with Traditional Right

The term “Alt-Right” is an abbreviation of “Alternative Right” – an expression allegedly coined in 2008 by Paul Gottfried, a Jewish emeritus professor of humanities at Elizabethtown College, Pennsylvania, to refer to “conservatives who saw themselves as too extreme for the mainstream movement . . . whose adherents include a range of racists, from white separatists to neo-Nazis.”

The very word “alternative” implies that the Alt-Right is an alternative to the traditional Right (conservatives) — Americans who believe in a constrained or limited government, the importance of law and order, and time-tested traditions embodied in the institutions of family, church, school, government, the Constitution, and the free market. Those institutions instill discipline and motivation, as well as correct and constrain the individual’s vices.

The Alt-Right, however, see traditional Conservatives as being too passive, spineless, yielding and ineffective against the Left’s successful assault on American culture and institutions, and on Western civilization itself. Thus, the Alt-Right’s contemptuous label for traditional Conservatives as “Cuckservatives” – cuckolded, emasculated and impotent conservatives.

In contrast, the Alt-Right is assertive, even combative, if circumstances require it. That masculine assertiveness is best typified by an Alt-Rightist nicknamed “Based Stickman” – Kyle Chapman, 41, a self-identified patriot and “protector of freedom” who first appeared at a pro-Trump rally on March 4, 2017 at the Civic Center Park in Berkeley, CA, dressed in a homemade combat outfit comprised of helmet, gas mask, a wooden shield with an American flag sticker, and carrying a big stick (thus, “stick man”).

In the park, Chapman defended himself and other pro-Trumpers from physical attacks by radical Leftists who call themselves Antifa (anti-fascists).

Chapman is representative of a New or Alternative Right who will no longer be passive because they believe this may be America’s last opportunity to reverse the tide of the Left’s Cultural Marxism that has taken over education (from kindergarten through college), entertainment and pop culture, the media, and seemingly every social, economic, and political institution.

Another example of the New Right’s assertiveness took place on June 16, 2017, when Alt-Right activists disrupted the performance of a New York Public Theater’s “re-imagining” of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar play, in which a Donald Trump-lookalike Caesar was stabbed to death by conspirators.

Vocabulary

Speaking of Based Stickman, you may wonder what “based” means.

“Based” is one of the words coined by Alt-Rightists on Internet chat boards, such as the /pol/ (politically incorrect) sections of 4chan and 8chan. In other words, the Alt-Right have developed their own vocabulary, the meanings of which can’t be found in dictionaries, but can be surmised by how the words are used in context. Some examples:

  • based: a term of approval or praise, which means courageous or ballsy — the opposite of “cuck”.
  • cuck: a favorite term of insult, which means being cuckolded, neutered or emasculated.
  • cuckservative: a term of insult and abuse for spineless traditional conservatives.
  • muh: being underwhelmed; indifferent; the verbal equivalent of a shrug.

Ideology

Political ideology is comprised of attitudes, values, and beliefs. In the case of the Alt-Right, their attitude is one of combative assertiveness; their values are rooted in the Western civilization, which includes Christianity; and their beliefs are that America’s decline is due to the hollowing-out of the manufacturing economy by outsourcing, an open door to immigration (illegal and legal) and refugees, and the Left’s takeover and corruption of culture.

To reverse that decline, the Alt-Right champions American nationalism (against the forces of globalism) and populism (the forgotten middle class), which explains why the Alt-Right resonate to and find appealing Donald Trump’s call to an “America First” domestic and foreign policy.

Two strains of American nationalism have emerged among the Alt-Right: civic nationalism vs. racial nationalism:

  • Racial nationalists believe that America was founded by and is rooted in the “white” (non-Jewish) race, and that dilution of “white” America by immigration, race-mixing, and government policies like Affirmative Action and multiculturalism have led to national decline and the increasing vilification and marginalization of “white” people, especially of “white” men. The Alt-Right white nationalists want white segregation — a return to an America of the “white” race via the repatriation of all immigrants who had come to the U.S. since the 1960s when an open-door immigration policy began. It is not clear what the white nationalists propose to do with blacks, native Americans, and Jews, not to mention the many “white” Americans on the Left. The identification of race-mixing as one of America’s banes accounts for a strain of chauvinism in racial Alt-Rightists, who propose a return to men as heads of household, and (white) women as docile wives, mothers and homemakers. An example of an Alt-Right racial nationalist is a writer-blogger-video game designer named Vox Day (real name Theodore Beale), 48, who claims to have a genius-level IQ. Many of the regular commenters on Day’s blog, Vox Populi, are similarly inclined. Some are almost slavish, calling Day their “Dark Lord”. Oddly for an American nationalist, Vox Day lives with his wife and children in northern Italy.

  • Civic nationalists are those who believe that the American nation is not defined by race, but by important shared political values embodied in the U.S. Constitution. Some examples of Alt-Right civic nationalists are “Based Stickman” Kyle Chapman and Mike Cernovich, a writer and self-promoting media “personality”. Not coincidentally, both Chapman and Cernovich are married to non-whites. That earned Chapman a derisive and dismissive comment from a racial Alt-Right nationalist named Eli Mosley: “There is no hope for this man or his rice-children.” Mosley’s comment received 50 up-votes on a Disqus chat-forum trashing Based Stickman.

While there really is a War on White Men, espousing a white racial American nationalism (as some Alt-Rightists do) neither makes sense nor is practical:

  • It’s nonsensical because many on the Left are non-Jewish whites, e.g., Bill Clinton, while there are patriotic non-whites among the Right, such as this Vietnamese immigrant who loves America. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. put it best: What matters is the content of one’s character, beliefs and behaviors — which are matters of our choice and volition — instead of the color of one’s skin, which we are born with and about which we can do nothing.
  • That’s also why a white racial American nationalism is impractical, because you alienate and marginalize Americans who can be your supporters and allies in common cause.
  • Another impracticability is how the word “white” is defined, and how “whiteness” is determined. How much “whiteness” makes one a “white”? Ironically, Vox Day, the champion of white nationalism, is of English, Irish, Mexican and Native American descent. Is Vox Day “white” enough?

Already amorphous and unorganized, with neither formal membership nor a common leader, the division among the Alt-Right between racial and civic nationalists throws the future of this new political movement into question. Where the Alt-Right goes, beyond the 2016 election that elevated their candidate Donald Trump to the White House, remains to be seen. Should Trump succeed in revitalizing the U.S. economy, the Alt-Right will probably subside and fade. But if President Trump were removed, by impeachment or assassination, then the anger that gave rise to the Alt-Right will likely burst into open violence.

~Eowyn