Comey, Trump, Russia, Gorsuch, hearings, leaks leaks leaks

FBI Director James Comey spoke publicly in DC on Monday in front of the House Intelligence Committee, stating there were in fact investigations occurring with regard to Russia’s meddling in the presidential election and also between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.

It was clear to me, from the outset, that it was politics, politics, politics. Something of which Director Comey has become quite adroit in at least the past year.

The line was drawn in this fashion: Demorats wanted President Trump’s wiretap allegation smashed and derided, whilst Republicans were primarily concerned with the leaking of classified information.

Trey Gowdy begins the interaction with Director Comey and sets the foundation for his line of questioning involving FISA and safeguards.

Please note that Congressman Gowdy specifically utilizes the term “wiretap” to describe the acquisition of communications belonging to an “unnamed US citizen.” Again, Comey outs the Trump investigation but refuses to discuss anything to do with the leaks at all. Do you see my point and my resulting frustration?

I highlight this portion because of its incredible importance. Do you see?

GOWDY: Admiral Rogers said there are 20 people within the NSA that are part of the unmasking process. How many people within the FBI are part of the unmasking process?

COMEY: I don’t know for sure. As I sit here, surely more, given the nature the FBI’s work. We come into contact with U.S. persons a whole lot more than the NSA does because we may be conducting — we only conduct our operations in the United States to collect electronic surveillance — to conduct electronic surveillance, so I don’t — I can find out the exact number, I don’t know it as I sit here.

GOWDY: Well, I think, Director Comey, given the fact that you and I agree this is critical, vital, indispensable, a similar program is coming up for reauthorization this fall with a pretty strong head wind right now. It would be nice to know the universe of people who have the power to unmask a U.S. citizen’s name. Because that might provide something of a roadmap to investigate who might’ve actually disseminated a masked U.S. citizen’s name.

COMEY: Sure. The number is relevant but what I hope the U.S. — the American people realize is the number’s important, but the culture behind it is in fact even more important. The training, the rigor, the discipline. We are obsessive about FISA in the FBI for reasons I hope make sense to this committee but we are — everything that’s FISA has to be labeled in such a way to warn people this is FISA, we treat this in a special way.

So we can get you the number, but I want to assure you the culture of the FBI and the NSA around how we treat U.S. person information is obsessive and I mean that in a good way.

GOWDY: Director Comey, I am not arguing with you and I do agree that culture is important, but if there are 100 people who have the ability to unmask and the knowledge of a previously masked name, then that’s 100 different potential sources of investigation and the smaller the number is, the easier your investigation is.

So the number is relevant. I can see the culture is relevant. NSA, FBI, what other U.S. government agencies have the authority to unmask a U.S. citizen’s name?

COMEY: I think all agencies that collect information pursuant to FISA have what are called standard minimization procedures, which are approved by the FISA court that govern how they will treat U.S. person information. So I know the NSA does, I know the CIA does, obviously the FBI does. I don’t know for sure beyond that.

GOWDY: How about the department of — how about Main Justice?

COMEY: Main Justice, I think does have standard minimization procedures.

GOWDY: All right, so that’s four. The NSA, FBI, CIA, Main Justice. Does the White House have the authority to unmask a U.S. citizen’s name?

COMEY: I think other elements of the government that are consumers of our products can ask the collectors to unmask. The unmasking resides with those who collected the information.

And so if Mike Rogers’s folks collected something and they sent it to me in a report and it says U.S. person number one and it’s important for the FBI to know who that is, our request will go back to them. The White House can make similar requests of the FBI or of NSA but they can’t on their — they don’t own their own collect and so they can’t on their own unmask. I got that about right?

ROGERS: No, that’s correct.

COMEY: Yeah.

GOWDY: I guess what I’m getting at, Director Comey, is you say it’s vital, you say it’s critical, you say it’s indispensable. We both know it’s a threat to the reauthorization of 702 later on this fall. And by the way, it’s also a felony punishable by up to 10 years.

So how would you begin your investigation, assuming for the sake of argument that a U.S. citizen’s name appeared in the Washington Post and the New York Times unlawfully. Where would you begin that investigation?

COMEY: Well, I’m not gonna talk about any particular investigation…

GOWDY: That’s why I said in theory.

COMEY: You would start by figuring out, so who are the suspects? Who touched the information that you’ve concluded ended up unlawfully in the newspaper and start with that universe and then use investigative tools and techniques to see if you can eliminate people, or include people as more serious suspects.

GOWDY: Do you know whether Director Clapper knew the name of the U.S. citizen that appeared in the New York Times and Washington Post?

COMEY: I can’t say in this forum because again, I don’t wanna confirm that there was classified information in the newspaper.

GOWDY: Would he have access to an unmasked name?

COMEY: In — in some circumstances, sure, he was the director of national intelligence. But I’m not talking about the particular.

GOWDY: Would Director Brennan have access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s name?

COMEY: In some circumstances, yes.

GOWDY: Would National Security Adviser Susan Rice have access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s name?

COMEY: I think any — yes, in general, and any other national security adviser would, I think, as a matter of their ordinary course of their business.

GOWDY: Would former White House Advisor Ben Rhodes have access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s name?

COMEY: I don’t know the answer to that.

GOWDY: Would former Attorney General Loretta Lynch have access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s name? COMEY: In general, yes, as would any attorney general.

GOWDY: So that would also include Acting AG Sally Yates?

COMEY: Same answer.

GOWDY: Did you brief President Obama on — well, I’ll just ask you. Did you brief President Obama on any calls involving Michael Flynn?

COMEY: I’m not gonna get into either that particular case that matter, or any conversations I had with the president. So I can’t answer that.

But wait. I have what I consider to be an obvious question but one I’ve not yet heard people ask. Director Comey stated the investigation has been ongoing since July of 2016. If so, wouldn’t an integral part of such an investigation be surveillance of the Trump campaign and others aligned or linked therein?

Yet Mr Comey says there was no surveillance going on. How can that be? Was the FBI conducting half an investigation? A fraction of an investigation? How otherwise can one explain the information collected regarding General Michael Flynn? How was it gathered? How was it distributed? How did it get leaked and by whom? How does one acquire telephone conversation content — on Michael Flynn or Trump’s conversations with Australia’s PM Turnbull or Mexican President Nieto for example — absent wiretapping or surveillance in the first place?

In the process of conducting said highly important investigations wouldn’t you want to use all the tools at your disposal and, furthermore, collect as much pertinent evidence as possible? Of course you would. The statement makes no sense.

Where was James Comey with regard to Obama’s aides improperly accessing the names of Americans swept up in foreign surveillance or whether they leaked classified documents to the US press? Director Comey could confirm that, well, yes, we’re closely examining President Trump’s Russian “collusion” but otherwise could not confirm there was any sort of investigation on the matters of felonious leaking by government officials (Who else could have done so?) and would not talk about it. Why not? What’s the difference?

Another very important question. By the FBI’s own account and everyone else’s, including the Russians, it was believed with certainty that Hillary Clinton was a shoe-in for the presidency. Why, then, did the Russians magically decide to assist Donald Trump — as James Comey alleges — when people were convinced Trump would lose in a spectacular manner?

It doesn’t make sense. Neither the investigation nor the assumption about the Russians.

Perhaps the biggest question is this: will the leakers be identified and, if so, will they be arrested? Or is it in the best interest of the deep state to obfuscate the matter to the point that the leakers are never found?

Because, trust me, if the leakers are prosecuted and there is federal penitentiary time attached, you’ll hear sphincters slamming shut all around DC and the warm breezes will turn cold. That’s called a chilling effect.

Also quite disturbing is this, from McClatchyDC.com:

FBI’s Russian-influence probe includes a look at far-right news sites

by Peter Stone & Greg Gordon

Federal investigators are examining whether far-right news sites played any role last year in a Russian cyber operation that dramatically widened the reach of news stories — some fictional — that favored Donald Trump’s presidential bid, two people familiar with the inquiry say.

Operatives for Russia appear to have strategically timed the computer commands, known as “bots,” to blitz social media with links to the pro-Trump stories at times when the billionaire businessman was on the defensive in his race against Democrat Hillary Clinton, these sources said.

In other words, the FBI under Comey is investigating “fake news.” What is fake news?

The bots’ end products were largely millions of Twitter and Facebook posts carrying links to stories on conservative internet sites such as Breitbart News and InfoWars, as well as on the Kremlin-backed RT News and Sputnik News, the sources said. Some of the stories were false or mixed fact and fiction, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the bot attacks are part of an FBI-led investigation into a multifaceted Russian operation to influence last year’s elections.

For every individual arguing that InfoWars or Breitbart is fake news, I can provide a great deal of documentation indicating, over numerous years, that what people term the mainstream media such as ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and many others are equally or more fake than those two named above, and have been specifically colluding with the Democrats and Leftist-themed ideologues for a lengthy period of time.

The FBI investigating “fake news” is indeed disturbing. It is no less true now than any time prior that one must be an enlightened consumer of news and, as an adult, know enough about your country, your surroundings and your world in order to make the best informed decision regarding the portrayal of information to you by various news organizations. In other words, it blows to be stupid and there are penalties for being so, though we know that a “sucker is born every minute.”

Perhaps we should ask what there was to learn from the hearing today with FBI Director James Comey. I conclude below with the real lesson to be intuited from the hearing, but in terms of hard facts we discovered there are, well, no real hard facts. There is still no evidence that Russia hacked the election or somehow influenced the presidential election despite what the American Media Maggots emphatically say. There is still no evidence that Russia colluded with the Trump campaign or his staffers. We learned that James Comey is rather selective in terms of the political topics he’s willing to address.

We learned that no evidence was provided that indicated Obama wiretapped Trump. But if that were true, then why has Fox News summarily fired Judge Napolitano for saying this?

Why indeed.

House Intel Chair Devin Nunes weighed in, and he wasn’t terribly happy.

Then there was this little-publicized questioning of Director Comey by NY newbie freshman Rep. Elise Stefanik, who zeroes in on Comey immediately.

Did you notice Director Comey was a bit nonplussed at her direct first question? I did. She has taken Comey aback. He did not anticipate such pointed and informed questions from a neophyte. When Comey said he didn’t have a DNI, that was bullshit. He did. It was James Clapper. The lying James Clapper. The lying under oath James Clapper. You know. That guy.

Did you also hear James Comey admit to Rep. Stefanik that, along with the Demorats and DNC, the Republicans were tapped as well? He stated so. But what was the difference between the GOP being tapped and the DNC being tapped? That’s right. The lack of corruption in the content of the emails and information.

But let me say this. Elise Stefanik has a great career ahead of her because she appears fearless, resolute, and unimpressed by dark, carved wood. You get my drift. “When did you notify the White House?” Boom. Done. Owned.

Let us transition.

“I am a faithful servant to the Constitution.” So said Judge Neal Gorsuch in his opening statement with regard to his SCOTUS nomination, on Monday. The actual flames and grilling begin Tuesday morning at 9:30. First, here’s the Demorat take on Gorsuch, from CBS.

Then there are the actual words of Judge Gorsuch himself as he makes his opening statement.

Bottom line regarding Neil Gorsuch? He will be confirmed. I also predict the Demorats will not choose to use their filibuster against him. You’re dealing with an individual who

  • Presided over 2,750 case on the 10th Circuit;
  • Wrote 175 majority opinions;
  • Wrote 65 concurrences or dissents;
  • Had 72 in-person meetings with US Senators

Charles Krauthammer may have jinxed things when, on Monday, he said: “Too stupid. Even the Democrats won’t do it.”

But never minimize the ability of Demorats and Leftists to see racists and sexists everywhere. Joe Dinkin, National Communications Director for the Working Families Party (yes, that is a party) states that Neil Gorsuch is a white supremacist and nationalist because Gorsuch hasn’t overtly and publicly disavowed President Trump’s travel ban. It’s a Muslim ban, you see. So Gorsuch wears a white robe and a pointy hat. Insanity.

In conclusion, do not doubt that there is a message to be acquired from Comey’s hearing today, and the message to President Trump as well as his advisors, staff and assistants comes from not just Director James Comey, the Demorats and a portion of the GOP, but much of the embedded deep state as well.

The message is: back off. Leave the DC swamp as it is. Undrained. The creatures prefer it unmolested. If you fail to heed our warning, we’ll destroy you at all costs and by any means necessary.

If you were President Trump you’d have to be asking yourself: whom can you trust?

That potential pool is dwindling by the day.

BZ

P.S.

You should now be asking yourself: is FBI Director James Comey the source of the leaks?

 

The truth about Buzzfeed and Trump

Let’s look at President-elect Donald Trump’s first press conference. Then let’s discuss the circumstances.

During President-elect Donald Trump’s press conference today, Trump took aim at “fake news” regarding the release of an unverified dossier by Buzzfeed, calling them a “failing piece of garbage.”

Following that, he ended up getting into an argument with a CNN reporter, who he also called out during the presser over their report on a two-page synopsis they claim was presented to Trump. With Trump looking to call on other reporters, Jim Acosta yelled out, “Since you are attacking us, can you give us a question?” “Not you,” Trump said. “Your organization is terrible!” Acosta pressed on, “You are attacking our news organization, can you give us a chance to ask a question, sir?” Trump countered by telling him “don’t be rude.” “I’m not going to give you a question,” Trump responded. “I’m not going to give you a question. You are fake news.”

It would appear there is no love lost between CNN and Trump. Let’s begin to explain, from BuzzFeed.com:

These Reports Allege Trump Has Deep Ties To Russia

A dossier, compiled by a person who has claimed to be a former British intelligence official, alleges Russia has compromising information on Trump. The allegations are unverified, and the report contains errors.

by Ken Bensinger, Miriam Elder and Mark Schoofs

A dossier making explosive — but unverified — allegations that the Russian government has been “cultivating, supporting and assisting” President-elect Donald Trump for years and gained compromising information about him has been circulating among elected officials, intelligence agents, and journalists for weeks.

Translation: we don’t much care that anything is verified or corroborated; we’re going to throw it onto the wall in any event because the information can do nothing but assail Donald Trump. CNN, equally despising Trump but perhaps even more clearly craven than Buzzfeed justifies publishing the story and promoting it (yes, I watched CNN do just that) under the guise of “news about news is news.” Damn the facts or corroboration.

In a nutshell, backed by the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, this is what occurred.

A still-unidentified wealthy GOP donor — clearly not a good pal of Donald Trump — hired a firm in 2015 called Fusion GPS to assemble opposition research on Donald Trump. Fusion ended up hiring a former British MI-6 operative named Christopher Steele, in the spring of 2016, who wrote the 35-page report on Trump. Please let me point out that the DC firm Fusion GPS is the same one hired by Planned Parenthood to put a positive spin on videos showing the sale of baby parts. This is “good to know” information.

Because the meme was “in the air,” Steele was to dig up smegma on Trump’s “obvious” ties to Russia. Steele talked to some Russians and the gossip was included in the report later compiled.

The information somehow “found its way” to the FBI. That was not magic, of course. It was purposeful, by way of Arizona Senator John McCain.

Yes, John McCain — clearly not a good pal of Donald Trump — got this hot mess started. He sent one of his own operatives across the Atlantic in order to acquire Trump’s dossier from Steele. McCain discovered the dossier’s existence when he was at a Canadian meeting with Sir Andrew Wood, a former associate of UK’s Tony Blair who is, also, not a good pal of Donald Trump, and subsequently sent an aide to acquire the report, in August of 2016.

An interesting aside. Very few persons have dared to mention the direct involvement of Senator John McCain, even that stalwart “the spin stops here” Fox News guy, Bill O’Reilly, who purposely avoided mentioning the involvement of McCain in his Thursday, January 12th Talking Points Commentary broadcast.

John McCain turned the dossier over to the FBI, saying he did “what any citizen would do.”

The report contained this:

Lurid sex claims

The report states that in 2013 Trump hired prostitutes to urinate on the bed of the Presidential Suite at the Moscow Ritz Carlton, where he knew Barack and Michelle Obama had previously stayed.

It says: ‘Trump’s unorthodox behavior in Russia over the years had provided the authorities there with enough embarrassing material on the now Republican presidential candidate to be able to blackmail him if they so wished.’

Trump ridiculed the idea, pointing out that Russian hotel rooms are known to be rigged with cameras and describing himself as a ‘germophobe’. 

Property ‘sweeteners’

The document states that Trump had declined ‘sweetener’ real estate deals in Russia that the Kremlin lined up in order to cultivate him.

The business proposals were said to be ‘in relation to the ongoing 2018 World Cup soccer tournament’.

Russia ‘cultivated’ Trump for five years

The dossier claimed that the Russian regime had been ‘cultivating, supporting and assisting Trump for at least five years’.

According to the document, one source even claimed that ‘the Trump operation was both supported and directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin’ with the aim being to ‘sow discord’. 

A dossier on Hillary Clinton

At one point the memo suggests Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov ‘controlled’ another dossier containing compromising material on Hillary Clinton compiled over ‘many years’.

Elsewhere in the document, it is claimed that Putin was ‘motivated by fear and hatred of Hillary Clinton.’

Peskov poured scorn on the claims today and said they were ‘pulp fiction’. 

Clandestine meetings

At one point the memo says there were reports of ‘clandestine meetings’ between Donald Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen and Kremlin representatives in August last year in Prague.

However, Trump’s counsel Michael Cohen today spoke out against allegations that he secretly met with Kremlin officials – saying that he had never been to Prague.

It has now emerged that the dossier was referring to a different person of the same name.

On Halloween, October 31st of last year, Mother Jones magazine — Leftist Paper Central — ran the David Corn story. No one else covered it at that point; not Fox, not NBC, not CBS or ABC.

On January 5th, Obama was briefed on intelligence and in that briefing the dossier was revealed. Even Obama asked why the dossier information, unsubstantiated and unconfirmed, was included in the briefing. On January 6th, Donald Trump received the same intelligence information from four quite senior US intelligence chiefs.

Simultaneously, Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, Little Chuckie Schumer, Devin Nunes, Adam Schiff, Richard Burr and Mark Warner received the same information. CNN then was the recipient of information from a leaker that Obama and Trump had been briefed on the contents.

That’s where Buzzfeed stepped in it, literally and figuratively, with their story. Please click and then read the article.

Many of the allegations have been completely and utterly discredited whilst none have been confirmed in any fashion whatsoever.

Perhaps now you’re beginning to understand the reason behind Donald Trump’s unhappiness at the press conference.

The bottom line is this: the information — uncorroborated, unconfirmed, unsubstantiated — was released with the sole purpose of smearing Trump even before taking office.

This is markedly different from the Wikileaks information about Hillary Clinton, the DNC, John Podesta and the American Media Maggots, insofar as none of that information has been challenged or refuted. The evidence is as plain as day. Those things occurred. The players are simply pissed because they were caught.

The gloves are off. It’s bare-knuckled brawling now. The American Media Maggots aren’t even making the slightest pretense of being unbiased or even semi-truthful. Any journalistic forms of standards or ethics are predominantly gone. It’s all about innuendo and allegations unsubstantiated.

Even journalist Bob Woodward is angry with the media and US intelligence agencies. From the NYPost.com:

Bob Woodward calls Trump dossier ‘garbage’

by Marisa Schultz

WASHINGTON — Legendary journalist Bob Woodward on Sunday clashed with his former “Watergate” reporting partner over the intelligence briefing of President-elect Donald Trump on the salacious allegations contained in an unverified dossier of opposition research.

“I’ve lived in this world for 45 years where you get things and people make allegations,” Woodward told FOX News Sunday.

“That is a garbage document. It never should have been presented in–- as part of an intelligence briefing.”

Further, Bob Woodward had serious words about US intelligence.

Woodward also said that “Trump’s point of view” was being “under-reported,” noting that outgoing White House Counsel Neil Eggleston could have given the briefing to incoming Counsel Don McGahn.

“So Trump’s right to be upset about that,” Woodward said. “And I think if you look at the real chronology and the nature of the battle here, those intelligence chiefs who were the best we’ve had, who were terrific and have done great work made a mistake here. And when people make mistakes, they should apologize.”

Glenn Greenwald at TheIntercept.com also wrote:

The Deep State Goes to War With President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss, as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry, and damaging those behaviors might be.

Mr Greenwald is not a lover of Donald Trump, but he realizes the danger that is occurring in the US now.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.

All of these toxic ingredients were on full display yesterday as the Deep State unleashed its tawdriest and most aggressive assault yet on Trump: vesting credibility in and then causing the public disclosure of a completely unvetted and unverified document, compiled by a paid, anonymous operative while he was working for both GOP and Democratic opponents of Trump, accusing Trump of a wide range of crimes, corrupt acts, and salacious private conduct. The reaction to all of this illustrates that while the Trump presidency poses grave dangers, so, too, do those who are increasingly unhinged in their flailing, slapdash, and destructive attempts to undermine it.

The gloves are indeed off, ladies and gentlemen. It’s a bare-knuckled battle from here on out.

Because, after all, what do we have here? We have baseless allegations gathered by well-paid mercenaries for political assassins — on both sides of the aisle, make no mistake — to use against Conservatives, Republicans and Donald Trump.

That is what really occurred between Buzzfeed and Donald Trump.

BZ

 

“Everyone” knows Russia hacked the elections

“Everyone knows the Russians hacked the election.” Right?

Technical analysis: Malware “Russian hacking” sample provided by US government is common malware.

Please note this from WordFence.com, on Friday, December 30th.

Overall Conclusion

The IP addresses that DHS provided may have been used for an attack by a state actor like Russia. But they don’t appear to provide any association with Russia. They are probably used by a wide range of other malicious actors, especially the 15% of IP addresses that are Tor exit nodes.

The malware sample is old, widely used and appears to be Ukrainian. It has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence and it would be an indicator of compromise for any website.

You can find a public repository containing the data used in this report on github.

This is not a political analysis in the slightest, but a technological examination of the facts as yet known. The article is lengthy and of interest if you’re well-versed in technical digital matters. Please read if you are so inclined.

Techie comments include:

unity100 December 30, 2016 at 6:19 am • Reply

Long story short, it doesnt have anything to do with Russia. ‘May have’ used by anyone indeed, however Russia being able to use datacenters located especially in Germany to hack against US is quite unlikely, with the German intelligence practically being subservient to US intelligence as recent leaks showed.

Steve Maughan December 30, 2016 at 6:24 am • Reply

What you appear to be saying is there is no “smoking gun” link even to Russia, nevermind the Russian Government!

mark December 30, 2016 at 6:27 am • Reply

Hi Steve,

It does appear that way. Unless FBI/DHS shares some additional IOC’s, there’s not really anything here we can use to make the connection.

Rusty December 30, 2016 at 6:34 am • Reply

Interesting what you find when you are on a non-political quest for the truth. I appreciate the work you did digging into this. It’s hard to find a source that doesn’t lean one way or the other, and just provides cold, hard facts. Thanks!!!

David Bennett December 30, 2016 at 6:42 am • Reply

Great article but don’t you think it is a confusing headline because if anything, your article shows there is no smoking gun that leads back to Russia as a state actor?

“US Govt Data Shows Russia Used Outdated Ukrainian PHP Malware”

Then Aaron hits a Commenter’s Home Run:

Aaron Miner December 30, 2016 at 2:01 pm • Reply

The problem with that reasoning is that this is also exactly what a non-governmental hacking job would look like. The burden of proof lies with those attempting to demonstrate a Russian plot to affect the election, which means they need to find evidence that distinguishes the a Russian hacking attempt from the null scenario. In the absence of such evidence, we must assume the null hypothesis (that it was more likely any of the many non-Russian, non-governmental actors capable of such an attack) until further evidence is presented.

Otherwise, we’d have to assume that the lack of evidence for aliens crash-landing in Roswell, New Mexico is evidence of a government conspiracy, because a government conspiracy would leave no evidence of an alien crash-landing in New Mexico. That would be circular reasoning, and therefore a fallacy.

It is claimed that “everyone” knows the Russians hacked the DNC, John Podesta’s emails, Hillary Clinton’s emails, et al, and turned them over to Wikileaks. Because it serves a political end for the Demorats — that is, it provides a ready and convenient excuse for Hillary Clinton’s having lost the election — the American Media Maggots have picked up on the theme as well. Therefore, “everyone” knows the Russians are responsible for the hacks and throwing the election.

However, what about the Sony hack two years ago? The FBI concluded after a few weeks that North Korea was responsible. It was convenient to say so, so it was so. Many people were not so sure. Why? Because determining a cyber attack is more of an art than a science. And intelligence agencies frequently rely on what is called “fourth party collection.” Even the NSA. Which was hacked.

But guess what?

For reasons delineated in prior posts, I think I’d consider the weight of the propeller-heads above over the input of others at this point, who are motivated by — well, let’s just say “self-interests.”

BZ

 

“It’s the Russians.” FBI says: no it’s not

What makes the situation particularly delicious is the fact that the SOURCE of the story is the New York Times. And that they knew it back in late October of this year. Yet no one seems to remember the story. Let us refresh:

Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia

by Eric Lichtblau and Steven Lee Myers

WASHINGTON — For much of the summer, the F.B.I. pursued a widening investigation into a Russian role in the American presidential campaign. Agents scrutinized advisers close to Donald J. Trump, looked for financial connections with Russian financial figures, searched for those involved in hacking the computers of Democrats, and even chased a lead — which they ultimately came to doubt — about a possible secret channel of email communication from the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.

Law enforcement officials say that none of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government. And even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump.

How incredibly odd that no one is referencing this article now. Does that not make you wonder just a teensy-weensy bit? Isn’t the following just a little odd also?

Hillary Clinton’s supporters, angry over what they regard as a lack of scrutiny of Mr. Trump by law enforcement officials, pushed for these investigations.

So the FBI clears Hillary Clinton and, additionally, responds to her request to look into Trump’s connection with the Russians?

Supporters of Mrs. Clinton have argued that Mr. Trump’s evident affinity for Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — Mr. Trump has called him a great leader and echoed his policies toward NATO, Ukraine and the war in Syria — and the hacks of leading Democrats like John D. Podesta, the chairman of the Clinton campaign, are clear indications that Russia has taken sides in the presidential race and that voters should know what the F.B.I. has found.

And yet, where is the evidence that the Russians were responsible? The FBI didn’t find it.

Still, they have said that Mr. Trump himself has not become a target. And no evidence has emerged that would link him or anyone else in his business or political circle directly to Russia’s election operations.

Then there is this link, mostly ignored by the American Media Maggots because it does not follow the meme of “Russians” and “Trump.” That is to say, the NSA. Hillary Clinton outed the NSA and compromised GAMMA level security. They were not pleased. It is, after all, the NSA that has the thousands of square feet of Cray XK supercomputers.in its basements at Fort Meade and elsewhere. But where was the NSA in this? Conspicuously silent.

So let me see if I’ve got this right. When the FBI cleared Hillary Rodham Clinton and said there was insufficient cause to seek an indictment with regard to her emails, that was a good and valid decision.

Yet, when the FBI says there is no evidence to suggest the Russians are involved with Donald Trump or the presidential campaign, they are not to be believed?

And isn’t it odd that everyone — ahem, excuse me, the Demorats and Leftists — want to shoot whatever messenger there may be and not recognize the importance of the messages themselves?

That Hillary Rodham Clinton, her staffers, her campaign, was rife with corruption, cheating and endless lies?

Apparently Leftists think we have no memory or internet access.

BZ

Here is how urban blacks win hearts and minds

black-thugs-chicago-wednesday-11-9-2016

“You voted Trump,” the mob screams, “You gonna pay for that shit.”

Another woman shouts “beat his ass,” while another man is heard laughing before remarking, “Don’t vote Trump.”

Here, ladies and gentlemen, is a crime in progress heavily documented by the suspects themselves, young black urban males. See the photograph above. In California this would be 211 PC – Robbery, and 215 PC – Carjacking. Both are felonies. Information indicates this occurred Wednesday in Chicago.

Here is the evidence. Now it is up to the local police jurisdictions to investigate, as well as the FBI and DOJ for the concomitant hate crimes involved. It is also up to the American Media Maggots to place this video on television, newspapers and the internet in order to bring the suspects to justice for the felonious hate crimes. Here is the original Facebook URL, as I provide the first clues: https://www.facebook.com/pookie.slim.5/posts/988115401334756

What? Do I hear crickets chirping? Because blacks can’t be racist, right?

Now you know why Americans hate the media, distrust the FBI and the DOJ, and know the game is rigged for Leftists and the politically correct elites. Now you know why Donald Trump was elected. You also know why the above incident occurred on Wednesday.

Imagine if this were your father, your cousin, your brother, your uncle, your grandfather.

Racism is a two-way street. And no one is equal until all are equal.

BZ