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?

 

“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

 

Obama defecates on America before leaving

Mr Obama, like a spoiled child who has been told he can’t do or have something, is moving in a unilateral fashion to ensure the presidential transition is as troublesome as possible for President-Elect Donald Trump, to the point where the US could actually be under escalated threat. Cyber warfare, now, can be every bit as disastrous as kinetic warfare.

The most accurate summary of what’s happening was made by Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, when he said:

“Obama is like a tenant who has been evicted from a property, and he’s going to trash the place on the way out.”

When Obama’s Doctrine has historically been to “lead from behind,” he now feels it’s time to blow up his chest and posture. Dove turns suddenly to hawk. Why here, why now? Easy: it serves Obama’s and the Demorats’ narrative because this focus deflects from the facts that Demorats, the DNC and Hillary Clinton cheated, lied, colluded, embraced corruption and committed actual yet-unindicted crimes

Let’s not forget it’s Mr Obama who said during the 2012 debate with Mitt Romney:

Let us not forget that the Obama Doctrine itself called for a “Russian reset” in 2009, to the point where Hillary Clinton delivered as a gift, literally, a red button to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in a press conference. The “reset” was to shift from the ways of the Evil & Judgmental George Bush. As perhaps a portent of things to come, the Russian-language label had the wrong word, and read ‘overcharged’ instead of ‘reset.’

Let us not forget it was Mr Obama who leaned over to Russian President Dimitri Medvedev and was caught, sotto voce, on a active microphone asking Russian President Dmitry Medvedev for “space.” Obama said “this is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

Our relationship with Russia is the worst it’s been since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Obama stated he wanted, specifically, sanctions and retaliation for Russia’s “hacking of our election” and the DNC, though Obama offers no evidence or facts to support the allegation — in fact, having said the Russians were not involved — therefore escalating tensions between the two countries. Obama has stated there are “covert actions” coming next. Covert actions? Of what variety? And why — if covert actions are in fact looming — would you be sufficiently daft to announce same?

Further, the sanctions and expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats from various locations and shutting down two Russian compounds in Maryland and New York is stuff of the old Cold War. “Covert actions” are not. Russia may conclude these proposed actions are true existential threats to their security, to include hacking their military and nuclear facilities, their banks, the electrical grid. While the American Media Maggots egg Mr Obama on — in itself one of the strangest things recently, the AMM now being hawks instead of doves — simultaneously Russia leaves Obama out of cease-fire talks with Syria.

In response — no shock — Putin in Moscow says that Russia is considering “retaliation” for Obama’s “retaliation.” Putin’s “retaliation” is of the unknown variety at this point.

Mr Obama does this with twenty-one days left in his lame duck administration.

Even the New York Times seemed to “get it” when it wrote on Thursday that Obama’s actions appear designed to “box in President-elect Donald Trump.” That includes the UN and Israel as well. Obama has had eight years to focus on cyber espionage and cyber warfare, yet somehow waits until the last 21 days of his presidency to make any kind of stand whatsoever? Somehow we knew not of those 35 spy/diplomats and two spy hubs prior?

Particularly with regard to Barack Hussein Obama, I don’t believe in coincidences. Up to this point Obama has had the grim determination of an asthmatic chihuahua regarding foreign hacking.

What’s conveniently forgotten, however, is that Mr Obama — using our taxpayer dollars — tried to purposely interfere in Israel’s 2015 elections in an attempt to specifically keep Benjamin Netanyahu out of office.

Here’s the point. Yes, the Russians and the Chinese are likely hacking the shite out of US government, corporate and intelligence interests perhaps on a daily basis. But we only become upset over it when Leftists, the Demorats, the DNC, John Podesta and Hillary Rodham Clinton are involved? Seriously? Ox? Gored?

Look, Barack Hussein Obama already said the Russians were not involved. The FBI said the Russians were not involved. Yet the CIA intimated with no evidence the Russians were involved and the AMM, Obama, Leftists and Demorats all line up? You expect me to believe you simply on faith? Faith is the very last thing you deserve, Barack Hussein Obama.

This is the same CIA whose DNI, James Clapper, said this in public and LIED directly to each and every American by doing so.

The CIA would never politicize its findings or lean in any particular direction for White House purposes. Would it?

Again, why is Obama doing these things? As Spite House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz said recently: in essence, because he can.

It would appear the US under Mr Obama is conducting retaliatory measures on the Drudge Report, a focus of Obama, due to its publishing a wide array of articles dealing on and critical of Mr Obama himself. Matt Drudge Tweeted: “Is the US government attacking DRUDGE REPORT? Biggest DDoS since site’s inception. VERY suspicious routing [and timing],”

DDoS is shorthand for a Distributed Denial of Service. DDoS is a type of DOS (Distribution of Service) attack where multiple compromised systems, which are often infected with a Trojan, are used to target a single system causing a Denial of Service (DoS) attack.

Let’s not lose sight of the truth. Mr Obama has had eight years to deal or even attempt to address cyber attacks by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. He has done nothing. The Chinese hacked into millions of OPM personnel records. Obama’s response? Meh. Your intimate federal personal records meant nothing to Obama because he was not personally politically affected. It held no sway over the election.

Ladies and gentlemen, I’m not that brilliant. I can find all of these things on the internet. The caveat is: if I want to.

Obama focuses only at the last second on these issues and concurrently decides it’s a wonderful time to do the things he’s had two terms to consider. To wit;

With regard to that last issue, 1.6 million acres, a greater area than the state of Delaware, have been converted to federal control and minimal public use. One man can, by the stroke of a pen, take state land without even one Congressional vote under the Antiquities Act of 1906, something Mr Obama has done on 29 prior occasions, more than any president other than FDR, in order to circumvent Congress on behalf of various environmental groups and interests. This is truly a land seizure by the federal government.

Obama is acting anti-democratically, unilaterally, via edicts from his personal Mount Olympus, despite the disagreements by members of his own party. He believes his decisions are untouchable and, in fact, some of them may actually be irreversible.

In his last moments: all because he can.

If Mr Obama is actually concerned about his so-called “legacy,” he is ill-prepared mentally to recognize the facts. His legacy is that of division on every political and social level imaginable. Sam Stein, for God’s sake, Senior Political Editor for the Huffington Post, said that Obama leaves the party “in a much worse position,” the “states are decimated,” he “lost control of the House and Senate,” the “governorships are decimated.” All factually correct.

Under Obama, the American voter has consistently rejected the stance of the Demorats (including Mr Obama) for the past eight years (2008 to 2016) as they lost 63 seats in the House and 10 seats in the Senate. Republicans (from 2008 to 2016) gained 900+ seats in state legislatures, along with 12 governorships across the US — meaning that 2/3rds of the governors in the nation are now Republicans.

As the Divider-In-Chief, Obama’s entire agenda revolved around striating people by class, sex, race, religion, earnings, region, state, city, county, clothing, music, laws, wages, healthcare, culture, employment, family, mode of transport, energy consumption, food, cable channels watched, media consumed, social settings, the way you view America, even your writings, statements and thoughts.

Then we have Mr Obama’s actions in his final presidential days. In my opinion, he is moving to isolate and denigrate Donald Trump, not Vladimir Putin.

The only conclusion one can draw is that of Sheriff Clarke’s reference above, Mr Obama is purposely defecating in the national punchbowl and Mr Trump’s coming punchbowl because he is shockingly immature, self-centered and, well, because he can.

BZ

 

Thanks to Jill Stein, Hillary Clinton & Demorats

Because your demands for recounts and investigations of various states and precincts have, in fact, revealed election fraud biased towards Demorats, Greens and Leftists.

Not Donald Trump.

Stuart Varney also had kind words for Jill Stein:

Myself as well. Because, being me, I love it when a great Leftist plan goes awry.

From BizPacReview.com:

Stein’s recount backfires bigtime as ‘major ballot box fraud’ discovered in Hillary-heavy Detroit

by Michael Dorstewitz

People everywhere are saying, “Thanks, Jill!”

Former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein‘s recount efforts in Michigan indicate that there was indeed voter fraud in the Great Lake State — but it favored Hillary Clinton.

The evidence of shenanigans was discovered in more than one-third of the voting precincts situated within the Democrat controlled city of Detroit. Machines in those precincts tabulated more votes than what they should have.

This is just one area. In just one state. Stein contested three states to include Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — then had her cases shot down by federal judges in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The recount is done.

So I say: let’s make sure we do in fact open invetigations into election fraud in major urban rat cages around America. Because one clear thing will be found: rampant fraud on the Left in favor of the Demorats.

BZ

 

Obama says: no Russian hacking

If you’re like me, you find yourself surprised every day by the news stories that appear. That is why I found myself gobsmacked today. From Breitbart.com:

Obama Crushes Conspiracy: No Evidence that Russia Tampered with Votes in Election

by Charlie Spiering

President Barack Obama emphatically denounced the conspiracy theory saying Russians successfully tampered with the American voting process.

Obama dismissed the hack and the leaked emails as “not very interesting” and lacking “explosive” revelations. He puzzled as to why it was an “obsession” by the news media despite the knowledge that the Russians were responsible.

The conflicting and interesting thing here, however, is Obama’s statement about the emails being “not very interesting.” It is another minimization by a Leftist of a continuing series of events that, had they been committed by conservatives or the GOP, would have created shite-storms of monumental proportions and endless investigations by the DOJ and FBI.

Two notations:

  1. I didn’t see that coming, and
  2. I wonder how pissed off the AMM and HRC are right now?

I can see smoke issuing from their ears from here.

BZ