Tag Archives: James Comey

The Mueller report confirms: a soft coup against America and Trump

Posted on by

I’ve said this since late 2016, all through 2017 and 2018, with the March 2019 Mueller report now confirming:

What we experienced in America, instigated by the Barack Hussein Obama 44 administration, the DNC, Hillary Clinton and her campaign, the DOJ and the FBI plus other abetting actors like John McCain (and many others), was a soft coup against a presidential nominee, a president-elect and a sitting president of the United States.

Donald John Trump.

This soft coup was, yes, against him but by extension was aimed directly at you and me. Us. American voters. Anyone who dared not to vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Here’s what happened in a nutshell: the counterintelligence divisions of the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, the DIA and the NSA were all arrayed — in concert with the DNC, the Demorats, Hillary Clinton, Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele, John McCain, Glenn Simpson — while working hand-in-hand with the American Media Maggots in a week-by-week, day-by-day, hour-by-hour hammering of the situation — and in concert with the Barack Hussein Obama administration and the then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch — were working overtime with all possible available resources in order to not only derail the candidacy of an individual for president but, further, to smear the person in such a way as to make them a pariah, a leper, forevermore in the minds and eyes of the United States and the world.

This was spying on a political campaign. Spying on a private citizen. With the full weight of the US government behind.

This is something a tinpot dictatorship does. This is something a totalitarian society does. Not a Republic. Not a nation that abides by laws and operates by the rule of law.

Then there was the dirty bought-and-paid-for “dossier” financed by the DNC, the FBI, Hillary Clinton and aforementioned Russian oligarch. You want actual “Russian collusion”? Want to mix in Jimmy The Leak?

The fuckery was afoot, the plot drawn, and even “insurance” formulated by FBI agents Lisa Page and Peter Strzok in case Hillary Clinton failed to win the presidency. The Russia investigation was just that “insurance.” There was no way, of course, this could happen. But “just in case.”

Page first entered the spotlight in December 2017, when it was revealed by the Justice Department inspector general that she and then-FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok exchanged numerous anti-Trump text messages. The two were involved in the FBI’s initial counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates during the 2016 election, and later served on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team.

Among their texts was one concerning the so-called “insurance policy.” During her interview with the Judiciary Committee in July 2018, Page was questioned at length about that text — and essentially confirmed this referred to the Russia investigation while explaining that officials were proceeding with caution, concerned about the implications of the case while not wanting to go at “total breakneck speed” and risk burning sources as they presumed Trump wouldn’t be elected anyway.

Further, she confirmed investigators only had a “paucity” of evidence at the start.

Then-Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., kicked off that section of questioning by asking about the text sent from Strzok to Page in August 2016 which read: “I want to believe the path you threw out in Andy’s [McCabe’s] office—that there’s no way he gets elected—but I’m afraid we can’t take the risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

The former FBI lawyer explained how the FBI was trying to strike a balance with the investigation into the Trump campaign—which agents called “Crossfire Hurricane.”

“So, upon the opening of the crossfire hurricane investigation, we had a number of discussions up through and including the Director regularly in which we were trying to find an answer to the question, right, which is, is there someone associated with the [Trump] campaign who is working with the Russians in order to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton,” Page said. “And given that it is August, we were very aware of the speed and sensitivity that we needed to operate under.”

You caught that, correct? “The Director” is none other than Jimmy “The Leak” Comey who had been keep in this loop. And there was a “paucity” of evidence. Lisa Page said that, even prior to the appointment of Robert Mueller as Special Counsel by Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein — the same Rosenstein who wrote a letter to President Trump outlining the various and numerous reasons to fire James Comey — there was no evidence to indicate Trump-Russia “collusion.” From September of 2018:

More than nine months after the FBI opened its highly classified counterintelligence investigation into alleged coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia, FBI lawyer Lisa Page said investigators still could not say whether there was collusion, according to a transcript of Page’s recent closed-door deposition reviewed by Fox News.

“I think this represents that even as far as May 2017, we still couldn’t answer the question,” Page said.

“I cannot provide the specifics of a confidential interview,” Ratcliffe told Fox News when asked for comment. “But I can say that Lisa Page left me with the impression, based on her own words, that the lead investigator of the Russian collusion case, Peter Strzok, had found no evidence of collusion after nearly a year.”

May 2017 is a key month because FBI DIrector James Comey was fired by President Trump and Mueller was designated special counsel. In August, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller, wrote the still-secret “scope memo” spelling out the boundaries for the special counsel investigation.

Do we remember why I call Comey “Jimmy the Leak“?

Comey testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee in June 2017 that he leaked memos he wrote after conversations with Trump in order to force the appointment of a special counsel.

“I asked a friend of mine to share the content of a memo with the reporter, I didn’t do it myself for a variety of reasons, but I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel,” Comey testified June 8, 2017. (RELATED: James Comey Denies Being A Leaker)

Comey instructed his friend, Daniel Richman, to give the Times a memo he wrote about a conversation he had with Trump on Feb. 14, 2017. Comey claimed Trump asked him to shut down an investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Comey’s ploy worked, as Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel May 17, 2017.

So what occurred this past Sunday, March 24th?

Let’s get back to the letter issued on Monday by Attorney General William Barr, which states the Mueller report indicates there is no Trump-Russia conspiracy:

Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member Collins:

As a supplement to the notification provided on Friday, March 22, 2019, I am writing today to advise you of the principal conclusions reached by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III and to inform you about the status of my initial review of the report he has prepared.

The Special Counsel’s Report

On Friday, the Special Counsel submitted to me a “confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions” he has reached, as required by 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c). This report is entitled “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.” Although my review is ongoing, I believe that it is in the public interest to describe the report and to summarize the principal conclusions reached by the Special Counsel and the results of his investigation.

The report explains that the· Special Counsel and his staff thoroughly investigated allegations that members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, and others associated with it, conspired with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, or sought to obstruct the related federal investigations. In the report, the Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.

The Special Counsel obtained a number of indictments and convictions of individuals and entities in connection with his investigation, all of which have been publicly disclosed. During the course of his investigation, the Special Counsel also referred several matters to other offices for further action. The report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public. Below, I summarize the principal conclusions set out in the Special Counsel’s report.

Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. The Special Counsel’s report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel’s investigation was whether any Americans -including individuals associated with the Trump campaign – joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

[Footnote from letter: In assessing potential conspiracy charges, the Special Counsel also considered whether members of the Trump campaign “coordinated” with Russian election interference activities. The Special Counsel defined “coordination” as an “agreement-tacit or express-between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference.”]

The Special Counsel’s investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

The second element involved the Russian government’s efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple. offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

Obstruction of Justice. The report’s second part addresses a number of actions by the President – most of which have been the subject of public reporting – that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion – one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction .. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Stop. Alan Dershowitz has something to say about this point.

Excellent questions. May I be so base as to suggest that Mueller lacks the political cojones to draw the distinction, and may I also suggest that Mueller essentially “Comey’ed” the situation (using the name as a verb) insofar as he drew clear and numerous points but failed to do his job. Either there are events and situations worthy of prosecution or there are not. This was Mueller’s job. He equivocated. You see, Robert Mueller and Jimmy The Leak are not just friends, but they are former FBI Directors.

The Special Counsel’s decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves itto the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel’s office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel’s obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.

In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,” and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President’s actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department’s principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of¬justice offense.

37,040-41 (July 9, 1999). As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel’s report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.

Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel and my initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or could be subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6( e ), which imposes restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to “matter[ s] occurring before [a] grand jury.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(2)(B). Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6( e) material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain circumstances. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 401(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for their intended criminal justice function. Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the 6( e) material that by law cannot be made public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all 6( e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible. Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.

As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that “the Attorney General may determine that public release of’ notifications to your respective Committees “would be in the public interest.” 28 C.F.R. § 600.9(c). I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.

The reactions, as you might guess, came pouring forth. Here are Steve Hilton, Gregg Jarrett, Sara Carter and Kayleigh McEnany.

Who knew of this? Who do you think knew of this?

Is there anyone here who believes that Barack Obama is stupid, ill-educated, unaware of politics and was so incredibly laissez-faire that he was completely oblivious as to what occurred in his administration? Particularly with regard to what became the number one target of the Demorats, Donald John Trump?

Here is ABC’s George Stephanopoulis speaking with Representative Jim Jordan:

The American Media Maggots did indeed shit car parts following AG Barr’s summary of the Mueller report.

So somehow this Steven Colbert video isn’t aging so well any more.

Here are the American Media Maggots in full-on continuous Trump Derangement Mode. Let’s listen.

Yet: I have a question. An obvious one. Perhaps so incredibly obvious that no one seems to have thought of it.

Dear Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Jerry Nadler, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, James Comey, et al. You all swear you have proof of President Trump “colluding” with Russia or Russia having influenced our election for Trump, against Clinton. I believe you have index fingers. Or at least you have staff with index fingers. Why is it that you didn’t utilize said device and dial up the Mueller team?

“Say Bob, ol’ buddy, have I got some evidence for you.” And then give it to him.

You could have done this every day for the past two years. Yet either one of two things happened: 1) You simply forgot to, in the daily rush of your hectic lives, or 2) You never had any fucking evidence in the first place. Me? I’m going with number two.

We know the FBI was biased. There are numerous facts in evidence regarding that.

The Mueller report summary is out. The Leftists, Demorats and American Media Maggots, having been thwarted once more by facts, are busy resetting goalposts, changing equations, reframing accusations and generally shitting car parts. The question is: what next? Does the report itself get released?

Lindsay Graham, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee has some thoughts.

Further: why not release just about all the documents relevant to the case? President Trump could declassify a host of documents.

For example: why can’t we see just what it was that the FBI provided to the FISA courts in order to acquire their searches of Trump, the tower and his associates?

One thought is this. And it is a damning one. A massive reason why Leftists and Demorats want no further documents uncovered.

Does anyone understand the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine? If, for example, an investigation is conducted and it is found that a FISA judge signed off on an affidavit packed with specious, unverified information such as the salacious “dirty dossier” — up to and including outright falsehoods — everything in terms of evidence subsequently procured is illegal and therefore inadmissible in court.

That would mean: convictions and indictments on Michael Flynn, Manafort, Cohen, et al, would have to be vacated.

One final point, something I’ve always wondered.

Where was the benefit of the doubt for Donald Trump?

As in: “Mr Trump, I’m Agent Smith from the FBI and we have information to indicate your campaign may have been subject to some kind of infiltration attempt by foreign powers, to possibly include the Russians. Would you work with us to try to get to the bottom of this?”

You know. Like what happened to Kalifornia Senator Diane Feinstein when it was discovered that she had a Chinese operative as her driver and personal attache for ten years, in her office, with access to highly sensitive documents and information.

The FBI managed to afford Senator Diane Feinstein the benefit of the doubt.

I wrote this back in August of 2018.

Feinstein was ‘mortified’ by FBI allegation that staffer was spy for China: report

by Lukas Mikelionis

U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein fired a staffer a few years back who was allegedly part of an effort to spy and pass on political intelligence to the Chinese government.

The FBI informed Feinstein, the then-chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, about five years ago about the staffer and allegations that the staffer was a spy. The source who confirmed the incident to the San Francisco Chronicle said “Dianne was mortified” upon learning about it.

Certainly Donald Trump would have been “mortified” to discover such a thing in his campaign.

But let’s ask ourselves a fundamental question. Could it be remotely possible that the Chinese determined to insert an agent directly into Feinstein’s vehicle because she was the Chair of the Senate Committee on Intelligence — a committee upon which she still sits?

The suspected spy served as the lawmaker’s driver in California, but took on other roles as well, including helping out in her San Francisco office and being Feinstein’s liaison to the Asian-American community in the state. He attended Chinese Consulate events on behalf of the senator.

This is worth a chortle:

A former official said that the spy’s handler “probably got an award back in China” for his efforts to penetrate Feinstein’s office and pass on intelligence.

Taxpayer money paid this Chinese mole or spy. Yours and mine. First question: did he get a pension? How would we know? Wouldn’t it behoove the Demorats to keep such a cock-up quiet? Of course it would. What a great job. Steal secrets, spy on the gweilo, then take a cushy retirement.

Then let’s break this down as well:

The suspected spy served as the lawmaker’s driver in California, but took on other roles as well, including helping out in her San Francisco office and being Feinstein’s liaison to the Asian-American community in the state. He attended Chinese Consulate events on behalf of the senator.

He was a driver and, apparently, much more. Let’s be serious. After her husband’s close associations with China and her comfort factor in dealing with same, would it not be logical that the amount of time spent with her day after day, week after week, year after year, a bit of a confidant, would result in her guard letting down? Of course. It turns out that Russell Lowe wasn’t just her driver — he was her office manager as well.

What of this?

Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s Ties To China Go Way Deeper Than An Alleged Office Spy

by Ben Weingarten

Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s warm relationship with and advocacy for Communist China go back decades and involve millions, if not billions, of dollars.

As media, intelligence agency, and political scrutiny of foreign meddling is seemingly at its apex, a story with big national security implications involving a high-ranking senator with access to America’s most sensitive intelligence information has been hiding in plain sight.

The story involves China and the senior U.S. senator from California, and former chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Democrat Dianne Feinstein. It was buried eight paragraphs into a recent Politico exposé on foreign efforts to infiltrate Silicon Valley, as a passing example of political espionage.

Did the senator expose herself to potential blackmail, or the public to danger through leakage of sensitive, highly classified information? Is firing really the proper punishment for providing political intelligence to a foreign power?

By now you get my point. The FBI decided to do Senator Feinstein a solid by notifying her and her staff of the potential threat from within due to this individual. They told her something similar to “we think you have a Chinese spy problem.”

That is precisely what the FBI did not do for the Donald Trump campaign. They could have taken the staff and then-candidate/nominee Donald Trump aside and said something similar to “eh, just thought you should know, we think you have something of a Russia problem,” as with Feinstein.

But no.

Gosh. I wonder what the difference was? And wasn’t Robert Mueller the FBI director during that time, in 2013? Why yes, he was. Comey wasn’t appointed until September of 2013.

The difference was Donald John Trump.

This was a soft coup against President Trump.

But in truth it was and is a soft coup against the American people. The American voters.

The story is just unfolding.

But wait; there’s more.

BZ

 

 Share

BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, Thursday, 12-13-18, with special guest PROFESSOR MICHAEL JONES, and a second SECRET guest!

Posted on by

Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursday nights, thanks to my shameless contract — as well as appear on the Sack Heads: Against Tyranny Show every Wednesday night.

Hour 1: BZ spoke to PROFESSOR MICHAEL JONES, otherwise known as The Underground Professor, after a year’s lapse. Professor Jones is a highly-accredited Constitutional scholar whose own radio show archives can be found here. Tonight he talked about the creation of the US Constitution, what it means, and why our country is not a Democracy. If not a Democracy, then what is it? Listen and find out!

Hour 2: BZ started into Happy Stories and then transitioned into his Special Super Secret Sauce Guest, none other than Sack Heads SHAUN, co-owner of the entire SHR Media Network! Listen up to find out what he said by clicking the links below!

If you want to listen to the show in Spreaker, click on the yellow button at the upper left.

Listen to “BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, Thursday, 12-13-18” on Spreaker.

If you care to watch the show on the SHR Media YouTube channel, click on the red start button below. We kindly ask you to SUBSCRIBE to the SHR Media channel. Please NOTE: For DISH subscribers: your Hopper has recently been wired to play YouTube videos. You can now toss ol’ BZ onto your massive flatscreen TV and watch him in all of his obese, biased and politically-egregious, lamentable goodness — for free!

You can watch the show here on the SHR Media Facebook page. Please like and follow us on Facebook.

Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin (on Twitter @BZep, Facebook as Biff Zeppe and the Bloviating Zeppelin, and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.

As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.

Please remember we only monitor the chat room at SHRMEDIA.COM — though there is chat available on both Facebook and YouTube. Come on over to the SHR chat room where you’ll meet great friends!

  • Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives on Spreaker? Go here.
  • Want to watch past shows on Periscope? Go here.
  • Want to watch past shows on the SHR Media Facebook page? Go here.
  • Want to watch past Berserk Bobcat Saloon shows on YouTube? Go here.

Thank you one and all for listening, watching and supporting the SHR Media Network: “Conservative Media Done Right.”

BZ

 

 Share

BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, Thursday, 10-18-18

Posted on by

Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays, thanks to my shameless contract — as well as appear on the Sack Heads: Against Tyranny Show every Wednesday night.

Make no mistake: until November 6th, I’ll be doing my best to point out the obvious: there is great news out there for Conservatives. We must remain positive, and we must get out and vote.

We cannot afford to be smug or complacent with the win involving Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh. This is the time to double down on resolution, to commit to supporting anything and everything that isn’t a Demorat, a Leftist or the American Media Maggots.

We can’t afford to listen to the bad news Leftists are going to ratchet up and continue to spew about Conservatives and our chances in November. We know they lie, they are biased and they publish falsehoods with impunity. The American Media Maggots are nothing more than the publishing arm of Demorats and Leftists.

We have to vote red in November. We have to keep the House, and we have to keep the Senate. We must mail in our absentee ballots. We can let nothing deter us from appearing at the polls on November 6th, no matter the circumstances, no matter the weather.

Leftists, Demorats and the American Media Maggots want to destroy Conservatives and Conservatism, eliminate us, hurt us both politically and, these days, physically as well. We cannot let this stand.

Commitment. Resolution. Fortitude. Stand up for America and for the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

Because if you don’t?

No one else will.

Vote red on November 6th. Keep America great.

Hour 1: BZ “connected the dots” about the Mueller investigation, the Deep State, and the Soft Coup against a presidential nominee, a president-elect and a sitting president. Then: how PG&E screwed over its customers in the name of “climate change” in order to ameliorate wildfire lawsuits

Hour 2: BZ proffered more Happy Stories and emphasized that we must all VOTE RED ON NOVEMBER 6th.

If you care to listen to the show in Spreaker, click on the yellow button at the upper left.

Listen to “BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, Thursday, 10-18-18” on Spreaker.

If you care to watch the show on the SHR Media YouTube channel, click on the red start button below. We kindly ask you to SUBSCRIBE to the SHR Media channel. Please NOTE: For DISH subscribers: your Hopper has recently been wired to play YouTube videos. You can now toss ol’ BZ onto your massive flatscreen TV and watch him in all of his obese, biased and politically-egregious, lamentable goodness — for free!

You can watch the show here on the SHR Media Facebook page. SHR has also associated itself with Periscope and with Google Play. Watch the show on Periscope here.

Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin (on Twitter @BZep, Facebook as Biff Zeppe and the Bloviating Zeppelin, and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.

As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.

Please remember we only monitor the chat room at SHRMEDIA.COM — though there is chat available on both Facebook and YouTube. Come on over to the SHR chat room where you’ll meet great friends!

  • Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives on Spreaker? Go here.
  • Want to watch past shows on Periscope? Go here.
  • Want to watch past shows on the SHR Media Facebook page? Go here.
  • Want to watch past Berserk Bobcat Saloon shows on YouTube? Go here.

Thank you one and all for listening, watching and supporting the SHR Media Network: “Conservative Media Done Right.”

BZ

 

 Share

BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, Thursday, 9-6-18, with KARI BAXTER DONOVAN

Posted on by

Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays, thanks to my shameless contract — as well as appear on the Sack Heads: Against Tyranny Show every Wednesday night.

Hour 1: BZ spoke to his East Coast Political Goddess, KARI BAXTER DONOVAN, co-creator and co-owner of Populist Media — whose website has changed to Populist.Media. She weighed in on her populist website and on current political events.

Hour 2: BZ led the hour with numerous Happy Stories, and then transitioned into an SHR MEDIA SPECIAL REPORT: the Intelligentsia Elites. Yes, the show went into overtime by about 10 minutes.

If you care to listen to the show in Spreaker, click on the yellow button at the upper left.

Listen to “BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, Thursday, 9-6-18” on Spreaker.

If you care to watch the show on the SHR Media YouTube channel, click on the red start button below. We kindly ask you to SUBSCRIBE to the SHR Media channel. Please NOTE: For DISH subscribers: your Hopper has recently been wired to play YouTube videos. You can now toss ol’ BZ onto your massive flatscreen TV and watch him in all of his obese, biased and politically-egregious, lamentable goodness — for free!

Facebook has decided to play well with Spreaker again, so you can watch the show here on the SHR Facebook page. SHR has also associated itself with PERISCOPE and with Google Play.

Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin (on Twitter @BZep, Facebook as Biff Zeppe and the Bloviating Zeppelin, and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.

As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.

Please remember we only monitor the chat room at SHRMEDIA.COM — though there is chat available on both Facebook and YouTube. Come on over to the SHR chat room where you’ll meet great friends!

  • Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives on Spreaker? Go here.
  • Want to watch past shows on Periscope? Go here.
  • Want to watch past shows on the SHR Media Facebook page? Go here.
  • Want to watch past Berserk Bobcat Saloon shows on YouTube? Go here.

Thank you one and all for listening, watching and supporting the SHR Media Network: “Conservative Media Done Right.”

BZ

 

 Share

The retired Intelligentsia Elites are threatened

Posted on by

Intelligentsia Elite bromance: Comey, Brennan and Clapper. Isn’t it somehow fitting and appropriate that Brennan wears the red tie that day?

Those threatened include John Brennan, James Comey, James Clapper, Susan Rice, and a host of individuals — some of whom, in retrospect, possibly shouldn’t have been issued a security clearance in the first place: think Communist John Brennan.

That said, the Intelligentsia Elites are up in arms at the impertinence of President Donald Trump! Fie, they say! How can the guy with the dead orange cat on his head determine who keeps a security clearance? The temerity of this interloper! They are the DC Intel cognoscenti, the highbrows, the literati.

First, the predicating August 15th event as covered by the WashingtonTimes.com:

Brennan first to fall as Trump kicks off review of Obama officials’ access

by Dave Boyer

President Trump on Wednesday personally revoked the security clearance of former CIA Director John O. Brennan, a bitter and vocal Trump critic, citing his “erratic conduct and behavior” as their clashes escalated over the special counsel’s Russia investigation.

It was the first move in a White House review of access of top Obama-era intelligence and law enforcement officials, and it is believed to be the first time a president has taken such a direct and public role in shutting off a security clearance.

In a statement, Mr. Trump declared that Mr. Brennan has “a history that calls into question his objectivity and credibility.”

Agreed.

However: time to fight back! they say. Let’s watch one of these Hoovering IEs try to justify their clearance as the lunatic silver threads of liquid spittle are flung all about the CNN studio. Even the Floor Director was disgusted, and the janitor was certainly less than pleased upon cleanup later that night. Those camera lenses are expensive.

Good old Phil Mudd. A liar then and a liar now. We’ll get back to him. Trust me.

In the meantime, from the PatriotChronicles.com:

THE TRUTH COMES OUT ABOUT HOW PROFITABLE THE SECURITY CLEARANCES ARE

by Simon Daly

It has become more and more apparent that it was a good move to take away the security clearances. Hannity talked about the book “Compromised,” on his radio show.  Peter Schweizer, President of The Government Accountability and Institute, gave the forward for the book by Seamus Bruner. In the Forward Schweizer clued us all into how intelligence agents, like Comey and Mueller, were working the system. But this was not meager connections. They made millions.

But wait. Isn’t it Phil Mudd who insisted, at the highest decibel levels possible, that he receives no remuneration from the government? And wasn’t it Paris Dennard who continued to insist that wasn’t necessarily the case? With, ahem, private contracts?

Yes to both. Private contracts.

“James Comey’s net worth has skyrocketed 4000 percent. By the time he left [the Department of Justice] in 2005 and came back in 2013, Comey made 6.1 million dollars after [Robert] Mueller granted his employer, Lockheed Martin — the largest contractor in history — a billion-dollar boondoggle. Under Mueller’s direction, the FBI granted multiple spy contracts to Lockheed Martin while Comey was advising them on the legality of their operations. Comey also received another six million dollars working for one of the world’s largest hedge funds and an additional $500,000 for unused vacation time.”

“Mueller cashed in, as well. In 2013, when Comey took over the FBI while Mueller left to start consulting at a consulting firm, he made more than $3.5 million dollars in about a year, giving speeches and representing clients who had previously enriched his FBI director; clients like the world’s most profitable spy corporation.”

But wait. Let’s visit Hypocrisy Central for a moment.

“Two of Mueller’s former clients are cooperating with the special counsel, Facebook [and] Apple. Mueller’s former client, the paragon of privacy Apple Inc. provided the special counsel with access to Paul Manafort’s iCloud despite making a public spectacle protecting the San Bernardino terrorist’s privacy.

Doesn’t one hand wash another’s back once government service is concluded? Of course. It’s the Gravy Train. “The spice must flow.”

“Jim Comey and Robert Mueller are very close friends,” said Schweizer. “They met each other in the 1990s at the Justice Department and have really been sort of this tag team from the beginning. When one of them is in the private sector and one is in government, they steer contracts in the direction of people they’re affiliated with and vice-versa. It’s a very troubling story that shows the revolving door applies every bit as much to these gentlemen, and crony capitalism applies every bit as much as it does to other people in Washington.”

Security clearances are under the gun like never before. Thank God. Were you aware that roughly 5 million people have various federal security clearances in the US? And mustn’t you ask: just how many of those are totally unwarranted?

Trump, intelligence officials clash over ‘golden ticket’ security clearances

by Ben Wolfgang and Guy Taylor

They’re prestigious, fiercely held and often highly valuable — and they’re under the microscope like never before.

Led by President Trump, critics have zeroed in on the proliferation of security clearances and cast them as “golden tickets” to high-paying jobs and positions of power and influence, holding them up as shining examples of the Washington carousel that allows the most exclusive establishment insiders to benefit from their status long after they have left public service.

Mr. Trump’s defenders say past administrations have gone far beyond the pale in their broadsides against his policies and have leveraged their security clearances to make partisan critiques seem more authoritative.

The offended IEs fire back.

Former officials say that any effort to systematically revoke the clearances of such political opponents could undermine the continuity of defense and national security contacts by upending an institutional memory pipeline.

But some concede that those who hang on to their clearances can gain “vast sums of money,” and there is a growing push in the White House and on Capitol Hill to overhaul the system.

“I think there’s no doubt that security clearances are a golden ticket in D.C.,” said Rick Manning, president of the conservative nonprofit group Americans for Limited Government, who argued in favor of revoking Mr. Brennan’s security clearance.

“But it’s not necessarily a bad thing,” he said. “People who get security clearances have earned them. The challenge we have right now, however, is that there are some former Obama administration officials, including Brennan, who seem to be using information they have access to for partisan political purposes and to carry out score-settling.”

D’ya think? And I would ask, what happened to ol’ BZ the microsecond he left the embracing arms of the FBI or the US Marshal? That’s right. His security clearances were de-rezzed right out of the system along with every password or access point he once possessed. AND RIGHTLY SO. It’s a need to know vs a need to share. My needs had ceased. Properly. Rightfully. Logically.

White House National Security Adviser John R. Bolton suggested recently that he offers a personal example of how a clearance can benefit an individual and a company.

“In my case, my clearance was active at the time when I was a member of a board of directors of a company that did classified work for the government and it was felt important that some of the directors be able to access that information,” he told ABC News on Sunday. “There were other times when I was a civilian that my classification was dormant, my security clearance was dormant, and I think that’s appropriate, too.”

Mr. Bolton suggested a review of the entire system of deciding who has access to sensitive information. High-level officials also have said the approval and review processes take entirely too long.

There’s another serious problem.

“When John Brennan makes unsubstantiated allegations like Vladimir Putin could blackmail the president of the United States, and he says those things while he’s still holding a top-secret clearance, foreign spies upon whom the U.S. intelligence community relies to steal secrets on our behalf … might assume Brennan knows something the rest of us do not,” said Daniel Hoffman, a retired CIA senior clandestine services officer. “In my view, Brennan has been wildly irresponsible, but it would be [up to] the security experts to determine whether he, in fact, mishandled classified [information] or should no longer be trusted with classified information.”

Senator Richard Burr asked Brennan to put up or shut up.

Sen. Richard Burr, who leads the Senate Selective Committee on Intelligence, issued a sharp rebuke of former CIA Director John Brennan, saying that if he has evidence of Russian collusion he should have presented it to his panel.

The North Carolina Republican’s statement was remarkable in that he has adhered to a strict nonpartisan approach as the committee pursues a more than yearlong investigation into Russia’s hacking Democratic Party computers and other interference.

After President Trump revoked Mr. Brennan’s security clearance Thursday, the ex-top spy claimed there is no doubt candidate Trump colluded with the Kremlin. On Twitter, Mr. Brennan has accused the president of committing felonies, such as treason. He has asserted Mr. Trump is being blackmailed by Vladimir Putin.

Mr. Burr suggested Mr. Brennan has become a partisan ex-director whose statements are “purely political and based on conjecture.”

Even James Clapper wasn’t a lockstep friend of Brennan. From TheHill.com:

Clapper: Brennan’s rhetoric is becoming an issue

by Megan Keller

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Sunday that he thinks former CIA Director John Brennan‘s rhetoric is becoming an issue “in and of itself.”

“John and his rhetoric have become an issue in and of itself,” Clapper said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “John is subtle like a freight train and he’s gonna say what’s on his mind.” 

Clapper’s comments came in response to an op-ed penned by Brennan in The New York Times this week, in which he wrote that President Trumpcolluded with Russia during the 2016 election. 

Clapper said he empathized with Brennan, but voiced concerns for Brennan’s fiery rhetoric toward Trump and his administration.

“I think that the common denominator among all of us [in the intelligence community] that have been speaking up … is genuine concern about the jeopardy and threats to our institutions,” Clapper said.

But isn’t it odd how the “17 intelligence agencies” that came out against Trump tried to brand themselves as “apolitical” and “unbiased” when, in fact, they were the most politically biased? To the point where even Clapper is having misgivings?

Then we have the issue of James Clapper himself leaking material to CNN, his “new” host network upon retirement. From the WashingtonTimes.com:

Obama DNI Clapper leaked dossier story on Trump: House intel report

by Rowan Scarborough, 4-28-18

James Clapper, while the nation’s highest ranking intelligence officer, leaked to CNN sleazy anti-Trump information contained in the Christoper Steele dossier that was privately briefed to the president-elect, according to a new House intelligence report.

Now a paid CNN analyst, Mr. Clapper had denied he was the leaker. He is an ardent Trump critic and has predicted his downfall.

President Barack Obama’s director of national intelligence, Mr. Clapper admitted to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in private testimony that he briefed CNN’s Jake Tapper in early January 2017.

He had pressed FBI Director James Comey to present to Mr. Trump at Trump Tower on Jan. 6, 2017 the dossier’s salacious parts, according to Mr. Comey’s own memos.

CNN then ran a story on Jan. 10, 2017 about the briefing which said the Russians own compromising material on the new president concerning prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room.

The report gave the dossier instant legitimacy. Its unverified charges have dogged the Trump White House ever since.

Here is more from the Federalist.com:

Declassified Congressional Report: James Clapper Lied About Dossier Leaks To CNN

by Sean Davis, 4-27-18

A newly declassified report on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections reveals that former intelligence chief James Clapper lied to Congress about information he shared with CNN on the infamous Steele dossier.

Buried within a newly declassified congressional report on Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections is a shocking revelation: former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper not only leaked information about the infamous Steele dossier and high-level government briefings about it to CNN, he also may have lied to Congress about the matter.

In one of the findings within the 253-page report, the House intelligence committee wrote that Clapper leaked details of a dossier briefing given to then-President-elect Donald Trump to CNN’s Jake Tapper, lied to Congress about the leak, and was rewarded with a CNN contract a few months later.

Back to John Brennan. Remember the Brennan v Feinstein wars? Where Brennan insisted his CIA didn’t spy on Congress? Except that, uh, it did?

Inquiry by C.I.A. Affirms It Spied on Senate Panel

by Mark Mazzetti & Carl Hulse

WASHINGTON — An internal investigation by the C.I.A. has found that its officers penetrated a computer network used by the Senate Intelligence Committee in preparing its damning report on the C.I.A.’s detention and interrogation program.

The report by the agency’s inspector general also found that C.I.A. officers read the emails of the Senate investigators and sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department based on false information, according to a summary of findings made public on Thursday. One official with knowledge of the report’s conclusions said the investigation also discovered that the officers created a false online identity to gain access on more than one occasion to computers used by the committee staff.

The inspector general’s account of how the C.I.A. secretly monitored a congressional committee charged with supervising its activities touched off angry criticism from members of the Senate and amounted to vindication for Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the committee’s Democratic chairwoman, who excoriated the C.I.A. in March when the agency’s monitoring of committee investigators became public.

Demorats lost confidence in Brennan way back in 2014? What happened since then? Oh yeah: Trump.

But anger among lawmakers grew throughout the day. Leaving a nearly three-hour briefing about the report in a Senate conference room, members of both parties called for the C.I.A. officers to be held accountable, and some said they had lost confidence in Mr. Brennan’s leadership. “This is a serious situation and there are serious violations,” said Mr. Chambliss, generally a staunch ally of the intelligence community. He called for the C.I.A. employees to be “dealt with very harshly.”

How soon we forget. What happened to Brennan? Nothing.

Back to James Clapper. I’m going to be honest and clear, the two things I value most. James Clapper lied baldly, nakedly, abjectly, to the American public and to Congress. Does anyone remember:

By the way, this is classic, textbook body language displayed by Clapper to indicate lying. His right hand is on top of his head. He refuses to look Ron Wyden in the face as he answers, glances down and up, and rubs his head as an affectation. You could — and instructors do — utilize this video in classes on interview and interrogation. As in: here’s the quintessential example of public lying.

Here is another example of James Clapper lying in March of 2017 because, in retrospect, we know this to be false because of Flynn, Stephanopoulos, Manafort and Cohen prosecutions, as in: how’d they get the information otherwise?

Anyone besides me starting to see something of a thread or a pattern or a trend here? Perhaps why I presented the old “contrast and compare” back-and-forth method used by my various professors in college?

Now let’s go back to Phil Mudd. Remember when Paris Dennard said “it’s profitable for them after they leave government because if you have a security clearance your contracts and your consulting pay you more money because of the access you have.”

Mudd then testalies and says he has no contracts with the government that pay him anything. Really? Mudd completely deflects and fails to answer Dennard’s question. I began to think: here we have the meat of the matter. Mudd’s meal tickets are being threatened: his power, connections and cash.

A few facts. Mudd joined the CIA in 1985. He was an analyst, and then worked for the CTC in 1992. In 2005, Mudd was appointed by then-FBI Director Robert Mueller to the FBI’s newly-created National Security Branch as Deputy Director. See the connection?

Mueller and Mudd worked together a little over four years. He was later promoted to the office of Senior Intelligence Adviser at the FBI. He served in that position until he retired from government service in March of 2010. All due his good friend Robert Mueller.

So I did a little digging. Remember when Phil Mudd says he doesn’t get a government dime for anything? Number one, I don’t really believe that for a moment, and number two? I wonder what he does now after retirement?

What if I were to tell you that Phil Mudd created his own security consulting firm called — wait for it — Mudd Management, and that he is its president, would you be shocked? From his Mudd Management bio page at PhilMudd.com:

Mr. Mudd is the President of Mudd Management, a company specializing in security consulting; analytic training; and public speaking about security issues.

Mudd also sells T-shirts. Sort of like the bodega/segunda of retired intelligence officers. You can get your security consulting as well as T-shirts that say:

So did Phil Mudd lie? How can I count the ways? His very checkbook depends desperately on holding onto his security clearance. His security clearance is monetized. He loses cash, power and prestige if its ripped from his cloying little hands.

Finally, there’s this from Lee Smith at RealClearInvestigations.com:

Privately, Intel Officials Back Shutting Out Brennan, Clapper

President Trump has been criticized for politicizing the intelligence community by threatening to strip the security clearances of former top officials including John Brennan and James Clapper. But numerous past and present senior intelligence officials say that the Obama administration started the politicization — and that revoking the clearances of those who abuse the privilege for partisan purposes may help right the ship.

“As is often the case with the Trump administration, the rollout of the policy is bad, but the idea driving the policy is sound,” said one senior intelligence official who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke to RealClearInvestigations only on condition of anonymity. “Under some Obama-era intelligence chiefs, intelligence was used as a political weapon. We need to root that out, not reward it.”

Thank you very much.

But: shhhhh. Don’t tell anyone that most of the intelligence community secretly thinks that Comey, Brennan and Clapper are outright boobs that are tarnishing the profession.

Take away security clearances from those who retired and/or fired or resign? Hell yes. All of them. Make everyone prove that they have a need to know again.

Who’s next up to bid for removal? Read this.

BZ

 

 Share