Monday, July 10, 2017

Funny


One for your side, this is funny!

"You know Hitler was from Germany."

"He was from Austria."

"Then how come you never saw him with kangaroos?"

"That's-"

"Or a boomerang?"


Thursday, July 06, 2017

The West will never be broken


Trump: The West will never be broken, our values will prevail and our civilisation will triumph. https://t.co/FD26TkFzKP
(https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/882934996482367492?s=03)

Monday, June 26, 2017

The president should have done more to counter Russia's election meddling, top Dem says

Rep. Adam Schiff, the top-ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday the president should have done more to counter Russia's meddling in the U.S. election.

"I think the administration needed to call out Russia earlier, needed to act to deter and punish Russia earlier, and that was a very serious mistake," Schiff, of California, said in a televised interview with CNN.

He was of course referring to president Obama who was still in charge when the possible Russian hacking came to light. Democrat Rep. Schiff stopped short of calling Obama's reticence collusion or even treason, but many believe Obama ignored Russian threats because he was convinced, like many other Democrats, by the fake media polls that showed Hillary winning, and he didn't want to make waves.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/26/obama-should-have-done-more-to-counter-russias-election-meddling-top-dem-says.html

Wednesday, June 07, 2017

Comey's Latest Statement Is An Indictment Of Comey, Not Trump

Comey going postal, metaphorically. ..

If anything, Comey's latest statement only highlights why Trump was justified in firing Comey in the first place. Comey, according to his own testimony, repeatedly told Trump that the president was not being investigated by the FBI. Not only that, Comey also told Congress that Trump was not being personally investigated. How on earth is it inappropriate, in light of those facts, for the president to ask for those facts to be made public by the very individual asserting them? Trump's exasperation looks far more justifiable given the behavior to which Comey admits in his own testimony, largely because Comey's tortured explanation for refusing to publicly explain those facts, even after disclosing them to Congress, holds so little water.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/07/james-comeys-latest-statement-is-an-indictment-of-comey-not-trump/

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

McCain: Russian Spy Pandemic could get you too

It's true. I'm a Russian spy too.

CNN BREAKING NEWS: 62M Russian Spies voted Trump "Avoid any Smirnoff & pet bears", says McCain, "Russian Spy Pandemic could get you too!"



Sunday, May 28, 2017

That's Zucked up!

Are You Zucked?

Here's an email I recently got from a currently unemployed American techie (who's also a longtime kf reader):

I am having difficulty competing with H-1b visaholders.  I thought it would be an easy sell.  I would say, "I am willing to work for as little as them, plus I speak English, and went to graduate school, and made good grades, and have done exactly that job well for decades."

Employers don't care.  You see, when they say to Americans, "You must routinely work evenings and weekends and holidays and vacations and all-nighters for free," the Americans look for another job.  When employers say that to H-1b visaholders, they can add, "Oh, and it's a crime for you to work in America for anyone except me, and if you get fired you are immediately deported back to Bangladesh, per capita annual income $800.  If you keep working at this awful job, by contrast, your whole family may move here for family reunification."

And we worry why more Americans aren't motivated to get STEM degrees? … The H-1B program (at about 100,000 visas a year) may look small, but it seems to have a huge impact on the tech industry (why so many Silicon CEOs care so much about it) ….

http://www.kausfiles.com/2017/05/26/are-you-zucked/


Saturday, May 27, 2017

The Harvard Crimson




BREAKING: Mork Zinkletink Zonks all over the Internet!

zoink!

The day is here for Mink Zuckerzuck to go speeching for the Harvard! Every year we beg him to come PLEASE but only now will he come here to this place, here now, he is here to prove that he is stronger president material than Joel BidenBoy. Nice Try Joe Man, but you can't Zonk the Zucker-Duck. This guy can Zoink anything.

FLYBY: 10 Websites that Merk Zuckerbook Stole From the Water Sports Boys

zonkerdonk

The only thing worse than these stolen websoots is the QUAD. Does that make sense? I dropped out reeeeally early.

BREAKING: Dark Zinkybink Parties with the Dick Swinging Big Boys at 44 Bow

Mork Zinkletonk Zoinks All Over Internet

ALSO BREAKING: local plates

This week, the Harvard College Class of 2017 will enter a world still divided over November's presidential election and, overwhelmingly, begin their post-graduate lives deeply pessimistic about the direction the country is headed.
Anti-war student activists clashed with politicians and University administrators as the nation grappled with one of the most controversial wars in the country's history.
​"He's in the crowd, but you can't pick him out," a 1991 article said of Harvard's newly-elected President Neil L. Rudenstine. "He doesn't look like a Harvard president."

--

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

CBO ACA heath insurance stats

Just released by the CBO.

The Obamacare status quo: Individual market premiums have increased 105 percent in four years for the 39 states on ACA… https://t.co/LP2QQ7NIpY

Pope meets with Trump

Perfect example of Media Lies:
"Journalist" says Pope didn't say anything or smile. Complete lie, watch the video:… https://t.co/k5BJklOxmy

Friday, May 19, 2017

Harvard Study Reveals Huge Anti-Trump Media Bias...

As I've said...

Harvard Study Reveals Huge Anti-Trump Media Bias...


https://heatst.com/culture-wars/harvard-study-reveals-huge-extent-of-anti-trump-media-bias/


Flynn

Thanks for realizing that saying "I hope this Flynn stuff ends soon"
Is not a big deal.
Not like erasing email, hammering phones and bleaching your server.


Thursday, May 18, 2017

Liberals and conservatives challenge Ohio web harassment law...

Agree that this is anti-1st Amendment.

Artist's Impression Of The Mainstream Media This Week

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Another Comey Memo

Found.

Thursday, May 11, 2017

Comey's lack of oversight


Here's a reason Comey should have been fired, lack of oversight:


First, understand their job – Each of the aforementioned was/is part of the congressional intelligence oversight called the "Gang of Eight". The Go8 are exclusively responsible for overseeing all intelligence community activity as it relates to intelligence gathering and corresponding investigations.

In short these eight elected representatives are in charge of all oversight of all U.S. intelligence operations and investigations.  As elected representatives, they represent one of the most important checks within the system of government overseeing non-elected officials.


Again, we refer back to the March 20th testimony of FBI Director James Comey where he is questioned by Freshman Representative Elise M. Stefanik.

Stefanik is a young, freshman republican congresswoman from the Albany New York area.  And using a probative questioning timeline, she single-handily pulled the mask from FBI Director James Comey, and exposed the corruption within the Gang-of-Eight yet no-one seems to notice.

In the segment of the questioning below Rep. Stefanik begins by asking director Comey what are the typical protocols, broad standards and procedures for notifying the Director of National Intelligence, the White House and senior congressional leadership (aka the intelligence Gang of Eight), when the FBI has opened a counter-intelligence investigation.

The response from Comey is a generalized reply (with uncomfortable body language) that notification of counter-intel investigations are discussed with the White House, and other pertinent officials, on a calendar basis, ie. "quarterly".

With the statement that such counter-intel notifications happen "generally quarterly", and against the backdrop that Comey stated in July of 2016 a counter-intel investigation began, Stefanik asks:

…"when did you notify the White House, the DNI and congressional leadership"?

Everything happens in the first three minutes of that questioning.  Against the backdrop to what you know now about Director James Comey's investigation which began in July 2016, let's unpack the response.

Director Comey said he informed the DNI (James Clapper), White House National Security Council (Susan Rice), and the DOJ who would have been his boss acting Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates (head of counter intelligence operations).   He DID NOT notify congress.

Again, review that 2:49 second Q & A segment.

Director Comey is admitting to congress that for eight months he did not tell them about the counterintelligence investigation "because of the sensitivity of the matter".

From his own testimony Director Comey admits he coordinated with: Susan Rice (White House), James Clapper (DNI) and Sally Yates (DOJ Counter-Intel).  However, Comey also admits he intentionally did not tell congressional oversight.  EVER.

The people within congress who SHOULD HAVE BEEN notified of the counterintelligence operation are the 'Gang-of-Eight': (Ryan, Pelosi, McConnell, Schumer, Nunes, Schiff, Burr and Feinstein/Warner) [*note Warner replaced Feinstein in '17].

Director Comey is openly admitting to beginning an intelligence operation/investigation in July 2016 and intentionally not notifying congress until March 2017.  In essence, he is completely operating without oversight.

However, did you hear a single member of the Gang of Eight raise objection to this stunning revelation?

Comey is admitting to keeping the Go8 in the dark.  Comey is admitting to intentionally acting without oversight.  Did a single member of the Go8 call for his removal?  Did they protest this action?  Did they demand to know why he felt empowered to violate the checks-and-balances?

NO.

Not a single member of the oversight Gang of Eight raised an eyebrow after this testimony.  Why?

What is the purpose of oversight when the people doing the oversight don't care if a non-elected official can operate independent of oversight?

Answer those questions and you can see the depth of the swamp.

This is a much bigger issue than President Trump firing James Comey.  This reality represents the structural collapse of a primary function of government.

Here's where it gets interesting.  Pay close attention to the names and actions by congressional leadership as they respond to Director James Comey's firing.

Nunes and Shiff are the head of the House Permanent Committee on Intelligence.  Burr and Warner are the heads of the Senate Intelligence Committee.  Ryan and Pelosi are the heads of the House.  McConnell and Schumer are the heads of the Senate.

The group functions as the Gang-of-Eight as a result of their position in congress and on the oversight committees.   Yet it would appear they held no active interest in oversight of FBI Director James Comey's intelligence activity.

Why is that?

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/05/10/the-biggest-political-scandal-the-media-is-missing-it-should-lead-to-congressional-leadership-impeachment-hearings/

Thursday, May 04, 2017

List of Obamacare Taxes Repealed | Americans for Tax Reform

Way to go Rs!

 As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama had promised repeatedly that he would not raise any tax on any American earning less than $250,000 per year. He broke the promise when he signed Obamacare. With the passage of the House GOP bill, tens of millions of middle income Americans will get tax relief from Obamacare's long list of tax hikes.
 
List of Obamacare Taxes Repealed
Posted by John Kartch on Thursday, May 4th, 2017, 6:11 PM PERMALINK

The American Health Care Act (HR 1628) passed by the House today reduces taxes on the American people by over $1 trillion. The bill abolishes the following taxes imposed by Obama and the Democrat party in 2010 as part of Obamacare:

-Abolishes the Obamacare Individual Mandate Tax which hits 8 million Americans each year.

-Abolishes the Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax. Together with repeal of the Individual Mandate Tax repeal this is a $270 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare's Medicine Cabinet Tax which hits 20 million Americans with Health Savings Accounts and 30 million Americans with Flexible Spending Accounts. This is a $6 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare's Flexible Spending Account tax on 30 million Americans. This is a $20 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare's Chronic Care Tax on 10 million Americans with high out of pocket medical expenses. This is a $126 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare's HSA withdrawal tax. This is a $100 million tax cut.

-Abolishes Obamacare's 10% excise tax on small businesses with indoor tanning services. This is a $600 million tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare health insurance tax. This is a $145 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare 3.8% surtax on investment income. This is a $172 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare medical device tax. This is a $20 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare tax on prescription medicine. This is a $28 billion tax cut.

-Abolishes the Obamacare tax on retiree prescription drug coverage. This is a $2 billion tax cut.

http://www.atr.org/list-obamacare-taxes-repealed

Comey Clinton circa 1996


Comey, 1996


May the 4th Be With You 👌🏻


#HappyStarWarsDay
May the 4th Be With You 👌🏻

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Talent Stack


The Trump Talent Stack

by Scott Adams

As I explained in my book, there are two ways to make yourself valuable. The first way is to become the best at some specific skill, the way Tiger Woods dominated golf. But not many of us can be Tiger Woods. So that path is unavailable to 99% of the world.

I recommend a different approach. Most people can – with practice – develop a variety of skills that work well together. I call this idea the Talent Stack.

For example, I'm a famous syndicated cartoonist who doesn't have much artistic talent, and I've never taken a college-level writing class. But few people are good at both drawing and writing. When you add in my ordinary business skills, my strong work ethic, my risk tolerance, and my reasonably good sense of humor, I'm fairly unique. And in this case that uniqueness has commercial value. 

Now consider president-elect Trump. He doesn't have one talent that is best-in-the-world, but he does have one of the best talent stacks I have ever seen. Consider all the ways in which Trump is better than average, but not best-in-the-world. I'll list the obvious ones.

Public Speaking: Trump is an engaging speaker, and he knows how to entertain a crowd. But no one would say he's one of the best speakers in the world. 

Humor: Trump is funny. But he isn't Seinfeld funny. He's just funnier than most people. That's all he needs.

Intelligence: Trump is smart. He probably wouldn't beat Hillary Clinton on a standardized IQ test, but he's smarter than 90% of the world, and probably far more. That's good enough for a talent stack.

Knowledge of Politics: Compared to career politicians and political pundits, Trump looks under-informed. But he probably knows more about politics than 95% of the public. And that seems to be enough. Advisors will fill in the knowledge gap. 

Branding: Trump is a world-class marketer and brander. He probably isn't the best in the world at those things. But he's very, very good.

Hiring and Firing: One of the most important skills a president needs is the ability to hire good advisors and – equally important – fire the mistakes. Trump has plenty of experience doing both. He probably isn't the best in the world at hiring and firing, but I'll bet he's in the top 10% just from practice.

Strategy: Trump won the presidency in large part because his non-standard strategy worked great. He focused on free media, big rallies, and the key swing states. That was good enough to win. Trump probably isn't the best strategist in the world, but he's very good.

Social Media: Trump understands social media in a way that people of his generation usually don't. Trump might not be the most Internet-savvy politician of all time, but he's definitely in the top 10%. 

Persuasion: Trump might be the most persuasive person I have ever observed in the act of persuading. But keep in mind that persuasion requires a talent stack too. Trump is persuasive because he combines a bunch of minor skills into one big persuasive toolbox. For example, Trump is good at reading people, good at being provocative to attract energy, and good at sales technique. He probably isn't the best in the world at any of those minor skills, but when you add them together, along with lots of other subsidiary persuasion skills, and now the Office of the President – Trump might be the most persuasive person on Earth.

Risk management: Trump understands risk. We see it in his business dealings as he isolates different lines of business in their own corporate structures so they can fail without bringing down the rest. We also know that Trump enters businesses that have an unlimited upside potential with limited risk. And he prefers gambling with other people's money. Trump probably understands risk management better than 90% of the public. 

Trump's critics have a hard time understanding Trump's success because he lacks any best-in-the-world talents. They mock his simple speaking style, his lack of policy knowledge, his provocative Tweets and more. But as they criticize the trees they lose sight of the forest. Trump has no trees in his forest that are the best trees in the world. But his forest is one of the best forests in the world.

The takeaway here is that anyone can develop a more valuable talent stack. Just figure out which talents go well together. If in doubt, add public speaking to your stack first. Learn a second language if you can – but only a useful language. And persuasion makes you more effective at nearly everything you do. Those are just examples. You're the best judge of which skills you need. 

President-elect Trump might not be a good role model in terms of his personal life. And you might not care for his policies. But when it comes to a role model for success, you will never see better. Trump's talent stack is outstanding. 

On a related note, Kanye West is another good example of a talent stack. He isn't the best in the world at singing, dancing, writing, or any other skill you would assume is necessary for his job. But you won't see many people with Kanye's combination of talents, including his business acumen, his drive, and his knack for self-promotion. Kanye has been building his talent stack for years. And now he's adding politics. You probably think Kanye has no chance to be president because of his current mental/emotional health hospitalization. But you'd be wrong. Hillary Clinton proved that health concerns are not disqualifying.

I'm not going to predict a future Kanye West presidency. But if you think it is unlikely, you don't understand the power of talent stacks. It is possible that Kanye is doing nothing in the hospital but recovering. But I like to think he is using that time to learn Spanish. That's how Master Persuaders roll.

You can read more about talent stacks and the value of systems over goals in my book.



Thursday, April 20, 2017

No-go list of advertisers

I'll never by buying from any of these advertisers again.

The following list of companies have taken ads off of The O'Reilly Factor.

Mercedes-Benz

Mitsubishi

Hyundai

Lexus

BMW of North America

Constant Contact

Ainsworth Pet Nutrition

UNTUCKit

Allstate

T. Rowe Price

GlaxoSmithKline

Sanofi

Credit Karma

Wayfair

TrueCar

Rollins, Inc

Bayer

Esurance

Society for Human Resource Management

Coldwell Banker

The Wonderful Company

H&R Block

Weather Tech

BambooHR

Jenny Craig

Ancestry

Subaru

Old Dominion Freight Line

Amica Insurance

LegalZoom

CarfFax

Invisalign

Pacific Life

VisionWorks

Stanley Steemer

Eli Lilly and Company

Allstar Products Group

Advil/Pfizer

Propane Council

Reddi Wip

GoodRX

Southern New Hampshire University

Touchnote

BeenVerified

Consumer Cellular

MilelQ

Peloton

Infiniti

Land Rover

Next Day Blinds

Pfizer

Jaguar

Voya

Mahindra

Allergan

Moberg Pharma AB

Mattress Firm

Angie's List

Laser Spine Institute

Ring



Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Life comes at you fast

CNN finally admits 0bama was wiretapping Trump

'Fight Like a Girl'

If the "fight like a girl" line seems familiar, it's because Palin said it first.

The former governor of Alaska used the line during a speech in Madison, Wisconsin, in 2011.

Sarah Palin Calls Out Elizabeth Warren for Stealing Her 'Fight Like a Girl' Line

It looks like a "fight" may be brewing between Sarah Palin and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).

On Tuesday, Warren tweeted "fight like a girl" to her followers. She later used the same phrase in an NPR interview while promoting her new book.

"I don't know. Coming from liberals who urge women to claim victimization, 'Fight like a girl' just doesn't sound the same as when legit fighters for equality say it, mean it, live it, and will never give it up," Palin said to Breitbart News.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/19/sarah-palin-calls-out-elizabeth-warren-stealing-her-fight-girl-quote

Friday, April 07, 2017

Master Chess Moves

This is how 4D chess works:

- Deep State false flags Syria gas attack. President Trump responds with a "headfake response."

- Trump warned Putin. Putin warned Assad. Humane, precision strike. None or minimal casualties. Strength of the United States military flexed. Terrorists put on notice.

- Red lin in the sand was crossed. Trump upstages Obama, and shows that war crimes like chemical weapon attacks against children will be met with the force of tomahawk cruise missiles.

- Fake Russia narrative destroyed forever. Wiretap and Susan Rice investigation moves forward as Nunes is replaced with Trey Gowdy.

- trump supporters prove that #NoMoreWars is more important than blind loyalty.

- Massive power play to China as Trump eats dinner with President Xi. North Korea put on notice.

- All eyes on Trump as he tells the public, "No child of God shall suffer such horror."

- Democrats forced to support the president.

- Gorsuch confirmed.


Sunday, April 02, 2017

Da Da Da

Russia Posts April Fools' Voicemail: 'Press 2 For Services of Russian Hackers, Press 3 For Election Interference' (AUDIO)

 

Russia Posts April Fools' Voicemail: 'Press 2 For Services of Russian Hackers, Press 3 For Election Interference' (AUDIO)

Saturday, April 01, 2017

FOX: Trump Surveilled Before Nomination, Agencies with Info Blocked Nunes for Weeks

Wow, Trump was right, he was surveilled by Obama.

FOX: Trump Surveilled Before Nomination, Agencies with Info Blocked Nunes for Weeks

by MICHELLE MOONS

A Friday breaking Fox News report on surveillance of President Trump's team that began before he became the Republican presidential nominee claimed a very senior intelligence official was responsible—as well as for the unmasking of the names of private U.S. citizens.
The report cited sources which also indicated that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) knew of the existence of the information in January, but one or more intelligence agencies blocked him, and there were only two locations where he could view the information that he called "very troubling."

On Thursday, the New York Times began reporting what they claimed were the identities of two White House officials who were the sources of the information disclosed to Nunes.

Nunes met with sources on White House grounds on the day before he announced to reporters striking news that he had seen new and disturbing information indicating intelligence officials under the Obama administration "unmasked" the names of Trump team members who were incidentally surveilled.

The Friday Fox News report cited "a number of sources" with claims that not only were the two White House officials not the sources of the information shared with Nunes, but that Nunes knew of the information in January, and that the agencies where the information came from had blocked Nunes from gaining access to it. Further, the report cited officials within the agencies who said they were frustrated with the spreading of names for political purposes.

"Our sources, who have direct knowledge of what took place, were upset because those two individuals, they say, had nothing to do with the outing of this information," Fox reported.

"We've learned that the surveillance that led to the unmasking of what started way before President Trump was even the GOP nominee," reported Adam Housley. "The person who did the unmasking, I'm told, is very well known, very high up, very senior in the intelligence world and is not in the FBI."

"This led to other surveillance which led to multiple names being unmasked. Again these are private citizens in the United States," said Housley. "This had nothing to do with Russia, I'm told, or foreign intelligence of any kind."

The two named in Thursday's reports as the sources of the information in those stories were not Nunes sources. "It was a navigation situation and the reason why they had to navigate, I'm told, is that Nunes learned about this unmasking and who this was, taking place back in January."

"It took, obviously, a number of weeks to try to figure out a way for him to see this intelligence, because the agencies were stonewalling, we're told, to allow him and others to see it," said Housley. "This is all coming from folks that are in these agencies and frustrated with the politics that is taking place in these agencies.

"We're told that the main issue here is not only the unmasking of the names, but the spreading of names for political purposes that have nothing to do with national security and everything to do with hurting and embarrassing Trump and his team," reported Housley.

"Fox also learned that an individual with direct knowledge that after Nunes had been approached by his source, the agencies basically would not allow him in at all," said Housley.

Nunes and the White House have faced heated questions from the press about Nunes's viewing of the information on White House grounds; however, the Fox report added that there were only two places where Nunes could have viewed the information. One was at the agencies where the information came from, which the reporting notes would have put the source at risk, and the other location was on the 18-acre White House grounds. Housley noted that the Old Executive Office Building is on White House grounds. He also specified where information after hours and where highly sensitive information may be accessed.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/01/fox-trump-surveilled-before-nomination-agencies-info-blocked-nunes-weeks/

Wednesday, March 29, 2017

Who let the Farkas out, who who?

I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.

Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.

So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more.  We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to [Democrat politicians].

But wait, it didn't just stop there. It gets worse – or better, depending on your position.

With the help of MSNBC, simultaneous to her admission of first-hand specific knowledge of the administration spying on Mr. Trump, Ms. Evelyn Farkas outs herself as the key source for a New York Times report which discussed President Obama officials leaking classified information to media.

Considerable irony jumps to the forefront when you recognize, the New York Times tried to protect Evelyn Farkas as the source of their reporting by stating:

"More than a half-dozen current and former officials described various aspects of the effort to preserve and distribute the intelligence, and some said they were speaking to draw attention to the material and ensure proper investigation by Congress. All spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing classified information, nearly all of which remains secret." (link)

D'oh.

Whoopsie.

Looks like Devin Nunes and the House Intelligence Committee has a new person to bring in for testimony.   A positive development because at this rate the media leakers will out themselves without much need for investigation.

I wonder what the criminal penalties are for having access to intelligence and sharing it with Democrat politicians ["The Hill People"].

Question #1:

Who, specifically, are these "Hill People" you speak of Mrs. Farkas?

Watch again.  Longer version – key moment at 04:50 [prompted] Just hit play:


Combine all of these data-points and you discover that Evelyn Farkas was essentially part of a disinformation campaign with Obama insiders spreading a fake DNC constructed story using false information.    However, in addition to pushing the false Trump Russian conspiracy narrative, Farkas has knowledge of the outcome of the original pushing of the narrative leading to actual surveillance of the Trump team.

This bolsters the information already presented by Devin Nunes that an entirely separate network of surveillance, unrelated to the Russian conspiracy story, was directly targeting the candidacy of Trump and the post-election surveillance of the President Elect Trump-transition team.


https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/03/28/oh-my-president-obamas-own-defense-deputy-admits-obama-white-house-spied-on-candidatepresident-elect-trump/



Tuesday, March 21, 2017

"Because of the sensitivity of the matter" ~ James Comey avoids Congress, blocks Q/A on Obama


It Took a Freshman GOP Congresswoman To Pull The Mask From FBI Director Comey…

FBI Director James Comey unmasked as a Deep State Black Hat Operative.

Representative Elise M. Stefanik is a young, freshman republican congresswoman from the Albany New York area.  And using a probative questioning timeline, she single-handily pulled the mask from FBI Director James Comey, yet no-one seemed to notice.

Obviously Ms. Stefanik has not been in the swamp long enough to lose her common sense.

In the segment of the questioning below Rep. Stefanik begins by asking director Comey what are the typical protocols, broad standards and procedures for notifying the Director of National Intelligence, the White House and senior congressional leadership (aka the intelligence Gang of Eight), when the FBI has opened a counter-intelligence investigation.

The parseltongue response from Comey is a generalized reply (with uncomfortable body language) that notification of counter-intel investigations are discussed with the White House, and other pertinent officials, on a calendar basis, ie. "quarterly".

With the statement that such counter-intel notifications happen "generally quarterly", and against the backdrop that Comey stated in July of 2016 a counter-intel investigation began, Stefanik asks:

…"when did you notify the White House, the DNI and congressional leadership"?

BOOM!  Watch an extremely uncomfortable Director James Comey outright LIE… by claiming there was no active DNI -which is entirely false- James Clapper was Obama's DNI.

.

Watch it again.

Watch that first 3:00 minutes again.  Ending with:

…"Because of the sensitivity of the matter"  ~ James Comey

Director Comey intentionally obfuscates knowledge of the question from Rep Stefanik; using parseltongue verbiage to get himself away from the sunlit timeline.

The counter-intel investigation, by his own admission, began in July 2016.  Congress was not notified until March 2017.  That's an eight month period – Obviously obfuscating the quarterly claim moments earlier.

The uncomfortable aspect to this line of inquiry is Comey's transparent knowledge of the politicized Office of the DNI James Clapper by President Obama.  Clapper was used rather extensively by the Obama Administration as an intelligence shield, a firewall or useful idiot, on several occasions.

Anyone who followed the Obama White House intel policy outcomes will have a lengthy frame of reference for DNI Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan as the two primary political operatives.   Brennan admitted investigating, and spying on, the Senate Intelligence Committee as they held oversight responsibility for the CIA itself.

The first and second questions from Stefanik were clear.  Comey's understanding of the questions was clear.  However, Comey directly evaded truthful response to the second question.   When you watch the video, you can see Comey quickly connecting the dots on where this inquiry was going.

There is only one reasonable explanation for FBI Director James Comey to be launching a counter-intel investigation in July 2016, notifying the White House and Clapper, and keeping it under wraps from congress.    Comey was a participant in the intelligence gathering for political purposes – wittingly, or unwittingly.

As a direct consequence of this mid-thought-stream Comey obfuscation, it is now clear -at least to me- that Director Comey was using his office as a facilitating conduit for the political purposes of the Obama White House.

Unfortunately, a slightly nervous Stefanik, never forced Comey to go back to the non-answered question and respond by saying:

No, Mr. Comey, there WAS a DNI in place in 2016, please answer the question of when did you notify him (Clapper) and the White House?

….. then it would get a little ugly:

Why did you notify Clapper and the White House but delay congressional notification?

With all the banter about these hearings, and against this slight moment of clarity of purpose, it bears repeating:

There is only ONE KNOWN Factual and CRIMINAL activity currently identified: the unmasking and leaking of Mike Flynn's name to the media.

FBI Director Comey states his organization is "investigating".  Fair enough, however – not a single congresscritter asked HIM if he is the source of the unmasking or leaks.

♦ How can a congressional committee conduct an investigation if they don't know if the primary witness, the lead investigator, is the source of the leaks?

♦ Wouldn't the very first step, the actual basis of the foundation for the investigation itself, be to ensure the person conducting the investigation did not participate in the illegality of the conduct being investigated?

Think.

Avoid the shiny things.

Why wouldn't congress ask this simple question?

Admiral Mike Rogers answers that approximately 10-20 people within his NSA organization had the potential to unmask and/or leak to the media.  Fair enough.

♦ Wouldn't the first question as follow-up be to ask Admiral Mike Rogers if he is one of those numbered possibilities?

♦ Wouldn't the second follow-up question, in an authentic inquiry, be to ask Mike Rogers: if he is one of the possibilities with access to that information, then was he actually the person who unmasked or leaked?

If Mike Rogers and James Comey admit they are in charge of two of the possible source organizations for leak activity (expressly known illegal behavior)… then what affirmative confidence has either person expressed to congress to ensure the inquiring body that they personally were not the originating source?

And why didn't congress ask them?

Think.

There is NO PEA in this shell game of distraction.

Why didn't congress ask them?

Occam's Razor – Because the question(s), the brutally obvious question(s), then lead to the follow-up:  If the only criminal activity is the sourcing of the leak, and the two people giving testimony are potential suspects in that criminal activity, then: A)  How can we trust their testimony, and B) Why are we even having this hearing"? (with two people who are suspects in an ongoing investigation)…

The answers reveal the current intention of the intelligence committee is not to actually investigate, but rather to give the outward illusion of investigation.

If they were not merely giving an illusion….  Congress would be pointing out that FBI Director James Comey has a direct and specific conflict of interest that is so glaringly obvious it's unfathomable no-one see it.

Director Comey, and to a lesser extent Rogers, would have been in direct contact with the prior administration individuals, and entities acting on their behalf, who were politicizing the information being gathered and lying about (ie. leaking to the media) the content therein.

"Because of the sensitivity of the matter"  ~ James Comey

Didn't Comey further claim in this hearing that lying about the content of (or even the existence of) a counter-intelligence investigation was not itself a criminal act?    Hello?

That said, James Comey has an expressed interest in claiming an ongoing investigation exists (even if it doesn't) just to ensure the prior administration contact and behavior was shielded behind the wall of "an ongoing investigation".  Comey says: "Because of the sensitivity of the matter"..  Where "the matter" is the politicized and entirely false information from the White House.

FBI Director James Comey has singularity of knowledge and has cleverly placed himself in a position where there is no "oversight" of his claims.

…"Because of the sensitivity of the matter"  ~ James Comey

See how that works?

At one point in his political life Comey may have been a White Hat, but there's no doubt his behavior is exactly what a black hat operative would be doing to shield his connection to the black hat activity of the prior administration.

Summary:  Hillary Clinton political operatives manufactured the illusion of a computer connection between Russian entities (financial banks) and the Trump campaign/organization.  Those manufactured points of evidence were then passed along to White House entities who used the political intel community (Clapper to Comey) to open an investigation of nothingness – to nowhere.  The mere existence of that investigation was then used as the originating point for a series of media intel leaks (the narrative) intended to cloud and damage the Trump campaign/organization. FBI Director James Comey, as head of one of the investigative agencies, became part of that political apparatus.  Now, usefulness exhausted and with the media engaged, it's CYA time all around for the originating entities.

"Because of the sensitivity of the matter"  ~ James Comey