But the ones who are will tell you a few things...
Poll: Most voters say celebrity political endorsements don't matter https://t.co/lqGUJX1J9p— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 15, 2019
Saturday, June 15, 2019
Most voters are not swayed by celebrity endorsements
Comment:
But the ones who are will tell you a few things...
But the ones who are will tell you a few things...
Friday, June 14, 2019
Schiff happened
Comment:
Definite Schiff at that.
Schiff says Stefanik is wrong, but as Stefanik shows in open testimony, Mr. Integrity admits that the FBI did not follow normal protocols. Was Schiff lying? Stefanik proves that she wasn't. Nor was she wrong, as Schiff claims.
Update a little later:
Looking over the tweets, it seems that many there were overlooking something. Number one, they are overlooking why Schiff said something wrong. But the other thing was this: why did Schiff feel the need to contradict Stefanik? Why, indeed. Here's a possible answer: there is something there that Schiff doesn't want the public to know about. Isn't that obvious? This was supposed to be "by the book". Only thing is that it wasn't.
Definite Schiff at that.
Schiff says Stefanik is wrong, but as Stefanik shows in open testimony, Mr. Integrity admits that the FBI did not follow normal protocols. Was Schiff lying? Stefanik proves that she wasn't. Nor was she wrong, as Schiff claims.
Update a little later:
Looking over the tweets, it seems that many there were overlooking something. Number one, they are overlooking why Schiff said something wrong. But the other thing was this: why did Schiff feel the need to contradict Stefanik? Why, indeed. Here's a possible answer: there is something there that Schiff doesn't want the public to know about. Isn't that obvious? This was supposed to be "by the book". Only thing is that it wasn't.
.@RepAdamSchiff didn’t believe me today when I told him Comey circumvented Congress by opening an investigation into the Trump campaign. Maybe he’ll change his mind once he hears it straight from Comey’s mouth? WATCH ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/xHtmGZTERe— Rep. Elise Stefanik (@RepStefanik) June 12, 2019
Who wins this kerfuffle?
There was a bit more to this than what I heard originally. Anyway, the media is having a cow over it, as one might suppose.
However, it needs to be pointed out to them at the time that the question was raised, that the previous administration did the very thing as the question posed to Trump.
Yet, for them, this is news. Just another dose of stupid.
However, it needs to be pointed out to them at the time that the question was raised, that the previous administration did the very thing as the question posed to Trump.
Yet, for them, this is news. Just another dose of stupid.
NYT: Dossier not relevant to Trump foreign oppo comment because British former spy Steele was 'not working for a hostile foreign government.' So hostility, not foreignness, is key. Also because Steele 'turned over his findings to FBI.' Two points: https://t.co/zI4FNPq14s pic.twitter.com/cIepoZeAkC— Byron York (@ByronYork) June 14, 2019
1) Steele was not dossier's source. In his words, sources were: A: senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure; B: former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside Kremlin; C: senior Russian financial official; G: senior Kremlin official. Hostile foreign government?— Byron York (@ByronYork) June 14, 2019
2) Steele's goal was to make false 'findings' public. Gave them first to Fusion GPS, who briefed Clinton lawyer, who briefed Clinton campaign. Then FBI, then press. FBI strategy brilliant because Steele could inflate dossier credibility by telling press FBI was investigating.— Byron York (@ByronYork) June 14, 2019
Brief discussion about Trump
Updated,
6.14.19:
9:47 am:
Let's take another look at this. Just now, I looked up the term "lawfare". Isn't that the same as weaponizing the government in order that it could be used to destroy the opposition?
James A. Baker, the FBI guy that Comey likes so much, was forced out, and reportedly joined the Lawfare blog.
If the Democrats can do it, why can't Trump? I know how provocative that sounds, but the Democrats aren't backing down on their tactics, so why should Trump NOT use those very same tactics?
The Dems say it is against the law. Okay, then why are you doing it yourselves?
7:48 am:
If I have any complaint about Trump, is that he allows his opponents openings to attack. He opened himself up to Stephanopolous' attack. If he redirected it back at 'em on the spot, as opposed to leaving it out there so that the Democrat spin machine could get cranked up, he would be doing a better job of fighting back. He could have pointed out that Hillary bought and paid for "dirt" on himself in the form of the Steele Dossier. He could add that he wouldn't weaponize the government against his political opponents the way the previous Democrat Administration did! If he had said something like that, they would have edited it out, as it would not have been useful propaganda for them.
6:21 am:
Mittens joins the fray. Is there any wonder why this guy lost a winnable election? It is hard to see how this helps him get back to the top of the heap. He may as well join the Dummiecrats.
What makes these people unworthy is what they say about Trump. That is why I chose to support the guy. If they didn't lie about the dude, I might not have supported him. At first, I was skeptical about Trump as the GOP primaries played out, you see. I might have supported a guy like Cruz if Cruz didn't act like Romney here.
Guys like Romney really do look like "cucks".
6.13.19:
Nearly three and a half years ago, I wrote that I would vote for Trump. I did, and I will do so again. Why?
It seems that his opposition is stuck on stupid. Perhaps it is a case of ideology making a person stupid. His opponents are so desperate to find things to attack him with that they say stupid things.
The things they say reduce their credibility. The ones least attached to ideology will abandon the tribe once they see how stupid the approach is.
Truth is independent of ideology. But real intelligence can only proceed from the knowledge obtained from truth. If you are blind to truth, you might as well be lobotomized for all the good your brain is to you.
Stupid unfounded attacks only make you look as stupid as you really are. Only the blind leading the blind will fall for it.
1.22.16:
Lately, there have been some reports that the Establishment wing of the GOP is warming up to Trump. This is being taken as an "ah hah!" type moment in which the conservative wing is saying that The Donald isn't conservative, and thus cannot be trusted. The Donald says he can make good deals. I think this is better than taking the position that you won't negotiate at all. Is that what the conservatives want to take to the people in the general election? My guess is that it won't work in the general. It may not work in the primaries, either.
This blog has always been anti-ideology. After all, I have stated several times that "ideology can make us stupid."
It may be a bit of rose-colored glasses here about Trump, but if he is anything, he is independent of those who would control him. That means ideological types as well as the lobbyist types with their money. Trump is free to do what he thinks is best for the country. He is free to do what he claims he does best, which is to make deals.
I don't know if The Donald can be trusted to adhere to ideology, but I'll trust him to get the best possible deal he can for the country. In the final analysis, that's the best that you can hope for. If I could vote today, I'd vote for him. Ideology be damned.
6.14.19:
9:47 am:
Let's take another look at this. Just now, I looked up the term "lawfare". Isn't that the same as weaponizing the government in order that it could be used to destroy the opposition?
James A. Baker, the FBI guy that Comey likes so much, was forced out, and reportedly joined the Lawfare blog.
If the Democrats can do it, why can't Trump? I know how provocative that sounds, but the Democrats aren't backing down on their tactics, so why should Trump NOT use those very same tactics?
The Dems say it is against the law. Okay, then why are you doing it yourselves?
7:48 am:
If I have any complaint about Trump, is that he allows his opponents openings to attack. He opened himself up to Stephanopolous' attack. If he redirected it back at 'em on the spot, as opposed to leaving it out there so that the Democrat spin machine could get cranked up, he would be doing a better job of fighting back. He could have pointed out that Hillary bought and paid for "dirt" on himself in the form of the Steele Dossier. He could add that he wouldn't weaponize the government against his political opponents the way the previous Democrat Administration did! If he had said something like that, they would have edited it out, as it would not have been useful propaganda for them.
6:21 am:
Mittens joins the fray. Is there any wonder why this guy lost a winnable election? It is hard to see how this helps him get back to the top of the heap. He may as well join the Dummiecrats.
What makes these people unworthy is what they say about Trump. That is why I chose to support the guy. If they didn't lie about the dude, I might not have supported him. At first, I was skeptical about Trump as the GOP primaries played out, you see. I might have supported a guy like Cruz if Cruz didn't act like Romney here.
Guys like Romney really do look like "cucks".
6.13.19:
Nearly three and a half years ago, I wrote that I would vote for Trump. I did, and I will do so again. Why?
It seems that his opposition is stuck on stupid. Perhaps it is a case of ideology making a person stupid. His opponents are so desperate to find things to attack him with that they say stupid things.
The things they say reduce their credibility. The ones least attached to ideology will abandon the tribe once they see how stupid the approach is.
Truth is independent of ideology. But real intelligence can only proceed from the knowledge obtained from truth. If you are blind to truth, you might as well be lobotomized for all the good your brain is to you.
Stupid unfounded attacks only make you look as stupid as you really are. Only the blind leading the blind will fall for it.
1.22.16:
Lately, there have been some reports that the Establishment wing of the GOP is warming up to Trump. This is being taken as an "ah hah!" type moment in which the conservative wing is saying that The Donald isn't conservative, and thus cannot be trusted. The Donald says he can make good deals. I think this is better than taking the position that you won't negotiate at all. Is that what the conservatives want to take to the people in the general election? My guess is that it won't work in the general. It may not work in the primaries, either.
This blog has always been anti-ideology. After all, I have stated several times that "ideology can make us stupid."
It may be a bit of rose-colored glasses here about Trump, but if he is anything, he is independent of those who would control him. That means ideological types as well as the lobbyist types with their money. Trump is free to do what he thinks is best for the country. He is free to do what he claims he does best, which is to make deals.
I don't know if The Donald can be trusted to adhere to ideology, but I'll trust him to get the best possible deal he can for the country. In the final analysis, that's the best that you can hope for. If I could vote today, I'd vote for him. Ideology be damned.
The secret is out
Comment:
A "mea culpa" from Attkisson. More irony. She's good at it.
As for "science", I take it that he means government-supported science, which is nothing more than politician-supported science, which is nothing more than bravo sierra.
A "mea culpa" from Attkisson. More irony. She's good at it.
As for "science", I take it that he means government-supported science, which is nothing more than politician-supported science, which is nothing more than bravo sierra.
You caught me. I am against all science. (Please don't tell the others.) https://t.co/19h0tcnNzd— Sharyl Attkisson🕵️♂️ (@SharylAttkisson) June 13, 2019
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Income Inequality
...not as bad as the left would have you think...
Come to think of it, here's a point of view that says income inequality is a good thing.
If history is any guide, socialism is not a good thing....
Come to think of it, here's a point of view that says income inequality is a good thing.
If history is any guide, socialism is not a good thing....
Theory as fact
Comment:
Sharyl Attkisson writes about a theoretical "insurance policy" that could be used against a political candidate. Actually, she is describing what was done against Trump these last several years. It is masterpiece of irony.
Sharyl Attkisson writes about a theoretical "insurance policy" that could be used against a political candidate. Actually, she is describing what was done against Trump these last several years. It is masterpiece of irony.
What would the intelligence community's 'insurance policy' against Trump look like? https://t.co/MusHC2BQZn— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 13, 2019
Too much politics
It is only June in the year before the election, but the news is already swinging towards that kind of reporting.
Not here.
I tended to avoid mentioning things like the Democrat candidates. Not completely, though. I did mention a few of them, but not in context with anything like a race.
Much of what happens is a show, which is intended to impress voters. It is all a circus.
Reporting is light on the investigations, so it looks like I won't have a lot to write about there. Besides that, my tank is a bit dry for the moment.
Posting may be light for awhile.
Not here.
I tended to avoid mentioning things like the Democrat candidates. Not completely, though. I did mention a few of them, but not in context with anything like a race.
Much of what happens is a show, which is intended to impress voters. It is all a circus.
Reporting is light on the investigations, so it looks like I won't have a lot to write about there. Besides that, my tank is a bit dry for the moment.
Posting may be light for awhile.
Wednesday, June 12, 2019
Bruce Ohr as linchpin in Spygate
Comment:
Ohr was perfectly positioned to advance the Russian collusion narrative. But he also concealed some important information that would have raised some eyebrows. If that deception had become known in time ( before the FISA warrant) , it may have jeopardized the enterprise.
Once again, all these people seem to know each other. The conspiracy was in their "small group".
Ohr knew McCabe. Lisa Page once worked for Ohr. Ohr's wife worked for Fusion GPS. It all forms a long chain made of personal links from one to person to another.
Cody Shearer knew the Clintons. Shearer gives dossier to Winer, who also knows the Clintons. Winer gives it to Steele, his friend. Winer helps Steele with connections here in the US. Steele knows Kavalec from Moscow. All these connections moved the narrative along.
It Started With a Lie: Bruce Ohrs Linchpin Role in Russiagate https://t.co/jtsVvdwW7A— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 12, 2019
State Department news
A lot of what you see shapes how you think of things. Consider the recent controversy with respect to Wikipedia and how it handles its information. Sharyl Attkisson has written about it.
There is an alternative to Wikipedia, or shall I call it a copy called "Conservapedia". The way the two website report on the Clinton Global Initiative is quite instructive. You'd think that it was referring to two different entities.
I've made my eyes tired reading all morning about this stuff. Some of it made me laugh. For instance, James Comey investigated the Clinton Foundation during the Bush Administration. His brother is well-connected, you might say.
The following two tweets are from yesterday's posts. The bottom line is that the Mueller probe is more galling than even I thought. For example: Cody Shearer sends a dossier on Trump to Winer ( State Dept ) who sends it to his friend Christopher Steele. Steele knows Kavalec, who he worked with when they were both in Moscow. Kavalec is at the State Department. One thing I speculate about is those FISA 702 "about queries", and if Shearer got some stuff off that that he wasn't supposed to be able to see. Mix that in with possible Russian disinformation obtained by Steele from Trubikov and Surkov, and you might have the infamous Steele Dossier.
But it all depends on your source of information as to how you might view all this.
From Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch
And from Sara Carter
There is an alternative to Wikipedia, or shall I call it a copy called "Conservapedia". The way the two website report on the Clinton Global Initiative is quite instructive. You'd think that it was referring to two different entities.
I've made my eyes tired reading all morning about this stuff. Some of it made me laugh. For instance, James Comey investigated the Clinton Foundation during the Bush Administration. His brother is well-connected, you might say.
The following two tweets are from yesterday's posts. The bottom line is that the Mueller probe is more galling than even I thought. For example: Cody Shearer sends a dossier on Trump to Winer ( State Dept ) who sends it to his friend Christopher Steele. Steele knows Kavalec, who he worked with when they were both in Moscow. Kavalec is at the State Department. One thing I speculate about is those FISA 702 "about queries", and if Shearer got some stuff off that that he wasn't supposed to be able to see. Mix that in with possible Russian disinformation obtained by Steele from Trubikov and Surkov, and you might have the infamous Steele Dossier.
But it all depends on your source of information as to how you might view all this.
From Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch
Coup Update: Harassment of @RealDonaldTrump continues with abusive fake "contempt" moves by Pelosi House PLUS @JudicalWatch new docs show Obama State Dept worked hand in glove with Clinton spy Christopher Steele. This and more with @SeanHannity tonight at 9pm, @FoxNews pic.twitter.com/co0HhCMn4n— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) June 11, 2019
And from Sara Carter
Former State Department Official Was Approached By A Hollywood Producer To Make A Movie On Steele Dossier https://t.co/koDMWITFmn via @SaraCarterDC— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 12, 2019
Tuesday, June 11, 2019
Now Sharyl Attkisson says that it was about Flynn
Updated,
6.11.19:
A quick read through this. Getting late. It looks like there is going to be a lot of stuff coming out about the Obama State Department, as well as Hillary Clinton.
The main takeaway from the Bongino show was that it is bigger than Trump.
6:39 pm:
Bongino's show notes have a lot more detail. I haven't gone through all of that, as time is short today. I was busy with some chores. I'll take a look at those, and maybe I'll tweet them before posting here. But the main thing is to watch Bongino's show.
6:24 pm:
This video is over an hour long, and you really need to watch it all. If you cannot, then let me summarize this succinctly as possible. It. Is. All. About. Flynn. What?????? Not about Trump?
Nope. Flynn opposed the Iran Deal. The Obama Administration wanted to preserve the Iran nuke deal. Flynn was a threat to that.
The key thing here is that the Obama Administration used Steele in order to go after Flynn. Well, not exactly like that, but they did use Steele and the State Dept. and they did go after Flynn. This was before Trump ran for office. That's why it is not about Trump.
Quite the coincidence that the Obama Administration was using the modus operandi that they used on Flynn in order to go after Trump.
5.20.19:
Comment:
Trump and Flynn wanted to clean up the spying abuses. They got Flynn. Or did they? He hasn't been sentenced yet. The conviction could be thrown out.
6.11.19:
A quick read through this. Getting late. It looks like there is going to be a lot of stuff coming out about the Obama State Department, as well as Hillary Clinton.
Bongino on this story on Ep. 999? Checking... https://t.co/W9UfFkhRNt— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 12, 2019
The main takeaway from the Bongino show was that it is bigger than Trump.
6:39 pm:
Bongino's show notes have a lot more detail. I haven't gone through all of that, as time is short today. I was busy with some chores. I'll take a look at those, and maybe I'll tweet them before posting here. But the main thing is to watch Bongino's show.
6:24 pm:
This video is over an hour long, and you really need to watch it all. If you cannot, then let me summarize this succinctly as possible. It. Is. All. About. Flynn. What?????? Not about Trump?
Nope. Flynn opposed the Iran Deal. The Obama Administration wanted to preserve the Iran nuke deal. Flynn was a threat to that.
The key thing here is that the Obama Administration used Steele in order to go after Flynn. Well, not exactly like that, but they did use Steele and the State Dept. and they did go after Flynn. This was before Trump ran for office. That's why it is not about Trump.
Quite the coincidence that the Obama Administration was using the modus operandi that they used on Flynn in order to go after Trump.
5.20.19:
Comment:
Trump and Flynn wanted to clean up the spying abuses. They got Flynn. Or did they? He hasn't been sentenced yet. The conviction could be thrown out.
Open Border Uber Alles
Comment:
George Will wants unlimited immigration. Does that count Al Qaeda and ISIS? How about terrorists? How about the undesirable types that fill up our prisons?
If you screen out the undesirables, then you can have a sensible policy. Our current policy is not sensible.
Trump tries to change that, and you'd think that the Nazis had taken over.
George Will wants unlimited immigration. Does that count Al Qaeda and ISIS? How about terrorists? How about the undesirable types that fill up our prisons?
If you screen out the undesirables, then you can have a sensible policy. Our current policy is not sensible.
Trump tries to change that, and you'd think that the Nazis had taken over.
George Will Wants Open Borders? 'I'm For As Much Immigration As The Economy Can Take' https://t.co/inIy7ffxYP #Trending via @pjmedia_com— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 11, 2019
CIA had secret access to powerful surveillance system
Comment:
According to this source, the CIA had secret access to a powerful surveillance system intended only for international surveillance, not for domestic use. It appears that it was secret because it is against the law.
This source claims that the Obama administration weaponized this secret system against Americans.
Is it true? If it is, this is a very serious thing.
According to this source, the CIA had secret access to a powerful surveillance system intended only for international surveillance, not for domestic use. It appears that it was secret because it is against the law.
This source claims that the Obama administration weaponized this secret system against Americans.
Is it true? If it is, this is a very serious thing.
HAMMERTIME: BAKER BURIED WHISTLEBLOWER MONTGOMERY’S TRUMP SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE THEN SUDDENLY “REMEMBERED” FBI HAD IT - The American Report - https://t.co/QF3lxkn2kH via @shareaholic— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 11, 2019
Monday, June 10, 2019
Steele's Shoddy Dossier
Comment:
Here's another one from Bongino's podcast. It is a really good show. Highly recommended.
If Steele is going to testify to American investigators, it had better be good. For his testimony is why they are delaying the IG, or so I have read.
Here's another one from Bongino's podcast. It is a really good show. Highly recommended.
If Steele is going to testify to American investigators, it had better be good. For his testimony is why they are delaying the IG, or so I have read.
Steele’s Shoddy Dossier https://t.co/aTN9B1fxOH— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 10, 2019
Trump really was spied on
Comment:
This link courtesy of the Dan Bongino podcast.
After reading it, how can anyone accuse Trump of anything given the scope of this power to spy. This is something that I was somewhat familiar with. But the article shows it goes even further than I thought.
If people knew this, then they would have known that the Russian collusion accusation and obstruction accusation are pure garbage. For if anything existed, it would have leaked. The existence of anything that would have been fatal to Trump would have been known before the election. But this went on for months after the election, as the Mueller probe started more than six months later.
This link courtesy of the Dan Bongino podcast.
After reading it, how can anyone accuse Trump of anything given the scope of this power to spy. This is something that I was somewhat familiar with. But the article shows it goes even further than I thought.
If people knew this, then they would have known that the Russian collusion accusation and obstruction accusation are pure garbage. For if anything existed, it would have leaked. The existence of anything that would have been fatal to Trump would have been known before the election. But this went on for months after the election, as the Mueller probe started more than six months later.
The two hop rule explained https://t.co/bIsw54GPBZ— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 10, 2019
Waiting on IG Report
Comment:
If the IG reports are holding up everything, then how long can they do it? Until election day 2020?
That's because they are slow-walking this thing.
Now Steele's testimony is blamed for further delays. Perhaps that is why Steele decided to testify. He is anti-Trump, so if he can slow down the counter-investigations, the slow-walking can get even slower.
If the IG reports are holding up everything, then how long can they do it? Until election day 2020?
That's because they are slow-walking this thing.
Now Steele's testimony is blamed for further delays. Perhaps that is why Steele decided to testify. He is anti-Trump, so if he can slow down the counter-investigations, the slow-walking can get even slower.
Mark Meadows: Don't Expect IG Report This Month - Do Expect Criminal Indictments... https://t.co/buLsjPGCIB via @thelastrefuge2— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 10, 2019
Barr unleashed?
Comment:
IG report coming soon. ( It always seems to be coming soon. ) That investigation is slowing down the Barr investigations, so it is said.
Carter Page documents could be on the IG report. So that is what they are waiting for?
IG report coming soon. ( It always seems to be coming soon. ) That investigation is slowing down the Barr investigations, so it is said.
Carter Page documents could be on the IG report. So that is what they are waiting for?
Why The IG Report On FISA Abuse Will Unleash Barr’s Investigation https://t.co/m3cXCovqxr— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 10, 2019
Carter Page interview: DOJ set to reveal new documents on Russia probe
Comment:
The Carter Page video came from a CTH article. It matches up well with the stuff I saw yesterday on that deep dive.
There it is again---the Page mentions Kilimnik as a Russian agent. KK as he is called, is State Dept. If he is a Russian spy, there's a big problem at State. Knock, Knock! Hello! Anybody home?
Mueller should have been interested in that, if it was an honest investigation. Same is true for Mifsud. If Mifsud was a Russian agent, same problem as for KK. Mifsud was UK intel.
Incidentally, Page would make 3 sources that were used as an excuse for this investigation. They were labelled as foreign agents, when they weren't. These sources were Page, Mifsud, and Kilimnik.
This Mueller investigation was not an honest investigation. They should have been investigating some real problems with State and with our allies, provided that what was said in the Mueller report about these people being Russian agents was true.
The NSA 702 "about queries" abuse is probably what they are hiding, per CTH link above. This abuse was already documented by the FISA court investigation even before Trump was nominated and elected.
There was an 85% noncompliance rate on the audit conducted of "about queries" by the FISA court. It was most likely these noncompliant "about queries" were being used to spy on Obama's political opponents. It was political and abusive, as well as illegal.
Will there ever be accountability for the abuses that have already occurred? In my opinion, this thing is being slow-walked so that a phony obstruction accusation ( as phony as Russian collusion ) will be a political issue in 2020 election. The Democrats hope to exploit this politically.
The Carter Page video came from a CTH article. It matches up well with the stuff I saw yesterday on that deep dive.
Mueller should have been interested in that, if it was an honest investigation. Same is true for Mifsud. If Mifsud was a Russian agent, same problem as for KK. Mifsud was UK intel.
Incidentally, Page would make 3 sources that were used as an excuse for this investigation. They were labelled as foreign agents, when they weren't. These sources were Page, Mifsud, and Kilimnik.
The NSA 702 "about queries" abuse is probably what they are hiding, per CTH link above. This abuse was already documented by the FISA court investigation even before Trump was nominated and elected.
There was an 85% noncompliance rate on the audit conducted of "about queries" by the FISA court. It was most likely these noncompliant "about queries" were being used to spy on Obama's political opponents. It was political and abusive, as well as illegal.
Will there ever be accountability for the abuses that have already occurred? In my opinion, this thing is being slow-walked so that a phony obstruction accusation ( as phony as Russian collusion ) will be a political issue in 2020 election. The Democrats hope to exploit this politically.
DOJ set to reveal new documents on origins of Russia probe https://t.co/lWAt1k99IT via @YouTube— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 10, 2019
Sunday, June 9, 2019
Stunning
Updated:
6.9.19:
7:17 pm:
Well, I've looked at this closely. There's probably not a whole lot of anything new. For instance, I expected that the NSA had "everything" on "everybody". The thing that is problematical is the FISA 702 about queries. This is the stuff that NSA collects and stores, and somebody was accessing that information without proper authorization.
It is suspected that this was the way the previous administration kept tabs on opponents. If they did, and if it can be proven, then there should be some accountability. Actually, enough has already been established that should result in criminal investigation of many high officials in the Obama administration.
However, given the 95% Democrat partisan advantage in DC, any public official is probably not accountable. That too is a big, big problem.
6:41 pm:
This guy is the same guy that disputes that the emails were hacked. ( if memory serves ) The wikipedia entry on him is not unfavorable, because he sounds like the Democrats used to sound during the Bush administration.
So, let's get this straight. Democrats and the majority elect a guy ( Obama ) , partly because of perceived abuses in warrantless searches. But Obama doesn't clean it up, but makes it a lot worse.
By the way, it is not only Trump being surveilled, it is all of us.
If they can do this, what can stop them? Do you really wish for anybody in the government to have such power? This shouldn't be a partisan issue.
4:23 pm:
These are the whistleblower tapes. They are recordings that you can listen to if you are interested.
I have listened to one of several, and part of another one. Basically, what is in the American Report is in the whistleblower tapes.
Of course, these are most likely dead on accurate and true. Yet, it will mostly be greeted by indifference. Or, it may be considered partisan, because that is how everything is seen today.
If everything partisan is justified, then where does it end? It cannot have a happy ending. There is just no way that it could.
Just completed a deeper dive into the source "The American Report". It was about the "hammer". According to this report, spying on Americans has been going on for "years". Long before Trump ran for POTUS.
Some of the notes taken: ( keep in mind this is very preliminary and not well presented )
3 part series on "The Hammer" by the American Report dot org
notes:
using wikipedia to see what they have on the names used on the American Report
1. American Report not readily found on wikipedia
2. authors Fanning and Jones also not found
3. Denis Montgomery found: , seems critical
4. "The Hammer": not found either. However, article states that it is out there
there is indirect reference found on Montgomery (3) above:
Vault 7 document dump from Wikileaks does mention HAMR
5. Judge G. Murray Snow, US District Court for Arizona--- no reference to release of tapes
on wikipedia, but here it is: Did find Snow on a different pathway search on wikipedia
6. I blogged about Evelyn Farkas, and her youtube video was taken down shortly afterward
7. USAF Gen. McInerney connection to Hammer not on Wikipedia, critical entry of him
Fox interview prior to Comey firing
8. Admiral Lyons: Nothing found about hammer in relation to Ace Lyons, Lyons died last year.
9. dr. dave janda: Not on wikipedia, but a link from wikipedia
10. Whistleblower tapes: nothing much on search engine, nothing on wikipedia
Big question at this moment is what is on the "Whistleblower tapes"? Supposed to be proof of the spying.
This spying should not be confused with the FISA 702 about queries investigation. This is a whole new ballgame.
5.13.19:
Comment:
What is stunning to me is that these facts have been known for years now, and the Russian collusion ( conspiracy theory ) has run amok all this time.
It will crystallize it all in one report why Sundance at CTH calls the Russian collusion myth to be a cover story, and this is what they are covering up.
Spying? Of course there was spying on Trump. The evidence has existed for years. Wikileaks exposed it. Read this for the skinny.
6.9.19:
7:17 pm:
Well, I've looked at this closely. There's probably not a whole lot of anything new. For instance, I expected that the NSA had "everything" on "everybody". The thing that is problematical is the FISA 702 about queries. This is the stuff that NSA collects and stores, and somebody was accessing that information without proper authorization.
It is suspected that this was the way the previous administration kept tabs on opponents. If they did, and if it can be proven, then there should be some accountability. Actually, enough has already been established that should result in criminal investigation of many high officials in the Obama administration.
However, given the 95% Democrat partisan advantage in DC, any public official is probably not accountable. That too is a big, big problem.
6:41 pm:
This guy is the same guy that disputes that the emails were hacked. ( if memory serves ) The wikipedia entry on him is not unfavorable, because he sounds like the Democrats used to sound during the Bush administration.
So, let's get this straight. Democrats and the majority elect a guy ( Obama ) , partly because of perceived abuses in warrantless searches. But Obama doesn't clean it up, but makes it a lot worse.
By the way, it is not only Trump being surveilled, it is all of us.
If they can do this, what can stop them? Do you really wish for anybody in the government to have such power? This shouldn't be a partisan issue.
4:23 pm:
These are the whistleblower tapes. They are recordings that you can listen to if you are interested.
I have listened to one of several, and part of another one. Basically, what is in the American Report is in the whistleblower tapes.
Of course, these are most likely dead on accurate and true. Yet, it will mostly be greeted by indifference. Or, it may be considered partisan, because that is how everything is seen today.
If everything partisan is justified, then where does it end? It cannot have a happy ending. There is just no way that it could.
3:00 pm:Whistleblower Tapes: Trump Wiretapped "A Zillion Times" By 'The Hammer,' Brennan’s and Clapper's Secret Computer System - The American Report - https://t.co/0A9W3n097U via @shareaholic— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) June 9, 2019
Just completed a deeper dive into the source "The American Report". It was about the "hammer". According to this report, spying on Americans has been going on for "years". Long before Trump ran for POTUS.
Some of the notes taken: ( keep in mind this is very preliminary and not well presented )
3 part series on "The Hammer" by the American Report dot org
notes:
using wikipedia to see what they have on the names used on the American Report
1. American Report not readily found on wikipedia
2. authors Fanning and Jones also not found
3. Denis Montgomery found: , seems critical
4. "The Hammer": not found either. However, article states that it is out there
there is indirect reference found on Montgomery (3) above:
Vault 7 document dump from Wikileaks does mention HAMR
5. Judge G. Murray Snow, US District Court for Arizona--- no reference to release of tapes
on wikipedia, but here it is: Did find Snow on a different pathway search on wikipedia
6. I blogged about Evelyn Farkas, and her youtube video was taken down shortly afterward
7. USAF Gen. McInerney connection to Hammer not on Wikipedia, critical entry of him
Fox interview prior to Comey firing
8. Admiral Lyons: Nothing found about hammer in relation to Ace Lyons, Lyons died last year.
9. dr. dave janda: Not on wikipedia, but a link from wikipedia
10. Whistleblower tapes: nothing much on search engine, nothing on wikipedia
Big question at this moment is what is on the "Whistleblower tapes"? Supposed to be proof of the spying.
This spying should not be confused with the FISA 702 about queries investigation. This is a whole new ballgame.
5.13.19:
Comment:
What is stunning to me is that these facts have been known for years now, and the Russian collusion ( conspiracy theory ) has run amok all this time.
It will crystallize it all in one report why Sundance at CTH calls the Russian collusion myth to be a cover story, and this is what they are covering up.
Spying? Of course there was spying on Trump. The evidence has existed for years. Wikileaks exposed it. Read this for the skinny.
COMEY LAUNCHED TRUMP RUSSIA INVESTIGATION DAY AFTER GENERAL EXPOSED ‘THE HAMMER’ - The American Report - https://t.co/G4crbDrZLx via @shareaholic— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) May 13, 2019
Why do people believe Mueller?
Rasmussen had a poll ( not linked to here ) in which Mueller was said to have done a fair job. Evidently, people buy into the hype about Mueller's "integrity" and so forth.
Why do they buy in to this? There are more problems with that investigation than you could shake a stick at, yet these people think the investigation was fair?
When I think of Mueller, I don't see integrity, nor fairness. I'm not even sure of basic competence.
How to explain the sharp divide? Lots of people don't trust Mueller.
The explanation could be explained in two reasons.
Why do they buy in to this? There are more problems with that investigation than you could shake a stick at, yet these people think the investigation was fair?
When I think of Mueller, I don't see integrity, nor fairness. I'm not even sure of basic competence.
How to explain the sharp divide? Lots of people don't trust Mueller.
The explanation could be explained in two reasons.
- People believe what they wish to believe.
- The stories being told are different, most likely. The stories favorable to Mueller are told to people who want to believe Mueller, and vice versa.
Nobody wants to admit bias, I suppose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)