Bowsite.com

A 2016 DOJ criminal investigation was suppressed and buried by the DOJ/FBI that involved a major NY Democratic power broker, Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation.

The investigation revolved around the illegal sale of controlled US Homeland Security technology to Russia and China in the years before the 2016 election. The DOJ terminated its internal investigation despite clear and irrefutable evidence of criminal activity and hid it from the public!

Just like the Train in CA............

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

Reasoning: Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Nationalism, Some Fake News Country: USA World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180

History

The Gateway Pundit is an extreme right news and opinion website that is not afraid of conspiracy theories and the occasional publication of falsehoods (see analysis). The website was founded by Jim Hoft in 2004 to “speak the truth” and to “expose the wickedness of the left.”

According to their about page “The Gateway Pundit is one of the top political websites. It is consistently ranked as one of the top political blogs in the nation. TGP has been cited by Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, The Drudge Report, The Blaze, Mark Levin, FOX Nation and by several international news organizations.”

Funded by / Ownership

The Gateway Pundit is owned by Jim Hoft and funded primarily through online advertising.

Analysis / Bias

In review, The Gateway Pundit demonstrates extreme right wing bias in story selection that always favors the right and denigrates the left. There is significant use of loaded emotional language in headlines such as this: President Trump RIPS INTO Peter Strzok After He’s Fired – Calls For Hillary ‘Sham Investigation’ to be ‘Properly Redone’. The Gateway Pundit is also fiercely dedicated to the promotion of Donald Trump. TGP always sources their information, but sometimes utilizes questionable sources such as Breitbart and Mike Cernovich, who both a have terrible track records with fact checkers.

The Gateway Pundit has published numerous false or conspiracy stories such as Hillary Clinton having a seizure, identifying an innocent person in the Las Vegas mass shooting and again identifying the wrong person after the motor vehicle homicide at the White Supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Further, TGP claimed the “FBI received tips well in advance of the Florida school shooting and decided, for whatever reason, not to act.” Finally, based on publishing false information, TGP has faced lawsuits for defamation and damages to innocent individuals.

A factual search reveals several failed fact checks by IFCN fact checkers. Here are a select few. ?Anti-Trump Protesters Bused Into Austin, Chicago – FALSE ?Did a Woman Say the Washington Post Offered Her $1,000 to Accuse Roy Moore of Sexual Abuse? – FALSE ?‘Spooked’ Clinton Campaign Manager Deleted Tweets – FALSE ?Fake news posts blame Puerto Rico’s truck drivers for refusing to ship relief supplies – PANTS ON FIRE

Overall, we rate The Gateway Pundit Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracies and numerous instances of publishing false (fake) news. (10/4/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 8/13/2018)"

Are they picking out clothes for Trump?

So much nonsense in the media anymore. Think I will wait for Mueller's report on 0bama, Clinton, and Trump....lol

WND found “fact-checker” sites run by:

•A gamer.

•A leftist, Trump-hating, feminist professor who specializes in “fat studies.”

•A sex-and-fetish blogger.

•A health-industry worker.

•Organizations with billionaire Democratic Party activists and donors.

•And another guy who went to extreme lengths to conceal his identity.

But most of the self-appointed “fact-checker” sites had one thing in common: President Trump – and the news sites that dare to give him a fair shake – are overwhelmingly their favorite targets.

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

?Overall, we rate WND Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracy theories and numerous failed fact checks.

Detailed Report

Reasoning: Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Some Fake News Country: USA World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180

History

Founded in 1997, World Net Daily or WND is a politically conservative news and opinion website. WND was founded by Joseph Farah, who also serves as editor-in-chief. WND also publishes books under the imprint WND Books.

Funded by / Ownership

WND is owned by WorldNetDaily.com, Inc. and is funded through online advertising, book publishing and an online store that sells conservative related merchandise.

Analysis / Bias

Based on reviews by all of our researchers, WND is a Questionable online news source that has a far right bias and dabbles in right wing conspiracies such as President Obama’s birth certificate. They also use misleading clickbait headlines that do not always match the content of the article (See M. Allen’s review below). WND also has a very poor track record with fact checkers: ?“California To Register Illegal Aliens To Vote – Automatically.” – Pants on Fire ?“A U.S. Government Accountability Office report says Planned Parenthood Federation of America cannot find some $1.3 billion given to it by the federal government from 2002 through 2008.” – Pants on fire ?White House spokesman Robert Gibbs “lied” when he said President Obama’s birth certificate is posted on the Internet. – False ?Chobani CEO Hamdi Ulukaya vowed to “drown the United States in Muslims” and is “importing them to Idaho 300 at a time to work in his factory.” – Mostly False ?Elena Kagan Tied to Obama’s Birth Certificate – False

Several different media outlets have criticized WND for both promotion of white nationalism and peddling conspiracy theories. For example, the Washington Post and Columbia Journalism Review has written articles describing WND as Far Right and Alt Right. Further, The Southern Poverty Law Center labels WorldNetDaily as an antigovernment extremist group. (D. Van Zandt 6/19/2016) Updated (12/16/2018). Below is the detailed reviews of each researcher.

WND is deceptive in that their news articles appear moderate and not overtly sensational. However, Snopes has slammed them on many an occasion for parsing of facts, and using inaccurate data. In my opinion, this site with respect to news, is pretty deceiving as on their outward appearances seem well-balanced (scam ads notwithstanding). When you take a look at their Opinion page, their true colors are more evident. This is not a reliable site by any measure for news, and the rest of the site is pretty much a rag. (F. Locke Siewert (2/25/2017)

WND is a decidedly right biased site that does carry some center and slightly left content. This is through linking to reports from less biased sources. For example: The story regarding Black students at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The actual article is a fairly well balanced look at the issue by Todd Richmond of the Associated Press. The lead-in line WND used for the article was somewhat misleading, however. By using white supremacists in quotes it seems to imply that it isn’t a factor in the students demands when it is. Where the real bias on the site is evident is on the editorial pages and staff generated articles. Although mostly factual, the wording is heavily weighted and misleading. Carrying some moderate content is not enough, balanced against the editorial stance, to rate WND anything other than right biased and Questionable. (D. Kelley 2/25/2017)

WND is far right/alt-right. This story just came out. Direct quote “The story, nevertheless, was issued by the AP, which explained it obtained an 11-page document that “calls for the unprecedented militarization of immigration enforcement as far north as Portland, Oregon, and as far east as New Orleans, Louisiana.”

falselink

The issue here is it doesn’t link to the source but another news outlet that is using the source that then links to the source there. This is something you might find in a typical badly cited essay in college. Always cite original sources when referencing material.

Second issue in article –

“On Thursday, activists protesting Trump’s effort to enforce immigration law carried out a “Day Without Immigrants” protest in which immigrants were to stay home from work or school.

In Denver, some parents left work to take lunch to their children in public schools when the lunchroom workers took part in the protest.”

This is minor but it shows a significant downplay of how wide spread and national the “Day Without Immigrants” was. It shows clear bias in how they view said protest when you marginalize like this. Better solution is to not reference it at all to limit bias in reporting."

Want to really check em out..... what's their "rating" for CNN or MSNBC? If it's not the mirror image of what they slathered up above..... then you have your answer.....

Personally...... i couldn't care any less who they are..... nor what they say. I never just read things and instantly believe them. Nor do I read things and instantly discount them. Either way, it's a heads up to pay some attention. Normally WRT such things the facts will come out in due time. Well.... unless the site is run by white hispanics...... or kids with MEGA hats assaulting innocent old Native Americans minding their own business.....

The truth is very hard to decipher on the net and that is where the back ground check has to be made by one self. As Joe Friday said, "just the facts" but bias override the facts.

Slade- your link only proves my point. You personally was calling people liars before any facts were out. What’s worse you used your guess to negatively generalize all Democrats based on one persons action...which never holds one drop of water. So if that empire guy is found to be a liar and convicted does that mean your right. Maybe this time. But how many innocent people get caught up in you BS generalization. A lot more than you are right about.

You guys want to be the right wing version of Christian scientist then go for it. Keep following your L Ron Hubbard without question. Believe him when he says all news is fake except the stuff he agrees with. Believe him when he says all those that disagree with him are unpatriotic demons. Those are 2 big signs that he is a false prophet. Or go with ignorance is bliss.

Besides you made the claim the racist hoaxer never mentioned their race when he clearly did, so in other words you are a confirmed liar.

Keep slurping the kool-aid.

Slade- you show me on the police report where he claimed they were white. You inferred that based on interviews after. Still he never explicitly said his attacker’s were white. Regardless, you claim all Democrats are liars because one person who may or may not be a democrat did (based on impending indictment) which is complete BS. For the record, I’m glad the police worked this case. If he is guilty he should go to jail. Innocent until proven guilty just like Kavanaugh right?

Matt

Can't make this stuff up if you tried.....

Again..... what do the "mediabias" buddies say about all, not just "misinformed" but outright fake stories from your "trusted" sources? Fake story after fake story? Is their debunked story just an "honest mistake"? (retraction on page 42....) Where others outside their circle are not mistakes.... they are sinister biased lies? (as your factcheckers claim)

You'd think SOMEBODY would finally get it after Dan Rather and others in "trusted sources". But no.... they even make a movie about how Rather did what he did..... because he knew it was the right thing to do..... they, your "trusted sources", went after Bush to the point of fabrication..... and are going after Trump even harder BTW...

Good grief..... once again.... anything is justified if it's for "the greater good" Guess who appoints themselves as gatekeepers "For the Greater Good" that give out Bull Chit Passes like it was Halloween candy? Liberal Elitists.... just in case the "factcheckers" didn't happen to mention that.....

Here is just a few committed by leftwing loons.........

The Texas family whose car and motorcycle were burned, and whose garage was spray-painted with “n—-r lover”, only to have his wife later reveal that her husband had hoaxed the community by doing it himself.http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2016/12/23/denton-man-set-vehicles-ablaze-painted-racial-slur-garage-door-wife-says

The black, “white supremacist” arrested for the infamous burned-down black church which had “Vote Trump” written on it: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/fire-marshal-politics-motive-vote-trump-arson-44341228

South Philly graffiti — **”Black Bitch”, “Trump Rules” — arrest made, turns out to be black “white supremacist” : http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/real-time/S-Jersey-man-arrested-in-post-election-vandalism-in-South-Philly.html?mobi=true

young lady who was arrested for fabricating a story about an attack by racists on a NYC subway while yelling “Donald Trump”: http://ijr.com/2016/12/757186-muslim-teen-caught-lying-about-trump-inspired-assault-gets-humiliating-punishment/

young lady from Ann Arbor who fabricated a terrifying tale of a Trump supporter threatening that he’d burn the hijab off of her if she didn’t take it off: http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/ann-arbor-police-womans-story-about-being-force-to-remove-hijab-did-not-occur

University of Louisiana at Lafayette student who now admits she fabricated her claim that men wearing Trump hats attacked her, knocked her down, and stole her headscarf: http://klfy.com/2016/11/10/lafayette-pd-ul-student-made-up-story-about-attack-stolen-hijab/

the brown “white supremacist” arrested for writing KKK and swastikas at Nassau community college: http://patch.com/new-york/gardencity/man-who-drew-swastikas-across-nassau-community-college-arrested-police

the Bowling Green student who was arrested after falsely claiming she was attacked and taunted with racial slurs by MAGA-gear wearing Trump supporters: http://www.wtol.com/story/33736486/bgsu-student-charged-after-reporting-fake-assault

another student at BGSU who fabricated a story about a robbery and derogatory slur : http://www.toledoblade.com/Police-Fire/2016/11/19/BGSU-Second-report-of-slur-attack-false-too.html

a black man in Malden (Boston area) who claimed he was forced to run for his life after being threatened with lynching, chased, and told that “It’?s Trump country now”, but then admitted he fabricated the story: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2016/11/man_admits_to_faking_hate_crime_in_malden

the man who hung a nazi flag in SF (incidentally, across the street from his neighbors whose family members were Holocaust victims), only to later explain he was making an anti-Trump political statement: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/San-Francisco-homeowner-s-Nazi-flag-protest-of-10605083.php

the “courageous” throat-punching, racist-stomping woman who claimed to have bashed the fash only to be inexplicably handcuffed for her trouble, but who police say fabricated the incident: http://www.mndaily.com/article/2016/11/umpd-not-involved-in-handcuffed-university-student

the woman who was supposedly threatened at a gas station with a gun by Trump supporters, but who never contacted police and has now deleted her accusation: http://www.phillyvoice.com/police-no-official-report-ugly-racial-incident-del-gas-station/

Williams College students who admitted they wrote KKK graffiti and dumped fake blood in a church to ?bring attention to the effects of the presidential election?: http://williamsrecord.com/2016/11/16/two-students-admit-to-vandalizing-griffin-hall-on-saturday/

Bisexual North Park University student who school says fabricated hateful pro-Trump messages: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/north-park-fabricated-notes-402556366.html

An Elon University hate message that received national attention “Bye bye latinos hasta la vista” but was later revealed to be written by a Latino student who was upset about the results of the election and wrote the message as a “satirical commentary”: http://www.elonnewsnetwork.com/article/2016/11/note-found-whiteboard-kivette-bye-bye-latinos

These Wellesley college kids, accused of screaming racist and homophobic slurs, but were cleared of charges when it was determined they were only yelling “Make America Great Again” — incident took place in front of “Harambee House” (kek!): http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/12/19/pro-trump-babson-students-cleared-wellesley-victory-incident/RsIfPd27sNxqiXvnwOrhTJ/story.html

TD- exactly what are my trusted sources?

"It feels like if I had said it was a Muslim, or a Mexican, or someone black, I feel like the doubters would have supported me much more. A lot more," the Empire star said of his attackers.

Media Bias/Fact Check is a web site that rates factual accuracy and political bias in news media. The site classifies media sources on a political bias spectrum, as well as on the accuracy of their factual reporting.[2]

The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and the owner of the site, Dave Van Zandt, as an "armchair media analyst."[3] Van Zandt describes himself as someone with "more than 20 years as an arm chair researcher on media bias and its role in political influence."[4] The Poynter Institute notes, "Media Bias/Fact Check is a widely cited source for news stories and even studies about misinformation, despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific."[5]

So, in other words, it's some guy who sits around and decides if something is factual or not, but doesn't really have any more info than we do. Note the above, self-described "Armchair media analyst."

The media has gone in full mode in lying to persuade the public over to their political bias, personally the Left and Right are guilty more so than usual. Just give me the fricking truth and I will adjust to it but do not lie to me or you get no respect at all.

Most people reading this will know Sir Walter Scott’s famous couplet (from the narrative poem Marmion):

Oh, what a tangled web we weave

When first we practise to deceive!

Less well known, but undeservedly so, is the excellent completing couplet by J. R. Pope, published under the sly title “A Word of Encouragement”:

But when we’ve practiced for a while,

How vastly we improve our style!

Indeed. You really have to give it to the suits in Barack Obama’s intelligence services and Department of Justice (many of whom, of course, are still strutting about in Donald Trump’s administration). It was quite a web they wove, and tangled with complexity. Yet their prodigious practice also made it nearly impenetrable to anyone not inside their charmed circle.

That adamantine carapace of impenetrability is a sign of their high style, their assiduity, the reason that a “word of encouragement” did not come amiss.

Put your hand on your heart. Can you really tell me what happened and who all the major players are in the Get Trump farce that has been occupying the nation for more than two years now? There have been various worthy efforts to unpack the drama—I’ve made a few myself—but at bottom it is like Russia according to Winston Churchill, “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.”

Part of the problem is the shifting roles of the main players. Or rather, the shifting roles that elevate one or more players at one moment only to demote them back to the chorus a week or two later. How many people were suddenly cast into starring roles only, a few days or weeks later, to find themselves pushed back into bit-player status? George Papadopoulos: remember him? For a brief shining moment, he was the key to the whole “Russian Collusion” mythos. The New York Times told us so. But after he strutted and fretted his hour upon the stage he faded from sight and now is heard no more.

It’s the same with so many other characters—the Russian lawyer who one moment was supposed to have provided the smoking gun for the whole investigation, finally nailing Donald Trump, Jr. if not Sr., but she too sang her one aria and was pushed back to the room marked “Extras.”

Nevertheless, there are a few actors in this Gesamtkunstwerk who, though they started slowly, have exhibited surprising resilience and staying power.

Consider the unlikely power couple Bruce and Nellie Ohr.

As I recall, they first popped up on the radar screen during those heady weeks that brought Andrew McCabe, former Deputy Director of the FBI, and the love birds Peter Strzok, head of the FBI’s counterespionage division, and Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer who worked seriatim on the faux-investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails, the Russia investigation, Robert Mueller’s grand fumigation team, and was also Andrew McCabe’s conduit to the press for the purpose of leaking sensitive information to sympathetic journalists.

McCabe was fired. So was Strzok, but not before his text duet with Page in August 2016:

Page: [Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!

Strzok: No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.

Public service is a marvelous thing.

Any Day Now We’re just about out of popcorn for this entertainment. It’s difficult, even for specialists, to keep the whirling kaleidoscope of personalities straight. Once again, for about the tenth time, Robert Mueller is said to be almost, nearly, just about finished with his investigation into—into what? It’s hard to say. Tax evasion decades ago. Working as an unregistered agent for a foreign power (but not, as it turns out, Russia). Misspeaking to the FBI (why does anyone ever talk to the FBI?). And what was it that the jester Roger Stone is supposed to have done? Something very serious, one presumes, to earn a pre-dawn, swat-team enforced, guns-drawn raid on his house.

Maybe we’ll be notified soon that the report is on its way to the attorney general. Maybe some bits of it will be made public. It was supposed to be Friday. But then again, it was supposed to be a couple of months ago, last fall, over the summer. . . . The Mueller Report is a little like that sea battle Aristotle talks about in disabusing us of too-simple a view of necessity: either the battle will take place tomorrow or it won’t take place tomorrow. It would seem that both statements cannot simultaneously be true. This is where the distinction between the potential and the actual comes in. Also contingency: the most humbling reality that our quest for certainty faces. Things happen. When they do, we know, but our knowledge is always glimpsed in a rear-view mirror, never, really, in the road ahead.

But I digress. The news today—well, Friday, really—is that Doug Collins, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, released, motu proprio and sua sponte, a transcript of the committee’s interview with Bruce Ohr in August 2018. There are some interesting tidbits in the 250-plus page document. Anyone who has been following this production of “The Mousetrap” knows that Christopher Steele, the former British spook who compiled the infamous dossier of dirt on Donald Trump for Hillary Clinton, was fired by the FBI for leaking material to the press.

But Ohr’s testimony confirms what was suspected, that his firing was no impediment to getting material from Steele to the FBI. Bruce Ohr provided “back channel” access. And his sources were good: his wife, for example, did anti-Trump research for Fusion GPS, which had hired Steele.

For reasons that are mysterious, but not really, Bruce Ohr is still employed by the Department of Justice (though demoted), despite his having failed to report that his wife was working for Fusion GPS. The web, you see, is tangled!

“She provided me with a memory stick,” Bruce Ohr said of his wife, “that included research she had done for Fusion GPS on various Russian figures. And the reason she provided that information to me is [that] . . . . it related to the FBI’s Russia investigation. And she gave me that stick to give to the FBI.” Why didn’t Nellie give the flash drive to the FBI herself? Former Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), one of those questioning Ohr, wondered that, too.

Mr. Gowdy: Well, all marriages are different, so I’m trying to envision this cold start to a conversation with, “Here, honey, here’s a thumb drive.” There were no conversations before that?

Mr. Ohr: Well, Nellie was present with me in the end of July, when I first heard Russia information—information relating to the Russia investigation from Chris Steele. So she was present for some of that conversation. So she was certainly aware at that point that Chris Steele was giving me some information about Russia. At some point, I don’t remember when, I became aware that she was looking at some of the same figures as part of her work for Fusion GPS.

And on it goes. Shadowy Russian magnates. Lots of Christopher Steele. Lots of Fusion GPS.

To the Center Doug Collins said he plans to release additional transcripts, with the minimum redactions necessary for national security, of other interviews—with Lisa Page, for example, and Peter Strzok, and Nellie Ohr.

Why now? Collins explained that his patience had “grown thin” with the Justice Department. They have had the transcripts for months but refused to release them. Why?

It think it all comes back to weaving that web and keeping it tight. A few days ago, we got the news that Paul Manafort was sentenced to “only” 47 months in the slammer. Mueller’s prosecutors were disappointed. They were hoping for 24 years. There is always next week, though, when Paul Manafort comes up before a different (and Obama-appointed) judge who is expected to throw the book at him. Then it will be party time for the prosecutors, who can rejoice that they really have utterly destroyed another victim.

I have no brief with Manafort, who seems to be a pretty slimy operator. But, as Andrew McCarthy just noted, he was one of many such “consultants.” Moreover, Manafort’s financial malfeasance had nothing to do with Russia. He was working for people in the Ukraine, not Russians. But why is Manafort and not other such consultants charged—his partner Richard Gates, for example?

This brings us to the center of the web. As I and others have often had occasion to observe, neither Paul Manafort nor anyone else in this star-studded show would have caught the eye of Robert Mueller had Donald Trump not been, first, a stronger candidate than expected and, second, had he not had the temerity to win an election he was declared to have lost before the voting began. Indeed, not only would no one have caught the idea of Robert Mueller, Mueller would not now be traipsing around with the title special counsel.

Andy explains it thus: “Understand: Paul Manafort would never have been prosecuted if he had not joined Donald Trump’s campaign. He would not have been prosecuted if Hillary Clinton had won the 2016 election and spared Democrats the need to conjure up a reason to explain their defeat.”

And it’s not just Manafort who would still be sporting ostrich-skin jackets. Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, John Brennan, James Comey, James Clapper, and the rest—they all would be up to their old tricks instead of wallowing in various states of disgrace and likely indictment. Had Hillary Clinton become President, all illegal surveillance and FISA warrants against Trump proxies would have been quietly swept under the rug and the Clinton Foundation would still be doing big business.

As it is, several people close to Donald Trump have suffered from that proximity, not because of any “collusion” but simply because they offered convenient scalps that might plausibly lead to the chief scalp, Donald Trump’s.

So far, it hasn’t worked out that way, and from all accounts Mueller’s report will be but a tissue of innuendo with no crimes charged against the president. That indeed is why Jerry Nadler and other Democrats are revving up alternative schemes to hobble and ultimately destroy him. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if impeachment documents were drawn up. It would surprise me greatly were they taken seriously. The chance of their passing the Senate with a two-thirds majority are vanishingly small.

But of course that is not the end of the story. The web spinners are still hard at work. So are the miners, looking for ever deeper shafts into which they can bury news of the complex plots to frame first candidate and then President Trump. The fact that Representative Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) is no longer head of the House Intelligence Committee is a great asset for them.

Working strongly against them, however, is this still under-appreciated development: Donald Trump now has a competent and unhampered attorney general. As will soon become clear, it is not only people on Paul Manafort’s side of the aisle who should be advised to put their affairs in order.

A two tier judicial system and has always has been with the DNC, look what happen to Nixon and that was just a minor thing compared to the Clintons that would expand into Obama and that is not going to happen.

Kerik’s remarks came in response to transcripts showing former FBI legal counsel Lisa Page testified to Congress that the Department of Justice ordered the FBI not to charge Clinton with “gross negligence” for mishandling classified information.+

Lisa Page testified – last summer- that Loretta Lynch (likely with the knowledge and advice of Obama) blocked the prosecution of Hillary Clinton in 2016:

Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page admitted under questioning from Texas Republican Rep. John Ratcliffe last summer that “the FBI was ordered by the Obama DOJ not to consider charging Hillary Clinton for gross negligence in the handling of classified information,” the congressman alleged in a social media post late Tuesday, citing a newly unearthed transcript of Page’s closed-door testimony.

Page and since-fired FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok, who were romantically involved, exchanged numerous anti-Trump text messages in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election, and Republicans have long accused the bureau of political bias. But Page’s testimony was perhaps the most salient evidence yet that the Justice Department improperly interfered with the FBI’s supposedly independent conclusions on Clinton’s criminal culpability, Ratcliffe alleged.

“So let me if I can, I know I’m testing your memory,” Ratcliffe began as he questioned Page under oath, according to a transcript excerpt he posted on Twitter. “But when you say advice you got from the Department, you’re making it sound like it was the Department that told you: You’re not going to charge gross negligence because we’re the prosecutors and we’re telling you we’re not going to —”

Page interrupted: “That is correct,” as Ratcliffe finished his sentence, ” — bring a case based on that.”

James Comey had originally drafted a memo describing Clinton’s actions as “grossly negligent” but changed it in the final version:

Newly reported memos to Congress released Monday showed that language was softened between an early draft and the final copy of former FBI Director James Comey’s statement closing out the Hillary Clinton email case.

Originally Comey accused the former secretary of state of being “grossly negligent” in handling classified information in a draft dated May 2, 2016, but that was modified to claim that Clinton had been “extremely careless” in a draft dated June 10, 2016.

Comey stuck to that modified language when he announced in July 2016 that there would be no charges against Clinton.

Gross negligence is a criminal act and there was no way the Obama DOJ was going to allow Clinton to be hit with those charges. The excuse for not charging Clinton was that the statute was “Constitutionally vague.” Yet that vagueness was not an option accorded others- including one Kristian Saucier:

A FORMER NAVY MACHINIST mate who admitted taking photos inside a nuclear submarine was sentenced to a year in prison Friday, with a federal judge rebuffing a request for probation in light of authorities deciding not to prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information on a private email server as secretary of state.

Kristian Saucier’s attorneys argued in a court filing last week that Clinton had been “engaging in acts similar to Mr. Saucier” with information of much higher classification. It would be “unjust and unfair for Mr. Saucier to receive any sentence other than probation for a crime those more powerful than him will likely avoid,” attorney Derrick Hogan wrote.

Clinton’s transgressions were far in excess of Saucier’s:

The photos were deemed “confidential,” the lowest level for classification.

By contrast, an FBI investigation found Clinton’s private email server contained at least 110 emails with classified information. The probe found eight email chains with “top secret” information, 36 with “secret” information and eight with confidential information.

This confirms something else we’ve suspected since it happened- that Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton to inform him that Hillary would not be prosecuted.

May 2, 2016: Comey memo includes “gross negligence” June 10, 2016: Memo now written to include “extremely careless” June 29 , 2106: Lynch meets with Clinton on the tarmac July 5, 2016: Comey announces that Clinton will not face any charges

It stinks. It has stunk for three years.

On July 3, I wrote that there would be no prosecution of Clinton. Obama keeps bragging about how there were no scandals in his administration. That’s pure bullsh*t. There were plenty, but this is the worst of them.

It is time to demand all of the records of the Lynch-Clinton meeting, declassify them and get the truth out there. We need to see just how high this goes.

Not that there’s really any doubt. This is obstruction of justice.

LISA PAGE TESTIMONY MAY HAVE PUT OBAMA AG LORETTA LYNCH IN THE CROSSHAIRS

The pieces of the coup to undermine the Constitution of the United States of America are coming undone. Evidence from various sources now confirms that Obama’s CIA, DOJ and FBI illegally spied on the Trump team starting in 2015 and then built a coup to prevent him from winning the election and later remove him from office!""

Chris Steele Used Random CNN Online Comments to Create Anti-Trump Dossier — Deep State FBI Used it to Spy on

And, conveniently, the decision came down right after that meeting with Slick Willie and Loretta Lynch on the Tarmac...you know, where they "talked about their Grandkids"...

. . . .. .

. . . . .

You need to Lawyer up NOW !

ksflatlander has not been heard from, and this thread is testimony to the "one-two" combination punches you and others delivered to him.

Get a Lawyer now. You beat this poor guy up so bad . . . . . . . I fear he did not survive it.

Former Deputy Assistant AG Victoria Toensing: There Is Evidence Obama Administration FISA Abuse Started As Early As 2012 pic.twitter.com/1OjvsCYDqC

— Wojciech Pawelczyk ???? (@PolishPatriotTM) June 1, 2019

Over a year ago I asked whether U.S. Atty. John Huber could impartially and fully investigate FISA court abuses and other matters in which his boss Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein was up to his eyeballs, “Can Huber Investigate His Boss Rosenstein?”, in which I asked:

While it is reassuring to note that A.G. Jeff Sessions has climbed down from the back side of the milk carton, where his missing visage had been hiding, long enough to appoint Utah U.S. attorney John Huber to independently investigate claims of FBI abuses in surveilling the Trump campaign and other matters, one question remains. Can he investigate the commission of his boss, Rod Rosenstein’s, of a fraud upon the FISA court by signing a FISA warrant application that relied on a fake British-Russian dossier financed by Team Hillary and the DNC?

Turns out he didn’t investigate anything, according to AG William Barr in his recent interview with CBS. Huber was “dumber” to Sessions’ “dumb”:

JAN CRAWFORD: Um, what’s the status of Huber’s investigation in Utah? I think the former Attorney General Sessions had asked him to look at this.

WILLIAM BARR: Right, so Huber had originally been asked to take a look at the FISA applications and the electronic surveillance but then he stood back and put that on hold while the Office of Inspector General was conducting its review, which would’ve been normal for the department. And he was essentially on standby in case Mr. Horowitz referred a matter to him to be handled criminally. So he has not been active on this front in recent months and so Durham is taking over that role. The other issues he’s been working on relate to Hillary Clinton. Those are winding down and hopefully we’ll be in a position to bring those to fruition.

JAN CRAWFORD: So he won’t be involved in this really at all then?

WILLIAM BARR: No.

JAN CRAWFORD: This is his role, it’s done?

WILLIAM BARR: Right.

JAN CRAWFORD: And now Durham is going to pick up–

WILL BARR: Yes, right.

(continued at link)