Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

Democrats Are Raging Mad After Finding Out What Trump Has Been Doing To Their Documents

Oh my…

Published

on

When I first read this story, I did not believe it and I still pretty much don’t. Leftists and the media are now claiming that President Trump tears to shreds important White House documents that are required to be preserved under the law. Whether it happened or not, Democrats are incensed about it like always. Veteran records management analyst Solomon Lartey is claiming that White House staffers like himself have been tasked with going around and picking up the pieces of documents and taping them back together “like a jigsaw puzzle,” according to Politico. He also whines that he was paid an annual salary of $65,969 to do this. Sounds like he wasn’t happy with his pay.

Lartey spent the first five months of Trump’s presidency taping documents back together after Trump tore them up in anger, or so he claims. I can see the President tearing up things from time to time out of anger and frustration, but this guy and others are claiming he does it all the time and I just don’t buy that. Trump is far too professional for that and he’s not dumb, emotionally or otherwise. Not only does this guy say Trump tears up the documents, he says he shreds them into confetti-sized bits. I don’t believe that claim whatsoever. That would not be out of anger, that would be time-consuming and serve nor purpose whatsoever.

This entire claim is to assert that Trump is in violation of the Presidential Records Act, which says the White House must preserve all memos, letters, emails and papers that the President deals with and store them in the National Archives as historical records. Here’s why I think this guy and his cohorts are claiming this. Hillary Clinton actually violated that act over and over again and it can be proven. She had staffers shred documents and when she deleted emails and texts, she was violating the law. So tit for tat, they think Hillary’s issue is going to get her nailed eventually and want to spread the grief to President Trump. But no one is buying what they are ridiculously selling here. No one.

Trending: Cop Pulls Man Over for Best Anti-Obama Sticker He’s Ever Seen – It’s Priceless!

This sounds like sour grapes as well… one of Lartey’s associates, Reginald Young Jr., who worked as a senior records management analyst, said that during over two decades of government service, he had never been asked to do such a thing. “We had to endure this under the Trump administration,” Young said. “I’m looking at my director, and saying, ‘Are you guys serious?’ We’re making more than $60,000 a year, we need to be doing far more important things than this. It felt like the lowest form of work you can take on without having to empty the trash cans.”

Politico says that staffers knew they could not change President Trump, so they just quietly went about taping together documents. None of this sounds legit to me. Allegedly, staffers would collect pieces of paper from the Oval Office and the President’s private residence and send them to records management for Lartey and his colleagues to reassemble. And wonder of wonders, Politico is citing two disgruntled staffers that have since been fired and ‘people familiar with the process’. Right.

From People:

““We got Scotch tape, the clear kind,” Lartey told Politico. “You found pieces and taped them back together and then you gave it back to the supervisor.”

Lartey, who said his entire department was on taping duty during the early months of Trump’s presidency, told Politico that the papers included newspaper clips on which Trump had written notes; invitations; and letters from constituents and lawmakers.

“I had a letter from [Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer] — he tore it up,” Lartey said. “It was the craziest thing ever. He ripped papers into tiny pieces.”

Lartey said staffers in the records department were still being tasked with taping back together documents as recently as this spring. But that team grew smaller after Lartey and many other career officials were abruptly terminated from their positions earlier this year without any warning or explanation as to why.”

Probably because they were leaking to the media made up stories and blabbing when they shouldn’t have to hurt the President. Just my opinion on the whole matter.

Then Politico goes on to relate things they have absolutely no proof of. It’s rumors and gossip and not real journalism again. They claim other White House staffers have been demeaned in different ways and they use former communications director Hope Hicks as an example. She was charged with fetching coffee and steaming Trump’s pants while he was still wearing them, according to a recent tell-all book by former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. Let’s just say that I have a very hard time believing that as well. But say it was true, you know Hicks wasn’t the only one that fetched coffee or helped Trump with minor details so he could go about his business. This is silly.

On Twitter, Democrats had a collective meltdown, feigning outrage over this. That’s so hypocritical considering what Hillary Clinton actually did as opposed to what they are making up and accusing the President of. These people need to seriously get a life and some solid facts for a change.

By the way, you want to talk about the Swamp… Lartey had 30 years under his belt of working in the government. He needed to be cleaned out and let go. And you’ll be surprised that these same lackeys had nothing but praise for the Obama administration and their record keeping. Wonder if they helped shred stuff, delete texts and emails for Hillary and others? I guess you could call that organized, right?

Per Politico, Lartey, 54, and Young, 48, were career government officials who worked together in records management until this spring, when both were abruptly terminated from their jobs. Both are now unemployed and still full of questions about why they were stripped of their badges with no explanation and marched off of the White House grounds by the Secret Service. As I said, I’m sure there was a very good reason for it and this Politico piece goes to prove my point.

Both had to sign resignation letters and were terminated immediately. Young described the firing as traumatic and frustratingly Kafkaesque. “The only excuse that I’ve ever gotten from them,” he said, “was that you serve at the pleasure of the President.” And that’s more than enough reason for them to be gone.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

News

Dem Lawmaker Wants To Make Criminals Out Of People By Making A New ‘Hate Crime’

There seems to be some Constitutional issues with this

Right Wing News

Published

on

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service in the world, RWN offers the following information published by DownTrend

Well, I guess this is one way to cut down on the number of black people in jail. A New York State lawmaker is proposing making it a hate crime to call the police on black people. If you think I’m making this up or overreacting to something, check out this headline from The Patch, which says the same:

Calling 911 On Black People May Be Hate Crime Under Proposed Law

And the article backs that headline up:

New Yorkers who call 911 on law-abiding people of color are committing hate crimes and should be prosecuted, according to a state senator who was recently reported to police for campaigning in his own district.

State Senator Jesse Hamilton, who represents Brownsville, Crown Heights and Flatbush, proposed new legislation a week after a self-described Trump fan called police to report him for speaking to constituents in public. It would criminalize 911 calls against people of color without evidence of malice.

“That’s gonna be a hate crime. This pattern of calling the police on black people going about their business and participating in the life of our country has to stop,” said Hamilton.

Try to guess the race and political party of this guy. If you said white and Republican you were way off.

The deal is, there have been a handful of incidents in which white or non-black people have called the police on black people for doing things that were determined not to be a crime. The natural knee-jerk reaction is to make a law for something that isn’t even remotely a problem.

The law however would be a huge problem. If people know they could get slapped with a hate crime charge, they would be reluctant to ever call the police on a black person no matter what kind of heinous crime they appear to be committing. The onus should not be on average citizens to determine the guilt of a person they think is committing a crime. The easiest solution is for 911 operators to weed out the silly calls and not send police when someone reports something that very clearly is not a crime.

I have more than a few questions about this proposed law: Would it still be okay to call the police on white people. I’m assuming yes. Could black people call the police on other black people? How do Asians and Hispanics figure into this law? Oh, and what about illegal aliens who have sanctuary in NY and are above the law? Can they call the police on black people?

There also seems to be some Constitutional issues with this proposed law because it specifically makes it a hate crime to call the police on black people. It would still be a dumb law if it included all people of all races, but making it race-specific like this is a clear violation of equal protection under the law.

The clarification the news gave on this proposed law doesn’t make it seem any less terrible:

Hamilton’s proposal would strengthen current legislation that outlaws false reports by designating racially-motivated 911 calls as hate crimes, especially in instances where the call results in police responding with the preconception that the person might cause a threat. Read More

Continue Reading

News

Man Found Contracts Showing Obama Was Paying Trump Spy – Obama Tried To Shut Him Up By Stripping Security Clearance

Obama-appointed officials cleaned house

Published

on

A man named Adam Lovinger lost his security clearances after complaining about the questionable government contract that was awarded to Stefan Halper, who is being touted as an FBI informant whose job was to keep an eye on President Trump’s campaign. Who stripped the clearances, you might ask? It’s being reported that it was Obama-appointed officials who cleaned house and ripped Lovinger’s clearances away, presenting to us quite a concern that involves contracts and clashing forces within the government who either supported Obama then or support Trump now. Either way, it’s a mess.

Lovinger was reportedly complaining about Halper’s contracts back in 2016. He then lost his clearances on May 1, 2017. Lovinger’s lawyer, Sean M. Bigley, then complained to the Pentagon’s senior ethics official, mad that Lovinger’s “higher ups” were basically punishing him with the whole security clearance thing – punishing him for complaining about the deals that were given to Mr. Halper and apparently a “best friend” of Chelsea Clinton, as per the Washington Times.

The Washington Times called this out, as well as numerous other sites who wanted the public to be notified about what was going on behind closed doors. Since John Brennan just lost his security clearances, it was probably just another relative topic to bring up someone else who lost their clearances as well. However the big problem is why they lost their clearances and how it ties back to Obama’s administration, and perhaps even Hillary Clinton on a long stretch. Rather than point fingers at two particular names, it might just be the entire Democratic Party. However it goes, it’s up to the public to absorb the information and make their own decisions.

Anytime these news stories are breaking the headlines, it’s always important to take in all the information and figure out what’s going on. Then share the story with people who would enjoy it. If you’re up for a good bit of government drama, then this is right up your political alley!

Here’s a brief summary that details most of what happened:

“As it turns out, one of the two contractors Mr. Lovinger explicitly warned his ONA superiors about misusing in 2016 was none other than Mr. Halper,” Mr. Bigley wrote in his ethics complaint, which called the contracts “cronyism and corruption.”

Mr. Lovinger filed a whistleblower reprisal complaint in May with the Defense Department inspector general against James Baker, director of the Office of Net Assessment. The complaint also singles out Washington Headquarters Services, a Pentagon support agency that awarded the Halper contracts totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars.

In an internal October 2016 email to higher-ups, Mr. Lovinger wrote of “the moral hazard associated with the Washington Headquarters Services contracting with Stefan Halper,” the complaint said. It said Mr. Baker hired Mr. Halper to “conduct foreign relations,” a job that should be confined to government officials.

“It was a topic of conversation within the office,” Mr. Bigley told The Times. “What is Halper doing, and why is he being paid astronomically more than others similarly situated?”

The Office of Net Assessment conducts analyses of future threats and ways to defeat them.

“Nobody in the office seemed to know what Halper was doing for his money,” Mr. Bigley said. “Adam said Jim Baker, the director, kept Halper’s contracts very close to the vest. And nobody seemed to have any idea what he was doing at the time. He subcontracted out a good chunk of it to other academics. He would compile them all and then collect the balance as his fee as a middleman. That was very unusual.”

Mr. Bigley told The Times that the inspector general’s criminal investigative division has interviewed Mr. Lovinger about Office of Net Assessment contracting.

In all, Mr. Lovinger has four cases pending: whistleblower reprisal, criminal division, an ethics complaint and an appeal on his security clearance revocation.

A spokesman told The Times that the Pentagon would not comment on the case’s merits.

The spokesman said the Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudicaitons Facility reviewed Mr. Lovinger’s clearance.

It then “issued a statement of reasons stating why, under [federal guidelines] it would not be clearly consistent with the national interest to continue Mr. Lovinger’s security clearance, and he was provided with the opportunity to respond to the security concerns,” the spokesman said. “After considering all available information, the CAF issued an unfavorable clearance determination and Mr. Lovinger’s clearance was revoked.”

Mr. Bigley said the conflict is that the consolidated authority resides within the Washington Headquarters Services, which is the target of Mr. Lovinger’s complaint.

“The CAF’s entire ‘adjudication’ of this case was orchestrated by corrupt officials at WHS, which was demonstrated numerous times throughout the process,” he said.

To conservatives, Mr. Lovinger is a victim of the “deep state” — Obama loyalists out to harm the Trump administration.

Press reports identified Mr. Halper as a paid FBI confidential human source, whose mission was to make contacts with Trump campaign workers. The FBI was investigating any Trump ties to Moscow at a time when its intelligence officers were hacking Democratic Party computers.”

After lodging his complaints about the Office of Net Assessment’s outside research in general and Mr. Halper specifically, Mr. Lovinger sought an assignment to the Trump White House national security staff in January 2017. He was soon confronted with allegations from Mr. Baker that he failed to follow security rules. Mr. Lovinger denies any wrongdoing.

Mr. Baker was appointed chief of the Office of Net Assessment in 2015 by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, Mr. Obama’s appointee.

The Washington Headquarters Services, which revoked Mr. Lovinger’s clearance, is headed by Barbara Westgate, who was appointed in 2016.

Perhaps the most intriguing narrative in the Lovinger story is the appearance of Mr. Halper, a national security consultant in the U.S. and Britain who is tied to that country’s MI6 spy agency through his business partner.”

Continue Reading

Thanks for sharing!

We'd like to invite you to become a RWN insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to a friend