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

Connect with us

President Trump Releases His ‘Hit List’ – All 6 Served Under Obama

Published

on

As the bombshells keep dropping in the wake of the release of the FBI’s heavily redacted FISA warrant application for Carter Page reveals almost as much as it conceals regarding the Obama administration, and none of it good. Fervent in their quest to make a case against what they viewed as the “enemy,” the Obama administration made a case to spy on a US citizen and the Trump campaign, reducing their fourth amendment rights to little more than words on paper.

As they continue to attempt to justify their heinous, illegal, and highly unethical actions, President Donald Trump is considering his own response and that of the nation to what has been revealed.

At the White House press briefing, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders stated President Trump is considering revoking the security clearances from former intelligence officials who served under former President Barack Obama. Responding to a question about comments tweeted earlier in the day by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) that former CIA Director John Brennan should have his clearance stripped Sanders replied, reading from a prepared statement –

“Not only is the President looking to take away Brennan’s security clearance, he’s also looking into the clearances of Comey, Clapper, Hayden, Rice, and McCabe because they’ve politicized, and in some cases, monetized their public service and security clearances. Making baseless accusations of improper contact with Russia or being influenced by Russia, against the President, is extremely inappropriate. The fact that people with security clearances are making these baseless charges provides inappropriate legitimacy to accusations with zero evidence.”

The list of individuals facing the potential revocation of their security clearance features prominent critics from former President Barrack Obama’s administration who had access to top-secret intelligence information. According to Sanders, there is significant concern from the president and other members of his administration that these former officials are currently monetizing and politicizing their institutional knowledge from the country’s top intelligence agencies.

The current short list includes –

  • Former FBI Director James Comey
  • Former CIA Director John Brennan
  • Former Director of the National Security Agency Michael Hayden
  • Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
  • Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe
  • Former National Security Advisor Susan Rice

Paul tweeted earlier the same day asking – “Is John Brennan monetizing his security clearance? Is John Brennan making millions of dollars divulging secrets to the mainstream media with his attacks on @realDonaldTrump ?”

In a second and subsequent tweet, Paul stated his intentions to meet with the president to further discuss revoking Brennan’s security clearance.

After being fired by President Trump, leaking memos to the media via his “friend” and perjuring himself in Congressional testimony, Comey is now traveling the country peddling his book, telling people to vote Democrat – just not “Socialist Democrat.”

It was under Hayden’s leadership that the NSA’s massive metadata surveillance program was born which was done without a court order and an initial circumventing of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), in direct violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). This laid the groundwork for the surveillance to former Trump aide Carter Page and the Trump campaign.

Clapper now works for CNN as a contributor. Also of import regarding Clapper, following a document leak in June 2013 detailing NSA practices of collecting telephone metadata on millions of Americans, Clapper was accused of perjury due to testimony earlier the same year stating the NSA does not collect any type of data on millions of Americans.

McCabe was fired as Deputy Director of the FBI for unauthorized disclosures to the news media and lacking candor – including under oath – on multiple occasions, as well as his wife taking a significant amount in campaign contributions from Clinton proxy pal, Terry McAuliffe.

Rice is noted for her lying in the aftermath of the Benghazi scandal, peddling the fiction that the attack was caused by a YouTube video. She also was an instrumental part of the “unmasking” of various members of the Trump campaign on behalf of the Obama administration and she specifically requested that the NSA provide her with “detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates.”

Yet words like treason are being thrown around, with Brennan leading the pack screaming from the rooftops for President Trump’s head on a platter merely for the “crime” of being elected in a country that loudly proclaims to be “for the people, by the people.” However, to Brennan that is clearly irrelevant as he tweeted of “high crimes & misdemeanors” in the wake of President Trump’s press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin following an approximately two-hour closed-door meeting between the two world leaders.

It is important to note that it was Brennan specifically that from April 2016 to July 2016 that assembled a multi-agency task force that effectively turned the CIA into Hillary Clinton’s own personal opposition research outfit. During these months, Brennan was personally briefing former President Barrack Obama as to the events taking place.

As Kimberley Strassel of theWall Street Journal so clearly notes –

“The Trump-Russia sleuthers have been back in the news, again giving Americans cause to doubt their claims of nonpartisanship. Last week it was Federal Bureau of Investigation agent Peter Strzok testifying to Congress that he harbored no bias against a president he still describes as “horrible” and “disgusting.” This week it was former FBI Director Jim Comey tweet-lecturing Americans on their duty to vote Democratic in November.

But the man who deserves a belated bit of scrutiny is former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan. He’s accused President Trump of “venality, moral turpitude and political corruption,” and berated GOP investigations of the FBI. This week he claimed on Twitter that Mr. Trump’s press conference in Helsinki was “nothing short of treasonous.” This is rough stuff, even for an Obama partisan.

That’s what Mr. Brennan is—a partisan—and it is why his role in the 2016 scandal is in some ways more concerning than the FBI’s. Mr. Comey stands accused of flouting the rules, breaking the chain of command, abusing investigatory powers. Yet it seems far likelier that the FBI’s Trump investigation was a function of arrogance and overconfidence than some partisan plot. No such case can be made for Mr. Brennan. Before his nomination as CIA director, he served as a close Obama adviser. And the record shows he went on to use his position—as head of the most powerful spy agency in the world—to assist Hillary Clinton’s campaign (and keep his job).

Mr. Brennan has taken credit for launching the Trump investigation. At a House Intelligence Committee hearing in May 2017, he explained that he became “aware of intelligence and information about contacts between Russian officials and U.S. persons.” The CIA can’t investigate U.S. citizens, but he made sure that “every information and bit of intelligence” was “shared with the bureau,” meaning the FBI. This information, he said, “served as the basis for the FBI investigation.” My sources suggest Mr. Brennan was overstating his initial role, but either way, by his own testimony, he was an Obama-Clinton partisan was pushing information to the FBI and pressuring it to act.

More notable, Mr. Brennan then took the lead on shaping the narrative that Russia was interfering in the election specifically to help Mr. Trump – which quickly evolved into the Trump-collusion narrative. Team Clinton was eager to make the claim, especially in light of the Democratic National Committee server hack. Numerous reports show Mr. Brennan aggressively pushing the same line internally. Their problem was that as of July 2016 even then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper didn’t buy it. He publicly refused to say who was responsible for the hack, or ascribe motivation. Mr. Brennan also couldn’t get the FBI to sign on to the view; the bureau continued to believe Russian cyber attacks were aimed at disrupting the U.S. political system generally, not aiding Mr. Trump.

The CIA director couldn’t himself go public with his Clinton spin—he lacked the support of the intelligence community and had to be careful not to be seen interfering in U.S. politics. So what to do? He called Harry Reid. In a late August briefing, he told the Senate minority leader that Russia was trying to help Mr. Trump win the election and that Trump advisers might be colluding with Russia. (Two years later, no public evidence has emerged to support such a claim.)

But the truth was irrelevant. On cue, within a few days of the briefing, Mr. Reid wrote a letter to Mr. Comey, which of course immediately became public. “The evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign continues to mount,” wrote Mr. Reid, going on to float Team Clinton’s Russians-are-helping-Trump theory. Mr. Reid publicly divulged at least one of the allegations contained in the infamous Steele dossier, insisting that the FBI use “every resource available to investigate this matter.”

The Reid letter marked the first official blast of the Brennan-Clinton collusion narrative into the open. Clinton opposition-research firm Fusion GPS followed up by briefing its media allies about the dossier it had dropped off at the FBI. On Sept. 23, Yahoo News’s Michael Isikoff ran the headline: “U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin.” Voilà. Not only was the collusion narrative out there, but so was evidence that the FBI was investigating.

In their recent book “Russian Roulette,” Mr. Isikoff and David Corn say even Mr. Reid believed Mr. Brennan had an “ulterior motive” with the briefing, and “concluded the CIA chief believed the public needed to know about the Russia operation, including the information about the possible links to the Trump campaign.” (Brennan allies have denied his aim was to leak damaging information.)

Clinton supporters have a plausible case that Mr. Comey’s late-October announcement that the FBI had reopened its investigation into the candidate affected the election. But Trump supporters have a claim that the public outing of the collusion narrative and FBI investigation took a toll on their candidate.”

Strassel simply and succinctly concludes with this – “Politics was at the center of that outing, and Mr. Brennan was a ringmaster. Remember that when reading his next ‘treason’ tweet.”

 

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.

PRICELESS! Parkland Activist And ‘March For Our Lives’ Co-Founder QUITS, Now Regrets Everything

Published

on

It was about time the anti-Second Amendment Parkland student activists started to wake up and grew out of the temper tantrum they have been throwing since that horrible, but totally avoidable day, Valentines Day 2018 shooting.

Chicks On The Right is now reporting that one of the victim/activists Cameron Kasky may be in fact be starting to wake up. As it turns out, the young co-founder of March for Our Lives movement and is now starting to admit that he, and others, did make mistakes in the process.

Kasky told Fox News Radio’s Guy Benson and Marie Harf that he left the organization and he regrets mistakes he made.

Here is some of what he said to Fox News Radio:

“On going after Senator Rubio at the town hall: I’m very regretful of a lot of the mistakes that I’ve made along the way. One of the things I never really did was watch myself. If I was on a screen I kind of tried to run away from it. I’m not entirely sure why. But, looking back on that it’s like you said, you touched off on this very well in the intro, I’m not going to kick myself for it because I’m 17. Despite the fact that I thought I did at the time, I don’t know everything. But, I look back on that and I say, you know what, there were people who had just been buried and when you’re looking at somebody that you find might in some way have been complicit in this murderer obtaining the weapon it’s hard not to say something like that. But, I went into that wanting less conversation and more to embarrass Rubio and that was my biggest flaw. (3:00)

On if he would redo his question to Rubio: Certainly, and I even name dropped the murder, which at the time I never really thought about, but looking back it ticks me off so much when people do that because then you’re getting that person’s name out there and making them a celebrity. I mean that’s one of the worst things you see come out of these horrific mass murders is name recognition. These people are very often crying out for some sort of attention and power and entitlement and then you’re making them a household name. I feel in some ways responsible for that. (5:13)

On his plans going forward: This summer when March For Our Lives went on the summer tour that we embarked on I met that person in Texas whose got that semi-automatic weapon because that’s how they like to protect their family. I met the 50 some odd percent of woman who are pro-life, even though I thought it was preposterous that a woman could be pro-life and not pro-choice at the time. I learned that a lot of our issues politically come from a lack of understanding of other perspectives and also the fact that so often young conservatives and young liberals will go into debate, like I said earlier, trying to beat the other one as oppose to come to an agreement…I’m working on some efforts to encourage bipartisanship or at least discussion that is productive and help a lot of people avoid the mistakes that I made. (6:33)

On his current relationship with March for Our Lives: I left the March. I’m off the board. I left the organization and if I thought that my friends and the people I worked with couldn’t do it without me I would not have done that, but alas all of our efforts looking forward looked like they didn’t really need my involvement and while I could have helped it wasn’t crucial. You know what I thought in some of the platforms that I have for only the worst reasons is something I really believe in, because I’m a Spider man fan, and I can tell you with great platform comes great responsibility. I thought it was my responsibility to take all the things I was kicking myself for and to encourage others to avoid it. (8:12)

On his new podcast “Cameron Knows Nothing”: My whole message is I was dropped up as an expert. The whole message was these kids are the real experts. Look, I have some very intelligent friends. Some friends who can intellectually run circles around me, but I’m not the expert in pretty much anything. (9:30)”

What most stands out about what this student said is that he admitted regretting how he attacked Senator Marco Rubio from Florida during the infamous staged CNN town hall where Sheriff Israel took the opportunity to deflect from the fact that his own department failed the students by instead blaming politicians, the NRA and our gun laws. He later went on to add that he is planning to talk to Senator Rubio next month.

Although people are questioning what happened to make him change his tune I don’t think it should be much of a mystery. He is a young student, just like all the rest, and he went through a traumatic experience.

An experience that should have never happened and would have never happened if only the sheriff department would have done their job and seen the shooter was a problem when they were called out to his house 39 times. One of those times he even called the police on himself because he thought he would snap and go on a shooting spree at the school.

Whatever happened to change Kasky’s mind, we need to welcome it and hope the rest start seeing the light through all the hate and propaganda they are spewing.

Here’s the time Kasky asked Senator Rubio if he would stop taking NRA money.

Continue Reading

HUGE Message To Kavanaugh Accuser Flying High In The Sky Over Her House

Published

on

As of today, it is being reported that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford will testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday or Thursday of next week. The details and arrangements are still vague but Judge Kavanaugh is eager to clear his name. I’m eager to see this whole circus end so we can get on with the confirmation process.

Pilot David Siever flew a plane on September 20th over the psychology professor’s house with a giant banner attached that read, “Thank you, Christine, We have your back.” That was a huge message of support for Ford. It would seem there are a lot of women who are supporting her in all of this even though, in my opinion, her credibility is comparable to swiss cheese.

UltraViolet, a women’s rights group paid for the flight and the banner. The plane flew over gathered protesters who were marching to Ford’s home as a show of support for her after she accused Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault. There were approximately three dozen women in the protest group and a few men as well.

This same group had already written a “Dear Christine” letter that many of them signed this week in support of the Palo Alto professor. The group linked arms as they marched in front of her home and chanted, “Protect Christine! Protect Christine.” The rally was cobbled together at the last moment and protesters were mostly comprised of Palo Alto mothers and neighbors showing solidarity for Christine Blasey Ford.

Ford has also been celebrated and supported in the #MeToo movement. She is also allegedly the victim of harassment and death threats. However, her local supporters are all in for her. “We believe Christine,” they chanted. “Her story is our story!”

This particular rally was yet another effort to support Ford after she came forward in an article in the Washington Post to share her identity and her allegations against Kavanaugh.

But what these people don’t address is the fact that she can’t recall the year it happened, where it happened, when it happened, who hosted the party, who was there, who brought her or who took her home. Frankly, I’m not buying it.

Ford is claiming that sometime in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh was “stumbling drunk” when he and a friend forced her into a bedroom at a high school party, then groped her, tried to strip off her clothes and put his hand over her mouth to muffle her screams. One of his friends, Mark Judge, interrupted the assault, she alleges, giving her the chance to flee.

Kavanaugh is denying all of this and says it never happened. So is Mark Judge. Originally, Ford was insisting that before she would testify an FBI investigation had to be done. She changed that and then insisted that Kavanaugh testify first, not be in the room when she testifies, that no attorneys be present and that Mark Judge be subpoenaed to testify.

The Senate Judiciary Committee balked and said that they do not subpoena witnesses. They also pointed out that Kavanaugh should testify after Ford so he can answer charges against him and face his accuser. He also has a right to counsel in all this. Ford has still not said exactly what terms she agrees to for testifying next week.

A candlelight vigil on a Palo Alto street corner is planned for Sunday night. Letters of support are being stuffed into her mailboxes at home and at her office, and a GoFundMe page has been set up to help pay Ford’s legal bills.

Ford’s actual testimony next week is still very much in doubt:

“Fox News was told that Debra Katz, one of the lawyers representing Ford, requested that a hearing be set for Thursday — a request the Republicans on the committee had initially rejected, offering Wednesday instead.

“Grassley did not immediately respond to the letter, but a senior White House official told Fox News that it represented a request to continue negotiations about the terms on which she testifies without any firm commitment.

“It’s a clever way to push off the vote Monday without committing to appear Wednesday,” the official said.

“Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, who sits on the committee, tweeted that “we are no closer to hearing from Dr. Ford than we were when her lawyers said Dr. Ford was willing to testify during their media tour 6 days ago.'”

I am highly suspicious of this eleventh-hour victim coming forward with an unsubstantiated claim from 36 years ago against Kavanaugh. It seems she has a number of supporters but I would say there are far more out there that have a problem with her story. I guess we will know more when and if she testifies.

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend