Can YOU Ever Trust Your Government?


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© March 10, 2022

Here’s a title that should pique the interest of every Liberty-loving American (and those seeking Freedom in the one-time Free Western World): “How the West Was Won: Counterinsurgency, PSYOPS and the Military Origins of the Internet.” The title comes originally from a website called The Cogent which evidently is operated by Dustin Broadbery. At The Cogent the title comes in two parts posted on the same day (3/4/22).

I first discovered the title of Part One posting at the Activist Post dated 3/7/22. Then I found the Part Two posting at the NWO Report on 3/9/22.

Both the Activist Post and the NWO Report use the same image attention hook which I will use at the top of this page. In cross posting I will us The Cogent image hook of the original.

I suspect I’m behind the old 8-ball because I have no idea who Dustin Broadbery is. In a not to thorough search, I could only find profile info at Muck Rack which reads:

Dustin Broadbery

  • Freelance Writer, Freelance
  • London
  • Media, Politics, Technology
  • As seen in: Activist Post, The Conservative Woman
  • Covers Geopolitics, biosecurity, activism, technology and philanthropy

The globalised takeover of our commons is being orchestrated by a handful of elites so small in number you could fit them into one prison cell thecogent.org

Muck Rack then links to a few Broadbery articles and throws in his Twitter feed. My guess is Broadbery is of British origin because the spelling and grammar in the posts are traditional British usage.

Now to the cross posts.

Part One is a fantastic history of the emergence of the Internet developed initially as a psyop tool by the military which someone stumbled upon the concept of controlling people via social monitoring.

Part Two goes through the history of social engineering psyops to initially infiltrate Leftist (think Communist) operations through today to infiltrate ordinary citizen thinking that might be an enemy of government-think. For example: If you are a Bill of Rights, Flag-Waving Patriot and believer of the Christian influence in America’s Heritage; YOU MIGHT BE a domestic terrorist. WHY? Because you’d be contrary to the current government-think.

I am cross posting both parts which are quite lengthy. So, you might want to bookmark it to read as you have time. I believe you will be surprised at what you know and don’t know. In the lifespan that remains for me, trusting my government is not an option.

JRH 3/10/22

I need your generosity. PLEASE GIVE to overcome research expenses:

Please Support NCCR

Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!

********************************

How the West Was Won: Counterinsurgency, PSYOPS and the Military Origins of the Internet, Part 1

DARPA logo

By Dustin Broadbery

Updated: 3/5/22

The Cogent

Part 1: Look a Gift Horse in the Mouth

As the digital revolution was underway in the mid-nineties, research departments at the CIA and NSA were developing programs to predict the usefulness of the world wide web as a tool for capturing what they dubbed “birds of a feather” formations. That’s when flocks of sparrows make sudden movements together in rhythmical patterns.

They were particularly interested in how these principles would influence the way that people would eventually move together on the burgeoning internet: Would groups and communities move together in the same way as ‘birds of a feather, so that they could be tracked in an organised way? And if their movements could be indexed and recorded, could they be identified later by their digital fingerprints?

To answer these questions, the CIA and NSA established a series of initiatives called Massive Digital Data Systems (MDDS) to directly fund tech entrepreneurs through an inter-university disbursement program. Naming their first unclassified briefing for computer scientists ‘birds of a feather,’ which took place in San Jose in the spring of 1995.

Amongst the first grants provided by the MDDS program to capture the ‘birds of a feather’ theory towards building a massive digital library and indexing system – using the internet as its backbone – were dispersed to two Stanford University PHD’s, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who were making significant headways in the development of web-page ranking technology that would track user movements online.

Those disbursements, together with $4.5 million in grants from a multi-agency consortium including NASA and DARPA, became the seed funding that was used to establish Google

Eventually MDDS was integrated into DARPA’s global eavesdropping and data-mining activities that would attempt total information awareness over US citizens. Few understand the extent to which Silicon Valley is the alter-ego of Pentagon-land, even fewer realise the impact this has had on the social sphere. But the story does not begin with Google, nor the military origins of the internet, it goes back much further in time, to the dawn of counterinsurgency and PSYOPs during the second world war.

The Dawn of PSYOPs

According to historian Joy Rhodes, a renowned physicist told U.S. defence secretary Robert McNamara in 1961:

While World War I might have been considered the chemists’ war, and World War II was considered the physicists’ war, World War III . . . might well have to be considered the social scientists’ war.”

The intersection of social science and military intelligence is recognised by the US Army to have begun during WW1 when pre-war journalist Captain Blankenhorn established the Psychological Subsection in the War Department to coordinate combat propaganda.

These grey-area operations, as they become known, plateaued during world war II, when military strategists, building on wartime research in crowd psychology, drafted social scientists into the war effort through the Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD). The office would aggregate information about the German people and develop propaganda and psychological operations (PSYOPS) to lower their morale. This culminated in 1942, with the US federal government becoming the leading employer of psychologists in the US.

OSRD was an early administration of the Manhattan Project and responsible for important wartime developments in technology, including radar. The agency was Directed by engineer and inventor, Vannevar Bush – a key player in the history of computing, known for his work on The Memex, an early hypothetical computer device, that would store and index a user’s books, records and other information, and which would go on to inspire most major advancements in the development of personal computers over the next 70 years.

As the second world war ended, and a new threat emerged from post war ravaged Europe, scholars and soldiers once again reunited to defeat an invisible and aggressively expansionist adversary. Though this opponent may sound like COVID-19, it was in fact the Soviet Union.

Across the Soviet satellites in Europe and in the nations threatened by communism in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, cold war special operations, as they become known, were a nebulous category of military activity that included psychological and political warfare, guerrilla operations and counterinsurgency. To mobilise these ‘special warfare tactics’ the army established the Office of the Chief of Psychological Warfare (OCPW) in 1951, whose mission was to recruit, organise, equip, train, and provide doctrinal support to Psywarriors.

The office was directed by General Robert McClure, a founding father of psychological warfare and friend of the Shah of Iran, who was instrumental in the overthrow of Mohammad Mosaddegh in the 1953 Iranian coup d’état.

Integral to the projects of McClure’s OCPW, was a quasi-academic institution with a long history of military service called the Human Relations Area Files (HRAF). Founded by anthropologist turned FBI whistle-blower George Murdock, HRAF was set up to collect and standardise data on primitive cultures around the world. During WW2 its researchers worked hand in glove with naval intelligence to develop propaganda materials that would help the US liberate pacific nations from Japanese control. By 1954, the department had grown into an inter-university consortium of 16 academic institutions, funded by the army, CIA, and private philanthropies.

In 1954 the OCPW negotiated a contract with the HRAF to author a series of special warfare handbooks, disguised as scholarship, that sought to understand the intellectual and emotional character of strategically important people, particularly their thoughts, motivations and actions, with entire chapters compiled on the attitudes and subversive potentials of foreign nationals, while other chapters focused on the means of transmitting propaganda in each target nation, whether news, radio or word of mouth. This was, of course, decades before the internet.

SORO

In 1956, the Special Operations Research Office (SORO) emerged from these programs. Charged with managing the US Army’s psychological and unconventional warfare tactics during the cold war and taking the work of HRAF to the next level, SORO set about the monumental task of defining the political and social causes of Communist revolution, the laws governing social change and the theories of communication and persuasion that could be used to transform public perception.

SORO formed a central component of the Pentagons militarisation of social research, and particularly the ideas and doctrine that would usher in a gradual shift towards an American-led world order. Its research team was located on the campus of American University in Washington, D.C, and comprised the era’s pre-eminent intellectuals and academics. SORO’s ensemble team, from the fields of psychology, sociology and anthropology, would immerse themselves in social system theory, analysing the society and culture of numerous target countries, particularly in Latin America, while confronting the universal laws governing social behaviour and the mechanisms of communication and persuasion in each jurisdiction. If the US Army could understand the psychological factors that sparked revolution, they could, in theory, predict and intercept revolutions before they got off the ground.

SORO was part of a rapidly expanding nexus of federally Funded Research Centres (FCRC’s), that reoriented academia towards national security interests. Working at the intersection of science and the state, SORON’s, as they were known, advocated for an expert-directed democracy, regardless of the totalitarian consequences of social engineers and technocrats acquiring control over the thoughts, actions, and values of ordinary people.

In those early days of the cold war, academics and scientists working at the intersection of military and academia firmly believed that intellectuals should guide geopolitics. This was accepted as the most stable form of governance to take the free world into the next century. It explains how we have arrived under the rubric of the ‘settled science’ today. Or at least, policies masquerading as science. From the biosecurity state to the fundamentalism of climate science, much of what was achieved in those golden years of militarised social research shapes the twenty first century.

By 1962, sixty-six federally funded military research institutions were in operation. Between 1951 to 1967, the number tripled, while funding skyrocketed from $122 million to $1.6 billion.

But as opposition to the Vietnam War intensified in the 1960s, a growing number of intellectuals, policymakers and academics became increasingly concerned that the national security state was morphing into the statist, globalist force it had been fighting during the cold war and began publicly criticising Pentagon-funded social scientists as technocratic social engineers. This inspired a wave of discontent for the militarisation of social research to grip America, culminating in 1969 with American University’s administrators banishing SORO from their campus and severing ties with their military partners. The move was endemic of the changing attitude towards these grey area special operations and resulted in the 1960’s and 1970’s with the excommunication of military research centres from university campuses across the US. A move that forced the military to look elsewhere – towards the private sector for their alternative warfare capabilities. Following a long tradition of public-private military cooperation, from the Rand Corporation to the Smithsonian Group, these quasi-private institutions were being spun-out of the military at a rate of knots since the 1940’s.

Project Camelot

One of the programs conceived by SORO was ‘Methods for Predicting and Influencing Social Change and Internal War Potential. Codenamed Project Camelot, the landmark program sought to understand the causes of social revolution and identify actions, within the realm of behavioural science, that could be taken to suppress insurrection. The goal, according to defence analyst, Joy Rhodes, was ‘to build a radar system for left wing revolutionaries.’ A sort of ‘computerised early warning system that could predict and prevent political movements before they ever got off the ground.’

‘This computer system’ writes Joy Rhodes, ‘could check up to date intelligence against a list of preconditions, and revolutions could be stopped before the instigators even knew they were headed down the path of revolution.’

The research collected by Project Camelot would produce predictive models of the revolutionary process and profile what social scientists deemed ‘revolutionary tendencies and traits.’ It was anticipated that such knowledge would not only help military leaders anticipate the trajectory of social change, but it would also enable them to design effective interventions that could, in theory, channel or suppress change in ways that were favourable to U.S. foreign policy interests.

It was intended that the information gathered by Project Camelot would funnel into a large ‘computerised database’ for forecasting, social engineering, and counterinsurgency, that could be tapped at any time by the military and intelligence community.

But the project was beleaguered by controversy when academics in South America discovered its military funding and imperialism motives.

The ensuing backlash resulted in Project Camelot being, ostensibly, shut down, though the core of its project survived. Multiple military research projects picked up on Project Camelot’s ‘early warning radar system for left wing revolutionaries,’ while its computerised database for ‘forecasting, social engineering, and counterinsurgency’ went onto inspire a nascent technology developed in the years to come, that would eventually become known to the world as the internet.

The Military Origins of the Internet

At the height of the Cold War, US military commanders were pursuing a decentralised computer communications system without a base of operations or headquarters, that could withstand a Soviet strike, without blacking-out or destroying the entire network.

The project was coordinated by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), created by President Eisenhower in 1958, for the development of technologies that would expand the frontiers of science and technology and help the US close the missile gap with the Soviets.

DARPA has since been at the vanguard of every major advancement in the development of personal computers ever since the cold war, culminating in 1969 with the first computers being in universities across the US.

A few years later DARPA would develop the protocols to enable connected computers to communicate transparently across multiple networks. Known as The Internetting Project, DARPA’s prototypical communications network, the ARPANET, was born in 1973.

The project was eventually transferred to the Defence Communications Agency and integrated into the numerous new networks that had emerged. By 1983 the ARPANET was divided into two constituents: MILNET to be used by military and defence agencies, while the civilian version would retain the ARPANET handle.

Fast forward to 1990 and the ARPANET was officially decommissioned, and the Internet privatised to a consortium of corporations including IBM and MCI. Eventually the federal government created a dozen or so network providers and spun them off to the private sector, building companies that would become the backbone of today’s internet, including Verizon Time-Warner, AT&T and Comcast. That’s the same six corporations who not only own 90% of US media outlets, they control the flow of global communications, through a process of absolute vertical-horizontal alignment of legacy media with digital media, and the infrastructures and technologies that enable their mass communication, including cable, satellite and wireless, the devices and hardware, software and operating systems

J.C.R. Licklider

A central player in the development of the ARPANET, who many consider the founding father of computing, was American psychologist, J. C. R. Licklider.

Lick, as he was known, was the first Director of the agency tasked with executing DARPA’s information technology programs, The Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO), that has been responsible for just about major advancement in computer communications since the sixties.

As Stephen J. Lukasik, a contributor to the ARPANET project reflected in his paper ‘ ‘Why the Arpanet Was Built ‘Lick saw information technology and behavioural and cognitive science issues as connected.’

‘Lick was essentially predicting how the internet would go on to evoke real world social processes that would radically transform how we communicate, organise and process information. It is no coincidence that a psychologist of ‘Licks calibre was at the vanguard of a new technology designed to exploit basic vulnerabilities in the human psyche.

In the 1960’s Lick oversaw DARPA’s strategic interest in the new frontier of information technology, called Brain Computer Interfaces (BCI’s). In his famous paper, considered one of the most important in the history of computing, Lick put forward the then radical idea that the human mind would one day merge seamlessly with computers. He was anticipating the evolution of AI and the role that DARPA would go on to play in funding just about every major advancement in BCI technology over eight decades, including Elon Musk’s fully-implanted, wireless, brain-machine interface company, Neuralink.

The Vietnam War

The ARPANET brought together the Pentagon’s war machine with university research departments and the Bay area’s counterculture scene. Inspiring much of the anecdotal idealism that would define the early years of cyberspace as a liberating new frontier for humanity. Cyberspace, it was lauded by its early adopters, would free information and provide universal connectivity. The realms of possibility were, indeed, endless.

But war hawks and intelligence analysts had other ideas. If the lessons of the Vietnam war were anything to go by, the future of US warfare would not be with nation states, it would be with ideologies, or more specifically, grassroots movements, such as the Viet Cong, who had the power to stoke the flames of civil unrest, that could lead to uprisings, or worse, revolution. Alternative approaches were, therefore, needed to infiltrate and disrupt this new threat to the free world.

As the war raged in Southeast Asia, another psychology PHD, Robert Taylor, joined DARPA as the agency’s third director. Taylor transferred to Vietnam in 1967, to establish the first computer centre at the Military Assistance Command base in Saigon, a central pillar in the DoD’s psychological warfare operations. The move was endemic of the changing rules of military engagement that saw DARPA, and indeed, this new technology, playing a major role in the war effort, both in Southeast Asia, and at home on US soil, against the growing anti-war movement.

In 1968, Taylor and ‘Lick published their seminal paper “The Computer as a Communication Device.” Laying out the future of what the Internet would eventually become. The paper began with the visionary statement: “In a few years, men will be able to communicate more effectively through a machine than face to face.” Anticipating the meteoric rise of social media, particularly Facebook, in the decades to come.

Bringing the PSYOP Back Home

The origins of Facebook coincide with a controversial military program that was mysteriously shut down the same year Facebook launched.

The military program in question, LifeLog, was developed by DARPA’s Information Processing Techniques Office, with the stated aim of creating a permanent and searchable electronic diary of a person’s entire life – a dataset of their most personal information, including their movements, conversations, connections, and everything they listened to, watched, read and bought.

But would people willingly give up a record of their private lives to a military intelligence social media platform?

Probably not. Enter Facebook.

LifeLog, meanwhile, was ostensibly shut down, but this was not the first nor the last time that a project of this magnitude would be proposed.

In a 1945 article for The Atlantic, Vannevar Bush who, the reader will recall, directed the US Army’s psychological operations during World War II, discussed his hypothetical project, The Memex, as a device “in which an individual stores all his books, records and communications, and which is mechanised so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility.”

In immortalising people’s lives, it was hoped that LifeLog would eventually contribute to the emerging field of artificial intelligence (AI), that would one day think just like a human, intersecting with another DARPA backed project – the Personal Assistant That Learns (PAL) – a cognitive computing system designed to make military decision-making more efficient, which was eventually spun-off as Siri, the virtual assistant on Apple’s operating system, present in the homes of 1 billion unsuspecting people.

But LifeLog is just one part of the story. There was another DARPA program that also ‘disappeared’ one year before Facebook made its debut. Often cited as the precursor to Facebook. The Information Awareness Office (IAO) brought together several DARPA surveillance and information technology projects including MDDS which provided Google’s seed funding.

The stated aim of the IAO was to gather and store the personal information of every US citizen, including their personal emails, social networks, lifestyles, credit card records, phone calls, medical records, without, of course, the need for a search warrant. This information would funnel back to intelligence agencies, under the guise of predicting and preventing terrorist incidents before they happened. Reminiscent of Project Camelot’s early warning radar system for left wing revolutionaries.

Despite the government, apparently, abandoning their gambit for total information awareness over ordinary Americans, the core of the project survived.

I draw your attention to Palantir, the spooky data analytics firm founded by Facebook’s board member, Peter Thiel.

Portrayed as science fiction in the firm Minority Report, Palantir’s predictive policing analytics have been deployed extensively against insurgents in Iraq and by police departments in the US.

This is, of course, nothing new for the Chinese. The convergence of big tech data analytics with China’s social credits system has been used for many years to weed out and punish dissidents who can find themselves held indefinitely without charge or trial in political re-education camps for holding the wrong set of political beliefs.

But it must also be accepted, these Orwellian methods of repression did not originate in China. The encroachment of the CIA onto the public sphere has been happening since the 1960’s, when the US imported decades of counterinsurgency from the soviet satellites to tackle the anti-war and civil rights movements. This was ramped up in the wake of 9/11. And now through the backdoor of COVID-19 total information awareness is coming home to roost, as China’s social credits system has been implemented on the back of the Green Pass.

Before anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists, you had civil rights and anti-war activists. The ideology guiding dissent may have changed, but the military tactics used to counter it remain the same.

++++++++++++++++++++++

How the West Was Won: Counterinsurgency, PSYOPS and the Military Origins of the Internet, Part 2

CIA logo

By Dustin Broadbery

3/4/22

The Cogent

Part 2: The War is Over, The Good Guys Lost

If insurgency is defined as an organised political struggle by a hostile minority, attempting to seize power through revolutionary means, then counterinsurgency is the military doctrine historically used against non-state actors, that sets out to infiltrate and eradicate those movements.

Unlike conventional soldiers, insurgents are considered dangerous, not because of their physical presence on the battlefield, but because of their ideology.

As David Galula, a French commander who was an expert in counterinsurgency warfare during the Algerian War, emphasised:

“In any situation, whatever the cause, there will be an active minority for the cause, a neutral majority, and an active minority against the cause. The technique of power consists in relying on the favourable minority in order to rally the neutral majority and to neutralise or eliminate the hostile minority.”

Overtime, however, the intelligence state lost touch with reality, as the focus of its counterinsurgency programs shifted from foreign to domestic populations, from national security risks to ordinary citizens. Particularly in the wake of 9/11, when the NSA and its British counterpart, GCHQ, began mapping out the Internet.

Thanks to Edward Snowden’s revelations in 2013, we now know that the NSA were collecting 200 billion pieces of data every month, including the cell phone records, emails, web searches and live chats of more than 200 million ordinary Americans. This was extracted from the world’s largest internet companies via a lesser-known, data mining program called Prism.

There’s another name for this, and its total information awareness. The highest attainment of a paranoid state seeking absolute control over its population. What ceases to be worth the candle is that peoples right to privacy is enshrined under the US Constitution’s fourth amendment.

Few understand how lockdowns are ripples on these troubled waters. Decades of counterinsurgency waged against one subset of society, branded insurgents for their Marxist ideals has, overtime, shifted to anyone holding anti-establishment views. The predictive policing of track and trace and the theory of asymptomatic transmission are the unwelcome repercussions of the intelligence state seeking total information awareness over its citizens.

Throughout COVID-19 anyone audacious enough to want to think for themselves or do their own research has had a target painted on their back. But according to the EU, one third of Europe is unvaccinated. This correlates precisely with David Galula’s theory of counterinsurgency, that suggests one third of society is the active minority ‘against the cause,’ who must be neutralised or eliminated.

And for good reason. People are within sniffing distance of mobilising popular support from the neutral majority and toppling the house of cards. What follows is a protracted campaign by the establishment to neutralise the opposition.

It was not so long ago that journalists were called muckrakers, for digging up dirt on Robber Barrons who, overtime, learned how to throw muck back, using smear and innuendo, such as ‘conspiracy theorists’, ‘anti-vaxxer’ and ‘right-wing extremist.’

When Domestic Populations Become the Battlefield

The use of counterinsurgency in the UK goes back to colonial India in the 1800s. According to historians, this is the first time the British government used methods of repression and social control against indigenous communities who were audacious enough to want to liberate their homeland from Imperialist rule.

Counterinsurgency was used extensively during The Troubles in Northern Ireland against another anti-imperialist faction, also looking to liberate their homeland from The Crown. Much of the lessons learned in Northern Ireland were later transferred into the everyday policing and criminal justice policies of mainland Britain. And it wasn’t just dissenters who were targeted by these operations, it was anyone with left wing ideals, particularly trade unionists who, it could be argued, were conspiring with the Kremlin to overthrow parliamentary democracy.

I draw your attention to the spying and dirty tricks operations against the 1980s miners’ strike. This continued right up until 2012, when the police and intelligence communities were implicated in a plot to blacklist construction industry workers deemed troublesome for their union views. The existence of a secret blacklist was first exposed in 2009, when investigators from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) raided an unassuming office in Droitwich, Worcestershire, and discovered an extensive database used by construction firms to vet and ultimately blacklist workers belonging to trade unions. More than 40 construction firms, including Balfour Beatty and Sir Robert McAlpine, had been funding the confidential database and keeping people out of work for many years.

If you want to know what happened to the left, look no further than Project Camelot’s early warning radar system for left wing revolutionaries. Decades of infiltration has recalibrated the left into genuflections of establishment interests. It was the unions who scuppered the easing of lockdowns in the UK and consistently called on the Department of Education to postpone the reopening of schools. This is despite the impact which school closures had on marginalised families, who were statistically more at risk from the fallout of lockdowns, and supposedly represented by union interests.

From the infiltration of unions to the co-option of activism, a judge-led public enquiry in 2016 revealed 144 undercover police operations had infiltrated and spied on more than 1,000 political groups in long term deployments since 1968. With covert spymasters rising in the ranks to hold influential leadership positions, guiding policy and strategy, and in some cases, radicalising those movements from within to damage their reputation and weaken public support.

We also need to talk about big philanthropy. George Soros’ Open Foundation is the largest global donor to the twenty-first century’s equivalent of activist groups. The agitprop used in the former Soviet Union evolved, overtime, into the masthead of Extinction Rebellion. A motley crew of eco-warriors courted by high profile financial donors and aligned ideologically with the very multinational energy corporations they are supposedly at odds with. The theory of climate change came out of the UN, organiser of COP20, for what reason ER had to protest the event is anyone’s guess.

ER doner, George Soros, is also a seed investor in Avaaz, often cited as the world’s largest and most powerful online activist network. When the US was on the brink of insurrection, following the first lockdown, Black Lives Matter entered the fray, not so much a grassroots movement, but a proxy for the Democrats to essentially redirect the public’s outrage against lockdowns into the wrong, established-endorsed cause.

Counterinsurgency in the US

In the US, COINTELPRO was a series of illegal operations conducted by the FBI between 1956-1971, to disrupt, discredit and neutralise anyone considered a threat to national security. In the loosest possible definition, this included members of the Women’s Liberation Movement and even the Boy Scouts of America.

And it wasn’t just the customary wiretapping, infiltration and media manipulation, the FBI committed blackmail and murder.

Take for example the infamous forced suicide letter addressed to Martin Luther King that threatened to release a sex tape of the civil rights leaders’ extramarital activities, unless he took his own life. Consider also the FBI’s assassination of Black Panther Party chairman Fred Hampton.

In the 1960’s a Washington Post expose by army intelligence whistle-blower, Christopher Pyle, revealed a massive surveillance operation run by the Army, called CONUS Intel, involving thousands of undercover military agents infiltrating and spying on virtually everybody active on what they deemed ‘civil disturbances.’ It turns out, many of those targeted had done nothing even remotely subversive, unless you consider attending a left-wing college presentation or church meeting, revolutionary.

These programs came to a head in the 1970’s, when an investigation by the US Senate, conducted by the Church Committee, uncovered decades of serious, systemic abuse by the CIA. This included intercepting the mail and eavesdropping on the telephone calls of civil rights and anti-war leaders over two decades. As if predicting the internet as an instrument for mass surveillance, Senator Frank Church warned that the NSA’s capabilities could “at any time could be turned around on the American people.”

And turned around they were.

USAGM


Before the internet, the deployment of PSYOPS was limited to legacy media and permitted only on foreign soil. But that all changed in 2013, when the government granted themselves permission to target ordinary Americans.


Conceived at the end of the cold war as the Broadcasting Board of Governors, USAGM is a lesser-known government agency charged with broadcasting thousands of weekly hours of US propaganda to foreign audiences, that has played a major role in pushing pro-American stories to former Soviet Bloc countries ever since Perestroika.


Ostensibly concerned with maintaining US interests abroad, USAGM has also been the primary funder of the Tor Project since inception. Tor, also known as The Onion Browser, is the mainstay of encrypted, anonymous search used by activists, hackers, and the anonymous community, if you can get your head around the fact that the confidential internet activity of anarchists has been framed by a PSYOP since the get-go.


For decades an anti-propaganda law, known as the Smith-Mundt Act, made it illegal for the government to conduct PSYOPS against US citizens. But that all changed in 2013 when the National Defence Authorization Act repealed that law and granted USAGM a licence to broadcast pro-government propaganda inside the United States.

To what extent US citizens are being targeted by propaganda is anyone’s guess, since PSYOPS largely take place online, where it’s difficult to distinguish between foreign and domestic audiences.


What we do know is that in 2009 the military budget for winning hearts and minds at home and abroad had grown by 63% to $4.7 billion annually. At that time the Pentagon accounted for more than half the Federal Government’s $1 billion PR Budget.

An Associated Press (AP) investigation in 2016 revealed that the Pentagon employed a staggering 40% of the 5,000 working in the Federal Government’s PR machines, with the Department of Defence, far and wide, the largest and most expensive PR operation of the United States government, spending more money on public relations than all other departments combined.


Things are not so different in the UK.


During COVID-19 the British government became the biggest national advertiser. Even tick tock and snapchat were deployed by the Scottish government to push COVID PSYOPS to children.


Last year Boris Johnson announced record defence spending for an artificial intelligence agency and the creation of a national cyber force. That’s a group of militarised computer hackers to conduct offensive operations.


Offensive operations against who, you might ask.


Britain was not at war, but in an article for the Daily Mail last year, Britain’s top counter terrorism officer, Neil Basu confirmed that the UK was waging an ideological war against anti vaccination conspiracy theorists. Ideological wars of this nature typically take place online, where much of the government’s military budget was being spent.

Since the vaccine roll-out there has been a protracted effort to paint the 33% of British citizens who have a problem with lockdowns and vaccine mandates, as violent extremists, with one member of the commentariat drawing parallels with US style militias.


It doesn’t take a genius to see where this is heading.


The Facebook’s-Intelligence-Harvard Connection

Consistent with the opaque nature of Facebook’s origins, shortly after its launch in 2014, co-founders Mark Zuckerberg and Dustin Moskovitz brought Napster founder Sean Parker on board. At the age of 16, Parker hacked into the network of a Fortune 500 company and was later arrested and charged by the FBI. Around this time Parker was recruited by the CIA.


To what end, we don’t know.

What we do know is that Parker brought Peter Thiel to Facebook as its first outside investor. Theil, who remains on Facebook’s board, also sits on the Steering Committee of globalist think tank, the Bilderberg Group. As previously stated, Thiel is the founder of Palantir, the spooky intelligence firm pretending to be a private company.

The CIA would join the FBI, DoD and NSA in becoming a Palantir customer in 2005, later acquiring an equity stake in the firm through their venture capital arm, In-Q-Tel. At the time of his first meetings with Facebook, Theil had been working on resurrecting several controversial DARPA programs.

Which begs the question: With intelligence assets embedded in Facebook’s management structure from the get-go, is everything as it seems at 1 Hacker Way?

According to Lauren Smith, writing for Wrong Kind of Green:

Some of Facebook’s allure to users is that Mark Zuckerberg and his friends started the company from a Harvard dorm room and that he remains the chairman and chief operating officer. If he didn’t exist, he would need to be invented by Facebook’s marketing department.”

By the same token, if Facebook didn’t exist it would need to be invented by the Pentagon.

To achieve this, you would need to embed government officials in Facebook’s leadership and governance. Cherry picking your candidates from, say, the US Department of Treasury, and launching the platform from an academic institution, Harvard University, for example.

According to the official record, Zuckerberg built the first version of Facebook at Harvard in 2004. Like J.C.R Licklider before him, he was a psychology major.

Harvard’s President at that time was economist Lawrence Summers, a career public servant who served as Chief Economist at the World Bank, Secretary of the Treasury under the Clinton Administration, and 8th Director of the National Economic Council.

Now here’s where it gets interesting. Summers’ protege, Sheryl Sandberg, is Facebook’s COO since 2008. Sandberg was at the dials during the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and predictably, manages Facebook’s Washington relationships. Before Facebook, Sandberg served as Chief of Staff at the Treasury under Summers and began her career as an economist, also under Summer, at the World Bank.

Another Summers-Harvard-Treasury connection is Facebook’s Board Member, Nancy Killefer, who served under Summers as CFO at the Treasury Department.

It doesn’t end there. Facebook’s Chief Business Officer, Marne Levine also served under Summers at the Department of Treasury, National Economic Council and Harvard University.

The CIA connection is Robert M. Kimmet. According to West Point, Kimmet “has contributed significantly to our nation’s security…seamlessly blending the roles of soldier, statesman and businessman. In addition to serving on Facebook’s board of Directors, Kimmet is a National Security Adviser to the CIA, and the recipient of the CIA Director’s Award.

The icing on the cake, however, is former DAPRA Director, Regina Dugan, who joined Facebook’s hardware lab, Building 8, in 2016, to roll out a number of mysterious DARPA funded-projects that would hack people’s minds with brain-computer interfaces.

Dugan currently serves as CEO of Welcome Leap. A technology spin-off of the world’s most powerful health foundation, concerned with the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including transdermal vaccines. Welcome Leap brings DARPA’s military-intelligence innovation to “the most pressing global health challenges of our time,” called COVID-19.

Connecting the dots: Welcome Leap was launched at the World Economic Forum, with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Its founder is Jeremy Ferrar, former SAGE member, long-time collaborator of Chris Witty and Neil Ferguson and the patsy taking the wrap for the Wuhan leak cover-up story.

George Carlin wasn’t joking when he said: ‘it’s one big club, and you’re not in it.’

As luck would have it, just before Duggan’s arrival at Facebook, the social media giant orchestrated the controversial mood manipulation PSYOP, known as the Social Contagion Study. The experiment would anticipate the role social media went onto play during the pandemic.

In the study, Facebook manipulated the posts of 700,000 unsuspecting Facebook users to determine the extent to which emotional states can be transmitted across social media. To achieve this, they altered the news feed content of users to control the number of posts that contained positive or negative charged emotions. As you would expect, the findings of the study revealed that negative feeds caused users to make negative posts, whereas positive feeds resulted in users making positive posts. In other words, Facebook is not only a fertile ground for emotional manipulation, but emotions can also be contagious across its networks.


Once we understand this, it becomes clear how fear of a disease, which predominantly targeted people beyond life expectancy with multiple comorbidities who were dying anyway, spread like wildfire in the wake of the Wuhan Virus. In locking down the UK, Boris Johnson warned the British public that we would all lose family members to the disease. When nothing could be further from the truth. The pandemic largely happened in the flawed doomsday modelling of epidemiologists, it happened across a corporate united in whipping up mass hysteria, and it happened on social media platforms like Facebook, where our social networks were weaponised as echo chambers of the fear-narrative. It wasn’t so much a pandemic, but the social contagion experiment playing out in real time.


But there was more than just social media manipulating our emotional states, fear, shame, and scapegoating was fife throughout as the British government deployed behavioural economics to, essentially, nudge the public towards compliance.

Launched under David Cameron’s Government, the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), who are affectionately known as the Nudge Unit, are a team of crack psychologists and career civil servants tasked with positively influencing appropriate behaviour with tiny changes.


But according to whose measure of appropriate behaviour, exactly?

A clue lies in the fact that the Nudge Unit was directed by Sir Mark Sedwill during the first lockdown. He’s one of Britain’s most senior national security advisors with links to M15 and MI6.


Put another way, that’s an intelligence operative ruling the British people by psychological manipulation, though we are led to believe that in a democracy – government is an agency of the people and parliament is given force of law by the will of the people.

But what happens when our consent is manipulated by those in power?

One consequence is that the foxes take charge of the chicken coop. Another is that we begin to see drastic changes to the constitutional landscape, as politicians acquire impunity from public scrutiny and an entire nation is kept under house arrest.

But this demonisation of the masses is also the backwash of a protracted counterinsurgency crusade waged against ordinary folks. When the Berlin wall came down in the nineties and decades of counterinsurgency was rendered obsolete, the battle-lines moved from East to the West, from the Soviets to the lower orders of society. The mythos of communist infiltration, that gave rise to the threat of terrorism, is the ancestor of today’s biosecurity state. A government that tightens its grip, using fear of a common enemy, will find no shortage of common enemies, to continue tightening its grip.

Conclusions

Strong-arming the world’s population under the rubric of biosecurity would not have been possible without the internet, and if the expulsion of the military and intelligence community from academic institutions in the 1960’s had not resulted in the creation of Silicon Valley, they would not have acquired total information awareness, the precursor to the Green Pass.

But this formidable goal also caused the US to morph into the opponent it had been fighting during the cold war, as predicted by public intellectuals in the 1960s.

And so, with an annual budget of $750 billion and 23,000 military and civilian personnel in their employment, the Pentagon failed to denounce what many armchair researchers called out in the early days of the pandemic. That a global coup was underway was patently obvious, as crisis actors played dead in Wuhan, China.

Instead, those charged with protecting the west from Soviet-style putsch failed to apprehend it happening right under their noses. It’s not so much that they were caught with their trousers down, it’s that they aided and abetted the coop. Years of fighting a statist, expansionist adversary, caused the intelligence state to mutate into their nemesis, namely China.

It is uncanny that the country with the worst human rights record on earth became the global pacemaker for lockdowns, as western democracies exonerated their existential threat and bowed to China’s distinct brand of tyranny.

As a result, the big tech data analytics pioneered by Silicon Valley luminaries, that was road tested in China, finally landed on the shorelines of western democracies.

Another story entirely is the infiltration of sovereign nation states by the United Nations, whose special agency, the WHO, sparked the events that would lead to the fall of the West. In keeping with tradition, the UN’s foundation at Bretton Woods was infiltrated by communist spies, driven by socialist values, and funded by powerful petroleum dollars. The same corporations looking to shore up new markets for their monopolies, who would leave their legacy to Silicon Valley.

In an ironic twist of fate, the intelligence state created at the end of world war II, under the National Security Act, conceived the very corporations that would bring about the end of constitutional democracy, that would author a new bill of rights from their own community standards de jour, and that would shift us from sovereign nation states to global governance, into the collectivist future the Pentagon had been charged with protecting us from.

Nowadays, it doesn’t matter if you’re in the dusty slew of a Calcutta slum or enjoying pristine views over Central Park, everyone is subject to the same scrutiny and surveillance, policed by the same community standards, manipulated by the same algorithms, and indexed by the same intelligence agencies. No matter where you are, Silicon Valley is limiting what information you can see, share, communicate and learn from online. They are raising your kids, shaping your worldview and in the wake of COVID-19 and climate change, they have assumed the role of science administrator.

Founded on the principles of freedom of expression and heralded as a liberating new frontier for humanity, the internet has criminalised free speech, divorced it from our nature and ensnared us under a dragnet of surveillance.

But above all else, cyberspace has bought into existence a substructure of reality that is cannibalising the five-sensory world, while forcing humanity to embark on the greatest exodus in human history, from the tangible world to the digital nexus, from our real lives to the metaverse.

As Goethe quote goes ‘None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.’ Namely, anyone still looking through rose-tinted lenses in the digital age, oblivious to the fact they are victims of systematic addiction. The bread and circuses of the internet influences the same dopamine rewards centres and neural circuitry motivators as slot machines, cigarettes, and cocaine, as was originally intended by psychologists like JCR Licklider, at the helm of this new technology that would exploit basic vulnerabilities in the human psyche.

And as we descend further into the maelstrom of the digital age, the algorithms will get smarter, the psychological drivers will become more persuasive and digital rubric will become more real. Until eventually we will lose touch with reality altogether. But don’t worry, this war of attrition is happening in conjunction with the roll out of new software and devices, and most will be too busy building their digital avatars or dissenting on social media to know any better.

The Cogent provides no copyright info. The website provides an email address which saysone can ask to subscribe: thoreauthelookingglass@gmail.com

Wrong Wray — It’s NOT the Whole FBI


Current FBI Director Christopher Wray views FBI exoneration of targeting President Trump before and after election in 2016 in the IG Michael Horowitz Report. President Trump should view another firing of another Deep State FBI Director AND replace Wray with someone willing to drain the swamp stench of Dem influence in that Agency.

 

JRH 12/11/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

*****************************

Wrong Wray — It’s NOT the Whole FBI

The vast majority of the 12,484 special agents and 2,950 intelligence analysts in the FBI steadfastly abide by their oaths.

 

By  Mark Alexander

Dec. 11, 2019

The Patriot Post

 

On Tuesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray issued his response to the Justice Department’s FISA report, concluding: “Finally, we will review the performance and conduct of certain FBI employees who were referenced in the Report’s recommendations — including managers, supervisors, and senior officials at the time. The FBI will take appropriate disciplinary action where warranted. Notably, many of the employees described in the report are no longer employed at the FBI.”

 

But in a follow-up interview, when asked if he had any evidence that the FBI unfairly targeted Trump’s campaign, Wray replied, “I don’t.” If his response was specifically related to the FISA report evidence that was limited in its scope, then Wray’s comments are in line. But if he was suggesting that there is no evidence of bias among “managers, supervisors, and senior officials at the time,” that assertion is ludicrous and earned this response from Donald Trump: “I don’t know what report [Wray] was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me.”

 

Moreover, Director Wray was asked a leading question as to whether he was offended by suggestions that the FBI is part of the “deep state.”

 

He took the bait on a broad question: “I think that’s the kind of label that is a disservice to the 37,000 men and women who work at the FBI who I think tackle their jobs with professionalism, with rigor, with objectivity, with courage … so that’s not a term I would ever use to describe our workforce and I think it’s an affront to them.”

 

Wrong, Wray — the question asked was absurd and disingenuous. He knows better and should have chosen his words much more carefully. The “deep state” assertions have always been limited to a handful of FBI personnel Wray identified in his response — those high-ranking “managers, supervisors, and senior officials” with strong bias in favor of Hillary Clinton. This has never been about the FBI at large.

 

Almost two years ago, in “The FISA Memo and the Demos’ Deep-State Operatives,” I noted:

 

Democrats and their Leftmedia outlets are promoting the diversionary false narrative that serious questions about the political motives of those who seeded the FISA warrants are a “broad assault on the Department of Justice and FBI” by President Trump and Republicans. According to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), “This wasn’t about oversight. This is about … attacking the DoJ and FBI, a transparent attempt to discredit these institutions.”

 

As I noted then, in fact, it is Democrats like Schiff who are broad-brushing the FISA memo inquiry to include “institutions” rather than “individuals.” The memo names a handful of corrupt Democrat deep-state operatives in the DoJ and FBI who colluded to help Hillary Clinton defeat Donald Trump and who, after his stunning upset, sought to undermine the legitimacy of Trump’s presidency.

 

As I also noted then: “The vast majority of the 12,484 special agents and 2,950 intelligence analysts in the FBI steadfastly abide by their oaths ‘to support and defend’ our Constitution. They also strive to live up to the FBI motto: Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity. Indeed, most FBI agents, whose reputations are being sullied by the corrupt actions of a few high-ranking officials, are both personally and professionally offended by that corruption.”

 

Again yesterday in “The DoJ FISA Report — Trump Was Right,” I noted that “Hillary Clinton’s backers were high-ranking FBI bureaucrats” — as Wray identified in his report.

 

For the record, it was and remains Democrats who, by advancing this charade to take Trump down, have cast a cloud over the entire FBI — a cloud that will take years to dissipate. When Wray answers loaded media questions without redress, he also throws his whole agency under the bus.

+++++++++++++++++++

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

__________________________

Support The Patriot Fund

 

Our Mission

 

The Patriot Post is steadfast in our mission to extend the endowment of Liberty to the next generation by advocating for individual rights and responsibilities, supporting the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and promoting free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. We are a rock-solid conservative touchstone for the expanding ranks of grassroots Americans Patriots from all walks of life. We are not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we do not accept advertising to ensure our advocacy is not restrained by commercial influence. Our mission and operation budgets are funded entirely by the contributions from Patriots like you. Please support The Patriot Fund today!

 

The Patriot Post is protected speech, as enumerated in the First Amendment and enforced by the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, in accordance with the endowed and unalienable Rights of All Mankind. Copyright © 2019 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

 

JUDICIAL WATCH: FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS FBI TO SEARCH FOR STEELE DOCUMENTS


Wouldn’t it be good to know when the FBI knew the Steele Dossier was bogus and yet how often the bogus document was presented to a FISA Court for warrants to spy on President Trump during and after the 2016 election campaign? Judicial Watch is taking steps to configure the time frame especially since it is apparent FBI Director Christopher Wray has no intention to clean his house of corruption.

 

JRH 8/22/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

********************

JUDICIAL WATCH: FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS FBI TO SEARCH FOR STEELE DOCUMENTS

 

Christopher Steele

 

JW Press Release

August 19, 2019 (sent: 8/19/19 2:45 PM)

Judicial Watch

 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that U.S. District Court Judge Christopher Cooper ordered the FBI to conduct a search within 60 days for records of communications with former British spy and dossier author Christopher Steele post-dating Steele’s service as an FBI confidential source. In ordering the supplemental search for records, Judge Cooper held:

[T]he potential for illuminating the FBI’s activities is not too difficult to discern. Communications post-dating Steele’s time as an informant might reveal a great deal about why the FBI developed him as a CHS [confidential human source], his performance as a CHS, and why the FBI opted to terminate its relationship with him. Those records might either bolster or weaken Steele’s credibility as a source. That information, in turn, could provide a basis on which to evaluate the FBI’s performance of its law-enforcement duties, including its judgment in selecting and relying on confidential sources, especially in connection with such a politically sensitive subject. Of course, the records Judicial Watch speculates about might not even exist—and even if they do, they may not reveal anything significant about the FBI’s operations. But that they might do so makes them a matter of potential public interest.

The court ruling came in the Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for records of communications and payments between the FBI, Christopher Steele and his private firm, Orbis Business Intelligence (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice) (No. 1:17-cv-00916)). The lawsuit seeks:

 

  • All records of communications between any official, employee, or representative of the FBI and Mr. Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer and the owner of the private firm Orbis Business Intelligence.

 

  • All records related to the proposed, planned, or actual payment of any funds to Mr. Steele and/or Orbis Business Intelligence.

 

  • All records produced in preparation for, during, or pursuant to any meetings or telephonic conversations between any official, employee, or representative of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Mr. Christopher Steele and/or any employee or representative of Orbis Business Intelligence.

 

The court initially ruled in favor of a DOJ “Glomar” response to Judicial Watch’s March 8, 2017, FOIA request stating that it could “neither confirm nor deny the existence of records responsive to [Judicial Watch’s] request.” On March 26, 2018, subsequent to the declassification of records revealing Steele’s role as an FBI informant and his firing by the FBI in November 2016, the court reopened the case at Judicial Watch’s request. The FBI, however, continued refusing to search for records post-dating Steele’s dismissal, contending that any records discovered would be exempt from disclosure on privacy grounds.

In Friday’s ruling, Judge Cooper held that, on balance, any privacy interests Steele may have in keeping the documents secret are outweighed by the public’s interest in disclosure:

 

Steele’s privacy interests are far different from those courts usually consider under Exemption 7(C), where disclosure would make public for the first time an individual’s affiliation with law enforcement, whether as agent, cooperator, or target… The balance therefore tilts in favor of disclosure. Accordingly, the Court will order the FBI to conduct a search for records post-dating Steele’s service as a confidential source.

 

“The court was right to turn aside the FBI’s fake concerns for Clinton spy Christopher Steele’s privacy and order the agency to search for more records on its use of Steele and his Dossier to target President Trump,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That the FBI is still protecting Christopher Steele and the Clinton spy ring at Fusion GPS should tell you there is much more corruption to be exposed in the coup efforts against President Trump.”

Documents previously produced in this lawsuit show that the FBI paid Steele at least 11 times during the 2016 presidential campaign and then fired him for leaking.

Judicial Watch also uncovered smoking gun documents showing that former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr remained in regular contact with Steele after Steele was terminated by the FBI in November 2016 for revealing to the media his position as an FBI confidential informant.

Through another FOIA lawsuit, Judicial Watch obtained emails of Bruce Ohr discussing information obtained through his wife Nellie, which he passed on to the FBI. The information contained anti-Trump dossier materials, including a spreadsheet that tries to link President Trump to dozens of Russians. These Justice Department documents also contain Russia-related emails sent from Nellie Ohr to high-ranking DOJ official Lisa Holtyn during the period Ohr worked with anti-Trump firm Fusion GPS, which contracted with Steele to create the Trump Dossier. Holtyn at the time was a top aide to Bruce Ohr.

Judicial later acquired FBI 302 interview forms of Bruce Ohr’s reporting information he received from Steele to his FBI handlers.

Judicial Watch additionally uncovered documents from the U.S. Department of State revealing that State Department “Special Coordinator for Libya” Jonathan Winer played a key role in facilitating Steele’s access to other top government officials and prominent international business executives.

_____________________

©2017-2019, All Rights Reserved 

 

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172

 

Judicial Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions are received from individuals, foundations, and corporations and are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

 

Intro to ‘… A “Soft Coup” Against President Trump’


Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © July 28, 2019

 

One of my favorite WordPress blogs is Ares and Athena (let’s abbreviate that as A & A). A & A often does the same thing I do in cross posting from others subject matter that I find interesting.

 

A & A picked up a fascinating perspective from RedState blogger streiff. To be honest I’m not exactly a frequent flyer at RedState, so I’m unfamiliar about streiff writing. So I attempted to find something about the person.

 

I quickly realized that streiff is a pseudonym. I have no idea if streiff is male or female. I discovered that streiff is a pro-Trump blogger of some notoriety at RedState and seems to have been a part of the controversy of a RedState purge of pro-Trump bloggers but has managed to find his/her way back to RedState. If you are unaware of the RedState firing of bloggers, I’ll let you research the controversy because I really don’t care. As I said, I’m not a RedState frequent flyer.

 

HOWEVER, this streiff post picked up by A & A does disseminate a perspective on the Deep State coup attempt against President Trump that more people should be aware of to note the tactics probably will continue by other means.

 

Streiff builds his narrative by sharing some facts that I’ll let you read in the cross post, but here is an excerpt of the streiff wants you to grasp:

 

One could speculate that it was more than a soft coup against Trump. If all the reports we’ve received are correct, this resembles more of a decapitation strike aimed at taking out all resistance to the Democrat party. If the Republican President, the NRA, and other conservative groups can be alleged to have all been under the influence of a foreign power, albeit a Third World kleptocracy with an GDP smaller than New York State, then the entire opposition to the Democrats is discredited for years to come. The reason I don’t find this far fetched is that four years ago I would never have believed that the FBI and CIA would have interjected themselves into a presidential election on the side of one of the candidates and I never would have believed the UN Ambassador would be unmasking the personal communications of American citizens at the rate of one per work day.

 

If that is the case, then a lot of very powerful people need to be sharing a cell with … BE TANTALIZED AND READ THE CROSS POST.

 

Ares and Athena introduced the streiff post with this (posted today 7/28/19):

 

Trump’s  election threw a huge roadblock on the highway to dystopia. Thus, a desperate elitist/leftist attempt ensued to paint all opposition, especially Trump, as Russian lackeys via false accusations and naked propaganda.

 

If they were successful, his election would be invalidated. Thus, the festivities of the politically and morally corrupt DC machine and their selling out of America for their own gain  could continue.

 

The following article reveals some interesting information regarding one aspect of the plan and its implication.

 

And now the cross post below.

 

JRH 7/28/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Secret FBI Informant In The Maria Butina Case Says He Was Part Of A “Soft Coup” Against President Trump

 

By streiff

July 27, 2019

RedState

 

Maria Butina

 

One of the saddest episodes to emerge from the anti-Russia hysteria the Democrats and NeverTrump weenies managed to generate after the 2016 election is the case of Maria Butina. (You can chant “Russia is not our friend” under your breath to create the correct ambiance.) Butina, a member of a nascent Russian gun rights movement, was sentenced to 18 months in prison for failing to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. She was never accused of being an intelligence agent. She is in prison for doing what Tony Podesta did for years and got White House invitations. Butina’s misfortune was to be Russian and to be interested in working with the NRA. Because the NRA supports Republicans, this became a convenient tool to claim the NRA was a Russian influenced organization…a charge that was actually made on this very site…and therefore illegitimate.

 

Yesterday, a pretty amazing thing happened. According to an exclusive report by Sara Carter (who seems to be one of the very few political journalists, liberal or conservative, not using Jake Tapper’s Twitter timeline for story ideas) the FBI aimed an informant at Butina with orders to begin a sexual relationship with her and then lied to Butina’s defense team about the informant and what the informant said about her intent because his reports undermined the government’s case.

This is the set up:

 

[Overstock.com CEO Patrick] Byrne was a keynote speaker on July, 8, 2015 at Freedom Fest, a yearly Libertarian gathering that hosts top speakers in Las Vegas. Shortly after his address, Butina approached him. She was flattering and repeatedly told him she was a fan of his, saying she was a graduate student that had studied the famous libertarian Militon [sic] Friedman.

 

He spoke to her shortly and “brushed her off.”

 

The young redheaded Russian graduate student then approached him again over the course of the conference and explained that she worked for the Vice Chairman of the Central Bank of Russia and sent by them to make contact with Byrne.

 

She also said “did you know you’re a famous man in Russia, we watch videos about you and your relationship with Milton Freeman.”

 

She said she was appointed to lead Russia’s gun right’s group by Lieutenant-General Mikhail Kalashnikov, who was a Russian general, most notably known for his AK-47 machine gun design. The designation by Kalashnikov is considered a huge honor and Byrne then had an “extensive conversation about Russian history and I understood her designation about Kalishnikov was significant.”

 

She wanted to invite Byrne to Russia to speak at the Central Bank before dignitaries. The speaking engagement would be at a major resort for three days. Butina told Byrne the event would offer him the opportunity to meet senior Russian officials and oligarchs. He didn’t accept the offer because of his security clearance. He then reported Butina and her offer to the FBI.

 

Byrne was a little suspicious of everything because Butina confided that she was afraid she was being monitored and thought it would be best if they disguised their meetings as a romantic relationship. He also reported it because Byrne was a part-time FBI informant.

 

When he contacted the FBI and then subsequently for the next few months “instead what I got was vague instructions that it would be ok to get to know her better.”

 

He said there was very little response from the FBI after his initial contact, until Butina asked him to come meet her in New York City. He told the FBI he didn’t want any vague instructions on whether to meet Butina or not because “I didn’t want my security clearance to get pulled.”

 

At that point the FBI gave him an explicit “green light” to meet with her. He rented a hotel room with two bedrooms because he was under the impression that the romantic texts were simply her way to cover for communicating with him. However, she arrived at the hotel beforehand, occupied the room before Byrne’s arrival, and when he arrived, she made clear that her flirtatious texts were not simply a disguise.

 

Byrne said that the FBI agents made clear they were skeptical that Butina might be of interest, dismissing her as simply a normal 26 year old Russian graduate student. Over time, Byrne and Butina developed an intimate relationship but at the same time he alleges he was continuously reporting on Butina to the FBI in an effort to convince them that it might be worthwhile to introduce her to some of his contacts at the Council on Foreign Relations. He also noted he reported to the FBI his interactions more frequently with Butina starting in December, 2015, both out of a desire not to lose the possibility of something good coming from this encounter, but also, because Butina was starting to speak more frequently of meeting with big shots in Republican circles.

 

Ultimately, Byrne became convinced that Butina was basically a very enthusiastic person doing exactly what she claimed to be doing: trying to build linkages between this Russian gun rights group and the NRA and conservative groups in the US and that she was not acting on behalf of the Russian government.

 

After her arrest, her lawyer made a demand for so-called “Brady” material and the FBI told them there was none. The FBI lying to sandbag a defense attorney…can you see my shocked face?

But this is the interesting part:

 

Oddly, Byrne’s name was not disclosed by prosecutors in the case or by the FBI. And despite the government’s earlier efforts to paint Butina as a Russian spy attempting to infiltrate Republican circles she was never investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, which charged 25 Russian agents with interfering in the U.S. election. Further, the FBI, unlike convicted Russian bombshell spy Anna Chapman, did nothing to stop Butina from meeting with high level Republican and conservative figures. The bureau also didn’t warn those conservative figures she had made contact with,  even though they had her under surveillance and allegedly Byrne had been reporting on her during that time. As noted in a column by The Hill’s John Solomon Chapman’s actions were handled differently than Butina. When one of Chapman’s associates, who went by the name of Cynthia Murphy, made contact with Alan Patricof, a major Democratic donor close to Hillary Clintonthe FBI acted swiftly to arrest the entire cell.

 

[Butina attorney Robert] Driscoll said there was suspicion that the FBI did not disclose all the information it had on Butina and he stated that he believed “Patrick is not the only one” who was giving information to the FBI.

 

Why does this matter?

 

We’re seeing a pattern. When the FBI suspected that Carter Page was possibly compromised by the Russians, instead of following normal procedure and giving then-candidate Trump a defensive briefing and the opportunity to remove Page from the campaign, what did the FBI do? Nothing. We know they did that service for John McCain in 2008 and why they elected not to in 2015-16 is a question that needs to be answered. If Page had been fired from the Trump campaign in 2015 much of what happened since then would not have taken place.

 

Earlier this week the attorney for Joseph Mifsud intimated that his client, the guy who allegedly kicked off “Crossfire Hurricane” by telling George Papadopoulos that the Russians had “dirt” on Clinton, worked for western intelligence agencies. Bolstering this is the fact that Robert Mueller never claims that Mifsud was working for the Russian government and Mueller never charged Mifsud with lying to the FBI in interviews despite the fact that he did (see Jim Jordan Fillets Mueller On Joseph Mifsud Not Being Charged, Exposes Serious Credibility Issues With The Probe).

 

Recall that the New York Times confirmed that a woman dangled in front of Papadopoulos as a possible romantic liaison was, in fact, working for some US agency. We hope it was the FBI because if it was the CIA a boatload of laws were broken (see FBI Does Preemptive Damage Control By Confirming The Trump Campaign Was The Target Of A Spying Operation).

 

And so the push by John Durham to interview Joseph Mifsud and rumors that extensive exculpatory information existed on Page and Papadopoulos that would have put their activities in a different light brings new significance.

 

Back to Byrne. Why did he come forward?

 

Byrne’s decision to come forward didn’t come lightly. However, he said it was necessary after watching what had transpired between the FBI, the intelligence community and the probe into President Trump’s campaign over the past several years.

 

“It was something I knew I had to do,” he told this reporter. “Those running the operation were not honest and in the end I realized I was being used in some sort of soft coup.”

 

One could speculate that it was more than a soft coup against Trump. If all the reports we’ve received are correct, this resembles more of a decapitation strike aimed at taking out all resistance to the Democrat party. If the Republican President, the NRA, and other conservative groups can be alleged to have all been under the influence of a foreign power, albeit a Third World kleptocracy with an GDP smaller than New York State, then the entire opposition to the Democrats is discredited for years to come. The reason I don’t find this far fetched is that four years ago I would never have believed that the FBI and CIA would have interjected themselves into a presidential election on the side of one of the candidates and I never would have believed the UN Ambassador would be unmasking the personal communications of American citizens at the rate of one per work day.

 

If that is the case, then a lot of very powerful people need to be sharing a cell with Tiny the White Supremacist Biker and their organizations need to be burned to the ground. If it isn’t a global conspiracy and just a series of events carried out by politically motivated law enforcement and intelligence agents, they need to do hard time and everyone associated with them reduced to penury.

 

Streiff: Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.
Follow @streiffredstate

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.

_____________________

Intro to ‘… A “Soft Coup” Against President Trump’

Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © July 28, 2019

___________________

Secret FBI Informant In The Maria Butina Case Says He Was Part Of A “Soft Coup” Against President Trump

 

Copyright RedState.com/Salem Media. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you.

 

Hillary Clinton’s Lawyer Changes Story on When She Knew About Emails


On June 29 I cross posted a Vincent Vendetta video (a little over 7 minutes) which reported on a Judicial Watch deposition of the Crooked Hillary lawyer (Heather Samuelson)  that aided in wiping subpoenaed emails from the illegal server.

 

Three Search Engine Views of Person Identified as Heather Samuelson

 

Yesterday my Facebook friend Rose Reed Brown Messaged me a link from The Epoch Times went into greater detail about Samuelson than the video. The original Epoch Times article was posted June 30 but by the time Rose emailed the link, it had a July 3 update. That update is the detail I am cross posting below.

 

JRH 7/4/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Hillary Clinton speaks in Baltimore on June 5, 2017. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

 

Hillary Clinton’s Lawyer Changes Story on When She Knew About Emails

 

By MARK TAPSCOTT

June 30, 2019 Updated: July 3, 2019

The Epoch Times

 

WASHINGTON—Heather Samuelson, Hillary Clinton’s personal attorney, gave the FBI and Judicial Watch conflicting explanations of when she learned that the former secretary of state used a private email system to conduct official U.S. diplomatic business.

 

“I believe I first became aware when either she e-mailed me on personal matters, such as wishing me happy birthday, or when I infrequently would receive e-mails forwarded to me from others at the department that had that e-mail address listed elsewhere in the document,” Samuelson told Judicial Watch lawyers during a June 13, 2019, deposition.

 

Samuelson worked in the Department of State’s liaison office to President Barack Obama’s White House at the time, according to Judicial Watch.

 

Samuelson told the FBI in 2016 that she didn’t learn of the Clinton email system until becoming Clinton’s personal attorney in 2014, after serving for a year in the White House counsel’s office.

 

The 2016 conversation with the FBI was part of the bureau’s highly controversial investigation of the Clinton private email system, which culminated with then-FBI Director James Comey’s July 5, 2016, announcement that he wouldn’t recommend prosecution of the former chief diplomat.

 

Clinton used the private email system, originally on a server located in the New York mansion she shares with former President Bill Clinton, throughout her tenure as the top U.S. diplomat, from 2009 to 2013.

 

The non-profit government watchdog released the transcript of the deposition on June 28. The Samuelson deposition is the latest in a series of depositions by Judicial Watch of senior Clinton aides that were ordered Dec. 6, 2018, by U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth.

 

Lamberth described Clinton’s private email system as “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency,” and ordered Samuelson and nearly a dozen other former Clinton aides to answer Judicial Watch’s questions either in depositions or in written responses.

 

“After Clinton left office, Samuelson worked for a year in the office of the White House Counsel before becoming Clinton’s personal attorney” in 2014, Judicial Watch said in a statement accompanying release of the deposition.

 

“She was primarily responsible for conducting the review of Clinton emails and sorting out ‘personal’ emails from government emails, which were returned to the State Department under the direction of [former Clinton Chief of Staff] Cheryl Mills and [another] Clinton lawyer, David Kendall,” the Judicial Watch statement said.

 

“After the emails were returned to State, Clinton deleted the rest of the ‘personal’ emails from her server, wiping it clean. Samuelson conducted the review of emails on her laptop, using Clinton server files downloaded from Platte River Networks, which housed the Clinton email server,” the statement continued.

 

Samuelson’s contradiction of her prior statement to the FBI is significant because she also told Judicial Watch that she had been granted by the Department of Justice (DOJ) what she described as “limited production immunity” in June 2016.

 

It isn’t known whether the DOJ’s grant of immunity insulated Samuelson against whatever legal obligation she may have had while working in the White House or the State Department to disclose to law enforcement officials her knowledge that Clinton wasn’t using a secured U.S. government communications system to conduct official diplomatic business.

 

U.S. officials knew that Chinese intelligence had hacked into Clinton’s private system, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) told The Epoch Times on June 29.

 

Gohmert said the Chinese “actually hacked Hillary Clinton’s personal server—as our intel community established without any question—even though the FBI refused to ever examine the evidence.”

 

A forensic analysis of Clinton’s emails conducted by the intelligence community inspector general (ICIG) had determined that a copy of virtually every email from Clinton’s server was sent to an unauthorized source, Gohmert said.

 

Dozens of highly classified documents were sent to and from Clinton on her private email system when she was secretary of state.

 

Samuelson is the second former Clinton associate to be found in the Judicial Watch depositions to have told the FBI one thing in 2016, only to have it contradicted in 2019.

 

Former Clinton State Department aide Justin Cooper told Judicial Watch in a deposition released earlier this year that he worked with the secretary’s then-deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin in setting up the private email system.

 

Cooper’s claim contradicted Abedin’s previous claim in a 2016 deposition by Judicial Watch that she only learned of the private email system in 2015 by “reading in some news articles about a year, a year-and-a-half ago, when it was—it was being publicly discussed.”

 

Abedin was deputy chief of staff throughout Clinton’s tenure at the State Department and then worked for her throughout her primary and general election campaign for president in 2016.

 

“The news that the Obama DOJ gave immunity to Heather Samuelson, Hillary Clinton’s lawyer responsible for the infamous deletion of 33,000 emails, further confirms the sham FBI/DOJ investigation of the Clinton email scandal,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in the statement accompanying the deposition’s release.

 

“And it is curious that Ms. Samuelson changed her story about what she knew and when about the Clinton email system. Attorney General William Barr can’t reopen the Clinton email investigation fast enough,” Fitton said.

 

Contact Mark Tapscott at mark.tapscott@epochtimes.nyc

_______________________

Copyright @ 2000 – 2019

 

ABOUT The Epoch Times

 

The Epoch Times is dedicated to seeking the truth through insightful and independent journalism.

 

We stand outside of political interests and the pursuit of profit, to educate readers about today’s most critical issues with the intention of broadening minds and uplifting society. A well-informed society is the cornerstone of a flourishing democracy.

 

Being independent, we investigate issues overlooked—or avoided—by other media outlets. We do this because we believe journalism must play the role of being truly responsible to society.

 

We strive to highlight solutions and what’s good in society rather than the conflicts that divide us. We recognize the value of the traditional arts and their ability to inspire humankind towards its highest ideals.

 

In our newsroom and our reporting, we are committed to being honest, respectful, and compassionate.

 

We stand against the systematic destruction of traditional culture by destructive ideologies such as communism, which continues to harm societies around the world.

 

We are inspired in this mission by our own experience. The Epoch Times was founded in 2000 to bring honest and uncensored news to people oppressed by the lies and violence of communism.

 

Fulfilling this mission is our passion and our greatest honor.

 

The Epoch Times provides award-winning newspapers and news platforms with the goal of being the global newspaper of record, with a positive influence on society. The Epoch Times provides critical in-depth analysis that has often been overlooked by other mainstream media outlets.

 

Our History

 

Having witnessed events like Tiananmen Square and the persecution of the spiritual group Falun Gong, and READ THE REST

 

Ranks within CIA reportedly ‘anxious’ as DOJ plans to dig deeper on suspicious origins of Russia probe


As the Mainstream Media keep their heads between the cheeks of their own gluteus maximus with fake outrage after fake outrage of President Trump falsely accused of breaking the law, it appears the true colluders AGAINST the U.S. government might be getting nervous. (The latest false outrage is President Trump would look at unsolicited voluntarily offered oppo research and on an opposing candidate, BUT pooh-pooh solicited and paid for FICTITIOUS information manufactured from foreign sources – RUSSIA – and composed by a former MI6 Agent Christopher Steele.)

BizPac Review has the story that Federal Prosecutor John Durham and AG William Barr is investigating the CIA working with the FBI on sources and actions to frame President Trump for Election interference.

 

JRH 6/14/19 (Hat Tip Ares and Athena)

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

********************

Ranks within CIA reportedly ‘anxious’ as DOJ plans to dig deeper on suspicious origins of Russia probe

 

By Samantha Chang 

June 13, 2019

BizPac Review

 

 

US Attorney John Durham plans to question two CIA officers about the suspicious origins of Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. (screenshots)

 

The Department of Justice plans to interview two CIA officers for its investigation into the suspicious origins of Robert Mueller’s fruitless Russia collusion investigation.

 

Specifically, U.S. Attorney John Durham of Connecticut will question a senior counterintelligence official and a senior analyst who investigated Russia’s attempts to interfere in the 2016 election, according to the New York Times.

 

Sources say that the Deep State anti-Trump operatives within the CIA are worried about the potential fallout from this.

 

Did Obama FBI conspire with the CIA?

 

US Attorney General William Barr is trying to learn more about the sources that the Obama CIA and FBI relied on before deciding to spy on Trump campaign officials.

 

CIA Director Gina Haspel said her agency will cooperate with the investigation, but will ensure that CIA sources, methods, and intelligence are protected.

 

Basically, this is the first of a long line of inquiry to determine why bogus FISA warrants were issued to spy on 2016 Trump campaign officials and how the Obama FBI coordinated with the CIA to conclude that Russia allegedly tried to help Trump get elected and undermine Hillary Clinton.

 

This is all ironic since President Trump has been far tougher on Russian President Vladimir Putin than Barack Obama ever was.

 

(Source: Fox News)

 

Obama holdovers in CIA are worried

 

So far, the Barr investigation is not a criminal inquiry, but could lead to charges if wrongdoing is uncovered.

 

Sources told the Times that ranks within the CIA are anxious about the probe, since it could reveal the coup they were plotting against a sitting U.S. president — both before he took office and since.

 

Not surprisingly, Democrats are foaming at the mouth to protest AG Barr’s inquiry. This is especially ironic since Democrats have been investigating Trump and everyone associated with him around the clock — even for tangential matters unrelated to election meddling.

 

Former Obama CIA director John Brennan lashed out on Twitter, writing: “This is just the latest example of what Vice President Biden meant when he said that Mr. Trump is an existential threat to our country. “Unfit to be President” is a gross understatement. Donald Trump is undeserving of any public office, and all Americans should be outraged.”

 

This is just the latest example of what Vice President Biden meant when he said that Mr. Trump is an existential threat to our country. “Unfit to be President” is a gross understatement. @realDonaldTrump is undeserving of any public office, and all Americans should be outraged. https://t.co/vi0gYUxi67

 

— John O. Brennan (@JohnBrennan) June 12, 2019

 

Brennan monetized access to nation’s top Secrets

 

Meanwhile, in March 2019, Brennan meekly admitted that he pushed the Russia collusion hoax, citing “bad information” he received from his dubious (imaginary) sources.

 

John Brennan has shamelessly monetized his security clearance to get rich and to foment public hysteria that a sitting US president was secretly an agent of the Russian government.

 

In August 2018, President Trump revoked Brennan’s security clearance after he was caught leaking intel to the media.

 

Naturally, Brennan got enraged and repeatedly trashed President Trump on MSNBC, where he’s employed as a contributor.

__________________

Samantha Chang

Senior Staff Writer
Samantha@bizpacreview.com

 

Copyright © 2019. All Rights Reserved. BizPacReview

 

About BPR

 

BizPac Review is a top-rated political news website that provides breaking news and analysis unfiltered by the liberal bias that has eroded the media’s credibility. With public trust in the press sputtering at an all-time low, BizPac Review fills the void with its unparalleled coverage of current events that the mainstream media intentionally ignore.

 

Founded in 2009 and headquartered in West Palm Beach, BizPac Review is comprised of an experienced team of accomplished editors and reporters in Chicago, New York, and across the key battleground state of Florida.

 

We give you the straight scoop and provide news and insights for the patriotic American who unabashedly loves their country and refuses to be silenced. BPR has broken important stories that have been spotlighted on Fox News and on the Rush Limbaugh show.

 

Our analysis has been touted by the top conservatives in the world, including Donald Trump Jr., Dan Bongino, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Kris Paronto, Candace Owens, Larry Elder, and Sarah Palin.

 

Internet censorship and social-media suppression of conservative voices is READ THE REST

 

Obama DOJ Ordered FBI Not to Prosecute Hillary Clinton


Here’s another Sunday cross post some piece you may find interesting or fascinating. Again YOU may have read, BUT I’m guessing many have not read.

 

This one is a Breitbart post on released Lisa Page testimony preceded by the Facebook intro where I discovered it.

 

JRH 3/17/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

******************

Facebook Intro by Bob Brown 

Found at Facebook Group Patriot Action Network

Facebook post March 14 at 2:30 AM

 

Nail BO, H Clinton and other guilty democrats! I remember the Comey press conference on Clinton and I was excited as Comey was talking and leaning towards getting Clinton, then all of a sudden he dropped the call. It is now apparent Comey was a puppet for BO and many heads should roll. Clinton and others are corrupt and have a problem with the facts and the truth. Conservative Wisdom United.

++++++++++++++++

Lisa Page: Obama DOJ Ordered FBI Not to Prosecute Hillary Clinton

 

Lisa Page-Loretta Lynch-Crooked Hillary: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds, Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty, Rune Hellestad/Getty

 

By Charlie Spiering

March 13, 2019

Breitbart

 

Former FBI legal counsel Lisa Page testified to Congress that the Justice Department ordered the FBI not to charge former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with “gross negligence” by mishandling classified information.

 

Transcripts of Page’s closed-door testimony in July 2018 were released Tuesday by Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) on Tuesday, which included the following exchange with Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX):

 

RATCLIFFE: So let me if I can, I know I’m testing your memory. 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: That is correct.

 

RATFLIFFE: …bring a case based on that.

 

Ratcliffe highlighted the exchange on Twitter.

 

 

Page confirmed that the Department of Justice led by Attorney General Loretta Lynch had “multiple conversations” about charging Clinton with gross negligence but noted that it would be a rare decision.

 

“[T]hey did not feel they could sustain a charge,” she said, referring to the Department of Justice.

 

President Donald Trump reacted to the reports on Wednesday.

 

“The just revealed FBI Agent Lisa Page transcripts make the Obama Justice Department look exactly like it was, a broken and corrupt machine,” he wrote. “Hopefully, justice will finally be served. Much more to come!”

____________________

Copyright © 2019 Breitbart

 

Clinton Whistleblowers: Thursday’s Public Hearing to Reveal “Explosive” Information


It’s been about two years (give or take) since Crooked Hillary and Slick Willie evidence began to be exposed to the public. A lack of smoking gun dot connections, a coverup-minded Obama Administration and a colluding Mainstream Media (MSM) have protected the Clintons for quite some time.

 

So, I wait with baited breath in hope this Sara Carter article will prove true that a hearing before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are deserving recipients of criminal Justice.

 

JRH 12/13/18

So readers, I’ve been using a seven year old laptop to fulfill the old blogging habit. My lovely wife sprang for a Christmas upgrade. I’m a relatively small-time blogger but with a consistently growing readership despite some token censorship from the liberal-oriented blog and social platforms. Still looking to defray the Christmas costs.  

Whatever my readers can chip in will be appreciated: https://www.paypal.me/johnrhouk

Please Support NCCR

*********************

Clinton Whistleblowers: Thursday’s Public Hearing to Reveal “Explosive” Information

 

By Sara Carter
December 12, 2018 | 3:31 PM EST

SaraCarter.com

 

Crooked Hillary

 

A trove of documents on the Clinton Foundation alleging possible pay for play and tax evasion have been turned over to the FBI and IRS by several investigative whistleblowers, who will be testifying in an open hearing before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Thursday, according to the committee and lawmakers.

 

Roughly 6,000 documents that are expected to reveal the nearly two-year investigation by the whistleblowers with a private firm called MDA Analytics LLC, which allegedly turned over the documents more than a year and a half ago to the IRS, according to John Solomon, who first published the report last week in The Hill

 

The whistleblowers are former federal criminal investigators, who allege that the Clinton Foundation was “engaged in illegal activities and may be liable for millions of dollars in delinquent taxes and penalties,” according to Solomon.

 

The Department of Justice and the FBI’s Little Rock, Ark. field office, which is believed to be investigating the foundation, have allegedly obtained the documentation from the whistleblowers as well, according to lawmakers who’ve spoken with the whistleblowers.

 

Clinton Foundation officials could not be immediately reached for comment.

 

However, a former whistleblower, who has spoken with agents from the Little Rock FBI field office last year and worked for years as an undercover informant collecting information on Russia’s nuclear energy industry for the bureau, noted his enormous frustration with the DOJ and FBI. He describes as a two-tiered justice system that failed to actively investigate the information he provided years ago on the Clinton Foundation and Russia’s dangerous meddling with the U.S. nuclear industry and energy industry during the Obama administration.

 

William D. Campbell’s story was first published by this reporter in 2017. He turned over more than 5,000 documents and detailed daily briefs to the bureau when he served as a confidential informant reporting on Russia’s nuclear giant Rosatom. Campbell worked as an energy consultant, gaining the trust of Russians and providing significant insight into Russia’s strategic plans to gain global dominance in the uranium industry. He reported on Russian’s intentions to build a closer relationship with Obama administration officials, to include then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as reported. The documents he turned over to the DOJ, which were reviewed by this news site, showed Campbell had also provided highly sensitive information both related to the uranium case, as well as other intelligence matters, since 2006.

 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller was the director of the FBI at the time Campbell was a confidential informant and according to Campbell, the information was briefed to Mueller by his FBI handlers.

 

Rep. Mark Meadows

 

“(Mueller) received the documents, copies of which I still have, over a period of years and ignored a national security threat to the United States because of his political preference,” said Campbell, who said he is frustrated that the investigation into the Clinton Foundation and the other information he provided was apparently ignored years ago.

 

“These men were in charge of transport of nuclear materials (inside the United States) while committing criminal activity here in the United States and signing major US utility contracts,” said Campbell, referring to the information he provided the FBI on the American company Transportation Logistics International, also known as TLI, was the primary transport company for Russian enriched uranium sold to the United States.

 

“One teacup of what they were transporting both domestically and abroad could close down Wall Street or Washington,” Campbell warned. “(Mueller) ignored and delayed their arrests over years while I was risking my life undercover and interacting with these (Vladimir) Putin appointees both here in the United States and overseas.”

 

But Rep. Mark Meadows, chairman of the Freedom Caucus and member of the committee, said this time it will be different. He noted that the investigation is apparently ongoing with the FBI and DOJ and believes the information being delivered for Thursday’s hearing to be ‘explosive’ in nature and may help connect the dots.

 

Meadow’s told Fox New’s Martha MaCallum Tuesday, “the American people, they want to bring some closure, not just a few sound bites, here or there, so we’re going to be having a hearing this week, not only covering over some of those 6,000 pages that you’re talking about, but hearing directly from three whistleblowers that have actually spent the majority of the last two years investigating this.”

 

Meadows, who’s also on President Donald Trump’s short-list to replace Chief of Staff Gen. John Kelly, noted that some “allegations (whistleblowers) make are quite explosive.”

 

“We just look at the contributions. Now everybody’s focused on the contributions for the Clinton Foundation and what has happened just in the last year,” he said. “But if you look at it, it had a very strong rise, the minute she was selected as secretary of state. It dipped down when she was no longer there.”

 

“And then rose again, when she decided to run for president. So there are all kinds of allegations of pay-to-play and that kind of thing,” Meadows added.

 

VIDEO: GOP launches new effort to expose Clinton Foundation

 

[Posted by Fox News

Published on Dec 10, 2018]

__________________

Sara A. Carter is a national and international award winning investigative reporter whose stories have ranged from national security, terrorism, immigration and front line coverage of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

© 2018 Sara A. Carter | All Rights Reserved.

 

Kavanaugh hearing confirms the existence of the Deep State


Bob Livingston writes an editorial type piece drawing various associations displaying the existence of a Deep State in American government all related to the public view of the Blasey-Ford/Kavanaugh hearings.

 

Livingston pulls no punches. Livingston goes further in some credible speculation showing a GOP Establishment involvement in this clandestine Deep State that even implicates now Associate Justice Kavanaugh due to some past questionable extra-legal actions. Actions that by the way raised eyebrows in a minority of Conservative pundits questioning Kavanaugh’s Originalist credentials. Privately I pray those pundits are wrong pertaining to the level of Kavanaugh’s Originalism. Only time will reveal the accuracy of Conservative suspicions.

 

Read the Livingston piece and draw your own conclusions.

 

JRH 10/9/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

*********************

Kavanaugh hearing confirms the existence of the Deep State

 

By Bob Livingston – Editor, The Bob Livingston Letter™ 

October 8, 2018 

Personal Liberty

 

KAVANAUGH-HEARINGS-Swearing In

 

The Kabuki act that was the confirmation process of Brett Kavanaugh revealed something far more important than that underaged children of privilege growing up in the shadows of the District of Criminals were undisciplined and regularly engaged in parent-endorsed, if not parent-encouraged, debauchery. Unfortunately, not one in a million have grasped it, focusing instead on the licentious details Democrat senators directed them toward and whether one story was more credible than the other.

 

I have told you before that there are two governments in America; the one you see and the one you don’t. The one you see is the politicians and the courts. They are actors who give the illusion that you have a constitutional republic based on the rule of law and that you have some input in governmental processes.

 

The other government is unseen. It has many names and many elements that work against the best interests of the people. It is incestuous. Among its names are shadow government, powers that be and the simple term “they.” I call it the Deep State.

 

It is made up of faceless bureaucrats, crony corporations, the power elite, behind-the-scenes political operatives and lawyers, the banksters, the vast U.S. intelligence apparatus, the military-industrial complex (as revealed by President Eisenhower) and the globalists found in think tanks, the Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission.

 

The cover was pulled off a few of them these last days and weeks. They’ve been circling around the Christine Blasey Ford narrative like flies around a carcass. And, she, in fact, may even be one of them.

 

Despite hours of investigation by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the FBI, none of Ford’s accusations could be corroborated. The witnesses named by Ford – and by the second Kavanaugh accuser, Deborah Ramirez – denied knowledge of the activities the two women described, according to released or leak portions of the FBI investigation.

 

One of Ford’s witnesses is Leland Keyser, the sole female “witness” Ford named. Ford described Keyser as her best friend in their high school days at Holton-Arms preparatory school. Keyser is a former professional golfer who is now in poor health. Her health was the excuse Ford used to explain away Keyser’s refusal to corroborate Ford’s claims.

 

Keyser’s friends told The Daily Mail that Keyser was “blindsided” by Ford’s pulling her into the case. Ford friend Keyser was married to Bob Beckel for 10 years until they divorced in 2002. [Blog Editor: That’s the same Bob Beckel fired from Fox News for being too free with Left Wing curmudgeon profanity on The Five.]

 

Beckel worked for the State Department under Jimmy Carter, managed Walter Mondale’s president campaign, managed other Democrat politico campaigns and worked as a lobbyist for many years.  He now works as a political pundit on Fox News.

 

Ford’s friend Monica McClean is one of the “beach friends” with whom she discussed the possibility of coming forward with her accusations against Kavanaugh. She’s also the woman Ford coached on how to take a polygraph, according to a former Ford boyfriend.

 

McClean worked at the FBI for 24 years, retiring in 2016. She was a FBI field rep in the office of former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara. Prior to becoming U.S. Attorney, Bharara was chief counsel to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (Communist-NY), and played an important role on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

Keyser told investigators this week that McClean had been pressuring her to change her story and admit that she knew about Kavanaugh’s attempt to assault Ford 35 years ago. Her former partner in New York is Jim Margolin. Margolin is still with the FBI and is part of the Robert Mueller investigation into former Donald Trump fixer Michael Cohen. [Blog Editor: An example the FBI “rank-n-file” may not be as politically neutral in their investigations that even many Conservatives try to paint a picture.]

 

Ford’s lawyer, Debra Katz, is a longtime leftist political operative and fundraiser for SHillary Clinton. She is also vice chair of the George Soros-funded Project on Government Oversight. Soros money has gone to protestors interrupting the Kavanaugh nomination, and those women who cowed Senator Jeff Flake (Coward-Arizona) in an elevator last week were Soros operatives.

 

Ford’s brother, Ralph Blasey III, was formerly a lawyer with the leftist law firm Baker, Hostetler, which created Fusion GPS, the Democrat opposition research organization that employs or employed the wife of FBI agent Bruce Ohr and which created the phony Trump-Russia dossier. Blasey left Baker, Hostetler in 2004. The building in which the offices of Baker, Hostetler reside include CIA front companies Red Coats, Inc., Admiral Security Services and Datawatch. The building is owned by Ford’s father, Ralph Blasey II.

 

But Kavanaugh himself is a Deep State swamp creature. As told by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the international business editor of The Daily Telegraph and long-time reporter on American government, while Kavanaugh worked for Ken Starr on the Bill Clinton Whitewater investigation, Kavanaugh actively worked to discredit a witness in the Vince Foster death case. The witness, Patrick Knowlton, was the first person at the scene of Foster’s death at Fort Marcy Park.

 

Knowlton later sued FBI agents he claimed were working for Kavanaugh, alleging witness tampering and conspiracy to violate his civil rights. Kavanaugh later wrote the Starr Report on Foster’s death, covering up the fact that Foster was murdered and his body was dumped in the park.

 

Kavanaugh, while working as legal counsel in the White House of George Bush the lesser, also helped push the PATRIOT Act, which destroyed due process and 4th and 5th Amendments.

 

Kavanaugh’s lawyer for his Senate Judiciary process is Beth Wilkinson, a longtime Democrat lawyer who represented several top aides to Hillary Clinton during the FBI investigation into Clinton’s homebrew server. She is married to David Gregory of CNN. Wilkinson was also on the prosecution team that convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.

 

That implicates her in the coverup of this false flag operation, protecting the FBI and then-U.S. Attorney Eric Holder, who provided the explosives for McVeigh and his partner, Terry Nichols.

 

That there exists a nebulous group or groups actively working against the wishes of the American people is a difficult concept for a people as conditioned as Americans are to grasp. But anyone telling you there is no Deep State is either blind and ignorant or is lying to you.

______________________

Bob Livingston founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

 

© 2018 Personal Liberty ®

 

Weekly Update: Strzok Drafted Comey’s Letter to Congress About Weiner’s Laptop


In Judicial Watch’s Weekly Update Tom Fitton exposes the blatant corruption of the Deep State against President Donald Trump and his Administration. Fitton also delves into a Federal Judge telling the Department of Army to reconsider its refusal to award Staff Sgt. Joshua Berry a Purple Heart for wounds received from Islamic Terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan during the Fort Hood Massacre in 2009.

 

Staff Sgt. Joshua Berry – Wounded at Ft. Hood

 

In case you haven’t figured it out, Deep State is simply another name for the Democratic Party. And the Dems have string pullers largely embodied under the auspices of former President Barack Hussein Obama. And at the risk of sounding the Conspiracy Theorist nut, you can globalist string pullers such as George Soros.

 

JRH 9/8/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or despising) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

********************

Weekly Update: Strzok Drafted Comey’s Letter to Congress About Weiner’s Laptop

 

Email sent by Tom Fitton

Email sent 9/7/2018 5:31 PM

Judicial Watch (online version)

 

Strzok’s ‘Fingerprints’ Are on Comey’s Letter About the Weiner Laptop

Army Must Rethink Purple Heart for Joshua Berry in Fort Hood Terror Attack

State Dept. Uses Outdated, Unsecure System to Spot Visa/Passport Fraud

 

Strzok’s ‘Fingerprints’ Are on Comey’s Letter About the Weiner Laptop

 

We have added two new pieces to the giant jigsaw puzzle showing the effort to undermine President Trump. They show more of the workings of the disgraced former FBI Director James Comey and fired FBI official Peter Strzok.

 

We have released 424 pages of FBI records, including an email revealing that Strzok created the initial draft of the October 2016 letter Comey sent to Congress notifying lawmakers of the discovery of Hillary Clinton emails on the laptop of disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner.

 

Another email suggests that the FBI had not yet completed its review of Clinton’s emails by the time Comey sent a second letter to Congress on November 6, 2016, reconfirming his belief that Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be charged with a crime.

 

The records were produced as a result of a June 2018 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the DOJ failed to respond to a September 1, 2017, request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-01448)). Judicial Watch is seeking:

 

  1. All drafts of James Comey’s statement closing the Clinton email investigation, from his original draft in April or May 2016 to the final version.

 

  1. All records of communications between or among FBI officials regarding Comey’s draft statement closing the Clinton email investigation, including all memoranda and/or analyses of the factual and/or legal justification for his July 5, 2016 announcement regarding his decision not to seek Mrs. Clinton’s prosecution.

 

  1. All records previously provided to the Office of Special Counsel in the course of its now-closed Hatch Act investigation of Mr. Comey.

 

The documents reveal that on October 27, 2016, Peter Strzok emailed other senior FBI officials a draft notice letter from Comey to Congress about the Weiner laptop discovery and the reopening of the Clinton investigation. The emails indicated that Strzok and another official Jon (Last Name Unknown) authored the notification to Congress. The notification, according the DOJ IG, came a full month after the emails were discovered by the FBI on the Weiner laptop.

 

According to the documents, at 11:04 p.m. on Saturday, November 5, 2016, FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki sent Comey an email containing a redacted draft document which he referred to as a “New Proposal” saying: “Folks, Per our 1000pm conversation, below is a revised straw man for discussion. Again, we could use this if the review when completed supports our conclusions. My comments again in ALL CAPS and bold italics.”

 

Rybicki’s “New Proposal … straw man” apparently refers to a draft of Comey’s letter to Congress concerning the FBI’s review of the 650,000 Clinton emails found on Weiner’s laptop. At the time of the Rybicki email, Comey was preparing his letter informing Congress of the FBI’s findings, and according to page 390 of the June 2018 report from the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, the deliberations regarding the letter began on the afternoon of November 3 and concluded “very early on November 6.”

 

Despite Rybicki’s email suggesting late on November 5 that the review of the new emails had not been completed, Comey’s November 6 letter to Congress stated, “[W]e reviewed all of the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State. Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.”

 

Comey’s “conclusions” in July were that no charges should be filed against Clinton, despite her repeatedly having sent classified information over her unsecured, non-State-Department server. Comey later admitted that he had drafted his July exoneration more than a month earlier.

 

Real Clear Investigations’ reporter Paul Sperry recently reported that “only 3,077 of the 694,000 emails [found on the Weiner laptop] were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges.”

 

These new documents provide more details of the corrupt and dishonest FBI investigation of the incredible revelations that Clinton’s classified and other emails were present on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. When will the Sessions DOJ and Wray FBI finally begin an honest investigation of Hillary Clinton’s national security crimes?

 

In a related Judicial Watch lawsuit, the State Department told the court in October 2017: “The State Department identified approximately 2,800 work-related documents among the documents provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

 

In January 2018, in accordance with a court order, the State Department began turning Weiner emails over to us. Initially, 18 classified emails were found in the 798 documents produced by the State Department.

 

Further examples of our work in this case on your behalf can be found here.

 

Army Must Rethink Purple Heart for Joshua Berry in Fort Hood Terror Attack

 

We’ve helped the father of a deceased Army sergeant get a step closer to winning the recognition his son deserves for his role in a terrorist attack within our borders.

 

U.S. District Court Judge Christopher R. Cooper has ordered the Army to reconsider its decision denying a Purple Heart to Sgt. Berry for injuries sustained in the 2009 international terrorist attack at Fort Hood, Texas.

 

If the Army wishes to stick with the denial, it must sufficiently explain why Sgt. Berry is not entitled to the Purple Heart.

 

On remand, the Army, assuming it wishes to stick with its determination, must explain why Berry is not entitled to a Purple Heart and do so with sufficient clarity that “a court can measure” the denial “against the ‘arbitrary or capricious’ standard of the [Administrative Procedures Act].”

 

On October 12, 2017, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of Sgt. Berry’s father, Howard M. Berry, who is challenging the Army’s denial of the Purple Heart under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) (Howard M. Berry v. Mark Esper, Secretary of the Army, et al. (No. 1:17-cv-02112)).

 

Following the Fort Hood attack, the Secretary of Defense declined to recognize the mass shooting as an international terrorist attack against the United States. Instead, the attack was characterized as “workplace violence.” As a result, active duty service members injured in the attack were ineligible for the Purple Heart, among other awards and benefits.

 

In response, Congress enacted legislation in 2014 mandating that service members killed or wounded in an attack targeting members of the armed forces and carried out by an individual in communication with and inspired or motivated by a foreign terrorist organization be eligible for the Purple Heart.

 

As a result, in 2015, the Secretary of the Army announced that service members injured or killed in the Fort Hood attack were eligible for the Purple Heart if they met the regulatory criteria.

 

The Purple Heart is not a “recommended” decoration for soldiers killed or wounded in combat or under attack. Rather, a soldier is entitled to a Purple Heart upon meeting specific criteria. Sgt. Berry met the regulatory criteria for an award of the Purple Heart.

 

Sgt. Berry suffered a dislocated left shoulder during the November 5, 2009, terrorist attack on Fort Hood by Maj. Nidal Hasan. Hasan, who admitted during his 2013 court martial that he had been influenced by al Qaeda, killed 13 people and injured 30 others.

 

In witness statements given to the U.S. Army Criminal Investigative Command (“CID”) and in a separate statement given to a Texas Ranger, Sgt. Berry had estimated that Hasan fired 30-40 rounds outside Building 42004 at Ft. Hood. Sgt. Berry told those around him to get down on the floor and stay away from the doors and windows. When Sgt. Berry heard gunshots hit the metal doors near him, he leaped over a desk to take cover and, in so doing, dislocated his left shoulder. He then heard Hasan trying to kick in the doors. According to a witness statement from another individual, Hasan fired three rounds at the briefing room doors.

 

Mr. Berry applied for a posthumous award of the Purple Heart to his son. The U.S. Army Decorations Board denied Mr. Berry’s application. In April 2015, the Army awarded the Purple Heart to 47 service members injured in the Fort Hood attack. Sgt. Berry was not among them.

 

On April 17, 2016, upon Mr. Berry’s application for review, a three-member panel of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records recommended that all Army records concerning Sgt. Berry be corrected to award Sgt. Berry the Purple Heart. The panel found “[t]here is no question that [Sgt. Berry]’s injury met the basic medical criteria for award of the [Purple Heart].” The Board’s eight-page determination provided a detailed analysis of “the degree to which the enemy (i.e., the terrorist) caused [Sgt. Berry’s] injury.”

 

A few months later, however, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Review Boards) Francine C. Blackmon issued a single paragraph memorandum rejecting the Corrections Board’s recommendation:

 

I have reviewed the findings, conclusions, and Board member recommendations. I find there is not sufficient evidence to grant relief. Therefore, under the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 1552, I have determined that the facts do not support a conclusion that his injury met the criteria for a Purple Heart.

 

In his ruling, Judge Cooper said the court could not “meaningfully evaluate the reasoning behind” Blackmon’s decision. Decisions which are “utterly unreviewable,” the judge added “must be vacated as arbitrary and capricious.” Judge Cooper noted the Army’s final memorandum:

 

provides no meaningful analysis—only a boilerplate determination “that the facts do not support a conclusion that [Berry’s] injury met the criteria for a Purple Heart.” Why not? Was there conflicting evidence regarding how immediate of a threat Hasan posed to Berry as he sat inside the building? Was the evidence clear but the Deputy Assistant Secretary thought that Berry could have taken cover without injuring himself? Or did she read the regulations as categorically taking the Purple Heart off the table for service members injured while taking cover?

 

The denial letter provides no hints. In turn, the Court cannot meaningfully evaluate the reasoning behind it. That is enough to warrant remand.

 

We are thrilled by the court’s ruling and hope the Army quickly comes to its senses and finally awards Sgt. Berry a well-deserved Purple Heart.

 

State Dept. Uses Outdated, Unsecure System to Spot Visa/Passport Fraud

 

You will no longer wonder how Hillary Clinton got away with using a non-government email system housed in her home basement when you read this incredible story from our Corruption Chronicles blog. And you’ll wonder if the government learned anything at all from 9/11.

 

Though it claims the 9/11 attacks “reenergized” its mission, the State Department branch responsible for spotting visa and passport fraud fails to practice basic security protocols, leaving the nation extremely vulnerable to foreign threats. To keep potential terrorists from entering the United States, the monstrous agency with a $37 billion annual budget uses outdated machines that are poorly monitored and fails to protect data and perform basic security scans, according to a distressing federal audit. The report documents the alarming inefficiencies in a decades-old system—Bureau of Consular Affairs Fraud Prevention Program (CA/FPP)—used by the State Department to determine if foreigners seeking U.S. visas are being candid about their identity and where they have traveled. The goal is to oversee and coordinate the integrity of U.S. visa and citizenship processes by stopping fraud in the visa and passport system, a crucial tool to protect national security.

 

It turns out that the State Department’s security team is a bit of a joke, according to the incredible lapses documented in the report, which was made public recently by the agency’s Office of Inspector General (OIG). The team doesn’t even bother to patch the system, scan it for computer viruses or audit for evidence of breaches or compromises by hackers. In short, the State Department consular division ignores basic information security practices in this essential program used to screen potential threats. Nearly two decades after the worst terrorist attack on American soil, this is incredibly disturbing. In fact, the report states that “the events of September 11, 2001, reenergized CA/FPP’s mission.” Not enough, apparently. “OIG found deficiencies that included shared passwords and lack of access control lists or visitor logs,” the watchdog writes in its report. In addition, the flawed system’s “security officer did not perform regular patch management or anti-virus scanning on the network or regular audit and accountability reviews to identify data loss or potential intruder activities.”

 

It gets better, or rather, more enraging. The OIG found that no one monitors the server and the State Department doesn’t keep adequate logs of who accesses the information on the database. In fact, a SharePoint site established by the agency a decade ago to track “possible consular malfeasance” has never even been examined. Auditors found that management was not even aware that the system had never undergone an assessment to determine whether it contained information that exceeded SharePoint’s security categorization. “Without applying appropriate controls, the case management system and its information are vulnerable to unauthorized access or compromise,” the report states. This indicates that breaches could very well have occurred, but we’ll never know for sure thanks to the government’s incompetence. This may seem inconceivable to most Americans as the nation faces serious threats from radical elements.

 

OIG investigators gathered mountains of evidence in the course of their probe, which considered interviews with hundreds of State Department personnel and contractors as well as observations of daily operations and written questionnaires. This includes 178 interviews and 224 questionnaires completed by consular officers in the field as well as 54 filled out by agency employees and contractors domestically. The watchdog makes a multitude of recommendations to fix this laughable “security” system, but this very basic one sticks out: “The Bureau of Consular Affairs should implement a website content management process for the Office of Fraud Prevention Programs that includes a dedicated team responsible for the regular updating of website content.” Another simple recommendation is that the State Department’s Office of Fraud Prevention Programs implement required security controls in accordance with federal standards. It’s troubling that the agency watchdog has to suggest these elementary, common sense approaches to a program that is so imperative to national security.

 

Then again, this is the same agency that allowed Hillary Clinton to traffic highly classified information on an unsecure, personal email server. It is also the agency run by high-level officials who knew weak security at U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide could result in a tragedy like Benghazi long before Islamic jihadists raided the Special Mission, killing four Americans.

 

Every big organization has IT troubles, but this ineptitude imperils our country.

 

Until next week …

+++++++++++++++++++

VIDEO: Tom Fitton’s Weekly Update – Deep State Sedition against Trump!

 

Posted by Judicial Watch

Streamed live 9/7/18

 

Deep State Sedition against Trump, Court Victory for Ft. Hood Soldier, Mueller-Weiner Laptop Docs, NEW Fusion GPS/Steele Docs.

 

READ THE REST

_________________

© 2018 Judicial Watch, Inc. 

 

Judicial Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions are received from individuals, foundations, and corporations and are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

 

DONATE

 

425 Third Street SW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20024
888-593-8442

 

About Judicial Watch

 

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations, and public outreach.

 

The motto of Judicial Watch is “Because no one is above the law”. To this end, Judicial Watch uses the open records or freedom of information laws and other tools to investigate and uncover misconduct by government officials and litigation to hold to account politicians and public officials who engage in corrupt activities.

 

Litigation and the civil discovery process not only uncover information for the education of the American people on anti-corruption issues, but can also provide a basis for civil authorities to criminally prosecute corrupt officials. Judicial Watch seeks to ensure high ethical standards in the judiciary through monitoring activities and the use of the judicial ethics process to hold judges to account.

 

Judicial Watch’s investigation, legal, and judicial activities provide the basis for strong educational outreach to the American people. Judicial Watch’s public education programs include speeches, opinion editorials (op-eds), publications, educational conferences, media outreach, radio and news television appearances, and direct radio outreach through informational commercials and public service announcements.

 

Through its Open Records Project, Judicial Watch also provides  READ THE REST

 

%d bloggers like this: