Saturday, May 27, 2017

We Finally Have Proof Of Inappropriate Financial Dealings With Russia [Video]

Gotta listen to her short video............Awesome and to the point

Alexandra Bruce – The classic characteristic of the psychopath is to accuse an adversary of exactly what he has actually done and is doing. There can be no better illustration of psychopathy than the Clintons and that faction of the Deep State that has enabled them to spearhead most unfathomable amount of high-level racketeering in the history of humankind, which Liz Wheeler of OAN enunciates so well, here:
“Remember that time, Donald Trump, with business partners with the Russian government, when Trump’s company received $35 million from Russia, from a government investment fund called Rusnano, that was personally started by Vladimir Putin and has been called “Putin’s child”? Oh, no – oh, no, wait – that was John Podesta, not Donald Trump.
“Remember that time, Donald Trump was paid an exorbitant $500,000 to give a speech in Moscow, paid for by a company called Renaissance Capital, a company, tied to none other than Russian intelligence agencies? Oh, no – wait, wait, wait – that was Bill Clinton, not Donald Trump.
“Remember that time, Donald Trump approved the sale of 20% of US uranium to the Russians, while he was Secretary of State? Oh, no – wait, wait, that was Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump.
“By the way, this sale gave control of that uranium to Rosatom, you know what that is? The Russian state nuclear agency.
“Remember that time, Donald Trump lied and said he wasn’t part of approving that deal, that gave the Russians one fifth of our uranium and then his emails were leaked, that showed he actually was lying and he did know about it? Oh, no – wait, wait, that was Hillary Clinton and John Podesta – not Donald Trump.
“Remember that time, Donald Trump coincidentally scored $145 million from shareholders of that same uranium company that was sold to the Russians? Oh, now, wait, that was Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation.
“Remember that time, Donald Trump accepted millions of dollars in donations from Russian oligarchs, like the chairman of a company that’s part of Russia’s nuclear research cluster or the wife of the mayor of Moscow or a close buddy of Vladimir Putin? Oh, no wait – that was the Clinton Foundation, not Donald Trump.
“Remember that time, Trump failed to disclose all these Russian donors to his foundation before he served as Secretary of State and we only found out about the Russian donors, because some hard-working journalists combed through Canadian tax records, of all places, to find that evidence? Oh, no wait – that was Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump.
“Make no mistake. We have evidence of inappropriate dealings with Russia but none of the evidence points to Donald Trump. It all points directly to John Podesta, Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Funny how the Mainstream Media and Democrats don’t seem to care about that.”

DNC Calls on Trump Son-in-Law Jared Kushner to be Fired… For Doing His Job

Another example of the Un-Hinged Leftist Dip Shits

The unhinged liberal attacks on the Trump administration got personal on Friday when leaked Deep State documents alleged that Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner spoke with the Russians in December.
Jared Kushner is a trusted Trump confidante and member of his inner circle. Jared is married to Ivanka Trump.

Kushner met with Russian officials briefly in December as part of his role in the transition and as a diplomatic conduit to the State Department.
Deep State leaked this information after listening in on more Trump transition team phone calls and spying on meetings.
Democrats called for Jared Kushner to be fired in their ongoing Russia conspiracy meltdown.
The Hill reported:
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) on Friday called for President Trump to fire his son-in-law Jared Kushner from his position as a White House senior adviser in light of reports that he attempted to establish a private communications channel between the president’s transition team and Moscow.
“Trump has no choice but to immediately fire Kushner, whose failure to report this episode on his security clearance is reason enough for a criminal investigation,” DNC deputy communications director Adrienne Watson said in a statement.
“The next question is whether the President authorized this, because no one stands between Trump and Kushner on the chain of command.”


Nancy Pelosi Complains That POTUS Trump’s Trip to Saudi Arabia ‘Wasn’t Even Alphabetical’ (VIDEO)

What's sad is this DipShit was serious about this. Her and Maxine are two of the same

Nancy Pelosi embarrassed herself once again as she arrogantly responded to a reporter asking her about Trump’s first foreign trip. President Trump has had a wildly successful foreign trip so far and she knows it which is why she failed miserably in her attempt to criticize him.
Nancy Pelosi actually complained that President Trump’s trip to Saudi Arabia was unusual and ‘wasn’t even alphabetical’. What does that even mean? You just can’t make this stuff up!

Reporter: “I’m just wondering for your impressions of President Trump’s trip so far, his first foreign trip, if you think it’s been a successful trip and some of the messages he’s been trying to…”
Nancy Pelosi responded with a nauseating arrogant tone as she said she traveled to several countries and didn’t criticize the President while abroad. But she just couldn’t help herself because she went on to say Trump’s trip was unusual…
Pelosi: “I have said, I thought it was unusual for the President of the United States to go to Saudi Arabia first. Saudi Arabia? It wasn’t even alphabetical. I mean Saudi Arabia!”
So here we have it, folks. Nancy Pelosi just can’t wrap her head around Trump going to Saudi Arabia first because it’s alphabetically wrong. Imagine if a Conservative woman said something like this? We would never hear the end of it.
Old bat Nancy Pelosi also thinks the NRA is a part of the Intelligence Community. You can watch that video here.
VIDEO via Tea Partier YouTube:


Hillary Clinton Lashes Out at Press and ‘Sexism’ for 2016 Loss, Claims She Beat Trump

This  Sore Loser Worthless Piece of Crap needs to realize how much of an Idiot she is proving to be. She is Corrupt and needs to quit blaming everyone else for  getting her Ass Kicked by Trump.She needs to look at how many Counties voted for Trump. Take out New York and the Big Cities in California and He smoked her.

After entering the White House in 2009, President Barack Obama went on his famous “apology” tour. Now, Hillary Clinton, having failed to win the White House in 2016, is currently on an “I’m owed an apology” tour.

In an interview for an article by New York Magazine published Friday, Clinton has apparently moved past “gracious Hillary” and “relaxed in the woods Hillary” and has now moved into “angry Hillary” mode.
Clinton: Budget 'Attack of Unimaginable Cruelty'
“I would have won had I not been subjected to the unprecedented attacks by [former FBI Director James] Comey and the Russians, aided and abetted by the suppression of the vote, particularly in Wisconsin,” she complains, adding voter suppression to her normal narrative blaming Russia/Comey.
Clinton resurrected the Russia/Comey excuse in an interview earlier this month with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour when she also called herself “part of the resistance” and claimed, “If the election had been on October 27, I would be your president.” But now she is taking it to the next level.
In the New York Magazine article, called “Hillary Clinton Is Furious. And Resigned. And Funny. And Worried,” the predominant mood is the fury — not the resignation, worry, or her alleged sense of humor. In the interview, Clinton pounces on the press — particularly the “advocacy press on the right.”
The press, she believes, didn’t make it any easier. “Look, we have an advocacy press on the right that has done a really good job for the last 25 years,” she says. “They have a mission. They use the rights given to them under the First Amendment to advocate a set of policies that are in their interests, their commercial, corporate, religious interests. Because the advocacy media occupies the right, and the center needs to be focused on providing as accurate information as possible. Not both-sides-ism and not false equivalency.”
She then blasts MSNBC and The New York Times for hiring moderate conservatives such as George Will and Bret Stephens, seething: “Why … would … you … do … that?” before saying 66 million people voted for her and “you know, the crazy third-party people” — a reminder of her famous “deplorable” comment that helped doom her candidacy.
Sixty-six million people voted for me, plus, you know, the crazy third-party people. So there’s a lot of people who would actually appreciate stronger arguments on behalf of the most existential challenges facing our country and the world, climate change being one of them! It’s clearly a commercial decision. But I don’t think it will work. I mean, they’re laughing on the right at these puny efforts to try to appease people on the right.
Clinton also blames her opponents in the primary and the general election for capitalizing on anger. When asked if Trump and Sanders capitalized on anger, Clinton says, “Yes,” and adds (incorrectly) “And I beat both of them.”
Clinton is also happy, when prodded, to blame her defeat on sexism. She believes, for instance, that the viciousness of the attacks against her was because women are seen as less likable as they become more successful.
“Once I moved from serving someone — a man, the president — to seeking that job on my own, I was once again vulnerable to the barrage of innuendo and negativity and attacks that come with the territory of a woman who is striving to go further,” she said.
Author Rebecca Traister — who at one point mulls “how a pussy-grabbing goblin managed to gain the White House over an experienced woman” — notes that online searches for “misogyny” have increased.
Asking Clinton if she can still believe people don’t know what misogyny means, Clinton responds: “Why, yes. I guess I can believe that.”
The New York Magazine article was published the same day as Clinton gave a commencement address at her alma mater, in which she warned against politicians who invent their own facts and “attempt to control reality.”

“When people in power invent their own facts and attack those who question them, it can mark the beginning of the end of a free society,” she said. “That is not hyperbole, it is what authoritarian regimes throughout history have done. … They attempt to control reality.”

And the DipShits are still here




Another Media flat out LYING. They just can't be honest anymore



A Few More Shared Facebook Post

                    Image may contain: 1 person, meme and text

 Image may contain: 1 person, text

           Image may contain: 3 people, text

                   Image may contain: 2 people, text

Image may contain: 1 person, text


Thursday, May 25, 2017

Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data on Americans with private parties

More Corruption coming out?

Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data on Americans with private partiesby John Solomon and Sara Carter
WATCH: Circa's Sara Carter explains the extensive nature in which raw intelligence was shared by the FBI. 
The FBI has illegally shared raw intelligence about Americans with unauthorized third parties and violated other constitutional privacy protections, according to newly declassified government documents that undercut the bureau’s public assurances about how carefully it handles warrantless spy data to avoid abuses or leaks.
In his final congressional testimony before he was fired by President Trump this month, then-FBI Director James Comey unequivocally told lawmakers his agency used sensitive espionage data gathered about Americans without a warrant only when it was “lawfully collected, carefully overseen and checked.”
Once-top secret U.S. intelligence community memos reviewed by Circa tell a different story, citing instances of “disregard” for rules, inadequate training and “deficient” oversight and even one case of deliberately sharing spy data with a forbidden party.
For instance, a ruling declassified this month by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) chronicles nearly 10 pages listing hundreds of violations of the FBI’s privacy-protecting minimization rules that occurred on Comey’s watch.
The behavior the FBI admitted to a FISA judge just last month ranged from illegally sharing raw intelligence with unauthorized third parties to accessing intercepted attorney-client privileged communications without proper oversight the bureau promised was in place years ago.
The court also opined aloud that it fears the violations are more extensive than already disclosed. 
“The Court is nonetheless concerned about the FBI’s apparent disregard of minimization rules and whether the FBI is engaging in similar disclosures of raw Section 702 information that have not been reported,” the April 2017 ruling declared.
The court isn’t the only oversight body to disclose recent concerns that the FBI’s voluntary system for policing its behavior and self-disclosing mistakes hasn’t been working.
The Justice Department inspector general’s officedeclassified a report in 2015 that reveals the internal watchdog had concerns as early as 2012 that the FBI was submitting ‘deficient” reports indicating it had a clean record complying with spy data gathered on Americans without a warrant.
The FBI normally is forbidden from surveilling an American without a warrant. But Section 702 of the Foreign Surveillance Act, last updated by Congress in 2008,  allowed the NSA to share with the FBI spy data collected without a warrant that includes the communications of Americans with “foreign targets.”
But the FISA court watchdogs suggest FBI compliance problems began months after Section 702 was implemented.
The FBI’s very first compliance report in 2009 declared it had not found any instances in which agents accessed NSA intercepts supposedly gathered overseas about an American who in fact was on U.S. soil.
But the IG said it reviewed the same data and easily found evidence that the FBI accessed NSA data gathered on a person who likely was in the United States, making it illegal to review without a warrant.
“We found several instances in which the FBI acquired communications on the same day that the NSA determined through analysis of intercepted communications that the person was in the United States,” the declassified report revealed.
It called the FBI’s first oversight report “deficient” and urged better oversight.
FBI officials acknowledged there have been violations but insist they are a small percentage of the total counterterrorism and counterintelligence work its agents perform. 
Almost all are unintentional human errors by good-intentioned agents and analysts under enormous pressure to stop the next major terror attack, the officials said.
Others fear these blunders call into the question the bureau’s rosy assessment that it can still police itself when it comes to protecting Americans’ privacy 17 years after the war on terror began.
That doubt, heaviest among civil libertarian Democrats but also growing among Republicans, is particularly sensitive because the law that allows the bureau to access warrantless spy data about Americans - Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act - is up for renewal later this year.
Lawmakers in both parties and both chambers of Congress are writing reforms behind closed door, leaving the intelligence community anxious it might lose some of the spy powers it considers essential to fighting terrorism, cyber attacks and unlawful foreign influence.
“No one on the Hill wants to look like we are soft on terrorism when you have increasing threats like Manchester-style attacks. But the evidence of abuse or sloppiness and the unending leaks of sensitive intelligence in the last year has emboldened enough of us to pursue some reforms,” a senior congressional aide told Circa, speaking only on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to talk to the media. “Where that new line between privacy and security is drawn will depend on how many more shoes fall before the 702 renewal happens.”
Rep. Trent Frank, R-Ariz., a member of the House Judiciary Committee that will help craft the 702 renewal legislation, said the rising revelation of problems about improper spying on Americans are having an effect on lawmakers who have long supported the intelligence community. 
“The bottom line is the law has to be followed and when it isn’t there has to be consequence that is of significance so that it deters others from breaking the same law,” he told Circa.
One of the biggest concerns involves so-called backdoor searches in which the FBI can mine NSA intercept data for information that may have been incidentally collected about an American. No warrant or court approval is required, and the FBI insists these searches are one of the most essential tools in combating terrorist plots.
But a respected former Justice Department national security prosecutor questions if the searching has gotten too cavalier. AmyJeffress, the former top security adviser to former Attorney General Eric Holder, was appointed by the intelligence court in 2015 to give anindependent assessmentof the FBI’s record of compliance.
Jeffress concluded agents’ searches of NSA data now extend far beyond national security issues and thus were “overstepping” the constitutional protections designed to ensure the bureau isn’t violating Americans’ 4th Amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure.
“The FBI procedures allow for really virtually unrestricted querying of the Section 702 data in a way the NSA and CIA have restrained it through their procedures,” she argued before the court in a sealed 2015 proceeding.
“I think that in this case the procedures could be tighter and more restrictive, and should be in order to comply with the Fourth Amendment,” she added.
The court thanked Jeffress for her thoughtful analysis but ultimately rejected her recommendation to impose on the FBI a requirement of creating a written justification why each search would help pursue a national security or criminal matter.

The Justice Department argued in that matter that the extra restriction would keep FBI agents from connecting the dots in terror cases and compared NSA searches to something Americans do every day.
“If we require our agents to write a full justification every time think about if you wrote a full justification every time you used Google. Among other things, you would use Google a lot less,” a lawyer told the court.
That was late in 2015. But by early 2017, the court became more concerned after the Obama administration disclosed significant violations of privacy protections at two separate intelligence agencies involved in the Section 702 program.
The most serious involved the NSA searching for American data it was forbidden to search. But the FBI also was forced to admit its agents and analysts shared espionage data with prohibited third parties, ranging from a federal contractor to a private entity that did not have the legal right to see the intelligence.
Such third-party sharing is a huge political concern now as Congress and intelligence community leaders try to stop the flow of classified information to parties that could illegally disclose or misuse it, such as the recent leak that disclosed intercepted communications between the Russian ambassador and Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn. 
The court’s memo suggested the FBI’s sharing of raw intelligence to third parties, at the time, had good law enforcement intentions but bad judgment and inadequate training.
“Nonetheless, the above described practices violated the governing minimization procedures,” the court chided.
A footnote in the ruling stated one instance of improper sharing was likely intentional. 
“Improper access” to NSA spy data for FBI contractors “seems to have been the result of deliberate decision-making,” the court noted.
The recently unsealed ruling also revealed the FBI is investigating more cases of possible improper sharing with private parties that recently have come to light.
The government “is investigating whether there have been similar cases in which the FBI improperly afforded non-FBI personnel access to raw FISA-acquired information on FBI systems,” the court warned.
The ruling cited other FBI failures in handling Section 702 intel, including retaining data on computer storage systems “in violation of applicable minimization requirements.”
Among the most serious additional concerns was the FBI’s failure for more than two years to establish review teams to ensure intercepts between targets and their lawyers aren’t violating the attorney-client privilege.
“Failures of the FBI to comply with this ‘review team’ requirement for particular targets have been focus of the FISC’s (FISA’s?) concerns since 2014,” the court noted.
The FBI said it is trying to resolve the deficiencies with aggressive training of agents.
That admission of inadequate training directly undercut Comey’s testimony earlier this month when questioned by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
“Nobody gets to see FISA information of any kind unless they've had the appropriate training and have the appropriate oversight,” the soon-to-be-fired FBI director assured lawmakers.
The struggle for the intelligence court and lawmakers in providing future oversight will be where to set more limits without hampering counterterrorism effort
The FBI told Circa in a statement, "As indicated in its opinion, the Court determined that the past and current standard minimization procedures are consistent with the Fourth Amendment and met the statutory definition of those procedures under Section 702."
Jeffress, however, warned in her 2015 brief of another dynamic that will pose a challenge too, an FBI culture to use a tool more just because it can.
“These scenarios suggest a potentially very large and broad scope of incidental collection of communications between a lawful target and U.S. persons that are not the type of communications Section 702 was designed to collect,” she told the court in a written memo.
And when questioned at a subsequent hearing, Jeffress observed: “I don’t think that the FBI will voluntarily set limits on its querying procedures, because law enforcement agencies tend not to take steps to restrict or limit what they can do, for obvious reasons.”
Circa congressional correspondent Kellan Howell contributed to this story.