Tag: 2016 elections

Reporter Now Covering the Trump White House for Politico Said That She Cried When Trump Won in 2016

The media is overwhelmingly liberal. We all know this. Journalists today seem more like propagandists for the Democrat party than reporters.

Even so, sometimes things happen that remind us just how biased the media really is.

Enter reporter Cheyanne Daniels of Politico, who covers the Trump White House. Back in 2016, when Trump pulled off a surprise win, Daniels wrote on social media that she cried.

Those are not the actions of an impartial journalist. That’s the behavior of a dedicated partisan.

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

Politico Reporter Who Said She Cried Over Trump’s Election Now Covers His Presidency

As a master’s student at Northwestern University’s esteemed journalism school in 2020, Cheyanne Daniels revealed that she cried when President Donald Trump was elected four years earlier because she knew “horrible things were to come.” She now covers the Trump presidency for Politico.

Daniels joined the outlet as a breaking news reporter in May following a three-year stint as a “race and politics reporter” for The Hill, where she covered both the 2024 election and stories like, “John Boyega: ‘Star Wars’ ‘most whitest, elite space,’” and, “‘Power Rangers’ actor splits with writer, says casting a ‘milestone.’”

Her reporting is now largely focused on the White House, the subject of several of her posts on social media. On Nov. 7, 2020, the day the Associated Press called the presidential election for Joe Biden, Daniels tweeted: “4 years ago, I cried when I realized Donald Trump had been elected, knowing horrible things were to come. Now, I’m in my apartment in D.C., hearing people cheering in the streets screaming that he has been defeated, and I’m crying once again. But for a very different reason.”

One week later, Daniels’s euphoria seemed to fade. “Trump may have lost the election,” she wrote, “but over 70 million people voted for him — and some of those voters were people who felt, like their demagogue, that MY life as a Black woman doesn’t matter, that I shouldn’t exist, I threaten the purity of white power.”

This person is not a reporter. She’s clearly an activist.

Keep reading

Russiagate: Dismantling the Democrats’ hoax

At the long-anticipated U.S.-Russia summit in Alaska on August 15, President Trump stressed that his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin was well aware that his country had not interfered in the 2016 election. This unexpected remark amid talks on Ukraine war settlement referred to a massive legal work conducted by the intelligence community aimed at exposing that “treasonous conspiracy.”

That is, in mid-July this year, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard revealed that the so-called Russiagate investigation was politically motivated and inspired by the Democrat party, particularly the outgoing Obama administration in late 2016. The disclosures reinforced suspicions long held but never conclusively substantiated: the Russia-interference claim was not merely flawed but deliberately constructed to undermine Trump’s presidency.

Russiagate in a Nutshell

On January 6, 2017—just days before Donald Trump’s inauguration—the U.S. intelligence community released a new assessment concluding that “Russia interfered in the election to favor Trump.” This statement reversed six months of prior assessments, which indicated there had been no recorded foreign meddling through cyber operations.

The strong claim had a profound and long-lasting impact. It is not just about Trump’s first term being severely obstructed. Many of his top-tier supporters were “canceled,” some of them sent to jail under false “evidence.” Trump himself suffered massive reputational damage that had almost buried his political career. Overall, the meddling accusation campaign resulted in better electoral positions for the Democrat party during the 2018 and 2020 elections.

Besides, Russiagate prompted some anti-interference bills to be passed by Congress. Many of them included sanctions on Russia and other adversaries of the U.S. which led to higher tensions with Moscow, Iran, and China. Some pundits say this plot could have triggered numerous wars, including hostilities in Ukraine.

Moreover, the accusations led to a long-lasting investigation by the FBI and other agencies, which cost American taxpayers a hefty pile of money. The initial FBI investigation, called Crossfire Hurricane, transformed into Special Counsel Mueller’s probe, and it damaged the federal budget for some $35 million. Durham’s subsequent probe cost some $7 million, and other congressional investigation expenses up to $5 million.

Surprising Truth

As a matter of fact, instead of the widely spread idea that Russia helped Trump take over the Oval office, Putin apparently preferred Clinton; he chose not to torpedo her campaign by keeping silent about her alleged poor health. Russian intelligence was reported to possess some sensitive documents on the issue, which they eventually refused to disclose. This little-known fact is just enough to dismiss Russiagate as a conspiracy that has nothing to do with reality, but the mainstream media claimed Moscow’s pro-Clinton stance as a marginal theory, representing the Democrats’ point of view as established narrative.

Keep reading

DECLASSIFIED: Federal Prosecutors Secured Evidence From FBI Brass That Comey Authorized Classified Leaks – But Declined to Bring Charges

Newly declassified memos reveal federal prosecutors secured evidence from FBI brass indicating that former FBI Director James authorized classified leaks shortly before the 2016 election, but they declined to bring charges.

According to the memos obtained by Just The News, an investigation by the US Postal Inspection Service Agents revealed former FBI General Counsel James Baker and Comey’s Chief of Staff James Rybicki were involved in leaking the classified information to The New York Times in October 2016.

The specific classified information was not identified.

“The USPIS Investigation also revealed Baker disclosed USG classified information to the NYT under the belief he was ultimately instructed and authorized to do so by then FBI Director James Comey,” one summary memo reads, according to Just The News. “For example, during interviews, Baker indicated FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki instructed him (Baker) to disclose the information to the NYT, and Baker understood Rybicki was conveying this instruction and authorization from Comey.”

Just The News reported:

Federal prosecutors gathered evidence from James Comey’s top lieutenants that he authorized the leak of classified information to reporters just before the 2016 election but declined to bring criminal charges, according to recently declassified memos that call into question the former FBI director’s testimony to Congress.

The bombshell revelations involving ex-FBI general counsel James Baker and ex-Comey chief of staff James Rybicki were memorialized in documents that FBI Director Kash Patel discovered earlier this year, but the passages were originally redacted by the Justice Department in versions sent to Congress earlier this month.

Attorney General Pam Bondi intervened and eliminated the redactions, dispatching new versions of the memos this week to the House and Senate Judiciary committees, officials told Just the News.

The memos detail evidence and interviews gathered by U.S. Postal Inspection Service agents concerning classified information leaked to The New York Times in October 2016, ahead of the November election in which Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton.

This is not the first time it was revealed James Comey authorized the leaks of classified information.

Keep reading

Whistleblower Ties Clinton Campaign to Fake Russia Hack

A whistleblower report declassified last week suggests that Hillary Clinton’s campaign efforts to manufacture evidence tying Donald Trump to alleged Russian hacking in 2016 were deeper than previously known – as were Obama administration efforts to conceal them.

According to the report, a former seniorU.S. intelligence analyst who investigated alleged Russian attempts to breach state voting systems during the 2016 election suspected the breaches may have been “related to activities” of the computer contractors involved in the Alfa Bank hoax,who were accused of manipulating Internet traffic data. 

In that well-publicized case, a Clinton campaign lawyer worked with federal computer contractors and the FBI to create suspicions that Russia was communicating with Donald Trump through a secret server shared by Alfa Bank of Russia and Trump Tower in Manhattan. 

The anonymous whistleblower – who served as the deputy national intelligence officer for cyber issues in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence from 2015 to 2020 – told Special Counsel John Durham he stumbled onto “enigmatic” data while leading the investigation of alleged Russian cyber activity for the Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian meddling in the 2016 election. He said that his discovery took place in December 2016 when President Obama ordered the ICA. 

After examining state-reported breaches of election networks, the whistleblower said, “It seemed only brief interaction was occurring – in some cases, no unauthorized access, or even attempted access, was detected on ‘victim’ systems.” Though the suspicious activity initially was attributed to Russian actors, further analysis raised doubts. 

But when he brought his findings to his boss, ODNI’s national intelligence officer for cyber issues, he was ordered to stop investigating and not include his findings in the final ICA draft. 

“After being directed to conduct analysis of Russian-attributed cyber activity for the ICA, I had been abruptly directed to abandon further investigation,” the whistleblower analyst said.

He added that his boss, whose name was blacked out in the whistleblower statement, “directed me to abandon analysis of these events, stating reports of Russia-attributed cyber activity were ‘something else.'” 

Keep reading

Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election post-mortem confirms plan to smear Trump with Russia, like intel

Newly declassified evidence shows the FBI was alerted to intelligence in 2016 indicating Hillary Clinton planned to smear then-candidate Donald Trump by linking him to Russian leader Vladimir Putin, and then bureau leaders played right into the campaign’s strategy by conducting a sweeping investigation into false claims of Trump-Russia collusion.

Now a major question hovers over the Justice Department strike force set up by Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate the affair: was it just a political dirty trick or did it rise to the level of a criminal conspiracy?

Clinton’s own words in a 2016 election post-mortem are likely to be key to investigators. 

Public records show Clinton herself, in coordination with her campaign general counsel Marc Elias, campaign manager Robby Mook, campaign chairman John Podesta, campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri, campaign policy adviser Jake Sullivan, and others launched an effort to link Trump to Putin as the 2016 battle for the White House raged.

Newly declassified evidence dubbed the “Clinton Plan intelligence” included purported intercepted communications from a George Soros ally suggesting that Clinton’s 2016 campaign against Trump was plotting an effort to demonize the Republican nominee by connecting him to Putin, and that the Clinton campaign expected the FBI would put more fuel on the fire.

Keep reading

What did Nancy Pelosi know and when did she know it?

This May 16, 2016, quote from Nancy Pelosi has haunted me:

“Donald Trump is not going to be President of the United States. Take it to the bank, I guarantee it.”

All these years, I’ve wondered, how could she be so certain?  This wasn’t just the usual campaign hyperbole. Her phrasing was a simple noun-verb construction, nakedly declarative, and absolutely certain. She left herself absolutely no wiggle room for later, just in case. Seasoned politicians don’t do that sort of thing typically, and Nancy Pelosi is most definitely seasoned. So why??  Why do it?

We may have gotten our answer.

The long-classified annex from the Durham report was declassified this Thursday. What it tells us is that the clock, as it were, on when the organizational malfeasance — the coup — against Donald Trump began may have to be ratcheted back months.

Down at the bottom of the now-declassified page in this X post is a paragraph from hacked emails the Russians had exfiltrated in March of 2016:

…The Clinton staff, with support from special services is preparing scandalous revelations of business relations between Trump and ‘The Russian Mafia.’  Currently, they are studying his connections…

Ironically, these are the first actual Russian-hacked emails we have proof of after all these years! As you may recall, the DNC “hack” has never been proven, as the FBI has never examined the hard drives.

The internet is now speculating what “special services” means, but I know what I read it to mean, in the context (you’ll see it in a moment) of the entire document:  the FBI. 

Now, where did this information come from? Whose hacked email are we talking about?

Keep reading

NEVER FORGET: Comey, Mueller, Brennan, Obama Lied about Russia Hacking the 2016 Election – And Their Alleged Source Crowdstrike NEVER had Evidence that the DNC was Hacked or that Russia Was Involved

NEVER FORGET.

Barack Obama, James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan, and every major mainstream media outlet lied for years to the American public by claiming “Russia hacked the election” to get President Trump elected in 2016.

They all knew this was a lie.

Here is a montage of media hacks pushing the lie that Russia hacked the election, via Megyn Kelly’s podcast:

These liars all pushed the line that Crowdstrike had evidence that the DNC was hacked by Russia.
But that was not true.

We knew this was a lie back from the beginning.

And we were absolutely correct. 

Crowdstrike had absolutely no evidence that Russia hacked the DNC and then forwarded hacked emails to WikiLeaks.  And they kept this to themselves.

A release of intel documents in 2020 that were held up by a corrupt liar, Rep. Adam Schiff, shows incredible information that destroys the Deep State’s many lies.

The biggest lie that the Russia collusion sham was based on was the tale that Russia hacked the DNC and then gave the hacked emails to WikiLeaks, who in turn released them before the 2016 election.

The whole story was a lie!

Crowdstrike had no evidence this ever took place.

Keep reading

Putin knew Hillary Clinton had physical, ‘psycho-emotional’ problems — but kept it quiet during 2016 campaign: Gabbard

Russian intelligence obtained damaging information about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s health amid her 2016 presidential campaign — including evidence that she had “psycho-emotional problems” that were being treated with severe sedatives — but Vladimir Putin chose not to release it before that year’s election because he thought the Democrat would win.

The astounding revelations were contained in a Sept. 18, 2020, House Intelligence Committee report that reviewed Russia’s influence on the 2016 contest and was declassified and made public Wednesday by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.

Russia’s foreign intelligence service, the SVR, “possessed DNC communications that Clinton was suffering from ‘intensified psycho-emotional problems, including uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression. and cheerfulness,’” stated the report, which the committee based on 20 interviews with intelligence officers and FBI agents, as well as a review of source material for the 2017 Obama-ordered report on Russian election meddling.

“Clinton was placed on a daily regimen of ‘heavy tranquilizers’ and while afraid of losing, she remained ‘obsessed with a thirst for power.’”

By September 2016, some of those communications showed then-President Barack Obama and Democratic party bosses found the state of Clinton’s health “extraordinarily alarming” and fretted that it could have a “serious negative impact” on her ability to beat Trump that November.

Keep reading

After Spreading Russia Hoax Lies, Media Lie Again To Bury Evidence They Lied

Newly declassified documents confirm that Obama-era intelligence officials pushed the discredited Steele dossier that served as the nexus of the Russia collusion hoax in a bid to kneecap Donald Trump before he could set foot in the White House. But instead of reckoning with the truth, the propaganda press is scrambling to discredit the revelations — not because the evidence is lacking, but because it’s a damning indictment of the media’s complicity.

Nine years ago, the media breathlessly peddled the now discredited claim that then-candidate Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. At the heart of the hoax was the Steele dossier — opposition research created by a former British spy, paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and laundered into the intelligence community.

On Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified a 2020 report by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence showing — among other things — that members of the intelligence community were concerned with several aspects of the dossier, such as credibility. In fact, according to the report, two senior CIA officers contended that the dossier should have been omitted from the ICA “because it failed to meet basic tradecraft standards.” In fact, the information in the dossier was so flawed that “every CIA analyst and operations officer” asked about the dossier made sure to “emphasize that they had nothing to do with the decision to include Annex A” and could not “vouch” for it.

Pretty damming, right? And that’ not even half of it. Additional coverage of the findings can be found here, here, and here.

One would think the media would be all over a story this explosive — historic levels of government corruption and a weaponized intel apparatus. While a functioning press would be digging into this (like us here at The Federalist!), the propaganda press is actually doing the opposite, trying to discredit the news.

“Trump’s intel chief Tulsi Gabbard reignites political battles with 2016 election documents on Russia,” CBS News’ Olivia Victoria Gazis wrote.

“‘It’s just wildly misleading’: Why the administration’s latest allegations about the Russia investigation don’t add up,” read a headline from CNN’s Jeremy Herb and Katie Bo Lillis.

Ironically, Herb and Lillis (the latter of which was involved in a massive defamation case this year that ended with a jury finding CNN is literally fake news) claim the declassified document “conflate[s] and misrepresent[s]” the findings of the intelligence community. But according to the declassified report, the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) “misrepresented both the significance and credibility of the dossier reports.”

“Trump rehashes years-old grievances on Russia investigation after new intelligence report,” The Associated Press’ Erick Tucker and Chris Megerian wrote. According to the Bobbsey twins, decisions to review the corrupt intelligence apparatus and their involvement in the 2016 Russia collusion hoax is “backward-looking.”

“Gabbard Releases New Documents Targeting Obama Administration,” The New York Times’ Julian E. Barnes wrote.

Keep reading

There Was No Peaceful Transfer Of Power In 2017

“The peaceful transition of power is one of the hallmarks of our democracy. And over the next few months, we are going to show that to the world.”

Those are the words of then-President Barack Obama days after Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. As it turns out, like many remarks issued throughout the course of his disastrous presidency, it was a complete and total lie.

Amid the backdrop of his “I heart democracy!” schtick, the 44th president was covertly working alongside the heads of America’s intelligence agencies to subvert democracy. Thanks to newly declassified records released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Americans (and the world) are able to see for themselves how Obama and Co. aimed to undermine Trump’s 2016 victory, sabotage his presidency, and ultimately thwart the will of the people.

While expansive and broaching numerous subject areas, the biggest takeaway from the document dump is that Obama and several key players — namely, former FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and DNI James Clapper — sought to provide validity to the baseless Clinton-manufactured narrative that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election. One of the main ways they attempted to do this was through the compilation of an Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), which Obama ordered in early December 2016 to identify “Russian activities and intentions in recent U.S. elections.”

The newly disclosed documents not only dismantle the FBI and CIA’s high confidence claim that a major part of Moscow’s shenanigans in the 2016 contest was “to help President-elect Trump’s election chances,” but that intelligence directly contradicting that narrative was left out of the ICA altogether. What was included in the ICA is unsubstantiated dirt bought and paid for by the Clinton campaign — despite prior claims from the Three Intel Stooges (Brennan, Comey, Clapper) that it wasn’t.

Keep reading