Tag: trump derangement syndrome

Deep State Attempts to Resurrect RussiaGate as Trump Gains Speed

As former President Donald Trump began tightening his grip on becoming the Republican presidential nominee early this year, former intelligence officials began ramping up familiar rhetoric and fear-mongering among the American public — that he is pro-Russia and a vote for Trump is a vote for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The same players from “RussiaGate” — the failed deep state hoax to frame Trump for colluding with Russia to win in 2016 — are pushing the narrative, with some help from Never Trump allies who made their way into in the Trump administration.

One of them, Fiona Hill, a Russia hawk who was reportedly recruited into the Trump administration by K.T. McFarland and Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Michael Flynn, has been making the rounds in the media warning about Trump as the public face for those disgruntled former intelligence officials.

“He wants to weaponize the intelligence community. And the fact is you need to look with a 360 degree perspective. He can’t just cherry pick what he wants to hear when there are so many U.S. adversaries and countries that don’t wish the U.S. well,” Hill told Politico recently. “If he guts the intel on one thing, he’ll be partially blinding us.”

Keep reading

New Book Admits Fani Willis’ Get-Trump Investigation Began With Illegal Recording

Democrat Fani Willis’ legal troubles extend beyond recent revelations that she deceptively hired her otherwise under-qualified, secret, married lover to run the political prosecution of former President Donald Trump and other Republicans in Georgia. A new book from Mike Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman admits that a widely misunderstood phone call, on which Willis’ political prosecution rests, was illegally recorded. That means the entire prosecution could crumble with defendants having a new avenue to challenge Democrat lawfare.

Find Me the Votes: A Hard-Charging Georgia Prosecutor, a Rogue President, and the Plot to Steal an American Election is a fawning political biography of Willis. For context on the bias of the authors, Isikoff was an original Russia-collusion hoaxer, and his articles to that end were used to secure warrants for the FBI to spy on innocent Republican presidential campaign advisers such as Carter Page.

For years, the media and other Democrats have held up Willis as a brilliant and credible prosecutor of Republicans. The new book suffers from poor timing, with Willis and her lover accused of perjury, subornation of perjury, bribery, and kickbacks related to the prosecution. Willis could be removed from the prosecution as early as this week.

Keep reading

Fact Check: George Stephanopoulos Lies About Trump and ‘Rape’

CLAIM: ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos claimed that former President Donald was “found liable for rape by a jury.”

VERDICT: FALSE. A jury in New York found that Trump was not liable for rape in a lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll.

Stephanopoulos repeatedly claimed, as he interviewed Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC), that Trump had been found “liable” for “rape.” In fact, he was found not to be liable; he was found liable for “sexual abuse” and, later for defamation. There are problems with both of those verdicts, but even if Trump were liable (in a civil sense, not a criminal one, as Mace noted), the fact is that he was never found liable for rape. And it borders on defamation for Stephanopoulos to claim otherwise.

As Breitbart News reported last May:

A jury in New York found former President Donald Trump liable Tuesday for sexual abuse and battery of writer E. Jean Carroll three decades ago, though not liable for rape, and awarded $5 million in civil damages against him.

The jury also found Trump defamed Ms. Carroll in his reactions to her lawsuit, which was encouraged by anti-Trump lawyer George Conway and backed by Democrat mega-donor Reid Hoffman, an associate of the late convicted sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein.

It is true that Judge Lewis A. Kaplan in the case said that Trump was found to have “raped” Carroll in the colloquial sense. But the judge’s claim was the subject of widespread criticism, and the jury specifically found Trump not liable.

It was Stephanopoulos who used the word “jury,” which makes his statement 100% false, not even defensible as a colloquial use of the term “rape” (as an apparent substitute for “sexual abuse”).

Keep reading

MSNBC Cuts Off Trump Victory Speech; Claims It’s “Irresponsible” To Broadcast

MSNBC’s salty anchor Rachel Maddow once again cut away from Donald Trump giving a victory speech after winning 15 of the Super Tuesday states, reasoning that it is “irresponsible to allow” Trump to “knowingly lie.”

As Trump was speaking, Maddow interjected “Yeeeaaaah okay,” while one of the other clowns laughed in the background.

The anchor then stated, “I will say it is a decision that we revisit constantly in terms of the balance between allowing somebody to knowingly lie on your air about things they have lied about before and you can predict they are going to lie about, so therefore, it is irresponsible to allow them to do that.”

Maddow continued, “It is a balance between knowing that that is irresponsible to broadcast and also knowing that as the de facto soon to be de facto nominee of the Republican party, this is not only the man who is likely to be the Republican candidate for president, but this is the way he is running.”

MSNBC anchor Stephanie Ruhle chimed in “Well here is how to balance it. We fact check the hell out of him.”

“Yes, and we do that after the fact,” Maddow responded, adding “That is the best remedy that we’ve got. It does not fix the fact we broadcast it.”

Keep reading

Republicans Probe GoFundMe and Eventbrite Over Government Transaction Surveillance

The US House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government appears to be trying to dig deeper into the meaning of the subject matter it has been convened to explore.

Specifically – how some private financial entities, egged on by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) – a federal, US Department of Treasury agency – allegedly went on to essentially surveil clearly political terms like “Trump” and “MAGA” on platforms such as Eventbrite and GoFundMe.

The latter company’s purpose is self-evident – it’s a crowdsourcer – whereas Eventbrite is in a similar business, with a stress on event management and ticketing.

And that’s apparently how deep – and wide – government influence on digital platforms/companies went in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021 events in Washington DC.

Now the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan wants to know what exactly was happening in these “spaces” at that time.

Keep reading

Supreme Court rules Trump cannot be kicked off ballot

The Supreme Court on Monday handed a sweeping win to former President Donald Trump by ruling states cannot kick him off the ballot over his actions leading up to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol — bringing a swift end to a case with huge implications for the 2024 election.

The court in an unsigned ruling with no dissents reversed the Colorado Supreme Court, which determined that Trump could not serve again as president under section 3 of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

The court said the Colorado Supreme Court had wrongly assumed that states can determine whether a presidential candidate is ineligible under a provision of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

The ruling makes it clear that Congress, not states, has to set rules on how the 14th Amendment provision can be enforced. As such the decision applies to all states, not just Colorado.

Keep reading

Obama’s CIA Asked Foreign Intel Agencies To Spy On Trump Campaign

The revelation that the U.S. intelligence community, under the Obama administration, sought the assistance of the “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance to surveil Donald Trump’s associates before the 2016 election is a chilling reminder of the lengths to which the Deep State will go to protect its interests and challenge its adversaries. (The Five Eyes countries are the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.) This bombshell, reported by a team of independent journalists, exposes a dark chapter in American political history, where foreign intelligence services were reportedly mobilized against a presidential candidate.

The alleged operation against Trump and his associates, which predates the official start of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation, is a stark example of political weaponization of intelligence. The involvement of foreign allies in surveilling American citizens under the pretext of national security raises serious questions about the integrity of our democratic processes and the autonomy of our nation’s intelligence operations.

The narrative that has been pushed for years, that the investigation into Trump’s campaign began with an Australian tip about a boastful Trump aide, now appears to be a cover for a more extensive and coordinated effort to undermine Trump. If reports are accurate, British intelligence began targeting Trump on behalf of American intelligence agencies as early as 2015, long before the official narrative claims.

The implications of this are profound. It suggests an unprecedented level of collusion between U.S. intelligence agencies and their foreign counterparts to influence the outcome of an American presidential election. The use of foreign intelligence to circumvent American laws and surveillance limitations represents a grave threat to our nation’s sovereignty and the principles of democracy.

Keep reading

Deja vu: Russia collusion is back

Anyone tuning into Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) interview with former White House press secretary and MSNBC host Jen Psaki on Monday night would be forgiven for thinking they were watching a clip from 2016. Pelosi said she believes that Russian President Vladimir Putin “has something” on former President Donald Trump and that it likely involves money. Sounds familiar, right?

After establishing that Trump “brought disgrace to the White House” and that “we must be sure that he does not step one foot into the White House” again, Pelosi asked, “What does he [Putin] have on Donald Trump that he has to constantly be catering to Putin? Telling Putin to go into these countries, NATO countries.”

“What do you think Putin has on him?” Psaki asked. “I mean, it sure seems like something, as you’ve said a few times, given that he refuses to criticize him, that he seems to be a fanboy of him. Are you worried at all?”

“I don’t know what he has on him, but I think it’s probably financial,” Pelosi replied. “Either something financial he has him on or something on the come. Something that he expects to get.” 

Of course, Pelosi doesn’t believe a word of what she said. Trump’s potential ties to the Kremlin, financial or otherwise, were debunked by special counsel Robert Mueller’s exhaustive 22-month investigation, which ended in March 2019. She is merely laying the groundwork for the Democrats’ plan to defeat Trump in November.

Lo and behold, the loyal foot soldiers in the legacy media are already repeating Pelosi’s words. The marching orders from the Democratic National Committee or the Biden campaign or whatever entity it is that determines party messaging has gone out. 

It is now clear that resurrecting the narrative that Trump is an agent of Russia will be an integral part of the Democrats’ 2024 strategy. And they are using it to discredit the House Republicans’ impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden’s alleged involvement in his family’s foreign influence-peddling business. 

Keep reading

The Missing Crossfire Hurricane Binder: President Trump Demanded its Contents Be Released – The FBI Wants It Hidden from the American Public and Will Do Anything to Prevent It’s Release

President Trump declassified a binder on January 19th, 2021.

The now infamous binder contains hundreds of pages about the Crossfire Hurricane scandal. It contains damaging information about the corrupt actors involved in our government. Two different DOJ Attorney General’s have defied President Trump’s direct lawful order to publish the binder in the Federal Register. It’s been over three years now, and the DOJ continues to defy the presidential order and every FOIA request to make it public. Can we now raid the homes of former acting AG Monty Wilkinson, and current AG Merrick Garland?

You can still find the link to this memorandum of declassification here.

The DOJ had already made redactions to protect sources and methods, and returned the binder back to the White House before Trump left office. But the corrupt FBI also wanted to hide names of those involved in the scandal. So, at the last minute, the DOJ demanded the binder comply with the 1974 Privacy Act. The Act requires any “agency” that releases records to also hide personal or identifiable name information. The DOJ knew this Act didn’t apply to the White House, it was a stall tactic. The courts decided this 22 years ago that the Privacy Act was based on FOIA requests, and the White House is not an agency.

Keep reading

Alvin Bragg Is Trying To Punish Trump for Something That Is Not a Crime

When Donald Trump’s lawyers urged a federal appeals court to approve “absolute” presidential immunity last month, they argued that it was necessary to prevent frivolous, politically motivated criminal charges against former presidents. Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously rejected that argument, along with the other reasons Trump offered for shielding him from prosecution for trying to reverse the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. The three-judge panel said the danger Trump perceived “appears slight” given prosecutors’ “ethical obligations” and “additional safeguards,” such as “the right to be charged by a grand jury upon a finding of probable cause.”

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against Trump, which is now scheduled for trial on March 25, would not have been affected by the immunity that the D.C. Circuit declined to recognize, because it is not based on Trump’s “official acts” as president. But the case shows that prosecutorial ethics and grand juries are no guarantee against partisan manipulation of the criminal justice system.

The legally and morally dubious charges against Trump, which stem from hush money that he paid porn star Stormy Daniels when he was running for president in 2016 to keep her from talking about her alleged affair with him, reinforce his complaint that Democrats are attempting “election interference” in the guise of seeking justice. And because it looks like this case will be tried before any of the other, more substantial criminal cases against Trump, it is apt to color the public’s perception of those cases as well. That likelihood suggests the conspiracy that Trump portrays, which supposedly involves Special Counsel Jack Smith and Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis as well as Bragg, is much clumsier than he suggests.

Smith and Willis say Trump unlawfully interfered with the 2020 presidential election by trying to enlist state and federal officials in his efforts to stop Biden from taking office. Trump says Bragg is unlawfully interfering with this year’s presidential election by pursuing bogus criminal charges. Bragg claims Trump unlawfully interfered with the 2016 presidential election by hiding information that might have turned voters against him. Of these three claims, Bragg’s is the least credible.

There was nothing inherently illegal about paying off Daniels. Although the $130,000 payment could be construed as a violation of federal campaign finance law, that interpretation hinges on viewing the hush money as a campaign expense, aimed at securing Trump’s victory, rather than a personal expenditure, aimed at avoiding embarrassment and sparing Melania Trump’s feelings.

Keep reading