Posted on

5G Wireless Broadband and how (not) to Boil Eggs

5G Wireless Broadband and how (not) to Boil EggsThe new 5G wireless broadband technology that is said to be rolled out soon for wireless communication everywhere has some people concerned about potential health effects.

In my perception, that concern is not without thought—and not only for human health reasons.

In order to understand why, one has to review not just the numerous studies done about the safety of the current (4G) technology but also the technology of microwave ovens and traditional ways of cooking. Let’s begin with the latter.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://canadafreepress.com/

Posted on

EXCLUSIVE… Cyber-Security Experts Release Damning Report: Why The DNC Was Not Hacked By the Russians

Investigation by cyber-security and intelligence experts William Binney and Larry Johnson

WHY THE DNC WAS NOT HACKED BY THE RUSSIANS

The FBI, CIA and NSA claim that the DNC emails published by WIKILEAKS on July 26, 2016 were obtained via a Russian hack, but more than three years after the alleged “hack” no forensic evidence has been produced to support that claim. In fact, the available forensic evidence contradicts the official account that blames the leak of the DNC emails on a Russian internet “intrusion”. The existing evidence supports an alternative explanation–the files taken from the DNC on between 23 and 25 May 2016 and were copied onto a file storage device, such as a thumb drive.

If the Russians actually had conducted an internet based hack of the DNC computer network then the evidence of such an attack would have been collected and stored by the National Security Agency. The technical systems to accomplish this task have been in place since 2002. The NSA had an opportunity to make it clear that there was irrefutable proof of Russian meddling, particularly with regard to the DNC hack, when it signed on to the January 2017 “Intelligence Community Assessment,” regarding Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election:

We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

The phrase, “moderate confidence” is intelligence speak for “we have no hard evidence.” Thanks to the leaks by Edward Snowden, we know with certainty that the NSA had the capability to examine and analyze the DNC emails. NSA routinely “vacuumed up” email traffic transiting the U.S. using robust collection systems (whether or not anyone in the NSA chose to look for this data is another question). If those emails had been hijacked over the internet then NSA also would have been able to track the electronic path they traveled over the internet. This kind of data would allow the NSA to declare without reservation or caveat that the Russians were guilty. The NSA could admit to such a fact in an unclassified assessment without compromising sources and methods. Instead, the NSA only claimed to have moderate confidence in the judgement regarding Russian meddling. If the NSA had hard intelligence to support the judgement the conclusion would have been stated as “full confidence.”

We believe that Special Counsel Robert Mueller faces major embarrassment if he decides to pursue the indictment he filed–which accuses 12 Russian GRU military personnel and an entity identified as, Guccifer 2.0, for the DNC hack—because the available forensic evidence indicates the emails were copied onto a storage device.

According to a DOJ press release on the indictment of the Russians, Mueller declares that the emails were obtained via a “spearphising” attack:

In 2016, officials in Unit 26165 began spearphishing volunteers and employees of the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, including the campaign’s chairman. Through that process, officials in this unit were able to steal the usernames and passwords for numerous individuals and use those credentials to steal email content and hack into other computers. They also were able to hack into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) through these spearphishing techniques to steal emails and documents, covertly monitor the computer activity of dozens of employees, and implant hundreds of files of malicious computer code to steal passwords and maintain access to these networks.

The officials in Unit 26165 coordinated with officials in Unit 74455 to plan the release of the stolen documents for the purpose of interfering with the 2016 presidential election. Defendants registered the domain DCLeaks.com and later staged the release of thousands of stolen emails and documents through that website. On the website, defendants claimed to be “American hacktivists” and used Facebook accounts with fictitious names and Twitter accounts to promote the website. After public accusations that the Russian government was behind the hacking of DNC and DCCC computers, defendants created the fictitious persona Guccifer 2.0. On the evening of June 15, 2016 between 4:19PM and 4:56PM, defendants used their Moscow-based server to search for a series of English words and phrases that later appeared in Guccifer 2.0’s first blog post falsely claiming to be a lone Romanian hacker responsible for the hacks in the hopes of undermining the allegations of Russian involvement.

Notwithstanding the DOJ press release, an examination of the Wikileaks DNC files do not support the claim that the emails were obtained via spearphising. Instead, the evidence clearly shows that the emails posted on the Wikileaks site were copied onto an electronic media, such as a CD-ROM or thumbdrive before they were posted at Wikileaks. The emails posted on Wikileaks were saved using the File Allocation Table (aka FAT) computer file system architecture.

An examination of the Wikileaks DNC files shows they were created on 23, 25 and 26 May respectively. The fact that they appear in a FAT system format indicates the data was transfered to a storage device, such as a thumb drive.

How do we know? The truth lies in the “last modified” time stamps on the Wikileaks files. Every single one of these time stamps end in even numbers. If you are not familiar with the FAT file system, you need to understand that when a date is stored under this system the data rounds the time to the nearest even numbered second.

We have examined 500 DNC email files stored on Wikileaks and all 500 files end in an even number—2, 4, 6, 8 or 0. If a system other than FAT had been used, there would have been an equal probability of the time stamp ending with an odd number. But that is not the case with the data stored on the Wikileaks site. All end with an even number.

The DNC emails are in 3 batches (times are GMT).

Date Count Min Time Max Time FAT Min Id Max Id

2016-05-23 10520 02:12:38 02:45:42 x 3800 14319

2016-05-25 11936 05:21:30 06:04:36 x 1 22456

2016-08-26 13357 14:11:36 20:06:04 x 22457 44053

The random probability that FAT was not used is 1 chance in 2 to the 500th power or approximately 1 chance in 10 to the 150th power – in other words, an infinitely high order.

This data alone does not prove that the emails were copied at the DNC headquarters. But it does show that the data/emails posted by Wikileaks did go through a storage device, like a thumbdrive, before Wikileaks posted the emails on the World Wide Web.

This fact alone is enough to raise reasonable doubts about Mueller’s indictment accusing 12 Russian soldiers as the culprits for the leak of the DNC emails to Wikileaks. A savvy defense attorney will argue, and rightly so, that someone copied the DNC files to a storage device (Eg., USB thumb drive) and transferred that to Wikileaks.

We also tested the hypothesis that Wikileaks could have manipulated the files to produce the FAT result by comparing the DNC email files with the Podesta emails (aka Larter file) that was released on 21 September 2016. The FAT file format is NOT present in the Podesta files. If Wikileaks employed a standard protocol for handling data/emails received from unknown sources we should expect the File structure of the DNC emails to match the file structure of the Podesta emails. The evidence shows otherwise.

There is further compelling technical evidence that undermines the claim that the DNC emails were downloaded over the internet as a result of a spearphising attack. Bill Binney, a former Technical Director of the National Security Agency, along with other former intelligence community experts, examined emails posted by Guccifer 2.0 and discovered that those emails could not have been downloaded over the internet as a result of a spearphising attack. It is a simple matter of mathematics and physics.

Shortly after Wikileaks announced it had the DNC emails, Guccifer 2.0 emerged on the public stage, claimimg that “he” hacked the DNC and that he had the DNC emails. Guccifer 2.0 began in late June 2016 to publish documents as proof that “he” had hacked from the DNC.

Taking Guccifer 2.0 at face value—i.e., that his documents were obtained via an internet attack—Bill Binney conducted a forensic examination of the metadata contained in the posted documents based on internet connection speeds in the United States. This analysis showed that the highest transfer rate was 49.1 megabytes per second, which is much faster than possible from a remote online connection. The 49.1 megabytes speed coincides with the download rate for a thumb drive.

Binney, assisted by other colleagues with technical expertise, extended the examination and ran various tests forensic from the Netherlands, Albania, Belgrade and the UK. The fastest rate obtained — from a data center in New Jersey to a data center in the UK–was 12 megabytes per second, which is less than a fourth of the rate necessary to transfer the data, as it was listed from Guccifer 2.

The findings from the examination of the Guccifer 2.0 data and the Wikileaks data does not prove who copied the information to a thumbdrive, but it does provide and empirical alternative explanation that undermines the Special Counsel’s claim that the DNC was hacked. According to the forensic evidence for the Guccifer 2.0 data, the DNC emails were not taken by an internet spearphising attack. The data breach was local. It was copied from the network.

There is other circumstantial evidence that buttresses the conclusion that the data breach was a local effort that copied data.

First there is the Top Secret information leaked by Edward Snowden. If the DNC emails had been hacked via spearphising (as alleged by Mueller) then the data would have been captured by the NSA by means of the Upstream program (Fairview, Stormbrew, Blarney, Oakstar) and the forensic evidence would not modify times – the data would be presented as sent.

Second, we have the public reporting on the DNC and Crowdstrike, which provide a bizarre timeline for the alleged Russian hacking.

It was 29 April 2016, when the DNC claims it became aware its servers had been penetrated (see http://bit.ly/2xEr11S). No claim yet about who was responsible.

According to CrowdStrike founder, Dimitri Alperovitch, his company first detected the Russians mucking around inside the DNC server on 6 May 2016. A CrowdStrike intelligence analyst reportedly told Alperovitch that:

Falcon had identified not one but two Russian intruders: Cozy Bear, a group CrowdStrike’s experts believed was affiliated with the FSB, Russia’s answer to the CIA; and Fancy Bear, which they had linked to the GRU, Russian military intelligence.

And what did CrowdStrike do about this? Nothing. According to Michael Isikoff, CrowdStrike claimed their inactivity was a deliberate plan to avoid alerting the Russians that they had been “discovered.” This is nonsense. If a security company detected a thief breaking into a house and stealing its contents, what sane company would counsel the client to do nothing in order to avoid alerting the thief? Utter nonsense.

We know from examining the Wikileaks data that the last message copied from the DNC network is dated Wed, 25 May 2016 08:48:35. No DNC emails were taken and released to Wikileaks after that date.

CrowdStrike waited until 10 June 2016 to take concrete steps to clean up the DNC network. Alperovitch told Esquire’s Vicky Ward that:

Ultimately, the teams decided it was necessary to replace the software on every computer at the DNC. Until the network was clean, secrecy was vital. On the afternoon of Friday, June 10, all DNC employees were instructed to leave their laptops in the office.

Why does a cyber security company wait 45 days after allegedly uncovering a massive Russian attack on the DNC server to take concrete steps to safeguard the integrity of the information held on the server? This makes no sense.

A more plausible explanation is that it was discovered that emails had been downloaded from the server and copied onto a device like a thumdrive. But the culprit had not yet been identified. We know one thing for certain—CrowdStrike did not take steps to shutdown and repair the DNC network until 18 days after the last email was copied from the server.

The final curiosity is that the DNC never provided the FBI access to its servers in order for qualified FBI technicians to conduct a thorough forensic examination. If this had been a genuine internet hack, it would be very easy for the NSA to identify when the information was taken and the route it moved after being hacked from the server. The NSA had the technical collection systems in place to enable analysts to know the date and time of the messages. But that has not been done.

Taken together, these disparate data points combine to paint a picture that exonerates alleged Russian hackers and implicates persons within our law enforcement and intelligence community taking part in a campaign of misinformation, deceit and incompetence. It is not a pretty picture.

The post EXCLUSIVE… Cyber-Security Experts Release Damning Report: Why The DNC Was Not Hacked By the Russians appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Posted on

HUH? Arkansas Swears In All-Female ‘Boy Scout’ Troop

The Boy Scouts of America have become so “inclusive” that they have basically become the Girl Scouts.

An all-female troop of ten attended a ceremony on Tuesday to be sworn-in as Boy Scouts in Arkansas.

According to Texarkana Gazette, the ten girls of Troop 19, ranging from 11-17 years old, were sworn-in alongside Boy Scouts of Troop 17 at a Methodist church in Bryant, Arkansas. “The group became the first all-girls troop chartered by the Quapaw Area Council of the Boy Scouts of America. The Quapaw Area Council is the largest council in the state, representing 39 counties in central and northeast Arkansas,” reported the paper.

Although there is already a space for females at the Girl Scouts, the Boy Scouts have been hit with declining numbers and pressure from the political Left to open their troops up to females. Girls were “fully incorporated” into the Boy Scouts ranks as of February 1, according to The Chronicle.

Apparently, all-female Boy Scout troops are trending in Arkansas: “All-girls troops have formed in Conway, White Hall and Cabot since the Bryant troop’s induction, and the council plans to add 10 or 12 more all-girls troops in the next month, according to Marcal Young, Scouts executive and CEO of the Quapaw Area Council.”

And Elyria, Ohio’s first all-female troop gained some traction on Monday night, as Jesse Grabowski, scoutmaster for Scouts BSA Troop 122, recruited girls and young women.

“The girls we’ve noticed wanting to sign up are looking for a program other than what they’ve already been exposed to,” said Grabowski. “They heard about our program and they’ve seen their brothers, cousins, friends go through the BSA program, and they like what they saw and are curious about what we have to offer.”

As noted by The Chronicle, the Boy Scouts of America have suffered a decline in scout attendance, and helped to further torpedo their intake with their decision to lift bans on transgender scouts and gay troop leaders. Last year, the Mormon Church withdrew support from the Boy Scouts, “effectively cutting off about one-fifth of the BSA’s scouting base.”

Troop 19 Scoutmaster Tim McEuen told the Texarkana Gazette that all-female troops like theirs should serve as a model for other states. “We want other states to look at us and think, ‘wow,'” he said.

But not everyone is so thrilled. Leaders at the Girl Scouts of the USA blasted the Boy Scouts for opening their troops to females, accusing them of turning their backs on single-gender environments and essentially siphoning off their scouts instead of handling various scandals appropriately.

“The Boy Scouts’ house is on fire,” the Girl Scouts told ABC News in a statement October, 2017. “Instead of addressing systemic issues of continuing sexual assault, financial mismanagement and deficient programming, BSA’s senior management wants to add an accelerant to the house fire by recruiting girls.”

In a blog post, the Girl Scouts highlighted the value of “single-gender environments.”

“Girl Scouts is the best girl leadership organization in the world, created with and for girls,” the blog post said. “We believe strongly in the importance of the all-girl, girl-led, and girl-friendly environment that Girl Scouts provides, which creates a free space for girls to learn and thrive.”

“The benefit of the single-gender environment has been well-documented by educators, scholars, other girl- and youth-serving organizations, and Girl Scouts and their families. Girl Scouts offers a one-of-a-kind experience for girls with a program tailored specifically to their unique developmental needs,” the post continued. “At Girl Scouts, we are the girl experts, and for more than a century we have provided millions of girls opportunities for adventure, inspiration, and valuable mentoring. … The Girl Scout Leadership Experience pairs girls with strong, caring female role models and mentors who prepare them to take the lead from age 5 to 18 and into adulthood.”

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml

Posted on

Tucker Carlson Blasts ‘Screechy Moron’ AOC And The ‘Green New Mess’

Fox’s Tucker Carlson continues to be at the top of his game and he directed his fire at the dark heart of the Democrats’ socialist scheme to destroy America, the Green New Deal.

The plan to impose socialism/communism on America may still be in an inchoate form but the corrupt media is lapping up the slop by the bucket and covering for 29-year-old dunce and taco bar revolutionary Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who has emerged as the salesperson who will appeal to the coveted millennials.

Carlson just unloaded on both the buck-toothed Bronx buffoon as well as the entire scam which he referred to as the ‘Green New Mess’ during a recent segment on his popular show.

CHECK IT OUT:

Via Real Clear Politics, “Tucker Carlson: “Screechy Moron” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Not Demanding China To Adopt ‘Green New Deal’”:

Tucker Carlson dismissed the Democratic-proposed Green New Deal as a “religious document” in climate theology. Carlson said the rhetoric about the Deal is “not the language of compromise and moderation, it’s the language of fundamentalist theology.”

The FOX News host said the Green New Deal, like gun control, is not about what they say it is, it is really about “punishment and control.” The left believes America must be punished for its prosperity, he said, through “atonement.” The “indulgence” is turning over control of the U.S. economy to the Democratic party.

“The Green New Deal isn’t about the environment,” Carlson said Wednesday. “Just like gun control isn’t about school shootings, and speech codes have nothing to do with sensitivity. Nothing is what they say it is. What it’s really about is punishment and control.”

“The Green New Deal is a religious document,” the FNC host said. “It punishes America for the sins of its prosperity. The only atonement it offers is turning over control of the entire US economy to the Democratic Party. That’s the indulgence they require. They’re using moral blackmail to get it. Theocrats always do.”

He also blasted AOC as a “Screechy Moron” which is an insult to screechy morons.

Via the transcript:

OK. We give up. Let’s take this seriously. Global warming imperils the earth. We need a mass mobilization of Americans to fight it. Solar-powered landing craft on the beaches of this generation’s Normandy. No cost is too high, no sacrifice too extreme. Cory Booker is our Patton. Let’s stipulate that’s all true, and not flagrantly insane. So who is our enemy exactly? Well, carbon of course. Carbon is poison. Al Gore told us that 25 years ago. And who’s the biggest carbon dealer on planet earth, the El Chapo of CO2? You may think it’s America, because nobody has bothered to send you an update. In fact, it’s not. Not even close. China is the undisputed kingpin in the carbon trade. China throws more than twice the amount of deadly carbon into the atmosphere that America does. China is the problem. And that’s true, even if you’re just a regular environmentalist and skeptical of received climate theology. Because China is also the biggest physical polluter in the world. China dumps almost as much non-degradable plastic into the ocean as the rest of the world combined. They haven’t banned straws in Shanghai. So it’s pretty clear. If you’re worried about killing polar bears and poisoning fish with mercury, you should worry most about China.

But nobody in our ruling class is.

You don’t see Democratic activists camped outside the Chinese embassy in protest. They’re not demanding sanctions on China. That screechy moron Ocasio-Cortez isn’t telling China to give up coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear power within ten years. No way. The left loves the Chinese government. It’s their model for governing. A few years ago, California governor Jerry Brown flew — yes, flew — all the way to the Chinese mainland to praise its fascist government for its environmental leadership. Pretty funny.

Will this madness end? It had better or it will be the end of us.

 

via Downtrend.com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://downtrend.com

Posted on

Will Obama Appointed Judge Amy Berman Jackson Have to Kill Paul Manafort Before She’s Impeached and Indicted?

Guest post by Joe Hoft

Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointed corrupt liberal judge with an angry disposition towards Americans who think differently than Obama, continues to put her own distorted interpretation of US law ahead of the US Constitution.

Her actions with Paul Manafort alone are ample cause for her to be removed or impeached.  She is going to kill this guy before she is brought to justice!

Yesterday we reported that Obama appointed corrupt DC judge Amy Berman Jackson claimed former Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort “intentionally made multiple false statements to the FBI, the OSC and the grand jury concerning matters that were material to the investigation”.  Unfortunately, this radical ruling was not a surprise coming from Judge Jackson.

We reported months ago and again in May 2018, that Obama appointed liberal activist Judge, Amy Berman Jackson, was assigned to the most important court case in US history, the Manfort case in the Trump – Russia fake investigation.

Sadly, Judge Jackson has a horrible far left record on the bench. In 2013 Judge Jackson rejected arguments from the Catholic Church that Obamacare’s requirements that employers provide cost free coverage to contraceptive services in spite of being contrary to their religious beliefs. This was overturned by the Supreme Court.

In 2017 Judge Jackson dismissed the wrongful death suit against Hillary Clinton filed by two of the families who lost loved ones in Benghazi. The families argued that Clinton had done little to help their sons and then lied to cover it up.

Then on January 19, 2018, Paul Manafort’s case was reassigned to Judge Jackson on January 19th, a few weeks after being filed.

It is unknown why she was assigned to this case or by whom. What is clear is that with her atrocious and slanted record to date, the Deep State and the Mueller team certainly wanted Judge Jackson overseeing the Manafort case.

On January 3, 2018, we reported that Paul Manafort filed a suit against the “Deep State” DOJ (Jeff Sessions), Assistant AG Rod Rosenstein and Corrupt Investigator Robert Mueller that should have shut down Mueller’s corrupt investigation!

We reported for months on the many criminal and corrupt actions taken by numerous parties related to the Mueller investigation. Mueller never should have taken on the job in the first place due to numerous conflicts. He is best friends with fired leaker and former FBI Director James Comey. He met with Comey shortly before Comey testified with Congress and stratigized with him. For this alone he should have recused himself. The team Mueller built to attack President Trump and have him removed is all Deep State liberal attorneys and crooks. Mueller’s record in the past is scattered with actions that let the Clintons off scot-free on numerous occasions when they should have been put in jail.

We now know that the FBI had an investigation into the Clintons and moneys they received from Russia in return for giving Russia 20% of all US uranium. Prior to the Obama administration approving the very controversial Uranium One deal in 2010 handing Russia 20% of America’s Uranium, the FBI had evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were involved in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering in order to benefit Vladimir Putin. The FBI approved the deal anyway. We also know that Rosenstein and Mueller were the ones who allowed the Uranium One deal to go forward. This was the real Russia collusion story involving the US government.

We know that Mueller’s team illegally obtained documents related to the Trump transition team and these emails were protected under attorney-client privilege. Mueller and his entire team should have resigned after this.

But perhaps one of the most damning aspects of the Mueller investigation is that it is not legal. The corrupt Mueller investigation is tasked with finding a crime that does not exist in the law. It is a legal impossibility. Mueller is being asked to do something that is manifestly unattainable.

FOX News Legal Analyst Gregg Jarrett explained this in an article in 2017 that the entire Mueller investigation is lawless. Jarrett argued that:

… George Papadopoulos pled guilty to a single charge of making a false statement to the FBI. He was not charged with so-called “collusion” because no such crime exists in American statutory law, except in anti-trust matters. It has no application to elections and political campaigns.

It is not a crime to talk to a Russian. Not that the media would ever understand that. They have never managed to point to a single statute that makes “colluding” with a foreign government in a political campaign a crime, likely because it does not exist in the criminal codes.

Jarrett then turned his attention to Corrupt Hillary:

It is against the law for the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to funnel millions of dollars to a British spy and to Russian sources in order to obtain the infamous and discredited Trump “dossier.” The Federal Election Campaign Act (52 USC 30101) prohibits foreign nationals and governments from giving or receiving money in U.S. campaigns. It also prohibits the filing of false or misleading campaign reports to hide the true purpose of the money (52 USC 30121). This is what Clinton and the DNC appear to have done.

Most often the penalty for violating this law is a fine, but in egregious cases, like this one, criminal prosecutions have been sought and convictions obtained. In this sense, it could be said that Hillary Clinton is the one who was conspiring with the Russians by breaking campaign finance laws with impunity.

But that’s not all. Damning new evidence appears to show that Clinton used her office as Secretary of State to confer benefits to Russia in exchange for millions of dollars in donations to her foundation and cash to her husband. Secret recordings, intercepted emails, financial records, and eyewitness accounts allegedly show that Russian nuclear officials enriched the Clintons at the very time Hillary presided over a governing body which unanimously approved the sale of one-fifth of America’s uranium supply to Russia.

If this proves to be a corrupt “pay-to-play” scheme, it would constitute a myriad of crimes, including bribery (18 USC 201-b), mail fraud (18 USC 1341), and wire fraud (18 USC 1343). It might also qualify for racketeering charges (18 USC 1961-1968), if her foundation is determined to have been used as a criminal enterprise.

The US statutory law is clear and Jarrett points it out. He concluded with the following –

…Mueller’s appointment by Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein violated the special counsel law.

As I pointed out in a column last May, the law (28 CFR 600) grants legal authority to appoint a special counsel to investigate crimes. Only crimes. He has limited jurisdiction. Yet, in his order appointing Mueller as special counsel (Order No. 3915-2017), Rosenstein directed him to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump.” It fails to identify any specific crimes, likely because none are applicable.

To put it plainly, Mueller is tasked with finding a crime that does not exist in the law. It is a legal impossibility. He is being asked to do something that is manifestly unattainable.

Manafort sued the DOJ, Mueller and Rosenstein because what they are doing is not supported by US Law.

Manafort’s case argued in paragraph 33 of its filing that the special counsel put in place by crooked Rosenstein gave crooked and criminal Mueller powers that are not permitted by law. Mueller was given the latitude to investigate whatever he wanted to and that is not permitted by the law. Manafort’s filing paragraph 33 stated –

But paragraph (b)(ii) of the Appointment Order purports to grant Mr. Mueller further authority to investigate and prosecute “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” That grant of authority is not authorized by DOJ’s special counsel regulations. It is not a “specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.” Nor is it an ancillary power to address efforts to impede or obstruct investigation under 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).

Manafort’s case was solid but the judge was Obama’s corrupt liberal Judge Jackson. On April 27, 2018, Judge Jackson dismissed Manafort’s plea.

Judge Jackson is not only wrong in her judgements, she is also overly abusive to Manafort. She scolded Manafort and his team for a statement his spokesman issued maintaining his innocence and said the comments appeared to run afoul of the order she issued in November limiting public statements about the case by lawyers involved and by the defendants. Of course she says nothing about the many leaks from the corrupt Mueller team.

In May 2018 Judge Jackson addressed another argument from the Manafort team and basically threw it out as well. (Back then it was more than clear that there’s no way Manafort is getting a fair trial with Judge Jackson overseeing his case.)

A federal judge delivered a setback to President Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort on Friday by refusing to throw out some of the criminal charges against him.

Manafort’s legal team had argued in a Washington, D.C., court that he was being charged twice for the same offense of lying to federal officials. Manafort maintained that the stacking up charges could negatively influence a jury against him, The Associated Press reported.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, however, said in a ruling Friday that any harm or prejudice Manafort could face would be handled by giving the jury “proper” instructions, according to the AP.

The judge dismissed the motion from Manafort without prejudice, meaning he can revisit it after his trial in the case, which is scheduled for September, the AP noted.

The corrupt and criminal Mueller team next worked with Obama Appointed Judge Amy Berman Jackson to place President Trump’s former Campaign Manager Paul Manafort in solitary confinement. This was a conscious action to literally torture Manafort for working with Trump during the campaign.

Bernard Kerik at Newsmax wrote an excellent post on why Manafort was placed in solitary confinement. According to Kerik –

In a very small regional jail in Warsaw, Virginia, sits Bob Mueller’s big fish, Paul Manafort.

Mueller, the U.S. Department of Justice Special Counsel appointed to investigate any possible collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump’s campaign, has charged Manafort with multiple counts of conspiracy, money laundering, tax crimes, false statements, and anything else they can wad into a big ball and throw up against the wall to see what sticks.

After his arrest, Manafort was placed on house arrest on a $10 million-dollar bail, until the government recently accused him of witness tampering and convinced U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson to revoke his bail, and remand him to jail pending trail.

To a casual observer, this would seem justified, however, to anyone that has been through it, or has witnessed the government’s selective and political prosecutions over the past few decades, they would tell you that it is all a part of a prosecutorial strategy.

Solitary confinement in prison lingo is also referred to as a special housing unit (SHU), or punitive segregation unit (PSU), and their individual cells are called a box, hole, or cage.

It’s basically a deathtrap. A 12′ x 8′ solid steel or concrete box with a metal bed, stainless steel sink and toilet, and if you’re lucky, a small concrete or metal writing table and stool. On the solid steel metal door, there may be a 4 x 24-inch window that gives the inmate a slight view of the outside corridor, that can be blackened out by the correction staff at a moment’s notice.

Kerik continues –

Where prison itself demeans, degrades, and demoralizes a defendant, solitary confinement goes far beyond the normal deprivation of freedom, where the strain of isolation can cause a prisoner to suffer from manic depression, hopelessness and despair, paranoia, anxiety and, quite often experience hallucinations. It can send suicidal prisoners over the edge, and incite juveniles to act out.

Pre-trial inmates can easily be manipulated into confessions and or guilty pleas, with promises or suggestions of being released from the box, and quite often they will do anything to be freed from the mentally and emotionally breaking cell, including lying, and pleading guilty to something they never did.

Again later in 2018, corrupt Judge Jackson –

…denied a request by President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort to suppress evidence seized by the FBI from his home as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s ongoing probe into whether Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Russia.

Manafort’s lawyers had sought to limit the scope of evidence that prosecutors can rely on for his upcoming September trial in Washington, D.C., claiming that the search warrant was overly broad and unconstitutional.

“Given the nature of the investigation, the warrant was not too broad in scope,” wrote Judge Amy Berman Jackson for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in her ruling.

No individual who disagrees with Obama will receive justice in Judge Jackson’s court.

Manafort’s only crime is he worked for and supported President Trump during his campaign for the Presidency. The Mueller team is a national travesty. It will go down in history as the most corrupt and criminal enterprise in US history. Corrupt Judge Jackson is part of this corrupt enterprise.

Attorney Sydney Powell discussed with Mark Levin the many corrupt actions that Mueller’s number one in command, Andrew Weissmann has taken during his career. Thousands of individuals lost their jobs with former accounting firm Arthur Andersen and four individuals who worked for Merrill Lynch were sent to prison with at least one in solitary confinement.

Today, as far as we know, Paul Manafort, charged with working as President Trump’s campaign manager, sits in jail. It is believed that he is still in solitary confinement.

Mueller, Weissmann and Judge Amy Berman Jackson should be thrown in jail for their blatant abuse of the US judicial system in torturing and destroying the lives of those who worked with President Trump. They should be held to the same criminal treatment that they have taken on too many people to date. Americans want justice!

God help Paul Manfort before Judge Jackson kills him in solitary confinement.  To think, Trump friend Roger Stone is now indicted by Mueller and Judge Jackson was ‘randomly’ selected to oversee his case as well.  God help us all!

The post Will Obama Appointed Judge Amy Berman Jackson Have to Kill Paul Manafort Before She’s Impeached and Indicted? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Posted on

Top State Official: Venezuelan Military’s Dissatisfaction with Maduro ‘Spreading’

WASHINGTON, DC — “Growing dissatisfaction” within the Venezuelan military is spreading in the chaos-ridden South American country, a top U.S. Department of State (DOS) official testified before a House panel on Wednesday.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s Special Representative for Venezuela Elliot Abrams conceded that there have only been a “few isolated cases” of defections from Maduro’s side since the country’s National Assembly inaugurated Juan Guaidó declared himself interim president last month. The United States and an estimated 50 other countries in the Western Hemisphere and beyond recognize Guaidó as the nation’s legitimate president.

Abrams’ comments came during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on the humanitarian crisis, political chaos, economic destruction, and insecurity triggered by Maduro’s socialist regime in Venezuela.

Despite the few defections thus far, the top DOS official declared that the United States is aware of “a lot of discontent in the military” in Venezuela, adding:

I mean, for one thing, if you’re a general down at the ranks, you know that your own people in the army are starving. And what about their mothers and sisters and brothers and fathers? So we think that this opinion [of dissatisfaction] is spreading within the military that the current situation is untenable and we hope that there will be a decision on the part of many in the military first not to support the Maduro regime, but secondly not to block desperately needed humanitarian aid.

While the Trump administration has approved at least $140 million in humanitarian assistance, Maduro and his supporters are preventing the life-saving aid from reaching the Venezuelan public, Abrams noted.

An anonymous White House official recently told Reuters the Trump administration expects more defections and is holding direct discussions with members of Venezuela’s military urging them to abandon Maduro as the United States government prepares new sanctions aimed at boosting pressure on the dictator.

The Trump administration has sanctioned high-ranking military officials in Venezuela over corruption and undermining human rights.

Abrams noted in his written testimony:

As a result of this growing pressure, there is a storm brewing inside the inner circle; a growing dissatisfaction and distrust that will eventually bring about an end to Maduro’s reign of terror. While it is impossible to predict the moment this will happen, we believe the current political and economic environment is unsustainable and that he will not be able to weather it much longer.

Abrams also attempted to spur wider mutiny within the Venezuelan military, where many officers loyal to Maduro are allegedly benefiting from corruption and drug trafficking linked to the regime.

The State official proclaimed in his written testimony:

[F]or those remaining supporters of the former Maduro regime, we have one simple message: your time is up. A new, free, and prosperous Venezuela is rising, and your fellow citizens will remember who stood by them in their struggle. This includes especially the armed forces and all security forces, who will be needed in the future to build a secure Venezuela where law and order defeat criminality and violence. Now is the time for the armed forces to support the Venezuelan people, reclaim their own legitimacy, and turn to helping build tomorrow’s Venezuela.

Venezuela is currently facing the worst economic, political, and humanitarian crisis in its history as it nears the 20th anniversary of the socialist “Bolivarian Revolution” under late dictator Hugo Chávez, Maduro’s predecessor.

The average Venezuelan citizen, including many members of the military, cannot secure three meals a day and lost 24 pounds in 2017, the latest year for which that statistic is available.

Dictator Maduro has repeatedly denied the existence of any humanitarian crisis in the country, claiming both the alarming statistics and the millions-strong refugee exodus from his nation are American government fabrications.

The last remaining federal democratic institution in the country, the National Assembly, removed Maduro from power via constitutional fiat on January 23, replacing him with interim President Juan Guaidó.

Maduro, however, still controls the nation’s military and has refused to step down.

Eric Farnsworth, the vice president of the U.S.-based Council of the Americas think-tank, indicated to Reuters that “members of the South American country’s security forces fear they or their families could be targeted by Maduro if they defect, so the U.S. would need to offer them something that could outweigh those concerns.”

President Trump has said U.S. military force in Venezuela is on the table, without specifying under what circumstances he would employ such an option.

Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), the chairman of the House panel that held the hearing Wednesday, explicitly declared that “Congress would not support military intervention in Venezuela.”

“I want to make clear to our witnesses and to anyone else watching: U.S. military intervention is not an option,” the chairman said in his opening remarks.

Before Trump took office, Abrams criticized the president’s fitness to be commander-in-chief.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Posted on

The Parris Island Marines Are Torching Christmas Trees With WWII Flamethrowers — And People Are Loving It

Next year sell tickets for a chance to operate a flamethrower. Via BI: Leave it to the Marines to turn a annual fire safety demonstration into a fun-filled flamethrower festival. Their annual Christmas tree bonfire is yearly event that was started by the Parris Island Fire Department to educate the public about the dangers of […]

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.weaselzippers.us

Posted on

Trump To California: Give Us Our $3.5 Billion Back For That ‘Green’ High-Speed Rail

One of the much-critiqued goals of the since-disappeared FAQ Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sent to major news outlets and posted on her “Green New Deal” information page was the creation of so many high-speed trains across the country that “air travel stops becoming necessary” (don’t spend too much time parsing the grammar of that line). Right on cue, newly elected California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) announced in his State of the State address this week that he was…canceling most of the high-speed rail project that has already taken over a decade and is now projected to cost taxpayers a staggering $77 billion because, well, it’s just not realistic.

So now President Trump wants federal taxpayers’ money back.

“California has been forced to cancel the massive bullet train project after having spent and wasted many billions of dollars,” Trump tweeted Thursday morning. “They owe the Federal Government three and a half billion dollars. We want that money back now. Whole project is a ‘green’ disaster!”

Newsom set himself up to be called out by the president. In his State of the State Tuesday, the liberal governor specifically mentioned trying to figure out a way not to pay federal taxpayers back.

“Let’s be real,” Newsom said in his State of the State address. “The current project, as planned, would cost too much and respectfully take too long. There’s been too little oversight and not enough transparency. Right now, there simply isn’t a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone from San Francisco to L.A. I wish there were.”

Having admitted that the Democrat-led California government could not be relied on to handle complex building projects and failed on the key issues of oversight and transparency, Newsom refused to entirely let go of the high-speed rail dream — in part because he didn’t want to give that $3.5 billion back to Trump.

“Abandoning high-speed rail entirely means we will have wasted billions and billions of dollars with nothing but broken promises, partially filled commitments and lawsuits to show for it,” said the Democratic governor. “And by the way, I am not interested in sending $3.5 billion in federal funding that was allocated to this project back to Donald Trump.”

As the Daily Wire noted Tuesday, the plan, as of now, is to complete only the Central Valley segment of the San Francisco-to-Los Angeles train. Newsom’s admission that the project, which is now 11 years in the making, is not realistic fiscally comes after a series of delays and significant increases in estimated costs. The San Francisco Chronicle reports:

California voters approved a $10 billion bond in 2008 largely for the construction of bullet train between San Francisco and Los Angeles. The state finally broke ground in 2015 on a 119-mile segment between Madera and Bakersfield, but the project has lost popularity and become a growing political target as it blows through deadlines and budgets. A revised business plan adopted last year pushed back the completion of the project by four more years and estimated a final cost of $77 billion.

The issue of high-speed rails became a national conversation last week when Ocasio-Cortez unveiled the Green New Deal and her since-deleted explainer and FAQ, which promised among other things to “[t]otally overhaul transportation by massively expanding electric vehicle manufacturing, build charging stations everywhere, build out high-speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary, create affordable public transit available to all, with goal to replace every combustion-engine vehicle.”

Related: WATCH: Students Love AOC’s Green New Deal, Till They Hear About Its Goals

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml

Posted on

Sen. Menendez threatens to call police on reporter who asked about Green New Deal

A reporter for the Daily Caller found Democratic Senator Robert Menendez at a Capitol Hill subway stop and asked him what he thought about Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal.


Democrats have been screaming for two years about Donald Trump’s “war on the press.” But Trump’s got nothing on Menendez when it comes to going to war.



Fox News:


Menendez avoided the question and asked where Rodgers worked. Rodgers said that when he told Menendez he worked for the Daily Caller, the Democrat responded by saying he would not answer any questions. An intern who was with Rodgers asked a follow-up question, and tensions apparently rose.





You can hardly blame Menendez for trying to wriggle away. Expect to see this reaction from many Democrats whenever they’re asked their opinion of the Green New Deal. Between now and election day 2020, the GOP will be talking cow flatulence and the elimination of the airline industry to prove just how radical the Democratic party is. 


But threatening to call the police on a reporter? I don’t believe even our media-hating president has ever done that.


Reaction was pretty negatvie all around:






“Never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel,” they used to say in ancient times when newspapers were king. Today, we might add not to argue with someone who buys pixels by the trillions. That said, politicians are far more eager today to pick fights with the press because partisanship has destroyed standards of media fairness and objectivity. 


But having a reporter arrested for doing his job? That’s a new one, even for Democrats.


 


 


 


 


A reporter for the Daily Caller found Democratic Senator Robert Menendez at a Capitol Hill subway stop and asked him what he thought about Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal.


Democrats have been screaming for two years about Donald Trump’s “war on the press.” But Trump’s got nothing on Menendez when it comes to going to war.


Fox News:


Menendez avoided the question and asked where Rodgers worked. Rodgers said that when he told Menendez he worked for the Daily Caller, the Democrat responded by saying he would not answer any questions. An intern who was with Rodgers asked a follow-up question, and tensions apparently rose.





You can hardly blame Menendez for trying to wriggle away. Expect to see this reaction from many Democrats whenever they’re asked their opinion of the Green New Deal. Between now and election day 2020, the GOP will be talking cow flatulence and the elimination of the airline industry to prove just how radical the Democratic party is. 


But threatening to call the police on a reporter? I don’t believe even our media-hating president has ever done that.


Reaction was pretty negatvie all around:






“Never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel,” they used to say in ancient times when newspapers were king. Today, we might add not to argue with someone who buys pixels by the trillions. That said, politicians are far more eager today to pick fights with the press because partisanship has destroyed standards of media fairness and objectivity. 


But having a reporter arrested for doing his job? That’s a new one, even for Democrats.


 


 


 


 




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

Posted on

More Deep State Lies: McCabe Disputes Rosenstein – Says FBI Discussed Impeaching Trump Through 25th Amendment “Several Times” (VIDEO)

Deep State Crooks Caught in MORE LIES!

As Cristina Laila reported earlier in September 2018 —

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein spoke with DOJ and FBI officials about wearing a wire and secretly recording President Trump to be able to build a case that Trump is unfit to hold office.  The Deep State anti-Trump Democrat operatives were plotting to remove Trump by the 25th Amendment on insanity charges… Because they disliked him and wanted Hillary to win.

DAG Rosenstein began plotting Trump’s removal shortly after FBI Director Comey was fired.

James Comey was fired on May 9th, 2017 and DAG Rosenstein was appointed Special Counsel Robert Mueller to investigate Trump-Russia collusion a week later.

Rosenstein was acting Attorney General after AWOL Jeff Sessions recused himself from his duties a day after he was sworn in.

Rod Rosenstein denied that the earlier accusations that he was discussing wearing a wire to take down Trump.

Rod Rosenstein signed a FISA warrant to spy on Trump in June 2017.

Rosenstein signed the final FISA Renewal – sometime around June 29, 2017. After Mueller’s appointment as Special Counsel on May 17, 2017.

New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt learned that Rosenstein discussed wearing a wire a SECOND TIME!

Now this…
Fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe will appear on ’60 Minutes’ on Sunday.

CBS News Correspondent Scott Pelley told teased the interview on Thursday. According to Pelley Andrew McCabe says the FBI and DOJ Democrats discussed wearing wires several times to spy on President Trump. This was AFTER they started spying on the Trump campaign, Transition team and Trump Administration illegally.

The Deep State FBI-DOJ can NEVER be trusted!

Via FOX and Friends:

The post More Deep State Lies: McCabe Disputes Rosenstein – Says FBI Discussed Impeaching Trump Through 25th Amendment “Several Times” (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com