Promises made, promises kept. 

Left vs. Right: The Continuing Saga of the Second Civil War....

    The divide between the left and right is not simply a question of one opinion versus another.  America has always a variety of differing political points of view, but up until very recently it was assumed that no matter which side won an election the country as a whole would not suffer irreparable damage.   The revolution was fought against a government that had no regard for the people it governed entirely because of that same lack of regard.  The Declaration of Independence made clear that the citizens of America would not tolerate tyranny.  Life and Liberty originate from the Creator, while it is men who establish governments.  The fundamental principle upon which this nation was built is that government exists solely to protect our God given rights, both collectively and as individuals because this is the system we have chosen.   It is self evident that for two or more men to be free to exercise their rights, compromise must exist between them.  It is the providence of government therefore to establish laws that those who are governed agree are necessary, as well as a system of equitable application and enforcement that is least intrusive upon the public in and of itself. 

not for the purpose of restricting the freedoms of the individual, but rather  only to The Constitution was drafted by men who were keenly aware of the potential for oppression of dissent by an unrestrained government, but still understood that a strong central government was essential to protect  the right to dissent.                                                   

http://conservativetribune.com/bill-maher-crossed-ivanka-trump/

http://www.themainewire.com/2017/05/great-divide-lefts-disconnect-middle-america/

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w5x0NiUtOg

Do not be misled by the title.  Not all denizens of Washington are creepy, crawly, evil, mean, wicked, and nasty entities with not the slightest qualm about protecting their niche by any means necessary. Many, in fact, are not only benign they can also be friendly, helpful, at at times quite powerful in their own right.   Swamp creatures are an extraordinarily diverse group, encompassing every race, creed, color, political affiliation, social group, financial status, hair color, accent and level of education.  There are some, not only from every side of every issue, but for every possible combination of opinion conceivable.  Any and everything they say or do  must be questioned because achieving their stated or apparent goal is always a secondary consideration at best.  Self preservation, personal gain, more prestige, more power, and a firmer foothold in the murky depths are always prime motives; the single constant goal is to become swampier by whatever means is necessary.  There are no rules or limits  The hardest part is trying to decide which ones are safe, and which are not. 

Many are 

In the end, Washington will always be Washington, home of the most influential government to ever 

http://victuruslibertas.com/2017/05/readers-and-viewers-of-vl-ask-fbi-anon-their-own-questions/

http://themillenniumreport.com/2017/05/the-inside-story-on-james-b-comey/

To protect and defend

How hard is it to see?  Strzock is just the fall guy.  Blame EVERYTHING on one guy, let him disappear and everything goes away.  The FBI walks away looking squeaky clean.  Shut down Meuller, and call a temporary cease fire 

Despite all the SJW progress in subdividing the country into  countless categories which are each being persecuted  by the rest, there are really only two distinct classes of people in this country, or in the world for that matter.  These two groups are mutually exclusive, but every individual within either group has the exact same rights, opportunities, and responsibilities as every other member of that group.  While it is not possible to determine which group a person belongs in by any observable factor, such as gender, job, residence, or nationality, the distinction between the two groups is profoundly consequential.   The question is simple, the answer is absolute: you either are a citizen of the United States or you are not.

Donald Trump ran for president on an 'America First' platform, from which no American (with the possible exception of Rosie O'donnell) has ever been excluded

Donald Trump Foreign Policy Speech

4/27/16 12:30 PM

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-foreign-policy-speech

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you, and thank you to the Center for the National Interest for honoring me with this invitation.  I would like to talk today about how to develop a new foreign policy direction for our country - one that replaces randomness with purpose, ideology with strategy, and chaos with peace.  It is time to shake the rust off of America's foreign policy. It's time to invite new voices and new visions into the fold.  The direction I will outline today will also return us to a timeless principle. My foreign policy will always put the interests of the American people, and American security, above all else. That will be the foundation of every decision that I will make.

America First will be the major and overriding theme of my administration.  But to chart our path forward, we must first briefly look back.

We have a lot to be proud of. In the 1940s we saved the world. The Greatest Generation beat back the Nazis and the Japanese Imperialists.  Then we saved the world again, this time from totalitarian Communism. The Cold War lasted for decades, but we won.  Democrats and Republicans working together got Mr. Gorbachev to heed the words of President Reagan when he said: "tear down this wall."

History will not forget what we did.  Unfortunately, after the Cold War, our foreign policy veered badly off course. We failed to develop a new vision for a new time. In fact, as time went on, our foreign policy began to make less and less sense.  Logic was replaced with foolishness and arrogance, and this led to one foreign policy disaster after another.  We went from mistakes in Iraq to Egypt to Libya, to President Obama's line in the sand in Syria. Each of these actions have helped to throw the region into chaos, and gave ISIS the space it needs to grow and prosper.

It all began with the dangerous idea that we could make Western democracies out of countries that had no experience or interest in becoming a Western Democracy.  We tore up what institutions they had and then were surprised at what we unleashed. Civil war, religious fanaticism; thousands of American lives, and many trillions of dollars, were lost as a result. The vacuum was created that ISIS would fill. Iran, too, would rush in and fill the void, much to their unjust enrichment.

Our foreign policy is a complete and total disaster.  No vision, no purpose, no direction, no strategy.

Today, I want to identify five main weaknesses in our foreign policy.

First, Our Resources Are Overextended.  President Obama has weakened our military by weakening our economy. He's crippled us with wasteful spending, massive debt, low growth, a huge trade deficit and open borders.  Our manufacturing trade deficit with the world is now approaching $1 trillion a year. We're rebuilding other countries while weakening our own.  Ending the theft of American jobs will give us the resources we need to rebuild our military and regain our financial independence and strength.  I am the only person running for the Presidency who understands this problem and knows how to fix it.

Secondly, our allies are not paying their fair share.  Our allies must contribute toward the financial, political and human costs of our tremendous security burden. But many of them are simply not doing so. They look at the United States as weak and forgiving and feel no obligation to honor their agreements with us.  In NATO, for instance, only 4 of 28 other member countries, besides America, are spending the minimum required 2% of GDP on defense.

We have spent trillions of dollars over time - on planes, missiles, ships, equipment - building up our military to provide a strong defense for Europe and Asia. The countries we are defending must pay for the cost of this defense - and, if not, the U.S. must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves.  The whole world will be safer if our allies do their part to support our common defense and security.  A Trump Administration will lead a free world that is properly armed and funded.

Thirdly, our friends are beginning to think they can't depend on us.  We've had a president who dislikes our friends and bows to our enemies.  He negotiated a disastrous deal with Iran, and then we watched them ignore its terms, even before the ink was dry.

Iran cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon and, under a Trump Administration, will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.  All of this without even mentioning the humiliation of the United States with Iran's treatment of our ten captured sailors.  In negotiation, you must be willing to walk. The Iran deal, like so many of our worst agreements, is the result of not being willing to leave the table. When the other side knows you're not going to walk, it becomes absolutely impossible to win.  At the same time, your friends need to know that you will stick by the agreements that you have with them.

President Obama gutted our missile defense program, then abandoned our missile defense plans with Poland and the Czech Republic.  He supported the ouster of a friendly regime in Egypt that had a longstanding peace treaty with Israel - and then helped bring the Muslim Brotherhood to power in its place.  Israel, our great friend and the one true Democracy in the Middle East, has been snubbed and criticized by an Administration that lacks moral clarity. Just a few days ago, Vice President Biden again criticized Israel - a force for justice and peace - for acting as an impediment to peace in the region.

President Obama has not been a friend to Israel. He has treated Iran with tender love and care and made it a great power in the Middle East - all at the expense of Israel, our other allies in the region and, critically, the United States.  We've picked fights with our oldest friends, and now they're starting to look elsewhere for help.

Fourth, our rivals no longer respect us.  In fact, they are just as confused as our allies, but an even bigger problem is that they don't take us seriously any more.  When President Obama landed in Cuba on Air Force One, no leader was there to meet or greet him - perhaps an incident without precedent in the long and prestigious history of Air Force One.  Then, amazingly, the same thing happened in Saudi Arabia -- it's called no respect.

Do you remember when the President made a long and expensive trip to Copenhagen, Denmark to get the Olympics for our country, and, after this unprecedented effort, it was announced that the United States came in fourth place?  He should have known the result before making such an embarrassing commitment.

The list of humiliations goes on and on.  President Obama watches helplessly as North Korea increases its aggression and expands even further with its nuclear reach.  Our president has allowed China to continue its economic assault on American jobs and wealth, refusing to enforce trade rules - or apply the leverage on China necessary to rein in North Korea.  He has even allowed China to steal government secrets with cyber attacks and engage in industrial espionage against the United States and its companies.  We've let our rivals and challengers think they can get away with anything.  If President Obama's goal had been to weaken America, he could not have done a better job.

Finally, America no longer has a clear understanding of our foreign policy goals.  Since the end of the Cold War and the break-up of the Soviet Union, we've lacked a coherent foreign policy.  One day we're bombing Libya and getting rid of a dictator to foster democracy for civilians, the next day we are watching the same civilians suffer while that country falls apart.

We're a humanitarian nation. But the legacy of the Obama-Clinton interventions will be weakness, confusion, and disarray.  We have made the Middle East more unstable and chaotic than ever before.  We left Christians subject to intense persecution and even genocide.  Our actions in Iraq, Libya and Syria have helped unleash ISIS.  And we're in a war against radical Islam, but President Obama won't even name the enemy!  Hillary Clinton also refuses to say the words "radical Islam," even as she pushes for a massive increase in refugees.

After Secretary Clinton's failed intervention in Libya, Islamic terrorists in Benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave Americans. Then, instead of taking charge that night, Hillary Clinton decided to go home and sleep! Incredible.  Clinton blames it all on a video, an excuse that was a total lie. Our Ambassador was murdered and our Secretary of State misled the nation - and by the way, she was not awake to take that call at 3 o'clock in the morning.  And now ISIS is making millions of dollars a week selling Libyan oil.  This will change when I am president.

To all our friends and allies, I say America is going to be strong again. America is going to be a reliable friend and ally again.  We're going to finally have a coherent foreign policy based upon American interests, and the shared interests of our allies.  We are getting out of the nation-building business, and instead focusing on creating stability in the world.

Our moments of greatest strength came when politics ended at the water's edge.  We need a new, rational American foreign policy, informed by the best minds and supported by both parties, as well as by our close allies.  This is how we won the Cold War, and it's how we will win our new and future struggles.

First, we need a long-term plan to halt the spread and reach of radical Islam.  Containing the spread of radical Islam must be a major foreign policy goal of the United States.  Events may require the use of military force. But it's also a philosophical struggle, like our long struggle in the Cold War.  In this we're going to be working very closely with our allies in the Muslim world, all of which are at risk from radical Islamic violence.  We should work together with any nation in the region that is threatened by the rise of radical Islam. But this has to be a two-way street - they must also be good to us and remember us and all we are doing for them.

The struggle against radical Islam also takes place in our homeland. There are scores of recent migrants inside our borders charged with terrorism. For every case known to the public, there are dozens more.  We must stop importing extremism through senseless immigration policies.  A pause for reassessment will help us to prevent the next San Bernardino or worse -- all you have to do is look at the World Trade Center and September 11th.

And then there's ISIS. I have a simple message for them. Their days are numbered. I won't tell them where and I won't tell them how. We must as, a nation, be more unpredictable. But they're going to be gone. And soon.

Secondly, we have to rebuild our military and our economy.  The Russians and Chinese have rapidly expanded their military capability, but look what's happened to us!  Our nuclear weapons arsenal - our ultimate deterrent - has been allowed to atrophy and is desperately in need of modernization and renewal.  Our active duty armed forces have shrunk from 2 million in 1991 to about 1.3 million today.  The Navy has shrunk from over 500 ships to 272 ships during that time.  The Air Force is about 1/3 smaller than 1991. Pilots are flying B-52s in combat missions today which are older than most people in this room.

And what are we doing about this? President Obama has proposed a 2017 defense budget that, in real dollars, cuts nearly 25% from what we were spending in 2011.  Our military is depleted, and we're asking our generals and military leaders to worry about global warming.  We will spend what we need to rebuild our military. It is the cheapest investment we can make. We will develop, build and purchase the best equipment known to mankind. Our military dominance must be unquestioned.  But we will look for savings and spend our money wisely. In this time of mounting debt, not one dollar can be wasted.

We are also going to have to change our trade, immigration and economic policies to make our economy strong again - and to put Americans first again. This will ensure that our own workers, right here in America, get the jobs and higher pay that will grow our tax revenue and increase our economic might as a nation.  We need to think smarter about areas where our technological superiority gives us an edge. This includes 3-D printing, artificial intelligence and cyberwarfare.

A great country also takes care of its warriors. Our commitment to them is absolute. A Trump Administration will give our service men and women the best equipment and support in the world when they serve, and the best care in the world when they return as veterans to civilian life.

Finally, we must develop a foreign policy based on American interests.  Businesses do not succeed when they lose sight of their core interests and neither do countries.  Look at what happened in the 1990s. Our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were attacked and seventeen brave sailors were killed on the USS Cole. And what did we do? It seemed we put more effort into adding China to the World Trade Organization - which has been a disaster for the United States - than into stopping Al Qaeda.  We even had an opportunity to take out Osama Bin Laden, and didn't do it. And then, we got hit at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the worst attack on our country in its history.

Our foreign policy goals must be based on America's core national security interests, and the following will be my priorities.  In the Middle East, our goals must be to defeat terrorists and promote regional stability, not radical change. We need to be clear-sighted about the groups that will never be anything other than enemies.  And we must only be generous to those that prove they are our friends.

We desire to live peacefully and in friendship with Russia and China. We have serious differences with these two nations, and must regard them with open eyes. But we are not bound to be adversaries. We should seek common ground based on shared interests. Russia, for instance, has also seen the horror of Islamic terrorism.

I believe an easing of tensions and improved relations with Russia - from a position of strength - is possible. Common sense says this cycle of hostility must end. Some say the Russians won't be reasonable. I intend to find out. If we can't make a good deal for America, then we will quickly walk from the table.

Fixing our relations with China is another important step towards a prosperous century. China respects strength, and by letting them take advantage of us economically, we have lost all of their respect. We have a massive trade deficit with China, a deficit we must find a way, quickly, to balance.  A strong and smart America is an America that will find a better friend in China. We can both benefit or we can both go our separate ways.

After I am elected President, I will also call for a summit with our NATO allies, and a separate summit with our Asian allies. In these summits, we will not only discuss a rebalancing of financial commitments, but take a fresh look at how we can adopt new strategies for tackling our common challenges.  For instance, we will discuss how we can upgrade NATO's outdated mission and structure - grown out of the Cold War - to confront our shared challenges, including migration and Islamic terrorism.  I will not hesitate to deploy military force when there is no alternative. But if America fights, it must fight to win. I will never send our finest into battle unless necessary - and will only do so if we have a plan for victory.  Our goal is peace and prosperity, not war and destruction.  The best way to achieve those goals is through a disciplined, deliberate and consistent foreign policy.

With President Obama and Secretary Clinton we've had the exact opposite: a reckless, rudderless and aimless foreign policy - one that has blazed a path of destruction in its wake.  After losing thousands of lives and spending trillions of dollars, we are in far worse shape now in the Middle East than ever before.  I challenge anyone to explain the strategic foreign policy vision of Obama-Clinton - it has been a complete and total disaster.

I will also be prepared to deploy America's economic resources. Financial leverage and sanctions can be very persuasive - but we need to use them selectively and with determination. Our power will be used if others do not play by the rules.  Our friends and enemies must know that if I draw a line in the sand, I will enforce it.  However, unlike other candidates for the presidency, war and aggression will not be my first instinct. You cannot have a foreign policy without diplomacy. A superpower understands that caution and restraint are signs of strength.

Although not in government service, I was totally against the War in Iraq, saying for many years that it would destabilize the Middle East. Sadly, I was correct, and the biggest beneficiary was Iran, who is systematically taking over Iraq and gaining access to their rich oil reserves - something it has wanted to do for decades. And now, to top it all off, we have ISIS.  My goal is to establish a foreign policy that will endure for several generations.  That is why I will also look for talented experts with new approaches, and practical ideas, rather than surrounding myself with those who have perfect resumes but very little to brag about except responsibility for a long history of failed policies and continued losses at war.

Finally, I will work with our allies to reinvigorate Western values and institutions. Instead of trying to spread "universal values" that not everyone shares, we should understand that strengthening and promoting Western civilization and its accomplishments will do more to inspire positive reforms around the world than military interventions.  These are my goals, as president.

I will seek a foreign policy that all Americans, whatever their party, can support, and which our friends and allies will respect and welcome.  The world must know that we do not go abroad in search of enemies, that we are always happy when old enemies become friends, and when old friends become allies.  To achieve these goals, Americans must have confidence in their country and its leadership again.

Many Americans must wonder why our politicians seem more interested in defending the borders of foreign countries than their own.  Americans must know that we are putting the American people first again. On trade, on immigration, on foreign policy - the jobs, incomes and security of the American worker will always be my first priority.  No country has ever prospered that failed to put its own interests first. Both our friends and enemies put their countries above ours and we, while being fair to them, must do the same.  We will no longer surrender this country, or its people, to the false song of globalism.  The nation-state remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony. I am skeptical of international unions that tie us up and bring America down, and will never enter America into any agreement that reduces our ability to control our own affairs.  NAFTA, as an example, has been a total disaster for the U.S. and has emptied our states of our manufacturing and our jobs. Never again. Only the reverse will happen. We will keep our jobs and bring in new ones. Their will be consequences for companies that leave the U.S. only to exploit it later.

Under a Trump Administration, no American citizen will ever again feel that their needs come second to the citizens of foreign countries.  I will view the world through the clear lens of American interests.  I will be America's greatest defender and most loyal champion. We will not apologize for becoming successful again, but will instead embrace the unique heritage that makes us who we are.  The world is most peaceful, and most prosperous, when America is strongest.

America will continually play the role of peacemaker.  We will always help to save lives and, indeed, humanity itself. But to play that role, we must make America strong again.  We must make America respected again. And we must make America great again.  If we do that, perhaps this century can be the most peaceful and prosperous the world has ever known. Thank you.

Enemies Foreign and Domestic

Chances are that you have probably had to say it yourself at some point:

   “I, ____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

The Oath of Office is established by law (5 U.S. Code § 3331) and, with one exception, is taken by anyone appointed or elected to any 'office of honor or profit,' and all military personnel.  Oddly enough, the exception is the President, whose Oath is established in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution:

    "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Democrats are insane: Democrats, Soros, & Sharia Law - Quite the Ménage à trois

"We are tired of Obama's empty speeches and his misguided rhetoric. This, this has caused the world to have no respect for America's word, nor does it fear our might"

Lt. General Michael T. Flynn, speaking at the 2016 Republican National Convention

The problem with North Korea

Operation Choke Point

• Become a Facebook fan

• Follow us on Tumblr

• Follow us on Twitter

• Get the feed

• Get the E-Mail

• Help us hold politicians accountable

• Home

• Articles

• Ask a Question

• Viral Spiral

• Archives

• About Us

• Search

• More

0

Articles · Featured Posts

Timeline of Russia Investigation

Key moments in the FBI probe of Russia's efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election

• • By Eugene Kiely

  • Posted on June 7, 2017 | Updated on July 11, 2017

Since July 2016, the FBI has been investigating the Russian government’s attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election, including whether President Donald Trump’s campaign associates were involved in those efforts.

“Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election” between Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, according to the U.S. intelligence community. Russian intelligence services gained access to the computer network of Democratic Party officials and released the hacked material to WikiLeaks and others “to help President-elect Trump’s election chances,” the IC said in a report released earlier this year.

At this point, no evidence of collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign has been made public. It may or may not exist. However, there is an ongoing investigation.

Here we present a timeline of key events in the investigation. We will update this timeline as necessary. For those reading this on a website other than FactCheck.org, please click here for updates.

2015

July — The Main Intelligence Directorate, or GRU, which is responsible for intelligence collection for the Russian military, gains access to the Democratic National Committee computer network and maintains that access until at least June 2016, when the hacking plot was publicly disclosed. (This is according to a report issued Jan. 6, 2017, by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.)

December — Some social media accounts apparently tied to a Russian online propaganda operation start to advocate for Trump’s election. (This is also according to the DNI report issued Jan. 6, 2017. That report attributed its source to “a journalist who is a leading expert on the Internet Research Agency,” a Russian online propaganda operation.)

Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn

Dec. 10 — Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn speaks at RT’s anniversary conference in Moscow. RT is a Russian government-funded TV station once known as Russia Today. Flynn, who would become a foreign policy adviser to Trump during the campaign and national security adviser in the Trump administration, sits next to Putin at the event. In remarks at the event, Flynn is critical of the Obama administration’s foreign policy and supportive of working with Russia to battle ISIS. (It’s later learned that he was paid $45,000 for his appearance, and failed to report the income on his government financial disclosure forms.)

2016

Feb. 26 — Reuters reports that Flynn “has been informally advising Trump” on foreign policy during the presidential campaign.

March — Russian intelligence services probably begin the cyber operations that resulted in the compromise of the personal email accounts of Democratic Party officials and political figures. (This is according to the Jan. 6, 2017, report issued by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.)

March 21 –– Trump tells the Washington Post that Carter Page, an American businessman who has worked in Russia and now owns a consulting firm called Global Energy Capital, is a member of his foreign policy team. (The Post would later report that the FBI was monitoring Page’s communications as part of its Russia probe.)

March 29 — Trump announces that Paul Manafort, a longtime Republican operative, will be his campaign convention manager. Manafort had worked for more than a decade for pro-Russia political organizations and people in Ukraine — including Viktor Yanukovych, the former president of Ukraine and a close ally of Putin.

April 27 – Trump delivers a foreign policy speech at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. Sergey Kislyak, Russian ambassador to the United States, attends the speech. Trump vows to improve relations with Russia by finding shared interests, such as combating terrorism. “I believe an easing of tensions and improved relations with Russia — from a position of strength only — is possible, absolutely possible,” Trump says.

June 3 – Donald Trump Jr., Trump’s eldest son, receives an email about information that could be damaging to the Clinton campaign that was purportedly “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” The email from music publicist Rob Goldstone says that Russian pop star Emin Agalarov reached out to him on behalf of his father, Aras Agalarov, a Russian real estate developer who has ties to Donald Trump Sr., including his 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow. “Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting,” Goldstone wrote. “The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump — helped along by Aras and Emin.” Goldstone asks if Donald Trump Jr. would speak to Emin. The younger Trump responds, saying, “[I]f it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”

June 7 – Goldstone again emails Donald Trump Jr., saying: “Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.”

June 9 – Donald Trump Jr., Manafort and Jared Kushner, Donald Trump Sr.’s son-in-law, meet with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower. The New York Times, which on July 8, 2017, broke the story of the meeting, said Veselnitskaya “has connections to the Kremlin.” (See the entry for July 8, 2017, for Donald Trump Jr.’s response to the story.)

June 14 — The Washington Post reports that hackers had gained access to DNC servers. It is the first public disclosure of the security breach.

June 15 —  CrowdStrike, a computer security firm hired by the DNC to investigate the hacking, says that Russia is behind the cyberattack. In a blog post on its website, CrowdStrike co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch says that the company “immediately identified two sophisticated adversaries on the network – COZY BEAR and FANCY BEAR.” He wrote that “both adversaries engage in extensive political and economic espionage for the benefit of the government of the Russian Federation and are believed to be closely linked to the Russian government’s powerful and highly capable intelligence services.”

Guccifer 2.0 takes credit in a blog post for hacking the DNC computers and releases a few documents, including the Democratic Party’s 200-page opposition research report on Donald Trump. “The main part of the papers, thousands of files and mails, I gave to Wikileaks. They will publish them soon,” Guccifer 2.0 says in its blog post. (U.S. intelligence would later identify Guccifer 2.0 as the “persona” used by Russian military intelligence to release hacked emails to media outlets and WikiLeaks.)

Trump releases a statement that says: “We believe it was the DNC that did the ‘hacking’ as a way to distract from the many issues facing their deeply flawed candidate and failed party leader.”

June 20 — Manafort becomes the Trump campaign manager. He replaces Corey Lewandowski, who was fired.

July 8 – Page, a Trump foreign policy adviser, visits Moscow and speaks at the commencement ceremony of the New Economic School. In his speech, Page is critical of U.S. policy toward Russia.

July 20 – Sessions delivers a speech at “Global Partners in Diplomacy,” an event held during the Republican National Convention in Cleveland and sponsored by the State Department, Heritage Foundation and others. After the event, Sessions had what he would later describe as a “brief encounter” with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the U.S. The event was attended by somewhere between 50 ambassadors, according to the Washington Post, and 100 ambassadors, according to Heritage. (Sessions acknowledged when he recused himself from the Russian investigation in march 2017 that he spoke twice with Kislyak, including at this event.)

July 22 — WikiLeaks releases nearly 20,000 DNC emails. It would eventually release more than 44,000 emails and 17,000 attachments, WikiLeaks says on its website.

July 25 – The FBI confirms it has opened an investigation into the hacking of the DNC computer network. “The FBI is investigating a cyber intrusion involving the DNC and are working to determine the nature and scope of the matter. A compromise of this nature is something we take very seriously, and the FBI will continue to investigate and hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace,” it says in a release.

(James Comey, the FBI director at the time, would later testify that the FBI in late July 2016 began investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump campaign associates were involved in those efforts. The New York Times would later report that Page’s speech in Moscow “was a catalyst for the F.B.I. investigation into connections between Russia and President Trump’s campaign.”)

Russian President Vladimir Putin

July 25 — In a tweet, Trump says: “The new joke in town is that Russia leaked the disastrous DNC e-mails, which should never have been written (stupid), because Putin likes me.”

July 27 — At a press conference, Trump says he has “never spoken” to Putin, even though he had said in 2013 “I have a relationship” with Putin. At the press conference, Trump also says he doubts that Russia was responsible for hacking the DNC computer network, but invites Russia to find the 30,000 personal emails that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s staff deleted when she left office. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he says. Trump later says he was being “sarcastic” in inviting Russia to find the emails.

July 29 — The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announces that its computer network also has been hacked. Several of its House candidates were targets of stolen emails released by Guccifer 2.0.

July 31 — The New York Times reports on Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort’s “business dealings with prominent Ukrainian and Russian tycoons.”

Aug. 8 — Roger Stone, a friend and an informal adviser to Trump, says during a speech to the Southwest Broward Republican Organization that he had “communicated with Assange,” referring to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. Stone tells the Republican group, “I believe the next tranche of his documents pertain to the Clinton Foundation but there’s no telling what the October surprise may be.”

Aug. 14 — The New York Times reports that Manafort’s name surfaced in a secret ledger that recorded millions of dollars in payments from a pro-Russian party in Ukraine. Manafort’s lawyer, Richard A. Hibey, told the Times that his client did not receive “any such cash payments.”

Aug. 14-17 — Stone exchanges Twitter messages with Guccifer 2.0, which the U.S. intelligence community later publicly identified as the “persona” used by Russian military intelligence to release hacked emails to media outlets and WikiLeaks. The exchange of Twitter messages was initiated by Stone after Guccifer 2.0’s Twitter account was reinstated after being suspended. In one message, Guccifer tells Stone, “please tell me if I can help u anyhow.”

Aug. 19 — Trump removes Manafort as his campaign manager.

Aug. 21 — Stone tweets, “Trust me, it will soon the Podesta’s time in the barrel,” referring to Clinton’s campaign chairman. (Rep. Adam Schiff would later claim that Stone’s tweet “predicted that John Podesta would be a victim of a Russian hack and have his private emails published.” Stone said the tweet was about Podesta’s business ties with Russia. He said his “friend and colleague Paul Manafort was under attack for his perfectly legal work in Ukraine for a democratic political party. I predicted that Podesta’s business dealings would be exposed.”)

Sergey Kislyak, Russian ambassador to the U.S.

Sept. 8 — Sen. Jeff Sessions meets privately with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, in the senator’s office.

In an interview that airs on RT, formerly known as Russia Today, Trump says it is “pretty unlikely” that the Russian government was behind the hacks targeting the Democratic Party. “I think maybe the Democrats are putting that out. Who knows? But I think that it’s pretty unlikely,” Trump said. “I hope that if they are doing something I hope that somebody’s going to be able to find out so they can end it, because that would not be appropriate.”

Sept. 26 — At the first presidential debate, Trump discounts reports that Russia is behind the computer hacks targeting Democrats. “I don’t think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC,” Trump says. “She’s saying Russia, Russia, Russia, but I don’t — maybe it was. I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK?”

Oct. 7 — WikiLeaks begins to release Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta’s emails.

The Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence issue a joint statement saying that the U.S. intelligence community is “confident” that hacks into the email systems of the Democratic Party and its officials were directed by the Russian government.

Oct. 9 — At the second presidential debate, Clinton notes that “our intelligence community just came out and said in the last few days that the Kremlin, meaning Putin and the Russian government, are directing the attacks … to influence our election.” Trump responds: “I notice any time anything wrong happens they like to say, the Russians, the Russians — she doesn’t know it’s the Russians doing the hacking, maybe there is no hacking. But they always blame Russia.”

Oct. 19 — At the third and final debate, Trump again refuses to accept the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment that Russia was responsible for stealing emails of Democratic Party committees and officials. “She has no idea whether it’s Russia, China, or anybody else,” Trump says of Clinton.

Oct. 30 — In a letter to FBI Director James Comey, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid criticizes Comey for failing to disclose that his office possesses “explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his advisors, and the Russian government.”

Nov. 8 — Donald J. Trump is elected 45th president of the United States.

Nov. 10 — Trump meets with President Barack Obama at the White House. Obama reportedly warns Trump against hiring Flynn.

Nov. 18 — The president-elect selects Flynn as his national security adviser.

Nov. 28 — Trump reiterates his lack of confidence in the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment that Russia was responsible for the computer hacks. Trump tells Time magazine, “It could be Russia. And it could be China. And it could be some guy in his home in New Jersey.”

Dec. 1 or 2 — Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and adviser, and Flynn meet with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, at Trump Tower. (The White House did not acknowledge the meeting occurred until it was disclosed in March 2017. The content of the conversation was not disclosed, but in May 2017 the Washington Post reported that Kushner and Kislyak “discussed the possibility of setting up a secret and secure communications channel between Trump’s transition team and the Kremlin.”)

Dec. 9 — The Washington Post reports that the CIA believes the Russians were trying to help Trump win the election. In response, Trump issues a statement that criticizes the U.S. intelligence community. “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It’s now time to move on and ‘Make America Great Again.’”

President Obama announces he has ordered a detailed review of Russian hacks during the 2016 campaign.

Jared Kushner

Late December — Kushner meets with Sergey N. Gorkov, the chief of Vnesheconombank — a Russian state-run bank that had been sanctioned by the Obama administration in 2014 after Russia had annexed Crimea. Under the sanctions, U.S. entities are prohibited from conducting any financial deals with Vnesheconombank. Gorkov was appointed to head the bank by Putin. (The meeting was not revealed until March 2017. At that time, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer explained that “throughout the campaign and the transition, Jared served as the official primary point of contact with foreign governments and officials until we had State Department officials up.” But in a statement, the bank said Gorkov met with Kushner in his capacity as the then-chief executive officer of Kushner Companies, his family’s real estate conglomerate.)

Dec. 29 — With less than a month remaining of his time in office, Obama announces “a number of actions in response to the Russian government’s aggressive harassment of U.S. officials and cyber operations aimed at the U.S. election in 2016.” That same day, Flynn speaks with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, about the sanctions — a fact that would not become public until the following year.

Dec. 30 — Putin issues a statement that says Russia will not retaliate against the U.S. for imposing sanctions, citing the incoming Trump administration. “While we reserve the right to take reciprocal measures, we’re not going to downgrade ourselves to the level of irresponsible ‘kitchen’ diplomacy,” Putin said. “In our future steps on the way toward the restoration of Russia-United States relations, we will proceed from the policy pursued by the administration of D. Trump.”

In a tweet, Trump praises Putin’s decision, calling the Russian president “very smart!”

2017

Jan. 3 — In advance of a meeting with U.S. intelligence officials about Russia’s interference in the U.S. elections, Trump tweets: “The ‘Intelligence’ briefing on so-called ‘Russian hacking’ was delayed until Friday, perhaps more time needed to build a case. Very strange!”

Jan. 6 — The Office of the Director of National Intelligence releases a declassified intelligence report that says: “Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election.” The report says Russian intelligence services gained access to the Democratic National Committee computer network for nearly a year, from July 2015 to June 2016, and released hacked material to WikiLeaks and other outlets “to help President-elect Trump’s election chances.”

The DNI report contains no evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

Intelligence officials brief Trump on their findings. After the briefing, Comey remains alone in the room with the president-elect to brief Trump on what Comey called “some personally sensitive aspects of the information assembled during the assessment” that was “salacious and unverified.” (The details of that information became public on Jan. 10.)

Comey also assures the president that he is not personally under investigation. “That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him,” Comey would later tell the Senate intelligence committee in written testimony prior to his June 8 hearing.

Trump releases a statement about the briefing that says, in part: “While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines.”

Jan. 10 — At the Senate confirmation hearing for U.S. Attorney General-designate Jeff Sessions, Sen. Al Franken asks Sessions: “[I]f there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?” Sessions replied, “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn’t have — did not have communications with the Russians.” (Sessions would later acknowledge that he had two meetings with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the U.S., during the campaign, although he would say neither was related to the campaign.)

Sessions also says, “I do believe that if an attorney general is asked to do something that’s plainly unlawful, he cannot participate in that — he or she — and that person would have to resign ultimately before agreeing to execute a policy that the attorney general believes would be unlawful or unconstitutional.”

CNN reports that Trump received a two-page synopsis of unsubstantiated compromising information that Russian operatives had allegedly gathered about Trump. The FBI presented the two-page synopsis to Trump at the Jan. 6 intelligence briefing on Russia. BuzzFeed publishes the full 35-page unsubstantiated report on Trump, even though the news outlet acknowledges the “allegations are unverified, and the report contains errors.”

Jan. 11 — Trump tweets in response to the CNN and BuzzFeed reports: “Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to ‘leak’ into the public. One last shot at me.Are we living in Nazi Germany?”

Jan. 12 — The Washington Post reports that Flynn and Kislyak spoke on Dec. 29, the day that the U.S. announced new sanctions on Russia in response to the cyberattacks during the 2016 presidential election. Spicer denies that the call was about U.S. sanctions. “The call centered on the logistics of setting up a call with the president of Russia and the president-elect after he was sworn in,” Spicer said. “And they exchanged logistical information on how to initiate and schedule that call. That was it, plain and simple.”

Jan. 13 — The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence announces that it will investigate “Russian intelligence activities” during the 2016 U.S. election, “including any intelligence regarding links between Russia and individuals associated with political campaigns.”

Jan. 15 — Vice President-elect Mike Pence says Flynn and Kislyak did not discuss U.S. sanctions on Russia. “They did not discuss anything having to do with the United States’ decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia,” Pence said.

President Donald Trump

Jan. 20 — Trump is inaugurated as the 45th president of the United States.

Jan. 22 — On the same day that Flynn is sworn in as the national security adviser, the Wall Street Journal reports that U.S. counterintelligence agents have investigated Flynn’s communications with Russian officials.

Jan. 25 — The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence announces that it will investigate Russia’s efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and “any intelligence regarding links between Russia and individuals associated with political campaigns.”

Jan. 26 — Acting Attorney General Sally Yates meets with White House counsel Donald McGahn in his office. She tells McGahn that high-ranking administration officials, including Vice President Pence, had made statements “about General Flynn’s conduct that we knew to be untrue.” She was referring to administration statements that Flynn did not discuss U.S. sanctions against Russia with the Russian ambassador. (This would not be disclosed until Yates testified before Congress on May 8.)

Jan. 27 — Trump and Comey privately dine at the White House. Comey says: “[T]he President said, ‘I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.’ I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed. We simply looked at each other in silence. The conversation then moved on, but he returned to the subject near the end of our dinner.” At that point, Comey says the president again said, “‘I need loyalty.’ I replied, ‘You will always get honesty from me.’ He paused and then said, ‘That’s what I want, honest loyalty.’ I paused, and then said, ‘You will get that from me.’” Comey also tells Trump that he is not personally under investigation. (Comey gave this account of the meeting in written testimony for his June 8 hearing before the Senate intelligence committee. It was first reported May 11 by the New York Times.)

Jan. 28 — Trump receives a congratulatory phone call from Putin.

Feb. 9 — The Washington Post reports that Flynn “privately discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country’s ambassador to the United States during the month before President Trump took office, contrary to public assertions by Trump officials,” citing unnamed current and former officials.

Feb. 13 – Flynn resigns. He acknowledges that he misled Pence and others in the administration about his conversations with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador. “I inadvertently briefed the Vice President Elect and others with incomplete information regarding my phone calls with the Russian Ambassador,” Flynn says.

Feb. 14 — Trump privately meets with Comey in the Oval Office. Comey says that the president brought up the FBI investigation of Flynn. “He then said, ‘I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.’ I replied only that ‘he is a good guy.’ … I did not say I would ‘let this go,'” Comey recalled. (Comey gave this account of his meeting with Trump in written testimony for his June 8 hearing before the Senate intelligence committee. The account was first reported May 16 by the New York Times. The White House issued a statement at that time saying the Times story is “not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and Mr. Comey.”)

Feb. 15 — A day after Trump reportedly asked Comey to drop the investigation of Flynn, the FBI director tells U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions that “he did not want to be left alone again with the president,” according to a New York Times story published June 6. (Comey also confirms theTimes account in his June 8 Senate testimony.)

White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus asks FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe if the agency would help the White House knock down news stories about contacts between Trump aides and Russians during the 2016 presidential campaign.

March 1 — The Washington Post reports that then-Sen. Sessions “spoke twice last year with Russia’s ambassador to the United States,” including a private meeting in the senator’s office on Sept. 8, 2016. The report contradicts what Sessions told the Senate Committee on the Judiciary during his confirmation hearing.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions

March 2 — Sessions, now the U.S. attorney general, acknowledges at a press conference that he met with the Russian ambassador and failed to disclose those meetings to the Senate. “In retrospect, I should have slowed down and said, ‘But I did meet one Russian official a couple of times. That would be the ambassador,’” Sessions says. He also announces he will recuse himself “from any existing or future investigations of any matters related in any way to the campaigns for President of the United States.”

March 4 — In a flurry of tweets, Trump accuses Obama of illegally “tapping my phones in October” during the “very sacred election process.” He compares Obama’s actions to Watergate and calls the former president a “bad (or sick) guy!” Trump presents no evidence that Obama was tapping his phones.

March 20 — FBI Director Comey confirms the existence of an FBI investigation at a hearing of the House intelligence committee. Comey tells the committee that the agency is investigating “the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts.”

March 22 — Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House intelligence committee, holds a press conference to announce that he had reviewed intelligence reports that show “incidental collection” on some unnamed Trump transition team members had occurred after the election. Nunes, a former Trump transition team member, says he believes the information was legally obtained and was unrelated to Russia, but he says it raises questions about whether the intelligence community was improperly unmasking U.S. citizens whose identities should be protected.

Trump tells Time magazine that the “new information” from Nunes proved he was “right” when he tweeted that Obama was tapping his phones. But it doesn’t, as we reported. Nunes himself said the information he reviewed “doesn’t mean that Obama wiretapped Trump Tower.”

March 27 — The New York Times reports that the Senate intelligence committee informed the White House that it wants to question Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, about his meetings in December with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, and Gorkov, the head of Russia’s state-owned bank.

Nunes acknowledges that he went to the White House to review the intelligence reports on the “incidental collection” of information on Trump transition team members.

March 30 — Trump calls Comey and asks what can be done to “lift the cloud” of the Russia investigation from his administration. Comey told Trump that he was not personally under investigation. “He finished by stressing ‘the cloud’ that was interfering with his ability to make deals for the country and said he hoped I could find a way to get out that he wasn’t being investigated,” Comey said. “I told him I would see what we could do, and that we would do our investigative work well and as quickly as we could.” (Comey gave this account of the meeting in written testimony for his June 8 hearing before the Senate intelligence committee.)

Flynn’s attorney, Robert Kelner, says in a statement that his client is willing to testify before Congress if Flynn receives immunity. “General Flynn certainly has a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit,” Kelner’s statement said.

March 31 — Trump tweets: “Mike Flynn should ask for immunity in that this is a witch hunt (excuse for big election loss), by media & Dems, of historic proportion!”

The White House releases a revised financial disclosure form for Flynn that shows he received speaking fees from RT TV, the Russian television network, and two other Russian firms. Flynn failed to report that income when he initially filed his disclosure form in February.

April 6 — Nunes announces he will no longer oversee the House intelligence committee’s Russia investigation.

April 11 — Trump calls Comey. The former FBI director recalls that the president “asked what I had done about his request that I ‘get out’ that he is not personally under investigation.” Comey suggests that Trump contact the acting deputy attorney general to make that request. “He said he would do that and added, ‘Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.'” This would be the last time that the two men spoke. (Comey gave this account of the meeting in written testimony for his June 8 hearing before the Senate intelligence committee.)

The Washington Post reports that the FBI obtained a secret court order last summer under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to monitor the communications of Carter Page, a member of Trump’s foreign policy team. The Justice Department convinced the FISA judge that Page, who had worked in Russia, “was acting as an agent of a foreign power, in this case Russia,” the Post wrote.

April 28 – The Senate intelligence committee requests that Flynn turn over any documents relevant to its investigation into the Russian interference with the election. (Flynn declined, and the committee would later subpoena the documents, which Flynn turned over on June 6.)

Former FBI Director James Comey

May 3 — Comey discloses at a Senate judiciary committee hearing that the FBI has “opened investigations on” more than one “U.S. persons” in connection with the FBI investigation into whether the Trump campaign cooperated with Russia’s efforts to influence the 2016 campaign. Comey declines to answer if Trump is under investigation. He says FBI investigators are “always open-minded” and will “follow the evidence wherever it takes us.” He says, “I’m not going to comment on anyone in particular, because that puts me down a slope of — because if I say no to that then I have to answer succeeding questions. So what we’ve done is brief the chair and ranking on who the U.S. persons are that we’ve opened investigations on. And that’s — that’s as far as we’re going to go, at this point.”

May 5 — The National Security Agency says in a detailed classified report that the Russian military intelligence operation carried out cyberattacks in 2016 on a company that supplies software for voting machines in eight U.S. states. The report contains no evidence that any votes were changed as a result of the hack. (The NSA report was obtained by The Intercept, an online website that started as a platform for NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. The report was published on June 5.)

May 8 — Yates testifies at a Senate hearing that she had two in-person meetings and one phone call with McGahn, the White House counsel, to discuss Flynn’s meetings with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador. Her first meeting with McGahn was on Jan. 26, as mentioned above.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein learns that Trump intends to fire Comey. Rosenstein later would tell Congress, “On May 8, I learned that President Trump intended to remove Director Comey and sought my advice and input. Notwithstanding my personal affection for Director Comey, I thought it was appropriate to seek a new leader.” Rosenstein then set out to write a memo outlining his concerns about Comey’s leadership.

May 9 – Trump fires Comey. A White House statement said that Trump acted “based on the clear recommendations” of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. In a two-and-a-half-page memo, Rosenstein cited Comey’s handling of the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for official government business while she was the secretary of state under Obama. Rosenstein criticized Comey for holding a press conference on July 5, 2016, to publicly announce his recommendation to not charge Clinton, and for disclosing on Oct. 28, 2016, that the FBI had reopened its investigation of Clinton.

May 10 — Trump meets in the Oval Office with Russia Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak. The official White House readout of the meeting makes no mention that Kislyak attended the meeting. (It was later reported that Trump made disparaging remarks about Comey and disclosed classified information at the meeting. See the entries for May 15 and May 19.)

CNN also reports the U.S. attorney’s office in Alexandria, Virginia, issued subpoenas to associates who worked with Michael Flynn on contracts after he left the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2014.

The Senate intelligence committee subpoenas Flynn seeking “documents relevant to the Committee’s investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 election.”

May 11 – Trump says in an interview with NBC’s Lester Holt that he was thinking of “this Russia thing” when he decided to fire Comey. The president says he would have fired Comey with or without Rosenstein’s recommendation. “He made a recommendation, but regardless of recommendation I was going to fire Comey, knowing there was no good time to do it. And, in fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.'”

The New York Times reports that Trump allegedly asked Comey for his loyalty at a private dinner meeting on Jan. 27 at the White House. (Comey confirms the Times account in written testimony for his June 8 appearance before the Senate intelligence committee. See the Jan. 27 entry for details.)

Sen. Mark Warner, ranking Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, discloses that the committee has sent a request to FinCEN, the Treasury Department’s criminal investigation division, for any information it may have related to the president, administration officials and former campaign officials. “We’ve made a request, to FinCEN in the Treasury Department, to make sure, not just for example vis-a-vis the President, but just overall our effort to try to follow the intel no matter where it leads,” Sen. Mark Warner told CNN. “You get materials that show if there have been, what level of financial ties between, I mean some of the stuff, some of the Trump-related officials, Trump campaign-related officials and other officials and where those dollars flow — not necessarily from Russia.”

May 12 — Trump tweets: “James Comey better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!”

May 13 — In a Fox News interview with Judge Jeanine Pirro, Trump denies that he asked for Comey’s loyalty. “But I don’t think it would be a bad question to ask,” he adds.

May 15 — The Washington Post reports that during a May 10 meeting with Russian officials Trump discussed classified information about an ISIS terrorist threat involving laptop computers on commercial airlines.

May 16 — The New York Times reports that Israel was the source of the intelligence information that Trump disclosed to Russian officials.

The Times also reports that Trump asked Comey at a Feb. 14 dinner meeting to shut down the FBI investigation of Flynn. (See the Feb. 14 entry.)

Special Counsel Robert Mueller

May 17 — Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, appoints former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III as special counsel to investigate any possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government’s efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election.

May 18 — Trump tweets that the investigation into collusion between his campaign and the Russians “is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!”

At a press conference with the president of Colombia, Trump denies that he asked Comey to close down the FBI’s investigation of Flynn. “No. No. Next question,” Trump said.

May 19 — The New York Times reports that Trump told his Russian visitors at the May 10 Oval Office meeting: “I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job.” Trump also told them, “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”

The Washington Post reports that federal investigators have “identified a current White House official as a significant person of interest” in the Russia investigation. Six days later, the Post reports that that person is Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser. The term has no legal meaning, but is used by law enforcement when identifying someone who may have information of interest to an investigation.

May 22 — The Washington Post reports that “Trump made separate appeals to the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and to Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, urging them to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election.” The paper says the meeting happened in March and that Coats and Rogers denied the president’s request.

May 23 — Coats appears at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing and is asked if the Post report on Trump’s request to help him push back against the FBI investigation is accurate. Coats declines to answer. “It’s not appropriate for me to comment publicly on any of that,” Coats said.

Former CIA Director John O. Brennan testifies before the House intelligence committee about the federal investigation into possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. In an exchange with Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy, Brennan says he does not know if any “such collusion existed,” but he was concerned about contacts between Russian officials and people involved in the Trump campaign.

“I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals and it raised questions in my mind, again, whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals,” he said. “I don’t know whether or not such collusion — and that’s your term, such collusion existed. I don’t know. But I know that there was a sufficient basis of information and intelligence that required further investigation by the bureau to determine whether or not U.S. persons were actively conspiring, colluding with Russian officials.”

May 26 — The Washington Post reports that Kushner and Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, discussed setting up a secure communications channel between Trump’s transition team and the Kremlin at a meeting in early December 2016. (See entry for December 2016.)

May 27 — National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster downplays reports of Kushner discussing so-called back-channel communications with Russia. McMaster says the U.S. has “back-channel communications with a number of countries. So, generally speaking, about back-channel communications, what that allows you to do is to communicate in a discreet manner.”

May 31 — The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence issues subpoenas for testimony, documents and business records from Flynn and Michael Cohen, a personal attorney to the president.

June 5 — NSA contractor Reality Winner is charged with leaking classified information about Russia’s hacking activities. It is widely reported that Winner gave The Intercept an NSA report dated May 5 that detailed how the Russian military intelligence operation carried out cyberattacks in 2016 on a U.S. election software company. (See May 5 entry.)

June 6 — Flynn provides more than 600 pages of documents to the Senate intelligence committee, CNN reports. The committee subpoenaed the documents on May 10.

The Washington Post reports that Trump asked Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats in a March 22 meeting “if he could intervene with then-FBI Director James B. Comey to get the bureau to back off its focus on former national security adviser Michael Flynn in its Russia probe.” The report was based on “officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal matters.” Brian Hale, a spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, issues a statement that said Coats “never felt pressured by the President or anyone else in the Administration to influence any intelligence matters or ongoing investigations.”

Dan Coats, director of national intelligence

June 7 — At a Senate intelligence committee hearing, Sen. Marco Rubio asks National Intelligence Director Dan Coats if he has ever been asked “by the president or the White House to influence an ongoing investigation.” Coats declines to comment, saying it would be inappropriate to answer that question at an open hearing. “I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and don’t know,” Coats says. “What I’m not willing to do is to share what I think is confidential information that ought to be protected in an open hearing, and so I’m not prepared to answer your question.”

At the same hearing, Michael S. Rogers, director of the National Security Agency, also declines to discuss any conversations he has had with the president. But he adds, “In the three plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate.”

Trump announces his intention to nominate Christopher Wray to replace Comey as the FBI director. Wray was an assistant U.S. attorney general in the Bush administration in charge of the Justice Department’s criminal prosecutions division.

Comey submits written testimony to the Senate intelligence committee in advance of his June 8 appearance before the committee. In his testimony, Comey says that he first spoke to Trump on Jan. 6, 2017, at Trump Tower, and he wrote memos after each meeting or conversation. The former FBI director said that he had “nine one-on-one conversations with President Trump in four months – three in person and six on the phone.” On three occasions, Comey told Trump he was not personally under investigation.

Here are Comey’s impressions of some of the key conversations that he had with the president:

On his Jan. 27 dinner with Trump at the White House, where Trump asked for Comey’s loyalty: “I explained why it was so important that the FBI and the Department of Justice be independent of the White House. I said it was a paradox: Throughout history, some Presidents have decided that because ‘problems’ come from Justice, they should try to hold the Department close. But blurring those boundaries ultimately makes the problems worse by undermining public trust in the institutions and their work.”

On his Feb. 14 Oval Office meeting about Flynn: “I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign. … Regardless, it was very concerning, given the FBI’s role as an independent investigative agency.”

On his March 30 phone call from Trump, in which Comey reassured the president that he was not personally under investigation and Trump asked Comey to find a way to get that information out to the public: “I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.”

June 8 – Comey testifies under oath before the Senate intelligence committee. As his written testimony detailed, Comey says the president asked him for his loyalty at a Jan. 27 dinner and asked him to drop the Flynn investigation at a Feb. 14 meeting. He also says Trump asked that the FBI “lift the cloud” over his administration and publicly announce that the president is personally not under investigation on March 30 and April 11.

Comey also discloses that he gave a copy of his memo about his meeting with the president on Feb. 14 to a friend with instructions that he share the contents of the memo with a reporter. He says he did so “because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”

Asked if the president’s request to drop the Flynn investigation amounts to obstruction of justice, Comey says: “ I don’t know. That — that’s [special counsel] Bob Mueller’s job to sort that out.”

June 9 – At a joint press conference with Romanian President Klaus Iohannis, Trump denies that he told Comey to drop the Flynn investigation. “I didn’t say that,” Trump says. He also says that he never asked Comey to pledge loyalty to him. “I hardly know the man,” Trump says. “I’m not going to say I want you to pledge allegiance.”

The president also says that he is “100 percent” willing to testify under oath about his conversations with Comey. “No collusion, no obstruction, he’s a leaker,” Trump says.

When a reporter begins to ask a question about Trump hinting that he may have tape recordings of his conversations with Comey, Trump says: “I’m not hinting at anything. I’ll tell you about it over a very short period of time.”

The House intelligence committee sends a letter to McGahn, the White House counsel, asking if any such tapes exist and, if so, to turn them over to the committee by June 23.

June 12 — Christopher Ruddy, CEO of the conservative Newsmax Media and a friend of the president, told PBS NewsHour’s Judy Woodruff that Trump is considering firing Mueller. “I think he’s considering perhaps terminating the special counsel,” Ruddy said. “I think he’s weighing that option.”

June 13 – Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said the president has the “right” to fire Mueller, but won’t. “While the president has the right to, he has no intention to do so,” Sanders told reporters aboard Air Force One.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein

Rosenberg, the deputy attorney general, tells the Senate Judiciary Committee that he alone has the authority to fire the special counsel, and that he has not seen any evidence of good cause for firing Mueller.

Sessions testifies before the Senate intelligence committee. “[T]he suggestion that I participated in any collusion, that I was aware of any collusion with the Russian government to hurt this country, which I have served with honor for 35 years, or to undermine the integrity of our democratic process, is an appalling and detestable lie,” he says.

Sessions, who has acknowledged meeting the Russian ambassador on two occasions, says he does not recall meeting Kislyak a third time at Trump’s foreign policy speech at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C., on April 27, 2016. “I don’t recall it,” Sessions says. “Certainly I can assure you nothing improper — if I’d had a conversation with him and it’s conceivable that occurred — I just don’t remember it.”

Sessions declines to answer any questions about his conversations with the president regarding Comey’s firing or any other matter. “[C]onsistent with long-standing Department of Justice practice, I cannot and will not violate my duty to protect confidential communications with the president,” he says.

June 14 – The Washington Post reports that Mueller, the special counsel heading the Russia investigation, has widened his inquiry to include “an examination of whether President Trump attempted to obstruct justice.” The Post reports: “Five people briefed on the interview requests, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly, said that Daniel Coats, the current director of national intelligence, Mike Rogers, head of the National Security Agency, and Rogers’s recently departed deputy, Richard Ledgett, agreed to be interviewed by Mueller’s investigators as early as this week. The investigation has been cloaked in secrecy, and it is unclear how many others have been questioned by the FBI.”

June 15 — Trump tweets: “They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story, found zero proof, so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story. Nice”.

The Washington Post reports that Mueller is investigating “the finances and business dealings” of Kushner. It also writes that the FBI and federal prosecutors have been “examining the financial dealings of other Trump associates,” including Flynn, Manafort and Page. In an email to the paper, Kushner’s attorney, Jamie Gorelick, said, “It would be standard practice for the Special Counsel to examine financial records to look for anything related to Russia.”

Pence hires Virginia lawyer Richard Cullen, a partner at McGuireWoods and former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia under President George H.W. Bush, to serve as his personal lawyer during the Russia investigation. “I can confirm that the Vice President has retained Richard Cullen of McGuireWoods to assist him in responding to inquiries by the special counsel,” Pence spokesman Jarrod Agen said in a statement.

June 16 – Trump seemingly confirms that he is under investigation by the special counsel for obstruction of justice. On Twitter, he writes: “I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt.”

June 18: Trump’s lawyer Jay Sekulow says on CBS’ “Face the Nation” that the president is not under investigation. “The fact of the matter is the president has not been and is not under investigation,” Sekulow says. “So this was his response, via twitter, via social media was in response to the Washington Post piece with five anonymous sources.”

June 22 – In a pair of tweets, Trump announces that he did not tape his conversations with the former FBI director. “With all of the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea…,” Trump tweeted. “…whether there are ‘tapes’ or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings.”

July 8 – The New York Times breaks the story of Donald Trump Jr. arranging a June 9, 2016, meeting with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower. In a statement to the Times, Donald Trump Jr. says it was a “short introductory meeting” and, “We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government, but it was not a campaign issue at the time and there was no follow up.” But the following day, Donald Trump Jr. says, “the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Mrs. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”

The Times writes: “He said [Veselnitskaya] then turned the conversation to adoption of Russian children and the Magnitsky Act, an American law that blacklists suspected Russian human rights abusers. The 2012 law so enraged President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia that he halted American adoptions of Russian children.” Donald Trump Jr. said: “It became clear to me that this was the true agenda all along and that the claims of potentially helpful information were a pretext for the meeting.”

July 11 – Before the Times publishes a story detailing the email chain between Donald Trump Jr. and music publicist Rob Goldstone about the June 2016 meeting with Veselnitskaya, Donald Trump Jr. tweets images of the emails. He says Veselnitskaya “was not a government official” and that “[t]he information they suggested they had about Hillary Clinton I thought was Political Opposition Research.”

Categories: Articles and Featured Posts

Locations: International and National

People: Donald Trump, james comey, Michael Flynn, and Paul Manafort

Issues: 2016 elections, hacking, and Russia

author: Eugene Kiely

© Copyright 2017 FactCheck.org

Be Right or Get Left

• Home

  • A More Perfect Union

  • One Nation Under God

  • To protect and defend

  • We Hold These Truths...

    • President Donald J. Trump

• Sources

We Hold These Truths...

Then Pilate said to him, “So you are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. 

For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. 

Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.”

Pilate said to him, “What is truth?”

After he had said this, he went back outside to the Jews and told them,

“I find no guilt in him." 

                                            (John 18:37-8 ESV)

Truth is the bastion of the innocent, the sword of the righteous, and the banner of honorable intent.  While there are often times that the road to hell is paved with good intent or that no good deed goes unpunished, America has always tried to place faith in Justice and believed that the truth shall set us free.  Hand in hand with these ideals was the belief that Justice was blind and that all were equal under the law.  

The liberal assault on the fundamental American value system, the constant division through identity politics, and the persistent degradation of our individual rights all accelerated so exponentially under the Obama administration that had it been allowed to continue under HRC the country would soon have become an unrecognizable politically correct quagmire of socialist policy indistinguishable among the other nations of the new world order, soon to be overwhelmed by the most serious threat the West has ever faced.  Justice under Obama was non-existent.  The only reason that he can claim that his administration was scandal free is not from lack of scandal, but simply because no one was ever held accountable for any of the blatant crimes committed during his tenure, including himself.  While the following list of individuals are singularly accountable for the criminal acts they committed, as Commander in Chief and head of the Executive Branch, Barrack Obama bears the final responsibility for the policies and political actions of his administration and the lies perpetrated to cover them up.

• 1. Hillary Rodham Clinton

     1. The unprovoked attack on the sovereign nation of Libya and subsequent murder of its President, Muammar Gaddafi.

     2. Criminal neglect and dereliction of duty as Secretary of State regarding the American diplomatic compound at Benghazi directly leading to the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens,  U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith,  

Alternative facts

The tangled web of the Russia narrative, the DNC email, James Comey, the coordinated media assault, the antifa assault on free speech, Seth Rich, BLM, Media Matters, Huma Abedin, Benghazi, pizzagate, the refugee crisis, Lois Lerner, Loretta Lynch, Susan Rice, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, John Podesta, CAIR, the Iranian nuclear deal, Wikileaks, Dina Powell, Anthony Weiner,  

https://aim4truth.org/2017/05/09/liars-liars-pants-on-fire/ 

http://themillenniumreport.com/2017/04/as-treasonous-bush-clinton-obama-pedo-cabal-dynasty-gets-exposed-desperate-elite-steps-up-war-against-humanity/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLlTLHnxSVuIzrARlmz9oCfQEF08UV-v-E&v=7luDkhuFuQg

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Libya-Regime-Change-Disguised-as-a-Peoples-Revolution-20170522-0018.html

http://www.boomsbeat.com/articles/171/20140203/50-interesting-facts-about-hillary-clinton.htm

And then there’s this: In Bill O’Reilly’s Tuesday podcast — available only to premium members — O’Reilly read directly from a letter in his possession written in 1952 by then-President Harry Truman to a Mrs. Andrew Melvin in Gainesville, Florida:

“Dear Mrs. Melvin, I am sorry the space of a letter is not enough to answer your question fully. History will tell you however that Old Buck, that’s President James Buchanan who is in office right before Abraham Lincoln, was short on decision and had he acted with the firmness of Andrew Jackson, for instance, in his dealing with the problems of the South the war between the states might well have been averted.”

The hilarious irony is that Truman was also a Democrat … just like silly ol’ “know it all” Chelsea Clinton, who it turns out knows very little.

http://conservativetribune.com/smug-chelsea-proved-wrong/

The Trump effect

http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=71845

http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/rngs/USA-TRUMP-EFFECT-POLL/010040HG13T/index.html

Apologies to President Trump

BY SHARYL ATTKISSON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 03/25/19 09:30 AM EDT 7,066

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL

With the conclusions of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe now known to a significant degree, it seems apologies are in order.

However, judging by the recent past, apologies are not likely forthcoming from the responsible parties.

In this context, it matters not whether one is a supporter or a critic of President Trump.

Whatever his supposed flaws, the rampant accusations and speculation that shrouded Trump’s presidency, even before it began, ultimately have proven unfounded. Just as Trump said all along.

Yet, each time Trump said so, some of us in the media lampooned him. We treated any words he spoke in his own defense as if they were automatically to be disbelieved because he had uttered them. Some even declared his words to be “lies,” although they had no evidence to back up their claims. 

We in the media allowed unproven charges and false accusations to dominate the news landscape for more than two years, in a way that was wildly unbalanced and disproportionate to the evidence.

We did a poor job of tracking down leaks of false information. We failed to reasonably weigh the motives of anonymous sources and those claiming to have secret, special evidence of Trump’s “treason.”

As such, we reported a tremendous amount of false information, always to Trump’s detriment.

And when we corrected our mistakes, we often doubled down more than we apologized. We may have been technically wrong on that tiny point, we would acknowledge. But, in the same breath, we would insist that Trump was so obviously guilty of being Russian President Vladimir Putin’s puppet that the technical details hardly mattered.

So, a round of apologies seem in order.

Apologies to Trump on behalf of those in the U.S. intelligence community, including the Department of Justice and the FBI, which allowed the weaponization of sensitive, intrusive intelligence tools against innocent citizens such as Carter Page, an adviser to Trump’s presidential campaign.

Apologies also to Page himself, to Jerome Corsi, Donald Trump Jr., and other citizens whose rights were violated or who were unfairly caught up in surveillance or the heated pursuit of charges based on little more than false, unproven opposition research paid for by Democrats and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Apologies for the stress on their jobs and to their families, the damage to their reputations, the money they had to spend to hire legal representation and defend themselves from charges for crimes they did not commit.

Apologies on behalf of those in the intelligence community who leaked true information out of context to make Trump look guilty, and who sometimes leaked false information to try to implicate or frame him. 

Apologies from those in the chain of command at the FBI and the Department of Justice who were supposed to make sure all information presented to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is verified but did not do so.

Apologies from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court judges who are supposed to serve as one of the few checks and balances to prevent the FBI from wiretapping innocent Americans. Whether because of blind trust in the FBI or out of ignorance or even malfeasance, they failed at this important job.

Apologies to the American people who did not receive the full attention of their government while political points were being scored; who were not told about some important world events because they were crowded out of the news by the persistent insistence that Trump was working for Russia.

Apologies all the way around.

And now, with those apologies handled — are more than apologies due?

Should we try to learn more about those supposed Russian sources who provided false “intel” contained in the “dossier” against Trump, Page and others? Should we learn how these sources came to the attention of ex-British spy Christopher Steele, who built the dossier and claimed that some of the sources were close to Putin?

When and where did Steele meet with these high-level Russian sources who provided the apparently false information?  

Are these the people who actually took proven, concrete steps to interfere in the 2016 election and sabotage Trump’s presidency, beginning in its earliest days?

Just who conspired to put the “dossier” into the hands of the FBI? Who, within our intel community, dropped the ball on verifying the information and, instead, leaked it to the press and presented it to the FISC as if legitimate?

“Sorry” hardly seems to be enough.

Will anyone be held accountable?

Anonymous Patriots May 9, 20175:20 pm

Liars Liars. Pants on Fire.

 This article can be heard by audio Part 1  Part 2  Part 3  Part 4  Part 5  Part 6

There have been so many lies told by the Obama administration and his intelligence bosses (FBI, CIA, NSA, ODNI, etc.) that it makes your head spin. To make sense of the obfuscations, disinformation, and outright lies, we decided to build a timeline to see if we could see a pattern of the “bigger picture.” What we found was a shocking indictment of Obama, Susan Rice, and the whole chain of command in the intelligence community. Lie after lie was told to hide the fact that principle intelligence bosses worked closely with Obama’s efforts to get Hillary Clinton elected, by hook or by crook – mostly by crook. 

By the way, if you haven’t noticed from our many citizen intelligence reports found at the American Intelligence Media, we could care less about political correctness. After giving you oodles of information that you can check for yourself on the internet, we call it out the way it is:

These neocons, politicians, and bureaucrats in Washington are lying like a pack of no-legged dogs.

Starting in the summer of 2016, three elaborate “October Surprises” were planned to derail the Trump Train. The U.S. intelligence community now admits full knowledge of the Trump dossier, server, and the DNC hacking all the way back to the beginning of summer 2016. The political spin was timed to accuse Trump of nefarious Russian involvement close to the election date so that he would not have time to defend an onslaught of accusations. Obama was so sure that the political espionage would work that Hillary, once in office, would have no trouble hiding the evidence of their illegal activities.

The arrogance of Obama and Clinton, after eight years of waging continuous illegal wars on sovereign nations, went to their heads. They thought that Trump did not have a chance to win until the summer of 2016 when the campaign was growing strong. This is when the Obama administration started making mistakes, leaving many trails that show their unprecedented treasonous actions. In the end, their accusations of Trump reflected their own crimes.

For example, it wasn’t Trump “in bed” with Putin, it was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who was cozy with Russia and who used her political position to set up lucrative uranium deals with Russia. It wasn’t Trump committing disgusting sexual acts with prostitutes, it was the Clinton cadre that was being exposed for perversion and pedophilia, from Anthony Weiner’s sexting to the Podesta emails that revealed the dark side of how the elites control Washington politicians using sordid blackmail operations. Their lies about Trump told us more about themselves that they probably know.

The closer the election date came and the more apparent it was that Clinton was losing momentum, the louder she and Obama became about Russian hacking of the election, which still to date has not uncovered any evidence. Average citizens like us watch the news in disbelief that the main stream media and Washington pundits and politicians think we believe their erroneous narratives and theatrical congressional hearings. We aren’t stupid. We see that U.S. “intelligence agencies” and their bosses are nothing more than Deep State players and entrenched bureaucrats trying to keep their corrupt government in power.

The elephant in the room, Susan Rice, has told so many lies she can’t come out in public anymore because her Pinocchio nose has grown too long and draws too much attention. Obama himself can’t remember what lies he has told, which is why his handlers probably sent him into Tahiti exile for 6 weeks to get him off the radar.

As you will read in the timeline below, Obama was getting more and more confused about the Russian narrative. His incongruent remarks about Russian hacking of the election and his lack of evidence needed to support the unprecedented sanctions on Russia due to the alleged hacking were getting out of control. Hence, Obama was cast out of the media limelight for a while so that the Deep State could figure out how to handle their political faux pas.

Have you wondered why James Comey can’t get his story straight about the Trump dossier which he presented as a one page “executive summary” to Trump as an “intelligence report?”  Seriously.  The FBI produced a one page intelligence report based on a fraudulent dossier to the President of the United States.  Mr. President, you might start reading the American Intelligence Media intelligence reports to get better intel than what you are currently being given by the 17 Deep State spying and lying agencies.

Comey gave a one page summary from a 35 page dossier filled with allegations against Trump. Could it be that he was too embarrassed by the childishly fake intelligence report to let Trump see the whole thing?  Yet later, Comey uses the Trump dossier as his excuse to making allegations about Trump/Russia ties. Why was this ridiculously fake October Surprise not openly and immediately denounced?

On October 31, one day after fake news and CIA operative Franklin Foer (a Slate reporter) released the October surprise about the Trump Towers server and Russian banks being in communication with someone on the Trump team, Comey makes a public statement saying Foer’s allegations are untrue and have no substance. How could Comey investigate Foer’s allegations in one day?

Take note Congress, AG Sessions, and President Trump. Citizens want these questions answered—directly and honestly. We are growing tired of Washington’s inability to be honest and truthful. 

Why didn’t Comey investigate and put the issue to rest instead of encouraging rebound in the echo-chamber of the main stream news agencies?

Why don’t Comey and James Clapper agree on the nature of Russian hacking or its effects on the election?

Why was a Russian criminal, Dmitri Alperovitch and his private company CrowdStrike the only group permitted to examine the DNC server? Why was Alperovitch’s one page report never admitted as evidence of the supposed “Russian hacking”? Why didn’t he notice that Guccifer 2.0 had hacked the DNC server and was already selling the contents online before Alperovitch did his investigation?

Frankly, why are taxpayers funding the FBI for intelligence services when they have to outsource their work to a private Russian-connected company?

Why would Comey and Clapper indicate that Guccifer 2.0 was a Russian hacker when he known to be a free agent “hack for money” individual?

Why would Clapper say Wikileaks was part of the Russian hacking of the DNC when everyone knows that is not true and that Julian Assange said he received the DNC leaks from a disgruntled DNC staffer, who we all know was murdered?

Why has the Senate or House intelligence committees not called the Awan brothers to testified since they were arrested for installing a proxy server that connected the intelligence committees classified information to a remote location that has yet to be found?

Why wasn’t the continuous flow of “leaks” to the press investigated as coming from the Senate and House intelligence committees who had already caught four Pakistani nationals stealing passwords, computers, and tablets from numerous members of Congress?

Why, if there were reason to spy on the Trump Team has no wrong-doing every come forward? Who was the intelligence chief who allowed the surveillance of the Trump Team?  (See our recent article CIA Bullets Keep US Dollar Strong.)

Was the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis involved since the admitted targets of the surveillance involved business transactions with Russia? Who is Leslie Ireland and what role did she play in the surveillance of Trump team members and other private citizens?

These questions are just the obvious ones that arise as we witness the biggest political scandal in American history while the political clowns and elephants in Washington dance around the questions and the media is getting lost in its own propaganda.

After hearing doublespeak, lies, and falsehood politics ad nauseam, the Anonymous Patriots decided to set the record straight. If you are a first-tier alternative media dissimenator, please get this intel out to your listeners and readers. If you are in a real intelligence agency (domestic or foreign), you need to use our report as a foundation for a better one to be delivered to the House and Senate intelligence committees, the Department of Justice, and the President.

If the FBI can do a one-page executive summary on a bogus dossier published by a fake news agency, then we challenge it to do an executive report on what we have found below:

Obama – Friend of Russia

In Syria, Obama had armed one side of the Syrian civil war, through CIA arms shipments to the “rebels,” and then struck a deal with Russia that gave the appearance of having removed all the chemical weapons from the Syrian arsenal. The resulting civil war has cost 500,000 lives and chemical weapons are still there.

Obama was supposedly working with Putin to wipe out ISIS and had an informal alliance in Syria. Obama spoke about being on personal terms with Putin and, in fact, a true ally of Russia.

Concerning the Iran nuclear deal, Obama once again joined with the Russians in safe-guarding a Russian client’s weapons arsenal through an agreement claiming to achieve the opposite by giving billions to Iran. In July 2015, Obama publicly thanked Putin for bringing about the Iran deal. Iran used a large part of the Obama bribe money to immediately buy weapons from Russia, to Putin’s advantage.

Obama Can’t Keep Story Straight

On September 4-5, 2016, Obama had an interview where he stated the following:

“Not much happens in Russia without Vladimir Putin. This [hacking] happened at the highest levels of the Russian government.”

There is still, to this day, no proof that Russians hacked the DNC.  As a matter of fact, the “Trump dossier” indicates Aleksej Gubarev was the Russian hacker, not Wikileaks or Guccifer 2.0, as the U.S. intelligence community finally decided, after changing its stories numerous times.

Obama said he personally confronted Putin about the hacking in September on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit in China, telling Putin to “cut it out” and warned of “serious consequences if he didn’t.”

“In fact, we did not see further tampering of the election process,” Obama said of the aftermath of that conversation. “But the leaks through WikiLeaks had already occurred.”

This is not true because Wikileak’s DNC leaks didn’t start until October, after Obama told his Putin to stop. This is ridiculous and shows that Obama was sure that his other “October Surprises” would derail the Trump Train.

“What we have simply said are the facts,” Obama said. “Based on uniform intelligence assessments, the Russians were responsible for hacking the DNC, and as a consequence, it is important for us to review all elements of that and make sure we are preventing that kind of interference through cyberattacks in the future.”

This time Obama says Russia hacked the DNA, but later, the entire U.S. intelligence community says Guccifer 2.0 hacked it. Guccifer tried to sell the DNC data and later the DCCC’s hacked data for profit – not for Putin.

“It requires us not to re-litigate the election, it requires us not to point fingers, it requires us to just say, here’s what happened, let’s be honest about it, and let’s not use it as a political football but let’s figure out how to prevent it from happening in the future.”

This is anything but true, as later Obama says the Russian’s did not hack the elections nor did the DNC leaks effect the elections. Obama said that Russia’s cyber meddling “was not some elaborate complicated espionage scheme,” arguing instead that a “hyper-partisan political environment led to an obsession with leaked emails” and is what interfered in the election. Obama says it was not “espionage” but “just obsessions with leaked emails.”

Obama’s Sanctions Against Russia 

U.S. intelligence agencies in October 2016 identified the Russian government as the source of hacker attacks that breached the Democratic party organizations and leaked private email conversations.

But the truth was that CrowdStrike’s Dmitri Alperovitch was the sole person who examined the DNC server, not U.S. intelligence agencies. The Anonymous Patriots identified this in January 2017 in an article entitled Russian Hackers Found.

The White House, still occupied by the Obama administration, announced a severe series of measures aimed at punishing Russia’s state-sponsored political hackers to deter further meddling in U.S. elections. One element of the response, laid out in an executive order, includes sanctions against a handful of Russian organizations and individuals targeted by name. Obama had to expand his executive authority to make unprecedented “attacks” against Russia based upon false intelligence from a private, cyber company CrowdStrike.

The U.S. then expelled 35 Russian diplomats accused of being intelligence agents and banned Russian personnel from two Russian-government compounds that the White House says were used for Russian intelligence gathering from American soil. These allegations are baseless and no evidence has ever come forth concerning this supposed espionage. These false accusations were Obama’s attempt to leave Trump with a political mess.

The Obama White House expanded the scope of the president’s powers from an earlier executive order, giving the president the power to impose sanctions not only in response to cyberattacks that affect national security, but also against anyone “determined to be responsible for tampering, altering, or causing the misappropriation of information with the purpose or effect of interfering with or undermining election processes or institutions.”

Under the tenants of Obama’s new executive order, even being “determined to interfere” in an election is a crime – even if you don’t commit an actual act.  This executive order covered Obama’s actions because he had no evidence concerning the allegations that lead to the sanctions. The White House’s collection of retaliatory tactics represents arguably the strongest-ever response to state-sponsored hacking attacks in the history of the internet. Don’t forget that Obama also ordered a full-scale cyberwarfare attack against Russia. The Russians reported that the cyberattacks were completely unsuccessfully.

In addition to the 35 “diplomats” asked to leave the U.S., the new sanctions blacklisted five Russian organizations and six individuals. It included not only Russia’s FSB and GRU intelligence agencies, but also i St. Petersburg-based intelligence agency known as the Special Technology Center, a security contractor known as Zor Security, and an innocuously named agency in Moscow known as the Autonomous Non-Commercial Organization Professional Association of Designers of Data Processing Systems. Among the six named men, four are GRU senior officials. The other two are a Russian and a Latvian, who the White House describe as “notorious cybercriminals” responsible for a series of financially motivated attacks against American companies.

These are false accusations since none of these “notorious cybercriminals” had ever been mentioned or indicted before now and are rolled-up into the sanctions as some type of justification for not having any evidence about the DNC hack.

Obama Downplays “Russian Cyberattacks”

On December 13, 2016, in an  interview with Trevor Noah, Barack Obama downplayed the allegations of Russian hacking of the 2016 presidential election to sway the results toward Trump.

“We were frankly more concerned in the run up to the election with the possibilities of vote tampering, which we did not see evidence of, and we’re confident that we stopped.”

Obama admits there was no Russian hacking of the election. Earlier, during the campaign, he couldn’t stop talking about Russian hacking of the election and the way this cost Clinton the election. He and Clinton said repeatedly that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies agree there was significant Russia hacking and manipulation of the election and that Russia had a dossier of blackmail on Trump and that Trump’s server was in communication with Russian Banks.  All of which was said by Comey, even before the election, to be baseless. Obama said of these DNC leaks (horrible Russian hacking that effected the election):

“What’s happened to our political system where some emails that were hacked and released ended up being the overwhelming story, and the constant source of coverage — breathless coverage — that was depicted as somehow damning in all sorts of ways when the truth of the matter was it was fairly routine stuff?”

Read carefully again. Obama said that the DNC manipulation of the primaries was “routine stuff.” He says the press shouldn’t have focused on Hillary’s cheating and that that obsessive focus constituted the “Russian hacking” influence on the election in favor of Trump.

Obama continues, “What is it about the state of our democracy where the leaks of what were frankly not very interesting emails, that didn’t have any explosive information in them, ended up being an obsession?  And the fact that the Russians were doing this was not an obsession?”

Notice now that Obama says the Russians “were doing this,” which is opposite of what he says above. John Podesta’s leaks led to Pizzagate and the revealing of pedophilia in Washington which includes Hillary’s complicit awareness of Anthony Weiner and Huma’s illegal activities of stealing classified State Department documents. Obama tries to downplay the DNC leaks when they should have led to indictments. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, the head of the DNC, had to step down and now faces charges for election interference. These are standard Obama lies that are said without careful thinking or a prompter.

“When the DNC got hacked, we immediately assigned our intelligence community — our law enforcement — to investigate what had happened, and we determined — and announced — in October that it was the consensus of all the intelligence agencies in law enforcement that organizations affiliated with Russian intelligence were responsible for the hacking of the DNC materials that were being leaked. That was a month before the election. This was not a secret.”

This is a lie. CrowdStrike was assigned exclusively to investigate the supposed DNC hack not the U.S. intelligence community. Comey only ordered an investigation in March 2017.

Obama States that Election Rigging Is Not Possible

 Speaking at a news conference in October, 2016, Obama reacted negatively when he was asked about the possibility of a rigged presidential election. He suggested that such thinking undermined the country’s democratic traditions, and then went on to say that anyone, namely Trump, who suggested such a thing wasn’t fit for the White House.

“If you start whining before the game’s even over, if whenever things are going badly for you and you lose, you start blaming somebody else, then you don’t have what it takes to be in this job because there are a lot of times when things don’t go our way or my way.”

“There is no evidence that that [election rigging] has happened in the past or that there are instances in which that will happen this time. And so, I’d invite Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes.”

Obama added there was “no serious” person who would even go as far as to suggest it was possible to rig American elections, and yet he and his administration accuse Trump and Putin of doing exactly that. From that time on, Obama didn’t stop complaining about the Russian’s hacking and manipulating the election. Obama became the biggest spokesperson for the lies and propaganda about the Trump-Russia and Trump- Putin narratives.

Obama Orders a “Review” of All Trump/Russia Intelligence

On December 29, 2016, President Obama ordered the intelligence community to produce a complete review of its findings before Trump took office on January 20th. The White House said that it will make as much of the report public as it can. Even though Obama has asked the public to take the assessment of Russian interference largely on faith, suggesting that the American people already know everything they need to know to accept the conclusions of the CIA report.

“There are still a whole range of assessments taking place among the intelligence agencies. But that does not in any way, I think, detract from the basic point that everyone during the election perceived accurately — that in fact what the Russian hack had done was create more problems for the Clinton campaign than it had for the Trump campaign.”

Obama – the King of Liars  

As we can see from Obama’s own words quoted above, he is either a compulsive liar or he is so confused that he can’t remember what he said at different times and simply mixes them all together in a big soup of erroneous propaganda. There is ample evidence that Obama was well-aware of all the October surprises and Russian allegations and that he was the number one person leaking the information to the news through comments like the ones quoted above. He basically tells the American people bold-faced lies to throw the election to Hillary Clinton.

Can there be any doubt after seeing his false testimony, in his own words, that Obama himself lead the charge against Trump with bogus dossiers and cheap intelligence from foreign, corporate intelligence buffoons? Obama did everything he could to besmirch and falsely accuse Trump of every immoral deed he could imagine.

Obama was completely aware of the covert plans to use Fusion, Orbis, the Awans, and especially his favorite Russian criminal, Dmitri Alperovitch (CrowdStrike) as the corporate intelligence agents to produce the “fake evidence” against the Trump Team.  Obama, and Susan Rice, were looking at every telephone call and communication that the NSA surveilled through “normal” intelligence surveillance. It is important to remember that absolutely nothing was found on anyone in the Trump Team, even General Flynn.

The FBI had already investigated Trump and his family completely and released a report to that effect on their website. That is why James Comey says that he did not order or conduct the surveillance. John Brennan also claims that he did not order or conduct the surveillance, but we know that the surveillance happened and was quite broad in scope.  

The only answer to the question of “who ordered the FISA or the unmasking of NSA surveillance to target the Trump Team” is obvious. It is easy to surmise because the people who were surveilled were being “watched” because of their personal business dealings with Russia.

The Anonymous Patriots have concluded that the U.S. Treasury Office of Intelligence and Analysis would have been responsible for the surveillance.  S. Leslie Ireland, another Obama-Clinton loyalist, was in-charge of that office and had the authority to order a FISA warrant and/or conduct the surveillance as part of her normal duties. Loretta Lynch, Michael Rogers, James Clapper, and Valerie Jarrett would also have been involved in the chain of command for surveilling the Trump Team. And, yes, Barack Obama would have been thoroughly aware of the Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury Office of Intelligence and Analysis’s activities.  

The collection of “intelligence” by Leslie Ireland may not be a crime, but targeting the Trump Team during an election and providing the opposition with that information is, indeed, a crime that everyone in the chain of command would have been guilty of or complicit with. As they probably all gloated: It’s not treason if you win.

Obama Fed the Main Stream Media Narrative

It is interesting to note that The New York Times states that the phony Trump dossier is always dragged in because the leaked NSA wiretaps show nothing that is incriminating or damaging to Trump, and only the Trump dossier can purportedly supply that. Keep in mind that the dossier was sent around to the entire intelligence community and the press even before Senator McCain dramatically released the information on national television.

In The New York Times on March 3, 2017, the day before President Trump tweeted about the Obama “wiretapping” him and when it was still accepted in the propaganda narrative to admit to leaking highly classified NSA intelligence to try to destroy Trump, reporters Scott Shane and Andrew E. Kramer wrote:

“Current and former American officials have said that phone records and [NSA-type] intercepted calls show that members of Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.”

“There have been courtesy calls, policy discussions and business contacts [in the intercepted phone calls of Trump campaign and associates], though nothing has emerged publicly indicating anything more sinister. A dossier of allegations on Trump-Russia contacts, compiled by a former British intelligence agent for Mr. Trump’s political opponents, includes unproven claims that his aides collaborated in Russia’s hacking of Democratic targets.”

It is perfectly clear from the continuous leaking of secretly-collected information from the NSA and CrowdStrike, Fusion, Orbis, the Awans, and British intelligence agencies that Barack Obama is the source of the bogus intelligence and the head “leaker” of bogus Trump propaganda. Obama’s own words are an indictment of himself. The case is clearly made by Obama’s own incriminating statements to the press.

Susan Rice – Liar, War Monger, and “Fall Gal”

Susan Rice is a despicable person who committed genocide against six million Sudanese without the slightest speck of guilt or shame. She lied openly, repeatedly, and proudly the untruths about Benghazi and has never changed her “fake story” to this day.  She was complicit in Obama and Clinton’s bombing of eight sovereign nations and the resulting 2 million deaths, 46 million refugees, and civil wars that ensued.  (See our article Susan Rice Unmasked: Washington War Monger)

If you imagined that Susan Rice might have a conscience, you are wrong. Her lies and propaganda about the Trump and his associates are an incidental falsehood that she thought would never come back to haunt her. She has now openly lied again and again about the “unmasking” on every news network that would air her lies.

Let’s look at Susan’s own words regarding surveillance which she personally had sent to the White House SCIF room where Steve Bannon found it in the course of his job when he became National Security Adviser to President Trump, the same job Susan Rice had for Obama.

On December 28, 2016, Susan Rice said the following:

“I do think that the fact that the press found it more interesting at the time to report on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails instead of President-elect Donald Trump’s, you know, videotaped comments about women, or a large number of other issues, is in retrospect probably a missed opportunity. The fact that they did not focus on this issue to the extent that we thought they would and they should, is something that I think the press needs to do some introspection about.”

“For the press not to give it [Trump/Russia ties] the sustained attention that it deserved, and meanwhile continue to give great attention to the product of these hackings, I think is something we all need to be concerned about and look back on and ask ourselves what we can learn from that.”

“What’s harder to measure is the extent to which it affected people’s perceptions and judgments. But it should not be a casual consideration that a foreign government, particularly a large adversarial government, attempted to have an influence.”

“We will respond in an appropriate manner at a time and place of our choosing. We’re going to respond appropriately, and just because something doesn’t go bang doesn’t mean that we haven’t done what needs to be done.”

These threats led to unprecedented and ridiculous sanctions on Russian diplomatic representatives in America and some Russian businesses, as well as the largest attempted cyberwarfare attack on Russian computer systems in history. These attacks were a complete failure and Russian diplomats publicly ridiculed Obama for his cyberattack that was ineffectual.

Susan Rice also shows her true hand by accidentally tipping her cards and showing that attempted propaganda smear campaigns against the Trump team were part of the Obama plan. Rice admits that she was disappointed with the main stream media for not doing a better job pushing the narrative that bashed Trump and supported Clinton.

Senator Rand Paul says that what he calls the “smoking gun” revelations about Susan Rice unmasking Trump team names from NSA wiretap databases are “actually eerily similar to what President Trump accused them of” in tweets on March 4, 2017 (wiretapping). It is inconceivable that Rice did not inform Obama during the more than one year period of her “unmasking” Trump campaign and transition team names in NSA wiretap reports.

Susan Rice herself points to Obama in the middle of a long MSNBC interview on April 4, 2017 discussing Rice’s “unmasking” of names in reports of intercepted Trump team Russia communications. Rice was evasive about her part but kept dragging Obama into the mix. She never says, for example, that she did the unmasking on her own without ever informing Obama, or that she kept it all to herself. Instead, Rice kept implicating Obama whenever she could, while minimizing her own role as somehow a passive one.

Rice said that Obama ordered the compilation of intelligence reports on Russian hacking and election interference, which implied that the reports included the unmasked name of Trump adviser General Michael Flynn in wiretap intercept reports of phone calls with Russian Ambassador Kislyak.

MSNBC kept pressing Rice about the NSA-intercepted Flynn conversations with the Russian ambassador in December 2016, which Rice kept trying to dodge until Andrea Mitchell brought up the intercepted Flynn/Russian ambassador conversations one last time, noting that it was after the Obama sanctions and expulsion of Russian spy-diplomats.

Rice finally replied by taking it back to August 2016, and confirming Obama knew about it and was “concerned,” saying:

“Well, Andrea, from basically August [2016] through the end of the [Obama] administration [in January 2017] we were hearing more and more—getting more and more information about Russian interference in our electoral process. It was of grave concern to all of us in the national security team of President [Obama] and the President himself.”

“So yes there was a pace of reporting that accelerated as the Intelligence Community got more and more information on that and shared it with U.S. [Obama] officials. I can say that from when this first came to light in intelligence channels to when the administration ended we got more and more information.”

These were not wiretaps about Russia or “incidental collection” on legitimate foreign intelligence subjects, though they may have begun that way.

The FISA warrant(s) were procured for political purposes to spy on the Trump team using the full weight of the U.S. government’s NSA spying apparatus.

According to Rep. Peter King (R-NY) of the House Intelligence Committee—who was briefed on the contents of the wiretap reports on the Trump Team and his associates obtained by Rice and other Obama officials— said they were like a private investigator’s file, with nothing on Russia-type intelligence.

“This [NSA wiretap] is information about their everyday lives. Who they were talking with, who they were meeting, where they were going to eat… just trying to lay out a dossier on somebody. Sort of like in a divorce case where lawyers are hired, investigators are hired to just find out what a person is doing from morning until night and then you try to piece it together later on.”

The former Obama defense official and Hillary campaign adviser, Evelyn Farkas, proudly admitted during an MSNBC interview on March 2, 2017 that she had urged her “former colleagues” to collect and spread the NSA wiretap intelligence on Russia and Trump and “that’s why you have the leaking.”  In an article in Politico on December 12, 2016, Evelyn Farkas, a Russia expert, inadvertently tripped up the entire narrative on the Trump-Russia plot, and in effect admitted that Putin had no motive to hack DNC emails and help Trump get elected to be a Russian ally. Other observers have also noticed a complete lack of any evidence that Putin wanted to interfere in the U.S. election to help Trump win.

The Trump-Putin conspiracy theory was designed to cover or excuse the illegal surveillance of Trump and his associates by the Obama administration. One of the motives may have been that Obama was fearful that the deals he struck with Putin on Syria and Iran would come unraveled and the truth be brought to light. To brace for these developments, the idea was hatched to accuse Trump and his associates of being the Russian dupes, using their innocent contacts with Russian officials or businessmen as the excuse for surveillance. This made Trump look like the Russian dupe and Obama as the tough guy with Putin, which Obama never was before that time.

The conversations captured in NSA digital wiretaps have turned out to be the opposite of the Democrat/media narrative. The remarks between the Trump team and Russian officials make it clear that no real relationship existed, that no insidious conspiracy was in play, that public events such as the WikiLeaks email releases were only annoyances, and that the “Trump dossier” was known to be fake.

Intelligence agency officials have consistently denied finding any evidence for such Trump collusion with the Russians despite furious efforts to prove it in order to take down President Trump. The best anyone has come up with is the claim that some internet “IP addresses” of attempted hackings trace back to Russian IP domains.  James Comey himself denied these “allegations” because he said that anyone with the slightest tech savvy knows that expert hackers cover their tracks to prevent such easy tracing, and even plant false trails such as those pointing to Russian IP internet addresses.

The continued misuse of the fake “Trump dossier” as an investigative roadmap by the FBI has been reported by The New York Times repeatedly. Instead, the Times should be investigating and exposing the “Trump dossier’s” glaringly obvious fraudulent nature and the political motives behind its compilation and release.

Liars and Traitors Exposed 

In December 2016, FBI Director James Comey and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper were in agreement with a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election, in part, to help Donald Trump win the White House. President Obama issued a public warning to Moscow that it could face retaliation.

“Earlier this week, I met separately with FBI Director James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” Brennan said.

In a statement from the head of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, Devin Nunes said:

“We have not received any information from the U.S. Intelligence Community indicating that they have developed new assessments on this issue. I am alarmed that supposedly new information continues to leak to the media but has not been provided to Congress.”

In one of the last news conferences of his presidency, Obama defended his administration’s response to the Russian hacking and vowed to “send a clear message to Russia” that its meddling was unacceptable.

“I think we handled it the way it should have been handled,” Obama said of the hacking investigation and the lack of a formal accusation of blame until a month before the election. “We allowed law enforcement and the intelligence community to do their job.”

Fixer

Perjurer

Fabricator 

Equivocator

Prevaricator

Pseudologist  

The Anonymous Patriots have already written a disclosure article about Herr Director Comey. See Detailing the Commission of Comey Crimes. When we call him out as a liar and fixer, we don’t do so flippantly. His nefarious history would make J. Edgar Hoover blush.

Well before the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence accused the Russian government of tampering with the U.S. election in an October 7, 2016 statement, Comey pitched the idea of writing an op-ed about the Russian hacking campaign during a meeting in the White House Situation Room in June or July, but the Obama administration vetoed it. Comey’s op-ed would have included much of the same information as the bombshell declassified intelligence report released January 6, 2017 which said Russian President Vladimir Putin tried to influence the presidential election.

For much of the 2016 summer, the FBI pursued a widening investigation into a Russian role in the American presidential campaign. Agents scrutinized advisers close to Trump, looked for financial connections with Russian financial figures, searched for those involved in hacking the computers of Democrats, and even chased a lead — which they ultimately dropped — about a possible secret channel of email communication from the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.

Intelligence officials have said that apparent connections between some of Trump’s aides and Moscow originally compelled them to open a broad investigation into possible links between the Russian government and the Republican presidential candidate. At least one part of the investigation has involved Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign chairman for much of the presidential campaign. But the focus in that case was on Manafort’s ties with Ukraine and not necessarily on Russian influence over Trump’s campaign.

In classified sessions in August and September 2016, Comey briefed congressional leaders on the possibility of financial ties between Russians and people connected to Trump. He focused attention on what cyber-experts said appeared to be a mysterious computer back channel between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which is one of Russia’s biggest banks and whose owners have longstanding ties to Mr. Putin. FBI officials spent weeks examining computer data showing an odd stream of activity to a Trump Organization server and Alfa Bank. Computer logs obtained by The New York Times show that two servers at Alfa Bank sent more than 2,700 “look-up” messages — a first step for one system’s computers to talk to another — to a Trump-connected server beginning in the spring. The FBI ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts.

The most serious part of the FBI’s investigation has focused on the computer hacks that the Obama administration formally blamed on Russia.

James Clapper – Director of National Lying and Spying

On CNSNews on March 5, 2017, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper denied knowledge of any wiretapping of President-elect Donald Trump. However, in an assertion receiving considerably less press attention, he also stated he had “no knowledge of evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign” and that, “to his knowledge no FISA court order for such surveillance was issued.”

“We did not include any evidence in our report – and I say ‘our,’ that’s NSA, FBI and CIA, with my office, the Director of National Intelligence – that had anything, that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was no evidence of that included in our report.”

On March 20, 2017, James Clapper testified in front of the House Intelligence Committee “that although the Russian government did in fact wage a strong propaganda campaign during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, votes were not changed. Specifically, they were not changed in swing states Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump.”  In January, Clapper said:

“They did not change any vote tallies or anything of that sort. The Russians have a long history of interfering in elections, theirs and other people’s. I don’t think we’ve ever encountered a more aggressive or direct campaign to interfere in our election than we’ve seen in this case.”

As anyone can notice, James Clapper simply makes up new lies as he goes along and doesn’t even try to cover his tracks. One minute the Russian’s “didn’t effect” the election and the next minute they conducted an unprecedented “aggressive” interference in the election. Surely, no one can possibly believe a single word that comes out of Clapper’s mouth anymore.

While Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence does not dispute the CIA’s analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed its assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton. The position of Clapper does not agree with the FBI and the CIA’s official, “Obama sanctioned”, report. The Russian government is still calling for any evidence of its involvement to be brought to light so that they can address the allegations reasonably. Putin, of course, denies the claims made by the confused U.S. intelligence community.

“We are also very interested in understanding what they accused Russia of,” said Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova. “Many times the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Minister Lavrov have asked Americans to provide full information. But never had any response.”

Don’t forget that back in March 2013, James Clapper was testifying before a Senate committee, under oath, about the scope of the NSA’s monitoring of U.S. citizens. This is the exchange he had with Oregon Senator Ron Wyden:

Wyden: Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions, or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Clapper: “No, sir.”

Wyden: “It does not?”

Clapper: “Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly.”

Unfortunately for Clapper, in June 2013, Edward Snowden’s leaked information was made public and it was revealed that James Clapper was not only Director of National Intelligence, he was also a shameless liar.

On January 5, 2017, James Clapper delivered a comprehensive review of Russia’s efforts to undermine this year’s U.S. presidential election to the White House, with congressional lawmakers to receive briefings on the classified report as soon as next week. The full report, which details the sources and methods in which Moscow interfered with the election process via a series of cyberattacks and hacks against the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta, was handed over to President Obama.

From the report:

“This was a multifaceted campaign. The hacking was only one part of it. It also included classic propaganda… and fake news. An unclassified, redacted version of the White House report will also be released to the public. The U.S. intelligence community stands ready to defend their findings in the White House report, despite whatever rhetorical barrage may come from the Trump camp. There is an important distinction between healthy skepticism and discouragement of the analytical rigor that U.S. intelligence professionals put into assessments like the White House report. The intelligence community is not perfect but I do not think the intelligence community gets the credit it’s due for what it does day in, day out to thwart national security threats in the U.S. and elsewhere, he added.”

Trump likened the U.S. intelligence assessments on Russian interference to the false flag findings on Iraq’s supposed stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction that led the U.S. to war in the country in 2003. Trump also cited WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s repeated denials that Russian operatives provided the hacked emails from Mr. Podesta and the DNC, which were posted on the site.

John Brennan – Liar and Deceiver

Donald Trump has publicly speculated that former CIA director John Brennan is one of the criminal leakers. In January, he tweeted out, “Was this the leaker of Fake News?” Trump has now charged the Justice Department with investigating “low-life leakers” in the government.

What we know is that intelligence agencies taped Flynn’s call with the Russian ambassador, and we know that the contents of the call were leaked to the Washington Post’s David Ignatius. We also know that Brennan has made no secret of his opposition to Trump and Flynn.

“Earlier this week, I met separately with FBI Director James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” CIA Director John Brennan wrote in a memo. “The three of us also agree that our organizations, along with others, need to focus on completing the thorough review of this issue that has been directed by President Obama and which is being led by the DNI.”

“I don’t think he [Trump] has a full understanding of Russian capabilities and the actions they are taking on the world.  Mr. Trump has to understand that absolving Russia is a road that he needs to be very, very careful about moving down.”

“Now that he’s going to have an opportunity to do something for our national security as opposed to talking and tweeting, he’s going to have tremendous responsibility to make sure that U.S. and national security interests are protected. Spontaneity is not something that protects national security interests.”

“I do take great umbrage at that, and there is no basis for Mr. Trump to point fingers at the intelligence community for leaking information [dossier] that was already available publicly.”

There are many allegations that Brennan is a convert to Islam based upon firsthand reports of those who served with him in Saudi Arabia. Those allegations include that Brennan was the target of a Saudi intelligence influence operation, one outcome of which was Brennan’s conversion to Islam. At that time, Brennan was Chief of Station in Saudi Arabia, a billet that is designed for an operationally trained officer with experience in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, which Brennan was not. Brennan’s background is that of an analyst, which may explain why he lacked the sophistication and experience to understand that he was being played by the Saudis in an influence operation. Brennan has also stated publicly that he visited Mecca, which is impossible for a non-Muslim to do unless he is a special guest of the Saudi King.

Not only was Brennan an apologist for the Muslim Brotherhood, but Brennan’s Islamophilia dated to his days in college, when he spent a year in Cairo learning Arabic and taking courses in Middle Eastern studies. He later got a graduate degree with an emphasis in Middle Eastern studies. In 1996, his ties to the Islamic world tightened after he became the CIA’s station chief in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Brennan once said:

“During a 25-year career in government, I was privileged to serve in positions across the Middle East — as a political officer with the State Department and as a CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia. In Saudi Arabia, I saw how our Saudi partners fulfilled their duty as custodians of the two holy mosques of Mecca and Medina. I marveled at the majesty of the Hajj and the devotion of those who fulfilled their duty as Muslims by making that privilege — that pilgrimage.”

Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, Brennan teamed up with British and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Clinton supporters, to spy on Trump and his people. Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Clinton campaign, leaking out mentions of this bogus investigation to the press in the hopes of inflicting maximum political damage on Trump. 

The Guardian says that British spy head Robert Hannigan “passed material in summer 2016 to the CIA chief, John Brennan.” To ensure that these flaky tips leaked out, Brennan disseminated them on Capitol Hill. In August and September of 2016, he gave briefings to the Neocons in the Senate (see our article Naming the Neocon Traitors that Have Sold-Out America), which then turned up on the front page of the New York Times.

Loretta Lynch – Clinton Crony and Obama Stooge

On December 15, 2016, Loretta Lynch said:

“Fortunately we didn’t see the sort of technical interference that I know people had concerns about, also, in terms of voting machines and the like. There’s a number of things we do, some of which we talk about publicly, some that we don’t talk about publicly. This [Trump/Russian ties] was a grave concern to us, so we began in the summer to look at what we could say publicly about this issue, and that is why you saw the intelligence community release its report in October, before the election. Letting the American people know that the intelligence community had determined that Russia was behind the hacks [of the DNC] itself. The investigation is ongoing, certainly the review is continuing. We rarely do that kind of public attribution, but it was important in that instance because the election effects everyone.”

“It is not a matter of the results, it is peoples’ faith in the integrity of the system. At the same time, the Department of Homeland Security was involved in reaching out to every state to make sure that they had access to every resource they needed to protect the state electoral system as well.”

Michael Rogers Talks to Trump

On Thursday, November 17, 2016, NSA Director Mike Rogers traveled to New York and met with President-elect Donald Trump. On Friday, November 18, The Washington Post reported on a recommendation that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position:

“The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed.”

On Saturday, November 19, 2016 Reuters reported in The Washington Post’s story that there was additional pressure by Defense Secretary Ash Carter and DNI James Clapper to fire Mike Rogers.

Devin Nunes in Over His Head

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes said Russian interference was real, but criticized the administration for being slow to react.

“Russia’s cyber-attacks are no surprise to the House Intelligence Committee. Unfortunately, the Obama administration, dedicated to delusions of ‘resetting’ relations with Russia, ignored pleas by numerous Intelligence Committee members to take more forceful action against the Kremlin’s aggression. It appears, however, that after eight years the administration has suddenly awoken to the threat.”

U.S. Intelligence Community Report on Russian

The U.S. intelligence community concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an “influence campaign” to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning the 2016 election. The declassified report determined with “high confidence” that Russia’s interference — consisting of hacking Democratic groups and individuals and releasing that information via third-party websites, including WikiLeaks — helped President-elect Donald Trump win the election.

Here are some of the highlights from the report that demonstrate that it is a complete fabrication and a clear attempt to cover-up the Obama administration’s crimes in these matters. From the report:

1. Goal was to undermine U.S. faith in democratic process

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.”

2. Effort was ordered by Putin

“We assess that influence campaigns are approved at the highest levels of the Russian government – particularly those that would be politically sensitive.”

3. Putin’s grudge

“Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him.”

4. A ‘significant escalation’

“Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations.”

5. Paid social media trolls

“Moscow’s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations — such as cyberactivity — with overt efforts by Russian government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries and paid social media users or trolls.”

6. #DemocracyRIP

“Before the election, Russian diplomats had publicly denounced the US electoral process and were prepared to publicly call into question the validity of the results. Pro-Kremlin bloggers had prepared a Twitter campaign, #DemocracyRIP, on election night in anticipation of Secretary Clinton’s victory, judging from their social media activity.”

7. Russian media involvement

“Russian media hailed President-elect Trump’s victory as a vindication of Putin’s advocacy of global populist movements – the theme of Putin’s annual conference for Western academics in October 2016 — and the latest example of Western liberalism’s collapse.”

8. Beyond the U.S.

“Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes.”

9. Other U.S. targets

“We assess Russian intelligence services will continue to develop capabilities to provide Putin with options to use against the United States, judging from past practice and current efforts. Immediately after Election Day, we assess Russian intelligence began a spearphishing campaign targeting US government employees and individuals associated with US think tanks and NGOs in national security, defense, and foreign policy fields.”

10. Putin and WikiLeaks

“In early September, Putin said publicly it was important the DNC data was exposed to Wikileaks, calling the search for the source of the leaks a distraction and denying Russian ‘state-level’ involvement.”

Any unbiased, discerning reader can see that this entire report is bogus and the very people who made the report have stated publicly the exact opposite.  In fact, all that the U.S. intelligence community did personally to influence the election was later blamed upon the Russians. There is no evidence presented in the report and the redacted versions of the report were made available to everyone to continue the harassment of the Trump Team. Again, the U.S. intelligence community has proven their intent to lie to the American people with this fake intelligence report.  

Timeline of the Events

Truth is always revealed in a timeline. A good timeline will have nodal points based on truth and enough time on the line so that truth becomes self-evident. We are beginning to see the picture–nice and clear.

June 16, 2015: Trump announces that he is running for president

September 2015:  A FBI special agent contacted the Democratic National Committee to report that at least one DNC computer system had been hacked by an espionage team linked to the Russian government. The agent was transferred to a tech-support contractor at the help desk, who did a cursory check of DNC server logs and didn’t reply to follow-up calls from the FBI agent.

April 2016: The Democratic National Committee’s IT department noticed suspicious computer activity, contacted the FBI, and hired a private security firm, CrowdStrike, to investigate.

May 2016: CrowdStrike determined that highly sophisticated Russian-intelligence affiliated adversaries — denominated Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear — had been responsible for the DNC hack. Fancy Bear had indicators of affiliation with Russia’s Main Intelligence Department (GRU).

June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.

June 15, 2016: A hacker with the online persona “Guccifer 2.0” claimed credit for the DNC hack and began posting internal DNC documents on the Guccifer 2.0 website. CrowdStrike reiterated its conclusion that the hack had been a Russian intelligence operation but did not acknowledge Guccifer 2.0’s successful hack and theft of documents.

July 2016: The FBI used the unverified dossier detailing President Donald Trump’s alleged ties to Russia to bolster its case for a warrant that would allow it to surveil Carter Page, an early foreign-policy adviser to Trump’s campaign. The FBI has been using the dossier as a roadmap for its investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election since last year.

The raw intelligence contained in the 35-page collection of memos — written by the former British intelligence operative Christopher Steele, who spent 20 years spying for MI6 in Moscow — apparently helped the FBI convince the FISA court that Page could be acting as an agent of a foreign power. In 2013, a Russian spy was trying to recruit Carter Page who gave a Russia-friendly speech at a prestigious Moscow institute. That trip was a catalyst for the FBI investigation into connections between Russia and Trump’s campaign. From the Russian trip of the obscure Mr. Page grew a wide-ranging investigation, now accompanied by two congressional inquiries.

July 6, 2016: Another batch of hacked DNC documents appeared on the Guccifer 2.0 website.

July 14, 2016: Another batch of hacked DNC documents appeared on the Guccifer 2.0 website.

July 22, 2016: On the eve of the Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks released its first trove of e-mails stolen from the DNC which they later admitted came from a DNC staffer.

August 21, 2016: Ten weeks before the election, John Brennan, then the CIA director, was so concerned about increasing evidence of Russia’s election meddling that he began a series of urgent, individual briefings for eight top members of Congress, some of them on secure phone lines while they were on their summer break.

August 5, 2016: Trump surrogate Roger Stone wrote an article for Breitbart News. Stone argued that Guccifer 2.0 had nothing to do with Russia.

August 12, 2016: A batch of hacked Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) documents appeared on the Guccifer 2.0 website.

August 15, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 released hacked DCCC documents on primaries in Florida.

August 21, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 posted hacked DCCC documents on Pennsylvania’s congressional primaries.

August 31, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 posted documents hacked from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s personal computer.

September 15, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 posted hacked DCCC documents on New Hampshire, Ohio, Illinois, and North Carolina.

September 23, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 posted hacked DCCC documents on chairman Rep. Ben Ray Lujan.

October 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons.

October 4, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 posted documents hacked from the Clinton Foundation.

October 7, 2016: In a joint statement, the Department of Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence said, “The U.S. Intelligence Community is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.”

October 7, 2016: WikiLeaks began publishing stolen e-mails from the account of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

October 31, 2016: Franklin Foer’s propaganda article in Slate is another October Surprise against Trump. Entitled, Was a Trump Server Communicating With Russia, the article says: “This spring, a group of computer scientists set out to determine whether hackers were interfering with the Trump campaign. They found something they weren’t expecting.”

November 2, 2016: Follow up article of Franklin Foer. Trump’s Server, Revisited. Sorting through the new evidence, and competing theories, about the Trump server that appeared to be communicating with a Russian bank.

November 8, 2016: Election Day.

December 2016: Officials in the Obama administration became concerned that the incoming administration would cover up or destroy previously gathered intelligence relating Russia’s interference with the election. To preserve that intelligence for future investigations, they spread it across the government.

December 29, 2016: On the same day that President Obama announced sanctions against Russian in retaliation for its interference in the 2016 election, national security adviser-designate Lt. Gen. Flynn placed phone calls to the Russian ambassador.

January 6, 2017: The CIA, FBI and NSA released their unclassified report, concluding unanimously, “Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election.”

The three intelligence agencies agreed that “the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible.” The report also stated that WikiLeaks had been Russia’s conduit for the effort, writing, “we assess with high confidence that Russian military used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release U.S. victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.”

January 20, 2017: Trump is inaugurated.

January 23, 2017: At Sean Spicer’s first press briefing, Spicer said that none of Flynn’s conversations with the Russian ambassador touched on the December 29 sanctions. That got the attention of FBI Director James Comey. According to The Wall Street Journal, Comey convinced acting Attorney General Sally Yates to delay informing the White House immediately about the discrepancy between Spicer’s characterization of Flynn’s calls and U.S. intelligence intercepts showing that the two had, in fact, discussed sanctions. Comey reportedly asked Yates to wait a bit longer so that the FBI could develop more information and speak with Flynn himself. The FBI interviewed Flynn shortly thereafter.

January 24, 2017:  Per a subsequent article in The Washington Post, Flynn reportedly denied to FBI agents that he had discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia in his December 2016 calls with the Russian ambassador.

January 26, 2017: Acting Attorney General Sally Yates informed White House counsel Don McGahn that Flynn had made misleading statements about his late December conversations with the Russian ambassador. Sean Spicer later said Trump and a small group of White House advisers were “immediately informed of the situation.”

February 13, 2017: The Washington Post reported that acting Attorney General Sally Yates had warned the White House in late January that Flynn had mischaracterized his December conversation with the Russian ambassador, and that it made him vulnerable to Russian blackmail. Later that evening, Flynn resigned.

February 15, 2017: Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz and other congressional Republicans formally asked the Justice Department’s Inspector General to investigate the leaks.

February 17, 2017: FBI Director Comey met privately with members of the Senate Intelligence Committee to discuss the Russia investigation. Immediately thereafter, the Committee sent a letter asking more than a dozen agencies, organizations and individuals — including the White House — to preserve all communications related to the Senate panel’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Beginning to see the picture here? Nothing but a pit of lying snakes, slithering around their offal and stink.

February 24, 2017: U.S. President Donald Trump criticized the FBI for failing to stop leaks of national security information to the media and directed the agency to find those who pass on classified information. 

February 25, 2017: The FBI rejected a White House request to publicly deny media reports about communications between Donald Trump’s associates and Russians known to U.S. intelligence during the 2016 presidential campaign.

March 2017: FBI Director James Comey publicly confirmed for the first time that his agency has been investigating possible ‘coordination’ between Russia and the Trump campaign, and whether any crimes may have been committed as part of a wider probe into the hacking of Democratic servers and Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

March 4, 2017: Trump tweeted that President Obama had wiretapped his phones during the presidential campaign.

March 5, 2017: FBI Director Comey asked the Justice Department to rebut publicly Trump’s assertion that President Obama had ordered the wiretapping of Trump’s phones. Meanwhile, Sean Spicer announced that neither Trump nor the White House would comment further on Trump/Russia matters until Congress completed an investigation into whether President Obama’s executive branch abused its powers during 2016 election.

March 9, 2017: Federal investigators and computer scientists continue to examine whether there was a computer server connection between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank. Questions about the possible connection were widely dismissed four months ago. But the FBI’s investigation remains open and is in the hands of the FBI’s counterintelligence team — the same one considering Russia’s suspected interference in the 2016 election.

March 15, 2017: The House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes said that, “We don’t have any evidence that that took place and in fact I don’t believe — just in the last week of time, the people we’ve talked to — I don’t think there was an actual tap of Trump Tower.”   

This statement was made before the investigation had even begun.

March 16, 2017: Senate Intelligence Committee leaders issued a joint statement rebutting Trump’s unfounded assertion that President Obama had wiretapped Trump Tower: “Based on the information available to us, we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016.”

This was another statement made before the investigation had even begun.

March 20, 2017: FBI Director James Comey testified before Congress on his agency’s investigation into Russian election interference. Comey testified that the FBI was investigating Russian interference with the election, including “the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts.”

With respect to Trump’s wiretapping claims, Comey said, “I have no information that supports these tweets.”  There was no investigation of Obama or Clinton Russian ties.

May 5, 2017: FBI Director James Comey refused to confirm under oath whether the bureau is investigating accusations related to whether the Obama administration spied on President Trump’s election campaign and transition team. The director said that he could not confirm that in public without authorization from the Justice Department, which would have initiated any such investigation.

May 2017: Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer and author of the fake “Trump Russian Dossier” alleging collusion between Russia and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign has conceded in court documents that part of his work still needed to be verified. The defamation case against Steele is playing out in the High Court in London. In the “dossier” Steele accused Aleksej Gubarev and his web-hosting companies of hacking the Democratic Party computer networks. Mr. Gubarev calls the charge fiction and filed a lawsuit in February. Steele said the dossier “needed to be analyzed and further investigated and verified.” Steele claims he failed to do “even the most basic attempt at verification.”

Steele’s Orbis Intelligence Ltd. was paid to do the work by Fusion GPS who was funded by both anti-Trump Republicans and anti-Trump Democrats. Steele says, “the dossier was never meant to be made public. Steele “reached an agreement with the FBI a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him to continue his work.”

The Truth About Obama Wiretapping

Information released from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on May 3, 2017, shows that the Obama administration distributed thousands of intelligence reports with the un-redacted names of U.S. citizens during the 2016 election. During his final year in office, Obama’s team significantly expanded efforts to search National Security Agency intercepts for information about Americans, distributing thousands of intelligence reports across government with the un-redacted names of U.S. residents during the midst of a divisive 2016 presidential election.

Government officials conducted 30,355 searches in 2016 seeking information about Americans in NSA intercept metadata. The activity amounted to a 27.5 percent increase over the prior year and more than triple the 9,500 such searches that occurred in 2013. The government in 2016 scoured the contents of NSA intercepted calls and emails for 5,288 Americans, an increase of 13 percent over the prior year and a massive spike from the 198 names searched in 2013.

The data provides the clearest evidence to date of how information “accidentally” collected by the NSA about Americans overseas was subsequently searched and disseminated after Obama loosened privacy protections to make such sharing easier in 2011 in the name of national security. The revelations are particularly sensitive since the NSA is legally forbidden from directly spying on Americans and its authority to conduct warrantless searches on foreigners is up for renewal in Congress.

The searches ultimately resulted in 3,134 NSA intelligence reports with un-redacted U.S. names being distributed across government in 2016, and another 3,354 reports in 2015. About half the time, U.S. identities were un-redacted in the original reports while the other half were unmasked after the fact by special request of Obama administration officials. Among those whose names were unmasked in 2016 or early 2017 were campaign or transition associates of President Donald Trump as well as members of Congress.

The data kept by ODNI is missing some information from one of the largest consumers of NSA intelligence, the FBI, and officials acknowledge the numbers are likely much higher when the FBI’s activity is added. Obama substantially eased the rules starting in 2011 allowing for government officials, including political appointees, to unmask and obtain information about Americans in NSA intercepts.

The easing allowed appointees like former National Security Adviser Susan Rice to request and review the unmasked names of Trump campaign or transition officials intercepted in foreign conversations late last year. The NSA can spy on foreign powers without a court warrant under Section 702 of the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act but is forbidden from targeting Americans. Today, the power to unmask an American’s name — once considered a rare event in the intelligence and civil liberty communities — now resides with about 20 intelligence officials. The FBI also can unmask Americans’ names collected under FISA to other intelligence professionals and policymakers.

A federal judge in Washington has ruled in 2013 and again in 2015 that the NSA collection of data on Americans violates the 4th Amendment of the Constitution, but that ruling is winding its way through appeals. The FISA court, meanwhile, continues to support the intelligence community’s continued use of the data, as recently as in 2015.

It is clear by the lies above that Obama and his team knew exactly what they were doing when they surveilled the Trump Team and that, in fact, they had made it common policy to eavesdrop on their opponents. The data from James Clapper’s own office demonstrates the enormous scope of Obama’s espionage crimes and the lies that Obama, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, Rogers and others have told to the public and congress.

Lying became so common-place for Obama and his intelligence bosses that they didn’t even start to cover their tracks until after Trump was elected. Then, as we can see by the massive discrepancies in their own public statements and the incongruences found in the Timeline of Events above, their own words and deeds are their indictment for treasonous crimes and gross misuse of the power of their office.

The time has come to make Obama and his pack of liars answer for their crimes through the indictment of their own words and deeds.

Citizens of America, we ask that you print, mail, and/or email this citizens intelligence report to everyone you know, including your elected representatives, the White House, the Department of Justice. We the People are submitting our own intelligence report since 17 U.S. intelligence agencies can’t do diddly squat in investigating this matter. We the People will not tolerate the destruction of our country by this gang of lying, thieving, conniving thugs. And we are quite finished with your Orwellian political correctness speech.

We call out the liars and traitors that they are. Period. Lock ‘em up, Dano.

6Comments Add yours

• 1

• Kelly Prosnier on May 10, 2017 at 11:24 am 

• Thank you for the post. You guys need to preserve these timelines and put them in a volume for future generations. It will be the REAL history book and will be so unlike what is presently on offer

• Sent from my iPhone

• >

• 2

• Anonymous on May 11, 2017 at 2:39 am 

• Great article. Stayed up way too late. Read all of it. So glad I did. I will share to those who care. I live in a liberal chunk of the PNW. Hard to find anyone who gives a rip. Very informative and concise. I am more informed. Again. You feel me?

• 3

• Elizabeth on May 16, 2017 at 7:29 pm 

• Great report of the timelines! Good job!

• 4

• João Thiago on May 30, 2017 at 7:08 am 

• Hoje em dia é possível descobrir uma variedade enorme de tipos e materiais, com muitas extremamente semelhantes às flores naturais, sendo que
  elas não precisam de cuidados como sol, sombra, rega e outros, podendo ser usadas em qualquer espaço
  e também envolvente. porque sei que http://ovolotheckyz.mihanblog.com/post/comment/new/30/fromtype/postone/fid/1495925004592a010cd8f2c/atrty/1495925004/avrvy/0/key/18ef38d9edd537a254991e249f5aeba2/

• 5

• Anonymous on June 29, 2017 at 6:01 pm 

• Thank you for your great information. We badly need your site for truthful information.

• 6

• Kai Zingel on December 15, 2017 at 2:18 am 

• Its international,in Europe we got the new Gestapo starring A. Merkel[the most horrible ”woman” after Clinton

·Comments are closed.

"Don't teach pigs to sing; it wastes your time and irritates the pig."

Robert Heinlein

4/6/2017 Response to http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/donald-trumps-fictional-america-post-fact-venezuela-214973

It is as ludicrous to call reality lies as it is to say the MSM presents a fair and balanced view of ANY issue. Banning Muslims, building a wall and draining the swamp are only 'pyramid in the desert' public policy to those who are willing to sacrifice the American dream for political correctness, which is the single most offensive phrase ever forced upon an unconsenting public.

After so many seemingly endless years of 'representatives' who could care less about what was good for America and seemed to actually take great delight in restricting freedom, it is not so much that the heart of the country loves Donald Trump as it is that we despise the left wing social justice warriors who insist they know what is best for everyone while they only care about power and control.

Not confirming Gorsuch was a fatal mistake. It proved all the 'conspiracy theories' about the deep state, biased media, and self-serving democratic globalists are undeniably true. We may have been temporarily distracted by the political sleight-of-hand for a while, but we are not stupid. And to try to pass off HRC as a qualified leader did nothing but force Americans to wake up, and we are actually quite pissed. It would not surprise me if the Democratic party ceased to exist in less time it takes Ivanka to become the first female president.