Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Latest

Ford-Kavanaugh showdown actually reveals Democrat sickness (VIDEO)

The victim testimony of Dr. Ford served the needs of Democrat senators. And after this scandal ends, Dr Ford will be discarded.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Riveting TV.” “Shame of the Nation.” “Hollywood seethes.” The Drudge Report lists these and about thirteen other links at the top of its page as of the time of this writing to describe what was anticipated as a major showdown between the Democrats and Republicans over the fate of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, as his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, got her chance to testify in front of the Senate Committee about her allegations that the Judge sexually assaulted her when she was a teenager at a drinking party back in 1982.

This event was both more – and less – than what either side of supporters probably expected.

In what can likely be seen as a very refreshing display of conservative assertiveness, Judge Kavanaugh was completely unambiguous and forceful in his testimony from beginning to end. Further, and perhaps more significant, Senator Lindsey Graham delivered a scathing lecture to the Democrats who are to a man aligned against Brett Kavanaugh, and to a man, all stating they believe Christine’s story.

Further, the sex-crimes prosecutor who the Republicans hired to question Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford told the senators the case would not hold up in a courtroom, when she talked to them in an overnight meeting where all fifty-one Republican senators were present:

“Mitchell spelled it out and was clear with senators that she could not take this anywhere near a courtroom,” one source told Fox News. She told them she would not charge the Supreme Court nominee and reportedly said she wouldn’t even seek a search warrant.

Mitchell’s opinion could sway fence-sitting senators ahead of a critical Senate Judiciary Committee vote set for Friday morning.

It is not necessary for Kavanaugh to secure majority approval of the committee in order to advance to the full Senate, but a favorable recommendation could bode well for his imperiled nomination — and vice-versa…

“It’s a tough one. She offered good testimony, and so did he,” Flake, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, said Thursday night. “If you’re making an allegation, you want there to be some corroboration. Where is the burden? It’s like impeachment. You don’t know.”

In fact, this is true. Dr Ford was as unwavering in her testimony as Judge Kavanaugh was with his own. However, there was a peculiarity in Dr Ford’s testimony that is suspect. Watch here:

Her story is complete, but she is reading it. It must be taken as strong possibility that this is to help her focus as she was already reported to be “terrified” of testifying. She also appears to be either forcing herself to have emotion, for her voice is cracking, but forced and very rehearsed. At other times she does appear to display genuine emotion. However, this testimony, while detailed, seems “vacant” of some real personal connection.

Naturally, people supporting the idea that Dr Ford actually experienced sexual assault at the hands of Brett Kavanaugh would be inclined to take her emotional display as genuine. In contrast, this clip, at the beginning of her testimony, reveals a somewhat different character to her voice:

She starts with a fairly strong tone of speaking, relative to her recounting of her story. But then, there was this rather strange episode concerning her polygraph test:

Here the sex-crimes prosecutor’s questions get blocked by her attorneys (she is flanked by at least two of them), and yet, she reports the polygraph test as “extremely stressful.”

The questions here seemed to run down a rabbit hole, yet the interesting situation remains that she was walked through this part of the questioning very carefully by her counsel.

She said she was “scared of the test itself.”

Again, why?

This makes no sense. A person with a legitimate claim of wrongdoing by someone else should have no problem stating her case. And, Judge Kavanaugh was not in the room during her testimony.

However, the presentation of this story is almost letter-perfect victim testimony, at least for Hollywood. However, again, the story Dr Ford offered is utterly uncorroborated, even by the people she named as witnesses or at least, corroborating people. They all denied this story.

Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony was refreshingly brutal. Even liberal outlet Vox noted that the Judge’s anger “worked.” The man claimed he was set up by Democrats intent on vengeance for various reasons. In this, he spoke as probably anyone who is on the side of President Trump and his nominee would think and feel if confronted with a situation that looks like nothing less than a last-minute lynching. He was furious. One can see so right here:

Again, the way one receives this testimony probably depends on his or her already-made-up-mind. This, of course is a tragedy, because the hearing was not purposed to make each side more set, but to shed light on the allegations and see what the real story actually is. Yet, as Brett Kavanaugh said himself, the attack was a disgrace.

And unlike Dr Ford, Kavanaugh did not think only of himself. He noted that this tactic is dangerous to the future of the nation as a whole.

He then got down to the brass tacks about Dr Ford’s allegation. He broke when he recounted his ten-year old daughter Ashley suggesting that the family pray for Dr Ford. However, unlike Dr Ford’s tears, which appear “forced”, Kavanaugh showed the much harder task of trying to hold them back. He noted, and acknowledged that it is evident that Dr Ford was abused by someone, but emphatically said he never did anything like that.

He never, ever wavered from this.

At the time of this writing the matter of confirming Judge Kavanaugh has been moved to a committee vote. The Democrats continued to grandstand, with several of them refusing to even answer “no” to the voice vote to continue the process. And, apparently, many of them simply left the room. At this time, the vote to move ahead went 11-8 to proceed.

As continuing attacks come from Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA), the shape of the attacks remarkably resembles the attacks against Donald Trump – efforts to decry Judge Kavanaugh’s decorum as unbefitting of a Justice, and so on, just as Trump’s accusers called him “unpresidential.”

There is one glaring issue about this story: Dr Ford’s story was reportedly leaked by Diane Feinstein (a fact she denies). However, the claims of and surrounding Dr Ford are conflicting. She claims to not want to have had her story revealed, but it was. By whom? If she didn’t want to be brought on display, she was anyway. Why? To serve the Democratic Party’s purpose. Christine Blasey Ford is now twice victimized in this issue. By making her story public, she and her family were reportedly receiving death threats. The same is true for Judge Kavanaugh and his family.

Nothing good came out of this for Dr Ford, and she honestly looks unstable. It seems to be that another tragedy is in the making because this frail woman looks like someone in need of help, and not in need of nurturing of victimhood. But this will not come. And it will not come because like so many other people, victims serve a purpose for stronger people. For Dr. Ford, those stronger people were the members of the Senate in the Democrat Party. And after this scandal ends, Dr Ford will be discarded as soon as she is no longer needed.

This is the sickness of Democrat politics in America.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
24 Comments

24
Leave a Reply

avatar
8 Comment threads
16 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
15 Comment authors
GonzogalGeorge HartwellLisa KarpovaTjoejohn vieira Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Marcia
Guest
Marcia

Jeff Flake doesn’t know where the burden of proof must lie? …. It lies with the accuser Dr. Ford and she has proven nothing. The second person had to call around to see what other people remembered because she was too drunk? … and the gang rape stuff is where this was taken to circus level. I personally think Dr. Ford has taken a half true and non-traumatizing for a normal person situation from her life, a case where it was another man who did something, but less than her story, and she has inflated and embellished the story purposely.… Read more »

a amon
Guest
a amon

” and the gang rape stuff is where this was taken to circus level.” does seem a bit much until you read this article, https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/09/kavanaugh-judge-prep-school-parties.html ” I know what happened at prep school parties in the 1980s. The Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge allegations are upsettingly familiar. ” much more detail in the article.. also try this, by an academic who studied at one of these elite schools and wrote a book about their culture, https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/09/28/kavanaugh-lying-his-upbringing-explains-why watched both statements, Ford seemed scared but kept calm and together.. she seemed real… Kavanagh was emotionally unhinged, is this what passes for judicial… Read more »

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Ford scared????? She is a Professor of Psychiatry, where she specialises at Stanford in ‘Mind Control – MK Ultra’. Her brother is an attorney, representing Fusion, and funnily enough Soros has budgeted $50 million, to carry on the ‘Steele Dossier/Trump Removal’ programme, including still using ‘Fusion’. Then you have her father, together with his history. Not forgetting her husband, who also specialises in ‘mind control’. So how does somebody on the ‘frequent-flyer program’ find she has a ‘selective phobia’, where flying is concerned? How is it possible to fail a ‘polygraph’? Is it not true that sociopaths have a tendency… Read more »

john vieira
Guest

What I loved is how her testimony was able to “fill in the gaps/flaws” that astute posters pointed out in her original testimony…somebody is obviously taking notes and amending the script as it progresses…however she will never remember the house or the fourth guy – who will never surface …and none of the other witnesses or the accused will either as it is all fiction. Very selective memory and intermittent phobias. CIA/Hollywood script no doubt.

Flying Gabriel
Guest
Flying Gabriel

In other words … it is as it seems until you find some material to support your bias. Then even the preposterous becomes believable. – Sums up everything wrong about America. The real context places him neither as a presiding judge nor a representative attorney. He’s simply a man fighting for his life. Even Jesus wouldn’t qualify to be the son of god to you – throwing money lenders out of the temple makes him emotionally unstable. The USA has this dreamlike hollywood disease where any public servant of high office has to resemble Clark Kent. That’s the problem when… Read more »

john vieira
Guest

Nailed it!!!

john vieira
Guest

https://slate..We considered that pulp fiction….akin to “Rhoding School”…”If you are struggling to process a memory of sexual violence you can reach out for help…”says it all…as they will “fill in” the gaps…seen how these filthy minded felons operate…

A.F.
Guest
A.F.

Rape is no crime in the USA…no surprise………………..

Joe
Guest
Joe

???

voza0db
Guest
voza0db

What rape scoundrel?

Donna
Guest
Donna

It certainly is.

john vieira
Guest

Nope…over the years “rape” has been overly reclassified so much so that is barely recognizable. The best that can be ascribed to these events…if they indeed happened – which due to the context, timing and players is highly unlikely… is assault.

Tjoe
Guest
Tjoe

I watched the entire hearing without talking heads polluting it. I spent most of the day, taking breaks and all. The author is bias. I certainly disagree with the author. I voted for Trump because Hillary is a criminal, not because of Trumps virtue. His ego overshadows his virtue’s most times. His puddy grabbing is legendary. It’s not about Trump, but there do seem to be some similarities rooted in privilege…the golden spoon. Trump and Kavanaugh are alike….born to privilege. More important than her testimony, was Kavanaugh’s demeanor when giving his testimony. For a Judge, you would think he would… Read more »

Flying Gabriel
Guest
Flying Gabriel

Attributing hate and menace is pure projection on your part. I’m not American or politically partisan and saw, not a judge presiding over a court room, but a man fighting for his life. I’m sure without the emotion he would have been labelled cold and calculated, emotionless psychopath – not suitable to be a judge. This is the advantage of being neutral – I can see your bias like a blister on your face.

Tjoe
Guest
Tjoe

Did you watch his testimony all the way through Flying Gabriel? He came unhinged and yes, showed “hate and menace” on his face.

Composure is different than literally falling apart. I don’t know where you live, but I don’t want such an unstable man on the US Supreme Court for life, I want to move on to the next candidate….who will by the way, be Republican. Don’t worry about the blister on my face, worry about the LOG in your eye.

geoff
Guest
geoff

“the Democrats who are to a man aligned against Brett Kavanaugh, and to a man, all stating they believe Christine’s story”

The funny part will be when women start making false accusations against these men come election time and their complicity with the Blasey Ford fiasco will come back home to bite them on the arse !!

john vieira
Guest

Deservedly so!!! And I sincerely hope that the biters have SHARP teeth. The world appears to be moving away from the Arthurian model and adopting the “taqiyya” model…which has overwhelmed the D.N.C

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

An outstanding video that dissects the body language and even voice of Dr Ford during her testimony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGxr1VQ2dPI

George Hartwell
Guest

That is a very interesting analysis of Dr. Ford and the conclusion is not supportive of Ford’s testimony.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

Today the lawyer who questioned Ford during the hearing released a memo she sent to the committee and lists the inconsistencies in Fords testimony: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-01/rachel-mitchell-memo-highlights-weaknesses-ford-testimony

jim bim
Guest
jim bim

Read this link, if true, it turns out that Ms. Ford is the head of Stanford University’s Undergraduate Intern Recruitment Program, for the Central Intelligence Agency. Ms. Ford`s brother Ralph III, used to work for the International Law Firm of . . . Baker Hostetler; the firm that created FusionGPS, the company that wrote the infamous “Russia Dossier” which they later admitted was only a collection of field interviews. Baker Hostetler is located in the same building where the CIA operates three companies: Red coats, Inc. Admiral Security Services and DataWatch Guess who operates those companies? RALPH BLASEY II. He… Read more »

Flying Gabriel
Guest
Flying Gabriel

Any Democrat Senator calling somebody else “Evil” is 100% psychological projection. I’ve never seen a more transparently wicked “gang rape” of a man’s character.
There is evil in America for sure – and in large servings … but it ain’t Brett Kavanaugh.
Hello from NZ.

john vieira
Guest

Seen it too and the evil is supported by a biased sold out and corrupted mainstream media, whose reach is not confined to America…Hello from Ca.

Lisa Karpova
Guest
Lisa Karpova

You can tell who is lying by who the social media is trying to protect. Damning pictures of Ford are being deleted.

Latest

Mueller report contains claim Russia taped Bill Clinton having phone sex with Monica Lewinsky

Bill Clinton allegedly was recorded by Russia in the 1990s, allowing Russia to learn of the affair before American officials.

Washington Examiner

Published

on

Via The Washington Examiner…


Special counsel Robert Mueller’s report mentions a claim that Russians recorded President Bill Clinton having phone sex with White House intern Monica Lewinsky — but the reference was redacted from the version released to the public.

The redaction is likely to anger Republicans, because the allegation has been known since at least 2001 and the Mueller report’s reference to a claim that President Trump watched prostitutes urinating in a Moscow hotel room was not struck out.

Clinton allegedly was recorded by Russia in the 1990s, allowing Russia to learn of the affair before American officials. A reference to the Clinton intercept was redacted from the Mueller report to protect “personal privacy,” but sources told the Washington Examiner that the context makes clear what was blacked out.

According to the report, Center for the National Interest President Dimitri Simes sent Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner a 2016 email with recommended talking points to counter Hillary Clinton’s Russia attacks. The email referenced “a well-documented story of highly questionable connections” between Bill Clinton and Russia.

At a meeting in New York, Simes told Kushner the details: Russia allegedly recorded President Clinton on the phone with Lewinsky, opening questions of foreign leverage over the ex-president-turned-potential first spouse.

“During the August 17 meeting, Simes provided Kushner the Clinton-related information that he had promised. Simes told Kushner that, [redacted],” the Mueller report says. “Simes claimed that he had received this information from former CIA and Reagan White House official Fritz Ermarth, who claimed to have learned it from U.S. intelligence sources, not from Russians.”

Ermarth, 78, a 25-year CIA veteran and chairman of the National Intelligence Council from 1988 to 1993, said he was concerned with the wording in the report. He said the report inaccurately suggests he mishandled classified information, when in fact he used public sourcing.

“The line in the Mueller report that says any of this was based on intelligence information is the product either of faulty remembering by Dimitri or a flawed inference … or a hostile fabrication by the Mueller people,” Ermarth said. “[The report wording] implies my misuse of intelligence or use of intelligence that is classified in this context. And that is completely false.”

Independent counsel Ken Starr’s 1998 report on Clinton’s affair with Lewinsky identified 17 phone sex calls in 1996 and 1997. The report says Clinton told Lewinsky “that he suspected that a foreign embassy (he did not specify which one) was tapping his telephones, and he proposed cover stories. If ever questioned, she should say that the two of them were just friends. If anyone ever asked about their phone sex, she should say that they knew their calls were being monitored all along, and the phone sex was just a put-on.”

Ermarth thinks he told Simes that the Clinton-Lewinsky phone call was intercepted while the president was traveling on Air Force One, but that detail is believed to not have been conveyed to Kushner or included in the report.

The former CIA officer, who was not interviewed by Mueller, said he discussed the intercept with Simes during a trip to Washington in either 2014 or 2015. The story’s omission from the Mueller report hints at a double standard for the Clintons, he said.

Mueller spokesman Peter Carr declined to comment, as did Simes. A White House spokesman and Kushner attorney Abbe Lowell did not respond to requests for comment.

The report was redacted by Justice Department leadership in cooperation with Mueller’s team. There were 855 redactions, according to the Smoking Gun. Only 7% of of those redactions were justified by “personal privacy,” according to an analysis by Vox. Most information was withheld because it involved grand jury deliberations or because it could harm an ongoing criminal case.

According to the report, Simes told investigators Kushner appeared to consider the phone-sex story “old news,” as news outlets had long ago reported that Russia had advanced knowledge about Lewinsky. Meanwhile, Kushner told Mueller’s team he did not receive information from Simes that could be “operationalized” and doubted new negative information could be unearthed on the Clintons.

Though the report was redacted to protect the former president’s privacy, it does reference an alleged sex tape featuring Trump watching prostitutes urinate in a Moscow hotel. The Mueller report says Russian businessman Giorgi Rtskhiladze texted former Trump attorney Michael Cohen that he “[s]topped flow of tapes from Russia.” Rtskhiladze told Mueller’s team that “he was told the tapes were fake, but he did not communicate that to Cohen.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

FBI Texts Show Agents Discussed Recruiting White House Sources To Spy For Bureau

The texts and sources reveal that Strzok had one significant contact within the White House – Vice President Mike Pence’s Chief of Staff Joshua Pitcock.

Sara Carter

Published

on

Via SaraCarter.com:


Senior Republican chairmen submitted a letter Thursday to Department of Justice Attorney General William Barr revealing new texts from former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok to his paramour FBI Attorney Lisa Page showing the pair had discussed attempts to recruit sources within the White House to allegedly spy on the Trump administration.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Charles Grassley and Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson revealed the information in a three page letter. The texts had been obtained by SaraACarter.com Tuesday and information regarding the possible attempt to recruit White House sources had been divulged by several sources to this news site last week.

The texts and sources reveal that Strzok had one significant contact within the White House – Vice President Mike Pence’s Chief of Staff Joshua Pitcock, whose wife was working as an analyst for Strzok on the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server. A senior White House official told this news site that Pitcock’s wife recused herself from the Clinton investigation as soon as Pence and Trump became the Republican nominees in July 2016. A senior law enforcement official also told SaraACarter.com that Pitcock’s wife no longer worked under Strzok after she recused herself from the Clinton investigation.

However, the text messages uncovered from November, 2016 and have left questions lingering about the relationship between Strzok, Pitcock and his wife among congressional investigators and lawmakers.

“The course of our oversight work we have reviewed certain text messages that may show potential attempts by the FBI to conduct surveillance of President-elect Trump’s transition team,” the letter states. “In text messages exchanged between former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and former FBI Attorney Lisa Page, the two discussed the possibility of developing “potential relationships” at a November 2016 FBI briefing for presidential transition team staff. Specifically, it appears they discussed sending “the CI guy” to assess an unnamed person ‘demeanor’ but were concerned because it might be unusual for him to attend.”

The Senators are investigating if any “of these communications, and the precise purpose of any attempts to ‘develop relationships’ with Trump or VP Mike Pence transition team staff are not immediately clear.”

Were these efforts done to gain better communication between the respective parties, or were the briefings used as intelligence gathering operations? Further, did any such surveillance activities continue beyond the inauguration, and in the event they did, were those activities subject to proper predication,” the letter states.

“Any improper FBI surveillance activities that were conducted before or after the 2016 election must be brought to light and properly addressed.”

The Texts

A few weeks after the presidential election, Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page discussed the logistics for the briefing. Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page said the following:

Strzok: Talking with Bill. Do we want Joe to go with Evanina instead of Charli for a variety of reasons?

(Strzok is referring to former FBI Assistant Director of Counterintelligence division Bill Priestap. ‘Joe is referencing FBI Special Agent Joe Pientka, who interviewed former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn in January, 2017. And Evanina is in reference to William Evanina, National Counterintelligence and Security Center.)

Page: Hmm. Not sure. Would it be unusual to have [sic] show up again? Maybe another agent from the team?

Strzok: Or, he’s “the CI guy.” Same.might [sic] make sense. He can assess if there [sic] are any news [sic] Qs, or different demeanor. If Katie’s husband is there, he can see if there are people we can develop for potential relationships

Page: Should I ask Andy about it? Or Bill (Priestap) want to reach out for Andy (McCabe)?Strzok: I told him I’m sure we could ask you to make the swap if we thought it.

FBI Seeks Sources In White House

There was one major connection in the White House. According to documents, White House sources and the FBI one of FBI’s top counterintelligence analysts who was personally working for former FBI Special Agent Strzok had a spouse working directly for Vice President Mike Pence.

The White House and the FBI told this news site that she had recused herself from the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server and working for Strzok as soon as Pence and Trump announced they were the candidates for the party.

The FBI asked that her name be kept private as not to reveal her identity. Her identity, however is revealed in the texts below. But this news site is withholding her last name for security reasons.

An FBI Intelligence analyst named Katherine, is married to Joshua Pitcock. Katherine’s name is different from her husbands. Pitcock worked for Pence as his Chief of Staff from January, 2017 until he resigned in August, 2017.

Prior to accepting his then new role at the White House, he had served as a senior Trump campaign official and long time aide to Pence.

Katherine had been detailed to Strzok and according to sources was one of the top analysts in the investigation into Hillary Clinton, according to federal law enforcement sources and U.S. officials.

Strzok was removed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team in 2017 and then fired from the FBI in August, 2018. He was fired after an extensive review by Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s office into the FBI’s handling of the Clinton investigation and was removed from Mueller’s team after the IG discovered his anti-Trump text messages to his paramour former FBI Attorney Lisa Page.

A senior White House official told SaraACarter.com that it is “our understanding that as soon as the President and Vice President accepted the nomination, she recused herself for the entire time after they were officially the nominees from anything that would have spill over to the White House.”

FBI officials could not immediately respond for comment.

Trump announced Pence as his pick on July 15, 2016. They officially became nominees on July 21, 2016 at the Republican convention. This means, Katherine was working on the Russia investigation with Strzok prior to that time frame. Strzok’s direct involvement and actions during the investigation will more than likely lead to criminal charges, a source with knowledge told SaraACarter.com.

A former senior intelligence official who spoke to this news-site said “my concern about this is the potential for information to flow from her to her husband to spin any information that the Vice President may or may not have heard during that time frame.” The former intelligence source said the connection raises questions regarding information that may have moved from the FBI into the vice president’s orbit “regarding former (National Security Advisor Michael Flynn),” they added.

The senior White House official responded saying, “she was recused from that investigation before he was ever sworn into office. That didn’t happen.”

However, “the texts leave many questions unanswered and appear to show that Strzok was in communication with Pitcock on some level,” the intelligence official added.

During the time Pitcock served as chief of staff, Flynn became the highest profile target of the now debunked investigation into the campaign.

In the letter Grassley and Johnson refer to Barr’s testimony “during your April 10, 2019, testimony before a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee, you stated that you are looking into the ‘genesis and conduct of intelligence activities directed at the Trump campaign during 2016.’ You further stated that ‘spying did occur,’ and that you believe it is your obligation to look into the question of whether surveillance activities by the Federal Bureau of lnvestigation (FBI) or other intelligence agencies were adequately predicated.”

“We share your concerns about these activities, and are troubled by the apparent unauthorized disclosures of surveillance efforts and other classified information during the same time period,” the Chairmen state in the letter. “We bring to your attention information that may assist your review.

Page Two of The Letter

Questions for Attorney General Barr April 25, 2019

  1. Please describe the nature and extent o f your review o f FBI surveillance o f the Trump Campaign, President-elect Trump’s transition staff, Vice President- elect Pence’s transition staff, President Trump’s staff, and Vice President Pence’s staff, including your efforts to determine whether that surveillance was adequately predicated.
  2. How many counter-intelligence briefings were provided to the Trump and Pence transition staffs prior to Inauguration Day? Please list the dates, all agencies involved, and each official that represented those agencies at the briefings.
  3. Many of the FBI employees involved in these activities are no longer employed by the federal government. How will your review obtain information needed from these individuals?
  4. Will you commit to providing the results of your review once completed?
  5. What steps have you taken to investigate whether DOJ or FBI officials hadunauthorized contacts with the media during the Russia investigation?

We anticipate that your written reply and most responsive documents will be unclassified. Please send all unclassified material directly to each Committee. In keeping with the requirements of Executive Order 13526, if any of the responsive documents do contain classified information, please segregate all unclassified material within the classified documents, provide all unclassified information directly to each Committee, and provide a classified addendum to the Office of Senate Security. Although our Committees comply with all laws and regulations governing the handling of classified information, they are not bound, absent prior agreement, by any handling restrictions.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Ethics, Morals and Integrity in British Public Life

Why does the UK Government, the FCO in particular, allow its retired diplomats to be able to go straight into the private sector without any ‘cooling off’ period?

Richard Galustian

Published

on

The ethics of allowing retiring British government officials to use immediately ‘the revolving door’ seems immoral.

Something that immediately springs to mind is how did former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair amass a fortune of nearly £100m within years of leaving office?

Ponder that fact about Blair when considering the true definition of ethics and integrity in public life worldwide.

War torn Libya is a most recent example in point. Libya, where most reasonable people would think it strange for companies to try and win business while there is war; or maybe it’s as the original Baron Rothschild put it, seek business when there is “blood on the streets”.

Peter Millett, former British Ambassador to Libya, is a merely a case in point, becoming a Board member of the LBBC (https://lbbc.org.uk/).

The Libyan British Business Council do some good networking for companies who seek work in the war torn country that is currently Libya, not, to be frank, earth shatteringly effective, not its fault given the civil war, but it has to be said, only a few of its individual members (of the LBBC) are distinguished and capable and well connected in their own right; most others are less so.

More important for Millett though, no doubt, is his new personal company he recently created in London. It’s called The Peter Millett Consultancy Ltd and describes itself as “Interested in offering consultancy and advice to companies and organisation interested in working overseas.”

Why, many ask, is any former Ambassador continuing to comment/meddle in affairs of their last posting, without making it abundantly clear they work for the private sector actually for themselves and not HMG, a distinction difficult for most locals, on this case Libyans to make. What, if any, are his conflict of interests? The British and Libyan public have a right to know.

Why does the UK Government, the FCO in particular, allow its retired diplomats to be able to go straight into the private sector without any ‘cooling off’ period?

Why is he (or any former government or military personnel) allowed to do this? The problem applies to all countries, not only those who served in Libya.

However Libya serves well to highlight the overall ethical problem.

And of course Millett is no exception but an example and as an individual is a fine capable man. However what worries Libyans is that he (and other like him from not only UK) regularly for example tweet about Libya without declaring their personal financial interests, such as retainers from companies. The rumour amongst Libyans is that Millett is receiving fees through one of the Tripoli based Libyan ‘Prime Minister’ Fayez Serraj’s departments or from one of Serraj’s cronies. Something which is very doubtful one hopes.

(Note: SEE COMPLAINT LETTER FROM EAST LIBYAN AUTHORITIES, THE HoR, COMPLAINING ABOUT PETER MILLETT ADDRESSED TO THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.)

Some Libyans even have said that he was incompetent as an Ambassador in Libya. The fact is conventional wisdom says that he served no better or worse than his predecessors.

The truth is he probably mistakenly considers himself still important for Libyans and that he can influence Libyans – he and others like him are deluded in that regard. Similarly in America the former US State Department official Jonathan Weener continues his efforts in Libya.

Meanwhile in keeping with the many years tradition of ‘revolving door’ from Diplomatic service to private business, a new former Ambassador will no doubt be swelling the ranks of British private enterprise. Frank Baker OBE has just left the Diplomatic Service.

The new man in Libya being Martin Reynolds CMG, appointed Her Majesty’s Ambassador in succession to Frank Baker.

By the way, Mr Reynolds will take up his appointment this month, April 2019.

The movement of individuals between the public and private sectors – known as the revolving door – it is feared by many could lead to ‘conflicts of interests’ situations, increasing the risks of, what some might call, corruption. Given their previous decision-making power, as Government servants with past access to key information and influence, former ministers and members of the government clearly can be an important asset for private companies. But is it ethical?

Governments should thus ensure that appropriate measures are in place to avoid former public officials misusing the information and power they hold to the benefit of their private interests. But do they?

The definition, according to Transparency International, of

“cooling-off periods, is the introduction of a minimum time interval restricting former public officials from accepting employment in the private sector…it is the most common measure to prevent conflicts of interest. Countries in Europe have set different cooling-off periods and requirements for former members of the government wishing to join the private sector. They usually vary from one to two years and are linked to specific types of activities in the private sector.

Overall, enforcement is still very weak and scandals related to post-public employment continue to appear in the media.

In the UK, the cooling-off period used to be measured in years but these days it’s weeks!

It begs the question when will ethics return to public life not only in UK but around the world?


HoR LETTER To HMG:

22 April 2019

Greetings,

Regarding: Former British ambassador to Libya, Peter Millett.

We urge you to open an urgent investigation into the suspicions of corruption associated with Libyan institutions and companies that deal with the the former British ambassador, who is still actively supporting and working with the Muslim Brotherhood and is now an ordinary citizen, he is providing political support and encouragement to the terrorists through social media that they are using on their channels as if it’s international political support to encourage young Libyans to fight and lose their life, in the absence of an appointed ambassador from his country.

This former ambassador, who, in a sign of international disregard and negative exploitation of the situation in Libya, had arranged for his country to arrange support for several officials of the Central Bank of Libya and the National Oil and Investment Corporation and support their installation in their positions through the Skhirat agreement and then resigned from the British government Another assignment as ambassador before his retirement, which raises the suspicion of corruption, we also surprised that a country so keen on the principles and transparency, Britain, did not move or notice this, dedicated to the special benefit of those who enabled them to lead these institutions, Corruption is at a time when Libyans are suffering from poor living in a time of corruption.

The list includes the governor of the Central Bank, Sadig Kabir who came to the position of governor by violation and was removed from office four years ago, and the President of the National Oil Corporation, which was charged with violating the law by the government of the member of the organization of the terrorist group Omar al-Hassi of the Libyan Fighting Group during the armed coup of militias in the Libyan capital In 2014 and the heads of departments of investment bodies, which at the lowest cases colluded from this former ambassador and interference in the internal affairs of Libya in order to prepare for private benefit and corruption, not the good of others.

It may be that the British government through these connections received wrong information and evaluation that resulted in the provisions, at that time, to provide political support terrible through this ambassador to the stream of corrupt political Islam from the Muslim Brotherhood organization and the Salvation Front and the Libyan Fighting Group, which carried out a terrorist act in the heart of Manchester, He (millet) when he was ambassador said that he was keen to “neutralize the sovereign institutions from the conflict” and this contradicts law and all Libyan procedures, in order to enable his friends and future partners who met with him on a continuous basis, including oil officials (Mustapha Sanallah), Libyan investments Authority (Ali Mahmoud) and the Central Bank (Saddik Kabir).

After the end of his term in Libya, and the appointment of another ambassador who worked with all respect and professionalism and was very different from Millett, the former British ambassador Peter Milllet established a company called “Peter Millet Consultancy” with one share holder, Peter Millet, in the UK.

The company called “Peter Milliet” has become an adviser to one of the largest global oil marketing companies, “Glencore”, which was contracted for an exclusive monopoly for the marketing of the Messella and Sarror mix oil for three years, and it is now been revealed that he contracted with the Libyan Foreign Investment Corporation as a consultant to help Cases brought against them in the United Kingdom.

Peter Millett’s name also appeared as an intermediary in the deal to print the Libyan 1 dinar’s paper recently with the governor who he defended and ensured his continued position through the political agreement signed in Skhirat.

With the aim of protecting the interests of the Libyan people ,,, We would be grateful to publish the results of your inquiries about the suspicions of political corruption that led to huge financial corruption and the extent to which any person (Millet or others) benefited from what happened in Libya and its impact on the status of these institutions and the assessment of the damage to the taxpayers’ the Libyan citizens from their interventions and the extent of conflict of interests of Peter Millets private work as a public servant as ambassador to his country to the contracts now, and how he exploited this to obtain these gains and enrich and benefit in return for political support and facilitate access to visas and meetings with actors in his government With the aim of Political gain to stay at the expense of the Libyan people, who suffered the scourge of these same adherents in violation of the law and the Constitution of Libya by these swindlers despite them being relieved from posts and removed by the House of Representatives before and after the political agreement.

We wish you success and the Libyan people well…

With a great appreciation and respect,

Talal Al – Mayhoub

Chairman of the Defense and National Security Committee

HOR

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Videos

Trending