Connect with us

Breaking

Analysis

News

“Smoking gun” text messages confirm Obama White House – NOT Russia – meddled in 2016 election

“Smoking gun” text messages confirm that Obama White NOT Russians meddled in 2016 election

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

3,845 Views

The RussiaGate scandal is one of the most aggressively pushed and factually empty hoaxes a government has ever tried to pull on its people.

The fact we have this phoney scandal in the United States, which is supposed to be the “land of the free”, is also a huge travesty against both the integrity and honor of the nation.

It is also a scandal that which reflects a most amazing degree of arrogance on the part of the liberals in the US government, in that they seem to have believed that they could fabricate a scandal and launch investigations based on it, only to get caught up in it themselves.

On March 29th, 2018, a possible ‘smoking gun’ was found in the investigation of the text messages between FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ lawyer Lisa Page that, if understood correctly, reveals the involvement of several Congressmen and other officials in the Obama Administration in a plot to stir up paranoia in order to justify launching of a fake investigation into the ‘meddling’ by Russian agencies in the upcoming US Presidential election.

It is important to note that though public notice of RussiaGate started in earnest AFTER the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency, the dynamic that set this up was actually planned and launched some five to six months before the November 8th, 2016 Presidential election.

Tyler Durden of ZeroHedge reported that unnamed investigators leaked to Fox News that text messages between FBI Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ attorney Lisa Page “strongly” suggest coordination between the White House, two independent intelligence agencies, and a Democratic Congressional leader. 

The people referred to are: Denis McDonough, President Obama’s Chief of Staff, CIA chief John Brennan, former US Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), Andrew McCabe, former Deputy Director of the FBI, and James Comey, Director of the FBI.

In the evidence section that follows, we have boldfaced the names just to show clearly how specific the references are.

The Evidence

According to the leak, the text messages tell of former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe being concerned with “information control,” and suggest a plot to leak details of the FBI’s incipient investigation to both the White House and Reid.

John Brennan also became involved in agitating for an investigation, though his agency was supposed to be operationally separate from the FBI.

August 2, 2016: Page texted Strzok, saying:

Make sure you can lawfully protect what you sign. Just thinking about congress, foia [Freedom of Information Act], etc. You probably know better than me.”

August 3, 2016: A text message from Strzok to Page described former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe as being concerned with

“information control” related to the initial investigation into the Trump campaign.

According to a report from the New York Times, Brennan was sent to Capitol Hill around the same time to brief members of Congress on the possibility of election interference.

August 8, 2016: Strzok texted Page:

“Internal joint cyber cd intel piece for D, scenesetter for McDonough brief, Trainor [head of FBI cyber division] directed all cyber info be pulled. I’d let Bill and Jim hammer it out first, though it would be best for D to have it before the Wed WH session.”

In these texts, according to the GOP investigators,

  • D” refers to FBI Director James Comey, and
  • McDonough” referred to Chief of Staff Denis McDonough

Fox News further stated that one of its sources said the information was “concerning” enough to justify launching an independent probe into the FBI’s role in launching the Trump investigation.

The Fox piece goes on to add more information:

An FBI spokesman did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment.

The congressional investigators pointed out to Fox News that the CIA and FBI are supposed to be “independent agencies,” and noted that “coordination between political actors at the White House and investigators would be inappropriate,” raising questions about the level of involvement of Obama White House officials.

But weeks later, on August 25, 2016, Brennan went to Capitol Hill to brief Harry Reid — and it was unclear whether FBI officials attended the briefing, a congressional source told Fox News.

Two days after the briefing, Reid penned a letter to Comey requesting an investigation into potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Senator Reid in the letter referred to wrote the following:

The evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign continues to mount and has led Michael Morrell, the former Acting Central Intelligence Director, to call Trump an ‘unwitting agent’ of Russia and the Kremlin.  The prospect of a hostile government actively seeking to undermine our free and fair elections represents one of the gravest threats to our democracy since the Cold War and it is critical for the Federal Bureau of Investigation to use every resource available to investigate this matter thoroughly and in a timely fashion.

Reid went on to cite reports in his letter, noting “methods” Russia was using to influence the Trump campaign and “manipulate it as a vehicle for advancing the interests of Russian President Vladimir Putin.”

We don’t have any examples of this to show. I suspect, neither did Harry Reid. But that didn’t stop him from continuing the plot weaving, as he added the idea that

Recent staff changes within the Trump campaign have made clear that the Trump campaign has employed a number of individuals with significant and disturbing ties to Russia and the Kremlin,” urging Comey to make the investigation “public.

The New York Times reported on Reid’s letter to Comey for the first time on Aug. 29, 2016.

August 30, 2016: Strzok texted Page: “Here we go,” sending a link to that selfsame Times report titled, “Harry Reid Cites Evidence of Russian Tampering in U.S. Vote and seeks FBI inquiry.”

The texts also detail the FBI and Brennan’s role in feeding information to Reid, which inspired him to write a letter to the FBI demanding that an investigation be launched.

That letter was later leaked to the press. The Reid letter, Fox said, provided political cover for the bureau when it tried to justify launching an investigation into Trump as early as July 2016.

In other words, the FBI was well-versed in how to strategically use “leaks” to manage information control and wash its hands over any potential collusion allegations… with the exception of course of the texts that reveal how the plot was hatched in the first place.

“We are not making conclusions. What we are saying is that the timeline is concerning enough to warrant the appointment of an independent investigator to look at whether or not the Obama White House was involved [in the Trump-Russia investigation],” a GOP congressional source told Fox News.

Naturally, coordination between political appointees at the White House and DOJ investigators would cast doubt on the entire Russia probe, Fox‘s sources said.

The question now is whether McCabe, who was fired two weeks ago, will be called in to testify on these stark allegations.

ZeroHedge went on to say:

One thing is for certain: The texts provide the clearest sign yet into the Obama administration’s role in helping get the Russia probe off the ground in an attempt to roadblock President Trump’s new administration, all the while Obama chose to do nothing about reports of Russian attempts at election interference.

Now, this last phrase, in my opinion, still reeks of fabrication. Part of the RussiaGate narrative is the blind insistence that Russia was interfering with the US election process.

However, as has been pointed out by no less than the Mueller investigation itself, Russian interference was laughably minimal, and probably of absolutely no effect whatsoever on any part of the US Presidential election campaigns by any candidate. 

However, the strong possibility of a connection does exist between the Obama Administration and the Hillary Clinton Campaign.

All the pieces are falling into place.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
1 Comment

1
Leave a Reply

avatar
1 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
1 Comment authors
Sally Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Sally
Guest
Sally

How Mueller and all his minion’s homes, offices, text messages haven’t been raided by US Marshalls and brought out in handcuffs only shows the reality of the deepstate and DC’s Cesspool of leftist rulers, who have for decades been ruling the FBI/DOJ/NSA against Americans. Worse then Russia, is all these corrupt activist who sold their souls to the DNC and betrayed Americans who sadly trusted them. Never again can we allow these cancers to grow in these unionized sand boxes of satanic wasteful bureaucratic mafia dens. It took years for them to selectively hire the most incompetent and unpatriotic leaders… Read more »

Latest

Create Progressive Utopia: Obama Wants To Train “A Million Baracks And Michelles”

Obama explained how he plans to create a “university for social change”.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


Former President Barack Obama said this week that despite the “challenging times” we face, he remains hopeful that the future will be OK thanks to an army of young activists that will create a progressive utopia, reports the Washington Examiner.

“If we could form a network of those young leaders, not just in the United States, but around the world, then we got something,” said Obama, adding: “if we can train a million Baracks and Michelles who are running around thinking they can change the world,” they will fulfill the ‘hope and change’ agenda, said Obama – echoing a similar statement he made in Japan last year.

Speaking at a packed arena at Bell MTS Place in Winnipeg, Canada on Monday, Obama explained how he plans to create a “university for social change” that will act as a jumpoff for young people in the US and around the world who don’t believe in the “old institutions.”

“If we train them — if we give them skills, support, financing, media training, spotlights, then they’re the ones that are going to carry forward the solutions that we so desperately need,” he said.

Obama also spoke about his two terms as president and his relationship with Canada and its leaders during hour-long-plus discussion with moderator Michael Burns, the former CEO of the Invictus Games.

He didn’t talk directly about his successor in the White House, President Trump, or the 2020 election, but he did take a jab at Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., provided a clue about how soon he might complete his first book since leaving office, and shared his admiration of Joe Biden, who was his vice president and is now looking at a bid for president. –Washington Examiner

Obama’s training center sure sounds a lot like the embattled Obama Presidential Center – a sprawling complex slated for construction in a park beside Lake Michigan, which is currently being sued for an illegal transfer of park land to The Obama Foundation.

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

Latest

Putin Meets Lavrov and Shoigu; Responds to US Withdrawal from INF Treaty

Russia responds to the US’s withdrawal from the INF Treaty. Works on counter-measures.

The Duran

Published

on

This is the official transcript of the meeting between the Russian President and Russia’s Foreign and Defense Ministers published by the Kremlin’s website.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, please provide an update on the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, and the disarmament dossier in general. What is going on in terms of limitation of offensive arms?

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov: Mr President,

Regarding the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, as you know, it has been in force since 1988. It had an indefinite term. According to the information at our disposal, the United States has been violating the Treaty since 1999, when it started testing combat unmanned aerial vehicles that have the same characteristics as land-based cruise missiles banned by the Treaty.

The United States went on to use ballistic target missiles for testing their missile defence system, and in 2014 they began the deployment in their missile defence system positioning areas in Europe of Mk 41 vertical launching systems. These launchers are fully suitable as they are for Tomahawk intermediate-range attack missiles.

Vladimir Putin: And this is an outright violation of the Treaty.

Sergei Lavrov: This is an outright violation of the Treaty. Launchers of this kind have already been deployed in Romania, and preparations are underway to deploy them in Poland, as well as Japan.

Another matter of concern for us is that only recently, just a year ago, the United States in its 2018 Nuclear Posture Review set the task of developing low-yield nuclear weapons, and it is probable that intermediate-range missiles will serve as a means of delivery for these weapons. It was also announced only recently that this provision of the US nuclear doctrine is beginning to materialise with missiles of this kind entering production.

In October 2018, the United States officially declared its intention to withdraw from the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles. We did everything we could to save the Treaty considering its importance in terms of sustaining strategic stability in Europe, as well as globally. The last attempt of this kind was undertaken on January 15, when the US finally agreed to our request for holding consultations in Geneva.

In coordination with the Defence Ministry, we proposed unprecedented transparency measures that went far beyond our obligations under the INF Treaty in order to persuade the US that Russia was not in violation of this essential instrument. However, the US torpedoed these proposals. Instead, the US presented yet another ultimatum. It is obvious that we cannot accept it since it contradicts the INF Treaty in both letter and spirit.

With Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

With Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

The US announced that it was suspending its participation in the INF Treaty, launched the official withdrawal from it, and said that it will no longer consider itself restricted by the INF Treaty. As far as we can see, this means that the US will make missiles in addition to engaging in research and development activities that have already been factored into the current budget.

There is no doubt that these developments make things worse overall in the sphere of nuclear disarmament and strategic stability. It all started with the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, when the US decided to withdraw from it in 2002, as you know all too well. This was done despite numerous initiatives by the Russian Federation at the UN General Assembly to save the ABM Treaty. The UN General Assembly passed a number of resolutions supporting the ABM Treaty. However, this did not stop the United States from withdrawing from it.

As a partial replacement for the ABM Treaty, the US and Russia signed a joint declaration that same year, 2002, on new strategic relations with a promise to settle all issues related to the so-called third positioning area of the missile-defence system being deployed in Europe at the time. The declaration provided for holding consultations as a way to reach common ground. This did not happen due to the unwillingness of the United States to take up Russia’s concerns in earnest.

In 2007, we made another gesture of good will at your instructions by coming forward with an initiative that consisted of working together to resolve the problems related to US missile defence system’s third positioning area in Europe. Once again, the US backed out of this proposal.

However, at the Russia-NATO Summit in Lisbon in 2010, we once again called for Russia, the US and Europe to work together on a continental missile-defence system. This call was not heeded. Nevertheless, two years later, in 2012, at the NATO Summit in Chicago it was NATO that called for dialogue with Russia on missile defence. However, all this good will boiled down to the US insisting that we simply come to terms with their missile defence approach, despite all the obvious risks and threats to our security posed by this approach.

Let me remind you that in 2013 Russia once again called on the US Department of State to open consultations, and came forward with concrete proposals. There was no reply. And in 2014, the United States brought the dialogue on missile defence to a halt and declared the intention to deploy its positioning areas in Europe and Asia, while also strengthening other systems, including in Alaska and on the east coast.

With Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

With Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

Talking about other essential international security and strategic stability instruments, the approach adopted by the United States to performing its commitments under the universal Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons has been a matter of concern for Russia. In fact, despite numerous reminders on our part, the United States commits serious violations of the Treaty in its actions within NATO. The Treaty commits nuclear powers to refrain from transferring the corresponding nuclear technologies.

Despite these provisions, NATO engages in so-called joint nuclear missions whereby the United States together with five NATO countries where US nuclear weapons are deployed conduct nuclear weapons drills with countries that are not part of the five nuclear-weapons states. This is a direct violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Another treaty that had a special role in removing the threat of nuclear war, or, to be more precise, whose preparation was a source of hope for addressing these threats, was the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty [CTBT]. The United States did not ratify it even though doing so was among Barack Obama’s campaign promises when he ran for president.

Right now, this instrument is completely off the radar, since the United States has lost all interest in any consultations on joining this Treaty. Being a party to the CTBT and acting in good faith, Russia holds special events at the UN General Assembly every year in order to promote the Treaty and mobilise public opinion in favour of its entry into force, which requires the United States to join it, among other things.

Apart from the INF Treaty, there is the Strategic Offensive Arms Treaty [START] that remains in force. It is also essential for preserving at least some measure of strategic stability and global parity. It is also under threat, since its effective functioning has come into question after the recent move by the United States to remove from accountability under the treaty 56 submarine based Trident launchers and 41 heavy bombers by declaring them converted into nun-nuclear.

This is possible under the treaty, but the other party has the right to make sure that once converted these weapons cannot be reconverted back into nuclear arsenals.

Vladimir Putin: An inspection has to be carried out.

Sergei Lavrov: Yes, an inspection. And there have to be technical means to persuade us that these systems cannot be reconverted and returned into the nuclear arsenal.

Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu.

Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu.

We have been holding talks since 2015 to make sure that the United States complies with its obligations on this matter. So far, there have been no results. The technical solutions we have been offered so far cannot persuade us that more than 1,200 warheads, which is an enormous amount, cannot be returned to the nuclear arsenal. Unfortunately, repeated proposals by Russia to launch talks on extending the Strategic Offensive Arms Treaty beyond 2021, when its first term is set to expire, have fallen on deaf ears in the United States. All we hear is that the decision on the New START has yet to be taken.

All in all, the situation is quite alarming. Let me reiterate that the decision taken by the United States on the INF Treaty is of course a matter of serious concern for the entire world, especially for Europe. Nevertheless, the Europeans followed in the footsteps of the United States with all NATO members speaking out in explicit support of the position adopted by the United States to refrain from any discussions on mutual concerns. All we hear are groundless ultimatums requiring us to take unilateral measures without any evidence to support unfounded accusations.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Mr Shoigu, what is the Defence Ministry’s view on the current situation? And what do you propose in this regard?

Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu: Mr President, it is obvious to us, despite the murky language that we hear, that apart from openly conducting research and development on the production of intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles, there have been actual violations of the INF Treaty, and this has been going on for several years. To put it simply, the United States has started producing missiles of this kind.

In this connection, we have the following proposals regarding retaliatory measures.

First, we propose launching in the coming months research and development, as well as development and engineering with a view to creating land-based modifications of the sea-based Kalibr launching systems.

Second, we propose launching research and development, followed by development and engineering to create land-based launchers for hypersonic intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles.

We ask you to support these proposals.

Vladimir Putin: I agree. This is what we will do. Our response will be symmetrical. Our US partners announced that they are suspending their participation in the INF Treaty, and we are suspending it too. They said that they are engaged in research, development and design work, and we will do the same.

I agree with the Defence Ministry’s proposals to create a land-based version of the Kalibr launchers and work on a new project to develop a land-based hypersonic intermediate-range missile.

At the same time, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that we must not and will not let ourselves be drawn into an expensive arms race. I wanted to ask you, would it be possible to finance these initiatives using the existing budget allocations to the Defence Ministry for 2019 and the following years?

Sergei Shoigu: Mr President, we closely studied this matter, and will propose adjustments to the 2019 budget in order to be able to carry out these initiatives within the limits set by the state armaments programme and the defence procurement orders for 2019 without going over budget.

With Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu.

With Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu.

Vladimir Putin: This should not entail any increases in the Defence Ministry’s budget.

Sergei Shoigu: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: Good.

In this connection, there is one more thing I wanted to ask you. Every six months we hold meetings in Sochi to discuss the implementation of the state defence order with the commanders of the Armed Forces and the defence sector representatives.

Starting this year, I propose modifying this format. I want to see how efforts to deploy our systems are progressing. This refers to the Kinzhal hypersonic air-launched ballistic missile, the Peresvet combat laser weapon, which has already been delivered to the army, and the Avangard system, which is now in serial production, having completed the test phase. I want to see how the production of the Sarmat missile is advancing alongside preparations for placing it on combat duty.

Several days ago, you reported to me on the completion of a key stage in testing the Poseidon multipurpose strategic unmanned underwater vehicle. We have to look at how these efforts are advancing.

We are aware of the plans by some countries to deploy weapons in outer space. I want to hear a report on how this threat can be neutralised.

There is another important topic I wanted to raise with both the Foreign Ministry and the Defence Ministry.

For many years, we have been calling on numerous occasions for holding meaningful disarmament talks on almost all aspects of this matter. In recent years, we have seen that our partners have not been supportive of our initiatives. On the contrary, they always find pretexts to further dismantle the existing international security architecture.

In this connection, I would like to highlight the following considerations, and I expect the Foreign Ministry and the Defence Ministry to use them as guidance. All our proposals in this area remain on the table just as before. We are open to negotiations. At the same time, I ask both ministries not to initiate talks on these matters in the future. I suggest that we wait until our partners are ready to engage in equal and meaningful dialogue on this subject that is essential for us, as well as for our partners and the entire world.

Another important consideration I would like to share with the senior officials of both ministries. We proceed from the premise that Russia will not deploy intermediate-range or shorter-range weapons, if we develop weapons of this kind, neither in Europe nor anywhere else until US weapons of this kind are deployed to the corresponding regions of the world.

I ask the Foreign Ministry and the Defence Ministry to closely monitor developments and promptly submit proposals on ways to respond.

<…>

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

Latest

I am a ‘yellow vest’ too, if it means wanting a better salary – Macron

“I learned a lot from those 20 months. It scared me,” Macron told French media.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT


After more than two months of Yellow Vest protests against the economic policies of the French government, President Emmanuel Macron claimed that he too could be a ‘yellow vest’ if the movement stands for higher salaries.

“If being a yellow vest means wanting fewer parliamentarians and work being paid better, I am a yellow vest, too!” Macron said on Thursday in an attempt to align with the grassroots movement against economic injustice, which was born as a protest against the French government’s policies.

In an interview with several French journalists (BFM TV, Paris Match, Le Figaro) he described the Yellow Vests as a social and political movement without “a fixed claim and leader,” as well as saying that it has “mutated” since its inception and has been “infiltrated by 40,000 to 50,000 militants who want the destruction of institutions.”

Macron also spoke about the RIC – the “Citizens’ Initiative Referendum” – a referendum demanded by the Yellow Vests. It envisages popular votes being held to allow the French to vet government policy proposals.

He dodged a straightforward question by saying that he was open to the possibility of a referendum but, at the same time, he does not want the popular vote to invalidate the decisions of parliament.

What Macron did rule out was a referendum on a wealth tax, one of his most unpopular reforms for which he has been dubbed the “president of the rich.” But Macron said he was open about other proposals.

In a December interview with Les Echos newspaper that was published online, Prime Minister Edouard Philippe admitted that the government had “made mistakes.” Among these was the fact that it had “not listened enough to the French people.”

The Yellow Vest movement, named after the high-visibility jackets worn by the demonstrators, ignited in November over government-proposed tax hikes, but it morphed quickly into wider discontent with Macron’s economic agenda and a decline in living standards.

Thousands of people have been protesting on Saturdays and Sundays in Paris and other French cities, with some rallies descending into violence. Hooligans have frequently been seen destroying property and torching cars; while demonstrators have also blocked roads and clashed with police.

Macron’s interview comes amid a big debate in France about a controversial anti-rioting bill, which aims to crack down on the street violence that has marred the Yellow Vest protests. The bill primarily targets ‘hooligans’ who damage property. However, some MPs are also pushing for harsher punishments for unauthorized protests and people who cover their faces during demonstrations – a move that has been slammed as a “threat to civil liberties,” even among Macron’s supporters.

“I learned a lot from those 20 months. It scared me,” Macron told French media.

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

Trending