Connect with us

Latest

News

CNN is the Clinton News Network. Wikileaks proves CNN and DNC colluded before Donald Trump interview

CNN and the DNC worked together to formulate the list of questions for a Donald Trump interview according to new emails released by WikiLeaks

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

519 Views

Yesterday Wikileaks announced the release of hacked DNC emails entitled #DNCLeak2.

The new Wikileaks dump has over 8,000 unseen, hacked DNC emails, which will most certainly be attributed to Russian hackers with no evidence backing those claims whatsoever, cue Robby Mook and Donna Brazile.

In one of the emails, DNC members were tipped off, in advance, of a forthcoming Wolf Blitzer interview of Donald Trump. The DNC members were then given the opportunity to prepare the list of questions for Trump.

In the email below Lauren Dillon of the DNC, send out group email asking everyone what questions Wolf Blitzer should ask Trump…

screen-shot-2016-11-07-at-11-46-40-am

“Wolf Blitzer is interviewing Trump on Tues ahead of his foreign policy address on Wed. Please send me thoughts by 10:30 AM tomorrow. Thanks!”

Wolf Blitzer is very much in the tank with HRC. He can be seen below drinking and dancing after Hillary Clinton stole the primary election from Bernie Sanders.

The interview was ultimately cancelled, but the DNC made a note that the questions they offered CNN are “Good to have for others as well”…

screen-shot-2016-11-07-at-12-00-12-pm


Here are the questions in full below, as released by Wikileaks.

The DNC focuses their questions for Wolf Blitzer and CNN around Trump’s foreign policy platform and his ability to lead. The questions also cover North and South Korea, the UN and ISIS.


From:[email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] more
Date: 2016-04-25 13:59
Subject: RE: Trump Questions for CNN

CNN said the interview was cancelled as of now but will keep the questions for the next one 🙁

Good to have for others as well.

Updated here:

– Who helped you write the foreign policy speech you’re giving tomorrow? Which advisors specifically did you talk to? What advice did they give you? Did they give you any advice that you chose not to take?

-A number of Republicans and think tanks including the Heritage Foundation have suggested tying defense spending to GDP, most often suggesting defense should be funded at 4 percent GDP. Is that something you would do/we’ll see in your plan?

– You’ve said you look to Ambassador John Bolton for military advice and called him “terrific,” but he was one of the architects of the Iraq war. How do you explain your praise for Bolton if you also claim the war was a mistake? What advice have you taken from him?

* TODD: “Who do you talk to for military advice right now?” TRUMP: “Well, I watch the shows. I really see a lot of great — when you watch your show and all of the other shows and you have the generals and you have certain people that you like.” TODD: “But is there somebody — is there a go to for you?” TRUMP: “Probably there are two or three.” TODD: “Every presidential candidate has a go-to.” TRUMP: “Well, probably there are two or three. I like Bolton, I think he’s a tough cookie, knows what he’s talking about. Jacobs is a good guy.” TODD: “Do you mean Ambassador John Bolton–” TRUMP: “Yes. I think he’s terrific–.” [Meet The Press, NBC, 8/16/15]

– CIA Director Brennan and former CIA Director Hayden have both said that our military and intelligence officers might refuse to follow some of your orders if you were president. You’ve said that the military would in fact listen, but what would you do if the military refused to listen to you? Should they be court-martialed if they refuse to follow orders?

* Asked What He Would Do If The Military Refused To Obey His Illegal Orders, Trump Said “They’re Not Going To Refuse Me. Believe Me.” BAIER: “General Michael Hayden, former CIA director, NSA director, and other experts have said that when you asked the U.S. military to carry out some of your campaign promises, specifically targeting terrorists’ families, and also the use of interrogation methods more extreme than waterboarding, the military will refuse because they’ve been trained to turn down and refuse illegal orders. So what would you do, as commander-in-chief, if the U.S. military refused to carry out those orders?” TRUMP: “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me. Believe me.” BAIER: “But they’re illegal.” [Republican Primary Debate, Detroit MI, 3/3/16]

* Trump: “If I Say Do It, They’re Going To Do It. That’s What Leadership Is All About.” BAIER: “But targeting terrorists’ families?” (APPLAUSE) TRUMP: “And — and — and — I’m a leader. I’m a leader. I’ve always been a leader. I’ve never had any problem leading people. If I say do it, they’re going to do it. That’s what leadership is all about.” [Republican Primary Debate, Detroit MI, 3/3/16]

– Do you think American victims of 9/11 should be able to sue Saudi Arabia in court? What role, if any, do you think Saudi Arabia had in the 9/11 attacks?

– You’ve said we should have bombed the “right people” after 9/11 and have suggested that the government has evidence Saudi Arabia was involved. Do you think we should have instead bombed Saudi Arabia?

* Trump Said We Needed To Bomb The “Right People,” The “People That Knocked Down The World Trade Center” And That Was Not Saddam Hussein. TRUMP: “No, I’m saying that, certainly, it would have been nice if the federal government could have given some of the trillion dollars that we’ve spent on Iraq. And by the way, I’m worse of a hawk than anybody. I’m worse than Roger Ailes, and that’s pretty bad, OK? But you’ve got to bomb the right people. You’ve got to bomb the right — the people that knocked down the World Trade Center. It was not the people of Iraq, and it was not Saddam Hussein. It’s sort of interesting. Saddam Hussein used to kill terrorists. Now Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists. I mean, that’s the Harvard of terrorism. So it’s a very, very sad situation.” [Cavuto, Fox Business, 12/17/08]

* Trump Suggested The Redacted Pages Of The 9/11 Report Would Reveal That Saudi Arabia Blew Up The World Trade Center. “‘Who blew up the World Trade Center? It wasn’t the Iraqis, it was Saudi – take a look at Saudi Arabia, open the documents,’ Trump told the gang at Fox & Friends Wednesday morning, after defending his bizarre theory that George W. Bush was president on September 11. Trump appeared to be referencing the 28 pages that were redacted from the 2002 Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 attacks.” [New York Magazine, 2/17/16<http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/02/donald-trump-suggests-the-saudis-did-911.html>]

– Would you order U.S. troops to withdraw from South Korea if they refused to pay us, and if so, how quickly?

* Trump Said He Was Willing To Withdraw U.S. Forces From Japan And South Korea If They Did Not Increase Their Financial Contribution. HABERMAN: “Would you be willing to withdraw U.S. forces from places like Japan and South Korea if they don’t increase their contribution significantly?” TRUMP: “Yes, I would. I would not do so happily, but I would be willing to do it. Not happily. David actually asked me that question before, this morning before we sort of finalized out. The answer is not happily but the answer is yes. We cannot afford to be losing vast amounts of billions of dollars on all of this. We just can’t do it anymore. Now there was a time when we could have done it. When we started doing it. But we can’t do it anymore. And I have a feeling that they’d up the ante very much. I think they would, and if they wouldn’t I would really have to say yes.” [Donald Trump Interview, New York Times, 3/26/16<http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/us/politics/donald-trump-transcript.html?_r=0>]

– How many military bases do you think the U.S. should have in Southeast Asia?

* Trump Said He Did Not Think The U.S. Gained Anything By Having Military Bases In South Korea And Japan. LANE: “You know, well, they say and I think this is on public record, it’s basically 50 percent of the non-personnel cost is paid by South Korea and Japan.” TRUMP: “50 percent?” LANE: “Yeah.” TRUMP: “Why isn’t it 100 percent?” HIATT: “Well I guess the question is, does the United States gain anything by having bases?” TRUMP: “Personally I don’t think so. I personally don’t think so. Look. I have great relationships with South Korea. I have buildings in South Korea. But that’s a wealthy country. They make the ships, they make the televisions, they make the air conditioning. They make tremendous amounts of products. It’s a huge, it’s a massive industrial complex country.” [Editorial Board Interview, Washington Post, 3/21/16<https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/03/21/a-transcript-of-donald-trumps-meeting-with-the-washington-post-editorial-board/>]

– You’ve said that you would listen to our generals if they called to send 20,000 troops in to fight ISIS, then later said you would find it hard to go along with those troop levels. Which one is it? Would you listen to the troop levels our generals called for? If not, how many troops do you think is appropriate to send in to combat ISIS?

* Trump Said He “Would Listen To The Generals” But Was “Hearing Numbers Of 20,000 To 30,000” Ground Troops To Fight ISIS In Syria. HEWITT: “Mr. Trump, more troops?” TRUMP: “We really have no choice. We have to knock out ISIS. We have to knock the hell out of them, we have to get rid of it and then we have to come back here and rebuild our country, which is falling apart.” HEWITT: “How many?” TRUMP: “I would listen to the generals but I’m hearing numbers of 20,000 to 30,000. We have to knock them out fast. We have to knock them out fast. Look, we’re not allowed to fight. We can’t fight. We’re not knocking out the oil because they don’t want to create environmental pollution up in the air.” [Republican Primary Debate, Miami FL, 3/10/16]

* Trump: “I Find It Hard To Go Along With” The Generals’ Suggestion For 20- To 30,000 Troops “Because It’s So Much.” DIEHL: “And could I ask you about ISIS, speaking of making commitments, because you talked recently about possibly sending 20 or 30,000 troops and–” TRUMP: “No I didn’t, oh no no no, okay, I know what you’re saying. There was a question asked to me. I said that the military, the generals have said that 20- to 30,000. They said, would you send troops? I didn’t say send 20,000. I said, well the generals are saying you’d need because they , what would it take to wipe out ISIS, I said pretty much exactly this, I said the generals, the military is saying you would need 20- to 30,000 troops, but I didn’t say that I would send them.” DIEHL: “If they said that, would you go along with that and send the troops?” TRUMP: “I find it hard to go along with-I mention that as an example because it’s so much. That’s why I brought that up. But a couple of people have said the same thing as you, where they said did I say that and I said that that’s a number that I heard would be needed. I would find it very, very hard to send that many troops to take care of it.” [Editorial Board Interview, Washington Post, 3/21/16<https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/03/21/a-transcript-of-donald-trumps-meeting-with-the-washington-post-editorial-board/>]

– You’ve said that the U.S. disproportionately funded the U.N., should we reduce our funding to the United Nations? How much should we reduce it by? If we get nothing out of the U.N, why should we continue to be a member of it?

* Trump Said We Disproportionately Funded The United Nations And Got Nothing Out Of It. TRUMP: “You know, I’ll give you another one, I talked about NATO and we fund disproportionately, the United Nations, we get nothing out of the United Nations other than good real estate prices. We get nothing out of the United Nations. They don’t respect us, they don’t do what we want, and yet we fund them disproportionately again. Why are we always the ones that funds everybody disproportionately, you know? So everything is like that.” [New York Times Interview, 3/26/16<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/us/politics/donald-trump-transcript.html?_r=0>]

– Which international organizations should the U.S. be a member of? Which treaties do you think it is valuable the U.S. remain a part of?

– In 2000, you said you supported a pre-emptive strike against North Korea if it would keep them from getting nuclear weapons. Do you still support that?

* Trump: Am I Ready To Bomb North Korea’s Reactor? “You’re Damned Right.” “What would I do in North Korea? Fair question. It’s easy to point out the problem, but what should we do to solve it? Am I ready to bomb this reactor? You’re damned right.” [Donald Trump, The America We Deserve, 1/15/00]

* Trump: “A Surgical Strike Would Not Only Put Out The Fire In North Korea, But It Would Also Send A Message Around The World That The United States Is Going To Eliminate Any Serious Threat To Its Security, And Do So Without Apology.” [Donald Trump, The America We Deserve, 1/15/00]

From: Freundlich, Christina
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:34 AM
To: Roberts, Kelly; Dillon, Lauren; Sarge, Matthew; Graham, Caroline; Walker, Eric; Bauer, Nick; Brinster, Jeremy
Subject: RE: Trump Questions for CNN

Obviously I think these are all great. lauren?

From: Roberts, Kelly
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:21 AM
To: Dillon, Lauren; Freundlich, Christina; Sarge, Matthew; Graham, Caroline; Walker, Eric; Bauer, Nick; Brinster, Jeremy
Subject: RE: Trump Questions for CNN

This is the list Brinster, Sarge and I came up with:

– Who helped you write the foreign policy speech you’re giving tomorrow? Which advisors specifically did you talk to? What advice did they give you? Did they give you any advice that you chose not to take?

– CIA Director Brennan and former CIA Director Hayden have both said that our military and intelligence officers might refuse to follow some of your orders if you were president. What would you do if the military refused to listen to you? Should they be court-martialed if they refuse to follow orders?

– You’ve said you look to Ambassador John Bolton for military advice and called him “terrific,” but he was one of the architects of the Iraq war. How do you explain your praise for Bolton if you also claim the war was a mistake? What advice have you taken from him?

* TODD: “Who do you talk to for military advice right now?” TRUMP: “Well, I watch the shows. I really see a lot of great — when you watch your show and all of the other shows and you have the generals and you have certain people that you like.” TODD: “But is there somebody — is there a go to for you?” TRUMP: “Probably there are two or three.” TODD: “Every presidential candidate has a go-to.” TRUMP: “Well, probably there are two or three. I like Bolton, I think he’s a tough cookie, knows what he’s talking about. Jacobs is a good guy.” TODD: “Do you mean Ambassador John Bolton–” TRUMP: “Yes. I think he’s terrific–.” [Meet The Press, NBC, 8/16/15]

– Do you think American victims of 9/11 should be able to sue Saudi Arabia in court? What role, if any, do you think Saudi Arabia had in the 9/11 attacks?

– You’ve said we should have bombed the “right people” after 9/11 and have suggested that the government has evidence Saudi Arabia was involved. Do you think we should have instead bombed Saudi Arabia?

* Trump Said We Needed To Bomb The “Right People,” The “People That Knocked Down The World Trade Center” And That Was Not Saddam Hussein. TRUMP: “No, I’m saying that, certainly, it would have been nice if the federal government could have given some of the trillion dollars that we’ve spent on Iraq. And by the way, I’m worse of a hawk than anybody. I’m worse than Roger Ailes, and that’s pretty bad, OK? But you’ve got to bomb the right people. You’ve got to bomb the right — the people that knocked down the World Trade Center. It was not the people of Iraq, and it was not Saddam Hussein. It’s sort of interesting. Saddam Hussein used to kill terrorists. Now Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists. I mean, that’s the Harvard of terrorism. So it’s a very, very sad situation.” [Cavuto, Fox Business, 12/17/08]

* Trump Suggested The Redacted Pages Of The 9/11 Report Would Reveal That Saudi Arabia Blew Up The World Trade Center. “‘Who blew up the World Trade Center? It wasn’t the Iraqis, it was Saudi – take a look at Saudi Arabia, open the documents,’ Trump told the gang at Fox & Friends Wednesday morning, after defending his bizarre theory that George W. Bush was president on September 11. Trump appeared to be referencing the 28 pages that were redacted from the 2002 Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 attacks.” [New York Magazine, 2/17/16<http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/02/donald-trump-suggests-the-saudis-did-911.html>]

– Would you order U.S. troops to withdraw from South Korea, and if so, how quickly?

– How many military bases do you think the U.S. should have in Southeast Asia?

– President Obama recently announced he’s sending 250 U.S. special operations troops to Syria to help in the fight against ISIS. How many U.S. troops do you think need to be sent to Syria/Iraq and what do they need to do there?

– You’ve said that the U.S. disproportionately funded the U.N., should we cut our funding to the United Nations? How much should we reduce it by? If we get nothing out of the U.N, why should we continue to be a member of it?

* Trump Said We Disproportionately Funded The United Nations And Got Nothing Out Of It. TRUMP: “You know, I’ll give you another one, I talked about NATO and we fund disproportionately, the United Nations, we get nothing out of the United Nations other than good real estate prices. We get nothing out of the United Nations. They don’t respect us, they don’t do what we want, and yet we fund them disproportionately again. Why are we always the ones that funds everybody disproportionately, you know? So everything is like that.” [New York Times Interview, 3/26/16<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/us/politics/donald-trump-transcript.html?_r=0>]

– Which international organizations should the U.S. be a member of? Which treaties do you think it is valuable the U.S. remain a part of?

– In 2000, you said you supported a pre-emptive strike against North Korea if it would keep them from getting nuclear weapons. Do you still support that?

* Trump: Am I Ready To Bomb North Korea’s Reactor? “You’re Damned Right.” “What would I do in North Korea? Fair question. It’s easy to point out the problem, but what should we do to solve it? Am I ready to bomb this reactor? You’re damned right.” [Donald Trump, The America We Deserve, 1/15/00]

* Trump: “A Surgical Strike Would Not Only Put Out The Fire In North Korea, But It Would Also Send A Message Around The World That The United States Is Going To Eliminate Any Serious Threat To Its Security, And Do So Without Apology.” [Donald Trump, The America We Deserve, 1/15/00]

From: Dillon, Lauren
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 9:05 AM
To: Freundlich, Christina; Roberts, Kelly; Sarge, Matthew; Graham, Caroline; Walker, Eric; Bauer, Nick; Brinster, Jeremy
Subject: Re: Trump Questions for CNN

Reminder

Kelly please take lead. Folks, send your questions and any necessary backup to Kelly.

On Apr 24, 2016, at 10:24 PM, Dillon, Lauren <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Wolf Blitzer is interviewing Trump on Tues ahead of his foreign policy address on Wed.

Please send me thoughts by 10:30 AM tomorrow.

Thanks!

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Pelosi tries to prevent State of the Union address because of shutdown

Nancy Pelosi advised Mr. Trump not to deliver a live State of the Union speech, but the reason may be because she is unwilling to be exposed.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi tried what is perhaps a new stunt in the ongoing government shutdown saga (we hesitate to call it a “crisis”). She requested that President Trump either reschedule his yearly State of the Union address or – and she said this literally – deliver it in writing to Congress on January 29th, the date the speech is scheduled to occur.

“Sadly, given the security concerns and unless government re-opens this week, I suggest that we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to the Congress on January 29th,” Pelosi wrote in a letter to Trump.

The letter, which can be seen directly by clicking the hyperlink above, tries to essentially make this request the President’s fault because he refuses to take “no wall” for an answer.

The motive behind this attempt is interesting. Politico covered this story originally, and this publication is pretty far to the left and definitely not a Trump fan oasis. Yet in a rare random feat of journalism, the Politico article does appear to give some of the real reason why the Speaker of the House did this.

Publicly, Democrats plan to argue that the parties need to focus on addressing the shutdown, now the longest in U.S. history. They’re also concerned about security staff working through a major national event without being paid.

“This shutdown is ridiculous and the people tasked with protecting him and protecting us are not getting a paycheck,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the House Rules Committee chair. “So it’s inappropriate to carry on with business as usual.”

But privately, Democrats also don’t want to give Trump a major platform to blame them for the shutdown when Trump’s demand for billions in wall funding has been the main driver, according to a Democratic lawmaker close to leadership. Trump has tried to pin the blame on the shutdown on Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, but public polls shows the public largely blames the president.

The announcement comes as a group of bipartisan House lawmakers in the Problem Solvers Caucus is set to meet with Trump on Wednesday to discuss border security. Trump, frustrated by his inability to secure any additional money for his border wall, has tried to peel off moderate Democrat support as Pelosi and Schumer dig in.

But Democrats are rallying fellow members to stay together. Schumer attended a closed-door caucus meeting with House Democrats just as Pelosi made the announcement on the State of the Union address on Wednesday. Her message was to stay unified in their opposition.

Politico was able to bury this bold-typed point in the rhetoric that “public polls largely blame the president.” However this may not exactly be the case.

There are indications that the 26-day long standoff is going to go the President’s way. While this is admittedly speculative, there seem to be solid factors on the President’s side of the argument that the Democrats do not have. Some are factual, and many are emotional and rhetorical:

  • Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is standing firm, and has not wavered from the commitment to pass nothing that the President will not sign.
  • Some Democrat leaders are beginning to speak about border security – including the wall – as vital needs. This includes this representative from Southern California (!) Representative Katie Hill, who gave this interview on Fox News:

  • Where the argument is pragmatic and information-based, as Representative Hill notes, then the argument becomes quite compelling for a wall.
  • CNN turned down the opportunity to interview Dan Plante, a San Diego area TV reporter, about the border wall there because Mr. Plante said that the new wall that has been installed in that sector is hugely successful.
  • The level of information given by the Democrat opposition leaders, Pelosi and Chuck Schumer is essentially at the level of “no you can’t have it. Because!!” – in other words, septuagenarians acting like four-year olds. Really.
  • Talk show anchor Rush Limbaugh and his huge body of listeners are wildly in favor of the shutdown and everything the President is doing. It is very clear that the shutdown’s length is doing nothing to deter President Trump’s base. And as long as that holds true, he will not move a muscle.
  • President Trump is a businessman, not a politician. He is far more results-driven than the mainstream media can afford to admit. While they characterize him as insane, or a child, or throwing a tantrum, the President doesn’t really care. He knows what he wants, and he is prepared to be patient and wait the Democrats out.
  • The final sign we will offer on this list (though there are more) is that the Russia collusion narrative is back. When things go bad for the media on Trump, they try to pull out Russia. Maybe it is just a bad habit because it seems less and less effective each time it is tried.

The battle lines are tropes versus reality, and politics versus policy. It is too soon to be sure that this will go the President’s way and that the wall will go up, but patience and perseverance are beginning to expose cracks and weaknesses in the Democrat argument. Some of the US certainly does NOT care about a border wall. But those that do have not been shaken by all this – rather, they have been strengthened, plus they have facts on their side.

All the Pelosis and Schumers of the world can do is fret and complain and look like fools, and they seem to be doing exactly that.

 

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

Latest

Peak Stupidity: Deep State and mainstream media push ‘Trump is a spy’ nonsense (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 167.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the sheer stupidity of the entire ‘Trump is a Russian spy’ narrative being plastered all over the mainstream media, as neo-liberal shills and neocon war hawks continue to damage the Office of the United States President by insisting on pushing a made up story that a five year old child who waits for Santa Claus to bring Christmas gifts would have a hard time believing.

Meanwhile the real crime and real treason derived from a Comey-Clapper-Brennan Deep State plot to remove a democratically elected Trump from power, is being blacked out from the mainstream, neo-liberal news cycle.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

The Gateway Pundit lists the 35 times the FBI “deviated from standard practice” or committed crimes in an effort to exonerate Hillary Clinton and indict US President Donald Trump..


The FBI leadership under the Obama Administration took many actions that deviated from standard practice [i.e. were corrupt and criminal] in their efforts to exonerate Hillary from her crimes and then spy and frame candidate and then President Trump.  Today current members of the FBI are embarrassed to even turn on their TV’s as a result.

Time magazine of all places reported recently about the many efforts the FBI took related to Hillary exoneration and then the Trump framing.  These corrupt and criminal actions have taken a desperate toll on the current members of the FBI –

In normal times, the televisions are humming at the FBI’s 56 field offices nationwide, piping in the latest news as agents work their investigations. But these days, some agents say, the TVs are often off to avoid the crush of bad stories about the FBI itself. The bureau, which is used to making headlines for nabbing crooks, has been grabbing the spotlight for unwanted reasons: fired leaders, texts between lovers and, most of all, attacks by President Trump. “I don’t care what channel it’s on,” says Tom O’Connor, a veteran investigator in Washington who leads the FBI Agents Association. “All you hear is negative stuff about the FBI … It gets depressing.”

Of course the employees of the FBI are in a funk, their fearless and corrupt leaders, as well as leaders in Obama’s corrupt DOJ, went to extravagant links to exonerate the obvious criminal actions of Hillary Clinton, and then to do all they could to prevent candidate Trump from winning an election.  Then once the election was won by President Trump, they went to unheard of depths of deceit and corruption to attempt to remove him from office.

Here’s a list of the actions the Deep State FBI took in their recent criminal actions surrounding the 2016 Presidential election and since [the first 11 items are from the Time post noted above with comments in brackets] –

1 – Comey breached Justice Department protocols in a July 5, 2016, press conference when he criticized Hillary Clinton for using a private email server as Secretary of State even as he cleared her of any crimes
2 – Comey reopened the Clinton email probe less than two weeks before the election
3 – Andrew McCabe lied to the bureau’s internal investigations branch to cover up a leak he orchestrated about Clinton’s family foundation less than two weeks before the election and had lied for months about it
4 – FBI wasn’t adequately investigating “high-risk” employees who failed polygraph tests (but, in fact, putting them in charge of high-profile investigations, like Peter Strzok who failed his poly). In one instance, an FBI IT specialist with top-secret security clearance failed four polygraph tests and admitted to having created a fictitious Facebook account to communicate with a foreign national, but received no disciplinary action for that.
5 – The FBI’s miss of the Russian influence operation against the 2016 election, which went largely undetected for more than two years (The FBI had the chance to kill this Russian intrusion years before it reached crisis point in the election). Mueller’s Russia probe found that Moscow’s operation against the 2016 election first got under way in 2014, but the FBI failed to address it.
6 – The FBI was getting information it shouldn’t have had access to when it used controversial parts of the Patriot Act to obtain business records in terrorism and counterintelligence cases.
7 – The bureau missed the significance of the damaging 2015 hack of the DNC database [although others argue that the DNC was never hacked – due to the FBI’s lack of investigative process, we may never know what happened.] 8 – The bureau also sat on the disputed “dossier” prepared by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. [Which was then used for the entire case against Trump and anyone near him].
9 – The bureau’s decision to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was influenced by politics.
10 – Text messages between FBI special agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, which were critical of Trump.
11 – Comey broke with Justice Department rules and norms by assuming authority usually held by prosecutors and speaking in public about a case that did not produce criminal charges.
12 – Comey took copious notes and diligently informed others of all interactions with Trump while lying about having had any interactions with Obama, never taking notes or notifying anyone so even after having been warned of Mr. Steele’s motivations, even after having fired him for violating the rules, the FBI continued to seek his information—using Mr. Ohr as a back channel. This surely violates the FBI manual governing interaction with confidential human sources.
13 – FBI guidelines state that unverified information should not be submitted to the FISA court.
14 – They were passive, not proactive. The Obama administration “stood down” and watched these “activities” unravel. At worst, they possibly played a hand in creating circumstances to push the investigation forward into more serious stages that allowed for more intrusive techniques, such as spying. (The FBI is supposed to prevent crime, not watch it happen).
15 – John Brennan, James Clapper, Samantha Power, Loretta Lynch were all briefed by James Comey on the alleged Russian interference into the Trump campaign, yet the Trump campaign was left in the dark.
16 –FBI agents found Abedin deleting classified Clinton emails from her Yahoo account but failed to subpoena her devices. If they had, maybe they wouldn’t have had to reopen the case in 11th hour when NY agents found work emails on the laptop she shared with her perv husband.
17 – The FBI failed to notify Congress of the investigation into the Trump campaign for months rather than quarterly as was practice. [See Comey presentation to House Republicans in March 2017] 18 – The FBI did not pursue criminal charges when Clinton’s email archives were permanently deleted from her private server days after a subpoena for them was issued by a congressional committee investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi.
19 – The IG found that the FBI and DOJ during the MidYearExam probe of Hillary Clinton email server “did not require any witnesses to testify before the grand jury,” despite at least 3 witnesses lying to FBI agents.
20 – “[T]he 
Midyear team did not obtain search warrants to examine the content of emails in Mills’s or Abedin’s private email accounts and did not seek to obtain any of the senior aides’ personal devices.”
21 – IG Report: Nobody was listed as a subject of this [Clinton email] investigation at any point in time (So neither Hillary nor her top aides were formally under investigation by FBI at any time in 2015-2016, but the agents handling the issue thought it was a criminal action).
22 – The IG report indicates a strong pro-Clinton/anti-Trump bias in FBI investigators of Midyear and Operation Russian Collusion but it still went on without personnel changes or actions against the corrupt investigative team.
23 – The IG report found: “The MYE Team did not seek to obtain every device, including those of Clinton’s senior aides, or the contents of every email account through which a classified email may have traversed.”
24 – Manafort interviewed twice before joining the Trump team. If he was guilty of anything why did they allow him to join the Trump team?
25 – In 2008, a questionable person on McCain’s POTUS campaign caught the attention of FBI counterintelligence, and the FBI privately approached McCain. That questionable person was quietly removed from Team McCain but this same sensitivity was not provided to the Trump team.
26 – The corrupt Obama FBI and DOJ used the “salacious and unverified” opposition research called the Steele dossier to open a counterintelligence investigation and obtain warrants but it wasn’t even verified and it was created by the opposition party [DNC]. [Multiple sources] 27 – Unprecedented leaking to the press: 13 different individuals at the FBI were feeding a journalist information.
28 – Dan Bongino asks the question: How did Halper go from being a CIA informant to an FBI informant? And he’s right. It is a DEVIATION FROM THE STANDARD PRACTICE for law enforcement agencies to give up/share their asset.
29 – The “probable cause” arrest of George Papadopoulos is a deviation from the standard practice.
30 – Halper was a CHS (Confidential Human Source). FBI rules prohibit using a CHS to spy on Americans before an official investigation has been created.
31 -Stone and Caputo say they believe they were the targets of a setup by U.S. law enforcement officials hostile to Trump which was before an official investigation which again is a deviation from standard practice.
32 – The FBI interviewed Carter Page in March of 2016 about his Russian ties. Two months later, Comey is briefing the NSC about his concerns about Carter Page. Nothing of any note happened in those intervening months to cause a rise of concerns, so whatever concerns Comey had Comey had them before Page was hired on as an adviser. It was a DEVIATION FROM STANDARD PRACTICE for Comey to not have warned Trump about Page. Comey warns Obama instead who also takes no steps to warn Trump.
33 – Another deviation from the standard practice is to start an investigation without a crime.
34 – Planting the Isikoff article to be used in court to obtain a FISA warrant.
35 – Related to the FBI, it’s important to note that former DNI chief James Clapper limited the IC report for review to only 3 agencies rather than send the report out to all 17 agencies for review. This way he was able to control what was put into the report – another deviation from the standard practice.

This may only be a partial list of FBI abuses and actions taken with deviations from standard practice, if not clear cut crimes.  The gangsters who ran Obama’s FBI, from Mueller to Comey, are so corrupt, current and former agents are now embarrassed to be part of the once storied federal agency.  Quite frankly, it’s doubtful if the FBI can ever be trusted again!

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

Latest

Trump’s wish to take the US out of NATO leaves NeoCons seething

The US President has seen the truth of the irrelevance of NATO, but there is enormous resistance to change.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Tucker Carlson, Fox News and Russian and American news outlets alike have picked up the story that US President Donald Trump has on numerous occasions, opined that the United States would do well to depart from the North Atlantic Military Organization, or NATO.

This wish caused enormous fury and backlash from those opposed, which, oddly enough include both Democrats and Republicans. Their anger and alarm over this idea is such that the media networks through much of the US are alive with the idea of impeaching the President or bringing 25th Amendment proceedings against him for insanity!

Take a look:

Tucker Carlson, as usual, nailed it.

NATO was formed to make Western Europe secure in the face of a perceived Soviet threat. In 1991, the USSR collapsed and the threat of Ivan the Communist bad guy collapsed with it.

But 28 years later, NATO is still here. And, why?

Well, many “experts” continue to point at Russia as a threat, though after that statement no one seems honestly able to elucidate precisely how Russia would, in fact, threaten any nation, take over it, or conquer the world. Indeed, if anyone seems to understand the perversity of being in charge of the whole world, it seems to be Russia, as expressed by politician and LDPR leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky (see how this is so here).

Zhironovsky observed that China is the other nation that is running at full force, but viewing the problems the US is having with being the leader of the world, China stops short of trying to attain this position itself. The question becomes “What does a nation that rules the world actually do then?”

President Trump appears to be seeing the same question, or some similar variant based on the same theme. NATO serves no constructive purpose anymore. Despite the conflicts in Ukraine and Saudi Arabia and Yemen, Israel and Syria, there simply are no great threats in the world as it stands today. While there are certainly still wars, none of these wars represents an existential threat to the United States.

Why wouldn’t a US leader want out? In fact, there is further no existential threat to Europe from any present war, nor is there a threat from Russia itself. In fact, Russia has been entering into business relations with many European countries who wish to buy cheap and easily available Russian natural gas. Turkey purchased an S-400 antimissile system in addition to its US made Patriot battery.

There would seem to be very little in the way of concrete and reliable reasoning for the alliance to continue.

But the American Deep State and liberal establishment have come together to resist the US President in a truly furious manner, and it is revelatory of the hypocrisy of anti-Trump politics that American liberals, typically the “sing Kum-ba-yah peacenik” crowd, displays paroxysms of outrage and horror that NATO might be disbanded.

As the result of that, the American media is determined to choke off any possibility of one thinking, “well, what if we were to disband NATO?”

Why is this?

Simple. A lot of people make their living by preparing for the Russian “threat”, and it would mean the end of their work, the end of their money, and a great disruption in life. It does not matter that while this is true, these same people could conceivably apply their considerable skill sets to deal with real problems that face a world that no longer has a dipolar alignment, or to help prevent a real problem from arising from real situations, such as the recent and current Islamization of many European cities.

One of the great afflictions of American politics and policy has been that so much of it appears to be focused on “short term” or “no term” matters. We see this with the problems related to border security, the coming advent of AI-based automated processes that may furlough low-skilled workers in tremendous amounts in a short period of time. Rather than solve real problems, the elected representatives and media seem more content to oppose Donald Trump when he, as a businessman ought to do, makes a federal case out of what he sees on the horizon.

The Border Wall, for example, is a highly logical part of a properly handled set of immigration policies. But the very direct behavior of President Trump helped amplify the resentment the Democrats still hold against him for defeating Hillary Clinton in 2016, and so, the Democrats have effectively said “nuts!” to the needs of the nation and they take out their resentment on the nation by refusing to negotiate with the President about how to close the border.

NATO is another example. The alliance served its purpose. It is time for the alliance to end, or to be radically restructured in terms of new goals based in real, and not just flimsy rhetorical, needs.

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