There are a number of conservative commentators, and they are not all chronic Trump detractors, demanding “put up or shut up”, regarding voter fraud evidence promised by Team Trump.  RedState’s (Bonchie) and Tucker Carlson or that have assumed a Biden win (Guy Benson). We wonder how long they would take to pull together data, analysis, precedent, affidavits, and a legal strategy.  It has barely been three weeks.  Yes time is of the essences but according to the legal beagles on the case it has not expired. And detractors (we are all impatient) should ask themselves if they have been thoroughly accumulating and analyzing what is out there, perhaps starting with the data evidence which ought to be objectively verifiable.  They have budgets and contacts so they should have at it and report rather than throw rocks and innuendo at this stage.

The fact is a LOT has been “put up” and an outline of it is set forth in the British publication off-guardian.org   by Kit Knightly.  This article is over a week old now but telling way back then.

By the way the bifurcation between Sidney Powell and the official Trump legal team of concern to many we hope can be understood as Team Civil/Constitutional claims ( the official team) and Team Criminal – Powell et al.  Team Criminal claims are not merely unfairness related, structurally or as applied, which is enough under equal protection aspects to the Constitution for Trump to yet become victorious.  Powell is implying acts of criminality.   The nature of the two tracks require concentrating on different aspects to the law with associated burdens. We do not know how Powell will proceed to get a hearing, but we pray she will or by feeding the other Team.  We suspect neither team wants to have to answer questions about the other’s approach, findings, etc and the bifurcation is useful.

Here is the article mentioned.  It is from an interesting publication and we suspect setting it forth here will wet your appetite for more from it by visiting it.

The US Election is still a burning issue almost two weeks after the people went to the polls, and though the race has been called for Biden by every mainstream media outlet in the world, the recounts are ongoing and irregularities manifest.

Trump’s legal team, and many in the alternate media, are claiming the election was rigged. With one voice the mainstream media – and the entire political establishment – denounce these claims as “baseless”, and scream there is “no evidence”.

This is incorrect. There is plenty of evidence, both circumstantial and direct, which breaks down into six basic categories:

1. 1. Precedent – It has happened before.
   2. Motive – Deep State/Military dislike of Trump’s policies is widely known.
   3. Foreknowledge – Establishment voices predicted this exact situation.
   4. Opportunity – The voting system is highly susceptible to fraud.
   5. Voting Irregularities – Known software “glitches” & irregularities in the reporting of the results.
   6. Cover-up – Dishonesty in the reporting of the situation.

1. Precedent

There is plenty of evidence that US elections have been rigged before.

Nobody is talking about it much, but US elections have been rigged before. Everyone is more than familiar with the 2000 election, which was called for Al Gore before Florida flipped to Bush and swung the election. The controversy over “hanging chads” and misplaced votes was all people talked about for weeks.

One noteworthy “error” with electronic voting machines, switched over 10000 votes from Gore to an obscure third-party candidate.

After weeks of legal battles, Gore eventually conceded. Within a year the “attacks” of 9/11 had happened, and the US was at war in Afghanistan and planning six more wars within 3 years.

More recently, it was revealed the DNC had gone out of its way to hand Hillary the presidential nomination over Sanders in 2016. Then in the 2020 primaries, despite embarrassingly lopsided losses in the first few primaries, Biden’s presidential campaign had a “miraculous turnaround”, thanks largely to irregularities in postal ballots in Ohio, Wisconsin and New Jersey.

This is evidence of precedent.

2. Motive

The US Deep State has clear and publicly known motives for wanting to remove Trump from office.

It is no secret that many members of the US’s political establishment oppose Trump and Trump’s policies. This includes neo-con warmongers and chiefs of the military and intelligence agencies.

“The Resistance”, billed as some voice of the progressive alternative, boasted former members of George Bush’s cabinet as members.

The most strident opposition to Trump was on foreign policy – most specifically in the Middle East. Trump was committed to withdrawing from Syria, in direct opposition to the “Assad Must Go” crowd at the Pentagon and State Dept.

Just last week it was revealed that Department of Defense actually lied to Trump about their troop numbers in Syria, claiming to have pulled out almost everyone whilst they actually kept their covert war going.

Conversely, Biden has always been firmly in the establishment camp on Syria, and many warmongers are already predicting that Biden will want to “restore some dignity” to the Syrian people.

The US Deep State has carried out coups all around the world, many of them bloody and violent, in order to maintain Imperial ambitions and keep wars-for-profit going. They have every motive to want to remove Trump and put Biden in his place.

This is evidence of motive.

3. Foreknowledge

Establishment voices have been predicting, and planning for, this exact situation for almost a year.

In January of this year – well before anyone could have predicted the effect the “pandemic” would have on the world – legal scholars were Wargaming the outcome of a disputed Presidential election based on postal ballots in Pennsylvania.

In August a group naming themselves the Transition Integrity Project published a document predicting a “disputed” election, that the counting would take much longer than usual and that it would not be certain who was President until January.

More generally, the outcome of the election was widely “predicted”, with multiple press outlets claiming there would be a “red mirage” and a “blue shift”. Meaning it would look like Trump would win, and then suddenly Biden would win at the last minute.

This is evidence of foreknowledge.

4. Opportunity

There is plenty of evidence that the US voting system is open to potential corruption.

Voting machines, for example, are owned and distributed by private companies. Many of which have political ties. An article in the Guardian, of all places, went into great detail about this just last year, when they were suggesting that Trump may have stolen the 2016 election.

Likewise, postal ballots are known to be susceptible to fraud. William Barr, the Attorney General, summed it up in a television interview in September, and written reports in 2007 and earlier this year, have gone into great detail about historical cases of postal vote fraud and possibilities of future occurrences.

This is evidence of opportunity.

5. Voting Irregularities

There are plenty of irregularities in the results which suggest the possibility of something strange going on.

The story of the election by the numbers doesn’t really make logical sense. The turnout is said to be 72%, the highest in 120 years, and the first over 60% for over 50 years.

In the process Joe Biden, we are told, shattered Barack Obama’s popular vote record by almost 10 million votes.

Joe Biden?

This Joe Biden?

…got more votes than Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton?

Meanwhile Donald Trump increased his own popular vote by over 10 million, whilst increasing his vote share in almost every ethnic demographic, as well as with women and LGBT voters.

Making him the first incumbent president to increase his popular vote but still lose in over a century, and the only one since all 50 states were part of the union.

Even if you believe that narrative is possible, there’s more than enough evidence of voting irregularities to warrant at least questioning the result and investigating further.

In one Michigan county an error in the software configuration swung thousands of votes from Republican to Democrat and called a Congressional seat for the wrong party.

This error was only spotted because of the historically republican record of the county. In a more hotly disputed seat, this error could potentially never have been picked up.

Another Michigan county reported an error which switched 5,500 votes from Trump to Biden – a swing of 11,000 votes.

The software used in this county is used in 30 other states – including Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona and Pennsylvania, all of which were decided by less than 1% of the vote, and any two of which could swing the election to Trump.

In fact Dominion, the company which supplied the questionable voting software, was denied a contract by the state of Texas in 2019 when judges found there were “concerns” about “whether [it] is safe from fraudulent or unauthorized manipulation”.

A subsidiary of Dominion was kicked out of the Philippines for being too easy to hack.

This video clip appears to show CNN’s coverage switching over 19,000 votes from Trump to Biden in Pennsylvania.

The graphed results of both Michigan and Wisconsin show decidedly odd jumps in Biden’s vote.

The counting itself was also deeply suspect, with several states taking almost a week to count the last few percent of the vote, whilst managing to count over 90% of the vote on the first evening. In Wisconsin the National Guard were brought in to “transcribe” damaged ballots, whilst in Pennsylvania they were allowed to count postal votes with “no clear post mark”, fairly obviously

As Glen Greenwald wrote, the very fact the count was so arduous and complicated raises questions about the outcome.

6. The Cover-Up

The media are engaging in lies and censorship.

To state there is “no evidence” of election rigging is a lie. There is plenty of evidence. Every news outlet, channel and website is singing from the same hymn sheet on this – even Fox News, so often Trump’s supposed favourite channel.

Even before the election, as discussed above, all the mainstream media were running articles defending mail-in ballots, and claiming that they are not historically weak to voter fraud. This is totally untrue, as anyone who cared to research the topic would tell you.

In fact many countries have incredibly rigid controls on postal voting for exactly that reason.

And then, after the election, social media companies and mainstream media outlets censor the President of the United States.

So, why are all the media telling the same lies? Why are people being denied a platform?

This is evidence of a cover-up.

*

Ask yourself:

• • If, in 2016, some voting software used in 30 states had flipped 5500 from Hillary to Trump, and later been revealed to be financially tied to the Republican party, would that have been “just a glitch”, or evidence of cheating?
  • If the Brexit referendum had swung violently to Leave after dumps of suspect postal ballots were permitted into the count by a judge who was a known Brexit supporter, would the media have kept quiet?
  • If, in Russia, the media denied a platform to the opposition to accuse Putin of voter fraud, would that be “responsible media practice”, or evidence of bias and censorship?

We don’t know exactly what happened, or how the election was result was controlled, but as of right now the specifics do not matter.

The point is there is plenty of evidence suggesting something happened, more than enough to warrant asking rational questions and expecting reasonable answers.

Every time the media ignores the evidence, or censors those seeking it, they only display further that there must be some fire behind all of this smoke.

0

0

Would Democrats not appoint a special counsel to get to the bottom of Republican wrongdoing . . . if they otherwise would have to rely on Republicans to police themselves?

It is a silly question,–  in a heartbeat they would do so

Indeed Trump should do what Democrats have done –  hamstring an incoming rival’s administration, but unlike them, not with bogus charges and innuendo – but with a fearless pursuit of evidenced corruption. Real corruption deserves nothing less.

Extensive evidence and testimony indicates that the Bidens are hip deep in corruption, Joe, Joe’s brother, and Hunter .  Why on earth would Republicans not insure that justice is independently and vigorously pursued?  The Biden’s is where one Special Counsel is needed. There is another one necessary  — a second Special Prosecutor to seriously  and vigorously pursue all the crimes against Trump and the American people in what is now known as the Russia-gate Hoax.

On that score we’ve made this point over and over: Barr-Durham are as dirty or pathetic as the rest of the swamp.  They have to be gone around.

Congressman Davin Nunes has called for the second, (and we have no doubt would support the former as well).  The reason we believe one is necessary, is because if Biden(his people) were to be ensconced in power, they would be in a position to shut the effort down. . .  but a Special Counsel appointed and funded predating any of their assumption of power would have (ideally) necessary independence, whatever the electoral outcome.

We also need a third Special Prosecutor to pursue 2020 election fraud. The evidence for that including coordination as in conspiracy is also clear.

This article by Adam at InsideScoop reports Nunes comments:

Nunes: Appoint Special Counsel, I’m Not Seeing Indictments From Durham

“How many times do FBI Agents and Intelligence Agency leaders get to lie under oath without being prosecuted? “

(Oh, come now, Devin, you know. If they are Democrats, the answer is, “as many times as necessary.”         dlh)

Full article below

Congressman Devin Nunes (R-GA) is the latest to voice his concerns over the lack of follow-through on the Durham investigation.

He is now convinced there needs to be a Special Counsel appointed to investigate the criminal referrals sent by Congress and actions by Intelligence Agency officials that took place during and after the 2016 elections.

“Every day that ticks by it’s going to become an absolute necessity that a special counsel is appointed on the way out,” Nunes told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.”

Nunes also says it should be Attorney General William Barr that appoints the special counsel but he doesn’t know if that’s in the works or not. However, he’s worried that if Durham doesn’t come out with any referrals and Joe Biden takes office, they’ll shut it all down.

“Now that doesn’t mean that [President-elect Joe] Biden wouldn’t fire the special counsel but at least you’d have a special counsel office setup, with money, so that this investigation can continue, because I’m not seeing the indictments that I should be seeing when you take into the account that I’ve made 14 criminal referrals involving dozens and dozens of people,”

Who could have predicted that?

The swamp is deep.

I’m not saying that Durham is a part of the swamp but I’m certainly not buying that it’s out of the question. After all, people ‘close to the investigation’ keep saying these things take time. It doesn’t, however, seem to take any time to prosecute someone close to the Trump administration with a case based wholly on rumors.
Barr has said, many times, that he believes the Obama administration spied on candidate and then President Trump. He’s also said the evidence he’s seen from the Durham investigation is “troubling”.

How many times do FBI Agents and Intelligence Agency leaders get to lie under oath without being prosecuted? Is that not a crime anymore? It seems to be for anyone associated with the Trump campaign, even if the interviewing agents don’t think it was a lie.

Ask Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

Of course, Joe Biden could just fire the Special Counsel and likely get zero backlash from the media. And he probably would.

It’s becoming apparent that in order to have justice, it has to be applied by people who have nothing to do with the Department of Justice.

President Trump should pursue appointment of all three expeditiously.

0

0

Akin to our earlier point influenced by others, “direct evidence” of fraud as in a smoking voter machine is not required to recognize and bring to justice a crime or other wrongdoing (read article below) . A preponderance of evidence — statistical — historic — buttressed by testimony is enough to make a justiciable claim of wrongdoing, unfairness, what have you. A criminal claim is one thing, and as the article below points out is not unreachable with existing circumstantial evidence but a claim of susceptibility, lack of transparency (lots of direct evidence on that) along with the other evidence ought to be enough to at least call for a new election, a civil / Constitutional claim.  That is better than accepting corruption or civil war is it not?    R Mall

By attorney Robert Kirk writing at American Thinker

There’s a case for Sidney Powell’s circumstantial evidence

0

0

POPE FRANCIS BERATES NBA PLAYERS:

-FOR THEIR PROFLIGATE LIFESTYLES

– FOR NOT SPEAKING OUT AGAINST THE MURDER OF MILLIONS OF BLACK BABIES THROUGH ABORTION

– CHASTISES THEIR CLOSE ASSOCIATION WITH THE CHINESE COMMUNISTS

– SCOLDS PLAYERS’ FAILURE TO ADDRESS THE SERIOUS ISSUES WITHIN FATHERLESS BLACK FAMILIES

– URGES PLAYERS TO DEVOTE THEIR ATTENTION TO “BLACK-ON-BLACK CRIME”

– MODELS VESTMENT IDEAS (SEE BELOW)

——–

OH WAIT! IL PAPA DID NOT MEET WITH NBA PLAYERS TO ADDRESS ANY OF THOSE ISSUES!

– “POPE FRANCIS WANTED TO LEARN MORE ABOUT HOW THE PLAYERS BROUGHT ATTENTION TO “RACIAL INJUSTICE” ISSUES !

WILL THE ‘VICAR OF CHRIST’ INTRODUCE “BLACK LIVES MATTER” THEMES TO VATICAN? (One of the “initiatives NBA players introduced was to have “anti-racism’ slogans printed on their game jerseys.)
………..
WE WONDER IF IL PAPA WAS IMPRESSED WITH A WAY IN WHICH PLAYERS BROUGHT ATTENTION TO THE ISSUE OF “SOCIAL JUSTICE AND RACISM”:

NBA PLAYERS HAVE UNPRECEDENTED MEETING WITH POPE FRANCIS

The League agreed that, “Players will have a list of 29 statements to choose from to put on the back of their jerseys … for the first four days of the league’s resumption in Orlando”, according to ESPN.

The list, as agreed upon by the league and the NBA Players Association, includes these messages: Black Lives Matter; Say Their Names; Vote; I Can’t Breathe; Justice; Peace; Equality; Freedom; Enough; Power to the People; Justice Now; Say Her Name; Sí Se Puede (Yes We Can); Liberation; See Us; Hear Us; Respect Us; Love Us; Listen; Listen to Us; Stand Up; Ally; Anti-Racist; I Am A Man; Speak Up; How Many More; Group Economics; Education Reform; and Mentor.Those players that choose to can still keep the messages after the first four days, but their last names will be added underneath.

WILL PRIESTS NOW HAVE ‘SOCIAL JUSTICE’ MESSAGES ON THE BACKS OF THEIR MASS VESTMENTS ?    (we surmise some Vatican approved examples — see below)     dlh

Here is the full report:

NBA PLAYERS HAVE UNPRECEDENTED MEETING WITH POPE FRANCIS

NBA players have recently avoided the White House. The Vatican is a different story.
Five players and representatives from the league had an unprecedented private audience with Pope Francis on Monday morning after the Catholic leader’s assistant initiated one to discuss the group’s racial injustice initiatives, according to ESPN.com.

The NBA’s contingent included Kyle Korver, Sterling Brown, Jonathan Isaac, Anthony Tolliver and Marco Belinelli.

The NBA became the focal point of athletes’ responding to racial injustice after police shot Jacob Blake, a Black man, in Kenosha, Wisconsin seven times. After video of the incident was released, the Bucks spearheaded a boycott of playoff games inside the NBA bubble. The postseason was put on hold for several days as players decided whether to cancel the season altogether or return to finish it out.

Players ultimately agreed to return after getting owners and NBA commissioner Adam Silver to agree to several league-sponsored initiatives toward racial equality. Pope Francis wanted to learn more about how the players brought attention to the issues.
——-
One of the “initiatives included:
Players will have a list of 29 statements to choose from to put on the back of their jerseys in place of their names for the first four days of the league’s resumption in Orlando, ESPN’s The Undefeated reported Friday.

The list, as agreed upon by the league and the NBA Players Association, includes these messages: Black Lives Matter; Say Their Names; Vote; I Can’t Breathe; Justice; Peace; Equality; Freedom; Enough; Power to the People; Justice Now; Say Her Name; Sí Se Puede (Yes We Can); Liberation; See Us; Hear Us; Respect Us; Love Us; Listen; Listen to Us; Stand Up; Ally; Anti-Racist; I Am A Man; Speak Up; How Many More; Group Economics; Education Reform; and Mentor.

Though players are not obligated to have a message on their jerseys, according to the report, those that choose to can still keep it after the first four days, but their last names will be added underneath.

The Undefeated previously reported that players would not be using the names of men and women who have died in police custody or in racially motivated incidents, so as not to offend the families of a victim whose name wasn’t used.

Players have reportedly held meetings to discuss how to best use their platforms to address systemic racism and police brutality, in the wake of the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, among others. The messages on jerseys are just one of the ways they plan to do so, according to reports.

POPES’ VESTMENT IDEAS ON DISPLAY: (Latin to English translator available at  https://translate.yandex.com/   but have some fun and try to figure them out first)

0

0

Who Does He think He Is…Demanding “Declassify and Release!”…the President?

On her show Saturday night, Judge Jeanine Pirro interviewed former Ambassador and Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell. Pirro noted that President Trump earlier this year had authorized the declassification of all documents related to the “Russia Probe” and the Hillary email scandal. She asked Grenell why had they not been released, even at this late date.

Grennel had no good answer, apparently .He ‘hem-hawed’ and mumbled something about the public in this era would ‘demand’ their release. (Pirro noted that she and others had, and are, so “demanding!”) He also made reference to the tendency of intelligence agencies to “overclassify” and to oppose public release because of the risk that intelligence “sources and methods” will be revealed. All in all, to us, it sounded like B.S.

It has been charged by various reporters and pundits, and members of Congress, that release of documents regarding these subjects as well as documents and evidence of other potential wrongdoing by the previous Obama-Biden administration has been blocked by FBI Director Wray and CIA Director, Gina Haspel. Their reasons, when any are reported is much like Grenell’s “sources and methods” explanation.

It’s a legitimate question, in our view, to ask what effect the public release of these documents, along with the fruits of the Durham investigation, if there was an ‘investigation’, would have had on the Nov. 3 election.

From what is known, not just alleged, but known, the information revealed would have been fatal to Biden’s presidential aspirations. And for people, including very likely Comey, Brennan, Clapper, public release of these documents may have have led to serious jail time for crimes associated with an attempted coup.

When will Trump’s order to ‘declassify and release’ those documents happen? If we are part of the “public’, let it be known, ‘we are demanding it’…and so is Judge Jeanine!

Does anyone now doubt the existence of a “Deep State/MSM/ Democrat Party Cabal”?

We don’t.            dlh

Here’s a FOX story, dated Oct. 6, about Trump’s “declassification and public release ” authorization. Note: a transcript or reference to Grennel’s appearance on Judge Pirro show was unavailable at this writing.

Trump authorizes declassification of all Russia collusion, Hillary Clinton email probe documents

‘I have fully authorized the total Declassification of any & all documents,’ Trump tweeted

“Allies of the president, including Republicans on Capitol Hill leading their own investigations into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, have criticized officials like FBI Director Christopher Wray and CIA Director Gina Haspel, claiming that the directors have been blocking the release of documents.”

President Trump on Tuesday said he has “fully authorized the total Declassification of any & all documents” related to the Russia investigation and the FBI’s investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

“I have fully authorized the total Declassification of any & all documents pertaining to the single greatest political CRIME in American History, the Russia Hoax. Likewise, the Hillary Clinton Email Scandal. No redactions!” The president tweeted Tuesday night.
“All Russia Hoax Scandal information was Declassified by me long ago,” Trump tweeted. “Unfortunately for our Country, people have acted very slowly, especially since it is perhaps the biggest political crime in the history of our Country.”

He added: “Act!!!”

Last year, the president gave Attorney General Bill Barr authority to declassify any documents related to surveillance of the Trump campaign in 2016. Trump, at the time, also ordered members of the intelligence community to cooperate with Barr’s probe.
Allies of the president, including Republicans on Capitol Hill leading their own investigations into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, have criticized officials like FBI Director Christopher Wray and CIA Director Gina Haspel, claiming that the directors have been blocking the release of documents.

The president’s tweets come after Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe declassified documents that revealed former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s purported “plan” to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server” ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

Fox News first reported that Ratcliffe declassified Brennan’s handwritten notes – which were taken after he briefed Obama on the intelligence the CIA received – and a CIA memo, which revealed that officials referred the matter to the FBI for potential investigative action.

“Today, at the direction of President Trump, I declassified additional documents relevant to ongoing Congressional oversight and investigative activities,” Ratcliffe said in a statement to Fox News Tuesday.

A source familiar with the documents explained that Brennan’s handwritten notes were taken after briefing Obama on the matter.

“We’re getting additional insight into Russian activities from [REDACTED],” Brennan notes read. “CITE [summarizing] alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service,” Brennan’s notes read.

The notes state “on 28 of July.” In the margin, Brennan writes “POTUS,” but that section of the notes is redacted.

“Any evidence of collaboration between Trump campaign + Russia,” the notes read.
The remainder of the notes are redacted, except in the margins, which reads: “JC,” “Denis,” and “Susan.”

The notes don’t spell out the full names but “JC” could be referring to then-FBI Director James Comey, “Susan” could refer to National Security Adviser Susan Rice, and “Denis” could refer to then-Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough.

The declassification comes after Ratcliffe, last week, shared newly-declassified information with the Senate Judiciary Committee which revealed that in September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral on Hillary Clinton purportedly approving “a plan concerning U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections” in order to distract the public from her email scandal.
That referral was sent to Comey and then-Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok.

“The following information is provided for the exclusive use of your bureau for background investigative action or lead purposes as appropriate,” the CIA memo to Comey and Strzok stated.

“This memorandum contains sensitive information that could be source revealing. It should be handled with particular attention to compartmentation and need-to-know. To avoid the possible compromise of the source, any investigative action taken in response to the information below should be coordinated in advance with Chief Counterintelligence Mission Center, Legal,” the memo, which was sent to Comey and Strzok, read. “It may not be used in any legal proceeding—including FISA applications—without prior approval…”
“Per FBI verbal request, CIA provides the below examples of information the CROSSFIRE HURRICANE fusion cell has gleaned to date,” the memo continued. ““An exchange [REDACTED] discussing US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning US presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering US elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server.”

The memo is heavily redacted.

Ratcliffe informed the committee last week that the Obama administration obtained Russian intelligence in July 2016 with allegations against Clinton, but cautioned that the intelligence community “does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the text to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”

According to Ratcliffe’s letter, the intelligence included the “alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016, of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.”
Nick Merrill, Clinton’s spokesperson, called the allegations “baseless b———t” last week. A spokesman for Clinton did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment on the declassified documents.

But Ratcliffe, in a statement released after the information was made public, pushed back on the idea he was advancing “Russian disinformation.”

“To be clear, this is not Russian disinformation and has not been assessed as such by the Intelligence Community,” Ratcliffe said in a statement to Fox News. “I’ll be briefing Congress on the sensitive sources and methods by which it was obtained in the coming days.”

A source familiar with the documents told Fox News on Tuesday that the allegation was “not disinformation.”

“This is not Russian disinformation. Even Brennan knew, or he wouldn’t be briefing the president of the United States on it,” the source said. “There is a high threshold to orally brief the president of the United States and he clearly felt this met that threshold.”
Another source familiar with the documents told Fox News that “this information has been sought by hundreds of congressional requests for legitimate oversight purposes and was withheld for political spite—and the belief that they’d never get caught.”

The source added that the Brennan notes are significant because it is “their own words, written and memorialized in real time.”

Meanwhile, last week, during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Comey was asked whether he received an investigative referral on Clinton from 2016, but he said it didn’t “ring any bells.”

“You don’t remember getting an investigatory lead from the intelligence community? Sept. 7, 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to James Comey and Strzok regarding Clinton’s approval of a plan [about] Trump…as a means of distraction?” Graham asked Comey.

“That doesn’t ring any bells with me,” Comey said.

Graham questioned “how far-fetched is that,” citing the fact that Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, through law firm Perkins Coie, hired Fusion GPS and ex-British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to author and compile information for the controversial and unverified anti-Trump dossier.

The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, through law firm Perkins Coie, hired Fusion GPS and ex-British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to author and compile information for the controversial and unverified anti-Trump dossier.

The dossier contains claims about alleged ties between Donald Trump and Russia that served as the basis for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants obtained against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

Attorney General Bill Barr last year appointed U.S. Attorney of Connecticut John Durham to investigate the origins of the FBI’s Russia probe shortly after special counsel Robert Mueller completed his years-long investigation into whether the campaign colluded with the Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election.

It is unclear whether this information will be considered part of Durham’s investigation, or whether the president’s declassification will affect Durham’s investigation.
Last month, Fox News reported, though, that Durham had assumed aspects of U.S. Attorney John Huber’sinvestigation into the Clinton Foundation.

A source familiar with Durham’s investigation told Fox News last month that parts of what Huber was investigating in 2017 — involving the Clinton Foundation — have been incorporated in Durham’s investigation.

In November 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions directed Huber, the U.S. attorney for Utah, and other senior prosecutors to evaluate “certain issues” involving the sale of Uranium One, and other dealings related to the Clinton Foundation. Sessions tapped Huber after requests by congressional Republicans, who had been calling for the appointment of a special counsel to review the matters.

Huber was also tasked with reviewing the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe, including allegations that the Justice Department and FBI “policies or procedures” were not followed.

It has been unclear, for years, the status of Huber’s investigation, but another source told Fox News Thursday that Huber has faced mounting criticism from the Justice Department and White House over his progress.

It is unclear whether any aspects of the Clinton email investigation were included in Huber’s review.

0

0

This video published in the last 24hrs takes about 18 minutes and will set up our commentary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgDyeNJ4FBk

We agree with Ms Gau’s conclusion, we must have a vigorous pursuit of the truth and not give in.

As regards 1960, we are not dealing with the same Democrat Party.  We are dealing with one run by people intent on a “Global Reset” that involves one world government and inevitable tyranny. In 1960 the year Democrats stole the election from Richard Nixon, the results were we believe seriously negative and wrong, but nothing like the precipice we are faced with now with a Harris presidency.

Some of the “get over it” types assume the Supreme Court will not “overturn” election “results”.  SCOTUS does seem to be the direction of the Trump legal team, (with the court of public opinion as a back-up).  My view is that elections in 2022, and 2024 are too iffy as palliatives when insecurity and dependency on government move so quickly. Look at the induced COVID “crisis” playbook and results.  So far it is not encouraging.

“Move on, get them next time, focus on the Georgia US Senate race . . .”  those are the gist of arguments to “get over it” as if without the Presidency or the House a potential one or two  vote margin in the US Senate is salutary with the likes of Mitt Romney and Susan Collins and some others on the Republican roster (ironically it could be that a few Democrats in the House would be more likely to stand to protect key aspects of the Republic . . . but I have no real confidence).

The Harris presidency would move quickly to consolidate power and dependency.

The Trump legal team has taken the lid off a whirlwind. The Supreme Court will have to save us from a stolen election if the evidence of such is sufficient.  They must not choose to wrongly deny evidence that is convincing in order to “save” the country from conflict. That is the proper concern of political leadership and the people.

If the Constitution demands and protects “one man one vote” within the system set up by the Founders then SCOTUS must deny an election that offends it or is so tainted so as cancel confidence in it.  It would be a corrupt system on trial or one too weak by design or negligence to guarantee the integrity of the vote.  It is a situation where the people are the ones with rights not certain politicians. That integrity is the balance of the justice scale that must be given the benefit of the doubt.  The people can be “made whole” as a body politic, by eliminating fraudulent votes or by order of a new election if the system is so tainted.

If sufficient evidence is present of  large scale corruption having been implemented, even if evidence is destroyed, that cannot be a win for corruption as the thieves are not the ones on trial by SCOTUS, to be given benefit of doubt, but the security and integrity of the system. Or, if the system has inherent weakness (one of which would be a feature of easily destroying evidence or ignoring fraud as a matter of course) then that is sufficient to deny the validity of the election in order ti insure integrity of the system and “one man one vote”.

If the system used is so insecure (it is in many states) and it is evidenced by testimony about the system, of negligence, of circumstantial or statistical or anomalous evidence sufficient to call into question the integrity of the election, the safe thing to do is to order the corrective of a new election at least in those states where the problem is evident (under rules sufficient to insure the integrity of the vote).  It is the peoples’ election, nothing is owed the candidates.

The above commentary was not an effort to regurgitate thoughts of my betters elsewhere but I did run into the article below at American Thinker toward the end of writing this in order to provide an example of a federal election being recast not recounted.  It refers to a recent congressional race where there was sufficient taint to call for a new election as mere  recounts of fraudulent votes and tallies are hardly justice served.

Recount? A judicially ordered new election is far better

0

0

• Indeed the cards are still being dealt — as in new facts being discovered, verified and analyzed, and appeals to judges about crooked decks and dealers being made. The tournament clock has not run out and rules allow it to be extended on appeal.
  
• Why fold when draws still available and opponents hands so actually marginal

We believe nothing in the title of this post would be contradicted by dlh in his last posts. We read his as a sigh for our country —  recognizing human nature and the endemic corruption of powerful forces intent on undermining our freedoms (and anemic responses to it). Even at that, his views we know not to be a capitulation, rather, the recognition that the truth doesn’t always make any difference, that lies can prevail . . . but that we must overcome such adversity.

We too are somber about how truth is so often hidden or ignored and also how enthusiasm can, in the current vernacular, cause one to get ahead of their skis. But Mesdames et Messieurs Powell, Ellis, Wood and Giuliani do not strike us as provocateurs. Powell, Ellis and Wood have taken politically charged cases but have not  been political operatives as such.  Giuliani has a political history but from the political establishment side of things, in that regard as much a Bushyite as anyone else.  He was also a renowned prosecutor and we think has a nose for rats and syndicate type behavior.

All strike us as having a lot of smarts and fearlessness even if accompanied by showmanship or ego. But as Rush has said this week, none of these lawyers want to be pegged as another Geraldo hyping Al Capone’s vaults.  Three especially are renown in legal circles and we don’t think they would push something they know to be flimsy.  Their declining to reveal much specificity as yet to the hostile press is entirely appropriate as sober litigators not wanting the matters to be tried in the press as opposed to courts of law. Several of these litigators we think ache to embarrass the national press and we doubt see a path to doing that by being charlatans. Further, letting too much specifics out can contaminate by inducing nitpicking that sullies the public opinion component to this. They want to control the roll out and should not be moved by badgering from the likes of Tucker Carlson or any member of the media.

Speaking of Tucker Carlson the paragon of authenticity and understatement or something, remember just a few weeks ago about the “theft” he led us to believe of a thumb drive containing an expose of Hunter Biden.  As far as we know it was an Giraldo level of sensationalism from Carlson, with the level of conspiracy overtones and implications of skullduggery he seemed to relish.  But where’s the beef, relevant to the thumb drive, Tucker?   Given you had a backup was your innuendo of attempt at coverup warranted?

We agree as regards hostile deniers of the election fraud matters raised by Powell et al (not referring to skeptics) as Michael Thau commenting at RedState writes:

When Proven Liars Say Trump’s Chances Are Slim, It’s Time to Listen to Honest Folk Who Know the Score Instead

. . . but can also agree with Scott McCay at The American Spectator:

Hurry Up With That Kraken, Will You?

excerpt:

There’s a reason less than half of America believes Biden fairly won the 2020 election. You have to be a partisan Democrat not to notice the smell.  . . .

So when Powell and Wood, who are lawyers with well-established reputations as stars in their profession and who are not kooks by any definition, are confidently stating not only that the election was plagued with massive fraud and abuse, but that Trump will ultimately be declared the winner once it has all shaken out, that ought to be taken seriously.

Even if what’s being said appears, before we’ve seen the evidence, to be a bit on the fanciful side. And despite how hard those foul political winds are blowing.

Let’s see that Kraken for ourselves. And let’s hope it’s more than just a plate of calamari.

0

0

I fervently hope that Sidney Powell is not another William Barr or John Durham

Few, including many who claim to be on our “side”, believe that the Trump legal team has anything.

Court losses, media skepticism, odd behavior by some legal team members, and little to go on besides pronouncements of incredibly pervasive fraud and criminality in the 2020 election… all leave us wondering: Do we have heretofore respected and persuasive spokespeople, confirming our suspicions and rousing our hopes for a just reckoning and a pleasing outcome to the election? Or, do we have another Attorney General Barr and his ‘Super-investigator’ John Durham, selling similar hopes in the months leading up to the election…and delivering nothing!?

Understandable that some are now bitterly muttering, “Not again”. The far right news outlets continue to raise our hopes, with daily stories of the certain and imminent reversal of the 2020 presidential election results, while Joe Biden continues to announce ‘his’ choices of far left radicals and the worst of the Obama regime for his ‘incoming’ administration. As improbable and dangerous to America that Biden’s election as president would be, or is, we all wonder if we are witnessing another version of the “Russia investigation”.

Soon after his appointment as Attorney General, Mr. Barr hinted at the pervasive criminality by the previous administration in attempting to undermine the Trump administration and overthrow a duly elected president. Barr strongly suggested that a thorough investigation would lead to the conviction of former major figures from the previous administration and the achievement of true justice under the rule of law.

With such obvious and irrefutable proof of serious wrongdoing by the Obama-Biden administration and the administration of justice for the guilty parties, conservatives were encouraged that voters would reject a party which had condoned and promoted serious threats to the public safety and America’s national security.

But, now, the election is over; we’re led to believe that voters have elected parties to the previous administration’s wrongdoing, Attorney Barr is silent, and the “investigation”, if there ever was one, “continues”(?).          dlh

Beth Baumam reports on Sidney Powell’s interview with Howie Carr — Howie is skeptical; Powell is, as usual, reticent, seemingly confident

SIDNEY POWELL: WHISTLEBLOWERS MAY NEED WITNESS PROTECTION AFTER THEIR ALLEGATIONS ARE BROUGHT TO LIGHT

Trump Team attorney Sidney Powell on Friday told Newsmax’s Howie Carr that once the campaign drops evidence of voter fraud there will be a number of people who will need to be in witness protection.

“When are we going to have some positive developments in the president’s case here?” Carr asked.

Powell said evidence of fraud will be released this coming week.

“This was very widespread, very deliberate, well-funded and everybody and their pet rock is trying to stop me from exposing it,” the attorney said.

According to Powell, the various election software that was used went far beyond just the presidential election and was used so specific people were put in government positions. She believes it was also used against John James, the Republican candidate for Senate in Michigan, and Leon Benjamin, the Republican candidate for Virginia’s 4th Congressional District.

“I think they did it to any particularly strong Republican candidate this time around,” she said.

When Carr pressed the former federal prosecutor about whether or not there will evidence of a “smoking gun,” Powell stated the Trump Team has it.

“We have a number of smoking guns,” Powell said. “And we may have to get witness protection for them.”

Powell has repeatedly said software and election officials have the ability (to) flip votes, in this case from Trump to Biden. She claimed the Trump Team also has evidence of dead people voting in the election, something Corey Lewandowski talked about in Pennsylvania earlier this month.

Based on her estimates, Powell believes roughly seven million votes were purged from President Trump and given to former Vice President Biden. She estimates that Biden received at least 10 million fraudulent votes. Although the Trump Team is still verifying the data they were provided with, Powell said if it ends up being solid, several million dead people voted in the 2020 election.

“We’ve also got evidence of people being paid, check stubs of people being paid to ballot harvest and do fraudulent voting,” she said.

“There were several ways they did this. One was an algorithm I believe they ran nationwide but I can’t say that for sure yet because we haven’t had the time to run the data nationwide,” the attorney explained. “But that would typically be the way that it’d be done and certainly make it less apparent that it’d been done in any one place if they ran the algorithm consistently across the country.”

Powell stated “the Democratic operation had to have been involved” based on Internet evidence they have seen. She cited Biden’s now infamous phrase that he had the most extensive voter fraud case in American history as evidence of Democrats’ involvement.

0

0

There are, however, realities that disappointed, and rightfully concerned conservatives should accept, include the following:

Whatever the merits of the belief that this election was not honest, all the apparent evidence of that will not succeed in our current “courts of law”. If one can believe that fraudulent national elections are part of today’s culture, how much of a stretch is it to know that our courts… our judiciary…is also incredibly corrupt. If you can’t believe that you probably can’t believe other ”wild’ claims that there are states in this great nation whose voters would actually vote to make extraordinarily  dangerous drugs like heroine and cocaine, legal ! (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oregon-first-state-decriminalize-cocaine-heroin-measure-109/ )

If you find it impossible to believe that Joe Biden, despite all the indications of election fraud, and the things widely known about him, and those not so properly communicated about him, could be elected president of the United States, consider these other realities:

– Joe Biden is the least visible radical leftist in modern politics. Always a ‘liberal’, or ‘progressive’, Biden has always been one of the dimmest bulbs in congress. (as former Defense Secretary Bob Gates correctly noted, “Joe Biden has been wrong about every major foreign policy position he’s taken in over 40 years”). But he continued to be reelected, term after term.

– the notion that Joe Biden, despite his dim-wittedness, his remarkably stupid public statements, the viciousness and dishonesty he has displayed toward political opponents (i.e. Judge Bork, Clarence Thomas) is a smartly political,  “nice guy” is legendary…and wholly mythical ! Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy were two of the ‘least nice’ guys, ever, in the US Senate.

– the myth of Biden’s “niceness” has been reinforced over the years, and most recently throughout this year’s election cycle by the media and his fellow officeholders (even the ‘conservative’ outlets and fellow Republican politicians defer in discussing Biden with,”Joe is one of the nicest guys I know…despite his many ‘gaffes'”). We believe those who know better still spread the myth of Joe’s “niceness” because there is nothing else about him one can say without being seen as ‘uncharitable’…in fact, he’s unprincipled, underhanded, greedy, nasty in his treatment of political opponents, easily manipulated when he sees personal political gain, and not very bright! But, he smiles a lot. (If you think I write like I know Joe intimately,that’s not my intention. But if you have read and considered factual reports from credible media about Joe, you would agree the description of him I offer is accurate.)

Besides the possible, if not probable, election fraud and the corruption of our judicial system, there is another sad reality that honest, hardworking, patriotic Americans must accept about the presidential election of 2020: so many of our fellow Americans… well-meaning, normally thoughtful, moral, even the religious faithful, believe that Biden is “better for the country” than Donald Trump.

There’s a reason for this extremely misguided notion:

a) Biden talks a lot about his “faith”. Like Nancy Pelosi, they’ve worked at making people believe their “God-fearing ways, their devotion to their “Catholic faith”, their alignment with the views of Pope Francis, the media solidifying the myth of Biden’s “niceness” and commitment to “unity”, “compassion”, etc.

b) Trump’s manner of campaigning and carrying out his presidential duties is so different from other presidents in modern times. Even though, Trump may eventually be recognized as the most positively consequential president in the nation’s history, his “style” is a ‘turnoff ‘ for many of the American people described above (“well-meaning”, “normally thoughtful”, etc).

And yet the public behavior of Trump which is so off-putting to many is nothing compared to the less-public, and far-less well-known behavior than that of most of his predecessors.

Lyndon Johnson may have been the crudest, most vulgar person to ever occupy the Oval Office. JFK may have had the most extreme of sexual appetites, almost none of which were known during his time in office but in recent years have been disclosed, though not nearly as exposed as Trump’s less extreme actions.

Only Clinton, it is generally conceded, was blatantly more offensive in his actual behavior than Trump’s widely exaggerated alleged behavior.

Other presidents before recent times were not as openly exposed as in the recent age. Eisenhower and his ‘alleged affair’ with his driver, ‘Ms.Kay Summersby’* was revealed by the press but without much in the way of sensationalism. There was much about FDR that was not known publicly but was later revealed to little public notice.

At any rate, the bottom line is, there is nothing that will overturn the election of Joe Biden in 2020. It’s our belief that the next 4 years are likely to be disastrous for the USA, but that our nation, and its basic goodness among nations of the world will survive, if barely. And, assuming America comes ‘out the other side’ of a Biden- then Harris presidency, it will be stronger.

Dark days lie ahead, however, and its unlikely we will ever see another person like Donald Trump as our president…and for those two realities, we should all be regretful.  dlh

****************************************

https://spectator.org/why-trump-lost/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/georgia-certifies-donald-trump-lost-11605915757

0

0

Regarding “stop the steal” efforts we pray are successful,  here is a collection of links to commentaries of note for the day.  We emphasize one report that the media will try to use to undermine any traction being gained by revelations of evidence of mass cheating by Trump lawyers Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, et al. Regarding any perception of the recently concluded “recount” in Georgia not changing any result, suffice it to say “garbage in, garbage counted” That is all they recounted, garbage, if no audit is undertaken to prove the integrity of the vote.  Of course Erick-Woods Erickson, a pain in the ass when he just used Erick Erickson, now 33% more so, serves to flummox key aspects to the legal process being undertaken by Trump attorneys. It is not over until it is over and we believe the Trump attorneys cannot be paid enough to sully themselves by issuing bad faith claims.

President Trump Campaign Fact-Checks the Fake News Media: Georgia Has Not Certified Biden’s Win

Stand Firm, Trump Voters

Your Political Leaders Hate You And Think You’re Stupid

The Hand Recount in Georgia Has Concluded. Where Does the Trump Campaign Go From Here?

Trump Campaign Lawyers: There Is a Pattern of Planned Voter Fraud in Multiple States

Sidney Powell: Trump Won in a Landslide and We’re Going to Prove It

Rep. Banks Plans to Provide ‘Conservative Counterprogamming’ to the Far-left Agenda as Republican Study Chair

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/11/when_computers_cheat_they_inevitably_leave_evidence_behind.html

0

0