RUSSIAN LAWYER TESTIFYING IN CONGRESS ABOUT FUSION GPS, TIES TO HILLARY CLINTON AND LORETTA LYNCH

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/10/nyt-russian-lawyer-story-proves-dems-helped-cr...

NYT Russian Lawyer Story Proves Dems Helped Create Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory

he New York Times published a story on Saturday that revealed Donald Trump Jr. met with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a “Russian lawyer who has connections to the Kremlin,” on June 9th, 2016. On Sunday, The Times followed up with a report that said Don Jr. “was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with [the] Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, . . .” Paul Manafort, President Trump’s campaign manager at the time, and Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and current advisor, also attended the meeting, according to The Times.

Of course, the typical figures are suggesting that this “proves” that collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government occurred during the election. But the critical detail of who sought to broker the meeting is wholly omitted in both of The Times’ reports. In a statement to The Times, Don Jr. said, “I was asked to attend the meeting by an acquaintance, but was not told the name of the person I would be meeting with beforehand.” This individual’s name has not officially been revealed. The Washington Post suggested the person was Rob Goldstone, a music publicist and personal friend of Don Jr. Don Jr. has neither confirmed nor denied Goldstone’s involvement.

Whoever the acquaintance was, subsequent reporting by Circa News said that members of the President’s legal team have confirmed that the acquaintance “who sought the meeting is associated with Fusion GPS.” Based on other contemporaneous events, this account seems highly probable.

It is important to remember exactly what was transpiring in the late spring and early summer of 2016. Specifically, the key timeframe is April-June 2016. It was during this time that three different event trajectories converged: (1) Trump becoming the presumptive Republican nominee, (2) the Democratic National Committee (DNC) learning and disclosing that Russian hackers penetrated its computer network, and (3) Democratic Party operatives hiring Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research on Trump.

Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee either in late April or early May, depending on who you ask. Trump declared himself to be the presumptive nominee on April 26th, after sweeping the primary election contests in Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode Island, Maryland and Pennsylvania. One week later, on May 3rd, then-chairman of the Republican National Committee Reince Priebus declared Trump to be the presumptive nominee after Trump emerged victorious from the heavily contested Indiana primary contest, which led Republican Texas Senator Ted Cruz to drop out of the race.

Trump’s presumptive nomination is significant here for other, less obvious reasons. That is because, according to The New York Times, during the Republican primaries,

a wealthy Republican donor who strongly opposed Mr. Trump put up the money to hire a Washington research firm run by former journalists, Fusion GPS, to compile a dossier about the real estate magnate’s past scandals and weaknesses.

However, The Times continued,

After Mr. Trump emerged as the presumptive nominee in the spring, the Republican interest in financing the effort ended. But Democratic supporters of Hillary Clinton were very interested, and Fusion GPS kept doing the same deep dives, but on behalf of new clients.

Until this time, there was no known coordinated effort to investigate Trump’s alleged “ties” to Russia. But, as The Times noted, that all changed in June:

In June, the tenor of the effort suddenly changed. The Washington Post reported that the Democratic National Committee had been hacked, apparently by Russian government agents, and a mysterious figure calling himself “Guccifer 2.0” began to publish the stolen documents online.

The above-mentioned Washington Post article was published on June 14th, 2016. What The Post did not note, however, was that the DNC knew Russia was behind the hack long before its article was published.

Public reports confirm the DNC’s early knowledge of Russia’s involvement in the hack. The Washington Post article says “DNC leaders were tipped to the hack in late April.” The specific date, according to a separate report from The New York Times, was “[t]he day before the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner,” which occurred on April 30th, meaning that the DNC was notified of the intrusion on April 29th. Within 24 hours of the notification, The Times reported, the DNC “hired CrowdStrike, a cyber security firm,” which The Washington Post said “installed software on the DNC’s computers so that it could analyze data that could indicate who had gained access, when and how.” A DNC lawyer told The Times that, “Within a day, CrowdStrike confirmed that the intrusion had originated in Russia.”

Dear one, how did the DNC know it was being hacked in 2016?

You haven't said.

More importantly, why would they not report this crime to the police?

SUSAN RICE FACING CRIMINAL CHARGES FOR UNMASKING TRUMP NAMES: Samantha Power Also Facing Charges

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bob-woodward-obama-officials-possibly-facing-c...

Bob Woodward: Obama officials possibly facing criminal charges for unmasking scheme

The Washington Post's Bob Woodward warned on Wednesday that there are people from the Obama administration who could be facing criminal charges for unmasking the names of Trump transition team members from surveillance of foreign officials.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said earlier that he had briefed Trump on new information, unrelated to an investigation into Russian activities, that suggested that several members of Trump's transition team and perhaps Trump himself had their identities "unmasked" after their communications were intercepted by U.S. intelligence officials.

The revelation is notable because identities of Americans are generally supposed to remain "masked" if American communications are swept up during surveillance of foreign individuals.

During an interview on Fox News, Woodward said that if that information about the unmasking is true, "it is a gross violation."

He said it isn't Trump's assertion, without proof, that his predecessor wiretapped Trump Tower that is of concern, but rather that intelligence officials named the Americans being discussed in intercepted communications.

"You can learn all kinds of things from diplomats gossiping, because that's what occurs. Under the rules, and they are pretty strict, it's called minimization. You don't name the American person who is being discussed," Woodward said.

He noted that there are about 20 people in the intelligence community who, for intelligence reasons, can order this "minimization" be removed.

"But the idea that there was intelligence value here is really thin," Woodward said. "It's, again, down the middle, it is not what Trump said, but this could be criminal on the part of people who decided, oh, let's name these people."

He drove the point home, adding that "under the rules, that name is supposed to be blanked out, and so you've got a real serious problem potentially of people in the Obama administration passing around this highly classified gossip."

FORMER FBI ASST. DIRECTOR THINKS THAT HILLARY SHOULD BE SHOT BY FIRING SQUAD!

http://www.anonews.co/former-fbi-asst/

Former FBI Asst. Director Thinks Hillary Should Face A Firing Squad

Former FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom is not playing around, and he knows harsh truths about Hillary Clinton and the one thing she did that warrants being shot by a firing squad. It’s one thing to commit white collar crimes, but Kallstrom is pointing out something that many Americans may not realize, which is the one thing Hillary did that warrants death by firing squad.

It is the fact that Hillary put her private unsecured server in her basement at her residence and mishandled classified docs, this is the reason she should face a firing squad in James K’s Opinion.

What is he talking about? When Hillary put in a home-based, private server and intentionally used it, emailing out nation’s most classified documents, this was a crime warranting treason. Democrats will scoff at this, calling it ridiculous, but is it?

James K. also says he thinks that the only reason she wanted to keep off the govt servers is to hide her illegal activity. The only reason the server was discovered was a Benghazi FOIA that led to the discovery of the server in HRC basement.

We know Hillary intended to keep off the “state dot gov” servers for one reason, and that was because she said she didn’t want her illegal activities subject to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. It should be noted that it was exactly FOIA requests into Benghazi by Judicial Watch that led to the discovery of her private server.

Anyone notice that Grumpy Trumpy threw lil' Jeffy Beau' Sessions under the bus...backed over him...and then floored it forward again!

"What the bugger good is he to me after he recused himself! That little buggerer!"

Sessions was the first major pol to endorse him and, basically legitimize him as a 'Republican'......... Enjoy your thanks, Jeffy!

bwwwwwahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/10/youre-fired-trumps-va-terminates-500-suspends-...

You’re Fired: Trump’s VA Terminates 548, Suspends 200 for Misconduct

ive hundred and forty-eight Department of Veterans Affairs employees have been terminated since President Donald Trump took office, indicating that his campaign pledge to clean up “probably the most incompetently run agency in the United States” by relentlessly putting his TV catchphrase “you’re fired” into action was more than just empty rhetoric.

Another 200 VA workers were suspended and 33 demoted, according to newly published data by the department as part of VA Secretary David Shulkin’s commitment to greater transparency. Those disciplined include 22 senior leaders, more than 70 nurses, 14 police officers, and 25 physicians.

Also disciplined were a program analyst dealing with the Government Accountability Office, which audits the department, a public affairs specialist, a chief of police, and a chief of surgery.

Many housekeeping aides and food service workers—lower-level jobs in which the department has employed felons and convicted sex offenders—were also fired.

Scores of veterans have died waiting for care while VA bureaucrats falsified data to procure monetary bonuses, but fixes have been slow to come by largely because the union that represents VA employees has used its political muscle with Democrats to emphasize job security for government employees.

Former President Barack Obama originally appointed Shulkin as a VA undersecretary. By the end of the Obama administration, however, Shulkin had grown increasingly frustrated with the American Federation of Government Employees union and other groups defending bad employees’ supposed right to a government check even when they hurt veterans.

“Just last week we were forced to take back an employee after they were convicted no more than three times for DWI and had served a 60-day jail sentence … Our accountability processes are clearly broken,” Shulkin said at the White House.

In addition to reluctance by managers to vigorously pursue firings, the overturning of firings after the fact by the Merit Systems Protection Board—often with little public acknowledgment—has been a longstanding problem.

Shulkin asked for new legislation that reduces the role of board, especially when firing senior leaders. Congress passed the Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act in answer, and Trump signed the bill in June.

The published data predate those new powers, and do not note which disciplinary actions were later overturned.

One record shows a “senior leader” being removed Jan. 20, while another record shows a “senior leader” being demoted April 21. Those appear to refer to the same person—disgraced Puerto Rico VA hospital Director DeWayne Hamlin—who returned to work in a lesser job after he appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Former Obama Secretary of Veterans Affairs Bob McDonald seemed to have so little grasp on firing employees that in August 2016, he said he had fired 140,000 employees, a figure that made little sense since that would be nearly half the workforce.

He said “you can’t fire your way to excellence” and blamed “negative news articles” for a morose culture, rather than the individuals perpetrating the misconduct described in those articles.

Though high-level hospital officials were affected, according to the data covering the first six months of the Trump administration, relatively few disciplinary actions occurred in the central offices where Washington bureaucrats work. Those employ fewer people than the hospitals, but repeated scandals have also shown such employees looking out for one another to preserve each others’ jobs.

There were five firings in the Veterans Health Administration Central Office, including one senior leader. There were also two in the Office of General Counsel, and one in the Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs.

The data does not include employees’ names, and does not show which employees were on new employee probationary status. Employees can be fired much more easily during their first year.

During the Obama administration, McDonald lamented that in the private sector “you cut a deal with the employee and you’re able to buy them out,” but said you cannot do that in government.

Yet the Department of  Veterans Affairs repeatedly made five- and six-figure payments to bad employees to get them to quit after they threatened to gum up the works by appealing disciplinary actions. The department even allowed Hamlin to offer a low-level employee $300,000 to quit after she refused to help management retaliate against a whistleblower who exposed Hamlin’s arrest.

The agency paid more than $5 million in settlements to employees under McDonald, which had the effect of encouraging bad employees to relentlessly appeal and make unsupported charges of discrimination when they were targeted for discipline, in an often successful attempt to convert punishment into reward.

Shulkin said he “will look to settle with employees only when they clearly have been wronged … and not as a matter of ordinary business.”

start @ 1:32

Trump Warns Mueller of Conflict of Interest, 1716

Good morning, I’m still reporting on: Trump Warns Mueller of Conflict of Interest, 1716
Synopsis: According to an article in The Hill written by Jacqueline Thompsen and posted an hour ago, President Trump has warned special counsel Robert Mueller that his office has multiple conflicts of interest and that if Mueller starts investigating beyond the Russia probe that he could be fired.
The story stems from an interview President Trump gave to the NYT earlier today. Trump told the failing newspaper:
“I think that’s a violation. Look, this is about Russia.”
According to The Hill:
“He did not say that he would order the Justice Department to fire Mueller or under what circumstances he would fire him, but he indicated Mueller investigating his family's finances would cross a line.”
Trump shockingly revealed that he had interviewed Mueller to replace Comey as FBI director shortly before he was asked to name him as special counsel by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
Trump also revealed some of the amazing back story behind Mueller’s appointment. He said that Rosenstein, who recommended Comey’s firing was playing both sides. In other words, Rosenstein apparently had already made a deal with Mueller to accept the job of investigating the Trump/Russia connection where his actions would fall under less public scrutiny.
Trump told the NYT:
“Well, that’s a conflict of interest. Do you know how many conflicts of interest there are?”
The President was referring to Mueller’s staff being loaded with Hillary Clinton supporters – even former employees of the Clintons.
This new report of Trump considering firing Mueller for conflicts confirms rumors that surfaced last month that Mueller’s firing was under discussion.