Sunday, June 25, 2017

Many in the military and intelligence communities are concerned that this Russian meddling which took place entirely under the Obama administration is another “wag the dog” operation.

Many in the military and intelligence communities are concerned that this Russian meddling which took place entirely under the Obama administration is another “wag the dog” operation. The Russians are an extreme danger to the infrastructure integrity of the United States.

Congress, the Department of Justice and our intelligence agencies should investigate the dissent concerning the “Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee.”   To the best of my knowledge, no independent qualified US intelligence source has been permitted to examine the Democratic National Committee files, computer network etc. James Comey  never issued a subpoena to examine those files.   Since this is crucial evidence on which VP Biden publicly threatened a cyber war [which we can’t win] with Russia, it  is highly unusual that such key evidence would not be immediately seized and held intact  for definitive analysis. 

Even a trivial examination of the many links usually found on the Internet explains the current level of sophistication and frequency of such hacking which then shows that any statement that it can be done by a teenager sitting in a little bedroom is very accurate in terms of the sophistication required. The software used  by the hackers was several generations older than that currently used by the Russian intelligence operations and is widely used in hacking operations.

Concerning Gen. Flynn, remember that Jill Stein was also at the same table with Putin. If anybody undercut the election of Hillary Clinton it was Jill Stein. Why isn’t anybody talking about her possible relations with Putin to undermine US elections?

Particular concern to many of us is the vulnerability of our information, communication, transportation, energy, and other grids to interference by Russia, China, Iran, and even North Korea. Such interruption could destroy US  civilization as we know it. Yet the Obama administration looked the other way. The Trump administration is not doing any better.

[See: Congressional Testimony: Efforts to stop Iran’s terror-financing were systematically undermined by the Obama Administration
By Charles Lipson, ZIP DIALOGUE]

Why? To get a nuclear deal, says an insider from the Obama Administration
The testimony is stunning and deeply disturbing.

Efforts to stop terror financing not only involved Iran but also its partners, Syria and Venezuela.

US government efforts to investigate and roll up these networks were all quashed in pursuit of a nuclear deal.

The investigative units themselves were actually disbanded, lest they trouble Iran and make the nuclear deal more difficult to achieve. That, at least, is the testimony of someone who saw it first-hand.

David Asher, an adviser to Gen. John Allen at Defense and State, told the House Foreign Affairs Committee said that the Obama administration “systematically disbanded” law enforcement investigative units across the federal government focused on disrupting Iranian, Syrian, and Venezuelan terrorism financing networks out of concern the work could cause friction with Iranian officials and scuttle the nuclear deal with Iran, according to a former U.S. official who spent decades dismantling terrorist financial networks. –Washington Free Beacon

Why did the Obama Administration roll up the units stopping terror financing?

Asher’s answer: The administration feared the efforts to investigate and disrupt terror-financing would be an obstacle to reaching an Iranian Nuclear Deal.

Senior leadership, presiding, directing, and overseeing various sections [of these agencies] and portions of the U.S. intelligence community systematically disbanded any internal or external stakeholder action that threatened to derail the administration’s policy agenda focused on Iran,” [Asher] testified.

He detailed extensive collaboration among the Iranians, Syrians, and Venezuelans and said there was enough evidence to take down the terror-financing networks.

What was taken down instead were the anti-terror units in the US government.


POSTING NOTIFICATION:  These materials  have not been evaluated.. Golan Ben-Oni  has both personal and professional credibility. Thus, his urgent warnings about a major impending cyber threat should receive immediate and thorough examination by the US intelligence community.

NEWARK — There have been times over the last two months when Golan Ben-Oni has felt like a voice in the wilderness.

On April 29, someone hit his employer, IDT Corporation, with two cyberweapons that had been stolen from the National Security Agency. Mr. Ben-Oni, the global chief information officer at IDT, was able to fend them off, but the attack left him distraught.

In 22 years of dealing with hackers of every sort, he had never seen anything like it. Who was behind it? How did they evade all of his defenses? How many others had been attacked but did not know it?

Since then, Mr. Ben-Oni has been sounding alarm bells, calling anyone who will listen at the White House, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the New Jersey attorney general’s office and the top cybersecurity companies in the country to warn them about an attack that may still be invisibly striking victims undetected around the world.

And he is determined to track down whoever did it.

“I don’t pursue every attacker, just the ones that piss me off,” Mr. Ben-Oni told me recently over lentils in his office, which was strewn with empty Red Bull cans. “This pissed me off and, more importantly, it pissed my wife off, which is the real litmus test.”

Two weeks after IDT was hit, the cyberattack known as WannaCry ravaged computers at hospitals in England, universities in China, rail systems in Germany, even auto plants in Japan. No doubt it was destructive. But what Mr. Ben-Oni had witnessed was much worse, and with all eyes on the WannaCry destruction, few seemed to be paying attention to the attack on IDT’s systems — and most likely others around the world.

The strike on IDT, a conglomerate with headquarters in a nondescript gray building here with views of the Manhattan skyline 15 miles away, was similar to WannaCry in one way: Hackers locked up IDT data and demanded a ransom to unlock it.

But the ransom demand was just a smoke screen for a far more invasive attack that stole employee credentials. With those credentials in hand, hackers could have run free through the company’s computer network, taking confidential information or destroying machines.

Worse, the assault, which has never been reported before, was not spotted by some of the nation’s leading cybersecurity products, the top security engineers at its biggest tech companies, government intelligence analysts or the F.B.I., which remains consumed with the WannaCry attack.

Were it not for a digital black box that recorded everything on IDT’s network, along with Mr. Ben-Oni’s tenacity, the attack might have gone unnoticed.

Scans for the two hacking tools used against IDT indicate that the company is not alone. In fact, tens of thousands of computer systems all over the world have been “backdoored” by the same N.S.A. weapons. Mr. Ben-Oni and other security researchers worry that many of those other infected computers are connected to transportation networks, hospitals, water treatment plants and other utilities.

An attack on those systems, they warn, could put lives at risk. And Mr. Ben-Oni, fortified with adrenaline, Red Bull and the house beats of Deadmau5, the Canadian record producer, said he would not stop until the attacks had been shut down and those responsible were behind bars.

“The world is burning about WannaCry, but this is a nuclear bomb compared to WannaCry,” Mr. Ben-Oni said. “This is different. It’s a lot worse. It steals credentials. You can’t catch it, and it’s happening right under our noses.”

And, he added, “The world isn’t ready for this.”

Targeting the Nerve Center

Mr. Ben-Oni, 43, a Hasidic Jew, is a slight man with smiling eyes, a thick beard and a hacker’s penchant for mischief. He grew up in the hills of Berkeley, Calif., the son of Israeli immigrants.

Even as a toddler, Mr. Ben-Oni’s mother said, he was not interested in toys. She had to take him to the local junkyard to scour for typewriters that he would eventually dismantle on the living room floor. As a teenager, he aspired to become a rabbi but spent most of his free time hacking computers at the University of California, Berkeley, where his exploits once accidentally took down Belgium’s entire phone system for 15 minutes.

To his parents’ horror, he dropped out of college to pursue his love of hacking full time, starting a security company to help the city of Berkeley and two nearby communities, Alameda and Novato, set up secure computer networks.

He had a knack for the technical work, but not the marketing, and found it difficult to get new clients. So at age 19, he crossed the country and took a job at IDT, back when the company was a low-profile long-distance service provider.

As IDT started acquiring and spinning off an eclectic list of ventures, Mr. Ben-Oni found himself responsible for securing shale oil projects in Mongolia and the Golan Heights, a “Star Trek” comic books company, a project to cure cancer, a yeshiva university that trains underprivileged students in cybersecurity, and a small mobile company that Verizon recently acquired for $3.1 billion.

Which is to say he has encountered hundreds of thousands of hackers of every stripe, motivation and skill level. He eventually started a security business, IOSecurity, under IDT, to share some of the technical tools he had developed to keep IDT’s many businesses secure. By Mr. Ben-Oni’s estimate, IDT experiences hundreds of attacks a day on its businesses, but perhaps only four each year give him pause.

Nothing compared to the attack that struck in April. Like the WannaCry attack in May, the assault on IDT relied on cyberweapons developed by the N.S.A. that were leaked online in April by a mysterious group of hackers calling themselves the Shadow Brokers — alternately believed to be Russia-backed cybercriminals, an N.S.A. mole, or both.

The WannaCry attack — which the N.S.A. and security researchers have tied to North Korea — employed one N.S.A. cyberweapon; the IDT assault used two.

Both WannaCry and the IDT attack used a hacking tool the agency had code-named EternalBlue. The tool took advantage of unpatched Microsoft servers to automatically spread malware from one server to another, so that within 24 hours North Korea’s hackers had spread their ransomware to more than 200,000 servers around the globe.

The attack on IDT went a step further with another stolen N.S.A. cyberweapon, called DoublePulsar. The N.S.A. used DoublePulsar to penetrate computer systems without tripping security alarms. It allowed N.S.A. spies to inject their tools into the nerve center of a target’s computer system, called the kernel, which manages communications between a computer’s hardware and its software.

In the pecking order of a computer system, the kernel is at the very top, allowing anyone with secret access to it to take full control of a machine. It is also a dangerous blind spot for most security software, allowing attackers to do what they want and go unnoticed. In IDT’s case, attackers used DoublePulsar to steal an IDT contractor’s credentials. Then they deployed ransomware in what appears to be a cover for their real motive: broader access to IDT’s businesses.

The N.S.A. campus in Fort Meade, Md. Tens of thousands of computer systems, some of which could be connected to public utilities, have been “backdoored” using the agency’s stolen cyberweapons.

Patrick Semansky / Associated Press

Mr. Ben-Oni learned of the attack only when a contractor, working from home, switched on her computer to find that all her data had been encrypted and that attackers were demanding a ransom to unlock it. He might have assumed that this was a simple case of ransomware.

But the attack struck Mr. Ben-Oni as unique. For one thing, it was timed perfectly to the Sabbath. Attackers entered IDT’s network at 6 p.m. on Saturday on the dot, two and a half hours before the Sabbath would end and when most of IDT’s employees — 40 percent of whom identify as Orthodox Jews — would be off the clock. For another, the attackers compromised the contractor’s computer through her home modem — strange.

The black box of sorts, a network recording device made by the Israeli security company Secdo, shows that the ransomware was installed after the attackers had made off with the contractor’s credentials. And they managed to bypass every major security detection mechanism along the way. Finally, before they left, they encrypted her computer with ransomware, demanding $130 to unlock it, to cover up the more invasive attack on her computer.

Mr. Ben-Oni estimates that he has spoken to 107 security experts and researchers about the attack, including the chief executives of nearly every major security company and the heads of threat intelligence at Google, Microsoft and Amazon.

With the exception of Amazon, which found that some of its customers’ computers had been scanned by the same computer that hit IDT, no one had seen any trace of the attack before Mr. Ben-Oni notified them. The New York Times confirmed Mr. Ben-Oni’s account via written summaries provided by Palo Alto Networks, Intel’s McAfee and other security firms he used and asked to investigate the attack.

“I started to get the sense that we were the canary,” he said. “But we recorded it.”

Since IDT was hit, Mr. Ben-Oni has contacted everyone in his Rolodex to warn them of an attack that could still be worming its way, undetected, through victims’ systems.

“Time is burning,” Mr. Ben-Oni said. “Understand, this is really a war — with offense on one side, and institutions, organizations and schools on the other, defending against an unknown adversary.”

‘No One Is Running Point’

Since the Shadow Brokers leaked dozens of coveted attack tools in April, hospitals, schools, cities, police departments and companies around the world have largely been left to fend for themselves against weapons developed by the world’s most sophisticated attacker: the N.S.A.

A month earlier, Microsoft had issued a software patch to defend against the N.S.A. hacking tools — suggesting that the agency tipped the company off to what was coming. Microsoft regularly credits those who point out vulnerabilities in its products, but in this case the company made no mention of the tipster. Later, when the WannaCry attack hit hundreds of thousands of Microsoft customers, Microsoft’s president, Brad Smith, slammed the government in a blog post for hoarding and stockpiling security vulnerabilities.

For his part, Mr. Ben-Oni said he had rolled out Microsoft’s patches as soon as they became available, but attackers still managed to get in through the IDT contractor’s home modem.

Six years ago, Mr. Ben-Oni had a chance meeting with an N.S.A. employee at a conference and asked him how to defend against modern-day cyberthreats. The N.S.A. employee advised him to “run three of everything”: three firewalls, three antivirus solutions, three intrusion detection systems. And so he did.

But in this case, modern-day detection systems created by Cylance, McAfee and Microsoft and patching systems by Tanium did not catch the attack on IDT. Nor did any of the 128 publicly available threat intelligence feeds that IDT subscribes to. Even the 10 threat intelligence feeds that his organization spends a half-million dollars on annually for urgent information failed to report it. He has since threatened to return their products.

“Our industry likes to work on known problems,” Mr. Ben-Oni said. “This is an unknown problem. We’re not ready for this.”

No one he has spoken to knows whether they have been hit, but just this month, restaurants across the United States reported being hit with similar attacks that were undetected by antivirus systems. There are now YouTube videos showing criminals how to attack systems using the very same N.S.A. tools used against IDT, and Metasploit, an automated hacking tool, now allows anyone to carry out these attacks with the click of a button.

Worse still, Mr. Ben-Oni said, “No one is running point on this.”

Last month, he personally briefed the F.B.I. analyst in charge of investigating the WannaCry attack. He was told that the agency had been specifically tasked with WannaCry, and that even though the attack on his company was more invasive and sophisticated, it was still technically something else, and therefore the F.B.I. could not take on his case.

The F.B.I. did not respond to requests for comment.

So Mr. Ben-Oni has largely pursued the case himself. His team at IDT was able to trace part of the attack to a personal Android phone in Russia and has been feeding its findings to Europol, the European law enforcement agency based in The Hague.

The chances that IDT was the only victim of this attack are slim. Sean Dillon, a senior analyst at RiskSense, a New Mexico security company, was among the first security researchers to scan the internet for the N.S.A.’s DoublePulsar tool. He found tens of thousands of host computers are infected with the tool, which attackers can use at will.

“Once DoublePulsar is on the machine, there’s nothing stopping anyone else from coming along and using the back door,” Mr. Dillon said.

More distressing, Mr. Dillon tested all the major antivirus products against the DoublePulsar infection and a demoralizing 99 percent failed to detect it.

“We’ve seen the same computers infected with DoublePulsar for two months and there is no telling how much malware is on those systems,” Mr. Dillon said. “Right now we have no idea what’s gotten into these organizations.”

In the worst case, Mr. Dillon said, attackers could use those back doors to unleash destructive malware into critical infrastructure, tying up rail systems, shutting down hospitals or even paralyzing electrical utilities.

Could that attack be coming? The Shadow Brokers resurfaced last month, promising a fresh load of N.S.A. attack tools, even offering to supply them for monthly paying subscribers — like a wine-of-the-month club for cyberweapon enthusiasts.

In a hint that the industry is taking the group’s threats seriously, Microsoft issued a new set of patches to defend against such attacks. The company noted in an ominously worded message that the patches were critical, citing an “elevated risk for destructive cyberattacks.”

Mr. Ben-Oni is convinced that IDT is not the only victim, and that these tools can and will be used to do far worse.

“I look at this as a life-or-death situation,” he said. “Today it’s us, but tomorrow it might be someone else.”

Friday, June 23, 2017


A.     History documents  that  several false assumptions/accusations  led the US into major wars. 

.1.  The USSMaine was  sent to protect U.S. interests during the Cuban revolt against Spain, she exploded suddenly, without warning, and sank quickly, killing nearly three quarters of her crew.  Popular opinion in the U.S., fanned by inflammatory articles printed in the "yellow press" by William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer, blamed Spain. The phrase, "Remember the Maine! To hell with Spain!", became a rallying cry for action, which came with the Spanish–American War later that year.

 George W. Melville, a chief engineer in the Navy, proposed that a  likely cause for the sinking was from a magazine explosion within the vessel. The Navy's leading ordnance expert, Philip R. Alger, took this theory further by suggesting that the magazines were ignited by a spontaneous fire in a coal bunker.The coal used in Maine was bituminous coal, which is known for releasing firedamp, a gas that is prone to spontaneous explosions. There is stronger evidence that the explosion of Maine was caused by an internal coal fire which ignited the magazines. This was a likely cause of the explosion, rather than the initial accusation of a Spanish mine.

2. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (August 7, 1964) gave broad congressional approval for expansion of the Vietnam War.On August 2, shortly after a clandestine raid on the North Vietnamese coast by South Vietnamese gunboats, the U.S. destroyer Maddox (conducting electronic espionage nearby) was fired on by North Vietnamese torpedo boats. Two days later, in the same area, the Maddox and another destroyer reported that they were again under attack. Although these reports now appear to have been mistaken, Johnson proceeded quickly to authorize retaliatory air strikes against North Vietnam. The next day he gathered congressional leaders and accused the North Vietnamese of “open aggression on the high seas.” He then submitted to the Senate a resolution that authorized him to take “all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression.” The resolution was quickly approved by Congress;  Later, when more information about the Tonkin incident became available, many concluded that Johnson and his advisers had misled Congress into supporting the expansion of the war.

3.The false certainty of the US intelligence community that  Saddam Hussein  actually possessed nuclear weapons 

B.      Public  records document  that the Obama administration  orchestrated false information to create  public acceptance for several major administration programs. 

  1. Obamacare. To pass Obamacare, the political consultant/architect was Jonathan Gruber,the Obamacare Architect: “Yeah, We Lied to The "Stupid" American People to Get It Passed”

 2.  Iran deal.  Ben Rhodes’ Iran Deal ( “wag the dog”) echo chamber operation) which was  explicitly intended to mislead the US public in order to sell this administration’s desired  Iran agreement [ The aspiring novelist who became Obama’s foreign-policy guru  by David Samuels  New York Times May 5, 2016]

 Below, is an excerpt from the New York Times which reproduces in Ben Rhodes’ own words Rhodes’s  campaign to sell the Iran 

"We created an echo chamber,’ he admitted, when I asked him to explain the onslaught of freshly minted experts cheerleading for the deal. ‘They were saying things that validated what we had given them to say.”

3.Susan Rice and  the CIA-State Department-White House scenario that it was a anti-Muslim video that triggered the assault on our diplomatic station in Benghazi. 

4. Intelligence analysts   complained that their  output is being distorted by the political echelon [50 Spies Say ISIS Intelligence Was Cooked]; 

C.   President Obama and  VP Biden threatened Russia with cyber warfare [at a place and it is time of our choosing] thus giving Putin an excellent opportunity to blame the United States for any systems failure [there are many that occur] in Russia. Further, this subject to the United States to the possibility of a cyber war which we can not win.

 Obama , announcing the U.S. response:

“We will continue to take a variety of actions at a time and place of our choosing, some of which will not be publicized,” he said in a statement released by the White House. 

( Note that VP Biden threatened Russia with cyber warfare -at a place and it is time of our choosing- thus giving Putin an excellent opportunity to blame the United States for any systems failure [there are many that occur] in Russia. Further, this subjects the United States to the possibility of a cyber war which we can not win.)

He was referring, in part, to a cyber operation that was designed to be detected by Moscow but not cause significant damage, officials said. The operation, which entailed implanting computer code in sensitive computer systems that Russia was bound to find, served only as a reminder to Moscow of the United States’ cyber reach.


The cyber operation is still in its early stages and involves deploying “implants” in Russian networks deemed “important to the adversary and that would cause them pain and discomfort if they were disrupted,” a former U.S. official said.

The implants were developed by the NSA and designed so that they could be triggered remotely as part of retaliatory cyber-strike in the face of Russian aggression, whether an attack on a power grid or interference in a future presidential race.

Officials familiar with the measures said that there was concern among some in the administration that the damage caused by the implants could be difficult to contain.

As a result, the administration requested a legal review, which concluded that the devices could be controlled well enough that their deployment would be considered “proportional” in varying scenarios of Russian provocation, a requirement under international law.

The operation was described as long-term, taking months to position the implants and requiring maintenance thereafter. 



Thus, it is essential for   US  national security and  for American national unity that Robert Mueller [or someone of higher authority]  begin their investigation with a thorough examination of square one 

2.     How to begin at square one in the investigation

The story  that is being sold  to the American public  is  that there is  100% agreement by all the   US  Intelligence agencies that the Russians penetrated the computer systems of the Democratic National Committee and John Podesta in an attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election in favor of Donald Trump. [For example see:OBAMA’S SECRET STRUGGLE TO PUNISH RUSSIA FOR PUTIN’S ELECTION ASSAULT Greg Miller, Ellen Nakashimaand ,Adam Entous 
\WASHINGTON POST   June 23, 2017]

The "intelligence assumptions" cascade with the further  assumption being  announced that the Russians would not conduct such an operation without the explicit knowledge and the explicit direct approval of Vladimir Putin. Or that we have definitive evidence either from a  3rd country source or from our own penetration into Putin's inner circle that he personally ordered the operation.

If Russia, China, Iran, North Korea an Islamic power, or a criminal element  really wanted to disrupt the election in the United States they have the capability to easily do so. This would be by means of a coordinated,  attack on a series of computers, not an isolated intrusion into a single computer system.

This story is politically convenient but it does not comply with the capabilities of the Russians and with the political and technical savvy of the dark web  Internet community operations.

First, they would infiltrate the hundreds of computers operated by the local Democratic and/or Republican organizations. Quantitatively this is a relatively small number compared to past viral and other attacks. This is relatively simple technically given the low level of security protection, the large number of people with access, and the large number of incoming and outgoing emails and other transactions

 Then they would incapacitate the donor lists which would prevent refurbishing the financial coffers during the last phases of the campaign. They would incapacitate the precinct walking lists which would forestall the ground games which are essential to most campaigns. They would incapacitate the directories which would prevent communication with the volunteers, with the potential voters , with  potential donors and with all of the other local and national organizations of their party which would prevent coordination, etc.. This “ hacking “ operation could be accomplished by destroying the files or by  encoding them for ransom. Recent attacks that have been reported in the media have been of much greater magnitude and sophistication.

What is agreed upon is that these  intrusions were  very sloppy and that the tools used (which had been developed by Russian hackers ) were from a generation or two earlier than those currently used by Russian organizations affiliated with Russian intelligence and that these older tools  are widely distributed and  have been widely used in the hacking community. [ Thus, the observation that this hacking could have been conducted by a reasonably competent 14-year-old sitting in the basement of his parents house is certainly a worthy contender as to whom exactly was the culprit.]

Many technical experts  do not agree with the CrowdStrike  [ Democratic Party contractor ] assessment or with the Obama administration’s claims that the DNC/DCCC hacks were  clearly committed by Russian state actors. A great  deal of  the  criticism  is aimed at the FBI/DHS Joint Analysis Report (JAR) “Grizzly Steppe” that was released at the end of December.

The JAR cited as  “specific indicators of compromise” IP addresses and a PHP malware sample. But what does this really prove?

 Wordfence, a WordPress security company specializing in analyzing PHP malware, examined these indicators and didn’t find any hard evidence of Russian involvement. Instead, Wordfence found the attack software was  an out-of-date, web-shell hacking tool. The newest version is more sophisticated. Its website claims it was written in the Ukraine.

Mark Maunder, Wordfence’s CEO, concluded that since the attacks were made “several versions behind the most current version of P.A.S , one might reasonably expect Russian intelligence operatives to develop their own tools or at least use current malicious tools from outside sources.”

 Errata Security CEO Rob Graham pointed out in a blog post that while P.A.S is popular among Russia/Ukraine hackers. it is “used by hundreds if not thousands of hackers, mostly associated with Russia, but also throughout the rest of the world.” In short, just because the attackers used P.A.S., that’s not enough evidence to blame it on the Russian government.

Independent cybersecurity experts, such as Jeffrey Carr, have cited numerous errors that the media and CrowdStrike have made in discussing the hacking in what Carr refers to as a “runaway train” of misinformation.

Those aspects of the Democratic Party and John Podesta information systems that were relevant to this intrusion should have been secured by the US government. It is inexplicable why James Comey failed to  subpoena and safeguard these materials.  it is reported that the Democratic Party refused  to allow  the US government  to have independent access to these materials.

Robert Muller should immediately subpoena and safeguard all the  computer files and systems of the Democratic National Committee and of John Podesta that are relevant to this hacking operation.

So all we have to go on is the “assessment “by contractors to the Democratic Party that two groups of Russian hackers (which they claim are affiliated with different Russian intelligence agencies)  operating individually did the hackng.

Normally, hackers would seek items such as "opposition research files"; "donor lists" etc. After a quick look at the routine files for such organizations they would cease their operation out of boredom. If the Russians did hack these files they would have to know in advance that they would find very valuable pay dirt such as the evidence uncovered of double dealing, deceit, deception etc.

We do know that Wikileaks  published these files .Julian Assange has publicly stated that he did not get them from a government source.  Julian Assange, in an interview with Sean Hannity  December 15, 2016 stated  that "no state actor was involved.”Hannity  then plays the statement by national security director James Clapper which supports this view. [James Clapper's statement begins approximately at the 2.3 minute point].   An excellent  review of the entire actual situation is:  MILITARY INTELLIGENCE  Monday, November 7, 2016 WHAT IS PUTIN’s REAL GAME

Robert Muller  should offer Julian Assange whatever immunity and /or other protections that would obtain his full and complete testimony as to his sources of information. [If he is unwilling to name specific individuals, he should be willing, under oath, to clear other individuals and/or other organizations.]


By Rabbi Dov Fischer 6-23-17

What?  Karen Handel beat that Democrat in the race for Sixth Congressional District in Georgia ?

How could that be?  How could that posssibly be?  Five straight Republican Congressional wins in races against Democrats?

Didn’t the voters in Georgia know that Chuck Schumer believes that Donald Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin to win the 2016 Presidential election against Hillary Clinton?

Looks like no one really cares.  And looks like Americans see through the nonsense and the enormous waste of our taxes and national resources.

Didn’t the voters know that Michael Flynn was forced to resign months ago because he had not been square with Vice President Mike Pence when asked whether he had spoken with Russian government representatives before President Trump took office?

Didn’t the voters benefit from $50 million spent, much from outside the District, to educate them that The Resistance is ready?

Didn’t the voters know that Congress has been holding hearings to find out whether anyone in the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians?

Didn’t the voters know that Attorney General Jeff Sessions felt he had to recuse himself from investigating collusion charges because there were other charges floating that he himself had spoken to a Russian ambassador in the United States?

Haven’t the voters seen Attorney General Sessions being grilled on television by Democratic Party United States Senators?

Looks like no one really cares.  And looks like Americans see through the nonsense and the enormous waste of out taxes and national resources.

Didn’t the voters know that James Comey now is a favorite of Democrats, as the former FBI Director testified with all sorts of innuendoes against President Trump and his supporters?

Don’t the voters know that there now is a Special Prosecutor, Robert Mueller, looking into all sorts of things concerning the Trump White House, or whatever?

Didn’t the voters know that Kellyanne Conway once jokingly told the public from the White House that she endorses Ivanka Trump clothing products?

Didn’t the voters know that President Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has done business with Russians?

Don’t the voters know that the Trump White House regularly is lampooned by “Saturday Night Live” and Stephen Colbert?

Looks like no one really cares.  And looks like Americans see through the nonsense and the enormous waste of out taxes and national resources.

From the day that we elected President Donald Trump over a self-obsessed, power-driven, and lying former First Lady and miserably incompetent former Secretary of State who shattered our national foreign footprint rather than any glass ceilings, whose contributions to American leadership included a failed healthcare program that she fatally convinced her husband to promote until its doom, and later a failed series of foreign policy disasters that she helped convince the empty-suit who beat her for the Presidency in 2008 to pursue until others encountered doom, the media and the Democrats have not given Donald Trump a day of fairness.  Not a day, not a single 24-hour period, to simply pursue his vision for a greater America.

Despite that nearly unprecedented attack and five months of their anti-Trump vitriol and investigations and rumors and leaks and even hints of impeachment, this president has continued to lead.  In only five months, he has straightened out the United States Supreme Court by naming one of the finest jurists of our generation, someone so impeccable that Democrats could not dent Neil Gorsuch’s armor even as Republicans marveled at his fidelity to the Constitution and to the Framers’ vision, to fill out the Court.  And the president has begun proceeding to name judges to the 129 other open federal judicial seats that can straighten out the federal district courts that conduct trials and the federal appellate courts that ultimately settle most of America’s laws.

Notwithstanding a five-month war of hate against a fundamemntally good man, with a fundamentally good heart and a vision to make this country great again, to repair the extraordinary damage to America’s foreign and world leadership posture, while fixing all that ails us at home, the president has moved, as quickly as his opponents could be sidestepped, to fulfill one important campaign promise after another.  He has approved the Keystone XL pipeline.  He has issued executive orders reversing a universe of Obama regulations that had handcuffed the American economy, suffocated business, and stifled the American labor force.  He has begun liberating America’s own natural sources of energy from decades of Democrat regulation that gave the Saudis and Kuwaitis and Venezuelans and so many other hostile countries that are not our friends and that mean us no good – and that do not care a whit about the environment, nor impose any meaningful environmental oversight on oil and gas extraction in  their countries – and he has opened new doors for the development and extraction and production of American energy, American oil, American natural gas, American clean coal.

He has opened bidding by inviting submissions for building a wall on our Southern border with Mexico, and his mere strength of presence has resulted in an unprecedented reduction in illegal crossings into our country from across that border.  No wall – just a real president, with a real Attorney General, and a real Justice Department and a real Homeland Security team ready to enforce the laws already on America’s books – and illegal immigration has dropped like an Acme anvil in a Warner Brothers cartoon.  Real ICE raids that finally have given law enforcement confidence and belief that the people whom they round up actually will be deported, not just set free in exchange for a blatantly false promise to appear months later at a court hearing that everyone would know would never happen.

Under brutal non-stop attack from Schumer and Pelosi and their shills at CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the entire left-wing apparatus – an attack so brutal that it has extended to the worst calumny and defamation, lies and libel and slander that go just to the limits of “New York Times malice,” even to portrayals of suggested assassination in New York theatrical productions – this President has forged new relationships overseas.  Our real friends – nations like England and Japan and and Israel – no longer are the pinatas for an Obama-Clinton-Kerry foreign policy.  Other friends – nations like Germany and France – have had to get used to a new playing field where, although the friendship and allegiances remain as strong as ever, now they and their cohorts have to pay their fair share of the bills, put up their fair share of the blood and sweat, and understand that they no longer have a kneeling, prostrating, apologizing “rock star” to tickle but a real American president to deal with.  So maybe President Trump is not as popular with the Europeans as Obama was.  Maybe they do not like when he asks them to pay the bills they have contracted to pay, and maybe they do not like when he tells them that he will not march America down Obama’s ridiculous and nonsensical dance to tie the hands of American power and industry to some blindsided environmental agreements.  So our president is not as popular with the Europeans as was Obama.  And America is not as popular.  Well, we voters are not Europeans, and he is popular with us.

But when the Russians over whom those Democrats now obsess – but whom Obama always considered irrelevant as he and his Hillary Re-set gave Vladimir Putin the Crimea, part of Ukraine, and a new foothold in the Middle East – threaten European sovereignty, to whom will those Angela Merkels and Emmanuel Macrons silently give thanks and beg for protection?  They will give thanks that Trump is in the White House leading the Western alliance and the resolve of freedom, rather than an Obama who responded to the rise of ISIS by joking that they merely were a junior varsity and to the terrorist massacres in Paris by sending John Kerry and James Taylor abroad to ride bicycles and sing “You’ve Got a Friend.”

The voters in Georgia knew that their prior President went to Castro’s Cuba, where he danced the salsa in front of a cutthroat while others were being murdered in Europe.  A president who genuflected and bent the head and knee for Arab oil sheiks.  A president who led from behind in Benghazi, even as American heroes and patriots died and Hillary thereafter lied to their families and the American people while secretly admitting to her daughter that our finest had been murdered by Arab Islamists on a 9-11 attack and not by a YouTube video that almost no one saw.

Those Georgia voters knew that, for the past five months, they instead have had a president who is reversing Obama’s Cuba policies at breathtaking speed, restoring America’s commitment to freedom and human rights in the Western hemisphere.  A President who has traveled to Saudi Arabia, met with Arab world leaders, and proved that America can have strategic alliances even with countries that do not share our values, but on our terms.  We set the terms for such alliances.  We – not they – make clear where we will compromise for our strategic purposes and where we will not bend.  Unlike Obama, who began his presidency by traveling to Cairo and begging the Arab world for forgiveness – and who was repaid for his sycophancy with eight years of ISIS and Benghazi and a complete breakdown of all that our armed forces finally had achieved during the Surge in Iraq – this President went to the Arab world, challenging them to join us in fighting Arab Islamic terror, making no apologies nor excuses for maintaining a deep friendship with Israel as an ally of truly shared values – and still emerged with standing ovations and respect.  Because people overseas respect American strength, and they longed for it after eight years of a pretender who was in way over his head, though he crooned with Jay-Z and always was cheered on by an adoring and adulating media who experienceds thrills in their legs and brain freezes as he tore down so much of what made us great.

The Democrats spent an unholy fortune in Georgia these past several months, seeking to wrest that House seat from the Republicans, just as they have tried in Kansas and Montana and South Carolina.  The political obituaries for President Trump already had been written for the night that Democrat Jon Ossoff had beaten the Republican, ready for publication as soon as that Bernie Sanders leftist would win the House seat that had been in GOP hands.  If ever the Devil went down to Georgia, it was during the parade of American leftist media camping out to tell a story of the demise of the Trump Presidency, the end of the Republican Congress, the return of the Weak.  Maxine Waters surely had the Bills of Impeachment ready, perhaps delayed only because still working on spelling the harder words like “Bill” and “of.”  Nancy Pelosi surely was being prepared with extra Vitamin B12 to get on the rostrum and try to generate five or ten minutes of quasi-coherence, describing the great new Democrat wave.

But, instead, the Republican won.  Again.  After five months of the media telling us that Americans are tired of Trump, regret Trump, care all about James Comey and investigating Attorney-General Sessions and investigating Jared Kushner and investigating Mike Flynn and investigating Donald Trump, it turns out that American voters do not care a whit about all that Washington Insider nonsense.

Americans want jobs.  Americans want a federal judiciary that represents our values.  Americans want European initiatives to remain in Europe, and we want them to pay their promised bills, just as each of us does every day in our own lives.  Americans want clean oil and gas and coal that comes from our shores, that employs our citizens, and that keeps those assets at home, instead of importing foreign energy and paying tyrants for the privilege to send them our money in return for their truly dirty resources.  We want lower taxes, an end to Obamacare, an America where we can keep our doctors once again and pay only for the health coverage options we want.  We do not want to pay for Sandra Fluke’s condoms until she pays for our acetaminophen and ibuprofen and Band-aids.  We do not want to fund Planned Parenthood’s abortions, only their family planning and social counseling.  We want criminals who are not rightly in America to be thrown out of this country.  We want no part of international trade agreements that worry about every other country but our own, nor any part of environmental accords that choke off our industries while allowing China and India and the rest of the world to pollute without compunction.  We do not mind working with China, and delaying calling them on currency manipulation and trade violations, if they truly come through tit-for-tat in managing that maniac in North Korea.  And if they fail us, there is time to call them on currency manipulation and to change the rules of international trade to be fair again.  We are done with free trade agreements that do not protect our workers and Trans-Pacific deals that sell out our interests to curry favor with those who do not care about our interests.

In short, no one who previously has supported President Trump really cares about all the nonsense that consumes the Washington Beltway.  We see through the nonsense and the enormous waste of our taxes and national resources, with one bogus investigation after another.  We just want the Congress – and particularly the Republicans whom we elected to work with President Trump –  to do what we sent them there to do: lower taxes, repeal and replace Obamacare, get the Southern border under control, reverse the Obama era regulations, liberate American energy, maintain a strong world footprint fostering strength and power without sending our boys into new military adventures that we have no business wasting our resources over.  Get the government working for us, start rebuilding the American infrastructure that Democrats and Republicans have allowed to decay while wasting decades building bridges to nowhere and conducting endless investigations over things we do not care about.


Thursday, June 22, 2017


John Eastman, law professor at Chapman University, writes in American Greatness this week that the powers invested in Special Counsel Mueller to investigate “Russian hacking/collusion/obstruction poses grave dangers to our body politic and our liberty.”  His advice to President Trump: Fight fire with fire.  Turn the law and the courts back on your opponents.  Trump is being investigated without any probable cause of a crime.  The Obama administration, in contrast, is a target-rich arena of criminal activity.

It is unconstitutional to issue a search warrant when there has been no crime and there is no probable cause.  But that is exactly what President Trump’s DOJ has inflicted on the president and his team with Mueller’s special investigation.  It was not just cowardice, but folly for the DOJ to buckle to the left-wing media’s hysterical insistence to investigate our president’s alleged collusion with the FSB.

The special counsel will not to track down the details of a crime known to have been committed and determine “who dunnit,” but will scour the personal and business affairs of a select group of people – the President of the United States, members of his family, his business associates, and members of his presidential campaign and transition teams – to see if any crime can be found (or worse, manufactured by luring someone into making a conflicting statement at some point). This is not a proper use of prosecutorial power, but a “witch hunt,” as President Trump himself correctly observed. Or, to put it more in terms of legalese, this special prosecutor has effectively been given a “writ of assistance” and the power to exercise a “general warrant” against this select group of people, including the President of the United States, recently elected by a fairly wide margin of the electoral vote.

That is the very kind of thing our Fourth Amendment was adopted to prevent. Indeed, the issuance of general warrants and writs of assistance is quite arguably the spark that ignited America’s war for independence.
Professor Eastman suggests fighting fire with fire, prosecution with prosecution.

Unfortunately, the only antidote may be to fight fire with fire. President Trump: Perhaps it is time to make good on that old pledge to appoint a special prosecutor to look into the Clinton “matters” after all. And while you’re add it, add in referrals to the grand jury for the contempt of Congress committed by the IRS’s Lois Lerner and former Attorney General Eric Holder, an FBI investigation of the destruction of government documents and servers in the midst of the IRS scandal, an investigation into alleged perjury committed by IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in testimony about those matters given under oath to Congress, an “obstruction of justice” investigation against former Attorney General Eric Holder and others (and related perjury charges against Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez) for allegedly ordering that an egregious voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party be dropped shortly before a default judgment was about to be entered in the government’s favor, etc., etc., etc.
President Obama and his leftist minions spat on our constitution  and flouted the rule of law for eight long years.  Google “Obama flouts constitution,” or see here and here and here and here and here.  Their abuse of power was ignored by the media and our partisan courts, but it has not been forgotten by conservatives.

President Trump’s voters would like to see equality before the law upheld once again in America.  It is bad for our country that rich and powerful Democrat politicians and bureaucrats harm our national security and ruin other people’s lives, in flagrant violation of the law, and are never held to account for their crimes.

Professor Eastman’s advice to fight fire with fire stops short.  Based on his own analysis, it is unconstitutional to do warrantless searches with no probable cause.  Ending the baseless “Russian collusion” witch hunt is fundamental to upholding our constitution.

Those who counseled President Trump to not prosecute Hillary Clinton said a Clinton investigation would distract the White House from furthering Trump’s positive agenda.  That was a strong argument – then.  But as Professor Eastman points out, it backfired.  Perhaps Trump’s civility was taken as a sign of weakness.  Hillary launched the lie that the Russians made her lose the election.  Democrats instigated this phony Russian collusion investigation of Trump, precisely in an effort to distract the White House and halt the Trump agenda.  The best defense is to return to offense.

President Trump has the responsibility to re-establish the rule of law in our country, and he will have the enthusiastic backing of his base if he does so.  It is time to end Democrats’ politically motivated abuse of the law.  Stop the Mueller investigation, and go after Obama Inc.’s multiple crimes.

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Bruce Thornton, FPM

The threats to our constitutional order posed by the special counsel investigation.

The appointment of Robert Mueller, James Comey’s BFF, as special counsel stinks to high heaven. Forget the bipartisan encomia to Mueller’s “ethics” and “professionalism” and “integrity” and all the other usual question-begging praise the elite shower on each other to justify their power and privilege. Such mutual admiration and reciprocal puffery is just one of the ways that DC is “Hollywood for ugly people,” given that both industries are in the business of selling sows’ ears as silk purses. We heard all the same praise about Comey, who has been exposed as self-righteous, conniving, and cowardly, his ethics trimmed to his careerism. He proves that all political appointees and “public servants” should be judged guilty until proven innocent.

And right now Mueller demands particular scrutiny and suspicion. Why should we ordinary citizens, who don’t know him from Adam, believe that he can set aside his friendship with Comey and be fair and objective? Especially after Comey confessed he leaked his memo about Trump’s comments because he “thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel,” and he is likely to be a witness? And mirabile visu, that special counsel just happens to be his close friend? And a Democrat, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, just happens to be the one making the appointment of a man under whom he served from 1990-93? And what about new information that Mueller was interviewed by Trump to replace Comey? Was the topic of why Comey was fired part of the interview, which could make him a witness in his own investigation?

Worst of all, this same DOJ, along with the FBI and maybe Mueller’s team, is still springing leaks that are poisoning the integrity of the nascent investigation. It seems to me that a man of such high integrity as Mueller would have put the investigation on hold until the leakers were rooted out, in order to insure the integrity of the investigation. But then, a man of integrity wouldn’t agree to head up an investigation that involves one of his closest friends, who has an axe to grind against the target of the investigation. Nor is Mueller’s past record of substituting his will for the law reassuring. In 2006 he raided the offices of Representative William Jefferson without getting permission from the legislative branch. He seized documents not pertinent to the investigation, and refused to return them when asked by the executive. As the Wall Street Journal writes, Mueller “let his prosecutorial willfulness interfere with proper constitutional and executive-branch procedure,” a bad habit he shares with Comey.

Or consider the staff Mueller has assembled, comprising lawyers from old his law firm, and Andrew Weissmann. All are contributors to the Democrats, though in their defense, it serves the interests of lawyers to have Democrats in power. After all, the regulatory Leviathan is a Klondike of lucrative litigation. Weissmann, however, is a particularly suspicious choice. As the Journal points out, he headed up the five-year-long Enron investigation, which led to the prosecution of the Arthur Anderson accounting firm. The 2002 conviction was later overturned by the Supreme Court––after 28,000 employees lost their jobs. More interestingly, one of Weismann’s harshest critics was the New York Observer, which in 2015 called Weismann a “Stunningly Bad Choice” on the part of the DOJ for Chief of Criminal Division Fraud Section. The owner of the Observer at that time was, wait for it, Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and aid, who leakers now tell us is in the investigatory crosshairs.

Again the Journal nails it: “With that history, can Mr. Weissmann fairly judge the actions of the Trump family and campaign? And knowing that history, why would Mr. Mueller choose Mr. Weissmann for his prosecutorial team when the appearance of fairness is crucial to public acceptance of the result?”

Finally, as Andy McCarthy has steadfastly documented, Rosenstein’s appointment of a special counsel “failed to follow regulations that permit a special counsel only for criminal investigations— Rosenstein instead put Mueller in charge of the Russia probe described in Comey’s March 20 testimony. Again, that probe is a counterintelligence investigation.” As a consequence, there are no limits to the investigation, which can now encompass whatever Mueller wants. In short, as McCarthy continues, it is a “fishing expedition”:

It is already straying far afield from suspicions about Trump collusion in Russia’s election-meddling — which, we need to remind ourselves, is the purported rationale for the probe, and thus for Mueller. The probe’s focus has morphed from collusion to obstruction: the chief-executive’s weighing in on Flynn’s prosecution, pushing for disclosure of true information that he was not a suspect in the Russia investigation, and firing of the FBI director — all actions Trump was constitutionally entitled to take.
It reminds me of Stalin’s head of the secret police, Lavrentiy Beria, who infamously said, “Show me the man, and I can show you the crime.”

Trump, of course, must shoulder some of the blame for allowing this to happen. He should have cleaned house at the DOJ and FBI the day after he took office. Given the obvious hatred of him on the part of Democrats, and given the amount of leaks and vitriol aimed at him since election day, Trump should never have left Democrat appointees or agency lifers in their jobs. Furthermore, since the Russia investigation is a counterintelligence, not a criminal one, Jeff Sessions did not legally have to recuse himself, and so should not have, leaving Rosenstein in place to appoint Mueller. And as much as Trump’s tweets delight his base, there’s no need to throw fuel on an already raging fire.

But the real issue here is not Trump’s missteps. It is the tidal wave of illegal leaks coming from the bipartisan minions of the Leviathan state who refuse to accept the outcome of a legal election, and who will seek to reverse it by any means necessary––fake news, vulgar and vitriolic rhetoric, simpatico federal judges, Democrat fifth columnists in the federal agencies and bureaucracies, and now the powerful weapon of a special counsel unaccountable to the people or their representatives in Congress.

Contrary to some of Mueller’s fans, no one “deserves respect” because of the recommendations of friends and colleagues, least of all a political appointee unknown personally to the vast majority of voters. Respect is earned by doing the right thing not as defined by partisan, professional, or ideological interests, but because it is lawful, moral, and just. As the Journal writes, “The country needs a fair investigation of the facts, not a vendetta to take down Mr. Trump or vindicate the tribe of career prosecutors and FBI agents to which Messrs. Mueller and Comey belong.”

I hope Mueller proves his critics wrong. I hope he quickly confirms the obvious: that there was no collusion by the president with Russia, nor was there any “obstruction of justice” in Trump’s comments to Comey. By doing so Mueller can reaffirm the Constitutional order now being undermined by Trump’s enemies.

On the other hand, I for one will not be surprised if the investigation drags on until October of 2018, and a damning report is released just in time for the midterm elections. If so, the contrast with the failure to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the criminal behavior of Hillary Clinton––for which, unlike the case of Trump, there is ample evidence already in the public domain––will be a glaring example of the Democrats’ and some Republicans’ hypocrisy and disdain for the bedrock principles of equality before the law, and the sovereignty of the people rather than federal agencies and their clerks.

If there are facts unknown that damn Trump, then they should be discovered and publicized. But if the investigation descends into innuendo, interpretative sophistries, and a toxic cloud of rumor that lead to a legally elected president being brought down solely for partisan gain, then Mueller will share the blame for such an assault on the Constitutional order.

Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, a Research Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution, and a Professor of Classics and Humanities at the California State University. He is the author of nine books and numerous essays on classical culture and its influence on Western Civilization. His most recent book is Democracy’s Dangers and Discontents (Hoover Institution Press),