Today I listened to hours of two hearings going on at the same time. The first was the senate congressional hearing on Russian interference with our 2016 presidential election. So far there hasn't been any information linking President Trump or his team affecting the election results. The Russians may have tried, but most of what we have learned involving the winning team took place after the election and it may have been nothing at all. As it turned out General Michael Flynn, an early supporter and security advisor to President Trump during the campaign and appointed head of NSA afterword until he was fired as it turned out he was unmasked as having several conversations with the Russian Ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak. We have not been privy to what was said, but many people in Washington, DC have had contact with Ambassador Kislyak including
senators and congressman all the time. It also turns out that he had contact after leaving the military as a private consultant receiving money from both Russian and Turkish governments. According to Flynn's attorney he advised the Pentagon and this was approved, but the documents don't exist or have been disappeared, not uncommon during the Obama regime. I believe the later as part of a plot to discredit President Trump as this would have assuredly come up when Flynn was renewing his highest level security clearance. The Obama regime granted it, even though they knew about his Russian and Turkish contacts. They were setting President Trump up no doubt.
The real story is this. If the Russians or someone under their guidance hacked HRC and the DNC, the story would have ended there, if everything they found was legal and ethical. The FBI even warned the DNC about hacking and they refused FBI help, probably worried about what the FBI would find on their servers. Most of the documents released by Wikileaks occurred after the FBI offer. The DNC is blaming the messenger rather than their illegal and unethical message as effecting the election. If these hacks did effect the election results, the Democrats and Hillary Clinton should blame DWS, Donna Brazile, John Podesta, and herself. HRC has a long history of
sub rosa activity and this is no different. If anyone would be prone to blackmail, it would be Hillary Clinton herself. While she was Secretary of State she approved the sale of 20% of US Uranium to the Russians. At the same time, the Russian oligarchs, who purchased the company, made a $145 million donation to a shell Canadian charity that laundered the money and then passed it on to the Clinton Foundation. If there is something that could be used for blackmail, this would certainly be it. No one seemed to mention it. All the Democrats wanted to talk about was Flynn being blackmailed, nothing about Clinton. They said Flynn lied to the FBI and should be indicted, but what about HRC, she lied to the FBI and committed at least a dozen other crimes related to national security. How about an independent investigator for her. You know why. Obama would never allow it as it might just get back to him. The "fast and furious," Benghazi, Bo Bergdahl, secret cash to Iran, and other Obama lies deserve an independent council, but wouldn't happen.
What did we learn? No evidence was presented by General Clapper or Obama hack, former deputy AG Sally Yates, that Russia colluded with President Trump's campaign. Yates and Clapper gave an answer fell back on national security and so they couldn't say. Yates tried at times to give an answer that contained innuendo, but when questioned fell back on national security. One of the most interesting moments came when Senator Ted Cruz questioned her about the executive order banning some immigrants and refugees from six Mideast and African countries. He reminded her that in the history of her office, she is the first and only AG who refused to back the President. If she opposed the order she should have resigned instead of behaving like the political hack that she is. Neither claimed to know anything about unmasking or leaking.
The second soap opera I was following was the hearing on the President's executive order banning immigrants and muslims from certain countries. The US attorney sited American Constitutional Law and a history of bans by other presidents in the name of national security. Some of the judges tried to fall back on the Presidents campaign statements rather than law. As might be expected 10 of the 13 judges hearing the case were appointed by Obama or Clinton, so the fix is in unless they want to abide by the Constitution and previous related decisions. The most esteemed judge, J. Harvie Wilkerson III, a Reagan appointee, is a conservative, but has recused himself as his son is a clerk for the Solicitor General Jeffery Wall. Obama, Carter and Bush banned travel to the US from Muslim countries. Of course, George Soros is financing his anti America open borders policy so expect this one to wind up at the Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment