Were senators under surveillance by Obama administration?
Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News senior judicial analyst, on allegations Sen. Rand Paul and another senator were under surveillance by the Obama administration and President Trump's travel ban.
POLITICS Breaking: Judge Reveals Scalia Wiretap Bombshell…Media Dead Silent
BY JOHN FALKENBERG
ON MAY 16, 2017 AT 3:02PM
Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano just made a stunning claim about the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and President Barack Obama.In a segment this week on the Fox News Business Network’s “Mornings With Maria,” Napolitano said he was told by Scalia that Scalia thought the Supreme Court was under surveillance by the administration of former President Barack Obama.
“Justice Scalia told me he often thought the court was being surveilled, and he told me that probably four or five years ago,” Napolitano said in the clip shown below.
That’s huge for a couple of reasons.
First of all, if that claim is true, it’s a gross overreach of the executive branch into the judicial branch, to say the least. But much, much more than that, think of the massive rulings that were made over the course of the Obama presidency:
Two crucial Obamacare rulings. Gay marriage legalized nationwide — one of the most controversial rulings in recent memory. And if Obama’s White House really did have the Supreme Court under surveillance, Obama could have been inappropriately informed about all of it.
And, as the judge pointed out in the segment, “the use of intelligence data for political purposes is a felony.”
Let’s not forget that President Donald Trump had also made similar accusations against the Obama administration not long ago
It’s a strange coincidence for several prominent politicians — including Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who has recently made formal requests for information on his own possible surveillance by the Obama administration — to be claiming the same injury against a man not really known for his uprightness and honesty.
Could there be some truth to this?
At the Conservative Tribune, we’ve discussed Obama’s fascination, shall we way, with surveillance before — this is just further confirmation.
But by all means, mainstream media, go nuts about whatever conversation was had between Trump and the Russians last week.
H/T The Gateway Pundit
History Shows 2002 Comey-Clinton Bailout, Deep Swamp Sounds The Alarm As Indictments Headed
These Two Have Crossed Paths Before, But The Result Has Always Been The Same.
POSTED BY: MATTHEW BERNSTEIN 12 MAY 2017
Washington saw a political firestorm upon learning that President Trump had fired FBI Director James Comey. The Democrats, as well as the mainstream media, were up in arms about the sudden dismissal.
It seemed strange that the liberals, both in Washington and the media, were so adamant against this decision when six months prior they wanted to fire Comey as well. So what changed?
It’s simple. Ever since Comey met the Clinton family, he has ruled in their favor. Since first meeting the former President and First Lady, Comey has helped them along the way.
Starting with the WhiteWater scandal in the 90s, Comey had investigated the Clintons and found some damaging information. In 1996, he found that Hillary Clinton was involved in mishandling of documents, but passed the case off to different people.
It goes further though. After being appointed Attorney General by former President George W. Bush, Comey was tasked with investigating Bill Clinton in 2002.
Comey Has Investigated The Clintons Before.
The investigation was about how four men, who had donated to the Hillary Clinton Senate campaign, had misappropriated millions of dollars of federal aid. The missing money was set to go to housing, education and business, but never made it there.
CBS reported in 2002 that the case had been closed, with no charges filed. As such, the pardons that former President Clinton had were going to continue. Even though these people were stealing money, and coincidentally tied to the Clintons, Comey didn’t choose to pursue it.
In other words, Comey has spent nearly two decades associated and investigating the Clinton family. In that amount of time, which included several high-profile cases, he always ruled in their favor.
This includes the highly publicized Hillary email scandal ruling last summer. No wonder Democrats were upset at the firing. Comey always ruled in favor of the Clintons; with his firing, it means they won’t have a free pass anymore.
Sources: The Gateway Pundit – CBS – Time
George Soros and his shady $4.8 million U.S. taxpayer deal
By Cheryl K. Chumley
The Washington Times
Thursday, April 20, 2017
George Soros, the self-declared billionaire philanthropist who amuses himself by capsizing and upsetting national economies and by pressing all-things-progressive in politics, has a curious expenditure of taxpayer cash in the amount of $4.8 million — and Judicial Watch is demanding answers.
So should Americans. The money’s been sent to Macedonia — a country that leans conservative, in direct contrast to Soros‘ own personal political interests.
Specifically, the $4.8 million reportedly went from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is overseen by the State Department, to the Macedonian branch of Soros‘ Open Society Foundations. And this, of course, is a clear What the Freak moment. Why are tax dollars helping Soros and his minion groups on anything — on anything at all?
Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act suit against the State Department and against USAID, demanding records related to the payments and communications that flowed between the two agencies and Open Society.
As Fox News noted, Judicial Watch also requested copies of messages sent from Barack Obama-appointee Jess Baily — who was a former U.S. ambassador to Macedonia — to the Open Society Foundation’s Macedonia offices.
The FOIA suit comes as USAID reported on its own website the gifting of $4.8 million in tax dollars to Soros‘ Open Society groups to help Macedonians learn “topics such as freedom of association, youth policies, citizen initiatives, persuasive argumentation and use of new media.”
Recommended by Or, in a word: activism. In two words, one might say: political activism.
Sounds like an Obama-fueled endeavor, doesn’t it? And my, how curious Macedonia just happens to lean ideologically to the right. Enter Judicial Watch’s lawsuit.
USAID won’t comment, citing pending litigation and the need to keep tight-lipped for legal reasons. But an Open Society spokesperson justified the money, saying Soros already spends through his foundation almost a billion dollars on pro-democracy efforts the world over, and by comparison, “our local foundations administer a minuscule amount of U.S. aid.”
Right. What’s a few million to a billionaire, but “minuscule.” Surely, U.S. taxpayers would disagree — particularly if their hard-earned dollars were being used to fund endeavors that countered their political wills.
Some in Congress have expressed outrage. Rep. Chris Smith, New Jersey Republican, for example, has led an effort in the House to get Bailey to explain the seeming use of taxpayer dollars for Soros projects in Macedonia. Sen. Mike Lee, Republican from Utah, meanwhile, has also expressed dismay that tax dollars funding USAID have been funneled into Soros operations — particularly when those Soros operations seemed political in nature.
“I have received credible reports that, over the past few years, the U.S. mission to Macedonia has actively intervened in the party politics of Macedonia, as well as the shaping of its media environment and civil society, often favoring groups of one political persuasion over another,” Lee said, in a letter in January, reported by Fox News.
Judicial Watch also thinks the Soros group has indeed interfered in political affairs on the Macedonia scene — a violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
And logic would suggest: Where there’s a Soros thumbprint, there’s a Soros influence. It’s time to audit USAID and see what’s been going on behind the scenes — see what taxpayers have really been funding.
Judicial Watch Sues State Department for Records of Alleged Russian Tampering in the 2016 Election that were Shared with Senator Benjamin Cardin
MAY 10, 2017
The New York Times reported ‘a cache of documents marked “secret”’ was sent to Senator Cardin
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of State for all records provided by them to Senator Benjamin Cardin’s office related to alleged Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:17-cv-00852)).
The suit was filed after the State Department failed to respond to a March 2, 2017, FOIA request seeking:
There was also an effort to pass reports and other sensitive materials to Congress. In one instance, the State Department sent a cache of documents marked “secret” to Senator Benjamin Cardin of Maryland days before the Jan. 20 inauguration. The documents, detailing Russian efforts to intervene in elections worldwide, were sent in response to a request from Mr. Cardin, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, and were shared with Republicans on the panel.
This is the fourth Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (see here, here, here) related to the surveillance, unmasking, and illegal leaking targeting President Trump and his associates.
“Did the Obama State Department improperly share classified information with a Democrat Senator as part of an anti-Trump scheme?” asked Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Needless to say, the Senate won’t be investigating Senator Cardin’s role in any potential violations of law, but Judicial Watch is going to federal court to do just that.”
European Union Faces Crisis As Turkey’s President Threatens To Destroy Europe With Great Flood
Posted by Asia Mayfield | Apr 20, 2017 |
Turkey is threatening to overrun Europe with migrants if EU officials don’t agree to grant visa-free travel to Turks.
Turkey is threatening to drown Europe in migrants unless the European Union agrees to visa-free travel for Turkish citizens. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, encouraged by a fresh referendum that increased his powers, is expected to abandon his intentions of joining the EU so he can continue the country’s Islamization.
EU officials fear that if they refuse to comply with Erdogan’s demands, the increasingly autocratic ruler will renege on his agreement to stop migrants in Turkey from entering Greece. If the threat is carried out, it would be disastrous for Europe.
“Turkey has the EU over a barrel over this issue of migration because the EU is a magnet for illegal migration from Africa and the Middle East,” UKIP’s Home Affairs spokesman Jane Collins told the Daily Express.
“The referendum result makes Erdogan’s position even stronger and with Trump calling to congratulate him it’s clear the EU will have no bargaining power besides money, which it also does not have.”
Last Sunday Erdogan scraped together just enough votes to pass a referendum allowing him to stay in power for longer and to act without consulting parliament. The measure is a further assault on the country’s once famed democracy.
Turkey’s president may start allowing migrant boats unimpeded travel to Greece.
Erdogan has urged Brussels to allow Turks free travel if they expect him to honor his agreement to accept Europe’s “irregular” migrants and prohibit smugglers from ferrying people to Greece.
Ömer Çelik, the Turkish minister for EU affairs, told The Times: “If we get a negative response from the EU we have the right to re-evaluate and suspend all of these agreements.”
Turkey’s belligerence shows that it’s no longer concerning itself with adopting Western morals. The day after the referendum Erdogan reinstituted the death penalty, an absolute disqualifier for EU entry.
“We’ve always been very reluctant to ensure a visa-free regime to Turkey as, in our opinion, Ankara does not match the democratic criteria,” said Gianni Pittella, the Italian leader of the Socialist grouping in the European Parliament. “Now after the referendum, our concerns are even bigger.”
Greek officials are preparing for the worst. They’ve already planned how to deal with a sudden influx of migrants. During the initial crisis, Greece was battered by an onslaught of hundreds of thousands of people. If forced to deal with another migrant crisis their struggling economy would plunge further into debt and Brussels would be pressured to provide assistance.
President Erdogan hopes to bully the EU into accepting his demands by threatening to release countless migrants.
“It is also not very important for us either. … They have made us wait at the gates of the EU for 54 years. So, we will sit and talk and hold a referendum on that, too,” Erdogan told a crowd of supporters when questioned on Turkey’s potential EU membership.
Europe is so anxious about what Erdogan might do that government officials remained unusually quiet after Sunday’s vote. Clearly, no one wants to irritate Erdogan.
On Monday the British Foreign Office expressed mild concern over the vote, but took care to highlight that: “Turkey is a close ally and friend of the UK and we have a range of shared interests.”
“The referendum is an important moment for Turkey, millions of Turkish people turned out to express their views, that clearly opens the way to significant changes in Turkey’s system of government…What’s important now is that Turkey enacts these constitutional changes in a way that sustains democracy, respects the rule of law, and protects fundamental freedoms in line with its international commitments,” the statement continued.
The proposal to allow Turks visa-free travel in the EU is still circulating in Brussels. Experts predict that officials will eventually comply. The migrant crisis reshaped the continent. Liberal fantasies about the wonder of refugees have been replaced with pragmatic views about the difficulties of assimilating large groups of adults into a new culture.
Erdogan is set to trigger another migrant crisis.
Relations between Turkey and the EU became increasingly fraught in the months leading to Sunday’s vote. Erdogan accused Germany and The Netherlands of acting like Nazis. Multiple countries expressed concern over authoritarian rule.
“It’s high time we disarmed verbally. The Nazi insults are unbearable,” German Deputy Foreign Minister Michael Roth told Welt am Sonntag.
A few analysts hold out hope that Erdogan will be curtailed by the narrowness of his victory.
“This large an opposition is hard for Erdogan to ignore,” wrote analysts Aykan Erdemir, a former member of the Turkish parliament, and Merve Tahiroglu, both with the Washington think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
“He may claim to have won a slight majority, but he lost in five of Turkey’s six largest cities, including its economic center Istanbul, where he has never lost an election since becoming mayor in 1994. He also lost in Turkey’s other economic powerhouses — including the capital Ankara and Izmir — suggesting the country’s poor economic performance could become his weak spot in the days and weeks to come.”
When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
~~ Thomas Jefferson
Tue May 9, 2017 | 9:28pm EDT
Trump fires FBI Director Comey, setting off U.S. political storm
By Steve Holland and Jeff Mason | WASHINGTON
U.S. President Donald Trump ignited a political firestorm on Tuesday by firing FBI Director James Comey, who had been leading an investigation into the Trump 2016 presidential campaign's possible collusion with Russia to influence the election outcome.
The Republican president said he fired Comey, the top U.S. law enforcement official, over his handling of an election-year email scandal involving then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
The move stunned Washington and raised concerns among Democrats and others that the White House was trying to blunt the FBI probe involving Russia.
Some Democrats compared Trump's move to the "Saturday Night Massacre" of 1973, in which President Richard Nixon fired an independent special prosecutor investigating the Watergate scandal.
White House officials denied allegations that there was any political motive in the move by Trump, who took office on Jan. 20.
But Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said he spoke to Trump and told him he was "making a very big mistake" in firing Comey, adding the president did not "really answer" in response.
An independent investigation into Moscow's role in the election "is now the only way to go to restore the American people’s faith," Schumer said.
Senator Richard Burr, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is overseeing its own investigation into Russian interference during the election, said in a statement he was troubled by the timing of Comey's termination.
"His dismissal, I believe, is a loss for the Bureau and the nation," Burr said.
U.S. intelligence agencies concluded in a January report that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered an effort to disrupt the 2016 election, with the aim of helping Trump.
Russia has repeatedly denied any meddling in the election and the Trump administration denies allegations of collusion with Russia.
RESTORING 'PUBLIC TRUST'
Trump, in a letter to Comey released by the White House, said: "It is essential that we find new leadership for the FBI that restores public trust and confidence in its vital law enforcement mission."
The president told Comey in the letter that he accepted the recommendation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions that he could no longer provide effective leadership. Comey's term was to run through September 2023. He was appointed director by Democratic President Barack Obama in 2013.
Sessions advised Trump's campaign before being picked by the president to lead the Justice Department. Sessions had recused himself from involvement in the Russia investigation, after he misstated his own 2016 contacts with Russia's ambassador to Washington.
Pushing back against critics of the move, White House officials said Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, a career prosecutor who took office on April 25, assessed the situation at the FBI and concluded that Comey had lost his confidence.
Rosenstein sent his recommendation to Sessions, who concurred and they forwarded their recommendation to Trump, who accepted it on Tuesday, they said.
The White House released a memo in which Rosenstein wrote: "I cannot defend the Director's handling of the conclusion of the investigation of Secretary Clinton's emails, and I do not understand his refusal to accept the nearly universal judgment that he was mistaken."
A White House official said Trump aide Keith Schiller hand-delivered the letter firing Comey to the FBI.
Trump, in his letter to Comey, said: "While I greatly appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation, I nevertheless concur with the judgment of the Department of Justice that you are not able to effectively lead the bureau."
Comey, 56, had been the target of criticism from many quarters for his handling of a probe involving Clinton's use of a private email server while she was U.S. secretary of state under Obama. As recently as Tuesday, the FBI clarified remarks that Comey made on the matter last week.
Trump had originally criticized the FBI director for not pursuing criminal charges against Clinton last July, but later lavished praise on him.
Comey had said in July the Clinton email case should be closed without prosecution, but then declared - 11 days before the Nov. 8 election - that he had reopened the investigation because of a discovery of a new trove of Clinton-related emails.
Clinton and other Democrats say they believe Comey's decision help cost her the election.
Several current and former U.S. intelligence officials questioned the White House explanation for Comey's firing.
"Trump praised him for the work on the email investigation, so that’s not it," said Austin Berglas, a former FBI supervisory agent on hacking cases. "I think he realized the extent of the Russia investigation under way and moved him out. To me, that’s the only logical explanation right now."
"The reason they’re giving for firing Comey doesn’t add up," said a senior U.S. official who has served in both Democratic and Republican administrations for more than 20 years.
"There has to be another reason, and I can think of only two possibilities. One is that despite the facts, the president considers Comey a political animal, and not a friendly species. The second is that he’s afraid of a real investigation into his Russia business," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
On Monday, former acting Attorney General Sally Yates told a Senate panel that she had informed the White House on Jan. 26 that Trump's then-national security adviser, Michael Flynn, was at risk of blackmail by Moscow because he had been untruthful about his discussions with the Russian ambassador, Sergei Kislyak.
Yates, a holdover from the Obama administration, was later fired by Trump after she declined to defend his travel ban on seven Muslim-majority countries, a policy that Trump said would help protect Americans from Islamist militants.
(Additional reporting by Dustin Volz, Mark Hosenball, Joseph Menn, John Walcott, Rick Cowan and Patricia Zengerle; Writing by Warren Strobel; Editing by Peter Cooney)
Full Definition of socialism
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods