Kimberley Strassel Destroys Narrative on NBC’s Meet the Press

…“I think we are having a discussion that is absolutely divorced from reality this week. It is astonishing,” she quipped as she reminded them of how then candidate Obama (not President-elect Obama) set up a highly covert back channel with the Iranians:

Let me set the scene for you: It’s 2008, we are having an election and candidate Obama, he’s not even president elect, sends William Miller over to Iran to establish a backchannel, and let the Iranians know should he win the election they will have friendlier terms. Okay? So this is a private citizen going to foreign soil, obviously in order to evade U.S. intelligence monitoring and establishing a backchannel with a sworn enemy of the United States who was actively disrupting our efforts in the military in the Middle East.

(NEWSBUSTERS)

Of course there is more to this issue than the MSM has led on to… such as this BLOOMBERG (2014):

President Barack Obama’s administration has been working behind the scenes for months to forge a new working relationship with Russia, despite the fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin has shown little interest in repairing relations with Washington or halting his aggression in neighboring Ukraine.

This month, Obama’s National Security Council finished an extensive and comprehensive review of U.S policy toward Russia that included dozens of meetings and input from the State Department, Defense Department and several other agencies, according to three senior administration officials. At the end of the sometimes-contentious process, Obama made a decision to continue to look for ways to work with Russia on a host of bilateral and international issues while also offering Putin a way out of the stalemate over the crisis in Ukraine.

[….]

Kerry has been the point man on dealing with Russia because his close relationship with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov represents the last remaining functional diplomatic channel between Washington and Moscow. They meet often, often without any staff members present, and talk on the phone regularly. Obama and Putin, on the other hand, are known to have an intense dislike for each other and very rarely speak….

Funny that “back-channels were an Obama thing… for reals!

Diane Feinstein: No Evidence Of Russia-Trump Camp Collusion

Via the DAILY CALLER:

A top Democratic member of the Senate Intelligence Committee says she has yet to see evidence of collusion between Donald Trump advisers and the Russian government.

“Do you have evidence that there was in fact collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?” CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked California Sen. Dianne Feinstein during an interview on Wednesday.

“Not at this time,” she responded…..

The Aftermath of the Attack In Syria

  • Joke: All jokes Assad, things are getting pretty Syrias right now.
  • A friends response: I’m laughing so hard I’m Putin!

PICTURE: Al-Shayrat Airfield, which is where these chemical attacks were launched from… AFTER Tomahawk Barrage

This is from the U.S. NAVAL INSTITUTE NEWS post, which includes videos of the launching of some of these Tomahawks:

…..“The strike was a proportional response to Assad’s heinous act,” Davis’s statement continued. “Shayrat Airfield was used to store chemical weapons and Syrian air forces. The U.S. intelligence community assesses that aircraft from Shayrat conducted the chemical weapons attack on April 4. The strike was intended to deter the regime from using chemical weapons again.”

A U.S. military official told USNI News that Russian forces in the country were given a “heads up” ahead of the launch of the missiles. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in a statement that the U.S. did not seek Moscow’s permission for the strike.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who serves on the Senate foreign relations and intelligence committees, told CNN’s Anderson Cooper this evening that “I don’t believe this is a message; I believe this is actually a tactical action that furthers an objective, which is important. My guess is, and I think you’ll see confirmation of it shortly, al-Shayrat Airfield, which is where these chemical attacks were launched from with fixed-wing aircraft a couple days ago, is going to be the target, and that is the airfield from which the chemical attacks were launched. It’s also a critical point in a part of the country where they’re battling rebels, non-ISIS rebels, in the northern part of Syria. So as I said, it’s an important and decisive step that was taken. It is not a message; it is an actual degrading of the capability of Syrian regime to carry out further chemical attacks against innocent civilians. This will degrade their capability to launch those attacks from the air, and I think it was an important step and hopefully it’s part of a comprehensive strategy moving forward to bring to a close this chaos that’s happening in Syria.”

Asked about the significance of this first attack in the bigger context of the ongoing situation in Syria, Rubio told Cooper, “I’m not saying this accomplishes everything, but I am telling you that this is the area from which those chemical attacks were launched and where we were going to see future attacks come from, particularly targeting innocent civilians in an area where the regime felt it was losing territory after making significant gains.”….

And — more from DEBKA FILE:

Washington has NO DOUBT that the Syrian SU-22 bomber which Tuesday dropped a sarin gas bomb on Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province, killing up to 100 people, was a joint Russian-Iranian-Syrian gambit to divert the Trump administration from a comprehensive plan for Syria. As US President and commander-in-chief he could not ignore this provocation.

Our sources report that the new US administration’s plans for Syria center on an offensive to evict the Islamic State from its Syrian capital, Raqqa, a mission for which US military preparations have been going forward for the past two weeks at five centers. To this operation Moscow, Tehran and Damascus were not averse. But that operation was also designed to rid Syria of Iranian and Hizballah forces – to which they were.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that despite previous agreements, Syria had not surrendered its chemical weapons stockpile, and accused Russia of “failing in its responsibility to deliver on its commitment” to supervise the surrender of those chemical weapons. “Either Russia has been complicit or simply incompetent in its ability to deliver,” Tillerson continued.

The question now is whether Vladimir Putin will decide to hit back at the US operation. Russia did not retaliate for the Israel air strike on March 17 over the northern Syrian T4 air base. If Putin chooses to sit on his hands once again, the same question may be addressed to Iran and Hizballah.

Very possibly, Trump and Putin reached accord on the limits of the US punitive attack in Syrian in long hours of debate during the day between the US State and Defense Departments and the Russian Foreign and Defense Ministries, which were first reported by DEBKAfile 24 hours ago. Pentagon sources report that Washington gave Moscow advance warning of the coming US attack on the Syrian Shayrat base where Russian air force units are also deployed.

Follow-up US military action may yet come after the US president asserted that for him, “many, many lines were crossed” by Assad’s chemical attack and his attitude towards Syria had changed….

Jay Sekulow Deconstructs Jeff Sessions

Jay Sekulow comes at this issue in an erudite and clear manner. I start the video out with a montage put together by Jay’s team. Also included is a segment (almost 11-minutes long) from the show prior to Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusing himself. The second segment is almost 8-minutes long and post-dates the AG’s recusal. The final segment (just over 5-minutes) is an update in regards to Nancy Pelosi.

THIS WHOLE thing is moving quickly. Some funny aspects have surfaced, like all 100 of our Senators meeting with Russian officials this week. Chuck Schumer has personally met with the Russian President Vladimir Putin, whereas President Trump has not. Oh, and don’t forget, Democrat hero and Lion of the Senate actually ASKED Russia to help defeat Reagan.

BOOM! Tammy Bruce Lays Bare Leftist Arguments

NEWSBUSTERS reports on the issue:

Following the release of the intelligence report detailing Russia’s meddling in the U.S. election late last week, the Sunday morning shows were all abuzz with commentary with most of it critical of President-elect Donald Trump. But things were slightly different on CBS’ Face the Nation where radio host Tammy Bruce ripped in President Barack Obama for his meddling in the democratic election in Israel, all in a futile attempt to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“In 2015, we spent over 350,000 taxpayer dollars funding an organization in Israel called OneVoice, which we learned once we gave them those grants they immediately began to build up an infrastructure to oppose Netanyahu in Israel,” recalled Bruce.

Bruce’s claim is accurate, and not only did Obama use taxpayer money to undermine a staunch US ally but the news broke around the same time as the Russian meddling was occurring. “This is not unknown, it was widely reported in the summer of last year that it was an Obama-aligned group of people that worked with his campaign that were the consultants to that effort to dislodge Netanyahu, an active campaign in Israel,” she continued.

According to The Washington Times a Senate investigation found, “OneVoice used the money to build a voter database, train activists and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama’s campaign.” And if that wasn’t bad enough, the US’ top official in the country was discovered to have “…regularly deleted emails with large attachments — a striking violation of open-records laws…”….

BBC vs Blogosphere |or| Fake vs. Real News (UPDATED)

This is via VLAD TEPES (with a h-t to GATEWAY PUNDIT). Mind you, the BBC report may have been right after the event, but they had the audio and I will comment on searches today on their YouTube Channel and site. Here is what the BBC reported was said: “Reportedly witnesses say that he shouted out ‘Aleppo’ and ‘revenge.'” Here is the report:

After perusing the BBC’s YouTube Channel and website, I continually find this written:

  • He can be heard yelling “Don’t forget about Aleppo, don’t forget about Syria” and uses the Islamic phrase “Allahu Akbar” (God is great).

And in a later broadcast recapping the event, you can see the same is said:

There seems to be a whitewashing of the message for the larger audience. Here is the fuller “yelling” his allegiance to the founder of Islam:

  • Killer: “Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will carry on Jihad as long as we live. Allahu Akbar. Don’t forget Allepo. Don’t forget Syria. Don’t forget Allepo. Don’t forget Syria. As long as our towns are not secure you won’t have taste of security. Back off. Back off. Only death will take me away from here. everyone who has contributed to this cruelty will pay, one by one.

VLAD has the video subtitled

JIHAD WATCH has some great reporting on the issue as well. Terror Attacks Since 9/11Jihad Watch quickly noted for instance that the assassin is making the one-finger-upraised signal that has come to signify allegiance to the Islamic State. The shooter is said to be part of a special ops team, as well as being on the private security detail of Erdogan on multiple occasions. This death will surely be added to the counter to the right!

Russian Ambassador Shot Dead In Turkey (Video)

CAUTION – Islamic Violence and some “snackbars”…

The Russian ambassador has died. Note that the assassin is making the one-finger-upraised signal that has come to signify allegiance to the Islamic State. It is widely rumored that Erdogan is actively supporting the Islamic State, so this could be taken in Moscow as an act of war against Russia — and that could escalate quickly. (JIHAD WATCH) See more at the DAILY MAIL.

NEW VIDEO! CAUTION

CIA vs FBI – Russia and the U.S. Election

Here are some related articles… the first one in the list below is the one Dennis Prager is reading from:

YOUNG CONSERVATIVES have this clip from TOWNHALL:

…Contrary to claims made by Democrats about Russian interference helping President-elect Donald J. Trump, there is no definitive proof that the Kremlin ordered such cyber attacks. It’s all based on circumstantial evidence, innuendo, and anonymous sources that are bound by an apparent inter-agency feud between the CIA and the FBI. On December 10, The Washington Post reported that both agencies were not on the same page, which seemed to have angered Democrats:

Sitting before the House Intelligence Committee was a senior FBI counterintelligence official. The question the Republicans and Democrats in attendance wanted answered was whether the bureau concurred with the conclusions the CIA had just shared with senators that Russia “quite” clearly intended to help Republican Donald Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton and clinch the White House.For the Democrats in the room, the FBI’s response was frustrating — even shocking.

During a similar Senate Intelligence Committee briefing held the previous week, the CIA’s statements, as reflected in the letter the lawmakers now held in their hands, were “direct and bald and unqualified” about Russia’s intentions to help Trump, according to one of the officials who attended the House briefing.

[…]

The competing messages, according to officials in attendance, also reflect cultural differences between the FBI and the CIA. The bureau, true to its law enforcement roots, wants facts and tangible evidence to prove something beyond all reasonable doubt. The CIA is more comfortable drawing inferences from behavior.

Our intelligence agencies don’t all agree that the Kremlin is responsible.

The talking point that 17 intelligence agencies agree that Russia was behind the hacks is not accurate….

More YOUNG CONS… “Here are the top 5 reasons why it isn’t accurate to definitively say Russia interfered in our election process. From Breitbart

  • There is actually no new information leading the CIA to its conclusion. The New York Timesreports: “The C.I.A.’s conclusion does not appear to be the product of specific new intelligence obtained since the election, several American officials, including some who had read the agency’s briefing, said on Sunday. Rather, it was an analysis of what many believe is overwhelming circumstantial evidence — evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome.” In other words, someone only decided after Trump won that the accusation was worth making.
  • The “evidence” that the CIA has gathered is inconclusive. The FBI also disagrees with some of the CIA’s conclusions about Russia’s motives. “While lawmakers were seemingly united on the need to present a strong bipartisan response, the FBI and CIA gave lawmakers differing accounts on Russia’s motives, according to The Post,” The Hillreported on Sunday.
  • Despite left-wing “fake news,” there is no evidence Russian hackers actually distorted the voting process.The most that the CIA is alleging is that the Russians may have helped hack of the Democratic National Committee emails, as well as (possibly) the emails of Hillary Clinton campaign chaiman John Podesta. There is zero evidence Russian hackers messed with voting. Ironically, Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s recount has eliminated any doubt about the integrity of the results.
  • Julian Assange and Wikileaks have vigorously denied that the Russians were involved in Wikileaks’ disclosures. Of the Democratic National Committee emails, Assange said: “That is the circumstantial evidence that some Russian, or someone who wanted to make them look like a Russian, was involved, with these other media organisations. That is not the case for the material that we released.” Assange made similar denials about the Podesta email leaks later in the election.
  • What would the consequences of allowing undue Russian influence in our elections be, exactly? Would we yield primacy in Eastern Europe to Vladimir Putin? Would we give up our plans for missile defense? Would we make deep unilateral cuts in our nuclear arsenal in exchange for flimsy concessions ? Would we tolerate a Russian land invasion of a friendly, pro-Western country? Would we cede the Middle East to Russian hegemony? Because Hillary Clinton and Obama already did that.

No, 17-U.S. Agencies Did Not Say Russia Hacked Dem E-mails

Unfortunately, Russia being behind the hacks is more conjecture than fact. Some have been leaked by Democrats themselves, others may have been leaked by NSA officials getting back at Hillary for the death of some intelligence agency employee’s and the worry that her reckless behavior with State Secrets would continue in the White House. Annnd may some were done by Wikileaks. The funny thing is however that Hillary denies her emails were at the same time she blames Russia.

Hillary Clinton in last night’s presidential debate tried to avoid talking about the substance of the damaging WikiLeaks disclosures of DNC and Clinton campaign officials by claiming 17 U.S. intelligence agencies determined that Russia was responsible for this. After Clinton made this claim, she scolded Trump for challenging U.S. intelligence professionals who have taken an oath to help defend this country.

What Clinton said was false and misleading. First of all, only two intelligence entities – the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – have weighed in on this issue, not 17 intelligence agencies. And what they said was ambiguous about Russian involvement. An unclassified October 7, 2016 joint DNI-DHS statement on this issue said the hacks

  • …are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow — the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europa and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

Saying we think the hacks “are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts” is far short of saying we have evidence that Russia has been responsible for the hacks. Maybe high-level officials would have authorized them if Russian hackers were responsible, but the DNI and DHS statement did NOT say there was evidence Russia was responsible….

Don’t forget that some are saying that a portion of these WIkiLeaks came from a Democrat operative, that dies in the nick of time:

DNC staffer Seth Rich was mysteriously murdered in the streets of Washington, D.C., on July 10. Although it is being investigated as a robbery, his wallet, credit cards and watch were not taken. The 27-year old was shot in the back on July 10 at 4:15 a.m. near his affluent neighborhood, while he was reportedly walking home from his girlfriend’s apartment. Police still have no suspects, witnesses or motive. His mother told the local NBC station that there were bruises on his face, knees and hands, apparently from trying to fend off his attackers.

[….]

Rich was a data analyst, so it is very possible he could have had access to the DNC’s emails. Julian Assange of Wikileaks said recently on TV that it wasn’t Russian hackers who intercepted the emails, as the Hillary Clinton campaign has alleged; instead, any one of a number of staffers within the DNC could have leaked them.

(RPT)

The Morning Answer Takes A Wiki-Leak “Break”

The Morning Answer discusses some of the Wiki-Leaked emails and discusses the anti-Catholic/Evangelical discussions, as well as the importance of showing collusion between the Dept of Justice working with the Hillary campaign on issues. IN OTHER WORDS, the DOJ is picking sides with a campaign… colluding against the other campaign. CRAZY!!

Russians NOT Behind DNC Email Leak (Narrative Fail)

On Aaron Klein’s Sunday radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” (broadcast on New York’s AM 970 The Answer and Philadelphia’s NewsTalk 990 AM), US government whistleblower William Binney threw his hat into the DNC hack ring by stating that the Democratic National Committee’s server was not hacked by Russia but by a disgruntled U.S. intelligence worker.

The motivation of the hacker…concern over Hillary Clinton’s disregard of national security secrets when she used a personal email and consistently lied about it.

Binney was just getting started with revelations we are sure no main stream media news site will dare to cover. The“Putin did it” fairytale is just to easy for the sheep to follow.

Binney also proclaimed that the NSA has all of Clinton’s deleted emails, and the FBI could gain access to them if they so wished.  No need for Trump to ask the Russians for those emails, he can just call on the FBI or NSA to hand them over.

(The Duran)

BreitBart concurs: “I have some news for Hillary and Democrats—I think I’ve got the real culprit. It doesn’t seem to be the Russians that hacked the DNC, but instead a hacker who goes by the name of Guccifer 2.0. The original Guccifer famously hacked Hillary’s home email server, you might remember.” However, PolitiFact notes the evidence supporting the contention that Russia is behind the hacking… but this seems far-fetched to me because Hillary via the Clinton Foundation is closely tied to Russian “donations,” via Clinton Cash.

DEBKA FILE has a story where they do not believe the leaked DNC emails were done by “Russia,” but rather a political opponent possibly:

On July 25, as the Democratic Party’s convention got underway in Philadelphia, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton found herself struggling to unite the party behind her nomination as the party’s presidential nominee, after the shock release of 20,000 emails through WikiLeaks, which exposed top party officials as campaigning to discredit her rival Bernie Sanders.

This breach of objectivity in Clinton’s favor was supported by documents, statistical tables and videos attached to the emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee’s servers. To damp the crisis. party leaders, including Clinton, took two immediate steps that made the situation worse: They sacked the head of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the day she was due to open the convention and, second, they called on the FBI to investigate the hacking and find who was responsible for the embarrassing leaks.

The culprit was quickly named as Russia’s military intelligence service, the GRU, by “experts close to the examination” – namely, the information security company CrowdStrike, which was hired by the DNC, and the FBI.

CrowdStrike said it had found two types of Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) malware inside the DNC’s servers that were intended to remain undetected for long periods of time, slowly spread inside the servers, and secretly send the data back to the culprits who planted the malware.

However, an analysis by DEBKAfile’s intelligence and cyber defense sources has determined that the hacking was almost certainly not carried out by the GRU’s cyber warfare branch, contrary to assertions by senior DNC officials who fix the blame on Russian intelligence.

Their assertions don’t hold water in the light of four facts:

1. Russia’s cyber warfare system is still mostly a “black hole” for the West. Although it is highly effective, very little is known about its methods of operation, organizational structures, scale of cooperation with counterparts in other countries, and the tools and resources at its disposal.

Had any branch of Russian intelligence been responsible for the hacking the Democratic party’s servers, no obvious signatures, such as the terms “Fancy Bear,” and “Cozy Bear” that were discovered, would have been left behind for investigators to find.  

2. Intelligence organizations, including those of Russia, are usually fully focused on seeking security, strategic and economic data. It is hard to see Russian military intelligence, whose resources are stretched, expending  time and manpower on digging out the DMC;s views of Bernie Sanders’ religiosity.     

3. Then, too, CrowdStrike’s claim to have cracked the case in two hours is hardly credible. Getting to the bottom of an APT (Advanced Persistent Threat) calls for extra-powerful computers, working in conjunction with the internet service provider (ISP), and consuming weeks, if not months of analysis. 

4.  Attributing the hacking attack to the Russians provided US agencies with a convenient reminder that the most notorious leaker of classified US documents, Edward Snowden, still lives safe from prosecution in Russian exile, and that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, remains in asylum at the Ecuadorean embassy in Britain.

(read more)

RED STATE notes that the pushing of the story that Russians hacked them is done mainly by Democrats (The DNC) and Democrat controlled security firms:

…And a Democrat-hired cybersecurity firm is helpfully pointing the finger at the Russians.

The company noted strong similarities between the attack on the DNC by the suspected GRU hackers and previous cyberintrusions of unclassified systems at the White House, the State Department and the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (After discovering the data breach, a DNC security source said its cyberexperts noted that the hackers’ exfiltration of files took place “9 to 5, Moscow time.”)

Why “9 to 5” Moscow time is proof of anything other than lazy thinking is beyond me. Is there evidence that Russian hackers, government or not, work only 9-to-5? As there is a 7 hour time difference between DNC HQ and Moscow wouldn’t it be logical for even American hackers to conduct attacks at “9-to-5” Moscow time because that is outside DNC business hours and less likely to be noticed? And there are other interesting places that are in that same time zone…

We may never know the culprit behind the hacking, but Russia may not fit the bill.