One Citizen Speaking

THE MUELLER REPORT

Seven crucial questions that need to be answered by the Muller Report…

(1) What event, fact, or document served as “probable cause” for opening up a counterintelligence investigation, what was its origin, and how was it documented or obtained.?

(2) What was the event, fact, or document that served as “probable cause” for obtaining a FISA warrant to surveil American citizens and were the rules on the presentation of exculpatory evidence followed. Especially when one considers that the target of the surveillance held no official position, had no security clearances, and simply was a tangential player who had access to other Trump campaign officials.

(3) What criminal activity served as the predicate for turning a counterintelligence investigation into a criminal investigation?

(4) What was the original, and subsequently-modified scope of  Robert Mueller’s investigation?

(5) Does the report contain an accurate timeline of events?

(6) Does the report indicate criminal referrals from the Office of Special Counsel that are pending?

(7) How did Robert Mueller handle the conflicts of interest between himself and many of the top-level participants?

To the extent that these seven questions are not answered, thoroughly and with fidelity, we still have an ongoing attempt to influence the 2020 election.

We will also note that it was Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team placed Grand Jury and Classified information on almost every page of the report -- full well knowing that there will be significant redactions that give the false impression that information is being withheld from the public. And, it is most likely that corrupt hyper-partisans like Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) and others will point to the redactions and claim that the truth is buried beneath the color-coded blackouts.

My thoughts…

My working theory is that the Steele Dossier was hand-crafted by several Clinton operatives and that Christopher Steele was paid to put his name on the document to provide a level of plausible deniability and to mask the true origins of the story being told. A story that was crafted from materials openly available on the internet and embellished with fanciful fiction.

It is also my belief that the mainstream media had access to enough of the information to make a determination that there was a potential conspiracy among top-level Obama Administration officials, possibly with Obama’s direct knowledge and approval, to interfere with a presidential election and to disadvantage any Trump presidency as a precursor to the 2020 election. And yet they sat idly on the sidelines to the violation of the precepts of American Journalism.

And, this is not the first time a Clinton-based scandal has been covered-up by Democrats.

Bottom line…

So before we allow the mainstream media to whipsaw the nation into a frenzy, dissemble, deflect, and misdirect, let us consider their role in this fiasco. And, let us ask ourselves, how did so many of former President Obama’s top advisors and officials become involved? Obama cannot claim ignorance of the matter because even he reads the paper, watches the news, and talks to political-types on a daily basis.

No matter what the report says, these are allegations put forth by a prosecutorial team AND HAVE NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED OR TESTED IN COURT – SO THEY STILL MIGHT NOT BE TRUE!

We are so screwed.

-- steve

WHAT IS A DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST?

The words mean nothing, it is the outcome that must be judged – and in the case of a “democratic socialist,” it means an authoritarian government where the needs of the collective outweigh the needs of the individuals. The suppression of individual freedoms in their pursuit of the unattainable goal of social justice – another meaningless phrase to describe a utopia that runs counter to human nature.

Only in the topsy-turvy world of the progressive socialist democrats does Orwell’s warning about the political use of language ring true; where up is down, right is left, black is white, and evil is good.

“Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. ” “The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice, have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of régime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way.” “But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” ― George Orwell

I cannot imagine a more illustrative example than  the use of the term “hate speech” as a contextual modifier and limiter of the concept of “free speech.”

The idea that certain “identities” or classes of people are allowed to “own” words in the sense of controllable private property and/or criminalize their use should be an anathema to inalienable rights, constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms, and free speech.

I cannot believe that any politician who has sworn an oath to protect, defend, and uphold the Constitution can make the case, except for politically-motivated self-interest, that criminalizing the n-word in punishing certain crimes is constitutional, especially when rappers use the word frequently in public.

The human embodiment of nothingness: presence without context and meaning…

Francis “Beto” O’Rourke’s philosophy appears to be: I’m with the people, the people are with me, and I am the people – so join my parade.

It appears that the key empowering facet of Alexandria Occasio-Cortez’s philosophy is that she does not need history. Her world started the moment she was born and she is free to remake the world in any way she sees fit – unencumbered by all of the time, effort, and energy required to absorb the lessons of the past and to use your own mental abilities to forge a useful feature. She confuses and conflates feelings with reasoned thought and believes if you can say it, you can will it into existence if you are the one with the power.

Bottom line…

There is a reason that the progressive socialist democrats want to suppress or re-write history, not only to hide the insanity of their definitions, the paucity of their ideas, the historical failures of the ideology they promote, but to also hide the corrupt insufficiency of their candidates.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

MEDICARE FOR ALL, FIRST THE FAIRY TALE, THEN THE POLICY DETAILS THAT SCREW YOU

Let us start with seven irrefutable facts…

(1) Medicare is a national health insurance program that provides health insurance for Americans aged 65 and older, younger people with some disability status as determined by the Social Security Administration, as well as people with end-stage renal disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease). Medicare is funded by a combination of a payroll tax, beneficiary premiums and surtaxes from beneficiaries, and general U.S. Treasury revenue. Medicare is an entitlement which you have earned, and in many cases, continue to pay for through various fees and other charges.

(2) Medicaid is a federal and state health insurance program that assists with paying medical costs for some people whose income, resources, and circumstances are insufficient to pay for independent health care. Medicaid is jointly funded by federal and state resources and IS NOT an earned entitlement, but rather a welfare safety net program funded by direct taxation.

(3) The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, significantly expanded both eligibility for and federal funding of Medicaid, using approximately $750 Billion of Medicare funding which imposed a de facto tax on senior citizens and others who had legitimated earned Medicare coverage.

(4) The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was drafted, in secret, by the Congressional Democrats, with input from progressive foundations and industry lobbyists and to the exclusion of Congressional Republicans who were denied participation in the drafting and amendment process.

(5) The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was passed with no member of the Republican Party participating – and using an unusual congressional “reconciliation” process to enact the legislation into law.

(6) The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was unconstitutional, and Chief Justice John Robert of the United States Supreme Court twisted the logic of the law to support the program. The essential elements have now been ruled unconstitutional which leaves major questions about the survival of its provisions.

(7) The President of the United States and Congressional Democrats lied to the American people. Especially egregious was President Barack Obama’s remarks at the American Medical Association on June 15, 2009, when he said:  "I know that there are millions of Americans who are content with their health care coverage — they like their plan and, most importantly, they value their relationship with their doctor. They trust you. And that means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what." This message was echoed by the Congressional Democrats and the mainstream media.

The results were catastrophic for some people…

For many people, the imposition of Obamacare meant they not only lost their individual doctors, access to their healthcare facility, interruptions in the healthcare, but also higher premiums, co-pays, and deductibles which made health care visits to the doctor almost impossible to afford. All to provide healthcare insurance to approximately seventeen million uninsured people, many illegal aliens in spite of federal prohibition. The truth is that the majority of the people were added to the welfare safety net Medicaid through the relaxation of eligibility standards.

The solution to the Obamacare health care catastrophe is to double down and completely nationalize healthcare delivery in the United States…

When confronted with the failure of their progressive healthcare initiative, Democrats blamed all of the problems on the incomplete implementation of the entire program and the necessity to work-out problematical issues over time. These are the very same Democrats that claim that all of these issues will be resolved by a single-payer healthcare system that will now be deceptively known as “Medicare for All.” 

Even though the Democrats can see the long-lines and rationed healthcare in similarly socialized systems in Britain, Canada, and elsewhere – al of which have fewer individuals requiring coverage, they persist in the delusion they can manage this nation-wide system. Curious when they cannot manage healthcare delivery to our nation’s veterans or indigenous peoples.

Bottom line…

You may wish to ask why healthcare costs have been rising when we were promised lower premiums, co-pays, and deductibles? You may wish to ask why medical fraud has increased almost exponentially in the age of computers and artificial intelligence? You may ask where are the savings from waste, fraud, and abuse? And, for some seniors, you may want to ask why AARP did not lobby on your behalf – understandable when their most significant source of revenue comes from one of the progressive insurance companies that helped craft and implement Obamacare?

So when I hear the 2020 progressive socialist democrats speak of “Medicare for All,” the first thought that runs through my mind is “lying sons of bitches.” The second being, “We are so screwed when millions of people can be persuaded by nonsensical fairytales to give up their freedom to an autocratic, dictatorial government regime on the promise that 'things will be better'.”

-- steve

A PROPOSED SOLUTION TO GLOBAL WARMING

It is the progressive socialist democrats and their media personalities that misquote science and portray hand-picked and limited findings as the authority to justify their fanatically corrupt socialist ideology into public policy. 

It is impossible for the progressives to concede that what is accepted as fact is continually tested and validated in light of new findings as they appear in the scientific literature. And, that science, by its very nature, is a search for truth, no matter where that search may lead. Thus claims of "settled science" to the certitude required to promulgate public policies that are clearly destructive of inalienable individual rights and freedoms are both false and indicative of those who are attempting to manipulate the system for their own ideological agenda. 

Except for certain fanatical activists who happen to be scientists, the outcome of the global warming debate was rigged from the start. Primarily because many institutions and scientists were willing to accept government funding even though they may have been told to ignore or minimize natural causes of global warming and to concentrate on the anthropomorphic (man-made) influences according to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

According to the UNFCCC, "Preventing “dangerous” human interference with the climate system is the ultimate aim of the UNFCCC." 

And to this goal, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (United Nations, 1992) provided a misguided definition. Article one, Definition two states “’ Climate change’ means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods."

Thus, focusing on man-made impacts and giving nature's forces (i.e., "natural climate variability) secondary emphasis Including phenomenological effects magnitudes greater than effects related to human activity. How one can honestly ignore the Sun's energy output in all spectral bands, the production of extraterrestrial cosmic rays, the Earth's position relative to the Sun, the Earth's precessional and rotational dynamics, the Earth's vulcanology and plate tectonics, the heat transfer and behavior of deep ocean currents, the interface between two chaotic fluids, and the most significant greenhouse gas influence, water vapor (clouds)? All of which are the significant drivers of climate change since the Earth manifested an atmosphere and oceans.

The challenge: find one scientific study that provides a credible, reliable, and replicable methodology for measuring man's climate signal amid the noise of climate's natural variability. However, we must exclude parametrically-tuned computer models that somewhat replicate past climate behaviors, but produce fantastical results when projected onto a future timeframe and global scale.

The Universe appears to be governed by certain physical constants and processes which are held in equilibrium by feedback loops, both positive and negative, and that climate seems to fluctuate between unknown values -- but shows evidence of regressing to some unknown mean value. Nobody has identified the planet's ideal climate limits although we have seen the Earth has been hotter, colder, with less atmospheric carbon dioxide and more atmospheric carbon dioxide without triggering a planetary catastrophe. We have seen severe weather patterns that do not appear to be linked to global weather phenomena but local oscillations like the observable El Niño/La Niña effects involving energy transfer from ocean currents.

The politicization of climate science …

“Article Four -- Commitments: 1. (f) [All parties] take climate change considerations into account, to the extent feasible, in their relevant social, economic and environmental policies and actions, and employ appropriate methods, for example impact assessments, formulated and determined nationally, with a view to minimizing adverse effects on the economy, on public health and on the quality of the environment, of projects or measures undertaken by them to mitigate or adapt to climate change.”

So we find climate science being used to justify public policy in every area of man’s life.

Science be damned…

“The UNFCCC borrowed a very important line from one of the most successful multilateral environmental treaties in history (the Montreal Protocol, in 1987): it bound member states to act in the interests of human safety even in the face of scientific uncertainty.” <Source: UN>

The real problem is not global climate change…

What we did not encounter in the past were corrupt politicians bold enough to state black is white, down is up, forward is backward with a degree of certitude that allowed them to strip a man of his inalienable individual rights and freedom of choice to support a toxic political ideology.

Thus, the bottom line solution to global warming, as it is politically defined, appears to be reducing not greenhouse gases, but political corruption.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

FORGET PROFESSIONAL POLITICIANS: THE RISE OF THE POLITICAL "ACTOR" AND PUPPET

The puppet master is Turkish-American lawyer, journalist, activist and political commentator Cenk Kadir Uygur (pronounced Jenk Ugar),         the main host and creator of The Young Turks and the co-founder of the progressive political action committee known as “Justice Democrats” along with Kyle Kulinski of Secular Talk.

To execute their plans they turned to bona fide experts in manipulation and social media: Zack Exley, a political and technology consultant specializing in fundraising and the use of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals; Saikat Chakrabarti, another technology expert with experience in fundraising and the manipulation of social media.

And some of those candidates they supported appear to be the most radical and outrageous in Congress…

Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ-03) Ro Khanna (D-CA-17) Rashida Tlaib (D-MI-13) Ilhan Omar (D-MN-05) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY-14) Pramila Jayapal (D-WA-07) The 2018 scorecard according to the Justice Democrat’s website … 78 candidates supported in primaries, 26 candidates supported in the general election, and 7 elected to Congress. And they are working hard on the 2020 election.

Ocasio-Cortez, the astroturf actor candidate supported by an astroturf organization…

If this video is missing from the email post, it can be found here.

Almost an unbelievable story, a conspiracy theory spun by the vast rightwing media – but, unfortunately, supported by the facts and their own words. The fact that Alexandria Occasio-Cortez is a paid actor and only reveals her ignorance when she goes off script and tries to act like something she is not,  a freedom-loving American politician.

The hubris of the progressives…

Like former President Barack Obama and his cadre of progressives, including Hillary Clinton, many believe they are the smartest people in the room and that they can either evade the laws that apply to ordinary mortals or render themselves immune from the consequences of their actions using their political power and contacts with the other progressive movers and shakers already embedded in our government. Notably, as we now see, the intelligence agencies (DNI, CIA, NSA), law enforcement (DOJ, FBI), Department of State, and the Internal Revenue Service.

AOC’s chief of staff ran $1M slush fund by diverting campaign cash to his own companies   Two political action committees founded by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s top aide funneled over $1 million in political donations into two of his own private companies, according to a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission on Monday. The cash transfers from the PACs — overseen by Saikat Chakrabarti, the freshman socialist Democrat's chief of staff — run counter to her pledges to increase transparency and reduce the influence of "dark money" in politics. Chakrabarti's companies appear to have been set up for the sole purpose of obscuring how the political donations were used. The arrangement skirted reporting requirements and may have violated the $5,000 limit on contributions from federal PACs to candidates, according to the complaint filed by the National Legal and Policy Center, a government watchdog group. <Source>

It has only been two years since Saikat Chakrabarti worked for Bernie Sanders and went on to co-founded an organization called Brand New Congress with Zack Exley, Alexandra Rojas, and Corbin Trent – who not so coincidently are embedded in the campaign and staff of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The stated objective of Brand New Congress was the launching hundreds of progressive (non-mainstream candidates into congressional races and dominating the House of Representatives. Mostly un-American candidates if you ask me.

Bottom line…

If this is literally true, then we are deeply in trouble as the Democrat Party has turned into the neo-Communist Party in the United States. And, it appears that the GOP does not understand what the opposition is doing and they continue to play their establishment/mainstream games that are typified by politicians like Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush. Where are our own radicals for liberty you might ask? Marginalized by the establishment candidates and fools like House Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. At least we have one wild-man who is not afraid to fight back in President Donald Trump – roundly criticized 90% of the time by the Democrats, the Democrat’s mainstream media propaganda arm, and the progressives and RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) within the GOP. Where is the TEA PARTY when we need them?

We are so screwed.

-- steve

THE TRICK TO UNDERSTANDING GOP POLITICS

While being bombarded by bombast and bullpucky after the release of the Mueller Report, and all the other progressive socialist democrat "deals," I think I have discovered how to cope with Conservative GOP Politics…

Progressive freakout...

The way progressive socialist democrats talk and behave, you might assume that the majority of Americans were these backwards third-world citizens who need to be told what to think, how to think, what they can say without offending someone, how to vote, what to wear, what to eat, what to drink, what to buy, how to set their thermostat, what to do about their children, current and future, and so on and so forth.

And without the elites in New York and San Francisco telling them how they should live their lives, Americans would just be drooling unexceptional population units.

Now comes President Trump with a brilliant idea. The elites want open borders, they do not want to enforce America's sovereignty with a border barrier or wall, they maintain sanctuary cities that protect illegal aliens ... so why not give them what they want: more illegal aliens. ICE would no longer be the "oppressor" but the facilitator, bussing illegal aliens into the sanctuary cities where they can thrive without the heavy foot of government on their necks.

But NO! The biggest complaints come from Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco and Chuck Schumer of New York. Their goal is not to make blue states bluer but to turn red states purple and then blue by importing people who will vote Democrat come the "big amnesty." Of course, the white elite politicians recognize that they are out of a job when identity politics rears its ugly head in demographic voting.  California and New York will be run by Latinx former illegal aliens who magically turned into "immigrants" with the stroke of a pen.

Bottom line...

As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for -- President Trump might just grant your wish. 

We are so screwed.

-- steve 

 

JULIAN ASSANGE ARRESTED BY BRITS, AMERICANS UNSEAL INDICTMENT AND ASK FOR EXTRADITION

A number of readers asked me what I thought of the manipulated release of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and the unsealing of his indictment in the United States …

About the government assertion that “Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Bradley/Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications.” – Definitely a computer crime and if proven Assange should be prosecuted and sentenced. Why Obama commuted the sentence of Manning is unfathomable as it rewarded criminal conduct and espionage – but then again, Obama hailed deserter Bowe Bergdahl as an honorable soldier.

Since it is alleged that Manning obtained password “hashes” using ordinarily available software and passed them on to Assange for decryption may be problematical because I do not see anything that claims Assange returned the actual password and that password was used to access classified materials – so the crime still primarily resides with Manning. As for the conspiracy between the two individuals, Manning and Assange, could it not be argued that a portion of the same conspiracy exists between leakers and legitimate media outlets? 

About the public assertion that Assange hacked the DNC, Clinton, and various Clinton associates -- There was a credible theory that the DNC release was not a hack and the sensitive information was collected and transmitted via a thumb drive wielded by a disaffected staffer – possibly one with an allegiance to Bernie Sanders. Conspiracy theorists believe that the DNC staffer might have been Seth Rich who was murdered in an alleged robbery attempt in which nothing was taken. As for Rich’s murder being a rightwing conspiracy theory, one needs to consider the context of previous claims of conspiracies which are now coming to light as actual conspiracies – possibly with a few mistakes in details here and there. Who initially believed that individuals in the Obama White House and the top echelon of the intelligence community (James Clapper/DNI, John Brennan/CIA, Loretta Lynch/DOJ, James Comey/FBI, and others) could have actively interfered in a presidential election and then a subsequent attempt to damage the actions of a sitting President?

About the public assertion that Assange published the classified documents stolen by Edward Snowden -- I don’t think WikiLeak’s role in the matter differs one iota from that of the New York Times publishing the classified “Pentagon Papers” (Report of the Office of the Secretary of Defense Vietnam Task Force) stolen by Daniel Ellsberg. Ellsberg escaped prosecution due to (wait for it) prosecutorial misconduct on behalf of the Nixon Administration. In the case of Snowden, he may have been a Russian operative since he sought, and was granted, asylum in Russia where he currently resides.

About the public assertion that Assange is a foreign national operating on behalf of the Russian government to sow discord and disruption in the United States --  I would like to see a finding that links the Russians to Assange, an Australian programmer, either as a witting or unwitting agent.

The mechanics…

There are four classic scenarios in which a publication might find itself with access to government classified information: one, passive receipt of classified materials from as yet an unknown sources; two, actively hacking or intercepting classified information; three, using bribery, coercion, or fraud to gain access to classified materials; and four, the outright solicitation (including persuasion or incitement) of classified information.

I cannot find a case where the government has criminally punished the passive receipt of classified documents other than the judiciary using a contempt of court citation to attempt to coerce an individual journalist to reveal a source or sources. Bribery, coercion, and fraud are clearly illegal acts in and of themselves. Hacking government computers or intercepting information is clearly illegal. As for solicitation, it is done every day via “tip lines” and is not punished. Even though receiving “stolen property” is a crime, it overlooked and not prosecuted. Publishing information from an individual who did commit a crime to obtain the information does not subject the publisher to criminal prosecution as a co-conspirator.

Consider that Snowden released information that caused imminent and serious harm to national security, and yet no publisher was prosecuted. One, because the information revealed that the government was violating the U.S. Constitution and federal law; and two, because the information was in the public interest and contributed to a debate about the breadth of domestic surveillance on American citizens by their government.

Unless you believe the government’s allegation that Assange actively participated in the hacking of government computers – he cannot be successfully prosecuted under existing laws, rules and regulations. Whether you regard Ellsberg, Snowden, and Manning as whistleblowers or criminals, they need to be held accountable for their illegal actions as individuals. As for Assange, he should have the same rights, privileges, and immunities as the New York Times – or he would have if he were an American citizen. Unfortunately, he is Australian which complicates matters due to the lack of constitutional protections.

Already the liberals are on the stump…

Consider this Tweet from progressive socialist democrat presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard…

First, Julian Assange is more a publisher than a journalist. Second, I would hope that anyone who encouraged a government individual in a position of trust to violate that trust by breaking their chain of command and dumping raw classified documents into the public domain is prosecuted to the full extent of the law – but this is unlikely. And third, I would hope that anyone who actively participated in the hacking of a government computer system is prosecuted and given a lengthy jail sentence. As for journalists, the First Amendment of the Constitution and federal law does not provide immunity from possessing, mishandling, and disseminating classified government documents related to national security and the protection of methods and sources, the government refuses to take the matter to the Supreme Court for a definitive ruling.

Bottom line…

As we saw in Watergate, where Associate FBI Director Mark Felt was leaking information to the Washington Post and today with the numerous government leaks --- this behavior is often condoned and excused at the highest levels of government. So we must ask, Cui Bono – who benefits from the Assange prosecution?

However, after reading the actual indictment, I am not so sure that this is not a predicate crime or pretext for forcing Assange to give up his sources, notably for the alleged hacking of the Democrat National Committee, Hillary Clinton, and various Clinton associates and cohorts.

Whatever the evil intentions and motivations, leakers of classified information have provided history-changing insight into the activities of a secretive government predisposed to conceal their self-serving actions, actions on behalf of special interests, foreign and domestic, actions to cover-up criminality and wrongdoing, and in general to avoid having embarrassing mistakes, errors, omissions, waste, fraud, and abuse come to the public’s attention through the media.

I believe that Assange should get a pass unless the government proves its allegations that he actively participated in hacking a government computer beyond pointing to commonly available programs to access and dump hashed password files.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

Thursday, April 11, 2019 WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy ALEXANDRIA, Va. – Julian P. Assange, 47, the founder of WikiLeaks, was arrested today in the United Kingdom pursuant to the U.S./UK Extradition Treaty, in connection with a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer. According to court documents unsealed today, the charge relates to Assange’s alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States. The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications. Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks. Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her. Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures. During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange. The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information. During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.” To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.” Assange is charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. The extradition will be handled by the Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs. An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty in court. WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy | USAO-EDVA | Department of Justice

FAKE NEWS: LOSE WEIGHT QUICKLY AND EASILY WITH THIS FREE MIRACLE SUBSTANCE BEING SUPPRESSED BY THE MEDICAL PROFESSION

Another headline divorced from reality...

Lose weight, be beautiful, vote Democrat -- HUH!

I was thinking about the rise of fake news and the death of journalism this weekend…

It appears to me that so-called journalists, a modern name for old-fashioned reporters, no longer have enough news of interest to capture the type of audience that they and their corporate master's desire. Therefore, they must manufacture and report “fake news” which is little more than speculative fiction containing weasel words like might and could, and which conflate and confuse degrees of probability from no-way Jose to virtually certain. Perhaps the most egregious example being when reporters deliberately confuse and conflate an El Niño-La Niña weather event with global warming to advance the agenda of their publication and a specific political party.

It appears to me that the problem is partly due to the expanding areas of coverage and the time constraints of relevancy. We consume local news because it is both interesting on some level and relevant to our daily lives. As the internet developed, geographical distances were diminished, and national stories became local stories and filled the “news.” With Facebook and Twitter, we can obtain almost real-time reports from the field, albeit unedited and not subject to accuracy standards, but which serve to put the audience on notice of the event and which makes subsequent events appear to be dated. Locality became of secondary importance. Therefore it was not unusual to find reporters taking short-cuts to grab the first ears and eyeballs with their stories – even though the initial reporting was rendered incomplete, false, or otherwise flawed by any updates. Reporters ceased going into the field as they sat glued to their desks scanning trending internet stories to generate their own work product.

We saw the rise of headline specialists, masters of SEO (Search Engine Optimization), whose attention-grabbing headlines were near lies and divorced from the story. All that matters is to capture audience attention and rank at the top of search engine results.

We see the creation of artificial panic as reported stories condense time and space and put stories in a 24/7 echo chamber that makes it appear like events – spaced widely in time and distance – happened every day and just around the corner -- and could impact your life today or tomorrow. The sheer repetition of speculation turned fiction into facts. Even with crime and mass shootings declining in a large, diverse nation, you would think that crime is at epidemic proportions and demands a political solution.

We also see the implementation of politically-correct reporting where the egregious actions of politicians remain unaccountable unless the scandal involves the opposition party or is so egregious it demands coverage. How many stories have you seen where some catastrophic outcome is assigned to a particular politician or political party who failed to prioritize money and public need and spent critical funding on activities to purchase votes or pay-off special interests? When was the last time you saw stories about politicians promoted by the “downtown power brokers” based on how much government money they could attract for their districts?

We are also reaping the consequences of educational institutions which have devolved into institutions of progressive indoctrination where commonly-accepted viewpoints are man-made myths, spin, and historical revisions, hence, we find that a single political party dominates today’s political coverage and the abuse of a sitting President of the United States is unprecedented but considered acceptable.

And how many people see the First Amendment being twisted and turned into unrecognizable knots as a single political party wants to control hate speech but claims to uphold free speech? Or claims that the freedom of the press is under attack when a particularly loathsome grandstanding reporter is denied access to a White House event – although there are tens of qualified and credentialed journalists from the same organizations available to do the very same job?

Bottom line…

We are so screwed when the so-called “truth-tellers to power” can’t even tell what is the truth amid the noise of politics.

-- steve

GAVIN NEWSOM: CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR DISRESPECTS CALIFORNIANS IN FAVOR OF FOREIGN NATIONALS

In what universe does the Governor of California have the right or the duty to spend taxpayer funds on a bogus trip to a foreign country that is complicit in violating federal immigration laws?

It appears that the self-promoting Governor want a public relations opportunity to position himself as a future presidential candidate and to elevate his political standing within the community of wannabe illegal aliens. How else can you explain a costly visit to a nation that allows, if not encourages, its impoverished, illiterate, diseased, or criminal citizens to take up illegal residence in the United States, specifically in California with its generous social welfare programs and conscious ignorance of federal immigration law.

Perhaps if the Governor performed his sworn duties, Californians would be better served?

The governor goes to Central America California Gov.  Gavin Newsom says he intends to help steer U.S. immigration policy just as former Gov. Jerry Brown influenced climate change policy—because California’s size, robust economy, diversity and political clout allow the state to “punch above our weight.” “The one area that California should do more is on immigration policy,” he said today, the second of his three days on an official visit to El Salvador. He added that in the last decade, the state ceded that role to governors from more conservative border states. “That’s why I’m down here. That’s what I want to bring back in terms of the leadership that we want to advance for our state.” [OCS: Perhaps the Governor should start by upholding his sworn duties and following existing federal law instead of aiding and abetting criminal activities? If the Governor wanted to have a bigger say in federal immigration policy, one would expect him to make his case to the state legislature and then to the federal government – not a foreign nation who is contributing to the growing illegal traffic of individuals who are disrupting the formerly golden state’s economy and social welfare safety nets. One might also expect that he would refrain from denigrating the President of the United States – a position to which he aspires – and the very nation he wants to lead while on foreign soil.] The stated purpose of his trip: to learn more about the root causes driving Central Americans to migrate by the thousands in the last year and how California could help here or at home. It also raises his political profile as a counterpoint to President Donald Trump. [OCS: The root cause is a dysfunctional third-world country who wants to outsource its poverty, illiteracy, crime, and disease to the United States in return for substantial sums of money flowing back into their country as illegal aliens send money – partially subsidized by Americans and Californians – home. If California wants to help Californians – not place foreign nationals above Californians and legal American citizens and migrants – perhaps the Governor should follow federal immigration law and curtail the welfare magnet that attracts illegal aliens to California. If we need more work permits, so be it. But don’t encourage a foreign power to commit illegal acts. If the governor does not know what is happening in his own state and has such poor advisors that have failed to adequately convey the status and remedy for illegal migration – as well as overlooking MS-13, the powerful street gang which originated in Los Angeles and is comprised mostly of Salvadorans – he should resign his office immediately. But then again, his goal appears to elevate himself to presidential status by attacking a sitting president. Another example of destructive rather than constructive leadership.] Newsom said he’s relying on the powerful California congressional delegation—which includes Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco and GOP House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield—and local leaders to work from the bottom up to compel changes in the Trump administration’s hostile approach to immigration from places such as Central America. [OCS: Here is a man who is trying to obstruct the administration of justice and to aid and abet those who are rapidly destroying our economy, culture, and politics – and he claims that the Trump Administration’s efforts to control our sovereignty is hostile. Hostile to whom? Foreign nationals who have no rights under American or California law? Or the Governor’s actions which are clearly hostile to Californians and all Americans.] “We have a unique responsibility and an opportunity to advance a different conversation,” he said after a session with humanitarian, LBGT and women’s rights advocates in the small town of Panchimalco, about an hour outside of San Salvador. [OCS: these advocates should be trying to improve their nation and have little or nothing to say about how immigration policy or any other policy is conducted in California or America. Who are they advocating for? Their citizens and illegal aliens?] Since arriving on Sunday, Newsom has met with El Salvador’s President Salvador Sánchez Cerén; U.S. ambassador Jean Manes, a career diplomat stationed at the embassy since the Obama administration; Salvadoran mayors and community members. [OCS: Another Obama appointee who appears to be continuing policies implemented or supported by former president Obama – and who should have been replaced two years ago.] While Newsom focuses on “managing up” to impact federal immigration policy in the remaining years of the Trump administration, humanitarian advocates on the ground in El Salvador say they hope he will have a positive impact on economic opportunities and human rights. [OCS: Maybe he should make a positive impact on the safety and security of America and in particular, California.] “He can influence the El Salvador government, the El Salvador legislators, to get them interested in how to reform workplace regulations, how to ratify codes that protect the rights of women,” said Montserrat Arevalo Alvarado. She’s executive director of Mujeres Transformando, an organization pushing for better working conditions for the 70,000 women who work in clothing factories, and make clothes mostly exported to the U.S. [OCS: It is not the Governor’s job to conduct foreign policy nor interfere in the activities of a foreign sovereign government while claiming to advocate for his own constituency. He is not a lobbyist.] “He can send letters, bring delegations and spotlight what is happening here,” she said. “I believe he can because our leaders go to the United States, too, and it’s important they listen to him.” Traveling with only his wife Jennifer Siebel Newsom, Assemblywoman Wendy Carrillo, some staff and reporters—as well as a security contingent from the California Highway Patrol. The governor has received a warm welcome here. [OCS: Another photo-op at the expense of over-taxed Californians and certainly a waste of environment-damaging fossil fuels. But, then again, the Governor – a silver-spoon elitist – is practicing the age-old policy of “don’t do as I do, do as I say.”] To read the entire story in context, it can be found here.

Bottom line…

Another California Governor who believes his own bullshit and thinks he should be the President of the United States. Perhaps he should find his socialist paradise abroad and run for office in Central America?

We are so screwed.

-- steve

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS ASS-BACKWARDS WHEN THE JUDICIARY EXERTS CONTROL OVER THE GOVERNMENT

In what reality should nine men and women supersede the United States Constitution and usurp the powers of the two other branches, Executive and Congressional, of government? Or possibly one person’s opinion in a close 5-4 decision? And, since when did a single federal judge have the ability to override the President’s plenary powers when it comes to issues affecting the safety and security of the United States.

Make no mistake about it; the United States is under attack from foreign nationals with allegiance to a foreign sovereign nation. Aided and abetted by the Democrat Party, it appears that a fifth column of traitors is attempting to destroy the United States from within by overloading its institutions and its economy to pay for non- or minimally-productive individuals who are flooding our nation.

So what do you make of this insanity of ruling that foreign nationals, in a foreign country, have the right to a hearing before a federal judge? In spite of the dangerous circumstances that immigration hearings are delayed for years and by then the illegal alien has disappeared somewhere in the United States and is beyond the ability of the government to locate or notify them of any pending proceedings.

Federal judge blocks Trump administration program forcing asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while awaiting court hearings The Trump administration’s ‘wait-in-Mexico’ policy for asylum seekers, explained The experimental U.S. policy requires migrants to wait in Mexico while their asylum claims are processed. (Luis Velarde/The Washington Post) A federal judge on Monday blocked an experimental Trump administration policy that requires asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their cases make their way through the U.S. immigration court system, a major blow to President Trump’s efforts to stem the surge of crossings at the southern border. [OCS: Correct me if I am wrong – but don’t those individuals seeking visas to enter the United States have to visit the U.S. embassy or consulate located in their nation to make application and have the matter administratively handled? You don’t just show up in the United States and then apply for a visa – that’s now how it works anywhere in the world.] U.S. District Judge Richard ­Seeborg in San Francisco enjoined the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) policy days after outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pledged to expand the program. The policy began in January at the San Ysidro port of entry in California but has been extended to the Calexico, Calif., entry and to the entry in El Paso, and Seeborg wrote that the approach would have been further extended if the court had not stepped in.’' [OCS: Why am I not surprised that the Judge was educated at elite Northeastern schools known for their progressivism, and is sitting in that bastion of progressive unreality known as San Francisco? An Obama appointee – naturally!] Several hundred migrants have been returned to Mexico under the program after seeking asylum at the border. The ruling — a preliminary injunction at least temporarily stopping the program — paralyzes one of the Trump administration’s last remaining tools to stem the flow of Central American families trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border, an influx that has hit decade-long highs and has infuriated the president. [OCS: “Infuriated the President?” How about imperiled the safety and security of the United States? How about the fact that the great majority of these travelers cannot be vetted and are unlikely to face government persecution in their homeland? And, how about the fact that the great majority of these individuals are not even valued at citizens in their homeland and their nation is pleased to see them leave – reducing pressures on their social support systems.] In his 27-page ruling, Seeborg said the legal question before him was not “whether the MPP is a wise, intelligent, or humane policy, or whether it is the best approach for addressing the circumstances the executive branch contends constitute a crisis.” Rather, he wrote, the program probably violates the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Administrative Procedures Act and other legal protections to ensure that immigrants “are not returned to unduly dangerous circumstances.” The American Civil Liberties Union, one of the groups that filed the lawsuit, cheered the ruling as a “very important decision” on the administration’s “unprecedented” attempt to block asylum seekers from setting foot on U.S. soil. <Source> [OCS: No surprise that it was the ACLU (aka American Communists Lawyers Union) and their cohort of immigration pimps and activists that acted to bollix up the works. More worried to protect the rights of foreign nationals than American citizens who are under attack.] Case 3:19-cv-00807-RS Document 73 Filed 04/08/19 27 Pages INNOVATION LAW LAB, et al., Plaintiffs, v. KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, et al., Defendant

Bottom line…

President Trump is doing his best to serve and protect this great nation. He is met with overwhelming hostility from the Democrats and their mainstream media propaganda arm. We simply cannot let the Democrats continue grabbing power.

We are so screwed.

-- steve