3986 The Truth About The FISA Memo | FBI/DOJ Exposed
On January 29th, 2018, the House Intelligence Committee voted to release the document detailing surveillance abuses by the FBI and DOJ, leading to outrage from the political establishment, mainstream media and the intelligence community who clearly prefer to operate in secrecy. The document - or memo - on the subject of “Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation” was sent to HSPCI Majority Members by HPSCI Majority Staff on January 18th, 2018. The document was declassified and released by order of President Donald Trump on February 2nd, 2018. Includes: Former FBI Director James Comey, Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Hillary Clinton, Sally Yates, Carter Page, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses, Rep. Adam Schiff, John Podesta, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Robert Mueller, Former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, Michael Isikoff, David Corn, Fusion GPS, Perkins Coie and the Christopher Steele dossier.Memo: https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/memo_and_white_house_letter.pdfYour support is essential to Freedomain Radio, which is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by making a one time donation or signing up for a monthly recurring donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
So the FISA memo has been released, and I just want to put things in context before we do a deep dive into its contents, which are essential for you to know just to understand how deep and wide this scandal, this horrifying abuse, actually goes.
So if we take the general narrative that is the case in democracies, in republics, that there is a battle that needs to be waged against secretive enemies, both foreign and domestic, and it's fighting terrorism and it's fighting spying and so on, and therefore these agencies need to operate in secrecy and can of course cloak what they do in the veil of protecting national security.
So they operate beyond the reach of the general public, of the mainstream media, of the alternative media, i.e.
the honest media, and as a result there is all of the secrecy that goes on.
They have to have massive powers and operate in secrecy.
The only reason that that secrecy is extended to them is if they agree to operate at the very, very highest standards and levels of integrity and conformity to very restrictive laws.
The moment that these massive agencies with incredible powers and deep secrecies begin to operate outside the law Well, a free society, a civilized society, the remnants thereof, face an existential crisis.
Because if the secrecy that is supposed to result from threats to the nation that need to be fought under cover of darkness, if that secrecy is used to cloak and enable Political corruption, then you have an extraordinarily dangerous period that needs to be dealt with very decisively by the executive branch, by the mainstream media, by the citizenry as a whole.
This is make or break time for the West as a whole because this is not happening only in America and we've only seen the tip of the iceberg of what is going on behind this cloak of secrecy.
So let's talk about the truth.
So on January 29, 2018, the House Intelligence Committee voted to release the document detailing surveillance abuses by the FBI and the Department of Justice, leading to outrage from the political establishment, mainstream media, and the intelligence community, who clearly prefer to operate in secrecy.
The FBI released a statement on January 31, 2018, and I quote, The FBI takes seriously its obligations to the FISA Court and its compliance with procedures overseen by career professionals in the Department of Justice and the FBI. We are committed to working with the appropriate oversight entities to ensure the continuing integrity of the FISA process.
With regard to the House Intelligence Committee's memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it.
As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of facts that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy.
This is an extraordinary statement.
The FBI misled and cornered General Flynn and interviewed him without a lawyer and then did not record the interview provided only notes and now are complaining that they are caught on the wrong foot.
Also, of course, since the fundamental issue in the FISA memo...
is that the FBI withheld essential information from a FISA court judge in order to gain the warrant to start wiretapping on Carter Page.
The fact that they're now complaining material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy, well...
That is exactly what the memo reveals.
So for them to complain that information is missing, when the entire point of the memo is that they withheld information from a sworn document to a FISA court judge, well, I guess projection is the word of the day.
On February 1st, 2018, House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff attempted to stop the release of the memo claiming it was, quote, not the same document, end quote, that committee members had been reviewing since mid-January.
Now, of course, nobody has revealed exactly what is incorrect about the memo's contents, but just creating this vague impression of wrongness as a whole, rather than actually making an argument or pointing out facts, It's pretty predictable. When people are caught, you know, like you grab a squid in the water, it's going to squirt out a huge amount of ink and then just attempt to escape.
So this fear, uncertainty, and doubt stuff is pretty predictable.
As is also, and this I think has gone under-commented on, everybody said that, well, everybody who had something to lose with the memo coming out, said that the release of the memo would imperil national security, that there were national security concerns.
Now the memo is out. And there are zero national security concerns in the memo.
Now, what does this mean?
This means that people cry out national security concerns to cover their own asses, to hide their own malfeasance, and to prevent the light of day shining upon the deep rabbit holes of their corruption.
So, this is a flat-out lie to the American public, claiming that the truth will endanger the American public, when, of course, the truth...
Actually endangers the people who did these unbelievable wrongs.
And of course, the memo, the FISA memo, is a hearsay document.
What that means, of course, is that it is not the actual FISA application and the supporting documents which were used to gain the capacity to wiretap on a political opponent of many of the friends in the FBI and the Department of Justice.
So I think like everybody else, let's stop with the hearsay.
Let's see the actual document because the contents have now been robustly described.
There can't be any national security concerns because Carter Page hasn't been charged with any crime.
So let's see the FISA application.
Let's pull all of this wriggling mess out into the sunlight so we can put on our hazmat suits and see what the hell has actually been going on.
According to Democrat Representative Adam Schiff, the White House has therefore been reviewing a document since Monday night that the committee never approved for public release.
While the majority's changes do not correct the profound distortions and inaccuracies in your document, they are nonetheless substantive.
And again, this is just fog, it's goo, it's flicking fingers in your eyes in the hopes that you'll blink and look away.
This is nonsense.
See... Adam Schiff is very, very concerned, you see, that documents are accurate.
But what's described in the FISA memo are massive withholdings of information that the FBI had in their pursuit of the wiretapping of a Trump advisor.
And so again, if this is your issue, Adam, I just, I don't know what to say.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said, Chairman Nunes' deliberately dishonest actions make him unfit to serve as chairman, and he must be immediately removed from this position.
I guess she's completely fine with, I guess, brain cancer.
McCain working away at his objectives, and man, you see Nancy Pelosi in an interview these days.
It's like watching a It's like watching a hippocampus get hit by a taser watching her attempt to formulate responses.
But yeah, guy who's coming up.
It's so funny, too, because the guy who's coming up with Democrat malfeasance and FBI malfeasance in support of Democrats and DOJ malfeasance in support of Democrats, well, he has to be removed from his position because he's getting close to the truth about criminal actions.
But of course, all the Democrats said that Trump, well, Trump fired Comey because Comey was getting close to, you understand, it's all, they are a wriggling bunch of squids.
Intelligence Committee spokesman Jack Langer said, in its increasingly strange attempt to thwart publication of the memo, the committee minority is now complaining about minor edits to the memo, including grammatical fixes and two edits requested by the FBI and by the minority themselves.
The vote to release the memo was absolutely procedurally sound and in accordance with House and committee rules.
To suggest otherwise is a bizarre distraction from the abuses detailed in the memo, which the public hopefully soon will be able to read for themselves.
So... The FBI is complaining about the memo, even though there were two edits requested by the FBI and by the minority themselves.
So the FBI and the minority both complaining that the memo is incomplete or missing essential information and not the same document that they reviewed.
Although, of course, part of the reason why it's not the same document they reviewed is because they had a chance to make edits to it.
I mean, that's absolutely...
I don't even know what to say.
If I have a book, hire an editor, and the book editor and I talk about edits, and I make edits to the book, and then the book gets published, and there's errors in it or whatever, or I think there are errors in it, do I then get to scream, well, that's not the book that I wrote!
You worked with an editor. So...
The following document on the subject of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation was sent to House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Majority Members by HSPCI majority staff on January 18, 2018, voted on to be released on January 29, 2018 and declassified by order of President Donald Trump on February 2, 2018.
Now, there are a lot of articles Which talk about alleged abuses.
Now here you can see the subject of the document is Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuses.
Not alleged abuses.
And so this is how you know partisan hacks when you see them.
Now before this document, sure.
But now this document is not saying alleged abuses.
It is saying abuses.
And those who are continuing to say alleged abuses...
We're not even allegedly abusing the truth.
The memo says, This memorandum provides members an update on significant facts relating to the committee's ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice, DOJ, and Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, during the 2016 presidential election cycle.
Our findings, which are detailed below, one, raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, FISC, and two, represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect American people from abuses related to the FISA process.
So, to provide perspective on this FISA court approval process, it was reported in 2013 that in over 33 years, The FISA court granted 33,942 warrants with only 12 denials of rejection rate of only 0.03%.
So, given that the FISA court pretty much rubber-stamps everything that comes across its desk, here we have, I think, the first clear and open example of an abusive process with regards to the FISA court.
So... This opens a whole can of worms, of course.
How has the FBI and the DOJ handled FISA court applications in the past?
If this is an instance of corruption, a very high-stakes game, what about people who were spied upon?
What about people where there were FISA court applications where there isn't this level of public scrutiny?
Has there been any malfeasance, falsification, withholding of exculpatory information from the FBI and the DOJ with FISA court applications in the past?
And this, of course, the FISA court, one of the rejections, these 12 denials in 33 years, one of them was President Obama's administration, had its first request to wiretap President Trump, signed off by Attorney General Lynch.
And the FISA court turned them down.
And then they went back to the FISA court in September 2016 with this bogus Russian dossier attached to their request.
And this was supposed to give additional support to this request.
So they went to want to wiretap political enemies.
FISA court said no in one of its rare no's.
And then they used this bogus Russian dossier without telling the court the source of the dossier in order to get the right to wiretap into the Trump campaign.
Astonishing, astonishing and horrifying stuff.
To be protected from unlawful surveillance by your own government is foundational.
Foundational. The blow that this has done to America's sense of security and safety with regards to their own government can scarcely be overestimated.
On July 26, 2016, brief tenured Trump advisor Carter Page was contacted by the Wall Street Journal related to allegations found in the Steele dossier.
The document, the Steele dossier, which was a bunch of paid-for nonsense that he put together.
He's a massive Trump hater and was paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign, by the DNC, and by the FBI. And he just put a bunch of junk together and it began to spread around.
So the document was circulating throughout both intelligence and media circles with rumors and unfounded allegations working their way into mainstream publications and news airwaves.
According to New York Times reports, CIA Director John Brennan briefed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on August 25, 2016, and alleged that, and I quote, unnamed advisers to Mr.
Trump might be working with the Russians to interfere in the election.
On September 23, 2016, Yahoo News said, I guess soon to be renamed Carter Page News as a result of a lawsuit.
Yahoo News published an article titled, quote, U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump advisor and Kremlin, focusing on the dossier's allegations about Carter Page.
Page steadfastly denied the allegations and is currently suing Yahoo News and other outlets for defamation.
So, in the memo, just released, it says, on October 21st, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order, not under Title VII, authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a U.S. citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign.
Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the director or deputy director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General DAG, or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division.
So this is a big deal.
Now, remember, remember, remember, the 5th of November, and also remember that who is in charge of the DOJ and the FBI? Where does the buck actually stop?
Well, the DOJ and the FBI at the time both reported to President Barack Obama.
And the idea that something this important that requires Director or Deputy Director of the FBI sign-off, that requires the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, that the idea that any of this Any of these actions would be performed.
Such a high-risk, high-stakes game as wiretapping somebody involved with your opponent's presidential campaign, the opposing party.
The idea that any of this would occur with Barack Obama having absolutely no knowledge of it whatsoever is inconceivable.
In any rational universe.
And this is one of the fundamental aspects of all of this.
They are protecting Hillary Clinton, although the Clintons are pretty good at protecting themselves.
But this is all going to lead to the top desk.
This is all going to lead to the top floor.
This is all going to lead to Barack Obama.
At which course, of course, it'll be called a racist witch hunt because identity politics of white diversity won't work.
So, this is...
Now, this is important too.
FISA probable cause order, not under Title VII. So, what this means is that the DOJ and the FBI were telling the FISA court that they had clear evidence that Carter Page, a U.S. citizen, was working as an agent of a foreign government.
He wasn't in contact with an agent of the foreign government.
He was, in fact, a direct agent of the foreign government.
Now that's astonishing. And so it wasn't like, well, he might be in contact with Vladimir Borovsky head or whatever, and so we need to be in contact with him to see what he said.
No, he was the target.
He wasn't swept up in a larger thing.
He wasn't talking to the target.
He was the target.
Now, that's astonishing because, of course, if you have direct evidence, enough to get a FISA warrant, if you have direct evidence and it doesn't lead to any kind of criminal charges, and no criminal charges, of course, have been filed, Against Carter Page.
That is really quite astonishing.
But the way it works, of course, is that they, I think, they wanted to target the Trump campaign.
Of course. I mean, to wiretap your political opponents.
See, this also tells you how uncontrollable Trump was, which is a good thing.
I mean, how out-of-the-box Trump was.
It seems to me unlikely that if someone like Marco Rubio had gotten the nomination, that they would be surveilling him because he's a known quantity.
He's a known entity. He's part of the swamp.
He's part of the whole... You know, bichromatic rainbow of left-right politics, the two-party, uniparty system in America.
Because Donald Trump was coming in from the outside, because he wasn't dependent on special interest groups, and because he'd spent, he'd had advisors spend a long time listening to the American public because he was challenging questions of immigration and demographics, and because he was such an unknown quantity, they needed to find out what the hell was going on.
I mean, if Jeb Bush had managed to slouch his way to the top debate podium against Hillary Clinton, he's a known quantity.
They know what's going on. They know his donors.
They know his wife. They know his position on immigration, that it's an act of love.
So no biggie. But Trump, they needed to find out information.
And of course, if you are corrupt, your basic assumption is that everyone else is corrupt.
Of course, right? We see the world in general not as the world is, but as we are.
And so if you're corrupt, you're going to assume that Donald Trump is corrupt.
And therefore you're going to try and get wiretaps on him or on his advisors to try and find out where this corruption is so that you can blow him up with it.
This is, again, fundamental projection.
So Carter Page, hey, been to Russia.
Went to Russia in July of that year.
And so it's like, oh, he went to Russia.
Okay, so he's a spy.
So let's start with this wiretapping.
So the memo continues.
The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC.
As required by statute 50 U.S.C. 1805 D.1, a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days, and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause.
Then Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one.
Then, Deputy Attorney General, DAG Sally Yates, then Acting DAG Dana Bente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ. All right.
So, as we move forward, this is essential to understand.
James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates, Dana Bente, Rod Rosenstein, all signed these FISA applications.
Did they know?
That Steele's Russian dossier, which formed the basis for the probable cause argument in the FISA documents, did they know that that was paid for by Hillary Clinton, by the DNC, by the FBI? Did they know that it was unverified?
Of course they did.
Of course. I mean, we've got James Comey openly saying it later to Trump that the contents of this dossier are salacious and unverified, which is why they didn't include the source.
Of the source. They didn't say to the FISA court judge, this information is unverified, opposition research paid for by Hillary Clinton to the DNC, and so on.
Of course. So if they knew that the contents of the Steele memo were, as Comey said, salacious and unverified, but they used that information to get a FISA court warrant to spy on an American citizen involved in In a U.S. presidential campaign.
Oh, man.
Fork in the road. One-way civilization, the other way, full-on banana republic tyranny.
I'm spending time on this.
It is so important, and you need to learn this stuff, and you need to spread it far and wide.
Don't care if you link people to this.
Just learn this stuff and talk about it.
Don't back down. On January 29th, 2018, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCain stepped down or was removed from his position as members of the House Intelligence Committee debated whether to release a document detailing surveillance abuses by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice.
I guess it should be called Ministry of Justice or Minjust.
Actually, Minjust would be a minimum of justice.
It's not even enough. It's really an opposite of justice.
So McCabe, who headed up the Hillary Clinton private server email investigation, is or was only weeks away from being eligible for his government pension.
And it openly discussed retiring in March upon reaching eligibility after 20 years of service.
See, you can just retire with 20 years.
It's not working there when you're 30, you're retiring at 50.
Hey, how many of you out there in the private sector are able to retire at 50?
Oh, but there's more.
Despite no longer holding his position, McCabe remains on something called terminal leave, which allows him to still be employed with the FBI and eventually collect an estimated $2.
Million dollars in pension benefits.
And they say crime doesn't pay.
It's like the old thing.
If you want to rob people badly, rob a bank.
If you want to rob people well, own a central bank.
Wow. Two million.
See, originally I think it was going to be 2.1 million, but then people said, man, that's totally vampiric and absolutely unsustainable logically.
Two million. That's a sweet spot.
Former Attorney General Eric Holder.
Ah, yes. The Eric Holder who lied under oath about the Fast and Furious program and was never prosecuted because privilege.
Eric Holder said, "FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is and has been a dedicated public servant who has served this country well.
Bogus attacks on the FBI and DOJ to distract attention from a legitimate criminal inquiry does long-term unnecessary damage to these foundations of our government." Very, very important to not do long-term unnecessary damage to the foundations of the government, say, by falsifying a FISA application to spy on political enemies.
See, that would be just terrible.
Now, McCabe.
What can we say? Well, he's got more than a few fingers in the swamp.
As a brand new political candidate, McCabe's wife received up to $675,000 in political donations from a Democrat political action committee, which was run by Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe.
McAuliffe is a longtime close associate of, bing, bing, bing, Bill and Hillary Clinton.
They are like the thorax of the spider in this web.
And one-time chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
The connection is so troubling, members of the Congressional Oversight Committee previously asked McCabe to supply documents detailing his wife's financial dealings with her campaign.
Then Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz said, It seems like an obscene amount of money for a losing race.
There are outstanding questions regarding a possible conflict of interest into this case.
They ask questions, they get documents, and trees die for no reason.
On January 30th, 2017, President Donald Trump fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates after she refused to defend his executive order to restrict immigration from several high-risk countries.
Now, the president has control over immigration.
That's right there, right there in the core of U.S. law.
Former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates said...
My responsibility is to ensure that the position of the Department of Justice is not only legally defensible, but is informed by our best view of what the law is after consideration of all the facts.
I'm sorry I shouldn't laugh, it's not funny.
Not only legal defensible, but, you know, how we view the law.
What we think the law probably says in ancient Aramaic.
Or my feels. Or the corns on my toes.
She goes on to say, In addition, I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution's solemn obligation to always seek justice and to stand for what is right.
See, that's not...
That's not how the law works.
And this may be why she's not in charge of it anymore.
See, she says at the beginning, responsibility to ensure a position of the DOJ is not only legally defensible, but, you know what they say, but, I love you, but, I agree with you, but, everything they say before but doesn't mean anything, so just throw it out.
Not only legally defensible, but has all of this agenda to it as well.
Now see, legally defensible, that's the job.
There's the law. If it's legally defendable or legally defensible, that's the law.
That's just kind of how it works.
But she wants all this other stuff.
Always seek justice and stand for what is right.
It's like, well, isn't that what legally defensible is?
And if it's not, shouldn't you work to fix the law so that they conform with justice and what is right?
No, no, see, there's legally defensible.
Then there's a whole other platonic realm called justice and standing for what is right, which means I get to inject leftist feels into objective law.
She also said, at present I am not convinced that the defense of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities, nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful.
See, again, the point of having an objective legal system is not to convince Sally.
The question is, is it lawful?
Does it conform to the law or not?
Are you convinced of it?
It's not what you said, President Trump.
It's how you said it.
Well, it's a good thing that I guess some people are fighting to break stereotypes about women and emotion, and some people, not so much.
While testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 8, 2017, Sally Yates made a legally indefensible claim regarding her motivation in refusing to defend the executive action.
She said, it was appropriate for us to look at the intent behind...
The president's actions.
Forehead. Fins.
Slap. It's important to look at what...
It's important to read the mind of the president and try and figure out what his thoughts and feelings were about what he did rather than actually compare his proposal to the law.
The fascism feels...
Prosecutor Andrew Weissman, who is now a deputy for special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe, privately praised Yates' actions via email after she was fired.
I'm so proud and in awe.
Thank you so much. All my deepest respects.
Yeah, it's a...
As the wise man said, it's a big club.
And you ain't in it. Neither am I. Thank heavens.
On March 20, 2017, then-FBI Director James Comey provided sworn testimony before the House Permanent Selection Committee on Intelligence regarding President Trump's wiretapping tweets.
He said, With respect to the President's tweets about alleged wiretapping directed at him by the prior administration, I have no information that supports those tweets, and we have looked carefully inside the FBI. The Department of Justice has asked me to share with you that the answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components.
The Department has no information that supports those tweets.
Dear God above man, God above man, you signed the FISA application, bro!
Did your hand just mysteriously detach itself and pink spider-like go off and do stuff against your will?
Oh, I've got a good idea.
If you want to look carefully inside the FBI, James Comey, might I suggest the bathroom mirror to find a place where this wiretapping activity may have originated?
Ah... DOJ. No idea.
No idea. You have no information that supports those tweets.
Sworn testimony.
Lying under oath.
About very important corruption.
It's now or never.
All right. Due to Attorney General Jeff Sessions' recusal.
I could do a whole other rant on that.
Deputy Attorney General Rob Rosenstein was able to appoint special counsel Robert Mueller to investigate ties between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election.
See, Jeff...
Good stuff on immigration, but just wanted to point out, this is just a general shout-out to people not on the left.
Are you ready? This is all you need to know.
These are the five words that can save the world.
Are you ready? Stop losing by the rules!
Well, you see, it's very important for me to recuse myself because there's a potential conflict of interest.
Ha, ha, ha. Think the left does that?
Look at all the conflicts of interest.
If you don't have a conflict of interest, there's no point being on the left.
That's why you go to the left, because you have a conflict of interest.
And you know you can get away with it.
Stop losing by the rules!
I'm not going to hit below the belt because that's not Queensbury rules.
They're calling airstrikes on your dog.
And well, I got it.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on May 18th, 2017.
My decision is not a finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted.
I've made no such determination.
What I have determined is that based upon the unique circumstances, the public interest requires me to place this investigation under the authority of a person who exercises a degree of independence from the normal chain of command.
So given that Rod Rosenstein signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of the DOJ related to surveillance on the Trump campaign, will he now recuse himself from any involvement or investigation into this FISA court scandal?
Jeff Protip probably won't.
I think the Democrat memo is just inquiries into countries without extradition treaties.
The memo continues.
Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence activity, FISA submissions, including renewals, before the FISC are classified.
As such, the public's confidence in the integrity of the FISA process depends on the court's ability to hold the government to the highest standard, particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens.
So it's just a little sidebar here.
This is from the lawyer Robert Barnes.
He said it's important to remember that FISA courts are not like other courts.
There needs to be specific evidence of a particular national security threat to circumvent regular federal courts.
It is a higher standard because its jurisdiction is limited.
That is why Congress imposed special restrictions.
On access to FISA courts and use of FISA evidence.
To access FISA courts, only the highest-ranking FBI officials must vet and approve.
A high-ranking DOJ official must authorize, and they must re-vet and re-approve every 90 days.
To spy on Americans through a FISA court, the FBI must show the target is, end quote, agent of a foreign power, end quote, not merely in contact with a foreign power.
The law makes it difficult to show someone is an agent of a foreign power to make sure it is not misused to spy on Americans.
The law does not allow the FBI to call an American an agent of a foreign power unless they can show the person knowingly engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities for or on behalf of a foreign power, and the nature of their activity is criminalized.
Claiming someone is an agent of a foreign power is a difficult standard to ever show and should never happen to a domestic political opponent in a domestic political campaign.
That is why the FBI had to cook the books, put a bogus informant on their team, and lie to the courts.
Specific laws violated by co-conspirators and falsified affidavits include perjury laws and FISA laws.
FISA imposes criminal liability on agents and DOJ attorneys who violate its provisions.
Agent of a foreign power means spying on behalf of a foreign power in a manner that violates the criminal laws of the United States.
Needless to say, talking to the Ruskies in 2016 doesn't fit.
Again, that's from Robert Barnes.
The memo continues. However, the rigor in protecting the rights of Americans, which is reinforced by 90-day renewals of surveillance orders, is necessarily dependent on the government's production to the court of all material and relevant facts.
This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known by the government.
Now, with regard to the FISA application for Carter Page, the fact...
That the document was bullshit oppo research that was paid for and not verified would be favorable to Carter Page in terms of the credibility of him being a Russian spy.
In the case, the memo goes on, in the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts.
However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.
Now, this is important. Omitting stuff in courts is fairly important.
Let's say you have an airtight alibi, but that information is omitted.
Hmm, seems relevant.
Momo continues.
One, the dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, Steele dossier, on behalf of the Democratic National Committee, DNC, and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application.
Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS to obtain derogatory information on Trump's ties to Russia.
Many people are inaccurately claiming that the Washington Free Beacon and anti-Trump billionaire Republican donor Paul Singer paid Christopher Steele for research.
In October 2015, the Washington Free Beacon hired Fusion GPS to investigate several Republican presidential candidates, including the eventual nominee, Donald Trump.
See, because people can't evaluate arguments, they just have to ad hominem.
It's tragic and sad. We're all trying to fix that, at least those of us who are talking about philosophy.
The contractual relationship between the Washington Free Beacon, funded by Singer, and Fusion GPS ended in May 2016, and Steele was not hired by Fusion GPS until June 2016.
Just want to clear this up.
Christopher Steele made what's called a statement of truth, I think, after which his head exploded scanner style.
He said, Yeah, wouldn't it be terrible to try and influence the U.S. presidential election process based on ties to Russia?
You want to know what the Democrats are doing?
Just look at what they're accusing.
It's really just a one-to-one photocopy.
Federal Election Commission disclosures revealed that the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid the Perkins Coie law firm a total of $257,000 for legal services in April 2016 alone.
While it is unclear what funds will later transfer to Fusion GPS, the financial transfers to Perkins Coie continued through the campaign, totaling approximately $12 million for legal services.
Interestingly, Obama for America, OFA, also paid over $972,000 to Perkins Coie since April 2016.
And of course, one of the reasons why you want to run all of this stuff through a law firm is so you get attorney-client privilege.
It's why Comey, who handed classified information to a friend of his, later hired that friend to be his attorney, and also why Uma Aberdeen and Anthony Weiner remain married.
Well, I think we understand.
You can't testify against your spouse.
Or maybe he's just that attractive now.
Memo continues, A, neither the initial application in October 2016 nor any of the renewals disclose or reference the role of the DNC-Clinton campaign or any party-slash-campaign in funding Steele's efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.
They did not tell the FISA court that it was oppo research which they clearly knew.
In order to get the wiretapping authorization.
The memo continues.
B, the initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by U.S. law firm, Perkins Coie, representing the DNC, even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier.
In a surprising irony, Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson co-authored a 1996 book entitled Dirty Little Secrets, The Persistence of Corruption in American Politics.
I think he was opposed to it, not so much a how-to manual, wherein he fiercely criticized the activities his company would later adopt.
And he wrote, or co-wrote, Horrifying.
The memo says, The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of and paid by the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.
So this memo does confirm that the FBI did indeed authorize payments to Steele for information, which was collected as part of this paid ARPO research for Hillary Clinton and the DNC. The FBI authorized payments to steal for this information.
Let's remember this when we go over James Comey's prior testimony.
Clinton supporter and former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morrill on March 15, 2017.
And I quote, Unless you know the sources, and unless you know how a particular source acquired a particular piece of information, you can't judge the information.
You just can't.
I had two questions when I first read it.
This is a steel dossier.
One was, how did Chris talk to these sources?
I have subsequently learned that he used intermediaries.
And then I asked myself, why did these guys provide this information?
What was their motivation? And I subsequently learned that he paid them.
That the intermediaries paid the sources and the intermediaries got the money from Chris.
And that kind of worries me a little bit because if you're paying somebody, particularly former SFB officers, they're going to tell you truth and innuendo and rumor and they're going to call you up and say, hey, let's have another meeting.
I have more information for you because they want to get paid some more.
So this is the source of the information used by the FBI. To spy on political enemies of their friends.
You understand? An ex-British spy talks to people who talk to people in Russia and he pays them.
That's it! That is a standard of proof used to spy on an American citizen involved in a U.S. presidential campaign.
Can they just call up some ex-wife or ex-girlfriend of yours, get dirt on you, and We have proof!
On May 3rd, 2017, James Comey testified in front of the Senate Judiciary hearing and refused to answer any questions related to former British Intelligence Officer Christopher Steele.
Given what we now know, Comey's testimony takes on a new context.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley asked, On March 6th, I wrote to you asking about the FBI's relationship with the author of the Trump-Russia dossier, Christopher Steele.
Most of these questions have not been answered, so I'm going to ask them now.
Prior to the Bureau launching the investigation of alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, did anyone from the FBI have interactions with Mr. Steele regarding the issue?
James Comey, that's not a question that I can answer in this forum.
As you know, I briefed you privately on this, and if there's more that's necessary, then I'd be happy to do it privately.
Thank you.
Chuck Grassley then asked, Have you ever represented to a judge that the FBI had interactions with Mr.
Steele, whether by name or not, regarding alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia prior to the Bureau launching its investigation of the matter?
James Comey, I have to give you the same answer, Mr.
Chairman. Bet you do.
Chuck Grassley then asked, This one I'm going to expect an answer on.
Do FBI policies, just the policies allowed, to pay an outside investigator for work, another source, is also allowed, sorry, is also paying for him as well?
Want me to repeat it?
Yes, actually I had to do, sorry.
He goes on to say, do FBI policies allow it to pay an outside investigator for work that another source is also paying that investigator for?
James Comey. I don't know for sure as I sit here, possibly is my answer, but I'll get you a precise answer.
See, here we go. See, he already knew the FBI had paid for the Steele dossier.
He already knew that the Steele dossier had also been paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC because he signed the document.
So if you actually have certain knowledge of something, well, he knew that it had been paid as far as the policies go.
Chuck Grassley then says, OK. Did the FBI provide any payments whatsoever to Mr.
Steele related to the investigation of Trump associates?
James Comey. I'm back to my first...
I can't answer this forum.
Senator Chuck Grassley.
Was the FBI aware?
Was the FBI aware that Mr.
Steele reportedly paid his sources, who in turn paid their subsources, to make the claim in the dossier?
James Comey, same answer, sir.
My God, it must be astonishingly powerful to have an absolute immunity shield for law.
And it's not so much that the left is corrupt, it's just that corrupt people are drawn to the left because they get the protection of the media and academia and Hollywood and just about everyone else.
Chuck Grassley then goes on.
Here's one you ought to be able to answer.
Is it vital to know whether or not sources have been paid in order to evaluate their credibility?
And if they have been paid, doesn't that information need to be disclosed if you're relying on that information in seeking approval for investigative authority?
You understand, right?
You need to tell the judge that you've paid the informant for information because then there's less verification opportunities, most likely.
You know, I... I paid for the prostitute, but she totally loves me.
And there's your gift. James Comey.
I think in general, yes, I think it is vital to know.
The FBI and the Justice Department have provided me material, inconsistent answers in closed setting about its reported relationship with Mr.
Steele. Will you commit to fully answering the questions from my March 6th and April 28th letter and providing all requested documents so that we can resolve those inconsistencies, even if in a closed session, being necessary?
James Comey. Because as I sit here, I don't know all the questions that are in the letters.
I don't want to answer that specifically.
But I commit to you to giving you all the information you need to address just that challenge.
Because I don't believe there's any inconsistency.
I think there's a misunderstanding.
But in a classified setting, oh, I'll give you what you need.
See? Out of sight.
Out of sight. Gotta be cloaked in darkness.
Gotta ride the sewers.
Gotta run the night shift.
Why? National security?
Job security.
The memo continues.
Two, the Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23rd, 2016 Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page's July 2016 trip to Moscow.
This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News.
So you understand, there's circular reporting, right?
So the FBI says, well, it's not just the Steele dossier, it's also verified by the publication in Yahoo News.
But if Steele was the source for both the dossier and the Yahoo News article, me and my hand puppet both say we're innocent, Your Honor.
You shouldn't laugh. It's so tragic.
It's heartbreaking.
You laugh or you cry.
The memo goes on to say, The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News.
Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News and several other outlets in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Pokinskui was aware of Steele's initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington, D.C. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed.
So... Good job, Yahoo News!
Way to be skeptical! But this is how things work.
You get a bunch of bullshit allegations.
They're leaked to the news outlets who are happy to serve salacious crap gossip that serves the left.
And then everyone says, well, it wasn't just, look at all these different places.
Look at all these different places that have all of these reports.
Got to be something to it.
Except they're all, you know, you got the hoes and You put your finger on the edge of the hose, it goes spraying everywhere, the water.
Oh, there's lots of water in the air, it must be raining.
No, it's all coming from the same source.
It's like looking through a gem at your money and thinking you're rich.
Look, there's lots of dollar bills there!
The memo continues. A. Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations, an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI, in an October 30, 2016 Mother Jones article by David Korn.
Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts with Yahoo and other outlets in September, before the page application was submitted to the FISC in October.
But Steele improperly concealed from and lied to the FBI about those contacts.
So this may not be the most trustworthy guy in the known universe.
The most serious of violations and unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI. So this guy is not trustworthy at all.
But don't worry. The money he paid to parties thrice removed for salacious crap that's completely unverifiable.
Oh, that's money in the bank, baby.
That's gold. Solid gold.
The memo continues.
B. Steele's numerous encounters with the media violated the cardinal rule of source handling, maintaining confidentiality, and demonstrated that Steele had become a less than reliable source for the FBI. B. Three, before and after Steele was terminated as a source,
he maintained contact with the DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Orr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein.
Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Orr, documenting his communications with Steele.
For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Orr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he, quote, This clear evidence of Steele's bias was recorded by Orr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files, but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.
He's being paid. He's paying people information about a political candidate he hates and loathes.
But you see, it's really, really important that Jeff Sessions recuse himself for any potential conflict of interest.
The memo continues, A, during this same time period, Orr's wife was employed by Fusion GPS. I need a crash helmet for this data.
All right, we continue. A. During this same time period, Orr's wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump.
Orr later provided the FBI with all of his wife's opposition research paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Orr's relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC. It's inexplicable.
You can't explain it.
Absolutely inexplicable.
Stop being so nice!
Isn't Trump teaching you how to win?
Can you do that at all?
At all? Stakes are pretty goddamn high.
You know that, right? Stop winning!
You know how. They've showed you how for the last 60 years.
You understand? On September 18, 2017, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was interviewed by the Senate Intelligence Committee and reported that he was unaware of who paid for the infamous dossier.
See, they spent millions of dollars, well, 160k if I remember large, and millions of dollars ended up flowing to various places, but he was completely unaware.
He's in charge, you see. I guess it just wasn't paying for hideous soul-destroying paintings.
Acting as John Podesta's attorney for the meeting with the Senate Intelligence Committee was lawyer Mark Elias, who acted as the go-between for the Clinton campaign slash DNC and Fusion GPS. Former CIA director Leon Panetta.
Well... It certainly makes the situation very awkward.
If you're testifying and saying you have no knowledge, and the attorney sitting next to you is one of those that knew what was involved here, I think it does raise an issue that the committee is going to have to look at and determine just exactly who knew what.
Spoiler! Don't think it's going to happen.
Former DNC chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was also interviewed by the Senate Intelligence Committee and, unsurprisingly, also denied knowledge of who funded the dossier.
Despite her campaign providing millions of dollars in funding for its production, Hillary Clinton later claimed to be unaware of the dossier until it was published by BuzzFeed.
Maybe she put her knowledge of her dossier in one of the phones she smashed with a hammer or one of the servers she data wiped clean.
I don't know. Hard to say.
These people who know nothing about their own campaigns really, really want to run the entire country.
The memo continues. Four.
According to the head of the counterintelligence division, assistant director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its, quote, infancy at the time of the initial Page FISA application.
Well, I guess there's a lot of shit in infancy, too, so I guess that word works infancy.
It's in its infancy. Wow.
I'm sorry. It's in its infancy.
It's false! Just say it.
Well, it could be true.
Trump could be a reptilian overlord in a human flesh suit.
So could I, for that matter.
Could be. Maybe he didn't get choked to death.
Maybe all the air through Brownian motion ended up just on the top half of the room.
It was a tall room. It was a vacuum down.
Could have happened. Can't disprove it.
Maybe they all went back. Could have happened.
Probable cause seems kind of important.
Probable. All right. Sorry.
Let's go back to you. The memo continues.
After Seal was terminated, a source...
Validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assess Steele's reporting is only minimally corroborated.
Yet in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was, according to his June 2017 testimony, salacious and unverified.
James Comey. The IC leadership thought it important, for a variety of reasons, to alert the incoming president to the existence of this material, even though it was salacious and unverified.
See, salacious and unverified, but I'm still totally signing it off, as this information being the basis for a wiretapping warrant against political enemies.
On January 27, 2017, FBI Director James Comey Attended a dinner where President Trump reportedly pondered asking the FBI to investigate the origin of the dossier, which Comey already knew.
He knew where the dossier had come from.
Paid for it. Partially.
But Comey pushed back. And he says...
During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6th, and as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them.
He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn't happen.
I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren't, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative.
Yeah, nice reputation you got there, Mr.
President. Be real shame if something happened to it.
So he knew. He knew.
Comey knew where the document had come from.
Of course he didn't want...
Of course he shouldn't laugh.
Of course he didn't want Trump ordering an investigation into where these allegations had come from.
It leads directly to FBI payroll.
Hmm. Tough to find.
Tough to find. Can't look at any check stubs, of course.
That would be crazy. Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, you know, it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally.
Yeah, because that narrative would never, ever be pushed by the left-wing media.
You could never worry about that.
It's all about the facts, baby.
The memo continues.
While the FISA application relied on Steele's past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations.
Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the Fisk without the Steele dossier information.
Boy, all this testimony.
It'd be wild if, I don't know, anything happened from it.
Anything? Anything at all?
Words, words, words, as Shakespeare said.
No surveillance warrant would have been sought from the Fisk without the Steele dossier information.
That's why there was a Steele dossier.
To pretend to the Fisk court that there was actual reason to believe that Carter Page was a Russian spy.
McCabe's statement has been confirmed by multiple other sources and was reportedly recorded, yet is disputed by...
Democrat Representative Adam Schiff.
Whoa! There's no hand in front of my face?
I will reality away.
I am a solipsism of echo-chamber leftist narcissism.
Memo continues.
Five. The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos.
But there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos.
Could be! They could be the same person with artfully constructed mirrors and instant plastic surgery provided by space aliens.
Could be! Could be.
Are you going to deny that that's even a possibility?
Aha! This is where we are.
Now don't forget that on February 13th, 2017, General Michael Flynn resigned as President Donald Trump's National Security Advisor due to allegedly misleading Vice President Mike Pence related to communications...
With Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak.
Flynn's conversation as a private citizen with Kislyak was surveilled and he was eventually unmasked, leading to the increased focus on the conversation.
Now, if this surveillance was obtained illegally, what happens to that evidence?
What happens to that prosecution?
You don't have to be Alan Drushiewicz to figure that one out.
Flashback. Woo!
Time flip. New York Times, May 16, 2017.
President Trump asked the FBI Director James B. Comey to shut down the federal investigation into Mr.
Trump's former National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn in an Oval Office meeting in February, according to a memo Mr.
Comey wrote shortly after the meeting.
Credibility is so important when it comes to unverified stuff and allegations.
Credibility is really important.
I ask you to imagine what kind of interstellar plunger would need to go into the core of this planet to be able to bury, say, Comey's credibility at the level it deserves.
It's deep, that's what I'm saying.
Can any reasonable person claim that James Comey is a reliable source of information right now?
See, I wrote it down, just like I wrote my signature on the FISA court application.
Former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort is also known to have been surveilled when he was routinely speaking with then-candidate Donald Trump.
Were those permissions also obtained by omitting key information about the source of various allegations?
Here's the thing, too.
FBI interviews. Not recorded in general.
They are written about later by the FBI agents who interview the subject.
They write a whole bunch of stuff down.
If the FBI has been found to be falsifying information on FISA court warrants, can we take one thing that is written by FBI agents as true now?
Reputation? Kind of important.
Kind of important. If they lied, if they lied on documents to surveil political enemies, can we trust any of the reports the FBI agents have written?
The memo continues. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Peter Strock.
Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel's Office to FBI Human Resources for improper tax messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page, no known relation to Carter Page, where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and invasion of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated.
The Strzok-Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an, quote, insurance, end quote, policy...
Against President Trump's election.
And you can scroll through these texts with each other, but yeah, you're my mistress and we're discussing things improperly and talking about leaking stuff to the media and insurance policies against Trump's possible win, but we're totally trustworthy and absolutely able to objectively investigate Hillary Rodham Clinton.
What a shitshow. Carter Page on February 2nd, 2018 The brave and assiduous oversight by congressional leaders in discovering this unprecedented abuse of process represents a giant historic leap in the repair of America's democracy.
Now that a few of the misdeeds against the Trump movement have been partially revealed, I look forward to updating my pending legal action in opposition to DOJ this weekend in preparation for Monday's next small step on the long potholed road toward helping to restore law and order in our great country.
President Donald Trump on February 2nd, 2018.
I think it's terrible.
I think it's a disgrace what's going on in this country.
I think it's a disgrace.
The memo was sent to Congress.
It was declassified. Congress will do whatever they're going to do.
But I think it's a disgrace what's happening in our country.
A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves and much worse than that.
Let's see what happens.
But a lot of people should be ashamed.
True words, except for the fact that not everyone has the capacity to feel shame, Mr.
President. That's kind of the problem.
The conscience. Empathy.
Empathy. Basic moral sensitivity.
It's a big, it relies on 13 interconnected aspects of the brain that have to be developed specifically through infancy and toddlerhood.
Without that, you're missing empathy like you're missing an arm, except you can get a prosthetic for an arm.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
Congress had made inquiries concerning an issue of great importance for the country and concerns have been raised about the department's performance.
I have great confidence in the men and women of this department, but no department is perfect.
Accordingly, I will forward to appropriate DOJ components all information I receive from Congress regarding this.
I am determined that we will fully and fairly ascertain the truth.
We work for the American people and are accountable to them and those they have elected.
We will meet that responsibility.
Yeah. Yeah, see...
This is where the real energy and focus of your department needs to be.
This rotten corruption within the most secretive and powerful agencies in the United States.
The misleading of judges, the spying on political opponents.
This is where you need to focus your bifocals, brother!
The big threat to the republic is not the use of medical marijuana!
So... So, this is really the most vetted president in the history of the Republic.
Because all of this stuff was surveilled, was wiretapped, and they got nothing.
If they had something, they wouldn't be doing all this Russia investigation bullshit.
Which again, a year and a month and nothing.
Nothing. Nothing.
So, this is the do or die moment for the Republic for freedom.
This determines the next thousand years of human history.
Understand? You have to stop letting people get away with terrible, terrible things.
Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush, hell, George H. W. Bush, Lois Lerner, Wasserman Schultz, all of these people, these fetid, unholy, jab-of-the-hut, deep-swamp sewer dwellers, need to be held accountable.
Compared to the war in Iraq, FISA memo is pretty small potatoes, but maybe small potatoes is all that justice can digest at the moment.
This is the last chance.
It will not come again.
It will not come again.
This is a do-or-die moment.
This is clear evidence of ungodly malfeasance on the DOJ and the FBI. So it leads upstairs.
It leads to Obama.
Do it! Have an objective rule of law.
Look, we get all these ethnicities and they're all living together.
You cannot have the soft bigotry of lowered expectations.
If Obama knew about this stuff, find out and do something about it.
Doesn't matter that he's half black.
It doesn't matter any of that stuff.
There's a rule of law. And if women and minorities are exempt from the rule of law, you get civil war!
You understand? Stakes are kind of high here, guys.
Kind of high. Because when people are continually exposed to this information, this is really important to understand.
In the past, information about government malfeasance was largely kept at bay when the left was in power and the Democrats were in power by a complicit and compliant mainstream media and academia, Hollywood, you know.
This is why you have all of these movies about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church and no movies about the far more widespread sexual abuse of children in government schools.
Because the Catholic Church stands between the left and their goal of dictatorship and government schools.
Well, they fund, through union dues, they fund a lot of leftist initiatives and they brainwash children into leftist ideologies.
So people are now seeing, because of the internet, because of the alternative media, because of Trump, people are actually seeing the corruption that everybody knew was there beforehand.
And it's so funny seeing people on the left steadfastly and staunchly defending the FBI. And since the 60s, since the summer of love, oh my god, well, they'll say anything to get the power that they need.
So people are now getting all of this information.
And because they have this information, not decades from now, not in history books, but right now, which was kept from them before, now that they have all of this information, they really can see not the gap.
It's not the gap between what the government or the FBI or the DOJ say they're going to do and what they actually do.
That's not the gap. That gap's kind of being understood and known about deep down by anybody who's followed this stuff for years.
The real gap is now that this information is out, Does the vote matter?
Does the political process matter at all?
Years ago, my first big video was called The Truth About Voting.
And I conditionally changed my position on that because of the unique candidacy of Donald Trump.
There is a man and his allies, which are few, standing Against everything and everyone.
Trump's approval rating close to 50% even after the unbelievable slagging put upon him by the mainstream media.
You have a man standing against the deep state.
You have a man standing against the media democrat complex.
Of course he needs his support.
Of course he needs his allies. Of course he needs his clarifications.
People voted for him because they wished for state power to be curtailed.
And they wished for there to be borders.
Now state power is to some degree being diminished because taxes are lowered, regulations are being diminished, the prototypes of the wall are being built.
But people now need to see if their vote matters.
They need to see if the man they put into power to take on the deep state can do it or not.
Now, don't expect it to him at all.
Do not expect him to do it alone.
Politicians have to read the country.
They have to figure out what's possible in the political environment, which means you need to start shifting people's opinions in your life.
Well, it's risky. People might be upset.
Well, compared to what?
Compared to what? Look, in history when the left gets their way, they kill people.
Brothers and sisters, they kill people by the millions.
Look at when the left gets their way in the French Revolution.
Look at what they did in Ukraine, starving millions of Ukrainians for failure to comply with Soviet communist edicts.
Look what they did in communism.
Look what they did in all sorts of totalitarian movements.
The killing fields in Cambodia, North Korea started off as a communist country, now has devolved in the usual cult of dictatorship.
Look at Cuba. They're kicking in your doors at four o'clock in the morning and dragging you away to be disassembled for body parts and fed to the fishes.
People might not like you.
Compared to what? Might be risky.
Compared to what? History tells us exactly what happens when totalitarians take power.
And when people can't take it anymore, they will take to the streets.
Now we've seen a lot of groups We've seen a lot of groups riot over the years.
We've seen a lot of groups engage civil disobedience.
Been quite a while since the Patriots did it, though.
Been quite a while since the Patriots did it.
And it is, of course, my hope that things can be resolved legally and peacefully.
But that comes down to the will of the executive.
It's been quite a while since the patriots engaged their disobedience.
It's kind of how America started, if you remember.
If the law fails, it may be how this phase of America ends as well.
Thank you so much for listening and for watching.
If you find these reports helpful and informative and useful, please help us out.
