Your Forced RSVP to the Cancel Party

Posted on October 21, 2019October 21, 2019 by Denise Simon

This list is hardly a complete list but it should stimulate some critical thought when it comes to Progessives attempting to run our lives and force law and policy upon us. The Progressives equal the Democrats, the Socialists, the Liberals. The notion of civil society is fading fast.

The Fight Doesn’t End With Kavanaugh | Earthjustice

Consider the following:

The impeachment inquiry consuming Washington DC is effectively cancelling not only the vote for Trump to drain the swamp but to undo and redo past administration(s) actions.
Cancelling history, changing the education syllabus on civics, monuments and principles.
Cancelling the protections of the Bill of Rights, mostly all of them forcing government, state and federal to dispense their own versions of protections.
Democrat organizations conspiring with media to cancel real news and facts with opinion.
Cancelling and omitting law for protests, demonstrations, gang violence and shame.
Cancelling new life for late term abortions while opposing the death penalty.
Cancelling public safety and sovereignty by enabling homelessness, sanctuary cities, and legal challenges on immigration law.
Cancelling self-governance for full reliance on government(s).
Cancelling access to health treatment(s) and medicines with overwhelming costs, deductibles and policy restrictions.
Cancelling any privacy protections when it comes to banking records, healthcare records, personal habits, buying trends, education, travel and homelife.
Cancelling consequences for unlawful acts while selectively applying consequences for others, application of indictments and sentencing is subjective.
Cancelling constituent access and legislative input.

Each of these items require the reader to apply real events to prove the points. Admitting the truths is the first step to seeking solutions, importance and call to actions by voters.

In this fractured and separated landscape, hate and apathy prevail such that any notion of recovery is fleeing. We have class warfare, fake news, deep fakes, shadow operations, new definitions and promoted manufactured dangers.

We have lost confidence in enforcing law, statesmenship, leadership, trust where it has been replaced by distrust, fear, self-censorship and isolation.

Pew Research this past June published a fascinating study.

Many Americans see declining levels of trust in the country, whether it is their confidence in the federal government and elected officials or their trust of each other, a new Pew Research Center report finds. And most believe that the interplay between the trust issues in the public and the interpersonal sphere has made it harder to solve some of the country’s problems. This research is part of the Center’s ongoing focus on issues tied to trust, facts and democracy.

The first item in the study:

Three-quarters of Americans say that their fellow citizens’ trust in the federal government has been shrinking, and 64% believe that about peoples’ trust in each other.

When asked a separate question about the reasons why trust has declined in the past 20 years, people offer a host of reasons in their written answers. Those who think there has been a decline of trust in the federal government over these two decades often see the problem tied to the government’s performance: 36% of those who see the decline cite this. Some worry the government is doing too much, others say too little, and others mention the government doing the wrong things or nothing at all. Respondents also cite concerns about how money has corrupted it and how corporations control the political process. President Donald Trump and his administration are mentioned in 14% of answers, and a smaller share lays the blame on Democrats. Additionally, 10% of those who see decline lay fault at the feet of the news media.

Those who think interpersonal trust has declined in the past generation offer a laundry list of societal and political problems, including a sense that Americans on the whole have become more lazy, greedy and dishonest. Some respondents make a connection between what they think is poor government performance – especially gridlock in Washington – and the toll it has taken on their fellow citizens’ hearts. Overall, 49% of adults think interpersonal trust has been tailing off because people are less reliable than they used to be.

***

2 Nearly two-thirds (64%) say that low trust in the federal government makes it harder to solve many of the country’s problems. About four-in-ten (39%) who gave follow-up answers on why this was the case cite domestic concerns, topped by immigration and border issues, health care, racism and race-related issues, or guns and gun violence issues. Some also cite environmental issues, tax and budget matters, or political processes like voting rights and gerrymandering.

Another 70% of Americans believe that citizens’ low trust in each other makes it harder to solve problems. (They were not asked a follow-up question to explain their answer.)

3 Most think the decline in trust can be turned around. More than eight-in-ten Americans (84%) believe it is possible to improve the level of confidence people have in the government. Their written responses about how to make headway on trust problems urge a variety of political reforms, starting with more disclosure of what the government is doing, as well as term limits and restrictions on the role of money in politics. Some 15% of those who answered this question point to a need for better political leadership, including greater honesty and cooperation among those in the political class.

Read the full study here.

U.S. Attorney Durham Seized 2 Interesting Blackberries

Posted on October 18, 2019October 18, 2019 by Denise Simon

AG Barr assigned John Durham to investigate the origins of the FBI’s counter-intelligence operation known as Crossfire Hurricane. Durham is working the globe on the investigation and two key people are Joseph Mifsud and Stephan Halper. There may be others that include Alexander Downer, Azra Turk, Seems that Peter Strzok issued two Blackberries to Joseph Mifsud. Durham has those two phones in his possession. You can bet that Durham is working the channels to see who else has FBI issued phones. The FBI loves those phones.

US News on Flipboard by The Epoch Times

Mr. Mifsud, a university professor and well-traveled lecturer, told George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign adviser, in London in April 2016 that Moscow owned thousands of Hillary Clinton emails. When the news reached the FBI in July, agent Peter Strzok initiated the probe.

Ms. Sidney Power is representing General Michael Flynn as she has added to the Mifsud intrigue with her motion before District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan asking him to order the government to turn over the BlackBerrys’ data. The filing lists the two phones’ model number, PIN and SIM card information. She filed a court motion on Monday disclosing the phones’ existence while tying them to Western intelligence.

She told the judge that on Oct. 11 she asked the prosecution for phone data. She was ignored until she sent notification days later that she planned to file the discovery motion.

The motion says: “Michael T. Flynn requests the government be ordered to produce evidence that has only recently come into its possession……… This information is material, exculpatory, and relevant to the defense of Mr. Flynn, and specifically to the “OCONUS LURES” and agents that western intelligence tasked against him likely as early as 2014 to arrange—unbeknownst to him—‘connections’ with certain Russians that they would then use against him in their false claims. The phones were used by Mr. Joseph Mifsud.”

“OCONUS LURES” is an FBI acronym for an operation to lure a person back to the U.S.

Ms. Powell has been filing motions demanding the government turn over exculpatory evidence. She wants to show it was withheld early on, violating Judge Sullivan’s order.

Reacting to the BlackBerry disclosure, Mr. Papadopoulos tweeted: “I lived this spy story. The government’s of the UK, Australia, Italy sent their agents: Mifsud, Downer, Halper, Azra Turk and many more. With the new info on Mifsud’s phones with the DOJ, my story was the one that exposed the greatest spying scandal in history. Downer is next!”

Alexander Downer was the Australian ambassador in London to whom Mr. Papadopoulos relayed the Mifsud gossip. Mr. Downer denies he was a spy. Stephan Halper and Azar Turk were FBI/western intelligence spies assigned to Mr. Papadopoulos in London.

Justice Department spokesperson Kerri Kupec declined to comment on the Flynn motion.

When news broke that Mr. Durham was in Rome, she released a statement:

“As the Department of Justice has previously announced, a team led by U.S. Attorney John Durham is investigating the origins of the U.S. counterintelligence probe of the Trump 2016 presidential campaign. Mr. Durham is gathering information from numerous sources, including a number of foreign countries. At Attorney General Barr’s request, the President has contacted other countries to ask them to introduce the Attorney General and Mr. Durham to appropriate officials.” More here for full story and context.

*** One other detail from the Daily Beast due to AG Barr’s travels to Rome with John Durham was to listen to a taped deposition of Joseph Mifsud. Meanwhile:

The Italian intelligence community had Mifsud on its radar for some years before he got involved in the Trump campaign’s troubles. His affiliations with both the Link University of Rome and London Center of International Law Practice—both often affiliated with Western diplomacy and foreign intelligence agencies—made him an easy target. So did the slew of apartments he owned in Malta that are allegedly tied to a racket involving Russians buying Maltese passports for cheap.

Two New Items on Biden and Burisma

Posted on October 18, 2019October 18, 2019 by Denise Simon

Due to two recent testimonies, a few fascinating items have surfaced. Burisma was considered a money-laundering operation and in order to clean up the image of the company, they hired Hunter considering his last name would point to credibility and a boost in reputation.

George Kent, a top U.S. State Department official, told lawmakers Tuesday he warned the Obama administration that the Ukrainian company that employed then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son was corrupt.

Kent’s comments came during his deposition in the House Democrats’ impeachment probe.

Near the end of an article on his testimony, NBC News noted:

During his nearly 10 hours of testimony, Kent also told members of Congress and their staff that Burisma, the energy company where Hunter Biden was a board member, was corrupt, according to a separate person who was present in the room. Kent said he told the Obama administration in 2016 that they should not hold an event with Burisma because of the company’s extensive corruption in Ukraine. More here.

Then…

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent testified that he worried Ukrainian officials would use Hunter Biden’s position at the company, Burisma Holdings, as an opportunity to influence his father. Kent said he tried to convey his opinion to Joe Biden’s office, but that a staffer told him the vice president didn’t have the “bandwidth” to address the issue because his other son, Beau, was battling cancer.

This is the first known instance in which a career diplomat tried to raise concerns regarding Hunter Biden’s business holdings in Ukraine. Several of Joe Biden’s former advisers also reportedly had discussions about whether his son’s business dealings could be seen as a conflict of interest.

Then…

Hunter Biden worked for the Boies Schiller Flexner law firm that consulted for Burisma. Biden was in charge for the company’s legal affairs with international companies, according to a press release, but Biden has disputed that characterization. At the time, Burisma’s founder faced multiple investigations into alleged tax evasion and money laundering.

Hunter Biden later stepped down from the board in April 2019 when his term expired. More here.

Coming from NPR in part:

Burisma is registered in Cyprus and is invisible in Kyiv. Lucian Kim of NPR: That’s Alexander Paraschiy, the chief of research at the Ukrainian investment bank Concorde Capital. After the bloody revolution on Kyiv’s streets five years ago, Mykola Zlochevsky, like many other government officials, fled the country. Burisma was facing a money laundering investigation and questions over how it had obtained its licenses.

PARASCHIY: Hiring some reputable guys with recognition in the world is one of the easiest and maybe cheapest ways to protect your business in Ukraine.

KIM: Burisma appointed Hunter Biden, son of then-Vice President Joe Biden, to its board of directors. A former president of Poland also joined the board.

DARIA KALENIUK: I believe the only reason Burisma and Zlochevsky were inviting people with such names was to whitewash their reputation and to present themselves as the company which is doing legitimate business in Ukraine.

KIM: In other words, the appearance of a conflict of interest arose because Hunter Biden’s father, Joe Biden, was responsible for U.S. policy on Ukraine as vice president. But Joe Biden, like many other Western leaders, was criticizing Ukraine exactly because it failed to convict a single high-level official for corruption, including Mykola Zlochevsky, the owner of Burisma.

As for Burisma, the company has continued to try burnishing its reputation. In 2017, it added another American to its board, Cofer Black, a former CIA official and a foreign policy adviser to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign.

KIM: But for a company with global ambitions, it’s hardly transparent. Burisma is registered in Cyprus, keeps a low profile in Kyiv and has ignored NPR’s repeated requests for comment. Nobody knows where its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, lives. But behind the scenes, he’s continuing to buy influence.

Burisma supports the Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank, and hosts an annual energy conference on the French Riviera attended by the prince of Monaco and former European and U.S. government officials. Hunter Biden, for one, no longer works at Burisma. He left the company earlier this year as his father was launching his presidential campaign. More details and context here.

Burisma was founded in 2002. Consolidation of Burisma Group took mainly place in 2006–2007. It became a major shareholder of Sunrise Energy Resources, a Delaware Corporation, which in 2004 acquired Ukrainian companies Esko-Pivnich and Pari, which owned natural gas exploration licenses.

What is really weird about Sunrise Energy, while being a registered Delaware corporation, the official address is 5353 Memorial Drive, Houston, Texas suite 4012. This is NOT an office building but rather a luxury high rise residential building. This is noted to be the address of the principal executive offices.

5353 Memorial Dr, Houston, TX 77007 photo

In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, 570 7th Ave., New York is also listed as an address. Well this is a tall building that is also multi-use condos.

There will likely be more….stay tuned.

Two Formal Challenges to Pelosi’s Impeachment Inquiry Mission

Posted on October 3, 2019October 3, 2019 by Denise Simon

You read it here, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is creating an off ramp to the early launch of the impeachment inquiry of President Trump. In previous months, Gerald Nadler, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has been on a quest to impeach listing all kinds of reasons to do so. Nothing was really sticking as far as Pelosi was concerned. But then came this phone call President Trump had with Ukraine that gave us a whistleblower and before all the facts and the complaint was released, Pelosi lit the impeach inquiry candle. Turns out all along, she knew about the call details and the whistleblower all due to Congressman Adam Schiff office secret work with authoring the whistleblower complaint in the first place. Deep state is getting deeper….
Meanwhile…..

Image result for congressman kevin mccarthy
Enter House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. He sent a letter to Pelosi challenging telling her to halt the whole inquiry thing because she is clearly not following rules, procedures and protocol. (I think she is doing that on purpose, read ‘off ramp)
In the McCarthy letter to Pelosi he demands answers to the following questions, which prove so far that Pelosi is not following procedures.

Those questions were as follows:

Do you intend to hold a vote of the full House authorizing our impeachment inquiry?
Do you intend to involve the full House in each critical step of this inquiry, including defining its scope and establishing its rules and procedures?
Do you intend to grant co-equal subpoena power to both the Chair and Ranking Member at the committee level?
Do you intend to require that all subpoenas be subject to a vote of the full committee at the request of either the Chair or Ranking Member?
Do you intend to provide the President’s counsel the right to attend all hearings and depositions?
Do you intend to provide the president’s counsel the right to present evidence?
Do you intend to provide the president’s counsel the right to object to the admittance of evidence?
Do you intend to provide the president’s counsel the right to cross-examine witnesses?
Do you intend to provide the president’s counsel the right to recommend a witness list?
Do you intend to refer all findings on impeachment to Chairman Nadler and the Judiciary Committee, as prescribed by Rule X of the Rules of the House, or is Chairman Schiff in charge of leading the inquiry as reported in the press?

“By answering ‘no’ to any of the above, you would be acting in direct contradiction to all modern impeachment inquiries of a sitting president,” McCarthy wrote.

Okay, hold on because here comes Congressman Doug Collins.

Collins is the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, is telling a federal judge that the Democrats’ impeachment investigation has no legal basis per his amicus brief.

The amicus brief: doug.collins.amicus

(in part)

That part of the text of the amicus brief echos that of Minority Leader’s letter to Pelosi.

All the while, the whole Ukraine phone call thing the House Democrats are using to pull the trigger on impeachment inquiries is also falling apart. The whole Biden scandal continues to fester.

Stay tuned…

Gen. Flynn’s Lawyer Seeks 40 Categories of Evidence

Posted on September 12, 2019September 12, 2019 by Denise Simon

Primer: Brady Doctrine is a law which requires the prosecution to turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant in a criminal case.

On Wednesday, the previously sealed Motion to Compel filed against federal prosecutors in the Michael Flynn case was made public with only minor redactions.

In her Motion to Compel, Powell catalogued 40 categories of evidence the government has refused to turn over. She seeks a court order requiring federal prosecutors to provide the withheld evidence under Brady and its progeny. Brady and its offshoots require prosecutors to disclose material exculpatory and impeachment evidence to the defense team. And, as Judge Sullivan made clear during Tuesday’s hearing, that duty exists even though Flynn had already pleaded guilty and even though he had agreed that the government would not be required to provide him with further evidence.

Powell, though, must still establish that the evidence sought is Brady material. Judge Sullivan seemed skeptical of the relevance of some of the evidence Powell mentioned and how it bore on Flynn’s guilt for the offense of conviction, namely lying to FBI agents. But Powell parried well, noting, for instance, that evidence concerning the texts exchanged between former FBI Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ lawyer Lisa Page were impeachment evidence.

In another exchange, Powell stressed that recently disclosed evidence showed the government had concluded that Flynn was not a Russian or Turkish agent, and, in fact that Flynn had briefed the government before meeting with Turkish officials. That evidence was relevant to sentencing, Powell argued, because it negates prosecutors’ claim that they had foregone a FARA violation charge against Flynn. “That’s a good point,” Judge Sullivan concurred.

Powell will have a chance in her reply brief to detail how each piece of evidence sought is either exculpatory or serves as impeachment evidence. Here there’s an interesting twist: Powell seems poised to also argue that the 40 pieces of evidence requested are exculpatory (and thus Brady material), because they will show that “the entire prosecution should be dismissed for egregious government misconduct and long-time suppression of Brady material.”

Some of the evidence Powell seeks is already presumed by many to exist, such as FISA applications pertaining to Flynn and the original 302 written shortly after FBI agents interviewed Flynn about his conversations with the Russian ambassador. But other evidence Powell identifies reveals that she has skinned all the snakes involved in SpyGate and knows exactly what went down. For instance, Powell requested “any information, including recordings or 302s, about Joseph Mifsud’s presence and involvement in engaging or reporting on Mr. Flynn and Mifsud’s presence at the Russia Today dinner in Moscow on December 17, 2015.”

Also intriguing is Powell’s request for: “All payments, notes, memos, correspondence, and instructions by and between the FBI, CIA, or DOD with Stefan Halper—going back as far as 2014—regarding Michael Flynn, Svetlana Lokhova, Mr. Richard Dearlove (of MI6), and Professor Christopher Andrew (connected with MI5) and Halper’s compensation through the DOD Office of Net Assessment as evidenced by the whistleblower complaint of Adam Lovinger, addressed in our brief.”

What is fascinating about this request is that the uninformed will see the 2014 date as evidence that Powell is on a fishing expedition, while in reality, her bid for this information shows that Powell has in three short months pieced together more tiles in the mosaic of the Russia collusion fraud than Robert Mueller did in two years. (this is an in part summary from Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist)

*** Fox News Sunday | Fox News

Meanwhile:

A couple of days ago, “We know that Mr. Mueller got a letter from Mr. Rosenstein that allowed him to target Michael Flynn Jr., and there was significant pressure to enter a guilty plea while they were hiding all the evidence that showed he had not been an agent of Russia, that there were no Logan Act violations,” Powell told Hannity.

Hannity asked Powell about the possibility that Flynn took a plea deal in order to protect his son from being prosecuted. Powell did not confirm Hannity’s scenario, but suggested it was possible.

“When you put together the fact that Mr. Mueller got the letter authorizing him to target Michael Flynn Jr., and they had seized Michael Flynn Jr.’s computers and electronic devices and those things, it’s not too hard to imagine that that might have happened,” she said.

“I don’t want to speak now to things that are not a matter of public record, but stay tuned because more and more will become apparent as we proceed through the litigation.”