The extent and scope of DNC corruption is almost beyond belief. Just when you thought the evidence was gathered, more crimes come to light. Remember when Hillary admitted she deleted 33,000 emails about yoga classes and wedding plans by smashing hard drives and cell phones with hammers? (more on that below)

This past Friday, Special Counsel John Durham submitted a court filing that alleges criminality conducted by the Clinton campaign when they hired a tech firm to spy on former President Trump before and after he took office.

Durham’s filing claims an executive of “Internet Company 1”, used his access to nonpublic government DNS data to analyze purported links between Trump and a Russian financial institution, named as Alpha Bank.  Internet Company 1 had access and maintenance agreements to dedicated servers for the Executive Office of the President (EOP).  Durham found that Rodney Joffe, named only as “Tech Executive 1” in the court filing, exploited his company’s contract by “mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information” [1] about the former President.

Friday’s filing was a result of Durham’s prosecution of Michael Sussman, an Attorney for the Clinton presidential campaign, charged with lying to the FBI.  Sussman told an FBI Attorney that he did not represent any client, when in fact he was being paid by the Clinton campaign.  Sussman’s Attorneys deny that he billed the Clinton campaign for a meeting he had with the FBI in September 2016.  It should be relatively easy to determine who is lying on that.

Trump’s ties to Russia were investigated by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller for nearly two years before he announced they had found nothing to support the claims propagated by Hillary Clinton.  It is common knowledge that the Clinton campaign funded opposition research that enlisted false claims in the Christopher Steele dossier designed to sick the FBI on then presidential candidate Donald Trump.  All of the allegations against Trump were proven false.

Sussman’s lawyers filed a response to the Durham allegations on Monday [2],  stating the Special Counsel filing on Friday was intended to “politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool.”  They further claim that Durham’s allegations regarding the DNS data mining post-dated the single charge of lying to the FBI in September 2016 and are therefore irrelevant to the case against their client.  Of course additional misconduct by Sussman may be relevant to proving he was indeed actively engaged in undermining the President of the United States before and after he took office.  Moreover, in Paragraph 5 of the filing, the Sussman lawyers insinuate that Trump was attempting to inflame other Republicans, calling this scandal “far greater in scope and magnitude than Watergate”, as if Trump had no right to comment on the matter.  Incidentally, he’s right!

The New York Times headline reads, “Court Filing Started a Furor in Right-Wing Outlets, but Their Narrative Is Off Track”.  Oh really, does the so-called “Right-Wing” media have a responsibility to bury such a huge story to protect the Democrats? And how exactly, is their narrative “off“?

By Tuesday the 15^th, CNN had crafted their version of the story by saying, “the accusation – which Durham couched in vague, technical language in a court filing late Friday – has been seized upon by Trump and his supporters, who claim the former President was subjected to a smear campaign”, followed by “Durham says in the filing that Michael Sussman, the Democrat lawyer, spoke about internet data related to Trump in a meeting with a federal agency, which sources say was the CIA, more than five years ago.”  Notice how they added the phrase “more than five years ago”, to make the reader think this allegation is “ancient history” and not worth pursuing.  In calling the filing “vague”, the Times also implies that the man-on-the-street can’t possibly understand it.  I don’t know about their readers, but I followed it just fine.  It’s also noteworthy that the CIA was gathering intel from Sussman on domestic spying campaign.  The CIA is by law restricted to limited domestic relations.  A Commission appointed by President Gerald Ford [3] reported that certain activities performed by the CIA on behalf of President Nixon were beyond the scope of their authority.  Apparently, by 2020 CIA activities designed to entrap the sitting President were completely legitimate, especially when requested by a political opponent.  

A Daily Mail article says former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, alerted Durham to a declassified CIA memo that asserts Clinton approved “looking into Trump’s Russia ties as a way of distracting from her email scandal”.  Furthermore claiming that “new bombshell reports now reveal Clinton paid people to hack servers at Trump Tower during the 2016 campaign and White House servers following the election.” [4]  Ratcliffe says former CIA Director John Brennan told then President Obama and his VP, Joe Biden, in 2016 about Clinton’s plan to fabricate Trump’s links to Russia in an effort to redirect the spotlight away from her 33,000 deleted emails, which were actual government property.

18 U.S.C § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally :

“Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, any record, paper, or document in any public office, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than three years, or both”.

I’m not Copernicus, but if my math is correct, that felony alone could sentence her to 99,000 years in prison.  But with time off for good behavior, she could be out in time to run for President again in 42,024.  Unfortunately, the statute prevents anyone convicted of said felony from “holding any office under the United States”.

If Brennan told Obama and Biden directly about the Clinton smear campaign, how much “plausible deniability” could they claim? It’s extremely obvious they both knew about it beforehand and quite possible they approved it, considering Obama’s expectation that his agenda would be continued under her administration.

Hillary Clinton, now 74, is also accused of hiring a tech firm to infiltrate servers at the Trump Tower during the 2016 campaign and the White House after he took office, aiming to smear Trump by linking him to Russia.  On October 31, 2016, just days before the election, she tweeted “Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump organization to a Russian-based bank”.  No links have ever been proven, but you can bet your last dollar the MSM blasted that bombshell over every possible outlet right up to the closing of the polls.  That tech firm, named only as “Internet Company 1” in Durham’s Friday filing, is reportedly Neustar, the firm from which Rodney Joffe retired in 2021.

In the end, the American people have a right to know what we have known all along.  The Clinton campaign fabricated a phony dossier intended to damage the reputation of presidential candidate Donald Trump.  The extent of that smear campaign was well planned and executed by highly-ranked Democrat operatives and officials in the federal bureaucracy. The Durham revelations extend the scope of her corruption. Mark Levin, the conservative host of “Life, Liberty, and Levin”, has called this the biggest scandal in American history and questions why Clinton and Obama have never been indicted for their criminality. They are common citizens, holding no office of protection. We certainly can’t expect the current Attorney General to pursue the case against either, but the truth never dies.

“But such is the irresistible nature of the truth, that all it asks, – and all it wants, – is the liberty of appearing.”

— Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, Part II: Introduction

Watergate was a church picnic in comparison to this particular Clinton scandal, which may have been linked to the effort to cover up her own secret private server scandal, the one that had her lawyers and aides smashing hard drives and cell phones with hammers to prevent authorities from discovering the despicable criminal acts of the DNC and the Clinton campaign.  When you know the very top of Democrat leadership is corrupt to the core and every party member lines up in total obedience, you probably should be considering other options with your vote.

Comments welcome.  Is anyone else outraged?

[1] The Hill, dateline Feb 14, 2022 ; Durham alleges cyber analysts ‘exploited’ access to Trump White House server

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/594126-durham-alleges-cyber-analysts-exploited-access-to-trump-white-house

[2] Thomson Reuters, dated Feb 14, 2022

https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/lbpgnwxdyvq/Sussmann-response-Durham-2022-02-14.pdf

[3] Report to the President by the Commission on CIA Activities Within the United States, June 1975

https://ourpresidents.tumblr.com/post/53864366507/the-commission-on-cia-activities-within-the-united

and by clicking on the link “Commission Report at the Ford Library” within that article, you can access Chapter 14, “Involvement of the CIA in Improper Activities for the White House”, p.172

https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/exhibits/intelligence/RockComm_Chap14_InvolveWH.pdf

[4] Caralle, K., Daily Mail, Ex-Director of National Intelligence ( John Ratcliffe) Claims Biden and Obama Knew About Hillary Campaign Plot to Hack Trump Servers, published Feb 14, 2022

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10511033/Ex-DNI-told-Durham-evidence-indict-MULTIPLE-people-Trump-Russia-probe.html

Paine’s Common Sense laid the groundwork for portions of the Constitution. Long before the United States Constitution was created (September 17, 1787) and ratified (June 21, 1788), Paine offered some of his suggestions on the form of government that would equitably represent all of the citizens. 

“If there is any true cause of fear respecting independence, it is because no plan is yet laid down.  Men do not see their way out – Wherefore, as an opening into that business, I offer the following hints; at the same time modestly affirming, that I have no other opinion of them myself, than that they may be the means of giving rise to something better.  Could the straggling thoughts of individuals be collected, they would frequently form materials for wise and able men to improve into useful matter.

Let the assemblies be annual, with a President only.  The representation more equal.  Their business wholly domestic, and subject to the authority of a Continental Congress.

Let each colony be divided into six, eight, or ten, convenient districts, each district to send a proper number of delegates to Congress, so that each colony send at least thirty.  The whole number in Congress will be at least 390.  Each Congress to sit and to choose a president by the following method.  When the delegates are met, let a colony be taken from the whole thirteen colonies by lot, after which, let the whole Congress choose (by ballot) a president from out of the delegates of that province.  In the next Congress, a colony be taken by lot from twelve only, omitting that colony from which the president was taken in the former Congress, and so proceeding on till the whole thirteen shall have had their proper rotation.  And in order that nothing may pass into a law but what is satisfactorily just, not less than three fifths of the Congress to be called a majority.”

  —  Thomas Paine, Common Sense, under Thoughts on the Present State of American Affairs, published at Philadelphia, February, 14 1776

Note that last sentence whereby Paine lays down the argument that all legislation should be widely supported by at least 60% of Congress, the threshold established later as the filibuster rule in the Senate.  The Democrats, operating on the slimmest margin possible, now want to eliminate the filibuster to pass their highly controversial “voting rights act”, which has little to do with securing voting rights, and could be more accurately described as a “right to cheat” act, while protecting the same election officials who kicked observers out of the room and boarded up windows in polling places to conceal their fraudulent activities. Democrats imply that a large segment of their voting base is not capable of voting in person, nor have the ability to obtain valid identification. They ignore the fact that virtually everything regarding identification must be proven by showing a government issued ID card, and insist that anyone should be able to cast a ballot without proving they are who they say they are, which opens the door for multiple votes and non-citizen ballots. Couple that with ballot harvesting practices that allow partisan operatives to collect ballots in large quantities that could be easily altered under cover of darkness, and you’re looking at a potentially massive scheme to rig elections.

The 19th Amendment (ratified August 18, 1920) says, “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” As late as 1920, when women were given the right to vote, it was clear that only citizens were entitled to vote. Republicans seek to ensure that, while Democrats want to eliminate the requirement. Under their insane proposition, anyone in the world with obviously questionable loyalties, could vote in our elections.

Comments welcome

I could write about DNC corruption and the MSM every day.  They certainly provide plenty of material.  But this one isn’t about the latest news flash.  It’s straight from the heart.

Yesterday, I received my copy of Peter Schweizer’s new release Red Handed: How American Elites Get Rich Helping China Win, and dove into it immediately.  The first chapter is basically a “set the stage” intro.  Chapter 2 is an exposé on the Biden family and their ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).  Schweizer and his team of investigators have traced $31 million in payments to the Biden family from Chinese businessmen with close ties to highly ranked members of China’s intelligence service, through various “shady business” deals with Hunter Biden and his portfolio of entities.  Textbook influence peddling.  Does Joe Biden have “plausible deniability”?  Not if anyone cares to look.

Where is Hunter anyway?  Certainly not in federal prison where he belongs.  Does anyone really believe the “chip-on-his-shoulder” Attorney General, Merrick Garland, is going to prosecute Hunter Biden? Garland was denied Senate hearings on his appointment to the Supreme Court in Obama’s last year. That is why I have been advocating for the Attorney General to be appointed by the party NOT in the White House, even when occupied by a Republican. The AGs under Obama and Biden were, and are, essentially Kings Guards. Did Trumps AGs protect him. or do his bidding? Apparently not. Seems like one-sided corruption to me.

It’s notable that Schweizer’s last book was titled, Profiles in Corruption, which also had a chapter on the Biden family, among other prominent Democrats.  He dedicated an entire book to the Clinton cabal.  I can’t wait until he gets to Obama for the “grand slam” of the last four Democrat presidential candidates, Al Gore excluded.

The message here is that these high-profile Democrats are filthy to the core, and all American voters should be aware of the extent to which they have perfected the art of corruption.  That’s disgusting enough, but when you know the media protects them and you realize that none of them have ever been investigated, let alone prosecuted, you are reminded of the classic Vince Lombardi quote, “What the Hell’s goin’ on out here?”

I have no affiliation with Schweizer and don’t currently enjoy any financial gain from the sale of his books.  I’m just recommending that every American read his work.

Also yesterday, before getting the book in the mail, I watched a documentary on George Washington titled “The First American”, an IMDb production by Newt Gingrich.  It was an excellent profile on the greatest American of all time, and was special to me, having had the privilege of knowing him personally.  The movie puts the viewer in the spirit of ’76, a state of mind that is sorely needed today.  It’s currently streaming on Amazon Prime and I highly recommend it.

This is a call to action.  If you want to call yourself an American, you should be outraged at the direction the DNC has taken this country.  It is not enough to silently accept their “political correctness”, ignore their corruption, and keep your mouth shut as the “woke mob” takes control of every aspect of your life.  True patriots don’t sit down and shut up.  We must stand up and be heard.  Not long ago, I was willing to consider loyal Democrat voters as a segment of the populace that could not be swayed to switch teams.  I have been trying to inform the independents and young voters who may be new to the political consciousness.  Now I’m convinced that anyone who opens their eyes and earnestly examines the truth, can be converted.  But it will take a tremendous effort to destroy the DNC and their media propaganda machine.  It will take true American patriots talking to their friends and family members, respectfully, but convincingly, that the DNC is rotten and should be defeated at every opportunity.  While they continue to divide the country by race and identity politics, we welcome anyone into our tent.  You have all heard the phrase “wake up America”.  It is our mission to enlighten the people with facts, to point out the deceptive agenda of the “fake news” media, and to become voices of reason.  I will admit that I have had thoughts of leaving the country and just going somewhere without all this turmoil.  But that is not feasible and it is a quitter’s attitude.  We can win hearts and minds.  We must not give up.   

“Tyranny, like Hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”

  —  Thomas Paine, The Crisis I, December 23, 1776

Comments welcome

Now the Democrats are desperately pushing passage of their proposed Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, hoping to ram those through Congress before this year’s mid-term election, just in case they lose control of the majority.  To facilitate that suddenly urgent agenda item, they claim it’s a great idea to eliminate the Senate filibuster in order to pass these voting reforms.

It’s a classic standoff between the Democrats who claim to be fighting for everyone to have easy access to voting rights, including non-citizens, with no proof of identity; and Republicans who hope to ensure that all votes are legitimate, cast by actual living citizens, and calling for Voter ID laws. Maybe we should send out mail-in ballots to China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. Why should they be excluded? Maybe we could include vouchers for taxpayer money if they vote Democrat. That sounds like something they might already have buried in their “pass it to see what’s in it” legislation. The unbelievable part is; they have no shame in promoting ideas like that. They actually think they are reasonable, or you are too stupid to question their motives.

President Biden was in Atlanta this past Tuesday lobbying for passage of both voting rights bills and a “carve out” of the filibuster.

Cedric Richmond, White House Senior Advisor, said Biden’s speech on January 6^th was a “down payment” in building the case to the public that the foundations of the country’s democracy are under assault, in reference to the voting rights bills and elimination of the filibuster. 

The foundations are under assault alright, by Democrats lobbying for changes to Senate rules.  Although the founders did not establish the filibuster, it wasn’t long before it was adopted by the Senate.

Aaron Burr is often credited as the father of the American filibuster, when as Vice President in 1805, he suggested to the Senate that they should eliminate a rule that automatically cut off floor debate, then called the “previous question motion”.  The following year, the Senate dropped the motion from their rule book.  That opened the door for the filibuster as we know it.

The filibuster assures the American people that legislation adopted by Congress is well thought out and has garnered significant support.  It is designed to stop hair-brained ideas from being passed with a simple majority.  Any Senator can request the floor to speak without time limit, in an effort to convince other Senators that the proposed legislation should be further scrutinized. The Democrats portray that as stall tactics, and it is sometimes abused by speeches that have nothing to do with the issue at hand.  On this particular piece of legislation, Democrats are so desperate to enact their method of retaining power, they label Republicans as “obstructionists.” To prevent, or end a filibuster, a minimum of 60 Senators must agree, known as cloture, whereby the legislation can proceed to a vote. They know they can’t get 60 votes, so they claim the filibuster is blocking “progress” and push to “carve out” an exception to suit them.

To change the Senate rule Democrats need only a simple majority, a 50-50 tie that can be broken by the Vice President, a procedural maneuver known as the “nuclear option”.  Currently, Sen. Manchin (D-WV) and Sen. Sinema (D-AZ) oppose the carve out or elimination of the filibuster, but will they hold firm?     

The House may operate under the “we have to pass it to see what’s in it” Pelosi doctrine, but the Senate was created specifically, to be the more deliberative body.

The Freedom to Vote Act expands access to the ballot and shields election officials. Apparently that means more mail-in voting which opens the door to more fraud and an easier way to cheat.  That other provision to “shield election officials” looks pretty shady to me; “shield them from what”?  They just pulled off the most massive voter fraud in history with complete impunity.  I know, we have all been “informed” by the media propaganda machine that Trump’s claims of voter fraud were all debunked. Are you positive the 2020 election was fair and totally legitimate? When you gather over 1,000 independent witnesses who sign sworn Affidavits under penalty of perjury, that they saw various “irregularities” in several states that were “coincidently” battleground states, and have video evidence of election officials scanning highly questionable stacks of ballots, after kicking observers out of the room and boarding up the windows, it seems to me that something secretive was going on. So secretive, that Democrats want to “shield election officials” from legal jeopardy by legislation. Maybe they should rebrand the name and call it what it is, the Freedom to Cheat Act.

Joseph Geevarghese, Executive Director of Our Revolution, a pro Bernie Sanders group, said, “If we don’t pass the Freedom to Vote legislation, Democrats are going to get slaughtered in 2022 and 2024.  If people can’t get to the polls and exercise their right to vote, our power is in jeopardy and that’s what this is about.”

(Paine):  I’ll be bound.  Some honesty from a Democrat; their power is in jeopardy.  On the other hand, he claims Democrat voters can’t get to the polls, inferring they need mail-in ballots.  I’d advise him that polling places are everywhere, probably within walking distance from nearly every urban Democrat where their power base is located.  It’s not that hard folks.  Or is he painting Democrat voters as too stupid to figure out how to vote in person? Every American is expected to do whatever it takes to get vaccinated. Why can’t Democrat voters get to polling places if they are expected to find a place to get vaccinated?

In an article, dated October 20^th, 2021, NPR, National Public Radio states, “Democrats say federal voting legislation is needed to counteract a wave of new restrictions from Republican-controlled state legislatures across the country. Critics of those laws say they are making it more difficult to vote, particularly for people of color.  The Freedom to Vote Act would have, among other things, established Election Day as a national holiday, set national minimum standards for early voting and voting by mail, and created new requirements for groups not currently required to disclose their financial donors. It also included standards for states that require voter identification, “[1]

(Paine):  “national minimum standards for early voting and voting by mail”? That sounds like a good way to manufacture thousands of ballots as needed in critical precincts in order to win any election.  And why is it so difficult to vote if you’re not white?  What does skin color have to do with it in the 21^st century? In 1888 it was skin color that made it difficult to vote because southern Democrats suppressed the Black vote, then supporting the “party of Lincoln”, and gave incumbent President Grover Cleveland a 90,000 popular vote margin. But karma prevailed, and in the first instance whereby the presidency was decided by the Electoral College, Benjamin Harrison secured victory by the electoral vote of 233 to 168, on the strength of him winning the north and the west. Yet today, the “progressive” left insists the Electoral College is flawed and must be eliminated. How conveniently they disregard history.

Now the media calls these “new restrictions” voter suppression, and has people believing that evil Republicans are trying to deny the right to vote to “people of color”, failing to mention is was actually Democrats who suppressed the Black vote earlier. When a movement suggests their opposition is doing something they did themselves and infers it’s only nefarious this time, that’s propaganda. They are either too stupid to know the history, or they are being deceptive, or both. That’s simple logic.

And what exactly are these “voting restrictions” enacted by state legislatures?  Does that mean Republicans are requiring voters to prove who they are by showing a voter registration card?  Does it mean voters are supposed to be U. S. citizens?  Oh my, the horror.

The United States Constitution, ratified 1789, did not originally define who was eligible to vote, allowing each state to determine who was eligible.  Throughout the 19^th century, voting rights began to expand to non-whites and citizens who did not own property.  Four of the fifteen post- Civil War constitutional amendments were ratified to extend voting rights to different groups of citizens.  These extensions state that voting rights cannot be denied or abridged based on the following:

• Race, color, or previous condition of servitude (15^th Amendment)

• On account of sex (19^th Amendment)

• By reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax (24^th Amendment)

• Who are 18 years of age or older (26^th Amendment)

Many states require eligible citizens to register to vote a set number of days prior to the election in order to vote.

Notice all these qualifications refer to citizens.  In what country are non-citizens given voting rights? I have yet to see any statutory justification for allowing non-citizens the right to vote in any election.

On the 15th of March 1965, Lyndon B. Johnson, 36th U. S. President, gave a speech before Congress in support of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which he had signed into law the previous July. In the speech he said, “Every American citizen must have an equal right to vote.” Notice he did not say “Every American must have the right to vote.” A Democrat President qualified the statement by restricting that right to citizens.

I agree, all citizens should be able to exercise their right to vote, after proving they are an American citizen. One verified citizen, one vote. I don’t mind mail-in ballots per se, as long as they are verified. But who is going to be in charge of the verification? Who is going to count the votes and who is going to oversee the counting? Maybe every citizen should be assigned a unique Voter ID Number, similar to a credit card number. The database could be sorted and scanned for duplicate entries very easily, managed by the Federal Election Commission. When voters relocate from one state to another, their new address would be revised in the database. The Voter ID Number could be attached to each Social Security Number. When a voter is deceased, that Voter ID Number would be eliminated upon notification from the Social Security Death Index. It’s not rocket science, just simple cooperation between the SSA and the FEC.

You don’t have to be a Republican to disagree with everything they stand for.  You just have to be sensible.

Comments welcome

[1]  National Public Radio, Oct 20^th, 2021

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/20/1040238982/senate-democrats-are-pushing-a-voting-rights-bill-republicans-have-vowed-to-bloc

[2]  Politico, Jan 9^th, 2022

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2022/01/09/joe-biden-takes-on-georgia-voting-526801