Obama's Presidential Records, the Deep State FBI Leaders Mueller and Comey, the Reptilian Progressive Democrats, and President Trump, the Eagle

THE REAL NEWS OF THE DAY IS THAT CALIFORNIANS CANNOT BUY VOTES IN GEORGIA. • • • Tuesday night's election message was South Carolina elected a Republican and, in addition, "Georgia can't be bought." Democrats made a huge effort to beat Republican Karen Handel in the Georgia congressional seat once held by Newt Gingrich. They failed. and in the failure, they once again damaged their self-touted image as the "party of the people." Georgia refused to sell their their votes to a ProgDem bunch of airhead, Hollywood fat cats who, like the Democratic National Committee, believe everything's for sale at the right price. Their candidate, John Ossoff, didn't even live in his district and refused to move back to it so he could vote in the election where he was the candidate. His opponent, former Georgia secretary of state Karen Handel, ran a down-to-earth, solid campaign and didn't flinch in the face of all the money pouring into her opponent from super-rich elites out on the Left Coast. The reported numbers vary, but it seems that Ossoff received close to 70% of his donations from a single state -- California. Handel won by 53% to 47%. • Just how stupid are the ProgDems?? Did they really think they could elect a non-resident whose funding came from 4,000 miles away to a congressional seat in a state that supported Donald Trump?? Stupid. And arrogant. • • • THE OTHER REAL NEWS OF THE DAY HAS BEEN HIDDEN BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA. Former President Obama has sequestered all the documents relating to the unmasking of Trump and his team for political purposes -- his national security advisor Susan Rice, and Obama, are now safe from probing investigations about their questionable unmaskings for at least five years. • Judicial Watch announced on June 19 that the National Security Council has revealed that documents regarding the unmasking by President Barack Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice of “the identities of any US citizens associated with the Trump presidential campaign or transition team” have been removed to the Obama Presidential Library. Such documents, by law, cannot be released to the public for at least five years, and after that the library may still erect hurdles to access them. In effect, documents reportedly related to Congress’ investigation of Russia collusion in the 2016 election are now sealed, including materials gathered by the Obama administration in 2015-16 and perhaps earlier. On April 4, Judicial Watch requested the records -- through the Freedom of Information Act -- containing information regarding people “who were identified pursuant to intelligence collection activities,” but the National Security Council (NSC) refused to fulfill the request. The NSC informed Judicial Watch that it would not be turning over communications with any Intelligence Community member or agency regarding the alleged Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election, the hacking of Democratic National Committee computers, or the any suspected communication between Russia and the Trump campaign or transition officials, writing to Judicial Watch : “Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library. You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, Presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.” • JW president Tom Fitton's response was to say it is reviewing its alternatives, but added : “Prosecutors, Congress, and the public will want to know when the National Security Council shipped off the records about potential intelligence abuses by Susan Rice and others in the Obama White House to the memory hole of the Obama Presidential Library. We are considering our legal options but we hope that the Special Counsel and Congress also consider their options and get these records.” • Has Obama cheated America again?? End of story?? NO. • • • THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT. The Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978, 44 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2207, governs the official records of Presidents and Vice Presidents created or received after January 20, 1981, and mandating the preservation of all presidential records. You can read the text ofthe PRA here < https://www.archives.gov/about/laws/presidential-records.html > • But, the bottom line of the NSC refusal to make the unmasking records available is that Judicial Watch is not authorized by the statute to get access to them. However, that does not mean that the unmasking documents are absolutely closed to the public for five years" In fact, the PRA makes all covered presidential records public property : "The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter." The US Archivist has managerial administrative responsibility for all presdiential records. Even during his term of office, a President must receive approval from the US Archivist before he destroys any records deemed to "no longer have administrative, historical, informational, or evidentiary value." The US Archivist must give a 60-day notice in the Federal Register of the intention to destroy presidential records. • ACCESS is possible on the following conditions under §2205 : "Exceptions to restricted access. Notwithstanding any restrictions on access imposed pursuant to sections 2204 and 2208 -- (1) the Archivist and persons employed by the National Archives and Records Administration who are engaged in the performance of normal archival work shall be permitted access to Presidential records in the custody of the Archivist; (2) subject to any rights, defenses, or privileges which the United States or any agency or person may invoke, Presidential records shall be made available -- (A) pursuant to subpoena or other judicial process issued by a court of competent jurisdiction for the purposes of any civil or criminal investigation or proceeding; (B) to an incumbent President if such records contain information that is needed for the conduct of current business of the incumbent President’s office and that is not otherwise available; and (C) to either House of Congress, or, to the extent of matter within its jurisdiction, to any committee or subcommittee thereof if such records contain information that is needed for the conduct of its business and that is not otherwise available; and (3) the Presidential records of a former President shall be available to such former President or the former President’s designated representative." • WHAT ALL THAT MEANS is that the either the House or Senate or their Judicial or Intelligence Committees or sub-committees, the incumbent President, the former President whose presidency created the records, any court, and the US Archivist and staff can have access to presidentia lrecords for appropriate reasons. • PRA § 2203 (g)(1) ; "Upon the conclusion of a President’s term of office, or...the conclusion of the last term, the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President....(2) The Archivist shall deposit all such Presidential records in a Presidential archival depository or another archival facility operated by the United States. The Archivist is authorized to designate, after consultation with the former President, a director at each depository or facility, who shall be responsible for the care and preservation of such records." The PRA provides restrictions on access to Presidential records for a normal period of 5 years, and up to 12 years for records such as intelligence, medical or what we normally call 'privileged' communications between the President and his staff. But, the access provisions of § 2205 override these restrictions. • • • BigLeaguePolitics asked several critical questions about the Obama unmasking records in its Tuesday edition -- "The NSC stated in its letter that 'Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library. You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act,...' First of all, Barack Obama’s presidential library does not actually exist. The proposed library in Jackson Park, Chicago, will not be fully constructed until 2021. So where are the records? Physically speaking, where are the records? Are the records at the construction site? What constitutes the Obama Library, as an entity, at this point in time?....There are a number of ways the Trump administration can choose to get at the records. Importantly, the House Intelligence Committee...might just have to add the Obama Library and the national Archivist to the subpoena list." • • • THE NSC ANSWER TO JUDICIAL WATCH WAS FROM THE DEEP STATE. In April, Bloomberg and Fox News revealed that Obama national security advisor Susan Rice had requested to “unmask” -- or unveil the hidden names of -- Trump transition officials who were caught up in surveillance of foreign targets. Typically, in the surveillance of foreign targets’ communications, US citizens mentioned or participating in them would have their names “masked,” or hidden, due to ethical, legal, and privacy concerns. However, government consumers of the intelligence can request to have these US citizen names unmasked if it is important to understanding the communications. The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person who had requested the unmasking, after examining her log requests. The revelation lent credence to Trump’s assertion that the Obama administration had been surveilling his transition team. The Wall Street Journal editorial board has argued Rice had no reason to request the unmaskings. Later, the House intelligence Committee also subpoenaed the intelligence community for information on unmasking requests by Rice, former CIA Director John Brennan, and US Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power. • The misuse of unmasking came under scrutiny after US officials illegally leaked to the Washington Post a private conversation between former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak on December 24. Flynn resigned after those communications, not because anything inappropriate was found, but because he had misrepresented those communications to Vice President Mike Pence. • Then, in May, Former FBI Director James Comey finally admitted publicly that President Trump -- whom the mainstream media had accused of being the target of several federal FBI investigations -- has not been under investigation. Comey's admission came after months of his deliberately leaving the impression that President Trump was. Quickly, the Progressive Democrats elites and their propagandist MSM switched to charging that Trump somehow obstructed justice in trying to save from a frivolous prosecution General Flynn, a decorated military veteran who ran the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Trump had fired Lieutenant General Michael T. Flynn (Ret.), who supported him during the campaign, but wanted to save his patriot friend from the clutches of the MSM and ProgDems simply because he had made some confusing statements about his own Russian contacts during the transition period when he was preparing the new Trump administration’s foreign policy. Trump was loyal to a friend and supporter. For that, according to Comey's sworn testimony, Trump is now in the crosshairs of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. • This is a classic example of the Deep State at work. The issue is not Trump but the FBI, whose two former directors are now double-teaming Trump for the purpose of destroying his presiodency, impeaching him and returning the White House to a Democrat. • • • MUELLER AND COMEY SHOULD BE THE TARGETS OF FBI INVESTIGATIONS. Comey and Mueller have been presented by the MSM as "beyond reproach," but their own work at the FBI was disastrous and should be the subject of investigations and hearings by congressional intelligence committees -- what are the Republican leaders in Congress waiting for??? Consider Special Counsel Robert Mueller. This is a man who, according to Judicial Watch, met secretly with islamist groups and sanitized FBI training materials so that FBI agents could not recognize and identify the enemy trying to kill Americans. The Judicial Watch report, “U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed ‘Offensive’ to Moslems,” should have disqualified Mueller from ever again serving in any role as an investigator of anything remotely connected to national security. Christopher Farrell of Judicial Watch calls it a “curious” story about how “a group of radical islamists” with links to terrorist groups like Hamas met with Mueller and convinced him to “scrub” and change FBI training materials on radical Islam. Mueller quietly assembled a group of islamic “experts” who read the materials and censored them. These people became the “editors” of the training materials. One of the changes, incredibly enough says Farrell, involved eliminating a reference to the Islamic Koran as the “teaching of the Prophets” and replacing it with “the revealed word of God.” A reference to the Moslem Brotherhood as a terrorist organization was also deemed offensive. • Comey, Mueller’s successor as FBI director, have “an appearance of a deep, long professional relationship, if not a personal one,” according to JW and AIM. When Mueller was FBI director, Comey was deputy attorney general. Both of them had said American scientist Steven J. Hatfill was guilty in the anthrax case though he was completely innocent. The Department of Justice eventually had to pay Hatfill over $5 million in damages after ruining his career. Farrell says the fact that Comey cleared his Senate Intelligence Committee testimony in May with Special Counsel Mueller suggests they have been “synchronizing the effort.” He adds, “It stinks.” Under these circumstances, it is impossible to believe that Mueller will conclude that Comey mishandled the Russian investigation and deserved to be fired by Trump. Instead, they both have enormous incentive to find Trump guilty of something. Together, they cannot permit FBI misdeeds to be exposed to public view. • The MSM and Republican Trump skeptics in Congress are now calling on President trump to carry on as President and ignore what is going on in the FBI and Special Counsel's office. Do they recognize this as a witch hunt?? Do they appreciate the significance of Comey’s admission that he leaked a document about his meeting with Trump to spark the appointment of Mueller?? Joel Pollak of Breitbart writes about “a deliberate political setup” against Trump. Newt Gingrich writes that Comey’s admission of leaking for the purpose of getting a special counsel investigation of the President “is tremendously important because it completely delegitimizes Robert Mueller’s so-called independent investigation. Former Republican House Speaker Gingrich says, "...what we have here is a fired FBI director, who leaked private material to the press, so he could get his friend appointed as a special counsel in order to take retribution on the President -- with the aid of a department full of federal lawyers who would have rather seen Hillary in the White House. And we are supposed to believe this will be an objective, unbiased investigation?” • • • CAN TRUMP SAVE HIMSELF. Only Trump can, because nobody else in official government leadership seems to be interested in saving him. He can fire Mueller after offering the evidence of this "setup" and citing evidence of Mueller’s terrible track record in investigating islamic terrorism. He has the evidence to show that Mueller has a conflict of interest through his friendship with Comey and cannot be trusted to arrive at the truth. Trump would take a terrible beating from the MSM, but it’s the right thing to do -- and, thanks to the weak-kneed acquiescence of the Republican Congress leadership, it may be the only thing left for Trump to do. • Jay Sekulow, a recognized constitutional lawyer and now a member of President Trump’s legal team, said last week he has no knowledge of the President being the target of a federal probe, despite Trump's statements that he is being investigated. Sekulow told Fox News : “The President has not been notified by anyone that he is under investigation.” Sekulow made the statement in a heated exchange with Chris Wallace about whether Trump could be under investigation without knowing. Wallace said : “You don’t know that he's not under investigation.” Sekulow responded : “I can’t read minds.” Sekulow also said that Trump’s tweet that led people to believe he was under investigation was in response to a Washington Post story in which unnamed sources said the President was being investigated. Trump's tweet was : "I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt!" • Trump is up against the FBI and two congressional comittees investigating whether the Trump campaign or presidential transition team colluded with Russia during or after the 2016 White House race. Before Trump fired James Comey as the FBI director, Comey told the President three times that he was not a target in the agency investigation. But, the Post story suggested the FBI probe, now being led by special counsel Robert Mueller, includes whether Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey. Sekulow says : “Nothing has changed since Comey said the President is not a target.” Sekulow also said Trump has never accused Deputy Attorney General Rob Rosenstein of “doing anything wrong.” • • • AND THAT BRINGS US BACK TO "UNMASKING." Garth Kant wrote in a WND EXCLUSIVE that : "Lost in all the hubbub and furor over President Trump’s firing of James Comey is that the former FBI director never complied with key a request from the House Intelligence Committee. A March 15 letter from Chairman Devin Nunes and ranking member Adam Schiff to the chiefs of the CIA, FBI and NSA essentially asks for any evidence that the Obama administration requested surveillance information on the Trump and/or Clinton presidential campaigns. One agency did not respond: the FBI." • Got that?? The CIA and the NSA provided Congress with information about the Obama spying on candidate Trump. The FBI did not. The Nunes letter asked questions about “unmasking,” the revealing of names within the intelligence community of US citizens whose communications were monitored during foreign surveillance. It asked the intel agencies who the administration was surveilling, who asked for and shared the information on those people, and why. Why did Comey, then FBI Director, not answer the letter?? Kant asks : "Is there a cover-up by the FBI? Was Comey himself stonewalling Congress? His agents appeared to think so. In fact, rank-and-file members of the intelligence community were reportedly so outraged by the stonewalling that they went to the media with bombshell claims that surveillance had been done purely for 'political purposes' to 'hurt and embarrass (candidate) Trump and his team.' They said the spying on the Trump team had nothing to do with the collection of foreign intelligence or an investigation into Russia election interference." Kant says : "Their charges appear to be supported by a mounting pile of evidence. As unpalatable as the thought of an FBI chief skirting the law may be, it may be a question worth asking, based on just what is known." Kant lays out the facts : "...the Obama administration was using information obtained from wiretaps to investigate Trump aides, as evidenced by the January 20 story in the New York Times with the print version headline 'Wiretapped data used in inquiry of Trump aides. Examining Russian ties.' The Senate Judiciary Committee has been looking into whether leaks of information on the targeting of the Trump team could have come from the FBI, because the bureau had requested Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants that led to the acquisition of the foreign surveillance that was leaked to the media. Comey hid the investigation from Congress. Comey testified before the House Intelligence Committee on March 20, that the FBI began the investigation in July 2016. He testified that he should have notified Congress of such an investigation in a quarterly report. But he further testified that he did not notify Congress until March 2017, eight months later. He did not explain the delay, and no one bothered to ask him." • President Trump has strongly suggested that the investigation into his associates’ alleged collusion with Russia was really a cover story to hide the fact the Obama administration spied on his campaign and transition team for political purposes. A Trump tweet on April 3 directly accused the Obama administration : “The real story turns out to be SURVEILLANCE and LEAKING! Find the leakers.” The day before former FBI Director Robert Mueller was named as special counsel to manage the investigation into allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, President Trump tweeted : “I have been asking Director Comey & others, from the beginning of my administration, to find the LEAKERS in the intelligence community.” The day after the appointment of the special prosecutor, Trump tweeted : “This is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!” He added a tweet aimed at those he saw as the real culprits : “With all of the illegal acts that took place in the Clinton campaign & Obama Administration, there was never a special counsel appointed!” • Former Congress member Michele Bachmann told WND : “The scandal of scandals is the appearance that the Obama administration used unique, sophisticated tools only belonging to the federal government to spy on GOP rivals to Hillary. Republicans need to stop being intimidated and find out and expose this gross abuse of power. The FBI had a sad habit under the Obama administration of flagrantly thumbing its nose to requests from Congress. They played ‘hide the ball’ from lawmakers and their staffs. Requests for information or for production of documents often seemed to be treated as optional. In fact, the FBI allowed itself to be politicized by the Obama administration to an extent commensurate with the IRS, Justice Department and other federal agencies. Most worrisome is any hint of corruption within law enforcement.” • On March 22, 2017, then House Intelligence Committee Chairmen Nunes announced evidence of spying on the Trump team. Nunes told the press he had learned that “on numerous occasions, the intelligence community incidentally collected information about US citizens involved in the Trump transition, including team members.” Nunes said details about those people “were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting” even though they had “little or no apparent foreign intelligence value.” Nunes emphasized : “none of this surveillance was related to Russia or any investigation of Russian activities or of the Trump team.” • Obama’s executive order putting classified intelligence in the hands of political operatives was one reason why Nunes declared: “The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate this surveillance (by the Obama administration) and its subsequent dissemination to determine : Who was aware of it, Why it was not disclosed to Congress, Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking (revealing of names), Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates, and Whether any laws, regulations, or procedures were violated.” Nunes said the NSA was cooperating, but the FBI was not. • National Secriuty Advisor Rice told MSNBC the unmasking of any names of Trump associates in intelligence reports was not done to spy on them “for any political purposes.” But, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy said that can’t be true : “The national-security advioer is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The President’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it.” Requesting the unmasking, according to McCarthy, could have had no purpose other than politics because she was not an investigator, said McCarthy : “The thing to bear in mind is that the White House does not do investigations. Not criminal investigations, not intelligence investigations.” • On May 17, 2017, Special Counsel Robert Mueller was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller to serve as special counsel to investigate both Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters. Given the course of the House and Senate investigations, it appears likely those “related matters” will have to include whether the Obama administration spied on the Trump team. They could also include why Comey did not cooperate with congressional investigations. • • • DEAR READERS, Patricia McCarthy of American Thinker on Wednesday started her article with a quote form Jean Le Rond d'Alembert, 18th French mathematician, philosopher and the co-editor of the Encyclopédie : "High office is like a pyramid; only two kinds of animals reach the summit -- reptiles and eagles." McCarthy writes : "It took the election of Donald Trump for the Progressives to unmask themselves, to reveal their true identities..." Her examples are now-former anchor Scott Pelley of CBS who opined to his audience that "the [House Majority Leader Steve] Scalise attack was to some degree self-inflicted."// Joy Reid of MSNBC, who wondered if Scalise's positions on "moral issues" like gay marriage and Obamacare did not make his shooting somehow understandable! She later tweeted that Scalise "was a white man with a violent background [a blatant lie], and saved by a black lesbian, and yet..." She could not bring herself to congratulate those two Capitol police officers // James Devine, a Democratic Party strategist from New Jersey, who almost immediately after the shooting launched a couple of hashtags, #HuntRepublicans and #Hunt RepublicanCongressmen! He appeared on the Tucker Carlson program to defend his scurrilous behavior. He had tweeted : "We are in a war with selfish, foolish & narcissistic rich people. Why is it a shock when things turn violent?" // Malcolm Harris, a writer at the Washington Post, tweeted that "the shooting of conservative Republicans could be justified." He implied that he hoped Scalise would die! // The New York Times embarrassed itself by dredging up the lie that Sarah Palin was responsible for the Gabby Giffords shooting in Tuscon in 2011 because of an ad showing targeted districts in the crosshairs of a gunsight, an ad not even created by her campaign. • These are the foot soldiers and MSM propagandists of the Progressive Democrats who are determined to destroy President Trump. Can anyone who is a normal human being with normal human sentiments hope to match these "reptiles' who have risen to the top? Patricia McCarthy rightly asks : "Who are these vile, thoughtless, cruel people and how did they come to infect our politics and media?....One cannot treat the majority of the American people like insects to be swatted away except at election time and expect to win respect or elections." And, these reptile ProgDems cannot treat the elected President of the United States as an imposter of low intelligence and questionable motives. The Left has totally rejected the election results and they have become vicious stormtroopers forcing their irrational will on America. But, will his erstwhile GOP support Trump or must we voters turn them out in 2018 and elect people who undertand and adhere to American constitutional government -- Congress members who will understand if President Trump actually has to fire Mueller -- a Comey co-conspirator determined to impeach our President. Trump is seeming more and more like the eagle in Washington.