Thursday, December 19, 2019

17 Mistakes, Omissions & Deliberate Deceptions

17 Mistakes, Omissions & Deliberate Deceptions
The View from the Middle

I worked for Procter & Gamble for 37 years, a company that made “the one-page memo” famous. Richard Deupree, P&G CEO from 1930 to 1947, championed this idea to make communications thoughtful, concise, compelling and easy for the receiver of to understand. Our government’s philosophy on written communications seems to be the very antithesis of the one-page memo. Their reports are so long and tedious and cumbersome that they actually discourage “We the People” from even reading them.

The latest example is the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz’s, report on the FISA abuses by the FBI with respect to their investigation collusion with the Russians by the Trump campaign. This report is 434 pages long written in legalese, loaded with acronyms and with more footnotes than pages. I estimate that less than one percent of the American people with even read the Executive Summary, which is almost 20 pages long. Consequently, I felt a need to translate and simplify this governmental jibber-jabber for my readers and focus on the real essence of Mr. Horowitz’s report - the 17 inaccuracies, omissions and deliberate deceptions. Read my “one-page memo” on these 17 examples of gross incompetence and or absolute deceit below and make your own judgements.

1) The FBI omitted information obtained from another governmental agency that Carter Page was a cooperating “operational contact” working with our government and providing information on Russian intelligence officers.
2) They asserted that Christopher Steele’s prior reporting had been “corroborated and used in criminal proceedings” which overstated Steele’s past reporting. This violated the FBI’s “Woods Procedures” which requires facts in a FISA request to be “scrupulously accurate” and verified.
3) They omitted information relevant to the reliability of a key Steele sub-source, namely that Steele himself had called him a boaster and egoist who may engage embellishment and that the FBI had opened an investigation on this person before the FISA application had been filed.
4) The FBI lied when they asserted that Steele did not provide the press information for September 23rd Yahoo News article.
5) They omitted Papadopoulos’s statements in September of 2016 denying that anyone associated with the Trump campaign was collaborating with Russian or with any outside group like Wikileaks in the release of emails.
6) They omitted Carter Page’s statement in September of 2016 that he had “literally never met” or “said one word to” Paul Manafort, and that Paul Manafort had not responded to nay of Page’s emails.
7) They omitted statements from Page that were inconsistent with the FBI’s theory, including denying having ever met Igor Sechin or Igor Divyekin (two allies of Vladimir Putin) or even knowing who Divyekin was.
8) They omitted the fact that Steele’s primary sub-source had made statements in January of 2017 raising significant questions out the reliability of allegations included in the FISA applications.
9) THIS IS A BIG ONE – The OGC (Office of General Counsel) Attorney altered an email from another agency to state that Carter Page was “not a source” for the other agency, when the memo confirmed that he actually was!!
10) Omitted information from reliable sources that suggested Steele “demonstrates a lack of self-awareness (and) poor judgement”. Also, that Steele “pursued people with political risk but no intelligence value” and that Steele didn’t always exercise great judgement” and it was “not clear what he would have done to validate” his reporting.
11) Omitted information from Bruce Ohr about Steele’s reporting, including A) Steele’s reporting was going to the Clinton campaign B) Glen Simpson of GPS was paying Steele to discuss his reporting to the media, and C) Steele was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being the US President”.
12) They failed to update the description of Steele after information became known that provided greater clarity on the political origins of Steele’s reporting, including that Simpson was hired by someone associated with the Democratic Party and / or the DNC.
13) They failed to correct the assertion in the first FISA application that the FBI did “not” believe that Steele directly provide information to the reporter who wrote the September 23rd Yahoo News article.
14) They omitted the finding by the FBI that Steele’s past contributions had been found to be “minimally corroborated” and instead continued to assert that Steele’s reporting had been “corroborated and used in criminal proceedings”.
15) Omitted Papadopoulos’s statements in late October of 2016 denying that the Trump campaign was involved in the circumstances of the DNC email hack.
16) They omitted Joseph Misfud’s denial that he supplied Papadopoulos with the information he shared with the FFG (Friendly Foreign Government) suggesting the campaign received an offer of assistance from Russia).
17) They omitted information indicating that Page played no role in the Republican platform change on Russia’s annexation of Ukraine, which was inconsistent with a factual assertion relied upon to support probable cause in all four of the FISA applications.

Michael Horowitz suggested that he “found no documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivations influenced the FBI’s decisions”, which simply means that no one confessed to bias verbally or in writing. He also admitted that he, “did not receive satisfactory explanations for the errors or problems (h)e identified.”

Thankfully, this is America and we have the right and privilege to make a judgement and decide for ourselves what was driving this abundance of errors, omissions and deliberate falsification of evidence. Unfortunately, our only choices are gross negligence, incompetence or political bias. All would leave a horrible stain on the FBI for years to come, but there are two factors that keep bringing me back to the fact that bias was the motive. First, if the FBI was just incompetent, errors would have been made equally for and against the Trump campaign. The odds that all 17 errors, etc. would be made randomly in one direction (like 17 straight coin flips coming up heads) are one in 131,072 or .000763%. No thinking person needs documentary or testimonial evidence to conclude that these particular FISA applications reeked of political bias.

Thursday, December 12, 2019

Intent is in the Eye of the Beholder

Intent, I Guess, is in the Eye of the Beholder
The View from the Middle

You may have noticed that every time the Democrats bring up the fact that President Trump asked President Zelensky of Ukraine to do him a favor and look into the Bidens, they also attach a motive to it. They say that he asked for this favor solely to disparage one of his political rivals in the upcoming 2020 elections. They never make the first claim without adding the suggested intent of the investigation that he was requesting. You see, they must convince you that the President did this purely for personal political gain. Have you asked yourself why that is?

First, they MUST make the request sound illegitimate, irresponsible and possibly illegal. So, they must suggest that they can read Donald Trump’s mind and are absolutely certain of what his motive was when he made this request of Zelensky. It seems that whenever the media or Democrats, but I repeat myself, read Trump’s mind, they find the worst of intentions. Yet, when they (Comey and the media) read Hillary Clinton’s mind, when she destroyed 30,000 emails under subpoena, they gave her the benefit of the doubt and claimed that she had “no intent” to violate the law. It’s amazing to me that when the media and Democrats resort to “mind reading” they consistently exonerate Democrats and condemn Republicans. Interesting, isn’t it.

So, Democrats MUST attach this slimier motive to Trump’s request just to make it SEEM inappropriate, but what if that was not the reason for Trump’s request. Certainly, the President of the United States has the right, even the duty, to investigate potential corruption in a country to which we are about to give millions, even billions, of dollars in aid. It’s not President Trump’s fault that Joe Biden and his son Hunter got involved with one of the most corrupt companies in one of the most corrupt countries in the world. So, if Trump’s motivation was to root out corruption in Ukraine, and Joe Biden was tangled up in that corruption, this request was not only not improper, it was noble!

Remember, even President Obama was concerned about Hunter Biden’s appointment to the board of Burisma, one of the most corrupt companies in Ukraine. Hunter had no experience in the energy industry and had no expertise in the Ukrainian language or culture. This “no show” job paying up to a million dollars a year smacked of impropriety at a minimum since Hunter’s father, Joe, was the point man for Ukraine for the Obama administration. Even now, David Axelrod, Obama’s campaign manager, recommends that Joe Biden should just, “admit that this was wrong” and try to move on. When you add the fact that Joe boasted that he coerced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor, who was investigating his son’s company, and he did so by threatening to withhold over a billion dollars of American aid, this investigation sounds not only more reasonable but essential.

But since we’re talking about intent or motives, let’s take a look on the other side of the political divide. What if the Democrats have been harassing this President and dividing this country for three years, just for personal, political gain. What evidence, you may ask, is there that this persecution has been deliberate and malicious? Remember how the Democrats reacted to the Trump election. They said they were going to “resist” and “obstruct” everything this President pursued. Within 20 minutes of his inauguration, they were calling for his impeachment. For what? From the beginning they were intent on impeaching him (ask Al Green and Maxine Waters) and their only goal was to find something, anything to accuse him of. Did they do this for personal political gain? Of course they did. So which act to you find more offensive? Asking Ukraine to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden to find out if there was any corruption at Burisma, or polarizing our entire country for your own political gain?

While I have you, let’s talk a little about the articles of impeachment just announce by Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Nadler. The first was “abuse of power”. I must admit that I agree that there has been an abuse of power in this impeachment process. I agree with Constitutional scholar, Johnathan Turley, that the Democrat majority in the House have abused their power by redefining “high crimes and misdemeanors” in a way that would have had every past President impeached. The Founders would truly be rolling over in their grave.

Second, Democrats have charged “obstruction of Congress”. Note that “quid pro quo” and “bribery”, the original accusations that started this entire inquiry, are not even mentioned as an article of impeachment. So, in effect, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Nadler are saying that even though President Trump did not commit the crimes he was accused of, he did vigorously resist being hung (politically) for it.

Both of these charges are so nebulous and weak that it should make us all irate that the Democrat majority wasted our time and tried to turn Americans against each other for literally – nothing. These articles were so weak that Nancy Pelosi had to announce her support for USMCA (our trade deal with Mexico and Canada) within two hours of their announcement. This is legislation that she has been holding for almost a year, but she just happened to finally support it within two hours of their impeachment announcement. This distraction from their pathetic impeachment efforts would be laughable if it weren’t so obvious.

Wednesday, December 4, 2019

Political Intrigue Fatigue

Political Intrigue Fatigue
The View from the Middle

I think I can speak for the vast majority of Americans when I say that I am exhausted by the three-year impeachment investigation that has been sucking all of the oxygen out of Washington and the country. Sure, Adam Schiff will try to convince you that the impeachment inquiry just started a few weeks ago, but he is just part of the elaborate drama that has been playing in Washington since President Trump was elected.
In fact, the Washington Post called for the President’s impeachment only 19 minutes after his inauguration. Man, that must have been a terrible 19 minutes. What exactly had he done to deserve impeachment? And House Democratic Representatives Al Green, from Texas, and Maxine Waters, from California, picked up the mindless cult chant shortly after that.

Then there was the Mueller investigation that desperately looked for “collusion” with Russia by the Trump campaign for nearly two years and found that not only has Trump not colluded with Russia (which, by the way is not a crime) but that no American colluded with or coordinated with Russia to interfere with the 2016 elections. This, of course, is despite the fact that Adam “full of” Schiff promised that there was tons of evidence in plain sight. I guess you needed Adam Schiff’s double vision, double standard glasses to see it.
Just a side note here. Who was President of the United States during the 2016 elections, and didn’t he say publicly that there was nothing to the Russian meddling?

For the last three weeks we have been subjected to the Adam “full of” Schiff show, which has bored America from start to finish. The viewership for the first day of the Adam Schiff show was only 13 million people, which is about half the ratings of the Republican debates, starring Donald Trump, back in 2016. That audience declined every day until it finished with an audience just over 11 million.

Of course we are desperately awaiting (not really) the findings of this inquiry which will be released later today. We’re all on pins and needles. Dear me, what will they conclude? As if we don’t already know. Would it surprise anyone to find out that this final report was written before the inquiry even heard its first witness, just like Comey’s exoneration of Hillary Clinton back in 2015. Just humor me here. Is “Adam Schiff’s Intelligence Committee” an oxymoron?

All of this endless investigation has sucked the life out of the American people and apparently Congress too, which can’t seem to get anything done. While Nancy Pelosi claimed that she can “walk and chew gum”, nothing of any meaning is passing The House despite some tremendous bipartisan agreement. For example, the USMCA (our trade agreement with Canada and Mexico) will add billions to our economy and create nearly 200,000 jobs has tremendous support from both sides of the aisle. Nancy Pelosi, however, will not bring it to a vote because she doesn’t want President Trump to get a win, even if it means depriving the American people from its benefits.

Both parties also agree on the need for an infrastructure bill to help repair our country’s roads, bridges and airports, and as you might imagine, there is bipartisan support for a prescription drug bill to help our senior citizens. I believe that there is even room to come together on some immigration legislation. Trump has already shown interest in offering a path to citizenship for the DACA kids / Dreamers in exchange for some border security spending. There is much that can be accomplished if Congress decided to focus on “We The People” instead of searching for impeachment in all the wrong places. By the way, is “I just don’t like the guy” grounds for impeachment?

Worst of all for Democrats, they are losing the public relations fight. The percent of the country that supports impeachment and removal from office continues to decline, and that’s while they are in charge of this charade in the House. Wait until (if) the Senate takes control.

Finally, the Democrat debates are taking a hit. The first debate boasted 18.2 million viewers, about 25% less than a Republican debate including Trump. This viewership has dropped steadily until the last debate on MSNBC hit rock bottom with an audience of only 6.6 million viewers. This may be a blessing in disguise, however, since the policies that these candidates support (Medicare for all, guaranteed income, free college and free everything else) are delusional at best.

The fact is, the country is exhausted. We’ve turned off our television news coverage and tuned into Nick at Night. We want a distraction from all of this distraction. We just want Washington to get back to work for the American people. Is that too much to ask?