For the Real Collusion Story, Look at Hillary Clinton
More and more it appears that is the case. From Brian Cates (EPOCH TIMES):
The other narrative is one that mainstream media journalists resent every second they have to spend covering it. They want to suppress it and pretend that only right-wing conspiracy theorists discuss it.
This is, of course, the narrative where all the evidence keeps surfacing—that the real collusion during the 2016 presidential election was between the Clinton campaign, top officials in the DOJ, and the FBI, the intelligence community, and key members of the mainstream media. And this collusion involved framing the Trump campaign for stealing the election with the help of the Russian government.
And now even more evidence has surfaced that top DOJ and FBI officials were colluding with Democratic operatives to influence the 2016 election.
John Solomon of The Hill, in a recent report, revealed evidence that demonstrated that the former No. 4 official at the DOJ held a meeting with Fusion GPS’s Glenn Simpson, during which the Steele dossier and its sources and allegations were discussed. Solomon reports that this official took detailed notes.
Bruce Ohr, who’s been twice demoted at the FBI since his role in this sordid affair was revealed, has been called to testify to Congress on Aug. 28. During that testimony, he’s certain to be asked about his contacts with both Steele and Simpson, as well as his failure to disclose that his wife, Nellie Ohr, was employed by Fusion GPS where she played a role helping to create the Steele dossier.
So evidence continues to mount that the Trump–Russian collusion narrative is actually a hoax—a massive political dirty trick that was hatched by the Clinton campaign, paid for with DNC cash, and laundered through Perkins Coie, all to create a fake dossier that was used to justify an FBI investigation as well as to spawn a strategic leaking campaign to the media.
Poor Ms. Clinton.And poor us because we lost someone who really mattered today, Aretha Franklin.
- Friday's @freep will feature an 8-page commemorative section on @ArethaFranklin. Here is the cover. RIP. Queen of Soul. #respect
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:
Suspected Islamic State member accused of killing police officer in Iraq arrested in Sacramento, where he settled as a refugee lat.ms/2MvkD7B
This is the US Justice Dept's press release on the issue:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
Iraqi National Wanted for Murder in Iraq Arrested In California
Had Previously Attempted To Gain Lawful Permanent Resident Status
Had Previously Attempted To Gain Lawful Permanent Resident Status
Omar Ameen, 45, an Iraqi national, wanted on a murder charge in Iraq,
appeared before a federal magistrate judge in Sacramento, California
today in connection with proceedings to extradite him to face trial in
Iraq. Ameen settled in Sacramento as a purported refugee and attempted
to gain legal status in the United States.
The arrest was announced by Assistant Attorney General for National
Security John C. Demers, U.S. Attorney McGregor W. Scott for the Eastern
District of California, Assistant Attorney General Brian A.
Benczkowski of the Criminal Division, Assistant Director Michael
McGarrity of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, and Special Agent in
Charge Sean Ragan of the FBI’s Sacramento Field Office.
An arrest warrant charging Ameen with the 2014 murder of an Iraqi
police officer was issued on May 16, by a judge of the Baghdad Federal
Al-Karkh Inquiry Court. In accordance with its treaty obligations with
Iraq, the United States filed a complaint in Sacramento seeking a
warrant for Ameen’s arrest based on the extradition request.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan issued the warrant on Tuesday,
and Ameen was arrested by the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force in
Sacramento today.
The Iraqi arrest warrant and extradition request allege that after
the town of Rawah, Iraq fell to the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham
(ISIS) on June 21, 2014, Ameen entered the town with a caravan of ISIS
vehicles and drove to the house of the victim, who had served as an
officer in the Rawah Police Department. On the evening of June 22,
2014, after the caravan arrived at the victim’s house, Ameen and other
members of the convoy allegedly opened fire on the victim. Ameen then
allegedly fired his weapon at the victim while the victim was on the
ground, killing him.
Ameen, originally of Rawah, in the Anbar province of Iraq, fled Iraq
following the alleged murder, and later settled in Sacramento as a
purported refugee. It is alleged that Ameen’s family supported and
assisted the installation of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) in Rawah, and that
Ameen was a member of AQI and ISIS. It is also alleged that he
participated in various activities in support of those terrorist
organizations, including helping to plant improvised explosive devices,
and committing the murder that is the subject of the extradition
request. Ameen concealed his membership in those terrorist groups when
he applied for refugee status, and later when he applied for a green
card in the United States.
The details contained in the charging document are allegations and have not been proven in court.
Today’s arrest and the subsequent extradition are the product of a
coordinated effort by the U.S. Department of Justice — in particular the
Criminal Division's Office of International Affairs which played a
significant role in the extradition process — the U.S. Department of
State, the FBI — in particular the FBI Sacramento Field Office which
provided considerable resources to further this investigation and ensure
the safety of the American people throughout it — and ICE-Homeland
Security Investigations.
So Omar Ameen came to the US as a refugee and settled in California. Four years later, he has been arrested and will now be returned to Iraq.
Is he guilty?
He's charged. He's accused. And that's a really big problem. The US government is fully aware of the lack of justice in Iraq. Returning him is very likely the same as sentencing him to die. Whether he is innocent or guilty, he is most likely going to be executed. Trials last minutes in Iraq. Rules and laws are not followed.
Grasp that THE NEW YORK TIMES used to do regular updates on the state of justice in Iraq and even they long ago stopped writing. Mainly because nothing changed. Progress did not arrive.
Omar Ameen may be guilty. Right now he has the presumption of innocence. And it's very sad that he is being handed over to a country where he will not get a fair trial and where the outcome from the charges is death.
In Iraq, tens of strikers begin open sit in in front of Basra Province government building after security forces kill a protester while dispersing a protest.
mobp.as/jX8Nm
Margaret Griffis (ANTIWAR.COM) notes, "One protester has died after police fired on a demonstration in Ezzedine Salim, Basra province. Current demonstrators are calling for the release of previously detained protesters."
On KPFA's VOICE OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA, the issue of the protests was addressed yesterday.
They discussed how Tahrir Square in Baghdad has seen protests but smaller ones and how their is the history of closing streets in Baghdad to prevent masses from gathering in Tahrir Square.
Balsam Mustafa: All of the parties, the Iraqi government, is in the Green Zone. So they were very careful to protect the Green Zone and they, as you said, blocked all of the roads. They prevented the protesters from moving forward and, a couple of week ago, they used water canons to prevent the protests for progressing. and this could be another reason why the protests in Baghdad was less than in the other provinces due to the security measures taken by the government.
As the protests continue, so does the violence aimed at them.
IOHR: Security Forces beat the protestor using batons while breaking up the protest.
This violence is a daily event that those brave enough to go into the streets and protest
Since Iraqi Security Forces fired live bullets on protesters in #Basra today, I would like to remind the world about the bullets fired during internet shutdown. Public response: “With our souls, with our blood, we shall defend you, O’Iraq.” @UNIraq #IraqProtests #العراق_ينتفض
Yesterday on KPFA, Balsam Mustafa noted, "There were reports of activists and protesters who were chased and beaten. Many were arrested. Although some of them were soon released on bail, some are still missing."
The demands of the protesters are people needs, the basics. This includes jobs. Baslam noted that in Basra, when new jobs were announced there were "over half a million applicants to only ten thousand jobs."
May 12th, Iraq held elections. Still no government formed. Next month, the KRG holds elections.
#Kurdistan legislative elections on 30 Sept: 773 candidates run for 111 (including 11 quotas) seats, 23 lists.
Iraq May elections: 6690 candidates, 87 lists, 329 (9 quotas) seats.
What explains such a crowded field? intra and inter identity politics could be one reason.
If a government is not formed in Iraq before September 30th, look for the KRG government to be formed before Iraq's national government is formed.
And the Iraq War continues.
Coalition strikes continue against ISIS targets in the Middle Euphrates River Valley and Iraq-Syria border region.
And US troops aren't leaving Iraq any time soon.
Pentagon: "We have assessed that, even after the liberation of ISIS controlled territory, ISIS probably is still more capable than al-Qaida in Iraq at its peak in 2006-2007...suggesting it is well positioned to rebuild and work on enabling its physical caliphate to reemerge"
The Iraq War drags on and on. At CSIS, Anthony Cordrsman offers his evaluation of Iraq which includes the following:
The end result has been a success, at least in fighting ISIS to the
point of destroying the its ability to occupy key Iraqi cities, and its
"caliphate." At the same time, this success has come at the cost of a
major expansion of Iran's military and security role in Iraq, and the
rise of Shi'ite and Sunni militias.
The U.S. has not rebuilt Iraqi forces to a level where they have a
credible capability to deter or defend against Iran, and tensions
between the Arab forces under the control of the central government in
Baghdad and the Kurdish Peshmerga in the North led to a major
confrontation in 2018, where the government forces took back large areas
the Pesh Merga had occupied, but the Arab and Kurdish forces remained
as divided as ever.
Once again, "winning" at the military level has been largely a
tactical success with no apparent strategy for winning even the military
side of a stable peace. And here, it is useful to examine the overall
U.S. approach to all three wars in the President's FY2019 budget request
to Congress – requests which provide far more detail than the almost
total lack of any specifics in the new National Defense Strategy.
The Administration asked for minimal civil aid of any kind but
requested an increase in the cost of the Department of Defense’s request
for such operations for all three wars from $60.1 billion in FY2018 to
$64.2 billion in FY2019 – far lower than the peak of $187 billion in
FY2008. It was also clear from the FY2019 budget request – and
statements by the Secretary of Defense and senior U.S. officers – that
it was seeking a significant increase in direct train and assist aid to
Afghan, Iraqi, and Syria forces in the field.
The number of troops the U.S. actually sent forward to assist allied
combat forces in each country was never made clear, and the current
Department of Defense monthly reports on military and civilian personnel
overseas does not include entries for Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria.
However, the budget request for FY2019 did state that the U.S. planned
to keep the total number of average military personnel actually deployed
in Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria. at 12,000 (less some 3,000 to 6,000 more
in “temporary” personnel.
This was a massive cut from 187,000 in FY2008, but much higher that
the low of 8,000 troops in FY2017. There also was a major increase in
other levels of support although the Department did not provide a break
out of the number of contractors or civilians, and the budget
justifications do not provide any clear way to tie the Department of
Defense reporting to the full State Department civil OCO effort
Other reporting by AFCENT showed that the U.S. had again made massive
earlier increases in its active air support for local ground forces.
The U.S. increased air support from a low of 1,411 sorties per year that
actually fired munitions in Iraq and Syria in 2014, to some
10,000-12,000 per year in 2015-2017. The U.S. sharply reduced the number
of attack sorties per month in 2018, but only after making massive
increases in such sorties in the fight to after liberate Mosul and
inflict major defeats on ISIS in both Iraq and Syria.
Equally important, the FY2019 budget submission did not describe any
form of plan or strategy for any of the three wars for the portion of
U.S. wartime spending devoted to Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO)
beyond the coming fiscal year. It made no attempt to define a strategy
or real-world budget estimate for the remaining period of FY2020 to
FY2023 in the Future Year Defense Plan. The Administration also has not
made any such attempt since submitting its budget request, or described
any plan to build-up Iraq forces, reduced Iranian influence, reduced the
growing flow of Russian arms sales, or help create some nation-wide
systems for the rule of law and local security.
To repeat, we never bought the lie that ISIS was defeated in Iraq because we never confused their adapting to what, for them, were excellent conditions. Meaning that the goal of terrorists cells and organizations is not to govern or rule. Iraq's government was so inept at the time (headed then by Nouri al-Maliki) that ISIS was able to take areas and govern them. They continue to do that in an area in Anbar Province but that is not their goal or aim and ending that in Mosul did not mean the defeat of ISIS. Suggesting otherwise, as the media did, is a misreading of the basic objectives and of international political theory.
Cordesman continues:
As for the civil side, the U.S.
seems to have almost deliberately ignore the warning from the World Bank
regarding the cost of rebuilding the areas damaged during the fighting
with ISIS or the far higher costs of economic reform that can meet the
needs of the Iraqi people and win their support for the central
government. Just as the U.S. effectively abandoned serious efforts at
nation building and stability operations in Afghanistan in 2014, and
never tried to restore them when it renewed major military support; the
U.S. ended such efforts in Iraq in 2011 and never renewed them as it
effectively went nearly bankrupt under the combined pressures a massive
need for structural reform, the cost of the fighting, and major
reductions in petroleum export revenues.
Similarly, the U.S. seems to have
done little to try to help Iraq raised one of the lowest ranked levels
of governance in the world, or to shape an outcome of the 2018 election
that would be any less divisive than the 2010 election the helped make
Maliki a would-be authoritarian, renewed the divisions between Sunni and
Shi'ite, and polarized and corrupted Iraq's military forces. In fact,
it is a bit of a contest as to which of the three governments in the
countries the U.S. currently is fighting in is ranked by the World Bank
as have the lowest levels of governance. As for corruption, both Abadi
and Ghani have made some progress in their respective countries, but
Transparency International ranks Syria as the 3rd most corrupt country
in the world, Afghanistan is still ranked 4th, and Iraq is ranked 11th..
The outcome of the Iraqi election
remains unclear and may well remain so for some months, given the
problems to both creating a coalition and making it actually operate.
However, it is already clear that could easily empower Iran, re-divide
Iraq between Shi'ite and Sunni, and/or leave a festering quarrel between
the central government and the Kurds. Such an outcome might well turn
the U.S. "victory" over the ISIS "caliphate" into a major victory for
Iran and defeat for the United States, but it seems to be yet another
aspect of the future than no one in the Administration is willing to
publicly face or address.
He writes of the need for support to be measure-based and that will (and should) remind everyone that this is a road we've traveled before. The benchmarks. Democrats demanded them from the Bully Boy Bush White House. If Iraq didn't meet certain benchmarks, military support would be cut off. Thing is, it never happened. The benchmarks were never met. And the military aid was never cut. It was nonsense. They should have followed it and stood by their words. Instead, the Congressional Dems (with few exceptions -- Lloyd Doggett would be one exception) saw continuing the Iraq War as a way to win the White House in 2008.
What's going to change with new benchmarks?
Benchmarks are a way to continue the war, not a way to end it. Benchmarks will not be pass/fail as they should be. Instead, we will again see press outlets and the government weasling out of what the benchmarks actually demand to insist that progress is being made.
The following sites updated:
A game, Bride of Frankenstein, etc
9 hours ago
Various thoughts
9 hours ago
SHOOTER, COLONY, SHADES OF BLUE
10 hours ago
Those Senate liars
10 hours ago
Brennan the creep
10 hours ago
Canada Complicit in Saudi War Crimes
12 hours ago
The conspiracy
13 hours ago
Alyssa Fake Ass Milano
15 hours ago
