Sunday, July 26, 2020

Judge orders Seattle news outlets to turn over unpublished images of riots to police





Judge orders Seattle news
outlets to turn over unpublished
images of riots to police




John Sexton • July 25, 2020


A judge in King County has ordered five news organizations to turn over videos and photos to police to help authorities identify people involved in rioting back in May.


King County Superior Court Judge Nelson Lee sided with the Police Department in a morning hearing, ruling that its subpoena was enforceable. He found that the photos and video were critical for an investigation into the alleged arson of SPD vehicles and theft of police guns…

The judge placed some limits on the subpoena. He said police could use the images to identify suspects only in the arson and gun theft investigations. Detectives could not use the photos or video to pursue suspects in vandalism or other lesser crimes — even if police found such evidence.


On May 30 several police vehicles were set on fire and police equipment, including weapons, was stolen:
During the protests, vandals heavily damaged six police vehicles. They smashed windows, removed ballistic helmets, uniforms, emergency medical equipment and fire extinguishers, and used an accelerant to start fires in five vehicles, according to a police affidavit and other documents.

A loaded Glock 43 semi-automatic pistol and a loaded Colt M4 carbine rifle with a suppressor remain missing, according to the SPD affidavit.


A total of 5 weapons were stolen from the vehicles that day, but three of them were recovered. You may recall video of one of the guns being recovered by a security guard who saw a protester take it and intervened to get it back:




Last month the FBI identified and arrested a woman believed responsible for torching five of the police vehicles. Her name is Margaret Channon and she has been charged with five counts of arson. As you can see in this clip, authorities used photographs showing some distinctive tattoos to identify her.




The Seattle Times is one of the organizations ordered to turn over images. The paper strongly opposed the subpoena on the grounds that this could make reporters the targets of more violence by protesters who are eager to avoid being identified:


The media outlets, as well an amicus brief submitted by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, also outline another major objection. They say that granting the subpoena could foster a public impression that journalists are an investigative arm of law enforcement, which could lead to physical harassment when they cover protests.

“Recent examples of violence against journalists covering protests demonstrate that these concerns are well founded,” stated the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filing, which noted that a journalist covering a May gathering outside a Tucson, Arizona, police station was punched, pushed and kicked by protesters who stated he was “with the police.”

Danny Gawlowski, a Seattle Times assistant managing editor, said in a declaration submitted to the court that one Times photographer was punched in the face by a protester. His statement said that newspaper staff have repeatedly had to explain to protesters that they are independent, and those assurances are instrumental to safely and accurately reporting the news.


I think they have a point here. Antifa goons already attack anyone with a camera. This decision will only prove to them that any professional reporter with a camera is potentially helping the police. So I suspect in future the black bloc are going to be more aggressive about going after local news cameras.

While I don’t want to see any journalists get hurt for doing their jobs, part of me does wonder if a few more smashed cameras might finally convince some in the national media that the thugs breaking things in Seattle and elsewhere aren’t the good guys.





Don't Forget to Recommend
 and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage


at

Portland Rioters: ‘Every City, Every Town, Burn the Precincts to the Ground’


AP featured image
 Article by Nick Arama in "RedState"

 The protest/riot in Portland last night was massive, by some counts almost 7500 people — certainly, there were several thousand.

The number of people who are involved in these actions is more than a little troubling, and the numbers are big, not just in Portland.


 “Peaceful protesters.”



Remember how some Democrats tried to argue when they said defund the police, they really didn’t mean total abolition of the police? It was just about redirecting some of the money? Then some crazy cities actually voted to give them what they wanted, cutting by 50% or making other significant cuts.

So now what do they want? In case you bought the prior line, they make it very clear in their chants last night.

“No cops, no prisons, total abolition.”




 Just in case that isn’t clear, here’s more. It’s not about justice, police brutality, or George Floyd.



That’s the platform, but media won’t report it accurately because no one would accept it and it shows them to be the radicals they are.

Once they got to the federal courthouse, they went into their same routine again, as we reported earlier. 


 They employed saws, hammers, and ropes but they’re really awful at this.

 They finally got the fence down but were then bum-rushed by the feds, who had a lot of agents there.



 It doesn’t end well for them, as the tearful cries of one Antifa person busted show.


 Portland Police also got involved and dragged off some of the screaming rioters.

 Are Democrats and the national media going to decry this or call it what it is? Unfortunately, the answer is no. But that says everything right there about them, that they wouldn’t.

https://www.redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/07/26/portland-rioters-every-city-every-town-burn-the-precincts-to-the-ground/ 




Don't Forget to Recommend and Follow us at our
W3P Homepage


at

Olivia de Havilland, Golden Age of Hollywood star, dies at 104

Olivia de Havilland, one of the last remaining stars from the Golden Age of Hollywood, has died at the age of 104.

 


De Havilland's career spanned more than 50 years and almost 50 feature films, and she was the last surviving actor from Gone with the Wind (1939).
The film earned her one of her five Oscar nominations.
De Havilland, who had lived in Paris since 1960, was central in taking down Hollywood's studio system, giving actors better contracts.
She also had a tempestuous relationship with her sister, fellow Oscar-winning actress Joan Fontaine.
At the time of her death, De Havilland was the oldest living performer to have won an Oscar.


Olivia Mary de Havilland was born in Tokyo in 1916 and soon moved to California with her family.
She made her breakthrough in Captain Blood, opposite Errol Flynn, and the pair developed an immediate chemistry.


De Havilland was then cast in the role of Melanie in David O Selznick's epic adaptation of the Margaret Mitchell novel, Gone with the Wind.
She lost the best supporting actress Oscar to Hattie McDaniel, who played Mammy in the film.
But she did win an Oscar in 1946 for her role in To Each His Own, and then a second for The Heiress in 1949.
De Havilland also famously turned down the role of Blanche DuBois in the 1951 adaptation of A Streetcar Named Desire. Vivien Leigh won an Oscar for the role.
De Havilland continued to act until the late 1980s, winning a Golden Globe in 1986 for Anastasia: The Mystery of Anna.
Off screen, she took on the studios at a time when they had complete control over their stars.
Backed by the Screen Actors Guild, she took Warner Brothers to court when it added time to her original contract as a penalty for turning down roles.
The California Supreme Court ruled in her favour in what became known as the De Havilland Law, which loosened the grip studios had on their actors.






https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-53546021
at

Most Americans Want To Re-Open Schools and Science Says It's Safe

Why do the Democrat Party and their media lackeys keep lying about it?


Media bias often comes down to framing, and the Associated Press just supplied us with a glistening example of how it’s done.

“AP-NORC poll: Very few Americans back full school reopening,” blared a Thursday headline in the outlet. Based on the survey’s results, however, that headline could easily have been rewritten to say “Very few Americans back full school closures” or “Most Americans back full or partial school reopening,” both of which would have been fairer descriptions of the results.

The poll actually found 68 percent of adults believe K-12 schools should open with major adjustments (46 percent), minor adjustments (14 percent), or “as usual” (eight percent). That means 68 percent of adults “back” schools reopening, including 56 percent of Democrats.

You can see what the AP did here, stretching to cast the results in the least favorable light for Republicans. That’s not because a bunch of reporters got together in a back room and conspired to undercut the GOP, it’s because their monolithic ideological perspective informs their interpretation of the news.

Liberals and conservatives can look at the same glass of water and say it’s either half full or half empty. The goal of fair reporters is to document those disagreements, not weigh in on them. This task necessarily involves some judgment calls, like filling up the front page and determining news value.

The news value in this case would seem to be that a majority of adults want schools reopened, not that a tiny minority of them want “full” reopening, a position the poll itself found virtually nobody holds. Given that almost nobody is arguing we should reopen schools with zero precautions, the AP’s decision to insert “full” into the headline is revealing. They’re arguing against a conservative strawman.

In his coverage of the poll on “Special Report,” Bret Baier gave the results fairer framing. “A lot of focus today on the ‘open as usual’ being only eight percent, but if you add it all up, you’re at 68 percent that want it open somehow,” he said, tossing to the AP’s Julie Pace. “The majority, as you cite in our poll there, want schools to open, but most people want to see some kind of adjustments,” Pace acknowledged.

This is hardly the worst example of media bias, but it’s a very clear one.

 ❧

Schools have been closed nationwide since the coronavirus outbreak began in the United States in early to mid-March. Since then, scientific research has largely reached a consensus regarding the safety for school-aged children, encompassing all parts of the COVID-19 threat including their risks of development and rates of transmission.

According to the Foundation for Research of Equal Opportunity, maintaining the closure of schools poses expansive threats to the mental, emotional, and physical health of children and their family than the reopening schools could.

“While the risks of COVID-19 in children are low and manageable, the harms of prolonged school closures are high. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, ‘The importance of in-person learning is well-documented, and there is already evidence of the negative impacts on children because of school closures in the spring of 2020,’” the report says.

The science also points to children being at very low risk of hospitalization or death from the novel coronavirus. 

“The Center for Disease Control’s most recent report shows 12 pediatric COVID deaths total, compared to 174 pediatric flu deaths this season. In the 2018-2019 flu season there were 400 pediatric deaths, and the 2009 swine flu pandemic killed 2,000 children,” writes Phil Kerpen in The Federalist. 

Despite the strong scientific support for sending children back to school next month, democrats still advocate for keeping schools closed and continuing alternate forms of learning. 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been pushing back on school openings since early July, when she said, “We don’t want our children to take risks to go to school.”

Democratic governors, including the governor of the state with the highest number of COVID-19 deaths, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, are hesitant in opening schools. Cuomo claims his likely pending decision to remain closed is “data-driven.”

“Everybody wants to reopen schools, but you only reopen if it’s safe to reopen, and that’s determined by the data,” Cuomo said. “You don’t hold your finger up and feel the wind, you don’t have an inspiration, you don’t have a dream, you don’t have an emotion–look at the data. We test more and we have more data than any state. If you have the virus under control, reopen. If you don’t have the virus under control, then you can’t reopen.”

Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, are pushing for schools to go back to teaching in-person. The next COVID-19 relief package, proposed by a Senate Republican, will include $70 billion for K-12 education, half of which is for schools that reopen in-person. It leaves only $5 billion for governors’ discretionary education spending. The education spending accounts for just a small percentage of the $1 trillion total package that is set for negotiations with democrats this upcoming week.

President Donald Trump has also expressed strong support for reopening schools this fall. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, the president faces resistance from local leaders, many of whom are Democrats.

“President Trump has repeatedly said he wants schools to reopen fully and that keeping them physically closed hurts the economy and working parents. But some state and local leaders have already postponed school start dates and delayed in-person learning, saying it is too dangerous to have children back on campus where infections could spread,” the article reads.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, however, recommends leaving the decision at the discretion of localities. Trump accused Biden of taking a meager stance for political reason, and thereby putting the health of students second.

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany quoted Dr. Scott Atlas in a press briefing, who says the argument to keep schools closed is non-existent when looking at the science. Atlas is a member of Hoover’s Working Group on Health Care Policy and the former head of neuroradiology at Stanford Medical School.

“Of course we can do it. Everyone else in the Western world, our peer nations, are doing it. We are the outlier here,” she said. “The science is very clear on this… The risk of critical illness from COVID is far less for children than that of seasonal flu. The science is on our side here. We encourage for localities and states to just simply follow the science. Open our schools.”


at

Escalation: State will fight John MacArthur & Grace Community Church




Published in "Capstone Report"
 

John MacArthur challenges Leftist Tyrants; State promises crackdown

Conservative Pastor John MacArthur puts the People’s Republic of California on notice: Christ is head of the church and not Caesar.

Johnson says, ‘State & Local leaders plan to cut power to the church’

Compare Leftist love for riots, casinos and Black Lives Matter to how they persecute Christ’s Church.

In a powerful statement Pastor John MacArthur of Grace To You put the State of California on notice: Christians will not bow to oppression. 

MacArthur argued for sphere sovereignty. He said that God ordained various types of authority like the family, the church and the state. Each is granted unique power from God and should defend its sphere of interest from intrusion by the others.

This is very good. It recognizes government has limited authority. This is critical in time like this where the very future of limited government is at stake. MacArthur’s statement will fuel a renewed Christian interest in defending both church and individual rights from government intrusion.

MacArthur does another important service by asserting our rights preceded the creation of the state. Thus, rights are not granted by the State or the Constitution. Thus, our rights are not resting on the good will of the state or even our Constitution, but rather God and God’s created order.

I have a few minor quibbles with MacArthur on political theology—but that is for another time. Now we must stand shoulder-to-shoulder with MacArthur, the elders and the people of Grace Community Church.

Pray.

We must pray for them because the state and local leaders plan to crackdown on the service.

According to Phil Johnson, “The local authorities say their plan is to shut off power to the church.”




This is only the beginning.

Leftist tyrants will deny you power, water and eventually everything in their quest for totalitarian control.

I write this as someone who favors a mask (and did back when the CDC was telling the public not to buy one. My reason? Medical professionals and research before this outbreak always indicated they were necessary and useful) and favors public and private measures to slow the outbreak of this Pandemic.

However, it is time Christians stand up against the double standard. These Leftist tyrants favor some activities such as gambling and riots while punishing Christians for worshiping God.

This is against America’s founding principles.

This is against God’s commands.

We must ignore Caesar and obey God. We are fortunate in that we can also obey God and at the same time obey the Constitution.

However you feel about MacArthur and Calvinism, I urge you to put that aside. Support these brave leaders and brave people in the church.

https://capstonereport.com/2020/07/26/escalation-state-will-fight-john-macarthur-grace-community-church/34706/

Commentary on Politics & Religion




Don't Forget to Recommend and Follow us at our
W3P Homepage


at

Progressives to Cities: Drop Dead


The ruin of major liberal cities 

by progressive policies 

is a significant political event.



On Tuesday the New York City sky was clear, blue and filled with sunshine. That’s it for this week’s good news. We turn now to Portland, Ore.; Seattle, Chicago, San Francisco and all of America’s other seemingly Godforsaken cities.

President Trump watches a lot of television, so he’s seeing the same daily urban nightmares we’re seeing. It’s hard not to sympathize with his instinct to send in federal authorities to restore civil order to cities like Portland, as he proposed Wednesday with the expansion of an urban anticrime initiative called Operation Legend to Chicago and Albuquerque.

It’s equally hard to disagree that, other than protecting federal facilities, Mr. Trump should let all of these smug Portlandia American cities stew in their own juices. 

I loved it when Portland’s mayor, Ted Wheeler,  said the federal presence “is actually leading to more violence and more vandalism.” Where’s Groucho Marx when we need him to make sense of nonsense?

Still, no matter one’s politics, it is sickening to see this happening to any U.S. city—mobs hammering and burning buildings along Portland’s streets and then a carbon-copy mob battering Seattle.

Days before, we’d watched video of two groups of police beaten bloody on the Brooklyn Bridge. Days later 15 people were wounded in a gun battle at a Chicago funeral for the victim of a drive-by gang shooting. 

There is a serious matter of civil order at issue here, but if you can look beyond the mayhem, something else quite sad is happening. The irrepressible vitality of these cities—their reason for being—is disappearing, undone by pandemic, lockdowns and a new culture of permanent protest. 

For years, I’ve been on the email list of Spike Wilner, the owner-founder of two jewel-like jazz clubs in New York’s Greenwich Village—Small’s and Mezzrow. Mr. Wilner’s weekly paeans to jazz and the people who play it are always a good, diverting read. This week’s email was different. Here is a chunk of it, because he’s got the city exactly right: 
“It’s hard to describe but the feeling is gone, the vibe absent. The thing that made New York, New York is missing. What’s it like now? 

“It’s very tense. People are very anxious and angry. Everything is closed or, if open, listless. There is no nightlife. If you leave your apartment after 9 p.m. it’s a complete ghost town inhabited by wraiths and zombies, dangerous people. . . . In certain parts of town you have a mob of folks partying outside, like a street fair. Other folks keep their masks tightly on and live in fear. The only place I’ve found some civility and warmth is the city playgrounds where I take my daughter each day. The children are oblivious to the pandemic and just play and climb.”

The political story of the 2016 presidential election was Donald Trump’s identification of overlooked lower-middle-class white voters in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. A new political division may be taking place now in big cities—between progressive elites and working-class residents, primarily the people who own or work for the storefront businesses that are the lifeblood of these cities. Outside wartime, with bombardments turning blocks into rubble, I’m hard put to think of any precedent for what is happening to these U.S. cities now. The enforced pandemic closures and isolation were bad enough. But the endless protests—with their instinct to violence and atmosphere of dread—have broken the spirit of many cities.

A story recently in Crain’s New York Business described how the outdoor dining tables of restaurants in Hell’s Kitchen on Manhattan’s West Side are overrun by disturbed or half-dressed beggars, whom Mayor Bill de Blasio’s administration has housed in nearby hotels. Said one restaurant owner: “Every bit of progress this neighborhood has made over the years is stepping backwards.” 

During New York’s 1970s financial crisis, the Daily News ran a famous headline about then-President Gerald Ford —“Ford to City: Drop Dead.” Here’s the update—“Progressives to Cities: Drop Dead.”

People living and working in these cities, most of whom consider themselves liberal, are being sold out by progressive politicians and activists blinded by politics to the quality of daily life. 

Progressive prosecutors refuse to prosecute. Cops are holding back because progressive mayors and governors don’t have their backs. 

Responding to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s directive that no alcohol can be served without food, many bar owners say they won’t survive. The state’s Labor Department just reported an unemployment rate in the Bronx of 24.7%, Depression level. 

The progressive ruin of major cities inhabited by liberals is a significant political event. Consequences that might have emerged over years have been compressed into months by the pandemic and protests. 

It is doubtful many will check the box for Mr. Trump in November, but who knows? Their alternative is Joe Biden, whose contribution to the urban chaos this week was: “There is no reason for the president to send federal troops into a city where people are demanding change peacefully and respectfully.” Which city was he looking at?


at

America Needs a Re-Founding




Article by Matthew J. Peterson in "The American Conservative" 

American conservatism refers to a post-World War II political movement that arose in opposition to the progressive liberalism that dominated our political and culture institutions in the 20th century. It has always included squabbling, disparate elements; the coalition has never quite agreed on what, exactly, it is trying to conserve.

The conservative movement succeeded in keeping America engaged enough to achieve victory in the Cold War against the former Soviet Union—a victory most American elites did not predict.

Conservatives also succeeded in galvanizing organized opposition against cultural dissolution and progressive alterations to our form of government. But it mostly failed to win any of those battles, instead fighting a long retreat. 

This retreat was exacerbated by partial success. Circumstantial policy preferences of the conservative Right hardened into supposed principles of political thought after the Reagan administration. Over time, as the Republican Party establishment absorbed conservatism into itself, the movement evolved into “Conservatism, Inc.”—the set of quasi-official conservative institutions we have with us today.

This state of affairs resulted in President Trump hijacking an anemic Republican Party with the help of Republican voters—and largely without Conservatism, Inc. 

Both party establishments are now scrambling to conserve their power, but the liberalism of the last century is breaking down. The American people no longer trust the institutions it has long controlled, and its cultural hold is waning (due largely to technological disruption). What will replace it?

The Left, in conjunction with its own establishment, wishes to build on the radical changes it has already made, ushering in a governing philosophy of transhumanism, the further enforcement of identity politics, and government-sanctioned domination of all opposition. As in California, the Left explicitly hopes that its control over our institutions combined with immigration will lead to a one-party nation-state. 

President Trump’s first term unexpectedly interrupted this project, revealing the depths to which we have fallen. The administrative state worked with the Left to destroy him by means previously unimaginable in America. 

Looking to the future, the outlines of a new conservative coalition that understands why voters turned to President Trump and not Conservatism, Inc. can be discerned on the horizon. But if it is to last, it will have to build a new framework of policy for the Republican Party on a firmer intellectual foundation. The question of what conservatives are trying to conserve can no longer be ignored. 

Neoconservatism has either degenerated into a defense of the liberal establishment or refuses to acknowledge or grapple with the gravity of the situation.

Paleoconservatism is rising again, and for good reason, but its reliance on tradition has never been enough on its own. Some traditions are good, and some (slavery) are bad: how will we tell the difference, especially in a nation whose tradition and history is now a century of progressive liberalism? 

The Claremont Institute and its friends have always provided a different, albeit partially compatible answer, and it is now more salient than ever: we must preserve and recover distinctly American principles of political life that have long been forgotten. Good tradition is in accord with Nature and Reason, both understood properly in the Anglo-American tradition as compatible with Christianity and divine revelation. 

This synthesis is what formed the American republic. Despite the last century of the American elite’s successful efforts to transform our nation, America yet contains structural and cultural elements that arise from deep within the Western tradition, constituting the prudential response of well-educated statesmen in the old republic to the modern world. 

Perhaps the most documented and observable founding in human history, ours is a regime based on both the protection of natural rights—arising from the contours of human nature, not government sanction or positive law—and the promotion of the common good. It asserted that certain truths, the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God, could be known by men of good will who understand Nature and Reason, and that these truths ought to shape our political structures and our political and cultural life.

Since our Creator made us rational creatures, the consent of the governed is necessary for just governance, but justice is the end of government, and is also necessary to validate that consent. Our branches of government, as bent out of shape as they now are, were not created as merely procedural gimmicks to separate and check power, but to allow for good governance rather than bad.

But the understanding that formed America is no longer taught to Americans, and to the extent our ruling class is familiar with it at all, it rabidly opposes these ideas. Further, the founding generations did not think that republicanism could survive without Christianity and virtue. For too long, the “culture war” was relegated to the “Religious Right.” It is now an existential civic question. 

Outside of a precious few exceptions, the institutions that should inculcate these truths and way of life do not presently do so. Conservatism must face the fact that in our era conserving alone is not enough. 

The Left re-founded America. We are in need of statesmanship of the highest order to re-found it again. Even those conservatives who believe the founding was flawed often agree on what is needed moving forward. As we do so, we must promote an American way of life that is appealing to Americans of good will.

Conservatism must not merely make arguments, and reshape a bold new platform of policy—it must act on them, wielding “regime-level” power in the service of good political order to do so—or it will fail. We must lead a counter-revolution. Since this is not, by definition, “conservative,” American conservatism may no longer be called “conservatism” if it chooses to rise to the occasion. 

Whether or not conservatives attempt to reshape America back to health is yet unclear, but a coalition in opposition to liberalism will be with us for a while yet—until the Left further establishes the dystopia it is now intent on conserving.


https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/america-needs-a-re-founding/ 




Don't Forget to Recommend and Follow us at our
W3P Homepage



at

Crossfire Coup Crew Been Quiet Lately



Ohr flipped day one when cornered by IG

James Baker flipped once his name started showing up in FOIA

Prediction

Strzok/Page flip to avoid jail - plead out to probation for their testimony upstream

Comey/McCabe have layers of title 18 charges 1001 (to Congress) + 371 + 2384

Image

A person has to draw back to 30,000 ft to get a just a peek of this vast huge scandal. The Spygate alone is more than 100 conspirators from inside and outside of government who directly played significant roles in this seditious scandal.

This includes members of Hillary’s campaign, the leadership of the DNC, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS, Orbis, the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, the State Department, Congress, Congressional staffers, British intelligence, Kremlin-linked Russians and the White House.

That's just Spygate

That doesn't include Ukraine and all that was going on there, that is a totally separate investigation that just stemmed off of the attempted takedown of Trump. The roots of this poisonous tree cover the globe, because Obama and the Clintons were selling our country globally.

As I said before the most disappointing of it all is Barry will avoid prosecution. Even though he'll skate, he's involved. There’s no conceivable way the leadership of so many different agencies could conspire to carry out a plan of this magnitude without his approval - PERIOD.

This thing, this cancer has grown so big it now includes federal judges, there's no way Sullivan goes this far down the road in this Flynn case on his own. He was pushed, because everything he's doing now goes against everything he was taught in law school and everything his past 30 yr history has shown.

And this huge number doesn’t include the dozens of media that willingly accepted & leaked false information & then reported it in order to both, supply added credibility to multiple fraudulent FISA applications & to create a megaphone with which to tear down a sitting POTUS.

The media has played the most disingenuous of parts in this scandal. Parts of this scandal that normally would have proven irresistible to reporters in the past have been purposely ignored. False narratives have been all too willingly promoted and facts flat out ignored.

The only real question remains is when Barr/Trump drop the hammer & all the declassified evidence makes it impossible for the corrupt media to keep ignoring this seditious scam, will the enemedia finally report the truth? Will they ever quit covering for the swamp?

Probably Not



at

Coffee Talk….




~ FBI HQ (left) – Main Justice buildings (right) ~

When you are this close to the institutions, conversations come much easier.   According to those with direct knowledge, when Jeff Sessions recused (fire-walled) from anything to do with the special counsel in ’17, ’18, ’19, Rod Rosenstein “should have” held oversight.  However, in his Senate Judiciary testimony of June 3, 2020, Rosenstein admitted that he conducted no oversight over the Mueller probe.

Rosenstein’s justification was he did not feel it was his position to question their “investigative processes“, later saying “everything was an investigative process“, ergo anything the special counsel was doing was considered valid; nothing was questioned, and Rosenstein felt it was his position to “facilitate” the Mueller team.

This is a key point:  The special counsel took over Main Justice.

Which begs the question….. If Rosenstein was providing everything; who was managing the daily events inside Main Justice while the SC events were ongoing?  Who was the internal coordinator for the legal and investigative crew?  Who was the bridge?  Answer:


 Tashina “Tash” Gauhar, literally from the school and law firm of former Obama “wingman” Attorney General Eric Holder.

2009- Tashina Gauhar is the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Intelligence. Ms. Gauhar has extensive experience working with the U.S. Intelligence Community and has held a variety of national security positions within the Department since 2001, including serving as an Assistant Counsel in the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review and later as the Deputy Chief of Operations in the Office of Intelligence, and recently the Chief of Operations. Prior to joining the Justice Department, Ms. Gauhar was an associate at the law firm of DLA Piper (then Piper Marbury Rudnick and Wolfe, LLP).  (link)

Tashina Gauhar was the Mid-Year-Exam (MYE) team member who was on a September 29, 2016, conference call with the FBI New York field office about the Weiner/Abedin laptop.  Tash Gauhar was directly at the center, no, the epicenter, of the most controversial time frame for the Mid-Year-Event team.

Tashina was one of only three MYE people who actually had the responsibility to review the Clinton emails from the Weiner/Abedin laptop. [The other two were Peter Strzok and the unknown “lead analyst”]

Tashina is probably only eclipsed by Lisa Page and Peter Strzok in the level of influence within the entire Mid-Year-Team apparatus.  “Tash”, as she was known to the team, is a hub amid a very tight circle.  Tashina Gauhar held a great deal of influence.  Suffice to say, the spawn of Eric Holder is a big deal in the story.

You know what other decision Tashina Gauhar was influential in?

Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ recusal:


Note this meeting was on March 2nd, 2017.  Which prompted this announcement:

WASHINGTON POST, March 2 2017 – Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Thursday that he will recuse himself from investigations related to the 2016 presidential campaign, which would include any Russian interference in the electoral process.
Speaking at a hastily called news conference at the Justice Department, Sessions said he was following the recommendation of department ethics officials after an evaluation of the rules and cases in which he might have a conflict.
“They said that since I had involvement with the campaign, I should not be involved in any campaign investigation,” Sessions said. He added that he concurred with their assessment and would thus recuse himself from any existing or future investigation involving President Trump’s 2016 campaign. (link)

Yes, the DOJ lawyer at the heart of the Clinton-email investigation; the DOJ lawyer hired by Eric Holder at his firm and later at the DOJ; the DOJ lawyer who was transferred to the Clinton probe;  the DOJ lawyer at the epicenter of the Weiner laptop issues, the only one from MYE who spoke to New York; the DOJ lawyer who constructs the FISA applications on behalf of Main Justice;…. just happens to be the same DOJ lawyer recommending to AG Jeff Sessions that he recuse himself.

Once Jeff Sessions recused, then what responsibilities did Tashina cover?

Tashina Gauhar was also the internal coordinator inside Main Justice who was the link between the special counsel and the resources of the entire department.  Essentially, Rod Rosenstein’s willful blindness put Tashina in a position of power.  This is how the special counsel group was able to take over Main Justice and coordinate their efforts.  Everything flowed through Tash while she protected the Weissmann, Zelby, Van Grack, et al team as they went about targeting the Trump administration. These were the usurpers embedded inside Main Justice while carrying out the “insurance policy” mission.

Ms. Tashina Gauhar had quite a portfolio:

Tashina Gauhar left the DOJ in Nov 2019.  She went to work for Boeing.

Tashina Gauhar was the Deputy Attorney General’s national security adviser and deputy assistant attorney general for intelligence since 2009. Tash was at the DOJ since 2001, and she formerly served as assistant counsel and chief of operations in what was then called the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review.  She worked for DAG Rosenstein as she did for DAG Sally Yates.  Tash Gauhar was the DAG’s executor and enforcer for national security.

Tashina required all of the AG packages for foreign policy appointments to go through her.

As the DOJ point on national security, only Gauhar received email notification about NSC meetings.  During her tenure she did not always pass those notifications along, so the AG (Sessions) both missed NSC meetings and went unprepared when she let the notifications wait until the last minute.

She was very close to the Counter Intelligence division and came to David Laufman’s defense.  [David Laufman was a DOJ-NSD lawyer who later became the attorney for Monica McLean, the FBI public information officer who wrote the complaint letter against Justice Kavanaugh with Christine Blasey-Ford.]

Tashina is reported to have attempted to get access to highly compartmentalized NSA information, and lied about being an appropriately cleared recipient.

In 2014 Attorney General Eric Holder changed the entire DOJ organizational chart making the Deputy AG the DOJ’s main point contact for the entire national security process.


Tashina Gauhar was also the person who retrieved the transcripts (tech cuts) of Gen. Flynn’s conversations with Sergey Kislyak, and she was assisting Mary McCord and Sally Yates at the meeting with White House Counsel Don McGahn.

Tashina Gauhar was frequently seen at public social gatherings with Mueller investigators.

Tashina Gauhar was deeply involved in the Iran JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) deal and the side agreements within the Iran deal.

Tashina Gauhar was one of a select few people to convince the AG that he should recuse himself.

Tashina Gauhar was/is best friends with Lisa Page.

Tashina Gauhar told the FBI to stop enforcing and prosecuting export control and sanctions laws to protect the Iran deal.

Gauhar told the FBI not to have any public information campaign targeting private companies and educating them about dual use technologies.

Tashina Gauhar told the DEA to stop drug investigations re: Hezbollah related to Operation Casandra.

Tashina Gauhar attended NSC meetings during the Obama Administration representing DOJ.  Tashina also knows all about the Uranium One deal.

Tashina Gauhar blocked the AG’s office from getting Senior Executive Service (SES) people. The AG had three SES people and the DAG had nine.

Tashina Gauhar was put in charge of reviewing the classified material President Trump ordered be passed to Congress, andshe was the liaison between the Deputy AG (Rosenstein) and the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for national security.


at