Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/tbrnew5/public_html/wp-includes/post-template.php on line 284

November 10, 2019

Nov 10 2019

The Voice of the White House Washington, D.C. November 10, 2019:
“Working in the White House as a junior staffer is an interesting experience.
When I was younger, I worked as a summer-time job in a clinic for people who had moderate to severe mental problems and the current work closely, at times, echos the earlier one.
I am not an intimate of the President but I have encountered him from time to time and I daily see manifestations of his growing psychological problems.
He insults people, uses foul language, is frantic to see his name mentioned on main-line television and pays absolutely no attention to any advice from his staff that runs counter to his strange ideas.
He lies like a rug to everyone, eats like a hog, makes lewd remarks to female staffers and flies into rages if anyone dares to contradict him.
It is becoming more and more evident to even the least intelligent American voter that Trump is vicious, corrupt and amoral. He has stated often that even if he loses the election in 2020, he will not leave the White House. I have news for Donald but this is not the place to discuss it.
Commentary for November 10: “This impeachment business builds slowly. Trump is blocking his people from testifying but if they are properly subpoenaed then, by law, they have to appear or be taken before a court and ordered to appear. Trump actually believes he is the law itself and that he can do what he wishes without fear of prosecution. He has diddled with his taxes, laundered Russian drug money, continually ripped off small businessmen who are stupid enough to work for his fake LLCs, lied to one and all, deliberately catered to far right religious and political groups not only to get votes but to protect him against any threat of removal from office, be it via Congress or the electorate. Unlike Nixon, who could read the writing on the wall, Trump lives in a fantasy world and his departure from high office will not prove to be either quick or civilized. That he will leave is beyond a doubt but it will take time to repair the wounds he will have inflicted on America’s perceived international reputation.”

The Table of Contents
• ‘We need to hear the evidence’: swing voters give their view on Trump
• For U.S. diplomats, public impeachment hearings could be catharsis and maybe a circus
• As Times Change, the FBI’s Snoopy and Heavy-Handed Ways Continue
• Informant Reveals FBI’s Already Vast Powers to Investigate Right-Wing Extremists
• FBI Guarding America
• An example of an FBI scam: Voice Encryption May Draw U.S. Scrutiny
• The CIA Confessions: The Crowley Conversations
• Encyclopedia of American Loons

‘We need to hear the evidence’: swing voters give their view on Trump
In this Kansas City suburb, voters who went for Trump in 2016 have their doubts about impeachment – but say the president has questions to answer
November 10, 2019
by Chris McGreal in Johnson county, Kansas
The Guardian
Steve Isley sees no reason not to believe what Donald Trump has to say about Congress’s impeachment investigation.
“The Democrats have been trying to impeach him ever since he got elected, so I’m not too wild about it,” said the retired construction worker. “So far I’m doubtful they have any evidence.”
But even Isley, who is planning to vote for the president again next year and scorns all Democrats as “socialists”, is prepared to keep open the possibility that, as the first public hearings begin in Congress next week, the investigation might reveal wrongdoing by Trump that would make impeachment legitimate.
“It’d have to be something along the lines of Nixon,” he said of the president who resigned over Watergate. “It’s not bad enough at this point.”
Isley, who grew up on a Kansas farm, lives in Johnson county, a Kansas City suburb that flipped from supporting Trump in 2016 to unseat a Republican and elect Sharice Davids, a gay Native American, to Congress as a Democrat two years later.
The swing in votes reflected a shift away from Trump in suburbs across America that would appear to complicate his re-election in 2020 if he’s unable to bolster support elsewhere, particularly in rural areas of swing states.
The impeachment hearings unfolding in Washington, which will enter their public phase on Wednesday, look unlikely to help.
The Republican leadership’s efforts to whip up outrage against the process as illegitimate, including a stunt where members of Congress stormed a room where witness depositions were being taken to claim Democrats were trying the president in secret, has again riled a hard core of Trump supporters to rally angrily in his defense.
But there is also a part of the electorate that voted for him – less ideological Republican supporters and independents – who are prepared to see where the evidence leads. They have a more open mind than Trump campaign strategists would like.
A Fox News poll showed nearly half of Americans favor impeaching the president and one-third of those opposed could change their minds if presented with new evidence.
“I vote Republican or I don’t vote,” said Bill Harris, a business manager who supports Trump. “This is all political. Nancy Pelosi is out to get Trump. Anyone can see that. That’s Washington. But I do think he has questions to answer. We need to hear the evidence, hear the people who were there. I’m not against that.”
Harris said he knows of others who voted for Trump whose doubts about the president have been stacking up and that if there is evidence of wrongdoing it would turn them away from him.
“There are those who defend him no matter what and then there are those people who think he’s too unpredictable, too unstable. He’s done some good things on trade but I think there are a lot of Republicans like myself who have doubts and concerns. I wish he would keep his mouth shut,” he said.
Then he added an afterthought.
“It would be a mistake for the Democrats to remove him. They should let the election do that. If the Democrats have the evidence, the voters will make the decision,” he said.
That is precisely what some Johnson county Democrats are counting on. The county won’t make much difference to the overall outcome of the presidential election as Kansas is a solidly Republican state. But it will be crucial in Davids’ fight for re-election and maintaining Democratic control of Congress, and it is reflective of the shift in other big city suburbs across the midwest, which will have an important say in who wins in 2020.
Nancy Leiker, the chair of the Johnson county Democratic party, said impeachment is not the most important issue for most voters. That remains healthcare.
“But I can’t help but think that as the investigation goes on and becomes more public, those numbers will change,” she said.
Leiker said opposition to Trump has drawn more people into campaigning and Democrats think the impeachment hearings can only help.
Cassie Woolworth, a contract IT analyst and single mother of three boys, was among those who largely ignored politics until Trump was elected.
“My generation of women took their eye off the ball. We thought the battles were won,” she said. “When he got elected, I was so angry. I felt so defeated.”
So Woolworth joined a local women’s branch of the Democratic Party and banged on doors to get Davids elected in 2018. She was also out campaigning in local elections last week.
“You’re already seeing the independents here stepping back from the Republican party. I think it’s because Trump keeps speaking,” she said.
Woolworth thinks the impeachment process will evolve into a political test for Republican members of Congress from midwestern states.
“Once people have heard the evidence, they will be judged by voters over how they voted on impeachment,” she said.
Some people will not take very much convincing.
Kent Tyler, an artist who voted for George W Bush and then Barack Obama, regards Trump with disdain but is waiting to see what the impeachment hearings reveal.
“Before I make up my mind, I want to see what will come to light. I think it’s very important,” he said. “I call myself a conservative Democrat. I used to be in the middle. Undeclared. Once Trump got into office, and he started doing his stuff, I switched to Democrat. Things need to be brought to light. I think the evidence is going to be very damaging.”
Still Tyler worries about what the impact of the hearings on an already divided country.
“So much hate has been made in America, I think it’s going to get very nasty,” he said.

For U.S. diplomats, public impeachment hearings could be catharsis and maybe a circus
by Humeyra Pamuk, Jonathan Landay and Arshad Mohammed
November 10, 2019
Reuters
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – On the first day of November, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo sent an internal email to thousands of State Department staff that began: “As champions of American diplomacy, we are in the truth-telling business.”
While the email seen by Reuters focused on global policy challenges, the message extolling truth struck a nerve in a diplomatic corps immersed in an impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump that Pompeo himself has spurned.
Next week three diplomats will be the first to testify in open hearings led by Democrats in the House of Representatives considering whether Trump should be impeached for abusing power by pressing Ukraine to investigate a rival. If so, his potential removal from office would be decided in the Senate.
Ten diplomats past and present have testified behind closed doors, most under subpoena. At least four voiced alarm at the efforts of Trump and his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, to politicize a department that prides itself on being apolitical.
Pompeo’s refusal to cooperate with the House inquiry and his failure to defend career diplomats from attacks fueled discontent. So did a White House spokeswoman’s calling them “radical un-elected bureaucrats waging war on the Constitution.”
“It sure would have been nice for him to say something supporting the troops. The silence is deafening,” a career diplomat said of Pompeo, a former CIA chief under Trump.
Early in the probe, Pompeo sternly objected to efforts to obtain depositions from current and former State Department officials and accused Democrats of bullying and intimidation. He has refused to heed subpoenas for documents.
When the three diplomats testify on Wednesday and Friday, with their reputations on the line as they face potentially harsh questions from Trump’s fellow Republicans in Congress, they will have the backing of many colleagues.
“People are supportive. I think that’s the majority viewpoint,” said a veteran State Department official, one of the 10 current officials and diplomats who spoke to Reuters and who all requested anonymity to avoid retaliation. “There is a sense that we’re getting shafted.”
The officials, who have served under both Democratic and Republican administrations, said the first public hearings are a chance for the diplomatic corps to show Americans they are public servants of integrity and principle who steer clear of partisan politics. While they spoke of deep frustration in the Trump era State Department, they stress it is their job to carry out the president’s policies.
Trump’s allies counter that he has changed the course of U.S. foreign policy with an “America First” approach that aims to bring back U.S. troops from “endless wars” and rebalance trade agreements in America’s favor.
“On the whole, everyone is watching and cheering on Taylor and Yovanovitch,” said another official, referring to William Taylor, the top diplomat in Kiev, and Marie Yovanovitch, whom he replaced in June after she was abruptly recalled by Trump.
Taylor and George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary who handles day-to-day policy on Ukraine, will testify before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday while Yovanovitch is scheduled to appear on Friday.
The State Department would provide no on-the-record comment for this story after multiple requests. A spokesperson confirmed a CBS News report that the department plans to provide legal assistance to employees called to testify.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
MOOD TURNS SOUR
The impeachment inquiry centers on a July 25 phone call in which Trump pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate unsubstantiated corruption accusations against former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, who was on the board of a Ukrainian energy firm.
Pompeo was on the call, but initially failed to acknowledge that he knew of its contents.
Biden is a leading contender for the Democratic nomination to oppose Trump’s bid for re-election next year. He and his son deny wrongdoing.
In closed-door testimony, witnesses have bolstered a whistleblower’s accusations that Trump sought the Biden investigation in return for granting Zelenskiy a White House visit and releasing nearly $400 million in U.S. security assistance to help Ukraine against Russia-backed separatists.
“It’s not what Pompeo is doing. It’s not his responses,” said another person who works in the State Department. “It’s the underlying facts of leveraging U.S. aid for political gain. That is so appalling.”
Trump and Pompeo deny any improper conduct, the president calling the probe a Democratic bid to undo his surprise 2016 victory ahead of a November 2020 election.
Becoming secretary of state in April 2018, Pompeo won early plaudits from career staff for reversing some of the unpopular policies of his predecessor Rex Tillerson by, for instance, increasing promotions and lifting a hiring freeze.
One career diplomat said that while “morale is low and everyone is complaining,” Pompeo was preferable to Tillerson in part because his access to Trump had allowed him to better advocate for the department.
While the hearings will give the diplomats a direct channel to Americans, some colleagues worry they will also be subject to brutal questioning in the room and vicious attacks outside by Trump allies looking to undermine their credibility.
“On the one hand, it’s good. On the other hand, it’s just going to degenerate into a circus,” one official said.
Reporting by Humeyra Pamuk, Jonathan Landay and Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Mary Milliken and Howard Goller

As Times Change, the FBI’s Snoopy and Heavy-Handed Ways Continue
The bureau has a long history of escaping accountability for intrusive and abusive action.
November 7, 2019
by J.D. Tuccille
reason.com
The FBI is in the news a lot these days over its role in the investigation of alleged ties between Donald Trump’s successful 2016 presidential campaign and the Russian government. But long before Americans debated whether the federal law enforcement agency was a righteous tribune of the people or a meddling agent of the Deep State, the FBI was something else: a nosy and unaccountable domestic enforcement agency that, by rights, should send chills down the spines of people of all political persuasions—especially since the bureau’s heavy-handedness continues to this day.
The San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) pulled out of a local Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) with the FBI in 2017. At the time, the move was widely portrayed as an effort to shield immigrants and the Muslim community from the Trump administration, and that certainly played a role. But internal FBI documents obtained by The Intercept show that there was more at stake.
City officers who participated in the JTTF were simultaneously subject to city ordinances and the feds’ Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG), both of which are enforceable against violators. That caused serious problems when local rules protective of civil liberties ran up against federal regulations that sought to keep a tight cap on everything in sight.
“There are requirements set forth in SFPD General Order 8.10 which govern investigations into First Amendment Activities,” the FBI documents reveal. “Compliance with SFPD General Order 8.10 subjects SFPD FBI [task force officers] to possible criminal exposure for disseminating/disclosing FBI documents to include classified documents.”
Police officers failing to comply with San Francisco police rules could be disciplined or fired, the document continues. But compliance with those rules could get them criminally prosecuted by the feds.
Given the number of cases the JTTF took on that invoked First Amendment concerns, participating cops were stuck in a Catch 22, having to decide which jurisdiction’s rules to violate, and hoping for higher-ups to have mercy.
So, San Francisco pulled out of the JTTF, followed by Portland, Oregon, a year later, in moves largely portrayed as confrontations between sanctuary cities and a nativist administration. But, while Portland nodded toward current political conflicts over immigration in its announcement severing ties with its JTTF, it also added that “Freedom of Information Act requests filed by ACLU affiliates in 2004, 2005, and 2006 revealed that the JTTF collected information on peaceful political activity.”
“If the FBI is willing to target activist groups that do nothing more than feed our houseless communities, there is no limit to what political activities they will deem worthy of excessive investigation,” says the website of Portland Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty.
With regard to San Francisco’s decision, “the issues raised by the white paper also precede the current president, reflecting the FBI’s post-9/11 transformation into a secretive domestic intelligence agency and the challenges that creates for municipal police departments eager to cooperate with the feds but less capable of shielding themselves from local accountability by invoking ‘national security’ claims,” according to The Intercept’s Ryan Devereaux.
The conflicts extend beyond Portland and San Francisco.
“Clashes are erupting between local and federal officials over the hundreds of joint task forces that operate around the country,” notes The Marshall Project, which reports on the criminal justice system:
The problem, police officials say, is that local cops assigned to joint task forces are not bound by department rules, such as wearing body cameras, which the feds have prohibited. The FBI and U.S. Marshals allow the use of deadly force if a person poses an ‘imminent danger,’ using a definition that is less strict than many police departments’… Task-force members are also immune to civilian lawsuits in a way that regular officers are not.
Concerns about over-the-top FBI conduct and minimal accountability sound awfully familiar to anybody with some knowledge of history.
“The FBI … has placed more emphasis on domestic dissent than on organized crime and, according to some, let its efforts against foreign spies suffer because of the amount of time spent checking up on American protest groups,” the Senate’s Church Committee complained in 1976. “As intelligence operations developed … rationalizations were fashioned to immunize them from the restraints of the Bill of Rights and the specific prohibitions of the criminal code.”
The post-9/11 environment, as The Intercept’s Devereaux suggests, seems to have breathed new life into the FBI’s old ways when it comes to monitoring peaceful conduct and shielding itself from scrutiny and consequences. That’s true of the task forces, but also of modern electronic surveillance.
“A federal judge secretly ruled last year that [FBI] procedures for searching for Americans’ emails within a repository of intercepted messages that were gathered without a warrant violated Fourth Amendment privacy rights,” The New York Times reported last month.
The judge’s ruling—upheld by a three-judge appeals panel—required the FBI to distinguish between searches that sought information on Americans, and those that pertained to foreigners. He also told the FBI to document, in writing, how its search terms met the standard of being likely to return foreign intelligence information or criminal evidence—as opposed to a fishing expedition, presumably.
That would be a judge in the same Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court that approved FBI surveillance of one-time Trump aide Carter Page, infuriating the president’s supporters in the process and fueling current political controversy over the bureau. Page’s surveillance case might or might not have been justified, but it was just one among many.
“The idea of requiring agents to document their rationales for searching for an American’s information emerged from several recent episodes in which the Justice Department reported to the court that the F.B.I. had conducted improperly sweeping searches of the repository,” the Times added.
“Improperly sweeping searches” sounds an awful lot like the “excessively broad, ill-defined and open-ended investigations” the Church Committee hoped to curtail back in 1976. Despite the fond hopes of reformers of the past, the FBI continues to be intrusive and heavy-handed in its actions, and resistant to scrutiny and correction.
The political controversies of the moment will eventually pass, but they’re unlikely to sweep away concerns about the FBI. If history is any guide, the bureau will still be running amok years from now.

Informant Reveals FBI’s Already Vast Powers to Investigate Right-Wing Extremists
October 20 2019
by Trevor Aaronson
The Intercept
In June 2012, Chris Stevens, a top-rated Army sniper, received a Facebook message from an acquaintance he hadn’t seen in years.
The message was from a man Stevens had known as a teenager. Before Stevens joined the Army, he’d had a turbulent childhood, living in group homes in California and getting in trouble for drug use. As a result of failing drug tests as a teenager, Stevens had been ordered to attend Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous meetings. That was where he met Angelo Sultana, the tall, imposing man who had contacted him. Sultana “was this figure there,” Stevens remembered. “He was loud, boisterous, and very aggressive. When he entered a room, he would talk and people would quiet. He was that sort of person.”
By 2012, Sultana was a member of the Northern California State Militia. On Facebook, he asked Stevens to come to California and train him and his friends in sniper techniques. A private right-wing group, the Northern California State Militia conducts military-style tactical training and disaster-response exercises and organizes social events for members. Stevens doesn’t know exactly how Sultana knew about his sniper training; he may have posted something on Facebook about his sniper competitions, he said, or perhaps Sultana had read a story that the U.S. Army had published about him.
Stevens found Sultana’s invitation concerning. Sultana had been convicted in 1986 of voluntary manslaughter in the beating death a 22-year-old musician. Stevens called the FBI and left a message. An FBI agent who specialized in domestic terrorism and was assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force responded, asking Stevens to accept Sultana’s invitation and report back to the FBI about what Sultana said. That is, to become an FBI informant.
At the FBI’s behest, Stevens met with Sultana over several months, and in Sultana’s living room, Stevens gave him and his friends tips for using a sniper rifle. Stevens reported back to the FBI on the type of sniper training Sultana requested and the kinds of guns he had. In April 2014, the FBI arrested Sultana on charges of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Posts Sultana wrote on a militia website suggested that he was preparing for a coming war. “I come with fear, my children do not deserve what I believe is coming. If it’s to be a fight, I won’t start it, I’ll do my damnest (sic) to finish it,” he wrote, according to court records. Sultana, who did not respond to requests to comment for this story, ultimately pleaded guilty to the firearms charge and served five years of probation.
What came next was increasingly ominous for Stevens, whose firsthand view of how federal law enforcement can investigate Americans based solely on ideology left him disillusioned with the government he’d served for nearly five years in the Army. After Sultana’s arrest, the FBI asked Stevens to keep spying on the militia without apparent probable cause. For the next four years, Stevens attended Northern California State Militia meetings and trainings, all of which were advertised publicly on Facebook, including meet-and-greets and family walks. Stevens tracked attendees and locations on his own initiative using an online mapping program whose data he shared with The Intercept; he then used that data to write reports for the FBI.
The FBI refused to comment specifically about Stevens’s work for the bureau or officially claim him as having been one of its more than 15,000 informants. That’s the bureau’s longstanding policy: to neither confirm nor deny an informant. Stevens’s story is supported by email exchanges with FBI agents and copies of intelligence reports he wrote for the FBI. “We are grateful for everything you have done for our organization, the military, and this country,” FBI agent Matthew Stanger, one of Stevens’s handlers, wrote in a June 2018 email. In addition, a retired U.S. Army officer confirmed in an interview with The Intercept that Stevens had described to him his work with the FBI as it was happening.
Amid growing concerns about white supremacist and far-right violence, current and former Justice Department and FBI officials have often claimed that federal law enforcement does not have adequate authority to investigate right-wing domestic terrorism threats. But Stevens’s infiltration of the militia shows the wide leeway the FBI has to use informants when investigating citizens based on their ideological beliefs.
The more time Stevens spent with the militia members, the more he began to question why he was there at all. Some of these people seemed to have mental illnesses and a few of them were racists, he told the FBI, but no one was committing crimes in his presence.
“Why are you having me do this instead of a federal agent who would be clearly more qualified and maybe more appropriately suited for this position?” Stevens remembered asking Stanger.
Stanger’s response was quick, Stevens recalled: “With you, we avoid a lot of red tape.”
“To me, red tape, as I’ve learned in the government, is set up for a reason,” Stevens told The Intercept. “Why aren’t they following that red tape? Did he mean just internal regulations? Or did he mean I could do the work without a warrant?”
The FBI declined to comment about the statement Stevens recalled hearing from Stanger.
“I was just a human recording machine paid by the government to go into people’s lives and befriend them and find out what they were thinking,” Stevens said.
Since the Walmart shooting in El Paso, Texas, on August 3, in which a white supremacist killed 22 and injured 24, calls for new domestic terrorism laws have grown louder. Facing public pressure to respond to the apparent rise of white supremacist violence, the FBI has touted a rash of arrests of violent right-wing extremists who allegedly were plotting attacks. Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, has proposed a bill that would expand domestic terrorism laws, and three Texas congressional representatives — Republicans Michael McCaul and Randy Weber and Democrat Henry Cuellar — have put forth a similar bipartisan effort.
The FBI has not offered an official response on whether the bureau needs new laws to combat domestic terrorists, but Christopher Wray, the FBI director, said during an April event at the Council on Foreign Relations that he was open to accepting expanded anti-terrorism powers. “We always like having more tools,” Wray said. “That makes us more versatile and more effective. So I would never be one to turn down the offer of new weapons in the fight.”
But, as Stevens’s informant work demonstrates, investigations of right-wing extremists depend not on new laws, but on internal decisions at the FBI on how to allocate resources and where to target powers that allow for broad surveillance and investigation of potential public safety threats.
“I think the bureau looked at me as this element that didn’t cost very much money, but was gathering intelligence in a fashion that the military would on an enemy force,” Stevens said.
While Stevens was still investigating Sultana, he was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army due to an unrelated back injury. He moved from the Washington, D.C., area to Phoenix to attend Arizona State University, where, in July 2014, he received another call from the FBI. Stanger asked if Stevens would come back to California to help investigate the militia with which Sultana allegedly associated. Stevens was hesitant, but Stanger appealed to his patriotism. The message: Help protect your country.
For the next four years, Stevens traveled back and forth from Arizona to California to attend Northern California State Militia meetings and trainings. During his approximately six years of work as an informant, Stevens said the FBI paid him about $30,000, much of it to reimburse his travel expenses. He attended about 20 militia meetings and trainings throughout California.
“I was just there to maybe, if they started speaking about their path to violence, that I could just follow them down that path,” Stevens said. “So after doing that time and time again, there was just nothing actionable, and I would think, Why after a year or so of me doing that didn’t they stop it? It seemed to increase as time went forward, and they just weren’t getting any actionable intelligence.”
Stevens’s infiltration of militia groups appears to contradict the FBI’s persistent claims that federal law enforcement does not investigate Americans based on ideology alone. Wray, the FBI director, emphasized this in a July 23 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. “Our focus is on the violence. We, the FBI, do not investigate ideology, no matter how repugnant,” Wray told the senators. “We investigate violence. And any extremist ideology, when it turns to violence, we’re all over it.”
Of course, since 9/11, the FBI has regularly investigated ideology and found adequate, if controversial, authorities to do so, with a particularly large loophole available in its vast roster of informants. The FBI’s deployment of informants to investigate Muslims, based solely on their religious affiliation, has been documented nationwide. The American Civil Liberties Union has been battling the FBI in court since 2011 over a case involving FBI informant Craig Monteilh, who spied on Muslim worshippers throughout Southern California. The Justice Department was so eager to quash the case after it was filed that then-Attorney General Eric Holder asserted the “state secrets” privilege. In that case, as in the militia investigations Stevens worked on, the FBI did not appear to have reason to suspect any of the surveillance targets were committing crimes.
As The Intercept reported in the 2017 series “The FBI’s Secret Rules,” which was based on leaked policy documents, FBI agents must obtain supervisory approval to enter a group or gathering using an undercover agent, and to obtain that approval, the FBI must have a “predicate,” or a factual basis to suspect criminal activity. But neither supervisory approval nor a predicate is required if the work is done by an informant, creating a loophole that allows the FBI to investigate Americans for virtually any reason.
In addition to the informant loophole, the FBI may authorize so-called assessments, which allow FBI agents to open an investigation of anyone without probable cause for national security purposes. Although the law does not dictate a time constraint for assessments, FBI policy limits these intrusive investigations to 72 hours unless probable cause can be established during the assessment.
When he was working as an FBI informant, Stevens wasn’t aware of the informant loophole, but he was nonetheless baffled at the time by the fact that the FBI, with all its highly trained agents around the country, kept bringing him to California to spy on militia events.
So far, aside from a series of high-profile arrests in the days immediately after the El Paso shooting, there’s little to suggest that the FBI is placing threats from right-wing and other domestic extremists on the same level as threats from extremists inspired by Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and other international ideologies.
In his July testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Wray said that “jihadist-inspired violence” remains the greatest terrorist threat in the United States — even though he acknowledged that in the first three quarters of this fiscal year, arrests of domestic terrorists, most of whom were white supremacists, roughly equaled the number of international terrorism-related arrests.
Getting straight answers from the FBI on the number of domestic terrorism cases it is investigating at any given time, and how that corresponds with the number of domestic terrorism arrests the bureau has made, can be a baffling task. In August, ProPublica requested records to support an FBI claim that agents had arrested 90 domestic terrorists in the previous nine months. The FBI told ProPublica that the number came from a compilation of press releases, but then refused to provide the releases. Available press releases about domestic terrorism arrests during that period of time came nowhere near the 90 the FBI claimed, according to ProPublica’s review of online records.
During a testimony in May before the House Homeland Security Committee, FBI Assistant Director Mike McGarrity admitted that the bureau devotes considerably fewer resources to domestic terrorism than international terrorism. Two of every 10 counterterrorism agents are assigned to investigating domestic threats, McGarrity testified. In a prepared statement, the FBI’s press office told The Intercept that of the bureau’s 5,000 currently open terrorism investigations, just 850 are related to domestic terrorism.
Adding to the overall perplexity in this area is that the FBI has reconfigured its domestic terrorist threat categories in a way that appears to deemphasize white supremacist violence. For more than a decade, the FBI used 11 categories to describe domestic terrorist threats, with white supremacists being one of them. The FBI recently reduced those categories to four, with white supremacists folded into a new category titled “racially motivated violent extremism.” The new category includes so-called black identity extremists — a term the FBI coined, and has since claimed to have abandoned, for a supposed ideology among some black extremists that violence against law enforcement officers is justified. But this new category does not appear to be a broad one that includes multiple types of “racially motivated violent extremism.” An FBI document from last year obtained by The Young Turks includes language that suggests this new category includes only white supremacists and so-called black identity extremists.
When Sen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, pressed the FBI director in his July Senate testimony about what effect folding white supremacists into the new category would have on the FBI’s investigative priorities, Wray avoided the question by using the official line that the FBI, as a matter of policy, investigates violence, not ideology.
Michael German, a former FBI undercover agent who investigated white supremacists and is now a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, has criticized what he views as the FBI’s recent lackluster efforts to investigate white supremacists while simultaneously claiming to need new powers to do the job.
“The FBI and federal prosecutors already have all the authority they need to address white supremacist violence proactively when they are feeling the pressure to act,” German said, pointing to the string of high-profile arrests after the El Paso shooting.
“When they properly prioritize cases involving deadly violence, rather than chasing environmentalists or other protest groups engaging in civil disobedience, they can be effective,” he said. “This public pressure is essential, as current and former Justice Department officials seem more interested in using these recent tragedies to claim greater counterterrorism powers than in changing the longstanding Justice Department policies that de-prioritize the investigation and prosecution of white supremacist violence.”
Stevens ultimately quit the FBI.
He had grown concerned by the agents’ continuing requests for him to investigate people who weren’t breaking laws, and his mental health and grades at Arizona State began to suffer. He had started to suspect that new people entering his life might be informants themselves. It got worse when an FBI agent who had accompanied Stanger for a meeting said that if Stevens disappeared, they’d start knocking on doors to look for him. Although the comment may have been meant as an assurance that the bureau would take care of him, Stevens viewed it as menacing.
He emailed Stanger, his handler, and said he was done. He also expressed concern that the FBI was spying on him, just as he’d been spying on other people without cause.
“I want to let you know that in no way whatsoever did our organization deploy anyone, in any way, into your life — ever, let alone in the last eight months,” Stanger wrote, adding: “We have never, and will never check on you.”
After breaking with the FBI, Stevens left the country to travel the world and live off his modest Army pension. He was in Southeast Asia when the El Paso attack occurred. From there, he read about U.S. government officials asking for more powers to investigate right-wing extremists — something he couldn’t reconcile with the years he’d spent investigating California militia members without probable cause.
“I have the feeling the government is in the same sort of position that they were in post-9/11, reacting to a new type of threat and searching for solutions,” Stevens said. “They don’t need any more power than they already have with their nationwide collection of informants that can walk into somebody’s house and record them. What more do they need?”

FBI Guarding America
List 1
10 May 1924 Attorney General Harlan Fiske Stone appoints J. Edgar Hoover Acting Director of the Bureau of Identification. Calvin Coolidge is President.
22 Oct 1934 Notorious bank robber Pretty Boy Floyd dies of multiple gunshot wounds in the back, after a shootout with the FBI at the Conkle Farm in East Liverpool, Ohio.
2 May 1972 J. Edgar Hoover dies in his sleep.
19 Oct 1982 Maverick carmaker John DeLorean is arrested in Los Angeles with $24M worth of cocaine in his suitcase. The case is later thrown out of court when a judge rules that the FBI sting operation constituted entrapment. DeLorean dealers nationwide discontinue “snow tires” as an option.
14 Jul 1986 Former FBI counterintelligence agent Richard W. Miller is convicted of espionage. He receives 20 years for passing state secrets to the Soviet Union.
23 Jun 1996 Former FBI agent Eugene Bennett, armed and wearing a ski mask, enters the Prince of Peace Church in Manassas, Virginia. Then he handcuffs Reverend A. J. Edwin Clever to a chair and holds the priest hostage until Bennett’s wife (another former FBI agent) arrives and scares away her spouse by shooting at him.
18 Dec 1996 FBI agent Earl Edwin Pitts is arrested at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia for conspiracy to commit espionage, attempted espionage, communication of classified information, and conveyance without authority of government property.
22 Dec 1999 Former FBI agent John Connolly is arrested in his Lynnfield, Massachusetts home for conspiring with Mobsters.
9 Oct 2000 Former FBI agent John Connolly is charged with fingering Mob informants who were helping authorities investigate a 1981 mob hit against business executive Roger Wheeler.
18 Feb 2001 FBI agent Robert P. Hanssen is arrested for espionage.
25 Jun 2001 Former FBI agent Michael Levin pleads guilty to stealing and selling Bureau files.
16 Jul 2001 FBI agents arrest Russian software programmer Dmitry Skylarov in Las Vegas for violating the DMCA.
4 Sep 2001 Former FBI security analyst James Hill pleads guilty to conspiracy to sell Bureau files.
11 Sep 2001 Former FBI counterterrorism expert John P. O’Neill is killed in the World Trade Center attacks. During his final years at the Bureau, O’Neill was preoccupied with capturing Osama bin Laden.
1 Mar 2002 In a case of mistaken identity, FBI agent Christopher Braga shoots unarmed 20-year-old Eagle Scout Joseph Charles Schultz in the face during a traffic stop in Pasadena, Maryland.
May 2002 The Professional Association of Diving Instructors voluntarily furnishes the FBI with a list of the roughly 2 million Americans who learned how to scuba dive over the preceding 3 years.
21 May 2002 FBI agent Colleen Rowley sends a 13-page memo to Director Robert Mueller criticizing the Bureau’s response to terrorism.
28 May 2002 A jury finds former FBI agent John Connolly guilty of racketeering and obstruction of justice.
16 Sep 2002 Former FBI agent John Harrison shoots himself and two coworkers in his office at the Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance building in New York.
9 Apr 2003 Former FBI agent James J. Smith is arrested for careless handling of government secrets around the Chinese double agent he was fucking.
15 May 2003 At the Barbary Coast casino in Las Vegas, FBI agent John T. Hanson III walks into the kitchen and fires two rounds into the walk-in freezer. Hanson later pays $12,517 in restitution to the casino and a $105 fine for discharging a weapon in public.
17 Jun 2003 Former FBI metallurgist Kathleen Lundy pleads guilty to falsifying evidence for a Kentucky murder trial.
17 Jul 2003 FBI translator Mario Castillo is arrested for making false statements, illegally accessing Bureau computer files, and personally profiting from the contents.
19 Sep 2003 Former FBI translator Mario Castillo pleads guilty to illegally accessing Bureau computer files and personally profiting from the contents.
9 Oct 2003 Former FBI agent H. Paul Rico is arrested at his Florida home for arranging a 1981 mob hit against business executive Roger Wheeler.
16 Oct 2003 FBI Director Robert Mueller publicly acknowledges that the identity of several of the 9-11 hijackers is in doubt.
13 Nov 2003 Justice Department inspector general Glenn Fine releases a report outlining instances of FBI managers perpetrating inappropriate sexual behavior and questionable racial and sexual comments, who generally received light reprimands.
12 Feb 2004 In a Ft. Worth, Texas courtroom, retired FBI agent John H. Conditt, Jr. receives 12 years for molesting a 6-year-old girl at least 10 times in 2002.
18 Feb 2004 Senator Charles Grassley releases a four-year-old report revealing that one in 1,000 FBI agents between 1986 and 1999 were fired for misconduct.
18 May 2004 In Washington, DC, former FBI crime lab scientist Jacqueline A. Blake pleads guilty to making false statements. In doing so, Blake admits having falsified more than a hundred reports regarding her DNA tests over a three-year period.
24 May 2004 Portland, Washington SAIC Robert Jordan apologizes for having detained Muslim attorney Brandon Mayfield for two weeks under the 1984 Material Witness Act, based on a fingerprint mismatch. “The FBI regrets the hardships that this has placed on Mr. Mayfield and his family.”
2 Jul 2004 Former FBI agent Eugene Harding pleads guilty to receiving stolen personal data from Social Security and IRS computer databases. Harding had been employed as a security consultant to some Las Vegas hotel resorts at the time.
11 Aug 2004 Former FBI employee Rosana Frederick is arrested in Brooklyn for allegedly scamming 11 immigrants out of $43,500. Frederick stands accused of offering to obtain green cards and U.S. citizenship for the alleged victims. Previously, Frederick had been convicted of extorting money from immigrants in December 1992, for which she received 18 months in prison.
More to follow…..

An example of an FBI scam:
Voice Encryption May Draw U.S. Scrutiny
by John Markoff
New York Times
May 22, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, May 21 — Philip R. Zimmermann wants to protect online privacy. Who could object to that?
Philip R. Zimmermann created a program to encrypt e-mail. His Zfone will do the same for Internet calls.
He has found out once already. Trained as a computer scientist, he developed a program in 1991 called Pretty Good Privacy, or PGP, for scrambling and unscrambling e-mail messages. It won a following among privacy rights advocates and human rights groups working overseas — and a three-year federal criminal investigation into whether he had violated export restrictions on cryptographic software. The case was dropped in 1996, and Mr. Zimmermann, who lives in Menlo Park, Calif., started PGP Inc. to sell his software commercially.
Now he is again inviting government scrutiny. On Sunday, he released a free Windows software program, Zfone, that encrypts a computer-to-computer voice conversation so both parties can be confident that no one is listening in. It became available earlier this year to Macintosh and Linux users of the system known as voice-over-Internet protocol, or VoIP.
What sets Zfone apart from comparable systems is that it does not require a web of computers to hold the keys, or long numbers, used in most encryption schemes. Instead, it performs the key exchange inside the digital voice channel while the call is being set up, so no third party has the keys.
Zfone’s introduction comes as reports continue to emerge about the government’s electronic surveillance efforts. A lawsuit by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy rights group, contends that AT&T has given the National Security Agency real-time access to Internet communications.
In the wake of 9/11, there were calls for the government to institute new barriers to cryptography, to avoid its use in communications by enemies of the United States. Easily accessible cryptography for Internet calling may intensify that debate.
“I’m afraid it will put front and center an issue that had been resolved in the individual’s favor in the 1990’s,” said James X. Dempsey, policy director for the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington-based public policy group.
The Federal Communications Commission has begun adopting regulations that would force Internet service providers and VoIP companies to adopt the technology that permits law enforcement officials to monitor conventional telephone calls. But for now, at least, F.C.C. regulation exempts programs that operate directly between computers, not through a hub.
“From the F.C.C.’s perspective you can’t regulate point-to-point communications, which I think will let Phil off the hook,” said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, an advocacy group in Washington.
Zfone may face more of a challenge in Europe, where the British government is preparing to give the police the legal authority to compel both organizations and individuals to disclose encryption keys.
But Mr. Zimmermann, 52, does not see those fearing government surveillance — or trying to evade it — as the primary market. The next phase of the Internet’s spyware epidemic, he contends, will be software designed to eavesdrop on Internet telephone calls made by corporate users.
“They will have entire digital jukeboxes of covertly acquired telephone conversations, and suddenly someone in Eastern Europe is going to be very wealthy,” he said.
While Mr. Zimmerman is giving away his software so far, his goal is to attract VoIP software and hardware developers to license his technology and embed it in their products.
Zfone can automatically encrypt any call between users of freely available VoIP software programs like X-Lite, Gizmo or SJphone. It can be downloaded at www.philzimmermann.com.
The system does not work with Skype, the VoIP system acquired by eBay, which uses its own encryption scheme. But at a conference last week in Cyprus, German officials said they had technology for intercepting and decrypting Skype phone calls, according to Anthony M. Rutkowski, vice president for regulatory affairs and standards for VeriSign, a company that offers security for Internet and phone operations.
Mr. Zimmermann said he had not yet tested Zfone’s compatibility with Vonage, another popular VoIP service.
Mr. Zimmermann contends that the nation is better off with strong cryptography. Indeed, Zfone can be considered an asset, he said, because it allows people to have secret conversations without hiding their Internet protocol addresses, which could be traceable geographically. Those observed having a secured conversation could come under suspicion, of course. But for that reason, he argued, sophisticated criminals or terrorists are unlikely to use the technology.
“I’m sympathetic to the needs of the intelligence community to catch the bad guys,” he said. “I specifically protect the content the criminals want, while simultaneously not interfering with the traffic analysis that the N.S.A. is trying to do. You could make the case that I’m being socially responsible.”

Following this encouragine article, on May 22, 2006, at 11:48 AM, Walter Storch published:
This was sent to us by one of our columnists a few minutes ago. A connection on the staff of the NYT read it and suggested we sent it on to you for comment. It is slated to go up asap and any input would be gratefully accepted.
Let me start this off with a howlingly funny story. It’s funny because it is so bloody stupid. One of my alphabet agency contacts was telling me of a renewed scam to better enable the knuckle-draggers to spy on everyone. What they do is this: Put together an encryption or scrambling system that purports to be “unbreakable ” so as to allow the possessors to carry on “absolutely secret” telephone or computer conversations. The obedient press then runs a rigged, government-written story, (shades of the Lincoln Group!) to the effect that this brilliant system simply cannot be broken and that the company selling it is going to be seriously investigated by the government for building a system that they cannot break.
In fact, the “unbreakable system” has a built-in trapdoor that you could drive a Mack truck through and the various agencies have this, believe it. When they encounter a scrambled message or conversation using this compromised system, the “unbreakable system” alerts them and since they have the means at hand to look into it, the recorders start in working. This is in the same category as “Internet II” which, my informant advised me, is almost entirely controlled by the domestic counter intelligence people and enables them instant access to all the user’s messages.
Suggestion? Anything that looks too good to be true…is. If it isn’t a criminal con job, it’s a bumbling government sting. The con jobs are usually much more clever and this one is as obvious as a turd on a bed sheet.
And a furious response:

From : Philip Zimmermann <prz@mit.edu>
Sent : Monday, May 22, 2006 1:11 PM
To : Walter Storch <tbrnews@hotmail.com>
Subject : Re: Attached copy
Anyone who knows anything at all about me knows that I don’t do back doors, and they know why. Visit my web site and look on the menu on the left side, an entry that says “No back doors”. Read what I have to say about it.
http://philzimmermann.com

Response to Mr. Zimmerman
I knew nothing about you until my NYT person sent me the article in today’s paper, based on your work.
This came after I sent material to him for his interest (because he often writes about it.)
He said he found my reporter’s article interesting and that is why, at his suggestion, I contacted you. I appreciate your prompt response.
I am glad you are not involved with this nasty business and I am certain you will approve it if we draw strong attention to these devious practices.
I have several advanced computer people working for me who have devised various methods of secure communication, devastating and Trojan Horse-laced firewalls (none of which is commercially available) and so on so you can see that I am concerned about unauthorized governmental snooping.
If and when I get wind of these activities, I expose them, and will continue to do so, without let or hindrance, believe me.
We ran a detailed article on the use of the television set as a receiver for illegal and clandestine listening purposes and got an enormous response. When concerned people asked me how to neutralize this, I told them to disconnect their set from the cable hookup and I am told that many do. All it takes is a knuckle-dragger down at the cable head and very simple equipment (according to a friend in the New Jersey Bell labs) to reverse the system and listen. One doesn’t need elaborate and expensive equipment to neutralize this. Simple disconnection is much more effective in the end.
I have recently been tipped that someone has a major Trojan Horse project planted in computers, servers and so on and that this has been dormant for the past three years, waiting activation.
We did a story on this and when “an interested party” (read government informer) got in touch with me and asked me if I knew anything more concrete, (such as identifying information on our informant) my reply was that not only would I not discuss this with him but if I had the trigger to this project, (which, regrettably, I do not)I would put it out and up at once to see if it was genuine. If it didn’t work, the tip was false but if it did, there wouldn’t be any systems left so the matter would be moot.
There has been too much dependence on computer systems and, from what my people tell me, they are very vulnerable. The only reason that our many enemies, both inside and outside the country, haven’t seriously crippled big parts of it it is because this might injure their own activities in the same field.
It is never a good idea to go for a walk across the Grand Canyon over a soda cracker bridge if a rain storm is in the offing.
Regards,
Walter Storch

Comment: Mr. Zimmerman quickly took down his website and descended into blessed silence two days later.

The CIA Confessions: The Crowley Conversations
November 10, 2019
by Dr. Peter Janney
On October 8th, 2000, Robert Trumbull Crowley, once a leader of the CIA’s Clandestine Operations Division, died in a Washington hospital of heart failure and the end effects of Alzheimer’s Disease. Before the late Assistant Director Crowley was cold, Joseph Trento, a writer of light-weight books on the CIA, descended on Crowley’s widow at her town house on Cathedral Hill Drive in Washington and hauled away over fifty boxes of Crowley’s CIA files.
Once Trento had his new find secure in his house in Front Royal, Virginia, he called a well-known Washington fix lawyer with the news of his success in securing what the CIA had always considered to be a potential major embarrassment.
Three months before, on July 20th of that year, retired Marine Corps colonel William R. Corson, and an associate of Crowley, died of emphysema and lung cancer at a hospital in Bethesda, Md.
After Corson’s death, Trento and the well-known Washington fix-lawyer went to Corson’s bank, got into his safe deposit box and removed a manuscript entitled ‘Zipper.’ This manuscript, which dealt with Crowley’s involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, vanished into a CIA burn-bag and the matter was considered to be closed forever.
The small group of CIA officials gathered at Trento’s house to search through the Crowley papers, looking for documents that must not become public. A few were found but, to their consternation, a significant number of files Crowley was known to have had in his possession had simply vanished.
When published material concerning the CIA’s actions against Kennedy became public in 2002, it was discovered to the CIA’s horror, that the missing documents had been sent by an increasingly erratic Crowley to another person and these missing papers included devastating material on the CIA’s activities in South East Asia to include drug running, money laundering and the maintenance of the notorious ‘Regional Interrogation Centers’ in Viet Nam and, worse still, the Zipper files proving the CIA’s active organization of the assassination of President John Kennedy..
A massive, preemptive disinformation campaign was readied, using government-friendly bloggers, CIA-paid “historians” and others, in the event that anything from this file ever surfaced. The best-laid plans often go astray and in this case, one of the compliant historians, a former government librarian who fancied himself a serious writer, began to tell his friends about the CIA plan to kill Kennedy and eventually, word of this began to leak out into the outside world.
The originals had vanished and an extensive search was conducted by the FBI and CIA operatives but without success. Crowley’s survivors, his aged wife and son, were interviewed extensively by the FBI and instructed to minimize any discussion of highly damaging CIA files that Crowley had, illegally, removed from Langley when he retired. Crowley had been a close friend of James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s notorious head of Counterintelligence. When Angleton was sacked by DCI William Colby in December of 1974, Crowley and Angleton conspired to secretly remove Angleton’s most sensitive secret files out of the agency. Crowley did the same thing right before his own retirement, secretly removing thousands of pages of classified information that covered his entire agency career.
Known as “The Crow” within the agency, Robert T. Crowley joined the CIA at its inception and spent his entire career in the Directorate of Plans, also know as the “Department of Dirty Tricks. ”
Crowley was one of the tallest man ever to work at the CIA. Born in 1924 and raised in Chicago, Crowley grew to six and a half feet when he entered the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in N.Y. as a cadet in 1943 in the class of 1946. He never graduated, having enlisted in the Army, serving in the Pacific during World War II. He retired from the Army Reserve in 1986 as a lieutenant colonel. According to a book he authored with his friend and colleague, William Corson, Crowley’s career included service in Military Intelligence and Naval Intelligence, before joining the CIA at its inception in 1947. His entire career at the agency was spent within the Directorate of Plans in covert operations. Before his retirement, Bob Crowley became assistant deputy director for operations, the second-in-command in the Clandestine Directorate of Operations.
Bob Crowley first contacted Gregory Douglas in 1993 when he found out from John Costello that Douglas was about to publish his first book on Heinrich Mueller, the former head of the Gestapo who had become a secret, long-time asset to the CIA. Crowley contacted Douglas and they began a series of long and often very informative telephone conversations that lasted for four years. In 1996, Crowley told Douglas that he believed him to be the person that should ultimately tell Crowley’s story but only after Crowley’s death. Douglas, for his part, became so entranced with some of the material that Crowley began to share with him that he secretly began to record their conversations, later transcribing them word for word, planning to incorporate some, or all, of the material in later publication.

Conversation No. 27
Date: Friday, Thursday, July 25, 1996
Commenced: 9:55 AM CST
Concluded: 10:22 AM CST

EC: Hello.
GD: Good morning, Mrs. Crowley. Is Robert available?
EC: He’s upstairs. Let me call him.
GD: If it’s too much….
EC: No, dear, I’m sure he would like to talk to you.
(Pause)
RTC: Good morning, Gregory. I was going through some papers.
GD: No problem. I can get back to you later.
RTC: No trouble. I was going to talk with you about your forthcoming books. I think you must be aware that the first book came on slowly but has gathered steam. That loud-mouth, Damato,1 has the Jews behind him and he wants answers from people. The Jews are absolutely outraged at the thought that our Israel-loving government would have even considered hiring the head of the Gestapo, and this is anathema to them. And as you know, an angry Jew can be heard for two blocks with your windows shut.
GD: Tell me about it. I get all kinds of squealing emails from them demanding that I recant this or prove that.
RTC: How do you deal with this?
GD: Well, if they’re polite, I’m polite but when the shrill demands start or the orders to do this or that, I basically tell them to suck my ass.
RTC: In such language?
GD: Sometimes. I told you that I have all the German concentration camp records on microfilm that I got from the Russians and they either want to see if their aunt Sophie is there or are horrified that the Russians would dare send these to an unauthorized person. I being the unauthorized person. I am not a Jew and only a Jew may look at these precious and sacred records, let alone write about them. I mean I might discover that the huge death tolls are fakes. Can’t have that. Why all the holocaust museums would have to shut down and all across America, weeping librarians would be pulling down the Anne Frank diaries and either tossing them into the dumpster or putting them into the fiction section. Anyway, they are very, very unhappy and most of them want me to send them something, anything, to prove I have the files. I always send one or two pages, just enough to make my point and then I put them on the block. Jesus, such self-centered and self-important assholes. I don’t hear the Armenians, who really were massacred by the Turks, making such an uproar. I mean, it’s like someone I don’t know demanding that I attack the government of Great Britain because they got a traffic ticket they feel was unjust. Don’t these rodents realize that outside of their incestuous groups, no one else gives a flying fuck about their crazy stories? Six million gassed, my ass. The highest toll I can find is about two hundred thousand Russian Jews shot or hanged by the German security police in occupied Russian territory and my God, I have reams of correspondence between the French, the Hungarians, the Latvians and, oh my, especially the Greeks, begging the Germans to rid them of their Jews. I mean begging them. The Hungarians were the most strident. Now, of course, we hear stories of weeping Italians begging the evil Germans to let all their boxcars full of Jews go free. And as the train steamed off, headed for the enormous gas chambers of the dread Auschwitz, the Italians waved goodbye. Oh, and here is a really funny one. Now, it seems, trains of wailing Jews went from Italy through Switzerland on their way to martyrdom and the soap factory and while the trains were stopped in Swiss stations, the evil Swiss came down and pissed on them. Of course this is another legend because none of the camp trains ever went through Switzerland. Alfonse the Tomato is typical of his breed. He’s doing badly in the polls so the Jews offer to give him a few dollars and the price is to act as their hand puppet. On it goes, Robert, on it goes.
RTC: My, you must be on the second pot of coffee, Gregory.
GD: Actually, I’ve been sniffing glue. Sorry to rant here but I do get so tired of listening to the same old wailing If I ever get around to trying to decipher Mueller’s notes and put out the daily diary he kept while he was over here, what is now the wind will become the whirlwind. And this time, your people will be beating their drums and blowing the tin horns to accompany the Hebrew cries for justice and money. In reverse order, actually. Of course, we could talk about all the calls you get from the Kimmel DOJ people about how truly evil I am and why you should never, ever talk to me.
RTC: Oh God, don’t bring that up. I don’t get as many calls as I used to but they still come in. I write their names and extension numbers down and send them to you. What do you do with them, by the way? Send them huge take out Chinese dinners?
GD: No, I ring them up and ask them who the fuck they think they are.
RTC: Actually, I don’t think they know. Someone puts them up to this, of course. And Kimmel hasn’t helped the situation by hovering in the background wearing a black cloak and hissing to his minions. Bill gets some of this and Bill will run with the hares and hunt with the hounds, if you take my meaning.
GD: I have come to that conclusion. Not a bad fellow and his wife is very nice but he wants to be important so he will pass something to me today, and ask me their questions tomorrow. I humor him, Robert, and if I give him information, I do so to mislead him and those who want the information. It’s so much fun to lead them down the secret trails right into the quicksand. For example, I know of someone who is a serious FBI informer so I once told Bill that the snitch was the one who was supplying me with the really awful documents from the files. Of course someone is supplying me but not the one I very privately tell him.
RTC: Yes, Mr. Mueller’s tag for you is perfect, Gregory. Mr. Sunshine indeed. I think they view you as old Nick himself with brimstone smells and a long tail.
GD: Well, sorry to have been so intense today but I bottle all this up and when it comes out, there is a lot of it.
RTC: Sounds like a dose of salts.
GD: More or less. Well, you’re Catholic Irish and I’m Protestant German but inside your Beltway, we are in the minority.
RTC: That’s sadly true.
GD: Instead of a chaplain starting sessions of Congress, pretty soon they’ll have the rabbi up there chanting. And eventually they will go too far and when the public finds out about it, and that will take some time because they own all the papers and the television stations, then El Al flights will be booked solid with a huge mass of one-way passengers, all carrying large carpetbags filed with dollars.
RTC: Do you really think so, Gregory? Or are you only trying to make an old man feel hopeful?
GD: No, it’s inevitable. Well, as Louis XIV said on his deathbed, ‘Oh Lord, come quickly!’
RTC: I think ‘go quickly’ would be more to the point.
GD: Let us pray, Robert, and a miracle of deliverance might suddenly come upon us.

(Concluded at 10:22 AM CST)

1 Alfonse Marcello D’Amato August 1, 1937 former Republican United States Senator from New York from 1981 to 1999. Attempting to curry favor with powerful Jewish interests in his district, D’Amato began an investigation into the CIA’s hiring of Heinrich Müller but it went nowhere as neither the U.S. Army (who had carried Müller on their rolls as a Colonel in the General Staff, nor the CIA who used him as one of their senior experts on Communism would release files to either the Senator, his staff or members of the DoJ’s Office of Special Investigations, a make-work small organization attempting to ferret out possible Nazis living in America. That there were a large number of Nazis living in America is unquestioned but almost all of them had been brought into the country as rocket scientists or SS specialists on Commuinsm.
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Conversations+with+the+Crow+by+Gregory+Douglas

Encyclopedia of American Loons

Daniel Smith

Alternative medicine isn’t medicine, but at least most woo is in itself probably as harmless as it is useless (the conspiracy theories and falsehoods involved in marketing them less so). MMS, or Miracle Mineral Supplement, is different. MMS an aqueous solution of 28% sodium chlorite, an industrial chemical that, when prepared in a citric acid solution, forms chlorine dioxide. Yes, we are talking industrial-strength bleach, and its effects on the body are what you’d expect from that. MMS is nevertheless promoted as a cure for HIV, malaria, viral hepatitis, the H1N1 flu virus, common colds, acne, cancer and much more. Its inventor, Jim Humble, has no evidence for any of his medical claims, of course; instead, he claims to be a billion-year-old God from the Andromeda galaxy.
In recent years, MMS has in particular been promoted as a “cure” for autistic children, in particular by deranged lunatic Kerri Rivera. But there are several other promoters of MMS around as well. Louis Daniel Smith is hopefully not anymore, though: In 2015 he was found guilty of selling industrial bleach as a miracle cure for numerous diseases and illnesses, including cancer, AIDS, malaria, hepatitis, lyme disease, asthma and the common cold through a business called “Project GreenLife”, and sentenced to 51 months in prison. In particular, the jury convicted him of one count of conspiracy to commit multiple crimes, three counts of introducing misbranded drugs into interstate commerce with the intent to defraud or mislead, and one count of fraudulently smuggling merchandise into the United States. Before the trial, three of Smith’s alleged co-conspirators – Chris Olson, Tammy Olson and Karis DeLong, Smith’s wife – pleaded guilty to introducing misbranded drugs into interstate commerce. The most scary part, however, is that Smith was part of a network of at least 1,700 people selling MMR around the world; stopping him was, in other words, likely to make only minimal difference to the worldwide distribution of MMS. Smith’s numerous fans and followers were of course quick to yell “conspiracy” and “oppression” and “health freedom”.
According to the instructions for use that Smith provided, nausea, diarrhea and vomiting were all signs that the miracle cure was working, and, despite a risk of possible brain damage, they suggested that the product might still be appropriate for pregnant women or infants who were seriously ill. Officially, however, the sodium chlorite was imported for use in wastewater treatment facilities, conveniently sold in 4-ounce bottles for $20 apiece. It is, in that light, only a remarkable coincidene that Project GreenLife also happened to sell citric acid, the other component of MMS, and provided information about use “for your safety and convenience”.
Diagnosis: We don’t generally cover ordinary criminals, but have to make an exception here. Hopefully he learned a lesson, but we are not really very optimistic, and there are many more like him. An extremely dangerous fellow – crazy, stupid and completely without scruples – so we recommend maintaining a safe distance.

No responses yet

Leave a Reply