TARP Money Recipients or Democrat Donors


Tarp Funds
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 Barney Frank $17,000
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 Carolyn Maloney $10,000
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 Chris Van Hollen $3,000
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 DCCC $5,000
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 James Clyburn $20,000
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 John Larson $2,500
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 Mel Watt $7,000
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 Nancy Pelosi $5,000
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $7,000
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 Steny Hoyer $17,500
Bank of America $15,000,000,000 Xavier Beccera $3,500
Bank of New York Mellon $3,000,000,000 Barney Frank $2,000
Bank of New York Mellon $3,000,000,000 Carolyn Maloney $2,500
Bank of New York Mellon $3,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $8,000
Capital One $3,555,199,000 Barney Frank $6,000
Capital One $3,555,199,000 DCCC $25,000
Capital One $3,555,199,000 James Clyburn $4,000
Capital One $3,555,199,000 Mel Watt $4,000
Capital One $3,555,199,000 Paul Kanjorski $4,500
Capital One $3,555,199,000 Steny Hoyer $7,500
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 Barney Frank $7,500
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 Carolyn Maloney $3,500
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 Chris Van Hollen $5,500
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 DCCC $22,500
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 James Clyburn $8,500
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 John Larson $4,000
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 Mel Watt $5,000
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 Nancy Pelosi $10,000
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $6,500
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 Steny Hoyer $10,000
Citigroup $25,000,000,000 Xavier Beccera $3,500
Comerica Inc PAC $2,250,000,000 DCCC $1,000
Fifth Third $3,408,000,000 Barney Frank $2,000
First Horizon $866,540,000 Steny Hoyer $250
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Barney Frank $10,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Carolyn Maloney $7,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Chris Van Hollen $5,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 DCCC $30,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 James Clyburn $10,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 John Larson $2,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Luis Gutierrez $2,500
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Mel Watt $5,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Nancy Pelosi $20,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $10,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Steny Hoyer $10,000
Goldman Sachs $10,000,000,000 Xavier Beccera $2,000
Huntington Bancshares $1,398,071,000 Barney Frank $1,000
Huntington Bancshares $1,398,071,000 Paul Kanjorski $1,000
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 Barney Frank $10,000
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 Carolyn Maloney $10,000
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 Chris Van Hollen $1,000
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 DCCC $30,000
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 James Clyburn $22,500
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 John Larson $2,500
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 Mel Watt $5,000
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 Nancy Pelosi $22,500
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $12,500
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 Steny Hoyer $20,000
JP Morgan $25,000,000,000 Xavier Beccera $1,000
KeyCorp $2,500,000,000 Barney Frank $2,500
KeyCorp $2,500,000,000 Steny Hoyer $2,000
Merril Lynch $10,000,000,000 Barney Frank $2,000
Merril Lynch $10,000,000,000 Carolyn Maloney $2,500
Merril Lynch $10,000,000,000 James Clyburn $5,000
Merril Lynch $10,000,000,000 John Larson $1,000
Merril Lynch $10,000,000,000 Mel Watt $2,000
Merril Lynch $10,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $5,000
Merril Lynch $10,000,000,000 Steny Hoyer $5,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 Barney Frank $10,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 Carolyn Maloney $5,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 Chris Van Hollen $1,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 DCCC $15,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 James Clyburn $6,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 John Larson $2,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 Mel Watt $2,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 Nancy Pelosi $10,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $9,000
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 Steny Hoyer $13,500
Morgan Stanley $10,000,000,000 Xavier Beccera $1,000
PNC $7,579,200,000 DCCC $2,500
PNC $7,579,200,000 Paul Kanjorski $2,500
Popular $935,000,000 Xavier Beccera $4,600
State Street $2,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $3,000
SunTrust $4,850,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $1,000
SunTrust $4,850,000,000 Steny Hoyer $500
Wells Fargo $25,000,000,000 Barney Frank $7,000
Wells Fargo $25,000,000,000 Carolyn Maloney $5,000
Wells Fargo $25,000,000,000 DCCC $30,000
Wells Fargo $25,000,000,000 James Clyburn $10,000
Wells Fargo $25,000,000,000 Nancy Pelosi $10,000
Wells Fargo $25,000,000,000 Paul Kanjorski $10,000
Wells Fargo $25,000,000,000 Steny Hoyer $10,000
Wells Fargo $25,000,000,000 Xavier Beccera $6,000

Is Chuck Todd Correct

The Obama Administration and previous Congress(es) identified the countries immediately affected by an “Executive Order” on immigration enacted Friday Jan. 27, 2017 under the incoming Trump Administration.

Included Countries Excluded Countries
Iraq Saudi Arabia
Syria Egypt
Iran Pakistan
Libya Afghanistan


Those first seven countries were named by Congress in 2016 as “countries of concern.”

Jan 29, 2017: While interviewing Reince Priebus, Chuck Todd (Meet The Press) brought up the other four countries pressing Priebus on why the new Administration did not include “the excluded countries”! Chuck Todd asserts (without providing any reference of fact) about travelers from the “Excluded Countries”…

Here’s what I’m confused about, when you look at those folks that have committed terrorist attacks in this country, killed American’s – Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. You have more terrorist have come from those three counties than any of the seven, that in fact, you have Saudi Arabia, more have come from Saudi Arabia to kill Americans, than the seven countries combined. Why was Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Egypt, not included on this list” … “if you are so concern about this issue.

Having been in office for a total of eight (8) days, Todd should not have been asking this question of Reince Priebus or the new Administration! And, it’s not the question any American with a clear head – is thinking of.

If Chuck Todd is correct, even if NBC and Todd smudged the numbers and information for a “gotcha moment” on air…

Why were Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Egypt not included on this list by the Obama Administration/Congress?

And, why did he (Chuck Todd) not ask Obama’s Administration the same question?

Most Americans may understand why Chuck Todd never asked this question of anyone in Obama’s Administration. NBC and Todd have been identified among those in Media who have worked to benefit both Obama and the Clinton’s.

But “why these countries were not included by Obama’s Administration” is the more important question. We’ll look into possible reasons and update this work.


Media was all a buzz as were the people who voted in the 2016 Election. Back in July, Comey gave Team Clinton a pass on the basis there was no intent. Or should we say, no intent “management coulda/woulda” decipher to justify bringing criminal charges against Hillary Clinton. The exodus and wrath of dissenting FBI Agents suggest otherwise. Even the the Anthony Weiner/Huma Abedin laptop and recent FBI announcements add curiosity and concern to the mix

However, this work is not about FBI agents but what these investigations do reveal and what has been confirmed yet ignored in recent decisions on criminality – based on the laughable absence of intent.

NOTE: In many cases regarding National Security, law does not require “intent” for someone who violates law to be found guilty. Should we consider how many times Court Judges tell Defendants (regular Citizens) “ignorance of the law is not an excuse” and find them guilty?

But here are just five points that do prove intent!

1. Hillary Clinton lied about the handing of “Classified Information”

This is an intentional act of concealment. The often changing talking points (i.e.: excuse from Clinton) further validates intent because this message was tweaked every time new information was discovered. Each tweak a succession of lies!

2. Hillary Clinton set-up and maintained a Private Server for eMail Communications

Again, this is an intentional act of concealment.

The only reason to setup a communications server outside of the US Government System she was required (by law, oath and/or policy) to use as Secretary of State – is an intent to conceal. Team Clinton has repeatedly said this was done for the purpose of convenience.

Convenience doesn’t fly and here’s why!

Any smart phone for the last several years has supported collection of electronic mail from multiple sources (email accounts and servers) just as most desktop mail applications support multiple accounts. Six or seven years ago, ‘some’ smart phones may not have supported multiple accounts. But such a limitation could have easily been rectified by selecting a different phone, or asking the manufacturer to modify the software.

In addition, the U.S. Government presumably has the resources to make those modifications in-house. But throw a $100,000 at the hardware manufacturers’ software developer to make a $1,000 modification and swoosh, it’s done.

Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation probably spent ten times that setting up and maintaining the external server, unsecured, located in an unsecured facility, maintained and accessed by unauthorized personnel.

3. Hillary Clinton was not forthcoming about that server. (another lie – legal evasion in lawyer terms)

For nearly eight years Obama and Hillary Clinton have claimed to be the most transparent Administration in U.S. history. If this were true, why setup a private server and then conceal the server existed?

Hillary Clinton was not forthcoming about this server to anyone except those in her inner circle! Which included President Obama (a modern tech user) who misrepresented knowledge of this server device.

Presence of an external server was found indirectly by examining email to/from messages of people who communicated with Clinton on a regular basis.

Despite the fact that Obama has used Executive Privilege regarding his communications with Secretary of State Clinton, discovery of President Obama’s misrepresentations was disclosed in the same ‘indirect’ manner through chains of emails passed through this server. Additionally, Obama used a pseudo account too.

4. Hillary Clinton’s Private Server was intentionally Erased “of all data” before turning it over to the FBI/Congress

Internal messages released by WikiLeaks in combination with other sources revealed the necessary steps to remove all traces of data on Hillary Clinton’s Private Server were taken within hours of a Congressional Hearing and issuance of a Subpoena to produce those electronic messages.

If Hillary Clinton was a trustworthy Government employee, there would be no reason at all to erase all data from a server’s hard disc. Wedding and yoga messages were not what other Government Agencies and Congress were interested in. And, they’re not that interesting!

But the server hard drive(s) were erased long before the existence of the server became known and subsequently handed over to investigating agencies. This erasure process coincided with the issuance of a Subpoena to hand over the data.

Had the issuing agency(ies) known about a private, non-government, unsecured external server being used for top secret and internal State Department business activities, the Subpoena would certainly have been expanded to cover this equipment.

5. Team Clinton destroyed multiple communication devices outside Government procedures.

Again, concealment is the only reason to destroy devices outside of the US Government Systems and Procedures Hillary Clinton was required to use as Secretary of State.

Any lie is an attempt to conceal, mislead and/or deceive.
    Including the “ground zero” story about Benghazi and a Video!

Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, forth (4th) in the Line of Succession for the Presidency and outside of Congress, second (2nd) to the President in making decisions and recommendations that affect this Country and its Citizens.

No one should believe Hillary Clinton was given this position without being proficient enough to have the position.

So, if John Doe, a regular guy, blue collar worker can read the law and understand its requirements, Hillary Clinton certainly knew the difference and accordingly — the legal requirements.

Additionally, Wiki-Leaks revealed this ‘unsecured private server’ was a topic of discussion and high level concerns of Clinton’s inner circle and other people working for her. They all knew the difference too!


A vote for Hillary Clinton, was a vote to continue this Now Transparent Intent to “Deceive the American People“.

Should White House Eject Reporters

In a Jan 23, 2017 interview between Kellyanne Conway (Counselor to President Trump) and Sean Hannity at Fox News, Ms. Conway makes a very smart observation.

“If they (White House Reporters) snark, if they roll their eyes, if their Twitter feed is filled with 92 percent anti-Trump tweets, they’re not being reporters, they’re being opinion columnists,”… “They’re being professional political hacks and pundits, and we have a right to call that out.”

Not only does the President of these United States “have a right to call them out”, but the Administration has a right to kick them out – with the peoples support. “Reporters” assigned to the White House are supposed to be News Reporters and not Opinion Columnists. (“supposed to be” are the key words!)

Many “Reporters” are proving themselves to be Opinion Columnists as Kellyanne describes. Would consumers benefit if they were kicked-out of the White House Press Room? Opinion Columnists do not report “News” no more than a Tabloid publishes facts consumers will use to form an opinion and subsequently vote on issues important to America.

This is why White House Reporters are supposed to be News Reporters and not Opinion Columnists – personal Opinions have no business in the Press Corps, utilizing White House resources and consuming the valuable time of real News Reporters who will correctly and effectively communicate White House News to Voters.

People Magazine, Elle, Cosmopolitan, Star, National Inquirer do not have White House reporters for a reason, they do not report news – they sensationalize stories – usually useless nonsense based on the high moral grounds of a small clic.

Over the last eight years with a foundation documented in film 80 years ago, Media has conducted itself in much the same manner as the Hitler Propaganda Machine. The only difference, its foundation has always been backed by wealthy media connected moguls who have sought to control pieces of the country through manipulation of our political process and the politicians they cover.

Hollywood use to depict life in early America fairly correctly in old westerns and most notably in the 1939 film, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” with James Stewart. While Wikipedia does a great job of outlining the story, the back-story is entirely missing.

From the beginning of the story, as soon as Mr. Smith (a patriotic and relatively simple man of conviction to country and its people) arrives, all Washington News Reporters do is trick him into looking like a total buffoon while having a laugh at his and the country’s expense.

The real story in the film is how a Congressman and influential News Barron manipulates a story about what Mr. Smith is saying during a filibuster he stages once he discovers the Congressman (who recruited Mr. Smith for the job) is using his position as a Congressman to enrich himself in the private sector.

Eighty years later and Media’s once covert attempts at manipulating news in an effort to influence voters and what the country believes is no longer a hidden objective. Media of all types have complained about the Internet since its inception. Politicians jumped on that bandwagon as soon afterwards. What they really fear is being exposed for the lies, sensationalism, misdirection and manipulation they have survived on for centuries.

During the 2016 election cycle, Media and the DNC were exposed (via WikiLeaks) of its collusion and conceited efforts to manipulate the outcome of the 2016 Election. No one denied it and only a few News Agencies with integrity reported on it. Similar to the absence of News Reporting during 2012 when a “video” was blamed by Clintons’ Team to cover up the shortcomings of the Obama Administration just eight weeks before the 2012 Election.

In 2008, it was the Journo-List Group of 450 Professional and Employed Reporters who’s open, publically published written mission was to distract readers from anything negative revealed about then Presidential Candidate Barrack Hussein Obama using misinformation and disinformation.

The entire foundation of the Journo-List Group was to influence the Vote via published stories in favor of a two term Senator with an entire political background rooted in corrupt special interest. With the combined reach of their collective news agencies, they had the power and stated objective to influence the outcome of the 2008 Presidential Election.

So was it coincidental that Obama, the DNC, Media and Clinton Campaign worked together in 2016. Hillary Clinton, while still under FBI and Congressional investigations, exposed of lies to America, Congress and Concealment (private server) was supported by the DNC who colluded to give her the Nomination. Bernie Sanders with a turnout of 25,000 in Los Angeles alone was by far the more popular Democrat Candidate.

Bottom line: White House “Reporters” who prove they are Opinion Columnists, should lose their credentials, clearance and be shown the door. News Agencies who replace them with similar pundits should be given the same consideration as one would give Cosmopolitan and People.

The alternative is one that could put Political segments of Media Industry completely out of business. President Trump and all Government Agencies could easily go direct to consumers (voters) by publishing all Press Events on the Internet. Consumers don’t need some opinionated hack telling them what “they think people say”, when they can hear it in full context directly from the horse’s mouth.

The Russian Misdirect

Do you smell smoke? It could be the smokescreen in all these discussions about Russia influencing the American vote and election results. Could this be intended to distract Voters, the American People and Justice Department from the real news and truth about the Political Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization that failed to win the 2016 Election for Hillary Clinton?Russian Misdirection and Misinformation Campaign

This Russian Misdirect appears intended to distract from the snowstorm of news leading up to the election. Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Campaign, Democratic National Party (DNC) and Media collectively colluded to nominate Hillary Clinton at the demise of Bernie Sanders and millions of American Voters that supported his campaign.

These facts come from a combination of sources. It all started to unravel after a three year effort by Judicial Watch who was successful in obtaining through Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) Requests, emails that exposed Clinton and State Department lies about Benghazi, a Video and how Obama lied about his knowledge of that server.

In the later stages of the election process, Wiki-Leaks types added to this firestorm of negative news by disclosing hacked emails from the DNC and Podesta that led to more “transparency” about Democrats in the Party colluding with Media to shape voter knowledge about these events, the candidates and campaigns of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.

Worst, these sources disclosed total disrespect for all American voters by Democrat Politicians including those at all levels of the Democratic National Party. Not just a handful or “basket full of deplorable” American Voters, a term Clinton used to describe those that did not support her campaign.

Of course, Clinton’s public statement was directed at Republican voters. But Clinton indirectly insulted a significant number of Democrat and Independent Voters. Anyone who saw through her double standards, special treatment and the smokescreens created by Media – the communication division of this Political RICO.

Russian Connections?

Of the three top Political players in this conjecture, Media ignores who has “Russian Political Connections” using disinformation stories about “Russian Business Connections” and “Computer Hacking”. Only Obama and the Clinton’s have documented and highly questionable dealings with Russia.

In 2012, it was Obama’s open microphone slip: ‘After my election I have more flexibility‘, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s “understanding” of that statement and commitment to “transmit that message to Vladimir Putin”

Shortly after Obama’s second term election, Russia executed their latest strong hand land grab on Ukraine’s Crimea Peninsula – a practice last executed by the USSR on Poland in the 1980s. A practice last defended by the USA nearly 200 years ago when California “Petitioned” the Federal Government for Statehood in these United States.

It was Hillary Clinton and the State Department intertwined with Russian Financial contributions to the Clinton Foundation that makes the approval and transfer of American Uranium to Russian Interest highly concerning and questionable. The term “Strategic Resource” is so coined as to indicate and assure these resources remain under American control. The mineral Uranium is used to make bombs so we must ask “why would America transfer ownership of that resource to Russian interest”.

Hillary isn’t the only Clinton who’s been working Russia in the background. Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 to speak at an event for Renaissance Capital. Published news indicates the speaking event went so well, Vladimir Putin called Bill Clinton personally to express his gratitude. More applicable to the complete Russia story are connections between Renaissance Capital, Rosatom and millions donated to the Clinton Foundation from people involved in the acquisition of Uranium One by Russian interest and likely government.

Media admits Trump has no property in Russia but news agencies insist he has received financing from Russian investors for holdings in other parts of Europe. Unfortunately these reports are absent specifics to who the investors are, what holdings they financed, when these investments were made and what percentage of the overall syndication of financing Russian interest ‘may have’ participated in.

The Wiretaps

It’s a silly argument so lets put word associations aside. Whether President Trump used “wiretap” or “surveillence” on Twitter, “seven” (7) characters or “twelve” (12), it all means the same.

Request for warrants to monitor Donald Trump / Associates occurred shortly after Trump became the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party.

As the story continues to unfold, the only thing Media has confirmed is that several attempts were made during the Obama Administration to obtain warrants to monitor Trump and/or his family, associates and businesses. Most (warrants) were rejected until weeks before the election when it was narrowed to nothing of value and nothing specific to the Trump Campaign.

However, somewhere a conversation between Micheal Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak was recorded. By law, the American Citizen in this recording was supposed to be erased and/or hidden by intellegence agents. It was not and the contents or relatd information was provided to and distributed throughout the Obama Administration before it was leaked to the Media by Officials of the U.S. Federal Government.

Coincidentially, these requests for warrants began shortly after Donald Trump became the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party in May of 2016. We do not know if other 2016 Presidential Campaigns for the Republican Nomination were also targets of these so called “Russian Connection” claims of Democrats and the Media.

Ambassador Sergey Kislyak appears to be the centerpiece of Democrat claims. But it has been Media who tied Trump’s Associates to a conversation, Senate Office Meeting (due course of business) and surprisingly, attending the same public event. Media has not used their resources or reported whether these type of superficial links exist between Ambassador Kislyak and any of the other 2016 Candidates for Republican Nominee.


Omissions in cases like this, especially with such broad stroke accusations are acts of trickery intended to bait the reader into believing insinuation. Not one of these stories have compared facts known about relations between Obama, Clinton and Russian interest with innuendo about Trump business activities.

Nor have any of these Media people said anything about the involvement of SEIU (Union) and George Soros (Foreign Special Interest) types. The now deminished Glen Beck once mapped out links between American Poltics, Election Influencing and George Soros. “Project Veritas” who initially disclosed how the Clinton Campaign incited violence at Trump rallies and a voter fraud strategy now “exposes prohibited communications” conducted within the ranks.

Hacking from Russia .ru

As far as Russian hacking, this should be accompanied by full investigating of all communist countries including China and North Korea who have been hacking internet firewalls all over the world. To check this, you only need to look at the logs of network equipment in your home by doing a trace-route on IP addresses trying to logon to your private internet connection. They happen every day!


President Obama’s Conclusion on Russian Hacking

A caller to the Rush Limbuagh show provided the paper trail to President Obama’s comments and conclusions on hacking by the Russian Government. The referenced Quote is from Obama’s Dec 16, 2016 Press Conference. Follow the link to a full transcript in the White House Archives for President Obama.

And so in early September, when I saw President Putin in China, I felt that the most effective way to ensure that that didn’t happen was to talk to him directly and tell him to cut it out, and there were going to be some serious consequences if he didn’t.

And, in fact, we did not see further tampering of the election process“.

The transcript of the December 12, 2016 Press Conference chaired by President Obama contains a lot of noise about what should and could be done about this or that, when and by whom. The “Official Statement” by President Obama quotes conclusions of both the intelligence community and President Obama at the time.

Investigations into the matter revealed there was “no further tampering of the election process” by Russia after September 3, 2016. So why do Democrat Politicians like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and Media continue to suggest otherwise?

White House Leaks Secret Surveillance Information

Information about private citizens obtained via Government Surveillance leaked for political purposes“.

Testimony by James Clapper and Sally Yates (who obtained and passed along very sensitive and secret information about a private citizen) disclosed how the White House colluded with the Intelligence Community to obtain secret information collected in a FISA sweep. Details which are also protected by the FISA Warrants used to obtain the information. That information was subsequently passed on to the Washignton Post.

Media collusion in misdirecting the public from Subject Matter Damaging to the Obama Presidency is documented in the over abundence of coverage about the 18 days between the date Sally Yates (Acting Attorney General) and friends told the White House Attorney about Flynn and his subsequent termination. (Note: it took four months to properly terminate James Comey)

Michael Flynn is not an isolated case. According to testimony by James Clapper, there have been 1,933 other Private U.S. Citizens who were inadvertantly captured in surveillance and disclosed in 2016 under the Obama Administration.

Notwithstanding, by the written “Word of Law” Sally Yates was not authorized to have the the information she passed along. In addition, the information she had was leaked to Media (Jeff Bezo’s “The Washington Post” in this case) who “Published” this very sensitive and secret information about private citizens.

The core details being “Michael Flynn talked to a Russian Ambassador” has been the root of all misdirection and misinformation about Russia hacking and influence of the 2016 Election through contact(s) connected to the Trump Campaign.

The real stories we should pay attetiion to is that the Information was:

  • Collected & Illegally Stored by Nefarious Means
  • Illegally Obtained by White House Officials
  • Then Leaked to Media
  • And Published by Media



“disgrace President Trump while concurrently covering up the back stories”

The bad actors include the intelligence community (likely FBI) who collected and failed to filter data on an American Citizen, the Justice Department who inappropriately reviewed Private Citizen data, White House Officials (includig and not limited to Sally Yate) who obtained the information and those who subsequently passed it on to Media – who then published the details. The effort (as published) to disgrace President Trump while concurrently covering up the back stories.

This is the Rule of Law — Interpretations of law dynamically modified by Democrat and other Public Servants who selectively apply (or ignore) the “ Words of Law” as necessary to fit an immediate need.

Decide on your own!
Are Russian hacking attempts so unusual or is it the absence of security that’s concerning, who has a history of ‘political connections’ with Russia and who would benefit the most if Hillary Clinton (who we know stole the Presidential Nomination from Sanders) had won the election? Further, with the mounting evidence of collusion within, by and between Government, Politicians, Private Individuals and Media, who has the most to gain by distracting America from the real story?

You know what they say, “if it smells like a skunk”! This one smells like a run for cover. Intentional misdirection to hide the unraveling exposure of Political RICO Conducted by Democrats (many Elected Officials” who openly demonstrate they have no real respect for America, its People or its Laws) and the Media’s continued attempt to cover-up their efforts and contributions to influence America’s 2008, 2012 and 2016 Presidential Elections. “Elected Official” means you (The American Citizen) can do something about it!