REMINDER: EVERY BOGUS 2016 FISA REQUEST to Spy on Trump was Signed by Obama’s AG Loretta Lynch

CAP

By Joe Hoft

Last night on the Laura Ingraham Angle on FOX News, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, John Yoo, noted that Obama’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch signed off on most all the FISA warrants during Obama’s last couple years in office (emphasis added) –

As somebody who’s worked on FISA applications, I can tell you how high it could go because under the FISA law itself the Attorney General has to approve the FISA application.  So if the Steele dossier, which we now know was completely made up, was used as a basis for the FISA application, then you have somebody that was high up in the FBI that had to approve that.  Somebody high up in the Justice Department had to approve that.  Ultimately the Attorney General [Loretta Lynch] has to approve that.

And then a second thing we haven’t touched on yet is that appears that the FBI attempted to send undercover informants and agents to infiltrate the Trump campaign.  There’s a whole other set of laws that are called the Attorney General guidelines which are supposed to only allow that in very, very rare circumstances.  So I assume the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General and maybe FBI Director Comey all had to sit in on that decision and approve it…

Here’s a reminder of what we reported on February 3rd, 2018, more than a year ago –>>

On March 7th, 2017, the Gateway Pundit reported – Only 1 in 10,000 FISA Requests Was Denied in 6 Years — Obama’s First Request to Wiretap Trump Denied in 2016.

We now know that the FISA requests to spy on Carter Page were based on the discredited and bogus fake Trump dossier created by Fusion GPS and that the dossier’s origin was not reported to the court.

We also know that all of these requests were signed off on by the Obama Administration’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch and that the first request to spy on Trump was denied by the FISA Court.

In March 2017 we reported that President Trump tweeted that former President Obama had petitioned a court [at least] twice in order to wire tap current President Trump when he was running for office.

In his first tweet President Trump tweeted:

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

CAP

The President next tweeted:

Is it legal for a sitting President to be “wire tapping” a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!

CAP

We also reported that according to ABC News:

More than a thousand applications for electronic surveillance, all signed by the attorney general, are submitted each year, and the vast majority are approved. From 2009 to 2015, for example, more than 10,700 applications for electronic surveillance were submitted, and only one was denied in its entirety, according to annual reports sent to Congress. Another one was denied in part, and 17 were withdrawn by the government.

A very disturbing fact about the wire tapping request of President Trump is that the FISA Court turned down President Obama’s Administration’s first request to wire tap President Trump that was evidently signed off on by Attorney General Lynch. With only two known applications denied out of 10,700 from 2009 through 2015, the fact that the Obama Administration’s application was denied by the FISA Court is very disturbing. The odds of this happening were 0.02%.

Now we know that Carter Page was spied on by the Obama Administration and the information provided to the Court to spy on him was bogus.

We now have additional evidence that the Obama Administration, its AG, FBI and DOJ were all corrupt and doing all they could, including obtaining warrants to spy on President Trump based on bogus information, to take him down before the 2016 election.

The amazing thing is … Trump still won!

Trump Supporters Crash Bill de Blasio’s Green New Deal Presser at Trump Tower

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio speaks inside Trump Tower about the Green New Deal, serving notice to US President Donald Trump demanding more energy-efficient buildings, including Trump Tower, May 13, 2019 in New York. (Photo by Don Emmert / AFP) (Photo credit should read DON EMMERT/AFP/Getty Images)

By Joshua Caplan

Supporters of President Donald Trump crashed New York Mayor Bill de Blasio’s press conference touting the city’s “Green New Deal” inside the lobby of Trump Tower on Monday morning, holding signs with insults directed at the far-left Democrat.

Speaking at a podium steps from the spot where President Donald Trump announced his own presidential run in 2015, the Democrat said he had come to Trump Tower to promote a new city air pollution law requiring skyscraper owners to cut greenhouse gas emissions or face fines.

De Blasio said Trump’s buildings in the city could face a combined $2.1 million in annual fines if they don’t reduce emissions by 2030.

“President Trump, you’re on notice. Your polluting buildings are part of the problem,” he claimed.

However, de Blasio’s speech was all-but drowned out by a throng of Trump supporters who demonstrated behind him on the building’s escalators, booing, whistling, chanting and holding up signs with messages including “Failed mayor” and “Worst mayor ever.” Footage of the heckling was shared to social media.

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 5.40.15 PM

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 5.42.20 PM

Loud music also played over the building’s sound system for part of the event. De Blasio had to shout to be heard.

“It’s so nice of them to serenade us at Trump Tower. Clearly, they are uncomfortable with the truth,” he said.

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 5.44.53 PM

Under a deal that President Trump struck with the city decades ago, Trump Tower’s lobby is considered a public space for much of each day.

New York City’s $14 billion “Green New Deal” aims to reduce emissions by roughly 30 percent. The plan will ban new glass buildings deemed “inefficient” and strive for carbon neutrality by 2050.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

✈️ Border Shock: Illegals *Flown* Inland ✈️ Reduces ’Overcrowding’ Update: 3/10 ’Families’ Identified as Fraudulent

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 3.27.28 PM

by Bob Price

U.S. Border Patrol officials are now using air transportation to move migrants from overcrowded processing centers to lesser-impacted facilities, particularly from the Rio Grande Valley Sector.

On Friday, officials in the Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol Sector began flying migrants from McAllen, Texas, to Del Rio, Texas, the Washington Post reported. The flights are operated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) but the migrants remain in the custody of Border Patrol.

The Post reported that the flights are aimed at moving single adults and family units from South Texas detention facilities as authorities prepare for even-larger numbers of family units and unaccompanied minors. These types of flights are highly unusual for Border Patrol, the newspaper reported. The agency resorted to utilizing flights which carry up to 135 souls because all buses are being utilized to transport migrants from the border to the initial processing centers. The flights are said to cost taxpayers about $16,000 each or about $120 per migrant.

San Angelo Live reported that migrants are being flown to Laughlin Air Force Base near Del Rio. Border Patrol officials then utilize buses to move the migrants to the Border Patrol station. Border Patrol officials stress these are “non-criminal alien family units.”

After processing, the Del Rio Sector will likely release family units with no criminal history or illnesses into local communities.

ICE officials are also screening family units in the Del Rio Sector for false or fraudulent family claims, Acting ICE Director Matthew T. Albence told Breitbart News in an interviewlast week.

“We have been working these cases from an investigative standpoint for quite a while,” Director Albence told Breitbart News. “What we’re doing now that is a little different is surging the additional resources to the ports of entry and Border Patrol stations where these individuals are being arrested and being processed. We’ve got teams in seven different locations who are conducting interviews of people who appear to be fraudulent families or where we have concerns that they are not who they say they are.”

“The results have been staggering thus far,” the director stated. “In just a couple of weeks, we’ve interviewed 256 family units and identified 65 fraudulent families. Almost three out of every ten families we’ve interviewed have become fraudulent.”

In an effort to more quickly determine the instances of false familial claims, federal officials are about to deploy a “rapid DNA” testing program in two locations. He said this specific type of DNA testing will return a result in 90 minutes that can identify a parent-child relationship.

Albence said the Rapid DNA testing will being this week. “We hope to have some results next week.”

The CNN search engine? Google favors stories from liberal news sites, study finds

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 3.03.29 PM

When it comes to political bias online, left-leaning Facebook and Twitter have been the most common punching bags, but a new study confirms that Google’s search algorithms are also skewed in favor of liberal viewpoints.

Researchers from Northwestern University performed an “algorithm audit” of the ‘Google Top Stories’ box, which is a major driver of traffic to news publishers and therefore prime online real estate. They examined results for nearly 200 searches relating to news events for one month in late 2017 and found “a left-leaning ideological skew.”

ALSO ON RT.COMGoogle flipped seats, shifted millions of votes to Dems in 2018 midterms, researcher tells RT

 

The researchers did allow some leeway for Google to defend itself, however, saying that while the left-leaning bias was detected, it is possible that the dominance of particular sources is a result of “successful strategic behavior” by those sources to achieve “algorithmic recognizability” — but whatever the reason, liberal sources still far eclipsed conservatives ones.

CNN, perhaps the outlet most-reviled by conservatives, was Google’s overall favorite source. Of the 6,302 articles appearing on Google’s ‘top stories’ during the month in focus, more than 10 percent came from CNN. The New York Times and Washington Post were up next, garnering 6.5 and 5.6 percent of the results, respectively.

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 3.06.37 PM

Fox News, the most mainstream right-wing outlet, was the source for only 3 percent of stories appearing in the top box. Then it was back to liberal outlets, with the BBC, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, The Guardian, Politico and ABC News filling out the rest of the top 10. Overall, 62.4 percent of the most common sources were left-leaning, while only 11.3 perfect were said to be right-leaning.

Ironically, despite the heavy promotion from Google in the online realm, CNN’s overall audience declined by a colossal 26 percent in April compared to a year earlier — and network boss Jeff Zucker admitted last November that CNN’s audience just “goes away” any time the channel switches from its (overwhelmingly negative) coverage of President Donald Trump to other topics. So it seems CNN is stuck in a vicious cycle; criticized for focusing too much on negative Trump stories, yet not being able to stop for fear of losing more viewers.

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 3.08.55 PM

Perhaps an even more damning indictment than Google’s detected liberal bias, however, is that nearly all (86 percent) of the stories promoted by the search giant came from just 20 sources across the entire internet, which doesn’t exactly display much of a commitment to diversity of information and opinion.

ALSO ON RT.COM‘Poisonous connection’ of big tech: Google staff confer over anti-Trump search tweak

Publishers selected for the top box receive “a significant boost in traffic” which demonstrates Google’s ability to “pick winners and losers” based on where they decide to direct most of our attention. Such power and bias in favor of major sources could also be linked to the decline of local news, which is competing in an unfair online environment, the study suggested.

The detection of Google’s left-leaning preferences will hardly come as a shock to conservatives, who have been complaining in recent years that powerful online platforms like Facebook, Twitter and Google have all shown clear bias against conservative perspectives. The grumbling has not been without cause, either.

Most recently, Facebook slapped a number of popular conservative commentators with permanent lifetime bans — and Twitter has been caught out ‘shadowbanning’ Republicans and is accused of being quicker to suspend or ban conservative users over liberals for alleged rule-breaking.

Yet, while Facebook and Twitter have engaged in what many analysts and critics are calling direct political censorship, the story is more complicated when it comes to Google.

The researchers found that it’s not simply whether a source is left or right-leaning that determines whether it goes into the top stories box. Writing for the Columbia Journalism Review, one of the study authors acknowledged that there appears to be more news produced on the left overall, something which also affects the results. Even so, Google’s curation algorithms were still found to be “slightly magnifying” the already left-leaning skew in online news production.

Then there’s the bias toward timeliness; the fresher the story, the more likely it was to be promoted in the top box. The researchers called this Google’s “predilection towards recency” and said that huge news organizations like CNN which have the potential to quickly generate fresh content “may be better positioned” to garner more attention.

If Google really values diversity, the authors suggest it should acknowledge that high-quality journalism can have a longer shelf life and “consider relaxing the timeliness constraint to widen the scope of sources available to its curation algorithm.”

ALSO ON RT.COMFive examples that show internet censorship is as much a threat to the left as the right

The results put to bed the notion, promoted by many Democrats and liberals that Google algorithm bias is a myth. Rep. Jerry Nadler last year called the notion of liberal bias online a “delusion” and a “right-wing conspiracy theory” — although Nadler, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee is still a chief proponent of the disproven conspiracy theory that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election.

Google has always denied that it is politically biased or abusing its monopoly position, but it looks like the search engine has plenty of work to do on its curation algorithms before it can convince anyone of its fairness.

Nadler opposed contempt charges against AG Eric Holder in 2012

 

Published on May 13, 2019

While House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler spearheads the campaign against Attorney General William Barr, he opposed the same charges against former Attorney General Eric Holder back in 2012. One America’s Pearson Sharp explains how Nadler’s long-standing feud with President Trump could be playing a part in his agenda against the attorney general.

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 2.57.14 PM

 

World Renowned Transgender Researcher Briefly Suspended by Twitter for Sharing His Findings

Twitter is now suspending scientists whose findings contradict their terms of service.

By 

A world renowned psychologist and scientist in the field of transgenderism, pedophilia, and sexual orientation had his Twitter account briefly suspended by the tech giant Sunday after sharing his latest scientific findings.

Ray Blanchard served on the gender dysphoria working group and chaired the paraphilia working group for DSM V. He is a world expert in the field. Twitter has just suspended his account for a thread setting out his findings from A lifetime of research. Unreal,” Helen Joyce of The Economist said, attaching a photo of the suspended account.

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 2.44.14 PM

DSM V is the latest Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, used by doctors and psychiatrists in diagnosing mental illnesses.

Apparently, Blanchard’s scientific findings did not mesh with Twitter’s terms of service. The microblogging giant flagged him for violating its rules against “hateful conduct.” In six Tweets, Blanchard laid out his beliefs based on his research:

My beliefs include the following 6 elements:
(1) Transsexualism and milder forms of gender dysphoria are types of mental disorder, which may leave the individual with average or even above-average functioning in unrelated areas of life.
(2) Sex change surgery is still the best treatment for carefully screened, adult patients, whose gender dysphoria has proven resistant to other forms of treatment.
(3) Sex change surgery should not be considered for any patient until that patient has reached the age of 21 years and has lived for at least two years in the desired gender role.
(4) Gender dysphoria is not a sexual orientation, but it is virtually always preceded or accompanied by an atypical sexual orientation – in males, either homosexuality (sexual arousal by members of one’s own biological sex) . . . or autogynephilia (sexual arousal at the thought or image of oneself as a female).
(5) There are two main types of gender dysphoria in males, one associated with homosexuality and one associated with autogynephilia. Traditionally, the great bulk of female-to-male transsexuals has been homosexual in erotic object choice.
(6) The sex of a postoperative transsexual should be analogous to a legal fiction. This legal fiction would apply to some things (e.g., sex designation on a driver’s license) but not to others (entering a sports competition as one’s adopted sex).

After significant backlash, Twitter reinstated Blanchard’s account.

“Twitter has unlocked my account and graciously apologized for their error. My sincere thanks to the people who expressed their concern during the past 24 hours,” he said Sunday night.

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 2.45.31 PM

Twitter has become known for its censorship of conservative ideas, including that transgenderism is a mental illness, which, as proven by Blanchard, is not so much a political idea as a scientific one.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑