It is being reported here that the House Select Committee has moved into phase two of its investigation into the Russian dossier and this phase is focused on John Kerry and Barack Obama’s State Department. Here is more:
The House Select Committee on Intelligence is now investigating former Secretary of State John F. Kerry’s possible role into the unverified dossier paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton Campaign, this reporter has learned. The dossier, assembled by a former British spy, laid the foundation for the FBI’s investigation into alleged collusion between President Trump and Russia and was the essential piece of evidence used by the FBI to get a warrant to spy on a former volunteer for the Trump campaign.
For more than a month, the committee has been in its second phase of investigations focused on former Obama State Department officials and their role in either transmitting information or using information provided by a former British spy and investigator Christopher Steele. Steele was hired by embattled research firm Fusion GPS, also under several congressional and Senate investigations.
But it was in February when questions surfaced regarding Kerry’s possible involvement or knowledge of the dossier.
Here is more:
information uncovered by the Senate Judiciary Committee and revealed in its criminal referral of Steele to the Department of Justice that several Clinton allies were also connected to the State Department and the dossier. Sidney Blumenthal, a close confidant of Hillary Clinton, and Cody Shearer, a former journalist who went on to work for the Clintons, appeared to be feeding Steele information.
I do not know how reliable this source is but we have learned over the last few months how involved the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign were with the Russian dossier–from paying for it to providing, sharing, and distributing information–so it does seem likely the Select Committee would be looking into this.
It certainly seems as if there was some meddling in the 2016 election after all, but it was the Obama administration and the Democrats doing the meddling.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Federal Judge dismisses DACA challenge
Late last month the Supreme Court declined taking up an expedited hearing on the DACA challenge, throwing the case back into the lower courts to be fully adjudicated before, we can assume, heading back to the Supreme Court when all the lower court appeals are finished.
The next phase has begun: According to this story a Federal Judge in Maryland has dismissed the challenge against DACA. Here is more:
A federal judge in Maryland on Monday dismissed a challenge to President Trump‘s decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
“This Court does not like the outcome of this case, but is constrained by its constitutionally limited role to the result that it has reached,” Judge Roger Titus said in his opinion. “Hopefully, the Congress and the President will finally get their job done.”
“An overwhelming percentage of Americans support protections for ‘Dreamers,’ yet it is not the province of the judiciary to provide legislative or executive actions when those entrusted with those responsibilities fail to act,” Titus continued.
I am sure this ruling will be appealed but I do not know if there are more lower court appeals to come or if the next appeal would be to the Supreme Court but I am sure this is not the end of the story.
The one thing that stands out to me with this ruling is the fact this judge could not help but interject his own personal beliefs on this issue in his statement but I am impressed by the fact he did not let his personal opinion stop him from ruling from a Constitutional standpoint and not a personal standpoint. I have to give him credit for that because this seems to be getting more rare day by day.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
First let me say that I do not think the President should be out there calling people names. I understand he is frustrated but I think there is a better way to go about it. Of course the Democrats and some of the Republicans have been guilty of the same–Donald Trump has been called a Nazi, a white nationalist, a misogynist, a homophobe, and a racist, among other things–but at some point we need to get past all of this and move on.
But speaking about being called a racist it happened again: Over the weekend Donald Trump said that Maxine Waters needed to take an IQ test. Maxine Waters made the claim this was a racist comment. Here is what she said:
“This president has been called stupid, he has been called ignorant, and even his Secretary of State did not deny that he called him a moron. And so he has no credibility. He has been name calling. He’s been saying all kinds of things. And I certainly expected him to come out with some racist remarks about me. So he did exactly what I expected him do. And, by the way, I’m told he wasn’t funny at all.”
The first thing I noticed about this comment is Maxine Waters confirmed that Donald Trump has been the victim of name-calling himself, he is not alone in the name-calling. Perhaps he has brought some of it on himself with his own name-calling but the Democrats are not innocent themselves. In fact I would argue the name-calling predates Donald Trump with the Democrats basically crying racism every time somebody opposed Barack Obama for his policies.
Secondly, there was nothing racist about this comment. This is the Democrats “go to” line every time somebody opposes them but it is growing stale and because of this the term is losing its effectiveness. People are growing tone deaf when they hear this term because it has been overplayed.
There is still racism in this country, to deny that would be foolish, but the problem is not as prevalent in today’s day and age as the Democrats would like us to believe–for the most part people have moved beyond race. The problem with these false claims of racism is that it takes away from real claims of racism when they occur because people just roll their eyes and say “here we go again” when there is an issue which should be dealt with.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
A treatise on thought, wisdom, and the Word Part Two
This is part two of a larger writing I have undertaken entitled “A treatise on thought, wisdom, and the Word.” I am trying to compare philosophy to theology to show that philosophy is incomplete without theology. It grew into a much longer treatise than I intended so I broke it down into two parts. I believe part two stands on its own but you can read part one here if this is something which interests you. You can also read “The Theist versus the Free Thinker: The Battle Between Faith and Reason.” This is the treatise which began this new exploration. I understand this goes pretty deep into the weeds and is not for everybody but I hope some will find this helpful so here we go with part two:
Most who have studied ancient history–from atheists to agnostics to nihilists and absurdists–agree that Jesus was an historical figure even if they deny His divinity. Many of the Cynic and Skeptic philosophers were on the right path on some issues and it has been suggested by some thinkers that Jesus might be the ultimate Cynic philosopher, were it not for the fact He attributed everything to God.
A great example of this can be found by contrasting the thought of Dio Chrysostom and Seneca with Jesus’ Word: Dio Chrysostom said “Consider the beasts yonder and the birds, how much freer from trouble they live than men, and how much happily also, how much healthier and stronger they are, and how each of them lives the longest life possible, although they have neither nor human intelligence.”
Seneca said, “the greatest hindrance to living is expectancy, which depends upon tomorrow and wastes today.”
Jesus combined these thoughts and said much the same thing with the Word but He took it to the next level according to the book of Matthew:
“26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27 Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life]?
28 ‘And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labour or spin. 29 Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendour was dressed like one of these. 30 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you – you of little faith? 31 So do not worry, saying, “What shall we eat?” or “What shall we drink?” or “What shall we wear?” 32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.” (Matthew 6:26-34 NIV)
See what Jesus did there? “The pagans (Dio Chrysostom and Seneca) run after these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them.” Jesus gave meaning to the absurdity.
This is why I say Cynics and Skeptics were on the right path on some issues but Cynicism, Skepticism, and Stoicism lead to absurdism and nihilism without Christian theology. These philosophies are similar and contain varying degrees of pantheistic theology. They basically teach us that god is nature, and life itself is meaningless because we are all part of nature and everything happens for the benefit of nature–what happens to us individually is of no consequence.
At this point the slide into absurdism and nihilism is easy: Paraphrasing Albert Camus, once you realize the absurdity of the world you can be happy because there is no longer any expectation of anything greater so you will not be let down. “One must imagine Sisyphus happy” because he was resigned to his fate according to Albert Camus in the “Myth of Sisyphus.”
If all life was born out of chaos and was by mere happenstance alone the absurdists and nihilists would be right, there could be no meaning to life because there was no meaning to our birth. I believe the idea that man came into existence by mere chance alone to be the true absurdity because something cannot come out of nothing without a prime mover. G.K Chesterton liked to use art as a metaphor for creation: A painting does not come into its own, it requires an artist. If life is art, and when you think about it life really is an art form, there must be an artist…
Following up on that last paragraph please allow me a slight digression which I believe is relevant to this treatise: Even Charles Darwin recognized there was a paradox in his theory of evolution which he admitted could pose a problem to his theory, known as the Cambrian Explosion and here is more on that: “Charles Darwin considered this sudden appearance of a solitary group of trilobites, with no apparent antecedents, and absence of other fossils, to be “undoubtedly of the gravest nature” among the difficulties in his theory of natural selection. He reasoned that earlier seas had swarmed with living creatures, but that their fossils had not been found due to the imperfections of the fossil record. In the sixth edition of his book, he stressed his problem further as: “To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.”
Basically, there is no fossil evidence to back up Charles Darwin’s theory that all life evolved from a single organism over time, but rather that all life appeared during the same period with no antecedent proofs to justify his theory. How can this be if his theory of evolution is true?
Charles Darwin had no answer but G.K. Chesterson did. He said, “evolution is a good example of that modern intelligence which, if it destroys anything, destroys itself. Evolution is either an innocent scientific description of how certain earthly things came about; or, if it is anything more than this, it is an attack upon thought itself. If evolution destroys anything, it does not destroy religion but rationalism. If evolution simply means that a positive thing called an ape turned very slowly into a positive thing called a man, then it is stingless for the most orthodox; for a personal God might just as well do things slowly as quickly, especially if, like the Christian God, he were outside time.” (Orthodoxy)
Having allowed that digression let us continue: Jesus taught us something different altogether and this is where theology comes into play because Jesus taught us that we are all part of God’s creation, that He created all life and therefor we all serve a purpose greater than ourselves. Our lives should be dedicated to the One who gave us life and if we do so while giving the glory to God, through faith and with God’s grace, we will be rewarded in the next life. Again this takes the leap I wrote about in part one but which side of Pascal’s wager would you rather be on? But wagering just in case it is true is not enough, you have to earnestly put your faith in God, believe in the Word, and act accordingly.
It makes one contemplate the idea that God was working through the Cynics and Skeptics but they did not realize it and could not complete the “thought” because of their ignorance of the Word.
This is where Jesus differed from the Cynics and that was because he was the Word where the Greeks only had thought, and this is where the apostle Paul also differed because he took this discussion to the next level. Paul had the Word and he took the quantitative leap Soren Kierkegaard said all men must make to avoid the philosophical absurdity of the world and he did so thousands of years before the existentialist Danish philosopher posited this idea.
Jesus is the one person (for he was fully man) who did not have to make this leap between the absurdity of the world, philosophically speaking, and the belief in God (because He is fully God.)
Jesus IS the leap. He is the Way, the Truth, and the Light. (A trinity within the Trinity?) He is the Word which brings us beyond thought. And again here is another example where Jesus differs from the likes of other great thinkers like the Buddha and Lao Tzu. They both claimed to give us the way but said we should not follow themselves but rather their teachings while Jesus said He is the way, follow Him. “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” John 14:6
Allow me another digression: It is interesting to point out here, as Dr. Peter Kreeft does in his “Fundamentals of Faith” that Buddha’s followers have deified him despite his assertion he was only a man while agnostics and atheists have tried to humanize Jesus, who claimed He was God. Why is that?
The answer to that question is not something we will treat here, allow it to suffice that the reason for this is the Buddha offered the “way” of a good life devoid of any higher power and the consequences thereof while Jesus taught us the moral authority comes from above and there are consequences for our actions. This is a hard teaching from the humblest of people and so it needs to be undeified to remove sin from the equation in the eyes of non-believers. The gate is narrow…
Pascal, who is most famous for his wager, said “there are only three types of people; those who have found God and serve him; those who have not found God and seek him, and those who live not seeking, or finding him. The first are rational and happy; the second unhappy and rational, and the third foolish and unhappy.”
I have been on all three sides of this equation and I think this makes me qualified to speak on this. I would add the first are theologically sound, the second theologically hopeful, and the third are Skeptics, Stoics, absurdists, and nihilists. But where do we go from here? I think there is one last example linking thought to the Word which can be used for the sake of this treatise.
I stumbled across the Book Of Wisdom recently and this is controversial because while this book is considered Apocryphal by the Protestant Church it is considered canon by the Catholic Church and is included in Catholic versions of the Bible.
The Book of Wisdom had been accepted as having been authored by Solomon but now there is serious doubt about its authorship, even within the Catholic Church, but it does try to link thought to the Word so I thought I would include a couple of passages here because it seems relevant to what I have been writing.
“She [wisdom] is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness” (Wisdom 7:26).
While Wisdom 9:18 says that men were “saved through wisdom.”
The first passage is not nearly as controversial in my mind as the second. Solomon could have had anything in the world he wanted and he chose wisdom and God gave it to him. Was not God showing Solomon an “image of His Goodness” by granting him wisdom? In this case Solomon’s wisdom, given to him by God, was the Word.
The second passage seems heretical on the surface because the Bible teaches us that salvation is acquired through faith by God’s grace alone, but could all this be tied together?
If God gave Solomon wisdom, which was His thought, his philosophy through the Word, is it possible that God was spreading his Word through wisdom (His thought) to the ancient Greeks and Romans although they could not comprehend it? “And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.” (John 1:5 KJV)
But this is not the only example of God granting wisdom in the Bible; Joseph was also granted wisdom. (Acts 7:10) And Proverbs is full of references to knowledge. (wisdom)
So the answer seems to be yes if thought leads to wisdom and wisdom leads people to God’s Word but it is up to us to use this wisdom correctly. If thought leads to wisdom and wisdom leads one to Jesus and Jesus is God’s Word, then it would seem to me that wisdom through thought can lead to God’s Word and salvation if it is used to seek and find the Truth. Any thought which stops before this is incomplete and many philosophers stop thinking at the very point where they should start thinking.
With this last statement I reaffirm an idea I posited in my first treatise–“The Theist versus the Free Thinker: The Battle of Faith and Reason”–that some philosophers stop thinking where they should start thinking, and while reading G.K. Chesterson’s “Orthodoxy” I just learned he posited the same idea. He said, “there is a thought that stops thought. That is the only thought that ought to be stopped.” And he continued, “that is the ultimate evil against which all religious authority was aimed” and “it was against this remote ruin that all the military systems in religion were originally ranked and ruled.”
“Seek ye the truth and the truth shall make ye free” This is the only way to escape an otherwise absurd world and once you are set free there is nothing in this world which can put fetters on your ankles because you serve a higher purpose and only then are you truly free. “For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” (2 Corinthians 5:1 KJV)
Or as the apostle Paul said in Philippians 4:11-13: “11 I am not saying this because I am in need, for I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. 12 I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. 13 I can do all this through him who gives me strength.” (NIV)
Contrast this with the rich man who asked Jesus what he had to do to enter the kingdom of Heaven. Jesus answered in Mark 10:21-22:
21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
I would ask those who doubt the existence of God to think beyond the box, to think beyond where others stop. Many people consider Christianity to be a box which stifles free will and thought, a box which is used to control people, but I would argue the opposite. If you accept the Word you will be set free from the box which men use to bind you in the chains of this world. Then, and only then, will you be truly free. Or as Pascal said, as I referenced above, you will be rational and happy.
As you can see in the references above, Paul was content even while he was in chains because he was free, while the rich man found himself bound in the chains of his riches and he was sad. He was a slave to sin. (John 8:34)
Paul accepted the Word while the rich man rejected it and which man was happier? The rich man had everything in this world that he wanted but he did not have everything he needed but on the other hand Paul might not have had everything he wanted but he had everything he needed.
I have written and rewritten several different endings to this treatise and after reading what I have written I realize this treatise took me in an entirely different direction than I originally intended but this is where I believe I was led and I hope it can be useful to some people out there who are struggling, who are laboring, and who are heavy laden and seeking the Truth through thought and wisdom but have not yet found it.
I will end on a personal note which I pray can help others: On September 30th, 2015, when I was in the midst of a health crisis which shook me to the core and made me question what I thought I believed, my burden was lifted and I found rest in my soul when I needed it the most when I accepted Jesus Christ into my heart as my Savior so I will leave you with this: “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matthew 11:28-30 KJV)
“Learn of me”
Amen
Sunday, March 4th open thread: ‘The Ghost in you’
Here is the open thread for Sunday, March 4th. Please feel free to post links to interesting articles and to discuss whatever issues arise during the course of the day. Nothing is off-topic here.
Last week we discussed 7 stories, did you miss any of them? If so there is an easy way to make sure it does not happen again. I understand that all of you are busy and cannot always find the time to check the blog for updates so why not subscribe to America’s Watchtower and receive email updates whenever I write a new post? That is the easiest way to follow the blog to ensure you never miss another post.
In addition to subscribing you can also follow America’s Watchtower on Facebook and Twitter by clicking the links on the right. But you will get more than that for I often post links to articles probably will not be writing about so it is a great way to keep up with what is happening.
The Twitter widget in the sidebar is fully interactive. This widget updates my tweets in real time and allows you to respond to or retweet my tweets right from the blog. It also allows you to tweet me right from America’s Watchtower.
I have really been getting into the ’80’s alternative music I listened to back in the day on Pandora lately so here is the Psychedelic Furs performing “The Ghost in You” live in 1984.
frui diem
Jeff Sessions: the Department of Justice is investigating the leak of Michael Flynn’s phone call
Earlier in the week we learned that Jeff Sessions has ordered the Department of Justice Inspector General to investigate the alleged abuse of FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, and we also learned that it was Andrew McCabe who authorized the leaking of information about the ongoing investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal. A Department of Justice Inspector General report is expected to “criticize” Andrew McCabe for this.
In other words, nothing meaningful is going to happen to Andrew McCabe and because an Inspector General is going to investigate the abuse of FISA warrants we can expect the same–maybe a tersely worded condemnation with no action behind it.
Today Jeff Sessions announced in an interview that the Department of Justice was going to investigate the illegal leaking of the contents of a phone call between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak, as well as 27 other leaks. Here is more:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a recent interview that he was investigating who illegally leaked former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s phone calls to the media.
Asked specifically by Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo if his office was investigating the leak, he responded: “That is a violation of the law, to leak classified documents, and it is being investigated.”
Last August, Sessions stood up a task force dedicated to investigating leaks. He did not indicate during the recent interview when anything might be announced, but said the leaks are being investigated “aggressively.”
“I will say this, the last two years before I became Attorney General there were – each year there were three open investigations of classified leaks. Now we have 27, we’re going after this aggressively. I am directing it personally. Some of the matters involve this matter and some of it is a matter I am not recused on and we’re pursuing it aggressively,” he said during the interview earlier this month.
Unlike the investigations into the FISA abuses and the leaking authorized by Andrew McCabe these investigations look like they are being conducted by Jeff Sessions directly and not through an Inspector General so maybe, just maybe, something will come from this.
Judging by recent history I am not confident anything will come from this, but part of me is hopeful that Jeff Sessions is more active behind the scenes than we think and has been holding his cards close to his vest.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Bernie Sanders pays a $14,500 fine to the FEC for accepting Australian aid during the 2016 election
The investigation into alleged collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians has already uncovered the fact that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee were working through Fusion GPS with a foreign agent, Christopher Steele, which lead to the mostly debunked Russian dossier. This dossier was used as partial justification to spy on Paul Manafort through a FISA warrant as well as “evidence” to kick off the investigation into the President.
Now we are learning in this story that Bernie Sanders has agreed to pay the Federal Election Committee $14,500 for accepting money during the 2016 campaign from an Australian political party, here is more:
Sen. Bernie Sanders‘s (I-Vt.) presidential campaign paid a $14,500 fine to settle a federal election complaint after an Australian political party paid for foreign volunteers to help Sanders during the 2016 presidential primary.
WMUR reported that the Sanders campaign agreed to settle with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) while not admitting fault for accepting assistance from the Australian Labor Party.
The party paid for flights and daily stipends for Australian volunteers to help out with Sanders campaign events, according to a copy of the “conciliation agreement” obtained by the news outlet.
As alluded to above, Bernie Sanders is denying any wrongdoing by claiming the campaign settled to avoid a drawn out court battle. And who knows, maybe he is telling the truth but that does not mitigate the point that as of now both major Democratic candidates were involved with foreign agents during the 2016 campaign.
For all of the talk by the Democrats and the mainstream media surrounding Donald Trump colluding with the Russians none of them seem to have a problem with the actual collusion which has been uncovered. I wonder why that is? The end justifies the means…at least in these two cases. Selective outrage at its finest…
Hat Tip to Bunkerville for finding this story.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
According to this New York Times story the Department of Justice Inspectors General report is expected to criticize Andrew McCabe for authorizing the disclosure of information related to Hillary Clinton’s email scandal investigation. Here is more:
A Justice Department review is expected to criticize the former F.B.I. deputy director, Andrew G. McCabe, for authorizing the disclosure of information about a continuing investigation to journalists, according to four people familiar with the inquiry.
The department’s inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, has zeroed in on disclosures to The Wall Street Journal as part of a wide-ranging investigation into, among other things, how the F.B.I. approached the 2016 inquiry into Mrs. Clinton’s handling of classified information. Mr. Horowitz has said he expects to release a report this month or next.
The findings have potentially serious ramifications for the F.B.I., which is in the middle of a special counsel investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. Though the report is not expected to focus on that, some of the same agents — including Mr. McCabe — handled both the Russia case and the Clinton inquiry.
The inspector general has concluded that Mr. McCabe authorized F.B.I. officials to provide information for that article, according to the four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the report before it is published.
“Authorizing the disclosure of information” is a rather nice way to say that Andrew McCabe signed off on leaking details of an ongoing investigation. Paging Jeff Sessions…
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Judicial Watch is reporting that Loretta Lynch used an alias while conducting official Department of Justice business. The Department of Justice is claiming this was needed in order to “protect her security and privacy and enable her to conduct Department business efficiently via email” but Judicial Watch has a different take on it.
Illustrating how government hides information from the American public, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch used a fake name to conduct official Department of Justice (DOJ) business in agency emails obtained by Judicial Watch. As the nation’s chief law enforcement officer Lynch, Barack Obama’s second attorney general, skirted public-records laws by using the alias Elizabeth Carlisle in emails she sent from her official DOJ account. In the records provided to Judicial Watch, the DOJ explains it as necessary to “protect her security and privacy and enable her to conduct Department business efficiently via email.”
This begs the question of how many other government officials use fake names and whether those aliases are searched when agencies process Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
You can see how that works: an entity like Judicial Watch requests documents from someone like Loretta Lynch and they are provided with the documents–eventually–however a search for documents written by Loretta Lynch most likely do not turn up documents written by “Elizabeth Carlisle” and why would they? And it seems to have worked:
In its mission to educate the public about the operations and activities of government, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request with the DOJ on October 15, 2015 for documents related to SCN. Specifically, Judicial Watch asked for legal opinions and analysis prepared by the DOJ relating to the U.S. involvement in the program, documents that form the foundation for the decision for the country to participate in SCN, all international agreements and related records involving the commitment of U.S. resources or personnel to SCN and records of communication between officials in the Office of the Attorney General relating to the initiative. The DOJ claimed to have no records related to the SCN and billed Judicial Watch a startling $50,000 to conduct the search that didn’t produce a single file.
Though the DOJ recently furnished the documents with Lynch’s fake name, the records were part of Judicial Watch’s original 2015 FOIA request.
This brings us back to Judicial Watch’s question of how many other government officials were using aliases to help them skirt open-records laws. There is one other case Judicial Watch knows about:
Besides Lynch, we have only discovered the use of such aliases among government operatives to conduct official business at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Obama’s EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, famously used the alias Richard Windsor in a government email account to conduct official business and communicate with staff. Jackson even took required EPA computer training under the fake identity with the handle Windsor.Richard@epa.gov. She eventually resigned over the scandal, which brought to light the agency’s violations of federal open-records laws.
And I would be willing to bet there are many, many more…
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Jeff Sessions to open an investigation into possible FISA abuses
Hey everybody, a Jeff Sessions sighting! It had been previously reported that the FBI used the mostly debunked Russian dossier to obtain FISA warrants against the Trump campaign and it has also been reported that the FBI withheld the fact this dossier was financed by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee while seeking these warrants.
The Attorney General was asked today about whether or not the Department of Justice was going to investigate these alleged FISA abuses and he answered in the affirmative. Here is more:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Tuesday that the Justice Department will investigate potential abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
“Yes, it will be investigated,” Sessions told reporters at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees FISA warrants, according to the Washington Examiner.
He said looking into any abuses is the “appropriate thing” to do.
It is not clear if Sessions has opened a formal investigation into the matter, but he said the Justice Department’s inspector general would take it up.
All I can say is, it is about time! We will see if anything comes from this, until I see it I will have my doubts.
The Democratic memo which was released last week disputes these claims, however I still remember when Mitt Romney was running for President and Harry Reid made the claim the former Massachusetts Governor paid no taxes for 10 years. When he was asked about proof he said something to the effect of, I made the claim it is up to Mitt Romney to prove it is not true. I would hold the Obama regime to the same standard and say the charges have been made, prove them false. Quid est veritas?
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
America's Watchtower 