DT Marshall’s His Cult Followers Into An Army Of Angry, Rude, Vulgar, Vile Trolls:
They Attack, And When Conservatives Defend Themselves Cry “Foul!” And Play The Victim
To prove the validity of merely the title and sub-title I will post Head-lines to fact filled, fully researched, and verified articles, and the ones who protest the most sans evidence and go FULL EMOTION…those are The Trump Troll/Cultist Army.
Trump D.C. Hotel Contractors Say They’re Owed Millions
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
In late October, just weeks ahead of the election, President-elect Donald Trump made a quick detour to Washington for the official opening of his new five-star hotel, just a few blocks from the White House.
During a ribbon-cutting ceremony, Trump told the crowd that the two-year, roughly $200 million renovation project at the historic Old Post Office Building was done ahead of schedule and under budget, thanks to what he called an incredible team of people — “including hundreds of construction workers, electricians, maintenance workers and so many others who helped make this project a reality. They’re really the important ones.”
Now some of those companies would like final payment for their work. Documents obtained by NPR show three Washington-area companies have filed liens against Trump International Hotel totaling more than $5 million…
[MY NOTE: “Under budget” because you stiffed the workers…AGAIN.]
Trump Told Russians That Firing ‘Nut Job’ Comey Eased Pressure From Investigation
Voter-Fraud Commission May Have Broken Law
(NEWSER) – President Trump has long contended that “millions” of illegal voters marred the November election, despite no evidence to support that belief, and the commission he’s approved to shake out voter fraud has been hitting some roadblocks. The latest obstacle: the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity may have broken the law in its request for nationwide voter data, the Hill reports. The commission’s letter sent to all 50 states and DC apparently didn’t go through the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, required of all federal agencies making requests for public information. More on that and related stories:
- Not following the OIRA process would be a violation of the Paperwork Reduction Act, though some say the commission isn’t technically an agency and doesn’t fall under the law’s purview. Others disagree. “I think it shows a carelessness in their desire to come in and … do what they want and to do so with a disregard for the rules,” Rutgers University professor Stuart Shapiro says.
- So far, 44 states and the District of Columbia (the Nation counts 45 states) have said they can’t (or won’t) turn over certain portions of the requested info, with some saying they won’t provide any, per CNN and other sources.
- The Washington Post dives into why this mass rebuff is happening as states figure out what they can legally make available. The story notes that “partial data could make it all largely worthless or misleading” in trying to put together a “national picture.”
- Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state who’s the vice chair of the commission, put out an official White House statement Wednesday blasting the “fake news” that 44 states have “refused” to hand over voter info. Per Kobach’s numbers, 20 states “have agreed to provide the publicly available information requested by the Commission,” with another 16 mulling what data they’re legally allowed to release—meaning just 14 states and DC have outright said no to the commission. Kobach doesn’t categorize specific states in his remarks.
- One of commission member thinks the backlash coming to this request for voters’ personal info, which includes party affiliations and partial Social Security numbers, should have been obvious. “The fullness of experience being what it is, we should have predicted it,” Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap tells Mic.
GOP operative who sought Clinton emails cited Trump aides: report
A Republican activist who sought last year to obtain Hillary Clinton‘s personal emails that had been deleted from a private email server had included the names of top Trump campaign officials in a recruiting document, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday.
Among those listed in the document are now-White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, now-counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway, now-Agriculture Department policy adviser Sam Clovis and former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
The document is dated Sept. 7, 2016, according to the Journal.
Around that time, GOP activist Peter Smith began assembling a team of lawyers, tech experts and Russian-speaking investigators to obtain 33,000 of Clinton’s private emails that he believed had been stolen by hackers.
Smith, who died last month shortly after speaking with the newspaper, said that his operation was not tied to the Trump campaign, and the recruiting document does not suggest that he was coordinating with campaign officials.
It is not clear why the former campaign officials were listed in the document.
Smith told the Journal that his operation had been in contact with several hacker groups, including two that he had suspected of being tied to the Russian government.
[Note: Anyone besides me find it scarily strange that GOP activist Peter Smith, who was investigating the Russian hacking, DIED shortly after speaking out about it?!!]
The moment you give up your principles, and your values, you are dead, your culture is dead, your civilization is dead. Period. Oriana Fallaci
The Time I Got Recruited to Collude with the Russians
Friday, June 30, 2017, 10:50 PM
I read the Wall Street Journal’s article yesterday on attempts by a GOP operative to recover missing Hillary Clinton emails with more than usual interest. I was involved in the events that reporter Shane Harris described, and I was an unnamed source for the initial story. What’s more, I was named in, and provided the documents to Harris that formed the basis of, this evening’s follow-up story, which reported that “A longtime Republican activist who led an operation hoping to obtain Hillary Clinton emails from hackers listed senior members of the Trump campaign, including some who now serve as top aides in the White House, in a recruitment document for his effort”:
Officials identified in the document include Steve Bannon, now chief strategist for President Donald Trump; Kellyanne Conway, former campaign manager and now White House counselor; Sam Clovis, a policy adviser to the Trump campaign and now a senior adviser at the Agriculture Department; and retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, who was a campaign adviser and briefly was national security adviser in the Trump administration.
I’m writing this piece in the spirit of Benjamin Wittes’s account of his interactions with James Comey immediately following the New York Times story for which he acted as a source. The goal is to provide a fuller accounting of experiences which were thoroughly bizarre and which I did not fully understand until I read the Journal’s account of the episode yesterday. Indeed, I still do not fully understand the events I am going to describe, both what they reflected then or what they mean in retrospect. But I can lay out what happened, facts from which readers and investigators can draw their own conclusions.
For the purpose of what follows, I will assume readers are already familiar with the Wall Street Journal’s reporting on this matter.
My role in these events began last spring, when I spent a great deal of time studying the series of Freedom of Information disclosures by the State Department of Hillary Clinton’s emails, and posting the parts I found most interesting—especially those relevant to computer security—on my public Twitter account. I was doing this not because I am some particular foe of Clinton’s—I’m not—but because like everyone else, I assumed she was likely to become the next President of the United States, and I believed her emails might provide some insight into key cybersecurity and national security issues once she was elected in November.
A while later, on June 14, the Washington Post reported on a hack of the DNC ostensibly by Russian intelligence. When material from this hack began appearing online, courtesy of the “Guccifer 2” online persona, I turned my attention to looking at these stolen documents. This time, my purpose was to try and understand who broke into the DNC, and why.
A few weeks later, right around the time the DNC emails were dumped by Wikileaks—and curiously, around the same time Trump called for the Russians to get Hillary Clinton’s missing emails—I was contacted out the blue by a man named Peter Smith, who had seen my work going through these emails. Smith implied that he was a well-connected Republican political operative.
Initially, I assumed the query must have been about my work on the DNC hack; after all, few people followed my account prior to the DNC breach, whereas my analysis of the break-in at the DNC had received considerably more coverage. I assumed his query about the “Clinton emails” was therefore a mistake and that he meant instead to talk to me about the emails stolen from the DNC. So I agreed to talk to him, thinking that, whatever my views on then-candidate Trump, if a national campaign wanted an independent non-partisan view on the facts surrounding the case, I should provide it to the best of my ability.
Yet Smith had not contacted me about the DNC hack, but rather about his conviction that Clinton’s private email server had been hacked—in his view almost certainly both by the Russian government and likely by multiple other hackers too—and his desire to ensure that the fruits of those hacks were exposed prior to the election. Over the course of a long phone call, he mentioned that he had been contacted by someone on the “Dark Web” who claimed to have a copy of emails from Secretary Clinton’s private server, and this was why he had contacted me; he wanted me to help validate whether or not the emails were genuine.
Under other circumstances, I would have gone no further. After all, this was occurring in the final stretch of a U.S. presidential election, and I did not feel comfortable, and had no interest in, providing material help to either of the campaigns beyond merely answering questions on my already public analysis of Clinton’s emails, or of the DNC hack. (I’m not a U.S. citizen or resident, after all.) In any case, my suspicion then and now was that Hillary Clinton’s email server was likely never breached by Russia, and moreover that if Russia had a copy of Clinton’s emails, they would not waste them in the run-up to an election she was likely to win. I thus thought Smith’s search for her emails was in vain.
But following the DNC hack and watching the Russian influence campaign surrounding it unfold in near real-time, Smith’s comment about having been contacted by someone from the “Dark Web” claiming to have Clinton’s personal emails struck me as critically important. I wanted to find out whether this person was merely some fraudster wanting to take Smith for a ride or something more sinister: that is, whether Smith had been contacted by a Russian intelligence front with intent to use Smith as part of their scheme by laundering real or forged documents…
Lastly, let me posit this to flush out the #TrumpCultists :
The Array of Conflicts of Interest
Facing the Trump Presidency
DT LEARNED FROM THE BEST-
When one Twitter Trump-Troll said that DT could change (admitting that DT is currently bad/a nut) the immediate response was:
Dude he has been this way for 70 yrs. !! Ray Charles had better vision then you Trumpkins.
-Rev. Larry Wallenmeyer.