Thursday, November 21, 2019

Lindsey Graham Said This Date Is a Lock for the Release of the Report onn Alleged FISA Abuses Under Obama

Lindsey Graham Said This Date Is a Lock for the Release of the Report onn Alleged FISA Abuses Under ObamaIt’s been months. We’ve heard timetables offered over and over again. When will it drop? When will the report of alleged FISA abuse during the Obama administration drop? It was supposed to be sometime during the summer. Now, we’re way into fall and there was still no word. Every journalist and blogger was hoping that it wouldn’t drop during Thanksgiving. That would be cruel and unusual punishment. Instead, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said that the report would drop on a Monday. December 9th is the date this long-awaited report will be available to the public. As Katie wrote in a prior post, December 11 is when Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, an Obama appointee, will come before Congress to testify about the contents of the report (via Fox News)

Hamas and Islamic Jihad vow closer cooperation in war of “paralysis of Israel”
By Christine Douglass-Williams / Jihad Watch


Hamas and Islamic Jihad vow closer cooperation in war of “paralysis of Israel”
“Amid the backdrop of tensions between Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza and mutual recriminations, the leaders of the two terrorist organizations are trying to project an image of unity and rapprochement.” The goal of both organizations is to obliterate the State of Israel and establish an Islamic state in “Palestine.” In this goal, […]

Read in browser »

share on Twitter Like Hamas and Islamic Jihad vow closer cooperation in war of “paralysis of Israel” on Facebook Google Plus One Button 

Today's Headlines

Special Report: 
Trump's Only Crime...Exposed
By: Diane Sori and Craig Andresen / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

Let's start with the fact that the impeachment inquiry is not a real event, it’s an Adam Schiff orchestrated and scripted duplicitous abuse of power...with behind closed doors depositions being but a dress rehearsal for public hearings that are simply a man and a party on a phishing expedition looking for a crime to fit their ultimate agenda of impeaching the man they know they simply can't beat come 2020.

And while Democrats are now foolishly reveling in what they think are “big wins” for their side regarding what in reality is a “political coup” masquerading as an “impeachment inquiry,” President Trump in the end will have the last laugh for second and third-hand hearsay will not make for a strong legal case where it matters in the U.S. matter that Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL), foolishly stated that hearsay evidence is better than direct evidence. And while hearsay might make for good soundbites on the six o'clock news and make for eye-catching headlines in mainstream and online media rags, there remains certain truths as to the why we're at the point we're at now what with Nancy Pelosi claiming that the House will impeach President Trump before Congress begins its Christmas recess.

And as expected the media is again downplaying the Democrats faux-pas just like they continue to downplay the “Clinton body count list”...just like they downplay the fact that neither U.S. ambassadors nor House members themselves were ever meant to set foreign policy directives. And if one thinks in those terms it also starts one thinking that maybe the trouble President Trump now finds himself in was possibly set into motion decades ago...decades ago when Bill Clinton was president...decades ago when Clinton's foreign policy directives or lack thereof saw the first World Trade Center bombing morphing into Mogadishu which morphed into the USS Cole, which in turn morphed into Obama's foreign policy directive of overtly and callously "leading from behind."

Let us explain.

Acts of terrorism and acts of war as well as acts of espionage...both domestic and international spying...are not new, but what is new is how we as a nation react and counter these happenings, specifically how a president's directives address these issues. And said reaction must always encompass not just revenge for revenge's sake, but how said revenge will help to shape future American foreign policy directives...or in Obama's case again the decided lack thereof. And while in decades past our foreign policy directives were put forth by strong men...presidents who knew American military might or even the threat thereof, would be the deciding factor in victory or defeat.

Think of Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, and JFK, but also understand that since the 1990's under Democrat Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack HUSSEIN Obama, our foreign policy directives were anything but forceful let alone successful. And while both Bush presidencies saw America engaged in rightful wars, they were wars that never really ended for true victory would mean America would come out on top, something the Democrats frowned on allowing. And when Obama was elected in 2008, "victory" actually became a word absent from our military's vocabulary as Obama's foreign policy directives tied our troops hands behind their backs as they were told not to fight to win but to fight to win the hearts and minds of the enemy...with the enemy wishing us all dead then being the same enemy still wishing us all dead now.

And this foreign policy lack of strength...something that started with the first World Trade Center bombing and ended with “red lines” being drawn in the sand...directly led Democrat presidents appointing ambassadors who became their de facto foreign policy makers. And while some Democrat lawmakers knew or had suspicions this was happening, they said not a word as Democrats in general saw foreign policy issues as something to be put on the back burner as so-called “social justice” issues took over their collective mindset. And when you add in the interruption of Bill Clinton's 1997 impeachment and the political fallout that ensued, the stage was set for the Democrats to show who was boss when a Republican...any Republican...was elected as president...especially a Republican with cracks in his armor.

Enter center stage Donald J. outspoken, pro-military, rough around the edges, non-politician candidate who beat seasoned bought-and-paid-for politician Hillary Rodham Clinton to become the 45th President of these United States. And so the Democrats targeted their man...they tried with the Bush's but failed to find a way to go forward with seeing Trump as ripe for the political picking. And so with revenge for 2016's loss as their motive...the motive for public consumption that is...Democrats zeroed in on foreign policy matters as their means by which to take Trump down for economic issues were not a viable option what with the economy on strong footing.

And so the stage for impeachment...for a "political coup"...was set but like we stated earlier what the Democrats forget is that foreign policy in general, especially in regards to our diplomatic corps, took its first downturn during the Bill Clinton years with President Trump now being the fall guy for trying to set right both Clinton's and Obama's diplomatic and military wrongs.

As the first president after the fall of the Soviet Union, Bill Clinton's foreign policy strategy documents spoke about the triumph of democracy being inevitable in the vacuum created by the absence of communism, ignoring the fact that terrorism itself would soon become an international issue as it too started filling said void. So Bill Clinton's foreign policy directive became one of “improvising policy at each flash point”...basically vacillating between failed diplomatic and military actions.

And so the man who criticized his predecessor George H,W, Bush for being “too occupied and concerned” with foreign affairs saw on his watch the first World Trade Center bombing...the bombing that was a dry run of sorts for 9/11...the civil war in Somalia replete with American deaths, and the USS Cole bombing as well.

Actually, if Bill Clinton had paid more attention to the happenings of February 26, in the first World Trade Center bombing...maybe 9/11 could have been prevented from happening.

On February 26, 1993 at 12:18 p.m. EST, just a month after Clinton took office, a bomb exploded on the second subterranean level of the Vista Hotel's public parking garage, below 2 World Trade Center killing six people and injuring more than a thousand. This was the first indication for the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) that terrorism was indeed branching out from being solely a regional threat happening outside the U.S. and was becoming an international threat that needed to be dealt with.

And Bill Clinton's response was cursory at best...he never even visited the site of the attack...even after a serious weakness in the immigration system used by one of the terrorists involved in the bombing was found. Clinton never addressed that issue, in fact it was exploited years later by one of the 9/11 hijackers leading American terrorism experts to say this attack was the first of many missed warnings. ''In retrospect, the wake-up call should have been the 1993 World Trade Center bombing,'' were the exact words of Michael Sheehan, counter-terrorism coordinator at the State Department in the last years of the Clinton presidency.

Clinton's vacillating could also be seen when he was forced to confront the ongoing civil war in Somalia...his first real test strictly on foreign policy matters...a test he failed miserably. Choosing to listen to his then Secretary of State Warren M. Christopher in regards to using both diplomacy and eventually military intervention in Somalia, we bore witness to a direct failure on the diplomatic front when on October 3-4, 1993, nineteen American troops were killed in the Battle of Mogadishu. And why was this a Clinton diplomatic failure... because he had charged American diplomats with the task of brokering a deal to at least “neutralize” the two factions involved in Somalia's civil war...a war between the government and Somalia's many tribal warlords. Obviously unable to complete their assigned task, Clinton even told the Somali's our troops date of departure...sounds eerily familiar now doesn't it.

And of interest to note is that one of Bill Clinton's main envoys in Somalia at the time of the attack and during its aftermath was none other than career diplomat and now Democrat impeachment witness Marie Yovanovich, the very woman claiming President Trump hurt her feelings in a tweet.

And but a year after we left Mogadishu, Bill Clinton saw failure again on the diplomatic front when against State Department recommendations he took little to no action to stop the genocide in Rwanda. And because of this, his failure to act, more than half a million Tutsis were killed. Also, through misguided diplomatic maneuvering Clinton gave China “Most Favored Nation” (MFN) status in spite of their questionable human rights record, and yet again through diplomatic processes he granted North Korea concessions in exchange for a promise to discontinue their nuclear weapons program...which we all know how well that worked out, now don't we.

Now regarding the October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole...the billion dollar naval destroyer that was attacked while docked off Yemen's coast for refueling...saw her being approached by a small skiff packed with explosives and manned by two al-Qaeda suicide bombers who when near the ship detonated explosive charges. The blast created a 60-by-40 foot hole in the ship's hull, killing 17 crew members and injuring 39 others.

And what was Bill Clinton's response to this attack...he vowed retribution against the terrorists but did nothing at all to back up those words neither diplomatically nor militarily. “You will not find a safe harbor. We will find you and justice will prevail,” were his words said...words which frustrating some of his own counter-terrorism advisors as well as U.S. diplomats working with Yemen on the case. In fact, it took military action under President Trump's watch to take out, via in a U.S. airstrike in Yemen, Jamel Ahmed Mohammed Ali Al-Badawi, the longtime al-Qaida operative who was one of the masterminds behind the Cole attack.

Simply, Bill Clinton and his administration failed miserably both on the diplomatic and military front in regards to American foreign policy...leaving foreign policy in the George W. Bush (Bush 43) years to be primarily shaped by 9/11 and the War on Terror. However, as a general rule, Bush 43’s foreign policy team was being led by throw-backs to his father’s era, and to some extent even back to the Reagan era. We’re talking about the likes of Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, and Condoleeza Rice whose approach wasn’t anything new and certainly it wasn’t radical, but there were some indications of what was to come via Bush 43’s style...a style born from his relative disinterest in foreign policy before 9/11 that is.

Bush 43 simply didn’t have the foreign policy acumen that his father had going into the job, and while he surrounded himself with those who clearly had more experience, the Bush 43 line of thought was to not do anything bold, and certainly don’t go bold without the permission of the United Nations. While this wasn’t a globalist tact in the truest sense of the word, it did signal leaning in that direction. Remember, Bush 43 had Colin Powell build the case for the Iraq War with Powell then having to convince the U.N. that it was the right thing to do. To this day many don’t agree that going into Iraq was the right thing to do, but the reality was that Bush and Powell were right about WMDs being in Iraq.

Simply, if we had not gone into Iraq, Saddam Hussein most likely would have used those weapons, but as it was most of those WMDs ended up in the hands of Syria's Bashar al-Assad.

And from a strictly diplomatic point of view the Bush 43 administration was old school. And if Bush 43 had a doctrine it was simply this: the responsibility of the U.S. and thus the primary role for our diplomats, was to promote democracy in order to protect both our national interests and the interests of our allies against terrorists and terrorism. In that respect, Bush was dead wrong as diplomacy only stands a chance of success when those with whom you’re engaged diplomatically are rational...and terrorists are surely nothing of the sort.

At the same time as our diplomatic efforts were continuing to seek approval from the U.N., a sure indication that things were heading in the wrong direction, that organization was sinking further into the abyss of supporting the worst the world had to offer at the expense of the common goals of civilized people. Throughout America's history our diplomatic corps protected and promoted both our national interests and our national security around the world always in concert with our allies, but that would all come to an abrupt halt in 2008.

Last week, Democrats raised a big stink over President Trump’s firing of Marie Yavonovitch from her post as the Ambassador to Ukraine for how dare he fire a career diplomat. The Democrats were incredulous, Yavonovitch was dismayed, and the mainstream media went into orbit. Apparently they had all forgotten the fact that the very first thing Obama did when assuming office was to fire each and every ambassador from every post around the world. Every last one of them...en masse...and for what reason...simply because he could.

But there was a deeper reason, and trust us when we tell you that “deep” is a key word in all of this...Obama fired each and every ambassador immediately not because he didn’t think they were doing a good job, but because he didn’t want people who would do the job that our diplomats had been doing for more than 200 years. Obama didn’t want our diplomatic corps to defend our national priorities, and he surely didn’t want our diplomats protecting or promoting our best national interests or the best interests of our allies. No, Obama wanted something else entirely...he wanted to “fundamentally transform America.”

Our national best interests as well as the best national interests of our allies were not in the interests of Obama, and the fundamental transformation of America would now require said interests to be replaced by the interests of an ideology diametrically opposed to both freedom and liberty. And Obama, in order to implement his vision of the fundamental transformation of America had to turn our Department of State into the “Department of Deep State”...and who better to put in charge of that covert operation than Hillary Clinton herself.

The “Department of Deep State” would conduct business counter to both our national interests and national security on a private server to eliminate transparency, a server controlled by Hillary Clinton and her primary advisor Huma islamist plant. No longer would our diplomatic corps be protecting and promoting democracy around the world, but under the Obama administration Deep State operatives would enact the “Obama Doctrine” of creating vacuums of power in volatile parts of the world for the purpose of being filled by islamist thugs. Libya, Syria, Egypt...Obama wasn’t interested in regional stability as he was caliphate building.

Remember the Russia reset button? Remember the wink and a nod with North Korea? Remember Uranium One and its sale of 20 percent of our uranium stocks to Russia? Remember the groundwork laid for the Iran nuclear deal? Remember Benghazi?

Under the Obama administration the “Department of Deep State” ceded our national security, our national interests, and those of our allies to the U.N. with Obama proudly claiming that the United States would be “leading from behind.” And what is “leading from behind” but just another way of saying that we had surrendered to globalism...the very globalism Bill Clinton's a fore mentioned failed foreign policy directives allowed him to tie our country directly into the U.N. and its “One World” agenda that was now being being picked up and expanding upon by Barack HUSSEIN Obama himself and his newly created “Department of Deep State.”

John Kerry took over the “Department of Deep State” when Hillary left, and Kerry oversaw the final capitulation to the mullahs of Iran with the signing of the Iranian nuclear deal and the delivery of $150 billion dollars in cash piled up on pallets in a cargo plane, flown in the dark of night to Tehran while Hillary set about the business of preparing to be anointed as Obama’s successor and his de facto third term in office.

By the time Obama walked out the door, Deep State was firmly embedded. Deep State was running the CIA, the FBI, the DOJ, and just about any other alphabet agency you can think of including ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN, and Deep State’s command and control center was on the 7th floor of the “Department of Deep State”...just down the street from where Hillary was supposed to have been Obama’s sock puppet...but they never took Donald Trump into account. They never took him seriously until it was too late. Remember when in September 2016, Hillary reportedly came unglued after an interview at NBC and screamed at her staff, “If that f****** bastard wins, we all hang from nooses!”

Now that we, as RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS, have provided the proper background information necessary to see the bigger picture, allow us to put it into proper context regarding the first three “witnesses” produced by Democrats in the public impeachment hearings.

And with your now being able see the bigger picture we have assembled, it should become clear that last week’s “witness” list was much more than met the eye. Career diplomats who have served at a time when our policies were being farmed out to the U.N. cannot be expected to deliver on what should always be our most important obligations...protecting our national interests and security, promoting democracy, and working hand-in-hand with our allies for their best interests as well. Sadly, when one steps back far enough to see the big picture, one comes to the realization that for decades, all the way back to the Bill Clinton years, a combination of relative indifference and outright malfeasance has placed our most valuable tool for leverage in the hands of the Deep State.

To the likes of William Taylor, George Kent, and Marie Yavonovitch protecting and promoting our nation’s best interests as a foreign policy imperative, that sadly has become a foreign concept.

Therefore, it was no surprise that liberals like Adam Schiff chose as their first three star “witnesses” people who have not actually “witnessed” anything with relation to any “high crime or misdemeanor” committed by President Trump...or did they?

That all depends on what you believe to be a “high crime or misdemeanor.” To those who sought to hand Obama a third term in office by anointing Hillary Clinton to the presidency, to protect and further the cause of globalization, and the best interests of countries and ideologies that don’t like us very much, along with diverting attention from the corruption and unlawful treasonous acts that were necessary to accomplish such a “fundamental transformation of America,” perhaps President Trump, in their eyes, has committed such a “high crime or misdemeanor.” In fact, last week’s use of career diplomats as key “witnesses” has exposed what liberals believe to be that crime.

To liberals hell bent on this coup attempt, President Donald Trump is guilty of Deep State Interruptous and while liberals dare not say that out loud as they would expose decades of treason by doing so...RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS can say it.

In fact...we just did.

Copyright @ 2019 Diane Sori and Craig Andresen / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved. 

Tomorrow, Friday, November 22nd, from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss their Special Report: 'Trump's Only Crime...Exposed'; and the latest on the impeachment public hearings.

Hope you can tune in at: on Tune-In at: