Chelsea’s ‘Best Friend’ Wins $11 Mil In Defense Contracts With No Clearance

by Richard Pollock


A company whose president is “best friends” with Chelsea Clinton received more than $11 million in contracts over the last decade from a highly secretive Department of Defense think tank, but to date, the group lacks official federal approval to handle classified materials, according to sensitive documents TheDCNF was allowed to review.

Jacqueline Newmyer, the president of a company called the Long Term Strategy Group, has over the last 10 years received numerous Defense Department contracts from a secretive think tank called Office of Net Assessment.

The Office of Net Assessment is so sensitive, the specialized think tank is housed in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and reports directly to the secretary. To date, the Long Term Strategy Group has received $11.2 million in contracts, according to USAspending,gov, a government database of federal contracts. But after winning a decade of contracts from the Office of Net Assessment, the federal agency is only now in the process of granting clearance to the company. Long Term Strategy Group never operated a secure room on their premises to handle classified materials, according to the Defense Security Service, a federal agency that approves secure rooms inside private sector firms. Long Term Strategy Group operates offices in Washington, D.C., and Cambridge, Mass. 

“The Long Term Strategy Group is currently in process for a facility clearance with the Defense Security Service,” the agency informed The DCNF in an email. 

Newmyer declined to address her company’s lack of facilities to handle classified material. “With regard to your questions about the status of our facilities, those are best directed to the US government, which has authority over such matters,” she wrote in an email to The DCNF.  She also declined to say whether her company is footing the bill for the new secure facility, or if the taxpayers are footing the bill through the Office of Net Assessment.

Adam Lovinger, a whistleblower and 12-year Office of Net Assessment (ONA) veteran, has repeatedly warned ONA’s leadership they faced risks by relying on outside contractors as well as the problem of cronyism and a growing “revolving door” policy, where ONA employees would leave the defense think tank and join private contractors to do the same work.

Others outside ONA have drawn similar conclusions about the office’s reliance on outside contractors. USA Today complained in August 2013 that the same set of contractors never seem to leave ONA: “While Democratic and Republican administrations come and go, ONA and its team of outside advisers remains the same. Contract records show the office relies on studies from outside contractors.” 

Clinton and Newmyer first met each other while attending Sidwell Friends School, an exclusive private Quaker school in the nation’s capital. They were in each other’s weddings, and in 2011 Chelsea referred to Newmyer as her “best friend.”  In numerous emails, Chelsea’s mom, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, actively promoted Newmyer and attempted to assist her in securing Defense Department contracts.

Secretary Clinton put Newmyer in contact with Michèle Flournoy, then-President Barack Obama’s undersecretary of defense, according to the emails from Clinton’s private email server released by the Department of State under a lawsuit filed by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.  Hillary followed up in a July 19, 2009 email, asking Newmyer, “By the way, did the DOD contract work out?”

ONA was supposed to work on complicated future warfare scenarios when it was originally set up in the 1970s.  The think tank’s first director, Andrew Marshall, was adored by a coterie of ONA staff. He was called “Yoda,” after the “Star Wars” series, adding to his mystique. Marshall lasted in the DOD post for 42 years and retired at the age of 93 in 2015.


In 2016, Lovinger sent a series of memos to James H. Baker, ONA’s new director, raising many problems Baker “inherited” from Marshall, including the use of contractors. ONA has a reputation for issuing “‘sweet-heart contracts’ to a privileged few,” Lovinger told Baker in a Sept. 30, 2016 email chain.


ONA’s leadership, led by Baker, did not take kindly to Lovinger’s warnings and allegedly retaliated against the staffer, according to Sean Bigley, a federal security clearance attorney who also represents him.  Baker suspended Lovinger’s security clearance in May for “security infractions,” and launched numerous investigations.  The suspension came after Lovinger had been detailed to the National Security Council. He was removed from the National Security Council after losing his security clearance, and now languishes inside a Defense Department satellite office doing busy work.

In a Sept. 13, 2017 letter to DOD officials, Bigley charged: “A review of the ‘case file’ in this matter illuminates a picture of intentional whistleblower retaliation against Mr. Lovinger; personal and political vendettas against Lovinger by Baker …”  Although Lovinger has since been exonerated of all the accusations, he still faces the possibility of a revocation of his clearance. His case is currently pending before Defense Department officials.

In a recent move, Baker decided to “reclassify” Lovinger’s ONA position to one that now requires new skills he doesn’t possess.  Bigley complained about this new act of alleged retaliation in a Sept. 21 letter to the DOD acting general counsel:  “The practical effect of Baker’s plan, if executed, is that Mr. Lovinger will become a surplus employee and will be terminated; he does not possess the skill set applicable to the proposed reclassification.” Lovinger is the only staff member Baker has “reclassified,” according to Bigley.

One of Lovinger’s main complaints about ONA was that many of the reports contractors wrote imparted very little new information to the think tank. “Over the years ONA’s analytic staff has expressed how they learn very little from many (if not most) of our often very thin and superficial contractor reports,” he wrote in the Sept. 30, 2016 email. 

Some of Long Term Strategy Group’s reports bear out Lovinger’s critique. A September 2010 Long Term Strategy Group report, titled “Trends in Elite American Attitudes Toward War,” came to the astounding conclusion that, “American intellectuals have for the last century held considerably more cosmopolitan views than their non-intellectual counterparts.”  Another Long Term Strategy Group report was “On the Nature of Americans as a Warlike People.”

Lovinger also suggested in a March 3, 2017 memo to the record that contractor studies should be peer-reviewed: “There has never been an external review of these contractors’ research products,” he said, adding, “It is now clear that over several decades the office transferred millions of dollars to inexperienced and unqualified contractors.” 

Others outside of ONA have been even more critical of the think tank. Book critic Carlos Lozada criticized the think tank as “an opaque bureaucratic outfit,” in a Washington Post review of a book about Marshall, ONA’s founder.  University of Notre Dame Political Science Chairman Michael C. Desch said “a systematic scrutiny of [ONA’s] work is long overdue” in the December 2014 issue of  The National Interest. He recommended that ONA, “like so many now-superfluous parochial schools, should close its doors.”

On the liberal front, Middlebury Institute’s director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program, Jeffrey Lewis, wrote a scathing attack on ONA in the Oct. 24, 2014 edition of Foreign Policy Magazine. “Marshall funded a fair number of crackpots,” he charged.  Lewis cited two studies on Iraq “written by a crackpot who thinks Saddam planned the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and 9/11, and a study on ‘Islamic Warfare’ by the guy who fabricated both a Ph.D. and an interview with Barack Obama.”

Lovinger has also been critical of the revolving door at ONA, where previous government staffers went to work for ONA contractors.  Phillip Pournelle, who was ONA’s military adviser from November 2011 to December 2016, now works at Long Term Strategy Group as its “director for gaming and analysis,” according to his LinkedIn page.

Steve Rosen, also a long-time ONA consultant, was originally Newmyer’s professor at Harvard. But Newmyer and Rosen hit it off, and they “co-taught” a Harvard class together in 2006.  Newmyer and Rosen are top officers in a nonprofit they created together called the American Academy for Strategic Education, which is dedicated to educating a rising generation of strategic thinkers,” according to its website.  The organization has raised $894,000 since it began operations in 2013, according to their IRS 990 filing. The academy paid Newmyer and Rosen $45,000 each in 2015.

Since serving as president of Long Term Strategy Group, Newmyer has participated in many prestigious bodies on national security, and she was enrolled in a Ph.D. program at Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.  But her Ph.D. had little to do with today’s international conflicts or in contemporary military strategy. Her dissertation was on “a comparison of seminal works on strategy and statecraft from ancient China, the medieval Middle East, and early modern Europe,” according to a Harvard profile of her.

Adam Lovinger did not consent to an interview for this article. The Office of Net Assessment did not reply to a DCNF inquiry.

 

 


Delivered by The Daily Sheeple We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details). Contributed by Richard Pollock of The Daily Caller News Foundation.





Mueller’s Witch Hunt Finds Nothing on Trump, But Look Which Obama Truth Surfaced

by V Saxena

 

Though special counsel Robert Mueller has thus far uncovered zero evidence that President Donald Trump colluded with the Russians to affect the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, a far more shocking revelation regarding former President Barack Obama has made its way to the surface.

“US investigators wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort under secret court orders before and after the election, sources tell CNN, an extraordinary step involving a high-ranking campaign official now at the center of the Russia meddling probe,” CNN revealed in a bombshell scoop last week.

Obama administration investigators also reportedly wiretapped Trump advisers Carter Page, Michael Flynn and others.  While it remains unclear how this information was unearthed, CNN’s sources claim Mueller’s team “has been provided details of these communications.”

But the more pressing point are the implications of this discovery.  “If these reports are accurate, it means U.S. intelligence agencies secretly surveilled at least a half dozen Trump associates,” veteran journalist Sharyl Attkisson explained in a column for The Hill. “And those are just the ones we know about.”

In other words, “(i)t looks like Obama did spy on Trump, just as he apparently did to me,” she added, referencing an allegation she made several years back that Obama’s Justice Department had attempted to hack into her personal and work computers in 2013.  What remains unknown is whether any of this sketchy behavior was actually legal.  Attkisson noted, however, that even if these hacks and wiretaps were legal, that doesn’t take away from the shadiness of it all.

The truth is, the revelation shows Obama and his administration were actively engaged in surveillance of American citizens that would have been unthinkable not all that long ago.  As Attkisson writes: “It seems that government monitoring of journalists, members of Congress and political enemies — under multiple administrations — has become more common than anyone would have imagined two decades ago … So has the unmasking of sensitive and highly protected names by political officials.”


Agreed.


From targeting conservative organizations via the IRS to trying to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for abortifacients, the Obama administration waged a relentless assault on the American people’s constitutionally guaranteed rights and liberties. 

Will Mueller look into this new information and act accordingly, though? Considering his decision to line his team with leftists, I think the answer is likely a resounding “no.”

 

Please share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think.


Alaska Homeschool Dad Framed by FBI – Social Services Targets Children for Political Reasons

by Brian Shilhavy

Today, Health Impact News is reporting on the story of Francis August Schaeffer Cox. Schaeffer Cox is allegedly a political prisoner today, serving a 26 year prison sentence for crimes he never committed. 

Schaeffer Cox, a well known 2nd Amendment lobbyist who had won 38% of the vote in a State House election, became the subject of an intense FBI investigation after he angered state and federal authorities by openly accusing them of drug trafficking and child prostitution. Oil pipeline service company executive, Bill Allen, who had been spared prosecution on multiple counts of sexual abuse of minors in exchange for his 2008 testimony against pro-2nd Amendment Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, was among those implicated.

The State Wide Drug Taskforce supplied children for sex to a number of state and federal officials in exchange for those official’s cooperation in concealing the ongoing illicit drug trafficking activities of the State Wide Drug Taskforce,” Schaeffer Cox said. Not long after these public statements, the same departments that Schaeffer Cox accused of corruption sent in numerous provocateurs to try to switch his efforts off of exposing corruption and on to violent vigilante-type actions.

Schaeffer Cox, who believes in non-aggression and voluntarism, can be heard on multiple undercover recordings telling the provocateurs, “No, I’m going to pull a Ghandi, NOT a Rambo” and “if we turn violent, people will see us as the bad guys.” In what some have called a deviation from accepted investigative techniques, the FBI responded to Schaeffer Cox’s rejection of their violent proposals by creating a threat to his children that could serve as a motivator. Working with the Office of Child Services, the FBI filed a child neglect complaint regarding Schaeffer and his wife Marti’s 1 and 1/2 year old son. Because they do not require probable cause, child neglect complaints are an attractive tool for investigators who wish to enter a home, but lack any evidence to support a warrant.


Who is Schaeffer Cox? From his own words written from prison in 2013:

Dear Sensible People of a Candid World,

My name is Francis August Schaeffer Cox. I am a 29 year old, husband and a father of two young children.

I am a political prisoner in a secret Federal prison located in Marion, Illinois. I was sentenced to just under 26 years in prison on January of 2013.

I haven’t done anything illegal and I certainly haven’t done anything morally wrong. I will share my story with you as best as can be done in a letter. It is my hope that after investigating what has been done to me and my family you will conclude that it would be right for you to help us. To that end, this is our story.

I was born in Denver, Colorado U.S.A. to Gary and Jennifer Cox. My father, who attended West Point, was the pastor of a small church and taught Greek and Hebrew at a local university.

My mother was a schoolteacher before she had children. After my sister, two brothers, and I were born she stayed home to raise us and see to it that we all got a proper education.

In the early 90’s my father went into business with his brother David Cox, the former Chief of Staff for Senator David L. Boris. As a family we provided residential assisted living to the elderly. The business was very successful and our family became quite wealthy.

In 1999 my parents moved our family from Denver, Colorado to Fairbanks, Alaska where, 11 years later, I would be arrested and sent to prison after being accused of a vague and nonspecific conspiracy against the Federal Government. A conspiracy that, the prosecutors argued [sic], would take place at some unknown future time many years from now.

As a young man I loved the frontier of Alaska. At age 18 I led a month long expedition to the summit of 6100 meter Mt. McKinley. I would lead a second expedition two years later with my father by my side and in 2005 a third expedition that included my beautiful and beloved wife Marti. All three were successful.

My godparents introduced me to the sea and the commercial fishing industry. And together we pioneered new methods to harvest caviar from wild herring and release the fish unharmed. I did an apprenticeship in the construction industry and studied Artic [sic] building techniques. Before going into business for myself, I worked with a large company to build power plants and remote gold ore processing facilities in Alaska’s wilderness.

By age 23, with my faithful and loving wife as my partner, I was an accomplished businessman in my own right. Having achieved enough financial independence to no longer be living paycheck to paycheck I decided to run for public office.

I ran for the State House of Representatives. I came in second in a three way race with roughly 38% of the vote, an impressive feat for such a young, political newcomer. I was positioned well for a win in the next elections, two years later.

Little did I know the Federal government was about to unleash a hellish nightmare on me and my family that would prevent that from ever happening. My platform was simple: The government needs to follow the Constitution because it’s the law. I argued that when the government disregards the law and tramples on others, simply because they are powerful enough to do so and get away with it, it hurts them as a Nation. (continued below)

State Sponsored Kidnapping of Children for Political Reasons


Before continuing on with the Schaeffer Cox story, we need to address the question: Why is Health Impact News and MedicalKidnap.com publishing the Schaeffer Cox family story?

We are one of the few news sources that regularly reports on the state-sponsored kidnapping of children away from families by using “Child Protection Services.” We mostly cover medical kidnapping stories, explaining how families all across the U.S., every day, are losing their children simply because they disagreed with doctors, or were accused by medical professionals of abusing their children, when often such “abuse” is simply failing to take a physician’s advice for medical procedures.

Over the past few years, we have documented how children can be removed from families by the government in what has become a billion dollar child trafficking system. See:  The U.S. Foster Care System: Modern Day Slavery and Child Trafficking

Child Kidnapping and Trafficking: A Lucrative U.S. Business Funded by Taxpayers Called “Foster Care”

While a primary motivation to remove children from families and put them into the custody of the state is financial (many billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of government jobs), there are other reasons such as putting sick children into drug trials, and trafficking them to pedophile groups. See:

Child Sex Trafficking through Child “Protection” Services Exposed – Kidnapping Children for Sex

Arizona Places 2 Year Old Child in Foster Pornographic Pedophile Ring – Foster Mom Burns 80% of Her Body

One of the lesser known reasons why children are removed from their families is for political reasons. We have previously reported on child kidnappings for political reasons with the North Carolina Randy Davis stories, and the story of Arlan Lee, a Native American former social worker turned whistleblower in South Dakota who had his own kids targeted (video here).

Randy Davis is also Native American, and when he went public and reported alleged corruption with “senators, the NC Commission of Indian Affairs, the Coharie Intra-Tribal Council, and entire departments within Sampson County – including Child Protection Services (CPS)” they allegedly tried to silence him by taking away his daughter. (See: EXCLUSIVE: Corrupt North Carolina Officials Try to Silence Whistleblower Using Child Protection Services)

As we look into the Schaeffer Cox story, we see a new twist to using CPS for political reasons, as the FBI allegedly tried to manipulate the strong paternal bond between parent and child by using CPS to target his child.

Why Did the FBI Target Schaeffer Cox?

There is a public website documenting Schaeffer’s case, with links to videos, court documents, etc.   Some excerpts from freeschaeffer.com:


Schaeffer Cox, a well known 2nd Amendment lobbyist who had won 38% of the vote in a State House election, became the subject of an intense FBI investigation after he angered state and federal authorities by openly accusing them of drug trafficking and child prostitution.


Oil pipeline service company executive, Bill Allen, who had been spared prosecution on multiple counts of sexual abuse of minors in exchange for his 2008 testimony against pro-2nd Amendment Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, was among those implicated. “The State Wide Drug Taskforce supplied children for sex to a number of state and federal officials in exchange for those official’s cooperation in concealing the ongoing illicit drug trafficking activities of the State Wide Drug Taskforce,” Schaeffer Cox said.


Not long after these public statements, the same departments that Schaeffer Cox accused of corruption sent in numerous provocateurs to try to switch his efforts off of exposing corruption and on to violent vigilante-type actions. Schaeffer Cox, who believes in non-aggression and voluntarism, can be heard on multiple undercover recordings telling the provocateurs, “No, I’m going to pull a Ghandi, NOT a Rambo” and “if we turn violent, people will see us as the bad guys.”


In what some have called a deviation from accepted investigative techniques, the FBI responded to Schaeffer Cox’s rejection of their violent proposals by creating a threat to his children that could serve as a motivator.  Working with the Office of Child Services, the FBI filed a child neglect complaint regarding Schaeffer and his wife Marti’s 1 and 1/2 year old son. Because they do not require probable cause, child neglect complaints are an attractive tool for investigators who wish to enter a home, but lack any evidence to support a warrant.


Once Schaeffer Cox was made aware of the “writ of assistance” issued for the seizure of his young son, the FBI dispatched undercover provocateur, Bill Fulton, to again try to convince Schaeffer Cox to go on a shooting spree in response to these new developments. Bill Fulton, acting under the supervision of FBI Special Agent Sandra Klein, pointed out that the child neglect complaint was obviously the corrupt work of Schaeffer Cox’s political adversaries in the government, and urged him to go kill all officials involved.


When Schaeffer Cox and his friend, Les Zerbe, refused Fulton’s violent suggestions a second time, Fulton flew into a rage, held a hunting knife to Les Zerbe’s throat, and told him he would “slit his throat open and bleed him out at his feet” if he and Cox didn’t agree to the proposed mass shooting. Cox and Zerbe refused, and escaped, never to see Fulton again.
 

Suspecting foul play by the FBI and local police, and fearing for their lives from Fulton, Schaeffer Cox and his wife went to the military police station on Ft. Wainwright for help. Officers there advised Schaeffer Cox that federal agents had come into the station and bragged of how they planned to “fix the Schaeffer Cox problem” by “going into his home to take out his kid, then just shoot Schaeffer Cox in the process.” The MP’s gave Schaeffer Cox’s attorney affidavits to this effect and would later testify to the same under oath.


At FBI Special Agent Klein’s direction, Fulton made a third attempt to get Schaeffer Cox to do a mass shooting. Fulton did this by issuing a death threat ultimatum and promising to kill Schaeffer Cox himself if he refused the proposal of violence again.


Fearing for their lives, the Cox family packed up and headed for Canada. But the FBI sent another undercover provocateur, RJ Olson, after them, court documents say. Olson, a self described “drug wholesaler” working under the supervision of FBI Special Agent Richard Southerland, held the whole Cox family, including a 2 year old boy and a 3 week old baby girl, hostage, against their will in the attic for 21 days after sabotaging their vehicle, then using death threats from Fulton and a made up story about a truck driver to keep them from leaving.


The government does not dispute the fact that the actions of the provocateurs working under the FBI’s supervision did in fact meet the legal definition of 1st degree kidnapping,” said Robert John, the Fairbanks attorney who got all related state charges against Cox thrown out.

On March 10th, 2011 Schaeffer Cox was taken from the attic to a deserted industrial lot in Fairbanks where he believed he would meet the “truck driver” Olson had promised. No such truck driver existed. Instead, there was a FBI ambush of out of town agents who did not know Schaeffer Cox was a well respected local political voice with popular support. The Agent’s, who had been instructed to shoot Schaeffer Cox on site if he had a weapon, were not advised by the local FBI case agent of Cox’s repeated statements about being like Ghandi not Rambo.

FBI Special Agent Richard Southerland supplied JR Olson with an unregistered, nontraceable pistol and instructed him to “put it in Schaeffer’s lap then get under the truck so there will be some thick metal between you and him when the shooting starts.” The FBI’s plan was interrupted when the owner of the industrial lot happened upon the scene and started asking questions about why men with masks and machine guns were hiding around the corner.

Schaeffer Cox was arrested and put on trial for “conspiracy against the government.” The prosecution was led by Steve Skrocki and Joseph Botini, the same people that were held in contempt of court for hiding evidence in several related trials of Alaska political personalities. The audio recording of Schaeffer Cox repeatedly rejecting violence were hidden from the jury, but are now being made available to the public by Schaeffer Cox’s supporters via YouTube and other means.

Steve Skrocki, who has publically attacked Schaeffer Cox for his belief in Moral Higher Law, built his case primarily on the testimony of Fulton and Olson. Recently released audio recording and email between Steve Skrocki and his boss, US Attorney Karen Loeffler, now show that Skrocki coached his witnesses to lie, then vouched for those lies in his closing arguments to the jury.

Still others have taken issue with Skrocki’s entire theory of the case. “The importance of this case is significant to the whole of humanity” says Larry Pratt, president of Gun Owners of America. He points out that the prosecution conceded that Cox had no actual plans for violence, but convicted him anyway based on Cox’s belief that “We The People” may someday have to stand down an out of control government. 

Schaeffer Cox, who has been in prison since 2011 agrees. “This amounts to sending people to prison for simply believing in the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment” he says. “If we don’t reverse my conviction, it will set a sweeping new precedent allowing for the wholesale round up of those who have not committed any crimes.”

READ the Rest of the Story HERE

















Vindication: Obama's long form Birth Certiifcate is a proven forgery

by Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

 

I have been vindicated, Obama’s long form birth certificate is a proven forgery. Contact incoming AG Sessions, demand criminal charges and investigation, which foreign intelligence was involved in creating Obama’s bogus IDs

WATCH LIVE Sheriff Arpaio Obama Birth Certificate Press Conference

Here is the evidence compiled by me. Evidence of forgery, fraud, fabrication in Obama’s IDs

Additionally, I reported previously that Johanna Ahnee, whose Hawaiian birth certificate is a source document for Obama’s forged birth certificate, met me in Hawaii. She met me the evening before I and 2 experts were supposed to go to the Health Department of Hawaii to examine Obama’s original birth certificate. Johanna and another woman, whom she presented as her niece, had dinner with me and wanted to know what evidence do we have to prove that Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery. She was supposed to go with me and experts to the Department of Health.  Next morning, around 6 am, she called and said that she will not go with us. When I and experts arrived in Department of Health, we were not allowed to meet the director of Health. We were given a letter from the Assistant Attorney General, Jill Nagamine, which stated that they will not cooperate with federal subpoena and will not let us examine the original. I am sure that this was done because there is no original, just as there is no original application for the stolen Connecticut Social Security number 042-68-4425, which Obama used while residing in the White House.

Come January 20, it is time for criminal prosecution of all involved parties and there are many of them.


Update:

1. Nagamine’s husband is a Dunham-Obama family attorney. He handles Obama’s sister’s divorce from her first husband. Nagamine is an insider who worked hard to cover up this forged ID and keep the American people defrauded with no original document on file.

2. Johanna Ah’Nee’s boss is also an insider. He is listed on a committee picking Superior Court of Hawaii judges to be nominated by the governor. Think about it, why some nobody-owner of a copy and graphics shop is picking judges?

3. Savannah Guthrie was rewarded by NBC with a multi-million dollar contract and a position of a morning anchor after she claimed that she saw and touched a raised seal on Obama’s ID, which was not there.  Let’s hope that incoming AG Sessions investigates all of these people. Write to transition team at https://apply.ptt.gov/yourstory/

Perhaps Comey outsmarted the Clintons & Lynch

by Anonymous

 

Another look at Comey's possible intentions.

 Comey is not a stupid guy.  He may have been directed to "take the fall" with his Hillary announcement (we know that Loretta didn't want this thrown on her desk to preside over, even though the FBI has no authority to make decisions whether or not to prosecute crimes; they only investigate and Justice Dept decides that).  However, he decided to do something out of the ordinary -- lay out and disclose all of his evidence during his Press Conference.  He knew what he was doing and he knew that it would create a "firestorm" of controversy.  If he had just sent everything he had to AG Lynch, it might have all gotten buried or, at least, not disclosed until long after the election.  Instead, he threw it all out for the public to know.

 He also knew that it would cause Congress to call for an investigation so, now, he will not just be able to go and answer their questions; he made himself available almost instantly ( tomorrow at 10 AM) full well knowing that they will want to dig even deeper, hear about more evidence and have an open-ended Q&A for the entire day if they want to.  If he wanted to, he could have stalled this for a month just by saying "he's busy; send me a  Subpoena or let's schedule it for a convenient time.  I think Comey knew that this way the FBI's entire case will get a full public airing (and, since there isn't a prosecution pending, he can be candid and open about anything and everything).  If it went to the Justice Dept's hands, it would die a slow death there. 

Nothing will be kept secret now; we'll learn about things (such as Hillary having 12 private servers) that no one even suspected existed.  Comey can, literally, try this case before the public, just as he started to do laying out the key evidence just before "dropping the case", when everyone thought he was heading toward a recommendation of prosecution. The Public and Media will now get to know EVERYTHING that would or could have been presented in court if there was a prosecution (in fact, even more than what could be presented in court because there will be no rules of evidence holding him back).  This hearing could be extremely eye-opening.  Like I said, Comey isn't a stupid guy and he might have just outsmarted Lynch and Obama when they told him to "kill this case". 

A Grand Jury might have taken 6 months or longer to accomplish, if playing "according to Hoyle", plus it is secret, except for leaks.  Now nothing will be secret.  Again, Comey is not stupid and he might also prove that he is no one's lacky; however, he will just "play it straight"; answer all of the questions and not have to volunteer anything.  After all, Obama and Lynch can't tell him to lie to Congress.  He might look foolish laying out this case when not recommending prosecution but he might be wiser beyond our thinking because now he will just be responding to questions "under oath.

That's my take on this scenario.  This could come out to be the biggest fake-out in American history and, possibly, the only way to take down a liar and dishonest government official who is being "protected".  It might, actually, be worse than anything Hillary and Bill ever imagined. 

Who knows; maybe this will also carry into the Foundation crap as well.  We will see.


The Clinton - Mezvinksy - Soros Connection

by Staff

Edward Mezvinsky was born January 17, 1937. 

Then you'll probably say, "Who is Ed Mezvinsky?" Well, he is a former Democrat congressman who represented Iowa's 1st congressional district in the United States House of Representatives for two terms, from 1973 to 1977. He sat on the House Judiciary Committee that decided the fate of Richard Nixon.

He was outspoken saying that Nixon was a crook and a disgrace to politics and the nation and should be impeached. 

He and the Clintons were friends and very politically intertwined for many years.

Ed Mezvinsky had an affair with NBC News reporter Marjorie Sue Margolies and later married her after his wife divorced him.

In 1993, Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky, then a freshman Democrat in Congress, cast the deciding vote that got President Bill Clinton's controversial tax package through the House of Representatives.

In March 2001, Mezvinsky was indicted and later pleaded guilty to 31 of 69 counts of bank fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud.  Ed Mezvinsky embezzled more than $10 million dollars from people via both a Ponzi scheme and the notorious Nigerian e-mail scams.  He was found guilty and sentenced to 80 months in federal prison. After serving less than five years in federal prison, he was released in April 2008 and remains on federal probation.

To this day, he still owes $9.4 million in restitution to his victims.

About now you are saying, "So what!"

Well, this is Marc and Chelsea Mezvinsky.
That's right; Ed Mezvinsky is Chelsea Clinton's father-in law.  Clintons staying at Soros Family home during Chelsea’s wedding  Now Marc and Chelsea are in their early thirties and purchased a 10.5 million dollar NYC apartment (after being married in George Soros' mansion).

Has anyone heard mention of any of this in any of the media? {And now you have a brief insight into how the Committee's billionaire elite control the politics and direction of nations - Ed.}

If this guy was Jenna or Barbara Bush's, or better yet, Sarah Palin's daughter's father-in- law, the news would be an everyday headline and every detail would be reported over and over.  And yet liberals say there are no double standards in political reporting.   

And people are already talking about Hillary as our next President!

Kansas Ethics Head Hazlett in Ethics Trouble Himself

by Mary Kay Culp, KFL Executive Director

Today's KFL blog (read it HERE) examines how the states' legal ethics head, Stan Hazlett, went after one attorney's license, allegedly breaking the rules and repeatedly lying! He now faces his own set of ethics charges. Interestingly, that attorney also had a connection to abortion. Because of his actions it was revealed in a story in the Topeka Capitol Journal that sexual abuse was going on at the women's correction center in Topeka, with abortion being used to hide it!

This strongly echoes the ongoing saga of former attorney General, Phill Kline who Hazlett is also going after. 

Three weeks ago, anti- Kline "tweets" were going on the internet against Phill Kline, at his ethics hearing in the Supreme Court. After complaining about the source of the derisive comments--an appellate court law clerk (who helps the justices write their rulings)--Kline's attorney issued a letter to Hazlett. The letter is HERE. Many substantive charges are made, and Hazlett is asked to release more materials.

Note: Donate to Kline's defense at https://www.lifeissues.org/amistad/donate/index.html

The question remains why Hazlett steadfastly dogged Kline after two investigative bodies and a Wichita judge supported his actions.

Is it because of the fact that Hazlett works for the Kansas Supreme Court, whose member, Justice Carol Beier, has a recognized dislike of Mr. Kline? That assertion is not wholly ours. A December 2008 Supreme Court ruling regarding Kline found he did nothing wrong and yet Beier, who wrote the opinion, devoted 18 pages to denigrate him. The entire ruling written by Beier was so out of the ordinary, that the chief justice at the time, Kay McFarland said this, as part of her separate comments:

" …It appears to me that the majority invokes our extraordinary inherent power to sanction simply to provide a platform from which it can denigrate Kline for actions that it cannot find to have been in violation of any law and to heap scorn upon him for his attitude and behavior that does not rise to the level of contempt. This is the very antithesis of "restraint and discretion" and is not an appropriate exercise of our inherent power.”

Adding:

“I believe it is inappropriate to set forth, as if to threaten [Kline] with, the various penalties that could be imposed if some past or future hypothetical misconduct should "come to light" at a later date….This vague statement seems to anticipate and encompass the discovery of additional past or future misconduct.”

It is difficult not to wonder if there was some tipoff to Beier or her staff (especially as more "bad tweets"have been uncovered) about a CD with work product from then-former KS AG Kline's staff that supposedly appeared "mysteriously" on the desks of abortion attorneys just weeks earlier and that it supposedly contained damning information.  It didn't although they have tried during Kline's ethics allegations journey to make something of it. The origin of the CD, and its transfer to abortion attorneys has never been determined, but certainly needs to be. 

There are other issues related to Kansas corruption that we are working on because they too demand further exploration and action, and we will be reporting on them soon--especially the destruction of evidence related to the Planned Parenthood charges that have all now been dropped by Johnson County DA Steve Howe. 

Again, read the KFL blog article (here) about another Kansas attorney who Hazlett pursued who is fighting back allegedly with facts that proved Hazlett is not above lying, and note the similarities to how Hazlett has treated and continues to treat Phill Kline! Also, again, please read the great letter Kline's attorney Condit has written to Hazlett HERE.  




Brennan Justice Center Financed By George Soros

by Judy Kent


Washington, DC - A new report from the National Center for Public Policy Research finds the Brennan Center for Justice - one of the country's loudest opponents of voter integrity measures - to have a history of bias-driven research.

The report also discloses that the Brennan Center has received millions in funding from George Soros.

The report is the latest entry in the National Center's GroupSnoop.org series.

"The Brennan Center is on a mission to undermine support for voter integrity measures, claiming that state-level voter ID provisions will disfranchise millions of voters and that voter fraud rarely occurs. However, some of its major reports concerning voter ID measures and voter fraud are wrought with bias and have been refuted by election scholars," said National Center General Counsel Justin Danhof.

GroupSnoop.org is an educational website launched by the National Center in 2011 to provide candid, documented analysis of influential public policy-oriented non-profits. In the national debate over voter integrity measures, the Brennan Center is a prominent opponent of efforts to curb voter fraud and protect voters against identity theft. This new GroupSnoop.org profile shines some much-needed light onto the inner workings, funding and motivations of the Brennan Center.

The profile shows that the Brennan Center has a history of cherry-picking data that aligns with pre-determined conclusions that voter integrity measures, such as requiring a photo ID to vote, are actually efforts to disfranchise specific voting blocs. The Brennan Center appears to ignore or severely downplay data that are inconvenient for its theses.

For example, in November 2006, the Brennan Center published a widely cited report, "Citizens Without Proof," in which it claimed that 21 million adult Americans lack a photo ID, including 25 percent of black Americans. Election scholars with the Heritage Foundation evaluated the report and concluded that "[b]y eschewing many of the traditional scientific methods of data collection and analysis, the authors of the Brennan Center study appear to have pursued results that advance a particular political agenda rather than the truth about voter identification."

The Brennan Center profile on GroupSnoop.org also exposes the advocacy group's close ties to George Soros, known for his prolific funding of explicitly left-wing organizations. Soros has a history of making contributions intended to influence American policymaking and elections. Soros reportedly spent an estimated $27.5 million during the 2004 election cycle in a failed effort to oust then-President George W. Bush.

"Further clouding the Brennan Center's reputation is that convicted felon George Soros' Open Society Foundations have funneled over seven million dollars to the Brennan Center since 2000," said Danhof. "It is no wonder the Brennan Center works so hard on a daily basis to provide intellectual ammunition to those fighting voter integrity measures."

Despite the Brennan Center's best effort to paint voter integrity measures as racially-charged barriers to voting, the American public strongly supports democratically-enacted voter ID laws at the state level to protect the value of their vote. In a recent Rasmussen poll, 73 percent of Americans supported voter ID laws.

As the Brennan Center continues its campaign against voter ID, a simple and effective way to protect against stolen votes, it is troubling that the media - which increasingly seeks to "fact-check" political speech - is not reporting that the Brennan Center is an advocacy organization. This need for scrutiny is increasingly important given that the Brennan Center is willing to say that lawmakers supporting ballot protection legislation do so out of racial animosity and political maneuvering.

This new GroupSnoop.org profile should change that narrative.

"Brennan Center work should be presented as opinion - if it is considered at all," said Danhof. "The Brennan Center is a George Soros-funded extreme advocacy group that appears willing to fight all meaningful efforts to combat voter fraud. It should be regarded as such."


How a Sebelius judge saved Planned Parenthood

by Jack Cashill {WND.com}


With her first appointment to the Kansas Supreme Court as governor in 2003, Democrat Kathleen Sebelius chose the proudly “third-wave” feminist, Carol Beier. It was a timely choice.  That same year, Republican Phill Kline took office as Kansas Attorney General.  From Beier’s perspective, Kline represented a serious threat to the “reproductive freedom” that she, Sebelius, and other third-wavers espoused.

As Kline sensed before taking office, the state’s two dominant abortion providers, Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri (CHPPKM) in suburban Kansas City and George Tiller’s Women’s Health Care clinic in Wichita, were ignoring state restrictions on late term abortion, Tiller flagrantly.  What Kline discovered only after a multi-year fight with Sebelius’s people to get access to relevant records was that both clinics were grossly ignoring mandatory reporting laws on child rape.

Of the 166 abortions performed on girls under-fifteen in the years 2002 and 2003, the clinics reported only three cases to the state department of Social and Rehabilitation Services. They should have reported all 166.

Kline was prepared to press charges against both Tiller and CHPPKM. For reasons of ideology and campaign finance, Sebelius could not let this happen.

To begin, Sebelius persuaded Paul Morrison, a popular Republican district attorney from Johnson County in suburban Kansas City, to change parties and run against Kline in 2006. The state abortion industry invested nearly $2 million to help the local media defeat Kline.

To the dismay of the abortion industry, however, Kline was elected to fulfill the remaining two years on Morrison’s term as Johnson County DA. From that position, he was able to continue the investigation into CHPPKM he had begun as attorney general.

In October 2007, Kline filed 107 counts, 23 of them felonies, against CHPPKM. District Court Judge James Vano found “probable cause” of crimes having been committed and allowed the case to proceed.

Planned Parenthood and new AG Morrison sued Kline to derail the prosecution.  When the case reached the Kansas Supreme Court, the justices grudgingly ruled in Kline’s favor and allowed his case against Planned Parenthood to go forward.  If the facts supported Kline, Judge Beier clearly did not. “His attitude and behavior are inexcusable,” she wrote for the majority , “particularly for someone who purports to be a professional prosecutor.”

Associated Press writer John Hanna uncritically described her summary as “a public tongue-lashing.” A Topeka reporter termed her opinion “a searing condemnation.” The Kansas City Star headlined its story, “Kansas Court Rebukes District Attorney Kline.” And remember, Kline won the case.

If the media were blind to what was happening, then Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice, Kay McFarland, was not.  She called Beier’s opinion “ the very antithesis of ‘restraint and discretion’ and . . . not an appropriate exercise of our inherent power.”  McFarland scolded Beier and the majority for attempting “to denigrate Kline for actions that it cannot find to have been in violation of any law and to heap scorn upon him for his attitude and behavior that does not rise to the level of contempt.”


McFarland may have suspected that Beier’s hectoring of Kline was not spontaneous. Earlier that year, in fact, Beier co-authored a provocative paper that endorsed a strategy very much like the one used to defame Kline.  The paper was written for the Feminist Legal Theory and Feminisms (sic) Conference sponsored by the University of Baltimore School of Law and dealt with what is called third-wave feminism and its effect on parenting law.


The article’s closing quote by Gloria Steinem captures the spirit of this radical feminist incarnation. “We are talking about a society in which there will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned,” said the feminist icon and all-purpose leftist. “We are really talking about humanism.”  Understanding that tradition is not easily discarded in a state like Kansas, Beier and Walsh cite approvingly a strategy suggested by feminist law professor Bridget Crawford.

Write the authors, “Crawford posits that the third-wave’s reclamation of feminism through engagement with the media is powerful ‘cultural work’ that may be a necessary pre-condition to an evolution in the law.”

According to Crawford, “The media are tools to produce cultural infrastructure, without which even the best intentioned and artfully designed legal reforms are ineffective.”  Beier knew something about the media. Before going to law school, she worked several years for the Kansas City Times, the then sister publication of the Kansas City Star.

The Star proved to be the most useful of all media “tools” at Beier’s disposal. Indeed, the paper won Planned Parenthood’s top 2006 national editorial honor for its work defeating “anti-choice zealot” Kline and attacked him relentlessly thereafter.  So powerful was the media’s “cultural work” that in May 2007 Sebelius had no qualms about letting Planned Parenthood celebrate her birthday at a big Kansas City blow-out.

Leading the “conga line around the concert hall” was Peter Brownlie, the local CEO whose abortion clinic was then at the center of Kline’s investigation.  The partiers “sure know how to have fun!” enthused the Planned Parenthood newsletter.  With the cultural infrastructure so well established, Kline lost his re-election bid and was forced to leave the state to find employment.

Wanting to make an example of Kline lest some other prosecutor challenge Planned Parenthood in the future, the activists on the Supreme Court prompted an ethics investigation into Kline’s handling of the abortion cases.  Ironically, one of the charges was that Kline did not share the scope of his investigation with Sebelius. This was true. Kline feared her people would hamper the investigation and possibly destroy evidence.

As it turned out, they did both. Planned Parenthood will likely escape prosecution because Sebelius’s health department and her attorney general’s office separately destroyed key evidence.  Last week, as the decision in the ethics case neared, Kline filed a recusal motion showing that Beier’s 2008 opinion was “flagrantly dishonest in its presentation of facts.” After reading Kline’s motion, four other justices decided that they too had previously complained about Kline’s behavior and recused themselves, as did Beier.

In doing so, the justices gave Beier cover. A public airing of the Beier-led assault on Kline would have seriously damaged the court’s reputation and Sebelius’s.  Planned Parenthood stood to lose over $300 million in federal funding if CHPPKM had been successfully prosecuted. Sebelius protected Planned Parenthood’s interest in Kansas and now oversees its funding as Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The ladder goes up, Kathleen, but the circles go down.




Kansas Supreme Court Message: Don't enforce the law

by Jenn Giroux


Phill Kline's legal marathon to clear his good name and save his law license

On May 15, 2012 the legal team of former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline filed a motion in the Kansas Supreme Court seeking the recusal of two justices who would otherwise sit in review of Kline's appeal of an ethics panels' recommendation that his law license be indefinitely suspended after he prevailed in successfully filing criminal charges against Planned Parenthood. The motion seeks to recuse both Justice Carol Beier for her bias and deception and Justice Lawton Nuss, who, himself, was the subject of an ethics complaint brought by Kline when he was Attorney General. The legal brief is nothing short of a white hot legal bombshell. The majority of the brief focuses on Justice Beier. The heavily footnoted motion exposes for anyone who reads it, Justice Beier's pattern of dishonest opinion writing, her bias against Kline, and her aggressive activism from the bench to protect the abortion industry from legitimate legal prosecution. The motion also reveals Beier's tactics to undercut and defeat legitimate enforcement of Kansas laws designed to protect children from sexual abuse.

As prosecutor of Johnson County, Kansas, Kline filed 107 criminal charges against Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri in October, 2007. While civil suits have been filed against Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers in the past, Phill Kline's investigation was the first and only criminal case pursued against the abortion giant by a prosecutor in our nation's history. While in office, Kline was personally attacked and publicly maligned by the Kansas Supreme Court (and their friends in the media) for his willingness to investigate child rape and illegal abortions that were being performed by Planned Parenthood and late term abortionist George Tiller. Every single judge that reviewed Kline's evidence found probable cause that crimes had been committed. The detailed recusal motion reveals the deception of Justice Carol Beier, a lifetime appointee to the Kansas Supreme Court by then-Governor Kathleen Sebelius. Beier prevented Kline's prosecution of Planned Parenthood from ever reaching trial, and her not-so-subtle dishonesty came to light when she crafted a remedy in one case that required Kline to hand over all of his evidence to his successor, former Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison, who made clear his intention of returning the evidence to Planned Parenthood. You read that right: while Planned Parenthood was fighting to derail Kline's investigations of abortion-related crimes, Justice Beier fashioned a factually dishonest opinion that required Kline to turn over the evidence gathered during his investigation to the target of the investigation.

Additionally, Mr. Kline's appeal brief dismantles the flawed reasoning of the Disciplinary Panel which conducted a kangaroo court-like hearing and has now recommended his suspension. The outcome was all too predictable despite the fact that there are no facts to support their findings and recommendations.

It is important to keep the following facts in mind:

1. While Kline has been constantly maligned with accusations that he was violating patient privacy, not a single patient name was ever revealed by him or his staff in two prosecutorial offices covering nearly six years of effort.

2. The evidence clearly shows hundreds of abortions on children. Under state and federal law these pregnancies are a result of child abuse/rape. Of over 400 abortions on children, only 16 were reported as potential abuse. To date, no one but Kline has seriously followed up on that evidence or these abused children.

3. Justice Carole Beier is a Sebelius appointee and an avid supporter of abortion. She formerly worked for the National Women's Law Center which represented interests supporting abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood. This presents a clear bias and conflict for her in this case.

4. None of the allegations against Phill Kline relate to the investigation that he initiated against the Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri. They are created accusations which are completely false.

5. The evidence against Planned Parenthood has always been, and continues to be, strong and verifiable.

6. Every judge who has reviewed the evidence has found probable cause to believe that Planned Parenthood committed crimes.

7. Justice Beier, as revealed in the recusal motion, has written approvingly of using the media as a "tool" to shape public perception in order to bring about "legal reform" in support of "third-wave feminism." And that is exactly what she achieved with her anti-Kline opinions — turning Kline into a reviled figure in Kansas based in large part on non-existent evidence and lies about the actual evidence.

8. Kline consistently prevailed in moving the case forward while he was in office because the evidence was so strong. However, he lost in the public perception game because of Beier's deceptions and the deliberate media confusion created in Kansas, a state whose mainstream media feeds off the lies of one another. At the height of Kline's investigation the main newspaper, The Kansas City Star, ran a cartoon of Kline sitting on the bench next to a little girl with his hand up her dress. The script under the photo mocked the investigation of child rape with the theme: "he'll violate anyone's privacy to get what he wants." That same paper was awarded the "Maggie Award" by Planned Parenthood (in honor of founder, Margaret Sanger) for their editorial efforts to unseat Phill Kline.

Phill Kline lost his bid for re-election in 2008. It was a tragic turn of events when then Senator, now Governor of Kansas Sam Brownback betrayed the pro-life movement and longtime friend, Phill Kline, by endorsing RINO Steve Howe, who now serves as prosecutor over the remaining criminal case against Planned Parenthood. Unfortunately, Howe has chosen to drop the felony charges which could have led to the de-funding of Planned Parenthood nationwide. Many in the pro-life community (inside Kansas and across the country) have believed for some time that Howe lacks the will and the desire to aggressively prosecute the case against Planned Parenthood. Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of this is the fact that throughout Kline's ordeal of fighting unjust charges from political enemies, (i.e. friends of the abortion industry trying to remove Kline's law license), there has been only silence from Governor Brownback's office. He sat in the Governor's office just blocks away from where Phill Kline was put on trial by Beier's political hacks. It calls to mind the biblical verse: "I do not know the man" (Mathew 26: 72). This is no surprise coming from the same man who betrayed the entire country by refusing to invoke a long standing Senate tradition which allowed one Senator of a nominee's home state to pull the plug on their nomination. This would have stopped the appointment of Kathleen Sebelius as Obama's HHS Secretary. Brownback, in both scenarios, could have changed the course of events by simply stepping forward for the truth. He chose political self-preservation instead.

Many may ask: "Why are they still after Kline?"

The answer is simple. Planned Parenthood wants to make an example of Phill Kline to send this message to all prosecutors nationwide: if you pursue criminal investigations against the abortion industry, you will suffer....you will be sued, you will be unjustifiably charged with trumped-up ethical accusations, you will be sued again and again, you will be lied about in the media, you will be betrayed by political friends in high places, your ability to support your family will be targeted, and of course, you will be politically assassinated. The one thing they have continually underestimated is Kline's tenacity and willingness to stand up for the truth and the law in order to protect the legal rights of abused children and the unborn. The power of that truth can be found in the legal brief filed this week. This case against Phill Kline has far reaching effects if Justice Beier and her other abortion-minded friends on the bench succeed. Few people in my lifetime have endured what Phill Kline and his family have been put through. Kline's silent strength shines through in all of the suffering. It has been both inspiring and painful to watch. And it is a story that must be told. Truly they are a living example of this verse: "Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven." (Mathew 5: 3-12)