United States – Washington D.C. Noise Pollution

February 5, 2018

United States – Washington D.C. Noise Pollution

Padmini Arhant

Fellow Americans,

I would like to clear the air once and for all.

There is noise pollution in Washington D.C.

There has been news articles and press interviews throughout the day accusing the release of memo from the House Intelligence Committee’s Chairman Devin Nunes as abuse of power. Since I am forced to deal with innuendoes rather than direct talks and reference, I respond to the allegation.

I find this accusation of abuse of power impulsive and interesting considering those who are making such claims are parallel to none in this art of abusing power verifiable in the tenure as CIA director introducing the inhumane and internationally condemned torture techniques as well as mistreatments of those held in custody without trial or right to legal defense to prove their innocence.

Notwithstanding the intelligence agencies missing in action in preventing the worst terror attack against the nation on September 11, 2001.

This is not the first time that an administration or office of Presidency has had difference of opinion and problems with the highest office bearers in intelligence agency.

The FBI founder and first director Edgar J. Hoover’s relationship with former President John F. Kennedy and subversion subsequent to the latter’s assassination is a classified yet publicly known secret.

The entire controversy surrounding Russia investigation headed by former FBI director Robert Mueller III and the recent intelligence memo is all related to alleged Russia meddling in 2016 Presidential election and the outcome against the democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Having visited this topic numerous times on this website, anything said or written no matter how well articulated and presented on this subject, the cliché is unavoidable.

Nevertheless, there is a demand to agree with the fast track Russia investigation aimed at indictment of the sitting President Donald Trump regardless of the methods and unusual approach from intelligence apparatus, DOJ, the Clinton campaign and DNC to prove their case.

It is important to refresh memory on Presidential quest by the democrat candidate Hilary Rodham Clinton.

The democrat candidate Hillary Clinton Presidential bid in 2008 against then democrat contender Barack Obama in the primary was unsuccessful. There was a high drama in having the contender Hillary Clinton concede to then candidate Barack Obama following the democrat primary election in 2008.

Fast forward to 2016, the democrat primary election and the lead up to Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton nomination was again anything but peaceful. The political storm between the Clinton campaign and the other contender Senator Bernie Sanders’ campaign was fierce and contentious. The tensions within DNC and infighting due to admittedly rigged nomination of the establishment candidate Hillary Clinton resulted in the expulsion of then DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the murder of democrat staffer Seth Rich, the supporter of candidate Bernie Sanders in the primary election.

Having wrestled and rammed over the Sanders’ campaign, the Clinton campaign along with the political class and media presumptuously decided on Clinton victory.

The democrat candidate Hillary Clinton, a seasoned politician and tenacious contestant having held the key post as Secretary of State had never resisted the concept of end justifying the means witnessed in 2008 and 2016 primary election campaigns.

The final election between the democrat candidate Hillary Clinton and the republican challenger Donald Trump was written off under the assumption of the democrat winning the election.

Meanwhile, there has been measures from the Clinton campaign as widely reported and acknowledged on the service acquired from the former British Intelligence operative, Christopher Steele, a foreign national with openly stated resolve to see the republican candidate Donald Trump fail in the Presidential race. As per the reports thus far which has not been refuted by the relevant parties, the Clinton campaign along with DNC paid $12 million to Christopher Steele for the dossier on the republican candidate Donald Trump and the campaign advisers alleged ties with Kremlin.

The Steele dossier obviously not meeting the objectivity given the author’s predisposition and overt resentment towards the subject i.e. the Presidential candidate Donald Trump has been used by FBI and DOJ in the submission for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant against one of the Trump campaign advisers Carter Page in 2016.

The FBI and DOJ were aware of the background on the dossier as having been paid for by the Clinton campaign and DNC. The recent exchanges since the release of the intelligence committee memo cited the FBI and DOJ mentioned about the dossier being politically motivated to FISA court at the time of seeking warrant. However, there is no indication on corroboration of the dossier that was presented to FISA court.

Now, the statements from the democrats favored sources suggesting that the dossier had no role in obtaining the warrant and that the intel memo cherry picked information from the dossier ignoring many crucial elements and therefore the memo is lacking in accuracy.

Clearly, the democrats and allies altered position in the wake of intel memo release is self-contradictory. On the one hand the dossier is stated irrelevant in gaining surveillance warrant from FISA court and in the same breadth the dossier is quoted to have critical information about the targets viz. the candidate Donald Trump and the Trump campaign advisers that are supposedly omitted by Chairman Nunes in the intel memo.

These are the questions the FBI and DOJ should address for proper clarifications to the American public.

Did the FBI and DOJ specify to FISA court that the dossier author Christopher Steele is a foreign national, a former British intelligence operative hired and paid by the Clinton campaign and DNC for the specific purpose of finding possible links between the opponent Donald Trump and Russia?

Did FBI and DOJ advise the FISA court whether the dossier was properly verified and found to be incontrovertible?

What other contents were provided to FISA court in addition to the unverified dossier as asserted lately in the reaction to intel memo?

The deputy AG Rosenstein apparent knowledge about FBI intelligence officials handling of Steele dossier, the FISA warrant and the surveillance activity together with the dismissal order given in writing to fire the former FBI director James Comey to incumbent President Donald Trump severely pose conflict of interest in the supervision role on Russia investigation.

As explained earlier on the topic on this website, the objection over alleged Russia intervention in 2016 election that has not been established with more than eight months passed in the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller III is meaningless and hypocritical in the backdrop of Clinton campaign invited and paid anti-Trump foreign agent Christopher Steele prepared dossier to derail then Presidential candidate Donald Trump election prospects.

Now the questions to those members rallying behind Russia investigation by former FBI director Robert Mueller on deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein oversight.

Do Russia investigation backers also favor inquiry against Clinton campaign for allowing foreign intrusion in the paid service from Christopher Steele?

Where is the evidence on alleged impeding by Russia in 2016 Presidential election?

How come the previous administration of ex-President Barack Obama and the intelligence agency FBI as well as  DOJ did nothing to avert the alleged Russia interference despite maintaining they had credible information in this respect?

How is it that when the democrat candidate Hillary Clinton lost in 2008 to then democrat contender Barack Obama there was no Russia intrusion detected unlike the alleged dramatic Russian spell in 2016 against the Republican candidate Donald Trump?

Should accountability be enforced only on certain member or selective few in politics and grant impunity to others in direct violation of constitution and abuse of power in office?

The three to four page intel memo is rejected as concise data insisting the fifty page document is the detailed version even though the volume conforms to concentric circles with a common center being the unsubstantiated Steele dossier, alleged Russia links and concerted efforts until now to shun transparency.

There is no doubt the political fervor to disrupt governance, the stock market upbeat performance and voter trust in the mid-term election year prompting the misguided and misrepresented Russia probe.

The reality is those calling for Russia investigation with impeachment as the ultimate goal should be investigated and subject to the fullest extent of law that would essentially set precedence on fairness and application of rule on the basis none are above the law.

Finally, the House intelligence committee plan on Phase II to find the State Department involvement in the misuse of position and authority is a valid proposal and emphasize congressional responsibility to end inappropriate and unethical practice at the helm freeing the political system from deep state and secret society collusion.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Author & Presenter PadminiArhant.com

 

 

 

 

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, United States | Leave a Comment 

United States – Intel Memo and Russia Investigation

February 2, 2018

United States – Intel Memo and Russia Investigation

Padmini Arhant

The latest furor in Washington D.C. on congressional staff drafted memo for the Republican House Intelligence Committee Chair, Republican Congressman from California Devin Nunes and subsequent approval by the White House to release the intelligence memo hardly escapes attention.

The rebuttals from FBI, the justice department and the democrats’ memo in response to the development is the other aspect of the issue.

While there are arguments on the procedural and constitutional implications with back and forth statements along with media perspectives escalating the problem, the basis of the entire uproar is undermined that deserves focus.

The purpose should aim for transparency in the political system ominously missing much to public frustration and disappointment. Then the use and misuse of intelligence apparatus by one political party against another and especially citizens in civil society in addition to emphasis on Congressional oversight to prevent infringement on civil liberties in the course of overzealous espionage activity that is a persisting tradition in politics.  

The news media published details claimed as information directly from the respective sources on both sides acknowledged as credible data leads to more than it meets the eye.

The saga leading to Russia Investigation with calls for indictment of the incumbent President appears to be the primary objective ignoring the past administrations actions in consciously misleading and misrepresenting American electorate as well as constitutional violations amounting to treason clarifies the political motive behind the pursuit.

What needs to be understood in this particular dispute is the Russia investigation headed by former FBI director Robert Mueller and overseen by deputy attorney general Rod Jay Rosenstein. The controversial Russia investigation is to determine the alleged involvement of President Donald Trump’s campaign advisers and associates with Kremlin and their alleged efforts to obtain findings on the democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton from Russian sources in order to gain political advantage in the 2016 Presidential election.

Interestingly, the origin of this quagmire setting precedence inviting foreign intrusion in the democratic process of national election and obstruction of justice to seek warrant is omitted in the protest.

The democrats apparently engaged a foreign national, the former agent of the British intelligence and paid to conduct research on then Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump alleged ties with Kremlin.

The British ex-spy supplied clues without proper verification were then used by FBI and the justice department to get a warrant against Presidential candidate Donald Trump’s campaign foreign adviser Carter Page from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) withholding the British agent’s involvement from the FISA judge issuing the warrant.

Clearly, the obstruction of justice had occurred in the onset with non-disclosure on British foreign agent hired by the major political party viz. the democrats competing in the national election during FBI and justice department submission to FISA court thereby misleading the court in issuing the warrant.

Furthermore, the noise over alleged Russia interference in 2016 election overwhelm the foreign entity participation i.e. the former agent of British intelligence agency through paid service for the democrats in acquiring potentially damaging material against the Republican opponent in the Presidential race.

As highlighted recently on the topic of Russia Investigation on this website, the democratic party has plenty to address to their own base and the nation at large in the ways and means adopted to nominate the establishment candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton that were admittedly rigged leading to the expulsion of then DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the murder of the democrat staffer Seth Rich with police investigation results not yet made available since the incident in July 2016.

Amid these events, one side crying foul against another is equivalent to the pot calling the kettle black.

As for alleged Russia meddling, the foreign intervention in the national election has been facilitated with the democrats appointing the foreign spy agent followed by obstruction of justice in abstaining from truth in the FISA court that merits appropriate explanation prior to proceeding with Russia investigation.

The rules and laws applied across the spectrum exempting none regardless of position and status barring partisanship and bias would exemplify credibility and justice in the otherwise structure fraught with political acrimony.

The earnest quest for truth would hold all those in violations and abuse of power accountable not the selective few in the bitter political environment seeking elimination of anyone against the core entities agenda.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Author & Presenter PadminiArhant.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Ethics, Featured | Leave a Comment