Fusion GPS – USA Gov Policy

The revelation, from court documents, that the co-founder of the anti-Trump firm Fusion GPS met last year with Justice Department official Bruce Ohr and hired Ohr’s wife to help with the opposition research firm’s investigation of the Republican candidate, is further and highly serious evidence that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and in particular the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has been substantially compromised by financial and political ties to the Clintons. Nellie Ohr served as a paid subcontractor on anti-Trump work .

Despite the clear conflict of interest and ethical breach, Bruce Ohr remains a DOJ official.

The incestuous relationship between the DOJ and FBI officials and the Clinton campaign or the Clinton Foundation has called into question the entire abrupt dropping of charges against Hillary Clinton and the massive investigation into Donald Trump’s campaign, which, to date, has uncovered no substantive evidence against the President, and has utterly failed to state what laws have been broken.

Beyond Ohr, the evidence of an unethical relationship between FBI and DOJ is significant and growing. Peter Strzok, who was assigned to the politically-charged allegation that the Russians provided some information assistance to the Trump campaign, was also a key figure into the as-yet unexplained failure of the FBI to move against Clinton’s mishandling of the emails. He has been revealed to be an enthusiastic supporter of Hillary Clinton, and was in a strategic position to both improperly shield her from prosecution and harass the candidate who beat her in the 2016 campaign, as part of Mueller’s team, which has an inappropriate concentration of Democrat Party contributors and Clinton supporters.

Strzok was in charge of the “interrogation” of Hillary Clinton in July 2, 2016 regarding passing classified information onto her private email server. Observers see that action as essentially a politically motivated whitewash. Strzok was demoted, but strangely not fired, in August. His partisanship has been revealed in emails sent to his FBI colleague and lover. Despite requests, Congress has been kept in the dark about much of this incident. The FBI has failed to cite any competent authority giving that agency the right to defy the nation’s legislative branch, and the once proud organization is now subject to contempt of Congress citations.

As others have noted, the team Mueller has put together looks less like a team of objective legal investigators and more like a gang of political hit-men. A number of them are contributors to the Democratic Party and to Hillary Clinton.

A Free Beacon analysis notes that the strange behavior of key FBI personnel “is the result of a bureaucratic culture that emerged in the 1990s and was fueled by its two most recent former directors, James Comey and Robert Mueller, who ran the agency for the past 16 years. Mueller headed the FBI from 2001 to 2013, when Comey took over and served until he was fired by Trump in May…Under President Barack Obama, the FBI suffered a string of failures that critics blame on the FBI being pressured by liberal, politically correct policies that emphasized diversity and multiculturalism of its workforce over competence and results.”
Prescription medication is used to treat gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD), ulcers, and reference cheapest viagra other digestive side effects. The benefit of using organic oils is that, they leave no side effects on the genital area as with blood circulation in and out of the penile region and augments the blood flow to the blood vessels (arteries and veins) as a system to pump blood, just like the lowest cost levitra oil pump in your car. However, at least 60% of the total semen must be motile. tadalafil in india The combination has been buy viagra an age-old remedy for erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation in men.
Significant examples of a politically-motivated tilt by both the DOJ, which the FBI is a part of, and the law enforcement agency itself are extensive. The problem was epidemic during the Obama Administration, when branches such as the Internal Revenue Service were employed to harass the Tea Party, and when former Attorney General Loretta Lynch openly speculated on criminally prosecuting those who merely disagreed with Obama on climate change. It extended as well to the FCC, which at one point attempted to place monitors in newsrooms in an attempt to control conservative media.

The Free Beacon’s Bill Gertz provides a number of examples of how left-wing perspectives have replaced objective analysis in FBI statements:

The FBI has consistently attempted to underplay the very real role played by Islamic extremists in terror attacks;

It incorrectly minimized North Korea’s role in the cyber attack against Sony Pictures in 2014;

Despite all evidence to the contrary, when an anti-Trump, Bernie Sanders supporter deliberately targeted and shot up a Republican sports outing last June, seriously wounding a congressman, the FBI intentionally misstated that the event was “spontaneous.”

Gertz notes that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was promoted despite the clear conflict of interest of having his wife receiving payments worth $700,000 from a pro-Clinton political action Committee.

The report concludes tomorrow.

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.