Like a cork in a bottle.
So, I did a little digging and apparently Egypt owns the canal. Question, how much money are they losing right now? Does it matter, at least in relation to the whole deep state thing, or are they not really involved but are more of a collateral damage thing because of larger things going on?
Ex-FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith pleads guilty in first criminal case arising from Durham probe
Published August 19
Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith pleaded guilty Wednesday in federal court to making a false statement in the first criminal case arising from U.S. Attorney John Durham’s review of the investigation into links between Russia and the 2016 Trump campaign.
U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia James Boasberg accepted the plea. Clinesmith's sentencing date has been set for Dec. 10 at 11 a.m. ET.
Durham's office on Wednesday said that Clinesmith's guilty plea was to "one count of making a false statement within both the jurisdiction of the executive branch and judicial branch of the U.S. government, an offense that carries a maximum term of imprisonment of five years and a fine of up to $250,000."
Clinesmith was referred for potential prosecution by the Justice Department’s inspector general’s office, which conducted its own review of the Russia investigation.
The inspector general accused Clinesmith, though not by name, of altering an email about former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page to say that he was “not a source” for another government agency.
Page has said he was a source for the CIA.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-fbi-lawyer-kevin-clinesmith-pleads-guilty-durham-probe
Ex-FBI lawyer avoids prison after admitting he doctored email in investigation of Trump’s 2016 campaign
Jan. 29, 2021
The former FBI lawyer who admitted to doctoring an email that other officials relied upon to justify secret surveillance of a former Trump campaign adviser was sentenced Friday to 12 months of probation, with no time behind bars.
Prosecutors had asked that Kevin Clinesmith, 38, spend several months in prison for his crime, while Clinesmith’s attorneys said probation would be more appropriate. Clinesmith pleaded guilty last summer to altering an email that one of his colleagues used in preparing an application to surreptitiously monitor former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page during the bureau’s 2016 investigation of Russia’s election interference.
U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg said that Clinesmith’s conduct had undermined the integrity of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which approved the FBI’s flawed applications to surveil Page. “Courts all over the country rely on representations from the government, and expect them to be correct,” Boasberg said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/kevin-clinesmith-fbi-john-durham/2021/01/28/b06e061c-618e-11eb-afbe-9a11a127d146_story.html
“I Have Initiated the Destruction of the Republic!” – BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Adulterous Attorney Kevin Clinesmith After First Carter Page FISA App Originated
Published November 26, 2019
Obama’s FBI became the place where corrupt actors had promiscuous affairs, ignored crimes from those they liked, prosecuted made up and fraudulent crimes from those they disliked and ruined lives ruthlessly in the process. It will take years, if ever, to mend the reputation of today’s FBI.
One set of FBI lovers have been in the news for the past few years. This disgusting couple, Creepy Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, reportedly maintained an affair while letting Hillary Clinton off of all charges related to her email crimes. They then used taxpayer funded dollars to text each other on their FBI phones and email each other on their FBI laptops about their affair while on company time. They then became the key players in the greatest scandal in US history, the Mueller Special Counsel.
Now a second set of lovers is in the news, Kevin Clinesmith and Sally Moyer. The Washington Post reported over the weekend that a former FBI attorney altered information that supported a FISA warrant that was used to spy on candidate and President Trump. Now Deep State actors are trying to minimize the actions of this new set of Mueller gang lovers who attempted a coup on President Trump’s Administration.
The WaPo reported this weekend and it was quickly uncovered that former Mueller gang members Kevin Clinesmith was involved in altering documents used to obtain a FISA warrant to legitimize spying on candidate and President Trump. The WaPo claims that this will be coming out in the upcoming IG report in December.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/11/i-have-initiated-the-destruction-of-the-republic-breaking-exclusive-adulterous-attorney-kevin-clinesmith-after-first-carter-page-fisa-app-originated/
Mr. Jekielek: Very curiously, you’re talking about taking things back before Crossfire Hurricane and into basically generating support for the Iran deal. But actually, in the book, you go quite a bit further back, and you have a whole chapter dedicated to China, which is of course one of my favorite topics. And you take us way back into the ’90s, where the process of normalization, of stronger relations with the Chinese Communist Party and so forth. So tell me a little bit about this. I read that chapter with rapt fascination.
Mr. Smith: Thanks, thanks.
Mr. Jekielek: You pointed out some very, very interesting things, even a few that I wasn’t entirely aware of.
Mr. Smith: Okay, I’m very proud of that. That’s good.
Mr. Jekielek: How does the whole China piece fit into this puzzle? I think that’s something that not a lot of the viewers are going to be necessarily expecting.
Mr. Smith: Right. China has become something since even before the ’90s, since about the ’70s, with Henry Kissinger’s and the president he served, Richard M. Nixon’s, outreach to China, which was a strategic gambit to advance the interests of the United States against the Soviet Union, a more dangerous communist country at the time in the ’70s. Since then, American policymakers, people in Washington, have not sufficiently revisited our opinions about China.
There were different outliers. There were different voices of reason, people who were saying things. And I point to Kissinger to say that this is not a Democratic problem; it’s not a Republican problem. It’s a Washington problem. Some people on both sides of the aisle, it’s people who come here to do work to sell influence and to buy influence.
In the ’80s, the congressman from Missouri, Richard Gephardt, who was also a 1988 presidential candidate, sounded a message very similar to Donald Trump’s once he started worrying about American jobs. He started worrying about people who were shipping jobs off. At the time he was worried about South Korea and Japan as well, but then China became a very big concern for him.
And the way that people targeted Gephardt, the press, opponents, targeted Gephardt was eerily similar to the way they’re going after Donald Trump now. Any idea of saying, “Wait a minute, let’s look at what’s happening here. Let’s find out what’s happening to American jobs. And why are we selling out American jobs to foreign adversaries?” Donald Trump, the way they’ve shut him up is by calling him a racist, right? This is the instrument that they’ve used to go after Trump.
Well, strangely or not strangely, this is one of the same tactics they used to keep Gephardt down as well. They called him a xenophobe. They called him a racist. Gephardt also had a description for the swamp that sounded very similar to Donald Trump’s. He talked about policymakers. He talked about thought leaders. He talked about the authors of opinion editorials, academics, and this is the same message that Trump sends out as well.
Why do you have all these people who are agreeing on this one thing? Why are they all here in Washington? Why do they all agree about the centrality and the significance of the Chinese Communist Party? And when you have someone who comes in and says, “Wait a minute, this is a problem, actually, for a number of different reasons.”
It’s a problem in terms of the American workforce. It’s also a problem in terms of American national security. And Trump has found allies on China, most of them right now on the Republican side, though, historically, there have been Democrats who have been very good on China. You don’t have to go all the way back to 1988 and find Gephardt. Even more recently, there have been senators who have been very good on China.
Why more of them aren’t standing up now and joining Donald Trump is bad. It’s understandable in terms of partisan politics. But it’s a terrible thing for the country, especially right now. This is a country that has taken a number of body blows. One of them has in particular come from China, referring to [what] we were speaking about before: they say the Chinese Communist Party flu, right. This is a very serious thing. So it would be important for American officials, American policymakers to join together on this, that this is a problem. We’re not there yet.
https://www.ntd.com/lee-smith-on-the-permanent-coup-and-why-clinesmith-is-likely-just-the-first-indictment_498925.html
That chapter on China describes the role that Senator Dianne Feinstein has played regarding China and regarding American policy. Look, in many ways in the 1970s, it was exciting for people to reach out to China, a very hopeful time in different ways. And in some ways this policy started as a time of hope. “Let’s see if we can drag the Chinese Communist Party out of communism and bring them into the community of nations.”
Well, that is not what has happened, and this policy, this idea has failed. So why are people still involved? Why is Dianne Feinstein, why does she continue to defend the Chinese Communist Party? And I’m not just talking about what the party does inside of China. I’m not just talking about what it’s done in Hong Kong, what it’s done to the Uyghurs, but also what is happening here in the United States. What is the role of the Chinese Communist Party? Isn’t it right for American policymakers to represent their constituents at home? Instead, they are defending foreign powers who are hurting her constituents, who are hurting other Americans.
Mr. Jekielek: You describe Senator Feinstein’s relationships with very, very high-level leaders, for example with Jiang Zemin, who basically rose to power through what they called pacifying Tiananmen Square in 1989, really ultimately perpetrating the Tiananmen Square Massacre.
Mr. Smith: Right, right. And her explanation for that—she boasts about having been a friend of Jiang’s for a long time, and she talked, she gave an interview to The Wall Street Journal shortly after Tiananmen Square [and] said, “Well, my friend Jiang told me that there was no police there, so all they really had was the army, and I think it’s time for us to put all this behind us.” I’m not saying that she is singly responsible for holding Jiang’s feet to the fire of Tiananmen. That is not singly her responsibility. But I mean, at this point, it’s just obscene.
The amount of time that has gone by and the people who continue to defend. Many people in the book, Senator Cotton, Representative Mike Gallagher, these are people who’ve been very good, very good on China. And they’re pointing to the different problems that Beijing poses for American national interest. We’ve seen different fights over Huawei and ZTE, and look at the number of Americans who are representing those interests. We have Democrats, we have Republicans who are representing the interests of adversarial powers.
The thing about Donald Trump is he is the one president who has brought this to light. And he has been engaged in this fight. And I do believe that one of the reasons that he has met so much resistance in Washington from many people has been what he’s been saying about China. This has been a problem. This has been a problem with a number of different policymakers and people across the board, Democrats and Republicans, that he’s taken on this fight, just as it was a problem for Dick Gephardt back in the ’80s.
Mr. Jekielek: Is China somehow involved in trying to influence US politics as we speak?
Mr. Smith: The coronavirus may be the most profound influence operation in American politics in American history. I mean, we don’t know yet or I don’t know. I don’t think either of us know whether or not it was intentional. But we see the different things they did.
They closed off internal travel from Wuhan, and they kept external travel going. In a sense, they directed death outwards. They certainly could have warned the United States and the rest of the world. If you look right now at the tally, the tally is astonishing: how many dead, how many American dead, how many dead around the world, [and] how many Americans out of work. It’s hard to imagine.
It would be hard to imagine a Soviet strike during the heart of the Cold War, with 200,000 dead and many tens of millions out of work. They would have been quite pleased with such a strike. I don’t think that we should respond to it as a nuclear attack, but it’s a very serious thing that happened.
And I think actually, I think that President Trump deserves a lot of credit to try to keep it on a low burn right now. We have lots of other concerns. I don’t think that he should be—you can see that he’s frustrated about this and he’s angry, but it’s a very good thing that picking a fight with China over this is not at the top of his list. I think it’s good to keep calm, but we need to look at this quite clearly and seriously and see what happened. It’s astonishing.
Oh, yes, it’s affecting this election. It’s affecting how we Americans have lived since, certainly since March. It will continue to affect how we live for at least many months to come, if not many years to come.