quinta-feira, 31 de maio de 2018

A QUEM INTERESSA O DISCURSO DOS PATRIOTAS E NACIONALISTAS


TORTURA, MORTE, EXÍLIO,
E
DITADURA MILITAR.
A QUEM INTERESSA O DISCURSO 
DOS
IDIOTAS FUNCIONAIS? 
    O STF DESEJA COM MAIS UM GOLPE A MUDANÇA DE REGIME, NOS LEVAR PARA O PARLAMENTARISMO. QUE É O PIOR DOS REGIMES POLÍTICOS - É O REGIME DA IRRESPONSABILIDADE. http://palacazgrandesartigos.blogspot.com/2017/07/a-evolucao-dos-regimes-politicos.html  

   JÁ QUE EXISTE O ESPÍRITO DE MUDANÇA VAMOS PROPOR A INTERVENÇÃO JÁ, NOS MOLDES AQUI INDICADOS. http://societocratic-political-regime.blogspot.com/2017/09/intervencao-ja-set-2017-com-comentarios.html 

    SENHORES MILITARES, "NÃO ADIANTA MUDAR OS PORCOS (99% DOS POLÍTICOS), SE O CHIQUEIRO (REGIME POLÍTICO) PERMANECER O MESMO" - ASSIM SE EXPRESSA O CABOCLO AQUI DO SERTÃO - ARAPEI-SP – SERÁ QUE SOMENTE COM OS TENENTES CORONEIS É POSSÍVEL INTRODUZIR NOVAS IDEIAS, PARA SALVAR O BRASIL? SERÁ QUE OS “IDIOTAS FUNCIONAIS” QUE NÃO SÃO IDIOTAS E SIM PATRIOTAS E NACIONALISTAS – “BRAZIL FIRST”  - PODEM SOFRER UMA METAMORFOSE, EM VENERAR MAIS A REPÚBLICFA QUE A MONARQUIA DE DUQUE DE CAXIAS, ESQUECENDO UM POUCO A MAÇONARIA, PARA DEIXAR SURGIR AS IDEIAS DE UM LIDER MILITAR, QUE FOI UM DOS FUNDADORES DO CLUBE MILITAR – "CASA DA REPÚBLICA – SOCIOCRÁTICA” -  QUE FOI O GENERAL BENJAMIN CONSTANT , COM A REPÚBLICA SOCIOCRÁTICA, QUE RUI BARBOSA NA CALADA DA NOITE MUDOU PARA ESTA DESGRAÇA DE  DEMOCRACIA? http://societocratic-political-regime.blogspot.com.br/2017/09/comunismo-democracia-e-societocracia.html .  

   CASO  NOSSOS MILITARES FOSSSEM REALMENTE PATRIOTAS E NACIONALISTAS E NÃO CAPACHOS DOS ESTRANGEIROS,  DA MÍDIA GOLPISTA, JUNTO COM A FIESP ANARQUISTA E VIESSEM A SOFRER  UMA “TRANSFUSÃO”, PARA SE TORNAREM UM   “EXÉRCITO CIDADÃO” http://societocratic-political-regime.blogspot.com.br/2017/09/comunismo-democracia-e-societocracia.html ;  NÓS IRÍAMOS GANHAR AS BATALHAS PARA POR ORDEM NESTA DESGRAÇA REINANTE. O EXÉRCITO É  “BRAÇO FORTE E MÃO AMIGA” SÓ PARA O LADO DOS PATRONAIS, SE ESQUECENDO QUE OS TRABALHADORES NÃO COMUNISTAS, TAMBÉM TEM DIREITO DE SER UMA CLASSE MÉDIA DA FORMA QUE O LULA REALIZOU.http://societocratic-political-regime.blogspot.com/2017/07/vamos-trocar-o-tabuleiro.html.


    SEGUE UM COMENTÁRIO QUE MOSTA UM EXÉRCITO PATRIOTA DA AMÉRICA LATINA E UM EXÉRCITO AMORFO SEM LIDERANÇA PATRIÓTICA E NACIONALISTA, NA MÃO DE COMANDO CONTAMINADO PELOS FINACISTAS DO MUNDO.

FUI BUSCAR NO FACEBOOK DO EXÉRCITO BRASILEIRO, QUE MOSTRA A BRAVURA DE NOSSOS SOLDADOS, UMA CHAMADA(*) E RESOLVI ILUSTRAR O QUE SEGUE ABAIXO:
 (*) 29 de maio às 16:59 · 
   Equipe composta por militares da 12ª Brigada de Infantaria Leve representam o Brasil na Competição Internacional de Patrulhas “Tenente Coronel San Martin”.

  COMO A COMPETIÇÃO INTERNACIONAL DE PATRULHAS  FOI BATIZADA DE “TENENTE CORONEL SAN MARTIN” ACHEI POR BEM EXPOR ALGO A RESPEITO E COMENTAR A PROFRUNDIDADE DO ESPÍRITO PATRIÓTICO E NACIONALISTAS DESTE VULTO LEMBRADO, DEVIDO A APROXIMAÇÃO DA ARGENTINA. E FIZ UMA COMPARAÇÃO ENTRE  SAN MARTIN E SIMON BOLIVAR. https://www.infopedia.pt/$san-martin-e-bolivar
  
San Martin 
San Martin era natural da Argentina, embora tivesse passado parte da sua infância e da sua juventude em Espanha, onde teve treino militar. Só em 1812 voltou a Buenos Aires para se juntar à revolta, da qual se tornou líder. San Martin estudou uma arrojada estratégia de ataque das forças imperialistas, pela qual pretendia levar um exército revolucionário a atravessar os Andes, e usar o Chile como a sua base para atacar o centro do Peru. Em 1816 organizou cerca de 5000 homens em Mendonça, conduzindo-os ao encontro dos seus inimigos na batalha de Chacabuco, em 1817. Após este ato revolucionário entrou em Santiago. E o Chile tinha assegurada a sua independência na Batalha de Maipú. De seguida, San Martin apostou na preparação da invasão do Peru, e para isso organizou um exército e uma frota naval. Conseguiu afastar os imperialistas de Lima, a capital, e declarou a independência do Peru em 28 de julho de 1821. Os seus planos não correram como esperava e teve de pedir apoio de Bolívar, que exigiu a seu afastamento em troca do envio de tropas colombianas. Deixou Lima e faleceu em França em 1850. FUGIU!!!

Bolívar
Este ambicioso crioulo nasceu no seio de uma família abastada de Caracas, em 1783. De início não estava empenhado na luta pela independência, até despertar para a revolução em 1810. Cinco anos depois refugiou-se no Haiti, onde planeou em 1816 a sua estratégia para chegar a Caracas e subir o rio Orinoco. Na batalha de Boyacá venceu os realistas e entrou em Bogotá. O seu triunfo foi evidente após a batalha de Carabobo, em 1821, que lhe deu novo alento para sonhar com a unificação da Grande Colombia (Venezuela, Colombia e o Equador). Em 1822, as suas tropas lideradas por Sucre, atingiram o Peru, e em 1824 participou em duas batalhas de Junín e de Ayacucho. Nesta altura estavam já libertadas as colônias espanholas da América do Sul.

 MESMO AI NAS FRONTEIRAS COM A ARGENTINA, O EXÉRCITO BRASILEIRO DEVERIA HOMENAGIAR MUITO MAIS BOLIBAR, QUE ALÉM DE GENERAL, FOI O MAIOR ESTADISTA EMPIRICO, QUE ACERTOU A MELHOR FORMA DE GOVERNAR. O GENERAL SAN MARTIN FOI UM PERDEDOR POIS NÃO FOI NADA COMPETENTE PARA DAR SEGURANÇA DE ESTILO DE GOVERNO AOS POVOS DA ARGENTINA, DO PERU E DO CHILE. FOI PEDIR APOIO A BOLIVAR. 

  BOLIVAR É HOMENAGIADO NO CALENDÁRIO POSITIVISTA POR AUGUSTO COMTE - ESTA É UMA DAS RAZÕES DO EXÉRCITO DA VENEZUELA SER ALTAM,ENTE PATRIOTA E NACIONALISTA - É UM "EXÉRCITO CIDADÃO". http://societocratic-political-regime.blogspot.com.br/... . 

  VOLTANDO AO BOLIVAR -  ESTE GRANDE INTELIGENTE VULTO, NÃO SOMENTE MILITAR COMO "CIENTISTA POLÍTICO", FOI HOMENAGIADO, PRÓXIMO AO CHAMPS ELYSEES EM PARIS (**) - . . http://educalendario.blogspot.com/2010/12/1130-bolivar.html

  AO LER O DOCUMENTO A SEGUIR SUBSTITUA AS PALAVRAS DITADURA POR PRONUNCIADURA, AS PALAVRAS DITADOR POR PRONUNCIADOR - NÃO TEM NADA DE DÉSPOTA. https://societocratic-political-regime.blogspot.com/2017/06/a-ditadura-republicana-nao-e-tiranica.html

NOTA: O MESMO ÓDIO QUE OS OLICAGARCAS BRASILEIROS TEM DO LULA É O MESMO ÓDIO, QUE A OLIGARQUIA VENEZUELANA TEM DE BOLIVAR E POR CONSEGUINTE TINHA DO CHÁVEZ E AGORA DO MADURO. 

(**)  






quinta-feira, 24 de maio de 2018

II - O Fantasma de 2013 Ronda 2018

As Forças do Capital e do Golpe podem se aproveitar desse Movimento e Encaixar o discurso perfeito para Cancelar as Eleições de outubro e instalar um Governo do Judiciário e da Mídia, à Serviço do Mercado e da Restauração do Neoliberalismo.

Quanto ao Acordo com os Caminhoneiros informo: Parente enfia Subsidio no Lombo do Povo. Esta Reunião com os Donos das Empresas de Transporte desloca os Impostos para o Rombo do Déficit.

Pauta dos caminhoneiros:


Para evitar as mentiras da imprensa, segue abaixo a pauta dos caminhoneiros:


A) Frete mínimo nacional.
B) Corte total do Imposto PIS/CONFINS sobre o diesel e Gasolina.
C) redução dos pedágios para caminhoneiros. 
D) Fim da CIDE ( Parcialmente cumprido pelo governo)
E) Renegociação das dividas dos caminhoneiros.
F) Estradas em bom estado. 


Essa é nossa pauta e o governo nada fez, apenas cortou a CIDE, porém não são 3 centavos que vai fazer o movimento parar.
O prazo para o governo atender nossas reivindicações é até segunda feira, dia 28, mas com caminhoneiros paralisando vias de acessos. A partir do dia 29 iremos radicalizar e paralisar ainda mais o governo. A partir de terça, caso todas as pautas nao sejam atendidas iremos:


1) bloquear totalmente todas as estradas federais, deixando apenas veículos de polícias, ambulâncias e bombeiros passararem.
2) Paralização total dos portos e aeroportos. 


E nova pauta a ser incluída além das pautas de A a F, vamos incluir:
G) renúncia do presidente.
H) renúncia dos presidentes do senado e Câmara. 
I) Eleições antecipadas. 

Quem quebrou a economia do país foi o roubo de vocês políticos. Acabou a brincadeira. 

O prazo está dado e o relógio correndo. 

Vocês políticos quando querem desviar recursos, aprovam até leis, porque não agora, aprovam leis para benefício do povo?


Cadê o povo brasileiro pra apoiar os caminhoneiros, o gigante não havia acordado? Cadê os agricultores com suas máquinas na pista ou não usam óleo diesel? Cadê os professores, médicos, polícia, cadê o povo brasileiro pra se unir e lutar pelo Brasil ? Não é  só o caminhão que pede socorro,  mas sim a população brasileira! Acorda povo, vamos pra rua, tem que ser agora ou estaremos todos ferrados !!!

Faça a sua parte, *ajude ao menos a compartilhar essa mensagem!* Mostre a sua indignação!

Acordo: Parente enfia subsídios no lombo do povo!
Reunião com caminhoneiros desloca impostos para o rombo do déficit

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=442579609518707&id=100013000153984

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=442747509501917&id=100013000153984

Além da deterioração geral da economia, com impacto direto no índice de desemprego e em questões sensíveis como a segurança pública, as atuais políticas do governo Temer estão sacrificando qualquer esperança de um futuro digno para os brasileiros. Apenas para ficar com um exemplo, as políticas de contenção de gastos sociais adotadas pelo atual governo levarão à morte 19.732 crianças até 2030, segundo estudo recentemente publicado pela Fiocruz. 
Segundo a Associação dos Engenheiros da Petrobrás, o diesel importado dos EUA, que em 2015 respondia por 41% do total importado pelo Brasil, em 2017 superou 80% do total. 


Não há uma greve
Greve é interrupção do trabalho promovida pelo trabalhador.


No caso dos caminhoneiros:
• os supostos "autônomos" são prestadores listados e credenciados por transportadoras; se não as obedecerem, são excluídos da lista de credenciados; SIMPLES!
• somem a isso a enorme fração de caminhões de EMPRESAS, parados nos acostamentos;
• e ainda o atendimento de setores estratégicos: ou vcs acham que são os "AUTÔNOMOS" que levam QAV - Querosene de Aviação, para os aeroportos???

Quando o patrão paralisa atividades econômicas para alcançar seus objetivos políticos, o nome disso é "Lock Out".

E reduzir o valor do diesel por "Lock Out" NUNCA será o mesmo que reduzir por interesse dos trabalhadores.
A quem já serviu o "lock out" de caminhoneiros?
Exemplos:
• A greve de trabalhadores do transporte municipal em Berlim em novembro de 1932, foi decisiva para a vitória do NSDAP - Partido Nazista, nas eleições que deram a Chancelaria/1° Ministro da Alemanha a Hitler.
• A Greve dos caminhoneiros chilenos, em 1973, foi decisiva para o Golpe Militar contra o Governo Socialista de Allende.
Conhecer um pouco da história não faz mal a ninguém!!!


"A história se repete, a primeira vez como tragédia e a segunda como farsa."
Karl Marx
FUP - Federação Única dos Petroleiros



                                                          ANTONIO LOPES 

sexta-feira, 4 de maio de 2018

I know which country the US will invade next

This article was originally published by Truthdig.

The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT. 

Published 3 May 2018

By the end of this column, it will be clear which country the United States will invade and topple next. Or failing that, it will be clear which country our military-intelligence-industrial complex will be aching to invade next.

We all want to know why America does what it does. And I don’t mean why Americans do what we do.

 I think that question still will be pondered eons from now by a future professor showing his students a video mind-meld of present-day UFC fighters booting each other in the head while thrilled onlookers cheer (not for either of the fighters but rather for more booting in the head).

But we all seem to assume that America—the entity, the corporation—has some sort of larger reasoning behind the actions it takes, the actions put forward by the ruling elite. And almost all of us know that the reasons we´re given by the press secretaries and caricature-shaped heads on the nightly news are the ripest, most fetid grade of bullshit.

We now know that the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction. 

We now know that the crushing of Libya had nothing to do with “stopping a bad man.” If one does even a cursory check of what dictators around the world are up to recently, you’ll find that the US doesn’t care in the slightest whether they are bad or good, whether they’re using their free time to kill thousands of innocent people or to harmonize their rock garden. In fact, the US gives military aid to 70 percent of the world’s dictators. (One would hope that’s only around the holidays though.)

So if it’s not for the stated reasons, why does the US. overrun, topple and sometimes occupy the countries it does? Obviously, there are oil resources or rare minerals to be had. But there’s something else that links almost all of our recent wars.

As The Guardian reported near the beginning of the Iraq War, “In October 2000, Iraq insisted on dumping the US dollar—the currency of the enemy—for the more multilateral euro.”

However, one example does not make a trend. If it did, I would be a world-renowned beer pong champion rather than touting a 1-27 record. (I certainly can’t go pro with those numbers.)

But there’s more. Soon after Libya began moving toward an African gold-based currency—and lining up all its African neighbors to join it—we invaded it as well, with the help of NATO. 

Author Ellen Brown pointed this out at the time of the invasion:
[Moammar Gadhafi] initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar.

John Perkins, an author of “Confessions of an Economic Hitman,” also has said that the true reason for the attack on Libya was Gadhafi’s move away from the dollar and the euro.

This week, The Intercept reported that the ousting of Gadhafi, which was in many ways led by President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, actually had to do with Sarkozy secretly receiving millions from Gadhafi, and it seemed that his corruption was about to be revealed. 

But, the article also noted,“[Sarkozy’s] real military zeal and desire for regime change came only after [Hillary] Clinton and the Arab League broadcasted their desire to see [Gadhafi] go.” And the fact that Gadhafi was planning to upend the petrodollar in Africa certainly provides the motivation necessary. (It doesn’t take much to get the US excited about a new bombing campaign. 

I’m pretty sure we invaded Madagascar once in the 1970s because they smoked our good weed.)

Right now you may be thinking, “But, Lee, your theory is ridiculous. If these invasions were about the banking, then the rebels in Libya—getting help from NATO and the United States—would have set up a new banking system after bringing down Gadhafi.”

Actually, they didn’t wait that long. In the middle of the brutal war, the Libyan rebels formed their own central bank.

Brown said, “Several writers have noted the odd fact that the Libyan rebels took time out from their rebellion in March to create their own central bank—this before they even had a government.”
Wow, that sure does sound like it’s all about the banking.

Many of you know about Gen. Wesley Clark’s famous quote about seven countries in five years. Clark is a four-star general, the former head of NATO Supreme Allied Command, and he ran for president in 2008 (clearly he’s an underachiever). But it’s quite possible that 100 years from now, the one thing he’ll be remembered for is the fact that he told us that the Pentagon said to him in 2002“We’re going to take down seven countries in five years. We’re going to start with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, then Libya, Somalia, Sudan. We’re going to come back and get Iran in five years.”
Most of this has happened. 

We have, of course, added some countries to the list, such as Yemen. 

We’re helping to destroy Yemen largely to make Saudi Arabia happy.

 Apparently, our government/media care only about Syrian children (in order to justify regime change).

 We couldn’t care less about Yemeni children, Iraqi children, Afghan children, Palestinian children, North Korean children, Somali children, Flint (Michigan) children, Baltimore children, Native American children, Puerto Rican children, Na’vi children … oh wait, I think that’s from “Avatar.” Was that fiction? My memories and 3-D movies are starting to blur together.

Brown goes even further in her analysis of Clark’s bombshell:

What do these seven countries have in common? … [N]one of them is listed among the 56 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). That evidently puts them outside the long regulatory arm of the central bankers’ central bank in Switzerland. The most renegade of the lot could be Libya and Iraq, the two that have actually been attacked.

What I’m trying to say is: It’s all about the banking.

So right now you’re thinking, “But, Lee, then why is the US so eager to turn Syria into a failed state if Syria never dropped the dollar? Your whole stupid theory falls apart right there.”

First, I don’t appreciate your tone. Second, in February 2006, Syria dropped the dollar as its primary hard currency.

I think I’m noticing a trend. In fact, on Jan. 4, it was reported that Pakistan was ditching the dollar in its trade with China, and that same day, the US placed it on the watch list for religious freedom violations.
 The same day? Are we really supposed to believe that it just so happened that Pakistan stopped using the dollar with China on the same day it started punching Christians in the nose for no good reason? No, clearly Pakistan had violated our religion of cold hard cash.

This leaves only one question: Who will be next on the list of US illegal invasions cloaked in bullshit justifications? Well, last week, Iran finally did it: It switched from the dollar to the euro. And sure enough, this week, the US military-industrial complex, the corporate media, and Israel all got together to claim that Iran is lying about its nuclear weapons development. 

What are the odds that this news would break within days of Iran dropping the dollar?

 What. Are. The. Odds?

The one nice thing about our corporate state’s manufacturing of consent is how predictable it is.

 We will now see the mainstream media running an increasing number of reports pushing the idea that Iran is a sponsor of terrorism and is trying to develop nuclear weapons (which are WMDs, but for some strange reason, our media are shying away from saying, “They have WMDs”). Here’s a 2017 PBS article claiming that Iran is the top state sponsor of terrorism. 

One must assume this list of terror sponsors does not include the country that made the arms that significantly enhanced Islamic State’s military capabilities
(It’s the US)

Or the country that drops hundreds of bombs per day on the Middle East. (It’s the US) But those bombs don’t cause any terror. Those are the happy bombs, clearly. Apparently, we just drop 1995 Richard Simmons down on unsuspecting people.

Point is, as we watch our pathetic corporate media continue their manufacturing of consent for war with Iran, don’t fall for it. These wars are all about the banking. And millions of innocent people are killed in them. Millions more have their lives destroyed.

You and I are just pawns in this game, and the last thing the ruling elite want are pawns who question the official narrative.

Lee Camp is an American stand-up comedian, writer, actor, and activist. Dubbed by Salon as the “John Oliver of Russia Today”, Camp is the host of RT America’s first comedy news show Redacted Tonight, which tackles the news agenda with a healthy dose of humor and satire. Lee’s writing credits are vast, having written for The Onion, Comedy Central and Huffington Post, as well as the acclaimed essay collections Moment of Clarity and Neither Sophisticated Nor Intelligent. Lee’s stand-up comedy has also been featured on Comedy Central,  ABC’s Good Morning America, Showtime’s The Green Room with Paul Provenza, Al-Jazeera, BBC’s Newsnight, E!, MTV, and Spike TV.

This article was originally published by Truthdig.
The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT. 

quarta-feira, 2 de maio de 2018

Stop War in Yemen

e:SCCBESME HUMANIDADEsccbesme.humanidade@gmail.com
para:info@sandersinstitute.com,
"BernieSanders.com" <info@berniesanders.com>
data:2 de maio de 2018 23:19
assunto:Stop War in Yemen


This is my friend, that live in Arabia Saudita

4 years Of attack and they still attack in my country until this moment for years thousands of Thousands of An ascent people has been killed For no reason.😭😤
Stop War in Yemen

sábado, 21 de abril de 2018

Trump-Russia investigation is an abuse.


The Justice Department Inspector General reportedly issued a criminal referral of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington.

The wheels of justice may have finally caught up with McCabe for repeatedly lying under oath to investigators. It’s high time America had some accountability for his misconduct.

We uncovered documents about McCabe’s conflicted handling of the Clinton investigation that should have triggered action months ago. Our finds on FBI and McCabe corruption generated irresistible public pressure for accountability.

McCabe’s potential criminal acts, on James Comey’s watch, are further proof that both the Clinton email and Trump-Russia investigations were irredeemably compromised. The Clinton email investigation was a sham, and the Trump-Russia investigation is an abuse. Unfortunately, the cover-up continues. The Justice Department and FBI are playing shell games, refusing to turn over McCabe text messages in our FOIA litigation.

We discovered that McCabe was thoroughly steeped in a conflict of interest while he participated in the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email scandal. Despite massive contributions from Clinton ally Terence McAuliffe to McCabe’s wife’s 2015 political campaign, he did not recuse himself from the investigation until just a week before the 2016 presidential election. We also forced out documents showing that McCabe used FBI resources for his wife’s campaign.

Separately, the FBI failed to turn over any McCabe text messages in a final response to our September 2017 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, we filled it on behalf of Jeffrey A. Danik, a 30-year veteran FBI supervisory special agent, against the Department of Justice for records related to McCabe (Jeffrey A. Danik v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:17-cv-01792)).

This lawsuit seeks text messages and emails of McCabe referencing: Dr. Jill McCabe, Jill, Common Good VA, Terry McAuliffe, Clinton, Virginia Democratic Party, Democrat, Conflict, Senate, Virginia Senate, Until I return, Paris, France, Campaign, Run, Political, Wife, Donation, OGC, Email, or New York Times.  It’s a simple request yet, it has thus resulted in FBI games, obfuscation, and stonewalling.

The Inspector General’s criminal referral is, just the first step in cleaning up the Deep State corruption that metastasized under the Obama administration and continues to this day.

What is the FBI Hiding About the Comey Book? 

James Comey might well be wishing he’d never written those notorious memos to himself about his conversations with President Trump, especially now that he is under investigation by the Justice Department Inspector General sharing some of the memos, which were classified, with his friend -- for the specific purpose of leaking them to the New York Times.

Now that they have been released and made public, a key question remains: Was Comey given permission to use the memos in his book? I have a feeling that Comey got a special deal from the FBI because he was going after Trump and they were unwilling to say no to things they would have said no to if Comey were anyone else and Trump was not his target.

We have now filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Justice Department for FBI pre-publication review and other records about former Director James Comey’s book, A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00894)).

We sued because the Justice Department failed to produce any records in response to our March 16, 2018, FOIA request for:

All records of communications between the FBI and former FBI director James Comey relating to an upcoming book to be authored by Mr. Comey and published.

All records, including but not limited to forms completed by former FBI director James Comey, relating to the requirement for pre-publication review by the FBI of any book to be authored by Comey with the intent to be published or otherwise publicly available.

Comey reportedly received an advance in excess of $2 million for his book which was published on April 17th. Former FBI agents and officials intending to write books concerning their tenure are customarily required to submit the entire transcript for pre-publication review.

Comey illegally took and then leaked material from his FBI memos in order to get a special counsel appointed to target President Trump. And so we are asking questions about whether he received special treatment from the FBI to use these ill-gotten FBI documents in his book.

This is the second Judicial Watch lawsuit on the Comey book deal. Shortly after Mr. Comey signed to write his book August 2017, we sent a FOIA request seeking FBI documents related to the deal and coordination on his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. In January 2017, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Justice Department for failing to respond to these requests.

On April 15, 2018, in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos about his book, Comey admitted to leaking conversations he had with President Trump in order to get a special prosecutor appointed, saying, “Look, it’s true … I gave that unclassified memo to my (friend), who was also acting as my lawyer, but this wasn’t a lawyer task, and asked him to give it to a reporter.”

This echoes his controversial testimony before the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence about the circumstances that led to his dismissal, the ongoing investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and his handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s illicit email server. In November we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Justice Department for its records about Comey’s testimony (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:17-cv-02316)).

We have several other lawsuits pending for Comey-related records:

  • In June 2017, we filed a FOIA lawsuit seeking the memorandum written by former Director James Comey memorializing his meeting and conversation with President Trump regarding the FBI’s investigation of potential Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:17-cv-01189)). 
  • In July 2017, we filed a FOIA lawsuit seeking metadata of the “Comey memos” and related records-management information (Judicial Watch, Inc., v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 17-cv-01520)). 
  • In August 2017, we filed a FOIA lawsuit seeking the handling, storage, protection, dissemination, and/or return of classified information signed by Comey (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:17-cv-01624)). 
  • In September 2017, we filed a FOIA lawsuit behalf of the Daily Caller News Foundation against the U.S. Department of Justice seeking memoranda allegedly written by former FBI Director James Comey regarding his discussions with President Donald Trump and Trump’s aides (Daily Caller News Foundation v. U.S. Department Justice (No. 1:17-cv-01830)). 
  • In January 2018, U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg ordered the FBI to turn over the “Comey memos” for in camera review by the court. In doing so, the court rejected arguments by the Sessions’ Justice Department to dismiss the lawsuits seeking the Comey information. On February 2, Boasberg ruled that the “Comey memos” would not be made public. Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation are appealing the ruling. 
As you can see, we are focused like a laser on the Comey-FBI corruption scandal that is illicitly seeking to undo the election of President Trump.

Judicial Watch Sues DOJ for Comey-Mueller Communications
 

While James Comey parades around the country peddling books, and Robert Mueller continues drawing a salary in an investigation based on Comey’s now-public memos, we are asking a court to help us learn what these two Deep Staters were whispering to each other behind closed doors.

Just today we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Justice Department for all records of communications relating to former FBI Director James Comey’s providing memoranda of his conversations with President Trump to Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00932)).

We sued after the FBI informed us that it would neither “confirm nor deny” the existence of the materials for an August 4, 2017, FOIA request seeking: 

All records of communications between former FBI Director James Comey and Special Counsel Robert Mueller, or members of SC Mueller’s investigative committee, relating to the return of memoranda of conversations, memoranda to the file or notes regarding same generated by Comey following conversations with government officials during his tenure as FBI Director.

In other words, we want to know how Mueller and Comey handled the infamous Comey memos.

On January 19, the FBI gave us a “Glomar” response, stating that it could, “neither confirm nor deny that the specific items you seek exist or do not exist as mere acknowledgment of these items would require the FBI to confirm or refute these assumptions,” which it claims could possibly interfere with law enforcement proceedings.

Comey’s involvement with the special counsel was first revealed on June 8, 2017, when the former FBI director testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee that he had leaked memos of his conversations with President Trump “because (he) thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”

On January 23, 2018, The New York Times reported that, “Mr. Comey met last year with Mr. Mueller’s investigators to answer questions about memos he wrote detailing interactions with the president that had unnerved him.”

On June 13, 2017, Politico reported that Columbia University Law professor Daniel Richmond, a friend of James Comey, “turned over copies of the former FBI director's explosive memos… to the FBI, sidestepping a request by congressional committees to deliver the materials to Capitol Hill.”

Here is the central issue: Did Comey improperly funnel his dishonest memos and collude with the Mueller special counsel operation as part of a vendetta against President Trump? And why is the DOJ still protecting James Comey and the out-of-control Mueller operation?

Until next week…



Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton