Guccifer 2.0 Not A Russian Hacker

Both during and after my recent interrogation by the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, democratic members of that Committee repeated again the false claim that a blogger who calls himself Guccifer 2.0 is a known Russian asset.

By Roger Stone

While our politicized intelligence agencies insist this is a fact, much of the known evidence is to the contrary.

The Deep State chorus repeating this falsehood over and over again makes it no truer than the discredited notion that the DNC was hacked at all, and that the Russians did it.

The Nation magazine recently reported on a study issued by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), which is a group comprised of numerous former high-level US intelligence officials. Based upon the VIPS study, The Nation concluded that, “There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5, 2016… not by the Russians and not by anyone else.” Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak; a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data storage device. In short, they reported it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial alleged hack claim that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer.

Additionally, these unproven allegations have led to a frivolous lawsuit filed by former Obama administration lawyers against me and the Trump campaign. In my motion to dismiss this harassment law suit by some Obama-blessed front group “Protect Our Democracy”, I submitted a sworn declaration by Dr. Virgil Griffith, a cognitive computer graduate from the California Institute of Technology, who questioned the unproven assumptions that Russian hackers are responsible for theft of DNC emails and other data.

In their zeal to bring down the Trump administration, and anyone connected with it, the DNC might have crossed a bridge too far in their scorched earth campaign.  They attempted every tried-and-true dirty trick, every narrative manipulation, and even down right media collusion, to no avail.  For a group of people who had heretofore been able to do anything, to anyone, at any time of their choosing, this was too much to bear.  Suddenly confronted with the legitimate possibility of losing their power, potentially forever, it appears they resorted to desperate measures.  The old adage is true: desperate people do desperate things.

Confronted with a real hacker exploiting Hillary Clinton’s homebrew email server, and the leaks of confidential and damaging emails between Hillary Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal regarding Benghazi from the original Guccifer, it appears the DNC decided to fight fire with fire.  If the Guccifer story could harm the Hillary campaign, perhaps a Guccifer 2.0 story could help her.

In order to make sense of what is surely a complicated scheme, it is most helpful that we undertake a historical review:

On June 12th, 2016, Julian Assange of Wikileaks announced on an ITV televised interview that “We have upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton which are great … and pending publication.”  At this point, the DNC, the Clinton Campaign, and Crowd Strike, a DNC paid contractor, knew a damage control campaign would be required immediately.

On June 14th, 2016, the DNC released a statement explaining that they’d made the discovery that their servers had been hacked.  Among the trove of documents claimed to be purloined, they make specific and unusual mention of a document or documents related to “Trump Opposition Research”.

On the same day, June 14th, DNC paid contractor Crowd Strike released a report on malware they found on a DNC server during an investigation a month earlier in May of 2016.  They reported that the evidence suggested that the malware was injected by the Russians., but provided no detailed specifics of this evidence.

The next day, on June 15th, a person or persons using the name of a hacker who was recently in the news (the original Guccifer was in court the previous month) steps forward calling themselves Guccifer 2.0 and claimed responsibility for the DNC hack.  Guccifer 2.0 affirms the DNC statement and claims to be the source for Wikileaks.  They post five documents purposefully tainted with ‘Russian Metadata Fingerprints’ and the first of the documents just happened to the “Trump Opposition Research” the DNC announced on the previous day.

Very shortly after Guccifer 2.0 makes its announcement, Gawker, The Smoking Gun, and ArsTechnica all publish articles relating to the DNC hack and focus not on the hack itself, but rather on the Trump opposition file, all on the same day, June 15th.

On June 17th Gawker, ThreatConnect, and The Smoking Gun publish articles that suggest hacked DNC data contains personal donor information including “names, emails, and cell phone numbers”.

On June 18th Guccifer 2.0 announces that it has new documents from the DNC network, including financial reports and donor personal data including “names, emails, and private cell phone numbers.”

On June 20th Guccifer 2.0 makes a point to post that it is the lone hacker of the DNC and promises a dossier on Hillary Clinton from the DNC.

On June 21st, Guccifer 2.0 releases a blog entry titled “Dossier on Hillary Clinton from the DNC”, which is nothing more than links to widely circulated and non-classified documents related to the DNC and Hillary Clinton.

On June 22nd, Wikileaks begins publishing the DNC emails.  That same day Guccifer 2.0 takes credit for the leak.

Later that day, still on the 22nd of June, Guccifer 2.0 then posts that it will speak to anyone over Direct Message on Twitter.  The next day, on June 23rd, a VICE journalist Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai takes up the offer, conducts an interview, and publishes an article titled Why Does DNC Hacker ‘Guccifer 2.0’ Talk Like This? which includes language analysis assessments from three experts.

Over the next few days Guccifer seems to bask in its newfound fame and spends time creating a Guccifer 2.0 FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) blog post.  It makes a point to wish everyone a happy Independence Day on the 4th of July.

While not specifically part of the Guccifer 2.0 history, at this point anyway, it is worth mentioning in the timeline that it was on July 10th that Seth Rich was murdered.

Guccifer remains active on Twitter, suggesting that its getting ready to publish information, but nothing comes of it.

Within a few days a deluge of articles from Vocative, The Hill, ThreatConnect, TAIA Global, and The Smoking Gun start announcing that Guccifer 2.0 is likely a Russian, perhaps even Russian government affiliated, even though Guccifer 2.0 says plainly at the top of its blog that it is Romanian.

On August 5, 2016 I published my conclusions on Breitbart News that Guccifer 2.0 was not a Russian hacker and, based on its statements, it was indeed responsible for the hack of the DNC. As I told the House Intelligence Committee, I have revised that view and now believe there was no hacking, never mind a hack perpetrated by the Russians

Shortly thereafter, Guccifer 2.0 tweets “@RogerJStoneJr thanks that u believe in the real #Guccifer2” at 10:23 PM on August 12, 2016.

I actually initiated our brief and now entirely public exchange. I had seen on Twitter that Guccifer 2.0 has been suspended from the platform. I Tweeted in protest of the suspension, as I hate censorship. I also noted when Guccifer 2.0 was reinstated, offering congratulations in the first of the series of benign, innocent and even banal exchanges. Not exactly 007 stuff. This was weeks after Wikileaks had already posted the DNC-Clinton material.

The two Twitter Direct Message communications between myself and the Guccifer 2.0 Twitter account occurred on August 15th and again on August 17th. These conversations were innocuous and the full contents of which have been fully revealed to the public.  An additional attempt was made by Guccifer 2.0 to have a DM talk with me on September 9th, but my side of the conversation consisted merely of a request to repost a link, which Guccifer 2.0 agreed to do. I regularly would make re-Tweet requests of many correspondents who have particularly large followings on Twitter or Facebook as a way to get my own message and writings out.

On September 13th, Guccifer 2.0 released the infamous NGP/VAN zip file, which becomes the source of a series of debunking exercises, the results of which are discussed later in this article.

Over the next couple of months, Guccifer 2.0 releases documents it claimed it used hacks and exploits to obtain, including a dossier on Democratic Congressman Ben Ray Lujan.  The dossier is harmless.  Guccifer then makes the bold claim that it hacked the Clinton Foundation and then posts a selection of documents that are claimed to have come from the hack.

A few days before the 2016 US Presidential Election, on November 4th, 2016, Guccifer 2.0 makes its last posts of the year.  Guccifer 2.0 makes a half-hearted offer to be a hacker poll watcher on election day.  The account stays dark until January 12th, 2017, more than two months later.

Throughout the course of Guccifer 2.0’s public communications, it made a variety of substantial claims.  These claims will now be investigated in more detail before we move on to motive and intent, as well as the conflicting evidence.

Guccifer 2.0’s most substantive claim was that it hacked the DNC’s servers.  He stated in his VICE interview that he breached the server using a “Zero-day exploit of NGP-VAN.”  While the report from ThreatConnect made the erroneous assessment that Guccifer 2.0 is a collective of Russians, the report did reveal some very useful facts that served to debunk Guccifer 2.0’s claims, including that he hacked the DNC server.  Unfortunately, it is now necessary to delve into some technical lingo, it is important for the sake of understanding what went on.  For the sake of our less technical readers, an ultra-brief primer is presented below.

A Local Area Network (LAN) is a group of computers that are connected together by hard wires or Wi-Fi connections.  A group of computers on a LAN can communication with each other, but with no other computers or computer networks (including the Internet) unless going through a security device or gateway.  These security devices are most often called Firewalls, a term familiar to most readers, and can be hardware, software, or both.  The DNC server in question is a computer that resides on the DNC LAN, inside of the DNC headquarters building in Washington, D.C. Any communication with the DNC server must go through the DNC LAN, and if coming from the Internet, through the DNC security devices and/or gateways.

NGP VAN is an American voter database, IT consulting, online fundraising, and new media technology company based out of Washington, D.C.  They have a series of web based tools that allow progressive (explicitly not conservative!) campaigns and organizations to leverage technology to meet their goals.  In 2009, they were the largest partisan provider of campaign compliance software, used by most Democratic members of Congress.  The Wall Street Journal said of them “NGP VAN is something of a secret weapon for the Democratic Party and the labor unions and progressive groups that use it.”  The primary products from NGP-Van are MiniVan, a mobile canvasing tool for voter contact and data collection, VoteBuilder, a campaign persuasion and get-out-the vote web tool, and NGP, a web based platform for digital engagement tracking, fundraising, and compliance reporting.  NGP is used by nearly every Democratic campaign running for federal office, is a set of web based applications, and is hosted on NGP-Van servers and controlled by NGP Van in their own facilities.  NGP VAN also has released a set of programming interfaces called their Innovation Platform, that allows software engineers to access NGP functionality directly.  All of NGP systems are web based and have zero direct interaction with the DNC LAN.

A Zero-Day exploit is a software vulnerability that is unknown to those most interested in mitigating the vulnerability, including the vulnerable software creators.  Hackers exploit the vulnerabilities to adversely affect the target computers, programs, data, and if possible, gain access to the wider Local Area Network.

Armed with these few technical terms, we can easily see that what Guccifer 2.0 was claiming is in fact gobbledygook.  Translated another way, Guccifer 2.0 claims that he used an unknown software vulnerability of a COMPANY (not a product), whose products have no direct connection to the DNC LAN, to bypass the DNC LAN security devices, and access the DNC server.  It is for this reason that ThreatConnect correctly discredits the breach by saying “As it stands now, none of the Guccifer 2.0 breach details can be independently verified.”

The second most substantive claim by Guccifer 2.0 was that he was the source of the DNC emails.  He claimed as much, multiple times.  He made a point of mentioning Wikileaks during the purposeful destruction of his own reputation on October 4th, 2016, when he did not post any interesting data with the excuse the databases were “too large. I’m looking for a better way to release them now.”  The “better way” never came, no further data was ever released.  He made these dubious claims a full seventy-three days after the last large data dump came from Wikileaks, which he said he sourced. His Clinton Foundation hack claim was discredited when all the files he posted, turned out to be from previous leaks or from public domain documents.  Ultimately, Guccifer 2.0 never produced anything from the Clinton Foundation verifying a hack, nor has the Clinton Foundation confessed to being hacked.

It is important to remember that Julian Assange stated numerous times that the emails were leaked, rather than hacked, in persistent contradiction with Guccifer 2.0’s claims.  To this day, there is nothing independently verifying Guccifer 2.0’s claims that he hacked the DNC servers.  One final note on the DNC servers, reflect upon why the DNC refused to hand over their ‘hacked server’ to the FBI, claiming that their private firm, Crowd Strike, certified that everything was A-OK and that it was ‘The Russians!’

Speaking of Seth Rich, how the House Intelligence Committee ignores the YouTube interview with Assange, from which the except below was extracted, I don’t know.


“Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material, and often very significant risks. There’s a twenty-seven-year-old, works for the DNC, shot in the back, murdered [Seth Rich], just two weeks ago, for unknown reasons, as he was walking down the street in Washington, so-“


“That was just a robbery, I believe, wasn’t it?”


“No, there’s no finding. So-“


“What are you suggesting? What are you suggesting?”


“I’m suggesting that our sources take risks, and they are, they become concerned to see things occurring like that-“


“But was he one of your sources? I mean-“


‘We don’t comment on our sources-“


‘So, why make the suggestion? About a young guy being shot on the streets of Washington?’


“Because we have to understand how high the stakes are. In the United States. And that our sources, are…face serious risks, that’s why they come to us, to protect their anonymity.


“But it’s quite something to suggest a murder, that’s basically what you’re doing.”


Well, others have suggested that. We are investigating to understand what happened, in that situation, with Seth Rich. I think it is a concerning situation, there’s not a conclusion yet, we wouldn’t be willing to state a conclusion, but we are concerned about it. More importantly, a variety of Wikileaks sources are concerned when that kind of thing happens.”

What is it Mr. Assange is saying?

The high probability now is that there was no hack of the DNC and that their information was downloaded to something as simple as a thumb drive and spirited out the back door– Most likely by Mr. Rich, who would’ve known of the DNC’s on- going to efforts to cheat Sen. Bernie Sanders by manipulating the party rules to help Hillary.

Now that we’ve dissected some of the technical aspects of Guccifer 2.0’s claims, let’s now investigate what we know about the Guccifer 2.0 persona.

Guccifer 2.0 claims to be Romanian, as is clearly stated at the top of its blog.  News reports have focused upon various facts to support their assertions that Guccifer 2.0 is Russian, but each of these facts was created by deliberate calculated choices made by Guccifer 2.0.  It could have named its computer account anything, but it opted to name the account after the founder of the Soviet Secret Police.  It didn’t have to create/open and then save the documents to encode a Russian name into the document Metadata, it chose to do so.

You have to believe that smart hackers are better at covering their steps. A talented hacker would never use his home country IP address, but Guccifer chose to use a Russian VPN service instead.  It could have used an encrypted email service but instead used a public web-based email service that forwarded its Russian VPN IP address.  All of these choices, when put together, seem a rather ham-handed attempted to scream ‘RUSSIA!’.

Aside from the self-promoted, unverified claims, Guccifer 2.0’s actions have had very little actual impact.  It has released no new ‘secret’ documents, the only exception being the apparent leaking of a couple of hundred email addresses and contact numbers for Democrat donors.  Data readily available to the DNC.

When I testified for the House Intelligence Committee, several members insisted an analysis of Guccifer 2.0’s speech pattern indicated he is Russian. This is the same Intelligence community that perpetuated the bogus claim that Guccifer 2.0 left Russian markers on some computer servers. In fact, Guccifer 2.0’s use of “told”, “tell”, “say”, “said”, and definite/indefinite article use, as well as command of prepositions, expose Guccifer 2.0 as being someone that natively speaks in English. The terminology and phrasing that has been used in much of Guccifer 2.0’s informal communications also points to a native English speaker clumsily and irregularly using a hokey fake Russian accent reminiscent of a bad Hollywood movie.

What is intriguing about the ‘Russian Metadata’ tainted documents, appear to be mistakes made by the person or persons portraying Guccifer 2.0.  In some of the documents, specifically the ones that had been created/opened and saved to inject the “Russian Metadata’ into the file, another piece of metadata was injected too:

Created by Warren Flood on 15th of June at 13:38

Modified byФеликс Эдмундович on 15th of June at 14:08

Who is Warren Flood?

We want to be clear that we do not accuse Warren Flood of conducting any of the acts attributed to Guccifer 2.0, more so, analysis of writings attributed to Warren Flood when compared to those of Guccifer 2.0 show subtle but marked differences suggesting the pieces were written by different individuals.  What the data does suggest, however, is that the files were manipulated on a computer where a Warren Flood’s account was logged in when that computer had Microsoft Word initially installed.  Such computers existed, at the time of the Guccifer 2.0 activity, at the White House, and members of Vice President Joe Biden’s staff.

Back to Warren.  Who is he that he could have installed software on a White House computer?  It turns out that Mr. Flood includes in his LinkedIn profile that he currently works at Bright Blue Data LLC, a firm that specializes in progressive political data.  His past work history, however, is more telling:  Obama for America, Democratic National Committee, and The White House – Executive Office of the President.

He was Joe Biden’s technical director, and had easy access to the physical White House as well as the DNC HQ Building in Washington D.C.

While we have no way to ascertain if Flood was the author, it is almost certain that someone used a PC or laptop that Warren had previously installed Microsoft Word on, while he was working at his previous jobs.  Whoever created the Trump Opposition File that Guccifer 2.0 provided to the media, would have had to have access to former (current for the time) White House or Joe Biden staff computers.  What it is clearly NOT, is Russians.

Going back to June 12th, when Julian Assange announced that WikiLeaks would be releasing Clinton’s emails.  At that time, Hillary Clinton was still under an FBI investigation, and Trump was bashing her use of her private email server while his supporters chanted “Lock Her Up! Lock Her Up!” at all of the Trump rallies.

The DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign were in a desperate position.  They needed something, anything, that would call into question the reputation of Wikileaks.  Like an on-time delivery, Guccifer 2.0 appears days later, telling lies and attaching himself to Wikileaks even as Wikileaks disavows it continuously.  Coincidently, the most inflammatory piece of data Guccifer 2.0 releases is the Trump Opposition Report, something that moved the narrative away from Clinton’s email crimes and onto Russian prostitute urine fantasies.  How incredibly convenient for Team DNC.

The only ones to factually have had access to the DNC servers are members, contractors, consultants, and employees of the DNC.  Once such person who had unfettered access was Seth Rich.  Seth Rich was murdered on July 10th.  It is notable that no verified hacks or leaks of the scale of the Wikileaks DNC data dump occurred after this date.

Using Occam’s Razor, reviewing intent, capacity for execution, beneficiaries, and losers, we can see that the DNC itself stood most to gain from Guccifer 2.0’s activities.  Would a real hacker stop a couple of days before Hillary’s historic loss?  We think not.

While we have before bought into technobabble that we did not fully understand and took at face value the mainstream media’s claim that Guccifer 2.0 was a Russian hacker, today I’m more inclined to believe it was another dirty trick from the DNC’s Deep State bag of Dirty Tricks, and my guess is they are not yet done.

  • John Buatti

    I’ve heard that some woman wants to do mediation between Weinstein and the victims with a retired Judge….(trying to limit the secret facts they hide inside their cult)
    Sounds like that the establishment/Deepstate cult is having a family feud where the predator Weinstein was first allowed to fulfilled his sick sex perverted needs by posing a blind eye to his perversion.. but now something has cracked inside their cult family, not sure what.., but if this guy turns on them and spills all their cult inside secrets we are going to see their dirty laundry on display for everyone to see and the beginning or their internal implosion !
    Weinstein in the recording was saying to the woman to go in the toilet or bathroom “don’t embarrass me in front of the people here”…which means that all of the hotel management knew about his perverted sex exploitation of other women that he took there, or why would he say “”don’t embarrass me in front of them”” …like if the hotel management knew what he was doing there and he was trying to look like a winner and score …

  • John Buatti

    Harvey Weinstein on why he’s supporting Hillary Clinton

  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti

    Soros is a NAZI collaborator and Hillary’s friend…
    Hey Cooper look at this:

  • John Buatti

    Soros is a NAZI collaborator and Hillary’s friend…
    Hey Cooper look at this:

  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti

    Harvey Weinstein on why he’s supporting Hillary Clinton

  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti

    Las Vegas,
    He could have believed that he was acting alone but there was someone there shooting with him . or he knew that he was going to get help !
    Why would the investigator have a problem revealing that there were two shooters if it was an ISIS “attack” ?
    I can understand this reluctance if the Authorities were protecting a DeepState or Establishment organized killing…to put the blame on gun laws in order to remove guns,,this explains the purposely released video (shock factor technique to feed the people with ) of the guns in the room some unused bullets, not in their magazine sprinkled around the dead man (sloppy shooter) that was supposedly shooting it out with police or security from his door so protected from police fire,..
    11 minutes of fire using a semi automatic rifle and 30 round cartridges would use 132 cartridges or 3960 bullets if you could shoot non stop….but because he needed to reload a new 30 round cartridge every 5 seconds (that’s how long it takes to discharge one ) that could take around 15 seconds (remove the old cartridge and put the new one in and re-aim) he could possibly shoot 33 (30 round) cartridges or 990 bullets in 11 minutes…if his finger was up to it. (you can count the peaks of about 15 to 20 rounds max shot from my audio analysis, which indicates he was using standard 30 round cartridges at that stage of the shooting )
    We know that by the video sound of the shooting there were many brakes between shootings rounds so this reduces the possible 990 rounds he could have shot if he did it continuously… who help him shoot all these people?
    Also the crowd started running away from the shooter as soon as they realized .(about 2 or 3 minutes into the shooting ) he had to have had some help to shoot them all before the crowd was out of range…and given that he could shoot a maximum of 990 rounds if he shot non stop for 11 minutes… and if his finger was up to it for 11 minutes and the crowd didn’t run away for 11 minutes how did he manage to kill 58 people and injured 600 in those few short minutes before they started running away when it takes the shooter a full 11 minutes to shoot 990 bullets ?
    So how did he kill 58 people and injured 600 more on his own having shot about 900 bullets and were these bullets all on target ?
    If it was ISIS then this makes Trump’s travel ban even more justified …egg on the face of the Dems judge that first blocked it and the Dems that politicized it and weaponized it against Trump.
    My audio analysis

  • John Buatti

    If a bump-stock was used to automate shooting why aren’t we hearing long shooting rounds of 100 bullets or more ? And how many rounds are stored in a semi-automatic rifles like A.K-47 or M-16 T-56 ? (some of these guns can be used in full auto mode)
    Well they store a maximum of 30 rounds per magazine !
    The Rate of fire of these guns is: 600 rounds-per-minute for the M-16 and 700–950 for the A.K-47 but a magazine has only 30 rounds after which you have to reload ?
    So why would the shooter need a bump-stock to automate shooting when the maximum he could shoot was 30 bullets at any one time then take out the empty magazine and load a new one which could take between 30 to 40 seconds (if he has them near) before start shooting again ? He could have shot a magazine of 30 rounds without the bump-stock then having a brake while reloading.
    The shooter had to have had help to kill 59 and injured 500+ given that he could only discharge 30 bullets in a few seconds then stop and reload!
    It sounds to me that the second gun shooting sound was coming from the roof of Mandalay Bay Las Vegas and at one point the two guns were shooting simultaneously .How does one person shoot two guns simultaneously?
    Also why would the gunman need two windows broken in two different adjoining rooms to shoot from when both windows had the same view of the crowds below and were only meters apart, unless it was needed for the second shooter to shoot from there ?
    Same argument for the echo of the shooting, why would the echo change or disappear altogether if you were shooting from one or the other window when the windows were only meters apart ?
    This indicates that one of the guns was shooting from the roof or near the ground of Mandalay Bay Las Vegas !
    To kill 59 and injured 500+ the shooter/s had to discharge about 20 magazines of 30 rounds in a few minutes before the crowd started running away from him/them…. (600 people divided 30 rounds=20 magazines).

    In this video the difference between a semi-auto gun and one with the added bump-stock is of 5 rounds per second vs 7.5 rounds per second, a difference of 2.5 rounds per second more, so hardly any gain on 30 rounds magazines that runs out after 6 seconds shooting in semi-auto … or with the added bump-stock that runs out a 30 rounds magazine in 4 seconds then you have to reload it (not very precise shooting because the rifles bounces from your shoulder compared with shooting without it where you can aim ).
    So if he did use a bump-stock on the semi-auto rifle he would have shot 2.5 extra rounds quicker which is about 50 rounds quicker compared to a standard semi-auto rifle on the use of at least 20 magazines which he would have needed to kill and injured all those people. (2.5 extra rounds using the bump-stock x 20 magazines=50 shooting rounds faster) …not a real gain..which would overheat and jam a semi-auto rifle not design to shoot continuously.

    My audio analysis

  • John Buatti

    Australia is implementing the Globalist reengineering plan for society by using lower level local government (called Council run by pretend-leftist ) to initiate the removal Australia Day from those municipalities (not that I care I’m Italian) but I care to stop these Globalist DeepState etc…..from dismantling our identity and replace it with their self serving autocratic model . They are afraid of religion because religion unites people but they need us divided to implement their agenda…..that’s why the attacks on Christians…worldwide….carried out by the DeepState sponsored SIS in Syria
    Lets put it this way, if the Deep State or Globalist will mobilize their armed leftist against the US population the will hit a brick wall because if the Nationalist will join forces with the Patriots which have most of the guns we will assist at the decimation of these groups and of their political voices like Obama Hillary and other Dems…and no amount of police will stop it..
    If they want to suicide themselves they are free to do so…but lets not be provoked in any reactions..that’s what they want to then sell it on the nightly news to undermine Trump!
    Coffin-bearing far-right protesters crash Moreland council meeting
    Far-right protesters storm Vic council
    Childcare staff to overrule parent wishes in national baby sleep safety crackdown
    if you put a child on their backs to sleep they can choke to death if they bring the milk back up…my opinion.

  • Sam

    I love it man, You have them cornered. Be careful don’t end up on the Clinton Cartel list.

    Gods Speed!

  • John Buatti

    I’ve heard that some woman wants to do mediation between Weinstein and the victims with a retired Judge….(trying to limit the secret facts they hide inside their cult)
    Sounds like that the establishment/Deepstate cult is having a family feud where the predator Weinstein was first allowed to fulfilled his sick sex perverted needs by posing a blind eye to his perversion.. but now something has cracked inside their cult family, not sure what.., but if this guy turns on them and spills all their cult inside secrets we are going to see their dirty laundry on display for everyone to see and the beginning or their internal implosion !
    Weinstein in the recording was saying to the woman to go in the toilet or bathroom “don’t embarrass me in front of the people here”…which means that all of the hotel management knew about his perverted sex exploitation of other women that he took there, or why would he say “”don’t embarrass me in front of them”” …like if the hotel management knew what he was doing there and he was trying to look like a winner and score

  • John Buatti

    Click “Open entire bunch” to see weinstein women…..

  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti!!-:strip_icc-!!-/2014/03/03/071/n/3019466/289ca81e44ededf3_463109695/i/Oprah-gave-Harvey-Weinstein-kiss-cheek-Critics.jpg

  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti
    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Michelle Obama is a Man. Joan Rivers reveals this 1 month before she dies.
      Interviewer: “Do you think the U.S. will see the first gay president or the first woman president?”
      Joan Rivers: “We already have it with Obama. You know Michelle is a tran, a transgender. We all know this. It’s okay.”

  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti

    All the Police response (audio recording) to the Las Vegas NV Mandalay Bay Mass Shooting
    Some cop said the fire was coming from Gate 7 and above their heads.

  • John Buatti

    All the Police response (audio recording) to the Las Vegas NV Mandalay Bay Mass Shooting
    Some cop reported that the fire was coming from Gate 7 and above their heads and reporting that people were reporting that there were three shooters (like my audio analysis shows), listen at 15 minutes of the video or click here:

  • John Buatti

    At 19:20 onward Police confirms that there are at least 2 shooters with fully automated weapons . See below
    or see all at my page

  • John Buatti

    Also listen from 47 minutes onward
    possible third shooter , put cc on

  • John Buatti

    This is the Las Vegas shooting Police transcript from the video’s audio so it has a few misspelled words. It shows that there are two shooters in different locations and a possible third shooter.!AkLOCtwVy2QimiXoGUl3yxeML0mI

  • John Buatti
    • Maria

      Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
      On tuesday I got a brand new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleLegitimateStockJobsFromHomeJobs/get/hourly ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!dy90lhhhhh

    • Virginia

      Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
      On tuesday I got a brand new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleOnlineLightEasyTechJobsOpportunities/easy/jobs ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!du83lhhhh

  • John Buatti

    The Police clearly said there were 2 shooting locations …how much proof do we need to workout that there were at least 2 shooters, one was at Mandalay Bay and the other was in Ali Baba lane, 100m from the concert crowd shooting then in the back and the other from the front…which explains the distant sound of one gun recorded by the taxi from under the first shooter’s window at the Mandalay Bay …
    Look …this is where the second shooter was , that is in “Ali Baba lane” confirmed by the Police recording at 47 min of the video below,….
    What is wrong with the investigators…are they death or blind or just want to cover it up ?
    just click play and it starts where the cop says it
    Ali Baba lane, 100m from the concert crowd …second shooter location…
    Taxi driver recording

  • John Buatti

    The Deep State spokesman Obama tries to shut the people up after he commented on Trump…no one listens to him and then gets desperate to save his face by finally telling the crowd to shut up while claiming that the US has free speech …while the people say (I think ) “…get off him ….” then ridicules a Trump supporter declaring him stupid….for supporting Trump…..and this is a Democrats gathering !
    Obama is using the ” guilty of …” psychological treatment technique like Russia tampering ..or sex allegations.. to imply guilt of his opponent and put himself in a high moral position and spoon feed it to the crowd there…CNN and many others use the same psychological technique to their TV audience, demonize, ridicule, and delegitimize your opponent (Trump) to win people’s vote.
    Was Obama in his full mental capacity there ?

  • John Buatti

    The LGBT Heckler asked Michelle Obama that if she was in support of the LGBT community why didn’t her husband signed an Executive order to make Companies treat the LGBT equal to the other workforce !
    Michelle Obama loses her coolness and responds:….I don’t do that …?
    Well are Michelle Obama and Obama fit to hold office given that the Dems were the biggest LGBT supporters !
    Looks like that when it comes to friends Michelle Obama and Obama are not prepared to ruffle their friends Businesses feathers over the LGBT community. They just pretend to support the LGBT community to hold that fake moral high ground…for votes!

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Communist leader on “friend” Barack Obama
      On November 15, 2008, Sam Webb, National Chair of the Communist Party USA delivered an address to the Communist Party USA National Committee. During his address, he noted the following concerning the party’s relationship with Obama,
      “The left can and should advance its own views and disagree with the Obama administration without being disagreeable. Its tone should be respectful. We are speaking to a friend.”

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part I
      Islam is ½ and Obama is the other ½
      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part 2
      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part 3
      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part 4
      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part 5
      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part 6
      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part 7
      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part 8
      Revealing the Truth About Barack Hussein Obama: Part 9

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Communist precinct captain

      Communist Party USA leader John Bachtell admitted working for Barack Obama, in August 21 2015 interview with the;
      Gawker: Your involvement in electoral campaigns is mainly organizing for progressive Democrats?
      John Bachtell Yes, mainly progressive Democrats and independents at every level, whether it be city council, state rep, Senate, Presidential. I was really active in both Obama campaigns. Actually I was his precinct captain for his Senate campaign in Illinois.[15]

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Bea Lumpkin on Obama
      Senior Chicago Communist Party USA member Bea Lumpkin, and her husband and comrade Frank Lumpkin were longtime supporters and a fans of Barack Obama.

      As a friend, supporter and campaigner for pro communist Chicago mayor Harold Washington, Lumpkin credits the Washington campaigns with blazing the way for Barack Obama.[16]

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      From a 2006 Young Communist League USA report by Jessica Marshall.[14]
      Young people are up to the challenge. In 2004 youth-run organizations helped to organize and register 4.6 million new young people to get out and vote… the majority of them voted against Bush and more than half were young people of color. The YCL was there and present for those experiences – we learned alongside them through our Midwest Project.
      The YCL has to be at the table this fall too. Every club and every member needs to be out there and involved. And we need to bring everyone we work with out too! This is a national campaign to change the Congress and we are gonna be a part of that!

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      In an October 23 2007 report to a Chicago Special District Meeting on African American Equality, Communist Party USA National Board member John Bachtell wrote:[12]
      The historic election of {Harold} Washington was the culmination of many years of struggle. It reflected a high degree of unity of the African American community and the alliance with a section of labor, the Latino community and progressive minded whites. This legacy of political independence also endures…
      This was also reflected in the historic election of Barack Obama. Our Party actively supported Obama during the primary election. Once again Obama’s campaign reflected the electoral voting unity of the African American community, but also the alliances built with several key trade unions, and forces in the Latino and white communities.
      It also reflected a breakthrough among white voters. In the primary, Obama won 35% of the white vote and 7 north side wards, in a crowded field. During the general election he won every ward in the city and all the collar counties. This appeal has continued in his presidential run.Young Communist League backing
      According to a November 20 2004, election report[13] from Young Communist League USA national coordinator Jessica Marshall confirms Young Communist League USA support for Obama’s campaign through Youth for Obama.
      In New York YCLers were delegates and founders of the local organizing committees of the National Hip Hop Political Convention. In Providence, Miami and Chicago YCLers helped head up the League of Pissed Off Voters efforts. YCLers staffed Democratic Party operations and headed up precincts in Ohio and Florida. A YCLer from Virginia was a canvas director for a progressive young candidate in a tight race in Ohio. In Miami, the newly formed club helped ACT organizing efforts at Miami Dade Community College.
      In Chicago YCL members were very active in the Youth for Obama efforts and one member worked with the United States Student Association and his student government to register over 1,000 new voters.

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Communist Party support in Obama’s 2004 Senate race
      The Communist Party USA was supportive of several candidates in the 2004 election cycle including Frank Barbaro, Cynthia McKinney, Barack Obama, Betty Castor, Nancy Farmer and Inez Tenenbaum[9];
      It would be helpful for each district to single out House seats that can be swung from Republican to Democrat to develop our list of key races, which includes progressive Frank Barbaro in New York and Cynthia McKinney in Georgia.
      A number of exciting candidates are emerging in the Senate, in the first place Barak Obama in Illinois, and also several progressive women including Betty Castor seeking to retain retiring Bob Graham’s seat as Democrat; Nancy Farmer seeking to defeat Kit Bond in Missouri; Inez Tenenbaum seeking to retain retiring Fritz Hollings seat as Democrat.
      The Communist Party USA actively campaigned for Obama during his successful 2004 Illinois Senate race[10].
      Activists from Illinois were immersed in the campaign to elect Barak Obama to the U.S. Senate. Obama won a landslide victory in the March 16 Democratic primary. If Obama wins in November, he would be only the third African American senator since Reconstruction.
      “This was a historic victory. It was a victory for political independence and grassroots, coalition, and issue oriented politics over the machine and money,” said John Bachtell, Illinois CP district organizer.
      From a November 21 2004 report to the Communist Party USA National Committee – “The Communist Party USA and the 2004 Elections: Build the Party, Build the Coalitions”.[11]
      MO: State Rep. During the campaign to elect a worker as State Representative: A new club in St. Louis, with another in formation. A new YCL club and another by the end of the year. A total of 19 new members in the YCL and Party. An increase from 2 to 12 bundles of PWW/NM a week. MI: A new club in Saginaw emerged from a national/district team that helped on a local campaign which elected a township trustee. A new club in the Upper Peninsula formed after a visit by Sam. New clubs in Lansing and Ann Arbor will be formed by the end of the year. ILL: 27 new members and an increase in PWW/NM bundles to 2500 a week. This in the process of participating in the movement from Illinois to Wisconsin to put that state over the top for Kerry, participating in the historic election of Barak Obama to the US Senate, and the successful campaign of Melissa Bean, defeating incumbent Republican Congressman Philip Crane.

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.


      Vernon Jarrett and Barack Obama
      Vernon Jarrett was a prominent Chicago journalist and was a family friend and later father-in-law of Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett.
      In the 1940s Jarrett worked in several communist influenced organizations in Chicago, including serving on the publicity committee of the communist controlled Packing House Workers Strike Committee, with Frank Marshall Davis.
      He also ran a radio show with Communist Party USA member Oscar Brown, Jr.
      Vernon Jarrett was also a fan of Barack Obama. He watched his career from its early stages and became an influential supporter.
      In 1992 Obama worked for the ACORN offshoot, Project Vote to register black voters in aid of the Senate Campaign of Carol Moseley Braun-who had strong Communist Party USA ties and was Harold Washington’s legislative floor leader.
      Obama helped Carol Moseley Braun win her Senate seat, then took it over himself in 2004-backed by the same communist/socialist alliance that had elected Washington and Moseley Braun.
      Commenting on the 1992 race, Vernon Jarrett wrote in the Chicago Sun-Times of August 11th 1992;
      Good news! Good news! Project Vote, a collectivity of 10 church-based community organizations dedicated to black voter registration, is off and running. Project Vote is increasing its rolls at a 7,000-per-week clip…If Project Vote is to reach its goal of registering 150,000 out of an estimated 400,000 unregistered blacks statewide, “it must average 10,000 rather than 7,000 every week,” says Barack Obama, the program’s executive director…
      Dee Myles, a Chicago based chair of the Education Commission of the Communist Party USA penned a tribute to Vernon Jarrett, for the People’s Weekly World of June 5th, 2004.
      Readers like me can be extremely selective of the journalists we read habitually… We are selective about the journalists to whom we become insatiably addicted, and once hooked we develop a constructive love affair without the romance…
      Such was my experience with Vernon Jarrett, an African American journalist in Chicago who died at the age of 86 on May 23. I became a Vernon Jarrett addict, and I am proud of it!
      Vernon Jarrett’s career as a journalist in Chicago began and ended at the Chicago Defender, the African American daily paper. In between, he was the first Black journalist at the Chicago Tribune, and I first began to read his articles during his tenure at the Chicago Sun-Times.
      Jarrett’s claim to fame is that he was a partisan of the cause of African Americans in the broad democratic tradition of Paul Robeson and W.E.B. DuBois…
      Paul Robeson and W.E.B. DuBois were both Communist Party USA members. On April 9th, 1998 at Chicago’s South Shore Cultural Center, Vernon Jarrett hosted a Paul Robeson Citywide Centennial Celebration event, with his old comrade and Party sympathiser Margaret Burroughs and former Communist Party USA members Studs Terkel and his old friend Oscar Brown, Jr.
      Dee Myles went on to say;
      Jarrett was fanatical about African Americans registering and voting in mass for socially conscious candidates. He championed Harold Washington like a great warrior, and this March, from his hospital bed, wrote an article appealing to Black Chicago to turn out to vote for Barack Obama in the Illinois primaries. Obama astounded everyone with an incredible landslide victory as the progressive, Black candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for the U.S. Senate seat from Illinois. From his sickbed, Vernon Jarrett issued a clarion call, and the people responded.

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Oops, let another one slip! Michelle Obama was born a man—Barack Obama lets it slip that his “wife” is “Michael” during a speech to the military.
      She was born Michael Lavaughn Robinson in Chicago on 1/17/64. In a speech that former President Barack Hussein Obama gave to military members, he referred to his “wife” as “Michael.” Oops, he let another truth slip! That is at 1 minute 10 seconds in the youtube video.

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Michelle Obama is a Man. Joan Rivers reveals this 1 month before she dies.
      Interviewer: “Do you think the U.S. will see the first gay president or the first woman president?”
      Joan Rivers: “We already have it with Obama. You know Michelle is a tran, a transgender. We all know this. It’s okay.”

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Secret Service Visits After “Michelle Obama Is A Man” Video—-2017—-Sign in Kenya says: “Welcome to the Birthplace of Barack Obama” @ 4 minutes 48 seconds into video
      Obama Is Mr. Gay, Lesbian, and Transgender President
      Dr. of Common Sense

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      Secret Service Visits Black man, E.T. Williams, The Dr. Of Common Sense, At His Home due to speaking out about Barack Obama’s past
      “Secret Service just left my house.”

    • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

      The Stunning Transformation of Michael Obama. Larry Sinclair gives blow job to Obama years ago.
      Black Man Gets Proof Michelle Obama Is Transitioning Into A Man
      Barack Obama – Yes Michelle Obama IS A MAN / TRANSGENDER (includes Joan Rivers saying Michelle Obama is a transgender and Obama is gay)
      Transgender Michelle Obama Exposed
      Michelle or Michael?
      Message To Michael Obama- Michelle Obama Is A Transvestite
      What’s Wrong With Michelle Obama
      Black show host, Jesse Lee Peterson Radio Show, admits Michelle Obama is a Transgender
      First Lady Is A Man, Baby!
      Michelle Obama Tranny Scandal Explodes in Controversy as Chelsea Clinton Attacks Infowars
      Obama and Michelle have come out of the closet… Michelle is Michael

  • John Buatti

    If Trump was so racist why did he sign an Executive Order to provide funding for black colleges and universities (HBCUs) ?

  • John Buatti
  • John Buatti

    October 12, 2017
    The Honorable Daniel R. Coats
    Office of the Director of National Intelligence
    Washington, D.C. 20511

    Dear Director Coats:

    In June 2015, I wrote to several member agencies on the Committee on Foreign
    Investment in the United States (CFIUS) regarding the acquisition of Uranium One, an owner of
    U.S. based uranium assets, by Atomredmetzoloto (ARMZ), which is a subsidiary of Russia’s
    state energy corporation, Rosatom.1 The transaction raised a number of national security
    concerns because it effectively ceded twenty percent of U.S. uranium production capacity to the
    Russian government.2

    In that letter, I raised additional concerns related to potential conflicts of interest between
    the State Department and the transacting parties. These concerns stemmed from the fact that
    during critical stages of the acquisition approval, interested parties, such as the Chairman of
    Uranium One, Ian Telfer, made large donations—some in the millions of dollars—to the Clinton
    Foundation while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.3

    In response to my inquiry, the >>>> Obama administration <<<< wrote that in October 2010, CFIUS
    certified to Congress that “there [were] no unresolved national security concerns with the
    transaction” and that the transaction had been approved.4
    Further, the U.S. Treasury’s response
    noted that “[n]o CFIUS agency proposed mitigation or prohibition of the transaction.”5

    I am not convinced by these assurances. The sale of Uranium One resulted in a Russian
    government takeover of a significant portion of U.S. uranium mining capacity. In light of that
    fact, very serious questions remain about the basis for the finding that this transaction did not
    threaten to impair U.S. national security.
    In addition, it has recently come to the Committee’s attention that employees of Rosatom
    were involved in a criminal enterprise involving a conspiracy to commit extortion and money
    laundering during the time of the CFIUS transaction. According to court filings in the United
    States District Court for the District of Maryland, in 2009, the FBI began an investigation into
    corruption and extortion by senior managers of JSC Techsnabexport (Tenex), a subsidiary of
    Tenex operated as the sole supplier and exporter of Russian Federation uranium and
    uranium enrichment services to nuclear power companies worldwide.7
    Tenex established a
    wholly-owned subsidiary company located in the United States called Tenam, which became
    Tenex’s official representative in the United States. Tenex was run by Vadim Mikerin, a
    Russian national and Director of the Pan American Department of Tenex from 2004 to 2010. In
    2010, Mikerin became the executive director of Tenam until 2014.
    As director of Tenam, he
    oversaw the shipment of uranium from Russia for use in American power plants under the
    “Megatons to Megawatts” program.9
    It has been reported that at one point the program fueled
    ten percent of U.S. electricity.10
    According to the facts set forth by the federal government, between 2004 and 2014, Mr.
    Mikerin was involved in a multimillion dollar conspiracy involving an extortion and money
    laundering scheme that awarded contracts to American companies to transport uranium in
    exchange for kick-backs.
    11 In 2014, Mr. Mikerin pleaded guilty “to helping orchestrate more
    than $2 million in bribe payments through a web of secret accounts in Cyprus, Latvia, and
    Switzerland.”12 His actions, according to the government, occurred “with the consent of higher
    level officials at Tenex and Rosatom…”13 Indeed, based on news reports, the investigation
    began as an intelligence probe into Russian nuclear officials.
    14 During the investigation, federal
    agents attempted to convince Mr. Mikerin to turn on his Russian colleagues by showing him
    evidence of relationships between “shell companies and other Russian energy officials, including
    President Vladimir Putin.”15 He refused to expose them and was subsequently arrested and
    charged. It is unclear whether these criminal actors and actions factored into CFIUS’ review of
    the Rosatom transaction and, if so, whether it brought additional scrutiny.
    The Committee has also learned additional details regarding a June 2010 speech in
    Moscow where former President Bill Clinton, and thereby Secretary Clinton,16 received
    $500,000 from Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank whose senior officers include
    former FSB (Russian intelligence) personnel. Most of the banks in Russia are controlled in some
    manner by the Kremlin, and sources have described Renaissance Capital as an extension of the
    Russian government.17 At the Committee’s recent oversight hearing on the Foreign Agents
    Registration Act, a witness described Renaissance Bank in the following way:
    The Chairman was – or I should say another senior official was a
    British citizen of Russian origin named Igor Sagiryan. On their staff
    at Renaissance Capital, they trumpeted the fact that they had a
    number of former FSB officers on their staff. I should point out that
    there is no such thing as a former FSB officer. It is a lifetime
    commitment. And in the Department of Justice investigation into
    Prevezon Holdings, they determined that $13 million from the crime
    that Sergei Magnitsky uncovered, exposed, and was killed over went
    to the bank accounts of Renaissance Capital in the United
    Notably, in the same month as the Clinton speech, Uranium One and Rosatom notified
    CFIUS of the Russian government’s intent to acquire twenty percent of the United States’
    uranium assets. The next month, in July 2010, Renaissance Bank reportedly assigned Uranium
    One a “buy” rating, a move that would principally benefit its Russian investors.19
    The donations raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest for Secretary Clinton
    and the Obama administration. The fact that Rosatom subsidiaries in the United States were
    under criminal investigation as a result of a U.S. intelligence operation apparently around the
    time CFIUS approved the Uranium One/Rosatom transaction raises questions about whether that
    information factored into CFIUS’ decision to approve the transaction.
    In order to assess the decisions concerning the sale of Uranium One, please answer the
    following questions:
    1. When did the Obama administration begin an intelligence investigation into the Russian
    government’s involvement in U.S. uranium?
    2. According to 50 U.S.C. § 2170 (b)(4)(A), “[t]he Director of National Intelligence shall
    expeditiously carry out a thorough analysis of any threat to the national security of the
    United States posed by any covered transaction. The Director of National Intelligence
    shall also seek and incorporate the views of all affected or appropriate intelligence
    agencies with respect to the transaction.”
    a. Please provide a copy of the threat assessment made for the Uranium
    One/Rosatom transaction.
    b. Which intelligence agencies were affected by the transaction and were
    incorporated into the review?
    3. According to 50 U.S.C. § 2170 (b)(4)(C), “[t]he Director of National Intelligence shall
    ensure that the intelligence community remains engaged in the collection, analysis, and
    dissemination to the Committee of any additional relevant information that may become
    available during the course of any investigation conducted under subsection (b) with
    respect to a transaction.”
    a. Did the intelligence community provide information to any CFIUS agencies
    regarding its intelligence probe of the Russian government’s reported activity in
    U.S. uranium space? If so, when? If not, why not?
    b. Please provide a copy of all records provided by the intelligence community to
    CFIUS during the course of the investigation into the transaction.
    4. Please provide a copy of your agency’s official confirmation to the Treasury that the
    transaction did not raise any unresolved national security concerns.
    5. Please provide all records relating to the DNI’s determination that the Uranium
    One/Rosatom transaction did not raise any unresolved national security concerns.
    6. Please provide all records relating to communications with respect to Secretary Clinton
    and donations to the Clinton Foundation by parties interested in the Uranium
    One/Rosatom transaction.
    I anticipate that your written response and most responsive documents will be
    unclassified. Please send all unclassified material directly to the Committee. In keeping with the
    requirements of Executive Order 13526, if any of the responsive documents do contain classified
    information, please segregate all unclassified material within the classified documents, provide
    all unclassified information directly to the Committee, and provide a classified addendum to the
    Office of Senate Security. The Committee complies with all laws and regulations governing the
    handling of classified information. The Committee is not bound, absent its prior agreement, by
    any handling restrictions or instructions on unclassified information unilaterally asserted by the
    Executive Branch.
    Thank you in advance for your cooperation with this request. Please respond no later than
    October 26, 2017. If you have questions, contact Josh Flynn-Brown of my Committee staff at
    (202) 224-5225.
    Charles E. Grassley
    Committee on the Judiciary

  • John Buatti,%206-30-15.pdf
    June 30, 2015
    The Honorable John F. Kerry
    Secretary of State
    Office of the Secretary
    United States Department of State
    2201 C Street, N.W.
    Washington, D.C. 20520

    Dear Secretary Kerry:

    On April 23, The New York Times reported on details regarding the Clinton
    Foundation’s ties to a number of investors involved in a business transaction that resulted in the
    acquisition of Uranium One, owner of U.S. based uranium assets, by Atomredmetzoloto
    (ARMZ), a subsidiary of Rosatom, a Russian government owned company. The transaction
    raised a number of national security concerns because it effectively ceded 20% of U.S. uranium
    production capacity to the Russian government.
    Due to that foreign involvement, a review of
    the transaction was conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
    (CFIUS), whose membership includes the Secretary of State and of which Treasury is the chair.
    In addition, during critical stages of the acquisition approval, interested parties made large
    donations – some in the millions of dollars – to the Clinton Foundation while Ms. Hillary
    Clinton held the position of Secretary of State. When millions of dollars flow to decision
    makers who have substantial discretion to provide support for or against approval of
    controversial transactions, public confidence in the integrity of the process requires a
    commitment to transparency and responsiveness to oversight inquiries.
    Clinton Foundation Accepts Multiple Donations from Interested Parties in Deal
    In light of the gravity of the decision to allow a Russian takeover of almost a quarter of
    U.S. uranium assets, it is in the public interest to determine the facts and circumstances of the
    transaction, including any potential donations that could have influenced the CFIUS review

    process. The purpose of CFIUS is to ensure that national security is not undermined by
    transactions that result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person.
    The timing of donations to the Clinton Foundation raises the appearance of potential
    influence in CFIUS’s review process. According to The New York Times, in September 2005,
    Mr. Frank Giustra won a uranium deal in Kazakhstan for UrAsia, his company at the time.2
    deal was cut days after he visited the country with President Bill Clinton and after that deal in
    2006, Mr. Giustra donated $31.3 million to the Clinton Foundation.3
    UrAsia eventually merged
    with a South African company and became Uranium One.
    Reports further indicate that between 2008 and 2010, Uranium One and former UrAsia
    investors donated $8.65 million to the Clinton Foundation.4
    During this period of time, Uranium
    One’s legal hold on the Kazakhstan-based uranium deposits was in doubt. Allegedly, Uranium
    One executives contacted U.S. Embassy officials in Kazakhstan to help ensure the validity of
    their mining licenses.5
    According to The New York Times, the State Department cable explaining
    the circumstances was copied to Secretary Clinton, among other individuals.6
    In 2009, when the
    validity of the mining licenses was at issue, the Chairman of Uranium One, Mr. Ian Telfer,
    donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation via his family charity called the Fernwood
    In the same year, ARMZ acquired a 17% stake in Uranium One and the parties
    sought an initial CFIUS review.

    In June 2010, Rosatom, via ARMZ, sought majority ownership in Uranium One.
    According to news reports, Mr. Telfer donated $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation during this
    crucial time.9
    In total, Mr. Telfer donated over $2 million through 2013.10
    In addition, in June
    2010, President Clinton was paid $500,000 for a speech in Russia, funded by a Russian
    investment bank that assigned a buy rating to Uranium One stock and also reportedly had ties to
    the Kremlin.11
    In October 2010, CFIUS approved Rosatom’s plan to acquire a controlling 51%
    stake and, in January 2013, Rosatom purchased all remaining Uranium One shares.

    If the news reports are true, Secretary Clinton’s involvement in the decision-making
    process needs to be more closely examined given that the Clinton Foundation was accepting
    donations from parties who had a stake in the outcome of the uranium deal.

    Similar Deals Denied by CFIUS
    In contrast to the Rosatom deal, similar transactions have been scuttled by CFIUS. For
    example, in December 2009, Northwest Nonferrous International Investment Corp, a subsidiary

    of China’s largest aluminum producer, attempted to acquire a U.S. based mining company.13

    Reportedly, Treasury objected to the acquisition because the U.S. company, Firstgold, owned
    property near U.S. military bases.14
    In June 2010, a Chinese company withdrew its proposed
    acquisition of a fiber optic and solar panel company, Emcore, due to regulatory concerns.15
    another acquisition, a Chinese firm invested in Ralls Corp., operator of a wind farm project.16

    CFIUS initiated contact with Ralls, reviewed the acquisition and recommended that Ralls cease
    operations until the investigation was completed due to concerns the US Navy had regarding the
    placement of wind turbines near or within restricted drone testing airspace.17
    President Obama issued an executive order requiring Ralls to divest itself of the wind farm
    project due to a determined threat to national security.18
    It is clear that some potential acquisitions have caused substantial concern within the
    upper echelons of government to such a degree that the acquisition was denied. Indeed,
    Secretary Clinton shares a concern about foreign governments, such as China, acquiring U.S.
    tech firms and was recently quoted by C-SPAN:
    A lot of foreign companies particularly Chinese companies, but not exclusively, are
    looking to buy American companies, particularly with advanced technology. And, it’s
    very unfortunate.19
    Here, a Russian government controlled company was able to acquire 20% of U.S. uranium
    production capacity, yet the transaction was approved – and apparently approved in record
    speed. According to a letter sent by Uranium One to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
    Uranium One and ARMZ jointly filed notice with CFIUS in the first week of August 2010
    regarding the transaction.20
    In return, on October 22, 2010, CFIUS informed Uranium One and
    ARMZ that “there were no unresolved national security concerns regarding these transactions
    under Section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended.”21
    The amount of time
    between filing and final resolution is less than the 75-90 day review that, according to statute, is
    generally the timeline.22
    It is unclear why this uranium deal was approved when other deals with similar national
    security implications were not.

    Conflicts of Interest
    The facts and circumstances of this matter raise a number of important questions
    regarding possible conflicts of interest and potential quid pro quos.
    According to the Office of Government Ethics, federal law requires executive branch
    employees be disqualified from matters that have a direct and predictable effect on the
    employee’s own financial interests or if persons or organizations with which the employee is
    affiliated, such as a spouse, have a financial interest, unless the employee first obtains an
    individual waiver or a regulatory exemption applies.
    23 Notably, the Clinton Foundation includes
    the Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative which, according to the memorandum of
    understanding between the Clinton Foundation and Obama Administration, “…works with the
    mining industry, local and national governments, and other non-governmental organizations to
    enable sustainable growth in countries where the mining sector plays a significant role.”

    The risk of conflicts with Secretary Clinton at State was so great that the Clinton
    Foundation and the Obama Administration entered into a memorandum of understanding which,
    in part, required donations to be disclosed. However, millions of dollars in donations to the
    Clinton Foundation from executives with an interest in the Uranium One/ARMZ transaction
    were not disclosed, breaching the agreement.

    Accordingly, please answer the following:
    1. Please characterize Secretary Clinton’s involvement in the CFIUS investigation.
    2. Was Secretary Clinton briefed by State Department personnel regarding the Uranium
    One/ARMZ transaction? If so, by whom and how many times? If not, why not?
    3. Did Secretary Clinton disclose to State Department Ethics Officials that interested parties
    in the Uranium One/ARMZ transaction made substantial monetary donations to the
    Clinton Foundation?
    4. Did Secretary Clinton’s relationship with the Clinton Foundation require her to recuse
    herself from the CFIUS’s review of the Uranium One/ARMZ transaction? If so, did she
    recuse herself? If the relationship did not require recusal, please explain why not.
    5. Please list the State Department personnel that were involved in the Uranium One/ARMZ
    6. Please list all State Department officials that have attended the weekly CFIUS meetings
    in the past 5 years.

    7. Did the State Department representative who attended the CFIUS Uranium One/ARMZ
    meetings raise the possibility of a conflict of interest between Secretary Clinton and the
    interested parties in the transaction? If so, what steps did the State Department take to
    Please number your responses according to their corresponding questions. Thank you in
    advance for your cooperation with this request. Please respond no later than July 16, 2015. If
    you have questions, contact Josh Flynn-Brown of my Committee staff at (202) 224-5225.
    Charles E. Grassley
    Committee on the Judiciary

  • John Buatti

    Sep 7, 2017 Press Release
    WASHINGTON – Rep. Dana Rohrabacher has called on House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce to approve hearings on alleged corruption involving Russia and the Clinton Foundation, the global non-profit organization set up by former president Bill Clinton and his wife, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

    Mrs. Clinton ran for president as the Democrat nominee in 2016.

    Noting evidence that Russian financiers donated heavily to the foundation, the California Republican, who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats, proposed an “under-oath examination of the —– relationship between the donations and the 2013 CFIUS approval of the sale of America’s uranium reserves.”——

    The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States is the government’s interagency body that reviews and authorizes investments in and purchases by foreign entities of American companies.

    Rohrabacher’s letter, sent to Royce on Wednesday, cites “new evidence that the Obama Administration had prior knowledge of possible bribery and violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act involving state-owned Russian nuclear industry figures, the Clinton Foundation, and other Americans prior to the CFIUS approval of the uranium transaction.”

    As much as 20 percent of the reserves were transferred to Russia because of the deal, said Rohrabacher.

    The congressman also suggested the hearings look into Russian energy interests that provided financial support to a campaign to undermine the American fracking industry and the construction of oil and gas pipelines in this country.

    “We can no longer wait,” said Rohrabacher, “to fully inform the American people of alleged criminal collusion by the previous Administration with the Russians.”


    Ken Grubbs, 202-225-2415

  • Wanda Marie Woodward, Ph.D.

    Michelle Obama is a Man. Joan Rivers reveals this 1 month before she dies.
    Interviewer: “Do you think the U.S. will see the first gay president or the first woman president?”
    Joan Rivers: “We already have it with Obama. You know Michelle is a tran, a transgender. We all know this. It’s okay.”