Still, New York Times reporters did not hesitate to write that the unnamed Russians focused on Paul Manafort, identified as “Trump campaign chairman at the time,” and General Michael Flynn, identified as “a retired general who was advising Mr. Trump.” The article insinuated in print that both Manafort and Flynn “had indirect ties to Russian officials, who appeared confident that each could help shape Mr. Trump’s opinions on Russia.” So in summary, the Times article claimed as sources “three current and former American officials familiar with the investigation”—all unnamed—who said unnamed Russian officials who felt they could influence Trump were involved in undocumented conversations with Manafort and Flynn. Finally, the New York Times referenced that “intelligence was among the clues,” which included information “about direct communications between Mr. Trump’s advisors and American officials—that American officials received last year as they began investigating Russian attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of Mr. Trump’s associates were assisting Moscow in the effort.”11
These examples clearly suggest that Obama administration officials had leaked to the New York Times information obtained illegally by “unmasking” Trump campaign officials so as to obtain conversations and or emails with them that the NSA obtained through electronic surveillance of foreign nationals. No wonder Grassley and Nunes were suspicious.
Perhaps Mueller’s two most blatant leaks were evident first in a New York Times story published on September 18, 2017, titled “With a Picked Lock and a Threatened Indictment, Mueller’s Inquiry Sets a Tone.” In the article, reporters Sharon LaFraniere, Matt Apuzzo, and Adam Goldman made public that Mueller intended to follow his predawn gestapo-like raid into Manafort’s Alexandria, Virginia, apartment home with an indictment, according to information the newspaper reported learning from typically anonymous sources identified only as “two people close to the investigation.”12
Then on Friday, October 27, 2017, Mueller obtained his first indictments in the Russia collusion case from a Washington, DC, grand jury. Yet instead of making the charges public, Mueller had the grand jury seal the indictments until the following Monday, allowing the special counselor’s office to leak the news to CNN. This gave Mueller the weekend, including the Sunday morning news programs, to allow Clinton operatives to build the case on television that Manafort, Flynn, and whoever else Mueller had indicted were guilty as charged. Through the weekend, the uncertainty among Trump supporters was heightened by their inability to identify exactly which suspects Mueller had indicted.
Mueller should be forced to explain why he should be allowed to continue his investigation when a pattern of illegal unmasking and illegal leaking of classified information reaches beyond him to include the highest levels of the Obama administration. Proof abounded that Mueller’s Russia probe was riddled with systematic government impropriety that would not only justify his firing and disqualify his Russian collusion investigation from being allowed to continue but also demand a criminal investigation of Mueller himself and of the Obama administration officials involved in the illegal unmasking and illegal leaking.
The question is whether Donald Trump is capable, with the support of US patriots, of defeating the Deep State, or whether the Deep State has advanced to the point where it will crush the last vestiges of the Tea Party movement by removing Donald Trump from office. The Deep State will not care if Trump is impeached, declared mentally incompetent, or—as a final resort—assassinated, as long as he is removed from office before the completion of his first term.
The Strategy to Block Trump’s Inauguration Fails
Our source is not a state party.
—Julian Assange on the source of the email leaks, December 2016
WHEN THE VOTES WERE counted on Election Day 2016, Trump won the Electoral College vote, but Hillary won the popular vote. That was enough to encourage diehard Hillary supporters to think that there yet may be a way to deny Trump the victory. Maybe one or more strategic recounts could tip the Electoral College vote to Hillary. Or maybe enough electors could be convinced that Trump was unfit to give Hillary the 270 electoral votes needed for victory.
Protests began almost immediately, with thousands of people marching on Trump Tower the day after the election. Protests continued in the days following the election as demonstrators took to the streets holding signs that said, “Not My President,” the #NeverTrump rally cry, while Deep State operatives behind the scenes devised strategies that might block Trump from being inaugurated. In the weeks between Election Day on November 8, 2016, and Inauguration Day on January 20, 2017, the Deep State, together with Democratic Party operatives, dared to imagine that if Trump could be prevented from taking the oath of office, Hillary Clinton may yet be president.
Riots in the Streets
On November 10, 2016, Trump tweeted, “Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protestors, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair!” On November 11, 2016, the Associated Press reported that Portland, Oregon, was the epicenter of the anti-Trump riots spreading across the country, with some 4,000 protestors marching in Portland’s downtown area, smashing windows and chanting “We reject the president-elect.” As midnight approached, Portland police pushed back against the crowd, arresting 26 demonstrators as protestors threw rocks at them.1 Similar gatherings occurred throughout the United States:
• In Denver, protesters managed to briefly shut down Interstate 25 as demonstrators made their way onto the freeway. Traffic was halted in the northbound and southbound lanes for about 30 minutes. Protesters also briefly shut down interstate highways in Minneapolis and Los Angeles.
• In San Francisco, high-spirited high school students marched through downtown, chanting “Not my president” and holding signs urging a Donald Trump eviction. Protestors waved rainbow banners and Mexican flags as bystanders high-fived the marchers from the sidelines.
• In New York City, a large group of demonstrators gathered outside Trump Tower on 5th Avenue, chanting angry slogans and waving banners bearing anti-Trump messages.
• In Philadelphia, protesters near city hall held signs bearing slogans like “Not Our President,” “Trans against Trump,” and “Make America Safe for All.”
Three days after the election, the Washington Post reported that some 225 people had been arrested in anti-Trump protests, with at least 185 arrested in Los Angeles alone.2 To Hillary’s consternation, many of the people protesting in the streets had not even bothered to vote in the election. NBC’s KGW in Portland, Oregon, reported that most of the 112 protestors arrested in that city did not vote in Oregon, according to state election records, with 79 of the demonstrators arrested either not registered to vote in the state or not recorded as having turned in a ballot.3 An analysis conducted by the Oregonian newspaper in Portland investigating those arrested in ant-Trump demonstrations who did not vote revealed that at least one-third were out-of-state college students not eligible to vote in Oregon.4
Meanwhile, the conservative blogger known as the Gateway Pundit found proof that George Soros, the billionaire currency trader and investor whose Open Society Foundation is notorious for funding left-wing progressive causes, had funded anti-Trump leftist groups who were advertising on the internet to hire demonstrations