Twitter Trying To Silence Sean Hannity

Follow Shawn’s new Twitter account at  @seanhannity_

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Twitter Trying To Silence Sean Hannity

  1. frederik wisse says:

    Secret service outcoming . In the old soviet Union , all service was so secret that you could not find waiters in an official restaurant to serve you . Well now the news here in Holland yesterday all over local television : The Dutch secret service has found proof of Russian Hacking of US government and democratic party before the US elections .
    Hahaha , when you know how smart these guys are and how superstitious ,any brazen statement from them is meant to obfuscate the truth . How convenient for Hillary and Obama right now ! Yet there are now two flies in the ointment . First after a claimed ten years of hacking the secret service is presenting right now their story supporting the russian collusion and what the Dutch prime-minister is asking for right now ? More survaillance and increased capabilities for the secret-service ! A big lie to produce more lies . George Bush asked the same from the US citizens , which are now stuck with the results and I do not mean Trump here .

  2. RAH says:

    They can play all the games they want and it won’t stop what is about to blow. The trail now leads right to the oval office.

    “The FBI and DOJ Tanked the Case Against Hillary Clinton Because Obama Was Guilty of the Same Crime
    Instapundit links this today; it turns out this article is from October 2016.
    Still, even though it’s not new, it’s worth re-reading.
    Update: ArthurK. explains the likely glitch to me — Andy McCarthy wrote a fresh update on this subject, and maybe Instapundit actually linked the older version of the story.

    Below, the original post quoting the older version. I’ll get up new quotes in a bit.

    Obama’s DOJ couldn’t prosecute Hillary, even if they wanted to (they didn’t), because Obama was also knowingly sending classified emails to Hillary on the secret server which he knew was unsecure, Hillary and Huma had a get-out-of-jail-free card: Obama’s DOJ could not prosecute them without having to next turn its guns on Obama.
    Hillary couldn’t be proven guilty without proving the president guilty as well.
    “How is this not classified?” So exclaimed Hillary Clinton’s close aide and confidante, Huma Abedin. The FBI had just shown her an old e-mail exchange, over Clinton’s private account, between the then-secretary of state and a second person, whose name Abedin did not recognize.
    The FBI then did what the FBI is never supposed to do: The agents informed their interviewee (Abedin) of the identity of the second person. It was the president of the United States, Barack Obama, using a pseudonym to conduct communications over a non-secure e-mail system — something anyone with a high-level security clearance, such as Huma Abedin, would instantly realize was a major breach.
    Abedin was sufficiently stunned that, for just a moment, the bottomless capacity of Clinton insiders to keep cool in a scandal was overcome. “How is this not classified?”
    She recovered quickly enough, though. The FBI records that the next thing Abedin did, after “express[ing] her amazement at the president’s use of a pseudonym,” was to “ask if she could have a copy of the email.”
    Abedin knew an insurance policy when she saw one. If Obama himself had been e-mailing over a non-government, non-secure system, then everyone else who had been doing it had a get-out-of-jail-free card. Thanks to Friday’s FBI document dump — 189 more pages of reports from the Bureau’s year-long foray (“investigation” would not be the right word) into the Clinton e-mail scandal — we now know for certain what I predicted some eight months ago here at NRO: Any possibility of prosecuting Hillary Clinton was tanked by President Obama’s conflict of interest.
    As I explained in February, when it emerged that the White House was refusing to disclose at least 22 communications Obama had exchanged with then-secretary Clinton over the latter’s private e-mail account, we knew that Obama had knowingly engaged in the same misconduct that was the focus of the Clinton probe: the reckless mishandling of classified information. …
    In terms of the federal laws that criminalize mishandling of classified information, Obama not only engaged in the same type of misconduct Clinton did; he engaged in it with Clinton. It would not have been possible for the Justice Department to prosecute Clinton for her offense without its becoming painfully apparent that 1) Obama, too, had done everything necessary to commit a violation of federal law, and 2) the communications between Obama and Clinton were highly relevant evidence.”

  3. RAH says:

    Not even Twitter and Facebook working together is going to stop this. The pimple has grown into a multiple carbuncles that are about to burst. The NYT story about Trump going to fire Mueller followed by a demand by democrats that Mueller be protected is a good sign just how painful it is getting.

  4. Extreme Hiatus says:

    “FBI Agent Peter Strzok is outlining in this text message a deliberate intent to shape the Clinton interview, and then a deliberative process of filtering out only those aspects of the interview that would support their pre-determined outcome, delivered only days later.

    Additionally, FBI Agent Strzok is admitting that a group of FBI officials including himself, James Baker, Trisha Anderson, Lisa Page, and likely others (McCabe, Comey) conspired together to intentionally withhold information -derived from this interview- from congress and the American people.”

  5. Leon Brozyna says:

    Here’s a compare & contrast bit that came to me last night regarding the message chats between Strzok & Page … they seem to fear conducting a proper investigation on Clinton, in case she becomes president, but they have no such qualms about digging in on Trump, who actually is president.

    I suppose there’s something to those wicked witch of the west stories about Clinton in DC, but no fear of Trump? Perhaps there’s something to Kerry’s thoughts of Trump being gone in a year.

    Hmmmmm …

    • David A says:

      They hate Trump with a passion.
      They also fear him and were willing to commit great crimes to prevent his election, perhaps even sedition to remove him.
      ( That is desperate no matter how arrogant)

      If they feared Hillary, they likely still should.

    • Jeff L. says:

      I saw a recent article say that the DOJ was withholding 50k text messages between Strzok and his mistress from the congressional investigation because they were “personal” and “not relevant” to the investigation. Two points:
      1) It should be up to the congressional investigators to decide what is relevant and what is not.
      2) The government issued phones on which the text messages were sent and received have no expectation of privacy. “All use is subject to monitoring.”

      Why are these two still employed?

Leave a Reply to David A Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.