Podesta! Podesta! Podesta!

It’s the only reply, and I mean the ONLY reply to “Russia! Russia! Russia!” Opponents of President Trump bring up Russia as though repetition and loudness make something true, a shouting match in battle of talking points to Trump’s opponents without taking on the very serious matter of collusion as an act of Treason against the United States of America and the American People.

While supposed “intel people,” “spy chiefs,” and other fake news talking head “experts” are cited as authenticating Podesta’s claim Russia hacked his email throughout every Podesta email media story, there remains a simple truth: The entire gang of “Russiaist Democrats,” their basis of reality, is to promote acceptance without question of Podesta’s Russia hacked me claim, to accept it as a certainty and thereby a narrative irrespective of it originating from Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign Chair John Podesta.

Of course these same intel/DOJ/Deep State folks who worked with John Podesta, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Robert Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, Christopher Steele, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, John Brennan, Samantha Power, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, John Kerry, and, since Podesta worked for Bill Clinton when Eric Holder did, and Podesta is the bogus crier of conclusive certainty “Russia hacked me,” yes Bill too, all in their “professional capacities” (note this is a list of witnesses as well). And now this list includes a less known name in all of this but a person whose role establishes the gravity of what I am about to bring up, that person is attorney Scott Schools, who I understand recently resigned from being a career employee at the DOJ.

Schools appears to have authorized Robert Mueller’s “participation in the investigation of Russia’s role in the Presidential campaign of 2016:”

“Russia’s role in the presidential campaign of 2016” does not exempt Mueller from investigating everything Clinton, to also add the Clinton Foundation to the list of suspects of Russian Collusion, especially when the claim of a State Actor, was invoked by Podesta’s Russia Hacked Me narrative. One would think Mueller’s investigation would start with whether Russia did or did not hack Podesta. Without Mueller pursuing Podesta’s Russia Hacked Me narrative as an allegation to be proven true or false, the idea that Russia was interfering in our presidential elections, and more specifically, as another part of Podesta’s Russia Hacked Me narrative, that Russia hacked Podesta for the benefit of Donald Trump is not even able to be investigated until Podesta’s Russia Hacked Me narrative is proven true. Even though Podesta has said in interviews Russia hacked his email for the benefit of Donald Trump, he cannot prove that and it remains solely a hearsay allegation suspect of being rife with political bias without any legitimate basis to have opened any investigation of Donald Trump, his campaign, or any of his staffers by any agency of the United States government.

Said another way: A certain and specific politically biased claim by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign Chair John Podesta naming a State actor, Russia, should immediately be suspect of being a politically biased and charged narrative, of trickery, a sensationalized ploy, to which no investigation of Russia’s role in the presidential election of 2016 should occur without first verifying with absolute certainty Podesta’s Russia Hacked Me claim made clearly on behalf of Hillary Clinton who is running for President of the United States.

What we all know since the Inspector General’s report on the Hillary Clinton Email Investigation is that Strzok, Page, Comey, McCabe, Page et. al. listed above – DOJ’s documented folks who held political bias against Donald Trump – and irrespective of the conclusion of Inspector General Horowitz, were the investigators and decision makers in both the Clinton and Trump investigations, and that these folks appear to have used (rigged) the investigation process to benefit opponents of Donald Trump, even using the IG investigation to their advantage. None of this would matter if the very same people had not been the same investigators instigating and initiating investigation of Donald Trump and his campaign as though an echo of Podesta’s Russia Hacked Me narrative nor would any of this matter if it did not also appear these investigators and their agencies additionally rigged a fake instrument (i.e. the “Steele Dossier”) to be presented to FISA for warrants to spy on Americans around Donald Trump and his campaign.

The point of the “Steele Dossier” appears to have been for these government paid Progressive actors to submit something that can be pointed to as “probable cause,” as bait for all of us, media, everyone. The entire thing a switch and repackage of unverified opposition research as a “dossier” to obscure the truth by all appearances that the entire invocation of Mueller is based solely on Podesta’s Russia Hacked Me narrative.

For those who wish to compare and contrast, consider note everyone in the Trump Campaign who had a conversation that could be spun by these same DOJ et. al. of speculative predatory “investigators” acting as political 3rd world Police State operatives, provided more false information for the misnamed “Steele Dossier” by citing Steele’s own leaks to the Press (i.e. “corroborating press reports”) to FISA in the warrant applicaiton, all ignoring that Steele was fired for leaking information to the press (note foreigner Christopher Steele was not prosecuted for leaking, just fired.).

The term, “Replete with bias” would be disingenuous and an underestimate of the corruption continually perpetrated by the list of people I named above, which is likely only a partial list.

Here’s why the entire Podesta narrative doesn’t make sense. I haven’t seen any mention/communication of any sort that Podesta, Clinton, et al above listed wanted to reverse the Uranium One sale, have you? Nor have I seen any communications of Bill Clinton refunding the $500,000 speaking fee he received from Russians to speak in Russia, nor anything said by Chelsea Clinton, as Clinton Foundation Manager/Trustee, returning the hundreds of millions of dollars donated by a Russian company related to Rosatom prior to the Uranium One sale. Magic Question: What is gained by Russia getting Donald Trump, the man who can and likely will reverse the Uranium One sale, put in office?

If I lost you in discussing this, I promise it wasn’t me. What lost you, lost me, lost all of us, and has made for great fake news media propaganda, is convolution of the facts, not conspiracy theories.

For instance the fact CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States) voted to give control of 20% of our uranium to Russia, and numerous people who were involved in or voted in this CFIUS vote and transaction that negatively impacts our National Security, are the same people investigating “Russia’s role in the presidential campaign of 2016.” So the very people who colluded with Russia by recorded vote to give Russia control of 20% of our uranium, who were backed by a body of politically & ideologically aligned office holders all the way up to and including President Obama, are the ones investigating the presidential election of 2016 and decided to investigate only 1/2 of the campaigns involved: Donald Trump and his campaign.

If you can’t see the conflict of interest to have those who blatantly sold out America for political and ideological purposes to Russia now investigating their political opponent for collusion with Russia, I’d recommend you see Psychiatrist Charles Krauthammer if he were still alive.

God Bless you and thank you for reading and sharing this,

Toddy Littman

P.S. List of articles I skimmed to glean what I’ve posed above, which so blatantly is based on the assumption Podesta is being honest in what he’s said and while glancing over the impossibility that Podesta is also so stupid he’d click a “google” link without the word “google” in it (shorteners include a reference to well trafficked internet sites in the link, this link obviously didn’t do that).

– Consider how Podesta, a man who used to be Bill Clinton’s Chief of Staff, could have done this, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/us/private-security-group-says…

– Consider, if you were Russian hackers, State sponsored or not, would you put “bear” in your name?

https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/21/evidence-ties-russia-to-podesta-and-powell-email-hacks/

– Consider this shows the actual email, but apparently doesn’t… As you read you discover there were 2 links given, and that somehow the supposed wrong link was included with the right one when the email was passed to Podesta from Hillary Clinton’s IT folks (though that link isn’t in the email image). And that IT person, claimed to be a typo, said the email was legitimate…. And we’re to take their word for it when the entire set of events visualizes like a Keystone Cops episode?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-phishing-email-that-hacked-the-account-of-john-podesta/

– This guy here made some great considerations regarding Podesta’s email being hacked, at the Huffington Post of all places, Kudos to H.A. Goodman,

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/if-russia-hacked-podesta….

– I haven’t seen credible refutation of Julian Assange’s explanation Podesta’s password was “Password.” What gets me is if true, or Podesta’s password was “testing123,” how can we assume Podesta didn’t set up to be hacked? Again, he was the Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton, he’d only be this stupid on purpose.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2017/01/04/….

– Podesta’s Twitter hacked the next day…. Former Chief of Staff for President Bill Clinton didn’t think to change his password on all his accounts after being hacked the day before? The former Chief of Staff for Bill Clinton is this incompetent? Really? REALLY?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835460/Now-Podesta-s-Twitter….

– And could what BBC sees as information that can be gained from Podesta’s emails be why the Russia collusion assumption is being given any weight at all? Are people’s citation of the derogatory emails explanation Podesta was hacked to hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump or is it actually that the release of the emails by whatever means displays a the reality that the emails are Podesta, Clinton et. al’s candid view of the American People, of their opponents, revealing operations & strategies they are all ashamed of? It appears any derogatory emails within a month of the so called “hack” could just have been put into the mix to help make the “released to help trump” narrative appear true once Podesta was, using “password” or something like it as a password, ready to be hacked? Wouldn’t it be interesting if Assange is telling the truth, that there was no State actor, as then the entire hack is fake news, and the entire leaking of Podesta’s emails intentional to make a fake case of aiding Donald Trump, all because a month or even 2 before the election internal polling revealed to Podesta and the rest of the Hillary Clinton 2016 Campaign that Hillary was going to lose the presidential election of 2016,

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37639370

-Finis