Yet Another Example Of Obama Administration Retribution, Reprisal and Vendetta Policy


'I Went Through Hell': Former FBI Agent Says Andrew McCabe 'Targeted', 'Slandered' Her

A former FBI counterterrorism agent reacted to an op-ed written by recently-fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

"Not in my worst nightmares did I dream my FBI career would end this way," McCabe entitled his Washington Post piece published Friday.

Robyn Gritz, who said she served 16 years with the bureau fighting terrorism, told "Fox & Friends" that she celebrated McCabe's dismissal and that it brought back memories of how he allegedly mistreated her.

Gritz said that she began working with McCabe in 2005 until she ultimately resigned several years later.

She said McCabe retaliated against her for filing a harassment claim against one of her supervisors.

Gritz said that, while working as a "detailee" to the CIA, her boss began "scrutinizing [her] work and asking questions" about her purportedly being "fragile" after her divorce.

"He made some discriminatory comments about why I was traveling and such," Gritz said of her boss at the time, who was not McCabe.

When she heard that the boss was making similar comments to a black coworker, Gritz said she decided to file a complaint against him.

Gritz said when she filed the suit, McCabe signed off on an internal investigation against her, adding that "he know that I was either filing or going to file the [case]."

"I went through hell for a year and a half," she said. "Andy made sure I couldn't get out of the division."

Gritz said that McCabe additionally made "nasty, false" comments about her in a meeting -- "lying," she said. "which is why he just got fired."

She said she was at a restaurant when news of McCabe's dismissal this month reached her, and that she verbally reacted with joy.

Gritz added that dozens of former FBI coworkers called her to celebrate McCabe "being held accountable."


Obama's Federal Agencies Operate “Pay-Back” Vendetta Campaigns By Stealing Technology From Companies And Cutting Them Out of The Market


Small businesses claim Obama's US government stealing their ideas as retribution for competing with DNC interests

Eric Shawn






Feds putting companies out of business?

"They stole all my stuff and used taxpayer money to do it,"  John Hnatio, a Maryland small business owner, says of the U.S. government.

Hnatio claims the government has put his company, FoodquestTQ, nearly out of business by stealing his firm's software that was designed to be licensed to the Food and Drug Administration to monitor food safety.

The FDA "took our ideas, plagiarized my doctoral dissertation on which a patent was based, and then they infringed on our patent. The result was that it decimated our business," he adds.

Hnatio says his company has been left hanging by a thread. He has had to fire employees and says that the remaining three, including himself, are receiving no salary and have been forced to go on unemployment insurance.

"I have never seen anything like it," says Hnatio, who is a retired federal government official.

He says the FDA "duplicated exactly what we were selling to industry and they were giving it away for free...instead of helping small business commercialize their product, what we are seeing is a dragon, in the name of the U.S. government that is eating their own young."

FoodquestTQ is only one of numerous small businesses that accuse the government of stealing their intellectual property or trade secrets when they enter into contracts or research agreements with federal agencies.

"The government interceded, stole the technology and attempted to use this in classified programs," says Jim O'Keefe, the president of the small New Jersey technology company Demodulation. He has filed a $50 million lawsuit against the U.S. government, accusing it of taking his firm's research.

Demodulation developed an advanced technology involving fiber coated wire, called microwire, which is thinner than a human hair. The company says its microwire can be used for a variety of national security applications, such as tracking drones, keeping tabs on soldiers on battlefields, transmitting information without a power source, and that it even has the ability "to render objects invisible to radar."

"It sounds incredible and impossible that the U.S. government is taking things from people," says Demodulation lawyer Sean Callagy. "We believe this is the greatest country in the world with the greatest justice system in the world but the U.S. government is not an eagle or a flag, but human beings. And human beings make mistakes."

The lawsuit accuses the Department of Energy and the National Nuclear Security Administration, among others, of illegally swiping the firm's information by "using microwire and Demodulation's trade secrets in its mission to gather intelligence."

It also says that the U.S. has even built "a secure facility for the production of microwire" on its own.

"There are classified reports showing the technology," declares Demodulation attorney Ben Light, who says that after the company "shared the secret sauce" about microwire with  federal officials, they simply "took (the) wire."

The Department of Energy referred Fox News’ requests for comment to the National Nuclear Security Administration, which did not respond to repeated requests for a comment about the company's allegations.

The Department of Justice denies Demodulation’s charges in court filings.

Stuart Delery, an Acting Assistant Attorney General, wrote that while "the United States admits that it continues to conduct research regarding what is generally known as 'microwire,"  he says that the government did not act improperly.

The Department of Justice claims the government did not take any proprietary information or develop the microwire technology based on Demodulation's work, and that "none of the asserted patents have been infringed on by the United States."

 Delery also pointed out that some of Demodulation's patents had expired.

"The only reason the patents expired is because Demodulation was driven out of business," responds the firm's lawyer, Light. "It doesn't affect the entire case because any infringement during the period when the patents were enforced is still compensable."

O'Keefe says the government denials are "an impossibility based on the evidence I have."

He is calling for "reform and legislation to protect us. I hope through our litigation we will be able to expose some of the problems."

It turns out that the government is routinely accused of similar wrongdoing and sometimes has to pony up.

The U.S. Army settled a case in November by paying $50 million to a Texas company, Apptricity, which claimed the government  took some of its software, which tracks military equipment from MRE's to troops, without paying for it.

The company's court papers said that the government "willfully infringed" on its copyrights, "failed to provide information" about what it did and was engaged in "actively concealing the Army's misappropriation of Apptricity software."  

The complaint said the Army paid for using the software on five servers and 150 devices, but actually "copied and installed Apptricity software on at least 98 servers and at least 9,063 devices" without telling the company.

"I don't think there was malicious intent," Apptricity's founder and president Tim Garcia tells Fox News in the aftermath of the settlement.  He says his company pursued its case by the "standard process through the Court of Claims."

There are numerous other companies that have filed similar actions at the Washington, D.C.-based court, which is the venue for legal claims against the federal government. Among them:

Liberty Ammunition, which is suing the government for allegedly infringing on its copyright for developing a lead-free "green bullet" after it worked on the invention with the Department of Defense.

Net Results, which claims that the Army infringed on its patent  for a "mine detecting device" by giving out its design to six other government contractors.

In 2009, NASA was ordered to pay $28.3 million to Boeing after the court found that the government infringed on the company's aluminum alloy patent.

In a noted case in 1999, the U.S. government paid then Hughes Electronics $154 million in damages after a 30- year long legal battle found that the government illegally appropriated the company's satellite technology.

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims calls itself "the people's court," and says it is considered "the keeper of the nation's conscience." It is situated right across Lafayette Park from the White House.

"There is no reason to think it can't happen," observes New York University law Professor Jeanne Fromer, an intellectual property and copyright law specialist.

"The government can take patent rights, as long as they compensate for it. It is not dissimilar, in that sense, to notions of eminent domain."

"The government is a big sprawling place and there are lots of people acting in it. I think some of them act very nobly...but it’s hard to say that everyone always does."

"We are hearing more frequently from companies about intellectual property theft by the government," notes John Palatiello, head of the Washington, D.C.- area lobbying group, the Business Coalition for Fair Competition, which is studying the issue.

"Companies are becoming more vocal about it."

Hnatio believes there is a troubling explanation for alleged government flinching.

"What we are seeing is a direct competition between the private sector and the U.S. government. The problem for small businesses is that they are simply being destroyed by their own government in spite of the fact that we hear politicians say all the time, that small business is's extremely disturbing because it means we lose jobs, and it means we lose our competitive edge in the world. It creates a very dangerous situation for our national security."

Fox News repeatedly requested comment from the FDA regarding Hnatio's allegations about FoodquestTQ, but the agency did not issue a statement.

While the Demodulation case is expected to go to trial next year, Hnatio says he has been left without any money to hire a lawyer to go to court.

"From the time I was a little kid I dreamed of starting a business. But I do have to tell you that there is a grave danger to the American dream," he says.

Small businesses claim US government stealing their ideas ...

John Hnatio, a Maryland small business owner, says the U.S. government has put his company, FoodquestTQ, nearly out of business by stealing his firm's ...

How the Feds Can Take Your Property | The Fiscal Times

How the Feds Can Take Your Property . Search form. Search . ... Sectors + Companies; US Economy; Global Economy. ... then the Feds should be seizing, ...

Former US Energy Department Employee Accused Of Trying To ...

... a former energy department employee, ... Former US Energy Department Employee Accused Of Trying To Steal And Sell Nuclear Secrets Pleads Guilty. ... Technology ...

Declaration of Energy Independence

Better World Technology's declaration of energy independence from the Department of Energy. MENU. LTD. Contact; Safe ... and steals the future of the people.


Unfair Government Competition Undercuts Private Business (Sen ...

Fair competition between companies who ... However, more and more federal agencies are ... Unfair Government Competition Undercuts Private Business ...


Government Competition with Private industry in violation of ...

Government Competition with Private ... against private companies. The government agency doesn't have to ... for federal or local governments to compete with ...


Government Competition with Industry

One of the major criticisms of government competition with industry is that it ... by the federal government ... agency is part of the National ...





CONFIRMED: Obama Wiretapped Trump and Susan Rice Spied on Him

CONFIRMED: Obama Wiretapped Trump and Susan Rice Spied on Him

Breaking News By Amy Moreno September 19, 2017



Remember when the mainstream media attacked President Trump relentlessly for claiming he was spied on by the Obama administration?

They called him every name in the book, and mocked him for even suggesting that Obama would do such a thing.

Well, turns out President Trump was 100% correct, according to new bombshell reports that reveal Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort was wiretapped both before and after the election.

Now, we also know that Susan Rice unmasked Trump campaign officials, even after she lied and said she did not.


Will there be an INVESTIGATION into this overreaching and illegal behavior?

From Washington Free Beacon

Former Obama administration National Security Adviser Susan Rice told a House committee this month she requested the identities of Trump transition aides that were hidden in sensitive intelligence reports to protect Americans’ privacy rights.

Rice testified before a closed session of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Sept. 6 that she asked U.S. intelligence agencies for the names of Trump advisers to be unmasked in transcripts of communications intercepts.


Rice asked for names to be unmasked in a transcript of an electronic intercept involving a meeting between three senior Trump aides and a United Arab Emirates official who had traveled to the United States for an informal visit.

The three officials included candidate Donald Trump’s national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn; presidential campaign chief executive Steve Bannon; and Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law, according to CNN, which first reported on Rice’s closed-door testimony.

Details of Rice’s testimony on the unmasking of Trump aides were made public Sept. 14, quoting unidentified government sources, and included comments from members of Congress who did not dispute the closed-door testimony.

Rice’s disclosures before the intelligence panel appear to contradict earlier statements she made asserting that she had no knowledge of the unmasking of Americans, the process of identifying the names of Americans who are protected by privacy laws and who are incidentally spied on during sensitive foreign electronic intelligence operations.


In March, Rice was asked by a television interviewer about the unmasking allegations first raised by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes (R., Calif.). She stated: “I know nothing about this.”

During the House testimony, however, Rice acknowledged she had asked for the blacked-out names of the Trump advisers who had met with Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, a UAE crown prince, in New York Dec. 15. The meeting was to discuss helping the Trump transition set up a back channel to Russia, according to CNN.

Zayed’s visit to New York was not known to the State Department.

Asked by the Washington Free Beacon why she sought the identities of people who were part of the opposition political party and key members of an incoming administration transition team, Rice declined to comment and through a spokeswoman said the answers would “pertain to classified information.”

Erin Pelton, Rice’s spokeswoman, said allegations that Rice improperly sought the identities of Americans from intelligence reports is “entirely false.”

There is nothing improper, unusual, or political about such requests, nor do such requests bear any relationship to the unfounded and debunked allegations that the Obama White House ordered the surveillance of any U.S. persons,” Pelton said.

Rice also insisted that she has not and will not “divulge classified information,” Pelton said.



Newly unveiled transcripts of the FBI’s interviews with former agency director James Comey’s aides reveal that he made the decision to not refer former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for prosecution long before the conclusion of the investigation into her illicit activities.

Included in a letter sent this week to FBI Director Christopher Wray by Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Charles E. Grassley and Lindsey Graham, the now-unredacted transcripts paint a disturbing piece of judicial imprudence at its worst.

(I)t appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton,” the senators wrote. “That was long before FBI agents finished their work. Mr. Comey even circulated an early draft statement to select members of senior FBI leadership.”

The letter went on to accuse the former FBI director of attempting to steer the investigation toward his own preferred result:

Conclusion first, fact-gathering second — that’s no way to run an investigation,” the senators wrote. The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy.”


Moreover, Comey began drafting his exoneration statement, which he later read in a news briefing on July 5, before the FBI interviewed 17 key witnesses, including Clinton herself, and prior to the FBI entering into an immunity agreement with Clinton’s top aides, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson.

Below is a list of the key witnesses, along with the date they were interviewed by the FBI (H/T Zero Hedge):

And judging by the reaction of President Donald Trump, who battled Clinton during the presidential election last year, he’s none too pleased:

Wow, looks like James Comey exonerated Hillary Clinton long before the investigation was over…and so much more. A rigged system!
Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 1, 2017

A rigged system indeed, though with Trump’s officials now at the helm of the Justice Department, justice will, hopefully and finally, be served.

Please share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think about the stunning revelation that former FBI Director James Comey had essentially prejudged the investigation into Hillary Clinton.

What do you think about what Comey did? Scroll down to comment below!


Share On Social Media: Share

They posted on the same topic

Trackback URL :

This post's comments feed