Trump accuses NY Times of ‘virtual treason’…


President Trump is accusing the New York Times of treason because the Leftist rag told the world about a classified U.S. mission to mess with Russia undoubtedly due Russian cyber warfare being conducted against the United States. The most public of which is cyber meddling in U.S. election cycles.

 

I would not be surprised to find out some day the USA and Russia have been exchanging cyber barbs for quite some time. Is it ethical or even legal for the NYT to expose clandestine and probably Classified cyber missions intended as bloodless reprisals to Russian cyber-crimes? It’s definitely not ethical! If exposing Classified actions against a foreign enemy isn’t illegal, IT SHOULD BE!

 

Justin Smith pointed this post on my Facebook Group Social Media Jail Conversations for Conservatives & Counterjihadists

(yeah I know, lengthy title. I had just emerged from Facebook jail and was quite annoyed at the time. So I created the group. Feel free to join the still relatively small group). The group URL to Justin’s share is HERE.

 

Justin did not include the URL from whence he found the post. Justin’s reason: The “URL is being banned by Facebook”. The banned website is The Patriot Brief. Interestingly The Patriot Brief picked up the article from The National Sentinel. It is from the original source I am cross posting below. In case you are curious The Patriot Brief link to the article is HERE.

 

JRH 6/17/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

*******************

Trump accuses NY Times of ‘virtual treason’ after report exposing U.S. cyber-targeting of Russian infrastructure: He’s right

 

By Jon Dougherty

June 16, 2019

The National Sentinel

 

NYT Building

 

(NationalSentinel) We have made the observation before that in the age of Donald Trump, the establishment media has become a national security liability due to the fact that major outlets will publish just about anything in order to undermine him.

 

But in doing so, these same outlets also undermine our country — and some 312 million American citizens — making them as big a threat to our security as any foreign power.

 

The New York Times did it again Sunday with a story claiming that the Trump administration has escalated attacks on Russia’s power grid:

 

The United States is stepping up digital incursions into Russia’s electric power grid in a warning to President Vladimir V. Putin and a demonstration of how the Trump administration is using new authorities to deploy cybertools more aggressively, current and former government officials said.

 

In interviews over the past three months, the officials described the previously unreported deployment of American computer code inside Russia’s grid and other targets as a classified companion to more publicly discussed action directed at Moscow’s disinformation and hacking units around the 2018 midterm elections.

 

Advocates of the more aggressive strategy said it was long overdue, after years of public warnings from the Department of Homeland Security and the F.B.I. that Russia has inserted malware that could sabotage American power plants, oil and gas pipelines, or water supplies in any future conflict with the United States.

 

But it also carries significant risk of escalating the daily digital Cold War between Washington and Moscow.

 

“It has gotten far, far more aggressive over the past year,” one senior intelligence official told the Times. “We are doing things at a scale that we never contemplated a few years ago.”

 

You know what else carries “significant risk?” Reporting classified information that provides valuable insight and intelligence for a nuclear-armed adversary.

 

So much for “Russia collusion,” right?

 

The revelations infuriated POTUS Trump, and rightfully so. He said on Twitter the paper committed “a virtual act of Treason” over its report, The Hill noted.

 

“Do you believe that the Failing New York Times just did a story stating that the United States is substantially increasing Cyber Attacks on Russia,” Trump tweeted. “This is a virtual act of Treason by a once great paper so desperate for a story, any story, even if bad for our Country.”

 

“Anything goes with our Corrupt News Media today,” he added. “They will do, or say, whatever it takes, with not even the slightest thought of consequence! These are true cowards and without doubt, THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE!”

 

He also claimed the Times report was “NOT TRUE.”

 

The fact is the Times report most likely is true. Rational people understand that in light of report after report regarding Russia/China/Iran/North Korea targeting U.S. infrastructure, it makes sense for America — which is a cyber superpower — to respond in kind.

 

But these kinds of operations are not meant to be revealed. Doing so not only compromises said operations, but foreign intelligence agencies gleaning details from published open source information very often learn things that help them counter our moves.

 

Which, again, puts our country at risk.

 

The Times editors know this. They understand full well what revealing this kind of highly classified information can mean to an adversary.

 

And yet, they published it anyway. Just to ‘get Donald Trump.’

 

What does that say about them? It says — again — that the president has been right about our own press since he took office: They are more of an enemy than some of our adversaries. Or at least the equivalent.

 

Even though we have speech protections written into our Constitution via the First Amendment, you still can’t slander someone, libel them, yell ‘fire’ in a theater, or engage in various forms of “hate” speech.

 

Publishing highly classified information that provides ‘aid and comfort’ to an adversary should be legally actionable as well. Doing so harms our country by weakening our national security.

 

Think about it: Does anyone believe that FDR would not have punished the NYTimes or the Washington Post if either paper had published plans for the D-Day invasion, just because their editors believed Americans ‘had a right to know’?

 

Granted, we were in an actual war then, and we’re not fighting Russia — now. Though you could argue that in places like Syria, where Russian-sponsored mercenaries from the Wagner Group attacked U.S. forces and their allies early last year, amounts to a real conflict. Or Russia putting forces into Venezuela, in our hemisphere. Or encroaching on NATO’s eastern flank.

 

We have argued before that reporting the details about these highly classified operations are harming our national security at a time when the world is more dangerous than ever, not less, and for no good reason. The Times is just as guilty, in our view, as the U.S. officials who leaked the information. If they can be charged under the Espionage Act, then the ‘paper of record’ that published the information should be equally culpable.

 

The president is right.

__________________________

Follow Jon Dougherty on Twitter at @JonDougherty10

 

© 2017-2019 USA Features Media LLC.

 

ABOUT The National Sentinel

 

The National Sentinel is a fiercely independent, non-corporate-owned news site dedicated to bringing our readers fresh, informative content and the news of the day, without the bias and political chicanery of the so-called “mainstream” media.

 

Updated daily and throughout the day, rely on us to provide you with unfiltered news and information you won’t find anywhere else that helps you to make informed decisions. Like the media is supposed to do.

 

The National Journal is part of the USA Features Media network of sites. Follow USA Features on Facebook (click here).

 

A note about our advertisers: In accordance with Federal Trade Commission regulations, we are disclosing that our site earns a commission off of items we advertise and sell, as an affiliate. Think of it like a tip for bringing you awesome content! In any event, we have an advertising relationship with the stores we link to. Now you know.

 

See usage rights/permissions here. … READ THE REST

 

KERRY STATE DEPARTMENT PROMOTED STEELE DOSSIER AND RUSSIA COLLUSION FANTASY


Regardless of any claims to the contrary by former VP Biden and former President Obama, you have to be amazed on how corrupt and crooked the Obama Administration actually was! Thanks to Judicial Watch, more poop on what should be prosecutable corruption comes to light.

 

JRH 6/17/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

*******************

KERRY STATE DEPARTMENT PROMOTED STEELE DOSSIER AND RUSSIA COLLUSION FANTASY

Let’s do a movie about this!

 

By Lloyd Billingsley

June 17, 2019

FrontPageMag

 

Dept. of State

 

One day before the FBI launched its Trump-Russia investigation, Sovietophile academic Nellie Ohr, wife of DOJ boss Bruce Ohr and an employee of Fusion GPS, met with former British spy Christopher Steele. The upper reaches of the FBI and DOJ – Ohr, McCabe, Comey, Strzok, Page and such – have drawn the most attention in the fake Russia collusion story. It now emerges that the elusive Steele also deployed collaborators at the U.S. Department of State.

 

As 43 pages of documents obtained by Judicial Watch explain, “State Department ‘Special Coordinator for Libya’ Jonathan Winer played a key role in facilitating dossier author Christopher Steele’s access to other top government officials,” and “prominent international business executives.”

 

According to the Middle East Institute, Jonathan M. Winer was “deputy assistant secretary of state for international law enforcement, and counsel to United States Senator John Kerry.” Winer has written and lectured widely on, among other things, “corruption, and U.S.-Russia issues,” which seems somewhat removed from the Yale alum’s background.

 

In November of 2014, Winer sought to hook up Steele with Nelson Cunningham, president of McLarty Associates, a consulting firm co-founded by former Clinton White House Counselor Thomas ‘Mack’ McLarty. Winer’s email describes Steele as “an old friend of mine,” and “a former senior British intelligence officer focusing on former Soviet Union with a number of US and European private sector clients these days…”

 

In November of 2014, Winer “openly acts as a liaison for Steele,” attempting to set up meetings for “Chris” and referencing “Three Orbis Reports” in the subject line of the email. That same month Winer set up Steele with Ariuna Namsrai of ACPO “one of the world’s leading advisory and advocacy communications consultancies.”

 

Jumping ahead to January of 2017, movie producer Eric Hamburg forwards an article on the Steele dossier to Winer, proclaiming “Let’s do a movie about this!” Hamburg is the producer of the 1995 Nixon, starring Anthony Hopkins and directed by Oliver Stone. As it happens, Hamburg’s IMDB profile shows him posing with Hillary Clinton.

 

In February of 2018, Winer wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post claiming that Steele told him in 2016 he had “learned of disturbing information regarding possible ties between Donald Trump, his campaign and senior Russian officials.” Steele and Clinton factotum Sidney Blumenthal approached Winer with “separate dossiers.” No word whether the DNC also paid for Blumenthal’s dossier and whether his high concept featured any Russian whores urinating on a bed. Scenarios like that doubtless had Eric Hamburg panting to produce a movie.

 

“These documents show that Fusion GPS and Clinton spy Christopher Steele had a close relationship with the Obama State Department,” said a statement from Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “The State Department under John Kerry is emerging as another center of the Spygate conspiracy against President Trump.” That should come as no surprise.

 

Kerry once testified that U.S. actions in Vietnam were “reminiscent of Genghis Khan.” Kerry said the 2015 Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack in France had a “sort of particularized focus and perhaps even a legitimacy” and “a rationale that you could attach yourself to.” Kerry described the terrorist attack as obscurantisme, which even in French fell a bit short. The performance prompted Sen. John McCain to call Kerry, “the most inept secretary of state, certainly in my lifetime.” And when no longer Secretary of State, Kerry still acted like one.

 

After President Trump nixed the Iran deal, Kerry duly showed up in Iran for back-channel talks. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blasted Kerry for “actively undermining” administration’s policy toward the Islamic Republic.

 

For his part, Jonathan Winer was a State Department “Special Coordinator” for Libya, but what he managed to coordinate there remains unclear. For Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the murder of four Americans was all about some internet video, and after all, what did it matter?

 

As the State Department emails obtained by Judicial Watch show, Jonathan Winer was, in effect, Steele’s personal agent with the State Department, the Clinton propaganda machine, and even the entertainment industry. So Winer qualifies as an associate producer of the Russia collusion show, which the Democrat-media axis shows no sign of abandoning. It’s the biggest production on the left since Barry Soetoro teamed with David Axelrod on Dreams from My Father, which official biographer David Garrow called a novel, and the author a “composite character.”

 

Meanwhile, Attorney General William Barr is aiming at a broad-based, multifaceted investigation of the Russia collusion story’s origins. As other emails obtained by Judicial Watch reveal, the DOJ’s Bruce Ohr, Nellie’s husband, grabbed bonuses while that was going on, and bagged a pay raise after he lost his job as Associate Deputy Attorney General.

 

Prosecutor John Durham should find out if that was a reward for the Ohrs’ role in the illicit targeting of President Trump. In similar style, Durham might have a look at State Department records, and what they reveal about the multifaceted Jonathan Winer.

 

Curious observers might note that the State Department did not volunteer the material about Winer’s connections with Christopher Steele. Likewise, no congressional committee and nobody in the establishment media came up with the documents. The revelation resulted from legal action by Judicial Watch, whose motto is “because no one is above the law!” Other pertinent Judicial Watch revelations can be found at this link.

___________________

Lloyd Billingsley is the author of  Barack ‘em Up: A Literary Investigation and, most recently, Sexual Terrorist, about the Golden State Killer.  Lloyd’s work has appeared in City Journal, the Wall Street Journal, Washington TimesCalifornia Globe, and many other publications. Bill of Writes: Dispatches from the Political Correctness Battlefield is a collection of his journalism. His crime books include A Shut and Open Case, about a double murder in Davis, California.

 

© COPYRIGHT 2019, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

 

The Fires of Treason – No Small Thing


Even as the spoken and written Press propagandizes against President Trump, there is plenty of documentation – with more to be revealed – that a frame-job to depose a sitting President has occurred. Justin Smith does his part sharing what can be publicly dug up by anyone searching about this coup attempt. YET in this latest Justin submission he shared some misgivings about operation of justice in today’s America:

 

I’m not overly optimistic that William Barr is going to ever successfully prosecute the traitors to America that were found within the Obama administration and working together across party lines to destroy our republic, but maybe he will prove me wrong. If some of these people are not prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and imprisoned soon, I truly believe this republic is going to be so irreparably damaged that we will find ourselves in a continuation of battles and civil strife years out.

Justin has good reason for some pessimism. Politicians and crooks related to the Democratic Party have been committing crimes and getting away with it for at least a quarter century. Even if Attorney General is an honest representative of justice, can he buck a system that has been corrupted for so long? I HOPE SO!

 

JRH 6/16/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

****************

The Fires of Treason – No Small Thing  

The Truth Falls Like Radioactive Ash

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent  6/15/2019 8:46 PM

 

Americans are wondering how such a well-engineered republic, with all its time tested traditions and checks and balances, could be turned into a blazing forest fire of political misdeeds and treason by the Obama administration and the traitors within, but as the nation moves into the summer of 2019, many remain hopeful that U.S. Attorney General William Barr, U.S. Attorney John Durham and the fine efforts of men such as Representatives Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy and others will succeed in identifying, prosecuting and imprisoning all involved in the plot against candidate and then President Trump. The nation cannot ‘move on’ until these traitors, these rats who are now jumping their sinking ship, are held accountable for their criminal and unconstitutional actions.

 

Even prior to President Trump’s declassification order last month, escalating matters in the investigation of the investigators, most of America was already aware of most of the facts, already documented, in the seditious, subversive plot between the Hillary Clinton campaign and many key government figures, including former president Barack Obama, who could not have possibly failed to understand all the action. And now, with a paper trail as wide as Percy Priest Lake [Blog Editor: For readers who are unaware, the significance of the lake mention undoubtedly relates to author Justin Smith residing in Rutherford County Tennessee] and a fouled up coup, the truth is falling down on the traitors’ shoulders like radioactive ash.

Incredulously, during the last week of May, Representative Adam Schiff, House Intelligence Committee Chairman, accused President Trump and Attorney General Barr of attempting to “conspire to weaponize law enforcement and classified information against their political enemies.” This would be hilarious if it weren’t so serious, and if not for the fact that Schiff accused President Trump of the very thing the Democratic Party and then President Obama did for several of his last years in office.

 

As we know through many testimonies, Christopher Steele wouldn’t even vouch for his own dossier’s veracity and accuracy. Furthermore, FBI lawyer Lisa Page’s damning testimony before Congress stated that contrary to FBI procedures for counterintelligence operations, Donald Trump’s campaign, supposedly infiltrated by Russians and “colluders”, had not been warned of any such nefarious dealings because the Steele dossier was not reliable enough to necessitate any warning.

 

If the dossier was not reliable enough to warn Trump’s campaign about the Kremlin’s plot, how could it remotely serve as the basis for obtaining FISA warrants to spy on Donald Trump and his inner circle? America demands a full accounting of who, what, where, when, why and how the dossier was used four, possibly five, times to dupe the FISA Court.

On May 24th, Representative Lindsey Graham, who has emerged as one of President Trump’s most intense and loyal supporters, spoke on Trump’s declassification order and told Fox and Friends: “You’re going to find out the mentality of the people investigating the president. You’re going to find out what they did and said. You’re going to find out that Papadopoulos was not working with the Russians. There’ll be some transcripts coming out where he says, ‘If you did that, that’d be treason.’ So the bottom line is, there’s going to be a lot of information about they were warned Steele was a bad guy and you can’t trust him. They blew through every stop sign”.

 

If Donald Trump wasn’t the subject of the surveillance, as the FBI asserted, then there was no valid reason not to apprise him of the surveillance and what was suspected, during the January 2017 briefing. Who decided not to give the President a FULL briefing on the dossier? Who decided to deliberately hide this from the new Commander-In-Chief?

 

All of a sudden America is witnessing James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan accusing each other of being guilty of inserting the unreliable Steele Dossier into a presidential assessment, since its ridiculous stories and outright lies have been exposed. If they truly believed that this dossier was fact — that the American people faced an existential threat from Donald Trump’s sexual perversions, hatred of Obama and ties with Moscow, a reprobate who stole the election from Hillary  — why are they not vying for all the credit for warning President Obama and the American people, given that they leaked and pushed this narrative over the past three years?

 

Fox News investigative journalist Catherine Herridge reported last month that an email from former FBI Director James Comey in December 2016 indicates that it was John Brennan who pushed the dossier to be included in the presidential intelligence report. A source inside the CIA blames Comey for pressing the dossier’s inclusion.

Noting that he has seen the report, former Rep. Trey Gowdy has stated it does not look good for John Brennan.

 

Protesting their innocence, Andrew McCabe and James Comey are at odds too, even though they both swore President Trump remains a threat to the republic and leaked classified documents to the media, supposedly to save us, to save America. McCabe asserts that the Steele dossier was the primary evidence presented to the FISA Court by the FBI, which Comey denies. Why would they be at odds if their leaks were nobly motivated and their cause a righteous one?

 

The fact that President Trump’s declassification order includes the Department of Treasury and the Department of Energy makes the matter even darker, more intriguing, and, in fact, a critical point that suggests pressure applied on President Trump not to release classified documents was more subversion, and the focus was on using Russian collusion as a way to conceal the FBI’s spying and abuse of power; this was also part of a broader attempt to cover up other massive Democrat corruption, especially the Uranium One Deal and real Russian collusion by Democrats and the true depth of Clinton’s pay-for-play operation within the U.S. State Department, with many people aware of its existence.

 

The salary men of the FBI dream of getting the top job, so they play along, which explains Mueller’s motivation as a one-time bag man for Clinton in the Uranium One scheme. And that makes for an extremely vile and dangerous partner when one considers Hillary Clinton’s vermin-like rapacity and her shrewd, corrupt, clever ruthlessness. It’s like selling one’s soul to the devil and realizing too late what a terrible deal one has made.

 

Abuse of power is to the Democrats what drugs are to the addict, as exhibited by Susan Rice, National Security Advisor under Obama, who regularly unmasked American citizens picked up on NSA surveillance sweeps. Also important to note, Samantha Power, U.N. Ambassador, averaged unmasking someone every working day of 2016, unmasking almost three-hundred; in comparison, John Bolton only unmasked three during his tenure as U.N Ambassador, according to PJ Media.

 

And by now, it is pretty well acknowledged that elements within the FBI and most likely the CIA conducted an illegal surveillance operation against President Trump. Attorney General Barr has said as much, stating the only remaining thing is to determine if the surveillance was predicated upon the law and through a substantial evidentiary basis. The only decision left is whether or not these people face charges or the whole thing gets swept under the rug.

 

Some details remain to be confirmed, for instance: Was the entrapment conman Josef Mifsud working for the CIA and/or Britain’s MI6 and/or Hillary Clinton‘s Fusion GPS contractor, or Orbis Business Intelligence? I believe America is going to discover very few Russians involved in all of this, but rather, they will see the FBI attempted to infiltrate the Trump campaign and coordinated with Australia and the United Kingdom to frame Donald Trump for collusion, so he could be prevented from taking office or removed from office after the inauguration. The remaining questions aren’t going to be asked by the New York Times.

 

On May 15th, former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. Joe DiGenova explained to Breitbart News Daily: “There was a brazen plot that started before the election, and the plot was to illegally exonerate Hillary Clinton so that she could become president, and then if she lost, there was an insurance policy to frame Donald Trump so he could be prevented from taking office or removed from office after the inauguration. … John Brennan is at the core of this conspiracy. His handymen and acolytes were Clapper and Comey and the senior FBI officials who worked with Comey. Let’s not forget that all of the people in senior levels of the Department of Justice under Obama were involved in this plot. … Loretta Lynch was too dumb to be allowed to lead it,” DiGenova speculated. “This is Brennan Inc.”

 

No longer standing unified, the drama between Brennan, Comey and Clapper is just the surface. The Durham investigation could reach out of the FBI and CIA up through the Obama administration, including Attorney General Lynch and the White House itself.

 

We are in the midst of a morality play, where some of the most unlikely villains have aligned themselves with the cause of tyranny and Evil. And standing against them is the one time billionaire Playboy, President Donald Trump, an unlikely hero. Yet here we are, with the tide turning our way once more.

 

All of America’s true patriots must raise their voice today and tomorrow and for as long as it takes to arrive at a day of reckoning for these traitors to the republic and our beloved America, otherwise and to our chagrin, we may eventually see the administrative state simply bury this sorry episode of American history. However, make no mistake, the weaponization of federal agencies will happen again, and the next time, America may not be so fortunate to have a president who is strong enough to withstand the onslaught on behalf of the people and the nation.

 

When due process is ignored and justice is measured by compulsion and our Fourth Amendment Rights against improper searches and seizures seemingly no longer exist, freedom and liberty is endangered. When we see men, who rebuke the Constitution, leverage the law through politics, violating other men’s 6th Amendment right to due process and acquiring power over individual liberty by graft and scheme; and our representatives don’t protect us against them, but rather protects them against the people, our republic is endangered. And when America sees corruption wielding heavy influence and individual liberty so easily dispatched and suppressed, We the People have realized that our freedom too is endangered and soon to perish.

 

It is no small thing to restore a republic once it has fallen into corruption. It may be that the task is impossible, but it lies before us to do. The alternative offers only a dark future, and thus, it is no option at all. And if we do not try, the Founders’ Republic and the larger war for Western Civilization will be lost.

 

By Justin O. Smith

___________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text embraced by brackets and source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Be Aware the Left Lies to Justify Means to a Deluded End


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

June 8, 2019

 

I am quite annoyed with the Dems and Left Stream Media doing their utmost to convict and/or impeach President Trump for crimes he did not commit. In that spirit here are some articles that provide a vastly different picture than the lies disseminated by the Left.

 

JRH 6/8/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

********************

EXCLUSIVE: Another Key Witness Noted Over 100 Times in Mueller Report, Felix Sater, Is a Clinton and Loretta Lynch Linked Deep State Spy

 

By Joe Hoft

June 7, 2019

The Gateway Pundit

 

Bill Clinton & Felix Sater

 

Felix Sater is a deep state Democrat with ties to the Clintons and the Mueller gang.  He’s mentioned over 100 times in the Mueller report but not one mention refers to these connections with Deep State Democrats.

 

In March, the far left and dishonest Democrat leader Adam Schiff announced that he had invited Felix Sater to provide a testimony before Congress.  Sater eventually did not testify as Schiff and his party realized that Sater’s testimony would be detrimental to their Russia-Collusion sham.

 

 

A few weeks before Schiff’s announcement on Sater, far Left Buzzfeed released another bogus report stating President Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen was following President Trump’s orders to lie about an unsupported story on Russia.

 

Mueller’s team in an attempt to prevent a leak investigation into its operations came out 24 hours later and said the story was false.

 

Now we know that the entire junk report was provided to Buzzfeed by Clinton and Mueller lackey, Felix Sater.

 

 

Paul Sperry reported that the individual behind the Buzzfeed fake news story lying about President Trump was none other than Sater, a deep state dirt-bag close to the Clintons and Mueller and his gang of crooks:

 

 

Sperry was right. Sater was seen in pictures with Bill Clinton – (see above). Sater has also been pictured with far left media reporters pushing the Trump-Russia collusion fairy tale:

 

Felix Sater with News

 

Most shocking is Sater’s connections to the Clintons and the Mueller gang of corrupt and criminal attorneys and investigators.

 

It was reported that Sater’s connections began in 1998 [emphasis added]:

 

Sater pleaded guilty to racketeering in December 1998. But instead of being sentenced, Sater, like 16 other defendants in the case, signed a cooperation agreement with the US government, and his entire case file was sealed.

 

Signing Sater’s cooperation agreement for the Department of Justice was Andrew Weissmann, then an assistant US attorney and now a key member of the special counsel’s team. Mueller himself would be the FBI director for most of the time Sater served as a source.

 

The US attorney who oversaw Sater’s pump-and-dump case was Loretta Lynch, later the attorney general under President Barack Obama. While the Senate was considering her confirmation, Sen. Orrin Hatch asked Lynch about how her office handled Sater’s fraud case. In a written response, she said:

 

“The defendant in question, Felix Sater, provided valuable and sensitive information to the government during the course of his cooperation, which began in or about December 1998. For more than 10 years, he worked with prosecutors providing information crucial to national security and the conviction of over 20 individuals, including those responsible for committing massive financial fraud and members of La Cosa Nostra. For that reason, his case was initially sealed.”

 

To the government, he was no longer Felix Sater; in public he was referred to as John Doe, while in hundreds of pages of FBI interview reports, his code name was “The Quarterback.”

 

None of this stopped the Mueller gang from using Sater as a material witness in their Russia collusion sham.

 

In the Mueller report Sater is mentioned in the text and footnotes more than 100 times!  The Mueller team introduces Sater in the report as a New York based real estate adviser:

 

In the late summer of 2015, the Trump Organization received a new inquiry about pursuing a Trump Tower project in Moscow. In approximately September 2015, Felix Sater, a New York based real estate advisor, contacted Michael Cohen, then-executive vice president of the Trump Organization and special counsel to Donald J. Trump.

 

Not once in the Mueller report does the Mueller gang refer to Sater’s connections with the Clintons, Loretta Lynch or with Andrew Weissmann, the suspected drafter of the Mueller report. 

 

Today John Sullivan from the Hill released information that another key witness referred to as a Russian is not even Russian:

 

In Mueller’s report, Ukrainian businessman, Konstantin Kilimnik — the so-called Russian who Paul Manafort shared internal polling data with (gasp) isn’t a Russian, he’s actually as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters, reported Solomon.

 

It looks like Kilimnik is not the only source the Mueller team used to frame President Trump!

 

The entire Clinton-Mueller cabal is coming undone. The Mueller Report is a joke as more and more lies are unveiled in the Democrats’ attempted coup to remove President Trump from office.

 

Hat Tip D. Manny

++++++++++++++++

Trump-Russia Hysteria: Oh Look, Another Glaring Omission In The Mueller Report

 

By Matt Vespa

Jun 07, 2019 6:10 PM

Townhall.com

 

Bob Mueller Source: AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

 

The House Democrats’ ongoing debate about whether to push for a full-blown impeachment proceeding may be dominating the news, along with President Trump’s visit to the UK, but the Mueller report isn’t going away, especially after more tidbits about the investigation itself are coming to light. Special Counsel Robert Mueller is gone. His investigation is over. And yet, we have stories about key witness’s child porn charges being ignored. The Federalist’s Sean Davis did not mince words. He feels that the Mueller report that debunked Russian collusion showed that the special counsel and his team of die-hard Democrats tried to prove that there was such a conspiracy. For two years, they dug and found nothing. Now, after being unable to give Democrats the impeachment ammunition the needed, Mueller, in his exiting presser, all but gave the green light to start such proceedings. It’s that presser that many saw this whole investigation as nothing more than a political hit job and a perversion of a basic tenet of our legal system: innocent until proven guilty. Granted, a lot of us already knew there was no collusion.

 

I mean after the 456th bombshell on this story that had zero evidence to back it up—because there was none—the writing was on the wall months ago. The liberal media continued to peddle it, however, because Trump Derangement Syndrome is real and the Left is desperate to get rid of the president. As for the FBI, well, did they even verify the Trump dossier that was compiled by ex-MI6 spy Christopher Steele and used reportedly as credible evidence to secure a FISA spy warrant against Carter Page, a former foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign? Based on these glaring errors in the report, don’t bet the mortgage on it. Also, the State Department knew this document, funded by the Democrats and the Clinton campaign, was biased political opposition research. John Solomon of The Hill has been doing excellent work tracking the sordid details of this investigation. So, while the focus is on the DOJ/FBI for their alleged misdeed with this investigation, the State Department could be yanked into this storm:

 

Donald Trump’s campaign, it sat buried for more than 2 1/2 years in the files of a high-ranking State Department official.

 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s written account of her Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with FBI informant Christopher Steele shows the Hillary Clinton campaign-funded British intelligence operative admitted that his research was political and facing an Election Day deadline.

 

And that confession occurred 10 days before the FBI used Steele’s now-discredited dossier to justify securing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA warrant to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and the campaign’s ties to Russia.

 

And now we have this omission about a Russian who was actually a State Department intelligence source, though he’s portrayed as some nefarious Kremlin operative working with Paul Manafort. Solomon detailed this “deception by omission” in a lengthy piece (via The Hill) [emphasis mine]:

 

In a key finding of the Mueller report, Ukrainian businessman Konstantin Kilimnik, who worked for Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, is tied to Russian intelligence.

 

But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel Robert Mueller possessed since 2018 — describe Kilimnik as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters.

 

Why Mueller’s team omitted that part of the Kilimnik narrative from its report and related court filings is not known. But the revelation of it comes as the accuracy of Mueller’s Russia conclusions face increased scrutiny.

 

[…]

 

Kilimnik was not just any run-of-the-mill source, either.

 

He interacted with the chief political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, sometimes meeting several times a week to provide information on the Ukraine government. He relayed messages back to Ukraine’s leaders and delivered written reports to U.S. officials via emails that stretched on for thousands of words, the memos show.

 

The FBI knew all of this, well before the Mueller investigation concluded.

 

Alan Purcell, the chief political officer at the Kiev embassy from 2014 to 2017, told FBI agents that State officials, including senior embassy officials Alexander Kasanof and Eric Schultz, deemed Kilimnik to be such a valuable asset that they kept his name out of cables for fear he would be compromised by leaks to WikiLeaks.

 

[…]

 

Three sources with direct knowledge of the inner workings of Mueller’s office confirmed to me that the special prosecutor’s team had all of the FBI interviews with State officials, as well as Kilimnik’s intelligence reports to the U.S. Embassy, well before they portrayed him as a Russian sympathizer tied to Moscow intelligence or charged Kilimnik with participating with Manafort in a scheme to obstruct the Russia investigation.

 

Kasanof’s and Purcell’s interviews are corroborated by scores of State Department emails I reviewed that contain regular intelligence from Kilimnik on happenings inside the Yanukovych administration, the Crimea conflict and Ukrainian and Russian politics. For example, the memos show Kilimnik provided real-time intelligence on everything from whose star in the administration was rising or falling to efforts at stuffing ballot boxes in Ukrainian elections.

 

Those emails raise further doubt about the Mueller report’s portrayal of Kilimnik as a Russian agent. They show Kilimnik was allowed to visit the United States twice in 2016 to meet with State officials, a clear sign he wasn’t flagged in visa databases as a foreign intelligence threat.

 

The emails also show how misleading, by omission, the Mueller report’s public portrayal of Kilimnik turns out to be.

 

For instance, the report makes a big deal about Kilimnik’s meeting with Manafort in August 2016 at the Trump Tower in New York.

 

By that time, Manafort had served as Trump’s campaign chairman for several months but was about to resign because of a growing controversy about the millions of dollars Manafort accepted as a foreign lobbyist for Yanukovych’s party.

 

Specifically, the Mueller report flagged Kilimnik’s delivery of a peace plan to the Trump campaign for settling the two-year-old Crimea conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

 

“Kilimnik requested the meeting to deliver in person a peace plan for Ukraine that Manafort acknowledged to the Special Counsel’s Office was a ‘backdoor’ way for Russia to control part of eastern Ukraine,” the Mueller report stated.

 

But State emails showed Kilimnik first delivered a version of his peace plan in May 2016 to the Obama administration during a visit to Washington. Kasanof, his former handler at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, had been promoted to a top policy position at State, and the two met for dinner on May 5, 2016.

 

[…]

 

So Kilimnik’s delivery of the peace plan to the Trump campaign in August 2016 was flagged by Mueller as potentially nefarious, but its earlier delivery to the Obama administration wasn’t mentioned. That’s what many in the intelligence world might call “deception by omission.”

 

Yeah, sounds like “deception by omission” indeed. I’ll let you debate among yourselves, but this sounds like another example that the Mueller team tried to twist the fact in order to prove that Trump-Russia myth was real. At the same time, while the staff was loaded with liberal Democrats, I see that as a positive. There was nothing to this investigation and that fact that only partisan lefties were digging and still found nothing only adds more credibility to the conclusion: no collusion. There’s no way to pivot away from this. No wonder why Attorney General Barr is investigating the investigators who conducted this circus.

 

+++++++++++++++++++

Judicial Watch: FBI Docs Show Notes about Meeting with Intelligence Community Inspector General about Clinton Emails are ‘Missing’ and CD Containing Notes Is Likely ‘Damaged’ Irreparably

 

JW Press Room

JUNE 07, 2019

Judicial Watch

 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the FBI released 277 pages of redacted records in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that show the FBI failed to produce information from an August 2015 meeting with Intelligence Community Inspector General about Hillary Clinton’s email server. The FBI claimed that notes are “missing” and the CD containing notes from meeting is likely “damaged” irreparably.

 

The records, which were posted on the FBI’s website, are the 32nd release of documents in response to  a Judicial Watch 2016 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:16-cv-02046). Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the Justice Department failed to comply with a July 7, 2016, FOIA request for:

 

  • All FD-302 forms prepared pursuant to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server during her tenure.

 

  • All records of communications between any agent, employee, or representative of the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding, concerning, or related to the aforementioned investigation. This request includes, but is not limited to, any related communications with any official, employee, or representative of the Department of Justice, the Executive Office of the President, the Democratic National Committee, and/or the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton.

 

  • All records related to the meeting between Attorney General Lynch and former President Bill Clinton on June 27, 2016.

 

Included in the documents are February 2019 FBI electronic communications documenting the damaged CD and the missing notes from the August 3, 2015, meeting between FBI special agents and the ICIG about Clinton’s server:

 

For reference, Special Agents (SAs) [redacted] have been gathering and copying materials from the captioned case located in the Washington Field Office (WFO) CI-13 Workbox in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) tasking from Information Management Division (IMD; formerly known as Records Management Division).

 

On or about February 6, 2019, SAs [redacted] opened [redacted]-CYBER-1A27, which contained a CD with a crack on it (a damaged CD). SA [redacted] attempted to copy the damaged CD at the WFO Computer Analysis Response Team (CART) self-service area, but was not able to do so. SA [redacted] spoke with FBI information technology specialists on the ground floor of WFO regarding the damaged CD, who indicated it was unlikely the CD could be copied.

 

The electronic communication regarding the missing “Notes from Meeting” says:

 

On or about February 4, 2016, Special Agents (SAs) [redacted] attempted to locate [redacted] 1A4, described as “Notes from Meeting” acquired by [redacted] (see referenced serial). The SAs looked through all case materials in the CI-13 file and workbox area, however they were not able to locate this item.

 

SA [redacted] inquired with Supervisory Intelligence Analyst (SIA) [redacted] regarding the item, as he was previously the IA assigned to the case. SIA [redacted] contacted [redacted] regarding the item, who indicated he remembered handing over his case notes to SA [redacted] (see attached email).

 

On February 6, 2019, SA [redacted] contacted SA [redacted] regarding the notes.  SA [redacted] explained he documented all relevant case materials before leaving the case and did not retain any notes or other case materials.

 

As such, WFO CI-13 considers the item missing and will enclose this document into 1A4 as a placeholder until the missing item is located.

 

The email referred to in the electronic communication on the missing “Notes from Meeting” reads as follows:

 

From: [Redacted]
To: [Redacted]
CC: [Redacted] [Redacted] [Redacted]
Subject: RE: MYE Serial #??
Date: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 10:43:14 AM

 

I actually remember turning over my original notes for the file for this (it was right at the beginning of the case). I gave them to [redacted] who was running the file then. The only question will be whether or not I kept a copy for myself. I’ll look and see what I have.

 

Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) said during a hearing with Strzok that in 2015 ICIG investigator Fred Rucker advised Strzok of an “anomaly” on Hillary Clinton’s emails going through the private server. The forensic analysis found that all of those emails except four – over 30,000 – “were going to an address that was not on the distribution list.” It was later reported that it was a “Chinese state-owned company” that hacked Clinton’s server. The ICIG referred the Clinton email investigation to the FBI on July 6, 2015, just under a month before the meeting for which the notes were “lost.”

 

The document production contains emails between Justin Cooper (the former close aide to Bill Clinton, who helped set up Hillary Clinton’s email system) and Huma Abedin regarding an attempted breach of the Clinton email server. On January 9, 2011, Cooper emailed Abedin: “I had to shut down the server Someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in i didnt [sic] want to let them have the chance to. I will restart it in the morning.” Despite Abedin’s having explicitly warned Sullivan and Mills that Clinton’s unsecure non-government server had been attacked, the documents contain handwritten FBI notes of Abedin’s 2016 FBI interview in which she told agents she didn’t recall any hacking attempts.

 

“The Obama FBI was frantic to target then-candidate Trump while magically losing or destroying important evidence in the sham investigation of Hillary Clinton’s illicit email system,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This new information underscores the need for a fresh, unbiased investigation into the Clinton email scandal.”

 

In a related case, Judicial Watch recently obtained documents from the DOJ showing that on August 5, 2016 – a month after Comey’s exoneration of Clinton – FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok and Jonathan Moffa were notified by a FBI assistant general counsel from the national security law branch that several FBI 302 interview reports were in need of processing:

 

Today [Redacted] brought over additional 302s from the WFO [Washington Field Office]. Are those supposed to go through the redaction process for production to DOJ on Monday? We’re trying to figure out what needs to be completed this weekend.

 

Page responded by writing to Strzok, Moffa and others that four FBI 302 reports of interviews related to the Clinton “Midyear Exam” investigation had never even been written:

 

[Redacted] to the best of my knowledge, yes they will when Pete identified for [redacted] the DOJ edits that needed to be made to the 302s [redacted] discovered that there were four (I think) 302s that had never been written. What I don’t know is whose 302s they are but unless Pete or Jon are able to respond in short order, I would throw them on the pile for redactions. Thanks so much.

 

Additionally, Judicial Watch recently filed a lawsuit against the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for details of a meeting with the FBI regarding national security threats associated with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s “private” email system.

 

+++++++++++++++++

“The Supreme Court will nix a House Impeachment”

 

By Mark Langfan, INN

June 7, 2019

Israpundit

 

President Donald Trump can and will successfully apply to the Supreme Court the moment the US House of Representatives passes any Impeachment resolution, if that occurs. Legal luminaries such as Professor Alan Dershowitz wrote an article positively treating President Trump’s Supreme Court Impeachment claims. Other constitutional scholars and articles have hysterically panned President Trump’s likely Supreme Court Gambit.

 

Both sides have referenced the 1993 impeachment case of “Nixon v. US” as their legal authority. No, not that “Nixon” as in President Richard M. Nixon of Watergate fame, but one Walter L. Nixon, Jr. a disgraced Federal judge who was actually convicted by a jury “beyond a reasonable doubt” of two separate counts of making false statements before a federal Grand Jury, and actually sentenced to prison.

 

Walter Nixon refused to “resign” his federal judgeship, and was collecting a federal judicial salary in prison. So, the government had to “impeach” him to stop his federal paycheck. The Judge Nixon Supreme Court majority’s legal reasoning is actually the very legal basis for President Trump’s applying to the Supreme Court, and defeating his Impeachment: not on the House “procedures” of Impeachment, but on the substance of the constitutional term of art “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

The Nixon v. US case involved claims by the then-Judge Nixon that the Senate’s impeachment “procedures” were somehow infirm, and therefore, the Senate’s finding him guilty of impeachment was infirm. The specific details of Judge Nixon’s claims about the Senate’s procedures aren’t really important for purposes of this article. What is important is that Judge Nixon only claimed the Senate’s impeachment procedures were infirm, not that the substance of the charges against him were somehow not “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Since, Judge Nixon was actually found guilty by a federal jury that he was “beyond a reasonable doubt” guilty of making false statements to a Federal Grand Jury, Judge Nixon’s actually adjudicated felony crimes clearly hurdled the definitional constitutional requirement of “high crimes.”

 

In President Trump’s case, President Trump will not seek the Supreme Court’s adjudication of a veto over the House’s impeachment procedures. Rather, President Trump will attack the likely legally lightweight factually alleged claims as not raising to the substantive level of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

And it is on the turn of the very question of Impeachment “procedure” as opposed to Impeachment “substance” that the Supreme Court, based on Nixon v US, will find the definitional substance of “high crimes and misdemeanors” “justiciable” and rule for President Trump, and void a House impeachment.

 

To understand the coming Trump v. House-based legal arguments better, one has to look a little deeper at the actual US Constitution itself. The key aspect of the US Constitution itself that will be determinative for a Trump v. House Supreme Court determination is not the Impeachment procedures that are empowered to the Congress in Article 1, or the “Legislative Article” of the Constitution.

 

But rather President Trump will challenge the House under the constitutional Impeachment definitional substance of “high crimes and misdemeanors” found in Article 2, or the “Executive Article” of the US Constitution. As we will see, this Legislative Article 1 versus Executive Article 2 distinction will be determinative in the Supreme Court’s ultimate finding for President Trump.

 

In Nixon v. US, Chief Justice Rehnquist writing for the majority stated the legal standard for the Nixon v US decision as:

 

“A controversy is nonjusticiable—i. e., involves a political question—where there is “a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it . . . .” Baker v. Carr, 369 U. S. 186, 217 (1962).” Nixon v. US, 506 U.S. 224, at 228 (1993)

 

This sounds complicated, but it isn’t. It means to be a too hot potato “political question” for the Supreme Court to rule on, the issue has to be either

 

1) One where the US Constitution specifically relegates the issue at issue as one solely of one of the three branches of government, or,

 

2) One where the claimed constitutional issue is susceptible to meaningful legal interpretation. President Trump will satisfy both of these Nixon “political question” prongs, and will defeat the House on its impeachment definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

On the first Nixon “solely one branch” constitutional prong, unlike Nixon v US, where Judge Nixon solely raised a question on just the text of an Article 1 “Legislative” Article procedural constitutional infirmity, President Trump will be raising an Article 2, “Executive” Article substance constitutional infirmity of the House definition of the Article 2 “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

By the very definition of President Trump’s claim, the Supreme Court will have to look outside of the text and constitutional authority of the Legislative Article 1, and into the heart of the powers and obligations of the Executive Article 2.

 

Therefore, by definition, President Trump’s case “textually demonstrates” it is not solely a Legislatively based Article 1 issue, but really an Article 2 Executive question. Therefore, President Trump will not satisfy the first Nixon prong for being characterized as a “political question.”

 

On the second Nixon “judicially discoverable” constitutional prong, President Trump will receive help from a very unlikely source: the Democrat majority House Judiciary Committee of 1974. The Democratic House Judiciary Impeachment Report of 1974, issued in the wake of the Nixon Watergate scandal, was issued under the Democrat Chairman Peter Rodino, Jr. and entered into the record by the Democrat Zoe Lofgren of California. The report stated that:

“High Crimes and Misdemeanors” has traditionally been considered a ‘term of art,’ like such other constitutional phrases as ‘levying war’ and ‘due process.’

 

“The Supreme Court has held that such phrases must be construed, not according to modern usage, but according to what the framers meant when they adopted them,” Chief Justice Marshall wrote of another such phrase:

 

“It is a technical term. It is used in a very old statute of that country whose language is our language, and whose laws form the substratum of our laws. It is scarcely conceivable that the term was not employed by the framers of our constitution in the sense which had been affixed to it by those from whom we borrowed it.57”

 

Therefore, the Democrat House Judiciary is on record as stating that “high crimes and misdemeanors” is a “term of art”, and hence, is completely susceptible to “judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving” its meaning. And secondly, the Supreme Court has already ruled on similar questions because, “The Supreme Court has held that such phrases must be construed, not according to modern usage, but according to what the framers meant when they adopted them.” Hence, the House Committee has stated that the Supreme Court “must” construe legal “terms of art” found in the US Constitution. Thirdly, they specifically cite Chief Justice Marshall for finding that a constitutional “term of art” “judicially discoverable” and capable of “manageable standards.”

 

In conclusion, President Trump has only begun to fight, and fight he will. Be prepared for many other legal claims that will throw the House Democrats into hysteria and will surely win President Trump a second term.

 

Author: Mark Langfan is Chairman of Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI). He specializes in security issues, and has created an original, educational 3D Topographic Map System of Israel to facilitate clear understanding of the dangers facing Israel and its water supply. It has been studied by U.S. lawmakers and can be seen at www.MarkLangfan.com.

___________________

EXCLUSIVE: Another Key Witness Noted Over 100 Times in Mueller Report, Felix Sater, Is a Clinton and Loretta Lynch Linked Deep State Spy

 

© 2019 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

___________________

Trump-Russia Hysteria: Oh Look, Another Glaring Omission In The Mueller Report

 

Townhall.com is the leading source for conservative news and political commentary and analysis.


Copyright © Townhall.com/Salem Media. All Rights Reserved.

___________________

Judicial Watch: FBI Docs Show Notes about Meeting with Intelligence Community Inspector General about Clinton Emails are ‘Missing’ and CD Containing Notes Is Likely ‘Damaged’ Irreparably

 

© 2019 Judicial Watch, Inc.

_________________

“The Supreme Court will nix a House Impeachment”

 

Copyright © 2017- Israpundit – All Rights Reserved

 

A Look at FBI-Intelligence Community Corruption


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Posted 6/4/19

 

Sara Carter reports on a Judicial Watch FOIA disclosure on FBI corruption in giving Crooked Hillary a pass on her felonious actions with her unsecured email server and her coverup. Then I have a Kelleigh Nelson article that chronicles Mueller-FBI-American Intelligence corruption.

 

JRH 6/4/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

********************

FBI Failed to Document Four Clinton Witness Interviews. Barr Should Reopen Clinton Probe

 

By Sara Carter

June 3, 2019

SaraACarter/com

 

William Barr

 

The FBI failed to document at least four interviews of witnesses in the bureau’s investigation into former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server to send classified emails, according to documents obtained by the government watchdog Judicial Watch.

 

Judicial Watch also discovered among the 218 pages of emails between former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and his paramour former FBI Attorney Lisa Page that then FBI General Counsel James Baker had instructed “FBI officials to expedite the release of FBI investigative material to Hillary Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall in August 2016. Kendall and the FBI’s top lawyer discussed specifically quickly obtaining the “302” report of the FBI/DOJ interview of Mrs. Clinton.”

 

These findings are significant, as they come at a crucial time when the Department of Justice under Attorney General William Barr is investigating the bureau’s handling of both the Clinton probe and the investigation into the origination of the bureau’s investigation into President Donald Trump’s campaign alleged – now debunked – ties to Russia.

 

“These incredible documents show the leadership of the FBI rushed to give Hillary Clinton her FBI interview report shortly before the election,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And the documents also show the FBI failed to timely document interviews in the Clinton email ‘matter’ – further confirming the whole investigation was a joke. AG Barr can’t reopen the Clinton email investigation soon enough.”

 

The information obtained by Judicial Watch coincides with documents obtained by Congressional investigations. For example, Rep. John Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, told Fox New’s Maria Bartiromo Sunday that Strzok’s involvement in the Trump campaign’s defensive briefing mired in conflict.

 

First, Ratcliffe noted that it was Strzok who opened the official investigation into Trump’s campaign on July 31, 2016 dubbed “Crossfire Hurricane.” Ratcliffe warned that U.S. Attorney John Durham, who has been appointed by Barr to investigate the bureau, was essentially acting as a ‘special counsel’ in the DOJ’s investigation.

 

“It’s interesting that 18 days later on August 17, of 2016 that the FBI and CIA conducted a counterintelligence briefing for the purpose of protecting and warning Donald Trump would put in charge for coordinating that briefing Peter Strzok – the same agent who was already investigating the Trump campaign,” Ratcliffe told Bartiromo. “The same agent who eight days before that defensive briefing to protect and warn Donald Trump sent a text message saying he was going to ‘stop him.’ Then two days before that defensive briefing sent a text message saying ‘we need an insurance policy’ against the Trump presidency.”

 

“So little wonder on that day of August 17, 2016 Donald Trump isn’t warned about Russian interference in his campaign and he wasn’t briefed about the Steele Dossier, wasn’t briefed about Carter Page,” Ratcliffe added.

 

Currently, DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is putting together his report on the FBI’s handling of the FBI’s probe into the Trump campaign. According to numerous congressional sources the investigation is expected to include the FBI’s defensive briefing to Trump and the lack of information provided to the Trump campaign. Strzok, who was vehemently anti-Trump in his text messages to Page, is also expected to be a significant part of the Horowitz investigation.

 

VIDEO: Rep. John Ratcliffe Reveals Peter Strzok’s Role in Spying on Trump Campaign

 

[Posted by james hoft

Published on Jun 2, 2019

 

Rep. John Ratcliffe Reveals Peter Strzok’s Role in Spying on Trump Campaign]

 

Judicial Watch FOIA:

 

The documents were obtained in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to a December 4, 2017, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00154)) for:

 

  • All records of communications, including but not limited to, emails, text messages and instant chats, between FBI official Peter Strozk and FBI attorney Lisa Page;

 

  • All travel requests, travel authorizations, travel vouchers and expense reports of Peter Strozk;

 

  • All travel requests, travel authorizations, travel vouchers and expense reports of Lisa Page.

 

Revelation: Below Is an ‘Exact Excerpt’ From Judicial Watch’s Findings

 

On August 16, 2016, at 10:02 p.m. Baker emails then-Associate Deputy Director David Bowdich; Michael Steinbach, former executive assistant director for national security; former Acting Assistant Director Jason V. Herring; former FBI lawyer Lisa Page; former Principal Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson; Michael Kortan, FBI assistant director for public affairs, now retired; James Rybicki, former chief of staff to Comey; and others to inform them that he “just spoke” with Clinton’s lawyer Kendall, who requested documents from the FBI. Baker says he told Kendall he would “need to submit a request.” Baker tells them, “I said we would process it expeditiously.”

 

I just spoke with David Kendall … I conveyed our view that in order to obtain the documents [FBI investigative material] they are seeking they need to submit a request pursuant to the Privacy Act and FOIA. I said they could submit a letter to me covering both statutes. They will send it in the morning. I said that we would process it expeditiously. David asked us to focus first on the Secretary’s 302 [FBI interview report]. I said OK. [Redacted] We will have to focus on this issue tomorrow and get the 302 out the door as soon as possible and then focus on the rest of the stuff.

 

The following day, August 17, 2016, Kendall sent a FOIA/Privacy Act request on “behalf of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton” to the FBI’s top lawyer with a request for “expeditious processing.” Baker passes this request to Bowdich, Steinbach, Herring, Page, Anderson:

 

 

“In my view, we need to move as quickly as possible on this, but pursuant to David’s oral request last night, we should focus first on Secretary Clinton’s 302…. Is the end of this week out of the question for her 302?”

 

In a follow-up email exchange, the same day, Anderson arranged for Herring, Page, former FBI Assistant Director and head of the Office of Congressional Affairs Gregory Brower, Strzok and others to “coordinate a plan for processing and releasing” Clinton’s 302, though one official reminds others that they should process the request “consistent” with other requests.

 

Then, in an August 21, 2016, email exchange Baker tells his people that he would “alert” Kendall shortly before Clinton’s 302 was to be posted on the FBI’s FOIA Vault webpage. On September 2, 2016, the FBI announced the release of Clinton’s interview documents.

 

Finally, on August 24, 2016, the acting FBI FOIA unit chief said he sees “no problem” with giving Hillary’s attorney a heads up before her records were posted to the Vault.

 

Other documents show that on August 5, 2016, Page, Strzok and FBI intelligence analyst Jonathan Moffa are notified by a FBI assistant general counsel from the national security law branch that additional 302’s were in need of processing:

 

Today [Redacted] brought over additional 302s from the WFO [Washington Field Office]. Are those supposed to go through the redaction process for production to DOJ on Monday? We’re trying to figure out what needs to be completed this weekend.

 

Page responds by writing to Strzok, Moffa and others that four FBI 302 report of interviews related to the Clinton “Midyear Exam” investigation had never even been written:

 

[Redacted] to the best of my knowledge, yes they will when Pete identified for [redacted] the DOJ edits that needed to be made to the 302s [redacted] discovered that there were four (I think) 302s that had never been written. What I don’t know is whose 302s they are but unless Pete or Jon are able to respond in short order, I would throw them on the pile for redactions. Thanks so much.

 

On August 24, 2016, Daily Beast reporter Shane Harris sent an inquiry to the FBI asking if Comey’s admission to Congress was accurate that Hillary’s lawyers at William & Connolly did not possess the security clearances needed to see and possess highly classified Hillary emails being stored at their law offices. Harris’s question set off a scramble at the top of the FBI all the way up to Comey over the next 28 hours, producing a seven-page (mostly redacted) email discussion, with Lisa Page concluding, “Could we say something more equivocal?”

 

In a September 1, 2016, email exchange, Page, Strzok, Office of Public Affairs official Michael Kortan and Special Agent Richard Quinn discuss an email from The Hill’s John Solomon, wherein Solomon forwarded them his draft article for Circa.com citing “government sources” detailing extensive evidence the FBI had collected, which showed Hillary Clinton “violated federal record-keeping laws” through her use of a private BlackBerry and server, despite the security and legal risks she was told they posed.  Solomon asked for any final “guidance” from the FBI before publishing. Page writes to Moffa, Strzok and a redacted FBI official, it was “pretty inaccurate,” but provided nothing to support her charge of its inaccuracy. Judicial Watch’s work on the Hillary Clinton email scandal is cited extensively in the column, and former U.S. Attorney Matt Whitaker was quoted as well, saying a special prosecutor was needed to look into Hillary’s use of the personal server.

 

On August 16, 2016, after Congress requested that the FBI supply additional copies of the binders of Clinton server-investigation materials, an unidentified FBI official complained to his colleagues of being understaffed and under supplied:

 

We literally do not have the office supplies to do this. Nor do I have the IAs [Investigative Assistants/Analysts] for assistance…. These binders are huge and each one took hours to compile.

 

+++

I am not trying to throw shade…. I just wish decisions could get made by considering resources.

 

I need people in [room] 7947 ready to go in the early AM and a charge card for Staples.”

 

++++++++++++++++

Judicial Watch: New Strzok-Page Emails Reveal FBI Gave Special Treatment to Hillary Clinton’s Demands for Email Investigation Information Just Before Election

 

Press Room

JUNE 03, 2019

Judicial Watch

 

[Sara Carter (above) placed this Judicial Watch press release in her post less this last paragraph from the end:]

 

“These incredible documents show the leadership of the FBI rushed to give Hillary Clinton her FBI interview report shortly before the election,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And the documents also show the FBI failed to timely document interviews in the Clinton email ‘matter’ – further confirming the whole investigation was a joke. AG Barr can’t reopen the Clinton email investigation soon enough.”

 

+++++++++++++++++

Robert Mueller, The FBI And Obama’s Culture Of Corruption

 

By Kelleigh Nelson

June 4th, 2019

News With Views

 

Sometimes duplicity and treason are markers of the enemy, and sometimes, the failed intention of a masterful ally. But, nevertheless, as they burden you with a vexing brand of love, they become nothing more than the kiss of Judas, pressing a crown of thorns into your flesh.  —Addison Webster Moore

 

Americans cannot comprehend how their fellow countrymen could not love their country. But the left’s anti-Americanism is intrinsic to their entire worldview. Liberals promote the right of Islamic fanatics for the same reason they promote the rights of adulterers, pornographers, abortionists, criminals, and Communists. They instinctively root for anarchy against civilization. The inevitable logic of the liberal position is to be for treason. —Ann Coulter

 

And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever. —Thomas Jefferson

 

Incrimination through innuendo is the rule today as I listened to the liar of truth, Robert Mueller.  Truth is treason in the empire of lies and truth has now become the new hate speech.  Mueller’s final words stood the “rule of law” and presumption of innocence on their heads.

 

Apparently, Mueller wanted President Trump to appoint him FBI director again and he was rejected. The very next day, Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller to investigate the bogus Russian collusion.  Undoubtedly, President Trump knew that after 9/11, FBI Director Mueller purged the FBI training documents on Islamist terrorists and he acquiesced to the Muslim Brotherhood front group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

 

Robert Mueller had joined Trump’s National Golf Club in Virginia and seventeen years later, Mueller claimed the family was not making full use of the membership, and he wanted a portion of his $15K back. The Club justifiably refused. Unbelievably, this is included in footnote 529 on page 80-81 of the Mueller report.  No doubt Mueller had negative feelings for Donald Trump.

 

Deep State Revenge

 

After Attorney General (AG) Jeff Sessions recused himself from overseeing the Russian collusion debacle, Rod Rosenstein became the AG in charge of the investigation.  He disregarded the criminal conduct requirement and authorized a broad and vague counterintelligence probe, directing the special counsel to investigate “any links” between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.

 

Mueller passes Witch Hunt Torch to Nadler. Branco toon

 

This was unprecedented and gave a blank check to Mueller and his gang of Hillary supporting democrat attorneys the right to go after anyone or anything related to President Trump.

 

After the nearly two-year investigation, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Republican Deep State insider and hardcore Never Trumper, again put a knife in our President’s back.

 

Mueller’s actions made it clear he wanted to nail President Trump, he wanted him out of office, but there was no damning evidence.

 

Mueller’s eight-minute speech regarding the 448 page Two-Volume Special Counsel report contained these incriminating words, “And as set forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.” (Volume II of the Mueller report was the obstruction-of-justice investigation regarding President Trump’s actions and conduct during the entire spurious Russian collusion inquiry.)

 

AG Barr had specifically asked Mueller, “Is your reason for not charging Trump anything to do with the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines?” Barr said that Mueller told him three times, “No, that has nothing to do with it.” Barr is on record on two occasions saying that Mueller told him three times the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines have nothing to do with his decision not to indict the president or not to link the president to crimes.

 

Democrat Alan Dershowitz spelled it out in his recent Hill article. “Mueller went beyond the conclusion of his report and gave a political gift to Congressional democrats who are seeking to institute impeachment proceedings against President Trump. By implying that President Trump might have committed obstruction of justice, Mueller effectively invited Democrats to institute impeachment proceedings.”

 

Mueller failed to investigate the bogus dossier, FISA abuse, Obama’s spying on the Trump campaign, or the players involved. The intelligence community has proven themselves to be a venomous nest of traitorous vipers.

 

Spying and FISA Abuse

 

John Solomon reported over a year ago that spying on the Trump campaign occurred earlier than the summer of 2016.  “It originated earlier, 1,700 miles away in London, when foreign figures contacted Trump campaign advisers and provided the FBI with hearsay allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, bureau documents and interviews of government insiders. These contacts in spring 2016, some from trusted intelligence sources, others from Hillary Clinton supporters, occurred well before FBI headquarters authorized an official counterintelligence investigation on July 31, 2016.”

 

Rep. Mark Meadows, (R-NC) said, “This new information begs the questions: Who were the informants working for, who were they reporting to and why has the DOJ and FBI gone to such great lengths to hide these contacts?”

 

Former Deputy Assistant AG Victoria Toensing and her husband, former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Joe diGenova, were on Hannity on May 31st, along with a full panel of guests. Toensing said that there is evidence the Obama administration FISA abuse started as early as 2012, and the abuse goes all the way to the top.

 

Obama’s Illegal Surveillance

 

The Obama White House used the most sensitive intrusive surveillance systems of the NSA to spy on Americans.  A ruling by FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer finds that 85 percent of NSA database requests under FISA section 702 authority at the DOJ were illegal or noncompliant. Surveillance systems, including PRISM, were spying on thousands of Americans, including Donald Trump and those around him. (United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review Amicus Brief)  Moreover, Collyer finds that the DOJ showed an appalling “lack of institutional candor.”

 

In April 2017, Judge Collyer found that unwarranted and illegal surveillance of American citizens was done by the highest reaches of the Obama Administration for at least 4 years, starting in 2012. (Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens – MAY 26, 2017).  Moreover, James Comey authorized and allowed for limitless, continuous, unlawful, and warrantless access by three Federal contractors. (Institutional Lack of Candor – FISA Violations January 24, 2018).  Link

 

Judge Collyer found that its targets were American citizens and prominent Republicans and the abuse was continuous, frequently entering the same person’s name over a protracted period of time.

 

Collyer ruled that this information was shared and disseminated unlawfully to John Brennan and James Clapper. Brennan admitted that the CIA had hacked into the Senate Intelligence Committee’s computers. (Brennan, Clapper, and Comey were instrumental in infecting the DOJ and FBI with the Steele Dossier.)

 

Furthermore, information was disseminated within the Obama administration in violation of the 4th amendment, all under the authorization of James Comey. He knew it was illegal and he should be indicted for these and other crimes.

 

When they got caught, they fought back with treason by continuing to usurp the Constitution. Undermining the incoming President with the Russia hoax, trying to cover up their litany of crimes, and staging an attempted coup against Donald Trump.

They didn’t get away with it.

 

Admiral Mike Rogers

 

In the spring of 2016, the Director of the NSA, Admiral, discovered that the NSA’s comprehensive database collecting all electronic communications in the United States was being searched by unauthorized FBI “contractors” and he moved to “cut off that access.” Link

 

If Admiral Mike Rogers hadn’t put a stop to the misuse of the NSA, none of this would have come to light. Former assistant Attorney General, John Carlin, tried to have Rogers fired for fear that the skullduggery would be exposed further, but he failed. Rogers visited candidate Trump shortly after his discovery to warn him that Trump Tower was “wiretapped.”

 

Wray-FBI, Haspel-CIA & Coats-Dir. 0f National Intelligence

 

Stonewalling Classified Documents

 

In a Memorial Day radio interview, Joe diGenova told that FBI Director Christopher Wray, CIA Director Gina Haspel, and Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats have been stonewalling the release of classified documents to AG Barr prior to the President’s declassification. Take note that Dan Coats is a former Senator from Indiana and a close friend of VP Mike Pence who was in charge of the Trump transition team and recommended Coats.

 

AG Barr was fed up trying to get classified documents, so he went to the President and told him he could not get the answers the President requested.  Twenty-four hours later, the President declassified the documents.  The White House also instructed several agencies to cooperate with Barr’s inquiry, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Defense Department, the State Department, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

 

The intelligence community is in full resistance to disclosing what they did during the campaign.  There’s a full-scale war between AG Barr and another FBI director who thinks he’s James Comey.  DiGenova said that Christopher Wray is an “unmitigated disaster,” and we are “watching the quintessential Washington power battle.”  Devvy Kidd’s latest article on Wray fully agrees with diGenova.

 

DiGenova believes the Obama administration spying, exposed by Judge Rosemary Collyer, is a bigger scandal than the FBI’s Russian collusion coup.  Shortly after the 2012 election, the Obama administration began their illegal accessing of the National Security Agency (NSA) database via 702 queries.  And now, the FBI and CIA fear that since these disclosures have become publicly known, their powers may be cut back, FISA may be restricted and some additional people may go to prison.

 

AG Barr’s Investigators

 

Talk about the foxes in the hen house!  CIA Director Gina Haspel, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and FBI Director Chris Wray are all participating in the investigation, which Barr first announced publicly during a congressional hearing last month.

 

Dan Coats is a long-time establishment creature having served as an Indiana Congressman and Senator for a total of sixteen years.

 

FBI Director Chris Wray said that he does not consider court-approved FBI surveillance to be “spying” and said he has no evidence the FBI illegally monitored Trump’s campaign.  This alone should worry AG William Barr.

 

According to Sam Faddis, former CIA Ops officer, and author of Beyond Repair: The Decline and Fall of the CIA, Trump’s CIA director, Gina Haspel, is a protégée of John Brennan. She was at his right hand during all the critical junctures. Haspel was the CIA’s London Section Chief during the time the Deep State was working with former MI6 agent, Christopher Steele, and couldn’t possibly have been in the dark about the attempt to subvert the election/presidency of Donald Trump.  Although Trump called for the revocation of John Brennan’s secret security clearance, the Deep State has made sure that this has NOT happened as yet.  Most likely, they’re waiting out his presidency to return to “business as usual.”  Link

 

Remember John Huber, the missing appointee by Jeff Sessions?  Fourteen months ago AG Sessions had asked Huber to look into issues related to the sale of Uranium One and allegations that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had been improperly involved in the process, as well as broader claims of corruption at the Clinton Foundation.  In a recent interview on CBS, Mr. Barr seemed to suggest that what evidence Huber found, if any, may soon be revealed.  Barr also revealed that Inspector General Horowitz and John Durham have taken over most of Huber’s responsibilities.

 

One wonders with this cast of characters if we’ll ever see true justice.

 

Conclusion

 

As Gregg Jarrett stated on Fox News, Mueller’s actions were not only noxious, but patently unfair to Trump.  The special counsel publicly besmirched the president with tales of suspicious behavior and turned our justice system on its head.

 

Everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence.  It is the bedrock on which justice is built.  Throughout his career, there is proof this has never registered with Robert Mueller. Link and Link

 

Lindsey Graham, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee needs to subpoena Robert Mueller.  He should have staff lawyers ready to question him, just like the House committee wanted to do with Attorney General William Barr.

++++++++

SEE ALSO:

 

FBI ‘WORKED TO PROTECT HILLARY’ IN EMAIL SCANDAL; WND Exclusive; 6/3/19

___________________________

FBI Failed to Document Four Clinton Witness Interviews. Barr Should Reopen Clinton Probe

 

Sara A. Carter is a national and international award winning investigative reporter whose stories have ranged from national security, terrorism, immigration and front line coverage of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

© 2019 Sara A. Carter | All Rights Reserved.

_____________________

Judicial Watch: New Strzok-Page Emails Reveal FBI Gave Special Treatment to Hillary Clinton’s Demands for Email Investigation Information Just Before Election

 

© 2019 Judicial Watch, Inc.

Judicial Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions are received from individuals, foundations, and corporations and are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

________________________

Robert Mueller, The FBI And Obama’s Culture Of Corruption

 

Kelleigh Nelson has been researching the Christian right and their connections to the left, the new age, and cults since 1975. Formerly an executive producer for three different national radio talk show hosts, she was adept at finding and scheduling a variety of wonderful guests for her radio hosts. She and her husband live in Knoxville, TN, and she has owned her own wholesale commercial bakery since 1990. Prior to moving to Tennessee, Kelleigh was marketing communications and advertising manager for a fortune 100 company in Ohio. Born and raised in Chicago, Illinois, she was a Goldwater girl with high school classmate, Hillary Rodham, in Park Ridge, Illinois. Kelleigh is well acquainted with Chicago politics and was working in downtown Chicago during the 1968 Democratic convention riots. Kelleigh is presently the secretary for Rocky Top Freedom Campaign, a strong freedom advocate group. Email:Proverbs133@bellsouth.net Website: http://www.rockytopfreedom.com [Blog Editor: link did not work in my browser.]

 

© 2019 NWV – All Rights Reserved

 

Mueller and Obstruction of Justice


When Robert Mueller tried to create a crime when none existed should be a crime worthy of investigation. When Mueller tried to Europeanize the American legal system by insisting President Trump prove he is not guilty rather than innocent until proven guilty, is worthy of an investigation.

 

Investigate Mueller and his 13 angry Democrat Prosecutors.

 

JRH 6/2/19 (Hat Tip: CONSERVATIVE, RIGHT WING NEWS)

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

************************

Mueller and Obstruction of Justice

 

By Daniel John Sobieski

June 1, 2019

American Thinker

 

The irony was that Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn was charged with and plead guilty to making false statements to the FBI.

 

By his own standards Robert Mueller was guilty of making “false statements” in his parting gift to Democrat impeachment seekers. He was not, however,  under legal oath, which is maybe why Democrats did not want him to be questioned by Congress in a hearing beforehand.

 

Mueller has had to walk back his lie about Office of Legal Counsel policy keeping him from indicting a sitting president. In his alleged “farewell” address, former Special Counsel Mueller managed to channel former FBI Director James Comey. Where is it written that former FBI directors get to recite a litany of possible charges against someone they are not going to charge? If, as Mueller had said, you could indict a sitting President,  and that is why he was not indicted, then why did he spend some $40 million the past two years pursuing an indictment? Just what happened to the presumption of innocence?

 

Mueller told AG Barr that it was not DOJ policy on not indicting sitting presidents that guided his decisions. Then, knowing the lamestream media would run with his lie, said the opposite. Elizabeth Vaughan noted at Red State:

 

In his statement this morning, Robert Mueller said “if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.” He also said that, because of Office of Legal Counsel guidance, his team did not have the option of charging a sitting president with a crime.

 

This is the opposite of what he told Attorney General William Barr and several other DOJ officials at a meeting which took place on March 5th.

 

Barr was asked about why Mueller had failed to come to a conclusion on the question of obstruction of justice during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 1st. He said, “We were frankly surprised that they were not going to reach a decision on obstruction and we asked them a lot about the reasoning behind this. Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting, in response to our questioning, that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion he would have found obstruction.”

 

Barr made a similar remark at the press conference he held prior to the public release of the redacted Mueller Report. He told reporters, “We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that was not his position.”

 

Robert Mueller

 

It is not his or any prosecutor’s job to “exonerate” anyone. They are presumed innocent, are they not? It was not a matter of whether you can indict a sitting president. The fact is that no president can be indicted for doing what he is constitutionally empowered and entitled to do. That is not obstruction of justice. Trump could have fired Mueller just as he did Comey and closed his entire investigation at any time and it would not have been obstruction of justice.  So noted legal scholar Alan Dershowitz in an interview with Leandra Bernstein of the Sinclair Broadcast Group on ABC7/WJLA Thursday:

 

Constitutional lawyer and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said the special counsel had a legally flawed approach to investigating alleged obstruction of justice by President Donald Trump.

 

What jumps out at me is that the Mueller people got the law all wrong on obstruction of justice,” Dershowitz told Sinclair Broadcast Group in a Thursday interview. “They came to the conclusion that a president could obstruct justice by simply exercising his constitutional authority under Article 2.”…

 

According to Dershowitz, the president was within his authority to fire the FBI director and would have been justified, under the unified executive theory, to shut down the investigation.

 

“The position I’ve taken from day one is for the president to obstruct justice, he has to go beyond his own permissible constitutional authority and engage in conduct that would be a crime for anyone else, like tampering with witnesses, obstructing a witness, paying witnesses, telling them to lie. None of that is charged against President Trump,” Dershowitz said.

 

Trump also could have fired Mueller and closed the Office of Special Counsel at any time. If he couldn’t, Democrats and some Republicans wouldn’t have tried to pass laws preventing just that event.  They are creatures of the executive. Trump can fire any of his executive branch employees at any time for any reason. Agreeing with that assessment, Andrew C. McCarthy writes at National Review:

 

In our system, we have a unitary executive. All executive power is vested in a single official, the president of the United States. That means subordinate executive officers do not have their own power; they are delegated to exercise the president’s power. When they act, they are, in effect, the president acting. …

 

Prosecutorial power is executive in nature. Federal prosecutors therefore exercise the president’s power. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Special Counsel Robert Mueller have no power of their own; they exercise President Trump’s prosecutorial power for as long as that arrangement suits President Trump. The president does not need cause to fire them. He does not need to explain any dismissal to Congress — “Gee, it’s Thursday and I feel like firing someone” is good enough….

 

If lawmakers believe the president is abusing his power by firing good public servants arbitrarily, they can impeach the president. Or they can try to bend the president into better behavior by cutting off funding, refusing to confirm nominees, or holding oversight hearings that embarrass the administration. Congress has these powerful political tools. But it does not have legal means to usurp the president’s constitutional power.

 

But exercising presidential powers is not a crime. Of course, Robert Mueller didn’t need a crime. In the best traditions of Josef Stalin, Mueller with Flynn and others needed only the man. He would find the crime, As Dershowitz writes in the Washington Examiner:

 

Special counsel Robert Mueller was commissioned to investigate not only crime but the entire Russian “matter.” That is an ominous development that endangers the civil liberties of all Americans.

 

Federal prosecutors generally begin by identifying specific crimes that may have been committed — in this case, violation of federal statutes. But no one has yet identified the specific statute or statutes that constrain Mueller’s investigation of the Russian matter. It is not a violation of any federal law for a campaign to have collaborated with a foreign government to help elect their candidate…

 

One does not have to go back to the Soviet Union and Lavrentiy Beria’s infamous boast to Stalin, “Show me the man and I will show you the crime,” in order to be concerned about the expansion of elastic criminal statutes. There are enough examples of abuse in our own history.

 

From McCarthyism to the failed prosecutions of Sen. Ted Stevens, Rep. Thomas DeLay, Gov. Rick Perry and others, we have seen vague criminal statutes stretched in an effort to criminalize political differences.

 

Obstruction of what? An investigation fraudulently spawned by James Comey’s felonious leaking of a private conversation with President Trump and a fake dossier put together by a British spy from Russian sources and paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC? Funny, but Mueller never said his investigation was obstructed or impeded in any way. Nor was anything else.

 

How can you obstruct justice on social media in front of 300 million people anyway? Mueller is now free to run and hide from testifying before Congress and answering embarrassing questions like when did he know there was no collusion and why did he keep going anyway, why he hired a team of Democratic lawyers, including one from the Clinton Foundation, and had as his chief deputy someone who was at Hillary’s victory party?

 

By refusing to go after the real colluders with Russia who committed real crimes, it is Robert Mueller who was obstructing justice.

________________________

Daniel John Sobieski is a freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in Investor’s Business DailyHuman EventsReason Magazine and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.

 

© American Thinker 2019

 

About American Thinker

 

American Thinker is a daily internet publication devoted to the thoughtful exploration of issues of importance to Americans. Contributors are accomplished in fields beyond journalism and animated to write for the general public out of concern for the complex and morally significant questions on the national agenda.

 

There is no limit to the topics appearing on American Thinker. National security in all its dimensions — strategic, economic, diplomatic, and military — is emphasized. The right to exist and the survival of the State of Israel are of great importance to us. Business, science, technology, medicine, management, and economics in their practical and ethical dimensions are also emphasized, as is the state of American culture.

 

Staff … READ THE REST

 

US Attorney Huber NEVER EVEN STARTED His [FISA] Investigation


Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions tasked Federal U.S. Attorney John Huber (Office in Utah) to investigate FISA abuse allegations in spying on the Trump campaign. The problem with Huber’s investigation: HE DIDN’T DO SQUAT! Huber is either incompetent or a Deep Stater.

 

Thankfully President Trump now has a competent Attorney General in William Barr. Barr removed Huber whose tasks were assigned to U.S. Attorney John Durham. Story at The Gateway Pundit.

 

JRH 5/31/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

**********************

BREAKING: Attorney General Barr Discloses US Attorney Huber NEVER EVEN STARTED His Investigation — US Attorney John Durham Took Over His Work

 

By Joe Hoft

May 31, 2019

The Gateway Pundit

 

John Huber

 

Today on CBS Attorney General William Barr disclosed that the Huber investigation is over.

 

Huber was assigned to look at FISA applications and the electronic surveillance during the 2016 election and actions by Hillary Clinton.

 

Huber did not even start his investigation.

 

He didn’t do a damn thing!

 

AG Barr said this morning on CBS News that Huber did nothing and his work was taken over by the team he set up under US Attorney John Durham:

 

JAN CRAWFORD: Um, what’s the status of Huber’s investigation in Utah? I think the former Attorney General Sessions had asked him to look at this.

 

WILLIAM BARR: Right, so Huber had originally been asked to take a look at the FISA applications and the electronic surveillance but then he stood back and put that on hold while the Office of Inspector General was conducting its review, which would’ve been normal for the department. And he was essentially on standby in case Mr. Horowitz referred a matter to him to be handled criminally. So he has not been active on this front in recent months and so Durham is taking over that role. The other issues he’s been working on relate to Hillary Clinton. Those are winding down and hopefully we’ll be in a position to bring those to fruition.

 

JAN CRAWFORD: So he won’t be involved in this really at all then?

 

WILLIAM BARR: No.

 

JAN CRAWFORD: This is his role, it’s done?

 

WILLIAM BARR: Right.

 

JAN CRAWFORD: And now Durham is going to pick up–

 

WILLIAM BARR: Yes, right.

 

We reported this three days ago from an interview of Joe diGenova and now AG Barr has confirmed it.

 

John Huber was the special prosecutor tapped by former AG Jeff Sessions to investigate FISA abuses by Obama’s DOJ/FBI.  Sessions nominated Huber to perform this investigation after numerous calls for a special investigation into the Clinton Foundation and the Deep State.

 

But months ago we reported that nothing was getting done.

 

Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Doug Collins (R-GA) sent a letter to special prosecutor John Huber on January 8th demanding answers by a January 21st deadline.

 

“Your investigation has been ongoing for over nine months. During the course of our extensive investigation we have interviewed more than a dozen current and former DOJ and FBI personnel, and were surprised to hear none of these potentially informative witnesses testified to speaking with you,” the GOP lawmakers wrote.

 

The Republican Congressmen then blasted Huber for being a no-show at the December hearing where Clinton Foundation whistleblowers Lawrence Doyle of DM Income Advisors and John Moynihan of JFM Associates testified.

 

The Clinton Foundation whistleblowers, Mr. Moynihan and Mr. Doyle told the committee they had to send their evidence to the Huber investigation THREE TIMES because they kept losing it.

 

In October, Congressman Meadows and Jim Jordan said they wanted to haul John Huber in before Congress to testify because they had not received any updates on Huber’s investigation.

 

Now we know that it was all a farce.  Huber did NOTHING!

 

Huber and the former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, should be brought before a grand jury and investigated for their actions in obstructing justice.

 

The American people are very angry about all that is going on in DC.  We want OUR country back!  We DEMAND justice!

_____________________

© 2019 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

 

ABOUT The Gateway Pundit