Ranks within CIA reportedly ‘anxious’ as DOJ plans to dig deeper on suspicious origins of Russia probe


As the Mainstream Media keep their heads between the cheeks of their own gluteus maximus with fake outrage after fake outrage of President Trump falsely accused of breaking the law, it appears the true colluders AGAINST the U.S. government might be getting nervous. (The latest false outrage is President Trump would look at unsolicited voluntarily offered oppo research and on an opposing candidate, BUT pooh-pooh solicited and paid for FICTITIOUS information manufactured from foreign sources – RUSSIA – and composed by a former MI6 Agent Christopher Steele.)

BizPac Review has the story that Federal Prosecutor John Durham and AG William Barr is investigating the CIA working with the FBI on sources and actions to frame President Trump for Election interference.

 

JRH 6/14/19 (Hat Tip Ares and Athena)

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

Ranks within CIA reportedly ‘anxious’ as DOJ plans to dig deeper on suspicious origins of Russia probe

 

By Samantha Chang 

June 13, 2019

BizPac Review

 

 

US Attorney John Durham plans to question two CIA officers about the suspicious origins of Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. (screenshots)

 

The Department of Justice plans to interview two CIA officers for its investigation into the suspicious origins of Robert Mueller’s fruitless Russia collusion investigation.

 

Specifically, U.S. Attorney John Durham of Connecticut will question a senior counterintelligence official and a senior analyst who investigated Russia’s attempts to interfere in the 2016 election, according to the New York Times.

 

Sources say that the Deep State anti-Trump operatives within the CIA are worried about the potential fallout from this.

 

Did Obama FBI conspire with the CIA?

 

US Attorney General William Barr is trying to learn more about the sources that the Obama CIA and FBI relied on before deciding to spy on Trump campaign officials.

 

CIA Director Gina Haspel said her agency will cooperate with the investigation, but will ensure that CIA sources, methods, and intelligence are protected.

 

Basically, this is the first of a long line of inquiry to determine why bogus FISA warrants were issued to spy on 2016 Trump campaign officials and how the Obama FBI coordinated with the CIA to conclude that Russia allegedly tried to help Trump get elected and undermine Hillary Clinton.

 

This is all ironic since President Trump has been far tougher on Russian President Vladimir Putin than Barack Obama ever was.

 

(Source: Fox News)

 

Obama holdovers in CIA are worried

 

So far, the Barr investigation is not a criminal inquiry, but could lead to charges if wrongdoing is uncovered.

 

Sources told the Times that ranks within the CIA are anxious about the probe, since it could reveal the coup they were plotting against a sitting U.S. president — both before he took office and since.

 

Not surprisingly, Democrats are foaming at the mouth to protest AG Barr’s inquiry. This is especially ironic since Democrats have been investigating Trump and everyone associated with him around the clock — even for tangential matters unrelated to election meddling.

 

Former Obama CIA director John Brennan lashed out on Twitter, writing: “This is just the latest example of what Vice President Biden meant when he said that Mr. Trump is an existential threat to our country. “Unfit to be President” is a gross understatement. Donald Trump is undeserving of any public office, and all Americans should be outraged.”

 

This is just the latest example of what Vice President Biden meant when he said that Mr. Trump is an existential threat to our country. “Unfit to be President” is a gross understatement. @realDonaldTrump is undeserving of any public office, and all Americans should be outraged. https://t.co/vi0gYUxi67

 

— John O. Brennan (@JohnBrennan) June 12, 2019

 

Brennan monetized access to nation’s top Secrets

 

Meanwhile, in March 2019, Brennan meekly admitted that he pushed the Russia collusion hoax, citing “bad information” he received from his dubious (imaginary) sources.

 

John Brennan has shamelessly monetized his security clearance to get rich and to foment public hysteria that a sitting US president was secretly an agent of the Russian government.

 

In August 2018, President Trump revoked Brennan’s security clearance after he was caught leaking intel to the media.

 

Naturally, Brennan got enraged and repeatedly trashed President Trump on MSNBC, where he’s employed as a contributor.

__________________

Samantha Chang

Senior Staff Writer
Samantha@bizpacreview.com

 

Copyright © 2019. All Rights Reserved. BizPacReview

 

About BPR

 

BizPac Review is a top-rated political news website that provides breaking news and analysis unfiltered by the liberal bias that has eroded the media’s credibility. With public trust in the press sputtering at an all-time low, BizPac Review fills the void with its unparalleled coverage of current events that the mainstream media intentionally ignore.

 

Founded in 2009 and headquartered in West Palm Beach, BizPac Review is comprised of an experienced team of accomplished editors and reporters in Chicago, New York, and across the key battleground state of Florida.

 

We give you the straight scoop and provide news and insights for the patriotic American who unabashedly loves their country and refuses to be silenced. BPR has broken important stories that have been spotlighted on Fox News and on the Rush Limbaugh show.

 

Our analysis has been touted by the top conservatives in the world, including Donald Trump Jr., Dan Bongino, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Kris Paronto, Candace Owens, Larry Elder, and Sarah Palin.

 

Internet censorship and social-media suppression of conservative voices is READ THE REST

 

Poll: Justin Amash Trails Primary Challenger by Double Digits After Impeachment Call


RINOs beware! Primaries are coming AND your voters know who you are.

 

JRH 6/13/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

Poll: Justin Amash Trails Primary Challenger by Double Digits After Impeachment Call

 

Justin Amash

 

By Joshua Caplan

June 12, 2019

BREITBART

 

Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), the first Republican on Capitol Hill to call for impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump, trails primary challenger State Rep. Jim Lower by a sizeable margin, according to a poll released Tuesday.

 

A Practical Political Consulting/MIRS poll shows Amash (33 percent) behind Lower (49 percent) by 16 percent. The poll was conducted between June 5th-9th and served 360 likely Republican voters. Amash’s other primary challenger, Army National Guardsman Tim Norton, was not included in the poll.

 

 

The poll comes amid a Politico report stating President Trump has discussed the possibility of backing an Amash primary challenger with Vice President Mike Pence, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), and Republican National Committee (RNC) chairwoman Ronna McDaniel. However, no firm decision has been made on the matter.

 

The Michigan Republican shocked the Beltway when he accused President Trump of committing “impeachable” offenses stemming from special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report and claimed Attorney General William Barr misrepresented the special counsel’s key findings. Team Mueller found no criminal conspiracy occurred between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia, and shortly after, Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein determined that the president did not commit obstruction of justice during the sweeping investigation.

 

President Trump and top Republicans blasted Amash over his remarks, accusing him of being an attention-seeker with an unimpressive legislative track record to show for his four terms in Congress. “Never a fan of @justinamash, a total lightweight who opposes me and some of our great Republican ideas and policies just for the sake of getting his name out there through controversy,” the president tweeted last month. “If he actually read the biased Mueller Report, ‘composed’ by 18 Angry Dems who hated Trump, he would see that it was nevertheless strong on NO COLLUSION and, ultimately, NO OBSTRUCTION.”

 

“Justin is a loser who sadly plays right into our opponents [sic] hands!” he concluded.

 

On Monday evening, Amash resigned from the House Freedom Caucus, the conservative congressional group he helped start in 2015, after 30 of his now-former peers voted to condemn his remarks on impeachment.

 

“I have the highest regard for them and they’re my close friends,” he told CNN of the decision to leave. “I didn’t want to be a further distraction for the group.”

____________________

Copyright © 2019 Breitbart

 

The Sad Truth


Super PACs.

This informative article provides a good reason to contribute directly to your candidate of choice rather than a Political Action Committee (PAC). For that matter I stopped donating money to the National Republican Party because of the influence of Establishment RINOs who consistently vote with Dems. In 2020 I’ll be giving my money directly to a Conservative candidate, especially if a RINO needs defeated in a Primary. Indeed, RINOs are the reason I’m a registered Independent rather than a Republican.

 

JRH 6/10/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

The Sad Truth: Political Hucksters Harm the Conservative Movement

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent  6/9/2019 4:02 AM

 

All of Conservative America would not be surprised to hear that money given to the Democratic Party, a largely immoral and criminal party, and its political action committees (PACs) is misspent and goes into the pockets of the organizers more so than it gets to any candidate, but they expect much more from the Republican Party which claims to represent the “Moral Majority”. The sad truth is that conservatives are being defrauded and scammed by PAC operators and fundraisers on or near every election cycle and during every major unfolding political crisis. And a lot of self-proclaimed watchdogs sound one false alarm after another rather than expose the efforts of former allies of President Trump to line their own pockets, diverting funds away from endeavors that would actually facilitate President Trump’s agenda, a major problem that is also experienced in many other Republican campaigns.

 

Each new election and each new political cause finds Americans inundated by repetitive pleas for money that can and often do quickly change focus to the scandal of the day, whether it is pertaining to illegal immigration, Obamacare, Hillary Clinton escaping justice or Benghazi and Islamic terrorism. Old PACs associated with dormant issues or newly neutralized politicians are shifted to newly perceived money making issues.

 

These groups run all sorts of polls and studies, and they know where the profit is to be found among conservative base voters who are searching for outsider candidates, and their scams eventually take their toll. Conservatives think they are giving to a greater cause than themselves, but when results are short due to the lion’s share of the money being siphoned off by so-called “consultants”, everybody soon gets burned out and quits donating money, even to the legitimate causes.

 

Just prior to the 2018 elections, the Tea Party Majority Fund raised $1.67 million and donated $35,000 to candidates. During this same period, Conservative Majority Fund raised $1 million and donated $7500, while Conservative Strike Force raised $258,376 and donated nothing to any candidate.

 

Put Vets First raised approximately $4 million, in 2018, and only gave $9000 to candidates.

 

In 2014, out of $43 million raised by thirty-three separate political action committees, supposedly affiliated with the Tea Party, only $3 million was spent on ads and candidates facing tough campaigns often highlighted in the appeals. The rest went to operating expenses, including $6 million to companies owned or managed by the operators of the PACs, according to a study by Politico.

 

Also in 2014, the Black Republican PAC raised $700,000, and it only spent one percent of those contributions on candidates and ads supporting them, according to government filings.

 

It’s also worth noting that the 2015 National Draft Ben Carson for President PAC raised thirteen million dollars, none of which went to Mr. Carson. Armstrong Williams, business manager for Carson, said: “People giving money think it’s going to Dr. Carson and it’s not … Our hands are tied. We don’t want people exploited.”

 

In 2016, Roger Stone’s Committee to Restore America’s Greatness raised $587,000 and only spent $16,000 for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

 

Great America PAC raised nearly $29 million from small donations, in 2016, and donated $30,125 to candidates running for federal office. In 2018, donations totaled $8.3 million with almost $32,000 going to candidates.

 

Some PACs also make large payments to vendors they own or are run by people who work for them, as an unscrupulous means to hide how much the PAC consultants are making, which is exactly what the Senate Conservatives Fund and American Crossroads were caught doing one year. Such payments don’t have to be reported to the Federal Election Commission, so nobody really knows where the money goes, and all of this should set off red flags for donors, as it represents a huge conflict of interest and facilitates fine and decent Americans being separated from their hard earned dollars through the perpetration of a fraud.

 

Even worse, most of these PACs prosper off of outright, blatant lies they tell conservatives. Milwaukee’s Sheriff David Clarke didn’t want to run for the Senate in Wisconsin, and Laura Ingraham, Fox News host, wasn’t interested in running for the Senate in Virginia. The PACs play the hero for conservative values and freedom against the many real threats of today, and some they invent, when they’re actually nothing more than coastal political operatives keeping most of the money for themselves.

 

All of this has severely hurt the Conservative Movement in America, by possibly being a large factor in the GOP’s loss of control of the U.S. House of Representatives. This loss has severely damaged President Trump’s policy agenda and has him wasting too much valuable time on defense.

 

Imagine how different results might have been in 2018, if only $10 million of the roughly $177 million raised by PACs had been spent on real campaigns in the twenty House districts that Republicans lost by five percentage points or less. The extra $500,000 per campaign might just have made the difference in Mia Love’s district in Utah, where she would have won, if she had only received 625 more votes.

 

In Maine’s 2nd District, Bruce Poliquin needed about 3500 more votes. Karen Handel, running in Georgia’s 6th, needed 8000 more votes; and, in California’s 21st District, David Valadao lost by a mere 900 votes. [Ibid.]

 

Day after day, year after year, little old ladies are called and emailed with dire news and warnings that America’s future is at stake if a certain amount of money isn’t raised in a specific time frame — that the nation is doomed — and so, these little old ladies donate money that many of them really can’t afford, because they love America and believe they’re making the world better. Unfortunately all they are doing is making these telemarketers wealthier. And in the meantime, conservative candidates are losing elections, biting the dust, convinced that if they had just had another few hundred thousand dollars, they might have been victorious.

 

Any Trump supporter or conservative should be livid.

 

Going into the 2020 election season, Conservatives must do their dead level best to make contributions directly to the candidate’s campaign office, or better yet the candidate himself. Stop handing your hard earned money over to the political hucksters seeking to cash in on the angst of conservative voters and end this terrible blight on the Conservative Movement, ridding it of those self-interested confidence men acting at cross purposes to America’s best interests.

 

By Justin O. Smith

__________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Source links provide by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Mueller/Dem Horse-Pucky


John R. Houk

© May 30, 2019

 

I was not surprised Dems – especially in the House – reacted to Robert Mueller’s news conference with “impeach Trump”. The Dems and their propaganda MSM wing have twisted, misrepresented facts and downright lied about President Trump before, after and right up to the very present.

 

Mueller was forced to admit there was no crime of Donald Trump working with the Russians to insure a 2016 election victory. Mueller did inform what everyone has known for a long time – the Russians made an evil effort to influence the 2016 election cycle. MUELLER’S EPIC FAILURE of what is probably closer to the truth: The Russians gave aid to the Clinton campaign to influence the election and aid to the Dems to make the effort to impeach President Trump after the election.

 

Trump committed NO election crime but because the President wouldn’t fall for the perjury trap set for others involved in the 2016 campaign with a personal interview, Mueller implied Trump made an effort to obstruct an investigation where no crime existed.

 

AND THAT MY FRIENDS is why Mueller, Mueller’s 13 angry Dem/Hillary donating Prosecutors AND the Dems are full of horse-pucky.

 

Since it is doubtful most news sources – spoken or written – will let you know about Mueller/Dem horse-pucky, here are a series of commentaries on the Mueller news conference.

 

JRH 5/30/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

Special Counsel Mueller Gives Final Back Stabbing To Trump In Press Briefing To Help Democrats

 

By Jim Kouri

May 30th, 2019

News With Views

 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller held a special news conference on Wednesday saying he couldn’t reach a conclusion on whether Donald Trump obstructed justice, as he stopped short of delivering a full exoneration of the president. Mueller, using the craftiness of a career lawyer and political operative chose his words to allow Democrats in Congress to continue their deranged pursuit of destroying the President using the criminal justice system and the impeachment process.

 

“If we had had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so,” Mueller said. His briefing — which denied questions from reporters — on the investigation showed he was disappointed in not proving anything against Trump.

“That’s why Mueller left open the obstruction question, something the Democrats are using to harass a President they despise,” said political strategist Mike Barker. “The only good news I heard was Mueller announcing that he was closing his office and resigning from public service,” he added.

 

Mueller sent a clear signal to House Democrats who have demanded his testimony that he won’t provide any information that hasn’t already been made public. “Any testimony from this office would not go beyond this report,” he said.

 

The special counsel also said he found “insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy” on election interference.

 

President Donald Trump’s newly appointed Attorney General, while keeping a relatively low profile in his first days on the job, now appears to have hit the ground running in his investigation of what many are now calling The Trump-Russia Hoax.

 

On Tuesday and Wednesday, the Trump-hating Democrats and news media were taken-aback when they discovered Barr had already begun his probe of the now-famous Hillary Clinton bought and paid for “dirty dossier.”

 

Barr selected U.S. Attorney for Connecticut John Durham to investigate the origins of the Justice Department’s and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s probe of — and spying on —

the Trump presidential campaign in 2016. The questionable investigation continued into the Trump transition and his early weeks as Commander-in-Chief.

 

John Durham, who is the U.S. Attorney in Connecticut, was appointed by Attorney General Bill Barr. He will examine the FBI’s decision to open a counterintelligence investigation into the actions and motives for interfering in the election and “chasing” members of President Donald Trump’s campaign team using arguably misleading or false evidence to obtain warrants. The now famous “dirty dossier” is based on lies and innuendo provided by a foreign agent, a former British MI6 officer Christopher Steele.

 

Deep State Suspects in Conspiracy to Overthrow an Elected President

 

Robert Mueller is the leader of the Trump ouster who are now trying to defend the Deep State’s control over American politics from Donald Trump’s assault on its tyrannical vision. In the process Mueller also hopes to atone for the firing of his friend and fellow conspirator, James Comey.  Unfortunately many Americans cannot see that this man is not a “pillar of impartiality” as the corrupt media paint him. He is deeply committed to Deep State corruption while impersonating a Republican.

 

Rod Rosenstein is the Deputy Attorney General appointed by Obama. This is one reason for his insistence on appointing Robert Mueller as a Special Counsel to investigate Trump for alleged collusion with the Russians. His agenda is preservation of the Deep State as is Mueller’s. He would have been much happier if Hillary had won. In fact he was surely expecting it, as were FBI personnel such as Andrew McCabe.

 

Andrew Weissmann is the primary “witch hunter” on the Mueller team assembled to investigate Russian collusion. He is a notorious pit bull prosecutor with a record of suppressing exculpatory evidence in overreaching prosecutions that have been overturned by judges. He was a “Gung-Ho” Obama supporter. He is known to use questionable tactics in bullying a target’s underlings to force their testimony.

 

Peter Strzok was another Obama-loving FBI agent employed by Mueller because of his experience in counterintelligence. He is known as a devout Hillary Clinton supporter and one of the agents who interviewed Hillary about the email scandal, which turned out to be a phony powder-puff interview. He also edited Comey’s Clinton investigation resolution by replacing the words “grossly negligent” with “extremely careless” because the former action can be prosecuted in the handling of classified information while the latter cannot. His investigation gave almost all of Clinton’s subordinates blanket immunity even though none of them testified against Clinton.

 

Is this, as the media claims, a professional and objective team of crimefighters committed to solving an alleged crime? or was this is a coup d’etat to destroy the election of Donald Trump and and move to impeach him, which Mueller and his cronies had hoped would discredit the “people’s revolution” against the Deep State that Trump has fashioned.

 

“This horrendous nightmare is taking place because of the collectivist corruption of the DOJ and the FBI under Obama, Clinton and the two Bushes. Corruption in practice takes place in men’s institutions only after corruption of ethics and ideology takes place in their minds. Moral relativism (along with political collectivism) took over the minds of our professors, politicians and prosecutors in the aftermath of World War II and exploded throughout our culture from the 1960s to today. The chickens are now coming home to roost and usher in an authoritarian society,” said Jeffrey Longeran, a former criminal/civil investigations manager.

 

Conservatives in Congress should show they have spines and they should counterattack Hillary Clinton a[t] the Deep State with an investigation of the egregious “Uranium One” money grab in which she authorized the sale of 20% of America’s uranium to Russia, which brought tens of millions of dollars into the Clinton Foundation from Russian sources.

 

The fingerprints of Mueller, Weissmann and Rosenstein are also on the Uranium One deal, for they worked assiduously to facilitate and protect its completion, knowing full well but not caring that it compromised American security. Because their stalwart political horse, Hillary Clinton, was benefiting. Thus the Deep State’s aggrandizement was benefiting.

 

“This scenario is unbelievable. The Mueller Probe corruption is something we would expect to find in an African or Latin American country, or one of the Nazi Show Trials under judges who took an oath to serve Adolph Hitler in the 1930’s. It is the result of obsessively partisan FBI leaders that have let their ideology and hatred influence their role as policemen.

_______________________

Mueller: ‘I couldn’t find a Trump-Crime…so it’s Time to Impeach him!’

 

Trump-Barr-Mueller

 

By Sher Zieve 

May 30, 2019

Canada Free Press

 

I have never before witnessed such a sham of a legal system or—even worse—experienced the horror that the real criminals were the ones running it.  The additional horror is that other gangsters have and/or are replacing those who have been fired (some likely awaiting the day when they will be arrested) or have run for the proverbial hills upon realizing what may soon be revealed.  Having personally experienced this lifetime for not quite—but getting closer each day—a century, I do have some small perspective with regards to history.  Mueller—with all of the Trump-haters on his staff—could find that President Trump committed no crime.  So, in his own rather sleazy way, he turned it over to Congress to impeach him.  This is the caliber of human being we currently have in upper management within the bowels of the US government.

 

I, and certainly others, have written about Robert Swan Mueller III and his apparent crimes committed over the years under the color of law.  One of these was sending 4 innocent people to prison, in order to protect the murderer Whitey Bulger who had been designated “an informer” to and for Mueller’s FBI.  Mueller had also interviewed with President Trump to get his old job as FBI Director back.  But, President Trump didn’t choose him.  Uh-oh!  However, Mueller was chosen by Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as “Special Counsel” to head up the investigation of President Trump; whom he at the very least intensely disliked.

 

To briefly recap, this investigation was built upon a foundation of sand which included the following:

 

  • A self-proclaimed Trump-hater and (former?) British MI-6 agent who worked with some Russians to create (out of whole cloth) the now-infamous “Trump Dossier”:

 

  • The Clinton Campaign and DNC funded the “dossier”:  “The DNC and Clinton campaign-funded research continued through the end of October 2016, according to the Post’s report.

 

  • The “dossier” was requested and paid for by the Clinton Campaign.  Excerpt:  “According to the report, lawyer Marc E. Elias, who represented both Clinton’s campaign and the DNC, and his law firm Perkins Coie retained the firm Fusion GPS in April 2016 to investigate any connections, according to the Post. Before then, a still-unknown Republican client funded Fusion GPS’ research during the Republican primaries. Fusion had hired former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to conduct the research.”

 

  • The Mueller investigation began as a counter-intelligence investigation which metastasized into a full-blown criminal investigation…with NO CRIME mentioned!  As a stated crime is required by law before this type of investigation may begin, Mueller’s investigation…was illegal from its inception.  As a very large side-note “collusion” is still not a crime.

 

  • If there is no underlying crime…there can be no “obstruction of justice!”

 

The crimes which were committed by members within our own governmental agencies (DOJ/FBI, CIA, NSA etc.) are the greatest uncovered in the history of our country and are vast to the point that the uncovering of the worldwide Deep State conspiracy against POTUS Trump continues.  Note:  Within the UK, it appears to reach the very highest levels of government.

 

IMO, Mueller has been a dirty cop for decades (also remember his “Uranium One” activities indicating alleged treason) and he doesn’t appear to have any intention of changing.  Our country was close to demise before Donald J. Trump was resoundingly elected to the presidency of the USA.  Considering all of the blocks placed in his way by the DNC, RINOs and US government “intelligence” agencies Trump’s accomplishments are nothing less than remarkable…and legendary.  Think what he will accomplish in his second term of office…

 

“There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers”—Proverbs 6:16-19

 

_______________________

Judicial Watch President Calls for Investigation Into Mueller

 

By TTN Staff

2019-05-30

Trump Train News

 

VIDEO: Tom Fitton Discusses Mueller Statement With Lou Dobbs

[Posted by TheDC Shorts

Uploaded on May 29, 2019] 

 

The president of Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton, who investigates government corruption, is calling for an investigation into Robert Mueller.

According to The Daily Caller:

 

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton called for an investigation into Robert Mueller for suggesting “wrongdoing by an innocent person without any foundation.”

“Well, I don’t know what reputation he had that deserved any credence until now, but it’s no longer there,” Fitton told Dobbs. “He’s really destroyed whatever reputation he’s had with this political attack on the president, turning the rule of law on its head, suggesting the president is guilty and, because he can’t prove otherwise, we should conclude that he should be impeached.”

Calling it “an abuse of power,” Fitton said that Attorney General Barr has been “too deferential” to Mueller and should have “shut down” the “report before it was even written.”

“[I]t’s been abuse piled on top of abuse targeting President Trump,” Fitton said. “And this Mr. Mueller, he needs to be investigated as well. The office of professional responsibility should be asking, ‘Why did this Justice Department prosecutor come out and suggest wrongdoing by an innocent person without any foundation?’ Because there is no foundation. If there was a foundation, there would have been indictments or requests for an indictment while highlighting that. Outrageous.”

 

Fitton claims that there is a strong possibility that Mueller and Comey could have colluded in order to direct the investigation in a negative way against the president.

_____________________

DERSHOWITZ BLASTS MUELLER FOR ‘EXCEEDING HIS ROLE’

Statement ‘worse’ than Comey’s regarding Hillary scandal

 

May 29, 2019

WND

 

Then-FBI Director Robert Mueller, left, acknowledges applause during then-President Barack Obama’s remarks on June 21, 2013. Obama had announced James Comey, right, as his nominee to succeed Mueller as FBI director (Official White House photo)

 

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s statement Wednesday that “if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said that” is worse than then FBI Director James Comey’s statement about the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton, said Alan Dershowitz, emeritus professor at Harvard Law School.

 

“Comey was universally criticized for going beyond his responsibility to state whether there was sufficient evidence to indict Clinton,” he wrote Wednesday in The Hill. “Mueller, however, did even more.”

 

Comey declared in a July 2016 press conference that “although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive highly classified information.”

 

Dershowitz said Mueller, at his news conference at the Justice Department announcing his resignation as special counsel, “went beyond the conclusion of his report and gave a political gift to Democrats in Congress 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,” he said.

 

Dershowitz noted that obstruction of justice is a “high crime and misdemeanor” which, under the Constitution, authorizes impeachment and removal of the president.

 

WND reported earlier Wednesday Mueller’s claim that the Office of Legal Counsel guidance specifying that a sitting president cannot be indicted was the reason for not coming to a conclusion about obstruction conflicts with Attorney General William Barr’s testimony.

 

Barr told Congress on May 1 that at a March 5 meeting with Mueller, the special counsel told him “that he emphatically was not saying that, but for the OLC opinion, he would have found obstruction.”

 

No longer defending Mueller

 

Dershowitz said he no longer is defending Mueller against the accusations that he is a partisan.

 

“I did not believe that he personally favored either the Democrats or the Republicans, or had a point of view on whether President Trump should be impeached. But I have now changed my mind.”

 

The law professor said Mueller revealed his bias by putting his “elbow” on the scale of justice.

 

Mueller also has distorted the role of a prosecutor who “should never go beyond publicly disclosing that there is insufficient evidence to indict.”

 

“No responsible prosecutor should ever suggest that the subject of his investigation might indeed be guilty even if there was insufficient evidence or other reasons not to indict,” Dershowitz said.

 

He pointed out that federal investigations by prosecutors, including special counsels, are by nature one sided, hearing only evidence of guilt.

 

“They are not in a position to decide whether the subject of the investigation is guilty or is innocent of any crimes.”

Dershowitz said he “cannot imagine a plausible reason why Mueller went beyond his report and gratuitously suggested that President Trump might be guilty, except to help Democrats in Congress and to encourage impeachment talk and action.”

 

“Shame on Mueller for abusing his position of trust and for allowing himself to be used for such partisan advantage,” he wrote.

_______________________

Mueller Just Proved His Entire Operation Was A Political Hit Job That Trampled The Rule Of Law

At a hastily arranged Wednesday press conference, Special Counsel Robert Mueller proved that he was never interested in justice or the rule of law.

 

Robert Mueller

 

By Sean Davis

May 29, 2019

The Federalist

 

If there were any doubts about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s political intentions, his unprecedented press conference on Wednesday should put them all to rest. As he made abundantly clear during his doddering reading of a prepared statement that repeatedly contradicted itself, Mueller had no interest in the equal application of the rule of law. He gave the game, and his nakedly political intentions, away repeatedly throughout his statement.

 

“It is important that the office’s written work speak for itself,” Mueller said, referring to his office’s 448-page report. Mueller’s report was released to the public by Attorney General William Barr nearly six weeks ago. The entire report, minus limited redactions required by law, has been publicly available, pored through, and dissected. Its contents have been discussed ad nauseum in print and on television. The report has been speaking for itself since April 18, when it was released.

 

If it’s important for the work to speak for itself, then why did Mueller schedule a press conference in which he would speak for it weeks after it was released? The statement, given the venue in which it was provided, is self-refuting.

 

Let’s start with the Mueller team’s unique take on the nature of a prosecutor’s job. The standard American view of justice, affirmed and enforced by the U.S. Constitution, is that all are presumed innocent absent conviction by a jury of a specific charge of criminal wrongdoing. That is, the natural legal state of an individual in this country is innocence. It is not a state or a nature bestowed by cops or attorneys. Innocence is not granted by unelected bureaucrats or federal prosecutors.

 

At one point in his remarks, Mueller seemed to agree. Referring to indictments against various Russian individuals and institutions for allegedly hacking American servers during the 2016 election, Mueller said that the indictments “contain allegations and we are not commenting on the guilt or innocence of any specific defendant.”

 

“Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.”

 

Had he stopped there, he would have been correct. But then he crafted a brand new standard.

 

“The order appointing the special counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. We conducted that investigation and kept the office of the acting attorney general apprised of our work,” Mueller said. “After that investigation, if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”

 

According to Mueller and his team, charged Russians are presumed innocent. An American president, however, is presumed guilty unless and until Mueller’s team determines he is innocent. Such a standard is an obscene abomination against the rule of law, one that would never be committed by independent attorneys who place a fidelity to their oaths and impartial enforcement of the law ahead of their political motivations.

 

The contradictions and double standards didn’t stop there, though.

 

“It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge,” Mueller said, after all but stating that Trump committed a crime for which Mueller never charged him. Just as Mueller’s own words and actions at the Wednesday press conference prove that he didn’t want his team’s report to speak for itself, the report itself proves that Mueller and his team don’t believe it’s unfair to accuse somebody of something a court cannot resolve.

 

If they actually believed that, then the 240-page volume II of their report on their obstruction investigation of the president would never have been authored. After all, according to Mueller’s own statement, such an operation would be patently unfair. And if it’s unfair to air dirty laundry against a target who was never charged, surely it’s doubly unfair to do so in writing and on camera during a press conference whose mere existence refutes the very claims of its host.

 

Mueller revealed himself as little more than a clone of James Comey—the smarmy, scheming politician who replaced Mueller as the head of the FBI. Recall that it was Comey who assumed for himself powers that did not belong to him by law when he declared at a 2016 press conference no “reasonable prosecutor” would charge Hillary Clinton with criminal wrongdoing in her mishandling of classified information and unsanctioned use of a secret, private email server to evade public records laws. Just as Mueller did in his report and Wednesday press conference, Comey followed up his declaration that Hillary would not be charged with statement after statement after statement of all the awful things Hillary Clinton did.

 

“There is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information,” Comey said of Clinton. He excoriated her for repeatedly sending and receiving top secret information on her unsecured server which had never been authorized to process classified information. He even said it was possible, due to her “extreme” carelessness, that hostile foreign actors had penetrated her system and obtained highly classified information about U.S. national security programs.

 

Regardless of how you feel about Clinton, Comey’s display at that press conference was an embarrassment. He did an extreme disservice to the nation and the rule of law by unilaterally declaring himself the primary arbiter of prosecutorial decisions in the federal government when that authority belongs solely to the Department of Justice. And he did an extreme disservice to Clinton herself by dragging her through the mud in such a manner that clearing her name would be impossible.

 

In fact, DOJ guidelines expressly prohibit the actions of both Comey and Mueller in naming and shaming individuals who were never formally charged with any wrongdoing.

 

“As a series of cases makes clear, there is ordinarily ‘no legitimate governmental interest served’ by the government’s public allegation of wrongdoing by an uncharged party, and this is true ‘regardless of what criminal charges may . . . b[e] contemplated by the Assistant United States Attorney against the [third-party] for the future,’” states DOJ’s formal policy manual on the duties of federal prosecutors and principles of federal prosecutions.

 

Nationwide bar rules governing all practicing attorneys in the United States also explicitly prohibit Mueller’s display during Wednesday’s press conference.

 

“The prosecutor in a criminal case shall … refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused,” states Rule 3.8(f) of the American Bar Association’s rules of professional conduct.

 

Multiple federal agents and prosecutors reached out to The Federalist after Mueller’s press conference to express dismay at the former FBI director’s behavior.

 

“I’d have been crucified under this rule for a ‘not innocent’ comment about an uncharged party,” a former federal prosecutor told The Federalist. “I literally cannot fathom holding a press conference to say that an uncharged person was not innocent.”

 

“I wish these former FBI directors would learn their lessons: keep your mouths shut unless you’re referring a case for prosecution,” Jeff Danik, a retired FBI supervisor, said during a phone interview with The Federalist on Wednesday.

 

Mueller’s performance made it clear for all to see that what he ran for the last two years wasn’t an independent investigation pursuant to the rule of law so much as an inquisition motivated by political animus. Mueller and his team refused to charge prominent Democrats for crimes he charged against Republicans. Paul Manafort was charged with unregistered lobbying for foreign governments, while Mueller left alone long-time Democrat donor Tony Podesta and former Obama White House Counsel Greg Craig.

 

George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn were charged with making false statements to federal investigators, while Clinton campaign cronies Glenn Simpson and Christopher Steele’s false statements to Congress and the FBI were ignored. Trump’s nonexistent Russian connections were plumbed while a dubious Clinton campaign-funded dossier sourced directly to Russian officials was used as a prosecutorial roadmap rather than rock-solid evidence of actual campaign collusion with the Kremlin.

 

Mueller claimed his report spoke for itself, then put together a completely unnecessary press conference more than a month after his report’s public release, in which he not just spoke for the report, but expounded on the new legal standards he created to govern its conclusions.

 

These are the actions not of an impartial and independent investigator, but of a scheming political operative. None of this is any surprise to anyone who has followed Mueller’s tenure in government. As FBI director, Mueller repeatedly misused and abused the authority granted to him by Congress.

 

Mueller and Comey utterly bungled the federal investigation into the 2001 Anthrax attacks, resulting in a $5.8 million judgment against the government after the two men falsely accused an innocent man of being behind the attacks.

 

Even after the court judgment against him, Mueller was defiant.

 

“I do not apologize for any aspect of the investigation,” Mueller said afterward. He then doubled down and said it would be wrong to say there were any mistakes in how he handled the investigation.

 

Then there was Mueller’s handling as FBI director of a case in which FBI agents framed innocent men of murders the FBI knew had been committed by their own informants. One of the innocent men died in prison awaiting justice for a crime he never committed.

 

Then, as special counsel to investigate Russian collusion during the 2016 campaign, Mueller promptly hired partisan Democrats to run his investigation. He tapped as investigators FBI personnel who openly discussed their hatred of Trump and his voters, as well as their plans to keep him out of office.

 

There’s no longer any doubt about who Robert Mueller is or why he conducted himself the way he did. As abominable as his press conference was, we should in many ways be thankful that Mueller so willingly displayed for all to see his disdain for basic rules of prosecutorial conduct, his total lack of self-awareness, and his naked desire to stick it to Trump.

 

Sean Davis is the co-founder of The Federalist.

++++++

Other voices noting the horse-pucky:

 

Bogus Mueller Investigation Ends With His Sudden Retirement; By Judi McLeod; Canada Free Press; 5/30/19

 

Mueller is a Coward; By M. Noonan; Blogs For Victory; 5/29/19

 

DEMOCRATS INSULT TRUMP, ACCUSE, THEN WONDER WHY HE WALKS AWAY; By Timothy Benton; Ocensor; 5/29/19

 

Bob Mueller Runs and Hides in Eight Minutes to Avoid Having to Answer One Key Question; By ROGER L. SIMON; PJ Media; 5/29/19

 

Limbaugh on Mueller Remarks: ‘Do You Realize What an Abomination of the Justice System That Is?’ By JEFF POOR; Breitbart; 5/29/19

 

Robert Mueller’s abuse of our legal system continues – He didn’t need to speak Wednesday; By Tom Del Beccaro; Fox News; 5/29/19

____________________

Mueller/Dem Horse-Pucky

John R. Houk

© May 30, 2019

___________________

Special Counsel Mueller Gives Final Back Stabbing To Trump In Press Briefing To Help Democrats

 

© 2019 NWV – All Rights Reserved

_________________________

Mueller: ‘I couldn’t find a Trump-Crime…so it’s Time to Impeach him!’

 

Content is Copyright 1997-2019 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2019 Canada Free Press.Com 

_____________________

Judicial Watch President Calls for Investigation Into Mueller

 

© 2016 TrumpTrainNews

________________________

DERSHOWITZ BLASTS MUELLER FOR ‘EXCEEDING HIS ROLE’

 

© Copyright 1997-2019. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

___________________

Mueller Just Proved His Entire Operation Was A Political Hit Job That Trampled The Rule Of Law

 

Copyright © 2019 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

 

Disinfo as Fact to Frame Trump


John R. Houk

© May 17, 2019

 

The infamous Steele Dossier used by the Dems to try to frame President Trump for working with the Russians to steal the 2016 from Crooked Hillary did have an author who claims he had sources. The author or at least compiler is British former MI6 agent Christopher Steele – hence the most used appellation of the Steele Dossier.

 

So, did Steele merely create a work of fiction to villainize an American he didn’t like? Did Steele have a source (or sources) framework to construct the dossier that was and is unverified? AND if those sources exist, how reliable are they?

 

Chuck Ross writing for the Daily Caller some how has discovered potential sources via notes taken by State Department official Kathleen Kavalec. Accordingly the sources she noted were high level Russian Intelligence personnel.

 

These Russians are KNOWN individuals to Americans in government who care or watch what the Russians are doing. The chief implication Ross brings across is these Russian Intelligence individuals peddled disinformation to Trump-hater Steele.

 

My guess is Dem Trump-haters desired to believe the disinformation so badly, they observed at best the data was factual. AT WORST these Dem Trump-haters cared little about accuracy and colluded directly with Steele and perhaps indirectly colluded with Russians to frame Trump to first win 2016 for Crooked Hillary and/or failing the objective then impeach President Trump.

 

Of course my narrative is speculation. Time will tell how close my speculation is. I am willing to bet that “time” will show I am pretty darn close.

 

I’ll mention the names of those Russian Intelligences sources, but my guess you’ll never remember those hard to pronounce names even if those names begin to circulate among the Leftist Mainstream Media: Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Vladislav Surkov.

 

Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Vladislav Surkov

 

AND NOW, the Daily Caller cross post by Chuck Ross.

 

READ ALSO: New Document Exposes Two Russian Dossier Sources; By Matt Palumbo; Bongino.com; 5/17/19

 

JRH 5/17/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

STEELE IDENTIFIED RUSSIAN DOSSIER SOURCES, NOTES REVEAL

 

Christopher Steele

 

By Chuck Ross

5/16/19 8:44 PM

Daily Caller News Foundation

 

  • Christopher Steele told a State Department official a former Russian spy chief and a top Kremlin adviser were involved in an operation to collect compromising information on Donald Trump.
  • The State Department official’s notes also indicate Steele claimed the Russians, Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Vladislav Surkov, were “sources” for the dossier.
  • There is no evidence the compromising material mentioned in the dossier actually exists, raising questions about whether Steele was given disinformation.
  • Trubnikov, the former head of the SVR, also has links to Stefan Halper, an FBI informant who had contact with the Trump campaign.

 

Dossier author Christopher Steele identified a former Russian spy chief and a top adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin as being involved in handling potentially compromising information about President Donald Trump, State Department notes show.

 

In her notes, State Department official Kathleen Kavalec also referred to the two Russians — former Russian foreign intelligence chief Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Putin aide Vladislav Surkov — as “sources.”

 

The references to Trubnikov and Surkov, which have not previously been reported, are not definitive proof that either were sources for Steele’s dossier or that they were involved in an effort to collect blackmail material on Trump.

 

But the notes are significant because they are the first government documents that show Steele discussing potential sources for the information in his dossier, which the former MI6 officer provided to the FBI.

 

Trubnikov also has links to Stefan Halper, an FBI informant who collected information from Trump campaign aides George Papadopoulos and Carter Page. Halper arranged for Trubnikov to visit intelligence seminars at the University of Cambridge in 2012 and 2015. He also tapped Trubnikov to contribute to a Pentagon study published in 2015.

 

(RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: A London Meeting Before The Election Aroused George Papadopoulos’s Suspicions)

 

Kavalec took the notes during an Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with Steele at State Department headquarters. The documents, which were released earlier in May by Citizens United and first reported on by The Hill, show Steele laid out many of the same allegations about Trump and his advisers that are found in the infamous dossier.

 

The notes contain several inaccuracies, including that Russia was running operations out of its consulate in Miami. As Kavalec pointed out, Russia does not have a consulate in Miami.

 

Trubnikov and Surkov are not identified by name in Steele’s dossier, which the FBI used as part of its investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. But the information that the former British spy attributed to the two Russians involves the dossier’s most salacious allegation: that the Russian government had sexually compromising material on Trump.

 

Kavalec’s notes said Steele claimed Trump was “filmed engaged in compromising activities” with Russian prostitutes in 2013, but that “the Russians have not needed to use the ‘kompromat’ on [Trump] as he was already in cooperation.”

 

Steele, who operates a private intelligence firm in London, told Kavalec that Putin and some of his top advisers were running the Trump operation.

 

“Presidential Advisor Vladislov Surkov and Vyasheslov Trubnikov (former head of Russian External Intelligence Service — SVR) are also involved,” wrote Kavalec, who served as deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian issues.

 

Kathleen Kavalec notes (Published by Citizens United)

 

Kavalec’s handwritten notes also contain a reference to Trubnikov and Surkov as “sources,” but with no additional explanation.

 

Trubnikov served as head of Russia’s foreign intelligence service, SVR, from 1996 to 2000. He went on to serve as first deputy for foreign affairs and ambassador to India.

 

Kathleen Kavalec notes (Published by Citizens United)

 

The unverified allegations of sexual blackmail material on Trump are included in the June 20, 2016, memo from Steele’s dossier. Steele had been hired that same month by Fusion GPS, an opposition research firm the DNC and the Clinton campaign paid to investigate Trump.

 

Citing “a former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin,” Steele claimed Russian authorities had gathered a substantial amount of “embarrassing material” on Trump and would “be able to blackmail him if they so wished.”

 

It is difficult to know how to interpret Steele’s claims about Trubnikov and Surkov, given the numerous problems that have emerged with the former British spy’s reporting.

 

The special counsel’s report all but debunked Steele’s core claim of a “well-developed conspiracy” between the Trump campaign and Kremlin. The report also said Michael Cohen did not visit Prague, which is where Steele claimed the former Trump lawyer met with Kremlin insiders to pay off computer hackers.

 

(RELATED: Mueller Report Undercuts Several Steele Dossier Claims)

 

Public evidence has not backed up other allegations, including about “kompromat” on Trump. The president has vehemently denied the sex tape claim, and individuals who were with Trump during his Moscow trip have cast doubt on the allegation, saying Trump had virtually no time to take part in the steamy activities described by Steele.

 

But questions remain about who provided the information to Steele and what his sources’ motives were if the information is false.

 

Steele, who operated in Moscow through 2009 before leaving MI6, relied on a network of sources and sub-sources, some of whom are said to have worked in Russia. Virtually nothing is known about Steele’s collectors, but it has been reported that some of the sources who Steele cited in the dossier unwittingly provided information that ended up in the 35-page document.

 

A former CIA station chief in Moscow, Daniel Hoffman, said discerning how Steele obtained and used information from Trubnikov and Surkov is “tricky.”

 

“Was [Steele] collecting intelligence on Trubnikov, or was he using Trubnikov to collect intelligence? Those are two different things,” Hoffman told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

 

Hoffman said Trubnikov remains a “trusted guy in the Russian national security bureaucracy,” despite not having an official title in Russian government for over a decade.

 

“They never stop,” Hoffman said of Russian intelligence operatives. “There’s no such thing as a former intelligence officer. The guy is going to be reporting back to the SVR or Putin.”

 

Hoffman has been a leading proponent of one theory about the dossier that has gained traction in the wake of the special counsel’s report. The former CIA officer has argued Steele likely fell victim to a Russian disinformation campaign.

 

A growing number of experts in Russian intelligence operations have embraced the theory, and Attorney General William Barr testified to Congress on May 1 that he is concerned about the prospect and is looking into it.

 

(RELATED: Investigate The Steele Dossier As Russian Disinformation, Intel Experts Say)

 

Hoffman has written that if the Russian government hacked Democrats’ computer systems, they could have figured out that Steele was trying to gather information on any connections between the Kremlin and Trump. Steele is also likely known to Russian intelligence given his covert work in Moscow, making it easier for Russian operatives to uncover his intelligence-gathering operation.

 

Hoffman said it’s difficult to determine whether Trubnikov and Surkov were involved in a disinformation campaign — saying “it’s a hall of mirrors” — but that it can’t be ruled out. He said he could envision a scenario in which Trubnikov could sniff out Steele’s operation and spin the dossier author’s collector with false leads.

 

Steele’s firm, Orbis Business Intelligence, did not respond to requests for comment. The Russian embassy also did not respond to a request for comment. The State Department declined comment.

 

Vyacheslav Trubnikov (Alexander Shcherbak\TASS via Getty Images)

 

Trubnikov’s links to Halper, the FBI informant, are also a source of intrigue.

 

Halper tapped Trubnikov to contribute to a study he did in 2015 for the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment (ONA) titled “The Russia-China relationship: The Impact on the United States’ Security Interests.” Halper, who served in three Republican presidential administrations, was paid over $1 million from 2012 through 2018 for reports from ONA, which is led by Pentagon officials Andrew May and James Baker.

 

Halper established contact with Papadopoulos, the Trump campaign aide, under the guise of contributing to a study on energy security issues in the Mediterranean and Middle East.

 

Halper paid $3,000 to Papadopoulos to write a paper on the topic. During meetings in London, Halper and a covert government investigator, Azra Turk, plied Papadopoulos for information on any contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia. While no evidence has emerged that Halper paid Papadopoulos out of ONA funds, a source familiar with Halper’s work for ONA told The DCNF that $3,000 was a sum he often paid contributors.

 

(RELATED: Who Was ‘Azra Turk’ Working For?)

 

Halper also cozied up to Page in the midst of the 2016 campaign. The pair met for the first time July 10, 2016, at a political event hosted at Cambridge University. They remained in contact through September 2017, which is the same month the FBI ended its electronic surveillance on Page.

 

Halper might also have had a role in sharing information about Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser.

 

The Washington Post and The New York Times have reported Halper and Sir Richard Dearlove, the former chief of MI6, expressed concerns about interactions between Flynn and a Russian-British researcher at Cambridge named Svetlana Lokhova.

 

Flynn visited the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar in February 2014, when he served as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

 

Several news outlets published stories in 2017 about Flynn and Lokhova, with the thinly veiled suggestion that the pair had a romantic fling and that Lokhova was trying to compromise Flynn. Lokhova has vehemently denied allegations of any impropriety with Flynn, and no evidence has emerged to suggest that there was any.

 

(RELATED: Cambridge Academic Reflects On Interactions With ‘Spygate’ Figure)

 

Halper and Dearlove publicly raised concerns about possible Russian infiltration of the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar. In December 2016, Halper was quoted in a Financial Times article saying he was resigning from the seminar due to “unacceptable Russian influence on the group.”

 

According to two sources for the FT piece, Halper and Dearlove feared “that Russia may be seeking to use the seminar as an impeccably-credentialed platform to covertly steer debate and opinion on high-level sensitive defence and security topics.”

 

Despite his concerns about possible infiltration at Cambridge, Halper twice provided a platform for Trubnikov at the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar. Trubnikov spoke at the university May 4, 2012, and May 11, 2015. The latter appearance was rescheduled because Trubnikov had issues with his visa, according to a program for the event.

 

Christopher Andrew, who convened the intelligence seminar with Halper and Dearlove, took Halper to task over the FT article, according to an email obtained by The DCNF.

 

“I am somewhat shocked by the comments attributed to you in today’s FT. I can well imagine that you’ve been misquoted but do need to know as a matter of urgency what you actually told the FT,” wrote Andrew, who serves as official historian for MI5, the British domestic intelligence service.

 

Follow Chuck on Twitter

___________________________

Disinfo as Fact to Frame Trump

John R. Houk

© May 17, 2019

_________________________

STEELE IDENTIFIED RUSSIAN DOSSIER SOURCES, NOTES REVEAL

 

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

 

About The Daily Caller

 

Founded in 2010 by Tucker Carlson, a 20-year veteran journalist, and Neil Patel, former chief policy advisor to Vice President Cheney, The Daily Caller is one of America’s largest and fastest-growing news publications. Our team of experienced, full-time reporters and editors works around the clock to deliver award-winning original reporting, in-depth investigations, entertainment, thought-provoking commentary and up-to-the-second breaking news.

 

From exposing shocking mismanagement of Republican National Committee funds to exclusively revealing the FBI’s interview with Hillary Clinton, The Daily Caller’s reporting has been thorough and tough on members of both political parties. In 2016, The Daily Caller emerged as a news leader in covering the U.S. presidential election, providing around-the-clock, on-the-ground coverage of the primary process, the debates, and the general election. The Daily Caller was also included as a full-time member of the traveling press pool for the Democratic nominee.

 

The Daily Caller’s reporters are credentialed members of the U.S. Senate and House press galleries. We also provide comprehensive coverage of the executive branch, with a dedicated White House correspondent and membership in the White House Correspondents’ Association. Additionally, The Daily Caller is a member of the White House in-town press pool, responsible for dispatching reports to the global press at White House events on a monthly basis.

 

The Daily Caller’s reporting is distributed worldwide to over 20 million unique readers each month through our highly-visited homepage, wildly popular newsletters and READ THE REST

 

Will Durham Finally End Deep State Corruption?


John R. Houk

© May 15, 2019

By now you have probably read that AG William Barr has appointed John Durham from the DOJ to investigate probable corruption in the process that led to spying on the Trump Campaign of 2016. Hopefully the scope of that investigation includes an examination of the FBI investigation into Crooked Hillary’s ILLEGAL private unsecured email server and Crooked Hillary Campaign involvement (which must include any Obama connection) in 2016 election manipulation.

 

BUT a history of Dem law breaking excuses means I’m not holding my breath for any actionable prosecution. I MEAN MY GOD, Trump appointee Director Christopher Wray is providing every appearance of covering up for FBI spying and corruption in all connections to President Trump:

 

 

 

 

 

By most accounts John Durham has been receiving accolades as a politically neutral Prosecutor of integrity. BUT when Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Prosecutor, he too received integrity accolades from the GOP and Dems alike. I remember Rep. Louie Gohmert raising concerns about Mueller. AND sure enough Mueller proceeded to assemble a prosecutorial team of Crooked Hillary donors and Dem Party hacks.

 

AGAIN due to a history of Dems skating away from legal action when laws are broken, I will not be surprised if NOTHING comes to account with a Durham investigation. By the way – for the same reasons I’m not holding my breath with reputed forthcoming revelations from Inspector General Michael Horowitz relating to FBI impropriety.

 

If my underwhelming suspicions are proven inaccurate, I WILL BE ECSTATIC.

 

JRH 5/15/19

our generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

6 Things to Know About the Prosecutor Investigating Spying on Trump Campaign

 

By Fred Lucas

May 14, 2019

The Daily Signal

 

Edgar Hoover FBI Building

 

John Durham, known for prosecuting FBI agents connected to infamous mobster James “Whitey” Bulger, is now a fourth attorney general’s pick to lead a special investigation into suspected government misconduct.

 

The Justice Department confirmed to media outlets that Attorney General William Barr named Durham, now U.S. attorney for the District of Connecticut, to look into why and how department and FBI officials began investigating associates of President Donald Trump before the 2016 election.

 

Durham’s resume includes investigating the mafia and crooked politicians.

 

Attorneys general from the Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama administrations all previously appointed Durham to lead special investigations.

 

Barr reportedly selected him to head the probe weeks ago, as the FBI came under intensified scrutiny for spying on one Trump campaign adviser and sending a confidential informant to talk to another.

 

In the aftermath of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report clearing the Trump campaign of conspiracy with Russia to influence the election, many Republican lawmakers called for an investigation into how the probe of Trump and his team commenced.

 

Two known incidents loom large: The FBI obtained a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to put Trump campaign aide Carter Page under surveillance. The FBI also sent a confidential informant to talk to George Papadopoulos, another Trump campaign aide, in a bar. The woman told Papadopoulos that her name was Azra Turk, and he later described her as “flirtatious.”

 

Here are six things to know about the prosecutor picked by Barr.

 

  1. Career Prosecutor

 

Durham, 68, began his career as a Connecticut state prosecutor working from 1978 to 1982 in the New Haven State’s Attorney’s Office.

 

A registered Republican, he next served in nonpolitical positions through 35 years in the U.S. District of Connecticut, based in New Haven.

 

From 1982 to 1989, Durham supervised the New Haven field office of the Boston Strike Force in the Justice Department’s Organized Crime and Racketeering Section. For the next five years, he was chief of the criminal division for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Haven.

 

From 1994 through 2008, he served as deputy U.S. attorney, and then, through 2017, as counsel to the U.S. attorney.

  

Trump’s first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, appointed Durham as acting U.S. attorney for Connecticut in October 2017, and Trump nominated him for the post the next month. He took office in February 2018.

 

  1. Busting Mafia-FBI Connection

 

In 1999, then-Attorney General Janet Reno appointed Durham to investigate corruption in federal law enforcement in Boston.

 

He examined whether two Boston mob figures, Bulger and Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi, had corrupted the FBI agents whom they served as informants.

 

Durham’s investigation led to a 10-year prison sentence for retired FBI agent John Connolly Jr., found guilty of helping the two gangsters avoid prosecution.

 

As part of this investigation, Durham produced documents showing four men had been framed by FBI agents and convicted of murder in the 1960s. Two died in prison, but two others won a $100 million civil judgment against the Justice Department.

 

  1. Special Probes of CIA and Terror Detainees

 

In 2008, then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey appointed Durham as a special prosecutor to conduct what turned into a three-year probe of the destruction of CIA interrogation tapes. He didn’t recommend any prosecutions.

 

In an overlapping probe, then-Attorney General Eric Holder named him as a special prosecutor to investigate alleged mistreatment of terror suspects by CIA interrogators and government contractors.

 

The second probe came after the Justice Department released a report noting possible past abuse by CIA interrogators. Durham concluded by closing most of the cases, but called for continued inquiries into the deaths of two prisoners.

 

  1. Devoted Catholic, Red Sox Fan

 

Despite handling high-profile cases, Durham typically keeps a low profile.

 

Earlier this year, according to The Day newspaper in New London, Connecticut Deputy Chief State’s Attorney Leonard C. Boyle noted the only reason that Durham would make a public speech to a crowd at the University of St. Joseph, a Roman Catholic school in West Hartford, Connecticut.

 

“Other than an overwhelming commitment to the cause of justice, the two great devotions of John’s life are his Catholic faith and his family,” Boyle said of Durham.

 

Durham and his wife Susan have four sons and eight grandchildren. He reportedly is a big Boston Red Sox fan.

 

The New Republic, a liberal magazine, wrote of Durham in 2011 that he “earned a nonpartisan, camera-shy, ‘white knight’ reputation.”

 

  1. Public Corruption

    Durham led some of the biggest public corruption cases in Connecticut.

 

Among them was the case of Connecticut Gov. John G. Rowland, a Republican who resigned in 2004 after federal prosecutors found he illegally took gifts from state contractors. Rowland pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a year in prison for offenses committed as governor.

 

Durham also led an investigation of Bridgeport Mayor Joe Ganim, a Democrat, who was convicted on racketeering and bribery charges in 2003. Ganim spent six years in prison.

 

  1. Lauded by Democrats

 

Democrats recently excoriated Barr for even using the word “spy” to talk about actions by the Obama administration’s FBI and Justice Department against the Trump campaign before the presidential election in November 2016.

 

However, Democrats could have a difficult time in attacking Durham.

 

Confirmed as U.S. attorney in February 2018 by a voice vote in the Senate, he had gained praise from Democrats when Trump nominated him.

 

Among these admirers were two of Trump’s biggest critics, Connecticut’s two Democratic senators—Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy. The two men had recommended Durham to serve as U.S. attorney.

 

“John Durham has earned immense respect as a no-nonsense, fierce and fair prosecutor, and we are pleased that the White House has agreed with our recommendation that he serve as United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut,” a joint statement by Blumenthal and Murphy said. “As an Assistant United States Attorney, John Durham has proven himself time and time again in some of the most challenging and sensitive cases.”

 

It looks like Barr has found just such another case for Durham.

______________________

Will Durham Finally End Deep State Corruption?

John R. Houk

© May 15, 2019

__________________

6 Things to Know About the Prosecutor Investigating Spying on Trump Campaign

 

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

 

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Send an email to Fred. @FredLucasWH

 

The Daily Signal

 

Orwellian America…


Leo Hohmann writes about Leftist-Orwellianism becoming a reality in the USA promoting Leftist ideology, Leftist Multiculturalism which ironically accommodates the Islam that is intolerant of ALL THINGS non-Islamic.

 

JRH 5/13/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

Orwellian America: Where telling the truth, telling a joke, or sometimes even stating the obvious, can get you in trouble

 

Jihad training compound discovered in rural Macon County, Alabama.

 

By Leo Hohmann

May 12, 2019

LeoHohmann.com

 

It’s been a busy couple of weeks in terms of the ongoing transformation of America so let me catch you up.

 

Does anyone else see it as ironic that the squelching of conservative speech has been placed into overdrive since Americans elected a conservative president?

 

It’s as if the technocrats embedded in the deep state are punishing us for refusing to elect their pre-ordained candidate.

 

The old Soviet Union, if you recall, also claimed to have “free” elections. But the poorly kept secret was that only pre-approved candidates were allowed on the ballot. It was the professional politicos in the Soviet bureaucracy who hand-selected the “choices” that were then offered to the proletariat, who on their own could not be trusted to vote the right way. “Choices” had to be limited.

 

Similarly, a beast-like system has been created by modern technocrats in America. A system where outsiders like Donald Trump have no chance of winning because they don’t have the support of the “professionals” in the bureaucracy.

 

I think it’s pretty clear that Trump snuck up on them in 2016, that they believed their own flawed polling, and underestimated just how teed off the middle-class working people had become after decades of rule by politicians on the right and left who did not understand their plight, and didn’t care to learn.

 

They now are determined not to let it happen again. Ever. No more Trump. No more Trumpian wannabes.

 

Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Google-YouTube – which benefit from government-supported monopolies – are all purging conservatives from their platforms in time for the 2020 election. Even those not purged will be more careful, tempering, watching what they say, so as not to lose their voice all together.

 

Most major cities are also cracking down on dissenters. They are implementing the United Nations’ New Urban Agenda and partnering with progressive corporations in public-private partnerships. Anyone employed by one of these cities, or one of their corporate “partners,” is not allowed to express any unauthorized opinions on the government-backed social media sites.

 

If this sounds like “collusion,” that’s because it is. Collusion to silence those on the right. Think Orwell’s “1984.” It has arrived with little fanfare.

 

Specifically off limits are statements, comments or even jokes that offend certain privileged groups, notably followers of Islam, LGBTQs, or the Planned Parenthood abortion industry. If a person employed by these politically correct cities or companies steps out of bounds, they face a very real risk losing their job and possibly their career.

 

Teachers are routinely disciplined, even fired, for referring to transgender students by the wrong pronoun. You can read about one such case in Virginia here.

 

Michael Taylor, mayor of Sterling Heights, Michigan

 

In Sterling Heights, Michigan, Republican Mayor Michael Taylor sides with the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslims over a large community of Chaldean Christians who did not want a mega-mosque built in the middle of their neighborhood. In terms of sheer numbers, there are more Chaldeans in Sterling Heights than Muslims, but the Chaldeans are fractured and split while the Muslim community speaks with a single voice and carries a big stick. A big stick in terms of the ease with which CAIR threatens to use legal action if it doesn’t get its way. CAIR speaks and the spineless politicians listen. Taylor, for example, flip-flopped from opposing the mega-mosque to supporting it. Taylor denies it, but his change of heart clearly came after CAIR’s executive director pointed a dagger-like finger at him and declared him guilty of “Islamophobia.”

 

That’s all it takes for the vast majority of politicians in today’s America to make up their minds which side they want to be on whenever a controversy involving Islam pops up.

 

Want proof? There’s plenty.

 

Dawud Walid is an imam and head of CAIR-Michigan

 

Dawud Walid, CAIR-Michigan’s chapter boss, was able to get a low-level mayoral appointee removed from her post last year in the city of Warren, a suburb of Detroit. Diane Koslowski had committed the unpardonable sin of criticizing Islam on her private Facebook page, where she posted “Islam is hate.”

 

Though she publicly apologized and expressed deep remorse for “offending” Muslims, it did her no good. She was still forced to resign in disgrace from the city advisory board. You can read our report on last year’s fiasco in Warren here.

 

  • Now it has happened again this week in Dearborn, Michigan, where the new Gestapo led by CAIR and Walid jumped into action against a man who, like Kozlowski, violated the Islamic Sharia law against blaspheming/slandering a Muslim.

 

Dearborn Mayor Jack O’Reilly sided with CAIR and the Muslims over his own city employee in a case that really amounted to some bad Facebook humor. Bill Larion, a surveyor in the city’s engineering department, posted that he thought Sports Illustrated’s inclusion of a burkini-clad Muslim woman in its Swimsuit Edition would have better suited for the cover of “Camels ‘R Us.”

 

  • In fact, CAIR spends a lot of its time calling on people to resign, simply because they expressed a politically incorrect thought. It also happened last week in St. Lawrence County, N.Y., where CAIR demanded a local county lawmaker resign because she posted to Facebook a true statement about the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to “destroy us from within.”

 

In Dearborn, Mr. Larion’s comment was clearly in bad taste. But did it warrant his immediate firing, even after issuing an apology to the city’s Muslim community? Almost certainly not. Compare that drastic retribution against a local city surveyor to the way Muslims in far more powerful positions are treated when they slip up and make insensitive comments against Jews, such as Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib have done.

 

Then you have the Muslim attorney general of Minnesota, Keith Ellison, who has been accused by multiple former girlfriends of physical abuse. They offered hard evidence, including text messages and medical reports. Did Ellison suffer any consequences?

 

  • And what about the school run by Muslim American Society in Philadelphia, where middle-school children were taught to chant songs about chopping off the heads of Jews. The MAS has 50 chapters. As far as I know they all continue to operate under business as usual. No consequences.

 

But a low level employee of Dearborn makes an off-color joke on Facebook and he loses his job.

 

Dearborn Mayor O’Reilly, virtue signaling to his large and growing Muslim community [about 40 percent of Dearborn is Muslim], said he had “zero tolerance for the type of language used in the Facebook comment,” the Detroit News reports.

 

Zero tolerance for an off-the-cuff joke about burkinis. All the tolerance in the world for children singing about beheading Jews and nary a peep when a Muslim politician is accused of sexually assaulting women.

 

  • Nor did I see any national media coverage of the discovery this week of a jihadist training camp in rural Macon County, Alabama. This camp is reportedly operated by the same terrorist, Sirraj Wahhaj, who was caught training kids at a similar camp last year to attack schools in New Mexico.

 

 

  • Meanwhile, a Seattle-area school district has been urging its teachers to “bless” Muslim students each day during the Islamic holiday of Ramadan. They are being sued by the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund on behalf of non-Muslim parents who are not happy about the special treatment of Muslims in their children’s schools. Since when do Christian children ever receive a special “blessing” from public schools during Christmas or Good Friday?

 

Yes, it’s been a news-filled week on the cultural jihad front. Not that you would know it from watching or reading mainstream corporate media outlets.

 

These are all the signs of a conquered nation. When a nation bends over backwards to exaggerate and condemn the sins of its own people while covering up or downplaying the sins of its enemies, that nation is already conquered in its collective psyche. The mind-control spin doctors have everyone living in a matrix of ignorant bliss.

 

God help us.

 

DONATE TO HOHMANN

___________________________

Leo Hohmann is a freelance writer and journalist, author of the 2017 book “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad.” [or buy via Amazon] He is working on a follow-up that will investigate the Interfaith movement and how it is ushering false and antichrist ideas into Western churches. If you would like to support his research and writing projects, please consider a donation of any size.