All Dots Connected Validity


John R. Houk

© August 13, 2018

I had a friend request on the MeWe social media (my MeWe profile) where I discovered a repost of a popular chain email. I haven’t figured out how to link to individual MeWe post as yet or I’d share it. I found it on Vonda’s MeWe page if you choose to look for it.

 

If you look around the Web this chain email is all over the place under various names, versions and snippets. I am calling the chain email All Dots Connected based on the first three words on this version.

 

As a Conservative, the chain email is so familiar much of the information you can find here or read from Conservative sources. The thing is though, chain emails are notoriously unreliable for reasons leaning from down-right untrue to partially true, right on through to manipulative propaganda of twisted facts and lies.

 

Indeed, most of the fact checkers (dominated by Leftist ideology) labels this chain email as false. I used to be a devotee of Snopes and Politifact as dependable fact checkers. Then I began to notice the false stamp on facts I knew directly was true or at least mostly true. Here are some posts exposing the Leftist taint of Snopes and Politifact. If you do a little of your own investigating you will probably discover a Leftist taint of most fact checking websites.

 

The fact checking website I currently trust the most is Truth or Fiction.

 

Realizing the bias of fact checkers I decided to do my own look at the chain email All Dots Connected. What I discovered was the post is mostly true. There are some assertions based on one source alone; viz., Roger Stone. Just to be upfront. Stone is berated by the Left as a Right-Wing Conspiracist nut-job. The political Right pundits even question his reliability on many if not most Stone’s line of thinking. You’ll have to decide for yourself on Stone’s credibility.

 

Roger Stone was a one-time campaign advisor for Donald Trump. This placed a target on Stone’s back from the Mueller witch hunt. BUT SURPRISE, just like President Trump, the Mueller hound dogs have found ZERO on Stone as a go-between involving Donald Trump and Russia meddling in the 2016 election:

 

Mr. Mueller, a former FBI director, was appointed in May 2017 to investigate Russia’s alleged involvement, including any potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Moscow.

 

Mr. Stone, 65, successfully predicted the release of Democratic documents by WikiLeaks during the race and previously claimed to be in contact with the website’s publisher, Julian Assange.

 

“I never received anything including allegedly hacked emails from WikiLeaks or Julian Assange or the Russians or anyone else,” Mr. Stone told ABC News. “[I] never passed them on to Donald Trump or the Trump campaign or anyone else.”

 

Individuals close to Mr. Stone who said they were contacted by Mr. Mueller’s office include Jason Sullivan, his former social media consultant; Andrew Miller, a longtime associate; Randy Credico, a radio host and comedian who personally met with Mr. Assange at his residence in London during the race; and fellow former Trump campaign advisers Sam Nunberg and Michael Caputo. John Kakanis, Mr. Stone’s driver and accountant, was subpoenaed to appear before the special counsel, Reuters previously reported.

 

“CNN reports Mueller probing my personal finances. Reuters reports Mueller subpoenas my current and former associates and now clear my e-mail, text and phone all monitored. My crime? Supporting @realdonaldtrump for President!” Mr. Stone said in a social media post this week.

 

The special counsel’s office declined to comment when reached by The Washington Times. (Mueller team pressing Roger Stone associates in Russian collusion probe: Report; By Andrew Blake; Washington Times; 7/13/18)

 

Currently Mueller is trying to strongarm Stone with investigations that have nothing to do with Russia interfering in the 2016 election. That witch hunt continues on getting anything on President Trump that had nothing to do with Mueller’s mandate to investigate if Trump and Russia worked together to fix the 2016 election cycle.

 

The last part of the chain email All Dots Connected tries to link Rod Rosenstein’s wife Lisa Barsoomian as a potential instrument of the CIA the to take down President Trump. To me, any such link is a huge stretch of the imagination of fantastical speculation. I have little doubt Barsoomian would work with other Deep Staters, but currently there is no connection other than her association with hubby Rosenstein, Comey, Mueller and the Clintons on some kind government basis.

 

AND NOW, All Dots Connected with linked sources, source quotes and personal commentary.

 

JRH 8/13/18

Please Support NCCR

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

ALL DOTS CONNECTED

 

Posted by Vonda Reynolds

August 11, 2018 1:12 PM

From Vonda MeWe Page

[Found very similar post entitled, “From ’01 to ’05 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation…”; By  SuperCharged2000; Investment Watch Blog; 7/24/18]

 

ALL DOTS CONNECTED…Clinton’s, Mueller, Rosenstein, Comey, Learner, plus secret guests … Let’s PLAY FOLLOW THE TRAIL…
Let’s follow the trail……

 

Here’s what it looks like when all the pieces are sewn together. It smells like conspiracy and treason. Everyone needs to read this. Slowly, and patiently, because it’s very important……

 

From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

 

A Grand Jury had been empaneled.

 

Governments from around the world had donated to the “Charity”.

 

Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations” to the Clinton Foundation were declared. [The closest corroboration to this assertion is a Daily Mail lengthy article that shows the IRS refused to audit Clinton Foundation during this time period amidst inexplicable fraud schemes in alleged foreign charity work.]

 

Hmmm, now you would think that an honest investigator would be able to figure this out.

 

Guess who took over this investigation in 2002? [Truth or Fiction; 4/25/18]

 

Bet you can’t guess.

 

None other than James Comey.

 

Now, that’s interesting, isn’t it?

 

Guess who was transferred in to the Internal Revenue Service to run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS? [The Real Criminals, a RICO Scheme That Failed; By George McClellan; America Out Loud]

 

Your friend and mine, Lois “Be on The Look Out” (BOLO) Lerner.

Now, that’s interesting, isn’t it?

 

It gets better, well not really, but this is all just a series of strange coincidences, right?

 

Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the Department of Injustice from 2001 to 2005? [Ibid.]

 

No other than the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Rod Rosenstein.

 

Now, that’s interesting, isn’t it?

 

Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation during this time frame?

 

I know, it’s a miracle, just a coincidence, just an anomaly in statistics and chances, but it was Robert Mueller. [Ibid. and FBI.gov]

 

What do all four casting characters have in common?

 

They all were briefed and/or were front line investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation. [How $37 Million from the Clinton Foundation Disappeared in Baltimore; By Charles Ortel; LifeZette; 4/6/18]

 

Now that’s just a coincidence, right?

 

Ok, lets chalk the last one up to mere chance.

 

Let’s fast forward to 2009……

 

James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go and cash-in at Lockheed Martin. [Exposed: FBI Director James Comey’s Clinton Foundation Connection; By Patrick Howley; Breitbart; 9/10/16]

 

Hillary Clinton is running the State Department, on her own personal email server by the way.

 

The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of Hillary. [Axios – 10/24/17 AND The Hill – 11/02/17 06:00 AM EDT]

 

Like all good public servants do, you know looking out for America’s best interest, she decides to support the decision and approve the sale of 20% of US Uranium to no other than, the Russians.

 

Now you would think that this is a fairly straight up deal, except it wasn’t, the People got absolutely nothing out of it.

 

However, prior to the sales approval, no other than Bill Clinton goes to Moscow, gets paid 500K for a one-hour speech then meets with Vladimir Putin at his home for a few hours.

 

Ok, no big deal right?

 

Well, not so fast, the FBI had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery scheme. [FBI informant gathered years of evidence on Russian push for US nuclear fuel deals, including Uranium One, memos show; By JOHN SOLOMON; The Hill;  11/20/17 06:11 PM EST]

 

Guess who was the FBI Director during this time frame?

 

Yep, Robert Mueller.

 

He even delivered a Uranium Sample to Moscow in 2009. [Mueller’s Role in Delivering Uranium to Russians Raises Questions; By Steve Byas; The New American; 8/2/17]

 

Guess who was handling that case within the Justice Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland? [Russians Bragged About 10 Spies Assigned to Clinton; Mueller, McCabe, and Rosenstein Helped Cover It Up; By C. Mitchell Shaw; The New American; 3/1/18]

 

No other than, Rod Rosenstein.

 

Guess what happened to the informant?

 

The Department of Justice placed a GAG order on him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out about it. [FBI Informant Testifies, Loretta Lynch Imposed Gag Order To Cover Moscow-Clinton Scheme; By Martin Walsh; Conservative Daily Post; 2/8/18 4:32 PM – Updated 5:16 PM]

 

How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the United States of America end up in Russian hands when the FBI has an informant, a mole providing inside information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise?

 

Guess what happened soon after the sale was approved?

 

~145 million dollars in “donations” made their way into the Clinton Foundation from entities directly connected to the Uranium One deal. [What We Know About The Russia-Clinton Uranium One Deal So Far Is Crazy Enough; By James H. Hyde; The Federalist; 12/5/17 –

 

‘The Kazakhstan deal was extremely lucrative for Giustra. He and others, such as Ian Telfer, who according to The New York Times served as Uranium One’s chairman, donated substantial amounts to the Clinton Foundation. In an interview with Tucker Carlson of Fox News, Schweizer says, “As this deal was coming for approval in 2010, the Clinton Foundation received [donations] from nine shareholders in this uranium company that was sold to the Russians. None of them all of a sudden decided they were going to donate large amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation, more than $145 million. And by the way, a lot of those donations were never declared publicly by the Clintons, they were hidden.”’]

 

Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue Service working the Charitable Division?

 

No other than, Lois Lerner.

 

Ok, that’s all just another series of coincidences, nothing to see here, right?

 

Let’s fast forward to 2015.

 

Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi discovers that Hillary ran the State Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlaw personal email server.

 

He also discovered that none of those emails had been turned over when she departed her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was required by law. [Hillary Clinton didn’t comply with email policies, State Dept IG finds; By CBS/AP; CBSNews.com; 3/25/16 10:56 AM – Updated 1:07 PM EDT:

 

‘”At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act,” the report reads.

 

It goes on to say that Clinton produced 55,000 pages of emails to “mitigate” her failure to preserve the emails, but the inspector general “notes that Secretary Clinton’s production [of 55,000 pages of emails] was incomplete.” The report also says that the 55,000 pages included no emails from the first few months of her tenure as secretary for either received or sent messages.’]

 

He also discovered that there was Top Secret information contained within her personally archived email. [But her emails? You’re dang right her emails; By  Marc A. Thiessen; Chicago Tribune; 6/20/18 4:55 PM:

 

“In fact, the overlooked bombshell of the report is the inspector general’s confirmation that classified information contained in Clinton’s emails was in fact compromised by foreign intelligence services, and that Clinton had recklessly emailed President Barack Obama using her unsecured personal email from the territory of a hostile foreign adversary.”]

 

 (Let’s not forget at least 10 CIA spies in China were killed by the Chinese because of the leaks and god knows what else occurred) [Blog Editor: I could not find a direct link to CIA deaths in China and Crooked Hillary’s illegal private email server. BUT a connect the dots look shows Crooked Hillary’s private may have contributed to Chinese murders of CIA Agents. Here are some dots to consider:

 

A DOT:

 

The classified information found on Secretary Clinton’s email server was quite alarming. For instance, at least 47 of Secretary Clinton’s emails from her basement server contain the notation “B3 CIA PERS/ORG,” which indicates the material referred to CIA personnel or matters related to the agency. Ultimately, the FBI determined that:

 

“110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning [federal agency] to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.” (Critical Cybersecurity Takeaways From Hillary’s Email Debacle; By Stark On IR; CyberSecurityDocket.com; 7/15/16 12:19 pm)

 

A Dot:

 

The Chinese government systematically dismantled C.I.A. spying operations in the country starting in 2010, killing or imprisoning more than a dozen sources over two years and crippling intelligence gathering there for years afterward.

 

… Some were convinced that a mole within the C.I.A. had betrayed the United States. Others believed that the Chinese had hacked the covert system the C.I.A. used to communicate with its foreign sources. Years later, that debate remains unresolved.

 

 

Still others were put in jail. All told, the Chinese killed or imprisoned 18 to 20 of the C.I.A.’s sources in China, according to two former senior American officials, effectively unraveling a network that had taken years to build. (Killing C.I.A. Informants, China Crippled U.S. Spying Operations; By Mark MazzettiAdam GoldmanMichael S. Schmidt and Matt Apuzzo; NYT; 5/20/17)

 

A Dot:

 

Clinton and her top aides had access to a Pentagon-run classified network that goes up to the Secret level, as well as a separate system used for Top Secret communications.

 

The two systems — the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) and the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System (JWICS) — are not connected to the unclassified system, known as the Non-Classified Internet Protocol Router Network (NIPRNet). You cannot email from one system to the other, though you can use NIPRNet to send ­emails outside the government.

 

Somehow, highly classified information from SIPRNet, as well as even the super-secure JWICS, jumped from those closed systems to the open system and turned up in at least 1,340 of Clinton’s home emails — including several the CIA earlier this month flagged as containing ultra-secret Sensitive Compartmented Information and Special Access Programs, a subset of SCI.

 

 

As a result of Clinton’s negligence, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in a recent interview he thinks “the odds are pretty high” that hostile foreign powers like Iran, China and Russia hacked Clinton’s homebrew email server and stole US secrets. (Hillary’s team copied intel off top-secret server to email; By Paul Sperry; NY Post; 1/24/16 5:09am)

 

A Dot:

 

Former top FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified during two days of closed-door House hearings, revealing shocking new Intel against her old bosses at the Bureau, according the well-placed FBI sources.

 

 

The embattled Page tossed James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok and Bill Priestap among others under the Congressional bus, alleging the upper echelon of the FBI concealed intelligence confirming Chinese state-backed ‘assets’ had illegally acquired former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s 30,000+ “missing” emails, federal sources said.

 

The Russians didn’t do it. The Chinese did, according to well-placed FBI sources.

 

And while Democratic lawmakers and the mainstream media prop up Russia as America’s boogeyman, it was the ironically Chinese who acquired Hillary’s treasure trove of classified and top secret intelligence from her home-brewed private server.

 

 

Hundreds of top secret documents and even the president’s daily travel and security itineraries were on that server — and intercepted by a communist country — yet the FBI sat on the evidence. Likewise, all of Clinton’s and her inner circle’s outgoing emails were compromised as well, sources confirmed.

 

Even the Inspector General had tipped off the FBI — specifically Strzok — about the foreign breach. Still, no timely case was pursued. (FBI: Lisa Page Dimes Out Top FBI Officials During Classified House Testimony; Bureau Bosses Covered Up Evidence China Hacked Hillary’s Top Secret Emails; By Investigative Bureau; True Pundit; 7/17/18)

 

That is enough Dots for me to connect CIA deaths in China to Crooked Hillary’s illegal private email server.]

 

Sparing you the State Departments cover up, the nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we shall leave it with this…… they did everything humanly possible to cover for Hillary.

 

Now this is amazing, guess who became FBI Director in 2013?

 

Guess who secured 17 no bid contracts for his employer (Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was rewarded with a six million dollar thank you present when he departed his employer? [Blog Editor:

 

But Comey earned $6 million in one year alone from Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin became a Clinton Foundation donor that very year.

 

Comey served as deputy attorney general under John Ashcroft for two years of the Bush administration. When he left the Bush administration, he went directly to Lockheed Martin and became vice president, acting as a general counsel.

 

How much money did James Comey make from Lockheed Martin in his last year with the company, which he left in 2010? More than $6 million in compensation.

 

Lockheed Martin is a Clinton Foundation donor. The company admitted to becoming a Clinton Global Initiative member in 2010.

 

According to records, Lockheed Martin is also a member of the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt, which paid Bill Clinton $250,000 to deliver a speech in 2010.

 

In 2010, Lockheed Martin won 17 approvals for private contracts from the Hillary Clinton State Department. (Exposed: FBI Director James Comey’s Clinton Foundation Connection; By Patrick Howley; Breitbart; 9/10/16)

 

Most of the Left-Wing fact checkers dispute the direct connection between Comey, Lockheed Martin and Crooked Hillary. The Leftists twist the dots with a “FALSE” disregarding the linkage between dot to claim no direct connection means it didn’t happen. The most neural fact checker – Truth or Fiction – says the facts are correct but those facts do not provide a provable direct link, hence labels the linkage as misleading – HERE and HERE.]

 

No other than James Comey.

 

Amazing how all those no-bids just went right through at State, huh?

 

Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the “Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal Revenue Service and exonerates her. [Blog Editor: This should sound familiar:

 

“The U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI began an investigation into the IRS controversy in May 2013.[30] In October 2015, the DOJ announced it was closing the investigation and would not seek criminal charges.[1] The determination came after an investigation of almost two years, in which the DOJ and FBI interviewed more than 100 witnesses and reviewed more than a million pages of IRS documents.[1]

 

In a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia, announcing the case closure, Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Peter J. Kadzik wrote that while “our investigation uncovered substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment, and institutional inertia…Not a single IRS employee reported any allegation, concern or suspicion that the handling of tax-exempt applications—or any other IRS function—was motivated by political bias, discriminatory intent, or corruption.”[1] Kadzik wrote “We found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives that would support a criminal prosecution.”[31] Kadzik stated that the investigation specifically absolved Lerner of criminal liability, and determined that Lerner was in fact the first official to recognize a problem and try and correct it.[1][32] (FBI finds no evidence to support criminal prosecution; Wikipedia; page was last edited on 6/18/18, at 03:09 (UTC)”)]

 

Nope…. couldn’t find any crimes there.

 

Can you guess what happened next?

 

In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile the DOJ is handing out immunity deals like candy. [Blog Editor:

 

“Former FBI Director James Comey started to draft a statement exonerating Hillary Clinton in the bureau’s investigation into her use of a private email server before the FBI interviewed her or her key witnesses, the Senate Judiciary Committee said Thursday.

 

“Conclusion first, fact-gathering second — that’s no way to run an investigation. The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Judiciary Subcommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in a letter to the FBI.

 

The Judiciary Committee reviewed transcripts, which were heavily redacted, indicating Comey began drafting the exoneration statement in April or May 2016, before the FBI interviewed up to 17 key witnesses, including Clinton and some of her close aides. (James Comey started drafting statement exonerating Hillary Clinton before FBI interviewed her, aides; By Melissa Quinn; Washington Examiner; 8/31/17 01:40 PM)]

 

They didn’t even convene a Grand Jury.

 

Like a lightning bolt of statistical impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like the true “Gangsta” Homey is, James steps out into the cameras of an awaiting press conference on July the 8th of 2016 and exonerates the Hillary from any wrongdoing. [Blog Editor:

 

VIDEO: FBI Director James Comey’s full statement on Clinton email investigation

 

Posted by CNN

Published on Jul 5, 2016

 

Five-minute rebuttal to Comey exoneration:

 

VIDEO: The FBI and Exonerated Emails: What’s Really Behind Comey and Clinton

 

Posted by Dr. Steve Turley

Published on Jul 12, 2016]

 

Can you see the pattern?

 

It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Asst. Attorney General, Comey gets fired based upon a letter by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the story continues.

 

FISA Abuse, political espionage….. pick a crime, any crime, chances are…… this group and a few others did it.

 

All the same players.

 

All compromised and conflicted.

 

All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves.

 

All connected in one way or another to the Clintons.

 

They are like battery acid, they corrode and corrupt everything they touch.

 

How many lives have these two destroyed?

 

As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in its 20+ years of operation of being the largest International Charity Fraud in the history of mankind, has never been audited by the Internal Revenue Service.

 

Let us not forget that Comey’s brother works for DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation’s taxes. [Report: Comey’s Brother Works for the Law Firm That Handles Clinton Foundation’s Taxes; By June; Gateway Pundit; 5/12/17]

 

And,

See the person that is the common denominator to all the crimes above and still doing her evil escape legal maneuvers at the top of the 3 Letter USA Agencies? Yep, that would be Hillary R. Clinton.

 

WHO IS LISA BARSOOMIAN?

 

Let’s learn a little about Mrs. Lisa H. Barsoomian’s background. [Blog Editor: Much of the information below is based on Roger Stone posts. Incidentally, Stone’s website is under a red McAfee alert warning:

 

“Site Report

 

Here’s why stonecoldtruth.com/muller-rosenstein-and-comey-the-three-amigos-from-the-deep-state/ is dangerous

 

We regularly scan sites for suspicious and malicious activity — and this one just isn’t safe. You’ll find more details below.

 

 

One should consider if the McAfee alert is Left-Wing based or is actually infected with malicious content harmful to one’s computer. Nevertheless, many Conservative websites reference the Stone post and those websites are not under a McAfee alert.]

 

Lisa H. Barsoomian, a US Attorney that graduated from Georgetown Law, is a protege of James Comey and Robert Mueller. [Blog Editor:

 

“Enter Lisa Barsoomian, wife of Rod Rosenstein. Lisa is a high-powered attorney in Washington, DC, who specializes in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the Intelligence Communities. She works for R. Craig Lawrence, an attorney who has represented Robert Mueller three times, James Comey five times, Barack Obama forty-five times, Kathleen Sebelius fifty-six times, Bill Clinton forty times, and Hillary Clinton seventeen times between 1991 and 2017.

 

Barsoomian participated in some of this work personally and has herself represented the FBI at least five separate times. It would be great to research the specifics of the cases she worked in, but many of the documents from the Court Dockets relating to these cases have been removed from the D.C. District and Appeals Court, including records of her representation for Clinton in 1998’s case Hamburg. V. Clinton.

 

The “Three Amigos” have surprisingly obvious conflicts of interest in their past and current investigatory responsibilities. Mueller even acted as a delivery boy for Hillary’s State Department, hand transporting ten grams of highly enriched uranium under the auspices of counter-terror. Was it a coincidence that this happened at the same time as Hillary and her associate John Podesta were nurturing the Uranium One deal that would see Russia take control over 20% of America’s proven uranium reserves? Shortly after the Russia uranium deal closed, the Clinton Foundation was showered with many millions of dollars from Russian donors.” (The “Truth” Part III: The Three Amigos; By Dan Newman; Truth News Network; 8/9/18)

 

And more:

 

“But the biggest reason why Rosenstein should recuse himself is that his wife was mentored by both Comey and Mueller and has been involved in many cases representing the FBI and Democrats involved in this case.

 

Roger Stone reported the following on Lisa Barsoomian in 2017:

 

Enter Lisa Barsoomian, wife of Rod Rosenstein.  Lisa is a high-powered attorney in Washington, DC, who specializes in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the Deep State, err, I mean, the Intelligence Communities.

 

Lisa Barsoomian works for R. Craig Lawrence, an attorney who has represented Robert Mueller three times, James Comey five times, Barack Obama forty-five times, Kathleen Sebelius fifty-six times, Bill Clinton forty times, and Hillary Clinton seventeen times between 1991 and 2017.

 

Barsoomian participated in some of this work personally and has herself represented the FBI at least five separate times.  It would be great to research the specifics of the cases she worked in, many of the documents from the Court Docket relating to these cases have been removed from the D.C. District and Appeals Court, including her representation for Clinton in 1998’s case Hamburg. V. Clinton.

 

Her loyalties are clearly with the entities that make up the Deep State, as are her husbands.” (GRAHAM PUTS PRESSURE ON ROSENSTEIN FOR HIS PART IN THE MUELLER PROBE – BUT HERE’S WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW; By STEVEN AHLE; Steadfast and Loyal; 6/3/18)

 

And more:

 

Senator Lindsey Graham sent a letter on Thursday to Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein about whether Rosenstein should recuse himself from the Mueller investigation due to his obvious conflicts with the case.

Graham should also request information about Rosenstein’s wife who represented the Clintons in the past.

Graham, in the May 31-dated letter, cited reports that Mueller’s investigation is looking at whether President Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey – and the fact that Trump relied on a Rosenstein-authored memo to justify the firing.  Rosenstein’s role was further detailed in a New York Times report earlier this week on a memo written by ousted FBI official Andrew McCabe.

Fox News has confirmed that the memo described a meeting where Rosenstein claimed Trump had asked him to reference Russia in his recommendation to fire Comey. Rosenstein declined, and instead focused on Comey’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email probe. Trump pushed back on the account Thursday.  “Not that it matters but I never fired James Comey because of Russia! The Corrupt Mainstream media loves to keep pushing that narrative, but they know it is not true!” Trump tweeted.

Rosenstein’s wife, Lisa Barsoomian, represented Bill Clinton in a case in the 1990’s.  This alone should be enough for Rosenstein to be unqualified for any role related to the Clintons, Obama or their cronies.

Roger Stone reported the following on Lisa Barsoomian in 2017 –

Enter Lisa Barsoomian, wife of Rod Rosenstein.  Lisa is a high-powered attorney in Washington, DC, who specializes in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the Deep State, err, I mean, the Intelligence Communities.

Lisa Barsoomian works for R. Craig Lawrence, an attorney who has represented Robert Mueller three times, James Comey five times, Barack Obama forty-five times, Kathleen Sebelius fifty-six times, Bill Clinton forty times, and Hillary Clinton seventeen times between 1991 and 2017.

Barsoomian participated in some of this work personally and has herself represented the FBI at least five separate times.  It would be great to research the specifics of the cases she worked in, many of the documents from the Court Docket relating to these cases have been removed from the D.C. District and Appeals Court, including her representation for Clinton in 1998’s case Hamburg. V. Clinton.

Her loyalties are clearly with the entities that make up the Deep State, as are her husbands.

… Rosenstein’s wife is enough reason for him to recuse himself! (Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein’s Wife Also Has Extensive Ties to the Clintons, Mueller and Comey; Posted by Jim Hoft – Written by Joe Hoft; Gateway Pundit; 6/2/18)

 

Barsoomian, with her boss R. Craig Lawrence, represented Bill Clinton in 1998. [Hamburg v. Clinton documents of on Scribd.]

 

Lawrence also represented:

 

Robert Mueller three times;

James Comey five times;

Barack Obama 45 times;

Kathleen Sebelius 56 times;

Bill Clinton 40 times; and

Hillary Clinton 17 times.

 

Between 1998 and 2017, Barsoomian herself represented the FBI at least five times.

 

You may be saying to yourself, OK, who cares? Who cares about the

work history of this Barsoomian woman?

 

Apparently someone does, because someone out there cares so much that they’ve “purged” all Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court dockets (?). [Blog Editor: Honestly, the only reference to a Barsoomian document purge of any sort are the many versions (and there are many) of this chain email. Ergo, either the statement is accurate OR no such purge ever took place.]

 

Someone out there cares so much that the internet has been “purged” of all information pertaining to Barsoomian. [Blog Editor: This statement is blatantly false or I would not be able what I have discovered my own to this point.]

 

Historically, this indicates that the individual is a protected CIA operative. [Blog Editor: Unsubstantiated speculation undoubtedly based on the CIA’s reputation] Additionally, Lisa Barsoomian has specialized in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the intelligence community. [Blog Editor: I found this relating to Barsoomian and FOIA:

 

‘In 2000, she represented the FBI in a case that involved “a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the Electronic Privacy Information Center,” according to Wired. An ABC News story stated: “Government lawyer Lisa Barsoomian contended the group’s request for a court order was moot because the FBI had agreed to expedite its review.”

 

She was also involved in a Freedom of Information case involving a prisoner.’ (Lisa Barsoomian, Rod Rosenstein’s Wife: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know; By Jessica McBride; Heavy.com; Updated 7/9/18 2:52pm)

 

From what I could discover on the fly about Lisa Barsoomian and FOIA is she overwhelming represented the FBI. The only specific FOIA/CIA/Barsoomian action I found are primarily quotes of this chain email without naming the specific reference requested.]

 

And, although Barsoomian has been involved in hundreds of cases representing the DC Office of the US Attorney, her email address is Lisa Barsoomian at NIH gov. The NIH stands for National Institutes of Health.

 

This is a tactic routinely used by the CIA to protect an operative by using another government organization to shield their activities. Blog Editor: Again, unsubstantiated speculation.]

 

It’s a cover, so big deal right? I mean what does one more attorney with ties to the US intelligence community really matter?

 

It deals with Trump and his recent tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports, the border wall, DACA, everything coming out of California, the Uni-party unrelenting opposition to President Trump, the Clapper leaks, the Comey leaks, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal and subsequent 14-month nap with occasional forays into the marijuana legalization mix …. and last but not least Mueller’s never-ending investigation into collusion between the Trump team and the Russians.

 

Why does Barsoomian, CIA operative, merit any mention?

 

BECAUSE….

 

She is Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s WIFE….That’s why!!

 

GET THIS INFORMATION OUT TO EVERYONE YOU CAN.

 

Jaw dropping, shocking and extremely sad that this info has never been exposed-

 

DO YOUR PART IN PLASTERING THIS INFORMATION EVERYWHERE …. it’s bullet proof and cannot be blown off by leftists … and will convince many not paying attention that we have a soft coup happening now..

 

GLP powers activate …. get this all over the net and email
Boxes. [Blog Editor: Being a Baby-Boomer, I have no idea what “GLP” means. I’m guessing it has to do with getting the info out far and wide.]

___________________

All Dots Connected Validity

John R. Houk

© August 13, 2018

__________________

ALL DOTS CONNECTED

 

Chain Email with Blog Editor Commentary

 

WSJ: Was John Brennan The One Who Actually Engaged In “Treason”?


Tim Brown uses an article by the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel to extrapolate the notion former CIA Director John Brennan (See Also HERE) was an Obamunist traitor. The notion arises because Brennan accused President Trump of Treason for merely meeting with Putin in Helsinki.

 

JRH 7/22/18

Please Support NCCR

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

WSJ: Was John Brennan The One Who Actually Engaged In “Treason”?

When men like John Brennan point their finger at others and cry “treason,” they are attempting to pin the very crime they are guilty of on someone else.

 

By TIM BROWN

JULY 21, 2018

Freedom Outpost

 

Well, Sebastian Gorka has been upfront that former Obama CIA Director John Brennan is both a “Communist” and a “traitor.”  Now, it appears that the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel may be following that path without coming right out and saying it.

 

In a recent column, Strassel seems to take issue with Brennan’s tweets from earlier this week when he tore into President Donald Trump over his actions in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

 

“Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes & misdemeanors,’” tweeted Brennan.

 

“It was nothing short of treasonous,” added Brennan, who worked for what could be argued was the most treasonous person to sit in the Oval Office.  “Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???”

 

 

According to Ms. Strassel, “This is rough stuff, even for an Obama partisan.”

 

She then wrote:

 

That’s what Mr. Brennan is—a partisan—and it is why his role in the 2016 scandal is in some ways more concerning than the FBI’s. Mr. Comey stands accused of flouting the rules, breaking the chain of command, abusing investigatory powers. Yet it seems far likelier that the FBI’s Trump investigation was a function of arrogance and overconfidence than some partisan plot. No such case can be made for Mr. Brennan. Before his nomination as CIA director, he served as a close Obama adviser. And the record shows he went on to use his position—as head of the most powerful spy agency in the world—to assist Hillary Clinton’s campaign (and keep his job).

 

Mr. Brennan has taken credit for launching the Trump investigation. At a House Intelligence Committee hearing in May 2017, he explained that he became “aware of intelligence and information about contacts between Russian officials and U.S. persons.” The CIA can’t investigate U.S. citizens, but he made sure that “every information and bit of intelligence” was “shared with the bureau,” meaning the FBI. This information, he said, “served as the basis for the FBI investigation.” My sources suggest Mr. Brennan was overstating his initial role, but either way, by his own testimony, he as an Obama-Clinton partisan was pushing information to the FBI and pressuring it to act.

 

More notable, Mr. Brennan then took the lead on shaping the narrative that Russia was interfering in the election specifically to help Mr. Trump—which quickly evolved into the Trump-collusion narrative. Team Clinton was eager to make the claim, especially in light of the Democratic National Committee server hack. Numerous reports show Mr. Brennan aggressively pushing the same line internally. Their problem was that as of July 2016 even then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper didn’t buy it. He publicly refused to say who was responsible for the hack, or ascribe motivation. Mr. Brennan also couldn’t get the FBI to sign on to the view; the bureau continued to believe Russian cyberattacks were aimed at disrupting the U.S. political system generally, not aiding Mr. Trump.

 

Think about that just a moment because on Saturday I reported on the fact that sources have claimed that former FBI attorney Lisa Page has begun to testify under oath that there was absolutely no basis for the Mueller investigation into Trump.  In that report, I referenced John Solomon’s claim that:

 

For any American who wants an answer sooner, there are just five words, among the thousands of suggestive texts Page and Strzok exchanged, that you should read.

 

That passage was transmitted on May 19, 2017. “There’s no big there there,” Strzok texted.

 

The date of the text long has intrigued investigators: It is two days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named special counsel Robert Mueller to oversee an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and the Russia campaign.

 

Since the text was turned over to Congress, investigators wondered whether it referred to the evidence against the Trump campaign.

 

This month, they finally got the chance to ask. Strzok declined to say — but Page, during a closed-door interview with lawmakers, confirmed in the most pained and contorted way that the message in fact referred to the quality of the Russia case, according to multiple eyewitnesses.

 

The admission is deeply consequential. It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was “there.”

 

Strassel continues:

 

The CIA director couldn’t himself go public with his Clinton spin—he lacked the support of the intelligence community and had to be careful not to be seen interfering in U.S. politics. So what to do? He called Harry Reid. In a late August briefing, he told the Senate minority leader that Russia was trying to help Mr. Trump win the election, and that Trump advisers might be colluding with Russia. (Two years later, no public evidence has emerged to support such a claim.)

 

But the truth was irrelevant. On cue, within a few days of the briefing, Mr. Reid wrote a letter to Mr. Comey, which of course immediately became public. “The evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign continues to mount,” wrote Mr. Reid, going on to float Team Clinton’s Russians-are-helping-Trump theory. Mr. Reid publicly divulged at least one of the allegations contained in the infamous Steele dossier, insisting that the FBI use “every resource available to investigate this matter.”

 

The Reid letter marked the first official blast of the Brennan-Clinton collusion narrative into the open. Clinton opposition-research firm Fusion GPS followed up by briefing its media allies about the dossier it had dropped off at the FBI. On Sept. 23, Yahoo News’s Michael Isikoff ran the headline: “U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin.” Voilà. Not only was the collusion narrative out there, but so was evidence that the FBI was investigating.

 

In their recent book “Russian Roulette,” Mr. Isikoff and David Corn say even Mr. Reid believed Mr. Brennan had an “ulterior motive” with the briefing, and “concluded the CIA chief believed the public needed to know about the Russia operation, including the information about the possible links to the Trump campaign.” (Brennan allies have denied his aim was to leak damaging information.)

 

Clinton supporters have a plausible case that Mr. Comey’s late-October announcement that the FBI had reopened its investigation into the candidate affected the election. But Trump supporters have a claim that the public outing of the collusion narrative and FBI investigation took a toll on their candidate. Politics was at the center of that outing, and Mr. Brennan was a ringmaster. Remember that when reading his next “treason” tweet.

 

Indeed, remember it.  Brennan was Obama’s Muslim convert for jihad here in the US.

 

When men like John Brennan point their finger at others and cry “treason,” they are attempting to pin the very crime they are guilty of on someone else.  Ms. Strassel, while not being as forthright as Gorka about Brennan’s treason, nevertheless, seems to be saying just that in what she wrote.  America would do well to listen and bring justice to bear upon this traitor and the traitors surrounding him, but I have my doubts that anyone in this life will actually hold him accountable.

 

Article posted with permission from The Washington Standard

__________________________

Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.comSonsOfLibertyMedia.comGunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com. He is husband to his “more precious than rubies” wife, father of 10 “mighty arrows”, jack of all trades, Christian and lover of liberty. He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina. . Follow Tim on Twitter. Also check him out on Gab and Steemit

 

Copyright © 2018 FreedomOutpost.com

 

A Tale of Two Deep States


Daniel Greenfield writes “A Tale of Two Deep States”. Interesting scenario – Two Deep States. Greenfield tells us both Deep States are against the Trump Administration. The Greenfield labels are the Obama Deep State and the Russian Deep State. Intrigued? Read the Greenfield essay.

 

JRH 6/29/18

Please Support NCCR

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

A Tale of Two Deep States

 

By Daniel Greenfield

June 28, 2018

Sultan Knish

 

“Why the hell are we standing down?”

That was the question that the White House’s cybersecurity coordinator was asked after Susan Rice, Obama’s national security adviser, issued a stand down order on Russia.

Testimony at the Senate Intelligence Committee hearings on Russian interference in the election once again raised the central paradox of the Russia conspiracy theory. If Russian interference in the election represented the crisis that we are told it did, why did Obama fail to take any meaningful action?

The White House’s own cybersecurity people wanted an aggressive response before being told to stand down. Obama issued a bloodless warning to Russia while his people deliberately crippled our offense.

Democrats and the media blamed the Russian hacking on Trump. But it was Susan Rice who had told the cybersecurity team to “knock it off” and Obama’s people who hadn’t wanted him to be “boxed in” and forced to respond to Russian actions. Was this just the usual appeasement or was there more to it?

Why didn’t Obama and his team want to stop Russian hacking? Because they needed the Russians.

The 2016 election is really the story of two deep state intelligence operations that dovetailed neatly with each other. One was an ongoing Russian operation that took advantage of a weak president to sow chaos in America and Europe. The other was a domestic political operation utilizing counterintelligence resources in the United States and Europe to spy on, undermine and try to bring down Trump.

Contrary to claims made by Obama operatives, the Russian operation was not new. Russian hackers and spies had done enormous damage to America’s intelligence community. But they had succeeded so well because the mission of the intelligence community had shifted from deterring foreign adversaries to suppressing domestic political opponents. And this new mission made the Russians attacks irrelevant.

The Russian attacks on the formerly formidable NSA were so easy to accomplish because it was no longer countering the Russians. Instead Obama viewed it as a police state tool for spying on pro-Israel activists, members of Congress and Trump campaign officials. The NSA’s opposite numbers in Russia, posing as rogue hackers, were no longer hammering rivals, but a twisted and crippled organization.

Obama didn’t want to fight the Russians, but the Russian attacks were very useful because they justified the NSA’s powers, which he was abusing not to go after the Russians, but after American political rivals. And the Russian election hacks played perfectly into his hands by justifying the counterintelligence investigations supposedly aimed at the Russians, but really aimed at domestic political opponents.

The Mueller investigation is only the latest of these disguised counterintelligence police state gimmicks.

Without the Russians, Obama’s people would have just been nakedly abusing their powers to spy on Americans. But as long as the Russians were active, his deep state had the excuse that it needed.

The two intelligence operations, the Russian one and the Obama one, were interdependent. Their deep state symbiosis was possible only because neither side threatened the core interests of the other.

The Russians were a national security threat, but Obama’s people didn’t care about national security. And Obama’s counterintelligence operation was aimed at domestic political opponents rather than the Russians. It’s still unknown if the Russians and Obama’s people actively colluded in these operations, but it’s likely that seasoned professionals on both sides had a quiet understanding of their respective roles.

The Russians had not set out to alter the outcome of the election. Nor did they have that capability. Their attacks followed the pattern of the Dulles Plan, a fictional piece of Soviet propaganda which attributed any anti-Soviet activity to an American conspiracy to undermine Communism. The KGB veterans running Russia as an actual deep state sought to undermine the American political system by feeding extremism, creating panic and discrediting elections. And that also fit the Obama agenda.

Obama’s people had spent eight years dismantling political norms and undermining America. The KGB deep state conspirators in Russia and their leftist counterparts in Washington D.C. had emerged from the same ideological school. Their aims and allegiances had diverged, but the ex-Communists in Moscow and Adams Morgan Socialists in Washington D.C. shared a common hatred for America and its values.

There was no reason to interfere with the Russian interference. Obama and his people did not believe that the Russians would significantly affect the election. But if his efforts to eavesdrop on Trump officials came to light, the Russians had provided him with an alibi. Susan Rice, as national security adviser, was at the center of the eavesdropping effort and had every reason to protect the Russian operation.

Protecting the Russians also protected the Obamas.

Nor did the Obama deep state have any particular allegiance to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The Obamas and the Clintons loathed each other. Though both factions were leftists, their approaches were as much at variance as Bolsheviks and Trotskyists. Obama had been forced to make a deal with the Clintons to secure his hold on the Democrat operation. But his support for Hillary Clinton was only an endorsement of the lesser evil. Her defeat left him and his political allies in total control of the Democrat operation.

And the chaos and violence of his anti-Trump resistance achieved his goal of radicalizing the Democrats.

The Russians didn’t hack the election. That conspiracy theory remains wishful thinking. But the allegation proved very useful in enabling everything from the pre-election eavesdropping on political opponents to the post-election sabotage of the Trump administration to the move away from electronic voting to paper ballots which enable the old-fashioned kind of Democrat ballot stuffing.

But like an iceberg, the most troubling development of the Russian conspiracy is mostly underwater.

After 9/11, the intelligence community was revived with a new purpose. That purpose was fighting Islamic terrorism. During Obama’s two terms, the intelligence community was compromised, crippled and transformed into a domestic deep state aimed at suppressing the political opposition. Tragically, it came to resemble the KGB, with its domestic surveillance and investigation of political opponents.

This transformation of law enforcement and intelligence agencies did not emerge out of thin air.

The Founders were rightly cautious of the power of a strong central government. And a national law enforcement and intelligence infrastructure was always ripe for the worst big government abuses.

The FBI’s record of political tampering under Hoover was no secret. And it didn’t end there. Everything in Washington D.C. is political. Especially the apolitical. Its engine of careerism runs on networking and connections. The apolitical bureaucracy is a buzzing hive of ambition and backstabbing. Every agency has its own Machiavellian subcultures with courtiers, saboteurs, spies and manipulators. And every agency culture has a leftist ideological component, among its other agendas, some more than others.

The Obama years politicized everything from the food you ate to the clothes you wore. Certainly no arm of government survived those terrible two terms without being substantially transformed.

As the cold winter sun set on another year in Washington D.C., the deep state was reborn.

The Democrats have spent two years accusing Republicans of colluding with Russia. But as usual they were accusing their political opponents of their own crime. Republicans had not undermined national security. The Democrats did. A Republican president hadn’t sat across from Putin’s agent and assured him that he would have more flexibility to make deals after the election. A Republican president hadn’t let the Russians hack our national security secrets to provide a casus belli for targeting his opponents.

That was all Obama.

Barack Obama and Susan Rice sabotaged efforts to stop the Russians because their deep state domestic spying program depended on Russian collusion, both the reality and the allegation. Everything from the original allegation, Clinton campaign opposition research which drew on claims by a Russian intelligence operative, to the Mueller counterintelligence investigation, which has done nothing to actually stop the Russians, but has gone after Republican campaign pros, needed the Russians as its stalking horse.

Russian hacking didn’t change the election. But Obama’s exploitation of Russian hacking nearly did. We still don’t know what materials were gathered by the eavesdropping operation. Or who saw them. Information is the ultimate weapon in national security and election campaigns. Obama used the former to tamper with the latter. And all these years later, we still don’t know what damage was done.

While Mueller prowls around pursuing Hillary Clinton’s conspiracy theories, those crimes remain unexplored. But we do know that the Russians didn’t do anything that Obama didn’t allow them to do.

Any serious effort to investigate Russian election hacks must begin with the man who let them to do it.

___________________

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center’s Front Page Magazine.

 

More details on Daniel Greenfield.

 

 

8 Times Obama’s Intelligence Agencies Set People Up To Fabricate The Russia Story


Now here is a collusion list that is sure to inspire massive lying deflection with such beginning phrases as “But Trump did …

 

Have you noticed that NOT one scintilla of corroborated evidence has been produced to suggest that President Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016? My God! It’s 2018 and the Dems pulling all the stops and lies to remove the President from Office.

 

AND YET, there is a huge (or YUGE) amount of public information of not only collusion but also corruption within the Obama/Crooked Hillary camp to steal the 2016 election or (in the blessed event that won Trump won) impeach the President.

 

Willis L. Krumholz writing for The Federalist illustrates a clear picture of actions that should lead to criminal prosecution.

 

JRH 6/6/18

Please Support NCCR

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

8 Times Obama’s Intelligence Agencies Set People Up To Fabricate The Russia Story

These events should anger any red-blooded American who believes in representative democracy and the importance of the rule of law.

 

Daily Briefing – Obama & Clapper

 

By Willis L. Krumholz

JUNE 6, 2018

The Federalist

 

The intelligence bureaucracies spied on the Donald Trump campaign: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants were granted because of a Hillary Clinton-funded and unverified document, national-security letters were issued to allow warrantless spying, and the unprecedented but not-illegal-per-se unmasking of Trump officials’ conversations with non-U.S. persons was shockingly routine.

 

Yet the news of a CIA-connected human source operating as far back as April or May of 2016 is about more than just spying. It is the latest example in what now looks to be a long line of attempted setups by the Clinton team, many times aided and abetted by our intelligence bureaucracies.

 

These events should anger any red blooded American who believes in representative democracy and the importance of the rule of law. Let’s review eight examples.

 

  1. CIA And FBI ‘Human Intelligence’

 

We’ve just learned about Stefan Halper, a CIA-connected Cambridge professor who — working for the FBI — contacted Trump advisers Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, and Sam Clovis during the 2016 election, to investigate what they might know about suspicions of collusion with Russia. Former Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo has claimed that he was approached by an unknown second U.S. intelligence community asset in early May of 2016.

 

The FBI says that the Russia investigation began in July, because of something Papadopoulos said to an Australian diplomat in May. Papadopoulos had supposedly told the Australian diplomat something about Russia having information that “could be damaging” to Clinton. Papadopoulos allegedly heard this from Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese-born professor who allegedly claimed to have close ties with Russia.

 

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team charged Papadopoulos — unconvincingly — with lying to investigators, because Papadopoulos said his contacts with Mifsud began before he was on the Trump campaign. Actually, the contacts started after he “learned he would be a foreign policy advisor for the campaign,” but before the campaign made a public announcement that he was to be an advisor.

 

Mifsud is strangely now in hiding, possibly fearing for his life. Lee Smith details Mifsud’s ties to Western intelligence agencies, and Margot Cleveland suspects Mifsud may have been a U.S. intelligence plant along with Halper.

 

  1. The Trump Tower Meeting

 

Whenever Democrats or David French types talk about Trump and Russia collusion they look to the Trump Tower meeting as definitive proof. There are several problems with that. First, no presidential campaign in American history would pass up the chance of hearing evidence of crimes being committed by their opponent, no matter the source. In fact, some would say you’re doing the country a favor if you let everyone know that your opponent is subject to blackmail from a not-so-friendly foreign power (just don’t have your son and son-in-law sit in on the meeting).

 

More problematic is that Glenn Simpson — head of Fusion GPS, the firm being paid by the Clinton campaign and the DNC to prove (or create) ties between Trump and Russia — met with the two Russians who attended the Trump Tower meeting both before and after the meeting. Simpson’s excuse for doing so? Because he was working with the two Russians on a different issue, the repeal of the anti-Kremlin Magnitsky Act.

 

In other words, at the very least, the firm that created the dossier for Clinton and the DNC — using Russian intelligence sources — was the same firm that was working with the Kremlin to repeal a law passed by Congress because Putin’s thugs beat an innocent man to death in Russian prison. At most, this was yet another setup.

 

  1. Mike Flynn And The Logan Act

 

During the 2016 campaign, Democrats howled about the need to prosecute Trump campaign officials under an obscure 1799 law called the Logan Act. Byron York has documented that this was the pretext Obama-appointed former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates used to unmask former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s side of highly-appropriate phone conversations with the Russian ambassador that occurred during the transition period, and then send FBI agents to interview Flynn about those conversations.

 

Although the FBI has tried to cover this up, we now know that the agents who interviewed Flynn — including the disgraced and hugely anti-Trump Peter Strzok — didn’t believe that Flynn had lied. Nevertheless, Mueller’s team charged Flynn with lying to the FBI. After Mueller’s charge had nearly bankrupted Flynn, and after Mueller threatened to go after Flynn’s son, Flynn pled guilty to lying to the FBI.

 

  1. Andrew McCabe Sets Up Reince Priebus

 

After an intelligence briefing at the White House in early 2017, former FBI number two Andrew McCabe asked to meet privately with former White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus. A story had just dropped — anonymously sourced from multiple intelligence community officials — that Trump aides had multiple contacts with Russian intelligence during the election.

 

McCabe wanted to tell Priebus that the FBI didn’t think the story was true. Of course, Priebus asked McCabe if the FBI could publicly say just that. McCabe said he would have to check. But former FBI Director James Comey called Priebus to say that the FBI couldn’t publicly shoot down the story.

 

Days later, the “breaking news” on CNN was that the White House had tried to pressure the FBI into batting down the reports on supposed ties between Trump and Russia. So not only was the White House supposedly colluding, now there were allegations of obstruction of justice.

 

  1. Brennan Shops Dossier To Harry Reid

 

Former CIA Director John Brennan, who may have been the U.S. intelligence official to first push an investigation into the Trump campaign, briefed then-Sen. Harry Reid on the Clinton-funded dossier in August 2016.

 

The briefing did two things: First, it lent some legitimacy to the dossier, and second, it got Reid to pressure the FBI to not drop the investigation. The briefing had the added bonus of allowing Reid to speak publicly about Trump’s ties to Russia, as if he had just gained access to groundbreaking proof of collusion, which was of course covered by the media.

 

  1. Comey And Clapper Give CNN A Reason To Publish The Dossier

 

Comey, at the behest of former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, briefed Trump on one of the allegations in the dossier, but not on the main allegation in the dossier, who had funded the dossier, or how that dossier was being used by the FBI. Nevertheless, this briefing looks like one more setup, meant to allow CNN to report on the existence of the dossier as if it were highly verified and being seriously examined by U.S. intelligence community officials.

 

Clapper then leaked information about the dossier and the briefings to CNN, and later looks to have lied about those leaks to Congress. Amazingly, Clapper has previously lied to Congress. Clapper now works for CNN.

 

  1. The Jeff Sessions Recusal

 

Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation after anonymous intelligence community leaks about his contacts with Russians. Specifically, Sessions — as a senator — met with former Russian ambassador to the U.S. Sergei Kislyak in his D.C. office. In another meeting, Sessions gave a speech and a gaggle of diplomats — including Kislyak — talked with him for several minutes as he was coming off the stage.

 

The idea behind the unnecessary recusal was that somehow Sessions had misrepresented these contacts to former Sen. Al Franken. Actually, Franken — referring to one of many CNN stories sourced by anonymous officials about supposed Trump and Russia collusion — had clearly asked about whether Sessions had colluded with any Russians during the campaign, not whether Sessions had ever met any Russians.

 

  1. Rosenstein Recommends Comey Firing, Appoints Special Counsel

 

But with Jeff Sessions out of the way, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein became the acting attorney general for all things Russia-investigation-related. Rosenstein then recommended Comey’s firing, and then — overseeing the investigation that stemmed from that firing — appointed Robert Mueller as special counsel. Mueller, a former FBI Director, happened to be a close associate of Comey and Rosenstein, and would surely want to protect the interests of the FBI and the Justice Department.

 

Taken together, these setups indicate a massive effort to aid the Clinton campaign before the election.

 

After all, the entire theory of Trump-Russia collusion originated with the Clinton campaign in the lead-up to the Democrat National Convention, when it became clear that the DNC had experienced a document theft. That document theft was highly embarrassing to Clinton and the DNC, as it revealed that the DNC had been systematically stacking the deck against Bernie Sanders. The immediate goal, then, was to both distract from the mistreatment of Bernie, and completely peel the GOP national security establishment away from Trump. The Clinton campaign was successful in both of these efforts.

 

Later, during the general election, whenever Hillary’s misdeeds came up, Clinton responded by pointing to Trump’s nefarious ties with Russia. Distasteful as it may seem, this was Machiavellian politics 101. Any focus group of voters would have told the Clinton people that Hillary was the steady hand, but that they had ethical concerns about her, and also sought a change from the status quo. The way to counteract this reluctance was to paint Hillary’s opponent as ethically challenged, too, and paint his alternative to the status quo as downright dangerous. (You might say that Trump was an easy target here, but look what the Obama-campaign did to Romney.)

 

Dirty tricks are of course not new to American politics. But the apparent involvement of the U.S. intelligence community in these setups is deeply troubling. Democrats, intelligence bureaucrats, and the media have told us that the investigation started with Page. When that fell apart, they said the investigation started with Papadopoulos. Now, the Papadopoulos origination story is falling apart too.

 

It now looks like the corrupt and highly partisan upper-echelon of the U.S. intelligence community started their preliminary investigation as soon as the Clinton people — in the run-up to the Democratic convention — began claiming that there were ties between Trump and Russia. During this same time, Clinton and the DNC paid Fusion GPS, which hired Chris Steele to dig up ties between Trump and Russia.

 

This is nothing more than prosecutorial point and shoot, where corrupt big-government politicians send the corrupt and sympathetic federal bureaucracy after their political enemies. It’s no different than what happened with Lois Lerner at the Internal Revenue Service. Democrats gave speeches and sent official letters, Obama implied he wanted action, and dutiful bureaucrats did the rest.

 

With the intelligence agencies on board, legitimacy was lent to the Hillary Clinton campaign’s wild claims. All the media had to do in the weeks before Election Day was to frantically report that Trump’s campaign was being investigated, and that a document containing allegations of Trump-Russia ties (the “dossier”) was being seriously looked into by intelligence officials. That fed back to the voters, and certainly made many feel a little bit better about voting for Clinton, or not voting for Trump.

 

After the election, it has been all about C.Y.A., because these corrupt bureaucrats leading these intelligence bureaucracies never imagined Trump would win. Here, ladies and gentleman, is your real election interference and collusion: between the massive, all-powerful and unaccountable intelligence bureaucracies, the media, the Obama administration, and the Clinton campaign.

____________________

Willis L. Krumholz is a fellow at Defense Priorities. He holds a JD and MBA degree from the University of St. Thomas, and works in the financial services industry. The views expressed are those of the author only. You can follow Willis on Twitter @WillKrumholz.

 

Copyright © 2018 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

 

Tinker, Tailor, Clapper, Carter, Downer, Halper, Spy


In this Jewish World Review post, Mark Steyn relates the obvious to readers: There was indeed interference in the 2016 election cycle, BUT it was not Donald Trump colluding with Russians. Rather it was the Dems and their Deep State comrades in the Obama Administration pulling out ALL efforts to make Trump was not elected. OR if elected, to undermine President Trump so malignantly, he’d get impeached or resign.

 

JRH 5/28/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Tinker, Tailor, Clapper, Carter, Downer, Halper, Spy

 

By Mark Steyn

May 28,2018

Jerusalem World Review

 

Facts – Myths

 

As I think most persons paying attention now realize, the investigation into foreign interference with the 2016 election was created as a cover for domestic interference with the 2016 election.

 

It was run at the highest (or deepest) Deep State levels by the likes of James Clapper and John Brennan, whose frantic and hysterical Tweets are like no utterances of any CIA director in history. That also explains one of the puzzling aspects of the last year that I’ve occasionally mentioned here and on TV and radio: If you were truly interested in an “independent” Special Counsel, why would you appoint Robert Mueller? He’s a lifetime insider and the most connected man in Washington – a longtime FBI Director, and Assistant Attorney-General and acting Deputy Attorney-General at the Department of Justice.

 

Exactly. His most obvious defect as an “independent” counsel is, in fact, his principal value to the likes of Andrew McCabe and Rod Rosenstein: He knows, personally, almost every one in the tight little coterie of discredited upper-echelon officials, and he has a deep institutional loyalty to bodies whose contemporary character he helped create. In other words, he’s the perfect guy to protect those institutions. As for the nominal subject of his investigation, well, he’s indicted a bunch of no-name Russian internet trolls who’ll never set foot in a US courthouse. That’s not even worth the cost of printing the complaint. Rush Limbaugh has been kind enough to quote, several times, my line that “there are no Russians in the Russia investigation”. Which is true. Yet that doesn’t mean there aren’t foreigners. And an inordinate number of them are British subjects – or, to use today’s preferred term, “Commonwealth citizens”. All the action in this case takes place not in Moscow but in southern England.

 

Let’s start at Cambridge University with a two-day conference called “2016’s Race to Change the World“, held on July 11th and 12th 2016 – or three weeks before the FBI supposedly began its “counterintelligence” operation against Trump, codenamed “Crossfire Hurricane”. That’s from the first line of the Rolling Stones’ “Jumpin’ Jack Flash”. The song and its key signature figure in the plot of a ho-hum Cold War thriller of the same name, about a British spy trying to get info from the Russians to an [sic] heroic American woman.

 

Yes, really. Jonathan Pryce played “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” , and I asked him about it when I moderated a panel on acting at St Catherine’s College, Oxford with him and Patti Lupone a few years later.

 

If you think that’s a weird event for an Oxbridge college to host, it’s as nothing to this “Race to Change the World” beano. I do my share of international junketing, but the bill of fare for this curious symposium is so bland as to be almost generic – panels titled “Europe and America”, “2016 and the World”, “Global Challenges Facing the Next President”. Compared to the laser-like focus of a typical Cambridge confab (“A Westphalia for the Middle East?“), it’s almost as if someone were trying to create an event so anodyne and torpid no one would notice it. All that distinguished these colorless presentations was the undoubted eminence of the speakers: former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright; former UK Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind; and Sir Richard Dearlove, former C (that’s M, for 007 fans) at MI6. The conference appears to have been put together at a couple of weeks’ notice by Steven Schrage, former “Co-Chair of the G8’s Anti-Crime and Terrorism Group” and a well-connected man on the counterterrorism cocktail circuit: Here he is introducing Mitt Romney to the director of the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center, and here he is spending election night in the UK at a party with Scotland Yard elite counterterrorist types. Make of that what you will – it’s a somewhat odd background for the convenor of an insipid, vanilla, cookie-cutter foreign-policy seminar – but among the small number of strangely prestigious attendees at Mr Schrage’s conference were:

 

~Carter Page, a petroleum-industry executive and Trump campaign volunteer;

 

~Christopher Steele, the former head of the Russia house at MI6;

 

~Stefan Halper, a University of Cambridge professor with dual UK/US citizenship.

 

Today, Mr Page is better known as the endlessly surveilled “person of interest” whose eternally renewable FISA warrant was the FBI’s gateway into the Trump campaign; Mr Steele is a sometime FBI asset who, a week before the Cambridge conference, had approached the G-men with the now famous “dossier” that provided the pretext for the FISA application; and Professor Halper turns out to be not some tweedy academic but a man with deep connections to MI6 and the CIA, on the payroll of something at the Pentagon called the “Office of Net Assessment”, and (one of) the supposed FBI informant(s) inside the Trump circle.

 

Carter Page says that in the course of this two-day conference he met Professor Halper for the first time. But I was struck by this aside Mr Page made to Sara Carter:

 

Madeliene [sic] Albright was always trying to get me to go into public debates. I told her I was there just as a listener, just as an attendee.

 

Hmm. If you’ll forgive another Patti Lupone-type digression, many years ago our mutual pal Ned Sherrin decided to launch, just for a laugh, a rumor that me and Carol Thatcher (Mrs T’s daughter) were having an affair. Ned told somebody, and somebody told somebody else, and about eight months later it turned up as an item in Nigel Dempster’s highly authoritative Daily Mail gossip column, along with a rather goofy picture of me and Carol at a David Frost shindig at the Grosvenor House in Park Lane. And Ned was stunned – because he assumed the Daily Mail story was true. Because, by the time it circled back to him, he’d clean forgotten he’d started the whole business.

 

Oddly enough, that’s exactly how James Comey and Andrew McCabe and John Brennan work. At the FISA court, the FBI, to bolster their reliance on the Steele dossier, pointed to newspaper stories appearing to corroborate aspects of it – even though, as he subsequently testified under oath at the Old Bailey, those stories were in fact fed to those reporters by Steele himself. Nevertheless, it works like a charm on gullible FISA judges. You take one thing and you make it two things. Or even better, you take nothing and you make it a thing: Here, from yesterday’s letter by Senator Ron Johnson, are McCabe, Sally Yates and other FBI/DOJ honchos arranging for Comey to brief Trump on the Steele dossier for the sole purpose of giving CNN a news peg for leaking details about what’s in it.

 

It’s almost as if that’s what Madeleine Albright is doing here, isn’t it? It’s one thing to invite Carter Page to show up at some tedious yakfest at Cambridge with Halper sitting in front of him and Chris Steele sitting behind. But what if you could get Page to stand up and say something? Then you could find a friendly journo to report it and, instead of just a nobody on the fringes of the campaign, you’d have a “senior Trump advisor” sharing his thoughts on the global scene with Madam Albright and Sir Richard and Sir Malcolm and all the other bigshots, and then you could use that story three weeks later at the FISA court, to demonstrate how deep into the heart of the campaign the Russkies had penetrated.

 

Instead, Professor Halper has to make do with chit-chatting to Mr Page over the tea and biscuits, and planting the seeds for a friendly relationship.

 

Herewith a note on the academic circuit: emeritus professors and visiting fellows are popular covers with espionage agencies because there’s minimal work and extensive foreign travel, to international talking shops like the one above. If you make the mistake of being a multinational businessman and go to foreign countries to meet with other businessmen, you’ll be investigated up the wazoo. But, if you’re a professor and you go to foreign countries to meet with other professors, the world is your oyster. You also get to meet young people, who are the easiest to recruit.

 

Here’s another professor, and from another Commonwealth country: Malta. Joseph Mifsud is (was) a professorial fellow at the University of Stirling in Scotland, but is (was) based in London as a principal of the “London Centre of International Law Practice” and a director of the “London Academy of Diplomacy”, both of which sound fancy-schmancy but are essentially hollow entities operating from the same premises – 8, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, a tony address (next to the London School of Economics and the Royal College of Surgeons) but the “London Centre/Academy’s” fifth in three years and at which they and a handful of other endeavors are holed up in a minimally furnished back room filled by four interns round a trestle table on fifty quid a week.

 

Professor Mifsud also has (had) similarly undemanding academic sinecures at the “Euro-Mediterranean University” in Slovenia and “Link Campus University” in Italy. At the beginning of March 2016, a young man called George Papadopoulos joined the Trump campaign. On March 14th, traveling through Italy, he met with Professor Mifsud. They got together again in Britain, and at some point Papadopoulos became head of the “London Centre of International Law Practice’s” soi-disant “Centre for International Energy and Natural Resources Law & Security”, a post for which he had no obvious qualifications. Happily, like most other jobs at the “London Centre”, it didn’t require work, or showing up at the “London Centre” or even being in London.

 

Mifsud is said to have ties to high-ranking figures in Moscow, but there seems to be more prima facie evidence of ties to high-ranking figures in London. That’s Professor Mifsud above with my old friend Boris Johnson, Britain’s Foreign Secretary, at some Brexit event last October 19th. On October 31st Joseph Mifsud disappeared and has not been seen since. I know how he feels: The same thing happened to me twelve days after I lunched with Boris at The Spectator in early 2006. Is (was) Mifsud an FSB asset? An MI6 asset? Both? Neither? Well, there’s more circumstantial evidence of Mifsud’s ties to British intelligence, including multiple meetings with, inter alia, Claire Smith of the UK’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

 

At any rate, back in London on April 26th 2016, Professor Mifsud told young Papadopoulos that the Russians have all this “dirt” on Hillary, “thousands of emails”. A couple of days later, a friend of George’s at the Israeli Embassy, Christian Cantor, introduced him to Erika Thompson, who worked for Alexander Downer, Canberra’s High Commissioner in the UK, at Australia House. On May 4th, Papadopoulos was quoted in The Times of London denouncing David Cameron for calling Trump “divisive, stupid and wrong“. On May 6th, Ms Thompson called Papadopoulos to say that Mr Downer wanted to meet him. On May 10th they met for drinks at the Kensington Wine Rooms. Young George claims that the High Commissioner told him to “leave David Cameron alone”. Which doesn’t sound quite right to me.

 

As longtime readers may recall, I have drunk with Alexander Downer and that is not something to be undertaken lightly. Somewhere in the course of the evening a pretty squiffy Papadopoulos lifted his head up from the bowl of cocktail olives and started blabbing about Russian “dirt” on Hillary.

 

Another digression: Mr Downer was Australia’s longest serving foreign minister and, as I used to say in those days, “my favorite foreign minister”. Since then, he has spent many years on the “advisory board” of Hakluyt, a curiously named body set up by former MI6 chaps. I’m not saying he spends his nights rappelling down the walls of presidential palaces (although I would be tickled to be proved wrong), but I don’t think I’m betraying any confidences when I say that, after tea with Alexander in Adelaide a couple of years back, whence he had just returned from some meeting with some group or other in Lisbon, I remember musing about that select circle of people who can jet around the world in the expectation that doors will open for them and some useful tidbit will drop into their laps. As for Hakluyt, its website is here: I do believe it’s the coolest thing I’ve seen since (another long me-‘n’-Carol-type story) I was given Marlon Brando’s business card, which had the words “Marlon” and “Brando” on it and nothing else.

 

At any rate Mr Downer relayed the information about young George to Aussie Intelligence back home. Canberra sat on the info for two months and then passed it along to the Yanks in late July, just in time for that FISA application.

 

And so, as July turned to August, Peter Strzok bade farewell to his “paramour” Lisa Page and flew to London for a sit-down with the High Commissioner at Australia House. When Strzok reported back to Washington, the FBI sicced the omnipresent “professor” Stefan Halper on George Papadopoulos. So the Trump aide woke up one August morning to an email from a Cambridge academic he’d never heard of, inviting him on an all-expenses-paid trip back to Britain to give a speech for $3,000. Once in London, Halper casually inquired of his new friend, “George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?”

 

Right. As Rush put it, the day before I guest-hosted last week:

 

He was a nothing. He was a nobody, which made him a perfect mark. He was a young guy who wanted to go places… He actually put on his résumé that he had participated in Model UN in high school.

 

Just so: Papadopoulos was the perfect mark. And the easiest way to reel him in is to get him off his home turf. In your own neighborhood, you have your routine – your usual bars, favorite restaurants; you notice if something’s off. But, flown to London, you have no routine, no old haunts. You go where you’re invited, you’re introduced to important people – like “High Commissioners”, woshever the hell thash ish, hic – [Blog Editor: As an American I think Steyn is expressing a drunken form of “whoever the hell they is, hiccup] and you want them to think you’re important, too, so you reveal that you know all about the Russian “dirt” on Hillary.

 

So you got that from the Russians, right? Er, no. I got it from a Maltese guy in Italy who’s a Scottish professor and plugged in to MI6, and then I told it to an Australian bloke in London who’s also plugged in to MI6 and told me to lay off David Cameron, and then an American guy in Cambridge who’s plugged in to MI6 reminded me about it to see if I’d deny all knowledge of it, which would be suspicious, wouldn’t it..?

 

As I said, and as Rush likes to quote, there are no Russians in the Russia investigation. But, like that rumor about me and Carol Thatcher, you just put these things out there and a few months later they come back to you, via Canberra and the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing program and suddenly it’s “independently” “corroborated” “evidence” from a respected ally and you can take it to a FISA judge.

 

There were two investigations into presidential candidates during the 2016 election. But, as Andrew McCarthy reminds us, these two investigations were not the same. The Clinton “matter” was a criminal investigation – because there was credible evidence that Hillary had committed criminal acts. The FBI had no such clear-cut goods on Trump. So they had to find something else:

 

The scandal is that the FBI, lacking the incriminating evidence needed to justify opening a criminal investigation of the Trump campaign, decided to open a counterintelligence investigation. With the blessing of the Obama White House, they took the powers that enable our government to spy on foreign adversaries and used them to spy on Americans — Americans who just happened to be their political adversaries.

 

And the advantage of a “counterintelligence investigation”, unlike a criminal investigation, is that everything in it is “classified”. So that even an obvious set-up at a Cambridge confab or Kensington wine bar is “intelligence” that has to be “protected” for “national security” reasons. It’s a brazen, audacious scheme, and unlikely to have been loosed without the approval, however discreetly stated, of the then President. Occam’s Razor suggests that the man running the operation was the CIA’s John Brennan through the “inter-agency taskforce” that met at Langley. But Brennan isn’t that reckless: Go back to Madeleine Albright urging Carter Page to speak up at a Cambridge conference; Christopher Steele leaking parts of his dossier to the newspapers; a staffer at Australia House inviting George Papadopoulos for a drink… The best way to turn nothing into something is to plant it somewhere far away and wait for it to work its way back to you:

 

Britain’s spy agencies played a crucial role in alerting their counterparts in Washington to contacts between members of Donald Trump’s campaign team and Russian intelligence operatives, the Guardian has been told.

 

Golly, you don’t say! I wonder who “told” The Guardian that. A conference here, a speech there, a cocktail round the corner, and pretty soon you have the simulacrum of “counterintelligence” concerns from America’s closest allies:

 

According to one account, GCHQ’s then head, Robert Hannigan, passed material in summer 2016 to the CIA chief, John Brennan. The matter was deemed so sensitive it was handled at “director level”. After an initially slow start, Brennan used GCHQ information and intelligence from other partners to launch a major inter-agency investigation.

 

Er, wait a minute. If it’s “so sensitive” it’s being handled “director-to-director”, why isn’t the head of GCHQ meeting with his opposite number at NSA? Why’s he meeting with Brennan?

 

Hey, don’t get hung up on details. It all went brilliantly – except for one tiny detail: Hillary managed to do the impossible and lose. On January 23rd 2017, three days after Trump’s inauguration, GCHQ at Cheltenham Tweeted the sad fate of Mr So Sensitive:

 

We’re sorry to announce that Robert Hannigan, our Director since 2014, has decided to step down as head of GCHQ.

 

Oh, dear. Well, enjoy your sudden retirement, old boy. Unfortunately, for Brennan and Comey and McCabe and Strzok and the others on this side of the Atlantic in the third week of January, it wasn’t quite that simple. Because, instead of protecting Hillary, they were now protecting themselves – so it was necessary to dig in and double-down on the “Russia investigation”.

 

Which sounds super-credible except for one small point: there was never a Russia investigation. As Andrew McCarthy sums it up:

 

Opening up a counterintelligence investigation against Russia is not the same thing as opening up a counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign.

 

Which is what they did – Brennan and Clapper and Comey and McCabe. They took tools designed to combat America’s foreign enemies and used them against their own citizens and their political opposition. It was an intentional subversion of the electoral process conducted at the highest level by agencies with almost unlimited power. And, if they get away with it, they will do it again, and again and again. That’s what Brennan’s telling us on Twitter, and Clapper on “The View”:

 

Yeah? So what? Whatcha gonna do about it?

 

Good question.

________________________

Mark Steyn is an international bestselling author, a Top 41 recording artist, and a leading Canadian human rights activist. His latest book is “The Undocumented Mark Steyn: Don’t Say You Weren’t Warned“. (Buy it at a 57% discount by clicking here or order in KINDLE edition at a 41% discount by clicking hereSales help fund JWR)

 

© 2018 Mark Steyn Enterprises (US) Inc.

 

© 1997- 2018 Jewish World Review 

 

About JWR

 

JWR is a free magazine published five days a week on the World Wide Web of interest to people of faith and those interested in learning more about contemporary Judaism from Jews who take their religion seriously.

 

Our inaugural editorial is also our mission statement.

 

Readers, individuals wishing to submit an article on “spec,” or make a tax deductible donation and those seeking advertising rates may contact JWR by email or by calling (718) 972-9241. Please note that all correspondence with JWR remains our property and may be used accordingly.

 

READ THE REST

 

Methinks Brennan Up to His Neck in Treason Collusion


John R. Houk

© April 28, 2018

 

I just read an interesting article in in the Conservative Tribune about John Brennan the former CIA Director under the Obama Administration. I found it interesting because of the veiled threats Brennan has been directing toward President Trump’s tweets.

 

Today’s Gateway Pundit covered Trump’s tweet relating to the House Intelligence Committee Report issue via the GOP majority, exonerating the President from any collusion with the Russians in the 2016 election:

 

Just Out: House Intelligence Committee Report released. “No evidence” that the Trump Campaign “colluded, coordinated or conspired with Russia.” Clinton Campaign paid for Opposition Research obtained from Russia- Wow! A total Witch Hunt! MUST END NOW!

 

To which Brennan tweeted back at 10:29 AM (4/27/18):

 

A highly partisan, incomplete, and deeply flawed report by a broken House Committee means nothing. The Special Counsel’s work is being carried out by professional investigators—not political staffers. SC’s findings will be comprehensive & authoritative. Stay tuned, Mr. Trump….

 

The veiled threat: “Stay tuned, Mr. Trump”.

 

The Gateway Pundit explains why Brennan’s veiled threat is pathetic:

 

The “professional investigators” Brennan is referring to on Mueller’s team is a who’s who of corrupt and conflicted Obama and Hillary cronies.  As we reported over the past year Mueller’s team consists of the following:

 

  • Rush Atkinson, an attorney on detail from the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section at the Department of Justice
    — Donated $200 to Clinton in 2016

 

  • Peter Carr– DOJ spokesman under Barack Obama.

 

  • Andrew Goldstein, a public corruption prosecutor on detail from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York
    Worked under Trump-basher Preet Bharara in the liberal New York southern district.

 

  • Adam Jed, an appellate attorney on detail from DOJ’s Civil Division. — Defended Obamacare at the DOJ.

 

 

  • James Quarles,a former partner at WilmerHale and a former assistant special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force. –Former assistant special prosecutor on the Watergate Special Prosecution Force.

 

  • Jeannie Rhee, a former partner at WilmerHale who has served in the Office of Legal Counsel at DOJ and as an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. — Rhee is a Clinton Foundation Lawyer and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel under Barack Obama.

 

  • Brandon Van Grack, an attorney on detail from the Justice Department’s National Security Division.
    — Led a grand jury inquiry in Northern Virginia scrutinizing former Trump associate Michael Flynn’s foreign lobbying.

 

  • Aaron Zebleya former partner at WilmerHale who has previously served with Mueller at the FBI and has served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia. — Worked with Robert Mueller at the WilmerHale firm. 

 

  • Zainab Ahmad, a top national security prosecutor on detail from U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of New York.

 

  • Michael Dreeben, an appellate attorney on detail from the Office of the Solicitor General, described by former colleagues as one of the brightest criminal law experts of the past two generations.

 

Peter Strzok and his mistress Lisa Page were thrown off of the investigation after Trump-hating text messages between the two FBI agents were discovered by the IG.

 

The above people are the crack Special Prosecution team Brennan tweeted about who are Crooked Hillary affiliates. Apparently, John Brennan’s CIA was an also a Crooked Hillary campaign affiliate. Indeed, it is becoming apparent that Brennan may have been a go-between Crooked Hillary and Russians perhaps facilitated by the British Intelligence agency known as  Government Communications Headquarters or simply the acronym GCHQ.

 

Judge Andrew Napolitano had made the connection between GCHQ spying on Donald Trump and was nearly fired for it at Fox News. I have suspicion that is pure conjecture mind you, that the power of John Brennan’s leadership of the CIA had something to do with threatening Napolitano over the GCHQ spying on Trump.

 

The Conservative Tribune has a story on the corrupt John Brennan.

 

JRH 4/28/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Respected Conservative Mag: CIA Director Colluded with Foreign Powers To Destroy Trump

 

By JOE SAUNDERS 
APRIL 26, 2018 AT 10:20AM

Conservative Tribune

 

[Blog Editor: CT has an about minute-and-half video introducing article. I can’t figure out how to embed it. And Soooo, I found a Youtube video that is essentially an electronic voice reading this article outloud.}

 

VIDEO: Respected Conservative Mag: CIA Director Colluded with Foreign Powers To Destroy Trump

 

Posted by BREAKING NEWS HEADLINES

Published on Apr 26, 2018

 

READ THE REST or read below

 

This is definitely not the collusion case liberals are trying to make, but it’s one Americans should be thinking about.

 

When the lefty British newspaper The Guardian published an article earlier this month touting the role of British intelligence agencies in fomenting suspicions that the Donald Trump campaign had been aided by Russia, The Guardian editors were no doubt hoping to feed Americans doubts about the duly elected president.

 

But a writer for the conservative magazine American Spectator had an entirely different take on it — and argued it points the finger back at the kind of “Deep State” obstruction to the Trump administration that Trump supporters have been warning about since before Trump’s inauguration.

 

In an April 19 piece, Spectator writer George Neumayr wrote that The Guardian had unintentionally provided proof that former CIA Director John Brennan was using any weapon that came to hand to try to ensure the election of Hillary Clinton in 2016 — and keep his own job.

 

“John Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Hillary campaign, leaking out mentions of this bogus investigation to the press in the hopes of inflicting maximum political damage on Trump,” Neumayr wrote.

 

According to The Guardian report from April 13, the British Government Communications Headquarters (an outfit better known as “GCHQ,” devoted to gathering intelligence through electronic signals monitoring) learned in 2015 of “‘interactions’ between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents.”

 

GCHQ gathered more information over the next six months with the help of other countries — Western nations as well as the former Soviet republic of Estonia.

 

That information was passed to Brennan — then still heading the CIA — in the summer of 2016. And, according to Neumayr, Brennan wasted no time passing it on to lawmakers from both parties, probably in hopes of it leaking to the media.

 

“Any other CIA director would have disregarded such a flaky tip, recognizing that Estonia was eager to see Trump lose (its officials had bought into Hillary’s propaganda that Trump was going to pull out of NATO and leave Baltic countries exposed to Putin),” Neumayr wrote. “But Brennan opportunistically seized on it, as he later that summer seized on the half-baked intelligence of British spy agencies (also full of officials who wanted to see Trump lose).”

 

Basically, according to Neumayr, Brennan was desperate to keep his position as head of the CIA and knew a Trump victory would mean the end of the Obama-Clinton era, and a new beginning for U.S. intelligence agencies.

 

Now, anyone who’s followed the news since 2016 knows full well that Brennan has made no secret of his loathing for President Trump — and that Trump publicly despises the former CIA director.

 

Brennan’s infamous Twitter posting regarding the richly deserved firing of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is notorious for just how personal the attack on Trump was:

 

 

But what Brennan apparently didn’t count on was that time would prove how right that firing was. The damning Justice Department Inspector General’s report proved that. (Ironically, the report was released on the same day that The Guardian published its paen to the work of British intelligence in undermining Trump.)

 

To Neumayr, The Guardian piece is just one more brick in the wall of proof that Brennan was the one who colluded with foreign powers to influence the presidential campaign of 2016. And he did it with the help of the anti-Trump American media.

 

“Were the media not so completely in the tank for Obama and Hillary, all of this political mischief would make for a compelling 2016 version of All the President’s Men,” Neumayr wrote near the end of his piece. “Instead, the public gets a steady stream of Orwellian propaganda about the sudden propriety of political espionage.”

 

Anyone who’s followed the news since 2016 knows that’s true too, and the sentence gives a nice touch of credibility to the rest.

 

Neumayr’s piece isn’t the collusion case liberals are hoping to make. But it’s definitely one Americans who care about the country should be thinking very hard about.

__________________________

Methinks Brennan Up to His Neck in Treason Collusion

John R. Houk

© April 28, 2018

________________________

Respected Conservative Mag: CIA Director Colluded with Foreign Powers To Destroy Trump

 

Copyright ©2017 Liftable Media Inc. All rights reserved. [Blog Editor: Yup, these guys are way behind in updating their copyright year.]

 

About CT 

 

Conservative Tribune is a platform for conservative voices talking about political and cultural news that matters.

 

It is an unapologetic purveyor of truth and clearly promotes the values of family, personal responsibility, limited government, and individual freedom.

 

Conservative Tribune is one of the largest websites in the United States and is a top 100 site according to Alexa.com.

 

Since joining Liftable Media in 2015 the site has doubled its reader base, with around 25 million unique American visitors every month.

 

Conservative Tribune consistently outperforms other digital publishers on Facebook.

 

Let’s Hope the Comey Memo is Coffin Nail in Deep State


John R. Houk

© April 20, 2018

 

The FBI has declassified portions of the notorious James Comey Memo which allegedly spurred the appointment of Robert Mueller by Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. For purposes of this blog post, here is a Scribd version:

 

I never watch the Leftist Media spin doctors because they lie. I have watched the Conservative implications of this Comey Memo on Fox News. And most of those commentators suggest President Trump was being what all we Conservatives were already aware; viz., the President and Russia had no connection to each to scam Trump’s election victory. Indeed, the Memo implicates a lot of collusion amongst the Obama DOJ and FBI. Sadly, there are many Obamanites still lingering around the DOJ/FBI. The lingering Obamanites explains the obstructionism that has prevented Congress from acquiring subpoenaed documents.

 

VIDEO: Hannity – Comey memos released.. ALL GOOD news for President Trump – 4/19/18

 

Posted by Trump Fan Network

Published on Apr 19, 2018

 

And Mark Levin on Hannity about Comey Memos:

 

VIDEO: Mark Levin on Comey Memos and More. This is Good.

 

Posted by Rshill7

Published on Apr 19, 2018

 

Uploaded under “Fair Use” provisions for discussion and commentary at http://PolitiBrew.com

 

Below is a Daily Wire post written by Ryan Saavedra who sources Mollie Hemingway primarily and a bit of Daily Caller adding perspective that the current DOJ/FBI is free enough of Obamanite corruption to act upon.

 

JRH 4/20/18

Please Support NCCR

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

PUBLIC ENEMY #1: Reports Suggest CNN Helped Orchestrate Setup Of Trump

Trump CNN Backdrop

 

By RYAN SAAVEDRA

April 20, 2018

Daily Wire

 

Memos written by former FBI director James Comey reveal that CNN may have helped orchestrate a possible setup of then-president-elect Donald Trump.

 

According to multiple published reports, the memos seem to indicate that a meeting Comey had with Trump was prompted by pressure from CNN and then was used to launch the media frenzy over the anti-Trump dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Mollie Hemingway at The Federalist writes:

 

In multiple memos, Comey specifically mentioned that CNN had the dossier and wanted a “news hook” that would enable the network to report on its most salacious allegations even though they had not been verified.

 

Writing on the conversation he had with Trump, Comey wrote in a classified memo: “I said the Russians allegedly had tapes involving him and prostitutes at the Presidential Suite at the Ritz Carlton in Moscow from about 2013.”

 

As Hemingway notes, no reports had been published by any media outlet at the time Comey met with Trump and briefed him on the allegations contained in the dossier.

 

“I said media like CNN had [the allegations] and were looking for a news hook,” Comey specifically told Trump and noted in his memo. The Daily Caller reports:

 

Four days after that meeting, CNN published a story revealing the existence of a salacious report alleging the Russian government had compromised Trump. The CNN story was referring to what’s now known as the dossier — an unverified 35-page report written by former British spy Christopher Steele.

 

“I explained again why I had thought it important that he know about it,” Comey wrote in another classified memo on January 28, 2017. “I also explained that one of the reasons we told him was that the media, CNN in particular, was telling us they were about to run with it.”

 

CNN’s January 10, 2017 report on the salacious and unproven allegations contained in the dossier was extremely significant, as Hemingway explains:

 

Extremely well-placed sources told CNN that the Obama administration’s top intelligence appointees had briefed Obama, Biden, and Trump all about a dossier they took incredibly seriously and considered credible. And it sounded really bad, as the headline [of CNN’s report] indicated.

 

“Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump,” CNN reported in an article written by Jake Tapper, Evan Perez, Jim Sciutto, and Carl Bernstein. What’s notable about the authors is that CNN’s Perez had undisclosed ties to Fusion GPS, the firm that compiled the Democrat-funded dossier. Perez later falsely reported that the Republicans were the ones who funded the dossier, even after the facts had been made public which proved he was not telling the truth. Hemingway continues:

 

BuzzFeed published the actual dossier within minutes of CNN’s story going live, showing the world that the dossier was riddled with salacious gossip that lacked even a possibility of corroboration.

 

Among the most important facts revealed in Comey’s memos, which the Justice Department released on Thursday, is the fact that there were seven memos compiled by Comey, four of which were classified. This is significant because Comey leaked four memos to his friend for him to turn around and leak to the media, which means that at least one of the memos had to have been classified.

 

As noted by Hemingway and the Washington Examiner’s Byron York, one of the biggest takeaways from Comey’s January 6, 2017 memo is that Comey indicates in the memo that the briefing was the idea of then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

 

“I said there was something that Clapper wanted me to speak to [Trump] about alone or in a very small group,” Comey wrote. “I then executed the session exactly as I had planned.”

 

Comey then went on to tell Trump that CNN had the allegations and was looking for a “news hook” so they could publish the salacious and unproven allegations.

 

“I said it was important that we not give them the excuses to write that the FBI has the material or [REDACTED] and that we were keeping it very close-hold,” Comey wrote in his memo. As The Federalist and The Daily Caller both noted, CNN ran the story just a few days after Comey’s meeting with Trump.

 

Given Clapper’s connection to Comey’s meeting with Trump, Hemingway notes an important finding from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) final report on Russia. The committee’s report found:

 

Finding #44: Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, now a CNN national security analyst, provided inconsistent testimony to the Committee about his contacts with the media, including CNN.

 

Hemingway continues:

 

So Comey, at Clapper’s expressed behest, told Trump that CNN was “looking for a news hook” to publish dossier allegations. He said this in the briefing of Trump that almost immediately leaked to CNN, which provided them the very news hook they sought and needed.

 

The briefing on January 6, 2017 was the catalyst for a series of events that ultimately led to where the Russia investigation currently sits. The briefing was immediately leaked to CNN, which attempted to legitimize the dossier, and in the process ignited a media firestorm. Hemingway concludes:

 

During the freakout, Comey deliberately refused to say in public what he acknowledged repeatedly in private — that the President of the United States was not under investigation. He even noted in his memos that he told the president at least three times that he was not under investigation. Comey’s refusal to admit publicly what he kept telling people privately led to his firing.

 

That led to Comey leaking multiple memos in order to get a special counsel appointed out of revenge.

 

Hemingway’s assertion that Comey leaked the memos out of revenge is not without factual basis. During an interview with NBC’s Savannah Guthrie this week, Comey admitted that he had an “obvious” bias against Trump because “he fired me.”

____________________________

Let’s Hope the Comey Memo is Coffin Nail in Deep State

John R. Houk

© April 20, 2018

_____________________________

PUBLIC ENEMY #1: Reports Suggest CNN Helped Orchestrate Setup Of Trump

 

© COPYRIGHT 2018, THE DAILY WIRE

 

Ryan Saavedra is a staff writer at The Daily Wire who covers a range of subjects, particularly focusing on media bias, politics, and the convergence of politics and culture.