Chairman Ron Johnson: Interim Report on FBI Purposeful Intent To Exonerate Hillary Clinton During Email Scandal…


Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) serves as Chairman of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. As Chairman Senator Johnson has released a Committee Report on “DOJ/FBI” leadership small group suspiciously exonerating Crooked Hillary.

 

JRH 2/8/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Chairman Ron Johnson: Interim Report on FBI Purposeful Intent To Exonerate Hillary Clinton During Email Scandal…

 

By sundance

February 7, 2018 4:14  PM

The Last Refuge

 

Senator Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, has a very narrow focus on the DOJ/FBI ‘small team’ involvement into the 2016 election.  Johnson’s authority focuses on how the group inside the FBI worked to exonerate Hillary Clinton despite evidence of intentional wrongdoing.

 

FBI Characters illegally Exonerating Crooked Hillary

 

However, within that investigative oversight, Chairman Johnson is bringing to light all of the communication within the ‘small group’ which includes the text messages between lead FBI investigator Peter Strzok and lead legal counsel Lisa Page during their efforts.

 

Toward that end, Chairman Johnson has released an interim report on findings (Senate Link Here), and as outlined below in the embedded pdf.

 

WASHINGTON DC – U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, released a majority staff report Wednesday titled “The Clinton Email Scandal And The FBI’s Investigation Of It,” along with text messages between two agents that shed light on the investigation.

 

The report details the congressional investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server and the oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s involvement with their investigation of Secretary Clinton’s private server.

 

Senator Johnson Interim Report SCRIBD

 

 

 

  • The report outlines how information available to the committee at this time raises serious questions about how the FBI applied the rule of law in its investigation. The majority staff report found that:

 

  • The FBI did not use a grand jury to compel testimony and obtain the vast majority of evidence, choosing instead to offer immunity deals and allow fact witnesses to join key interviews.

 

  • There were substantial edits to former FBI Director James Comey’s public statement that served to downplay the severity of Secretary Clinton’s actions, and that the first draft of the memo was distributed for editing two months before key witnesses were interviewed.

 

  • Director Comey stated that he had not consulted with the Justice Department or White House, when text messages among FBI agents involved in the investigation suggest otherwise. Two key investigators discuss an “insurance policy”against the “risk” of a Trump presidency, and “OUR task.”

 

  • Messages discuss “unfinished business,”“an investigation leading to impeachment,” and “my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.” The messages strongly underscore the need to obtain still-missing text messages and other information regarding the FBI’s actions and investigations into the Clinton email scandal and Russian involvement in the November 2016 election.

 

  • Senior FBI officials—likely including Deputy Director Andrew McCabe— knew about newly discovered emails on a laptop belonging to former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner for almost a month before Director Comey notified Congress.

 

_________________

The Last Refuge Rag Tag Bunch of Conservative Misfits – Contact Info: TheLastRefuge@reagan.com

 

OBAMA DOJ: HANDMAIDEN OF CLINTON CORRUPTION


bho-lynch-bill-hillary-corruptin

There should be impeachment proceedings against Barack Obama, Loretta Lynch and/or anyone in the Obama Administration involved in the blatant corruption that has spread like a malignant cancer throughout the U.S. government. Forget the lying Democrats and the Mainstream Media! It’s time for Congress to utilize all nuclear options to tie the hands of Congress members (THAT WOULD BE THE DEMS) who have joined the corruption class. If there is some kind of unwritten protocol not in the Constitution to take no action during an election – IGNORE IT!

lynch-swears-to-get-hillary-elected

JRH 11/3/16

Please Support NCCR

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

OBAMA DOJ: HANDMAIDEN OF CLINTON CORRUPTION

How the Clinton machine is perverting U.S. federal law enforcement to shield Hillary.

 

By Joseph Klein

November 3, 2016

FrontPageMag.com

 

The Obama Department of Justice has been corruptly aiding and abetting the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, to escape legal accountability for her actions. From Attorney General Loretta Lynch on down through the Justice Department’s political ranks, the Department has blocked the FBI from searching for the truth and following the evidence of potential criminality to its logical conclusion. Whether it is Hillary’s use of a private e-mail server while serving as Secretary of State or her involvement in the pay-for-play Clinton enterprise known as the Clinton Foundation, the Obama administration is applying a banana republic-style double standard to pervert justice and the rule of law in order to shield her.

 

Lynch and President Obama were reportedly furious with FBI Director James Comey for sending a letter to Congress on October 28th indicating that new evidence potentially pertinent to the e-mail case had come to light, which required further investigation. This evidence consisted of a batch of e-mails FBI investigators had found on one or more computers belonging to Anthony Weiner, Clinton confidante Huma Abedin’s estranged husband, while they were searching for evidence in an unrelated case involving Weiner’s alleged sexting to an underage girl. Comey sent his letter after months of agonizing over his previous decision to let Hillary off the hook in the e-mail case last July. He was said by a source close to him to have been particularly disturbed by the mounting number of resignation letters from FBI agents who felt betrayed by that decision.

 

Department of Justice officials had leaned on Comey not to send the letter to Congress, claiming that it would violate Department protocols and procedures against taking any action that could be perceived as interfering with the upcoming presidential election. To his credit, Comey ignored the Department officials’ objections, claiming he had an obligation to keep the Congress and the public informed of any potentially significant new developments in the case.

 

Democrats, who had lavished praise on Comey for his July decision, lashed out at Comey for sending his letter updating Congress. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid went so far as to make the baseless charge that Comey may have violated the law by informing Congress, because, Reid argued, he appeared to be taking sides in an election. The disgraced former Attorney General Eric Holder, held in contempt of Congress for withholding information relating to the Fast and Furious scandal, said about Comey’s action, “I fear he has unintentionally and negatively affected public trust in both the Justice Department and the FBI. It is up to the director to correct his mistake — not for the sake of a political candidate or campaign but in order to protect our system of justice and best serve the American people.”

 

Since when has Holder been genuinely concerned about protecting our system of justice and best serving the American people? Holder had already contributed to the erosion of public trust, with his blatant politicization of the Obama Department of Justice.  As evidenced by the Obama Department of Justice’s handling of the multiple FBI investigations involving Hillary Clinton, the Department has continued its slide into the muck of corruption. It interfered with both the normal course of criminal investigations and the election by stacking the deck in Hillary’s favor, ensuring that no indictment would occur to derail her path to succeed Obama and preserve his legacy.

 

First, the Department of Justice reportedly refused to empanel a grand jury in either the e-mail case or in connection with the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play allegations. “The problem here is this investigation was never a real investigation,” former assistant FBI director James Kallstrom said. “That’s the problem. They never had a grand jury empaneled [sic], and the reason they never had a grand jury empanelled, I’m sure, is Loretta Lynch would not go along with that.”

 

Kallstrom’s belief that Lynch acted to influence the results of the FBI probes in Hillary’s favor is buttressed by Lynch’s 30 minute private tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton shortly before FBI Director Comey faced the cameras on July 5th with his exculpatory announcement.

 

Second, at least five immunity agreements were handed out in the e-mail case, including to Hillary’s lawyer and confidante Cheryl Mills and to Platte River Networks’ Paul Combetta.  It appears that Combetta had previously lied to government investigators – a crime in itself – while trying to cover up the fact that he had evidently Bleachbited e-mails to delete them, even though they had been subject to a previously issued Congressional subpoena. The immunity agreements garnered nothing in return, but had the effect of blocking access to the computer devices of the immunity beneficiaries in the FBI’s separate Clinton Foundation investigation.  Apparently, the Department decided against the alternative option of subpoenaing the computer devices or seeking a search warrant, rather than granting useless immunities, in order to obtain any evidence relevant to the e-mail investigation that might have been contained in those devices.

 

Third, the Department and FBI did not conduct their last minute interview of Hillary Clinton under oath and allowed Cheryl Mills – herself a material witness – to sit in during Hillary’s interview. They did not ask pertinent follow-up questions. There was no verbatim transcript of the interview to use in checking the veracity of Hillary’s statements during the interview against her sworn Congressional testimony or her many public statements.

 

Fourth, the Department of Justice reportedly refused to allow the FBI to issue subpoenas to gather more evidence in connection with its investigation of the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play allegations. In fact, senior Department officials reportedly would not authorize a more thorough FBI investigation because they claimed there was not sufficient evidence gathered thus far to justify going further. Such a circular argument was a mere cover to prevent seasoned career investigators from learning the full extent of foreign government donations while Hillary was Secretary of State, their true motivations and any favors extended by the State Department in return.

 

Finally, the cross-connections between the Clintons and some high level Department of Justice and FBI officials cry out for recusal. But not so in this administration. For example, the wife of the deputy FBI director who was involved in the laggard Clinton Foundation investigation, Andrew McCabe, just happened to have received a large donation from close Clinton ally Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe to her 2015 run for the State Senate.

 

To make matters worse, the Obama Department of Justice assigned Assistant Attorney General Peter J. Kadzik, a close friend of Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta, to communicate with Congress about what Kadzik promised would be a “thorough” review of the newly discovered e-mails from Anthony Weiner’s online account.

 

Podesta praised Kadzik in an e-mail to an Obama campaign official back in 2008 as a “Fantastic lawyer,” and said about his pal, “Kept me out of jail.” Their history together goes further back than that. During the waning days of Bill Clinton’s presidency, it was Kadzik, then representing the infamous billionaire fugitive Marc Rich, who lobbied Podesta, then serving as Bill Clinton’s chief of staff, for a presidential pardon on his client’s behalf. Kadzik’s lobbying effort, no doubt helped along by contributions to Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign and to Bill Clinton’s presidential library, paid off. Bill Clinton delivered the requested pardon on his last day in office.

 

Kadzik joined the Department of Justice in April 2013, first as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs, and then as the Principal Deputy. With the Podesta connection intact, Kadzik has served as a highly placed Clinton campaign mole in the Department. An e-mail dated May 19, 2015 from Kadzik to Podesta, released by WikiLeaks, proves the point.  Bearing the subject heading “Heads Up,” Kadzik advised Podesta about upcoming Congressional testimony by the head of the Department’s Civil Division, and about another filing in the Freedom of Information case that would mean “it will be awhile (2016) before the State Department posts the emails.” Podesta forwarded Kadzik’s heads up e-mail to several senior Hillary Clinton campaign officials with the admonition: “Additional chances for mischief.”

 

Exploiting his coordinating role in the re-opened e-mail investigation and contacts with FBI investigators, Kadzik will now be in a position to relay inside information to his pal Podesta and to provide inside information to the Clinton campaign’s supporters in Congress as well.

 

The Clintons manage to turn virtually everything they touch into a cesspool of corruption. The Obama Department of Justice is no exception.

_________________

 ABOUT JOSEPH KLEIN

 

Joseph Klein is a Harvard-trained lawyer and the author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom and Lethal Engagement: Barack Hussein Obama, the United Nations & Radical Islam.

 

© COPYRIGHT 2016, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

 

ABOUT

 

FRONTPAGE MAG IS A PROUD PROJECT OF THE DAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER

 

The DHFC is dedicated to the defense of free societies whose moral, cultural and economic foundations are under attack by enemies both secular and religious, at home and abroad.

 

The David Horowitz Freedom Center combats the efforts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country as it attempts to defend itself in a time of terror.  The leftist offensive is most obvious on our nation’s campuses, where the Freedom Center protects students from indoctrination and intimidation and works to give conservative students a place in the marketplace of ideas from which they are otherwise excluded.  Combining forceful analysis and bold activism, the Freedom Center provides strong insight into today’s most pressing issue on its family of websites and in the activist campaigns it wages on campus, in the news media, and in national politics throughout the year.

 

David Horowitz began the Center for the Study of Popular Culture in 1988 to READ THE REST

 

Hillary Indictment Trouble?


Bill laughs at jailed Hillary

John R. Houk

© April 5, 2016

 

It appears that FBI Director James Comey is the first lynchpin hurdle on whether or not Hillary Clinton is indicted for using a private home server to receive and send classified information. (The second lynchpin would be Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the third lynchpin President Barack Hussein Obama.)

 

Director Comey is providing at least the appearance of a vigorous FBI investigation into Hillary with unverified reports that over a hundred FBI Agents are involved in combing server data.

 

Also apparently Director Comey seems to have earned the respect of both Dems and Republicans as a non-political civil servant serving in both the Bush Administration and the Obama Administration. Based on that journalist evaluation I have read about I thought it might be interesting to provide an excerpt from one of today’s Salon.com articles. Salon should be evaluated as a committed Leftwing Internet rag:

 

This is how the FBI destroys Hillary: The 10 questions that could end her White House dreams

These questions, if answered honestly, would most likely hand the Democratic nomination to Bernie Sanders

 

The FBI’s upcoming interview of Hillary Clinton will be a turning point in the race for Democratic nominee, especially since Clinton won’t be able to speak to James Comey and his FBI agents in the same manner her campaign has communicated with the public. Unlike loyal Hillary supporters who view the marathon Benghazi hearings to be a badge of courage and countless prior scandals to be examples of exoneration, the FBI didn’t spend one year (investigating this email controversy) to give Clinton or her top aides parking tickets. …

 

Imagine if you had 22 Top Secret emails on your computer?

 

Would you be able to claim negligence?

 

Also, the issue of negligence is a canard. Clinton and her top aides were smart enough to understand protocol. For every legal scholar saying that indictment isn’t likely (because it’s difficult to prove Clinton “knowingly” sent or received classified intelligence), there’s a former attorney general and former intelligence officials saying that indictment is justified.

 

 

I explain three possible scenarios in my latest YouTube segment regarding how the Clinton campaign would react to the reality of indictment. No doubt, certain supporters would still vote for Clinton, even with the possibility of criminal behavior.

 

 

Therefore, below are ten questions the FBI should ask Clinton and her top aides. These questions, if answered honestly, will most likely hand the Democratic nomination to Bernie Sanders. Remember, the issue of convenience or negligence won’t be enough to circumvent repercussions from owning a private server as Secretary of State. FBI director James Comey and his agents aren’t Democratic superdelegates or beholden in any way to a political machine. They’ll demand answers to tough questions and below could be some of the topics discussed in Clinton’s FBI interview.

1. What was the political utility in owning a private server and never using a State.gov email address?

 

 

An editorial from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel titled “Clinton’s abysmal record on open government” explains the possible political motive …

 

In addition, regardless of Clinton’s excuses, the only believable reason for the private server in her basement was to keep her emails out of the public eye by willfully avoiding freedom of information laws. No president, no secretary of state, no public official at any level is above the law. She chose to ignore it, and must face the consequences…

And donations to the foundation from foreign governments have raised conflict of interest questions for Clinton as secretary of state, an office with power over foreign affairs and favors second only to the president’s.

 

2. Were all 31,830 deleted private emails about yoga?

 

ABC News

 

…  “This review did not involve opening and reading each email. Instead, Clinton’s lawyers created a list of names and keywords related to her work and searched for those. Slightly more than half the total cache — 31,830 emails — did not contain any of the search terms, according to Clinton’s staff, so they were deemed to be ‘private, personal records.’” 

 

There was no government oversight, therefore the FBI has every right to ask why Clinton’s staff was allowed to pick and choose (through keyword searches) private emails from others that could have contained classified intelligence.

3. Why didn’t you know that intelligence could be retroactively classified?

 

This leads to the issue of negligence; a zero-sum proposition. Either Clinton wasn’t smart enough to know protocol, or breached protocol. Both scenarios aren’t good for a future presidency. Both scenarios won’t prevent legal repercussions, given the 22 Top Secret emails.

4. Why did you use a Blackberry that wasn’t approved by the NSA?

 

An article in Madison.com titled “Emails: Clinton sought secure smartphone, rebuffed by NSA” explains the issue of Clinton’s Blackberry:

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Newly released emails show a 2009 request to issue a secure government smartphone to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was denied by the National Security Agency.

A month later, she began using private email accounts accessed through her BlackBerry to exchange messages with her top aides.

 

Clinton used a Blackberry that wasn’t approved by the NSA. Along with the issue of political motive, and why she deleted tens of thousands of emails, the unsecured Blackberry use could easily lead to an indictment.

5. What did you say to Bryan Pagliano? 

 

Mr. Pagliano recently received immunity. He’s told the FBI, most likely, about his conversations with Hillary Clinton. Any discrepancy in stories could lead to a felony charge for Hillary Clinton or Pagliano’s immunity to be revoked. Both have every incentive to tell the truth.

6. Why were 22 Top Secret emails on a private server?

 

This is a simple question with no logical answer circumventing political repercussions. If Clinton and her staff are able to evade this issue, future government officials will also be able to have Top Secret intelligence on unguarded private servers.

7. Was any information about the Clinton Foundation mingled with State Department documents? 

 

The answer to this question could lead to hundreds of other questions.

8. Did President Obama or his staff express any reservations about your private server?

 

President Obama’s White House communicated with Clinton via her private server. If anyone in the White House said anything about Clinton’s server, this could lead to new controversy.

9. Did Bill Clinton send or receive any emails on your private network?

 

The server was located in their home, so it’s a valid question.

10. How was your private server guarded against hacking attempts?

 

Foreign nations and hackers already tried to compromise Clinton’s server.

 

These questions could easily give Bernie Sanders the nomination. I explain that Clinton faces possible DOJ indictment in the following appearance on CNN International. Although Bernie can win without Clinton’s indictment, the email controversy will most likely become a giant story very soon. With READ ENTIRETY (This is how the FBI destroys Hillary: The 10 questions that could end her White House dreams; By H. A. GOODMAN; Salon.com; 4/5/16 10:12 AM CDT)

 

Did I mention that Salon was a Leftist rag? AND Salon is throwing Hillary under the bus in favor of Bernie Sanders. Did you notice the author Goodman mentioned “22 Top Secret emails” – as in classified – more than a few times?

 

Regardless of this refreshing bluster from Salon.com, I have noticed that pundits on the Left and the Right do not think Hillary will ever be indicted although not really for agreeing reasons. Most Leftist pundits toe the line that this is all a Right Wing conspiracy of the usual smoke and mirrors with no proof of a fire. Right Wing pundits tend to believe that neither Loretta Lynch nor President Barack Hussein Obama will allow Hillary to be indicted on their watch.

 

Lloyd Billingsley of FrontPageMag.com offers a scenario that doesn’t really fit the usual Left-Right talking points about Hillary Clinton. Billingsley throws the ball in Director Comey’s court and some interesting facts connected to history between Comey and Hillary in the view Hillary received some interesting passes in some questionable legal issues. Below is the article in entirety.

 

JRH 4/5/16

Please Support NCCR

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

COMEY, CLINTONS AND CLEMENCY

 

By Lloyd Billingsley

April 5, 2016

FrontPageMag.com

 

Hillary Clinton’s email problems, going back to her time as Secretary of State, have not drawn heavy coverage from the old-line establishment media. As the investigation nears its final stages, FBI director James Comey’s past dealings with the Clintons may prove of interest.

 

Detail on those dealings emerged in American Evita: Hillary Clinton’s Path to Power, a 2004 book by Christopher Andersen, a former contributing editor to Time magazine who has written for Life, the New York Times, and Vanity Fair. None could be described as conservative but Andersen is candid about Hillary’s political past.

 

Hillary’s friends Robert Treuhaft and wife Jessica Mitford were “avowed Stalinists” who opposed the Hungarian uprising of 1956 and remained committed to the Communist cause. American Evita charts Hillary’s admiration for Marxist theoretician Carl Oglesby and Rules for Radicals author Saul Alinsky, from whom Hillary learned that “the only way to make a real difference is to acquire power.”

 

After Bill Clinton left the White House, one staffer told Andersen, the entire focus was on “getting Hillary back in.” The road led through New York, where Hillary took aim at the Senate seat vacated by Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Hillary was not from New York and had never spent more than a few days there, so she needed creative ways to attract votes.

 

New Square, a Hasidic enclave 30 miles northwest of Manhattan, had voted as a bloc in previous elections and campaign workers urged Hillary urged to stop there. In New Square, four members of the Skver sect had been convicted in 1999 of bilking government aid programs for some $30 million. During her visit, Hillary denied that any pardon was discussed.

 

The day before the election, in a letter to New Square’s main synagogue, president Bill Clinton said he looked forward to visiting the village. As Andersen noted, New Square delivered Hillary’s biggest victory margin of any community in New York state, 1,359 votes to only 10 for her opponent Rick Lazio.

 

During the final days of his presidency, Bill Clinton opted to reduce the prison terms of the New Square offenders, and after 9/11 that sparked an investigation. As Anderson notes, “Hillary received an unexpected gift in late June when, without explanation, U.S. Attorney James B. Comey closed the New Square clemency case.

 

Clinton’s pardon of fugitive Marc Rich also drew an investigation and Andersen finds it odd that the Bush administration would “help the Clinton’s out” by refusing to release documents related to the pardons. And “in accordance with his boss’s wishes, U.S Attorney James Comey gave Bill and Hillary a pass.”

 

On September 4, 2013, James Comey became director of the FBI. In that role, Comey oversees the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified material on her private email and server. Whether she gets a pass this time is uncertain, but Comey’s history with the Clintons is worth media attention. So is Hillary’s history on the subject of terrorism.

 

“At Hillary’s urging,” Andersen writes, “the President granted clemency to 16 Puerto Rican terrorists who have been sentenced to prison following a wave of bombings from 1974 to 1983 that took the lives of six Americans and wounded scores of others. Incredibly, the terrorists had not even asked for clemency.”  The worst attack was the January 24, 1975 bombing of Fraunces Tavern in Manhattan. The Puerto Rican FALN exploded a bomb during the lunch hour, “hurling body parts into the street and killing four people.”

 

The terrorists accepted President Clinton’s offer of clemency but expressed no regret for their actions. Former U.S. Attorney Joseph Di Genova went on record that “the Puerto Rican terrorists were pardoned because they were a political benefit to the president’s wife. Make no mistake about it.” As Anderson notes, FBI director Louis Freeh opposed the pardons, as did New York major Rudy Giuliani, senator Charles Schumer and former Puerto Rico governor Carlos Romero Barcelo who, says Andersen, “pleaded with the president not to release the bombers.”

 

Stories on the Clinton pardons have not been a staple of the current campaign, in which Republicans have been the targets of choice on the terrorism issue. Perhaps a bit more balance is in order. Reporters, meanwhile, will find American Evita: Hillary Clinton’s Path to Power a worthy refresher course on the Democratic frontrunner.

 

_____________________

Hillary Indictment Trouble?

John R. Houk

© April 5, 2016

___________________

COMEY, CLINTONS AND CLEMENCY

 

Lloyd Billingsley is the author of Bill of Writes: Dispatches from the Political Correctness Battlefield and Hollywood Party: Stalinist Adventures in the American Film Industry.

 

© COPYRIGHT 2016, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

 

ABOUT

 

FRONTPAGE MAG IS A PROUD PROJECT OF THE DAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER

 

The DHFC is dedicated to the defense of free societies whose moral, cultural and economic foundations are under attack by enemies both secular and religious, at home and abroad.

 

The David Horowitz Freedom Center combats the efforts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country as it attempts to defend itself in a time of terror.  The leftist offensive is most obvious on our nation’s campuses, where the Freedom Center protects students from indoctrination and intimidation and works to give conservative students a place in the marketplace of ideas from which they are otherwise excluded.  Combining forceful analysis and bold activism, the Freedom Center provides strong insight into today’s most pressing issue on its family of websites and in the activist campaigns it wages on campus, in the news media, and in national politics throughout the year.

 

David Horowitz began the Center for the Study of Popular Culture in 1988 to establish a conservative presence in Hollywood and show how popular culture had become a political battleground. Over the next 18 years, CSPC attracted 50,000 contributing supporters and established programs such as The Wednesday Morning Club, the Individual Rights Foundation, and Students for Academic Freedom.

 

FrontPage Magazine, the Center’s online journal of news and political commentary has 1.5 million visitors and over 870,000 unique visitors a month (65 million hits) and is linked to over 2000 other websites.  The magazine’s coverage of and commentary about events has been greatly augmented over the last two years by the presence of four Shillman Fellows in Journalism underwritten by board member Dr. Robert Shillman. FrontPage has recently added a blog called “The Point,” run by Shillman Fellow Daniel Greenfield, which has tripled web traffic.

 

DiscoverTheNetworks.com, launched in 2005, is the largest publicly accessible database defining the chief groups and individuals of the Left and their organizational interlocks.  It is a full service encyclopedia of the left providing an intellectual diagram of its institutional power in American culture and politics. DTN has had more than 8 million visitors so far this year and is a key resource for students, scholars and members of the media.

 

Since 2003, the Center has promoted an Academic Bill of Rights to support students’ academic freedom, and free the American university from political indoctrination and renew its commitment to true intellectual diversity. This campaign has had a permanent impact on American higher education.

 

In 2007, the Center undertook an READ THE REST

 

Obama, Hillary, et al – Nefarious Intentions


John R. Houk

© July 10, 2015

Remember Lois Lerner, the persecutor of Tea Party organizations and Conservative if they opposed the Obama agenda? Katie Pavlich gleaned some info from Judicial Watch that demonstrates that Lerner (as in the IRS) and the Department of Justice (as in – at the time – Obama’s buddy and confidante Attorney General Eric Holder) actually conspired to take out criminal action against any organization opposed to Barack Hussein Obama.

If you are a true American and purport to be a Democratic Party supporter, here is a good reason to at least write your Senator and District Representative to urge prosecution for these kinds of political dirty tricks. These kind of antics definitely the qualifications for Impeachment under the categories of High Crimes and Misdemeanors. Trust me, if you the Constitution, what qualifies as an impeachable Misdemeanor is quite broad under the Original Intent of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution.

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.ARTICLE II, SECTION 4 (Standards for Impeachment; The Heritage Guide to The Constitution)

From the Wall Street Journal:

On one end of the debate, Roger Sherman believed that a president should be removed “at [the] pleasure” of Congress. Likewise, George Mason offered the standard of “maladministration.” At the other end of the debate, Charles Pinckney suggested that a president should not be subject to impeachment for any offense. Other delegates used vague language that only fuels the modern debate as to their true intentions. James Madison objected to a standard of “maladministration” as too ambiguous but he also stated that impeachment was a necessary precaution against “the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate.” For his part, Alexander Hamilton referred to impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, for the abuse or violation of some public trust.”

Franklin viewed impeachment as a process by which public concerns over presidential misconduct could be resolved and the legitimacy of a presidency restored. He noted that there are times when a president’s conduct is viewed as “obnoxious” and demands a process of public review and decision. The impeachment process, he concluded, is “the best way . . . to provide in the Constitution for the regular punishment of the Executive when his misconduct should deserve it, and for his honorable acquittal when he should be unjustly accused.” (High Crimes and Misdemeanors, According to the Framers; Jonathan Turley; WSJ; Updated 11/9/98 12:01 a.m. ET)

As a Conservative my sense is Obama and many of the cohorts of his Administration probably have treasonous acts that may never be proven as a high crime. However, maladministration and malicious acts are very provable. The only hindrance are the Democrats of the House – in impeachment proceedings – and in the Senate doing their due diligence for their constituents and the Constitution – in convicting for malicious acts that may fall more under Misdemeanors than High Crimes.

The focus of this post is Hillary Clinton – the current favorite to win the Dem Party nomination for POTUS, but President Barack Hussein Obama is certainly has had unclean hands from his 2008 election campaign through to the present. His campaign was full of image lies portraying to Americans he was the epitome of hope and change. The reality was and still is a connection to Marxist idealism (HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE) and the racism involve with Black Liberation Theology (HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE) . This reality includes a host of Marxist mentors and admirations on the Leftist side and a load of hate-Whitey BLT supremacists.

Impeach the Leftist cronies, Prosecute them or both.

JRH 7/10/15

Please Support NCCR

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

New Documents Show Extensive Collaboration Between IRS, DOJ to Criminally Prosecute Conservative Groups

By Katie Pavlich

July 07, 2015

Townhall.com

Last year emails revealed former IRS official Lois Lerner was in contact with the Department of Justice Criminal Division about criminally prosecuting conservative tea party groups for pursuing political activity (opposed to President Obama’s agenda) by “posing” as non-profit organizations.

Now, new documents obtained by government watchdog Judicial Watch through two different Freedom of Information Act lawsuits show extensive collaboration between the IRS and DOJ (and subsequently the FBI) to go after conservative groups with criminal charges. The IRS likely violated federal law by illegally sharing 1.25 million pages of taxpayer information with DOJ, which were contained on nearly two dozen FBI backup tapes. Further, information shows DOJ wanted IRS officials who were scheduled to testify in front of Congress about the targeting scandal to turn over planned remarks to them first before delivering on Capitol Hill. From JW:

Judicial Watch today released new Department of Justice (DOJ) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) documents that include an official “DOJ Recap” report detailing an October 2010 meeting between Lois Lerner, DOJ officials and the FBI to plan for the possible criminal prosecution of targeted nonprofit organizations for alleged illegal political activity.

The newly obtained records also reveal that the Obama DOJ wanted IRS employees who were going to testify to Congress to turn over documents to the DOJ before giving them to Congress. Records also detail how the Obama IRS gave the FBI 21 computer disks, containing 1.25 million pages of confidential IRS returns from 113,000 nonprofit social 501(c)(4) welfare groups – or nearly every 501(c)(4) in the United States – as part of its prosecution effort. According to a letter from then-House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) to IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, “This revelation likely means that the IRS – including possibly Lois Lerner – violated federal tax law by transmitting this information to the Justice Department.”

But the IRS wasn’t simply sending the DOJ information, Lerner herself was meeting with DOJ officials to discuss pursuing criminal charges.

On October 8, 2010, Lois Lerner, Joe Urban [IRS Technical Advisor, TEGE], Judy Kindell [top aide to Lerner], Justin Lowe [Technical Advisor to the Commissioner of Tax-Exempt and Government Entities], and Siri Buller met with the section chief and other attorneys from the Department of Justice Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section, and one representative from the FBI, to discuss recent attention to the political activity of exempt organizations.

The section’s attorneys expressed concern that certain section 501(c) organizations are actually political committees “posing” as if they are not subject to FEC law, and therefore may be subject to criminal liability. The attorneys mentioned several possible theories to bring criminal charges under FEC law

Keep in mind Lerner previously and essentially stated in an email that at least one conservative group needed to be made a public example with prosecution.

“One IRS prosecution would make an impact and they wouldn’t feel so comfortable doing the stuff,” Lerner said in a 2013 email.

The goal was to stop the flow of other conservative non-profits, opposed to President Obama’s agenda, from applying for tax exempt status and therefore becoming more effective.

“These new documents show that the Obama IRS scandal is also an Obama DOJ and FBI scandal,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “The FBI and Justice Department worked with Lois Lerner and the IRS to concoct some reason to put President Obama’s opponents in jail before his reelection. And this abuse resulted in the FBI’s illegally obtaining confidential taxpayer information. How can the Justice Department and FBI investigate the very scandal in which they are implicated?”

It’s no wonder Lerner’s hard drive magically “crashed,” “losing” thousands of emails sent and received during the time period when she was meeting with DOJ to pursue prosecution of American citizens exercising their constitutional right to free speech.

Washington Times Video: Lois Lerner Linked to DOJ for Potential Prosecution of Tax Exempt Groups
http://launch.newsinc.com/?type=VideoPlayer/Single&widgetId=1&trackingGroup=69016&siteSection=townhall_nws_non_sty_dynamic&videoId=25815756
________________

Obama, Hillary, et al – Nefarious Intentions

John R. Houk

© July 10, 2015

__________________

New Documents Show Extensive Collaboration Between IRS, DOJ to Criminally Prosecute Conservative Groups

 

Copyright © Townhall.com. All Rights Reserved.