Is Crooked Hillary Finally Getting Exposed?


John R. Houk

© September 1, 2017

 

Without the Obama Administration to protect Crooked Hillary or Crooked Comey to bury investigative information some swamp data is beginning to come to the surface.

 

 

 

 

Is it possible that Obama inspired corruption is finally beginning to unravel to show everyday Americans that nefarious goings-on was perpetrated in front of our very eyes?

 

I am guessing if Crooked Hillary is exposed enough that she won’t go down alone.

 

JRH 9/1/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Grassley: Comey Wrote Clinton Exoneration Statement Before Email Investigation Ended

 

By Mary Chastain

August 31, 2017 7:07pm

Legal Insurrection

 

…in early April or early May 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton.

 

HR Clinton vs. FBI

 

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray to inform him that the committee found in unredacted parts in transcripts that former FBI Director James Comey decided to write a statement to exonerate then-presumptive Democrat presidential candidate before the FBI finished its investigation into her emails.

 

Grassley wrote:

 

According to the unredacted portions of the transcripts, it appears that in early April or early May 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton. This was long before FBI agents finished their work. Mr. Coney even circulated an early draft statement to select members of senior FBI leadership. The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.

 

OSC [Office of Special Counsel] attorneys questioned two witnesses, presumably Mr. [Jim] Rybicki [Comey’s Chief of Staff] and Ms. Trisha] Anderson [Principal Deputy General Counsel of National Security and Cyberlaw], about Mr. Comey’s July 5, 2016, statement exonerating Secretary Clinton. The transcript of what appears to be Mr. Rybicki’s interview contains the following exchange:

 

This is the portion of the transcript that Grassley provided:

 

Grassley Transcript LI

Here is a portion from what may be Anderson’s interview:

 

Anderson’s interview portion

 

Grassley and the other senators have asked Wray to provide the committee all drafts of Comey’s statement that closed the investigation, including the one from April or May, along with all of the records “related to communications between or among FBI officials regarding Comey’s draft statement closing the Clinton investigation. These documents include “all memoranda or analyses of the factual or legal justification for the announcement.”

 

The committee also wants the records “provided to the Office of Special Counsel in the course of its now closed Hatch Act investigation of Mr. Comey.”

 

Does this add new credence to those who suspected the fix was already in for Hillary to get off? It’s possible. After all, a week before Comey’s press conference, a local news crew discovered that then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with Hillary’s husband Bill on a tarmac at an Arizona airport. As Professor Jacobson noted at the time:

 

Neither Lynch nor Bill Clinton are dummies. They both know that such a private meeting creates the appearance of impropriety regardless of what was discussed. Bill Clinton’s wife is being investigated by the FBI — why do you think he dropped in for a chat with Lynch?

 

Of course they didn’t discuss the case. They didn’t need to.

 

If there was no appearance of impropriety, why did Lynch wait until a local news crew, apparently tipped off, asked her about it?

 

It feeds a narrative of the Clintons acting like the fix is in, with Hillary repeatedly bragging that there is no way she’s going to be indicted.

 

On July 5, 2016, Comey gave a detailed press conference to exonerate Hillary even though the found found serious problems and mishandling of classified information. He said he could not recommend charges because “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case because no bad intent.”

 

Lynch decided the following day to accept Comey’s recommendation not to prosecute Hillary.

 

Earlier this month, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) published 413 pages of memos from the DOJ that showed the tarmac meeting was planned. The ACLJ wrote:

 

We have just obtained hundreds of pages in our ongoing investigation and federal lawsuit on former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton while the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI had an ongoing criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. The results are shocking.

 

First, the Comey FBI lied to us. Last July, we sent FOIA requests to both the Comey FBI and the Lynch DOJ asking for any documents related to the Clinton Lynch plane meeting. The FBI, under the then directorship of James Comey, replied that “No records responsive to your request were located.”

 

The documents we received today from the Department of Justice include several emails from the FBI to DOJ officials concerning the meeting. One with the subject line “FLAG” was correspondence between FBI officials (Richard Quinn, FBI Media/Investigative Publicity, and Michael Kortan) and DOJ officials concerning “flag[ing] a story . . . about a casual, unscheduled meeting between former president Bill Clinton and the AG.” The DOJ official instructs the FBI to “let me know if you get any questions about this” and provides “[o]ur talkers [DOJ talking points] on this”. The talking points, however are redacted.

 

In January, the Justice Department inspector general announced “he will investigate the actions of the Justice Department and FBI in the months leading up to the 2016 election.” The investigation includes if Comey followed department policies. Comey, who was still FBI director at the time, promised cooperation. CBS News reported at the time:

 

The review will examine Comey’s news conference in July 2016 in which he said that the FBI would not recommend charges. During his announcement, Comey delivered an unusual public statement for an FBI chief by chastising Clinton and her aides as “extremely careless.”

 

It will also review the two letters he sent to Congress about the case in the final days before the 2016 election. Clinton and her aides said the disclosure of “new” emails – found on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner, the estranged husband of Clinton aide Huma Abedin – less than two weeks before Election Day hurt her in several battleground states.

 

+++

The fix was in! Memos show Comey exonerated Hillary before investigation concluded – but, that’s not all

 

By Scott Morefield

September 1, 2017

BizPac Review

 

If you’re going to conduct a legitimate investigation, it’s probably a good idea to wait until all the facts come in before actually coming to a conclusion, much less drafting a statement about the decision you plan to make.

 

Of course, if the ‘fix is in,’ why not go ahead and get your paperwork over with, right?

 

James Comey has yet again found himself in the national spotlight, this time over memos obtained by the Senate Judiciary Committee in their role of investigating Comey’s May 9 firing which show that the former FBI director had begun drafting a statement exonerating Hillary Clinton before all witnesses had even been interviewed.

 

 

In fact, the exoneration statement was so premature that the FBI hadn’t even interviewed Clinton herself yet.

 

Either Comey and his cohorts had a crystal ball, or the so-called ‘investigation’ into Clinton’s emails was corrupt to the core.

 

The revelations come from interview transcripts of Comey’s chief of staff, James Rybicki, and FBI counsel Trisha Anderson, which were given last Fall as a part of an Office of Special Counsel investigation into the FBI’s role in investigating Clinton’s emails.

 

Even though the transcripts are heavily redacted, they still show that the former FBI director began work on an exoneration announcement in either April or May of 2016, when the FBI had yet to interview 17 witnesses, including Clinton herself.

 

When was Clinton eventually interviewed? July 2, three days before Comey’s big reveal.

 

From the Daily Caller:

 

In a letter to the FBI, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham also noted that Comey’s draft was prepared even before two Clinton aides, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, had reached what the two Republicans called a “highly unusual” immunity deal with the Justice Department.

 

The limited immunity deal prohibited investigators and prosecutors from asking about conversations between the two Clinton aides and Platte River Networks, a Denver-based tech firm that maintained Clinton’s server after she left the State Department.

 

Which begs the question:

 

 

Grassley and Graham, like the rest of us, wonder how Comey could have possibly performed an impartial investigation if his mind seems to have already been made up.

 

“Conclusion first, fact-gathering second — that’s no way to run an investigation,” the senators wrote to the FBI. “The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy. The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.”

 

 

 

 

Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of BizPac Review.

++++

Despite initial refusal, Judge orders FBI to make details of Clinton email probe public

 

By BPR Wire

Jack Crowe, DCNF

September 1, 2017

BizPac Review

 

A federal judge ordered the FBI Thursday to publicly release previously unseen documents related to the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

 

Worried Hillary (Photo by Melina Mara/The Washington Post)

 

U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg ordered the FBI to produce uncensored court documents describing the grand jury subpoenas issued to force Clinton’s internet service providers to turn over information related to her private server use, according to a statement released by Cause of Action Institute.

 

The ruling was made in response to a motion filed in June as part of a suit brought by Cause of Action Institute and Judicial Watch. The organizations claim the Department of State violated the Federal Records Act by failing to maintain records related to Clinton’s handling of classified information.

 

Boasberg justified his ruling on the basis that the set of documents in question “rehashes information already made public, thus obviating any need for secrecy.”

 

Cause of Action President and CEO John J. Vecchione praised the decision in a statement released Thursday following the court’s ruling.

 

“I applaud the court’s opinion. The government attempted to end a case with evidence no one could review. This order makes public details submitted by the government about the FBI’s efforts to recover then-Secretary Clinton’s unlawfully removed emails,” he said. “Americans deserve to know the full scope of that investigation, and we, as Plaintiffs, should have an opportunity to contest the relevance of the government’s facts.”

 

Former FBI Director James Comey called Clinton’s use of a private email address and server to handle classified information “extremely careless” in his July Congressional testimony but stopped short of filing charges.

 

The requested documents relate specifically to subpoenas related to emails Clinton sent on two Blackberry accounts during her first few weeks in office.

 

Boasberg’s order overrules objections made by the Trump administration, who previously claimed that publicly releasing the documents would violate grand jury secrecy rules.

 

The order comes days after the FBI refused to turn over documents related to their investigation into Clinton’s private email server, citing a lack of public interest to justify denying the FOIA request.

________________

Is Crooked Hillary Finally Getting Exposed?

John R. Houk

© September 1, 2017

____________

Grassley: Comey Wrote Clinton Exoneration Statement Before Email Investigation Ended

 

© Copyright 2008-2017, Legal Insurrection, All Rights Reserved.

__________

The fix was in! Memos show Comey exonerated Hillary before investigation concluded – but, that’s not all

 

And

 

Despite initial refusal, Judge orders FBI to make details of Clinton email probe public

 

Copyright © BizPac Review 2017. All Rights Reserved.

Evidence of FBI Corruption


John R. Houk

© June 30, 2017

 

Here is a reprise of Oregon Malheur National Wildlife Refuge standoff instigated by the unjust re-sentencing of Dwight and Steven Hammond after they had already served time for a conviction that should never have happened. A bunch of ranchers from all over the Western U.S. came as a protest militia against the unjust actions of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). There were a few leaders of this rancher militia but the few headlines that made into the MSM placed Ammon Bundy and his brother Ryan as the faces of BLM resistance. Ammon and Ryan were fresh off a successful standoff with their father Cliven Bundy in Nevada.

 

Here’s a rehash of the Hammonds’ BLM difficulties:

 

According to an October 7, 2015 press release from the Obama Department of Justice, Dwight Lincoln Hammond, Jr., 73, and his son, Steven Dwight Hammond, 46, both residents of Diamond, Oregon in Harney County, were sentenced to five years in prison by Chief U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken for arsons they committed on federal lands.

The men were charged nearly a decade after the first fire and five years after the second.

 

Oregon Live reports on the fires:

 

The Hammonds’ run-ins with the government began in 1999, when Steven Hammond started a fire that escaped onto U.S. Bureau of Land Management territory. The intent of the fire was to burn off juniper and sagebrush that hindered the growth of grass for their cattle.

BLM employees reminded Steven Hammond that although his family leased public land for grazing, he couldn’t burn it without a permit. But in September 2001, the Hammonds started another fire. This one ran off their property on Steens Mountain, consumed 139 acres of public land and took the acreage out of production for two growing seasons, according to court papers.

Then in August 2006, lightning sparked several fires near the spot where the Hammonds grew their winter feed. Steven Hammond set a back-burn to thwart the advancing flames, and it burned across about an acre of public land, according to federal court records.

 

 

First, both men were sentenced in 2012 by now-retired U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan, following the trial. Steven received one year and a day in prison for setting fires in 2001 and 2006. Dwight got 3 months for his 2001 involvement. Hogan did not believe the men had malicious intent to be labeled as terrorists under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, even though he sentenced them to jail for the time he did.

 

 

Both men served their sentences and were released. Now, the feds have appealed those sentences and want the mandatory minimum five-year sentence imposed on the men, and so they appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, who agreed with the feds that the judge ruled illegally. However, now they are wanting to label the Hammonds as terrorists under the 1996 law in order to put them back in jail.

 

READ ENTIRETY (Bigger Than Bundy Ranch: Militia put on Level 2 Alert to Defend Oregon Ranchers against Tyrannical Feds Who Label Them Terrorists; By TIM BROWN; Freedom Outpost; 11/24/17)

 

NOW, after this rehash and couple it with the Obama Leftist corrupt regime which pushed much of the BLM land grabbing and rancher persecution; there are HUGE indications that the FBI has become so inculcated with Obama’s Leftist swamp, that they are severely a part of the problem to devastate the property rights of Ranchers.

 

Can you say, Communist redistribution in favor of State management?

 

FBI agent W. Joseph Astarita Court Sketch 6/28/17 Photo: Deborah Marble at KGW.com

 

At least one FBI Agent (so far) is under criminal prosecution for intimidation and manipulating evidence. Below is the story.

 

JRH 6/30/17

Please Support NCCR

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

SHERIFF BACKS CLAIMS OF FBI-LAWBREAKING IN OREGON STANDOFF

Documentary-makers release more evidence that raises questions

 

By BOB UNRUH

June 29, 2017

WND

 

The Hammond family

 

In a stunning development a year after the standoff at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, where two-dozen armed supporters gathered to protest the courts’ extension of sentences for two ranchers, a sheriff has backed claims of FBI misbehavior.

 

The declaration came from Deschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson just as FBI agent W. Joseph Astarita was pleading not guilty to three counts of making false statements and two counts of obstruction of justice in federal court in Portland, Oregon.

 

The FBI agent was accused of firing at the protesters, then picking up shell casings to conceal that fact and lying to investigators.

 

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Oregon said Astarita falsely stated he had not fired his weapon during the attempted arrest of protester LaVoy Finicum, who was shot dead by another officer during the incident, “when he knew he had in fact fired his weapon.”

 

“Astarita also knowingly engaged in misleading conduct toward Oregon State Police officers by failing to disclose that he had fired two rounds during the attempted arrest,” the statement said.

 

Nelson said, as the Washington Times reported, that the actions by “multiple members of the FBI Hostage Rescue Team” had “damaged the integrity of the entire law enforcement profession, which makes me both disappointed and angry.”

 

Get David Kupelian’s culture-war blockbusters, “The Marketing of Evil,” “How Evil Works” and his latest, “The Snapping of the American Mind” at the WND Superstore. Also available in e-book and audiobook versions.

 

Nelson said he told Justice Department and FBI officials, including now-acting Director Andrew McCabe, over a year ago about “possible criminal conduct” by some involved FBI Hostage Rescue Team agents.

 

And while the case against Astarita is in court, new evidence also is arising from the makers of an acclaimed documentary about the incident.

 

WND reported earlier on the armed standoff that has been variously described by opponents as “militia terrorism” and by defenders as rebellion against government tyranny.

 

The 41-day standoff ended in mass arrests after law enforcement fatally shot one of the occupiers.

 

The documentary is “American Standoff,” and while it aired previously on DirecTV, it can now be viewed in its entirety at this website. Among the people interviewed in the documentary is best-selling author and WND Vice President David Kupelian.

 

The “American Standoff” story starts with Dwight and Steven Hammond, Oregon ranchers who were controversially convicted and sentenced for setting a controlled land-management fire on their property that went out of control onto federal land. But after they served their sentences and were released, a judge – at a federal prosecutor’s insistence – ordered them back into court, where they were sentenced to further time in prison under an anti-terrorism law, even though there was no evidence presented that the ranchers had planned or engaged in terrorism in any way.

 

Sympathetic ranchers and others – encouraged by the federal government’s stand-down from a previous armed confrontation in Nevada two years earlier on the land of rancher Cliven Bundy – protested the new injustice and ended up staging an armed occupation of the refuge.

 

They succeeded in keeping federal officers at bay until they were finally taken into custody when police staged a highly dangerous highway stop of vehicles carrying the protesters and shot two men.

 

Ryan Bundy, one of Cliven Bundy’s sons, was injured, while LaVoy Finicum was killed.

 

Eventually, seven of the others who were arrested were acquitted of federal charges related to the standoff. The feds even dismissed charges against a self-described independent broadcaster, Peter Santilli, who documented the occupation near Burns, Oregon, but was accused by prosecutors of being part of the protest group.

 

However, one of the FBI agents was charged with serious infractions of the law for the final confrontation. So far, Astarita is the only FBI agent to be indicted.

 

In addition to the feature-length “American Standoff” documentary, director Josh Turnbow and his film-making crew have now produced a series of “Aftermath” short video segments that have been posted online.

 

In the first, Jeanette Finicum, the widow of LaVoy Finicum, explains how the government, after killing her husband, also canceled the lease she needed to continue her family’s ranching operation.

 

She said she has lawyers fighting to restore the lease.

 

And she said a wrongful death case is inevitable against the government after a certain legal time period passes.

 

She insists her husband had his hands in the air and was surrendering but “was murdered.”

 

“He was mowed down in cold blood.”

 

Then, the video explains, the federal agents were “caught on camera, picking up casings before the forensic team arrived at the site of the shooting.”

 

Also, the video shows, Finicum’s gun, which he reportedly had been reaching for, wasn’t found for eight hours after the shooting.

 

“How many people tended to his body without finding it?” the video asks.

 

See the footage of the first segment:

 

VIDEO: American Standoff: Aftermath Episode 1

 

Posted by Audience Network

Published on Jun 8, 2017

 

American Standoff: Aftermath is a new short form series that delves deeper into the personal lives of the characters and key issues surrounding the 2016 Malheur Standoff.

Episode 1: Finicum

After the death of Lavoy Finicum, the BLM cancelled the Finicum Ranch Grazing Permit. More than a year later, Lavoy’s widow Jeanette is still trying to get the permit reinstated.

Watch the next episode here: [Blog Editor: Original link not functional as of 6/30/17. The link after the bracket works.]  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2TBRsf-4cM

Audience Facebook: http://bit.ly/AudienceNetworkFacebook
Audience Twitter: http://bit.ly/AudienceTwitter
Audience Instagram: http://bit.ly/AudienceInstagram

 

The rest of the videos are available online here.

 

Turnbow told WND the “Aftermath” series continues the stories of people affected by the standoff.

In addition to conducting in-depth interviews with nearly everyone involved on all sides of the conflict, Turnbow said he tapped WND’s managing editor, David Kupelian, to offer a journalist’s perspective and analysis.

 

“I think Josh Turnbow did a terrific job in ‘American Standoff,’” said Kupelian, “not just in fairly and sensitively presenting all sides of a complex and troubling situation, but in telling a riveting, deeply thought-provoking true story about today’s America.”

 

Kupelian said the documentary “captures the classic modus operandi of an oppressive government: Perpetrate injustice, provoking widespread public outrage, which always includes a small number of people who seriously overreact and, however well-meaning, do something illegal or irresponsible – and then portray them as the real problem, or in this case as ‘criminals’ and ‘terrorists.’”

 

He said the main provocation in the story was “convicting two Oregon cattle ranchers, a father and son team whose controlled burn on their own property had gotten out of control and migrated onto federal land, with arson under an anti-terrorism statute that mandates a minimum five-year prison sentence.”

 

“Even the presiding judge said such a severe and unjust sentence would ‘shock the conscience.’ Well, it did shock the conscience of a lot of other ranchers – and the Malheur standoff was the result,” he said.

 

Get David Kupelian’s culture-war blockbusters, “The Marketing of Evil,” “How Evil Works” and his latest, “The Snapping of the American Mind” at the WND Superstore. Also available in e-book and audiobook versions.

 

Turnbow said he would like to find out what really happened and consider what the outcome should have been, especially with regard to the still-imprisoned ranchers serving a five-year “terrorism” sentence.

 

“We should be talking about it,” Turnbow says.

 

The larger issue at hand – federal control over land in the American West – continues to loom large.

 

The federal government is the largest landowner in the Rocky Mountain and Western states, owning contiguous parcels of millions of acres.

 

Conflicts between ranchers, who in some instances have owned and worked their land for generations, and a federal government seemingly always hungry for more, are common.

 

President Trump’s recent executive order to review the possibility of shrinking the boundaries of federal monuments could help defuse the longstanding tensions between America’s ranchers and the government.

 

See the trailer for “American Standoff”:

[Blog Editor: I am not sure if this is the same trailer WNDTV uses but it is about the same length on Youtube.]

 

VIDEO: American Standoff Trailer

 

Posted by Audience Network

Published on Apr 25, 2017

 

A story as tragic and incredible as the West itself, AUDIENCE Network presents the AT&T original documentary American Standoff which tells the story of the armed takeover of Oregon’s Malheur Wildlife Refuge and its violent conclusion. Don’t miss the premiere on 5/4 at 8PM!

 

________________

Evidence of FBI Corruption

John R. Houk

© June 30, 2017

_____________

SHERIFF BACKS CLAIMS OF FBI-LAWBREAKING IN OREGON STANDOFF

 

© Copyright 1997-2017. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Obama’s Saboteurs


Justin Smith nails the Obama criminal spying on political opponents straight on the head.

 

JRH 3/14/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Obama’s Saboteurs

Undermining Our Republic

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 3/13/2017 12:30 PM

 

Setting a dangerous precedent for the future of America, the New York Times, the Washington Post and other Leftist propaganda machines and an army of the Obama administration’s holdovers, nothing less than saboteurs, have waged a war of innuendo and speculation and felony leaks for months in an attempt to destroy President Donald Trump’s administration and the government American voters demanded. They have turned their backs on the Constitution and the American people, their oath to protect and defend both, and they have sought to undermine our democratic process and the Republic of the United States of America.

 

Classified information leaked to the media – a felony – set speculation in motion as the New York Times and the left-leaning Mother Jones alleged collusion between Donald Trump and his advisors and Russia for the past six months, even though their own reports show an initial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) warrant targeting Trump and several associates was denied and nothing criminal was ever proven. And, according to Heat Street [HERE & HERE], a more narrowly drawn FISA warrant was granted in October to investigate the Trump campaign’s alleged links to Russia’s Alfa Bank and SVB Bank; the FBI found nothing “nefarious” and attributed the raised alarm to “spam”.

 

Essentially, Donald Trump was not named in the second FISA warrant, but surveillance of him and his inner circle, private citizens such as Michael Flynn, Roger Stone and Paul Manafort, continued up to the general election [HERE & HERE]. One can only surmise that Obama and his leftist minions banked on finding information that would defeat Trump; and after Donald Trump won, they continued surveillance in hopes of eventually impeaching and unseating President Trump.

 

If phone calls to Russia merit an investigation, shouldn’t Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been investigated for accepting a $145 million bribe from Russia and ROSATOM [HERE & HERE] in exchange for helping them acquire twenty-five percent of America’s uranium resources? Oh, wait a minute — Hillary is a Democrat, so just overlook any criminal behavior.

 

Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) suggested the Obama administration’s extensive surveillance of Trump’s presidential campaign was troubling but not surprising. Hatch “suspected that they were going to do that anyways.”

 

How could the media and the Obama machine — the Obama Foundation, billionaire George Soros and Organizing for America — not expect Trump to counter-punch? But incredulously, they were unprepared for President Trump’s March 4th 2017 allegation on Twitter that former President Obama “had my wires tapped in Trump Tower just before the victory”.

 

Who in the Obama administration ordered the FISA wiretaps and why?

 

U.S. citizens normally cannot be searched or subjected to electronic eavesdropping without probable cause of a crime, however FISA makes exceptions if there is probable cause they are agents of a foreign power. No one person can state with a straight face that “Trump is a Russian spy”.

 

Retired Lt. Colonel Tony Shaffer, a defense intelligence officer trained by the CIA (Fox News), said, “I put this right at the feet of John Brennan and Jim Clapper, and I would even go so far as to say the White House was directly involved before [Obama} left”. He also asserted that it was clear sensitive information was divulged to the media by people who had access to beyond Top Secret material.

 

[Blog Editor: Here’s a Youtube video of Shaffer on Fox & Friends Weekend

 

VIDEO: Lt. Col. Shaffer: Potential Obama Wiretapping Is ‘Soviet-Level Wrongdoing’ @OBAMAFORPRISON2017

 

Posted by Wesley Veras

Published on Mar 4, 2017

@OBAMAFORPRISON2017 SHARE IT/MAKE IT VIRAL.]

 

On the same day of President Trump’s bombshell, Corey Lewandowski, Trump’s former campaign manager, told Judge Jeanine Pirro (Fox News) that the Obama administration was also “listening to conversations between then-Senator Jeff Sessions and the Ambassador from Russia while he was in his U.S. Senate office’. (And) the fact that the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act is being used to listen to a political opponent is “very, very damaging”.

 

[Blog Editor: Here’s a Youtube video of Pirro/Lewandowski interview:

 

VIDEO: Corey Lewandowski: Obama Bugged Sessions Meeting With Russian Ambassador

 

Posted by The PolitiStick

Published on Mar 4, 2017

 

Full Pirro/Lewandowski interview HERE.]

 

Please note that Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and many other Democrats met with this same Russian Ambassador. Their hypocrisy is on full display.

 

Some sort of surveillance of the Trump campaign occurred, if one can believe James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence. Clapper told NBC and ABC News that during his tenure in the Obama administration, up to January 20th 2017, there wasn’t any collusion or collaboration between Donald Trump’s campaign and the government of Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

 

The NYT’s story “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides” on January 19th 2017 states: “The FBI is leading the investigation, aided by the National Security Agency, the CIA and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks … intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the [Obama] White House.

 

With FBI Director James Comey’s motivation suspect, he asked the Justice Department to confirm that President Trump’s allegation was “absolutely false”. This was followed recently with Congress’s demand for any and all documents concerning any Department of Justice investigation of President Trump and his campaign.

 

Once the Democrats had their “uh oh moment”, as Garth Kant of WND called it, they realized that a scandal bigger than Watergate was beginning to unfold. The Obama Justice Department had apparently used its legal authorities to target a political opponent and a presidential candidate.

 

Any outrage from the Obama White House is extremely exaggerated. Obama does not deny that Trump was being monitored by his Justice Department, and any spying on his arch rival, a man with the ability to diminish his legacy, was done with Obama’s blessing. Only a fool could believe that Obama was ignorant of the spying. [Editor’s Bold Text]

 

From the DOJ’s seizure of Associated Press phone records and Fox News reporter James Rosen’s email records, to heavy IRS scrutiny of the Tea Party and on to the NSA’s warrantless mass surveillance of American citizens, the Obama administration’s enthusiasm for surveillance and using government power against its political enemies is a matter of shameful record. Obama’s and the Leftists’ so-called “Resistance” to the Trump administration has developed the feel of a not-so-covert coup against President Trump. [Editor’s Bold Text]

 

Americans are entitled to the full truth surrounding former President Obama’s use of nation-state resources for the purposes of political gain. Sycophantic rogue agents of the NSA, the CIA, the FBI and the Justice Department, all Democrat ideologues and communists, have apparently subverted the U.S. Constitution and spied on President Trump’s presidential campaign in a manner that was not approved by any court, in order to derail his election and the Democratic process, leaking sensitive national security secrets along the way. And anyone involved, including Obama, must be prosecuted and placed behind bars. [Editor’s Bold Text]

 

By Justin O. Smith

___________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text enclosed by brackets and all source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

Editor Intro to FBI, DOJ Make Side Deal …


public-enemy-1-2-comey-hillary

Editor John R. Houk

October 4, 2016

 

Over the last few days I have posted some info that shows Comey, his FBI or both involved not only in a cover-up to protect Obama and Crooked Hillary’s hindquarters but also to make Crooked Hillary untouchable enough to get elected. Shades of Obama Administration 2012 Benghazi lies to reelect Barack Hussein Obama.

 

Here are some examples of Comey corruption from those two posts:

 

The more that details about the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email practices come to light, the more their efforts appear to have been a sham designed to exonerate her of wrongdoing from the very beginning. …

 

 

Upon further review, it appears that Mr. Comey’s investigation was highly unusual, given the five immunity agreements that were handed out. …

 

“Instead of asking Attorney General Loretta Lynch to revoke his immunity deal and squeezing him, Comey let [Combetta] go because he was a ‘low-level guy,’ he testified at the House hearing. …

 

… Comey insisted that the immunity agreement was necessary to ensure that the FBI got the facts.

 

“There’s no doubt Combetta was involved in deleting emails,” said Comey. …

 

… Secretary Clinton’s former chief of staff Cheryl Mills and Clinton aide Heather Samuelson also received immunity agreements meant to ensure that they gave the FBI access to their laptops. …

 

 

To add insult to injury, the FBI allowed Samuelson and Mills to sit in on Hillary Clinton’s interview with the bureau.

 

… (Was The Fix In On FBI Investigation Of Hillary Clinton’s Emails? By Roger Aronoff; SlantRight 2.0; 10/1/16)

 

And the other post:

 

Gowdy was after a document called a 302, which is essentially a summary of interviews of key witnesses. The FBI wasn’t giving those to Congress, and instead was getting a “summary of a summary of an interview” instead. This is something the Committee, and Gowdy in particular, was not pleased with. 

 

 

FBI Director James Comey appeared before Congress for the third time.

 

Once again, he fumbled through another session, trying to explain away the reasons why he overlooked Hillary Clinton’s criminal behavior.

 

 

Suspicions were raised when the FBI handed out five grants of immunity to Hillary’s underlings – including former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, who was the mastermind behind the private server.

 

Many wondered why immunity was given to so many people and no charges were filed.

 

“GOP lawmakers focused in particular on the Justice Department’s decision to give a form of immunity to Clinton lawyers Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson to obtain computers containing emails related to the case.

 “Laptops don’t go to the Bureau of Prisons,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said. “The immunity was not for the laptop, it was for Cheryl Mills.”

 The FBI director repeated an explanation he gave for the first time at a Senate hearing Tuesday, that the deal to get the laptops was wise because subpoenaing computers from an attorney would be complex and time consuming.”

 

… (2 News Pieces on Crooked FBI; Compiled by JRH; SlantRight 2.0; 10/2/16)

 

NOW I FIND OUT that the immunity deals were based ONLY on a limited search AND that after the limited search the laptops were to be destroyed by THE FBI! Here’s the story.

 

JRH 10/4/16

Please Support NCCR

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

FBI, DOJ Make Side Deal To Destroy Clinton Aides’ Laptops

“… doesn’t that undermine the claim …?”

 

By Charles Campbell

October 3, 2016 at 2:16pm

Western Journalism

 

Sources from the House Judiciary Committee told Fox News Monday that the immunity deals struck with Hillary Clinton’s top aides, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, included the Justice Department agreeing to destroy their laptops after they had been turned over to federal investigators.

 

The House Judiciary Committee sent a letter Monday to Attorney General Loretta Lynch inquiring about the arrangement, and why it also included a limited search of computers files dating no later than Jan. 31, 2015.

 

“Please explain why DOJ agreed to limit their search of the Mills and Samuelson laptops to a date no later than January 31, 2015,” Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte wrote in the letter, which was first reported by Fox News.

 

Goodlatte states that the agreements, which were signed on June 10, meant that investigators could not review documents after the email server became public and they abandoned “any opportunity to find evidence related to the destruction of evidence or obstruction of justice related to Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State.”

 

“Why was this time limit necessary when Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson were granted immunity for any potential destruction of evidence charges?” he added.

 

It was revealed last month that the DOJ granted Mills and Samuelson immunity for any information recovered from their laptops.

 

The House Oversight Committee exposed the immunity agreements publicly, and it raised questions about why two Clinton aides were given permission to sit-in with Clinton during her July interview with the FBI.

 

The FBI claimed that because the interview was voluntary, the investigators had no control over who Clinton brought with her.

 

“Doesn’t the willingness of Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson to have their laptops destroyed by the FBI contradict their claim that the laptops could have been withheld because they contained non-relevant, privileged information? If so, doesn’t that undermine the claim that the side agreements were necessary?” Goodlatte wrote.

 

Last week, FBI Director James Comey said that he agreed to grant immunity because he wanted to avoid a drawn-out legal battle, but he also failed to mention that part of the “agreement” was for the laptops to be destroyed.

 

After the news of the laptops being destroyed broke, Twitter users expressed their contempt for how the case has been handled.

 

Shannon Bream 

✔@ShannonBream

 

BREAKING from Catherine Herridge: FBI made side deals with 2 HRC associates to “destroy” their laptops after inspecting them

+++

Raymond Smith 

@RaymondSmith54


@ShannonBream
 I am soooooooooo sick of this corrupt “administration” I am getting physically ill.

1:27 PM – 3 Oct 2016

+++

Shannon Bream 

✔@ShannonBream

 

BREAKING from Catherine Herridge: FBI made side deals with 2 HRC associates to “destroy” their laptops after inspecting them

+++


Tom Hannan 

@tomh2739

 

@ShannonBream @ByronYork I’m no lawyer but I think James Comey & The FBI just committed SEVERAL FELONIES

11:48 AM – 3 Oct 2016

 

“Like many things about this case, these new materials raise more questions than answers,” Coodlatte concluded.

__________________

Editor Intro to FBI, DOJ Make Side Deal

Editor John R. Houk

October 4, 2016

__________________

FBI, DOJ Make Side Deal To Destroy Clinton Aides’ Laptops

 

About Western Journalism

 

Western Journalism is a news company that drives positive cultural change by equipping and informing people with truth. It hosts WesternJournalism.com, a news website and blogging platform built for conservative, libertarian, free market and pro-family writers and broadcasters. The platform hosts hundreds of bloggers, and our content is widely distributed using social media. New blogs are able to be successfully launched using the platform because of the large audience actively served.

 

WesternJournalism.com is a property of Liftable Media Inc., a Top 100 digital publisher in the U.S. (Quantcast).

 

READ THE REST