Our Republic Is In Crisis


If you have ever read any of my blog posts you are fully aware that members of the Political Party known as the Dems are ardent liars. With that in mind you can only imagine the inner fury that arises when I hear a Dem proclaim “we must protect the Constitution” or “No President is above the law” and so on. I particularly find it galling when I’ve heard Nancy Pelosi – Speaker by the incredulous virtue of being the leader of the Majority Party in the House – quote Benjamin Franklin as he departed the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia:

 

The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

 

This exchange was recorded by Constitution signer James McHenry in a diary entry that was later reproduced in the 1906 American Historical Review. Yet in more recent years, Franklin has occasionally [sic] been misquoted as having said, “A democracy, if you can keep it.” A Republic, if You Can Keep It; By John F. McManus; TheNewAmerican.com; 11/6/2000

 

I’ve heard Pelosi quote Franklin on preserving our Republic by impeaching President Trump. The gall coming from a leader from what is now one of the most corrupt Political Parties in American history whose leadership has spent decades diluting, arbitrarily rewriting through unelected Courts and in many cases just criminally ignore the United States Constitution.

 

There are rumors that IG Michael Horowitz’s report on “DOJ and FBI’s conduct during the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant process as it relates to the 2016 presidential election” is going to scapegoat the unimportant and ignore the big fish Dem criminals – AS USUAL. If that is so, America has lost her Republic to the tyranny of the Deep State unelected bureaucracy. Justin Smith takes a look at the rumors!

 

JRH 11/27/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

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

Our Republic Is In Crisis

America’s Traitors Must Not Go Unpunished

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 11/25/2019 9:29 PM

 

The United States Republic has been under a sustained assault since 2016, by a Democratic Party, that has used every mechanism and maneuver possible to undermine President Trump’s Administration; and it now self-describes itself as “the Resistance”, an incendiary title most usually ascribed to insurgents fighting an occupying military power and not a “Loyal Opposition”. Their worldview is so far removed from America’s Founding, so antithetical, that they now stand as the Enemy from Within, as they engage in a war to cripple a duly elected government by any means necessary, and this cannot be allowed, if this nation is to continue as a true Republic.

 

Time and time again, the Democratic Party has exhibited it is willing to use any means necessary to gain a momentary advantage to achieve their agenda and goals, no matter the systemic implications and the unintended or intended collateral consequences. They do not care if their actions can be justified as a general rule of conduct, equally applicable to all of America, since they believe they are the most brilliant animals in the room and seek to impose their will, despite any protestations.

 

Our governing system is in crisis, and our Republic is indeed in crisis. Both are in crisis due to the Democratic Party’s belief that their actions to ignore, subvert and replace norms, institutions and laws are somehow authorized simply by their will, edict and proclamation, and their follower’s acceptance of this abrogation of the Constitution compounds and exacerbates the situation, creating dangerous times for all America.

 

Immediately upon Trump’s election, Rosa Brooks, Defense Department official under Obama, outlined ways to remove Trump from office, before the 2020 elections, in an article for Foreign Policy. In seditious and treasonous style, she brazenly advocated for a military coup.

 

In recently discovered tweets, Mark Zaid, attorney for the traitorous Ukraine Gossip Leaker, boasts of the coup in January 2017, typing the words: “#coup has started. First of many steps. #rebellion. #impeachment will follow. … As one falls, two more will take their place.”

 

And, in a recent New York Times op-ed, retired Admiral William McRaven essentially called for President Trump’s ouster, as he suggested “the sooner, the better.”

 

Traitors within the Obama administration’s CIA, FBI, DOJ and State Department, along with federal bureaucratic holdovers, had to be acting at the direction of Obama himself, when all is said and done, in this coup to overthrow President Trump, and the mainstream media was culpable all along the way, doubling, tripling and quadrupling down on the dishonest narrative. They are all now desperate to evade their responsibility for this, as they still advance the false premise that Russia hacked the 2016 election to help Donald Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. And as all the traitors are being exposed, one by one, they are willing to bring down the country rather than face the consequences of their sedition and treason.

 

[Blog Editor: A minuscule list of articles pointing to Obama Administration traitors you WILL NOT see from the MSM:

 

 

 

 

 

Reported by Fox News, John McLaughlin, former acting CIA Director, recently publicly exclaimed, “Thank God for the Deep State.” He was soon joined by John Brennan, former CIA Director, who added his agreement in praise for the “Deep State people” and their opposition to President Trump.

 

How are the American people supposed to maintain this nation, when nearly half of them support the anti-American, anti-Constitution and rule of law actions and policies of the Democratic Party? How does this not end badly for America?

 

The Democratic Party communists are hellbent on impeachment and the absence of wrongdoing and any real case doesn’t enter their illogical thought process. They do not care that they are further seeding the destruction of America and will reap the whirlwind to follow.

 

After President Obama’s hot microphone moment with Russian President Medvedev was excused and the media was essentially silent on it, the Democrats really are throwing bricks in a glass house, especially in light of former Vice-President Biden’s actual quid pro quo, regarding withholding aid to Ukraine until an honest Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden was fired. Can anyone really honestly state that President Trump has committed one single misdemeanor or high crime, in this entire miserable mess?

 

And now all America is being forced to endure the nauseating spectacle of the bug-eyed mentally ill Representative Adam Schiff chairing the “impeachment inquiry”, and acting bizarrely and near deranged, in the House Intelligence Committee, where Schiff has regularly abused his power and shredded the constitutional norms. Schiff has continuously, consistently and maliciously blocked every attempted defense of the nakedly absurd charges against President Trump, through chicane and deceitful means that are void of any concept of due process, concocted by Schiff and his communist lawfare confidence men and grifters — no right to argue against those set of Stalinist rules and this ensuing “show trial”, no right to call witnesses and no right to cross-examine “witnesses”, those purveyors of hearsay.

 

[Blog Editor: Examples of Shifty Schiff chicanery:

 

 

 

 

Speaker Pelosi has refused to initiate a formal impeachment trial, since that would trigger a legal process that would remove the Democrat’s current tyrannical hold over the process. Instead, she has opted to acquiesce to the current melodramatic fishing expedition, one more quixotic chapter in the ignominious crusade to reverse the 2016 election.

 

In the meantime, the gas-lighting of America by the media also continues, in stories like the November NYT’s ‘Russia Inquiry Review Is Said to Criticize F.B.I. but Rebuff Claims of Biased Acts’. This is simply an attempt to convince America that the entire FBI abuse of the FISA warrant process and multiple lies presented to the FISA Court all rests on the shoulders of one lone, lowly miserable chump of a lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, who manipulated and doctored one email, and its truthless assertions are meant to exonerate both the CIA and the FBI for opening the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation on false evidence they furnished to the FISA judges.

 

[Blog Editor: Indeed there is the appearance Clinesmith may be the scapegoat offering instead of including Dem-supporting criminals in the FBI and CIA:

 

 

 

More eerie blue gas-light dances throughout CBS and its 60 Minutes reality optional story on the supposed Russian hacking of our election, in a blatant attempt to deflect from the fact that Crowdstrike, owned by Ukrainian oligarch Dmitri Alperovitch, [Blog Editor: Actually Alperovitch was born in Russia BUT he is heavily connected to Ukrainian oligarch/billionaire  Victor Pinchuk who funds the Atlantic Council of which Alperovitch and infamous Chalupa sisters (Alexandra & Andrea) connected to Steele Dossier conspiracy are also members – TALK ABOUT SOLICITING FOREIGN MEDDLING IN A U.S. ELECTION!] created the story initially, and Crowdstrike had been hired by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton to interfere in the 2016 election. After the fact, Crowdstrike also became the sole entity allowed to perform a forensic examination on the DNC’s servers, while persuading the FBI to turn a blind-eye; in other words, the DNC’s contractor investigated its own criminal behavior. Doesn’t any patriotic American want that investigated?

 

[Blog Editor: The Mueller Report (or whoever the true author is?) claims the Russians hacked DNC servers solely based on Crowdstrike assertions rather than FBI/CIA forensic examinations:

 

FBI never examined hacked DNC servers itself: report; By Katie Bo Williams; The Hill; 1/4/17 7:29 PM EST

 

The FBI never examined the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) computer servers during its investigation into Russian attempts to interfere in the presidential election, BuzzFeed reports.

 

“The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington (D.C.) Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers,” DNC deputy communications director Eric Walker told BuzzFeed in an email.

 

According to one intelligence official who spoke to the publication, no U.S. intelligence agency has performed its own forensics analysis on the hacked servers.

 

Instead, the official said, the bureau and other agencies have relied on analysis done by the third-party security firm CrowdStrike, which investigated the breach for the DNC. … MORE TO READ

 

CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims; By Aaron Maté; Real Clear Investigations; 7/5/19

 

At a May press conference capping his tenure as special counsel, Robert Mueller emphasized what he called “the central allegation” of the two-year Russia probe. The Russian government, Mueller sternly declared, engaged in “multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election, and that allegation deserves the attention of every American.” Mueller’s comments echoed a January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) asserting with “high confidence” that Russia conducted a sweeping 2016 election influence campaign. …

 

… The report claims that the interference operation occurred “principally” on two fronts: Russian military intelligence officers hacked and leaked embarrassing Democratic Party documents, and a government-linked troll farm orchestrated a sophisticated and far-reaching social media campaign that denigrated Hillary Clinton and promoted Trump.

 

But a close examination of the report shows that none of those headline assertions are supported by the report’s evidence or other publicly available sources. They are further undercut by investigative shortcomings and the conflicts of interest of key players involved: 

 

  • The report uses qualified and vague language to describe key events, indicating that Mueller and his investigators do not actually know for certain whether Russian intelligence officers stole Democratic Party emails, or how those emails were transferred to WikiLeaks.

 

  • The report’s timeline of events appears to defy logic. According to its narrative, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange announced the publication of Democratic Party emails not only before he received the documents but before he even communicated with the source that provided them.

 

  • There is strong reason to doubt Mueller’s suggestion that an alleged Russian cutout called Guccifer 2.0 supplied the stolen emails to Assange.

 

  • Mueller’s decision not to interview Assange – a central figure who claims Russia was not behind the hack – suggests an unwillingness to explore avenues of evidence on fundamental questions.

 

  • S. intelligence officials cannot make definitive conclusions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee computer servers because they did not analyze those servers themselves. Instead, they relied on the forensics of CrowdStrike, a private contractor for the DNC that was not a neutral party, much as “Russian dossier” compiler Christopher Steele, also a DNC contractor, was not a neutral party. This puts two Democrat-hired contractors squarely behind underlying allegations in the affair – a key circumstance that Mueller ignores.

 

  • Further, the government allowed CrowdStrike and the Democratic Party’s legal counsel to submit redacted records, meaning CrowdStrike and not the government decided what could be revealed or not regarding evidence of hacking.

 

  • Mueller’s report conspicuously does not allege that the Russian government carried out the social media campaign. Instead it blames, as Mueller said in his closing remarks, “a private Russian entity” known as the Internet Research Agency (IRA).

 

  • Mueller also falls far short of proving that the Russian social campaign was sophisticated, or even more than minimally related to the 2016 election. As with the collusion and Russian hacking allegations, Democratic officials had a central and overlooked hand in generating the alarm about Russian social media activity.

 

 

The Democrats are waging a heated attack ahead of the post-Thanksgiving deluge of bad news they anticipate to be forthcoming in Horowitz’s report. Many criminal cronies whose turpitude and crimes have been richly and publicly fully documented for many months may soon be called to an accounting on detailed charges, and at the very least, those facing criminal indictments should and must eventually include the following, if any true justice still exists in America; charge, arrest, prosecute and imprison: Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Rosenstein. And if real justice is to be had, any sweep must capture Bill Priestap, Sally Yates, Loretta Lynch, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, John Carlin, Michael Gaeta, and most certainly even Barack Obama, the Democratic Party Prince of Darkness, just in time for Christmas, too. And a bit of added reward would see Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann included for their mendacious, malicious prosecution, when they knew for two full years they had no case. [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

Dem Party Prince of Darkness (acquired without permission from Bosch Fawstin)

 

Let all freedom loving patriotic Americans pray and work to ensure that any action countering this coup finally includes a nationwide drag-net that sweeps up all involved in the latest UkraineGate subterfuge, such as the faux “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella, those complicit agents from Rep. Adam Schiff’s office, and accomplice Michael Atkinson — the current Intelligence Community Inspector General who has a major conflict of interest as the former legal counsel to Assistant Attorney John Carlin, who headed the National Security Division of the Justice Department at the start of the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” stratagem; of equal note, Atkinson was also previously Robert Mueller’s chief of staff at the FBI. And let’s not forget that Ciaramella was a CIA spy serving in the White House, who then promptly engaged in the height of sedition and lawlessness by actually spying on the President of the United States and his staff.

 

[Blog Editor: Noteworthy info on Deep State IG Michael Atkinson:

 

IG Actively Aid the “Whistleblower” in His Impeachment Quest; By streiff; RedState.com; 9/28/19 1:00 pm

 

 

But if a shocking story reported by Sean Davis yesterday is true, then not only were we wrong but the implications are that the Intelligence Community, itself, and in particular the Intelligence Community IG decided to assist in the effort create a narrative that would justify the impeachment of a lawfully elected president who was acting lawfully.

 

… the IC changed the rules for classifying disgruntled personnel as whistleblowers in a very significant way:

 

The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”

 

 

 

To review the bidding. Someone in the Intelligence Committee leadership changed the definition of whistleblower so this whistleblower was elevated from a rumor monger to a protected individual. They did this about the same time as the complaint was filed. Because the IC IG is intimately involved in the whistleblower regulations (I’d be willing to guess that office is the proponent of the regulation but I don’t know that for a fact) Atkinson knew about the change. … READ ENTIRTY

 

Activity and Background of Sketchy IC IG Michael Atkinson Now Under Investigative Spotlight…; By sundance; The Last Refuge – TheConservativeTreeHouse.com; 10/7/19

 

Last week the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael Atkinson, testified behind closed doors to congress. Atkinson testified about his role in bringing the ‘whistle-blower’ complaint forward.  The details of that testimony are now starting to surface and thankfully congress is taking a closer look at the sketchy background of Michael Atkinson.

 

 

On Sunday, October 6th, Ranking Member Devin Nunes also discussed his concerns with the testimony of Michael Atkinson.  Nunes noted the testimony “was a joke”.

 

 

“So he’s either incompetent or in on it, and he’s going to have more to answer for, I can promise you, because we are not going to let him go; he is going to tell the truth about what happened,” Nunes added.  (read more)

 

 

Given the nature of Atkinson’s background, it appears his prior work in 2016, during his tenure as the lead legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD, likely played a role in his decision.

 

Here’s Nunes Sunday Interview (audio):

 

 

The center of the 2016 Lawfare Alliance election influence was/is the Department of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD. It was the DOJ-NSD running the Main Justice side of the 2016 operations to support Operation Crossfire Hurricane and FBI agent Peter Strzok. It was also the DOJ-NSD where the sketchy legal theories around FARA violations (Sec. 901) originated.

 

Michael K Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD) in 2016. That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were the former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.

 

Michael Atkinson was the lawyer for the same DOJ-NSD players who: (1) lied to the FISA court (Judge Rosemary Collyer) about the 80% non compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors; (2) filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and (3) used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.

 

Yes, that means Michael Atkinson was Senior Counsel for the DOJ-NSD, at the very epicenter of the political weaponization and FISA abuse.

 

If the DOJ-NSD exploitation of the NSA database, and/or DOJ-NSD FISA abuse, and/or DOJ-NSD FARA corruption were ever to reach sunlight, current ICIG Atkinson -as the lawyer for the process- would be under a lot of scrutiny for his involvement.

 

Yes, that gives current ICIG Michael Atkinson a strong and corrupt motive to participate with the Pelosi-Schiff/Lawfare impeachment objective.  Sketchy!

 

READ ENTIRETY

 

These traitors must not go unpunished, and if there is any truth to the report that Inspector General Horowitz has essentially given cover to several of the coup plotters, including James Comey, this portends of more dark days ahead and more evil machinations yet to come.

 

Over half of America has been awaiting the moment authorities, acting in accordance with the actual rule of law, put an end to this convoluted, terrible campaign of seditious fog that is driving our country close to the brink of a second civil war. The half of our countrymen who have digested and analyzed the evidence of this treason and sedition, underwritten by Hillary Clinton and her allies, on the back-channels of the information highway understand that millions of other credulous Americans who accepted the CIA narrative are in for a massive surprise once they discover how deeply all America has been betrayed.

 

I know without any doubt that much of the Republic’s future rests on the final determination of the Inspector General’s Report and any successful action towards rounding up and prosecuting all the anti-American TRAITORS involved in this entire sorry mess. When and if America witnesses this egregious part of Her history made right by the prosecution and imprisonment of these traitors, only then will myself and millions of other fine Americans look more hopefully on what the future may hold for America. If these traitors escape true justice, whether one wishes to acknowledge the fact, the republic is essentially done and over, and anything goes moving forward, since that will, in fact, be the attitude taken from any such point on by both parties.

 

In an age of traitors justifying their sedition and treason as a normal path of resistance to a President, whose only crime is being hated by the communist Democrats, it is not any exaggeration to state that many of those involved in this ongoing assault against the President and the Republic should have to answer charges up to and including treason. Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham must find the strength to force the ignoble cast of characters to feast at the table of the consequences of their own actions, and other loyal Americans in pertinent departments must anticipate and stand ready to preempt any attempt by these desperate traitors and their respective agencies to enlist the military brass in an outright overthrow of the executive, since intimations of this are already circulating. In these upside-down times, when the misguided, the ignorant and the Evil redefine patriotism as removing the President before a constitutionally mandated election, any such move will result in civil violence unseen since the mid-Nineteenth century: The Deep State and the Democratic party have worn out their welcome and their legitimacy.

 

By Justin O. Smith

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

Sources I considered using but did not but YOU might find useful (unless you are a Dem Traitor to the Founders’ U.S. Republic):

 

Politicians and their Families are Playing in the Corrupt Ukrainian Sandbox; By Kelleigh Nelson; DrRichSwier.com; 10/12/19

 

What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google; By Tyler Durden; ZeroHedge; 3/24/2017 – 19:00

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

___________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

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

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Judicial Watch FOIA Exposés of Obama Administration Criminality


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

October 19, 2018

The revelations of Obama/Clinton/Deep State crimes only matter if prosecutions begin!

 

JRH 10/19/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

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

Judicial Watch: Federal Judge ‘Shocked’ Clinton Aide Granted Immunity by Justice Department

 

Press Release

Email Sent: Oct 17, 2018, 1:43 PM

Via Judicial Watch

 

Court Criticizes State Department for Providing False Statements on Clinton Emails

 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that in his opening remarks at a Friday, October 12 hearing, U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth strongly criticized the U.S. Department of State, stating, “The information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the [Clinton email] search and… what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system.”

Turning his attention to the Department of Justice, Judge Lamberth said that he was “dumbfounded” by the agency’s Inspector General report revealing that Cheryl Mills had been given immunity and was allowed to accompany former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to her FBI interview:

I had myself found that Cheryl Mills had committed perjury and lied under oath in a published opinion I had issued in a Judicial Watch case where I found her unworthy of belief, and I was quite shocked to find out she had been given immunity in — by the Justice Department in the Hillary Clinton email case. So I did not know that until I read the IG report and learned that and that she had accompanied the Secretary to her interview.

(In an April 28, 2008, ruling relating to Mills’ conduct as a White House official in responding to concerns about lost White House email records, Judge Lamberth called Mills’ participation in the matter “loathsome.” He further stated Mills was responsible for “the most critical error made in this entire fiasco … Mills’ actions were totally inadequate to address the problem.”)

Lamberth also complained that the Justice Department attorney representing the State Department was using “doublespeak,” and playing “word games.”

The hearing had been ordered by Judge Lamberth regarding a request from Judicial Watch for testimony under oath from Clinton, Mills and several other State Department officials regarding the State Department’s processing of Judicial Watch’s FOIA request and Clinton’s emails. The State Department still opposes all of Judicial Watch’s requests for additional discovery into the Clinton email scandal.

Judge Lamberth said he was relieved that he did not allow the case to be shut down prematurely, as the State Department had requested:

 

The case started with a motion for summary judgment [seeking to close the case] here and which I denied and allowed limited discovery because it was clear to me that at the time that I ruled initially, that false statements were made to me by career State Department officials and it became more clear through discovery that the information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the search and this – what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system.

I don’t know the details of what kind of IG inquiry there was into why these career officials at the State Department would have filed false affidavits with me. I don’t know the details of why the Justice Department lawyers did not know false affidavits were being filed with me, but I was very relieved that I did not accept them and that I allowed limited discovery into what had happened.

 

Judge Lamberth also said the State Department was using “doublespeak” and word games:

 

THE COURT: The State Department told me that it had produced all records when it moved for summary judgment and you filed that motion.  That was not true when that motion was filed.
MR. PRINCE: At that time, we had produced all –
THE COURT: It was not true.
MR. PRINCE: Yes, it was – well, Your Honor, it might be that our search could be found to be inadequate, but that declaration was absolutely true.
THE COURT: It was not true.  It was a lie.
MR. PRINCE: It was not a lie, Your Honor.
THE COURT: What – that’s doublespeak.

 

***

 

PRINCE: There’s strong precedent saying that items not in the State’s possession do not need to be searched….

THE COURT:  And that’s because the Secretary was doing this on a private server?  So it wasn’t in the State’s possession?… So you’re playing the same word game she played?

 

In March 2016, Judge Lamberth granted “limited discovery” to Judicial Watch:

Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA cases.

***

 

[Judicial Watch] is certainly entitled to dispute the State Department’s position that it has no obligation to produce these documents because it did not “possess” or “control” them at the time the FOIA request was made. The State Department’s willingness to now search documents voluntarily turned over to the Department by Secretary Clinton and other officials hardly transforms such a search into an “adequate” or “reasonable one. [Judicial Watch] is not relying on “speculation” or “surmise” as the State Department claims. [Judicial Watch] is relying on constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials.

 

The development comes in Judicial Watch’s July 2014 FOIA lawsuit filed after the U.S. Department of State failed to respond to a May 13, 2014 FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)). Judicial Watch seeks:

 

  • Copies of any updates and/or talking points given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency concerning, regarding, or related to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

 

  • Any and all records or communications concerning, regarding, or relating to talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency.

 

This Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of the Clinton email system in 2015.

In May 2016, Judicial Watch filed an initial Proposed Order for Discovery seeking additional information. The State Department opposed Judicial Watch’s proposal, and in December 2016 Judge Lamberth requested both parties to file new proposed orders in light of information discovered in various venues since the previous May.

The full transcript of the hearing is available here.

“President Trump should ask why his State Department is still refusing to answer basic questions about the Clinton email scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Hillary Clinton’s and the State Department’s email cover up abused the FOIA, the courts, and the American people’s right to know.”

Watch additional comments from Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here.

 

###

 

Judicial Watch: FBI Documents Detail Weiner Laptop/Clinton Email Find Just Before the 2016 Election

 

Press Release

Email Sent: Oct 17, 2018 2:58 PM

Via Judicial Watch

 

‘A significant number of these 340,000 emails appeared to be between Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton …’

 

(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced today that it has received 45 pages of FBI documents that reveal a “significant number” of 340,000 emails on the laptop of disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner were between the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top aide Huma Abedin.

Judicial Watch obtained the documents as the result of a September 2018 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the Justice Department did not act on two FOIA requests for Anthony Weiner laptop investigation documents, including any Clinton emails found on the laptop (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No.1:18-cv-02105)).

The new documents include an October 3, 2016, email to a FBI official in New York that reads:

 

Just putting this on the record because of the optics of this case.

During the course of my review of a computer seized from Anthony Weiner, a seizure and search of which was authorized by an SDNY [Southern District of New York] Search Warrant, I encountered approximately/at least 340,000 emails stored on the computer. The large number of emails appears to be a result of a mail client program installed on that computer (such as Outlook) that pulled emails from servers belonging to both Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin.

A significant number of these 340,000 emails appeared to be between Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton (the latter who appears to have used a number of different email addresses). This is based simply a review of the header information. I did not review content of these emails, as the warrant only authorized me to view items that would give me probable cause to believe that CP [child pornography] evidence may reside therein.

SDNY is comfortable with me continuing my review as I have, which is to NOT read any emails to/from Anthony Weiner to which his wife, or a possible attorney is a party. Even if there is a third party on those emails, I will not review their content out of an abundance of caution. Obviously, I will not review any emails to which Anthony Weiner is not a party (such as emails between Ms. Abedin and Mrs. Clinton). I just wanted to formally bring this to your attention due to the pending election, the ongoing Congressional investigation into the FBI’s own investigation into Ms. Clinton’s email activities, etc.

 

The documents also include a September 29, 2016, FBI report indicating that after agents served unidentified persons with a grand jury subpoena on September 22, “Discussions immediately ensued between the US Attorneys’ Offices in the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and [redacted], as well as the Department of Justice in Washington, DC.”

RealClear Investigations’ reporter Paul Sperry reported that only 3,077 of the emails found on the Weiner laptop “were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges.”

In a related case, Judicial Watch obtained an email revealing that fired FBI official Peter Strzok created the initial draft of the October 2016 letter then-FBI director James Comey sent to Congress notifying lawmakers of the discovery of Hillary Clinton emails on Weiner’s laptop.

The notification to Congress, according the DOJ IG, came a full month after the emails were discovered by the FBI on Weiner’s laptop. The delay, the IG suggests, may have been the result of anti-Trump bias by FBI official Peter Strzok and others:

 

In September 2016, the FBI’s New York Field Office (NYO) and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) began investigating former Congressman Anthony Weiner for his online relationship with a minor. A federal search warrant was obtained on September 26, 2016, for Weiner’s iPhone, iPad, and laptop computer. The FBI obtained these devices the same day. The search warrant authorized the government to search for evidence relating to the following crimes: transmitting obscene material to a minor, sexual exploitation of children, and activities related to child pornography.

The Weiner case agent told the OIG that he began processing Weiner’s devices on September 26, and that he noticed “within hours” that there were “over 300,000 emails on the laptop.”

***

In assessing the decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the Midyear-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop, we were particularly concerned about text messages sent by Strzok and Page that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions they made were impacted by bias or improper considerations.

***

After October 4, we found no evidence that anyone associated with the Midyear investigation, including the entire leadership team at FBI Headquarters, took any action on the Weiner laptop issue until the week of October 24, and then did so only after SDNY raised concerns about the lack of action.

 

“These new documents show the FBI knowingly sat on the Clinton emails for over a month before notifying Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And even worse, we now know the FBI didn’t even bother to look at the emails, and then again only partially, for weeks. The Clinton email scandal needs to be reviewed again and immediately by the Justice Department.”

###

______________________

© 2018 Judicial Watch, Inc.

 

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

 

425 Third Street SW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20024
888-593-8442

 

What! Obama FBI Spied on Trump Campaign


With TWO Spies?

John R. Houk, Editor

Posted May 22, 2018

 

Even as the Leftist Mainstream Media and Obama Deep State operatives spin an alternative story, only a fool or a lying spin doctor would not admit Obama inserted his political desires into the 2016 election cycle.

 

Here are two news articles discussing FBI spying.

 

JRH 5/22/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Hold On, The FBI Was Spying On The Trump Campaign *Before* The Counterintelligence Probe Officially Started?

 

By Matt Vespa

May 22, 2018 2:27 PM

Townhall

 

Donald Trump

 

Who is the FBI spy that was trying to glean information on the Trump campaign? Well, reportedly, it’s longtime CIA operative Stefan Halper. And no, it wasn’t leaked. If this is true, and most likely it is, there’s enough public information on him, along with the news media leaving a trail of breadcrumbs that confirmed his identity. They were as subtle as a sledgehammer.

 

Last week, it was reported that the FBI had spied on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. It was later revealed by Axios that Halper had tried to get a top-level job in the administration after the campaign. Yet, before we get into what The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald and others have noted about the timeline of the FBI’s Russia probe, let’s look real quick at the linguistic martial arts the news media is playing here. All of this deep state/Trump was spied on stuff was written off by the news media as conspiratorial garbage. Well, it turns out they were wrong. They’re wrong about everything it seems, especially reports covering this White House. This is how The New York Times covered this development. They also said that this spy is someone well known within D.C. circles.

 

President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign “for political purposes” even before the bureau had any inkling of the “phony Russia hoax.”

 

In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia.

 

[…]

 

F.B.I. agents were seeking more details about what Mr. Papadopoulos knew about the hacked Democratic emails, and one month after their Russia investigation began, Mr. Papadopoulos received a curious message. The academic inquired about his interest in writing a research paper on a disputed gas field in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, a subject of Mr. Papadopoulos’s expertise.

 

The informant offered a $3,000 honorarium for the paper and a paid trip to London, where the two could meet and discuss the research project.

 

“I understand that this is rather sudden but thought that given your expertise it might be of interest to you,” the informant wrote in a message to Mr. Papadopoulos, sent on Sept. 2, 2016.

 

Mr. Papadopoulos accepted the offer and arrived in London two weeks later, where he met for several days with the academic and one of his assistants, a young woman.

 

Over drinks and dinner one evening at a high-end London hotel, the F.B.I. informant raised the subject of the hacked Democratic National Committee emails that had spilled into public view earlier that summer, according to a person familiar with the conversation. The source noted how helpful they had been to the Trump campaign, and asked Mr. Papadopoulos whether he knew anything about Russian attempts to influence the 2016 presidential election.

 

Yeah, how is that not spying? It is. And this is the problem with liberalism as of late; they’ve wantonly decided to ignore the definition of what words mean. Spying is now informing. Invasions are now called “uncontested arrivals,” but back to Mr. Halper and the timeline. It seems that his alleged information gathering operation started way before his rendezvous with Papadopoulos. Carter Page and Sam Clovis, two others affiliated with the Trump team, were also approached by Halper as well.

 

Greenwald noted that Halper has history with this sort of operation; he reportedly did something similar to Carter’s 1980 re-election campaign. Halper with some other former intelligence operatives allegedly funneled information on then-President Carter’s foreign policy to Republican candidate, and future president, Ronald Reagan. This was all revealed in 1983.

 

 

Greenwald also noted that while the news media knew who the FBI spy was, they refused to reveal his name, though they left so many clues that they might as well have disclosed the source. He also adds that the FBI and members of Congress are being more or less absurd that revealing the source would be damaging to national security; we pretty much already know who it is. And his work was already been reported. The Intercept then details how the Daily Caller was able to discern whom the source was using entirely public information, which brings us to FBI timeline. When did this investigation begin because it seems there were other times that Halper reached out to Trump team members prior to the Papadopoulos meeting that supposedly led to the FBI opening up a counterintelligence investigation in July of 2016. By the way, this theory was published by the Times in December of 2017, and it was ripped apart.

 

Via Intercept:

 

…the New York Times reported in December of last year that the FBI investigation into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia began when George Papadopoulos drunkenly boasted to an Australian diplomat about Russian dirt on Hillary Clinton. It was the disclosure of this episode by the Australians that “led the F.B.I. to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Trump’s associates conspired,” the NYT claimed.

 

But it now seems clear that Halper’s attempts to gather information for the FBI began before that. “The professor’s interactions with Trump advisers began a few weeks before the opening of the investigation, when Page met the professor at the British symposium,” the Post reported. While it’s not rare for the FBI to gather information before formally opening an investigation, Halper’s earlier snooping does call into question the accuracy of the NYT’s claim that it was the drunken Papadopoulos ramblings that first prompted the FBI’s interest in these possible connections. And it suggests that CIA operatives, apparently working with at least some factions within the FBI, were trying to gather information about the Trump campaign earlier than had been previously reported.

 

Then there are questions about what appear to be some fairly substantial government payments to Halper throughout 2016. Halper continues to be listed as a “vendor” by websites that track payments by the federal government to private contractors.

 

[…]

 

Equally strange are the semantic games which journalists are playing in order to claim that this revelation disproves, rather than proves, Trump’s allegation that the FBI “spied” on his campaign.

 

So, there’s the new line of inquiry. The FBI spy was investigating something prior to the official start of the counterintelligence probe. Byron York’s column in The Washington Examiner noted that Trump March meeting with The Washington Post editorial board is where the FBI and DOJ probably got the first batch of names to peruse; Trump has announced that Papadopoulos and Carter Page would be lending a hand:

 

Trump’s announcement did not go unnoticed at the FBI and Justice Department. The bureau knew Page from a previous episode in which Russian agents had tried, unsuccessfully, to recruit him. It’s not clear what the FBI knew about the others. But then-Director James Comey and number-two Andrew McCabe personally briefed Attorney General Loretta Lynch on the list of newly-named Trump foreign policy advisers, including Page, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

 

Lynch told the House Intelligence Committee that she, Comey, and McCabe discussed whether to provide a “defensive briefing” to the Trump campaign. That would entail having an FBI official meet with a senior campaign official “to alert them to the fact that … there may be efforts to compromise someone with their campaign,” Lynch said.

 

It didn’t happen, even though it was discussed again when Comey briefed the National Security Council principals committee about Page in the “late spring” of 2016, according to Lynch’s testimony. (The principals committee includes some of the highest-ranking officials in the government, including the secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, and Homeland Security, the attorney general, the head of the CIA, the White House chief of staff, U.N. ambassador, and more.)

 

So the nation’s top political appointees, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies were watching Trump campaign figures in the spring and early summer of 2016.

 

And all of this brings us to a figure that has remained under the radar in all of this: President Barack Obama. What did he know and when did he know it because the intelligence apparatus of the U.S. was under his administration, along with the FBI/DOJ. It’s relevant to bring the former president and his team under the microscope again. Until then, what we know via Larry O’Connor is that a) the Trump campaign was spied on; and b) the motive was political pending new developments:

 

First, let’s hope that all Americans, Left, Right and Never Trump, can agree that this operation was unprecedented and extraordinary. The FBI has never, as far as we know, conducted a clandestine investigation on a presidential campaign complete with electronic surveillance and a spy. The bar to initiate such an investigation would have to be pretty high. The FBI would not, under normal circumstances, authorize this kind of operation unless there was extreme and justifiable reasons to do so.

 

So, whatever the reason to initiate this operation, one expects that reason to be pretty concrete and conclusive.

 

Now, let’s examine the underlying political atmosphere surrounding the decision to launch this extraordinary, unprecedented investigation.

 

Donald Trump was President Obama’s political enemy. He was running, specifically, to undo Obama’s legacy and everything he had instituted through executive actions. He was also running against Obama’s chosen successor.

 

[…]

 

We know that the atmosphere surrounding the decision to launch the investigation was highly political. It was political in the most personal sense for President Obama, who held the reigns [sic] of power over the FBI and the DOJ at the time of the investigation.

 

We know that the political document known as the “Steele dossier” was used, at least in part, to justify many elements of the spying operation against the Trump campaign.

 

We know that George Popadopoulos’ statement in a bar with an Austrailian [sic] diplomat triggered some element of the investigation as well.

 

A guy making a statement in a bar and a pile of unverified opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign doesn’t even come close to the very high bar needed to be cleared to initiate a clandestine investigation on any American citizen, let alone a member of a presidential campaign just weeks before election day.

 

But, it appears, that’s all we have

 

[…]

 

Given the politically charged backdrop of the Obama versus Trump death match, coupled with the use of the Steele dossier (by definition a political document paid for by Trump’s political opponent) the only reasonable conclusion to reach is that the FBI spying operation was launched for political purposes.

 

And now the wait begins—and it could take years.

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

Ex-Trump Aide Comes Forward… Says There’s Second Spy, Second Intel Agency

 

BY CILLIAN ZEAL
MAY 22, 2018 AT 7:27AM

Conservative Tribune by WJ

 

Michael Cavuto on Fox News – Screen Capture of CT Video

 

One of President Donald Trump’s most explosive claims about the 2016 election — one that was dismissed out of hand until recently — was that his campaign was the subject of extensive surveillance.

 

Now, a former Trump aide is saying something even more explosive: There wasn’t just a mole inside the Trump campaign, there was a second spy and intelligence agency.

 

Michael Caputo is pretty much the definition of a political lifer. A media strategist, he worked with Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and various other Republicans. After the fall of the Soviet Union, he began doing work with the Russians.

 

This didn’t get the attention of too many people until he started working for Trump. Much like Carter Page, the low-level Trump campaign staffer whose ties to Russia became the subject of a million conspiracy theories, Caputo’s ties to the Russians became of intense interest to the overzealous FBI people charged with finding some sort of evidence that Trump was the Siberian Candidate.

 

Caputo appeared on Fox News just hours after Axios reported “President Trump’s top trade adviser, Peter Navarro, recommended appointing Stefan Halper, an academic and suspected FBI informant on the Trump campaign, to a senior role in the Trump administration.”

 

That’s bad. According to Caputo, things were even worse.

 

“Let me tell you something that I know for a fact, this informant, this person that they planted, that they tried to plant into the campaign and even into the administration, if you believe Axios — he’s not the only person that came into the campaign!” Caputo said.

 

“And the FBI is not the only Obama agency who came into the campaign,” he added.

 

“I know because they came at me. And I’m looking for clearance from my attorney to reveal this to the public. This is just the beginning and I’ll tell you, when we finally find out the truth about this, Director Clapper and the rest of them are gonna be wearing some orange suits.”

 

Orange suits are an unlikely outcome, but Caputo’s statement indicates that Obama-era surveillance of the Trump campaign — once dismissed as tinfoil-hattery — might actually be very real.

 

Of course, Caputo may have a reason to prevaricate about such things. Kimberley Strassel doesn’t. She’s the Wall Street Journal writer whose reporting has indicated that she believes there was an FBI mole inside the campaign.

 

“The Bureau already has some explaining to do. Thanks to the Washington Post’s unnamed law-enforcement leakers, we know Mr. Nunes’s request deals with a ‘top secret intelligence source’ of the FBI and CIA, who is a U.S. citizen and who was involved in the Russia collusion probe,” she wrote in an article earlier this month.

 

“When government agencies refer to sources, they mean people who appear to be average citizens but use their profession or contacts to spy for the agency. Ergo, we might take this to mean that the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign.

 

“This would amount to spying, and it is hugely disconcerting,” she added. “It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about, which was bad enough.”

 

During and after the campaign, Trump’s claims that he was surveilled (and that the surveillance was politically-motivated) were dismissed as baseless fantasies, yet another sign this was an unbalanced person who shouldn’t be normalized or believed.

 

And yet, here we are, weeks away from the inspector general’s report on the Clinton investigation, which doesn’t sound like it’s going to simply be the pro forma postmortem it normally would be, considering it involved a losing campaign. The report is expected to detail a whole host of tactics by the “deep state” that could easily be construed as being in service of the Clinton campaign and to the detriment of the Trump campaign.

 

If Caputo is telling the truth, this means there’s a whole host of issues here. Who was involved? The DOJ and FBI, obviously, but the CIA too? Other agencies under the aegis of the ODNI?

 

I can predict just one thing: Things are about to get very interesting for everyone who called Trump crazy when he talked about surveillance.

 

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

____________________

Hold On, The FBI Was Spying On The Trump Campaign *Before* The Counterintelligence Probe Officially Started?

 

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


Copyright © Townhall.com. All Rights Reserved.

_______________________

Ex-Trump Aide Comes Forward… Says There’s Second Spy, Second Intel Agency

 

Conservative Tribune by WJ homepage

 

Deep State Crimes Beginning to Spill


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© May 18, 2018

Hardly any media outlets whether TV, radio or print; inform on Deep State matters are being exposed. Why? Because the Mainstream Media (MSM) is Leftist and is the propaganda machine of the Deep State dedicated to take down our duly Elected President Donald Trump by whatever lie they can get to stick on the memories of the Americans that are gullible.

 

Because of this MSM blackout, I’m doing my part of cross posting the increasingly growing steady stream of news showing Deep State cadres are extremely close to being exposed form criminal activities.

 

JRH 5/18/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Ex-US Attorney: Obama CIA Chief Led Operation To Frame Trump

 

BY BEN MARQUIS
MAY 16, 2018 AT 2:16PM

Conservative Tribune by WJ

 

The Trump campaign/Russian collusion narrative — which led to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation — has been steadily unraveling in recent weeks.

 

Despite a year long investigation into allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election, “no credible evidence” of collusion with the Trump campaign has been found, and the “evidence” and intelligence that has been offered up appears to be false and manufactured.

 

Former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova spoke about that and other recent developments during an appearance on Fox News with Laura Ingraham on Tuesday night, and cast the blame on the operation, which he viewed as a set up to frame President Donald Trump, on former Obama administration CIA Director John Brennan.

 

“It was abundantly clear that there was no legitimate basis even for a counter intelligence investigation, let alone a criminal investigation,” DiGenova said.

 

“It is quite obvious that John Brennan was at the head of the group of people who were going to create a counter intelligence investigation against Trump by creating false information that was going to be fed through Carter Page, and fed through George Papadopoulos so that it would be picked up, reported back to Washington and provide the basis for a counter, a fake, counter intelligence investigation,” he continued.

 

“And it was all Brennan’s doing,” DiGenova stated emphatically.

 

“And that is why the Justice Department is viciously fighting revealing everything they can about the source in London, who everybody knows the identity of.”

 

Ingraham asked the former U.S. attorney to further explain recent reports about an unnamed “source” in London who allegedly provided information that was used as a basis for the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign.

 

“The source in London was another person who was feeding false information to George Papadopoulos and others about collusion which did not exist,” DiGenova replied.

 

Another guest on the program, former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell, spoke about another aspect of the creation of the Trump/Russia collusion narrative and the anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele on behalf of Democrat-funded political opposition research firm Fusion GPS.

 

She noted how the FBI had granted access to a handful of private contractors, likely to include Fusion GPS, to sift through raw intelligence gathered under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This was then passed on to Steele and others and recycled back to the U.S. intelligence community with a false air of legitimacy to help form the narrative used as the basis for the investigation into Trump.

 

DiGenova picked up on what Powell had mentioned and pointed out that there had been two opinions issued by the FISA court in opposition to that illegal practice of allowing private contractors access to the sensitive raw intelligence data.

 

“All of that was designed for the unmasking and the leaking of the names, and that was all done by private contractors,” DiGenova said. “The FISA court objected to it and it never stopped.”

 

The supposition that Brennan was the ringleader of an attempt to “frame” Trump is little more than DiGenova’s opinion, informed however well it might be by experience and information obtained through public and private sources.

 

That said, it increasingly appears as though the entire Trump/Russia collusion narrative was indeed created wholly out of false, manufactured or misconstrued information in order to provide justification for the investigation that was likely intended to prevent Trump from winning the election, or at least hamstring his agenda and lead to his impeachment once he took office.

 

On top of that, Brennan has made it blatantly obvious that he loathes Trump, so it isn’t too much of a stretch to think he may have used the powerful intelligence tools at his disposal in order to “frame” an innocent man and destroy him politically. Hopefully we will find out the truth soon when the DOJ inspector general’s report is released.

 

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

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

Trump: Obama FBI Spied on Campaign, ‘Bigger Than Watergate’

 

By Chris Agee
May 17, 2018 at 10:16am

The Western Journal

 

One paragraph from a recent New York Times article has sparked indignant reactions from President Donald Trump and a number of his political allies.

 

According to Fox News, the revelation that “at least one government informant met several times” with two advisers during the 2016 presidential cycle led to speculation that the FBI was conducting espionage within the Trump campaign.

 

The Times report indicated the informant met with both Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, prompting Trump and others to speculate about the extent of the operation within the Trump campaign.

 

In a tweet on the topic Thursday morning, the president cited National Review columnist Andrew McCarthy’s assessment of the new details.

 

 

“Wow, word seems to be coming out that the Obama FBI ‘SPIED ON THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN WITH AN EMBEDDED INFORMANT,’” Trump wrote. “Andrew McCarthy says, ‘There’s probably no doubt that they had at least one confidential informant in the campaign.’”

 

He claimed the allegation, if true, would be a conspiracy “bigger than Watergate!”

 

That tweet came one year after the appointment of Department of Justice special counsel Robert Mueller, who has gone on to secure indictments against some of the figures involved in the investigation. Trump marked the anniversary by attacking those in charge of the probe.

 

 

In one tweet, he once again called the investigation a “Witch Hunt,” this time adding “disgusting” and “illegal” to his description.

 

Trump went on to claim that despite the DOJ probe, he has had “the most successful first 17 month Administration in U.S. history – by far!”

 

Former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who was added to the president’s legal team last month, weighed in on the latest news by discusing [sic] a scenario in which former FBI Director James Comey should face criminal prosecution.

 

He appeared on “Fox & Friends” on Thursday to decry the behavior outlined in The Times article.

 

“That would be the biggest scandal in the history of this town, at least involving law enforcement,” Giuliani said.

 

According to The Times report, however, the FBI had been investigating Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton for some time regarding her email server controversy prior to dedicating any resources to Trump’s team. When the assignment came late in the election season, officials were reportedly specifically tasked with investigating four campaign associates: Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, and the aforementioned Page and Papadopoulos.

 

Regardless of the extent of the investigation, Giuliani expressed confidence that the FBI did not gather any evidence against the Trump campaign.

 

“If there’s a spy, they got nothing from it,” he said.

 

Nevertheless, Giuliani suggested Comey “should be prosecuted” if he ordered the investigation.

 

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

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

Here We Go=> Mueller Gives Manafort Judge Unredacted Rosenstein Memo

 

By Cristina Laila

May 17, 2018

Gateway Pundit

 

Robert Mueller’s office begrudgingly gave Judge T.S. Ellis the unredacted Rosenstein memo detailing the Special Counsel’s scope in a sealed court filing Thursday.

 

Robert Mueller

 

Reuters reported:

 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office notified a federal court in Virginia on Thursday it had filed under seal an unredacted memorandum that is expected to shed light on the scope of his wide-ranging probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

 

Judge T.S. Ellis lost his temper a couple weeks ago in a Manafort hearing and accused Mueller’s prosecutors of using the case against Trump’s former campaign chairman to oust the President from office.

 

The Reagan-appointed judge also ordered the government to hand over the unredacted Rosenstein memo.

 

The Judge told Mueller’s prosecutors, “We don’t want anyone with unfettered power.”

 

Mueller’s prosecutors argued they have certain authorities given to them which were laid out in Rosenstein’s August 2017 memo.

 

Judge Ellis scoffed at Mueller’s prosecutors who argued the memo has to be kept a secret because of ongoing investigations and ordered the unredacted memo to be released within a two week time frame.

 

And here we are; Judge Ellis now has the unredacted memo.

 

Stay tuned. The Gateway Pundit will be reporting on Judge Ellis’ response to this memo and to Manafort’s motion to have Mueller’s case against him dismissed.

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

IG Report: FBI & DOJ Broke Law In Clinton Email Investigation – Referred For Criminal Charges

 

IG Horowitz has found “reasonable grounds” for believing there has been a violation of federal criminal law in the FBI/DOJ’s handling of the Clinton investigation/s and has referred his findings of potential criminal misconduct to Huber for possible criminal prosecution

 

By TIM BROWN

MAY 17, 2018

Freedom Outpost

 

The Department of Justice’s Inspector General has released a report which indicated that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the DOJ both broke the law during the probe into Hillary Clinton’s illegal email server.

 

The report was kept private, but The Wall Street Journal reported:

 

Those invited to review the report were told they would have to sign nondisclosure agreements in order to read it, people familiar with the matter said. They are expected to have a few days to craft a response to any criticism in the report, which will then be incorporated in the final version to be released in coming weeks.

 

However, Former D.C. bureau chief for Investor’s Business Daily, Hoover Institution media fellow, and author of several books, including bestseller INFILTRATION, Paul Sperry, tweeted out that the IG is turning over a referral to the DOJ for possible criminal charges in the matter.

 

“IG Horowitz has found “reasonable grounds” for believing there has been a violation of federal criminal law in the FBI/DOJ’s handling of the Clinton investigation/s and has referred his findings of potential criminal misconduct to Huber for possible criminal prosecution,” he tweeted.

 

 

Sperry continued, “Comey/Yates targeted Gen. Flynn in C.I. investigation a yr BEFORE he communicated w Russian ambassador in Dec 2016 as a transition official–and the trigger was Flynn sitting at same table w Putin at Dec 2015 Moscow event, even tho Green Party’s Jill Stein also at table.”

 

 

“As the IG prepares to release his next report, Sally Yates is suddenly animated & agitated. She is tweet-storming against Trump, giving speeches bashing Trump, and spinning her role in the investigations in the New York Times. Yates appears worried about something ahead of report,” Sperry added.

 

 

Tyler Durden goes into detail over at Zero Hedge on recapping what all has taken place and what is expected to take place as a result of the report.  He believes that this is the foundation for appointing a Special Counsel.

 

He writes:

 

Once congress has reviewed the OIG report, the House and Senate Judiciary Committees will use it to supplement their investigations, which will result in hearings with the end goal of requesting or demanding a Special Counsel investigation. The DOJ can appoint a Special Counsel at any point, or wait for Congress to demand one. If a request for a Special Counsel is ignored, Congress can pass legislation to force an the appointment.

 

And while the DOJ could act on the OIG report and investigate / prosecute themselves without a Special Counsel, it is highly unlikely that Congress would stand for that given the subjects of the investigation.

 

After the report’s completion, the DOJ will weigh in on it. Their comments are key. As TrumpSoldier points out in his analysis, the DOJ can take various actions regarding “Policy, personnel, procedures, and re-opening of investigations. In short, just about everything (Immunity agreements can also be rescinded).

 

 

With the wheels set in motion last week seemingly align with Congressional requests and the OIG mandate, and the upcoming OIG report likely to serve as a foundational opinion, the DOJ will finally be empowered to move forward with an impartially appointed Special Counsel.

 

 

The question now though is, will we ever see any justice in the matter concerning Hillary Clinton’s crimes?  It’s one thing to deal with criminal activity in the DOJ and the FBI, even though it’s like the fox guarding the henhouse.  It’s another to actually deal with a woman, who we know because of the evidence we’ve seen and the laws we have, who knowingly broke the law.

 

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

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

WSJ Reporter: We’ve Confirmed the Worst – US Intel Truly Was Spying on Trump Camp

 

BY CILLIAN ZEAL
MAY 17, 2018 AT 7:05AM

Conservative Tribune by WJ

 

 

Kimberley Strassel (WSJ) & James Comey

 

A Wednesday piece by The New York Times which details the FBI’s investigation into Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign may have revealed more than intended, at least if a Wall Street Journal reporter who has covered the surveillance previously is correct.

 

The Journal’s Kimberley Strassel has written about the investigation in the past. In a piece last week, she posited that the FBI may have used a mole in the Trump campaign, particularly given the Department of Justice’s reluctance to turn over information about the informant to congressional investigators.

 

The Times piece revealed more details about the Trump campaign surveillance operation — called “Crossfire Hurricane” in reference to the Rolling Stones song “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” — and just how extensive it was.

 

While the tenor of the article, which was written by Matt Apuzzo, Adam Goldman and Nicholas Fandos, is overwhelmingly favorable to the FBI and dismisses any claims that the surveillance was politically motivated, (“I never saw anything that resembled a witch hunt or suggested that the bureau’s approach to the investigation was politically driven,” one DOJ official is quoted as saying) there were a few things buried deep in there that specifically caught Strassel’s attention.

 

In a tweetstorm Wednesday evening, Strassel noted key problems in The Times’ narrative, particularly when the story appeared and significant facts that they glossed over.

 

Strassel first argued that the article was a calculated leak of sorts in an effort to get out ahead of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and the information that he’s gathering and releasing regarding the FBI’s sources on the Trump investigation.

 

 

However, she says it proves what Trump was claiming all along: namely, that his campaign was being spied upon.

 

 

The story briefly mentions that “one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos, current and former officials said. That has become a politically contentious point, with Mr. Trump’s allies questioning whether the FBI was spying on the Trump campaign or trying to entrap campaign officials.”

 

However, if that informant met several times with two low-level Trump campaign officials, one wonders just what his role — if any — in the Trump campaign might have been. It seems somewhat unlikely that a random individual outside the campaign would have had the opportunity to meet with both George Papadopoulos and Carter Page without some suspicion being aroused if the informant didn’t have extremely close ties to the campaign.

 

 

 

Strassel then noted the fact that if the FBI is willing to leak information that makes them look good to media sources, they shouldn’t have any problem complying with the subpoena that the House Intelligence Committee issued.

 

She also pointed out that the FBI had claimed the dossier had little to no influence on the investigation.

 

 

 

 

Sally Yates, for those of you with short memories, was the deputy attorney general under former President Barack Obama.

 

Strassel closed with a shot at the DOJ and James Comey.

 

 

This is arguably the biggest story in quite some time. We already knew that intelligence had been weaponized by Obama-era apparatchiks to get a FISA court to agree to surveillance and that the Trump dossier had been prepared using money from the Clinton campaign. However, we’re beginning to realize it went deeper than that — and it could have included a mole in the Trump campaign itself.

 

If it did, we need to know. No more of this drip-drip-drip of information specifically designed as a limited hangout. It’s time that the American people are appraised, once and for all, just how far the Obama administration went in using the apparatus of the federal government to infiltrate the campaign of their political adversary.

 

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

__________________________

Deep State Crimes Beginning to Spill

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© May 18, 2018

________________________

Ex-US Attorney: Obama CIA Chief Led Operation To Frame Trump

 

Trump: Obama FBI Spied on Campaign, ‘Bigger Than Watergate’

 

WSJ Reporter: We’ve Confirmed the Worst – US Intel Truly Was Spying on Trump Camp

 

Conservative Tribune by WJ & Western Journal

_____________________

Here We Go=> Mueller Gives Manafort Judge Unredacted Rosenstein Memo

 

The Gateway Pundit

_________________

IG Report: FBI & DOJ Broke Law In Clinton Email Investigation – Referred For Criminal Charges

 

Freedom Outpost

 

‘Worse than expected’: IG’s coming report expected to be ‘fairly damning indictment’ of Comey’s FBI


James Gagliano – CNN Reporter

 

WHAT! A CNN reporter says his sources report that IG Michael Horowitz will be releasing a “damning indictment” of FBI Seventh Floor, i.e. the FBI managing elitists.

 

Michael Horowitz, Corrupt FBI & Corrupt DOJ

 

JRH 5/10/18

Please Support NCCR

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

‘Worse than expected’: IG’s coming report expected to be ‘fairly damning indictment’ of Comey’s FBI

 

By Tom Tillison

May 10, 2018

BizPacReview

 

James Gagliano, a law enforcement analyst for CNN, took to Twitter Wednesday to share that sources tell him the soon-to-be released Department of Justice Inspector General report is “worse than expected.” according to his sources.

 

The retired FBI supervisory special agent added that the report is “a fairly damning indictment of FBI’s seventh floor during the [James] Comey era.”

 

“Sources with knowledge of the impending DOJ Inspector General Report confirm that it will be a fairly damning indictment of FBI’s seventh floor during the Comey era. “It’s worse than expected,” seems to be the consistent theme …,” Gagliano tweeted.

 

 

 

The seventh floor is where senior officials at the FBI call home, such as fired FBI Director James Comey and his fired deputy director, Andrew McCabe, according to The Washington Times.

 

Did we mention that Gagliano is a CNN analyst?

 

Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz released a damning report last month that accused McCabe of “lack of candor” about his authorization of leaks to the media, behavior that the report said “constituted misconduct.”

 

 

 

Horowitz also forwarded  criminal referral for McCabe to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington D.C.

 

The reaction on social media centered around the question of whether the country will see “equal justice” following the release of the inspector general’s report, though some suggested the FBI may need to do some refurbishing on the 7th floor.

 

Here’s a sampling of responses from Twitter:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Wise words from BPR on censorship:]

 

We know first-hand that censorship against conservative news is real. Please share stories and encourage your friends to sign up for our daily email blast so they are not getting shut out of seeing conservative news.

____________________

Tom is a grassroots activist who distinguished himself as one of the top conservative bloggers in Florida before joining BizPac Review.

 

Copyright © 2018. All Rights Reserved. BizPacReview

 

About BPR

 

Conservative News You Can Trust

 

Based in Palm Beach County, BizPac Review is a privately held, for-profit news and opinion website covering news that matters to conservatives throughout Florida and the United States.

 

Our articles and posts are fact-checked and edited, and BizPac Review content is accepted by and listed with Google News.

 

BizPac Review is a major new conservative media outlet that provides an alternative to legacy media in Palm Beach County, Florida and the nation.

 

READ THE REST

 

Government Corruption Prosecutes Bundys


John R. Houk

© March 18, 2017

 

I am guilty of not following the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) persecution of the Bundy family over grazing rights for their cattle and attempts to protect those cattle from BLM confiscation.

 

There are those that truly believe the Bundys are criminals for not paying exorbitant grazing fees and then resisting the BLM for attempting to take the Bundy cattle to pay for those back exorbitant fees.

 

Catherine Crabill pretty much sums up how the government has gone from protecting U.S. citizens to thrive to using Big Brother tactics for Leftist environmentalism, Crony Capitalism or both:

 

While many remain oblivious to the strangulation of our most fiercely independent and productive citizens, the American Rancher, this last week’s news cycle sputtered out incomprehensible sound bites about Nevadan Rancher, Mr. Cliven Bundy.

 

Sometime in the mid 1800’s, long before Nevada was a territory, much less a state, Cliven Bundy’s ancestors settled a tract of land to raise a family and provide a livelihood ranching cattle.

 

In 1946 another debacle of a government agency was created, The Bureau of Land Management.

 

Like every single government agency, without exception, the BLM became a bloated bully who’s main contribution to the western states, in particular, was to destroy life, liberty and personal property.

 

52 other families in Clark County Nevada alone, had long since given up fighting the BLM. Grazing rights were/are typically denied under the guise of protecting “endangered species”, (a common practice nationwide to destroy watermen, farmers, and ranchers), or grazing fees are raised until those, like the Bundy’s, who dug the wells, fenced the land, and managed it just fine, are driven off or bankrupted.

 

The BLM also threatened the Bundy’s because they declared he owed them more than a million dollars in said “grazing fees”. I’ll say it again, for using the land that has been in his family for 7 generations.

 

THERE IS MORE (NOTHING LESS THAN TREASON, SEDITION AND EXTORTION IN NEVADA! Posted by DEAN JAMES – By Catherine Crabill; American Freedom Fighters; 4/15/14)

 

I was gratified when all those defendants were exonerated by jury trial pertaining to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge standoff. Unfortunately right after their jury exoneration the BLM and other Federal Agents arrested them for another trial over a standoff that took place prior to Malheur in Bunkerville Nevada area of the Bundy Ranch cattle operations.

 

This government persecution continues with the appearance of COVER-UP:

 

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has requested an investigation into allegations that employees of the Bureau of Land Management destroyed federal records, tampered with witnesses and obstructed a congressional investigation.

 

 

The original report details how BLM employee Danial Paul Love [aka Dirty Dan] used his position to gain entrance for family and friends to the Burning Man festival — held on BLM-managed land — and assign a security detail to his party and provide overnight lodging for these attendees.

 

 

It then goes on to document ways Love attempted to instruct witnesses and influence the testimony of colleagues questioned by investigators.

 

The Oversight Committee’s letter cites the report’s allegations of email scrubbing, conspiracy to change and withhold records for an impending congressional inquiry, and coaching witnesses as having the potential to taint the investigation and undermine trust in BLM’s law enforcement office. For this reason, Chaffetz asked for further scrutiny of Love’s actions.

The entire letter can be read on Oversight’s websiteREAD ENTIRETY (Committee to investigate whether feds obstructed probe into Burning Man fraud; By Tony Ware; Federal Times; 2/21/17)

 

More on Dirty Dan:

 

An investigation accusing a federal agent of misconduct and ethics violations could derail one of the most high-profile land-use trials in modern Western history.

 

 

But a Jan. 30 report by the Department of Interior’s Office of the Inspector General appears to raise serious questions about the BLM special agent in charge of operations during the standoff, who is expected to be a key witness for the government in the case.

 

The report, which does not identify the agent by name [Yup, it was Special Agent In Charge Dirty Dan], cites ethical violations that occurred in 2015 at the annual Burning Man event in Northern Nevada’s Black Rock Desert.

 

Federal investigators said the agent wrongly used his influence to obtain benefits for himself and his family members at Burning Man, abused federal law-enforcement resources and intimidated other BLM staff to keep quiet about his conduct. They also accused the agent of manipulating BLM hiring practices to help a friend get hired.

 

 

Whipple said the report paints a picture of an agent with a personal agenda and no regard for the rule of law. He said his client long has maintained that Love dangerously orchestrated events during the Bundy standoff to “enhance and enrich” his personal profile and “to make a name for himself.”

 

 

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Las Vegas also declined comment. Spokeswoman Trisha Young said Friday the witness list in the Bundy Ranch trials has been sealed and is not open to the public, and she declined to speak about Love’s role in the case.

 

Individual federal prosecutors assigned to the cases did not return calls.

 

 

“It’s in an ethics report. I think everything is up for grabs — misuse of the vehicles, using intimidation,” Gordon said. “This stuff, it suggests that he’s willing to cheat and lie for his job.”

 

She said defense attorneys involved in the Bundy Ranch trials might not be able to show juries the inspector general’s report [Why the H-E-Double Hockey Sticks NOT! Where’s the justice in suppressing the IG Report?] but could question Love about specific incidents raised in it.

 

 

Investigators said when they began looking into the complaints, the agent called other employees and encouraged them not to cooperate. He told them “I don’t recall” was a valid answer to investigators’ questions, the report said.

 

Investigators said the agent used intimidation to discourage his co-workers from speaking with investigators, telling one: “You know, if you don’t side with me, grenades are going to go off and you’ll get hit.”

 

 

On websites and social-media posts dedicated to the Bundy Ranch standoff, Love is accused of ratcheting up the conflict.

 

Recorded exchanges purportedly between Love and right-wing internet radio host Peter Santilli during the standoff show just how quickly events escalated as each man threatened the other with arrest.

 

Love maintained he had the federal courts on his side and wanted to end the standoff peacefully. Then he told Santilli that the protesters didn’t have enough people to hold off law enforcement, saying, “You better hope that 10,000 show up,” according to one website.

 

Santilli is one of the 17 facing charges.

 

 

For two decades, the BLM repeatedly ordered Bundy to remove his cattle from federal lands and in 2014 the agency obtained a court order to seize Bundy’s cattle as payment for more than $1 million in back fees. In April, the BLM, led by Love, implemented a roundup of 1,000 head of Bundy’s cattle ranging on public land.

 

Bundy fought back, issuing a social-media battle cry to help defend his land rights against federal agents. Supporters, including members of several militia groups, streamed to the ranch from several Western states, including Nevada, Arizona, Idaho and Montana. They showed up with rifles and handguns, determined to keep government agents at bay.

 

READ ENTIRETY (BLM misconduct probe may derail Bundy Ranch standoff trial; By Jenny Kane and Robert Anglen; azcentral.com; 2/3/17 9:58 p.m. MT – Updated 2/4/17 11:45 a.m. MT}

 

Journalist Pete Santilli was arrested under the Obama Administration DOJ claims he did not have a Free Press right for reporting on the Bunkerville Standoff:

 

Reporter Pete Santilli had his hearing in Nevada on Monday on trumped up charges he is facing for his reporting on the Bundy Ranch Siege in 2014. As he left the courtroom in chains, he cried out, “I’m a journalist. This is what they do in Communist China!”

 

READ THE REST (Federal Government Throws Journalist into Prison for the “Crime” of Covering BLM Protests! By Tim Brown; Eagle Rising; May 2016)

 

The corruption can be seen with Defense Attorneys and the Prosecution sparing about what evidence is admissible and about which witnesses will be allowed to testify:

 

A downtown Las Vegas courtroom provided scenes as wild as a Western movie Monday when federal prosecutors and defense attorneys battled over nearly every piece of evidence presented in the trial against six of rancher Cliven Bundy’s supporters.

 

Defense attorneys tried to block a government witness from testifying. A prosecutor invoked an evidence rule that led even the judge to flip open a legal handbook. A juror made a wisecrack that caused one lawyer to raise concerns of potential bias.

 

By 4 p.m., U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro had sent the jury home early and told them not to return until Wednesday.

 

The day’s most hotly disputed footage was played outside the presence of the jury when defense lawyer Todd Leventhal tried to bring into evidence a video from the April 2014 standoff in Bunkerville. The video was captured by a Fox News cameraman, and Leventhal, who represents Bundy supporter O. Scott Drexler, wanted the judge to let him play it when he cross-examined Bureau of Land Management Ranger Gregory Johnson.

 

Johnson testified as a government witness Monday. On April 12, 2014, he was recorded on dashboard camera footage using a megaphone to repeatedly order protesters to disperse.

 

The protesters, who were gathered near the site where federal authorities had been impounding Bundy’s cattle, screamed angrily. At one point on the footage, authorities referenced a man walking towards them — “blue shirt, looks like press.”

 

The cameraman was identified in court only by his surname, Lynch. Defense lawyers tried to use the footage he captured to bolster their arguments that protesters could not understand law enforcement’s instructions from 200 yards away on a windy day.

 

On the video, Lynch walks toward the cattle impoundment site where federal authorities were headquartered.

 

“I do not have a weapon — I am shooting for Fox News,” he yelled. “May I approach so this doesn’t end in bloodshed … the people don’t want to get hurt.

 

“You are in violation of a U.S. District Court order,” Johnson’s voice boomed over the megaphone.

 

“I am the press!” Lynch shouted.

 

“Go back.”

 

“Why? Why can’t you talk to me?!”

 

“You are in violation

 

“I have no weapon! Are you really gonna shoot these people?” Lynch exclaimed. “We can’t hear your announcement that far away.”

Navarro would not allow the video into evidence Monday, but she told Leventhal he could play it for jurors if he calls Lynch as a defense witness.

 

READ THE REST (Tempers flare, nerves fray in trial against Bundy supporters; By JENNY WILSON; Las Vegas Review-Journal; 3/6/17 8:54pm)

 

Recall above info in which Special In Charge Dirty Dan Love is accused of ethics violations and witness intimidation. Dirty Dan is the guy in charge yelling at the Fox News cameraman for documenting the standoff. Dirty Dan’s BLM Agents tried to confiscate the Bundy Cattle and intimidated the Ranchers into arming themselves with vicious actions against the protestors.

 

Guess what? The Federal Prosecutor is trying to prevent Defense access to Dirty Dan at the trial:

 

It appears the government wants to hide the illegal actions it has taken, along with those of the Bureau of Land Management in the Bundy Ranch trial that is soon to begin.

 

On Tuesday, Prosecutors in Las Vegas filed a Motion In Limine  in the case of The United States vs Cliven Bundy et al.  They are hopeful that Nevada District Court Judge Gloria Navarro will allow the US central government to “cover-up” any wrong doing by Bureau Of Land Management agents during the 2014 Bundy Ranch siege.

 

An attorney for one of the defendants told Guerilla Media Network, “It’s a shocking blatant attempt by the Government to cover-up the brutal conduct of BLM agents that caused a near catastrophe in Bunkerville, Nevada during the impoundment of rancher Cliven Bundy’s cattle.”

 

Guerilla Media Network reports:

 

The motion is a draconian attempt at best to “protect” government agents from being exposed to further scrutiny during the upcoming Nevada trials in which they will be under-oath to tell the truth.

 

 

The defense in this case is centered around civil rights violations of the Bundy family and protestors who came to Bunkerville, Nevada to protest an overreaching government agency who had beaten and incarcerated Cliven Bundy’s son Dave Bundy and other protestors, used a stun gun on his son Ammon Bundy, viciously attacked Mr. Bundy’s sister Margaret, and terrorized peaceful protest with threat of snipers and military force.

 

“It is what it is and we will fight it,” said Chris Rasmussen, attorney for reporter and radio show host Pete Santilli.  “The government wishes to eliminate anything we could use that goes to the defendants’ state of mind .. and we cannot allow that to happen. These people were frightened and there was a reason they reacted the way they did.”

 

“Do we or do we not still live in America?” said former Nevada State Assemblywoman Michele Fiore on Tuesday in response to the motion.  “One way or the other the truth will be told and I would like to see them stop me from voluntarily giving my testimony when this trial begins.”

 

Fiore has already told about some of the evidence that is known to exist concerning the criminal BLM, including audio and video from body cameras, and even spoken out on their crimes on the Nevada Assembly floor.

 

VIDEO: Michele Fiore: Government Alters Dashboard/Body Cam Video In Nevada Bundy Case

 

Posted by Pete Santilli Show

Published on Oct 3, 2016

*** Please help support our mission in Nevada by contributing at http://thepetesantillishow.com/donate or direct to our Paypal account: peter@petersantilli.com .

Defendants in the case of United States vs Cliven Bundy et al .. are accusing the BLM [Bureau of Land Management] and the FBI of altering dashboard and body-cam video in an attempt to cover-up their aggressiveness during the 2014 protest that led to the arrest of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and 18 others.

Defendants are also accusing the FBI “infiltration team” who posed as a documentary film crew called Long Bow, of editing video at crucial moments to make defendants who gave interviews look guilty of crimes they did not commit.

On at least 5 different occasions the defendants in the case say that video used to gain their indictments and create the Governments narrative that has kept them all in jail pending trial, was clearly altered at crucial moments to hide what they believe would expose the BLM as the aggressors and not the “victims” as Prosecutor Steven Myhre contends.

We have found at least 5 different clear cases of evidence tampering and have only viewed 1/4 of the discovery that was recently released to us by the Prosecutors office say defendants, who have begun the process of creating a power point demonstration that will be viewed by defense attorney’s on October 7, 2016.

… MORE VIDEOS

 

Carol Bundy, Cliven Bundy’s wife, reacted in a similar manner, “So what kind of defense are we allowed to have if we can’t tell the truth?  Because if the Government has it’s way it looks like we will not be allowed to have any defense at all.”

 

 

Judge Navarro has demonstrated that she is just as corrupt as the BLM and the politicians surrounding what is going on in Nevada.  Just look at what she has done to Santilli and Cliven Bundy.  Does anyone really believe she is not going to accept this motion? READ ENTIRETY (Prosecutors Seek to Protect BLM from Scrutiny in Bundy Ranch Trial; By TIM BROWN; Freedom Outpost; 1/28/17)

 

Now for the article that got me started on this brief excursion of government cover-up and corruption. This article is specifically about the Prosecutors preventing Dirty Dan to be confronted by the Defense as the accuser of the Bunkerville Standoff Defendants.

 

JRH 3/18/17

Please Support NCCR

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

The Utter Hypocrisy of the Government in the Bundy Ranch Trial

 

By TIM BROWN

MARCH 16, 2017

Freedom Outpost

 

The utter hypocrisy that is being demonstrated in the Bundy Ranch trial by those who swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution from both foreign and domestic enemies is quite telling as to the level of corruption we are seeing in our land today.  Furthermore, it is demonstrating that many of those who have taken that oath not only don’t know what the Constitution says, but also have become the very domestic enemies they proclaim to oppose because of their ignorance.

 

First, take this update from Guerilla Media Network’s Deb Jordan.

 

VIDEO: Bundy Trial Update: Judge May Not Allow Defendants Biggest Accuser To Be Questioned In Front Of Jury

 

Posted by Pete Santilli Show

Published on Mar 10, 2017

 

call Daniel P. Love to the stand she is leaning heavily toward not allowing the defense to call him to the stand either. In a shocking statement made outside the earshot of the Jury this past Friday, Navarro said that she has no obligation to allow the defense to call the former Special Agent in Charge of the Bundy cattle impoundment to the stand for the purpose of impeaching his testimony to the grand jury .. Also this week Dennis Michael Lynch took the stand ..

Please help support us in Nevada by contributing at http://thepetesantillishow.com/donate or READ THE REST

 

“Judge Gloria Navarro presiding over USA vs Cliven Bundy says, if the Prosecution does not call Daniel P. Love to the stand she is leaning heavily toward not allowing the defense to call him to the stand either,” Jordan wrote.  “In a shocking statement made outside the earshot of the Jury this past Friday, Navarro said that she has no obligation to allow the defense to call the former Special Agent in Charge of the Bundy cattle impoundment to the stand for the purpose of impeaching his testimony to the grand jury.”

 

No obligation?   This is the government’s star snitch, I mean witness, Bureau of Land Management agent Daniel P. Love.  Perhaps, the reason lies in the fact that the BLM’s conduct at Bundy Ranch was thuggish and tyrannical (Watch Video evidence of their misconduct here and here).  Perhaps, the reason lies with the fact that Love was found guilty of misconduct by the Inspector General on a number of issues, including using his influence to obtain tickets and special passes to the Burning Man festival in the Nevada desert.  He was also instrumental in driving Dr. James Redd to the point of suicide over his collecting of Indian Artifacts in 2009.

 

As for Judge Navarro, citizens are planning to issue a letter to Congress calling for her impeachment due to her conduct in the case.

 

However, that is not the whole of what is taking place in Nevada.  The Nevada Independent reports:

 

Although no shots were fired that day, federal officers previously testified that alarming investigative intelligence, combined with the guns present in the agitated crowd and para-military dress of some of the protesters, made them afraid for their safety. Six defendants the government describes as Bundy’s gunmen are on trial accused of  threatening and intimidating BLM and U.S. Parks Service law enforcement officers.

 

In recent weeks, on cross examination, the defense has managed to portray the federal cops as inexperienced wannabes who lacked judgment and overreacted under stress. After the decision was made to discontinue the roundup, some of BLM rangers and Park police initially refused orders to put away their weapons, stand down and pack up. Some of their responses under oath made them appear more fearful than professional.

 

But the defense this past week had little success with Metro Sgt. Tom Jenkins and none at all with Sheriff Joseph Lombardo.

 

Additionally, there was testimony by Metro Sgt. Tom Jenkins, who claimed that protesters were flashing handguns and rifles “from the time we got there until the time we left.”  However, he remained steadfast in his claims even though lengthy recorded exhibits didn’t always agree with his testimony.  Someone is not being truthful or has a really bad memory that cannot be trusted.

 

Jenkins claims his officers were “scared” and “crying.”  Really?

 

I wonder if Sgt. Jenkins thought there was fear in the hearts of the Bundys and their supporters over this?

 

https://youtu.be/9p0YemhFnw8

 

or this?

 

https://youtu.be/LhJ6H9vlEDA

 

Then there was testimony from Lombardo.  Again, from The Nevada Independent:

 

When Lombardo’s took the stand Thursday, he reminded those who have followed his career that the public needn’t worry about his leadership skills. An assistant sheriff at the time of the standoff, Lombardo accompanied Sheriff Doug Gillespie to Bundy’s makeshift stage outside his ranch in an attempt to cool the heated rhetoric and avoid bloodshed. He stood patiently during Bundy’s windy grandstanding and impossible demands — disarm all federal law enforcement and bulldoze the entrance booths at the region’s federal conservation and recreation areas — and then returned to Las Vegas believing the botched cattle roundup was reaching a peaceful resolution.

 

For the first time jurors saw video of the elder Bundy holding forth with armed, uniformed members of the Arizona State Militia, who call themselves the “Praetorian Guard,” standing guard. Dozens of his hundreds of followers were armed with handguns and rifles.

 

When Bundy instructed his followers to go get his cattle, Lombardo’s day grew complicated and dangerous. He attempted to negotiate with one of Bundy’s sons, Dave Bundy, in a plea for patience and enough time to allow the BLM to make a safe exit.

 

It was Lombardo, jurors learned, who essentially put his career on the line to overrule BLM Supervisory Special Agent Dan Love and press for the release of the impounded cattle during the height of the armed standoff’s tensions.

 

“He advised me they were federal cattle and it was his decision,” Lombardo said.

 

Fortunately, Lombardo prevailed.

 

On what constitutional basis do Cliven Bundy’s cattle become “federal cattle”?  There is no victim any what the government is portraying here.  Furthermore, just because a video shows armed citizens protecting one another from a tyrannical BLM, something that even Sheriff Lombardo was willing to stand up to, doesn’t mean they were breaking the law.  Seriously, is no one reading the Second Amendment?  Do none of these people know why we have it and what provoked the writing of the Second Amendment?  or the First? or the Third? or the Fourth, etc. etc.?

 

While the author of the Nevada Independent piece concluded, “Bring guns to a peaceful protest, and you’re bound to get everyone’s attention,” what he failed to identify is who brought them first.  The response of protesters with guns was an equal and measured defensive response to tyrants, period.  Now, you can see the utter hypocrisy and lack of moral compass that is on display in this case.

 

________________

Government Corruption Prosecutes Bundys

John R. Houk

© March 18, 2017

_________________

The Utter Hypocrisy of the Government in the Bundy Ranch Trial

 

Copyright © 2017 FreedomOutpost.com

 

Hillary Indictment Rumors – We can Only Hope


Hillary Sec-State Contributions

John R. Houk

© May 31, 2016

 

There have been unsubstantiated rumors that Hillary Clinton is about to be indicted. Very recently the Huffington Post put out a report that an indictment was imminent, then the report was pull off the HuffPo website in less than 24 hours:

 

Huffington Post Removes Article Claiming Hillary Clinton Will Be Indicted

by PATRICK HOWLEY

29 May 2016

Breitbart.com

 

The liberal publication Huffington Post removed an article on its website Sunday claiming that the FBI plans to pursue an indictment against Hillary Clinton on federal racketeering charges.

 

HuffPo freelance contributor Frank Huguenard, a scientist and public speaker, posted an article on the site’s blog entitled “Hillary Clinton to be Indicted on Federal Racketeering Charges”. Huguenard wrote:

 

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States Federal Law passed in 1970 that was designed to provide a tool for law enforcement agencies to fight organized crime.  RICO allows prosecution and punishment for alleged racketeering activity that has been executed as part of an ongoing criminal enterprise.

Activity considered to be racketeering may include bribery, counterfeiting, money laundering, embezzlement, illegal gambling, kidnapping, murder, drug trafficking, slavery, and a host of other nefarious business practices.

James Comey and The FBI will present a recommendation to Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the Department of Justice, that includes a cogent argument that the Clinton Foundation is an ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in money laundering and soliciting bribes in exchange for political, policy and legislative favors to individuals, corporations and even governments both foreign and domestic.

 

 

But the article link now directs to a page that says “404” with a frownie face and the message “This is so embarrassing” after Huffington Post took the piece down Sunday.

 

READ ENTIRETY IF WISH

 

In this vein the Freedom Outpost cross posts a PBS News Hour interview with a Washington Post reporter talking about how egregious Hillary Clinton’s email scandal has become. When two Left leaning news media outlets begin reporting Hillary is in trouble then I am guessing something is up for Crooked Hillary.

 

(Spoiler Alert: The PBS interview is so bland you may fall asleep before the end of the five minute or so segment. Tape your eyes open and listen to the details it is quite enlightening.)

 

JRH 5/31/16

Please Support NCCR

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

Clinton Cooked: Report on Email Scandal Worse Than Initially Expected (Video)

Even though this specific report has no “official” legal ramifications, it very likely provides a small window for the general public to gain some idea as to the nightmare the FBI is dealing with, and that doesn’t look very good for Mrs. Clinton moving forward.

 

By MICHAEL DEPINTO

MAY 30, 2016

Freedom Outpost

 

The State Department’s report condemning Hillary Clinton has brought the debate over her conduct as Secretary of State back to the forefront of the political landscape, and throws the race for the White House into uncharted territory. Judy Woodruff talks to Rosalind Helderman of The Washington Post about the details of the report and why Clinton’s violations are worse than her predecessors’.

 

In the video below, you’ll learn that the main purpose of the most recent report that could jeopardize Clinton’s bid for the White House, was to examine the overall usage and handling of State Department email while in office, and then the preservation of those government records upon leaving office. The investigation examined the records for the five previous Secretary’s [sic] of State to get a fair comparison. This particular report concluded that of the last five Secretaries, Hillary’s violation of Department policy, and her lack of compliance with the Federal Records Act were by far the most egregious.

 

The primary reason that Clinton’s records were the worst, was because during her tenure as Secretary, the threat and risks associated with cyber security were much better understood than they were perhaps 15 years prior to her tenure. That fact, coupled with her lack of taking anything even resembling reasonable steps to protect and securer the information in her possession made her the worst offender.

 

The report also states that despite Clinton’s public statements about how she has remained always willing to help in any way requested of her, the reality behind the scenes has been anything but cooperation from Hillary and most of her aids. The Department’s Inspector General still has yet to ever interview Hillary herself (at all), because Hillary has refused every request. Also, several of her aids have failed to respond to various questions asked of them.

 

Even though this specific report has no “official” legal ramifications, it very likely provides a small window for the general public to gain some idea as to the nightmare the FBI is dealing with, and that doesn’t look very good for Mrs. Clinton moving forward. Perhaps it’s best Bernie is sticking around after all.

 

VIDEO: Why Clinton’s private email use is deemed more serious than predecessors’

 

 

Posted by PBS NewsHour

Published on May 25, 2016

 

The State Department’s report condemning Hillary Clinton has brought the debate over her conduct as Secretary of State back to the forefront of the political landscape, and throws the race for the White House into uncharted territory. Judy Woodruff talks to Rosalind Helderman of The Washington Post about the details of the report and why Clinton’s violations are worse than her predecessors’.

 

Common Dreams reports:

 

Hillary Clinton and her top aides failed to comply with U.S. State Department policies on records by using her personal email server and account, possibly jeopardizing official secrets, an internal watchdog concluded in a long-awaited report (pdf) on Wednesday.

 

Clinton also never sought permission from the department’s legal staff to use the server, which was located at her New York residence, a request which—if filed—”would not” have been approved, the report by the agency’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) states.

 

“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,” it continues.

 

The findings are the latest development in the email scandal that has persisted throughout Clinton’s presidential campaign to little effect—but its conclusion was unexpectedly critical.

 

And it could spell trouble for the former secretary of state in the final stretch of the election, as public trust in Clinton continues to decline while polls show her rival Bernie Sanders has become the most formidable candidate against Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump.

 

As Politico’s Rachael Bade, Josh Gerstein, and Nick Gass write:

 

The watchdog’s findings could exact further damage to Clinton’s campaign, and they provide fresh fodder for Trump, who has already said he will go after Clinton for the email scandal “bigly.” The Democratic frontrunner’s bid for the White House has already been hindered by high unfavorability ratings, with people saying they don’t trust her.

 

The report represents the latest pushback — in this case by a nonpartisan government entity — against her campaign’s claim that she did not break any rules and that her use of a private server was completely allowed.

 

In fact, technology staff in the Information Resource Management (S/ES-IRM) office who brought up concerns about Clinton’s use of her private server were reportedly instructed not to question the arrangement.

 

“In one meeting, one staff member raised concerns that information sent and received on Secretary Clinton’s account could contain Federal records that needed to be preserved in order to satisfy Federal recordkeeping requirements,” the report states. “According to the staff member, the Director [of S/ES-IRM] stated that the Secretary’s personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further. As previously noted, OIG found no evidence that staff in the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Secretary Clinton’s personal system.”

 

Other staff from different offices were also instructed “never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.”

 

On Wednesday, Clinton’s campaign was quick to point out that the report’s criticisms also extended to the State Department in general, which the OIG found to be riddled with “longstanding, systemic weaknesses related to electronic records and communications” and noted that other department officials, including former Secretary of State Colin Powell, also used personal e-mails while in office.

 

The findings were issued a day after a group of U.S. intelligence veterans, including William Binney, John Kiriakou, and Diane Roark, published an open letter to President Barack Obama urging him to expedite the forthcoming FBI report on Clinton’s alleged email security violations.

 

“The question is not whether Secretary Clinton broke the law,” the letter states. “She did. If the laws are to be equally applied, she should face the same kind of consequences as others who have been found, often on the basis of much less convincing evidence, guilty of similar behavior.”

 

Article posted with permission from The Last Great Stand.

_______________________

Hillary Indictment Rumors – We can Only Hope

John R. Houk

© May 31, 2016

________________________

Clinton Cooked: Report on Email Scandal Worse Than Initially Expected (Video)

 

Edited by John R. Houk with spellcheck.

Text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

About MIchael DePinto

 

Michael is a member of the fast growing un-silent majority that is sick of the insanity going on in this country right now. He has been accused of being vitriolic, bombastic, sarcastic to the extreme, and probably worse behind my back. He is sick of being branded a right wing extremist, racist, homophobe, warmonger, or whatever asinine adjectives Liberal Progressives have for the words COMMON SENSE these days. Michael is also a blogger at The Last Great Stand and and an Attorney.

 

Copyright © 2016 FreedomOutpost.com