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

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


JRH 2/8/18

Please Support NCCR


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


By sundance

February 7, 2018 4:14  PM

The Last Refuge


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


FBI Characters illegally Exonerating Crooked Hillary


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


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


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


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


Senator Johnson Interim Report SCRIBD




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


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


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


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


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


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



The Last Refuge Rag Tag Bunch of Conservative Misfits – Contact Info:


True Election Collusion – THE MEMO:

Dems, FBI Leadership & DOJ Leadership

John R. Houk

© February 2, 2018


Donald on releasing the FISA Memo (though updated to make the FBI happy) for public consumption:


[A] lot of people should be ashamed of themselves.” (quote from BPR)


VIDEO: TRUMP REACTS TO FISA MEMO: “I Think It’s Terrible. I Think It’s a Disgrace”


Posted by james hoft

Published on Feb 2, 2018


TRUMP REACTS TO FISA MEMO: “I Think It’s Terrible. I Think It’s a Disgrace What’s Happening in Our Country”


When you read the FISA Memo you must realize it was sanitized to allegedly protect sources and methods of investigation. Even so, it is not a difficult stretch to understand the nefarious nature that Donald Trump was targeted before and after the November 2016 election by Obama Administration leadership (probably including Obama himself). The weaponized police state of Obama, the Dems AND Crooked Hillary tried to feloniously steal the election and failing that, STILL use false and/or fake data to impeach a duly elected President.


AND the American free press (aka the Leftist MSM) have been full participants in disseminating the falsified/fake data to an American public of which many believe the Mainstream Media is still a credible source of news.


So, this is what I’m going to do for my blog readers. First, I am posting a Fox News’ Catherine Herridge report. Second, the FISA Memo sourced from the Western Journal. WJ leaves out the intro on the original Memo so I am extracting from a pdf downloaded from SCRIBD courtesy of the fake news channel Last but not least – third, BPR review article entitled, “7 biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just released”.


JRH 2/2/18

Please Support NCCR




Posted by wikileaks tv

Published on Feb 2, 2018




SHOCKING revelations


Credits: fox news



February 2, 2018


The Honorable Devin Nunes

Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
United States Capitol

Washington, DC 20515


Dear Mr. Chairman:


On January 29, 2018, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (hereinafter “the Committee”) voted to disclose publicly a memorandum containing classified information provided to the Committee in connection with its oversight activities (the “Memorandum,” which is attached to this letter). As provided by clause 11(g) of Rule of the House of Representatives, the Committee has forwarded this Memorandum to the President based on its determination that the release of the Memorandum would serve the public interest.


The Constitution vests the President with the authority to protect national security secrets from it disclosure. As the Supreme Court has recognized, it is the President’s responsibility to classify, declassify, and control access to information bearing on our intelligence sources and methods and national defense. See, e.g., Dep’t of Navy v. Egan, 484 US. 518, 527 (1988). In order to facilitate appropriate congressional oversight, the Executive Branch may entrust classified information to the appropriate committees of Congress, as it has done in connection with the Committee’s oversight activities here. The Executive Branch does so on the assumption that the Committee will responsibly protect such classified information, consistent with the laws of the United States.


The Committee has now determined that the release of the Memorandum would be appropriate. The Executive Branch, across Administrations of both parties, has worked to accommodate congressional requests to declassify specific materials in the public interest.1 However, public release of classified information by unilateral action of the Legislative Branch is extremely rare and raises significant separation of powers concerns. Accordingly, the Committee’s request to release the Memorandum is interpreted as a request for declassification pursuant to the President’s authority.


The President understands that the protection of our national security represents his highest obligation. Accordingly, he has directed lawyers and national security staff to assess the


1 See, e.g. S. Rept. 114-8 at 12 (Administration of Barack Obama) (“On April 3, 2014 . . . the Committee agreed to send the revised Findings and Conclusions, and the updated Executive Summary of the Committee Study, to the President for declassification and public release”); H. Rept. 107-792 (Administration of George W. Bush) (similar); E.O. 12812 (Administration of George H.W. Bush) (noting Senate resolution requesting that President provide for declassification of certain information Via Executive Order).



declassification request, consistent with established standards governing the handling of classified information, including those under Section 3.1(d) of Executive Order 13526. Those standards permit declassification when the public interest in disclosure outweighs any need to protect the information. The White House review process also included input from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice. Consistent with this review and these standards, the President has determined that declassification of the Memorandum is appropriate.


Based on this assessment and in light of the significant public interest in the memorandum, the President has authorized the declassification of the Memorandum. To be clear, the Memorandum reflects the judgments of its congressional authors. The President understands that oversight concerning matters related to the Memorandum may be continuing. Though the circumstances leading to the declassification through this process are extraordinary, the Executive Branch stands ready to work with Congress to accommodate oversight requests consistent with applicable standards and processes, including the need to protect intelligence sources and methods.



Donald F. McGahn II

Counsel to the President


Here’s the Full Text of the FISA Memo Written by Rep. Devin Nunes


By George Upper 
February 2, 2018 at 12:05pm

The Western Journal


In all cases, any typographical emphasis — whether bold type, italics or underline — is original to the memo. Our goal here was to provide as accurate a representation of the original document as possible while still making it a little easier to read than the facsimile versions currently available online. — Ed. Note


January 18, 2018

To: HPSCI Majority Members

From: HPSCI Majority Staff

Subject: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation




This memorandum provides Members an update on significant facts relating to the Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) during the 2016 presidential election cycle. Our findings, which are detailed below, 1) raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.


Investigation Update


On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a U.S. citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General (DAG), or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division.


The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50 U.S.C. §,1805(d)(l)), a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause. Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Then-DAG Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ


Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence activity, FISA submissions (including renewals) before the FISC are classified. As such, the public’s confidence in the integrity of the FISA process depends on the court’s ability to hold the government to the highest standard—particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens. However, the FISC’s rigor in protecting the rights of Americans, which is reinforced by 90-day renewals of surveillance orders, is necessarily dependent on the government’s production to the court of all material and relevant facts. This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.


1) The “dossier” compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.


a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.

b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of—and paid by—the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.

2) The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News — and several other outlets — in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele’s initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington D.C. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed.


a) Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jonesarticle by David Corn. Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts with Yahoo and other outlets in September— before the Page application was submitted to the FISC in October — but Steele improperly concealed from and lied to the FBI about those contacts.

b) Steele’s numerous encounters with the media violated the cardinal rule of source handling — maintaining confidentiality — and demonstrated that Steele had become a less than reliable source for the FBI.


3) Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” (Emphasis Nunes’.) This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files — but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.


a) During this same time period, Ohr’s wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife’s opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Ohrs’ relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC.


4) According to the head of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its “infancy” at the time of the initial Page FISA application. After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele’s reporting as only minimally corroborated. Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was — according to his June 2017 testimony — “salacious and unverified.” While the FISA application relied on Steele’s past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations. Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.


5) The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel’s Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an “insurance” policy against President Trump’s election.



7 biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just released


By Luis Miguel 

February 2, 2018

BizPac Review


By declassifying the memo, President Trump just blew up Washington, D.C.


The controversial FISA memo, released by the House Intelligence Committee to the public on Friday, contains a number of bombshell revelations related to the FBI’s surveillance on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.


At least one Republican, Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona, concluded that the document shows “clear and convincing evidence of treason.”


Here are the biggest takeaways.


  1. Andrew McCabe admitted the dossier was used as the justification to secure a FISA warrant on Carter Page


Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon).


“Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] without the Steele dossier information.”


  1. The FBI’s probe into the Trump campaign was triggered by aide George Papadopoulos


Former Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos.

“The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok.”


  1. The FBI had no evidence of a connection between Papadopoulos and Page


Former Trump adviser Carter Page. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite).


“The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos.”


  1. The FBI knew the DNC and Clinton campaign were behind the dossier–but didn’t disclose that knowledge to the FISA court


Former FBI Director James Comey. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File).


“Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or. any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials.”


“The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named US. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a US. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOI at the, time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier).”


  1. The FBI paid Christopher Steele to work on the dossier


Christopher Steele, the former MI6 agent who compiled the Trump dossier. (Photo by Victoria Jones/PA Images via Getty Images).


“The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of – and paid by – the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.”


  1. Top DOJ official Bruce Ohr met with Steele in 2016 and told the FBI the British spy had an anti-Trump bias


Glenn Simpson, co-founder of Fusion GPS, which paid for the dossier on behalf of the DNC and Clinton campaign. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais).


“Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein.


“Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he ‘was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.’


“This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files, but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.”


  1. The memo reveals which officials green-lighted surveillance on Carter


Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik).


“As required by statute, a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause.


“Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ.”


In response to the memo, President Trump said “it’s a disgrace what’s happening in our country” and that “a lot of people should be ashamed of themselves.”


ABC VIDEO VIA TWITTER: A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves

“A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves,” Trump said over the revelations.


The president couldn’t have put it any better.


True Election Collusion – THE MEMO:

Dems, FBI Leadership & DOJ Leadership

John R. Houk

© February 2, 2018




Youtube Channel wikileaks tv


Here’s the Full Text of the FISA Memo Written by Rep. Devin Nunes


Copyright ©2017 Liftable Media Inc. All rights reserved.


The Western Journal


7 biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just released


© 2018 BizPac Review. All Rights Reserved.


2 Perspectives of Ongoing Deep State Coup

John R. Houk, Editor



It is looking more and more Dem conspirators in the FBI and DOJ tried to fix the November 2016 election to Crooked Hillary’s favor. AND barring the failure of a Crooked Hillary election, then the conspiracy appeared intending to take out President Trump with fake evidence.


Here are two perspectives on Deep State intentions that essentially overthrows the U.S. Constitution with behind the scenes criminal-political coup d’état behavior.


JRH 1/2/18

Please Support NCCR



Establishment media ignore the real sources of the Russia investigation.


By Lloyd Billingsley

January 2, 2018


Mueller Deep State


George Papadopoulos was the “improbable match that set off a blaze that has consumed the first year of the Trump administration.” Like the Trump campaign itself, advisor Papadopoulos “proved to be a tantalizing target for a Russian influence operation.”


Thus opens a 2500-plus-word December 30 New York Times piece headlined “How the Russia Inquiry Began: A Campaign Aide, Drinks and Talk of Political Dirt,” by Sharon LaFraniere, Mark Mazetti and Matt Apuzzo, with reporting by Adam Goldman, Eileen Sullivan and Matthew Rosenberg. The multiple authorship betokens serious investigation but this piece shapes up as dezinformatsiya and the Times gives it away in the early going.


“It was not, as Mr. Trump and other politicians have alleged, a dossier compiled by a former British spy hired by a rival campaign,” that started the investigation, and there is some truth to that. The dossier, one of the dirtiest tricks political tricks in US history, was only part of a plan revealed by FBI counterintelligence boss Peter Strzok in the office of FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe. As a Strzok email explained: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40. . .”


Like FBI boss James Comey, Strzok was a partisan of Hillary Clinton, the likely reason he got the job of spearheading the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. It was Strzok who changed “gross negligence” to “extremely careless,” freeing the Democrat from the prospect of criminal charges. As David Horowitz said, it was the greatest political fix in American history.


Donald Trump went on to win the White House but for Democrat “progressives,” that meant that Trump and Putin must have teamed up to steal the election from Hillary. That is the real source of the Russia investigation, sanctified in December 2016 by Senators Chuck Schumer, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Jack Reed. None was a fan of Trump and it recently emerged that McCain associate David Kramer, formerly with the State Department, met with dossier co-author Christopher Steele. The New York Times piece fails to mention Mr. Kramer and remains reluctant to follow the money, supposedly the first rule of investigative reporting.


The Clintons are not exactly short on cash and FBI deputy director “Andy” McCabe got some $500,000 from the Clintons for his wife’s political campaign. The establishment media are not curious whether Peter Strzok got a piece of the action, and if so how much. The Clinton’s faithful Odd Job would not be the first FBI man to grab the gold from under the table.


The FBI’s Robert Hanssen gave thousands of pages of classified material to the KGB and its Russian successor agency the SVR.  In return, the Russians gave him $600,000 in cash and diamonds, plus another $800,000 in a Russian bank. The FBI’s Richard Miller engaged in an affair with Svetlana Ogorodnikova and gave the Russian an FBI counterintelligence manual in exchange for sexual favors, $15,000 in cash and $50,000 in gold. FBI agent Earl Pitts gave KGB agent Aleksandr Karpov classified information and unmasked an FBI agent working in counterintelligence. The KGB and its Russian SVR successor paid Pitts $224,000.


Strzok works counterintelligence but on his watch Pakistani-born Iman Awan enjoyed access to the computers of the House Intelligence Committee and the Democrats’ favorite IT man performed his IT work from Pakistan for several months a year. If Peter Strzok knew about Awan’s illicit data-mining operation it seems clear he did nothing to stop it. On the other hand, POTUS 44 had commanded the FBI to look the other way when Muslims were involved, and the Bureau, which wields a budget approaching $9 billion, duly followed orders.


In the office of Andy McCabe, Peter Strzok discussed the “insurance policy” with his consensual flame Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer and Clinton devotee. When that emerged, new FBI boss Christopher Wray did not fire Strzok and take his gun and badge. Instead Wray stashed Strzok in human resources, where he will still command access to FBI records.


After all this, and a lot more, the New York Times opts to point the finger at George Papadopoulos. The establishment media prefer to claim that the FBI’s Clinton fan club and the bogus dossier had nothing to do with the Russia investigation.


Did the FBI perchance deploy the dossier to secure a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign? Russophile Nellie Ohr, wife of demoted DOJ official Bruce Ohr, duly hired on at Fusion GPS. What was Nellie’s role in the dossier?  Who paid for the dossier? Congress has been trying to get answers but the FBI has been stonewalling. What are they trying to hide?


Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, wants the DOJ and FBI to hand over all documents related to the dossier on Wednesday, January 3, 2018. The committee also seeks to interview Ohr, Strzok, FBI attorneys James Baker, Lisa Page, and Sally Moyer and FBI assistant congressional affairs boss Greg Brower.


If the FBI and DOJ fail to comply in full, that will certify their partisan corruption, the larger back story of the Russia investigation. All testimony should be public so the people can watch on C-SPAN and avoid the deep-state disinformation of the old-line establishment media.




House Intel Committee investigates plot to stop Trump

January 1, 2018



President Donald Trump


WASHINGTON – What began as an investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election has now become a probe into how federal law enforcement conspired to stop Donald Trump from becoming president.


The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has expanded its investigation that began with claims of Russian collusion and a fraudulent memo paid for by Trump opponents to one that focuses on members of federal law enforcement – both in the U.S. Justice Department and the FBI – and how they actively worked against the Trump campaign and the eventual Trump presidency.


In a startling turnabout, committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., is accusing the Justice Department and the FBI of misleading him in “a pattern of behavior that can no longer be tolerated.” He charges that Justice claimed it possesses no documents related to the infamous Trump dossier, then, under pressure, produced “numerous” such papers.

U.S. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif.


U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is already opposing the move, even though he and other Democrats have conceded recently that finding a Russia-Trump conspiracy has produced no real evidence.


Nunes has put in place what amounts to a separate investigation of the FBI and the Justice Department hierarchy.


According to reports, the major components are:


  • Fusion GPS, the opposition research company that prepared the bogus Trump-Russia dossier with money from Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee.


  • How the FBI allowed that dossier to fuel investigations since July 2016.


  • Investigative bias that has been discovered regarding several key investigators.


A key subpoenaed witness is David Kramer, an associate of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. Kramer is one of the few people known to have possessed a hard copy of the dossier. McCain asked Kramer to represent him at a Nov. 28, 2016, meeting with Christopher Steele in Surrey, England. Steele compiled the 35 pages of memos making up the dossier based on his paid Kremlin sources.


Kramer then obtained a copy of the dossier from Fusion GPS and McCain hand-delivered a copy to then-FBI director James B. Comey in December 2016.


Thank President Trump for all his accomplishments during his first year in office. Send him a FREE card of your choice. Go to


According to an interview in Mother Jones magazine, Steele said he supplied his memos accusing Trump of a Russia conspiracy to the FBI in “early July” 2016. Comey has testified he began the counterintelligence investigation in “late July.” The memos accused the Trump team of a conspiracy with the Kremlin to damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign.


Nunes wants more information on how the bureau used the document to investigate Trump people. He has been unsuccessfully trying to gain access to FBI documents.


In a Dec. 28 letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Nunes said the Department of Justice at first said dossier-related FBI interview summaries, known as 302s, “did not exist.” Weeks later, under an Aug. 24 subpoena, DOJ suddenly located “numerous FD-302s pertaining to the Steele dossier, thereby rendering the initial response disingenuous at best,” the House intel committee chief wrote.


Based on the record of stonewalling, Nunes said the committee no longer can accept Justice’s position that it cannot turn over other official investigative forms, called 1032s. They document meetings between the FBI and confidential human sources.


He gave the Justice Department until Wednesday to comply with his requests.


“Unfortunately, DOJ/FBI’s intransigence with respect to the August 24 subpoenas is part of a broader pattern of behavior that can no longer be tolerated,” Nunes wrote. “At this point, it seems the DOJ and FBI need to be investigating themselves.”




About Lloyd Billingsley is the author of the new crime book, Lethal Injections: Elizabeth Tracy Mae Wettlaufer, Canada’s Serial Killer Nurse, and the recently updated Barack ‘em Up: A Literary Investigation.




About FPM




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



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







© Copyright 1997-2018. All Rights Reserved.

About WND


WND, formerly WorldNetDaily, can best be explained by its mission statement: “WND is an independent news company dedicated to uncompromising journalism, seeking truth and justice and revitalizing the role of the free press as a guardian of liberty. We remain faithful to the traditional and central role of a free press in a free society – as a light exposing wrongdoing, corruption and abuse of power.


“We also seek to stimulate a free-and-open debate about the great moral and political ideas facing the world and to promote freedom and self-government by encouraging personal virtue and good character.”


Indeed, WND is a fiercely independent news site committed to hard-hitting investigative reporting of government waste, fraud and abuse.


Founded by Joseph and Elizabeth Farah in May 1997, it is now a leading Internet news site in both traffic and influence.


WND has broken some of the biggest, most significant and most notable investigative and enterprising stories in recent years. READ THE REST


Is Crooked Hillary Finally Getting Exposed?

John R. Houk

© September 1, 2017


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





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


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


JRH 9/1/17

Please Support NCCR


Grassley: Comey Wrote Clinton Exoneration Statement Before Email Investigation Ended


By Mary Chastain

August 31, 2017 7:07pm

Legal Insurrection


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


HR Clinton vs. FBI


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


Grassley wrote:


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


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


This is the portion of the transcript that Grassley provided:


Grassley Transcript LI

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


Anderson’s interview portion


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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



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


By Scott Morefield

September 1, 2017

BizPac Review


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


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


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



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


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


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


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


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


From the Daily Caller:


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


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


Which begs the question:



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


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





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


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


By BPR Wire

Jack Crowe, DCNF

September 1, 2017

BizPac Review


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


Is Crooked Hillary Finally Getting Exposed?

John R. Houk

© September 1, 2017


Grassley: Comey Wrote Clinton Exoneration Statement Before Email Investigation Ended


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


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




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


Copyright © BizPac Review 2017. All Rights Reserved.

King Calls For Wider Investigations of Obama, Clinton…

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) just became one of my new political heroes. He berated Congress in session (7/27/17) over ignoring ALL the Dem Party corruption while being hot to sick Robert Mueller on witch hunt to take down the Trump Administration.


Check it out:




Posted by Trumpet News

Published on Aug 1, 2017


The Gateway Pundit summarizes King’s message this way:


Rep. Steve King (R-IA) addressed Congress last Thursday in support of legislation that requires the Attorney General to turn over documents regarding former FBI Director James Comey’s involvement in various controversial cases.


The legislation passed 16-13 with King voting in favor of it. King addressed Congress with an impassioned and detailed inquiry/speech. … (Rep. Steve King Calls for Full Investigations Into Obama, Clinton, Comey, Soros, Lynch, and Others (VIDEO); By Carter; Gateway Pundit; 8/1/17 4:36 pm)


Below are the talking points in the AWESOME video you just watched from Rep. Steve King’s website.


JRH 8/4/17

Please Support NCCR


King Calls For Wider Investigations of Obama, Clinton, Comey, Soros, Lynch, Abedin, and Weiner Scandals


Jul 27, 2017

Press Release


Congressman Steve King released the following video of statements he made during Judiciary Committee debate of legislation requiring the Attorney General to provide copies of any document, record, audio recording, memo, correspondence, or other communication that refers or relates to a number of troubling aspects of James Comey’s tenure as FBI director.


In the course of his remarks, Congressman King recounted a litany of facts and events that reveal the corruption that surrounds many of the nation’s most prominent Democrats, as well as their disturbing pattern of using American taxpayer money to interfere in foreign elections. King’s entire remarks can be viewed here.


King concluded his remarks by asserting the trail of Democratic election corruption leads to Barack Obama, and that the examples he cites should be investigated fully.


Excerpted remarks:


On Barack Obama’s election interference in other countries:


“It’s pretty clear the Obama administration sent their people over to Israel to work against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Pretty much openly. Significant dollars invested in that campaign over there. The President of the United States, with at least the moral support of the people that had worked for him, in the country of Israel, [sought] to shift the results of the election against the seated Prime Minister, Bibi Netanyahu.”



“The Obama administration is a long ways from clean on this, as far as being involved in elections in other countries.”


On George Soros’ Use of Taxpayer Money to interfere in election in the Balkans:


learned the United States government, borrowing money from China and Saudi Arabia, had handed over at least $5,000,000 in contracts transferred through USAID into George Soros’s organizations that were used to manipulate elections in the Balkans.”


On the need to reopen investigations into Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner:


The long string that we should be looking at with this investigation and special counsel that is our request here goes a long ways back. It goes clear back to Huma Abedin, Anthony Weiner, 650,000 emails, which we still have access to.”


On James Comey’s sham investigation of Hillary Clinton:


This [Comey’s Investigation of Clinton] is what looks like, on its face, a sham investigation. Plus, they destroyed a tremendous amount of information: at least 30,000 emails, crushed hard drives, bought bleach bit, hired outside contractors to scrub emails up. And we’re to take James Comey’s word for this, that there wasn’t enough substance there to bring a prosecution, even though a year ago, July 5th, James Comey delivered 15 minutes of a summary of prosecution that was completely convincing to me until we got down to the last couple sentences of that presentation which was, ‘well, we can’t prove intent.’ Well, curiously there is no requirement for intent in the two statutes that appear to be violated.”


I look back in the records to the previous October and previous April, Barack Obama stated into the news media record ‘Hillary Clinton would never intend to put our national security at risk; Hillary Clinton would never intend to harm America’s security. That’s the previous October and April. Well, James Comey latched onto that word, ‘intend’, and they made up new law and gave Hillary Clinton an exemption for this intent that they said they couldn’t prove which is absolutely proven by the facts [Comey] delivered to us in the summary that day.”


On Loretta Lynch:


“Not only does this trail lead through Hillary Clinton and James Comey, but the Loretta Lynch component of this as well. When you put this in place, and look at the example of them on the tarmac, it’s hard to imagine they sat there for 45 minutes and discussed grandchildren.”


On allegations Democratic Operatives went to the Ukraine to get dirt on Candidate Trump:


“That brings me to Alexandra Chalupa who went off as a DNC contractor to Ukraine to try to gather dirt on the Trump people. So, bringing this around, Mr. Chairman, I’ll conclude with this: the trail leads also to Barack Obama and we need to investigate all of this.”



Steve King Bio on House Page


Steve King grew up in a law enforcement family in Storm Lake, Iowa. He attended Denison Community High School, where he met Marilyn Kelly, whom he married in 1972. They have lived in Kiron since 1976 and are members of St. Martin’s Church in Odebolt. Steve and Marilyn have three grown sons and seven grandchildren.

King studied math and science at Northwest Missouri State University. He started King Construction in 1975 and built the business up from one bulldozer. He brings valuable knowledge to Congress as an agribusinessman and a small business owner for 28 years. King’s oldest son now owns the construction business.

He served in the Iowa State Senate for six years. He was a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Judiciary Committee, Business and Labor Committee, the Commerce Committees, and chair of the State Government Committee. He worked in the State Senate to successfully eliminate the inheritance tax, enforce workplace drug testing, enforce parenting rights, including parental notification of abortions, pass tax cuts for working Iowans, and pass the law that made English the official language in Iowa.

King was elected to Congress in 2002 to represent Iowa’s Fifth Congressional District. During the 2012 election cycle, Iowa was redistricted to four districts. King now represents the Fourth Congressional District in the 114th Congress which includes: Ames, Fort Dodge, Mason City, Sioux City and Spencer. He brings personal experience, Constitutional principles, traditional marriage and family values and the perspective of representing one of the top producing agriculture districts in the nation to the people of Iowa’s Fourth Congressional District.

King serves on the Agriculture Committee. He has long been dedicated to adding value as close to the corn stalk and bean stem as possible, as …



King is also a member of the House Judiciary Committee, where he sits on the Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee and the Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee. He believes the Constitution means what it says and that it should be read with the intent of our Founding Fathers in mind. King is never caught without a copy of the Constitution in his coat pocket. He is a strong advocate of the Rule of Law and enforcing our borders. King is a full-spectrum, Constitutional Conservative.


King, for more than a decade, has chaired the Conservative Opportunity Society, a powerful and legendary House caucus that has become the conscience of Constitutional conservatives in the U.S. Congress. (READ ENTIRETY)



The Mueller Deep State Collusion

John R. Houk

© August 4, 2017

Now that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller (James Comey good friend) has impaneled a Grand Jury giving him the power of the government with search warrants and subpoenas, it is time to look at the tainted witch hunt team Mueller has assembled.


Michael Dreeben


Dreeben is a Dem donor meaning he is a Trump hater:


A fourth lawyer on Mueller’s staff, Michael Dreeben, donated $1,000 to Clinton 2006 and $250 to Obama in both 2007 and 2008. (Robert Mueller Stocks Staff with Democrat Donors; By Brendan Kirby;; Update 6/13/17 10:30 AM)


And here:


Dreeben donated $1,000 dollars to Hillary Clinton’s Senate political action committee (PAC), Friends of Hillary, while she ran for public office in New York. Dreeben did so while he served as the deputy solicitor general at the Justice Department. (SPECIAL PROSECUTOR TEAM IS FULL OF HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTERS; By BRIAN ANDERSON;; 6/12/17)


Andrew Weissmann


Weissmann donated a combined $2,300 to Obama’s campaign in 2008. In 2006, Weissmann contributed at least $2,000 to the DNC. (Mueller probe: Meet the lawyers who gave $$ to Hillary, now investigating team Trump; By Brooke Singman; Fox News; 7/24/17)


And here:


… Andrew Weissmann, who gave six donations to PACs for Obama in 2008, totaling $4,700 … (Ties to Comey Suggest Conflict of Interest for Special Counsel Mueller; By Joshua Philipp; Epoch Times; 6/15/17 12:19 PM – Updated 12:38 pm)


And here:


Andrew Weissmann defended the federal government’s surveillance rights in a panel discussion at the George Soros-funded New America Foundation, is also an Obama donor. (CONFIRMED: Mueller Team Can Be Disbarred For Clinton Conflicts In Trump Case; By Patrick Howley; Big League Politics; 7/23/17 5:07 am EST)


Jeannie Rhee


… Rhee represented Hillary Clinton in a 2015 lawsuit that sought access to her private emails. She also represented the Clinton Foundation in a 2015 racketeering lawsuit.


… She maxed out her donations both in 2015 and 2016 to Clinton’s presidential campaign, giving a total of $5,400. (Meet the all-star team of lawyers Robert Mueller has assembled for the Trump-Russia investigation; By Michelle Mark and Madeleine Sheehan Perkins; Business Insider; 8/1/17 8:31 PM)


And here:


One of the hires, Jeannie Rhee, also worked as a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation and helped persuade a federal judge to block a conservative activist’s attempts to force Bill and Hillary Clinton to answer questions under oath about operations of the family-run charity.


Campaign-finance reports show that Rhee gave Clinton the maximum contributions of $2,700 in 2015 and again last year to support her presidential campaign. She also donated $2,300 to Obama in 2008 and $2,500 in 2011. While still at the Justice Department, she gave $250 to the Democratic National Committee Services Corp. (Mueller staffs up to pursue obstruction of justice; By Thomas Lifson; American Thinker; 6/13/17)


James Quarles


According to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Quarles had made significant donations to Democratic candidates, including former President Barack Obama and Clinton. Most recently, in October 2016, Quarles donated $2,700 to Clinton’s presidential campaign. Quarles also donated over $7,000 to Obama over the last decade. Quarles did, however, donate $2,500 to former Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, in 2015. (Mueller probe: Meet the lawyers who gave $$ to Hillary, now investigating team Trump; By Brooke Singman; Fox News; 7/24/17)


And this:


Starting in 1987, Quarles donated to Democratic candidate Michael Dukakis’s presidential PAC, Dukakis for President. Since then, he has also contributed in 1999 to Sen. Al Gore’s run for the presidency, then-Sen. John Kerry’s (D-Mass.) presidential bid in 2005, Obama’s presidential PAC in 2008 and 2012, and Clinton’s presidential pac Hillary for America in 2016. (CORRECTED: Three members of Mueller’s team have donated to Democrats; By OLIVIA BEAVERS; The Hill; 6/12/17 02:23 PM EDT)


Aaron Zebley


Aaron Zebley, who repped Clinton aide and key email-scandal figure Justin Cooper … (CORRECTED: Three members of Mueller’s team have donated to Democrats; By OLIVIA BEAVERS; The Hill; 6/12/17 02:23 PM EDT)


More specifically:


Aaron Zebley represented Justin Cooper, a Hillary aide and one of two people with access to Clinton’s clandestine and illegal email server. Cooper helped set it up. (Corruption: 3 Reasons to Reset the ‘Russia’ Investigation; By Craig Huey; Election Forum; 6/21/17)


Greg Andres


A search of federal election records shows that Andres has donated at least a total of $3700 to federal Democratic candidates, including $2700 to New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in March 2017.



Andres, 50, also has another connection to the Democratic Party as his wife, Ronnie Abrams, is a federal judge that was nominated by President Barack Obama in 2011. (Mueller Hires Yet Another Democratic Donor; By Alex Pfeiffer; Daily Caller; 8/1/17 7:36 PM)


Andrew Goldstein


Goldstein contributed a combined $3,300 to Obama’s campaigns in 2008 and 2012. (Mueller probe: Meet the lawyers who gave $$ to Hillary, now investigating team Trump; By Brooke Singman; Fox News; 7/24/17)


And this:


During his [i.e. Goldstein] time in the Manhattan attorney’s office, Goldstein served under Bharara, who up until March served as the chief federal prosecutor in Manhattan. Bharara was controversially fired by the Trump administration, along with 46 other Obama-era U.S. attorneys, earlier this year. (Robert Mueller just hired an Obama-era US prosecutor for Trump-Russia investigation; By Chris Enloe; The Blaze; 7/3/17 9:52 am)


Elizabeth Prelogar


Prelogar is an appellate attorney on detail from the Office of the Solicitor General. Prelogar donated $250 to Clinton in 2016 and $250 to Obama in 2012. (Mueller probe: Meet the lawyers who gave $$ to Hillary, now investigating team Trump; By Brooke Singman; Fox News; 7/24/17)


And this:


Elizabeth Prelogar, an appellate attorney on detail from the Office of the Solicitor General.

–Fluent in Russian; former law clerk to Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan. (Trump Team Digs Up Dirt on Mueller’s 15 Activist Attorneys; By Staff; The Daily Trump; 7/22/17)


In an attempt at fair and balanced, there are others on the Mueller legal team that have donated to the Dems but only to the tune of hundreds rather than thousands of dollars. I can’t believe any Dem will do a fair investigation into a Trump/Russia collusion crime any more than I can believe a Conservative (yet not necessarily a RINO GOP) would do a fair investigation of either Russian collusion with Trump or the Clinton Crime Syndicate. Conservatives would look for Trump exoneration or Crooked Clinton conviction evidence. I know my view is skewed, but it is my opinion to connect the Crooked Clintons/Obama and their minions to crimes more than there will ever be credible evidence against the Trump organization.


The hugest problem of a conflict of interest is in Special Prosecutor Mueller himself due to a close friendship to Comey. This is the kind of friendship that convinces me Mueller will do all in his power to make sure former FBI buddy Comey is not snared in any legal violations EVEN if Mueller has to fabricate evidence against President Trump.


Check out these thoughts from Abe Hamilton:


“I think the president has sound grounds to disqualify Mueller for a host of reasons,” says Hamilton,” the least of which is his personal relationship with James Comey.”


There is no doubt, adds Hamilton, that at the center of the ongoing investigation is Comey himself.


“Brothers in arms: The long friendship between Mueller and Comey,” reads the headline of a May story at the liberal Washington Post.


Meanwhile, fact-checking website Snopes insists the claim they are “best friends” is “mostly false” despite quotes from a former assistant FBI director who said they are close and suggested a conflict of interest is obvious.


The law codifying the special counsel would require Mueller to recuse himself, Hamilton advises, because his friendship with Comey “would likely induce partiality.”


“At a minimum,” Hamilton tells OneNewsNow, “the president has the legal grounds to remove him based on that alone.”


Beyond that relationship, he further points out, is a conflict of interest with Rod Rosenstein, who hired Mueller. (Attorney: Oh, yeah, Mueller definitely has a conflict; By Chad Groening; One News Now; 8/2/17)


Mueller was involved in Crooked Hillary’s (then Secretary of State) Russia/American-Uranium collusion:


A top national attorney in consultation with U.S. attorneys confirmed to Big League Politics that special counsel Robert Mueller and members of his team can be formally disbarred for waging the “Russia” case against President Donald Trump. Mueller and his associates have glaring conflicts of interest in the case concerning Trump.


Mueller’s team is tainted not only by partisan political donations and activities, but by direct relationships with former clients like Hillary Clinton, who is integrally involved in most of the possible evidence in this case. These conflicts clearly violate American Bar Association guidelines.


Hillary Clinton colluded with the Russians in selling them our uranium. Clinton handpicked Mueller to give a sample of uranium to the Russians, and Mueller subsequently flew to Moscow, according to publicly available documents. (CONFIRMED: Mueller Team Can Be Disbarred For Clinton Conflicts In Trump Case; By Patrick Howley; Big League Politics; 7/23/17 5:07 am EST)


Those on the Mueller witch hunt legal team that have Dem Party agenda connections and/or connection to the Crooked Clintons have a huge conflict of interest according Big League Politics:


The American Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Standards for the Prosecution Function make clear that Mueller’s team is in violation of standards, according to the top national attorney. Here are the relevant sections (emphasis added):


“A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. A prosecutor should strive to eliminate implicit biases, and act to mitigate any improper bias or prejudice when credibly informed that it exists within the scope of the prosecutor’s authority.


(b)  A prosecutor’s office should be proactive in efforts to detect, investigate, and eliminate improper biases, with particular attention to historically persistent biases like race, in all of its work.  A prosecutor’s office should regularly assess the potential for biased or unfairly disparate impacts of its policies on communities within the prosecutor’s jurisdiction, and eliminate those impacts that cannot be properly justified.”


 “Standard 3-1.7           Conflicts of Interest


(a)  The prosecutor should know and abide by the ethical rules regarding conflicts of interest that apply in the jurisdiction, and be sensitive to facts that may raise conflict issues.  When a conflict requiring recusal exists and is non-waivable, or informed consent has not been obtained, the prosecutor should recuse from further participation in the matter. The office should not go forward until a non-conflicted prosecutor, or an adequate waiver, is in place…”


“(c)  The prosecutor should not participate in a matter in which the prosecutor previously participated, personally and substantially, as a non-prosecutor, unless the appropriate government office, and when necessary a former client, gives informed consent confirmed in writing.


(d)  The prosecutor should not be involved in the prosecution of a former client. A prosecutor who has formerly represented a client should not use information obtained from that representation to the disadvantage of the former client.”


“(f)  The prosecutor should not permit the prosecutor’s professional judgment or obligations to be affected by the prosecutor’s personal, political, financial, professional, business, property, or other interests or relationships.  A prosecutor should not allow interests in personal advancement or aggrandizement to affect judgments regarding what is in the best interests of justice in any case.”


“g)  The prosecutor should disclose to appropriate supervisory personnel any facts or interests that could reasonably be viewed as raising a potential conflict of interest.  If it is determined that the prosecutor should nevertheless continue to act in the matter, the prosecutor and supervisors should consider whether any disclosure to a court or defense counsel should be made, and make such disclosure if appropriate.”


“(j)  The prosecutor should promptly report to a supervisor all but the most obviously frivolous misconduct allegations made, publicly or privately, against the prosecutor.  If a supervisor or judge initially determines that an allegation is serious enough to warrant official investigation, reasonable measures, including possible recusal, should be instituted to ensure that the prosecution function is fairly and effectively carried out.  A mere allegation of misconduct is not a sufficient basis for prosecutorial recusal, and should not deter a prosecutor from attending to the prosecutor’s duties.” (Ibid.)


AND how can American voters ignore the conflict of interest between Mueller and Comey:


Former FBI Director Jim Comey “closely coordinated” with Special Counsel Robert Mueller before his planned testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee about his interactions with President Trump.


Fox News reported a source close to Comey said the former FBI director consulted with Mueller about how to approach Thursday’s Senate Intelligence Committee hearing. (Comey ‘closely coordinated’ with Mueller on Trump testimony: Report; By Josh Siegel; Washington Examiner; 6/7/17 5:05 PM)


Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) on Comey/Mueller collusion:


Rep. Louie Gohmert on Tuesday said the only collusion that should be investigated is between the “dirty” James Comey and Robert Mueller, who “conspired to violate the law” in order to “blackmail” the president.



“This thing stinks to high heaven,” Gohmert said. “Comey is dirty, Mueller is dirty.”



“Comey testified he ran things by Mueller before he testified, also ran things by other people in the Justice Department when he did the memo. There is so much collusion in the Justice Department.”


Further, there was obviously no obstruction of justice or Comey would have acted long before he was fired. Instead, Gohmert believes Comey’s testimony last week before the Senate Intelligence Committee further proves collusion.


“If (Comey) and the others at the Justice Department with whom he colluded had felt like there had been an obstruction of justice, then they conspired to violate the law by together holding that back so they could blackmail (Trump) later,” Gohmert said. (Rep. Gohmert: ‘Dirty’ Comey, Mueller Colluded to ‘Blackmail’ Trump; By Mark Swanson; Newsmax; 6/13/17 01:13 PM)


I realize the Dems will go ballistic if Mueller is fired. BUT you can expect the Trump base who elected him President will go medieval if some kind of loose change is tossed at Trump that is absolutely irrelevant to a Trump campaign colluding with Russia.


The lesser of two evils: Fire Mueller!


Then shut the Dems up by prosecuting real crimes like Crooked Hillary, her minions, Deep State Obama anti-government treason and Obama’s minions.


JRH 8/4/17

Please Support NCCR


WND has a great poll pertaining to Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller.


Here is the poll question and choices:


Do you have faith in objectivity of Special Counsel Mueller?


 Yes, of course. Trump just prefers someone whom he can manipulate


 Yes, he is the consummate professional


 Yes, he has a stable of great Democratic lawyers working for him


 I’m not sure yet


 No, he has a stable of hack Democratic lawyers working for him


 No, he’s the ultimate Washington insider. He can’t be trusted


 No, this is a witch hunt, and Trump needs to fire him posthaste




Go HERE to place your WND vote and get instant results


Did Illegal Surveillance Pass Laws in USA?

John R. Houk

© July 14, 2017


I realize there are a lot of unsubstantiated Conspiracy Theories out there. Because of this Conspiracy Theories are much like the old story of a Boy who Cried Wolf. In this day and age of television, video games, laptops, etc.; parents may not share classic stories like Aesop’s Fables that end with a learning moral. The moral of the Boy who Cried Wolf is if you tell an alarming lie all the time, when you tell the alarming truth, no one will believe you.


Deciphering the credible from the incredible Conspiracies brings up the Boy who Cried Wolf scenario in believability. I have unappreciated disagreements with Conspiracy Theory enthusiasts about the credible and incredible.


The current Deep State conspiracy to bring down the Trump Administration by any lying means necessary is remarkably credible hence believable.


The sad thing about this anti-Trump conspiracy is that a huge swath of Americans that ONLY get their information from the primary Mainstream Media (MSM), televised or print, are probably duped into believing President Trump is a corrupt criminal. The problem is the MSM is a part of the Deep State cabal conspiring against President Trump and the agenda he was elected to perform.


Ergo, if the MSM actually tells the truth about some info, their dishonesty has been so pervasive, I can’t believe them. AND YOU shouldn’t believe their wolf crying either.


Thanks to the Winning America Now e-newsletter, I have discovered some Deep State info that Chief Justice John Roberts may have been blackmailed into being the deciding Justice in validating Obamacare.


What was the possible dirt collecting method against Chief Justice Roberts? Illegal surveillance by the CIA and/or NSA perpetrated by the Obama Administration.


In full disclosure of the credibility/incredibility scale, one of the sources involved in making this public is former Sheriff Joe Arpaio who nearly convinced me that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya rather than Hawaii. Arpaio made some very credible assessments of Obama’s Birth Certificate validity. **


** On a personal level of opinion, I believe Obama was indeed born in Hawaii rather than Kenya. However, sometime between Hawaii to Indonesia and back to Hawaii, something hinky happened with Obama’s citizenship status. It is my opinion that Obama’s citizenship records were thus messed up in the travels that may have even gotten him into Occidental College as a foreign exchange student. For me this explains the suspicious Birth Certificate and the reasons Obama school records from childhood through college have been sealed from public exposure. That’s my conjecture and not a proven fact.


Below is the illegal Obama surveillance story that if true, should cause a huge Constitutional crisis with Obama forcing an unconstitutional law into constitutional validity via clandestine blackmail.

JRH 7/14/17

Please Support NCCR


EVIDENCE: Supreme Court Justice John Roberts Was ‘Hacked’ By Obama Officials


By Patrick Howley, Editor-in-Chief

July 12, 2017 8:07 am EST

Big League Politics


Evidence shows that John Roberts, chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, was “hacked” by a Deep State surveillance operation overseen by Obama administration CIA director John Brennan and Obama director of national intelligence James Clapper.


Roberts, the Bush appointee who made the decisive vote to uphold the constitutionality of Obamacare before the 2012 election, was allegedly the victim of the same Deep State surveillance program that spied on President Donald Trump.


Tapes released by Federal Judge G. Murray Snow — preserved on a Whistleblower Soundcloud page — show real estate billionaire Timothy Blixseth explaining Brennan and Clapper’s surveillance program to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and detective Mike Zullo. The existence of this surveillance program has been corroborated by Wikileaks’ “Vault 7” release and by the public comments of former CIA and NSA contractor Dennis Montgomery, who says he worked on the program for Brennan and Clapper.


Montgomery has gone public with his claims exposing how the program was used to spy on President Donald Trump when he was a private citizen. Montgomery has gained immunity and desperately wants House Intelligence Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes or other lawmakers to call him to testify about what he knows.


On the explosive tapes, Blixseth walks Arpaio and Zullo through the details of the program on a computer screen. At one point, the three begin pulling up specific names of targeted individuals.


“You know who that guy is? That’s the head of the FISA court they hacked into, Reggie Walton,” Blixseth tells the investigators.


“John Roberts, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, was hacked,” Blixseth tells Arpaio and Zullo.


LISTEN TO THE TAPE HERE (18:00 Minute Mark)


Insiders have always been skeptical of Roberts’ motives for siding with President Obama on the 2012 Obamacare case. While there’s still no available evidence that Roberts was blackmailed, the allegation that he was “hacked” by Obama officials provides some more context into the justice’s controversial career.


As Big League Politics reported, former FBI director James Comey seized and buried volumes of information that demonstrated this wide-ranging government surveillance operation targeting Donald Trump before he became president.


Larry Klayman, attorney for former NSA and CIA contractor and whistleblower Dennis Montgomery, delivered to the FBI 47 hard drives and data amounting to more than 600 million pages of documentation on the surveillance scheme. Then-FBI director James Comey’s general counsel James Baker took the data into his possession, according to multiple sources. But despite possessing Montgomery’s bombshell whistleblower revelations, Comey never acted on or publicized the information.


Additionally, Comey’s former firm Lockheed Martin granted entry to Montgomery to one of its facilities to help him work on the alleged mass surveillance program, which was allegedly overseen by Obama administration officials John Brennan and James Clapper and specifically targeted Trump.


“This guy showed me 900 million phone calls. And I see myself in there. I see people I know. I see Donald Trump in there a zillion times, and Bloomberg is in there,” Blixseth said on the tape, referring to information that Montgomery allegedly showed him.


“We don’t have any comment,” the FBI told Big League Politics when questioned about the existence of the program.


“I provided to the FBI seventeen businesses of Donald Trump, including the Trump Tower, the Trump leasing programs, all of these different programs, and including Trump himself and the various family members that had been wiretapped under these programs,” Montgomery said in a recent interview. “There has been a wiretap on Trump for years.”


“I started by going to Maricopa County and showing that Sheriff Arpaio himself was wiretapped under the Obama administration,” the whistleblower said.


“I was a CIA contractor both under John Brennan and under James Clapper and these individuals were running domestic surveillance programs in the United States collecting information on Americans. This isn’t political. They were collecting information on Republicans and Democrats. But they collected everything they could find. Bank accounts, phone numbers, chats, emails, and they collected a massive amount of it under the Obama administration,” Montgomery said.


Did Illegal Surveillance Pass Laws in USA?

John R. Houk

© July 14, 2017


EVIDENCE: Supreme Court Justice John Roberts Was ‘Hacked’ By Obama Officials


© 2017 Big League News


About Big League Politics


Big League Politics is a fast-paced news site led by a team of top-level investigative reporters, filmmakers, and citizen journalists all over the country. We challenge powerful politicians in both the Republican and Democratic Parties. We are not conservative. We are not liberal. We are road warriors fighting the good fight for journalism. How did this happen? It happened because the mainstream media and corporate journalism outlets are bought off by shady interests and they don’t tell the truth. We got sick and tired of it. That’s why most of our writers are completely incapable of getting a job anywhere else.


Our Ethics


  1. All stories on Big League Politics are factually accurate.


  1. All stories on Big League Politics are in the public interest. We don’t suck up to politicians. We expose corruption and give people the best information on the politics of the day. If we’re reporting it, then it’s important.


  1. No target is too big or too small. If someone has broken the public trust, we will be there in his/her face with a video camera.


  1. We let our writers have a voice. It is not our job to agree with everything that our writers say. But free speech is under attack at most publications and we think that’s wrong. At Big League Politics, censorship is READ THE REST