Archive for the ‘James Comey’ Category

DEVIN NUNES, WASHINGTON’S PUBLIC ENEMY NO. 1

Sunday, July 29th, 2018

 

This interview with Devin Nunes by Kimberley Strassel (one of our top journalists) goes to the essence of the battle going on between the Congressional investigation and the FBI, the Justice Department the media and Democrats in Congress.  Amazing cover ups are going on in Washington and this article sheds light on much of it.  I’ve highlighted certain paragraphs in the article but the entire article is well worth reading.  Nancy .

Devin Nunes, Washington’s Public Enemy No. 1

What did the FBI do in the 2016 campaign? The head of the House inquiry on what he has found—and questions still unanswered.

July 28, 2018   by Kimberley A. Strassel

Tulare, Calif.

It’s 105 degrees as I stand with Rep. Devin Nunes on his family’s dairy farm. Mr. Nunes has been feeling even more heat in Washington, where as chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence he has labored to unearth the truth about the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s activities during and after the 2016 presidential campaign. Thanks in large part to his work, we now know that the FBI used informants against Donald Trump’s campaign, that it obtained surveillance warrants based on opposition research conducted for Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and that after the election Obama administration officials “unmasked” and monitored the incoming team.

Mr. Nunes’s efforts have provoked extraordinary partisan and institutional fury in Washington—across the aisle, in the FBI and other law-enforcement and intelligence agencies, in the media. “On any given day there are dozens of attacks, each one wilder in its claims,” he says. Why does he keep at it? “First of all, because it’s my job. This is a basic congressional investigation, and we follow the facts,” he says. The “bigger picture,” he adds, is that in “a lot of the bad and problematic countries” that Intelligence Committee members investigate, “this is what they do there. There is a political party that controls the intelligence agencies, controls the media, all to ensure that party stays in power. If we get to that here, we no longer have a functioning republic. We can’t let that happen.”

Mr. Nunes, 44, was elected to Congress in 2002 from Central California. He joined the Intelligence Committee in 2011 and delved into the statutes, standards and norms that underpin U.S. spying. That taught him to look for “red flags,” information or events that don’t feel right and indicate a deeper problem. He noticed some soon after the 2016 election.

(more…)

Share

WHY OBAMA WANTED THE RUSSIANS TO HACK OUR ELECTIONS

Tuesday, June 26th, 2018

 

Wow ! This is one you really should read.   Nancy

WHY OBAMA WANTED THE RUSSIANS TO HACK THE ELECTION

How the two deep state intel operations fit together.

June 25, 2018   Daniel Greenfield    Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical left and Islamic terrorism.

“Why the hell are we standing down?”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(more…)

Share

VIDEO JUDGE JEANINE – THE IG REPORT

Sunday, June 17th, 2018

 

VIDEO  – JUDGE JEANINE  – OPENING STATEMENT   JUNE 16, 2018   THE  IG REPORT –  THE DEEP STATE IS ALIVE AND WELL AND HAS VERY DEEP TENTACLES
Share

THE CURIOUS CASE OF MR. DOWNER

Tuesday, June 5th, 2018

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

The Curious Case of Mr. Downer

His story about the Papadopoulos meeting calls the FBI’s into question.

High Commissioner of Australia to the United Kingdom Alexander Downer arrives at Downing Street in central London on March 22, 2017.
High Commissioner of Australia to the United Kingdom Alexander Downer arrives at Downing Street in central London on March 22, 2017. PHOTO: DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

To hear the Federal Bureau of Investigation tell it, its decision to launch a counterintelligence probe into a major-party presidential campaign comes down to a foreign tip about a 28-year-old fourth-tier Trump adviser, George Papadopoulos.

The FBI’s media scribes have dutifully reported the bare facts of that “intel.” We are told the infamous tip came from Alexander Downer, at the time the Australian ambassador to the U.K. Mr. Downer invited Mr. Papadopoulos for a drink in early May 2016, where the aide told the ambassador the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton. Word of this encounter at some point reached the FBI, inspiring it to launch its counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign on July 31.

Notably (nay, suspiciously) absent or muddled are the details of how and when that information made its way to the FBI, and what exactly was transmitted. A December 2017 New York Times story vaguely explains that the Australians passed the info to “American counterparts” about “two months later,” and that once it “reached the FBI,” the bureau acted. Even the Times admits it’s “not clear” why it took the Aussies so long to flip such a supposedly smoking tip. The story meanwhile slyly leads readers to believe that Mr. Papadopoulos told Mr. Downer that Moscow had “thousands of emails,” but read it closely and the Times in fact never specifies what the Trump aide said, beyond “dirt.”

(more…)

Share

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

Wednesday, May 30th, 2018

 

www.jewishworldreview.com/0518/steyn052818.php3 

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

by Mark Steyn   May 28, 2018

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

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

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

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

(more…)

Share

ARE WE IN A CIVIL WAR ?

Monday, May 28th, 2018

 


A few days ago, Jack Minzey, sent what was to be the final chapter in the long line of books and treatises which he had written.

Jack went to be with the Lord,  on Sunday, 8 April 2018. 

Professionally, Jack was head of the Department of Education at Eastern Michigan University as well as a prolific author of numerous books, most of which were on the topic of Education and the Government role therein.  His interest in Conservative Politics was exceeded  only  by his intellectual ability.

This is the last of his works:

Civil War

How do civil wars happen?

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.  That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it’s not the first time they’ve done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn’t really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There’s a pattern here.

What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don’t accept the results of any election that they don’t win. It means they don’t believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections.

That’s a civil war.

(more…)

Share

ANDREW MCCARTHY – POLITICIZED JUSTICE

Monday, May 21st, 2018

 

In Politicized Justice, Desperate Times Call for Disparate Measures

Share

VIDEO AND ARTICLE DERSHOWITZ EXPLODES: “I DON’T WANT TO LIVE IN A POLICE STATE “

Friday, May 4th, 2018

 

 VIDEO AND ARTICLE
Dershowitz Explodes: ‘I Don’t Want To Live In A Police State’
Share

THE SECOND AMERICAN CIVIL WAR CONTINUES

Sunday, April 15th, 2018

 

 

©2018. William Hamilton.

Nationally syndicated columnist, William Hamilton, is a laureate of the Oklahoma Journalism Hall of Fame, the Nebraska Aviation Hall of Fame, the Colorado Aviation Hall of Fame, and the Oklahoma University Army ROTC Wall of Fame. In 2015, he was named an Outstanding Alumnus of the University of Nebraska. Dr. Hamilton is the author of The Wit and Wisdom of William Hamilton: the Sage of Sheepdog Hill, Pegasus Imprimis Press (2017). “Central View,” can also be seen at: www.central-view.com.

 

 

On Saturday, April 14, 2018, William Hamilton <drwm.hamilton@gmail.com> wrote:

 

“Central View,” by William Hamilton, J.D., Ph.D.

The Second American Civil War Continues…

Readers may recall not long ago in this space: “What constitutes a Civil War is when certain bureaucrats within the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government, along with certain elected and appointed officials within the Legislative and the Judicial Branches of government, form a conspiracy, either formal or informal, to set aside the results of the presidential election of 2016 and to prevent the duly elected president from being able to govern effectively…”

Do not be confused about what is going on in Washington, D.C. The current tactic in the American Civil War II is to provoke President Trump into taking an action or actions that could be the basis for the charge of: Obstruction of Justice.

Note well: If and when the Democrats obtain a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, President Trump will be impeached for something like “running with scissors when his mother told him long ago not to do that.” That, however, would not get President Trump convicted by 2/3ds of the U.S. Senate. A truly substantive charge would be required.

Recall, President Nixon was not forced out of office because some over-eager campaign underlings broke into the Watergate offices of the Democratic National Committee. The burglars were caught in the act and they were on their way to being subjected to whatever punishment the Courts and the Federal Election Commission decided to mete out. But, when President Nixon tried to cover up what happened, he obstructed justice and for that Nixon was forced to resign. Nixon’s alternative was to risk being impeached by a simple majority of the House and, possibly, convicted by 2/3ds of the U.S. Senate.

(more…)

Share

THE POLITICIZATION OF THE FBI

Wednesday, March 14th, 2018

 

IMPRIMIS

The Politicization of the FBI

February 2018 • Volume 47, Number 2

Joseph E. diGenova  Former U.S. Attorney


Joseph E. diGenovaJoseph E. diGenova is a founding partner of diGenova & Toensing, LLP. He received his B.A. from the University of Cincinnati and his J.D. from Georgetown University. He has served as United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, Independent Counsel of the United States, Special Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives, Chief Counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, and Counsel to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (the Church Committee).


 

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on January 25, 2018, at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C., as part of the AWC Family Foundation Lecture Series. 

Over the past year, facts have emerged that suggest there was a plot by high-ranking FBI and Department of Justice (DOJ) officials in the Obama administration, acting under color of law, to exonerate Hillary Clinton of federal crimes and then, if she lost the election, to frame Donald Trump and his campaign for colluding with Russia to steal the presidency. This conduct was not based on mere bias, as has been widely claimed, but rather on deeply felt animus toward Trump and his agenda.

In the course of this plot, FBI Director James Comey, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, FBI Deputy Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok, Strzok’s paramour and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, FBI General Counsel James Baker, and DOJ senior official Bruce Ohr—perhaps among others—compromised federal law enforcement to such an extent that the American public is losing trust. A recent CBS News poll finds 48 percent of Americans believe that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Trump-Russia collusion probe is “politically motivated,” a stunning conclusion. And 63 percent of polled voters in a Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll believe that the FBI withheld vital information from Congress about the Clinton and Russia collusion investigations.

I spent my early legal career as a federal prosecutor. I later supervised hundreds of prosecutors and prosecutions as a U.S. Attorney and as an Independent Counsel. I have never witnessed investigations so fraught with failure to fulfill the basic elements of a criminal probe as those conducted under James Comey. Not since former Acting FBI Director L. Patrick Gray deep-sixed evidence during Watergate has the head of the FBI been so discredited as Comey is now.

(more…)

Share
Search All Posts
Categories