McCarthy: Lisa Page’s text PROVES that Mueller CANNOT plausibly charge Trump with ‘OBSTRUCTION’

(National SentinelIn the Clear: Former national security federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy cleared up some misunderstandings about yesterday’s alleged “bombshell” revelation in which FBI lawyer Lisa Page texted her lover, FBI agent Peter Strzok, that President Obama “wants to know everything we’re doing” in terms of the counterintelligence investigation into Team Trump.

In addressing reports about the revelation in conservative media, McCarthy wrote in his column for National Review that “Your play here is not that Obama is a liar. It is that the president is supposed to ‘interfere’ in intelligence investigations. That makes the Trump-Russia obstruction narrative patently absurd.”

McCarthy goes on to note that he has, for more than a year and well before special counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment, been touting the difference between a counterintelligence investigation and a criminal probe.

“Criminal investigations are about prosecuting people who violate the penal law. Political officials are generally supposed to stay out of them because we are a rule-of-law society — we want individual cases to be decided strictly by the law, not by political considerations,” he wrote.

He notes further:

There is not, nor should there be, complete independence between politics and this law-enforcement mission: Law enforcement is an executive political responsibility; the president is accountable for it; he sets the government’s law-enforcement priorities; prosecutors and investigators exercise the president’s power, not their own; and the president has undeniable constitutional authority to wade into investigations — even to the point of pardoning law-breakers. Still, by and large, the president should not interfere in criminal cases. If the president does interfere, he should do so transparently: Issue a pardon or order the investigation closed, and take the political heat for it; don’t stage-manage a farce to make it look like your crony is being exonerated by a real investigation when everyone knows you will not permit charges to be filed (see, e.g., the Clinton emails case).

Counterintelligence investigations are quite different, McCarthy — who specialized in them as a U.S. attorney — said. Since they are not about violations of penal law, there is no worry that political officials get involved in them, especially presidents because counterintelligence is performed on behalf of presidents.

“Counterintelligence is an information-gathering exercise undertaken for one purpose and one purpose alone: to inform the president, through his subordinate intelligence officials, of information about threats to, and opportunities to advance, American interests,” McCarthy clarified.

“The president is never supposed to resist ‘interference’ in counterintelligence. To the contrary, informing the president is the reason the FBI has a counterintelligence mission,” McCarthy explained. “Indeed, the information derived from counterintelligence operations is often included in the president’s daily intelligence briefing.”

McCarthy referenced the Sept. 16, 2016, text sent from Page to Strzok, in which the pair were discussing “talking points” being provided for then-FBI Director James Comey so he could brief President Obama, because “potus wants to know everything we are doing.”

“It appears obvious that the two are referring to ‘everything we are doing in what was then their most important counterintelligence initiative: the probe of possible connections between Donald Trump, then the Republican nominee for president, and the Kremlin,” McCarthy wrote.

The former national security prosecutor noted that Strzok and Page were working off information provided to the bureau and the Justice Department received via the infamous “Trump dossier” gathered by Christopher Steele, a former British spy who had provided the FBI with reliable information in the past.

Live Fire Gear - FireCord

Though it appears as though the FBI failed to verify the contents of the dossier, the bureau was nevertheless obligated to brief Obama because, again, it was counterintelligence. Obama’s and the campaign of Hillary Clinton’s motives for creating the dossier aside, it cannot be argued that the document was not considered as evidence in a counterintelligence investigation.

More:

Put aside what you think about all this politically as we sit here in February 2018. The question is what people were thinking in September 2016. I have no doubt that the Obama administration, including the upper echelons of the Obama-era Justice Department and FBI, believed Donald Trump was unfit to be president and that he was at least vulnerable to blackmail by the Putin regime, if not in cahoots with the Putin regime. I also have no doubt that they were politically aligned with Hillary Clinton, whom Obama was ardently supporting and a criminal investigation against whom the FBI and Justice Department had dropped, despite substantial evidence of guilt, after Obama had signaled that he did not want Mrs. Clinton charged.

The point here is not to sort out the motivations and intentions of officials, which ran the spectrum from a proper desire to protect the country to a politicized loss of objectivity that induced them blindly to accept Steele’s sensational claims as fact. The point is to understand formally what was going on.

Formally, the FBI was doing a counterintelligence investigation of Russian threats to the United States that happened to involve the Kremlin’s potential coopting of the Republican presidential candidate. That was something the FBI was supposed to keep the president of the United States informed about. Informing the president about foreign threats is the FBI’s counterintelligence mission. If the FBI credited the information involved and Director Comey had nevertheless failed to brief President Obama on it, he would have been guilty of an indefensible dereliction of duty.

McCarthy notes that indeed, Obama’s April 2016 statement to Fox News‘ Chris Matthews that he never interfered in Justice Department investigations was comically false as he ran the most politicized DOJ in modern history. He even signaled during the interview that he did not believe she did anything wrong — at least intentionally so — which was a sign to prosecutors and the FBI the president wanted her cleared.

And she was.

“Yet it is frivolous to claim that Obama’s “no interference” assertion in April was a lie because he got briefed by Comey in September about the Trump-Russia caper,” McCarthy writes, because in that April interview, Obama was talking about criminal investigations.

The following September, as indicated by the Page-Strzok text, Obama was being briefed on counterintelligence operations, by comparison.

“A president cannot ‘interfere’ with a counterintelligence investigation because keeping the president informed is the reason we have counterintelligence investigations.

“Consequently, what this episode ought to focus the commentariat on is the obstruction angle of the Mueller investigation. It is cockamamie,” writes McCarthy.

He notes:

The theory behind this aspect of the special counsel’s work is that President Trump obstructed the Russia probe by, principally, (a) leaning on Comey to drop the investigation of Michael Flynn, (b) firing Comey, and (c) “threatening” to fire Mueller. Here is the problem: The Russia investigation is principally a counterintelligence investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 investigation. The president cannot interfere in a counterintelligence investigation. Trump can no more obstruct the Russia investigation by taking actions that could conceivably affect it than Obama could obstruct the Russia investigation by being briefed on it and giving the FBI directions on it. Counterintelligence investigations are conducted for the president.

The point of them is to provide the president with all relevant information he needs to make decisions about protecting the country and advancing American interests. That’s also the point of the ‘Russia’ investigation.

Democrats and others obsessed with ‘getting Trump’ fail to make the distinction that counterintelligence operations are conducted to inform the president, McCarthy notes; if Mueller is conducting a criminal probe, then the Justice Department was required to make that point clear when it appointed him.

The DOJ did no such thing. In fact, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller without alleging that Trump or members of his campaign team even committed any violations of law.

“But let’s set that aside,” McCarthy continued:

According to Director Comey, Trump was not a criminal suspect. Asking Comey to go easy on Flynn — who was under criminal investigation for lying to the FBI — cannot legitimately have turned Trump into a suspect. As we’ve covered at length, the president is authorized to exercise prosecutorial discretion (an executive power) by weighing in on the merits of prosecuting a person; Trump did not direct Comey to drop the investigation, though he could have; Trump could have pardoned Flynn, which would have ended the investigation; and the investigation proceeded apace — ultimately leading to Flynn’s guilty plea.

As for firing Comey and purportedly threatening to fire Mueller (in fact, Trump has not taken any serious step in the direction of removing the special counsel), these are imagined by Trump detractors into obstruction episodes because they show Trump interfering in the Russia investigation. But the Russia investigation is a counterintelligence investigation. Trump gets to “interfere” in it if he chooses to. Though he grouses about it, he does not seem to have much inclination to interfere in it.

If there is no criminal investigation of Trump — and there is no indication there is — then it is not constitutionally possible for him to “obstruct” a counterintelligence probe since they are conducted for the president McCarthy concluded.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

DiGenova doubles down: ‘Heading for very SAD ENDING for several FBI, DOJ officials’ over FISA, Team Trump abuses (Video)

(National SentinelCriminals: Former U.S. attorney for the D.C. District Joe diGenova told Fox News‘ Sean Hannity Wednesday evening that he believes several current and former FBI and Justice Department officials involved in abusing the system in order to spy on President Donald J. Trump’s campaign are going to jail.

In what he called the “largest” federal law enforcement scandal in the history of the country, diGenova said it will be a “sad day” soon for those involved.

“We are heading toward a very sad ending for the FBI and senior DOJ officials. [Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew] McCabe is gone because [FBI Director Christopher] Wray knows what’s in the other emails and other texts,” he said, referring to communications between anti-Trump elements of the DOJ and FBI that have recently been revealed.

“The investigation that is underway is going to lead to criminal charges against a number of people,” diGenova predicted. “What you are seeing coming out now in the text messages is just the minimum of what is available now to DOJ officials… I believe that several high FBI officials will be charged criminally.”

He added: “This is the largest law enforcement scandal in history for this reason. The activity for McCabe and others, and [Justice Department official] Bruce Ohr and others, were designed to subvert the Constitution and a national election – the most serious offense under our Constitution.”

Last week the House Intelligence Committee released a four-page “FISA memo” detailing serial abuses by elements of the Obama FBI and DOJ of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to obtain surveillance warrants against a one-time member of Trump’s campaign, Carter Page.

The memo noted that the FBI relied on “dossier” compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele containing salacious allegations against Trump and members of his campaign.

The FBI reportedly failed to vet the dossier before using it as Exhibit A in order to obtain the surveillance warrant from the FISC.

Watch, per Fox News:

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Informant: Obama briefed TWICE on dirty Uranium One deal, did NOTHING (Video)

(National SentinelNational Security: Critics of a deal to allow a Russian state-owned uranium company, Rosatom, to purchase a Western firm, Uranium One, that held 20 percent of all U.S. strategic uranium, have long said it negatively impacted American national security.

And yet a series of U.S. officials including former Secretary of State and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton allowed the deal to go through.

Hand Picked Wines straight to Your Door- Exclusive member discounts

Many of those same critics have often wondered where was the president of the United States — Barack Obama — during the deal-making process which, reports have since noted, was fraught with corruption?

According to an FBI informant in the case, Obama was briefed at least twice but failed to stop the deal.

In October the informant, identified as Bill Campbell, came forward with details of a story of backroom dealing and quid-pro-quo arrangements involving several Obama administration figures along with Bill and Hillary Clinton.

As The National Sentinel reported:

An undercover informant for the FBI who worked in the Russian nuclear industry and was made to sign an “illegal” non-disclosure agreement (NDA) by Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch is claiming to have video evidence showing Russian agents with briefcases full of bribe money in relation to the Uranium One scandal.

Having been deeply embedded in the Russian nuclear industry, Campbell was able to gather incriminating evidence of bribery and kickbacks to and by U.S. and Russian actors involved in getting the Uranium One deal approved by the Obama administration.

Meanwhile, Campbell’s attorney, former Reagan Justice Department official Victoria Toensing, previously told Fox Business host Lou Dobbs, “He can tell what all the Russians were talking about during the time that all these bribery payments were made.”

FO-300x250-1

Reports noted earlier that as the Uranium One deal progressed beyond 2009 and into 2013 when it was concluded, tens of millions of dollars flowed into the Clinton Family Foundation.

In addition, Bill Clinton received hefty, outsized payments of $500,000 each for a series of speeches he gave in Moscow.

Fast-forward to this week. On Wednesday Campbell broke his silence again after receiving marathon cancer treatments to inform three congressional committees, according to investigative reporter and Fox News contributor Sara A. Carter, who obtained his testimony:

“For several years my relationship with the CIA consisted of being debriefed after foreign travel,” Campbell noted in his testimony, which was obtained by this reporter. “Gradually, the relationship evolved into the CIA tasking me to travel to specific countries to obtain specific information. In the 1990’s I developed a working relationship with Kazakhstan and Russia in their nuclear energy industries. When I told the CIA of this development, I was turned over to FBI counterintelligence agents.”

The informant’s attorney, Victoria Toensing partner at the firm DiGenova & Toensing, said the following:

“Mr. Campbell testified for over four hours until he answered every question from three Congressional committees; the Senate Judiciary, House Oversight and House Intelligence committees.

He recounted numerous times that the Russians bragged that the Clintons’ influence in the Obama administration would ensure CIFIUS approval for Uranium One. And he was right.”

In an interview Wednesday night with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Toensing — a former Reagan administration official — noted that Campbell testified that he was told Obama was briefed at least twice on the deal as it progressed.

“Mr. Campbell was told by the FBI that what he was being told and they were taking it upstairs and he was also told that President Obama also had it in his daily briefing twice,” she said.

Watch:

In December, Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered a new probe into the Uranium One deal.

Zero Hedge reported in January that ranking members of the Obama FBI and Justice Department were also involved:

Robert Mueller’s FBI had been investigating the scheme since at least 2008 – with retiring Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe assigned to the ongoing investigation which was hidden from the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS). Had they known, the committee never would have approved the Uranium One deal with TENEX’s parent company, Rosatom. 

Four individuals were eventually prosecuted and given plea agreements after the Uranium One deal was approved. The prosecuting DOJ attorneys? Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and top Mueller investigator in the Trump-Russia probe, Andrew Weissman – who praised former acting Attorney General Sally Yates for defying Trump.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

DiGenova: Memo 2.0 proves SOMEONE in Obama’s State Dept. helped feed false info to FBI; ‘Somebody’s going to have to go to PRISON’ (Video)

(National SentinelIndictments: Former U.S. attorney Joe diGenova argued on Fox News‘ Laura Ingraham program Tuesday night that the newly released “memo 2.0” — a redacted version of an eight-page memo written by Sens. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Lindsey Graham — proves someone in President Obama’s State Department fed the FBI false information through Trump dossier author Christopher Steele.

Part of that information was then used by the FBI to obtain surveillance warrants against a member of President Donald J. Trump’s campaign.

In his inteview, diGenova said such actions are likely illegal and that someone needs to be held legally responsible.

“The Grassley-Graham memo establishes beyond any doubt that the FBI knowingly deceived the FISA court about the information it was presenting to them, lied to them about the fact that it was verified information, which it was not — which the law requires,” he said.

“And now we know that additional Clinton allies, including Sidney Blumenthal, were involved in the transmission of false information, unverified information to the FBI through State Department officials. Somebody’s going to have to go to prison,” he declared.

Watch:

Also on Tuesday, Grassley released a “much-less redacted” version of this week’s criminal referral — also known as memo 2.0 — of former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.

On Monday, Grassley and Graham said that Steele compiled his anti-Trump dossier based on information provided him by a Hillary Clinton contact and Obama State Department official.

Investigative reporter Sara A. Carter noted further:

A new and highly redacted document released Monday by the Senate Judiciary Committee reveals that former British spy Christopher Steele, the man behind the unverified and controversial dossier, wrote an additional memo regarding alleged Russian collusion with President Donald Trump but that the information was largely based on information provided by allies of former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

…[G]rassley sent a criminal referral regarding Steele’s involvement in the dossier to the Department of Justice referral January 4. The criminal referral confirms that allies of Clinton and the Obama administration were providing Steele with what they deemed damaging information on then candidate-elect Trump.

“One memorandum by Mr. Steele that was not published by Buzzfeed is dated October 19, 2016. The report alleges (redacted), as well as (redacted),” Memo 2.0 states. ”

FO-300x250-1

Mr. Steele’s memorandum states that his company ‘received this report from (redacted) U.S. State Department,’ that the report was the second in a series, and that the report was information that came from a foreign sub-source who ‘is in touch with (redacted) US State Department,’ that the report was the second in a series, and that the report was information that came from a sub-source who ‘is in touch with (redacted), a contact of (redacted) of (redacted) a friend of the Clintons, who passed it to (redacted).”

“I don’t take lightly making a referral for criminal investigation. But, as I would with any credible evidence of a crime unearthed in the course of our investigations, I feel obliged to pass that information along to the Justice Department for appropriate review,” Grassley said in a statement.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Report suggests FBI PAID Trump dossier author Steele’s travel expenses so he’d look like an ‘INFORMANT’ rather than a HACK for the DNC

(National SentinelPoliticized: Congressional investigators are poring over evidence in an effort to find out if the FBI paid Trump dossier author and former British spy Christopher Steele’s travel expenses to Washingon, D.C., and Rome so he would look more like an “informant” than an opposition researcher paid by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Steele, who was due in a London court earlier this week for a long-awaited deposition, was a no-show after his lawyers argued he should not have to sit for videotape sessions.

Steele is under fire again following the release of a redacted eight-page memo by Sens. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that was part of a criminal referral involving Steele to the Justice Department.

Steele and the dossier are key to the so-called “Russian collusion” investigation. Congress wants to the Obama FBI’s full role in its relationship with Steele. The four-page FISA memo last week said that the FBI cut its ties to Steele after agents discovered he was leaking info about his relationship with the bureau to the press.

The Grassley-Graham referral also said that Steele was paid $160,000 by Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that commissioned the dossier, which was ultimately financed by the Clinton campaign and the DNC.

It also confirms that the FBI authorized payment to Steele as well.

Steele traveled to Washington D.C. in September of 2016 and met with reporters. One of the meetings was held in the office of the DNC’s general counsel. He also traveled to Rome in September of 2016 to meet with FBI officials.

Now, congressional investigators would like to know why the bureau agreed to pay Steele at all.

On Tuesday, Paul Sperry, an investigative reporter for the New York Post, tweeted that investigators were pursuing this “new line of inquiry.”

“BREAKING: Hill committees pursuing new line of inquiry into whether FBI offered to pay Steele in order to ‘clean him up’ before FISC as ‘paid informant’ vs hired Hillary hand. Looking at FBI reimbursement of Steele travel expenses to DC & Rome legat [sic] office. (Never went to Russia),” he tweeted.

In addition, according to Breitbart News, the Grassley-Graham memo indicates that Steele allegedly lied to the bureau about his contact with Yahoo News, while the FBI was not fully forthcoming with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to obtain a surveillance warrant for Trump campaign figure Carter Page.

“Then-FBI Director James Comey briefed Feinstein and Grassley in March 2017 and told them that the FBI had relied on the dossier “absent meaningful corroboration — and in light of the highly political motives surrounding its creation” because Steele himself was considered reliable due to his past work with the FBI,” the site reported.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Nunes MISSILE: ‘Clear LINK’ between DEMOCRATS and Russia in 2016 election

(National SentinelRevealed: House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., made waves again on Tuesday after he stated the panel’s ongoing ‘Russian collusion’ investigation has established a “clear link” between Moscow and Democrats.

During an appearance on Fox News, Nunes made it clear that the link was part of a conspiracy to undermine and smear President Donald J. Trump with the assistance of Russian government operatives.

“We have a clear link to Russia — you have a campaign who hired a law firm, who hire Fusion GPS, who hired a foreign agent, who then got information from the Russians on the other campaign,” said Nunes.

“It seems like the counterintelligence investigation should have been opened up against the Hillary campaign when they got ahold of the dossier. But that didn’t happen, either.”

The Intel chairman also said that the FBI never informed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the manufactured “Trump dossier” the bureau used to get a surveillance warrant for one-time Trump campaign advisor Carter Page was, in fact, a political opposition research document, not a piece of intelligence.

And he said the bureau also never informed the FISC that the dossier was paid for by the Hillary campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Nunes also lamented the fact that the establishment media is essentially ignoring the revelations contained in his FISA memo and the further allegations being made against the Obama administration and the former president for their alleged roles in the scandal.

“I think the bigger problem, challenge here, is that the mainstream media is totally uninterested in this,” he said.

“Can you imagine if the shoe was on the other foot – and Donald Trump or George Bush or Karl Rove had paid for information and then George W Bush’s FBI had opened an investigation into the Obama campaign because they were talking to Russians – which, by the way, really did happen; the Obama campaign was talking to Russians back in 2008 – and open up a counterintelligence investigation using dirt dug up and paid for by RNC and George W. Bush supporters?” the chairman continued.

“This town would be on fire. Every reporter would be following around Karl Rove and George W. Bush all over town – yet it’s crickets from the media,” he noted.

“It’s embarrassing. It’s absolutely embarrassing, I’m almost flabbergasted. Because I thought at least there would be some ounce of credibility left, but there really is none.”

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Coming next: DOJ IG Horowitz’s YEAR-LONG investigation into FBI’s bungling of Hillary email case set to blow case wide open

(National SentinelBombshells: Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz is not well-known to most Americans, but in the coming weeks his name is liable to become much more familiar.

That’s because he is expected to wrap up an investigation that he’s been conducting quietly in the background regarding the FBI’s so-called investigation into Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified emails.

As reported by The Hill, Horowitz’s report is expected by the spring, and it could reignite the Clinton case and lead to further revelations regarding the scandalous nature in which the probe was allegedly conducted.

Already many Americans are familiar with previous reports noting that, for instance, then-FBI Director James Comey began preparing a statement exonerating Clinton months before the probe was completed and before she was ever interviewed. In fact, the bureau has already confirmed this.

What’s more, we know that then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch was aware that Comey would exonerate Clinton before she recused herself from the investigation after meeting former President Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac in Arizona.

And others believe the scandal deeply involves former President Obama. That includes former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova, who spoke about that last month with The Daily Caller:

Now, Horowitz’s report promises to provide even more evidence that the ‘fix was in’ to let the Democratic nominee for president in 2016 off the hook for what many experts — including Comey — saw as clear-cut violations of the Espionage Act.

As reported by The Hill:

A political appointee in both the Bush and Obama administrations, Horowitz’s yearlong investigation already reportedly contributed to the early resignation of Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe. And his work has been felt in other ways.

Horowitz also uncovered a series of text messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page that led special counsel Robert Mueller to remove Strzok from his team. Those texts have fueled accusations among GOP lawmakers that Mueller’s probe is tainted by partisanship.

Friends and associates of Horowitz describe him as fair-minded and independent.

“He is really one of the smartest and fairest people I have ever had the pleasure to work with,” said Bill Hamel, who served as assistant inspector general for investigations at the Department of Education. “He’s a straight shooter and a fair guy. He’s an honest broker.”

That said, no matter what Horowitz’s findings conclude, they are liable to be attacked by a hyper-partisan Congress, say observers.

More from The Hill:

It’s possible that both parties will get political ammunition from Horowitz’s report.

The inspector general is examining whether then-FBI Director James Comey broke FBI procedure with his public disclosures about the Clinton case, including the letter that he sent to Congress a few weeks before the election. Before Trump fired Comey, Democrats were outspoken in their criticism of those decisions, saying they violated procedure and cost Clinton the election.

But Horowitz is also looking into allegations that McCabe should have been recused from the investigation. Republicans, including Trump, have seized on reports that McCabe’s wife accepted campaign contributions from Clinton ally and former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe when she ran for state office in Virginia, calling it a clear conflict of interest. 

Finally, Horowitz is also looking into unauthorized disclosures of information.

“There are a lot of legitimate questions that I hope would be answered by this inspector and that probably aren’t going to paint the DOJ or the FBI in a particularly good light,” Ron Hosko, a former official in the FBI’s criminal investigative division, told the paper.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

House Intel Committee could release FIVE MORE MEMOS exposing ‘politically motivated’ abuses by FBI, DOJ

(National SentinelFull Disclosure: Reports over the weekend noted that the House Intelligence Committee is preparing to release as many as five additional memos showing alleged legal abuses by some current and former ranking officials within the FBI and Justice Department.

The additional memos, were they to be released, follow the first “FISA memo” released on Friday detailing serious fraudulent activities in pursuit of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant by the FBI and DOJ to spy on a member of the Trump campaign over alleged ties to Russia.

Axios reports that the House panel could publish up to five more reports outlining “politically motivated “wrongdoing” across different agencies, including the FBI, the broader Justice Department, and the State Department.”

The site noted:

What we’re hearing: Republicans close to Nunes say there could be as many as five additional memos or reports of “wrongdoing.” But a source on the House Intelligence Committee tells me there’s no current plan to use the same extraordinary and highly controversial process they just went through, with a vote and ultimately a presidential approval to declassify sensitive information.

“There are several areas of concern where federal agencies used government resources to try to create a narrative and influence the election. Some have suggested coordination with Hillary Clinton operatives, [Sydney] Blumenthal and [Cody] Shearer, to back up the false narrative,” one Republican member of Congress told Axios.

That coincides with earlier reporting by Fox News contributor and investigative journalist Sara A. Carter, who said Saturday that additional memos are on the way.

“Here’s what we know. There was a second dossier that was put together by a person named Cody Shearer. He is a very controversial activist, a former reporter who worked with the Clintons in the past,” she said.

“And the FBI was also using this second dossier as part of what they were doing to back up the other dossier by Christopher Steele, an unverified dossier. And we believe Christopher Steele was also sending information to the State Department in bits and snippets,” Carter noted further.

“But I think the most important thing here and one of the things they are going to be looking at very closely are the leaks. There were a number of leaks out unverified information by possibly senior members of the Obama administration,” she said.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

GOP lawmaker: ‘Give us the FISA court TRANSCRIPTS’

(National SentinelDeep State: Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert will request that House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., subpoena the transcripts from Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court hearings involving the discredited “Trump dossier.”

The request comes after Friday’s release of the so-called “FISA memo,” which detailed serial abuses by the Obama administration of the FISA court in order to secure a surveillance warrant to spy on a Trump campaign figure. The dossier factored heavily in securing those warrants, the memo claimed.

“I have prepared a letter that I plan to submit to and hopefully have other people sign on with me tomorrow on our Judiciary Committee we have a great Chairman [Bob Goodlatte] on our Judiciary Committee,” Gohmert told Fox News Sunday. 

“He wants to get to the facts and what I’m asking him for is that we as the Judiciary Committee subpoena the transcripts from the FISA court hearings, the four different ones at least regarding the dossier…I want to hear everything that was said,” he added.

Specifically, Gohmert wants to know why the FISA court judge who granted the subpoenas — though the court was not told the dossier was a political, and not an intelligence, document — has not held the FBI and Justice Department officials who used it as the basis of their request in contempt.

Gohmert previously called for former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and Justice Dept. official Bruce Ohr to be jailed for using what they knew to be a political document in order to secure a FISC warrant to allow the bureau to spy on the Trump campaign.

“I think it’s important to know who the FISA judge was, and why with all the info he’s had for some time, he has not put anyone in jail for committing fraud on his court,” Gohmert, who serves on the Committee on the Judiciary,” said.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Rep. Steve King: ‘Watch for Obama’s fingerprints’ ALL OVER FISA abuse scandal

(National SentinelDeep Statist: Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said on Saturday that he believes evidence exists that former President Barack Obama had a heavy hand in abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that led to improper spying on President Donald J. Trump’s campaign.

FO-300x250-1

“Watch closely for Barack Obama’s fingerprints,” King told Breitbart News Radio yesterday. “[Democrats and their allies] will defend Barack Obama at all costs, and they’ll defend Hillary Clinton almost at all costs unless they have to sacrifice her to protect Barack Obama.”

King made his comments against the backdrop of Friday’s release of the scandalous FISA memo, a four-page document prepared by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee explaining that a surveillance warrant obtained from the FISA court by Obama’s FBI and Justice Department to spy on Trump campaign foreign advisor Carter Page was based on an unsubstantiated political report — the “Trump dossier” — not on actual intelligence.

Nothing in the dossier has been verified, which also troubled the Intelligence Committee. The panel’s chairman, Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said that ranking DOJ and FBI officials did not inform the FISA court the dossier was a political opposition report paid for in part by the Hillary Clinton campaign.

“Look at all of these investigations now,” King continued. “Look closely for Barack Obama’s fingerprints. I’ve just identified some that I think are fingerprints, and I think this trail leads to the Obama presidency, to Barack Obama himself, but it’s going to take some time if we get there, and I’m not certain that the evidence trail necessarily leads there.

“There’s an indication trail that says we need to take a look and find out. But if it’s not Barack Obama, then who is it? Well, it’s Loretta Lynch, for example, and James Comey, and McCabe, and that cast of characters from Sally Yates on down,” he continued.

“I don’t think we’ve ever seen such a long row of very high-level executive branch officials wrapped up in something here that is political partisanship, weaponizing the FBI and DOJ to do opposition research that was stimulated by the presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and [paid for with her] and the DNC’s checkbooks,” King noted.

On Saturday, The National Sentinel’s editor-in-chief, J. D. Heyes, laid out the possible path from the FISA warrant approval process in this scandal to the 44th president.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

SECOND source confirms: Rosenstein THREATENED House Intel chair Nunes and entire GOP side of committee

(National SentinelConfirmation:Fox News legal analyst who claimed Friday night that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein threatened House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and other Republicans on the panel now says a second source is confirming it.

The threat was allegedly tied to the Intelligence Committee’s then-plans to release the scandalous FISA memo, which revealed serial abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by upper echelon officials in the FBI and Justice Department to prevent Donald J. Trump from becoming president, and to undermine him after he defeated Hillary Clinton in November 2016. The memo says the officials used a bogus “Trump dossier” — a political document — and represented it before the FISA court as legitimate intelligence to get a surveillance warrant so the Obama administration could spy on a Trump campaign official, Carter Page.

The surveillance was reauthorized at least twice; all three authorizations involved use of the bogus dossier, which was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the campaign of Hillary Clinton.

Earlier Saturday The National Sentinel reported that legal analyst Gregg Jarrett told Sean Hannity during the latter’s program last night:

I can tell you a congressional source tells me that Rod Rosenstein in a meeting three weeks ago threatened Chairman Nunes and members of Congress he was going to subpoena their texts and messages because he was tired of dealing with the intel committee.

On Saturday, Garrett tweeted out confirmation of that, adding that a second source has also come forward to corroborate his initial source.

“A 2nd source has now confirmed to me that, in a meeting on January 10, Deputy A-G Rosenstein used the power of his office to threaten to subpoena the calls & texts of the Intel Committee to get it to stop it’s [sic] investigation of DOJ and FBI. Likely an Abuse of Power & Obstruction,” Garrett tweeted.

In addition, Jarrett also named the crime Rosenstein may have committed.

“It is a crime for a government official to use his office to threaten anyone, including a member of Congress, for exercising a constitutionally protected right. See 18 USC 242 and other similar abuse of power statutes.”

He added: “Again, if true, Rosenstein’s action was an illegal abuse of power and he should no longer serve as Deputy Attorney General. He allegedly used threats to try to stop the Intelligence Committee from exposing wrongful behavior in an attempt to cover it up.”

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

The OBAMA factor in the FISA memo scandal: AG Lynch signed off on ALL requests to spy on Team TRUMP; Prez likely BRIEFED about the spying

analysis
By J. D. Heyes, editor-in-chief

(National SentinelFISA Corruption: More information continues to be revealed and released following Friday’s publication of the scandal-filled FISA memo.

It has now become clear that there is a direct link from the FISA approval process to the former president of the United States, Barack Obama.

As ABC News reported:

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Courtcommonly referred to as the “FISA Court,” is a secret tribunal with legal authority to grant (or deny) warrants for electronic surveillance against would-be spies or terrorists.

The court — made up of 11 federal judges, serving 7-year terms and selected by the chief justice of the Supreme Court — meets in private, sometimes in the middle of the night. FISA targets are highly classified.

More than a thousand applications for electronic surveillance, all signed by the attorney general, are submitted each year, and the vast majority are approved.

The Obama administration said after President Donald J. Trump claimed he was “wiretapped” by his predecessor March 2017, “A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.”

But changes made to the original Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 — via the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (and renewed in December 2012) give presidents and the intelligence community much more latitude when it comes to surveillance of “foreign” persons.

As explained by Yale Law professor Jack Balkin in 2009:

The FISA Amendments Act of 2008, effectively gives the President – now President Obama – the authority to run surveillance programs similar in effect to the warrantless surveillance program [secretly implemented by George Bush in late 2001]. That is because New FISA no longer requires individualized targets in all surveillance programs. Some programs may be ‘vacuum cleaner’ programs that listen to a great many different calls (and read a great many e-mails) without any requirement of a warrant directed at a particular person as long as no US person is directly targeted as the object of the program.

As the Brookings Institute noted in a policy paper arguing for the Trump administration to renew legislation reauthorizing Section 702 of the FISA Act, which clarifies warrant requirements of the Act, information gathered via FISA warrants “sometimes known as PRISM, comprises a large part of the President’s Daily Brief.” 

If you can believe that Obama’s attorney general — the one who spoke with the former president-husband of a suspect currently under investigation for Espionage Act violations (Hillary Clinton) — would not have informed the head of the Executive Branch that his intelligence community was spying on a rival presidential campaign, well, okay.

But then, that information very probably was included in the President’s Daily Intelligence Brief.

There’s more; Brookings’ policy paper arguing on behalf of maintaining Sect. 702 also noted this important distinction:

We often think about 702 as an NSA authority, but it is also to a significant degree an FBI authority. Thus, the person and the integrity of the FBI director is critically important to the integrity of the program.

We now know, thanks to the release of the FISA memo on Friday, that fired FBI Director James Comey was involved in approving the FISA warrants used to spy on Trump campaign foreign policy advisor Carter Page over his alleged “ties” to Russia (foreign intelligence targets). As Fox News reported, “The memo stated that then-FBI Director Comey signed three FISA applications for [Trump campaign foreign policy advisor Carter] Page and McCabe signed one.”

Comey has testified before Congress that he had no idea the so-called “Trump dossier” used as justification for the FISA spy warrant against Page was bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign — that it was a political, not intelligence, document. As House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes said on Saturday, either Comey’s telling the truth or he’s lying — either way that’s a problem.

Given all of this, how likely is it that Obama — whose FBI director and AG were heavily involved in securing the FISA warrant (information included in daily presidential briefs) — really didn’t know that Trump’s campaign was under surveillance?

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

 

Trump on FISA memo’s revelations: ‘I think it’s a disgrace’; president MUST pardon anyone caught up in crosshairs of special counsel Mueller

analysis
By J. D. Heyes, editor-in-chief

(National SentinelClean House: As you might have guessed, President Donald J. Trump — the subject of one the biggest political hit jobs in the history of the republic — was none too happy about the findings of the House Intelligence Committee contained in the so-called “FISA memo” released on Friday.

“I think it’s terrible,” Trump said, as quoted by The Associated Press. “You want to know the truth. I think it’s a disgrace. What’s going on in this country, I think it’s a disgrace.”

As reported by NewsTarget, the memo reveals “serial abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by upper echelon officials in the FBI and Justice Department to prevent [Trump] from becoming president, and to undermine him after he defeated Hillary Clinton in November 2016.”

The four-page memo goes on, noting that Clinton, several U.S. media outlets, top-ranking figures within DOJ and FBI including some that are still serving, and others conspired to create a bogus “dossier” full of false and salacious charges that purportedly came from Russian “sources,” and then pretend it was a legitimate intelligence document in order to secure a top-secret surveillance warrant so the Obama regime could spy on the Trump campaign. (Related: FISA memo released — bombshell report reveals MASSIVE Deep State conspiracy to keep Donald Trump out of the White House)

These same people knew that the dossier — which was paid for by the Clinton campaign through a third-party law firm (because ol’ Hill is so cloak-and-dagger) — was just a political document, not real intelligence.

So yeah, it certainly is a “disgrace” all of this happened.

But it goes much deeper than that. It’s also criminal. At least it has been so far for Carter Page, the principal Trump campaign official put under surveillance by political appointees and others within the DOJ and FBI. And former national security advisor Michael Flynn, indicted and convicted of “lying” to the FBI. And others caught up in this web of deceit.

But it’s also criminal because certain officials within the FBI and DOJ willfully misrepresented “evidence” before a federal court — the FISA court — in order to obtain a surveillance warrant so they could improperly spy on an American citizen.

Like the Gestapo, or Stasi, or KGB.

There is no other choice for the president: He must fire Robert Mueller, whose appointment was also based on this same bogus information; he must fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein who signed off on the bogus FISA warrant application at least twice and who appointed Mueller knowing the Trump dossier was opposition research and not intelligence; and he must pardon Flynn (and maybe Page someday) since they have were ensnared in a political operation.

A version of this report first appeared at NewsTarget.com.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

FISA memo update: GOP will make case FBI probe of Trump-Russia ‘collusion’ based on TAINTED evidence

(National SentinelSpecial Counsel: Republicans plan to make the case following the release of the FISA memo that the FBI’s Russia “collusion” probe involving President Donald J. Trump and his campaign team is based on tainted evidence and thus should be ended.

As reported by John Solomon at The Hill, Republicans making that case are basing it on the contents of the as-yet-unreleased FISA memo, which purports to document Obama-era abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

The allegations thus far are that some politically motivated officials within Obama’s FBI and Justice Department who did not want to see Trump as president misrepresented an unsubstantiated opposition research document paid for in part by the Hillary Clinton campaign as legitimate intelligence in order to obtain a surveillance warrant so they could spy on Team Trump.

“Another document — an eight-page criminal referral filed with the Justice Department by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — is also part of the GOP case,” Solomon reported.

While the FBI has been waging a public campaign to either halt the release of the memo or have it released in heavily redacted form, the bureau has been working behind the scenes to vet the Graham-Grassley memo, which is also expected to be released soon, in redacted form, Solomon reported, adding:

Republicans believe both documents will back up arguments that evidence used to justify the FBI’s probe came from partisans loyal to Clinton, sources said. They are also expected to play into arguments from some Republicans that special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russia is based on false information.

GOP arguments that the FBI’s Trump-Russia collusion probe is based on flimsy, perhaps intentionally erroneous information, will focus primarily on the unsubstantiated “Trump dossier” compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, commissioned by Democrat-leaning opposition research firm Fusion GPS, and paid for by the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign.

Reports have suggested that politically motivated officials within the FBI and DOJ used the dossier to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant so they could spy on a rival presidential campaign.

“They will argue the FBI failed to critically assess the political motives and credibility of Steele and did not fully disclose that evidence came from Clinton supporters as it sought to get permission from courts for surveillance warrants,” Solomon reported.

“The fact that half to three-quarters of the evidence the FBI used to unleash the most awesome of surveillance powers upon Donald Trump’s inner circle came from sources tied directly to his Democratic opponent should worry us all, especially when that happened during an election,” said one senior Republican directly familiar with the evidence, describing the party’s core concerns.

hacked-FO-300x250

“The FBI allowed itself to be used by Clinton partisans to parlay single-sourced, mostly unverified evidence into a counterintelligence probe with clear weaknesses that weren’t disclosed,” the source added.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

FISA memo said to contain FOUR ‘explosive’ revelations that have NOT LEAKED (so far)

(National SentinelFISA Memo: Reports on Thursday evening continued to claim that the so-called “FISA Memo” would likely be released on Friday. Even so, one report noted something new: The memo allegedly contains four startling revelations that have yet to be discussed in previous news reports.

“Senior Republicans are pushing back on reports suggesting that this memo will not live up to the hype, telling me there are four separate explosive revelations in the memo that have not leaked out ahead of tomorrows expected release,” Fox News chief political correspondent Ed Henry told host Martha McCallum.

Henry noted further that if the claim is true, it ought to vindicate House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who has been accused by Democrats and Left-leaning media of playing politics with the memo.

Previously, Republican lawmakers have dropped hints as to what the memo contains. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., for instance, hinted to Fox News‘ Judge Jeanine Pirro that the memo outlines how the U.S. government may have committed fraud by presenting the courts with “false information,” to obtain FISA warrants.

“You’re aware as a Judge of the way evidence has to be authenticated and presented to a court to get a warrant,” began the Florida Republican.

“It has to be probable cause to sign a warrant,” Judge Jeanne interrupted.

“Of course, and prosecutors and investigators cannot perpetrate frauds on the court by presenting false information or information they know to be false,” Rep. Gaetz continued.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?