Is there new evidence Comey LIED in sworn testimony to CONGRESS over scandalous TRUMP probe?

(National SentinelConflict: During sworn testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee June 8, 2017, after he’d been fired by President Donald J. Trump, former FBI Director James Comey testified that he had only had two interactions with President Obama.

One, he said, was an hour-long conversation with Obama on policing, law enforcement and race. The other was a “brief” encounter to say goodbye on Obama’s way out the door, according to published testimony.

Via Politico:

SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): And so in all your experience, this was the only president that you felt like in every meeting you needed to document because at some point, using your words, he might put out a non-truthful representation of that meeting.

COMEY: That’s right, senator. As I said, as FBI director I interacted with President Obama, I spoke only twice in three years, and didn’t document it. When I was Deputy Attorney General I had a one one-on-one with President Bush been I sent an email to my staff but I didn’t feel with president bush the need to document it in that I way. Again, because of the combination of those factors, just wasn’t present with either President Bush or President Obama.

…SEN. MARTIN HEINRICH (D-NM): Mr. Comey, prior to January 27th of this year, have you ever had a one-on-one meeting or a private dinner with a president of the United States?

Live Fire Gear - FireCord

COMEY: No. Dinner, no. I had two one-on-ones with President Obama. One to talk about law enforcement issues, law enforcement and race, which was an important topic throughout for me and for the president. Then once very briefly for him to say goodbye.

But on Monday night during an interview with Fox News, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., and Rep. John Radcliffe, R-Texas, appeared with host Martha McCallum to discuss some of what they discovered after reviewing 50,000 text messages exchanged between anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

Among those, Gowdy said, was a message exchange discussing Comey’s plans to “brief the president” about an ongoing investigation close to the November 2016 election.

“And I saw an interesting text that Director Comey was going to update the President of the United States about an investigation,” Gowdy said.

“I don’t know if it was an Hillary Clinton investigation because that had been reopened in the fall of 2016 or whether it was the Trump investigation. I just find it interesting that the head of the FBI was gonna update the President of the United States who at that point would have been President Obama,” he said.

Nowhere in the published transcript of Comey’s testimony does he mention briefing Obama about an ongoing investigation.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Botched Russia meddling analysis makes U.S. intel agencies appear politically motivated

(National SentinelFaulty Assessment: Just two weeks before President-elect Donald J. Trump took office, President Obama’s intelligence heads made public a unanimous analysis that Russian operatives, under orders from President Vladimir Putin, staged an influence campaign in order to help Trump win the 2016 election.

As the Washington Times reported, it was a significant event: The CIA, NSA, and FBI were all challenging the legitimacy of a presidential election.

While the charges at the time seemed persuasive and sharp, some 10 months later they are unraveling, which is raising questions about the legitimacy of the initial assessment and whether it was politically motivated to undermine the incoming commander-in-chief.

“It left me scratching my head,” said one intelligence source with personal access to former Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper and former CIA Director John O. Brennan, two of the men who had signed off on the assessment.

Both men have since publicly criticized Trump, which in and of itself is nearly unprecedented.

What’s more, the Times reported:

The 15-page document presented to the president-elect at Trump Tower in Manhattan was mostly filler — a republication of a years-old CIA analysis of the Kremlin’s global television network Russia Today. A mere five pages were dedicated to [the] charge that Moscow blended cyberhacking with state-backed propaganda and social media trolls to defeat Mr. Trump’s Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton.

There was no supporting documentation of how America’s top spies arrived at the brazen conclusion that Russians had “gained access to” and “exfiltrated large volumes of data” from Democratic National Committee computers, an explosive claim that sent shock waves across the U.S. political and intelligence landscapes.

And yet, because of the source of the report, those five pages have cast a pall over Trump’s presidency ever since, hurting his credibility abroad and forming the backdrop for five separate congressional and special counsel investigations.

This, despite the fact that the document’s singular conclusion — Russian collusion with Team Trump — looks less and less believable by the day.

FO-banner-600x100

And now, members of both parties say that the Russian efforts to undermine the November election were neither new nor aimed at electing Trump, but merely to ‘undermine’ American democratic processes.

The Times said in interviews with scores of former U.S. national security, intelligence community vets at the highest levels as well as foreign diplomats who all thought the initial assessment was devoid of much detail.

“I actually called them both the day after it came out and asked, ‘Why was it so thin?’” said the source close to Clapper and Brennan. “The answer I got was simple: There was a serious counterintelligence operation going on.”

The Times noted, “U.S. spies were neck-deep in an elaborate counterintelligence operation, and they didn’t want to jeopardize it by revealing too many details, according to various officials inside and outside the intelligence community.”

Trump did not see it that way; he believed that the Obama intelligence apparatus had been politicized and, as we have learned since, it likely was, just like Obama’s Justice Department.

Are YOU ready for these 41 different emergencies? Click Here!

Other intelligence vets agree:

Fred Fleitz, a 19-year CIA veteran who served as a chief of staff for John R. Bolton during the George W. Bush administration, first laid out the argument in a Fox News op-ed the day after the assessment was made public.

The entire purpose of the report was apparently “to undermine the legitimacy of Trump’s election,” Mr. Fleitz wrote on Jan. 7. He called the assessment “rigged for political purposes” and lamented that it contained “serious accusations of Russian interference” but “did not back them up with evidence.”

At least one Russian envoy interviewed by the Times agreed. “I believe it was a total fraud and it was very badly concocted, to say the least,” he said. “It was clearly done to divert attention away from all the infighting and backstabbing that was going on inside the Democratic Party. It was also a perfect move to place the blame on someone else — a foreign power — for Hillary’s defeat.”

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Senators told North Korean nuke threat ‘urgent’

(NationalSentinelNorth Korea: The U.S. Senate was given a rare and unusual briefing on Wednesday by the White House’s top defense and intelligence chiefs regarding what has been reported as the “urgent national security threat” posed by North Korea’s advancing nuclear weapons program.

As reported by the Washington Free Beacon:

The hour-long secret session for all senators was held at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, next to the White House, and included a brief appearance from President Trump who made short, introductory remarks.

Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also took part in the session. His presence is an indication that military options for dealing with North Korea likely were discussed.

New steps by the administration will include the imposition of additional economic sanctions.

“The United States seeks stability and the peaceful denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. We remain open to negotiations towards that goal. However, we remain prepared to defend ourselves and our allies,” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and Director of Intelligence Dan Coats said in a joint statement after the briefing.

The also noted that past diplomatic efforts to reign in North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs have been fruitless.

“With each provocation, North Korea jeopardizes stability in Northeast Asia and poses a growing threat to our allies and the U.S. homeland,” they stated.

Senators in attendance who spoke to the media did not discuss specifics, but it was clear they were moved by the information they were provided:

Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.) told MSNBC the meeting was “very consequential” and included discussion of North Korea’s shift from liquid to solid fuel missiles, and improving nuclear weapons and missile capabilities.

Barrasso said he favors increasing sanctions, including sanctions on China.

Sen. Chris Coons (D., Del.) described the session as “very clear-eyed, sober and serious.”

Coons told MSNBC the administration wants to avoid a conflict but is “making it clear to China how serious we are about preventing North Korea from developing the capability to deliver a nuclear warhead by ICBM against the United States or one of our key allies, and that there are real efforts being made to avoid a misunderstanding or miscalculation because I do think this is a very dangerous circumstance and situation.”

During a recent visit between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, the U.S. was told that China did not hold as much sway over North Korea that Washington believed it had, U.S. officials said.

“I think it’s really an expression of how seriously the president is taking this, and that he wants to engage with Congress on it,” a senior administration official said of today’s brief, which has been scheduled for some time and is not in response to any events or conditions.

never-miss-story

Can North Korea strike U.S. cities with ‘mini’ nukes?

(NationalSentinel) War: The entire 100-member U.S. Senate traveled to the White House earlier today to receive a top-secret briefing on the evolving situation in North Korea, as U.S. military assets continue to gather in the region.

Fox News reported that it was “difficult to overstate” the concern many members have regarding Pyongyang’s military capabilities which, frankly, are not widely known due to the secretive nature of the ruling regime of Kim Jong-un:

While North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un has a reputation for bizarre behavior, the nuclear arsenal and aspirations of the Republic are being taken seriously. 

North Korea has conducted five nuclear tests in the past 11 years, the last several being the most destructive – and now they are threatening a sixth.

Analysts are particular focused on an editorial in North Korea’s official paper, the Rodong Sinmun, which said:

“There is no limit to the strike power of the People’s Army armed with our style of cutting-edge military equipment including various precision and miniaturized nuclear weapons and submarine-launched ballistic missiles.” 

Naturally much of that is propaganda – even the U.S. military’s strike power has limitations. But it’s that reference to “miniaturized nuclear weapons” that has lawmakers and the Trump administration uneasy.

As Fox News noted further, according to a recent New York Times report, “As Dr. [Siegfried] Hecker, a man who has built his share of nuclear weapons, noted last week, any weapon that could travel that far would have to be ‘smaller, lighter and surmount the additional difficulties of the stresses and temperatures’ of a fiery re-entry into the atmosphere. By most estimates, that is four or five years away. Then again, many senior officials said the same four or five years ago.”

The unusual Senate briefing, which was presented by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, was preceded by a meeting President Donald J. Trump held with members of the UN Security Council, also at the White House, in which he said the panel needed to be ready to respond with tougher sanctions.

“This is a real threat to the world, whether we want to talk about it or not,” Trump said.

Fox News reported on a further development:

On March 9, North Korea released photographs of Kim Jong-un inspecting what appears to be a miniaturized implosion device, but that photo op was met with skepticism. “No reason to believe that is true, or to disbelieve it. No reason to dismiss it or to panic,” Karako said. He added, “I think that our insight into these programs is relatively modest. I think the posture of our military is to assume the worst.”

Earlier, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a frequent Trump critic, nevertheless praised his “commander-in-chief” skills, noting that while neither he nor Trump wants a war with North Korea, “he’s not going to let them develop a nuclear missile” that can strike the U.S.

never-miss-story