Grassley, Graham DEMAND info from Hillary, DNC, Donna Brazile, Podesta, RE: Fusion GPS

(National SentinelSeeking Answers: Two Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, its chairman and a senior member, have sent letters to a number of key Democratic figures demanding information about their dealings with the author of the “Trump dossier,” former British spy Christopher Steele.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the panel’s chair, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., want answers pertaining to the committee’s investigation into allegations the FBI relied on the unsubstantiated dossier in order to improperly obtain a surveillance warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to spy on President Donald J. Trump’s campaign.

“As part of their ongoing oversight efforts to ensure that the FBI’s law enforcement activities are free of improper political influence, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) yesterday sent six letters seeking information and documents regarding Christopher Steele’s work on behalf of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary for America,” said a statement posted to Grassley’s Senate website.

“The letters seek information and documents relating to those political organizations’ knowledge of and involvement in Mr. Steele’s work and his reported interactions with the FBI while he was working on behalf of these political organizations,” the statement said.

Letters were sent to:

Legacy Food Storage

The letters referenced an October 2017 Washington Post story which said that the dossier was paid for, in large part, by the Clinton campaign and the DNC.

A letter from the law firm Perkins Coie acknowledged that, “[t]o assist in its representation ofthe DNC and Hillary for America, Perkins Coie engaged Fusion GPS in April of 2016” and that “the engagement concluded prior to the November 2016 Presidential election,” the letters said, referencing the story.

Earlier this month, the pair sent a criminal referral to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray asking that they investigate whether the former MI6 agent was dishonest during his interactions with federal authorities.

A report from earlier this month claimed to substantiate allegations that the FBI relied on the discredited dossier to obtain a FISA court warrant, which would be a gross misrepresentation and a possible criminal act.

“A large portion of the evidence presented in the salacious 35-page dossier put together by former British spy Christopher Steele, has either been proven wrong or remains unsubstantiated. However, the FBI gained approval nevertheless to surveil members of Trump’s campaign and ‘it’s outrageous and clearly should be thoroughly investigated,’ said a senior law enforcement source, with knowledge of the process,” investigative reporter and Fox News contributor Sara A. Carter reported.

“(The dossier) certainly played a role in obtaining the warrant,” added another senior U.S. official, with knowledge of the dossier. “Congress needs to look at the FBI officials who were handling this case and see what, if anything, was verified in the dossier. I think an important question is whether the FBI paid anything to the source for the dossier.”

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

COLD STEELE: GOP senators want CRIMINAL probe of bogus ‘Trump dossier’ author

(National SentinelNumbered Days: Two Republican senators are requesting the Justice Department launch a criminal investigation into the author of the discredited “Trump dossier,” former British spy Christopher Steele.

As reported by The Hill, Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina have sent a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray asking that they investigate if the former MI6 agent was dishonest during his interactions with federal authorities.

Steele was hired by Democratic opposition research firm Fusion GPS to author the dossier, which was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Some Republicans also believe the dossier, which contains salacious and unsubstantiated claims about Donald J. Trump and his campaign team, was used to get authorization from the FISA court to put the campaign under surveillance in 2016.

“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.

Graham added that “after reviewing how Mr. Steele conducted himself in distributing information contained in the dossier and how many stop signs the DOJ ignored in its use of the dossier, I believe that a special counsel needs to review this matter.”

Graham is an attorney by trade, having spent decades as an Air Force lawyer and officer.

The letter is the first criminal referral from any of the congressional investigations into Russia’s election interference.

In their request, the senators passed along a memo tied to “certain communications between Christopher Steele and multiple U.S. news outlets.”

The memorandum was not released publicly, The Hill reported, because it is classified.

Grassley’s office, in announcing their request, said it is standard for the committee to notify the Justice Department when it “comes across what appears to be credible evidence of a criminal violation that warrants further investigation by appropriate authorities based on information from any source, public or non-public.”  

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Grassley: James Comey may have LEAKED CLASSIFED memo to friend

(National SentinelIllegal: The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said in a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on Wednesday that former FBI Directory James Comey may have illegally leaked a classified memo to a friend.

In his letter, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, demanded answers from Rosenstein regarding the handling of memos that Comey wrote following his conversations with President Donald J. Trump, The Daily Caller reported.

The Judiciary chairman said that he and his staff have recently reviewed seven memos Comey wrote following his meetings with the president. Of those, four contained information that was classified as “Secret” or “Confidential.”

Grassley also noted that past media reports claimed that Comey gave at least four memos to his friend, Columbia law professor Daniel Richman.

During congressional testimony last year, Comey told a House panel he hoped that leaking the memos would lead to a special counsel appointment aimed at investigating Trump’s campaign. Shortly thereafter, Rosenstein appointed former FBI director and Comey friend Robert Mueller.

A report in July 2017 said that more than half of the memos Comey wrote following his Trump meetings contained classified information.

“This revelation raises the possibility that Comey broke his own agency’s rules and ignored the same security protocol that he publicly criticized Hillary Clinton for in the waning days of the 2016 presidential election,” The Hill reported.

The paper also noted that Comey testified the previous month before the House Intelligence Committee that he shared at least one of them with Richman. “He asked that lawyer to leak information from one memo to the news media in hopes of increasing pressure to get a special prosecutor named in the Russia case after Comey was fired as FBI director,” The Hill noted further.

“If it’s true that Professor Richman had four of the seven memos, then in light of the fact that four of the seven memos the Committee reviewed are classified, it would appear that at least one memo the former FBI director gave Professor Richman contained classified information,” Grassley writes.

He asserted in his letter that the Justice Department and FBI have so far failed to provide crucial details about the memos and how they were handled.

Grassley said during a recent review of the memos that was held in a secure facility, FBI personnel “refused” to answer questions about the chain of custody of the memos, when they were deemed classified, and who made the classified determinations.

The Daily Caller reported further:

In his letter, Grassley asked Rosenstein to clarify whether the DOJ or FBI have determined whether any of the memos that Comey sent to Richman contained classified information and which of the seven Comey memos had been provided to Richman.

Grassley is also inquiring when Richman received the memos and whether any had classification markings on them at the time they were exchanged.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Witness: Planned Parenthood personnel took fetal body parts without permission

(National SentinelGruesome Injustice: A newly released video by the pro-life group Center for Medical Progress features a former StemExpress employee who says she witnessed colleagues inside Planned Parenthood clinics procure fetal body parts following an abortion without first obtaining the required consent of the patient.

In this latest installment of a series of explosive videos, a former StemExpress procurement technician, Holly O’Donnell, said patients who were looking to donate aborted fetal tissue must sign a consent form.

However, she said, there were times when that did not happen.

“If there was like a high-gestated fetus, I mean, I have witnessed there was no consent signed, and these women didn’t know that it was getting taken,” O’Donnell said. “It’s stealing, it’s stealing baby parts.”

She said some women who aborted their babies agreed to donate body parts but others were “creeped out” by the suggestion and did not formally agree.

Earlier videos recorded by undercover operatives for the Center show Planned Parenthood officials negotiating for higher prices for aborted fetal body parts.

They also raise the specter that the abortion provider sought to profit from the sales.

Following a congressional investigation last year into the videos’ allegations, the House Select Panel on Infant Lives referred StemExpress to the Department of Health and Human Services for possibly violating the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 – or HIPAA — a law that protects the privacy of patients.

“This betrayal of a young woman’s trust should disgust us all,” the panel’s chairman, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), said at the time.

Also, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducted its own investigation and referred several Planned Parenthood affiliates and StemExpress — among others — to the FBI and the Department of Justice for a criminal investigation.

The committee’s chairman, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said they had shown a “disrespect for the law.”

During congressional testimony last week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions told lawmakers if the Judiciary Committee’s findings could be verified, they “could provide a basis for charges.”

The Hill reported last week that the FBI is seeking unredacted documents the Senate Judiciary Committee received from abortion providers.

Here’s the next big thing in survival farming! Click Here!

Said David Daleiden, the founder of the Center for Medical Progress, in a statement, “Planned Parenthood and their business partners like StemExpress preyed on pregnant women to harvest and sell aborted baby body parts in an illegal profit-driven scheme.

“Public officials should shut down Planned Parenthood’s barbaric abortion empire so Planned Parenthood can never defraud the public, hurt patients, or sell aborted baby hearts, lungs, livers, and brains again,” he added.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Grassley hits ‘partisan’ lawsuits against Trump, says Hillary should be sued as well

(National SentinelJustice: The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Wednesday that “partisan” lawsuits against President Donald J. Trump over alleged violations of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause need to file similar suits against former secretary of state and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton as well.

As reported by Circa, Grassley suggested that Clinton may also be guilty of violating the same clause — perhaps even more so — when she was serving as head of the State Department, calling the lawsuits “partisan and narrow” in their scope (See “The Hillary Files” from – PDF file)

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, was directing his comments at plaintiffs in a trio of suits charging that Trump is violating Article I of the Constitution, which states “no person holding any office of profit or trust under [the United States], shall, without the consent of Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The Judiciary chairman noted that millions of dollars in foreign contributions were given to the Clinton Family Foundation while Hillary was head of Foggy Bottom, as did her husband, ex-President Bill Clinton, who was paid by foreign governments and business interests for speeches and appearances.

Grassley suggested that Congress should consider “whether legislation may be necessary to force agencies to remedies when the Clause is violated.”

He sent letters to several plaintiffs this week, including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW); Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich; and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.; and Washington, D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine, a Democrat, and Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, also a Democrats.

“The Office of Government Ethics has held in its advisory opinions that [employees who prepare joint tax returns with their spouses] would be considered to have derived financial or economic benefit from their spouses’ assets,” Grassley wrote. “They would also be charged with knowledge of their spouses’ assets. Since Secretary Clinton filed joint tax returns with her husband, she received a direct financial and economic benefit from his income.

“Accordingly, based on the scope of the Clause outlined in your complaint, Secretary Clinton appears to have received emoluments that were not validated by congressional consent,” he added.

In their suit against Trump Racine and Frosh argue that “because the Founders believed that corruption was one of the gravest threats to the new nation, they viewed anti-corruption measures as essential to preserving an enduring republican system of government.”

However, Grassley pointed out that the litigants were being extremely partisan, cherry-picking alleged ‘violations’ of the Constitution while blatantly ignoring others because they involve fellow Democratic politicians. He said there are “multiple examples of potential corruption between Clinton Foundation donors — both foreign and domestic — and the State Department during Secretary Clinton’s tenure.” (Related: Are Democrats behind the dubious Trump dossier that has triggered so many ‘Russia’ investigations?)

Continuing, Grassley recounted that in August 2016 he “noted that foreign governments donated heavily to the Clinton Foundation while simultaneous lobbying the State Department.”

Critics of Clinton and her family foundation’s acceptance of tens of millions of dollars from foreign donors allege that governments were attempting to buy influence with her on the assumption that she, and not Donald J. Trump, would win the presidential election last November.

“The Clause must be enforced impartially, without regard for power, privilege, or party,” he said, as reported by Circa. “Selective efforts to enforce the Clause smack of partisan political bias. A fair examination of Secretary Clinton’s financial benefits from foreign government entities and instrumentalities, by your reasoning, plainly shows that those benefits implicate the Clause. Yet your complaint[s] raised none of these concerns.”

He said if Trump is guilty then so is the former secretary of state, noting that in June 2010, Hillary Clinton received $500,000 from “Renaissance Capital jointly with her husband” for a speech Bill Clinton gave in Moscow. The financial firm is a Russian investment bank whose senior officers include former Russian intelligence officials.

This story originally appeared at

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

WAIT … Maybe the DEMOCRATS have been “colluding” with Russia all along

(National SentinelPolitics: For months Democrats (and some #NeverTrump Republicans), as well as the propaganda “mainstream” media, have been accusing President Donald J. Trump and his inner circle of “colluding” with Russia to “steal the election” from Hillary Clinton.

One of the central pieces of “evidence” is the so-called “Trump dossier” that has never been substantiated and in fact has been discredited by its so-called creator, former British spy Christopher Steele.

In fact, the FBI relied on the wild allegations made in the dossier as “justification to win approval to secretly monitor a Trump associate,” CNN reported in April, adding:

The dossier has also been cited by FBI Director James Comey in some of his briefings to members of Congress in recent weeks, as one of the sources of information the bureau has used to bolster its investigation, according to U.S. officials briefed on the probe.

This includes approval from the secret court that oversees the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to monitor the communications of Carter Page, two of the officials said. Last year, Page was identified by the Trump campaign as an adviser on national security.

But subsequent reporting noted that the dossier was ‘financed,’ so to speak, by a Democratic opposition research firm based in Washington, D.C. — Fusion GPS — and since then, more questions have swirled regarding what level of cooperation the Democratic Party had with Russia. (RELATED: Are Democrats behind the dubious Trump dossier that has triggered so many ‘Russia’ investigations?)

In a column for The Wall Street Journal, Kimberly A. Strassel noted that it’s been just over a week since Democrats were elated by the news that Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wanted Donald Trump Jr. and Paul Manafort to appear before the panel to answer questions, publicly, about their meeting last June with a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower who claimed she had Kremlin-supplied dirt on the Clinton campaign.

“Yet Democrats now have meekly and noiselessly retreated, agreeing to let both men speak to the committee in private,” she wrote. “Why would they so suddenly be willing to let go of this moment of political opportunity?”

Fusion GPS.

The firm’s co-founder, Glenn Simpson, a former reporter for the WSJ, was also going to appear in public before Grassley’s committee, where he planned to plead the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination. But Democrats happily agreed to conduct all the testimony behind closed doors.

How does Fusion GPS figure into Trump Jr’s and Manafort’s testimony? As The Daily Caller noted in a July report:

Trump Jr. and Manafort were invited by the committee in order to discuss the June 9, 2016, meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer named Natalia Veselnitskaya.

Trump Jr. had been told that Veselnitskaya would provide derogatory information about Hillary Clinton. During the meeting, she focused on the Magnitsky Act.

Fusion GPS figures into the case because the firm worked alongside Veselnitskaya on an anti-Magnitsky Act lobbying campaign.

Strassel opines that, had Simpson been hauled before Grassley’s committee in a public forum, he’d have been asked who hired his firm to assemble the dirt on Trump, which was based on anonymous Russian sources. “Turns out Democrats are willing to give up just about anything — including their Manafort moment — to protect Mr. Simpson from having to answer that question,” she noted, adding: “What if, all this time, Washington and the media have had the Russian collusion story backward? What if it wasn’t the Trump campaign playing footsie with the Vladimir Putin regime, but Democrats?”

The more information is revealed about Fusion GPS, the more that seems the likely case: She says “word has it” that Simpson has agreed to appear before Grassley’s committee, but only if he’s not asked who hired him to dig up Trump dirt — and “Democrats are going to the mat for him over that demand,” Strassel reported.

If Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Democrats, and their sycophantic media allies are really after the truth about Russian meddling, they will pursue any and all leads to and from Fusion. But if they punt, then we will know for certain that they were never after the truth.

This story originally appeared at

Are Democrats behind the dubious Trump dossier that has triggered so many ‘Russia’ investigations?

(National SentinelPolitical espionage: President Donald J. Trump has so many enemies in the Deep State and political establishment swamp he seeks to drain he literally only has a small cadre of insiders he can trust.

But a new report suggests that the long-discredited “dossier” released last summer well before the election – which could not be verified by any of the scores of media outlets that had obtained it but nevertheless sparked many of the “Russia” investigations – may actually be tied to the Democratic Party.

Investigative reporter Paul Sperry, writing for the New York Post, notes that the dossier is tied to a secretive Washington, D.C., firm that commissioned it and is now thwarting congressional investigators looking into its connection to the Democratic Party.

He writes:

The Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month threatened to subpoena the firm, Fusion GPS, after it refused to answer questions and provide records to the panel identifying who financed the error-ridden dossier, which was circulated during the election and has sparked much of the Russia scandal now engulfing the White House.

Is Fusion GPS hiding something? The firm says it is a “research and strategic intelligence firm” founded by “three former Wall Street Journal investigative reporters.” But Sperry noted that congressional sources describe it as an opposition-research group for Democrats, with the founders much more political activists with a pro-Hillary, anti-Trump agenda than journalists (which could actually describe just about every other “mainstream” media journalist in D.C.).

“These weren’t mercenaries or hired guns,” a congressional source familiar with the dossier probe said. “These guys had a vested personal and ideological interest in smearing Trump and boosting Hillary’s chances of winning the White House.”

Sperry notes further:

Fusion GPS was on the payroll of an unidentified Democratic ally of Clinton when it hired a long-retired British spy to dig up dirt on Trump. In 2012, Democrats hired Fusion GPS to uncover dirt on GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. And in 2015, Democrat ally Planned Parenthood retained Fusion GPS to investigate pro-life activists protesting the abortion group.

More, federal records show a key co-founder and partner in the firm was a Hillary Clinton donor and supporter of her presidential campaign.

In September 2016, while Fusion GPS was quietly shopping the dirty dossier on Trump around Washington, its co-founder and partner Peter R. Fritsch contributed at least $1,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund and the Hillary For America campaign, Federal Election Commission data show. His wife also donated money to Hillary’s campaign.

Property records show that in June 2016, as Clinton allies bankrolled Fusion GPS, Fritsch bought a six-bedroom, five-bathroom home in Bethesda, Md., for $2.3 million.

There are other self-interests at work at Fusion. For one, Fritsch – who once served as the WSJ’s Mexico City bureau chief – married into a Mexican family with cross-border business interests.

“His wife, Beatriz Garcia, formerly worked as an executive at Grupo Dina, a manufacturer of trucks and buses in Mexico City that benefits from NAFTA, which Trump opposes,” Sperry wrote, adding:

Fritsch’s Fusion GPS partner Thomas Catan, who grew up in Britain, once edited a business magazine in Mexico, moreover. A third founding partner, Glenn Simpson, is reported to have shared dark views of both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Trump. Before joining Fusion GPS, Simpson did opposition research for a former Clinton White House operative.

Now, congressional investigators are said to be looking into whether the FBI incorrectly relied on the discredited dossier by Christopher Steele, the old British spy who was hired by Fusion GPS to build a Russia file on Trump, when, under then-Director James Comey, the bureau was opening a counterintelligence probe into Team Trump last summer:

The FBI received a copy of the Democrat-funded dossier in August, during the heat of the campaign, and is said to have contracted in October to pay Steele $50,000 to help corroborate the dirt on Trump — a relationship that “raises substantial questions about the independence” of the bureau in investigating Trump, warned Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

But nothing ever came of it. Eventually the dossier was published in full by Left-wing site Buzzfeed, with the caveat that nothing could be verified. As we reported in March, Grassley began his probe into the nexus of Steele, the dossier and the FBI.

“The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican nominee for President in the run-up to the election raises further questions about the FBI’s independence from politics, as well as the Obama administration’s use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends,” Grassley wrote in a letter to Comey in early March.

“It is additionally troubling that the FBI reportedly agreed to such an arrangement given that, in January of 2017, then-Director [of National Intelligence James] Clapper issued a statement stating that ‘the [intelligence community] has not made any judgment that the information in this document is reliable, and we did not rely upon it in any way for our conclusions.’”

Now, Senate investigators are demanding that Fusion GPS provide any and all records of communication between the firm and the FBI and Justice Department, to include former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who is now under investigation by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which Grassley chairs. Included in the Senate probe is Assistance FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and the Justice inspector general for failing to recuse himself despite financial and political connections to the Clinton campaign through his Democrat activist wife.

“Senate investigators have singled out McCabe as the FBI official who negotiated with Steele,” Sperry wrote.

Like Fusion GPS, the FBI is also failing to cooperate with the Senate probe. What’s more, now that Attorney General Jeff Sessions has (on Democrats’ demands) recused himself and Trump still doesn’t have an FBI director in place, he’s got no real way of pushing the Justice Department and the bureau into cooperating.

Steele’s dossier was rife with verifiable errors. In one of the more egregious examples, he claimed that

Trump lawyer Michael Cohen held a “clandestine meeting” on the alleged hacking scheme in Prague with “Kremlin officials” in August 2016 unraveled when Cohen denied ever visiting Prague, his passport showed no stamps showing he left or entered the US at the time, witnesses accounted for his presence here, and Czech authorities found no evidence Cohen went to Prague.

And yet, what’s troubling is that U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies including the CIA took the dossier seriously. Why? Because it fed into the Deep State’s worst fears about Trump:

The dossier ended up attached to a Top Secret intelligence briefing on Russia for President Obama, even though his intelligence czar last month testified “We couldn’t corroborate the sourcing.” The FBI, moreover, has been using it for investigative leads on Trump associates like Carter Page, even though former FBI Director James Comey this month described the dossier as “salacious and unverified.”

Naturally, Democrats in Congress nevertheless continued to refer to it as those the dossier was actually legitimate, in order to continue to allege nefarious things about “Russian collusion” with Team Trump.

To this date nothing has been reported proving there was any Trump-Russia collusion. The president has repeatedly called the story “fake news” and a “hoax,” and yet the GOP-controlled Congress continues to treat it as real, as evidenced by multiple investigations.

If – if – Russia legitimately attempted to hack into U.S. electronic balloting, that signifies a major threat to our country, but it doesn’t signify Trump collusion. Furthermore, the 2016 attempt by Russia to “influence” our political processes wouldn’t be the first time Moscow has tried (and by the way, we’ve done the same things).

Finally, there also is NO evidence proving that the Kremlin was intervening to help elect Trump. That has never made any sense, given all the dirt that Vladimir Putin’s Russia most likely has on Hillary Clinton.

Was the Democratic Party, working in collusion with the Deep State and political establishment, responsible for the “Trump dossier?” Thanks to Grassley, the evidence suggesting so is beginning to emerge.

Senate panel to probe Loretta Lynch’s role in covering for Clintons during 2016 campaign

(National SentinelCorruption: Many legal experts spoke highly of Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch during her days as s federal prosecutor in New York. But like so many other people, once she became associated with one of the most corrupt, politically motivated regimes in American history, her reputation suffered mightily.

And now, she’s the subject of a new probe by the Senate Judiciary Committee which is examining her role in helping to cover up, smooth over, de-escalate or whatever else she may have done to soften the blow of the FBI’s investigation into then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s criminal use of a private email server to handle classified materials during last year’s election cycle.

As reported by The Washington Times:

In a letter to Ms. Lynch, the committee asks her to detail the depths of her involvement in the FBI’s investigation, including whether she ever assured Clinton confidantes that the probe wouldn’t “push too deeply into the matter.”

Fired FBI Director James B. Comey has said publicly that Ms. Lynch tried to shape the way he talked about the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails, and he also hinted at other behavior “which I cannot talk about yet” that made him worried about Ms. Lynch’s ability to make impartial decisions.

Mr. Comey said that was one reason why he took it upon himself to buck Justice Department tradition and reveal his findings about Mrs. Clinton last year.

The probe into Ms. Lynch comes as the Judiciary Committee is already looking at President Trump’s firing of Mr. Comey.


At a Senate hearing earlier this month, Mr. Comey told lawmakers that Ms. Lynch had attempted to change the way the FBI described its probe of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server. The change appeared to dovetail with how Mrs. Clinton’s supporters were characterizing the probe.

“At one point, [Ms. Lynch] directed me not to call it an ‘investigation’ but instead to call it a ‘matter,’ which confused me and concerned me,” Mr. Comey said during his June 8 testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we are to close this case credibly.”

It’s not certain at all that this probe will produce evidence of criminal behavior or even if there was evidence of it. But it will be interesting to know more of the details surrounding the Obama administration’s attempts to run interference for the heir apparent, Clinton, because they may have some political impact on the various investigations now taking place into congressional (and independent) investigations into alleged “obstruction of justice” charges against President Donald J. Trump (which are bogus anyway, but…).

For all the world, Comey described Lynch’s actions as interference, if not outright obstruction, though you’ll notice the dishonest “mainstream media” isn’t about to make that distinction because, well, Lynch and Obama and Clinton are Democrats, and the MSM is the propaganda wing of the Democratic Party.

The committee’s investigation could also eventually shed more light on the Obama White House’s operations regarding the intentional spreading of sensitive intelligence aimed at undermining Trump and his inner circle. We won’t know until all is said and done.

But it is about time that the GOP Congress made serious attempts to hold Obama and Democrats accountable for their actions, because you know if the majorities were reversed it would be non-stop political warfare against Republicans and Trump.

Some things that took place last year with Lynch – her instructions to Comey, her improper meeting on an Arizona airport tarmac with former President Bill Clinton at the height of the FBI’s investigation, etc. – may have been more than just suspicious.

Senate panel opens new probe of Hillary Clinton favors to foundation donor

(National SentinelClinton Corruption: It has been said that brand-new lawyer could make a career out of pursuing Clinton crime family corruption, and the Senate Judiciary Committee proved that point again today.

As reported by The Daily Caller, the panel, led by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, has launched a brand-new probe into Hillary Clinton’s alleged effort, as secretary of state, to block a Bangladesh government corruption probe of Muhammad Yunus, a Clinton Foundation donor and close friend of the Clintons.

chief-organics-msmThe site noted further:

The Daily Caller News Foundation (TheDCNF) Investigative Group exclusively reported in May that Clinton sent top U.S. diplomats to pressure Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheik Hasina and her son Sajeeb Wazed in an effort to kill that country’s corruption investigation of Yunus and Grameen Bank. Yunus was then managing director of the state-owned Bangladesh bank.

In a June 1, 2017, letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Grassley repeated TheDCNF charge that Clinton threatened Wazed with an IRS tax audit if his mother did not back away from the corruption probe. Wazed has lived in the U.S. for 17 years. 

“If the Secretary of State used her position to intervene in an independent investigation by a sovereign government simply because of a personal and financial relationship stemming from the Clinton Foundation rather than the legitimate foreign policy interests of the United States, then that would be unacceptable,” Grassley told Tillerson.

“Co-mingling her official position as Secretary of State with her family foundation would be similarly inappropriate. It is vital to determine whether the State Department had any role in the threat of an IRS audit against the son of the Prime Minister in retaliation for this investigation,” Grassley noted further, the site reported.

In his letter, Grassley described how U.S. ambassadors James Moriarty and Dan Mozena, as well as Jon Danilowica, the Deputy Chief of Mission, met with Wazed in the U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh’s capital, on many occasions, and all while the corruption probe was underway. All three are career diplomats.

The DC:

Another official, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Administrator Rajiv Shah also met with Wazed. Shah’s agency awarded $13 million to Yunus organizations and another $11 million to allied Yunus organizations during Clinton’s tenure. The Department of State oversees USAID programs.

As TheDCNF previously reported, Clinton’s aid to Yunus included 18 grants, contracts and loans awarded to two of his America-based foundations, the Grameen Foundation USA and Grameen America, according to

Well, well. Until now neither the Trump administration nor Republicans who control Congress had expressed much interest in pursuing Clinton crime family corruption, but Grassley’s investigation changes that paradigm.

Granted, the Clintons always manage to get out of trouble – often with help from people like, say, former FBI Director James Comey – and likely will again. But it’s always nice to see some pressure put on people who, through their shady dealings and actions, most definitely deserve the scrutiny.

And heck, you just never know when that one investigation will lead to an indictment.


FBI’s Comey made inconsistent statements about Trump ‘dossier’

(NationalSentinelPolitics: FBI Director James Comey hasn’t made too many people on either side of the political aisle very happy over the past year, and the angst has now extended into the new administration.

Much of what he has said and done has been viewed as highly political in nature – completely out of character for a federal law enforcement agency that used to pride itself on being completely independent and non-partisan. Take the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server: Comey was all over the place, laying out what appeared to be an air-tight case for prosecution in a revealing (and rare) public statement July 5, 2016, only to claim no “reasonable prosecutor” would make the case (not his call, by the way).

In any event, he’s now being scrutinized for make conflicting statements regarding the infamous “Trump dossier” that contained numerous unsubstantiated and often salacious claims about Trump and his inner campaign circle. As reported by The Daily Caller:

Ahead of a highly anticipated Senate hearing later this week, FBI Director James Comey is being accused of making inconsistent statements about the bureau’s relationship with Christopher Steele, the ex-British spy behind the Trump dossier.

Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the allegation in a letter sent to Comey on Friday.

“There appear to be material inconsistencies between the description of the FBI’s relationship with Mr. Steele that you did provide in your briefing and information contained in Justice Department documents made available to the Committee only after the briefing,” Grassley wrote to Comey.

Grassley and other members of the panel will get the chance to ask Comey about his bureau’s conflicting statements.

The Judiciary Committee chief has regularly pressured the FBI director regarding reports that his department cooperated with Steele and even offered the former British spy $50,000 to continue his research on Trump, then a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination.

Reportedly, FBI agents met with Steele in July and again in October to talk about what he allegedly found – all of which was eventually laid out in a 35-page document that Buzzfeed published in January (Buzzfeed is now being sued by a Russian tech firm and others mentioned in the unsubstantiated dossier).

The dates July and October are noteworthy too. Earlier reporting noted that the FBI attempting to obtain a warrant from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court (FISA) to put Team Trump under electronic surveillance; the court did not grant the warrant in July, reports said, but did so in October. Aspects of this investigation are still being probed by House and Senate intelligence committees.

As for Grassley, he says he’s concerned about what kind of cooperation was going on between Steele and the FBI because the British spy was gathering Trump-related “intelligence” at the time on behalf an opposition research firm (Fusion GPS) that was in turn working for an ally of Hillary Clinton’s, The Daily Signal noted further.

“The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican nominee for President in the run-up to the election raises further questions about the FBI’s independence from politics, as well as the Obama administration’s use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends,” Grassley wrote in a March 6 letter to Comey.

Whether the “inconsistencies were honest mistakes or an attempt to downplay the actual extent of the FBI’s relationship with Mr. Steele, it is essential that the FBI fully answer all of the questions from the March 6 letter and provide all the requested documents in order to resolve these and related issues,” Grassley wrote.

Many of the claims made in the dossier have been proven false, while most others have been unsubstantiated.



Top Senate Republican probing British spy who supplied bogus Trump ‘dossier’ to FBI

(NationalSentinel) Congress: The Deep State has another problem now not named Donald J. Trump: Sen. Charles Grassley, the long-serving Iowa Republican and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Grassley is the first major Senate Republican besides Sens. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul to punch back against the establishment – with the government and within his own party – to ask some obvious questions regarding that phony-baloney Trump “dossier” published by Buzzfeed and reported by CNN after it had circulated in D.C. media circles for months without substantiation. (RELATED: The intelligence community’s ‘spy revolt’ with the Trump administration is a PSYOP designed to perpetuate the military-industrial complex)

According to The Hill, Grassley wants to know what agreements and allegiances the British spy who supplied the dossier – which was filled with allegations and insinuations that the Russian government had all sorts of ‘dirt’ on the president – the FBI made with him:

In a Monday letter to FBI Director James Comey, Grassley asked for records pertaining to any agreements the agency may have had with Christopher Steele. The MI6 agent wrote an explosive memo on behalf of Trump’s political enemies alleging that the Russians had compromising information on the president.

Comey briefed Trump on the existence of the memo in a private meeting in January.

Like our reporting? Sign up for our daily email newsletter and never miss a story! Click here

Shortly after, several news organizations published the unverified allegations, which the White House denied. 

In late February, The Washington Post reported that the FBI reached an agreement with Steele whereby the British spy would continue his investigation on behalf of the bureau.

“While Trump has derided the dossier as ‘fake news’ compiled by his political opponents, the FBI’s arrangement with Steele shows that the bureau considered him credible and found his information, while unproved, to be worthy of further investigation,” the Post reported at the time.

Grassley is pushing back and demanding the FBI provide information pertaining to its use of the British spy, whose salacious allegations have infuriated Trump and his allies.

“The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican nominee for President in the run-up to the election raises further questions about the FBI’s independence from politics, as well as the Obama administration’s use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends,” Grassley wrote.

“It is additionally troubling that the FBI reportedly agreed to such an arrangement given that, in January of 2017, then-Director Clapper issued a statement stating that ‘the [intelligence community] has not made any judgment that the information in this document is reliable, and we did not rely upon it in any way for our conclusions.’”

First and foremost, The Hill‘s report is intentionally incomplete; the dossier is fake, because again, though it had been circulating among Washington’s establishment media for months prior to the Nov. 8 election, no one published it because no one could verify a damned thing in itBuzzfeed published it, though it mentioned several times nothing has been or could be verified, but that was part of a media op to ‘get the dossier out there’ so the discredited mainstream media could all reference it by simply reporting on the fact that it had been published and thereby constructing another layer of doubt within the #nevertrump community.

But for publishing the dossier, Buzzfeed may have taken a fatal one for the team: The publication is being sued for libel by Russian firms listed in the dossier as having somehow been involved in gathering damaging info on Trump for Moscow. That, apparently, isn’t true either. (RELATED:Rand Paul: ‘Someone needs to go to jail’ over fake Trump dossier leak–Video)

In any event, this is certainly one aspect of the continuing Deep State operation against the Trump administration that needs to see the light of day, and we applaud and support Sen. Grassley’s effort.