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.


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?

Actor James Woods THRASHES Jeff Sessions as ‘coup d’tat’ led by MUELLER continues unabated

(National SentinelMissing in Action: Actor James Woods took to Twitter on Wednesday to criticize Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ inaction regarding the various scandals swirling around his Justice Department and the FBI.

Many political observers believe that Sessions has essentially surrendered control over the department to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein after recusing himself from the so-called “Russian collusion” investigation allegedly involving the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

And while Sessions can reverse that decision, they say, so far he’s seems unwilling to do so, even as multiple scandals involving current FBI and DoJ figures, as well as Obama administration officials, continue to mount.

“So basically we have been without an Attorney General for the duration of this administration. Meanwhile the Democrats and their henchmen are running rampant – destroying files, emails, texts and other evidence. This is a coup d’etat. Make no mistake,” Woods tweeted.

Woods’ tweet came in response to a story reporting that Sessions recently sat down for several hours and was interviewed by special counsel Robert Mueller, whom many believe is operating under a bogus “collusion” mandate with a new objective of ensnaring President Donald J. Trump.

In recent days, reports have noted that Sessions turned over some 50,000 text messages between disgraced FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Stzrok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

But reports also noted that five months’ worth of texts during a crucial period during the 2016 election cycle have since gone missing. The FBI claims it failed to back up those messages, blaming the loss on a “technical” issue.

Also, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., told Fox News’ Bret Baier on Tuesday evening that there is an informant talking to [Congress] about meetings the people in the ‘secret society’ were having offsite.

“All of this evidence of corruption yet Jeff Sessions continues to sit back and watch Mueller hunt down innocent people in the Trump administration,” The Gateway Pundit noted.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

‘Jaw-dropping’ text from STRZOK: ‘No there there’ re: Trump-Russia COLLUSION

(National SentinelWitch Hunt: Disgraced FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Stzrok sent a text message to his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page last year expressing reservations about joining special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of alleged “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Though he did eventually join Mueller’s team — only to be dismissed after discovery of anti-Trump texts he and Page exchanged — it appears as though Strzok did not believe the allegations to be true.

That, says Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, is “jaw-dropping.”

In an interview with a local talk radio host, Johnson read the text aloud: “You and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely, I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern that there’s no big there there.”

Johnson said that text referred directly to Mueller’s investigation, which had begun two days earlier. Prior to that, Strzok was a top investigator on the Clinton email inquiry, which went nowhere.

“I think that’s kind of jaw-dropping,” said Johnson.

“In other words, Peter Strzok, who was the FBI deputy assistant director of the counterintelligence division, the man who had a plan to do something because he just couldn’t abide Donald Trump being president, is saying that his gut sense is that there’s no big there there when it comes to the Mueller special counsel investigation,” he said.

President Donald J. Trump has always viewed the investigation as a distraction and a “witch hunt.” He has regularly claimed the same thing as Strzok — that there is no evidence of collusion because none took place.

Last week Republicans began pushing for the House Intelligence Committee and the White House to release a memo allegedly detailing systematic abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISC, by the Obama administration.

Republicans believe that various operatives within the Department of Justice and FBI used the unverified “Trump dossier” to obtain a warrant to spy on Trump’s campaign.

Some Republicans, including Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, believe the so-called FISA memo drafted by the Intelligence Committee will prove that Mueller’s investigation is a “sham.”

“I believe that once the American people have the opportunity to evaluate the allegations and claims in this memo, it will become evident the activities of the last administration, the crimes I believe were committed, and the total sham that this Mueller investigation is, built on a false premise and rotten to the core,” he told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

OUTRAGE: GOP lawmakers DEMAND second special counsel after FBI ‘loses’ Peter Strzok texts

(National SentinelObamagate: Republican lawmakers are demanding that the Department of Justice appoint a second special counsel to look into how the FBI could have lost a group of texts involving disgraced counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok.

Over the weekend, The Associated Press reported that the Justice Department turned over to Congress an additional batch of text messages involving Stzrok, but that for ‘technical reasons’ could not retrieve about five months’ worth of communications.

The AP noted further:

New text messages highlighted in a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray by Sen. Ron Johnson, the Republican chairman of the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, are from the spring and summer of 2016 and involve discussion of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. They reference Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s decision to accept the FBI’s conclusion in that case and a draft statement that former FBI Director James Comey had prepared in anticipation of closing out the Clinton investigation without criminal charges.

Following revelations about that so-called glitch, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, renewed his earlier call for a second special counsel to begin probing what he and other Republicans say is a mounting scandal.

“First the IRS destroyed emails pivotal to our investigation of their political targeting. Now the FBI ‘failed to preserve’ texts between Peter Strzok & Lisa Page following the ’16 election. The time for a second special counsel is now,” he tweeted.

In addition, House Freedom Caucus chairman Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., echoed Jordan’s call.

“Unreal. We’ve been asking for the remaining text messages between anti-Trump FBI agents (and former Mueller team members), Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. The FBI now says the texts are ‘missing.’ If it wasn’t already clear we need a second special counsel, it’s abundantly clear now,” he tweeted.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Gaetz: FISA Memo will PROVE that Mueller investigation is all Trump says it is – a ‘ROTTEN witch hunt’ (Video)

(National SentinelCollusion Hoax: Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz told Fox News host Tucker Carlson Friday evening during his program that the four-page FISA Memo drafted by the House Intelligence Committee contains information that he believes will prove President Donald J. Trump correct about special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia “collusion” probe.

In response to Carlson asking what they memo is such a “big deal,” Gaetz noted, “I believe that once the American people have the opportunity to evaluate the allegations and claims in this memo, it will become evident the activities of the last administration, the crimes I believe were committed, and the total sham that this Mueller investigation is, built on a false premise and rotten to the core, Tucker.”

Last week Circa News investigative reporter and Fox News contributor Sara A. Carter said sources have told her the contents of the memo are so “explosive” they could spell a quick end to Mueller’s probe of the Trump campaign and transition team.

During the same interview, Gaetz predicted that people would be fired and that some will “go to jail.”

“I believe this will not end just with firings. I believe there are people who will go to jail. I was very persuaded by the evidence,” Gaetz told Hannity.

During his interview with Carlson, the host asked why, if the memo contains evidence of lawbreaking, it is illegal for Gaetz and others who have seen its contents to discuss specifics.

Gaetz acknowledged the irony, but said the memo is classified top secret, thus prohibiting members by law from discussion specifics publicly.


Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

NUNES: House Intel Chair says he’ll pull MUELLER in for interview over Uranium One SCANDAL (Video)

(National SentinelWide Net: House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., told an audience in Washington, D.C., Tuesday that if he finds evidence special counsel Robert Mueller was involved in the Uranium One scandal, he’ll seek to interview him.

During remarks in November at David Horowitz’s Restoration Weekend 2017 that were largely unnoticed by most media outlets, Nunes pledged to interview Mueller if it turns out he had a role the deal, which has turned into another Obama-era scandal.

“Trey Gowdy, rightfully so, wants to methodically go through this, so the answer to Mueller, if he has involvement in it, we’re going to interview him. I mean, that’s the bottom line,” Nunes said in response to a question about his thoughts as to whether he believes Mueller was involved.

Here is video of Nunes’ response:

In closing Nunes said there was “much more to come” on the issue of Uranium One that he couldn’t discuss.

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, has said he believes that Mueller signed off on the deal, which allowed Russia to obtain 20 percent of all strategic U.S. uranium.

“One of the things that was most shocking was that a guy named Rosenstein, if that name sounds familiar, since he appointed Mueller (to lead Special Counsel on Trump) he was the guy that actually helped sign documents that got the whole thing, the original cover-up done by sealing documents back early in the Obama administration so that Hillary could go through and make mega-millions,” he said.

“The blockbuster line now here is that he (Mueller) and Rosenstein had to be involved in him being the Special Counsel now because now we know he needed to cover up the fact that him and Rosenstein covered up the first investigation,” he continued.


Bill and Hillary Clinton, via their foundation, were also part of the scandal.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has ordered Justice Department prosecutors to begin asking FBI agents to explain evidence they discovered into a currently dormant criminal probe into the controversial Uranium One deal that has been tied to Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation.

According to multiple law enforcement sources, interviews with FBI agents are part of the Justice Department’s efforts to fulfill a pledge that an assistant attorney general gave to Congress in November.

The assistant AG promised that the department would determine whether a special counsel is warranted to look into the Uranium One deal, according to a senior Justice Department official.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

The probe with NO END: Mueller’s ‘collusion’ investigation will last WELL INTO 2018

(National SentinelWitch Hunt: Special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia is expected to extend well into next year, according to sources familiar with the investigation.

As reported by ABC News, despite predictions by lawyers for President Donald J. Trump that Mueller’s probe will wrap up sooner rather than later, sources believe that isn’t the case at all.

“Most notably, the federal grand jury in Washington that has already indicted two key Trump associates is continuing to meet and hear more evidence from prosecutors,” the network reported.

“The grand jurors’ identities are unknown, but their faces are recognizable to the reporters and producers who have been standing inside the courthouse each week. Just a week ago, one of Mueller’s top prosecutors, Jeannie Rhee, was spotted at the courthouse by ABC News,” the report continued.

Special counsel grand juries often last up to 18 months and can be extended further in six-month increments if necessary.

Former national security advisor Michael Flynn, former campaign manager Paul Manafort, and campaign associate George Papadopoulos have all been indicted by Mueller.

But, as critics of the probe note, none of the indictments have had anything at all to do with alleged collusion between the president’s campaign and the Russian government, which was the original mandate of the special counsel.

The lack of evidence after more than a year of investigating those allegations — by congressional committees, the FBI, and Mueller’s special counsel — is frustrating some members of Congress.

“It’s time for Bob Mueller to put up or shut up. If there’s evidence of collusion, let’s see it,” Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said in an interview on Fox News earlier this month.

“If there’s not, let’s move on as a country and let’s institute reforms at the FBI so that an egomaniac FBI director like James Comey cannot depart from the normal standard procedures that guarantees all Americans equal treatment under the law,” he continued.

Trump and others have complained that the ongoing Russia collusion probe is harming the administration’s ability to improve relations with a strategic, nuclear-armed great power.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Trump to Mueller: Why hasn’t Dem operatives the PODESTAs been INDICTED yet?

(National SentinelSpotlight: During a wide-ranging interview with The New York Times that was published Thursday President Donald J. Trump said he believes that special counsel Robert Mueller will treat him “fairly” as he continues to investigate alleged “collusion” between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.

But the president also raised a question about why Mueller’s team has yet to file charges against the Podesta Group, a Democrat-aligned lobbying firm that did work in the U.S. on behalf of former Ukranian leader Viktor Yanukovych.

“Whatever happened to Podesta?,” Trump said. “[T]hey closed their firm, they left in disgrace, the whole thing, and now you never heard of anything.”

Trump was referencing the apparent scrutiny the Podesta Group is under by Mueller’s team, as, the lobbying work appears very similar to that done by former Trump campaign manager Paul Manfort, who has been indicted by a grand jury at Mueller’s recommendation.

The Podesta Group, once headed by brother of former Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, is likely to close by the end of this year. His brother, Tony Podesta, stepped down from his position at the firm in late October, The Daily Caller noted.

Regarding the significance of charges against Manafort, Trump said, “Paul only worked for me for a few months.”

He added: “Paul worked for Ronald Reagan. His firm worked for John McCain, worked for Bob Dole, worked for many Republicans for far longer than he worked for me. And you’re talking about what Paul was many years ago before I ever heard of him. He worked for me for — what was it, three and a half months?”

The president repeated his earlier contention that there was no “collusion” between his campaign and the Russian government.

He has described Mueller’s probe as a “witch hunt.”

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

BIAS: State prosecutor assisting Mueller BRAGGING about ‘legal resistance’ to Trump

(National SentinelDeeper State: New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has developed a reputation during President Donald J. Trump’s first year in office as being on of his administration’s biggest political nemeses.

He’s also proud of that.

Schneiderman, who is reportedly assisting special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russian collusion investigation into Team Trump, once again showed his bias against the administration, bragged about his successful resistance to the Trump administration in a Tuesday Medium post, The Daily Caller reported.

Schneiderman, who might play a pivotal role in the disposition of Mueller’s investigation, “has effectively branded himself as a public anti-Trump litigator during the president’s first year, in keeping with the history of hostility between the two men,” the news site noted.

In his Medium post, which was accompanied a profile of Schneiderman in The New York Times, noted that he has lodged 100 legal or administrative challenges to administration policies during the president’s first year in office.

Those challenges include lawsuits that contest Trump’s travel bans and his recession of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which was formulated into policy via an executive order issued by President Obama, in circumvention of immigration statutes.

Trump rescinded the order after careful consideration by the administration that it would not hold up in court as constitutional after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the Obama administration’s attempts to expand DACA in June 2016.

“We try and protect New Yorkers from those who would do them harm,” Schneiderman told The New York Times. “The biggest threat to New Yorkers right now is the federal government, so we’re responding to it.”

Schneiderman is attempting to build his political bona fides on his Trump resistance, investing resources and personnel in anti-Trump litigation. At the same time, he is coordinating with other Democratic state attorneys general to challenge the administration in court at virtually every turn.

The Daily Caller noted further:

Mueller’s office retained Schneiderman’s assistance in August in a bid to establish greater leverage against the president and his loyalists. Though the Constitution invests Trump with the power to pardon violations of federal crime, he cannot grant relief from state and local prosecution. Schneiderman’s cooperation provides a powerful supplement to the special counsel’s office, as it ensures criminal prosecutions may still proceed against any person Trump might pardon, diminishing the president’s assurances to wavering supporters.

Rated #1 Consumer Reports

It isn’t clear the extent of cooperation between Schneiderman’s and Mueller’s offices, the web site noted. However, unnamed sources close to the investigation say they have shared evidence and discussed potential cases.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

PARTISAN: Mueller now probing RNC data-sharing operations with TRUMP campaign

(National SentinelHack-like: Special counsel Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation into alleged ‘collusion’ between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia has taken a new twist, Business Insider reported Wednesday.


Mueller investigators are questioning staffers at the Republican National Committee about the organization’s digital operations with the Trump campaign.

Two sources told Yahoo News that Mueller’s investigators are looking into whether the joint RNC-Trump campaign data operation — directed on Trump’s side by Brad Parscale and managed by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner — “was related to the activities of Russian trolls and bots aimed at influencing the American electorate.”

Already, the FBI had been scrutinizing Kushner’s contacts a year ago with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. and the CEO of a sanctioned Russian bank. So far, however, the bureau has not produced any evidence or findings of wrongdoing.

The FBI has been scrutinizing Kushner’s contacts in December 2016 with the Russian ambassador to the US and the CEO of a sanctioned Russian bank.

No one in Mueller’s office or the RNC would verify the claims, however. Also, a source close to one of the Trump campaign’s data firms said they were “unaware of anyone being questioned,” Business Insider reported.

The site noted further:

Legacy Food Storage

It is not surprising that federal investigators have begun to examine the possibility that Russia and the Trump campaign helped each other during the election. Investigators have been looking into whether Russia provided the campaign with voter information stolen by Russian hackersfrom election databases in several states, and whether the Trump campaign helped Russia target its political ads to specific demographics and voting precincts.

In November, Parscale denied that Russians assisted the Trump campaign’s data operations.

“Absolutely not,” Parscale said on Fox News “The Story with Martha MacCallum.” He emphasized that the Trump campaign got the data it used here in America.

“In the United States, we actually have access to some of the best data, and the data we used on this campaign directly came from the Republican National Committee, and what they did after the 2012 election to build a data set like never seen before,” Parscale said. “We didn’t need data, we didn’t need it from anyone else, it was right here in the United States of America, and the best data is right here.”, short for “Russia Today,” a government-aligned media organ, reported in October that half of Russian ads on Facebook were shown after the Nov. 8, 2016 election, with an additional 25 percent never seen at all.

Mark Penn, the former chief strategist on Bill Clinton’s 1996 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign, and her 2008 presidential campaign, admitted it’s impossible Russian Facebook ads won Donald Trump the White House.

“I have 40 years of experience in politics, and this Russian ad buy, mostly after the election anyway, simply does not add up to a carefully targeted campaign to move voters,” he wrote in The Wall Street Journal.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Report: Mueller may indict Paul Manafort AGAIN

(National SentinelSwamp Thing: In the seven months since Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller as a special counsel to look into alleged collusion between Team Trump and Russia, he’s found nothing to substantiate the claim.

Rather, Mueller has expanded his limitless probe to all things Team Trump and Russia, including the financial dealings of then-GOP candidate Donald J. Trump’s campaign associates.


One of Trump’s associates who has been charged with financial crimes thus far is former campaign manager Paul Manafort, along with his erstwhile business partner Rick Gates, both of whom have pleaded not guilty.

However, Mueller may not be done with his charges against Manafort, at least. He could file what is called a superseding indictment of both men, according to The Daily Beast.

“I would expect a superseding indictment to come down relatively soon,” said Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University’s law school.

“There was much in the narrative of the indictment that referenced crimes not charged,” he told the news site. “Prosecutors will often issue a superseding indictment as the grand jury continues its work. There’s also a tactical reason for this, that superseding indictments tend to grind defendants a bit more over time.”

A superseding indictment essentially replaces the initial indictment, say legal experts. And in the initial indictment of Manafort and Gates, Mueller’s team hinted they could file additional charges in the future.

That now appears more likely:

Federal prosecutors can bring charges against any American who has money in a foreign bank account and doesn’t check a box on their tax forms disclosing it. The Manafort/Gates indictment describes financial behavior that may be liable for that kind of prosecution. And that’s an indicator that Mueller’s team may be preparing to formally charge both men with violating tax laws.

But Mueller isn’t playing by the normal rules, say critics, and that’s thanks in large part to the limitless mandate he was given by Rosenstein.

For example, a former prosecutor from the Justice Department’s tax division said Mueller handed down what’s known as a “speaking indictment,” or one that contains more information that necessary.

“It’s a way of dirtying up a defendant without having to actually prove the conduct,” he said. “I think, in fairness to them, they probably rushed it because they didn’t want to wait for the tax division approval on those tax counts. That, I assume, would be working its way through the system.”

A growing number of congressional Republicans, convinced that Mueller’s probe is what Trump says it is — a “witch hunt” — are said to be planning a comprehensive report that seeks to build criminal cases against senior FBI and Justice Department figures who appear to have plotted to keep Trump out of office.

One of the names mentioned is FBI counterintelligence investigator Peter Strzok, whom Mueller had on his team until anti-Trump texts and details of an “insurance policy” to prevent Trump from taking office were discovered.

As noted by Newsmax, the report would highlight the conduct of some FBI officials into last year’s investigation of suspected Russian meddling in the U.S. presidential election, people familiar with the plans have said.

This would come as Republican supporters of President Donald J. Trump in Congress have stepped up efforts to discredit special counsel Robert Mueller’s “collusion” probe amid allegations of anti-Trump bias on his prosecutorial and investigative team.

Trump’s lawyers have doubled down on an earlier prediction that the portion of Mueller’s investigation having to do with their client will soon come to an end.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?


GOP member of House Judiciary Committee to Robert Mueller: ‘Put up or shut’ about Trump-Russia ‘collusion’ (Video)

(National SentinelShowtime: A Republican member of the House Judiciary Committee has issued a challenge to special counsel Robert Mueller, who is currently conducting a lengthy probe of alleged collusion between the campaign of President Donald J. Trump and Russia: Show us the evidence.

“It’s time for Bob Mueller to put up or shut up. If there’s evidence of collusion, let’s see it,” Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz said in an interview on Fox News Wednesday.

“If there’s not, let’s move on as a country and let’s institute reforms at the FBI so that an egomaniac FBI director like James Comey cannot depart from the normal standard procedures that guarantees all Americans equal treatment under the law,” he continued.

Gaetz has been extremely critical of Mueller’s probe from the outset, saying that more than anything he sees it as overtly political and tainted against the president.

For him and other Republicans, the turning point was learning earlier this month that FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok, whom Mueller fired over the summer, had exchanged anti-Trump text messages with his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

Moreover, Gaetz and other Republicans have voiced concerns about the content of those texts, which appeared to suggest a plot or scheme to keep Trump out of the White House.

The discussions appeared to have also taken place in the presence of current FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Strzok wrote in the Aug. 15, 2016 text message.

“It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

Gaetz said that message is “totally unacceptable” while alleging that the text shows that McCabe, Strzok and other FBI officials “hatched a scheme to deprive Donald Trump of the presidency both before and after his election.”

McCabe was interviewed in Tuesday by the House Intelligence Committee.

Gaetz added that Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte has committed to issuing subpoenas to McCabe and Strzok.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Left is trying to GOAD Trump into firing ‘dirty cop’ Mueller with threats of violence, COUP

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

(National Sentinel) Political BaitingAs President Donald J. Trump becomes more successful in reviving our country after it was rendered moribund by former President Obama and his top-down, bureaucracy-heavy, one-size-fits-all, economy-killing approach to government, the far-Left is getting more and more unhinged.

And angry.

You see, they were all in for Obama’s “transformation” of America from a successful, growing, robust, powerful global leader into a declining, weak, economically drained shell of its former self. But they don’t want to have anything at all to do with the Trump revival, and in fact, they are doing all they can to disrupt Trump and destroy any chance he has at making America great again.

That’s why the angry Left is pushing for widespread civil unrest, perpetual outrage, and outright destruction if “dirty cop” Robert Mueller winds up being out of a job, thanks to being fired by the head of the Executive Branch.

In recent days Americans have learned a great deal about the operation put in place during Obama’s reign to undermine Trump’s chances of pulling off what many considered to be an election upset against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

What’s more, Americans have learned that there may even have been an actual coup planned by some members of the FBI and Department of Justice, including agent Peter Strzok, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, and Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr.

And of course, it’s an open secret that special counsel Robert Mueller is completely compromised and has a major conflict of interest in investigating Team Trump for alleged “collusion” with Mother Russia during last year’s election. In fact, some of the same anti-Trump players have managed to ‘find’ themselves on Mueller’s team — which, of course, is not by accident, as no one gets on Mueller’s team unless he hires them. And since Mueller has been swimming in the DC Swamp for a long, long time, he knows everyone he hired — including their animus towards the president.

Through it all, however, Trump has survived. And now that he and Republicans in Congress are onto the plot, there is widespread concern among the radical Left that Mueller’s days may be numbered.

Since Mueller represents the best remaining opportunity to get rid of Trump, the Left is already gearing up for the special counsel’s possible demise by agitating supporters and inciting them to “resist.”

As noted by PJ Media, there appeared to be a coordinated effort by Left-wing groups and individuals over the weekend to “take to the streets” if or when Mueller is fired by Trump.

The call to riot is not simply being issued by radical Leftist groups. Radical Leftist individuals, including former Obama officials like Eric Holder, who is a former attorney general, are also calling for resistance.

As reported by The National Sentinel, Holder issued his second thinly-veiled threat in a week that there would be hell to pay if “Republicans” or the president fire Mueller. (Related: CHAOS ALERT: Dem leader calls for deploying UN troops on the streets of America.)

“ABSOLUTE RED LINE: the firing of Bob Mueller or crippling the special counsel’s office. If removed or meaningfully tampered with, there must be mass, popular, peaceful support of both. The American people must be seen and heard – they will ultimately be determinative,” tweeted Holder on Sunday.

Earlier last week Holder tweeted, “Speaking on behalf of the vast majority of the American people, Republicans in Congress be forewarned: any attempt to remove Bob Mueller will not be tolerated.These are BS attacks on him/his staff that are blatantly political-designed to hide the real wrongdoing. Country not party.”

Why should this surprise me? After all, Obama’s CIA director, John Brennan, suggested over the summer that there be a coup against Trump if he fires Mueller.

The thing is, none of this is real. They goad the president with these threats.

The Swamp understands that Mueller is their last, best hope to get rid of Trump, one way or another: Either Trump gives them the opening they need to impeach him, or Mueller finds evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

The latter is far less likely than the former.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Is Mueller timing release of his findings to SABOTAGE the GOP and Trump in time for 2018 elections?

(National SentinelPolitical Timing: Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into President Donald J. Trump and his campaign over alleged “collusion” with Russia may take at least another year to complete, fueling speculation in some quarters he may time the release of his findings to coincide with the 2018 elections.

As reported by the Washington Post, members of Trump’s legal team who are scheduled to meet with the special counsel’s office this week are hopeful that Mueller’s probe is wrapping up.

However, the Post said, citing individuals familiar with the probe, the meeting could actually spur further investigation and create new tensions between the special counsel’s office and an increasingly frustrated President Donald J. Trump.

Those close to the investigation told the paper that it could last another year, referring to ongoing cooperation from witnesses such as former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos and former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Also, there could even be a trial involving a pair of former Trump officials.

As the special counsel’s office continues to request new documents, those working on the probe have told associates and friends they expect to be working through most of 2018.

That has triggered speculation among some in Trump’s corner that the special counsel’s findings could be timed for release in a manner that would do the most damage to the president’s party at the polls.

Already, Republicans in Congress are pointing to evidence of bias. They have noted that the special counsel’s office is filled with Democratic donors, including giving money to Trump’s election opponent, Hillary Clinton, with one Mueller prosecutor even attending Clinton’s election night party.

They also point to a suspicious email exchange between former lead FBI investigator Peter Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, which appears to indicate a plot to deny Trump the White House or, if he should win, find a way to have him removed. Further, the exchanged texts indicate that the plot was discussed in the presence of current FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

Trump allies also note that the creation of the special counsel in the first place was suspicious. During testimony before a House committee earlier this year, fired FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers he purposefully leaked a memo describing an alleged meeting he had with Trump in the Oval Office specifically for the purpose of having a special counsel appointed.

Former U.S. attorney Andrew McCarthy, in a column earlier this month, speculated that Mueller doesn’t have much evidence to support the original contention that Team Trump colluded with Russia. As such, he believes Mueller is now conducting an “impeachment investigation.”

“For all practical purposes, the collusion probe is over. While the ‘counterintelligence’ cover will continue to be exploited so that no jurisdictional limits are placed on Special Counsel Robert Mueller, this is now an obstruction investigation,” he wrote.

“That means it is, as it has always been, an impeachment investigation,” he added.

That is noteworthy, say political observers, given that Republicans may be in danger of losing control of the House in next year’s elections, and some Democrats are already discussing impeaching Trump.

All they lack thus far, say observers, is a reason.

“It may never come to that. We have no idea what Bob Mueller will provide,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., told The New York Times. She will likely compete with Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York to become chairperson of the powerful House Judiciary Committee, which would be responsible for returning articles of impeachment.

“Should it come to that, I hope that I would have the experience to cope with that in a very orderly and fair and informed manner,” she added.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Jarrett: Time to REMOVE Mueller and entire TEAM over dirty deal to illegally obtain Team Trump emails

(National SentinelUnconstitutional: Attorney and Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller and his entire team should be fired after they obtained thousands of privileged emails belonging to the Trump transition team.

Over the weekend, Fox News reported that Trump transition lawyer Kory Langhofer, the counsel to Trump for America (TFA), sent a letter to to House and Senate committees on Saturday arguing that the General Services Administration, which turned over the emails to Mueller’s team, engaged in “unlawful conduct” because it also handed over emails that were deemed privileged and, thus, protected by the Fourth Amendment.

Langhofer said the TFA discovered the “unauthorized disclosures” by the GSA on Dec. 12 and 13 and raised concerns with the special counsel’s office.

The GSA turned over a flash drive to Mueller’s team containing tens of thousands of emails from 13 transition team accounts. Mueller has used the emails to further his investigation into alleged Trump-Russia collusion, other reports have noted.

“We understand that the special counsel’s office has subsequently made extensive use of the materials it obtained from the GSA, including materials that are susceptible to privilege claims,” Langhofer wrote. He added that some of the records obtained by the special counsel’s office from the GSA “have been leaked to the press by unknown persons.”

Survival gear

In a Sunday column for Fox News, Garrett argued that Mueller’s team obtained a “‘significant volume of privileged material’ then used it in its investigation. Mueller’s staff apparently admits this egregious violation, which the law strictly forbids,” he stated further.

“Under the law, the only remedy is Mueller’s dismissal from the case,” he added. “The Presidential Transition Act states that all records of transition operations are private and confidential.”


Yet Mueller seems to have ignored the law.  Without a warrant or subpoena, his team of lawyers brazenly demanded these private records from the General Services Administration (GSA) which held custody of the materials.  The GSA does this as a service to all incoming presidents out of courtesy, but it neither owns the documents nor is authorized to release them to anyone under any circumstances because they are deemed entirely private.

Jarrett noted further that courts have been clear about what prosecutors must do under these circumstances: “An attorney who receives privileged documents has an ethical duty to cease review of the documents, notify the privilege holder, and return the documents.”  (U.S. v. Taylor 764 Fed Sup 2nd, 230, 235)

It does not appear as though Mueller did this, however.

“If any illegally obtained documents have been used in the Trump-Russia case, then the results are tainted and invalid.  This is a well-established principle of law,” Jarrett wrote, adding if Mueller used even a single email or document in his case, that should disqualify him, legally, from pursuing the case further.


The only remedy is removal, Jarrett continued.

“Either Congress should take aggressive action or the Presidential Transition Team (now Trump for America, Inc.) must petition a federal judge to order their removal,” he wrote.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?