Politics EXPOSING THE DEEP STATE (1 Viewer)

[MARIS61]

Former top FBI lawyer on defense as IG probe on surveillance abuse nears close

By Adam Shaw | Fox News

Former FBI lawyer James Baker is under criminal investigation by the DOJ for allegedly leaking information to the press

Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan says the four people under investigation have a deep bias against President Trump.

Republicans have alleged that the dossier was a central source for the warrant and that agents did not properly disclose the dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. Baker was asked Friday why the reference to where the dossier originated came in a footnote rather than in “big red magic marker.”

His remarks come as IG Michael Horowitz enters what is thought to be the final phases of his review into alleged surveillance abuses during the 2016 campaign. A source familiar with the matter confirmed to Fox News this week that Horowitz is focusing on how the dossier was used to secure the original warrant on Page, as well as three renewals.

With Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report now out in the open, attention has returned to the salacious and unverified anti-Trump dossier authored by Steele -- especially since its more sensational claims were not substantiated by Mueller's team.

The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that Horowitz is close to concluding his inquiry into the genesis of the Russia probe. The report said Horowitz’s team has questioned why the FBI considered Steele a credible source, and why the bureau seemed to use news reports to bolster Steele’s credibility.

It was revealed in January that Baker was under federal investigation for allegedly leaking to the media, an investigation believed to have been opened during the Obama administration and not in the course of the Russia investigation.

Fox News' Catherine Herridge and Alex Pappas contributed to this report.

 

[MARIS61]

Lawmakers say FBI may have been warned of Steele’s ‘political motivations’ before Trump aide surveillance

By Catherine Herridge, Adam Shaw | Fox News

Christopher Steele's anti-Trump dossier under new scrutiny after release of Mueller report

Calls to investigate the origins of special counsel Robert Mueller's probe are getting louder; analysis from John Yoo and Harry Litman, former deputy assistant attorneys general.

Top Republican lawmakers demanded answers Friday on whether the FBI was warned of anti-Trump dossier author Christopher Steele’s "political motivations" before the bureau applied for a surveillance warrant against a Trump campaign aide based in part on that document.

In a pair of letters to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa., cited newly revealed notes that a State Department official took during a meeting with Steele in October 2016, just 10 days before the first warrant application and a month before the presidential election. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has also written separate letters to Pompeo and Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

Lawmakers' letter to Secretary of State Pompeo by Fox News on Scribd

Those notes, first reported by The Hill, say that Steele’s security firm Orbis was “keen to see this information [in the dossier] come to light prior to November 8,” suggesting that it wanted the information to directly influence the 2016 presidential election.

"Based on the publicly-released version of the typed notes of the meeting, it appears Steele's intent of the meeting with the State Department was to maximize the impact of the unverified information that he had acquired in an effort to undermine the Trump campaign," Grassley and Johnson wrote. "Further, if that information was included in the material submitted to the FBI, then the FBI may have been aware of Steele's political motivations before submitting any FISA application."

They specifically want to know when the State Department shared these details with the FBI. An email from the official, Kathleen Kavalec, was sent on Oct. 13, 2016, though the recipient's identity is completely redacted, as is an attachment.

The notes, as published by The Hill and posted by Citizens United, also point to the involvement of opposition research firm Fusion GPS, noting that firm co-founder Glenn Simpson and colleague Peter Fritch recommended Steele's group for the job.

The dossier was eventually published by BuzzFeed News in 2017 and is filled with salacious and unverified claims about alleged dirt the Russians had over Trump. It is believed to have formed a significant part of the FBI’s application for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant against Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

Since the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia report, which did not find evidence of many of the claims within the dossier, fresh scrutiny has returned to the dossier and the role it played in the Page warrant application.

Republicans have pointed to Steele’s political motivations, as well as the funding of the dossier by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign, as proof that the origins of the probe were political as well.

Video
“This important information further demonstrates the bias of the primary source of material that was the basis for the Carter Page FISA warrant,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., wrote.

The notes also said that Steele indicated he had been in communication with reporters, which Johnson and Grassley say contradicts the FISA warrant application, “where the FBI repeatedly represented to the court that Steele did not have unauthorized contacts with the press prior to October 2016.”

The lawmakers want to know about the FBI’s communications with the State Department and what information was provided to it about the meetings -- specifically when State provided the notes about the meeting to the FBI. Graham also requested that the State Department make the official who took the meeting with Steele, Kathleen Kavalec, available for a transcribed interview with the Judiciary Committee.

The new revelations come as Horowitz is believed to be approaching the end of his investigation into the FBI and DOJ’s surveillance conduct in the 2016 election, and whether the agencies acted improperly. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that Horowitz's team has questioned why the FBI considered Steele a credible source, and why the bureau seemed to use news reports to bolster his credibility.

President Trump has repeatedly called the Russia investigation a “witch hunt” while Attorney General William Barr told lawmakers last month that “spying did occur” during the campaign.

 

[Minstrel]

I think you'd like this place, MARIS: Forwards From Grandma

 

[MarAzul]

I think you'd like this place, MARIS: Forwards From Grandma

Well there are a few good ones in there.

 

[MARIS61]

Obama WH Tied Clinton Email Cover-Up
MAY 10, 2019

The Obama White House Tracked a FOIA Request for Clinton Emails


We now have further evidence that the Obama White was in on the lies about Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email use.

In late April we announced that E.W. (Bill) Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, had admitted in writing and under oath that the agency found Clinton email records in the Obama White House, specifically, the Executive Office of the President.

Now we have obtained 44 pages of records from the State Department through court-ordered discovery revealing that the Obama White House was tracking a December 2012 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking records concerning Clinton’s use of an unsecure, non-government email system.

Months after the Obama White House involvement, the State Department responded to the FOIA requestor, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), falsely stating that no such records existed.

Our discovery is centered upon whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system and whether the State Department acted in bad faith in processing our FOIA request for communications from Clinton’s office. U.S District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers, and Clinton aides, as well as E.W. Priestap, to be deposed or answer written questions under oath. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”

The State Department’s Office of Inspector General issued a report in January 2016 saying: “At the time the request was received, dozens of senior officials throughout the Department, including members of Secretary Clinton’s immediate staff, exchanged emails with the Secretary using the personal accounts she used to conduct official business.” Also, the IG “found evidence that [Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills] was informed of the request at the time it was received …”

The State Department produced records in response to court-ordered document requests that detail Obama White House involvement in the Clinton email FOIA request.

In a December 20, 2012, email with the subject line “Need to track down a FOIA request from CREW”, Sheryl L. Walter, director of the State Department’s Office of Information Programs and Services (A/GIS/IPS), writes to IPS officials Rosemary D. Reid and Patrick D. Scholl and their assistants:

WH called – have we received a FOIA request from CREW (Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington) on the topic of personal use of email by senior officials? Apparently other agencies have. If we have it, can you give me the details so I can call the WH back? I think they’d like it on quick turnaround. Thanks! Sheryl

In the same email chain, Walter on December 20, 2012 also emailed Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s White House liaison, describing the CREW FOIA request:

Hi Heather – Copy attached, it was in our significant weekly FOIA report that we send to L and S/ES also. Do you want us to add you to that list? It’s a subset of things like this that we think likely to be of broader Department interest. More detail below re this request. As a practical matter given our workload, it won’t be processed for some months. Let me know if there are any particular sensitivities. If we don’t talk later, happy holidays! All the best, Sheryl

Sheryl: The request is assigned Case #F-2012-40981. It was received on 12/6/2012 and acknowledged on 12/10/2012. The request is assigned for processing.

On January 10, 2013, Walter writes to Samuelson that she is not including “personal” accounts in the FOIA request search:

Hi Heather – did you ever get any intell re what other agencies are doing re this FOIA request that seeks records about the number of email accounts associated with the Secretary (but isn’t specifying “personal” email accounts so we are interpreting as official accounts only). We are considering contacting the requester to find out exactly what it is they are looking for. Do you have any-concerns about that approach?

Soon afterward, Samuelson responds, “White House Counsel was looking into this for me. I will circle back with them now to see if they have further guidance.”

CREW’s general counsel, Anne Weismann, submitted a FOIA request to the State Department on December 6, 2012, seeking “records sufficient to show the number of email accounts of or associated with Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton, and the extent to which those email accounts are identifiable as those of or associated with Secretary Clinton.”

On May 10, 2013, [Information Programs and Services] replied to CREW, stating that “no records responsive to your request were located.”

Samuelson became Secretary Clinton’s personal lawyer and in 2014 led the review of Clinton’s emails to determine which ones were work-related and which were personal. She was also one of five close Clinton associates granted immunity by the Department of Justice in the Clinton email investigation.

Samuelson is one of several Obama administration and State Department officials ordered by U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth to respond under oath to our questions regarding whether Clinton’s private email use while Secretary of State was an intentional attempt to evade FOIA.

The new documents also include a January 2013 email exchange discussing Clinton’s departure from the State Department in which Agency Records Officer Tasha M. Thian specifically stating that Secretary Clinton “does not use email.”

This was directly contradicted by an email exchange between Secretary Clinton and Gen. David Petraeus dating back to January 2009 – the very first days of Clinton’s State Department tenure – in which she tells Petraeus that she “had to change her email address.”

Interestingly, this email exchange between Petraeus and Clinton was not produced in a related FOIA lawsuit seeking “all emails” of Hillary Clinton. The bottom portion of the email chain was produced, but not the beginning emails.

In a January 2013 email under the subject “RE: Sec Clinton’s papers,” Thian writes:

Just so you know, Secretary Clinton – she brought with her a lot of material as Senator and First Lady – 47 boxes. In case you hear there are many boxes I wanted you to know what they are. She is taking her copies of photos, public speeches, press statements, contacts, templates (some of these are both hard copy and electronic), reimbursements, etc…

Although Sec. Clinton does not use email [emphasis added] her staffers do – I have agreed that the emails of the three staffers will be electronically captured (and not printed out).

Also included in the new batch of documents is the draft Departing Officials Notice, which states that State Department personnel are not to remove classified records from Department “custody and control.”

These documents suggest the Obama White House knew about the Clinton email lies being told to the public at least as early as December 2012. A federal court granted us discovery into the Clinton emails because the court wanted answers about a government cover-up of the Clinton emails. And now we have answers because it looks like the Obama White House orchestrated the Clinton email cover-up.

 

[Lanny]

Former top FBI lawyer on defense as IG probe on surveillance abuse nears close

By Adam Shaw | Fox News

Former FBI lawyer James Baker is under criminal investigation by the DOJ for allegedly leaking information to the press

Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan says the four people under investigation have a deep bias against President Trump.

Republicans have alleged that the dossier was a central source for the warrant and that agents did not properly disclose the dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. Baker was asked Friday why the reference to where the dossier originated came in a footnote rather than in “big red magic marker.”

His remarks come as IG Michael Horowitz enters what is thought to be the final phases of his review into alleged surveillance abuses during the 2016 campaign. A source familiar with the matter confirmed to Fox News this week that Horowitz is focusing on how the dossier was used to secure the original warrant on Page, as well as three renewals.

With Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report now out in the open, attention has returned to the salacious and unverified anti-Trump dossier authored by Steele -- especially since its more sensational claims were not substantiated by Mueller's team.

The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that Horowitz is close to concluding his inquiry into the genesis of the Russia probe. The report said Horowitz’s team has questioned why the FBI considered Steele a credible source, and why the bureau seemed to use news reports to bolster Steele’s credibility.

It was revealed in January that Baker was under federal investigation for allegedly leaking to the media, an investigation believed to have been opened during the Obama administration and not in the course of the Russia investigation.

Fox News' Catherine Herridge and Alex Pappas contributed to this report.

My God, this has all been explained over and over and over again. Please report back to us when we have any indictments, any at all.

 

[Lanny]

Obama WH Tied Clinton Email Cover-Up
MAY 10, 2019

The Obama White House Tracked a FOIA Request for Clinton Emails


We now have further evidence that the Obama White was in on the lies about Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email use.

In late April we announced that E.W. (Bill) Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, had admitted in writing and under oath that the agency found Clinton email records in the Obama White House, specifically, the Executive Office of the President.

Now we have obtained 44 pages of records from the State Department through court-ordered discovery revealing that the Obama White House was tracking a December 2012 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking records concerning Clinton’s use of an unsecure, non-government email system.

Months after the Obama White House involvement, the State Department responded to the FOIA requestor, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), falsely stating that no such records existed.

Our discovery is centered upon whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system and whether the State Department acted in bad faith in processing our FOIA request for communications from Clinton’s office. U.S District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers, and Clinton aides, as well as E.W. Priestap, to be deposed or answer written questions under oath. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”

The State Department’s Office of Inspector General issued a report in January 2016 saying: “At the time the request was received, dozens of senior officials throughout the Department, including members of Secretary Clinton’s immediate staff, exchanged emails with the Secretary using the personal accounts she used to conduct official business.” Also, the IG “found evidence that [Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills] was informed of the request at the time it was received …”

The State Department produced records in response to court-ordered document requests that detail Obama White House involvement in the Clinton email FOIA request.

In a December 20, 2012, email with the subject line “Need to track down a FOIA request from CREW”, Sheryl L. Walter, director of the State Department’s Office of Information Programs and Services (A/GIS/IPS), writes to IPS officials Rosemary D. Reid and Patrick D. Scholl and their assistants:

WH called – have we received a FOIA request from CREW (Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington) on the topic of personal use of email by senior officials? Apparently other agencies have. If we have it, can you give me the details so I can call the WH back? I think they’d like it on quick turnaround. Thanks! Sheryl

In the same email chain, Walter on December 20, 2012 also emailed Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s White House liaison, describing the CREW FOIA request:

Hi Heather – Copy attached, it was in our significant weekly FOIA report that we send to L and S/ES also. Do you want us to add you to that list? It’s a subset of things like this that we think likely to be of broader Department interest. More detail below re this request. As a practical matter given our workload, it won’t be processed for some months. Let me know if there are any particular sensitivities. If we don’t talk later, happy holidays! All the best, Sheryl

Sheryl: The request is assigned Case #F-2012-40981. It was received on 12/6/2012 and acknowledged on 12/10/2012. The request is assigned for processing.

On January 10, 2013, Walter writes to Samuelson that she is not including “personal” accounts in the FOIA request search:

Hi Heather – did you ever get any intell re what other agencies are doing re this FOIA request that seeks records about the number of email accounts associated with the Secretary (but isn’t specifying “personal” email accounts so we are interpreting as official accounts only). We are considering contacting the requester to find out exactly what it is they are looking for. Do you have any-concerns about that approach?

Soon afterward, Samuelson responds, “White House Counsel was looking into this for me. I will circle back with them now to see if they have further guidance.”

CREW’s general counsel, Anne Weismann, submitted a FOIA request to the State Department on December 6, 2012, seeking “records sufficient to show the number of email accounts of or associated with Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton, and the extent to which those email accounts are identifiable as those of or associated with Secretary Clinton.”

On May 10, 2013, [Information Programs and Services] replied to CREW, stating that “no records responsive to your request were located.”

Samuelson became Secretary Clinton’s personal lawyer and in 2014 led the review of Clinton’s emails to determine which ones were work-related and which were personal. She was also one of five close Clinton associates granted immunity by the Department of Justice in the Clinton email investigation.

Samuelson is one of several Obama administration and State Department officials ordered by U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth to respond under oath to our questions regarding whether Clinton’s private email use while Secretary of State was an intentional attempt to evade FOIA.

The new documents also include a January 2013 email exchange discussing Clinton’s departure from the State Department in which Agency Records Officer Tasha M. Thian specifically stating that Secretary Clinton “does not use email.”

This was directly contradicted by an email exchange between Secretary Clinton and Gen. David Petraeus dating back to January 2009 – the very first days of Clinton’s State Department tenure – in which she tells Petraeus that she “had to change her email address.”

Interestingly, this email exchange between Petraeus and Clinton was not produced in a related FOIA lawsuit seeking “all emails” of Hillary Clinton. The bottom portion of the email chain was produced, but not the beginning emails.

In a January 2013 email under the subject “RE: Sec Clinton’s papers,” Thian writes:

Just so you know, Secretary Clinton – she brought with her a lot of material as Senator and First Lady – 47 boxes. In case you hear there are many boxes I wanted you to know what they are. She is taking her copies of photos, public speeches, press statements, contacts, templates (some of these are both hard copy and electronic), reimbursements, etc…

Although Sec. Clinton does not use email [emphasis added] her staffers do – I have agreed that the emails of the three staffers will be electronically captured (and not printed out).

Also included in the new batch of documents is the draft Departing Officials Notice, which states that State Department personnel are not to remove classified records from Department “custody and control.”

These documents suggest the Obama White House knew about the Clinton email lies being told to the public at least as early as December 2012. A federal court granted us discovery into the Clinton emails because the court wanted answers about a government cover-up of the Clinton emails. And now we have answers because it looks like the Obama White House orchestrated the Clinton email cover-up.

Ah yes, the e-mails. This certainly has not the coverage that it so richly deserves.

 

[Lanny]

Lawmakers say FBI may have been warned of Steele’s ‘political motivations’ before Trump aide surveillance

By Catherine Herridge, Adam Shaw | Fox News

Christopher Steele's anti-Trump dossier under new scrutiny after release of Mueller report

Calls to investigate the origins of special counsel Robert Mueller's probe are getting louder; analysis from John Yoo and Harry Litman, former deputy assistant attorneys general.

Top Republican lawmakers demanded answers Friday on whether the FBI was warned of anti-Trump dossier author Christopher Steele’s "political motivations" before the bureau applied for a surveillance warrant against a Trump campaign aide based in part on that document.

In a pair of letters to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa., cited newly revealed notes that a State Department official took during a meeting with Steele in October 2016, just 10 days before the first warrant application and a month before the presidential election. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has also written separate letters to Pompeo and Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

Lawmakers' letter to Secretary of State Pompeo by Fox News on Scribd

Those notes, first reported by The Hill, say that Steele’s security firm Orbis was “keen to see this information [in the dossier] come to light prior to November 8,” suggesting that it wanted the information to directly influence the 2016 presidential election.

"Based on the publicly-released version of the typed notes of the meeting, it appears Steele's intent of the meeting with the State Department was to maximize the impact of the unverified information that he had acquired in an effort to undermine the Trump campaign," Grassley and Johnson wrote. "Further, if that information was included in the material submitted to the FBI, then the FBI may have been aware of Steele's political motivations before submitting any FISA application."

They specifically want to know when the State Department shared these details with the FBI. An email from the official, Kathleen Kavalec, was sent on Oct. 13, 2016, though the recipient's identity is completely redacted, as is an attachment.

The notes, as published by The Hill and posted by Citizens United, also point to the involvement of opposition research firm Fusion GPS, noting that firm co-founder Glenn Simpson and colleague Peter Fritch recommended Steele's group for the job.

The dossier was eventually published by BuzzFeed News in 2017 and is filled with salacious and unverified claims about alleged dirt the Russians had over Trump. It is believed to have formed a significant part of the FBI’s application for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant against Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

Since the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia report, which did not find evidence of many of the claims within the dossier, fresh scrutiny has returned to the dossier and the role it played in the Page warrant application.

Republicans have pointed to Steele’s political motivations, as well as the funding of the dossier by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign, as proof that the origins of the probe were political as well.

Video
“This important information further demonstrates the bias of the primary source of material that was the basis for the Carter Page FISA warrant,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., wrote.

The notes also said that Steele indicated he had been in communication with reporters, which Johnson and Grassley say contradicts the FISA warrant application, “where the FBI repeatedly represented to the court that Steele did not have unauthorized contacts with the press prior to October 2016.”

The lawmakers want to know about the FBI’s communications with the State Department and what information was provided to it about the meetings -- specifically when State provided the notes about the meeting to the FBI. Graham also requested that the State Department make the official who took the meeting with Steele, Kathleen Kavalec, available for a transcribed interview with the Judiciary Committee.

The new revelations come as Horowitz is believed to be approaching the end of his investigation into the FBI and DOJ’s surveillance conduct in the 2016 election, and whether the agencies acted improperly. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that Horowitz's team has questioned why the FBI considered Steele a credible source, and why the bureau seemed to use news reports to bolster his credibility.

President Trump has repeatedly called the Russia investigation a “witch hunt” while Attorney General William Barr told lawmakers last month that “spying did occur” during the campaign.

Much ado about nothing.

 

[MARIS61]

In the end, this is why nothing else matters.

Graham pushing to declassify key 'document' on Steele dossierBy Gregg Re | Fox News

Sen. Graham: The media could care less about anything to do with Clinton they just want to 'get' Trump

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham weighs in on FISA warrants, the DOJ and the Mueller investigation.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham exclusively told "Sunday Morning Futures" that he is working to declassify a sensitive "document" that definitively proves that authorities knew the Steele dossier -- which the FBI used to justify the secret surveillance of a former Trump aide -- lacked any substantial independent corroboration.

Graham also previewed legislation he will introduce on Wednesday to halt what he called the "perfect storm" of illegal immigration that now constitutes an "invasion" at the southern border, and predicted that "90 percent of illegal immigration" from Central America would soon come to an end under his plan.

"There's a document that's classified that I'm gonna try to get unclassified that takes the dossier -- all the pages of it -- and it has verification to one side," Graham told anchor Maria Bartiromo. "There really is no verification, other than media reports that were generated by reporters that received the dossier."

Graham added: "So, the bottom line is the dossier has never been independently confirmed. It was used to get a warrant. They knew the author of the dossier was on the Democrat Party payroll. He hated Trump; they got the warrant anyway. Most Americans should be very upset about that. I'm very upset about it. And we're going to get to the bottom of it."

On four occasions, the FBI told the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) court that it "did not believe" former British spy Christopher Steele was the direct source for a Yahoo News article implicating former Trump aide Carter Page in Russian collusion, documents released after a lawsuit showed last year.

Instead, the FBI suggested to the court, the September 2016 article by Michael Isikoff was independent corroboration of the salacious, unverified allegations against Trump in the infamous Steele Dossier. Federal authorities used both the Steele Dossier and Yahoo News article to convince the FISA court to authorize a surveillance warrant for Page.

Former British spy Christopher Steele sat for a four-hour videotaped deposition last month.

But London court records show that contrary to the FBI's assessments, Steele briefed Yahoo News and other reporters in the fall of 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS -- the opposition research firm behind the dossier.

The FISA application also copied and pasted directly from a Washington Post opinion piece that claimed the Trump campaign had "worked behind the scenes" to "gut" the GOP platform on Russia and Ukraine.

The FBI seemingly conducted no independent review of the opinion article's disputed claims, which were widely cited as evidence the Trump team was compromised by Russia and working to publicly appease Russian President Vladimir Putin. Despite the brouhaha, Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe only briefly mentioned the episode, saying there was no evidence of misconduct when a lone Trump official vetoed a single delegate's proposed platform change.

The platform change would have called for providing lethal arms to Ukrainians fighting Russians, rather than defensive arms -- in a marked change from then-President Obama's policy that analysts say would have risked escalating tensions with Putin. The Trump administration ultimately did decide to provide lethal arms to Ukrainians later.

President Trump has vowed to declassify the full FISA applications to surveil Page, and related documents.

Graham indicated, however, that his promised "deep dive" into the Russia probe's origins is currently pending the completion of Inspector General Michael Horowitz's own investigation into alleged FBI and DOJ misconduct during the 2016 presidential campaign.

"I'm waiting for Horowitz to get his report done," Graham said. "But we had a pretty big bombshell this week."


Wall Street editorial board member says former FBI Director James Comey has a bruised ego
Kim Strassel says an FBI director should be making issues of the law, not entering the political realm.

Graham specifically cited the report from The Hill's John Solomon that the FBI expressly told that Steele, the bureau's confidenial informant, had admitted to a contact at the State Department that he was "keen" to leak his discredited dossier for purposes of influencing the 2016 election. Steele also acknowledged that his dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton campaign.

"Christopher Steele was trying to leak it to everybody," Graham said.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s written account of her Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with Steele was apparently sent to the FBI, according to records unearthed in a transparency lawsuit by Citizens United. Nevertheless, the FBI included claims in Steele's dossier in its successful FISA warrant application to monitor Page.

UKRAINE EMBASSY SPEAKS OUT: SAYS DNC OPERATIVE MADE CONTACT, SOUNDED ALARM ON MANAFORT

"But-for the dossier, there would be no warrant against Carter Page," Graham said. "The meeting on Oct. 11 was 10 days before the FISA warrant application. So the FBI was on notice that their confidential informant went to the Department of State to urge the Department of State to take the dossier and leak it to the public to affect the election. That's about as sick as it gets."

The only notation that the FBI included in the FISA application to alert the judge as to Steele's bias was that his information was prepared in connection with a presidential campaign.

The application did not mention that the dossier had been funded by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign, nor did the application mention that Steele had admitted to wanting the claims in his dossier to go public before Election Day.

News of that surveillance, which also leaked, kickstarted the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

In letters last week, a slew of Republican senators, including Graham, demanded answers from the State Department, as well as all related documents.

In a pair of missives to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said there was now clear evidence that Steele was simply out to smear then-candidate Trump.

"Based on the publicly-released version of the typed notes of the meeting, it appears Steele's intent of the meeting with the State Department was to maximize the impact of the unverified information that he had acquired in an effort to undermine the Trump campaign," Grassley and Johnson wrote. "Further, if that information was included in the material submitted to the FBI, then the FBI may have been aware of Steele's political motivations before submitting any FISA application."

The senators specifically said they want to know when the State Department shared these details with the FBI. Kavalec's Oct. 13, 2016, email was apparently sent to someone in the FBI, though the recipient's identity is completely redacted, as is an attachment.

 

[MARIS61]

Mueller Report Proves That It’s Time to Investigate the Investigators
MAY 13, 2019

Now that President Trump has been exonerated of the false accusations of collusion and obstruction, it is time to investigate the investigators.

The White House has justly praised the outcome of special counsel Robert Mueller‘s investigation for clearing the president of the odious charges that have hung over his presidency since even before his inauguration. The Mueller report overall was favorable to the president, but it also should be remembered as the Mueller special counsel’s final abuse of power. There were nearly 200 pages of irrelevancies about Russia collusion, but it couldn’t disguise the fact that all of those alleged contacts between the Russians and the Trump campaign amounted to nothing, legally or substantively. And the fact remains that the institutional climate in the Justice Department has been so hostile to the president that we can be certain that, if there had been even a scintilla of evidence supporting a criminal indictment, it would have been pursued.

Liberal members of Congress and their media allies are furious with Attorney General William Barr because he blew up the Mueller report smear job before it was out of the box. The Mueller team wanted to drop its 448-page bomb on the American people, who then would have had to sort through the innuendo and fake legal analysis without context. To his great credit, the attorney general imposed necessary discipline on the release, explaining to Congress and the American people in stark terms that there was no collusion and no obstruction. For this truth-telling, he faces impeachment threats, not plaudits, from the Democratic-media swamp.

The continuing argument over “obstruction” fits with the evident agenda of the anti-Trump Mueller team to create lingering political difficulties for the president, even though he has been cleared of legal jeopardy. Some of the Mueller operation’s so-called obstruction theories are ridiculous, such as that the president could not object to being targeted for investigation. Is it now a crime for someone falsely accused to be upset about it? Mueller presumes guilt and then refuses to “exonerate” President Trump. This turns our legal system upside down and shows the rule of law is no bar to smearing President Trump.

What is missing from the Mueller report is an honest discussion about the origins of the unverified hearsay in the “Steele dossier” that formed the underpinning of the unprecedented spying effort against Trump and his campaign. But looking ahead, the Steele dossier, its genesis and the actions of members of the Obama administration who exploited it to target the Trump campaign, are very much in the crosshairs. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s investigation of the abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process will soon conclude, and may result in criminal referrals. Attorney General Barr also promises an even broader investigation of “Spygate” abuses.

And the abuses were not limited to the Justice Department. The U.S. intelligence community was politicized to an extent never seen in history; the State Department played a role in pushing the sham collusion story. And President Obama almost certainly knew about and approved the spying being conducted on the Trump campaign.

Judicial Watch is not waiting for government investigators, however. We have pending approximately 50 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits seeking information on the anti-Trump coup.

Judicial Watch has, to date, pursued more than 40 FOIA lawsuits in an effort to get to the bottom of the “Russiagate” hoax, including dozens explicitly dealing with the illicit targeting and other abuses of power against President Trump. We also have 10 lawsuits dealing with the Mueller investigation specifically — because this assault on the rule of law is a dire threat to our republican form of government.

Tom Fitton is president of Judicial Watch, a conservative nonprofit educational foundation.

 

[MARIS61]

Rosenstein unloads on Comey, says he broke 'bright lines that should never be crossed'

By Gregg Re | Fox News

Video
Rod Rosenstein criticizes the Obama administration for their handling of the Russia investigation
Former Arkansas Republican Governor Mike Huckabee says Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's critical comments of the Russia election interference investigation is a soft way of saying there was a cover up.

Rod Rosenstein unloaded on former FBI Director James Comey in remarks to the Greater Baltimore Committee (GBC) on Monday evening, slamming Comey's turn as a "partisan pundit," reiterating that he deserved to be fired, and faulting him for trampling "bright lines that should never be crossed."

Rosenstein formally stepped aside as deputy attorney general two days ago. His speech specifically took aim at Comey's comments earlier this month implying that Rosenstein and Attorney General Bill Barr lacked the "inner strength" to "resist the compromises necessary to survive Mr. Trump."

Comey also derided Rosenstein's "character" and suggested his "soul" had been consumed "in small bites." The former FBI boss, who has taken to posting numerous photographs of himself in nature staring wistfully at trees and roadways since leaving public office, had been showered with media attention in recent months, and his memoir earned him over $2 million.

"Now, the former director is a partisan pundit, selling books and earning speaking fees while speculating about the strength of my character and the fate of my immortal soul," Rosenstein said. "That is disappointing. Speculating about souls is not a job for police and prosecutors. Generally, we base our opinions on eyewitness testimony."

COMEY PRIVATE MEMOS CONTAINED SECRET INFORMANT CODE NAME, FAR MORE SENSITIVE INFO THAN PREVIOUSLY KNOWN -- WHY?

Although Rosenstein emphasized that he "did not dislike" and even "admired" Comey in the past, he asserted that the former FBI head's handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation in 2016 was a grievous and defining professional error.

"The clearest mistake was the director’s decision to hold a press conference about an open case, reveal his recommendation and discuss details about the investigation, without the consent of the prosecutors and the attorney general," Rosenstein said. "Then, he chose to send a letter to the Congress on the eve of the election stating that one of the candidates was under criminal investigation, expecting it to be released immediately to the public."

Comey later said he felt compelled to hold the dramatic July 2016 news conference -- in which he said that "no reasonable prosecutor" would charge Clinton, even though he said she had been "extremely careless" in handling classified information -- because then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch had compromised the DOJ's appearance of impartiality by allowing Bill Clinton to meet her privately on an airport tarmac as the investigation was ongoing.

Rosenstein added: "Those actions were not within the range of reasonable decisions. They were inconsistent with our goal of communicating to all FBI employees that they should respect the attorney general’s role, refrain from disclosing information about criminal investigations, avoid disparaging uncharged persons, and above all, not take unnecessary steps that could influence an election."

Rosenstein called his memorandum supporting Comey's firing "reasonable under the circumstances," and said he would have provided a more fleshed-out analysis of the "pros and cons" of terminating the FBI director had he been "asked to make a recommendation before the removal decision was made."

But, Rosenstein emphasized, Trump "did not tell me what reasons to put in my memo." The president repeatedly has suggested that Comey's refusal to acknowledge publicly -- as he had privately -- that Trump was not under investigation ultimately played a role in his termination.

Audience appetite and President Trump are fueling saturation coverage, says Fox News media analyst Howard Kurtz.

Still, Rosenstein sounded a note of sympathy for the manner in which Comey was fired. The ex-FBI director reportedly learned of his fate from TV reports.

"If I had been the decision maker, the removal would have been handled very differently, with far more respect and far less drama," Rosenstein said, "so I do not blame the former director for being angry."

But, in another shot at Comey's deeply personal criticisms, Rosenstein went on: "My soul and character are pretty much the same today as they were two years ago. I took a few hits and made some enemies during my time in the arena, but I held my ground and made a lot of friends. And thanks to them, I think I made the right calls on the things that mattered."

The speech to the GBC -- a nonprofit association of business leaders that Rosenstein has credited with helping law enforcement, including when he was a U.S. Attorney -- was his second in as many years. It followed Rosenstein's remarks hours earlier to the University of Baltimore School of Law, in which he quoted Special Counsel Robert Mueller and urged graduates to stick to principles despite external pressure.

"So, that is some of what was going on when you gave me that award for courage in government service two years ago," Rosenstein concluded. "I probably did not deserve it at the time. I do not know whether I earned it since then. But I tried my best. It is nice to be home. Thank you very much."

Congressional Republicans have accused Rosenstein of intentionally withholding documents and information from Congress, failure to comply with congressional subpoenas and abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

In particular, Rosenstein was at the DOJ in June 2017 when the third renewal of the government's FISA warrant to surveil ex-Trump aide Carter Page was submitted. The FISA applications flatly accused Page of conspiring with Russians and included citations to media sources that traced back to British ex-spy Christopher Steele -- who was funded in part by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

The FISA applications did not state these connections clearly, nor did they mention new revelations that Steele apparently confided in the State Department that he wanted his since-discredited, now-infamous dossier to go public before Election Day in 2016.

A DOJ watchdog review of the department's FISA practices, among other issues, is expected to be completed within weeks.

 

[MARIS61]

And just like that. The shoe is on the other foot.

Barr assigns US attorney in Connecticut to look into government surveillance involving Trump campaign

By Gregg Re, Jake Gibson, Catherine Herridge | Fox News

Attorney General William Barr has appointed a U.S. attorney to examine the origins of the Russia investigation and determine if intelligence collection efforts targeting the Trump campaign were "lawful and appropriate," a person familiar with the situation told Fox News on Monday evening.

John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, will conduct the inquiry, the source said. The move comes as the Trump administration has pushed for answers on why federal authorities conducted the surveillance -- as well as whether Democrats were the ones who improperly colluded with foreign actors.

Two sources told Fox News earlier today that Barr was “serious” and had assigned DOJ personnel to the probe. Durham is known as a "hard-charging, bulldog" prosecutor, Fox News is told.

Sources familiar with matter say the focus of the probe includes the pre-transition period -- prior to Nov. 7, 2016 - - including the use and initiation of informants, as well as potential Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) abuses.

An informant working for U.S. intelligence posed as a Cambridge University research assistant in September 2016 to try extracting any possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia from George Papadopoulos, then a Trump foreign policy adviser, it emerged earlier this month. Papadopoulos told Fox News the informant tried to "seduce" him as part of the "bizarre" episode.

Durham previously has investigated law enforcement corruption, the destruction of CIA videotapes and the Boston FBI office's relationship with mobsters. He is set to continue to serve as the chief federal prosecutor in Connecticut.

ROSENSTEIN BLASTS 'ANGRY' COMEY, SAYS HE'S BECOME A DISAPPOINTING PARTISAN HACK

U.S. Attorney John Durham has been assigned to probe the origins of the surveillance of the Trump campaign, a source told Fox News. (Justice Department)

In January, House Republican Reps. Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows wrote to Durham seeking a briefing, saying they had "discovered" that Durham's office was "investigating [former FBI General Counsel James Baker" for unauthorized disclosures to the media."

Durham's new review would exist alongside the ongoing probe by DOJ Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz, who is continuing to review potential surveillance abuses by the FBI -- an investigation that began last March and that Fox News is told is nearing completion.

Republicans also have been looking for answers from U.S. Attorney for Utah John Huber, who was appointed a year ago by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to review not only surveillance abuses by the FBI and DOJ, but also authorities' handling of the probe into the Clinton Foundation.

Huber, Republicans have cautioned, apparently has made little progress and has spoken to few key witnesses and whistleblowers. But, in January, then-Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker reportedly indicated at a private meeting that Huber's work was continuing apace.

Durham's appointment comes about a month after Barr told members of Congress he believed "spying did occur" on the Trump campaign in 2016. He later said he didn't mean anything pejorative and was gathering a team to look into the origins of the special counsel's investigation.

Democrats have pummeled Barr in frustration following revelations in Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report that the Trump campaign did not collude with Russian actors, despite numerous offers by Russians to assist the campaign. Mueller's final report has led to a bitter D.C. battle over the limited number of redactions in the report, which the DOJ says are legally necessary because they pertain to grand jury matters.

In obtaining a secret FISA warrant to surveil former Trump aide Carter Page, the FBI copy-pasted directly from a disputed Washington Post opinion article to suggest the Trump campaign may have been compromised. The bureau also repeatedly assured the court that it "did not believe" British ex-spy Christopher Steele was the direct source for a Yahoo News article implicating Page in Russian collusion.

But, London court records showed that contrary to the FBI's assessments, Steele briefed Yahoo News and other reporters in the fall of 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS -- the opposition research firm behind the dossier. Fusion GPS was retained by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee (DNC), a piece of information not stated in the FISA application.

The FISA application cribbed word-for-word from the Washington Post article that claimed the Trump campaign had "worked behind the scenes" to "gut" the GOP platform on Russia and Ukraine. The FBI apparently did not conduct its own independent assessment of the piece, and Mueller's probe ultimately found no wrongdoing by the Trump team.

Additionally, internal FBI text messages exclusively obtained by Fox News earlier this year showed that a senior DOJ official raised concerns about the bias in a key FISA warrant, but that FBI officials pressed on.

"There's a document that's classified that I'm gonna try to get unclassified that takes the dossier -- all the pages of it -- and it has verification to one side," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" this weekend. "There really is no verification, other than media reports that were generated by reporters that received the dossier."

Graham specifically cited the report from The Hill's John Solomon that the FBI was expressly told that Steele, the bureau's confidenial informant, had admitted to a contact at the State Department that he was "keen" to leak his discredited dossier for purposes of influencing the 2016 election.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s written account of her Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with Steele was apparently sent to the FBI, according to records unearthed in a transparency lawsuit by Citizens United.

Fox News' Brooke Singman and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Gregg Re is a lawyer and editor based in Los Angeles. Follow him on Twitter @gregg_re.

 

[Lanny]

Mueller Report Proves That It’s Time to Investigate the Investigators
MAY 13, 2019

Now that President Trump has been exonerated of the false accusations of collusion and obstruction, it is time to investigate the investigators.

The White House has justly praised the outcome of special counsel Robert Mueller‘s investigation for clearing the president of the odious charges that have hung over his presidency since even before his inauguration. The Mueller report overall was favorable to the president, but it also should be remembered as the Mueller special counsel’s final abuse of power. There were nearly 200 pages of irrelevancies about Russia collusion, but it couldn’t disguise the fact that all of those alleged contacts between the Russians and the Trump campaign amounted to nothing, legally or substantively. And the fact remains that the institutional climate in the Justice Department has been so hostile to the president that we can be certain that, if there had been even a scintilla of evidence supporting a criminal indictment, it would have been pursued.

Liberal members of Congress and their media allies are furious with Attorney General William Barr because he blew up the Mueller report smear job before it was out of the box. The Mueller team wanted to drop its 448-page bomb on the American people, who then would have had to sort through the innuendo and fake legal analysis without context. To his great credit, the attorney general imposed necessary discipline on the release, explaining to Congress and the American people in stark terms that there was no collusion and no obstruction. For this truth-telling, he faces impeachment threats, not plaudits, from the Democratic-media swamp.

The continuing argument over “obstruction” fits with the evident agenda of the anti-Trump Mueller team to create lingering political difficulties for the president, even though he has been cleared of legal jeopardy. Some of the Mueller operation’s so-called obstruction theories are ridiculous, such as that the president could not object to being targeted for investigation. Is it now a crime for someone falsely accused to be upset about it? Mueller presumes guilt and then refuses to “exonerate” President Trump. This turns our legal system upside down and shows the rule of law is no bar to smearing President Trump.

What is missing from the Mueller report is an honest discussion about the origins of the unverified hearsay in the “Steele dossier” that formed the underpinning of the unprecedented spying effort against Trump and his campaign. But looking ahead, the Steele dossier, its genesis and the actions of members of the Obama administration who exploited it to target the Trump campaign, are very much in the crosshairs. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s investigation of the abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process will soon conclude, and may result in criminal referrals. Attorney General Barr also promises an even broader investigation of “Spygate” abuses.

And the abuses were not limited to the Justice Department. The U.S. intelligence community was politicized to an extent never seen in history; the State Department played a role in pushing the sham collusion story. And President Obama almost certainly knew about and approved the spying being conducted on the Trump campaign.

Judicial Watch is not waiting for government investigators, however. We have pending approximately 50 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits seeking information on the anti-Trump coup.

Judicial Watch has, to date, pursued more than 40 FOIA lawsuits in an effort to get to the bottom of the “Russiagate” hoax, including dozens explicitly dealing with the illicit targeting and other abuses of power against President Trump. We also have 10 lawsuits dealing with the Mueller investigation specifically — because this assault on the rule of law is a dire threat to our republican form of government.

Tom Fitton is president of Judicial Watch, a conservative nonprofit educational foundation.

For the last time, and try to get this through your head, the Mueller report even says it does NOT exonerate Trump of Obstruction. I thought this had been pointed out to you before. Read the report and get back to me.

 

[MARIS61]

For the last time, and try to get this through your head, the Mueller report even says it does NOT exonerate Trump of Obstruction. I thought this had been pointed out to you before. Read the report and get back to me.

Nor does it exonerate you.

Exoneration is not the role of the special prosecutor

What’s your point?

 

[MARIS61]

For the last time, and try to get this through your head, the Mueller report even says it does NOT exonerate Trump of Obstruction. I thought this had been pointed out to you before. Read the report and get back to me.

The AG, for whom the report was written, concluded that it exonerated the POTUS of obstruction.

 

[Lanny]

The AG, for whom the report was written, concluded that it exonerated the POTUS of obstruction.

1. You erroneously said that the report cleared Trump of Obstruction and that is false;
2. The Attorney General is a lackey of Trump. He's going to say whatever Trump wants him to say.
3. Let's let the House do their oversight investigations and see if they agree with Mueller or Barr.

 

[The Professional Fan]

In the end, this is why nothing else matters.

Graham pushing to declassify key 'document' on Steele dossierBy Gregg Re | Fox News

Sen. Graham: The media could care less about anything to do with Clinton they just want to 'get' Trump

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham weighs in on FISA warrants, the DOJ and the Mueller investigation.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham exclusively told "Sunday Morning Futures" that he is working to declassify a sensitive "document" that definitively proves that authorities knew the Steele dossier -- which the FBI used to justify the secret surveillance of a former Trump aide -- lacked any substantial independent corroboration.

Graham also previewed legislation he will introduce on Wednesday to halt what he called the "perfect storm" of illegal immigration that now constitutes an "invasion" at the southern border, and predicted that "90 percent of illegal immigration" from Central America would soon come to an end under his plan.

"There's a document that's classified that I'm gonna try to get unclassified that takes the dossier -- all the pages of it -- and it has verification to one side," Graham told anchor Maria Bartiromo. "There really is no verification, other than media reports that were generated by reporters that received the dossier."

Graham added: "So, the bottom line is the dossier has never been independently confirmed. It was used to get a warrant. They knew the author of the dossier was on the Democrat Party payroll. He hated Trump; they got the warrant anyway. Most Americans should be very upset about that. I'm very upset about it. And we're going to get to the bottom of it."

On four occasions, the FBI told the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) court that it "did not believe" former British spy Christopher Steele was the direct source for a Yahoo News article implicating former Trump aide Carter Page in Russian collusion, documents released after a lawsuit showed last year.

Instead, the FBI suggested to the court, the September 2016 article by Michael Isikoff was independent corroboration of the salacious, unverified allegations against Trump in the infamous Steele Dossier. Federal authorities used both the Steele Dossier and Yahoo News article to convince the FISA court to authorize a surveillance warrant for Page.

Former British spy Christopher Steele sat for a four-hour videotaped deposition last month.

But London court records show that contrary to the FBI's assessments, Steele briefed Yahoo News and other reporters in the fall of 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS -- the opposition research firm behind the dossier.

The FISA application also copied and pasted directly from a Washington Post opinion piece that claimed the Trump campaign had "worked behind the scenes" to "gut" the GOP platform on Russia and Ukraine.

The FBI seemingly conducted no independent review of the opinion article's disputed claims, which were widely cited as evidence the Trump team was compromised by Russia and working to publicly appease Russian President Vladimir Putin. Despite the brouhaha, Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe only briefly mentioned the episode, saying there was no evidence of misconduct when a lone Trump official vetoed a single delegate's proposed platform change.

The platform change would have called for providing lethal arms to Ukrainians fighting Russians, rather than defensive arms -- in a marked change from then-President Obama's policy that analysts say would have risked escalating tensions with Putin. The Trump administration ultimately did decide to provide lethal arms to Ukrainians later.

President Trump has vowed to declassify the full FISA applications to surveil Page, and related documents.

Graham indicated, however, that his promised "deep dive" into the Russia probe's origins is currently pending the completion of Inspector General Michael Horowitz's own investigation into alleged FBI and DOJ misconduct during the 2016 presidential campaign.

"I'm waiting for Horowitz to get his report done," Graham said. "But we had a pretty big bombshell this week."


Wall Street editorial board member says former FBI Director James Comey has a bruised ego
Kim Strassel says an FBI director should be making issues of the law, not entering the political realm.

Graham specifically cited the report from The Hill's John Solomon that the FBI expressly told that Steele, the bureau's confidenial informant, had admitted to a contact at the State Department that he was "keen" to leak his discredited dossier for purposes of influencing the 2016 election. Steele also acknowledged that his dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton campaign.

"Christopher Steele was trying to leak it to everybody," Graham said.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s written account of her Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with Steele was apparently sent to the FBI, according to records unearthed in a transparency lawsuit by Citizens United. Nevertheless, the FBI included claims in Steele's dossier in its successful FISA warrant application to monitor Page.

UKRAINE EMBASSY SPEAKS OUT: SAYS DNC OPERATIVE MADE CONTACT, SOUNDED ALARM ON MANAFORT

"But-for the dossier, there would be no warrant against Carter Page," Graham said. "The meeting on Oct. 11 was 10 days before the FISA warrant application. So the FBI was on notice that their confidential informant went to the Department of State to urge the Department of State to take the dossier and leak it to the public to affect the election. That's about as sick as it gets."

The only notation that the FBI included in the FISA application to alert the judge as to Steele's bias was that his information was prepared in connection with a presidential campaign.

The application did not mention that the dossier had been funded by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign, nor did the application mention that Steele had admitted to wanting the claims in his dossier to go public before Election Day.

News of that surveillance, which also leaked, kickstarted the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

In letters last week, a slew of Republican senators, including Graham, demanded answers from the State Department, as well as all related documents.

In a pair of missives to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said there was now clear evidence that Steele was simply out to smear then-candidate Trump.

"Based on the publicly-released version of the typed notes of the meeting, it appears Steele's intent of the meeting with the State Department was to maximize the impact of the unverified information that he had acquired in an effort to undermine the Trump campaign," Grassley and Johnson wrote. "Further, if that information was included in the material submitted to the FBI, then the FBI may have been aware of Steele's political motivations before submitting any FISA application."

The senators specifically said they want to know when the State Department shared these details with the FBI. Kavalec's Oct. 13, 2016, email was apparently sent to someone in the FBI, though the recipient's identity is completely redacted, as is an attachment.

Graham is doing what? Care to explain this?

 

[MARIS61]

Rush Limbaugh: Anti-Trump conspirators beginning to 'rat' each other out
By Victor Garcia | Fox News

Comey or Brennan? Dispute erupts over who pushed Steele dossier

Finger-pointing between high-level government officials begins over who pushed the unverified dossier weeks before President Trump's inauguration.

The growing feud between former FBI director James Comey and former CIA director John Brennan is just another example of anti-Trump conspirators positioning themselves to 'rat' each other out, according to conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

"So now they’re starting to point fingers at each other, and it’s gonna be a perfect time for leverage to be used for them to start ratting each other out," Limbaugh said Thursday on his radio show.

FOX NEWS EXCLUSIVE: INTERNAL FBI TEXTS SHOW DOJ WARNED FBI OF 'BIAS' IN KEY FISA SOURCE -- BUT FBI PRESSED ON

The launch of a formal inquiry into the origins of the Russia investigation led by John Durham has triggered a new round of behind-the-scenes finger-pointing among Obama administration officials.

A key dispute concerns whether Comey or Brennan, or possibly both, pushed the unverified Steele dossier containing claims about President Trump and his relationship to Russia. The dossier’s more sensational claims were never substantiated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team.

"This is what I meant yesterday when I said that the rats are beginning to scurry around. This is a textbook example of CYA (cover your a--), and in it, we have the former counsel — the lawyer for the FBI, James Baker — telling Michael Isikoff yesterday that senior FBI officials were worried Comey telling Trump about the golden shower story in the dossier might be construed as an attempt to blackmail Trump. In other words, we’re now hearing that FBI higher-ups were worried about what Comey was doing," Limbaugh told his audience.

Former FBI general counsel James Baker said this week on a podcast, hosted by Isikoff, that he and other officials were "quite worried" that Comey appeared to be blackmailing then President-elect Trump during a 2017 meeting regarding salacious allegations found in the Steele dossier.

Baker said he and others were so concerned about Comey briefing Trump that "analogies" were made to J. Edgar Hoover, the former FBI director who famously abused his power to blackmail individuals.

Limbaugh accused Baker and anti-Trump forces of leaking the dossier to the press.

EX-FBI LAWYER: OFFICIALS WERE 'QUITE WORRIED' COMEY APPEARED TO BE BLACKMAILING TRUMP WITH DOSSIER

"Mr. Baker, come on. The press had it because you gave it to them! The press had it because John McCain made sure they had it. The press had it because everybody in the Washington establishment wanted this dossier to be publicly consumed. You knew that it was unverified. You knew that it had not been corroborated, but you wanted it out there. McCain helped a bunch of people get this dossier out there," Limbaugh proclaimed.

"You say you’re worried about about the J. Edgar Hoover comparisons? The press had the dossier because it had been leaked!"

 

[Lanny]

Rush Limbaugh: Anti-Trump conspirators beginning to 'rat' each other out
By Victor Garcia | Fox News

Comey or Brennan? Dispute erupts over who pushed Steele dossier

Finger-pointing between high-level government officials begins over who pushed the unverified dossier weeks before President Trump's inauguration.

The growing feud between former FBI director James Comey and former CIA director John Brennan is just another example of anti-Trump conspirators positioning themselves to 'rat' each other out, according to conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

"So now they’re starting to point fingers at each other, and it’s gonna be a perfect time for leverage to be used for them to start ratting each other out," Limbaugh said Thursday on his radio show.

FOX NEWS EXCLUSIVE: INTERNAL FBI TEXTS SHOW DOJ WARNED FBI OF 'BIAS' IN KEY FISA SOURCE -- BUT FBI PRESSED ON

The launch of a formal inquiry into the origins of the Russia investigation led by John Durham has triggered a new round of behind-the-scenes finger-pointing among Obama administration officials.

A key dispute concerns whether Comey or Brennan, or possibly both, pushed the unverified Steele dossier containing claims about President Trump and his relationship to Russia. The dossier’s more sensational claims were never substantiated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team.

"This is what I meant yesterday when I said that the rats are beginning to scurry around. This is a textbook example of CYA (cover your a--), and in it, we have the former counsel — the lawyer for the FBI, James Baker — telling Michael Isikoff yesterday that senior FBI officials were worried Comey telling Trump about the golden shower story in the dossier might be construed as an attempt to blackmail Trump. In other words, we’re now hearing that FBI higher-ups were worried about what Comey was doing," Limbaugh told his audience.

Former FBI general counsel James Baker said this week on a podcast, hosted by Isikoff, that he and other officials were "quite worried" that Comey appeared to be blackmailing then President-elect Trump during a 2017 meeting regarding salacious allegations found in the Steele dossier.

Baker said he and others were so concerned about Comey briefing Trump that "analogies" were made to J. Edgar Hoover, the former FBI director who famously abused his power to blackmail individuals.

Limbaugh accused Baker and anti-Trump forces of leaking the dossier to the press.

EX-FBI LAWYER: OFFICIALS WERE 'QUITE WORRIED' COMEY APPEARED TO BE BLACKMAILING TRUMP WITH DOSSIER

"Mr. Baker, come on. The press had it because you gave it to them! The press had it because John McCain made sure they had it. The press had it because everybody in the Washington establishment wanted this dossier to be publicly consumed. You knew that it was unverified. You knew that it had not been corroborated, but you wanted it out there. McCain helped a bunch of people get this dossier out there," Limbaugh proclaimed.

"You say you’re worried about about the J. Edgar Hoover comparisons? The press had the dossier because it had been leaked!"

I keep waiting for those indictments. I mean, if you've got a let to stand on you should be able to get an indictment. Else, it looks like a load of crap.

 

[MARIS61]

Judicial Watch: Nellie Ohr Deleted Emails Exchanged with DOJ Husband Bruce Ohr

MAY 16, 2019

‘I’m deleting these emails now’

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released an email revealing that Nellie Ohr, wife of former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, informed him that she was deleting emails sent from Bruce Ohr’s DOJ email account.

From: Nellie Ohr

Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 12:49 PM

To: Ohr, Bruce (ODAG)

Subject: Re: Analyst Russian Organized Crime – April 2016

Thanks! I’m deleting these emails now

The full email exchange is between Bruce Ohr, Lisa Holtyn, Nellie Ohr, and Stefan Bress, a first secretary at the German Embassy, and is part of 339 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Justice.

Judicial Watch obtained the records through a March 2018 Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed after the Justice Department failed to respond a December 2017 request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00490)).

Nellie Ohr’s email has the same subject line as an email exchange with the subject line “Analyst Russian Organized Crime – April 2016” in which Bress initiates a discussion with Bruce Ohr and his top aide, Lisa Holtyn, proffering some “Russian analysts” to discuss a variety of topics with Ohr, Holtyn, and other DOJ officials. Among those topics to be discussed is “Impact of Russian influence operations in Europe (‘PsyOps/InfoWar’).”

Holtyn responds with, “I haven’t had a chance to confer with Bruce yet, but would certainly love to meet with the ‘A Team’!” Bruce Ohr then says, “That time works for me as well.” Bress then provides the personal details/passport numbers of the German analysts who will be meeting with Holtyn and Ohr. Holtyn tells Bress that the Ohr’s would like to host the German delegation for dinner and notes that Joe Wheatley and Ivana Nizich (a husband/wife team of DOJ Organized Crime prosecutors and friends of the Ohr’s) would join them as well.

Until he was demoted for his connection to the anti-Trump dossier, Bruce Ohr was a top official at DOJ. A House Intelligence Committee memo released by Chairman Devin Nunes said that Nellie Ohr was “employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump” and that Bruce Ohr passed the results of that research, which was paid for by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign, to the FBI. The “salacious and unverified” Dossier was used to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) surveillance warrant to spy on Carter Page.

These documents are part of Nellie Ohr’s and the DOJ’s communications about Russia. Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) recently wrote up a criminal referral concerning her testimony before Congress that she had no knowledge of what was going on during the Russia investigation at DOJ.

“This email is disturbing and suggests documents relevant to the improper targeting of President Trump were destroyed,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

This production of documents also revealed that Bruce Ohr remained in regular contact with former British spy and Fusion GPS contractor Christopher Steele after Steele was terminated by the FBI in November 2016 for revealing to the media his position as an FBI confidential informant.

 

[MARIS61]

More squabbles between the lying-under-oath Traitorous Obama Administration Head Rats.

Loretta Lynch accuses Comey of misrepresenting key Clinton probe conversation, was 'quite surprised' by his testimony

By Gregg Re | Fox News

The Lisa Page transcripts reveal a two-tiered justice system, says Georgia Congressman Doug Collins, ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee.

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch has flatly accused former FBI Director James Comey of mischaracterizing her statements by repeatedly alleging, under oath, that Lynch privately instructed him to call the Hillary Clinton email probe a "matter" instead of an "investigation."

Lynch, who testified that Comey's claim left her "quite surprised," made the dramatic remarks at a closed-door House Oversight Committee hearing last December. A transcript of her testimony was released on Monday by House Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins, R-Ga.

The episode marked the latest public dispute to break out among high-level ex-Obama administration officials, as multiple government reviews of potential FBI and Justice Department misconduct continue.

In a June 17 interview under oath with the House Intelligence Committee, Comey said Lynch had pressed him to downplay the significance of the Clinton email review. He said the moment led him to question her independence and contributed to his decision to unilaterally hold a press conference in July 2016 announcing the conclusions of the probe.

“The attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me," Comey testified. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude, ‘I have to step away from the department if we’re to close this case credibly.’”

Comey continued: “The Clinton campaign, at the time, was using all kind of euphemisms — security review, matters, things like that, for what was going on. We were getting to a place where the attorney general and I were both going to have to testify and talk publicly about. And I wanted to know, was she going to authorize us to confirm we had an investigation? ... And she said, ‘Yes, but don’t call it that, call it a matter.' And I said, ‘Why would I do that?’ And she said, ‘Just call it a matter.’”

Comey later said that Lynch's secret airport tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton in the summer of 2016 cemented his assessment that Lynch lacked independence.

But in her testimony in December, Lynch said Comey had completely mischaracterized the situation.

"I did not," Lynch responded when asked if she had ever told Comey to call the investigation a "matter."

"I have never instructed a witness as to what to say specifically. Never have, never will," Lynch continued. "In the meeting that I had with the Director, we were discussing how best to keep Congress informed of progress and discuss requesting resources for the Department overall. We were going to testify separately. And the concern that both of us had in the meeting that I was having with him in September of 2015 was how to have that discussion without stepping across the Department policy of confirming or denying an investigation, separate policy from testifying.

"Obviously, we wanted to testify fully, fulsomely, and provide the information that was needed, but we were not at that point, in September of 2015, ready to confirm that there was an investigation into the email matter -- or deny it," Lynch added. "We were sticking with policy, and that was my position on that. I didn't direct anyone to use specific phraseology. When the Director asked me how to best to handle that, I said: What I have been saying is we have received a referral and we are working on the matter, working on the issue, or we have all the resources we need to handle the matter, handle the issue. So that was the suggestion that I made to him."

Pressed for her reaction to Comey's statements, Lynch said they had come as a shock.

"I was quite surprised that he characterized it in that way," Lynch said. "We did have a conversation about it, so I wasn't surprised that he remembered that we met about it and talked about it. But I was quite surprised that that was his characterization of it, because that was not how it was conveyed to him, certainly not how it was intended."

House Oversight Commitee ranking member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio -- then the panel's chairman -- interjected.

"Excuse me. Ms. Lynch, so in the meeting with the FBI Director you referred to the Clinton investigation as a matter -- I just want to make sure I understand -- but you did not instruct the Director when he testified in front of Congress to call it a matter. Is that accurate?" Jordan asked.

"I said that I had been referring to -- I had been using the phraseology," Lynch responded. "We've received a referral. Because we received a public referral, which we were confirming. And that is Department policy, that when we receive a public referral from any agency, that we confirm the referral but we neither confirm nor deny the investigation. That's actually a standard DOJ policy.

"So in the meeting with the Director, which was, again, around September -- I don't recall the date -- of 2015, it was very early in the investigation, I expressed the view that it was, in my opinion, too early for us to confirm that we had an investigation," Lynch said. " At some point in the course of investigations, as you all know from your oversight, it becomes such common knowledge that we talk about it using the language of investigation and things, but at that point we had not done that and we were not confirming or denying it. We weren't denying it at all. There was, just essentially, in my view, we were following the policy. And when the Director asked me about my thoughts, I said, yes, we had to be -- we had to be completely cooperative and fulsome with Congress for both of us, and that we needed to provide as much information as we could on the issue of resources."

Last week, a high-level dispute over which senior government officials pushed the unverified Steele dossier amid efforts to surveil the Trump campaign has broken out into the open, after it emerged that Attorney General William Barr appointed a U.S. attorney to examine the origins of the Russia investigation and determine if the FBI and DOJ's actions were "lawful and appropriate."

Sources familiar with the records told Fox News that a late-2016 email chain indicated Comey told bureau subordinates that then-CIA Director John Brennan insisted the dossier be included in the intelligence community assessment on Russian interference, known as the ICA. But in a statement to Fox News, a former CIA official put the blame squarely on Comey.

A separate, comprehensive. report from the Justice Department Inspector General (IG) into possible FBI and DOJ misconduct and surveillance abuse is expected within a matter of weeks.

 

[Lanny]

More squabbles between the lying-under-oath Traitorous Obama Administration Head Rats.

Loretta Lynch accuses Comey of misrepresenting key Clinton probe conversation, was 'quite surprised' by his testimony

By Gregg Re | Fox News

The Lisa Page transcripts reveal a two-tiered justice system, says Georgia Congressman Doug Collins, ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee.

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch has flatly accused former FBI Director James Comey of mischaracterizing her statements by repeatedly alleging, under oath, that Lynch privately instructed him to call the Hillary Clinton email probe a "matter" instead of an "investigation."

Lynch, who testified that Comey's claim left her "quite surprised," made the dramatic remarks at a closed-door House Oversight Committee hearing last December. A transcript of her testimony was released on Monday by House Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins, R-Ga.

The episode marked the latest public dispute to break out among high-level ex-Obama administration officials, as multiple government reviews of potential FBI and Justice Department misconduct continue.

In a June 17 interview under oath with the House Intelligence Committee, Comey said Lynch had pressed him to downplay the significance of the Clinton email review. He said the moment led him to question her independence and contributed to his decision to unilaterally hold a press conference in July 2016 announcing the conclusions of the probe.

“The attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me," Comey testified. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude, ‘I have to step away from the department if we’re to close this case credibly.’”

Comey continued: “The Clinton campaign, at the time, was using all kind of euphemisms — security review, matters, things like that, for what was going on. We were getting to a place where the attorney general and I were both going to have to testify and talk publicly about. And I wanted to know, was she going to authorize us to confirm we had an investigation? ... And she said, ‘Yes, but don’t call it that, call it a matter.' And I said, ‘Why would I do that?’ And she said, ‘Just call it a matter.’”

Comey later said that Lynch's secret airport tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton in the summer of 2016 cemented his assessment that Lynch lacked independence.

But in her testimony in December, Lynch said Comey had completely mischaracterized the situation.

"I did not," Lynch responded when asked if she had ever told Comey to call the investigation a "matter."

"I have never instructed a witness as to what to say specifically. Never have, never will," Lynch continued. "In the meeting that I had with the Director, we were discussing how best to keep Congress informed of progress and discuss requesting resources for the Department overall. We were going to testify separately. And the concern that both of us had in the meeting that I was having with him in September of 2015 was how to have that discussion without stepping across the Department policy of confirming or denying an investigation, separate policy from testifying.

"Obviously, we wanted to testify fully, fulsomely, and provide the information that was needed, but we were not at that point, in September of 2015, ready to confirm that there was an investigation into the email matter -- or deny it," Lynch added. "We were sticking with policy, and that was my position on that. I didn't direct anyone to use specific phraseology. When the Director asked me how to best to handle that, I said: What I have been saying is we have received a referral and we are working on the matter, working on the issue, or we have all the resources we need to handle the matter, handle the issue. So that was the suggestion that I made to him."

Pressed for her reaction to Comey's statements, Lynch said they had come as a shock.

"I was quite surprised that he characterized it in that way," Lynch said. "We did have a conversation about it, so I wasn't surprised that he remembered that we met about it and talked about it. But I was quite surprised that that was his characterization of it, because that was not how it was conveyed to him, certainly not how it was intended."

House Oversight Commitee ranking member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio -- then the panel's chairman -- interjected.

"Excuse me. Ms. Lynch, so in the meeting with the FBI Director you referred to the Clinton investigation as a matter -- I just want to make sure I understand -- but you did not instruct the Director when he testified in front of Congress to call it a matter. Is that accurate?" Jordan asked.

"I said that I had been referring to -- I had been using the phraseology," Lynch responded. "We've received a referral. Because we received a public referral, which we were confirming. And that is Department policy, that when we receive a public referral from any agency, that we confirm the referral but we neither confirm nor deny the investigation. That's actually a standard DOJ policy.

"So in the meeting with the Director, which was, again, around September -- I don't recall the date -- of 2015, it was very early in the investigation, I expressed the view that it was, in my opinion, too early for us to confirm that we had an investigation," Lynch said. " At some point in the course of investigations, as you all know from your oversight, it becomes such common knowledge that we talk about it using the language of investigation and things, but at that point we had not done that and we were not confirming or denying it. We weren't denying it at all. There was, just essentially, in my view, we were following the policy. And when the Director asked me about my thoughts, I said, yes, we had to be -- we had to be completely cooperative and fulsome with Congress for both of us, and that we needed to provide as much information as we could on the issue of resources."

Last week, a high-level dispute over which senior government officials pushed the unverified Steele dossier amid efforts to surveil the Trump campaign has broken out into the open, after it emerged that Attorney General William Barr appointed a U.S. attorney to examine the origins of the Russia investigation and determine if the FBI and DOJ's actions were "lawful and appropriate."

Sources familiar with the records told Fox News that a late-2016 email chain indicated Comey told bureau subordinates that then-CIA Director John Brennan insisted the dossier be included in the intelligence community assessment on Russian interference, known as the ICA. But in a statement to Fox News, a former CIA official put the blame squarely on Comey.

A separate, comprehensive. report from the Justice Department Inspector General (IG) into possible FBI and DOJ misconduct and surveillance abuse is expected within a matter of weeks.

Thanks for the book but I have other things to do like play solitaire.

 

[barfo]

Thanks for the book but I have other things to do like play solitaire.

Playin' solitaire till dawn with a deck of fifty-one
Smokin' cigarettes and watchin' Captain Kangaroo
Now don't tell me I've nothin' to do

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

Judicial Watch Sues for Secret FBI Chart of Potential Violations of Law by Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
MAY 21, 2019

Also suing for Comey’s Talking Points On Clinton Email Decision

(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice seeking draft copies of FBI charts containing information on potential “statutory violations” committed by Hillary Clinton in the former secretary of State’s use of a non-secure, non-government email server to conduct government business.

Judicial Watch is also suing for draft copies of talking points prepared by the FBI for its officials to use following then-Director James Comey’s July 2016 press conference during which he recommended against prosecuting Clinton for mishandling classified information.

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia after the DOJ failed to respond to a December 3, 2018, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00800)). Judicial Watch seeks:

1. All final and draft copies of talking points prepared by the FBI for its Executive Assistant Directors (EADs) relating to the “Mid-Year Exam” investigation (“MYE Talking Points) following the July 5, 2016 James Comey press conference in which he indicated he would not recommend prosecuting Hillary Clinton.
2. All final draft copies of a one-page version of the aforementioned MYE Talking Points created for FBI Special Agents-in-Charge (SACs).
3. All final and draft copies of charts of the “statutory violations considered during the investigation [of Hillary Clinton’s server], and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute.”

Judicial Watch recently uncovered DOJ records in a related lawsuit showing that three days after then-FBI Director James Comey’s press conference announcing that he would not recommend a prosecution of Clinton. On July 8, 2016, the Special Counsel to the FBI’s executive assistant director in charge of the National Security Branch, whose name is redacted, wrote to Strzok and others that he was producing a “chart of the statutory violations considered during the investigation [of Clinton’s server], and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute…”

Neither these talking points nor the chart of potential violations committed by Clinton and her associates have been released.

“Judicial Watch will continue to press for the chart the FBI has been hiding which details possible violations of law by Hillary Clinton” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “Now that the Mueller investigation has ended, the FBI has the time and manpower to focus on an investigation of Clinton unencumbered by Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page and their anti-Trump colleagues.”

 

[MARIS61]

Thanks for the book but I have other things to do like play solitaire.

I'd expect nothing more from a guy who so determinedly avoids all contact with reality.

 

[Lanny]

Playin' solitaire till dawn with a deck of fifty-one
Smokin' cigarettes and watchin' Captain Kangaroo
Now don't tell me I've nothin' to do

barfo

I was gonna say "Countin' flowers on the wall, that don't bother me at all" but I figured the people in here would be too young to catch on.

 

[MARIS61]

Things will get ugly fast now.

Trump gives AG Barr authority to declassify documents related to 2016 campaign surveillance

By Talia Kaplan, Mike Arroyo | Fox News
White House to declassify documents; Fox News correspondent David Spunt has the details.

President Trump on Thursday night issued a memo giving Attorney General William Barr the authority to declassify any documents related to surveillance of the Trump campaign in 2016.

Trump also ordered the intelligence community to cooperate with Barr. The memo read: "The heads of elements of the intelligence community... and the heads of each department or agency that includes an element of the intelligence community shall promptly provide such assistance and information as the Attorney General may request in connection with that review."

"Today, at the request and recommendation of the Attorney General of the United States, President Donald J. Trump directed the intelligence community to quickly and fully cooperate with the Attorney General’s investigation into surveillance activities during the 2016 Presidential election," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement.

"The Attorney General has also been delegated full and complete authority to declassify information pertaining to this investigation, in accordance with the long-established standards for handling classified information. Today’s action will help ensure that all Americans learn the truth about the events that occurred, and the actions that were taken, during the last Presidential election and will restore confidence in our public institutions."

Trump claims his campaign was the victim of "spying," though the intelligence community has insisted it acted lawfully in following leads in the Russia investigation.

The president had told Fox News earlier in May that he would allow declassification "soon." He elaborated, "I didn’t want to do it originally because I wanted to wait, because I know what they -- you know I’ve seen the way they play. They play very dirty."

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page are currently the subject of a Justice Department inspector general investigation looking at potential misconduct in the issuance of those warrants. That review also reportedly is scrutinizing the role of an FBI informant who had contacts with Trump advisers in the early stages of the Russia investigation.

“I think spying did occur. The question is whether it was adequately predicated,” Barr testified last month, adding that he believed it is his “obligation” to review whether there was misconduct in the original investigation. “Congress is usually very concerned with intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies staying in their proper lane.”

He added that “spying on a political campaign is a big deal.”

President Trump backed the attorney general's testimony, saying the same day Barr testified last month that he thinks what Barr said "was absolutely true," adding, "There was absolutely spying into my campaign.”

Fox News' Catherine Herridge, John Roberts, Brooke Singman and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

[Lanny]

I'd expect nothing more from a guy who so determinedly avoids all contact with reality.

Now that's rich.
Besides, I took Trump's place in the war and am now forever permanently disabled as a result so I figure I've earned the right to say whatever I want without some petty jerk telling me off. Three times a week and sometimes more often I go through hell for the whole day. I'm unable to walk or run like the rest of you. Oh, and it hurts. I wake up in the middle of the night with pain so great that I can't sleep, every night. So, please keep your petty bullshit remarks withing your circle of friends and leave me out of it.

 

[MarAzul]

So, please keep your petty bullshit remarks withing your circle of friends and leave me out of it.

Oops!
No one forces you come here and hang your shit on the wall.

 

[MarAzul]

I've earned the right to say whatever I want without some petty jerk telling me off.

I even told you and the crowd once that very thing.
But then I sort of hoped it would be used wisely.