|
Post by kcrufnek on Oct 7, 2019 6:02:24 GMT -6
I understand. Sometimes it just seems like he's all over the place. And stop going on the rival shows.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Oct 7, 2019 6:21:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Oct 7, 2019 6:25:24 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Oct 7, 2019 6:31:11 GMT -6
Didn't see this coming. Said no one ever.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 6:38:41 GMT -6
Follow President Trump’s lead Schiff & release the transcript.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 6:41:13 GMT -6
Didn't see this coming. Said no one ever. Seeing speculation that Romney might primary President Trump. Needless to say, if he is that dumb, what happens to him, he’ll deserve it.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 6:44:05 GMT -6
Speaking truth:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 6:50:02 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/10/06/poll-americans-support-probe-biden-ukraine-china/Poll: 57% Americans Support Probe of Biden and Son’s Ukraine, China Actions A new poll showed that 57 percent of respondents support a Justice Department probe on former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden regarding their actions in Ukraine and China. Only 37 percent of respondents were against investigating them, according to the new poll by Investor’s Business Daily/TIPP, published on Friday. www.investors.com/politics/americans-back-trump-impeachment-ukraine-scandal-biden-probe/The poll showed that the recent headlines on Ukraine, surrounding President Donald Trump’s calls for the Bidens to be investigated and the Democrats’ push to impeach him over those calls, are having a negative impact on the former vice president. The poll also showed that as a result of the Ukraine issue, eight percent said they were more likely to vote for Biden, while 23 percent said they were more likely to vote against him. The former vice president’s son, Hunter Biden, sat on the board of a Ukrainian gas company and was paid $50,000 a month for no discernible work while his father was tasked with overseeing Ukraine for the White House.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 6:53:06 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2019/10/07/intel-community-ig-stonewalling-congress-on-backdated-whistleblower-rule-changes/Intel Community IG Stonewalling Congress On Backdated Whistleblower Rule Changes Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for U.S. intelligence agencies, acknowledged that his office secretly changed key whistleblower forms and rules in September, but refused to explain to lawmakers why those changes were backdated to August. By Sean Davis In tense testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) on Friday, the inspector general for federal spy agencies refused to disclose why his office backdated secret changes to key whistleblower forms and rules in the wake of an anti-Trump whistleblower complaint filed in August, sources told The Federalist. As The Federalist reported and the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) confirmed, the spy watchdog secretly changed its whistleblower forms and internal rules in September to eliminate a requirement that whistleblowers provide first-hand evidence to support any allegations of wrongdoing. In a press release last week, the ICIG confessed that it changed its rules in response to an anti-Trump complaint filed on August 12. That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general, told HPSCI lawmakers during a committee oversight hearing on Friday that the whistleblower forms and rules changes were made in September, even though the new forms and guidance, which were not uploaded to the ICIG’s website until September 24, state that they were changed in August. Despite having a full week to come up with explanations for his office’s decisions to secretly change its forms to eliminate the requirement for first-hand evidence and to backdate those changes to August, Atkinson refused to provide any explanation to lawmakers baffled by his behavior. When pressed on the curious changes and attempts to obscure the timeline of his revisions, Atkinson refused to explain why the forms were backdated to August even though they were not made until September. The ICIG previously stated that it changed its forms and guidance “in response to recent press inquiries regarding” the anti-Trump complaint, of which Congress was not even notified until the second week of September. The new forms, which were not uploaded to the ICIG website until September 24, nonetheless stated that the revisions were made back in August. Lawmakers honed in on the discrepancy during Atkinson’s appearance on Capitol Hill on Friday. How could the forms have been changed back in August if they were changed in response to press inquiries that could not have been made until mid-September at the earliest? “[T]he timing of the removal of the first-hand information requirement raises questions about potential connections to this whistleblower’s complaint,” three House Republican lawmakers wrote in a letter to Atkinson on September 30. “This timing, along with numerous apparent leaks of classified information about the contents of this complaint, also raise questions about potential criminality in the handling of these matters.” In an interview with Fox News, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., the top Republican on HPSCI, intimated the secret changes to eliminate the requirement for first-hand information were intentionally made to accommodate the anti-Trump complainant, who offered no first-hand evidence of wrongdoing by the president. “This guideline, they changed it because of this whistleblower,” Nunes, who said on Fox News last week. “[Atkinson] admits it in his own press release.” Several top lawmakers in the Senate raised similar concerns about Atkinson’s behavior in a separate letter. “Why did the IC IG initially require first-hand information in its May 2018 disclosure form?” the senators asked. “Why did the IC IG remove the requirement for first-hand information?” Atkinson has not answered their questions, either, raising questions that his behavior following his receipt of the anti-Trump complaint might not be completely above board. Atkinson ignored legal guidance from both the director of national intelligence and the Department of Justice that the anti-Trump complaint was statutorily deficient and forwarded it to HPSCI even though it did not meet the legal definition of an “urgent concern” that is required to be given to Congress. The embattled ICIG also admitted on Friday that the anti-Trump complainant lied on his whistleblower complaint form by concealing the complainant’s previous secret interactions with House Democratic staff prior to submitting the complaint. Atkinson never even bothered investigating potential coordination between the complainant, whom DOJ said showed evidence of partisan political bias, and House Democrats prior to the filing of the anti-Trump complaint.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 10:40:43 GMT -6
Jill Wine-Banks is a MSNBC contributor and former Watergate prosecutor. www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/msnbc-guest-outlines-plan-to-impeach-trump-and-make-nancy-pelosi-presidentJoining the network’s AM Joy on Saturday, Wine-Banks was asked if Congress should look to impeach Trump first or turn their eyes to Pence instead. In response, she suggested going after Pence first and giving Trump the option to either replace him before being impeached himself — so that a Republican can remain in the White House — or decline and let Pelosi take over. “You could impeach Pence first,” Wine-Banks stated. “The problem is that Donald Trump then has to name his replacement. But I think that maybe a deal could be struck where he was told, ‘If you don’t make a replacement, then Nancy Pelosi does become president. And so, you are going to be impeached and convicted. You need to make this replacement so that the proper party remains in power.’“
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 10:43:24 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 10:49:15 GMT -6
In 2014 a phone call was hacked and released between Victoria Nuland, Asst. Sec. of State for Europe, and US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt. The call was leaked to the news media on February 4, 2014.
From the video— What’s really important here is the level of planning for the coup that overthrew the elected President Viktor Yanukovych, which brought to power (as heard on the recording) a group of select individuals described as “moderate democrats.”
Nuland and Ambassador Pyatt agreed to who they would allow into the incoming regime.
For some reason this was OK to the US media.
And Joe Biden
Today the Democrats and fake news want President Trump impeached for discussing Joe Biden’s multi-million dollar pay-for-play scheme. The media says this is interference.
But toppling a government is just fine when Obama did it.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 10:52:45 GMT -6
www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kyle-drennen/2019/10/05/msnbc-biden-furious-media-even-covering-corruption-allegationsMSNBC: Biden ‘Furious’ With ‘Media Even Covering’ Corruption Allegations During her 10:00 a.m. ET hour show on Friday, MSNBC anchor Hallie Jackson informed viewers that the Joe Biden’s presidential campaign was “furious” that the “media is even covering” any allegations of corruption against his son Hunter. Later in the day, fellow anchor Andrea Mitchell touted a reporter sympathizing with Biden about the “brutal” campaign. After noting that “the President is clearly going after Joe Biden” with an ad campaign highlighting Hunter Biden’s suspicious business dealings in Ukraine, Jackson proclaimed: “I know that the Biden campaign is furious with the fact that the media is even covering what the President is saying about Joe Biden at all.” Turning to correspondent Mike Memoli, she wondered: “How are they planning to fight back on all of this?”… In the noon ET hour, anchor Andrea Mitchell eagerly featured a clip of Biden responding to a softball question about the controversy: “Meanwhile, The Reno Gazette, a reporter there, in Nevada, has asked Joe Biden if he expected the race to be this brutal.” The reporter sympathetically asked: “Did you think it would be this hard or the attacks would be so brutal against Hunter?”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 12:32:37 GMT -6
House Democrats on Monday subpoenaed the Pentagon and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Ukraine documents as a part of their coup impeachment push against President Trump.
The House Intelligence Committee chaired by liar Adam Schiff issued the subpoena, however the documents will be shared among three key committees.
“The subpoenaed documents shall be collected as part of the House’s impeachment inquiry and shared among the Committees…,” the letter stated.
“Your failure or refusal to comply with the subpoena, including at the direction or behest of the President or the White House, shall constitute evidence of obstruction of the House’s impeachment inquiry and may be used as an adverse inference against you and the President,” the letter stated.
The Pentagon and OMB have until October 15 to produce the documents, according to the letter.
The House Democrats still have not voted on articles of impeachment and they still have not named a crime committed by Donald Trump — Their impeachment inquiry is based on a partisan CIA officer and LEAKER who is trying to pass himself off as a whistleblower.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Oct 7, 2019 18:23:33 GMT -6
House Democrats on Monday subpoenaed the Pentagon and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Ukraine documents as a part of their coup impeachment push against President Trump. The House Intelligence Committee chaired by liar Adam Schiff issued the subpoena, however the documents will be shared among three key committees. “The subpoenaed documents shall be collected as part of the House’s impeachment inquiry and shared among the Committees…,” the letter stated. “Your failure or refusal to comply with the subpoena, including at the direction or behest of the President or the White House, shall constitute evidence of obstruction of the House’s impeachment inquiry and may be used as an adverse inference against you and the President,” the letter stated. The Pentagon and OMB have until October 15 to produce the documents, according to the letter. The House Democrats still have not voted on articles of impeachment and they still have not named a crime committed by Donald Trump — Their impeachment inquiry is based on a partisan CIA officer and LEAKER who is trying to pass himself off as a whistleblower. I thought they could not subpoena anything until there was a vote and it became official.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 18:45:33 GMT -6
House Democrats on Monday subpoenaed the Pentagon and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Ukraine documents as a part of their coup impeachment push against President Trump. The House Intelligence Committee chaired by liar Adam Schiff issued the subpoena, however the documents will be shared among three key committees. “The subpoenaed documents shall be collected as part of the House’s impeachment inquiry and shared among the Committees…,” the letter stated. “Your failure or refusal to comply with the subpoena, including at the direction or behest of the President or the White House, shall constitute evidence of obstruction of the House’s impeachment inquiry and may be used as an adverse inference against you and the President,” the letter stated. The Pentagon and OMB have until October 15 to produce the documents, according to the letter. The House Democrats still have not voted on articles of impeachment and they still have not named a crime committed by Donald Trump — Their impeachment inquiry is based on a partisan CIA officer and LEAKER who is trying to pass himself off as a whistleblower. I thought they could not subpoena anything until there was a vote and it became official. Why let little things like rules & laws get in the way?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 7, 2019 18:54:05 GMT -6
Washington Post reported on Monday, citing three people familiar with the discussions, that Democrats are going to go to great lengths to conceal the ‘whistleblower’s’ identity by holding his testimony in a remote location and even changing his physical appearance and voice. The Democrats also want to bar GOP lawmakers from questioning the whistleblower and only allow staffers to question him outside of the Capitol. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-democrats-consider-masking-identity-of-whistleblower-from-trumps-gop-allies-in-congress/2019/10/07/171a4b14-e927-11e9-9306-47cb0324fd44_story.htmlHouse Democrats are weighing extraordinary steps to secure testimony from a whistleblower whose complaint prompted an impeachment inquiry, masking his identity to prevent President Trump’s congressional allies from exposing the individual, according to three officials familiar with the deliberations. The steps under consideration include having the whistleblower testify from a remote location and obscuring the individual’s appearance and voice, these officials said. The efforts reflect the deepening distrust between Democrats running the impeachment inquiry of Trump and their GOP colleagues they see as fully invested in defending a president who has attacked the whistleblower’s credibility and demanded absolute loyalty from Republicans. The highly unusual arrangement for the whistleblower’s testimony underscores the toxicity between Republicans and Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, which was once considered among the most bipartisan but is now spearheading the divisive impeachment investigation. One individual familiar with the discussions said this is the first time the panel has had to take such extraordinary measures to protect a witness — including from their own GOP colleagues. .......... The House Democrats also restricted access to the visitor logbook after GOP staffers were looking at who signed the logs and gave the information to reporters (gasp). All of this raises an interesting question. That being, "If the "whistleblower" is telling the truth, why are the Democrats so desperate to hide him?".
|
|
|
Post by Uncle Mo on Oct 7, 2019 21:24:14 GMT -6
Washington Post reported on Monday, citing three people familiar with the discussions, that Democrats are going to go to great lengths to conceal the ‘whistleblower’s’ identity by holding his testimony in a remote location and even changing his physical appearance and voice. The Democrats also want to bar GOP lawmakers from questioning the whistleblower and only allow staffers to question him outside of the Capitol. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-democrats-consider-masking-identity-of-whistleblower-from-trumps-gop-allies-in-congress/2019/10/07/171a4b14-e927-11e9-9306-47cb0324fd44_story.htmlHouse Democrats are weighing extraordinary steps to secure testimony from a whistleblower whose complaint prompted an impeachment inquiry, masking his identity to prevent President Trump’s congressional allies from exposing the individual, according to three officials familiar with the deliberations. The steps under consideration include having the whistleblower testify from a remote location and obscuring the individual’s appearance and voice, these officials said. The efforts reflect the deepening distrust between Democrats running the impeachment inquiry of Trump and their GOP colleagues they see as fully invested in defending a president who has attacked the whistleblower’s credibility and demanded absolute loyalty from Republicans. The highly unusual arrangement for the whistleblower’s testimony underscores the toxicity between Republicans and Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, which was once considered among the most bipartisan but is now spearheading the divisive impeachment investigation. One individual familiar with the discussions said this is the first time the panel has had to take such extraordinary measures to protect a witness — including from their own GOP colleagues. .......... The House Democrats also restricted access to the visitor logbook after GOP staffers were looking at who signed the logs and gave the information to reporters (gasp). All of this raises an interesting question. That being, "If the "whistleblower" is telling the truth, why are the Democrats so desperate to hide him?".Because there are people like this guy and you, you insane motherfucker. God, I wish you would go back to being wrong about the Thunder.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 3:53:02 GMT -6
Washington Post reported on Monday, citing three people familiar with the discussions, that Democrats are going to go to great lengths to conceal the ‘whistleblower’s’ identity by holding his testimony in a remote location and even changing his physical appearance and voice. The Democrats also want to bar GOP lawmakers from questioning the whistleblower and only allow staffers to question him outside of the Capitol. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-democrats-consider-masking-identity-of-whistleblower-from-trumps-gop-allies-in-congress/2019/10/07/171a4b14-e927-11e9-9306-47cb0324fd44_story.htmlHouse Democrats are weighing extraordinary steps to secure testimony from a whistleblower whose complaint prompted an impeachment inquiry, masking his identity to prevent President Trump’s congressional allies from exposing the individual, according to three officials familiar with the deliberations. The steps under consideration include having the whistleblower testify from a remote location and obscuring the individual’s appearance and voice, these officials said. The efforts reflect the deepening distrust between Democrats running the impeachment inquiry of Trump and their GOP colleagues they see as fully invested in defending a president who has attacked the whistleblower’s credibility and demanded absolute loyalty from Republicans. The highly unusual arrangement for the whistleblower’s testimony underscores the toxicity between Republicans and Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, which was once considered among the most bipartisan but is now spearheading the divisive impeachment investigation. One individual familiar with the discussions said this is the first time the panel has had to take such extraordinary measures to protect a witness — including from their own GOP colleagues. .......... The House Democrats also restricted access to the visitor logbook after GOP staffers were looking at who signed the logs and gave the information to reporters (gasp). All of this raises an interesting question. That being, "If the "whistleblower" is telling the truth, why are the Democrats so desperate to hide him?".Because there are people like this guy and you, you insane motherfucker. God, I wish you would go back to being wrong about the Thunder. Would be believable if I liked the NBA,(which I don’t) & am no Thunder fan. So,(as par for the course), wrong again. As for the whistleblower, it’s just more proof of the nothing burger the Democrats have.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 3:54:30 GMT -6
Catherine Herridge: And tonight FOX News can confirm that on July 26th, one day after the president’s phone call with the Ukrainian leader the first whistleblower writes a two-page single spaced memo to themself using dramatic language. The whistleblower says a White House official (leaker) described the phone call as “crazy”, “frightening” and “completely lacking in substance related to national security.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 4:00:31 GMT -6
Peter Van Buren is a former State Department official and a whistleblower. On Monday he spoke with Tucker Carlson on the current Democrat-Deep State coordinated attack to remove President Trump in a political coup. Peter described the current accusations of the left as a “three way pitch-and-toss” between the Democrat Party, the liberal media and these deep state whistleblowers.
Van Buren then alleged that the second whistleblower is actually an accomplice with the first whistleblower.
Peter Van Buren: The second whistleblower is actually the source for the first whistleblower which means it’s all the same thing. Now this is different in the Kavanaugh case when they sent Michael Avenatti out to find additional victims wherever he could… In fact he’s simply the source for the first whistleblower. The CIA, this is an old trick. It’s called a feedback loop. And essentially what you do is you set up one of your sources to back up another source and you make it appear that your initial source is more credible by feeding information into the loop. That’s what seems to be going on here. They’re repurposing a witness as a second whistleblower.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 4:05:15 GMT -6
www.bing.com/search?q=renzi+prime+minister&qs=n&form=QBLH&sp=-1&pq=renzi+prime+minister&sc=5-20&sk=&cvid=DAE8151006D54CFCA7117124D5246209Italy’s spy chief Gennaro Vecchione met twice in August with U.S. Attorney General William Barr and prosecutor John Durham to help an investigation into the scandal involving President Donald Trump’s possible ties to Russia, one of Italy’s leading newspapers reported. The first meeting took place on Aug. 15 at the U.S. Embassy in Rome, according to an article published Sunday by La Repubblica newspaper. The second happened on Aug. 27 and involved Vecchione, the head of Italy’s Department of Information Security, as well as the chiefs of Italy’s internal and external security agencies. Both meetings were authorized by Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, Corriere della Sera reported earlier this week… …During the first meeting, Barr and Durham asked Vecchione to reveal the whereabouts of Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud, according to La Repubblica… …According to La Repubblica, Barr and Durham also demanded proof that Italy, led at the time by Matteo Renzi, took part in the international conspiracy to discredit Trump’s campaign. In an interview published Sunday by La Stampa, Renzi dismissed the allegation as a “farce” and says he never met Mifsud. At the Aug. 27 meeting with Barr and Durham, the heads of Italy’s security services had nothing to say to support the theory, according to La Repubblica — despite Vecchione’s initial promises.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 6:30:47 GMT -6
amp.dailycaller.com/2019/10/07/exclusive-fbi-official-sports-tickets-cnnAn FBI senior official who resigned under mysterious circumstances last year accepted baseball game tickets from a CNN reporter in 2016 and lied about it to investigators, according to a report obtained exclusively by the Daily Caller News Foundation. Michael Kortan accepted the tickets from the CNN journalist to at least two games, in May 2016 and September 2016. Kortan displayed a “lack of candor” during multiple interviews about the tickets. He was prohibited under FBI policy from accepting gifts from reporters who cover the bureau. He also accepted tickets from a New York Times reporter. The FBI’s top press officer during the Hillary Clinton and Trump-Russia investigations accepted tickets to a Washington Nationals game from a CNN correspondent and lied about it repeatedly during interviews with the Justice Department’s inspector general, according to a report obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation. Michael Kortan, who served as assistant director of public affairs, displayed a “lack of candor” during multiple interviews under oath with the DOJ watchdog about how he obtained the tickets, who he went with, and whether he reimbursed the CNN journalist, according to the report. “The OIG…concluded that Kortan lacked candor under oath when he provided answers to OIG’s questions relating to the September 2016 tickets that were misleading and false,” reads the report, which the DCNF obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. (RELATED: Senior FBI Official Lied About Accepting Tickets From Journalist) FBI policy prohibits employees from receiving gifts from “prohibited sources,” including journalists who cover the bureau. The office of the inspector general (OIG), which is led by Michael Horowitz, discovered Kortan’s contacts with the CNN reporter during a review of his text messages as part of the investigation into the FBI’s activities during the 2016 presidential election. Kortan’s media contacts and those of other FBI officials are noted on page 430 of the DOJ inspector general’s report from June 14, 2018, regarding the bureau’s handling of the Clinton email investigation. On Oct. 16, 2018, the OIG separately released a summary of the Kortan investigation (though without identifying him). The summary said that the Justice Department declined prosecution in the case. The full investigative report shows that Kortan resigned from the FBI on Feb. 16, 2018, while the OIG investigation was ongoing. He could not be reached for comment for this story. As part of the investigation, OIG investigators searched Kortan’s FBI-issued phones and email accounts, as well as his financial records. They also interviewed Washington Nationals security personnel to ascertain the quality of seats that Kortan was gifted. Kortan worked closely with the CNN reporter, who is not identified, and considered him one of his “top five” press contacts. Kortan accepted Nationals tickets from the reporter at least twice, for a May 9, 2016 game and another on Sept. 30, 2016. He also accepted tickets from a New York Times reporter in either 2014 or 2016. The OIG report cites text messages which indicate that the FBI official attended the May 9, 2016 game with the reporter. The reporter contacted Kortan on Sept. 27, 2016, offering up four tickets. “Nats v Marlins Friday night. I have to be away,” the reporter wrote on Sept. 27, 2016. “Can you use four tix?” “I’m good for 2 tix if that’s OK,” replied Kortan. Kortan initially told investigators with the OIG in a March 29, 2017 interview, that he reimbursed the reporter for the tickets, and denied accepting any gifts from members of the press. “Kortan described the CNN correspondent as one of his ‘top five’ contacts with the press as part of his job,” the report says. Kortan denied having a personal relationship with any of the reporters, saying that he didn’t “consider anybody a friend.” (RELATED: Strzok Text Messages Shed Light On FBI Interactions With The Media) He also said that he had “probably daily contact” with the CNN reporter to discuss “the news of the day.” When asked whether he paid for the tickets, Kortan was initially adamant that he did. “I have never accepted them without reimbursement,” he said in the March 29, 2017 interview, referring to the tickets. “I always reimburse the amount of the ticket as a routine, just because I do.” Kortan also gave a misleading answer when asked about the location of the tickets, the OIG report says. He initially said that the tickets — which cost $65 apiece — were in “general seating.” Showing the depth of the probe, on Oct. 4, 2017, OIG investigators went to Nationals ballpark to meet with the team’s manager of security and executive director of ticket operations to ascertain the quality of the tickets. They found that the tickets were in a “Members Only” section, and not in general seating, as Kortan claimed. “Kortan said that he did not feel obligated to provide the CNN correspondent with preferential treatment as a result of the tickets,” the report says, quoting Kortan as saying: “I’m not friends with anybody. I don’t see anybody socially. I have no personal relationships with any reporters. Never have.” Kortan also denied releasing information to reporters “inappropriately or illegally.” But Kortan would contact the OIG multiple more times after his initial interview to revise his statements. On April 3, 2017, he said that he could no longer recall whether he repaid the CNN correspondent for the tickets. He said that he intended to reimburse the reporter when they met two weeks later, but the reporter declined. Kortan also reversed his previous statement that his guest at the game was not with the FBI, admitting that a fellow FBI colleague went with him to the Sept. 30, 2016 game. The OIG deemed the CNN reporter a “prohibited source” because of his job covering the FBI and law enforcement beat. “Accordingly, as part of the CNN correspondent’s job responsibilities, he sought official action by Kortan and the FBI, conducted business with the FBI, and his interests were substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of Kortan and the FBI’s responses to his requests for information and commentary for reporting on the FBI and its work,” the report says. The investigation bears some resemblance into an investigation of Andrew McCabe, the former FBI deputy director. The OIG found that McCabe displayed a “lack of candor” during multiple interviews about whether he authorized leaks to a reporter in October 2016 for a story about an investigation of the Clinton Foundation. McCabe directed his chief counsel, Lisa Page, to make contact with Devlin Barrett, who worked for the Wall Street Journal at the time. Kortan worked with Page to provide information to Barrett, according to FBI documents. Unlike in the Kortan probe, the Justice Department has conducted a grand jury investigation of McCabe, who was fired from the FBI on March 16, 2018. The status of the case remains in limbo.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 6:36:08 GMT -6
“Back in 2000, we can report, President Bill Clinton had a conversation with Tony Blair of the U.K. and asked him directly to intercede in a dispute between British Airways into American carriers [USAIR and American Airlines],” said Carlson, referring to a February 2000 declassified conversation between the two leaders available in the Clinton Presidential Library. The Fox News host noted that Clinton was “much more direct” than Trump, quoting: “In a political season, it would be big over here to get this open sore resolved. If you could have somebody take a look at it.” “Is this a big deal?” Carlson asked. “Not really. Is it nakedly political? Is in an effort to use a foreign country to influence the outcome of an election in a presidential year? Well yes, it is. Obviously.” “Whenever they are telling you that something is without precedent, you can be certain that it happens every day here,” he concluded.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 6:49:40 GMT -6
Nope, no bias, etc whatsoever: www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/10/07/whistleblower-attorneys-offered-rate-discount-for-trump-informants-ranted-against-president-on-twitter/‘Whistleblower’ Attorneys Offered Rate Discount for Trump Informants, Ranted Against President on Social Media ........ The law firm representing the so-called whistleblower at the center of the impeachment movement targeting President Donald Trump as well as multiple other anti-Trump whistleblowers was so desperate to find Trump administration informants that they previously offered those who come forward discounted pricing for legal representation. A search of the Twitter account for the law firm’s founder and managing partner, Andrew Bakaj, finds rabid anti-Trump posts such as repeated advocacy for Trump cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment of the Constitution over claimed competency issues. The amendment offers a path for the commander-in-chief’s removal if the “president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” Bakaj founded the Compass Rose Legal Group, which is representing the central so-called whistleblower on the matter of Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian president. Bakaj previously interned for Hillary Clinton and did work for other Democrats. On Sunday, Bakaj confirmed that his law firm is representing “multiple whistleblowers in connection to the underlying August 12, 2019, disclosure to the Intelligence Community Inspector General.” “No further comment at this time,” he added. Mark Zaid, senior counsel with the Compass Rose Legal Group, said on Sunday that his firm is representing a second so-called whistleblower in the Ukraine case. On Feb 15, 2017, toward the start of Trump’s presidency, Bakaj and the firm each tweeted about the discounted pricing for potential Trump administration informants: That same year, Zaid, Bakaj’s partner at the firm, co-founded Whistleblower Aid, a small nonprofit that blasted advertisements around D.C. actively seeking whistleblowers during the Trump administration. On Twitter, Bakaj appealed for potential Trump-era whistleblowers to come forward: Prior to Trump’s inauguration, Bakaj tweeted that “the security of the nation rests with career federal employees (DoD, CIA, etc.) doing the right thing.” Bakaj repeatedly promoted the idea of invoking the 25th amendment to remove Trump from office: At one point, Bakaj called on then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and then-Defense Secretary James Mattis to take cabinet action and invoke the 25th amendment: In 2001, Bakaj interned for both Clinton and Senator Chuck Schumer. heavy.com/news/2019/09/andrew-p-bakaj/Zaid tweeted his firm would represent whistleblowers who believe Trump is a danger: Meanwhile, missing from the avalanche of news media coverage about the so-called whistleblower clients of Bakaj and Zaid is that at the beginning of Trump’s presidency Zaid co-founded Whistleblower Aid. The group is heavily tied to far-left activist organizations and Democratic politics. In his twitter profile, Zaid describes himself as a “non-partisan” attorney “handling cases involving national security, security clearances, govt investigations, media, Freedom of Information Act, & whistleblowing.” Missing from Zaid’s twitter profile is that he co-founded Whistleblower Aid. That detail is also not mentioned in Zaid’s bio on his attorney website. This even though Whistleblower Aid has been actively helping the first whistleblower also being represented by Zaid by setting up a GoFundMe page seeking to raise funds for the purported whistleblower’s defense. The page already brought in some $210,066 with a goal of raising $300,000. Whistleblower Aid was founded in September 2017 in the wake of Trump’s presidency to encourage government whistleblowers to come forward. The group did not sit around waiting for whistleblowers. Upon its founding, Whistleblower Aid actively sought to attract the attention of Trump administration government employees by reportedly blasting advertisements for its whistleblower services on Metro trains, using mobile billboards that circled government offices for 10 hours a day, and handing out whistles on street corners as a gimmick to gain attention. When Whistleblower Aid was first formed, the main banner for the mission statement of its website contained clearly anti-Trump language. “Today our Republic is under threat. Whistleblower Aid is committed to protecting the rule of law in the United States and around the world,” read the previous statement which can still be viewed via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. That part of the mission statement received attention in the conservative media. The sentence “today our Republic is under threat,” has since been scrubbed from the website. The mission statement now only reads, “Whistleblower Aid is committed to protecting the rule of law in the United States and around the world.” Speaking to the Washington Post just after Whistleblower Aid’s founding, John Tye, who co-founded the organization with Zaid, claimed, “This is not a partisan effort,” and then went on to express seemingly partisan alarm about Trump. Tye continued, “At the same time, yes, the rule of law starts with the office of the president. Like many other people, we are definitely concerned about things that are happening in the administration. The decision to fire [FBI Director] James Comey. The lack of transparency. A lot of people have questions about whether this administration respects the rule of law.” ...... Click link to read rest of story
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 6:57:31 GMT -6
Release the transcripts: www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/10/08/democrats-keeping-key-impeachment-witness-transcripts-secret/House Democrats are trying to impeach U.S. President Donald Trump based on information they are so far keeping secret from the public. The Democrat-led House Committees on Oversight and Reform, Intelligence, and Foreign Affairs pursuing the impeachment inquiry are refusing to release the full transcripts of the testimony provided by the first two witnesses. Last week, former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker and Intelligence Community (IC) Inspector General (IG) Michael Atkinson provided their testimony behind closed doors. To the dismay of Republicans, witnesses expected to come to Capitol Hill this week are expected to follow suit. Reps. Eliot Engel (D-NY), Adam Schiff (D-CA), and Elijah Cummings have chosen to release bits and pieces of the evidence gathered so far that favors their impeachment effort. Engel, Schiff, and Cummings are the committee chairmen leading the impeachment investigation. On Monday, Breitbart News reached out to the House panels for comment on when, if ever, they plan to release the full transcripts, but they refused to answer. Irked by the Democrats’ refusal to release the full transcripts, Republican lawmakers who witnessed the testimony first hand and pundits have called for the information to be made public. Via Twitter, Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) on Saturday urged Democrats to release Volker’s testimony — which lasted more than eight hours — “so all can read it.” “He candidly [and] professionally obliterated the bogus charge” by Democrats that President Trump made a quid pro quo offer to his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky. An intelligence community “whistleblower” claimed Trump pushed Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, in exchange for foreign aid during a July 25 call. The allegation triggered the impeachment inquiry. On Friday, Zeldin stressed on Twitter, “Volker was very clear yesterday in his testimony that it is untrue Trump demanded a quid pro quo of Zelensky that U.S. aid was contingent upon an investigation by Ukraine into the Bidens.” On Sunday, Zeldin noted: It’s been[three] days [and Rep Schiff] still hasn’t released the transcript of Amb Volker’s interview, instead just cherry-picking some texts. I don’t have to ask why, [because] I was there [with] both of them [Thursday]. Schiff’s not releasing it [because] it obliterates his fairy tale quid pro charge. On Monday, Zeldin blasted the media’s lack of interest in the full transcript of the impeachment inquiry’s first witness, choosing instead to rely on the Democrats for details. He wrote on Twitter: Fascinating that much of the media has had zero interest in reporting on what was actually said by [Amb.] Volker last Thursday in response to several hours of questioning by [Democrats] & GOP. It’s like they don’t want to hear any truths that don’t support Schiff’s quid pro quo fairy tale. ........... Echoing his colleagues, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), wrote on Twitter Friday: Ambassador Volker’s full interview yesterday directly undermined the salacious impeachment narrative Democrats are trying to sell you. They don’t want you to see that. It’s why they’re leaking supplemental documents and text messages out of context. Like Jordan and Zeldin, Meadows also witnessed Volker’s testimony first hand. Democrats chose to remain mum after sitting through hours of testimony by Volker. Meanwhile, their Republicans colleagues — Meadows, Jordan, and Zeldin — told reporters the interview failed to produce the fireworks expected by their rivals. Last week, Fox News revealed that IG Atkinson testified Friday that he had “no knowledge” of the “whistleblower’s” contacts with the House intelligence panel aide. The New York Times reported last Wednesday that the CIA officer who blew the whistle alleging a quid pro quo discussed the accusations against Trump with the House panel before the inspector general received the complaint. According to the law governing whistleblowers in the intelligence community, an official concerned about wrongdoing within the government must go to the IC inspector general before the congressional panels.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 8:14:31 GMT -6
Nothing nefarious or underhanded going on at all. It’s just a weird coincidence, that’s all. Right liberals? theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/07/house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-rules-for-impeachment-116th-congress-full-pdf/Sometimes dates are just data-points. However, sometimes data-points help structure information timelines showing a connection between two seemingly disparate events. When this happens, dates start to tell a story. The CIA operative “whistle-blower” letter to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, and Senate Intel Chair Richard Burr, was on August 12th (link). Now here’s Speaker Pelosi’s modified House rules for impeachment [116th Congress]: Quite a coincidence? ....... Also, they changed up the rules, etc on that date: So, heresay, etc is allowable for impeachment to begin,(see whistleblower complaint,(since proven false by release of phone transcript). In footnotes on page 6 of the memo, it clearly states the actions taken by Congress allowing the President’s counsel to respond to impeachment the presentation of information in the impeachment. This was the case with Nixon and Clinton, but not now, not for President Trump –
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 8:17:37 GMT -6
thehill.com/homenews/administration/464783-state-ordered-sondland-not-to-testify-before-houseGordon Sondland, President Trump’s ambassador to the European Union, will not testify as part of the House impeachment probe on Tuesday after a request from the Department of State, his attorney said. “Early this morning, the U.S. Department of State directed Ambassador Gordon Sondland not to appear today for his scheduled transcribed interview before the U.S. House of Representatives Joint Committee,” Sondland’s attorney, Robert Luskin, said in a statement. “As the sitting U.S. Ambassador to the EU and employee of the State Department, Ambassador Sondland is required to follow the Department’s direction,” Luskin added. Sondland is “disappointed” not to appear, according to Luskin.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 8:20:34 GMT -6
Unfortunately, facts & evidence contradict Schiff’s comments once again.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Oct 8, 2019 9:20:32 GMT -6
This morning, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) invited Trump Attorney and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani to testify before the Senate Judiciary.
|
|