|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 4:34:39 GMT -6
www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-rod-rosensteins-communications-with-eric-holder-john-huber-other-senior-obama-officials-and-the-media/On May 15, 2017, Public Affairs Specialist Marsha Murphy sends Rosenstein an email with the subject line “Eric Holder just called for you.” The message says: “Please call him.” On May 16, 2017, U.S. Attorney John Huber wrote to Rosenstein: “Rod, We’re proud of you.” Later that year, Huber was chosen by then-Attorney General Sessions to head up the Clinton Foundation investigation. (On May 17, 2017, Robert Mueller was appointed by Rosenstein as special counsel.) The documents revealed that Rosenstein had communications with Washington Post reporter Sari Horwitz that included multiple off-the-record calls, information sharing, and smoothing over arguments with the DOJ press office. In an email exchange on May 12, 2017, with the subject line “Off the record” Horwitz complains to Rosenstein about then-DOJ spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores yelling at her and the Washington Post’s national security editor and calling a story of theirs “bullshit.” Rosenstein replies, “I will talk to Sarah.” Horwitz adds that she is “around all night if [Rosenstein wants] to talk off the record.” In an email exchange between May 13-16, 2017, Horwitz requests that they speak off the record again. Rosenstein replied by sending her a link to a story about him in The Baltimore Sun.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 4:35:50 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 4:36:26 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 4:37:41 GMT -6
Rep. Devin Nunes: Let me tell you something else… The lawyers who stepped down today the prosecutors who suggested 7 to 9 for Roger Stone. We believe that this is not going to be the only example. We believe there is other examples of things they did during the Mueller investigation that I think you and your listeners and the American people will be very interested to learn in the coming weeks. As we start to unpeel the onion of what the Mueller team was really doing. Because I would say this, when Mueller was appointed we have to ask ourselves, he walks in the door the first day and he said, “OK, show me all the evidence you got on the Russians?” They’re like, “Bob, sorry we don’t have any Russians here. We don’t have any evidence.” So what the hell did they do for two years? They set up an obstruction of justice trap. And they went after a whole lot of people who have now got sentenced. Some already served their time. And I think all of this has to be called into question now.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 8:34:14 GMT -6
Nobody can claim Senator ‘Cryin’ Chuck Schumer is the sharpest tack in the box. He did it again. He outed one of Rep. Adam Schiff’s fake whistleblowers – again. In late November Crying Chuck inadvertently outed one of Adam Schiff’s fake whistleblowers in a tweet where he referred to “Alexander Vindman and whistleblowers like him“. What a dummy.  Yesterday Senator Schumer sent out another tweet where he refers to Lt. Colonel fake whistleblower again! Democrats claimed that whistleblowers should remain anonymous, yet they partake in the actions they claim others are doing. Nobody ever said Fake Tears Cryin’ Chuck Schumer was the sharpest tack in the box. |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 10:53:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 10:54:58 GMT -6
www.foxnews.com/shows/sunday-morning-futuresIt’s incredible to me that the MSM refuses to acknowledge this and the Democrats refuse to acknowledge this wrongdoing. This is the biggest political scandal of our time. Let’s be clear. They wanted to take Donald Trump down. They used the tools that we use against terrorists!…”… They laugh at anybody who says anything like this against to tell the truth. But then the mobs come at you and they try to shut you down. Shut you down on Twitter. Shut you down down on Instagram. Whatever it takes to make you go away so you do not expose the wrongdoing. It’s been exposed. It’s out there. Little by little the American people are figuring it out.”
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 10:56:06 GMT -6
Seems that this should be news:
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 10:58:39 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 11:00:37 GMT -6
Pelosi on Tuesday night accused President Trump of “political interference” and said the actions of the DOJ “should be investigated.”
PELOSI: By tweet President Trump engaged in political interference in the sentencing of Roger Stone. It is outrageous that DOJ has deeply damaged the rule of law by withdrawing its recommendation. Stepping down of prosecutors should be commended & actions of DOJ should be investigated.
Just wait until President Trump pardons Roger Stone. Pelosi’s head will be spinning around!
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 11:03:16 GMT -6
Democrats want yet another investigation into Donald Trump, this time involving his tweets about the sentencing of his longtime associate Roger Stone after the Department of Justice revealed Tuesday that it will be reducing the “excessive and unwarranted” sentencing recommendation of its prosecutors.
“By tweet [President Trump] engaged in political interference in the sentencing of Roger Stone,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) tweeted Tuesday evening. “It is outrageous that DOJ has deeply damaged the rule of law by withdrawing its recommendation. Stepping down of prosecutors should be commended & actions of DOJ should be investigated.”
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 12, 2020 18:46:18 GMT -6
US Attorney General Bill Barr will testify to the House Judiciary Committee in March.
Barr accepted an invitation to testify to Congress on March 31, the House Judiciary Committee announced on Wednesday.
The Democrats are demanding answers from Barr on his intervention in the Roger Stone case.
The Dems also want to know why corrupt US Attorney Jessie Liu’s nomination to the Treasury Department was pulled.
“In your tenure as Attorney General, you have engaged in a pattern of conduct in legal matters relating to the President that raises significant concerns for this Committee,” the Dems wrote, saying the Roger Stone intervention requires “immediate attention.”
The Dems said they will also ask Barr about the creation of a “process” by which Giuliani can give the DOJ information about the Biden crime family.
Democrats laughably referred to “5th place Biden” as Trump’s “political rival.”
It was reported earlier this week that Scott Brady, the US Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania is vetting the Ukraine documents gathered by Rudy Giuliani about the Biden crime family.
|
|
|
|
Post by redstripe on Feb 12, 2020 20:20:00 GMT -6
Biden crime family. Fucking awesome
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 5:03:49 GMT -6
Things that make you go hmmmm: This same juror is a Trump-hating conspiracy nut. Here are a couple of her tweets:   Looks like a textbook example for a new trial to me, but the judge has denied that currently. |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 5:06:32 GMT -6
From the same person who admitted he leaked confidential information to start a sham investigation:
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 5:07:57 GMT -6
To busy going after President Trump supporters maybe?
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 5:12:03 GMT -6
amp.dailycaller.com/2020/02/12/roger-stone-jury-foreperson-democratThe foreperson on Roger Stone’s jury ran for Congress as a Democrat in 2012, it was revealed Wednesday. Tomeka Hart revealed her role on the jury in a Facebook post defending four prosecutors who quit the Stone case in protest over a revision to the Trump confidante’s recommended prison sentence. Hart’s social media activity shows she closely followed the special counsel’s Russia investigation, and frequently posted negative stories about President Donald Trump. A former Democratic congressional candidate whose social media accounts are replete with criticism of President Donald Trump came forward Wednesday as the foreperson on the jury that convicted longtime GOP operative Roger Stone at a trial in November 2019. According to multiple news reports, Tomeka Hart revealed her role on the jury in a Facebook post supporting the four prosecutors who withdrew from the Stone case Tuesday in protest over a revision in a sentencing recommendation for the GOP operative. I have kept my silence for months. Initially, it was for my safety. Then, I decided to remain silent out of fear of politicizing the matter,” Hart wrote on Facebook, adding: “But I can’t keep quiet any longer.” CNN first reported Hart’s post but did not note that she was a Democrat. Commercial Appeal, a news outlet affiliated with USA Today that spoke to Hart, reported details of her professional background. Those details match up with the same person who ran for Congress in 2012. A Politico reporter who covered Stone’s trial identified Hart as a former congressional candidate. Hart, who did not respond to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment, lost to incumbent Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen in the primary that year. Hart’s social media accounts show she kept a close eye on developments in the special counsel’s investigation. Her Twitter feed shows dozens of references to Trump, many of them links to negative stories about the Republican. In a Twitter post on Aug. 19, 2017, Hart quoted a tweet referring to Trump as the “#KlanPresident,” in an apparent reference to the KKK.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 5:15:33 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/democrat-eric-swalwell-we-may-impeach-trump-again-soonDemocrat Eric Swalwell: We May Impeach Trump Again Soon Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Wednesday that House Democrats could seek to impeach President Donald Trump again in the near future after he tweeted about the harsh sentencing recommendations for Roger Stone. “Might you impeach him over this, over Roger Stone and the sentencing?” Tapper asked. “We’re not going to take our options off table,” Swalwell responded. “We don’t wake up in the morning wanting to impeach him. We want to work with him on prescription drugs, background checks and infrastructure. But we’re not going to let him just torch this democracy because he thinks that he’s been let off once and we’re not going to do something about it.” WATCH: TRANSCRIPT: TAPPER: Moments ago, President Trump said he learned lessons from impeachment. The lesson he learned? That Democrats are crooked, vicious, and they should not have pursued his impeachment. Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell of California. He serves on both the Intelligence and Judiciary committees. Congressman, thanks so much for joining us. Tell me what your take is on what President Trump said he learned in terms of the lessons learned. REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): He is learning the wrong lessons. He’s acting to now corrupt the Department of Justice. And we’re going to act immediately. We had a meeting today on the Judiciary Committee, an emergency meeting, to decide what’s next. And so we’re going to bring the attorney general in. We’re also going to conduct oversight of what’s going on with the Stone sentencing. But, Jake, I will just say this. He could just pardon Roger Stone. It would be wrong to do that, but to infect his corruption into the DOJ, I think that’s what’s so concerning to so many people who want independence among our prosecutions. TAPPER: So, Barr has announced that he will come before your committee, the House Judiciary Committee, in March. SWALWELL: That’s right. TAPPER: You’re on the committee. What do you want to ask him? SWALWELL: Well, we want to know, who’s making these decisions? Are prosecutors still independent? What is going on with other investigations into Trump officials? Because now we know, in the 2020 election, Barr has the ability to sign off on any investigation. He has to sign off on any investigation into a campaign. And so the erosion of independence among prosecutors is our chief concern. TAPPER: The sentencing of Roger Stone will ultimately be left up to Judge Amy Berman Jackson. Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa said — quote — “I think the judge is going to take care of all that, and nobody’s going to question the judge’s decision.” What do you think? SWALWELL: I agree. She’s an independent judge. I should not be recommending a sentence. The president of the United States should not be recommending a sentence. She should be given the ability to make that decision herself, based on the facts of the case and where Roger Stone should go based on the sentencing guidelines. TAPPER: Even some Trump critics said that the seven-to-nine-year recommendation was harsh and excessive. Do you question that? Do you disagree? SWALWELL: Well, it fits within the sentencing guidelines. He should not be treated any differently than anyone else who committed so many crimes and also went to trial. Jake, remember, in our criminal justice system, you are rewarded for taking responsibility early in the proceedings. If you go to trial, and you put up a bogus defense, or you try and mislead the court, you can be punished for that in your sentence. And that is what is going to happen here, I think. TAPPER: The Justice Department and the White House and President Trump all deny that President Trump directly told Attorney General Barr what to do or directly coordinated with him. As always, the president did send out a tweet. Is that enough to object to? SWALWELL: Yes. And, as Michael Cohen told our committee, President Trump knows, in many of the mob-like ways that he operates, that he doesn’t have to say something directly, that, indirectly, he can signal what he wants someone to do. That was how Cohen said he would communicate with the president. And I think by tweeting out that, Attorney General Barr got the message. TAPPER: Take a listen to Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) QUESTION: Are you concerned that four prosecutors felt so strongly about it that they resigned? SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): No. QUESTION: That they got off the case? CORNYN: No. (END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: Cornyn not concerned. What do you think? Are you concerned? SWALWELL: Yes, I’m very concerned that the independence of prosecutors, the ability of judges to just weigh the facts and the evidence is eroding, that the president’s taken a wrecking ball to that. And he was just impeached for that. We’re not going to stop holding him accountable. We have learned, when you hold him accountable, you can actually stop the corruption, whether he’s removed or not. And, ultimately, it’s going to be for the voters to judge in November. TAPPER: Might you impeach him over this, over Roger Stone and the sentencing? SWALWELL: We’re not going to take our options off table. We don’t wake up in the morning wanting to impeach him. We want to work with him on prescription drugs, background checks and infrastructure. But we’re not going to let him just torch this democracy because he thinks that he’s been let off once and we’re not going to do something about it. TAPPER: Congressman Eric Swalwell, Democrat of California, thanks so much. SWALWELL: Thanks, Jake. My pleasure.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 11:33:50 GMT -6
Speaker Pelosi: There is so much malfeasance with the people in the executive branch right now… We can point out the disrespect the rule of law, for lying to Congress. And that was really, really bad. It’s not a good thing. It’s lying to the American people. It’s lying to the American people under oath. But our priorities are to do our jobs for the American people.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 11:34:45 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 13:42:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 13:45:16 GMT -6
dailycaller.com/2020/02/13/roger-stone-jury-selection/Hart was interviewed on Nov. 5, 2019 along with a group of other potential jurors. Hart is not identified by name in the transcript (she is referred to as Juror Number 1261), but the description matches her resume. Hart ran for Congress and also served as the foreperson on a grand jury in Tennessee for two years. “Is there anything about that that affects your ability to judge him fairly and impartially sitting here right now in this courtroom?” Jackson queried. “Absolutely not,” Hart answered. “What is it that you have read or heard about him?” asked Jackson. “So nothing that I can recall specifically,” Hart replied. “I do watch sometimes paying attention but sometimes in the background CNN.” “So I recall just hearing about him being part of the campaign and some belief or reporting around interaction with the Russian probe and interaction with him and people in the country, but I don’t have a whole lot of details. I don’t pay that close attention or watch C-SPAN,” she continued.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 14:00:26 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-chinas-huawei-charged-with-racketeering-conspiracy-to-steal-trade-secretsChinese telecommunications giant Huawei was charged with conspiracy to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in a superseding indictment in Brooklyn, New York, on Tuesday “The 16-count superseding indictment also adds a charge of conspiracy to steal trade secrets stemming from the China-based company’s alleged long-running practice of using fraud and deception to misappropriate sophisticated technology from U.S. counterparts,” the Department of Justice said in a statement. “As revealed by the government’s independent investigation and review of court filings, the new charges in this case relate to the alleged decades-long efforts by Huawei, and several of its subsidiaries, both in the U.S. and in the People’s Republic of China, to misappropriate intellectual property, including from six U.S. technology companies, in an effort to grow and operate Huawei’s business.” The allegedly stolen intellectual property included “trade secret information and copyrighted works, such as source code and user manuals for internet routers, antenna technology and robot testing technology.” The DOJ said that Huawei and its subsidiaries “agreed to reinvest the proceeds of this alleged racketeering activity in Huawei’s worldwide business, including in the United States.” The DOJ added that Huawei stole trade secrets by entering into confidentiality agreements with the owners of intellectual property and then violating the contracts by taking the intellectual property and using it for Huawei’s own benefit. “As part of the scheme, Huawei allegedly launched a policy instituting a bonus program to reward employees who obtained confidential information from competitors. The policy made clear that employees who provided valuable information were to be financially rewarded,” the statement said. “Huawei’s efforts to steal trade secrets and other sophisticated U.S. technology were successful. Through the methods of deception described above, the defendants obtained nonpublic intellectual property relating to internet router source code, cellular antenna technology and robotics. As a consequence of its campaign to steal this technology and intellectual property, Huawei was able to drastically cut its research and development costs and associated delays, giving the company a significant and unfair competitive advantage.” The DOJ stated that Huawei lied about its alleged criminal activity when it was confronted by members of Congress and the FBI, adding that they also allegedly engaged in “obstructive conduct.” The new charges also allege that Huawei and its subsidiaries were involved in working with Iran and North Korea despite being prohibited from doing so due to sanctions placed on those nations. “The defendants’ activities, which included arranging for shipment of Huawei goods and services to end users in sanctioned countries, were typically conducted through local affiliates in the sanctioned countries,” the statement said. “Huawei employees also allegedly lied about Huawei’s relationship to Skycom, falsely asserting it was not a subsidiary of Huawei. The company further claimed that Huawei had only limited operations in Iran and that Huawei did not violate U.S. or other laws or regulations related to Iran. In fact, the indictment alleges Skycom was Huawei’s unofficial subsidiary that, among other services, assisted the Government of Iran in performing domestic surveillance, including during the demonstrations in Tehran in 2009.” Attorney General William Barr highlighted during a speech last week the massive threat that Huawei poses to freedom around the globe since it is controlled by communist China and it is the world’s largest telecommunications equipment manufacturer.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 15:25:16 GMT -6
Now, sue Gardner, Parsons, etc into oblivion:
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE DISTRIBUTION
GREITENS FULLY EXONERATED BY MISSOURI ETHICS COMMISSION
“NO evidence of ANY wrongdoing”
FEBRUARY 13, 2020—After a 20-month investigation the Missouri Ethics Commission (MEC) released an order fully exonerating former Governor Eric Greitens. They found “no evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of Eric Greitens.” Charlie Spies, the leader of Dickinson Wright PLLC’s political law practice, served as Mr. Greitens’ legal counsel throughout the MEC investigation.
Further, in an unusual move, the MEC agreed not “to limit the civil or criminal remedies that may be available to Governor Greitens,” against those who made accusations.
“Eric Greitens is and always has been innocent of these false accusations. Our contention from the beginning was that the accusations against Mr. Greitens were baseless,” said Catherine Hanaway, the leader of Husch Blackwell LLP’s Government Solutions practice team and a former U.S. Attorney.
The MEC order is the result of one of the most thorough and exhaustive investigations in the history of the commission. Overall, the MEC issued 23 subpoenas, conducted 20 interviews, and reviewed roughly 8,000 documents, emails and videos. Over the last two years the Greitens campaign incurred costs of over $1.3 million defending against the allegations.
Governor Greitens said, “It’s good to have been exonerated, and I’m glad to have been vindicated. I’m grateful that the truth has won out, but this was never really about me—they launched this attack because we were fighting for the people of Missouri.”
“I would like to thank Charlie Spies of Dickinson Wright PLLC, and Catherine Hanaway of Husch Blackwell LLP for finally setting the record straight,” Greitens concluded.
Charlie Spies and Catherine Hanaway will be available for media comment at 2 pm CST/3 pm EST today. Below is the conference call-in information:
## #
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 13, 2020 15:28:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 14, 2020 7:57:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 14, 2020 9:43:48 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/federal-prosecutors-recommend-hard-time-for-ex-baltimore-mayor-reveal-new-details-on-childrens-book-scandalFederal Prosecutors Recommend Hard Time For Ex-Baltimore Mayor, Reveal New Details On Children’s Book Scandal Former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh is facing up to five years in prison over her infamous “Healthy Holly” children’s book scandal, over which she resigned last May and pleaded guilty in November. Pugh was elected mayor of Baltimore in 2016 but quickly came under increased scrutiny over multiple deals involving her children’s book, for which her nonprofit received hundreds of thousands of dollars from various city and state contractors and by which prosecutors say she benefited not only financially but also politically. In November, Pugh pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy and tax evasion; while the terms of the agreement were not revealed, her sentencing was scheduled for late February. In a sentencing memorandum filed Thursday, federal prosecutors laid out their case against Pugh, who they accuse of being a “scammer” guilty of a multiple years of fraud, tax evasion, cover-ups and “brazen lies to the public” in order to personally profit — and all in the name of “children’s health.” “The blistering, 37-page sentencing memorandum, accompanied by financial records and copies of checks, for the first time pinpointed the number of ‘Healthy Holly’ children’s books Pugh sold — and re-sold,” The Baltimore Sun reports. “It outlined her efforts to conceal her dealings, including lying to FBI agents who came to her house to seize her cellphone.” The memorandum, signed by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Martin J. Clarke and Leo J. Wise, presents the case for severe sentencing for Pugh as a result of her “deliberate” pursuit of financial and political gain. “The chronology of events since 2011, comprising Pugh’s seven-year scheme to defraud, multiple years of tax evasion, election fraud, and attempted cover-ups, including brazen lies to the public, clearly establishes the deliberateness with which she pursued financial and political gain without a second thought about how it was harming the public’s trust,” reads the memorandum, as highlighted by the Baltimore Sun. Her actions reveal “a recurring pattern of well-executed steps that built on each other, becoming more audacious and complex leading up to the mayoral election,” Clarke and Wise charge. As highlighted by The Baltimore Sun, the prosecutors say that Pugh orchestrated a “three-dimensional” scheme in which she managed to “resell 132,116 copies for a total of $859,960.” Prosecutors say that about 94% of the book sales, around $805,000, came from “corporate book purchasers with an interest in obtaining or maintaining a government contract.” The memo also presents more details about the roles of a city comptroller and a key city contractor that could spark further inquiries. Among the accusations is Pugh’s failure to disclose book deals worth hundreds of thousands to the Senate before becoming mayor, among them her $500,000 deal with the University of Maryland Medical System, for which she served on its volunteer board. (Read the sentencing memo here.) Amid mounting pressure after it was revealed that most of her “Healthy Holly” books were never distributed to the children they were supposed to help — instead being stored in a Baltimore City Public School System warehouse and Pugh’s homes and offices — Pugh publicly apologized in March. “I sincerely want to say that I apologize that I have done something to upset the people of Baltimore,” she said. “I never intended to do anything that could not stand up to scrutiny.” Months after going on paid administrative leave, and after every member of the Baltimore City Counsel called for her resignation, Pugh finally resigned in May.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 14, 2020 9:44:49 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/trump-explains-why-he-sent-giuliani-to-ukraine-instead-of-intelligence-officialsIn an interview Thursday, President Trump, who has been enjoying a victory lap after being acquitted on both articles of impeachment by the Senate last week, openly acknowledged that he sent Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to pursue corruption investigations and explained his rationale for choosing to use his personal lawyer rather than intelligence officials. The transcript of Trump’s famous July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — which Trump released to the public in September along with the whistleblower complaint that sparked the impeachment inquiry — contains Trump stating that Giuliani would be involved in follow-up conversations about corruption investigations. Though Trump clearly states that Giuliani will be involved, he later denied in a November interview having “directed” Giuliani to “do anything” in Ukraine. On Thursday, the recently acquitted Trump felt free to openly discuss Giuliani’s role in Ukraine and the reason he feels more comfortable turning to the former trial lawyer than intelligence officials. “Was it strange to send Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine, your personal lawyer? Are you sorry you did that?” Geraldo Rivera asked Trump in an interview for the “Roadkill with Geraldo Rivera” podcast Thursday, as reported by CNN. “No, not at all,” said Trump, describing Giuliani, as he has multiple times in the past, as a strong “crime fighter.” Trump then offered a succinct explanation of his rationale for turning to Giuliani for such a task. “Here’s my choice: I deal with the [Former FBI Director James] Comeys of the world, or I deal with Rudy,” he said, citing his “very bad taste” for the intelligence community, with which Trump has been in a longtime public feud over how they’ve handled his 2016 campaign and the early stages of his presidency. “So when you tell me, why did I use Rudy, and one of the things about Rudy, number one, he was the best prosecutor, you know, one of the best prosecutors, and the best mayor,” the president told Rivera. “But also, other presidents had them. FDR had a lawyer who was practically, you know, was totally involved with government. Eisenhower had a lawyer. They all had lawyers.” The open acknowledgment of having sent Giuliani to Ukraine is the first by Trump since he told former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly in a late-November interview, in the midst of the Democrats’ impeachment campaign, that he didn’t “direct” Giuliani to do anything in Ukraine. “So you didn’t direct him to go to Ukraine to do anything or put any heat on them?” asked O’Reilly, as CNN reported at the time. “No, I didn’t direct him, but he’s a warrior, Rudy’s a warrior,” said Trump. “Rudy went, he possibly saw something. But you have to understand, Rudy (has) other people that he represents,” said Trump, who noted that the former New York City mayor has “done work in Ukraine for years.” Giuliani’s actions in Ukraine became a major focus of the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. In late September, Democratic impeachment leaders subpoenaed Giuliani, who argued that he was protected by attorney-client privilege. “Our inquiry includes an investigation of credible allegations that you acted as an agent of the President in a scheme to advance his personal political interests by abusing the power of the Office of the President,” read the letter, signed by multiple Democrat-led committee chairmen. “A growing public record, including your own statements, indicate that the President, you, and others appear to have pressed the Ukrainian government to pursue two politically -motivated investigations. The first is a prosecution of Ukrainians who provided evidence against Mr. Trump’s convicted campaign chairman, Paul Manafort. The second relates to former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is challenging President Trump for the presidency in 2020.” “For example, on September 19, 2019, you admitted on national television that you personally asked the government of Ukraine to target Vice President Biden,” the letter continued. “During an interview on CNN, Chris Cuomo asked you, ‘Sir, you did ask Ukraine to look into Joe Biden?’ You responded, ‘Of course I did.’ In addition to this stark admission, you stated more recently that you are in possession of evidence — in the form of text messages, phone records, and other communications—indicating that you were not acting along and that other Trump Administration officials may have been involved in this scheme.” Rather than waiting on the courts to rule on whether some Trump administration officials would be required to testify, the Democrats fast-tracked the impeachment inquiry, resulting in some key figures, particularly former national security adviser John Bolton, never testifying — an issue that Senate Democrats unsuccessfully attempted to use slow down the Senate trial. Trump was ultimately acquitted on both impeachment articles, abuse of power failing 48-52 and obstruction of justice 47-53.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 14, 2020 10:48:22 GMT -6
theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/02/14/u-s-and-u-k-intelligence-agencies-worry-about-john-durham-scrutiny-of-cia-draws-media-apoplexy/#more-183611U.S. and U.K. Intelligence Agencies Worry About John Durham – Scrutiny of CIA Draws Media Apoplexy… Posted by sundance There was once a time, not that long ago, when the mainstream left was highly critical of the CIA, and scrutiny of dubious claims by U.S. intelligence was a common occurrence. Of course all of that changed when those same intelligence agencies were weaponized to target a political enemy that was also the enemy of the left, namely Donald Trump. Now, in the era of modern political narratives, no intelligence claim against the Trump administration is too outlandish. Regardless of dubious sourcing, it’s all pushed as fact so long as the target of the claim is President Donald Trump. As a result it is not a surprise how targeted weaponization became the cornerstone of the Russian narrative, and sketchy intelligence claims of Russian involvement in elections became the mortar that binds the bricks. The end product is tenuous at best; and if anyone starts to scrutinize the instability of the construct they too become a target. Last year U.S. Attorney John Durham and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr were reported to be spending time on a narrowed focus looking carefully at CIA activity in the 2016 presidential election. That CIA activity is directly related to the construction of the December 2016 Joint Analysis Report (JAR), and January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA). Both constructs are so critical to the Russia narrative that anyone who dare question the information becomes an immediate risk and target. Using information from U.K. media, and looking closer at yesterday’s New York Times report about investigations of the CIA, in this outline we will explain where corrupt U.S. and U.K. interests merge; what specific action was taken, & why the mortar is crumbling. 2019 – “One British official with knowledge of Barr’s wish list presented to London commented that “it is like nothing we have come across before, they are basically asking, in quite robust terms, for help in doing a hatchet job on their own intelligence services””. (Link) The U.K. Independent ran the above quote last year based on British intelligence officials who were concerned about scrutiny on their aligned activity with the U.S. CIA during the 2016 election. More recently, yesterday the New York Times ran an article breathless with concern about DOJ inquiry and Attorney John Durham questioning the CIA directly. 2020 […] The Justice Department has declined to talk about Mr. Durham’s work in meaningful detail, but he has been said to be interested in how the intelligence community came up with its analytical judgments — including its assessment that Russia was not merely sowing discord, but specifically sought to help Mr. Trump defeat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. […] The analysts could have been engaged in standard bureaucratic behavior like obeying the filtering process or hoarding sensitive information. Or perhaps they were trying to cover something up. The questions asked by Mr. Durham and his team suggest they are looking for any potential basis to support making the latter reading, officials said. […] Mr. Durham has interviewed F.B.I. officials and agents who worked on the bureau’s Russia investigation, called Crossfire Hurricane, and for the special counsel who took over the inquiry, Robert S. Mueller III. They have also interviewed C.I.A. analysts. Mr. Durham and his team also interviewed around a half-dozen current and former officials and analysts at the National Security Agency, including its former director, the retired Adm. Michael S. Rogers, last summer and again last fall. The Intercept first reported the interviews of Admiral Rogers. But Mr. Durham has not interviewed the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, his onetime deputy Andrew G. McCabe or Mr. Brennan. Mr. Durham has requested Mr. Brennan’s emails, call logs and other documents from the C.I.A. to learn what he told other officials, including Mr. Comey, about his and the C.I.A.’s views of a notorious dossier of assertions about Russia and Trump associates. (NYT Link) It is important to remember how critical the Russian interference narrative is to the activity that took place in 2016. If you take away the mortar, the building collapses. If the concrete evidence is not there to support the intelligence claims of 2016/2017, then all justification for the downstream “investigations” is lost. Without the Russia narrative, those who weaponized intelligence for political surveillance are naked to the world. The Russia narrative is essential for their justification of everything. In a world with a functioning media the high importance of a key detail would mean even more scrutiny on that detail was warranted. Alas, in the world of orange-man-bad, the concept of a functioning media is as visible as a rotary phone. The two-year investigation that generated the Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the 2016 U.S. election. This claim is perhaps the sketchiest. It is also important to remember just how extensive the operations of the CIA were in 2016; because it is within the network of foreign and domestic operations where FBI Agent Peter Strzok is noted as a bridge between the CIA and FBI operations. By now people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor now generally admitted/identified as some kind of a western intelligence operative who was tasked to run an operation against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep} In a similar fashion the CIA tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent under the false name Azra Turk, Mr. Halper also targeted Papadopoulos. The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes CIA exploitation of assets and targets much easier. However, there is an aspect to the domestic operation also bearing fingerprints of the CIA; only this time due to the restrictive laws on targets inside the U.S. the CIA aspect is less prominent. This is where FBI Agent Peter Strzok working for both agencies starts to become important. In their text messages Strzok has a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA. Additionally, CIA Director Brennan has admitted Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative. Also late July “Electronic Communication” from the CIA to the FBI originating FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane” was party authored from the CIA by Strzok. The fast moving Strzok immediately used that EC, to initiate Crossfire Hurricane as authorized by his boss FBI Director of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap. Then Strzok traveled to London to debrief intelligence officials there about the Australian Ambassador to the U.K, Alexander Downer and his contacts with George Papadopoulos. Peter Strzok appears as a very eager, profoundly overzealous James Bond wannabe, who enjoyed a role acting as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for CIA Director John Brennan to utilize. [Strzok gets CIA service coin] Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015; at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons. It was also Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working double-agents for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S. Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the Fusion-GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting… back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan unfortunately died in a helicopter crash. Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s handler, it was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Byrne the instructions on where to send her. {Go Deep} Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer, hired by Fusion-GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. Deripaska refused to participate. All of this context outlines the extent to which the CIA and FBI were openly involved in constructing a political operation that settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit. Much of this overlapping operation was seemingly directed by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin] Thus we see the importance of the Russian Conspiracy-Interference Narrative. Without that baseline all of the aforementioned operations have no justification. Again, this Russia narrative is the critical mortar that binds the investigative and political surveillance bricks. All of this engagement was admittedly controlled by U.S. intelligence; and all of this was intended to give a specific Russia impression. This predicate is presumably what John Durham is currently reviewing. The key background point is to see how committed the CIA/FBI were to the narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ, put a hell of a lot of work into it. Intelligence community work that Durham is now unraveling. John Durham is looking at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talking to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This is important because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks. On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA. From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:  On Tuesday April 15th, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to…. 
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Feb 14, 2020 13:21:42 GMT -6
US Attorney General Bill Barr has assigned an outside prosecutor to review the abusive case against General Mike Flynn. Barr also assigned a handful of prosecutors to review other cases in the US Attorney’s office in DC. US Attorney in St. Louis Jeff Jensen is one of the prosecutors handling Flynn’s case. The New York Times reported: www.nytimes.com/2020/02/14/us/politics/michael-flynn-prosecutors-barr.htmlAttorney General William P. Barr has assigned an outside prosecutor to scrutinize the criminal case against President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. Barr has also installed a handful of outside prosecutors to broadly review the handling of other politically sensitive national-security cases in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, the people said. The team includes at least one prosecutor from the office of the United States attorney in St. Louis, Jeff Jensen, who is handling the Flynn matter, as well as prosecutors from the office of the deputy attorney general, Jeffrey A. Rosen. |
|
