Replies to post #312490 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[Tearex]

I would disagree with "totally baseless".....
"Maybe when your friends Comey or Brennnan goes to jail it will hit you.
Maybe when the O admin is exposed for weaponizing the government against his political foes you might understand.
IRS, CIA, FBI, Media, should not be the heavy hand of Dems.
keep Hillary's souvenir uranium rods closer.
Next time Bernie is vacationing in Russia, ask him to snag one for me!"

As for your

"That's a nice story, but it is you're story.
It never ceases to amaze me how you people tell a false story, as if it is my narrative put forth." ,

you are not innocent of that yourself.

fuagf, your accusation here is just not true. I understand that your stance is that my stories are false, but you have not identified a falsehood under your accusation.

Furthermore, I do not assign thoughts and motive to you or anyone else here, and that is the crux of the above emboldened quote.

Your links request as requested.

Sanders Blasted U.S. Foreign Policy During ‘Honeymoon’ in USSR in 1980s
https://freebeacon.com/national-security/sanders-blasted-u-s-foreign-policy-during-honeymoon-in-ussr-in-1980s/

The Stench at Obama's DOJ and FBI
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/01/24/the_stench_at_obamas_doj_and_fbi_136089.html

There can be no question, at this point, that certain higher ups in the FBI and the DOJ did not want Hillary to be indicted and did not want Donald Trump to become President. Those efforts were not independent of each other. Indeed, some of the same people were involved with both scandals.

Below is a timeline of events that places all of the actions in context and makes it rather plain that the FBI and DOJ were not investigating potential crimes objectively. Indeed, they were committing crimes during the process in aid of their preferred outcomes.

~ ~ ~

2007. Hillary Clinton wanted to be President. Hillary’s ambitions to be president started long ago. She ran for President in the 2008 cycle. In 2009, after losing to Obama, Hillary became Obama’s Secretary of State. She stayed in that post until 2013.

~ ~ ~

March 2015

March 2, 2015 – The Hillary email scandal breaks. Hillary was using an unapproved/unsecured server and devices to communicate. She was using a private email account. Classified information was being sent through that email, server and devices – including when Hillary was abroad.

All of that is illegal. As 2015 unfolds, it becomes clear to the FBI and the DOJ that President Barack Obama (despite his March 7, 2017 claim he found out about Hillary’s email server “through news reports”) was communicating with Hillary using her non-state department email. Obama was using an email and a name that masked who he was. That had to be known to authorities long before March of 2015 given that it occurred prior to 2013.

As the probe into the email scandal begins, Attorney General Loretta Lynch directs FBI Director James Comey to call it a “matter” rather than an “investigation.” Comey complies even though he later would testify that it made him “queasy.”

As Andrew McCarthy points out in his article, there was no chance that the DOJ was going to indict Hillary because that would have required implicating President Obama. That was never going to happen. From thereafter, DOJ officials acted with that understanding, however illegal, in mind.

March 7, 2015 – Virginia Governor and Clinton confidante Terry McAullife meets with Andrew McCabe and his wife Jill McCabe. Andrew McCabe as #3 in the FBI at the time. The month before, the Virginia Lt. Governor had recruited Jill McCabe to run for state Senate.

March 12, 2015: Jill McCabe announces her run for State Senate. In time, according to the Wall Street Journal, Jill McCabe’s campaign received “slightly more than $675,000 to her candidacy from entities either directly under Mr. McAuliffe’s control or strongly influenced by him.” That represents more than 1/3 of her total donations.

~ ~ ~

April 29, 2015

FBI warns Andrew McCabe about potential conflicts of interest given his senior position in the FBI while the FBI was undertaking an investigation of Hillary Clinton and McCabe’s wife receiving support from a Clinton friend McAuliffe.

The memo, “Protocol Regarding Potential Conflicts of Interest,” also “identified several areas where [McCabe’s] disassociation would be appropriate.” It also referenced that his wife was being “supported by the governor of Virginia” and that McCabe had proactively approached Bureau colleagues for guidance.

~ ~ ~

June 2015

Donald Trump announces his Presidential run.

~ ~ ~

July of 2015

The FBI investigation into Clinton’s emails begins.

~ ~ ~

January of 2016

Alexandra Chalupa, who had worked in the White House Office of Public Liaison during the Clinton administration, tells “a senior DNC official that, when it came to Trump’s campaign, “I felt there was a Russia connection.” Chalupa continues to do in 2016 and works with Ukranian officials to develop that narrative.

February of 2016

February 1, 2016. Andrew McCabe become #2 at the FBI – the Deputy Director “overseeing all FBI domestic and international investigative and intelligence activities.”

“When he assumed that role, officials say, he started overseeing the probe into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server for government work when she was secretary of state.” Although that occurs after Jill McCabe lost her election bid in November of 2015, “other Clinton-related investigations were under way within the FBI, and they have been the subject of internal debate for months, according to people familiar with the matter.”

March 2016

Trump has enough delegates to claim the nomination.

~ ~ ~

March/April 2016 – “John Brennan start[s] claiming to colleagues at the CIA that Estonia’s intelligence agency had alerted him to an intercepted phone call suggesting Putin was pouring money into the Trump campaign . . . [Brennan uses that, in part] as the justification to form a multi-agency spy operation (given the Orwellian designation of an “inter-agency taskforce”) on the Trump campaign, which he was running right out of CIA headquarters.”

~ ~ ~

April 2016

April 10 – Obama makes clear he does not want Hillary indicted/Says No Political Influence on the Hillary Investigation/Says he doesn’t talk to FBI/DOJ during investigation. Obama, on Fox TV, indicates Hillary did not intend to harm national security. However, intent is NOT an element of the crime she committed. At the time of that statement – made by a sitting President and in plain view of the Nation and more importantly his FBI/DOJ appointments – many witnesses had yet to be interviewed, including Hillary.

Also, Obama, during the interview, states that there would be no political influence on the investigation and that he doesn’t talk to FBI/DOJ heads during an investigation.

“Chris Wallace: Can you guarantee to the American people, can you direct the Justice Department to say, “Hillary Clinton will be treated — as the evidence goes, she will not be in any way protected.

Obama: I can guarantee that.”

Obama also stated: “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations.” Keep the word “investigations” in mind for later.

April 2016. Hillary campaign and DNC begin funding infamous Trump dossier. To conceal payments for the dossier, Hillary’s campaign and the DNC give money to attorneys who then pay for the dossier – a clear campaign law violation. If that campaign payment had been properly disclosed, the payment for the dossier, and likely the dossier, would have been exposed in the summer of 2016. That disclosure likely would have hurt Hillary’s campaign (exposes her dirty trick play) and LIKELY PREVENT THE USE OF THE DOSSIER to get FISA warrant on Carter Page, which led to other spying and ultimately the Mueller investigation.

~ ~ ~

Spring 2016

Christopher Steele, according to testimony provided by Fusion GPS owner and former Wall Street Journal Reporter Glen Simpson, was hired in the Spring of 2016 – to put together opposition research together on Donald Trump

“Late Spring” – FBI’s then-director James Comey briefed the principals of the National Security Council on “the Page information.” Just prior to that, candidate Trump disclosed Carter Page as an advisor. Carter Page is a tangential, volunteer Trump campaign advisor with long-time ties to Russia. Carter Page clearly is a Russian sympathizer with a desire to continue doing business in Russia.

It is important to note that Carter Page had been under surveillance in 2013 (not clear for how long) by the FBI. Such surveillance must be based on a claim that Carter could be an agent for a foreign government.

According to Andrew McCarthy, “Page was one of several American businessmen whom Russian intelligence operatives attempted to recruit in 2013. Yet, the main reason we know that is that Page cooperated with the FBI and the Justice Department in the prosecution of the Russian operatives. See Sealed Complaint, United States v. Evgeny Buryakov, pp. 12-13 (Page is identified as “Male-1” — whom one of the Russian spies refers to as “an idiot”).”

~ ~ ~

May 2016

May 2 – Ted Cruz drops out of Presidential race. Cruz’ departure confirms Trump will be the Republican nominee.

May 6 – An “intermediary” is contacted by a Obama Administration official and told the government has Hillary Clinton related emails that they wanted to get those emails to the Trump campaign.

May 9 –

a) The intermediary begins discussions with then Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo about such a process. A week later, Caputo turns down the offer worried they contained classified information. Caputo tells the gov’t representative to use the gov’t whistleblower process. Cavuto gave this information to Mueller team but they ignored it and never followed up with the intermediary nor the gov’t official. Cavuto also had the same man meet with Roger Stone. The man referred to himself as Henry Greenberg.

b) Obama Endorses Hillary Clinton. The question arises: Why Obama would take the risk of endorsing Clinton who is in the midst of “honest” criminal investigation. It is actually rare for a sitting President to be aggressive on the campaign trail for his replacement. Wouldn’t that be really embarrassing for the President if she had been charged with a crime?

**The answer could be that Obama already knew she was not going to charged.

May 10 – Former Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, who “arranged one of the largest foreign donations” to the Clinton Foundation, meets with George Papadopoulos, a tangential, volunteer, Trump campaign advisor. “Downer, who was accompanied by another Australian diplomat named Erika Thompson, reportedly claimed that Papadopoulos discussed the Clinton emails” and/or that Papdopoulos “heard from a Kremlin-connected academic, Josef Mifsud, that Russia had thousands of emails potentially damaging to Clinton.” “Papadopoulos maintains that he understood Mifsud to be talking about the 30,000-plus emails that Hillary Clinton had deleted from her homebrew server.”

May 19 – DOJ Official Gives Hillary Campaign A Heads Up. Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Peter Kadzik sends an email to campaign head John Podesta about FOIA requests and Congressional hearings.

May 2016 – Peter Strzok and Lisa Page make it clear they need to end the Hillary Investigation.

Peter Strzok is the FBI agent in charge of the Hillary investigation, which is dubbed Mid-Year Exam. He is having an affair with FBI lawyer Lisa Page. In a text exchange, Page informs Strzok that Cruz dropped out. Strzok responds:

“What?!?!?!?!” Strzok later states: “Now the pressure really starts to finish the MYE.”

That is evidence of and the motive for much to come.

May 2016 – FBI draft memo about Hillary started. Long before Hillary and other key witnesses are interviewed, James Comey starts drafting a memo with respect to the proposed conclusion of the Hillary investigation.

The original memo stated: “There is evidence to support a conclusion that Secretary Clinton, and others, used the email server in a manner that was grossly negligent with respect to the handling of classified information.”

The grossly negligent language is sufficient to charge Hillary with a crime.

May 2016. – Hillary staffers Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin mislead the FBI on what they know about Hillary’s email practices. In fact, they knew of the use long before the timeframe they gave the FBI. They are never charged with lying to the FBI.

Eventually, five Clinton associates, including Mills, are granted immunity and, incredibly, evidence is destroyed by the FBI as part of the immunity deals. There is never a good reason for a law enforcement agency to destroy evidence during an investigation. Also, keep in mind that the FBI was denied access to DNC servers when investigating whether and how the DNC was hacked by Russians – a 3rd party made the review. Why would the FBI allow the DNC to deny access?

~ ~ ~

May/June 2016

May/June.

During the final months of the Clinton email investigation, FBI agent Peter Strzok was advised of an irregularity in the metadata of Hillary Clinton’s server that suggested a possible breach.

Keep in mind in that Obama/FOX April 10 2016 interview, Obama stated: Hillary “would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy.”

Of course, the law is not based on intent. Once the FBI determines a possible breach of a figure like the Secretary of State, a damage assessment is required. However, Peter Strzok “did not support a formal damage assessment” and no assessment was done according to sources. That, of course, implies that the Director of Intelligence under Obama, James Clapper, refused to do his job to ensure that that assessment was done.

~ ~ ~

June 2016

June, 2016. Comey changes a report disclosing emails that could have been compromised between Hillary and then President Obama to email between Hillary and “a senior government official.”

June 20, 2016. Peter Strzok, who was opposed to Trump becoming president, as his texts reveal, changes the “grossly negligent” language in the Comey memo to “extremely careless.” That change all but ensures Hillary will not be charged with a crime.

June 27, 2016. Bill Clinton meets Loretta Lynch on the tarmac. They claim they were talking about grandchildren. When information related to the meeting is leaked, the FBI goes on a desperate search to determine who leaked the information. There is no corresponding urgent effort to expose the content of the very inappropriate meeting between the former president/husband of a target who just happened to appoint Lynch to office years ago. Lynch uses an alias email address to communicate with staff to “help craft responses to media requests about the meeting.”

~ ~ ~

July 2016

July 1, 2016. It is announced that Attorney General Loretta Lynch will accept FBI “determination and findings” as to the Hillary investigation – an abrogation of her duties not authorized by law. Strzok paramour Lisa Page then sarcastically texts to Strzok that: “It’s a real profile in courage, since she knows no charges will be brought.” Lynch would also tell Comey to call the Hillary email investigation a “matter” not an “investigation” – language consistent with how the Hillary campaign referred to the investigation. Comey complies with Lynch’s request.

Obviously, the determination to not charge Hillary had already been made, even though . . .

July 2, 2016. Hillary interviewed by the FBI. Hillary is finally interviewed by the FBI but she is not put under oath and there is no transcript (thereby making it all but impossible to charge her with lying to the FBI). She is interviewed for just over 3 hours – that is an hour less than Angelina Jolie was interviewed about Brad Pitt’s treatment of her children on a plane.

Hillary is allowed to have Cheryl Mills (a witness to the email crimes) in the room during the interview to act as Clinton’s attorney. Mills, of course, had been granted immunity by then.

Oh, and who interviewed her? Peter Strzok.

July 5, 2016.

a) Comey goes on TV, lays out case against Hillary, claims no intent therefore no prosecution. Comey’s presentation makes clear Hillary skirted the law but Comey applies Obama’s nationally announced, non-existent, “intent” standard and states no prosecutor would indict her. Of course, it is legally not the job of the FBI director to decide who gets prosecuted. To the contrary, their job is fact finding and to report to the DOJ. Comey never should have gone on TV to announce anything.

b) Obama Campaigns For Hillary in North Carolina. Is that just a coincidence that the two (Comey exoneration and Obama campaigning) happened on the same day? It takes an enormous amount of maneuvering to get a president from Washington DC to a another state. It has to be planned before that day. Again, why would Obama take such a risk unless he knew she was being exonerated by Comey that day?

Note that a prior appearance was set for June 12, it was cancelled. The question, however, remains.

Now, as the campaigns head to the Fall, the focus changes away from

the exonerated Hillary to Donald Trump’s campaign.

~ ~ ~

July 2016 – Carter Page goes to Moscow. The Trump campaign is aware of his Russian trip but not that he had been under surveillance.

July 2016 – Stefan Halper, “an American national security scholar whom the U.S. government has awarded contracts for classified projects, spied for the FBI . . . Halper chose British soil to introduce himself in early July 2016 to Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page, who became the target of an FBI wiretap the following October.”

July of 2016: CIA Director John Brennan starts the “surveillance” process that will eventually lead all the way to Robert Mueller investigation. Why? Because “of intelligence and information about contacts between Russian officials and U.S. persons that raised concerns in my mind about whether or not those individuals were cooperating with the Russians.” “Brennan passed on information and intelligence to the FBI, and signaled that the bureau better act on it.”

*A simple Google Search today demonstrates numerous stories of Brennan’s many anti-Trump statements and animus.

Summer of 2016. Comey’s first attempt to get FISA Warrant against Trump campaign official is denied. Comey sought a FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page (and others) – again, under the theory that he could be an agent of a foreign government.

Late July 2016. US government starts a “counter intelligence” operation, code-named “Crossfire Hurricane, based on statement by George Papdopoulos after a lot of drinking that Russia has dirt on Hillary Clinton.

Given Hillary’s unprotected use of email servers and blackberrys, including on foreign soil, it can be no surprise Russia could have such information. There is no factual connection between Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.

It is now known:

(a) “House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes said . . . his review of FBI and Justice Department “electronic communication” documents shows no intelligence was used to begin the investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election.”

(b) that the information related to Papadopoulos was provided to American intelligence sources by Former Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer. According to documents, Downer “arranged one of the largest foreign donations” to the Clinton Foundation.

* Of course, the real irony/joke is that the FBI starts surveilling people related to Trump, which ends up with false claims/dirt against Trump, because the Russians had dirt on Hillary.

**Note that they started a “counter intelligence” operation – not a criminal investigation. Each morning the president is presented with an intelligence report from all of the intelligence data collected by the FBI, NSA, etc. In other words, Obama likely was presented each day with the info gathered while the gov’t spied on Carter Page/George Papadopoulos, if not others.

So – was Obama leaving himself an opening back in April

when he said he doesn’t talk about “investigations” ??

~ ~ ~

Summer of 2016

Christopher Steele meets the FBI in Italy during the summer of 2016.

Steele learns “his research was being jointly subsidized by the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C.”

August 2016

Early August, 2016.

Brennan briefs Obama “on Russian interference. He explained that Putin’s explicit purpose is to aid Trump.” For the remainder of the election cycle, Brennan pushed “intelligence” to the likes of Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid and Comey about alleged ties between Russians and Trump campaign personnel. See August 27 below.

Comey and the FBI, however, officially conclude, in the days before the election, that “there was no clear link between the Trump campaign and Russia.”

August 8, 2016. A Peter Strzok text to Lisa Page discusses a meeting and/or briefing of then President Barack Obama’s Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and “D,” who is James Comey.

“Internal joint cyber cd intel piece for D, scenesetter for McDonough brief, Trainor [head of FBI cyber division] directed all cyber info be pulled. I’d let Bill and Jim hammer it out first, though it would be best for D to have it before the Wed WH session.”

August 12, 2016. “Senior Justice Department official called Mr. McCabe to voice his displeasure at finding that New York FBI agents were still openly pursuing the Clinton Foundation probe during the election season.” “When agents questioned why they weren’t allowed to take more aggressive steps, they said they were told the order had come from the deputy director—Mr. McCabe. Others familiar with the matter deny Mr. McCabe or any other senior FBI official gave such a stand-down instruction.”

“Lisa Page told the Wall Street Journal that the PADAG was “very pissed off” because the Justice Department had learned that the FBI’s New York office was “openly pursuing the Clinton Foundation probe.”

August 15, 2016. Strzok sends Page the “Insurance Policy” text. On that date, Strzok sends his paramour Lisa Page a text that implies they have an insurance policy against Trump getting elected.

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s [Andrew McCabe/FNI Dep. Director] office that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40….”

August 27, 2016. Harry Reid sends a letter to James Comey “requesting an investigation into potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.” That request is made AFTER John Brennan met with Harry Reid and purportedly show him the dossier.

August 29, 2016. NY Times reports existence of Reid Letter.

August 30, 2016. Peter Strzok texts Lisa Page: “Here we go,” sending a link to the Times report titled, “Harry Reid Cites Evidence of Russian Tampering in U.S. Vote and seeks FBI inquiry.” That text appears to confirm that the political arm of the U.S. government was working in concert with the FBI and/or the DOJ.

~ ~ ~

September 2016

Summer/September 2016. FBI official Andrew McCabe is aware of more Clinton emails/Delays review of them. Hillary Clinton emails are recovered from Anthony Weiner’s laptop. Weiner is the husband of close Clinton staffer Huma Abedin. To have the emails residing on Weiner’s laptop is a clear violation of law. Huma Abedin is never prosecuted for the violation – nor is Weiner – let alone Hillary.

FBI official Andrew McCabe, whose wife benefitted from campaign help (some say the arrangement netted over $700,000 for her campaign) from Clinton Ally Terry McAuliffe, delays review of the new discovered emails for at least several weeks.

September 2, 2016 – Stefan Halper, a Cambridge professor with longstanding CIA and MI6 ties, [who earlier made contact with Carter Page in July makes] contact with Papadopoulos on Sept. 2, 2016. They met in London later that month. Papadopoulos states that Halper brought up the stolen Hillary emails.

September of 2016.

Carter Page leaves Trump campaign. Press stories allege contacts between Page and Russian officials resulting in pressure for Page to leave the campaign – so he leaves.

Peter Strzok/Lisa Page Text States that President Obama wants to “know everything” the FBI was “doing.” Again, is that because it was an “intelligence operation” not a “criminal investigation” ??

U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Jonathan Winer “says Steele and Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal approached him with separate dossiers claiming malfeasance between Trump and Russia.” “Winer distilled the dossier into a two-page summary that he shared with former Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, who notified then-Secretary of State John Kerry.”

9.28.16. McCabe notifies Strzok of additional Hillary emails needing to be reviewed.

September/October 2016. DOJ Official Bruce Ohr’s wife goes to work for Fusion GPS (the firm that was the conduit between the Hillary Campaign and dossier author ex-British spy Christopher Steele). Ohr later funnels information from his wife to the FBI.

~ ~ ~

October 2016

October 21, 2016. Second Comey FISA request relying on the Steele Dossier – FISA Warrant Issued to spy on Carter Page. Andrew McCabe, in time, makes it clear that without the dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant. The dossier made up the “bulk” of the application according to U.S. Senate report.

a) FBI/DOJ seek FISA Warrant on Carter Page without first seeking to interview him as required by law. The FISA law states that the warrant can be issued if the needed information “cannot reasonably be obtained by normal investigative techniques.” Interviewing Page would have been a normal investigative technique. Yet the DOJ/FBI never attempted to interview Page prior to seeking the warrant.

b) FBI, FALSELY, stated “in its Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Application to the secret court that Steele was unaware of who backed Fusion GPS, the firm which hired him, for the research.”

c) The dossier was not verified – to this day. Comey told Trump in January of 2017 that the dossier was “unverified.”

“Under the subsection “FISA Verification of Accuracy Procedures,” the FBI itself acknowledges that: “The accuracy of information contained within FISA applications is of utmost importance . . . Only documented and verified information may be used to support FBI applications [FISA] to the court [FISC].

Yet, Comey represented to the FISA Court that the dossier was credible – in part, by citing a Yahoo news story on the matter. However, Comey knew that that story was planted by the dossier author Christopher Steele. In other words, it was not an independent verification of the dossier. “As Isikoff explains, his story was almost entirely based on information from the Steele dossier, which was passed to him by an intermediary. Therefore, citing it would be redundant. The revelation, which was made in a memo released by the House Intelligence Committee on Friday, “stuns me,” Isikoff said in an episode of his podcast, “Skullduggery.”

All in all, Comey swore under oath that the Court should consider the dossier credible evidence so that the FBI could spy on Trump campaign official Carter Page – even though Page had already left the campaign. Given that it was known that Page already left the campaign, it could well be that Carter Page was the fall guy excuse to begin domestic spying on others.

Without question, Comey misled the FISA Court by submitting and vouching for the unverified dossier and pushing the Yahoo News story. Those were not the only questionable acts, misrepresentations nor omissions of Comey.

The FBI and DOJ, at the time they made the original FISA application, also were aware of the following – ALL OF WHICH WAS HIDDEN FROM THE FISA COURT:

a) Hillary’s campaign and the DNC paid for the dossier – a fact which, if known, would give rise to judicial questions of potential evidentiary bias. Instead, they made a vague reference to it having a political origin. **Why didn’t the FISA Judge ask for more details about that?

b) Christopher Steele tells a DOJ official Bruce Ohr that Steele was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” Another fact that, if known, would give rise to judicial questions of potential evidentiary bias.

c) The FBI was willing to pay Christopher Steele for more research but rescinded its offer when the FBI found out Steele had briefed reporters on the content of his dossier – a violation of FBI rules. Thereafter, the FBI ended its relationship with Steele. Any Judge or jury would want to know if someone offering evidence otherwise was breaking rules. It bears on whether the witness can be trusted.

d) Carter Page was not considered by the Russians as a credible businessmen and/or figure. Many believe Carter Page was an insignificant player. Wiretapped Russian called him an idiot. Again, this raises the question of whether surveillance of him was really an attempt to get at others.

e) A DOJ official’s wife was working for the outfit commissioning the dossier. Another potentially biased individual.

Also, in March of 2017, Comey would tell a Congressional Committee that he relied on Steele’s credibility with respect to vouching for the dossier. Really?

** Keep in mind, by this time, the FBI is aware that the Hillary campaign paid lawyers, to give money to Fusion GPS, who gave money to a foreign agent (Christopher Steele), who got information from Russian informants. Yet, the FBI counter intelligence effort was being run on the Trump campaign not the Clinton campaign.



October 28, 2016. Comey announces the reopening of Hillary email Investigation after the “FBI’s discovery of a large quantity of emails during the search of a laptop computer obtained in an unrelated investigation of Anthony Weiner, the husband of Clinton’s former Deputy Chief of Staff and personal assistant, Huma Abedin.” Source IG Report, p.2.

According to Comey, he made to decision to go public because he “was making decisions in an environment where Hillary Clinton was sure to be the next president, my concern about making her an illegitimate president by concealing the restarted investigation bore greater weight than it would have if the election appeared closer or if Donald Trump were ahead in all polls.” In other words, he was making FBI/police decisions based on polls.

October 30, 2016. The FBI obtained a search warrant to review the emails. Source IG Report, p.2.

~ ~ ~

November 2016

November 6, 2016 – FBI Director James Comey informs Congress “that Hillary Clinton should not face criminal charges after a review of new emails. Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July,” Comey wrote in the new letter to congressional committee chairmen.”

However, in his ABC interview Comey said: “We know there are hundreds of thousands of Hillary Clinton’s emails there, including Blackberry emails.” He also said that his FBI team told him that “We cannot evaluate this material before the election.”

*What should you conclude form he above? Obviously, Comey and the FBI cleared Hillary WITHOUT reviewing all the emails.

November 9, 2016. Trump wins the Presidency.

November 2016, Hillary campaign immediately blames Russian interference and that narrative is maintained for months.

~ ~ ~

December 2016

December of 2016. Obama Administration begins process to relax rules on sharing intelligence about Americans. The rules previously provided that if an American was speaking to a foreigner who was being surveilled, the American’s name would be masked in the intelligence documents. Obama made it easier to share the actual names – which so happened to be Trump transition officials trying to do their job

December of 2016. CIA Director Brennan finally gets FBI Director Comey to agree Putin had intervened on behalf of Trump.

~ ~ ~

90 days renewals. Three times thereafter, the FBI and the DOJ reapplied for a FISA warrant and never apprised the Court of their prior misrepresentations and/or omissions. The existing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who currently oversees the Mueller investigation, was one of the officials who made a FISA warrant reapplication. It has also been said that Rosenstein, on January 10, threatened House Members with legal proceedings if they continue to push oversight of this matter.

~ ~ ~

Conclusions

So what conclusions are to be drawn in all of this?

~ Hillary Investigation:

1. Obviously, the Obama Administration DOJ officials were never going to charge Hillary Clinton with a crime related to the emails. To make that come true, their officials went easy on Hillary (as the Strzok/Page texts expressly suggest should be done). They altered procedure, they granted multiple immunity deals, they allowed for the destruction of evidence, they gave her an easy interview, they delayed the review of documents and/or failed to review them at all, they altered the characterization of Hillary’s offense from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless” to exonerate her from liability, they ignored the breach of her server and more. Their conduct amounts to obstruction of justice – a crime.

2. The race between Hillary and Trump pushed the FBI/DOJ to alter the Hillary email investigation timeline for election purposes. They weren’t following the evidence, they were keeping to a deadline. They pushed to end the investigation and to exonerate her so that she would not be burdened with the investigation as the race moved into the Fall.

Yes, it is true that Comey made a terrible (likely unprecedented) decision to publicly announce reopening the email investigation days before the election. In truth, however, because it would implicate Obama, no charges were ever going to be brought.

3. Do Comey’s original draft and his announcements related to Hillary not demonstrate he was not biased against her? Maybe. The fact that Comey made inconsistent and stupid decisions does not mean the FBI and the DOJ weren’t giving Hillary a free pass. Also, there is no doubt, that Comey stole documents from the FBI and illegally leaked such documents. Those are crimes. Beyond that . . .

4. It is obvious that the FBI/DOJ officials hastened the end of the Hillary email investigation and then immediately began an investigation of Donald Trump in earnest. The timing of the winding down of the Hillary investigation and “spying” on the Trump campaign, along with the July 5, 2016 Comey exoneration speech and the late July counter intelligence investigation related to a tangential Trump advisor should not be viewed as just a coincidence. It was, as Strzok said, an “insurance policy” against the election of Trump.

~ Trump Inviestigation:

1. At one time John Solomon of The Hill reported: Of the known public information, there are only 4 sources the FBI used to start the investigation of the Trump campaign. All four of those sources have ties to the Clinton: Ambassador Downer, Fusion GPS/Christopher Steele, the Yahoo News story and written by Michael Isikoff who got his information Christopher Steele, and Sidney Blumenthal/Cody Shearer funneling information to the State Department.

Now, however, it could be that the Obama Administration acted in concert with Clinton Allies by seeking to plant false information on Trump aides.

2. The Brennan Push – from July of 2016 until December of 2016, despite push back from the FBI, CIA John Brennan (a fierce critic of Trump) pushed the narrative that Putin was interfering on behalf of Trump. His efforts bore fruit and likely resulted in the existence of the Mueller Investigation.

3. FBI/DOJ officials knowingly concealed evidence and misled the FISA Court. They, including Comey, knew the law. They are senior law enforcement officials. They knew they had been turned down before and therefore had to bring more to the table.

So what did they bring? The dossier. The unverified dossier. They asserted to the Court, however, that it was credible. The way the legal system works is that, in order for the evidence to be considered, someone has to submit a declaration under penalty of perjury vouching for the credibility of the evidence.

They also omitted information that likely would have resulted in the Court denying the application. It was October of 2016, however, and they wanted information right then and there. After all, it was less than a month before the election.

Further, The FBI is subject to something called the Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG). According to the rules therein:

“Under the subsection “FISA Verification of Accuracy Procedures,” the FBI itself acknowledges that: “The accuracy of information contained within FISA applications is of utmost importance . . . Only documented and verified information may be used to support FBI applications [FISA] to the court [FISC].

Former FBI Director Jim Comey, multiple times, said the information in the dossier was not verified yet it was used to obtain a FISA warrant. Pretty clear case of abuse/law breaking – is it not?

4. Based on those lies in the FISA applications, all the evidence that was gathered as the fruit of that warrant, unless it can be shown the evidence was clearly not gathered from that warrant, could be ruled inadmissible in any criminal case. Look for Paul Manafort to make that argument.

5. Without the FISA warrant, would there have been an Independent Counsel? We shall never know – but it appears rather unlikely.

~ Overall:

1. Mueller. He had to know of the facts above. Why hasn’t he blown the whistle on the bad cops?

2. It is right to say that this episode is the worst abuse of political power in American history related to elections. Watergate is nothing by comparison. That involved people not employed by the government. Later it involved a cover-up in which Nixon and other WH staff participated.

Watergate did not involve the abusive use of DOJ and the FBI powers – two institutions which must be non-partisans for this Republic of ours.

This case does involve the FBI and DOJ. It also is foolish not to assume that Loretta Lynch and President Obama were ignorant of the goings on – if not involved in them.

Finally, the dishonest investigation of Hillary who committed actual crimes should not be acceptable. Nor should FBI or DOJ officials be allowed to alter events and Court proceedings for political purposes.

If we let this go, and people are not brought to justice, we will have forever damaged our Republic and the World’s view of us as a nation of laws.


~~~

Tom Del Beccaro is the Author of The Divided Era

Purchase The Divided Era today – Buy Now.

The larger our governments, the greater the competition for their spoils–therefore our divisions.

”There simply is so much at stake today. As a result, our governments that benefit so many, employ so many, and tax so widely–in short our governments that pick so many winners and losers–are understandably subject to an intense competition for their control.” So writes author Thomas Del Beccaro in this fascinating study of the history of political unity and division in the US, from the Revolution to the adoption of the Constitution, the Civil War through Reconstruction, The Gilded Age to our present Divided Era.

More . . .

~~

The Democrat Memo

Overall, the memo is longer than the Republican memo. That is due, in part, to the extensive amount of repetition in the Democrat memo and the fact that it contains a lot of argument for their position.

A. What is inside . . .

It confirms that the FBI started a counter-intelligence program (in July of 2016) because George Papadopolous said the Russians had emails of Hillary Clinton – presumably those emails were more than her yoga and wedding appointments. That fact that Russia many have had emails about Hillary was known to the FBI prior to the 24 year-old Papadopoulos saying so on a night of excessive drinking. The FBI did not need to start a counter-intelligence program on Trump officials based on that common knowledge.
It confirms that the FISA Court was told the dossier was politically motivated. HOWEVER, the Democrat memo leaves out (as did the FISA application) that it was the opposition Hillary Clinton campaign that paid for the dossier. As an attorney of 30 years, I can’t imagine a Judge wouldn’t have wanted to know that fact.
It confirms that the dossier was not verified at the time of the filing of the first FISA application – only that the “FBI has started a vigorous process to vet allegations from Steele’s reporting.”
It confirms (at length) that the FISA application was based on the FBI’s belief in Steele – not verified facts. Should an entire FBI investigation on an opposition candidate be based on the allegations of a paid spy? In retrospect, clearly not given that none of the material allegations have been true. At the time it was granted, however, it remains true that the candidate preferred by certain FBI/DOJ officials was able to start an investigation against the non-preferred candidate on the thinnest of reeds. THAT IS WHAT THEY DO IN RUSSIA. Putin makes false charges and eventually jails opposition leaders after a sham “investigation” if not before. The notion that that should not happen here should not even have to to be said – but apparently it does.
It confirms that the only corroboration of the dossier is the Yahoo story which Steele planted – while claiming the FISA application ALSO made use of a news story that Carter Page made a public denial of certain meetings in Russia. Yes, as I discuss below, Carter Page was a Russia-file. He wanted to be big there. But he was not unknown to the FBI (as the Democrat memo admits at length) and therefore there was no need to spy on him (to confirm the Russian contacts the FBI knew he had) given he had already left the Trump campaign (as the Democrat memo admits).
B. What the Democrats main argument in the memo?

The memo is clearly trying to argue the facts – it does not provide significant new facts or to refute existing facts. Indeed, it confirm certain critical facts, i.e. that the counter intelligence operation and FISA warrants were based on almost no evidence. Again, it does not refute any of the material, underlying facts of Republican memo.
The main argument for the Democrats is to claim that the Republican memo takes individual events out of context. That latter point is why I did the complete timeline below – so you see everything in context.
Here is a link to the Democrat memo.

~~

Deleting Emails Is Against The Law? Who knew? – Mueller’s Latest Indictment

Remember when Hillary deleted over 33,000 emails claiming there weren’t work related even though they were subject to subpoena and a State Department request to hand them over? Remember when she wiped her computer server clean?

Suddenly deleting emails can be illegal however.

“Robert Mueller has charged a lawyer with lying to investigators about his communications with Rick Gates, a partner of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort who also has been charged in the Russia probe.” Of course, the Manafort indictment has nothing to do with the election meddling – the investigation Mueller is supposed to be performing.

The indictment of Manafort’s partner does not either. But there is something interesting within the indictment.

“The indictment against Alex Van der Zwaan also accuses him of deleting or otherwise not producing emails sought by the Special Counsel’s office . . .” (Original Text of ABC story that has since changed the text of its story) (CNN: Gates also deleted and then failed to produce emails he exchanged with the unnamed person in September, the charging document says).

Imagine that. Do you think Hillary should be worried?

http://politicalvanguard.com/biased-fbi-and-doj-officials-broke-the-law-and-tried-to-decide-the-election-an-annotated-timeline/