/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

related

Rip 4chan

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/01/22/rep-trey-gowdy-and-rep-john-ratcliffe-discuss-missing-fbi-text-messages/

Watch the Video - Strzok and Page refered to a meeting just after Trumps election as "the first meeting of the secret society"

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/01/22/fbi-shadow-figure-surfaces-to-protect-president-obama-amid-released-fbi-text-messages/

Bill Priestap removed Obama's name from Comey's speech exonerating Clinton

Obama was changed to "Senior Government Official" the line was later removed completely

Detailed rundown on the Dossier

>There is nothing normal about the Fusion GPS dossier (The Hill)
https://archive.fo/4xaNp

>Russia dossier investigators suspect reporters were paid to spread collusion claims (WashTimes)
https://archive.fo/mxsNV

>Spinning in circles on the Trump dossier (WashEx)
https://archive.fo/UUskk

>Lifting the Steele Curtain (WSJ)
https://archive.fo/FUwoV

This third article is important when considered next to Grassleys letter to the FBI about the dossier:

>Grassley concerned about FBI use of Trump ‘dossier’ in Russia investigation (politico)
https://archive.fo/n7Zl2

>Noting that the dossier was passed on to the U.K. government according to lawyers representing author Christopher Steele, Grassley asked the FBI to clarify whether the document's contents could have been "surreptitiously funneled into U.S. intelligence streams through foreign intelligence sharing."

>Steele, a former British intelligence agent, initially compiled the dossier — replete with unproven details of alleged Russian efforts to compromise Trump — for the firm Fusion GPS.

>If the FBI had interpreted a foreign intelligence service's receipt of the Steele dossier as a de facto confirmation, "it would be alarming," Grassley wrote on Friday to FBI Director Christopher Wray.

>"Mr. Steele’s dossier allegations might appear to be 'confirmed' by foreign intelligence, rather than just an echo of the same 'research' that Fusion bought from Steele and that the FBI reportedly also attempted to buy from Steele."

In short Clinton and the dems engineered the dossier with the intention of injecting it into the Intel community so it would be reported by the media as an official intelligence issue rather than oppo research.

This is the sequence of events during the week that led up to the DNC admitting it paid for the dossier

>Dems obstructed the Fusion GPS hearing, Fusion GPS pleads the fifth to everything
http://archive.is/Uw7QF

>Nunes issued a subpoena for bank records back to 2015, Court was due to supply records Monday
https://archive.fo/6L9Rn

>Obama appointee Judge delayed subpoena
https://archive.fo/3Ibkt

>WaPo publishes story saying DNC funded the dossier tuesday
https://archive.fo/qkyQj

>This strengthened the injunction
https://archive.fo/lJcaw

>Because there’s something Fusion cares about keeping secret even more than the Clinton-DNC news—and that something is in those bank records. The release of the client names was a last-ditch effort to appease the House Intelligence Committee, which issued subpoenas to Fusion’s bank and was close to obtaining records until Fusion filed suit last week. The release was also likely aimed at currying favor with the court, given Fusion’s otherwise weak legal case.

Podesta tried to stop the hearing.
https://archive.fo/6L9Rn
>The untold story is the Democrats’ unprecedented behavior. Mr. Rooney had barely started when committee staffers for Mr. Schiff interrupted, accused him of badgering witnesses, and suggested he was acting unethically. Jaws dropped. Staff do not interrupt congressmen. They do not accuse them of misbehavior. And they certainly do not act as defense attorneys for witnesses. No Democratic lawmakers had bothered to come to the hearing to police this circus, and Mr. Rooney told me that he “won’t be doing any more interviews without a member from the minority present.”

See pic related.

The Fusion GPS bank records subpoena was delayed for a few days by Obama appointee Judge Tanya Chutkan
https://archive.fo/3Ibkt
>U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan granted the House motion to intervene and has delayed the due date for the bank to comply with the subpoena until Wednesday while she evaluates the complaint.

Tanya is the judge that was trying to force Trump to give an illegal an abortion
https://archive.fo/c60fu
>The temporary restraining order, issued by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan Wednesday evening, said the federal government must allow the unnamed 17-year-old girl, who is about 15 weeks pregnant, to receive the abortion within days.

This gave WaPo and other media critters time to fess up before Nunes got the truth

>>109509
The plot thickens and their excuses are running out. Good times ahead I hope.

Podesta committed perjury

>Exclusive: In Hill interviews, top Dems denied knowledge of payments to firm behind Trump dossier (CNN)
https://archive.fo/0Hm74

>Podesta was asked in his September interview whether the Clinton campaign had a contractual agreement with Fusion GPS, and he said he was not aware of one, according to one of the sources.

>Sitting next to Podesta during the interview: his attorney Marc Elias, who worked for the law firm that hired Fusion GPS to continue research on Trump on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC, multiple sources said. Elias was only there in his capacity as Podesta's attorney and not as a witness.

So Podesta denied paying Fusion while sitting directly next to the guy who paid Fusion on his behalf

So it looks like purjury but can it be proven? Maybe.
>EXCLUSIVE: Hillary Clinton is in 'secret negotiations' with ex-British spy Christopher Steele to buy SECOND 'dirty dossier' on Trump's romantic englements with Russian women, claims Clinton author (DailyMail)
https://archive.fo/ekyCy

>Hillary personally authorized her campaign chairman, John Podesta, to launch the first controversial Russian dossier, according to a senior Clinton campaign strategist who worked for Hillary in both her 2008 and 2016 presidential bids

>When Scandals Collide (National Review)
https://archive.fo/TKvON

>Here, the Clinton campaign and the DNC retained the law firm of Perkins Coie; in turn, one of its partners, Marc E. Elias, retained Fusion GPS. We don’t know how much Fusion GPS was paid, but the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid $9.1 million to Perkins Coie during the 2016 campaign (i.e., between mid-2015 and late 2016).

>A friend draws my attention to an intriguing coincidence.

>In its capacity as attorney for the DNC, Perkins Coie – through another of its partners, Michael Sussman – is also the law firm that retained CrowdStrike, the cyber security outfit, upon learning in April 2016 that the DNC’s servers had been hacked.

To sum it all up

>DNC pays CrowdStrike to tell the FBI Russia hacked the DNC

>DNC pays Fusion GPS to give the FBI the dossier

>Fusion linked lawyer gets visa approved by Lynch to attend meeting with Don Jr

>one or all of these use in FISA court to spy on Trump

>Fusion GPS paid journalists, court papers confirm (WashEx)
https://archive.fo/3J1OD

>One of the documents filed by lawyers for the House Intelligence Committee said each of the three reporters who received payments had written about the Russia probe, which could indicate that reporters were using Fusion GPS's work to write their stories.

>“Additionally, the Committee seeks transactions related to three individual journalists, [names redacted], each of whom have reported on and/or been quoted in articles regarding topics related to the Committee's investigation, some of which were published as recently as October 2017," the committee wrote.

>Additionally, a filing by lawyers for the House Intelligence Committee asserts that Fusion GPS “brokered meetings for dossier author Christopher Steele with at least five major media outlets in September 2016, including Yahoo news.”

>The meeting by Yahoo resulted in one of the first media reports based on the dossier, which specifically mentioned Trump adviser Carter Page. After seeing the latest court filings, Page heaped praise on the committee.

Link to court docs: https://www.scribd.com/document/365208275/Declaration-of-Scott-L-Glabe-Deputy-General-Counsel-for-the-House-Permanent-Select-Committee-on-Intelligence#

Everything is slowly falling into place…

The people that perhaps understand Fusion best are their former employers WSJ

>The Press Loves Fusion GPS (WSJ)
https://archive.fo/hsmPQ

>One of the dirty little secrets in Washington is that Fusion is a longtime source for journalists, planting political hits that Fusion is paid by third parties to dig up. Now the press corps is defending its meal ticket, often without reporting honestly about Fusion and how it works.

>One example is the story by someone named Jason Schwartz in Politico on Monday that attacked us for our Mueller editorial. This media enforcer quoted Neil King, identifying him as a former WSJ editor who slammed our work and said “I don’t know a single WSJ alum who’s not agog at where that edit page is heading.” Perhaps Mr. King is agog because Axios reported in January that he had joined . . . Fusion GPS.

>So Politico quotes an employee of Fusion to attack The Wall Street Journal for criticizing Fusion. Even better, Mr. Schwartz didn’t tell his readers that Mr. King has worked for Fusion. Mr. Schwartz also failed to point out that Mr. King’s wife, Shailagh Murray, also a former Journal reporter, worked in the Obama White House. Perhaps Mr. Schwartz understands that this kind of political incestuousness is so routine in Washington that even to mention it would get him drummed out of the club.

Pic related here:
https://archive.fo/eTHRG

Also worth reading:
https://archive.fo/xAfw9

>Faith in the outfit’s journalistic expertise and experience is one of the chords that Fusion GPS strikes in its relations with journalists, whether they’re trying to block a story or shop one. “If they have a story they think you’d be interested in,” says one Washington, D.C. journalist familiar with Fusion GPS’s operations, “they call you down to their office on Dupont Circle and show you a dossier. There’s no confidentiality agreement, but it’s understood that if they show you something and you talk about it, you’re cut off, or worse.”

What did they mean by this?

>In order to report honestly on the Trump scandals, a weakened press would have to report honestly on Fusion GPS—which would mean lifting the lid on the incompetence and malfeasance of their own institutions and colleagues, which would reveal a scandal as threatening to democracy as anything Trump has said or done. “Imagine if they subpoena Fusion GPS’s emails,” said a veteran Washington reporter, “there are going to be lots of journalists in there who’ve taken stories from them. Big names, senior figures in the field. It will look like an apocalypse.”

FBI used the dossier to get a FISA warrent but cant verify its contents

>FBI has not verified Trump dossier (WashEx)
https://archive.fo/RxGXi

>FBI and Justice Department officials have told congressional investigators in recent days that they have not been able to verify or corroborate the substantive allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign outlined in the Trump dossier.

…

>August 24, 2017 subpoena from the House Intelligence Committee to the FBI and Justice Department asked for information on the bureau's efforts to validate the dossier. Specifically, the subpoena demanded "any documents, if they exist, that memorialize DOJ and/or FBI efforts to corroborate, validate, or evaluate information provided by Mr. Steele and/or sub-sources and/or contained in the 'Trump Dossier.'"

>According to sources familiar with the matter, neither the FBI nor the Justice Department has provided documents in response to that part of the committee's subpoena. But in face-to-face briefings with congressional staff, according to those sources, FBI and DOJ officials have said they cannot verify the dossier's charges of a conspiracy between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.

THIS IS IMPORTANT - They were asked to provide info on how they vetted the dossier and so far they have supplied no information.

Until they do so there is no evidence that they did anything to vet the dossier before doing this:

>FBI used dossier allegations to bolster Trump-Russia investigation (CNN)
https://archive.fo/t1seP

>The FBI last year used a dossier of allegations of Russian ties to Donald Trump's campaign as part of the justification to win approval to secretly monitor a Trump associate, according to US officials briefed on the investigation.

The FISA on Manafort is MUCH worse than you think.

>US government wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman (CNN)
https://archive.fo/E2Tyo

>US investigators wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort under secret court orders before and after the election, sources tell CNN, an extraordinary step involving a high-ranking campaign official now at the center of the Russia meddling probe.

>The government snooping continued into early this year, INCLUDING A PERIOD when Manafort was known to talk to PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP

Related: James Clapper - 'It's possible' that Trump's voice was picked up by Manafort wiretap (WashEx)
https://archive.fo/Opzxb

>A secret order authorized by the court that handles the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) began after Manafort became the subject of an FBI investigation that began in 2014. It centered on work done by a group of Washington consulting firms for Ukraine's former ruling party, the sources told CNN.

>The surveillance was discontinued at some point last year for lack of evidence, according to one of the sources.

>The FBI then restarted the surveillance after obtaining a new FISA warrant that extended at least into early this year.

>Sources say the second warrant was part of the FBI's efforts to investigate ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives. Such warrants require the approval of top Justice Department and FBI officials, and the FBI must provide the court with information showing suspicion that the subject of the warrant may be acting as an agent of a foreign power.

So they got top Justice and FBI approval
Using the dossier:
>FBI used dossier allegations to bolster Trump-Russia investigation (CNN)
https://archive.fo/t1seP
When they could not and still have not been able to verify it:
>FBI has not verified Trump dossier (WashEx)
https://archive.fo/RxGXi

Carter Page was Wiretapped via FISA as well
>Court Approved Wiretap on Trump Campaign Aide Over Russia Ties (NYT)
https://archive.fo/ItMXc

>The Justice Department obtained a secret court-approved wiretap last summer on Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser to Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign, based on evidence that he was operating as a Russian agent, a government official said Wednesday.

Again, that evidence was the dossier:
>FBI used dossier allegations to bolster Trump-Russia investigation (CNN)
https://archive.fo/t1seP

And that "EVIDENCE" was UNVERIFIED
>FBI has not verified Trump dossier (WashEx)
https://archive.fo/RxGXi

Now the NYT continues to say this comedy gold
>The Justice Department considered direct surveillance of anyone tied to a political campaign as a line it did not want to cross

BUT THEY LET MANAFORT GET WIRETAPPED BEFORE AND AFTER THE ELECTION WHILE HE WAS IN COMUNICATION WITH TRUMP

>US government wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman (CNN)
https://archive.fo/E2Tyo

>The government snooping continued into early this year, INCLUDING A PERIOD when Manafort was known to talk to PRESIDENT Donald Trump

>James Clapper: 'It's possible' that Trump's voice was picked up by Manafort wiretap (WashEx)
https://archive.fo/Opzxb

>Did Susan Rice Lie, Again? (National Review)
https://archive.fo/6ptgX

>Nunes asserted that he’d seen evidence that Obama administration officials had “unmasked,” or disclosed in intelligence reports, the identities of Trump officials who met or communicated with representatives of foreign governments and that “none of this surveillance was related to Russia.”
(Nunes transcript: https://archive.fo/9FaV5)

>Former national-security adviser Susan Rice was at the center of the storm, accused of making a vast number of unmasking requests. What was her response? On the very day of Nunes’s press conference she said, “I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today.”
(Video: https://youtu.be/sH0akjRDJsY)

>Over time, however, her story evolved. She later clarified that she was simply saying that she didn’t know “what reports Nunes was referring to.”
(https://archive.fo/j6ydB)

>In April she said she never did anything “untoward with respect to the intelligence” she received.
(https://archive.fo/gm62O)

>So, what was the truth? Did she “know nothing” or did she do nothing “untoward”? Those aren’t the same statements, and the differences matter.

>Let’s flash forward to yesterday (September 13)

>Former national security adviser Susan Rice privately told House investigators that she unmasked the identities of senior Trump officials to understand why the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates was in New York late last year, multiple sources told CNN.
(https://archive.fo/DT8ud)

>Back in March, Susan Rice wanted to win another news cycle. If she told the truth — that, yes, she had made unmasking requests — she might have given a floundering Devin Nunes a lifeline. So she pled ignorance. She claimed not to know things that she plainly and clearly knew in detail.

There was more than one unmasker, and Rice didn't unmask Flynn

https://archive.fo/BDZKC
>A Republican official familiar with deliberations by GOP lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee said that the names of two U.S. citizens who were part of Mr. Trump’s transition team have been unmasked in intelligence reports.

>One is Mr. Flynn and the other hasn’t been identified, said the official. The report involving Mr. Flynn documented phone conversations he had in late December with the Russian ambassador to the U.S.

>The official said Ms. Rice had requested the unmasking of at least one transition official—not Mr. Flynn—who was part of multiple foreign conversations that weren't related to Russia.

So who unmasked Flynn? Clapper said he made one unmasking request but said he could not comment further

https://archive.fo/abKie
>Sen. Chuck Grassley asked Clapper and Sally Yates if they had ever requested the unmasking of Trump, his associates, or members of Congress.

>Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, hesitated before answering.

>“Yes, in one case I did,” he admitted, but refused to give any more details.

>“I cannot discuss any further than that,” Clapper said.

>Yates said she never requested unmasking of Trump, his associates or members of Congress.

The other person who has come up in the unmasking story is Samantha Powers

>Samantha Power sought to unmask Americans on almost daily basis (FoxNews)
https://archive.fo/FxKqx

>In a July 27 letter to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said the committee had learned "that one official, whose position had no apparent intelligence-related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama Administration."
(https://archive.fo/4UUiz)
>The "official" is widely reported to be Power.

>During a public congressional hearing earlier this year, Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina pressed former CIA director John Brennan on unmasking, without mentioning Power by name.

>Gowdy: Do you recall any U.S. ambassadors asking that names be unmasked?

>Brennan: I don't know. Maybe it's ringing a vague bell but I'm not – I could not answer with any confidence.

>Gowdy continued, asking: On either January 19 or up till noon on January 20, did you make any unmasking requests?

>Brennan: I do not believe I did.

>Gowdy: So you did not make any requests on the last day that you were employed?

>Brennan: No, I was not in the agency on the last day I was employed.

>Brennan later corrected the record, confirming he was at CIA headquarters on January 20. "I went there to collect some final personal materials as well as to pay my last respects to a memorial wall. But I was there for a brief period of time and just to take care of some final – final things that were important to me," Brennan said.

>Previous U.N. ambassadors have made unmasking requests, but Fox News was told they number in the low double digits.

It appears Powers is the fall girl.

>Trey Gowdy: Samantha Power testified that intel officials made 'unmasking' requests in her name (WashEx)
https://archive.fo/72oUe

>Tuesday evening, Gowdy told Fox News that Power told his committee that she was not the official requesting that unmasking in every case.

>"I think if she were on your show, she would say those requests to unmask may have been attributed to her, but they greatly exceed by an exponential factor the requests she actually made," Gowdy said.

>"So, that's her testimony, and she was pretty emphatic in it," he added. "The intelligence community has assigned this number of requests to her. Her perspective, her testimony is, they may be under my name, but I did not make those requests."

>"So, we've got to get tot he bottom of that," Gowdy said. "If there is someone else making requests on behalf of a principal in the intelligence community, we need to know that because we're getting ready to reauthorize a program that's really important to the country, but also has a masking component to it."

>Gowdy was referring to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Pressure is building on Congress to reauthorize that language, but Republicans are wary of doing so, in part because of the suspicion that the Obama administration unfairly unmasked people, including those on President Trump's transition team.

>>109548
Very good writeup and still much I have to read (only looked at a few of the links). Also much to take in, so I'll address your last posts because they are fresh in my mind…

I really hope they have more evidence to pin on people higher up and that the trail don't stop at Powers. But I guess they did enough to isolate themselves. If all requests was verbal and she blindly followed "because it was for the greater good" or some shit like that she probably will have to take the fall. She can claim someone told her to get the information, but she was the one requesting it. And no matter how she spins it she passed classified information on to another party that wasn't privy or had properly requested the information. She can't explain why she needed the information and I can't see how she is allowed to pass that information on to someone else without clearing it with CIA first.

How will the public react when this is released?

>>109557
Hard to tell. It will destroy the world view of many leftists and make them disillusioned and prone to lash out because they will not allow themselves to believe it. So there will be many that will scream about this being a coup and take to the streets. How many of the leftists that will join them I think depends on how hard the leftist media will push that narrative, or if they will report the real news. But there will be turmoil I think, because there is groups like Antifa and the like that will cease the moment in an attempt to start chaos because all is lost so they have nothing to loose. Remember most of them actually believe Trump is literally Hitler.
On the right I think it will be shock that this went on and lots of "Oh My God". And also anger towards what they tried to and did to the country and the world. Also joy that they get to see Hillary go to prison.
I myself will smile from ear to ear and it will be the biggest news story of the ages and I will follow it like no other. The live coverage from the court will be a spectacle like no other. I think actually the only way to conduct a real trial will be in Gitmo. If they tried to run the case in any courthouse in the US it would be shut down by demonstrators in no time. Leftists would come from all over the country and the world to "Shut it down".

tl;dr; It will be leftist anger, centrists WTF, right leaning glee and the country and world will watch it all as the trials are carried out in Gitmo

See >>109355 →

Also the NSA will have the texts, all of them.

"These people are STUPID"

Nice summary… let me add in Google:
http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/24/crowdstrike-five-things-everyone-is-ignoring-about-the-russia-dnc-story/
https://www.crowdstrike.com/resources/crowdstrike-closes-100-million-financing-round-led-google-capital/

>>109647
Crowdstrike still havnt taken much damage on thus but they should

https://archive.fo/9lK7Y
>Some critics say CrowdStrike’s evidence for blaming Russia for the hack is thin. Members of Congress say they still believe Russia was responsible but wonder why the DNC has never allowed federal investigators to get a look at the key piece of evidence: the server. Either way, a key “witness” in the political scandal consuming the Trump administration remains beyond the reach of investigators.

https://archive.fo/tbbDu
>Not only did Crowdstrike choose to quote improbably high losses estimated by a Pro-Russia analyst, we know have confirmation from Ukraine’s MOD that (1) those figures were wrong, (2) Crowdstrike’s reason for the losses were wrong, and (3) Crowdstrike’s spread of false information caused harm.

A lot of the basis for assuming that Russia hacked DNC is due to the malware used.
>Crowdstrike, along with FireEye and other cybersecurity companies, have long propagated the claim that Fancy Bear and all of its affiliated monikers (APT28, Sednit, Sofacy, Strontium, Tsar Team, Pawn Storm, etc.) were the exclusive developers and users of X-Agent. We now know that is false.
>ESET was able to obtain the complete source code for X-Agent (aka Xagent) for the Linux OS with a compilation date of July 2015. [5]
>If both a security company and a hacker collective have the X-Agent source code, then so do others, and attribution to APT28/Fancy Bear/GRU based solely upon the presumption of “exclusive use” must be thrown out.

>>109556
They never would have released the dossier if they didnt have to justify the spying they had already done. Even on that front there is some confusion

>http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/358828-there-is-nothing-normal-about-the-fusion-gps-dossier

>Marc Elias, the lawyer for the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, lying about any involvement with the dossier for more than a year with great sanctimony, as The New York Times pointed out.

>If it were normal opposition research, there’s nothing to be ashamed of, no need to lie about it, unless you know the work product is highly questionable and might actually raise questions as to why the Clinton campaign and the DNC were funding the spread of Kremlin-sourced misinformation.

>Also not normal: the hiring of a foreign national, Christopher Steele, a former MI6 agent, who readily admits he sought former contacts from his days working the Russia beat for Great Britain.

>Curiously, however, Steele filed documents this spring in British court stating that the Trump dossier was never to have been made public. Again, not “normal” for opposition research; the point is to make such information public, bringing facts from the past to remind people what someone said or did.

Did you know Buzzfeed subpoenad the DNC in their lawsuit for libelling that Russian dude in the dossier?
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/06/dnc-subpoenaed-in-dossier-lawsuit-steele-trump-russia/

So they are kind of all over the place and disorganised

>>109669
>So they are kind of all over the place and disorganised

It is an intrinsic part of lying that the narrative can't hold together when compared with reality.

Flynn's judge recused himself, likely for being on the FISA court that spied on Flynn
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/07/federal-fisa-judge-recuses-himself-from-michael-flynn-case/

This is the new Judge.

Judge orders State Dept. to work on recovering emails, suggests Clinton violated policy
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/20/judge-orders-state-to-work-with-fbi-on-clinton-email-investigation.html

Federal Judge Threatens To Hold IRS Commissioner, DOJ Lawyers in Contempt of Court over Lerner
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/federal-judge-threatens-to-hold-irs-commissioner-doj-lawyers-in-contempt-of-court-over-lerner/

He seems pretty based:

>"Judge Sullivan is the judge who held federal prosecutors in contempt, dismissed an unjust indictment against a United States Senator, and publicly excoriated the Department of Justice. He also had the moral conviction, courage and gumption to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Justice Department and the individual prosecutors."

http://observer.com/2014/06/breaking-meet-emmet-sullivan-irs-judge-who-once-sicced-a-special-prosecutor-on-doj/

Hopefully Flynn tries to take back his plea

Recent news:

>Justice Department reopens Hillary Clinton email investigation (http://archive.is/mAoCD)
>The Justice Department has launched a new inquiry into whether the Clinton Foundation engaged in any pay-to-play politics or other illegal activities while Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State (http://archive.is/WalT6)
>Comey’s original Clinton memo released, cites possible violations (http://archive.is/afNSf)
>Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley says Comey leaked “at least one” classified memo to a professor friend (http://archive.is/0s9Wt)
>Judge allows House panel to subpoena Fusion GPS's financial records (http://archive.is/YwY4B)
>GOP senators request criminal investigation of Trump dossier author (http://archive.is/lxT2S)
>DOJ deal gives Nunes access to ALL documents and witnesses sought in Russia probe (http://archive.is/Jg5nQ)

Claims from "high-ranking FBI official" that FBI discussed physical harm to President >>109708 →

Couple things came out today

1. Mueller interviews Comey again
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/former-fbi-director-james-comey-questioned-by-robert-mueller/article/2646834

2. Mueller interviews Sessions (i suspect the comey interview was cover for this)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-russia-investigation-jeff-sessions-robert-mueller-questions-probe-attorney-general-campaign-a8174196.html

3. James Rybicki/COS to FBI Director Wray quits
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fbi-director-wray-replaces-comey-era-chief-of-staff-holdover/article/2646839

Democrats and FBI want to look at Nunes' Memo
https://archive.fo/c8SDY
WASHINGTON—A fight is intensifying over a memo that its Republican authors say describes abuses by U.S. intelligence agencies in probing Russian election interference, as Democrats and law-enforcement officials demand additional access to the document and the classified intelligence underpinning it.
A senior Democrat on Tuesday requested that all members of the House Judiciary Committee be granted access to the intelligence that the memo was based on. A day earlier, the Federal Bureau of Investigation said it had not been granted access to review the memo’s contents by the House Intelligence Committee.
The four-page document has been made available to all House members; some GOP lawmakers have been calling for the memo to be released to the public.
The document, written by GOP staff of the House Intelligence Committee, raises concerns about the way the Justice Department used information from Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence official, in its application for secret court orders and warrants during the 2016 campaign, according to people who have seen the document.
Mr. Steele in 2016 produced a 35-page dossier of raw, unverified intelligence alleging connections between President Donald Trump and Russians. The president has repeatedly dismissed the allegations. Senior U.S. intelligence officials summarized the findings in a two-page addendum to a classified briefing given to Mr. Trump before he took office a year ago.
According to the people who have seen the document, it is drawn from highly classified material concerning surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the bedrock law authorizing spying on suspected foreign agents. The process of obtaining a FISA warrant is one of the most highly-guarded secrets in U.S. intelligence.
Democrats say the document is a partisan attempt to discredit the FBI and, ultimately, special counsel Robert Mueller’s criminal investigation into Russia’s links to Trump associates during the campaign. Democrats also note that while hundreds of lawmakers have now read the memo, only a handful of senior lawmakers of both parties have seen the FBI material on which the document was based.
“They’ve invited a whole bunch of members to view a highly biased and inaccurate summary of some extremely classified intelligence that none of these members will ever be able to look at. The result will be rumors, mischaracterizations and lies at the expense of the FBI,” said Rep. Jim Himes, a Democrat on the Intelligence committee.
Conservatives in recent days have been pushing for the release of the memo on social media, saying it would back up their assertion that law-enforcement officials were biased against Mr. Trump.
“The reality is that if the memo were damaging to the republicans the democrats would have leaked it by now,” Donald Trump Jr. wrote on Twitter Friday.
One senior Democrat who has see most of the FBI materials on which the memo is based said on Tuesday that the paper was a “conspiracy theory” concocted by Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, a California Republican. Mr. Nunes served on the Trump transition team and previously stepped down from leadership of the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia probe after questions about his handling of classified information were investigated by the House Ethics Committee. He was cleared of any wrongdoing by the panel.
“You and I have had the opportunity to review many of the documents that the intelligence committee claims are the basis for its memo,” wrote Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat and the party’s senior representative on the Judiciary committee, in a letter to his Republican counterpart on the panel.
Mr. Nadler called for the Judiciary Committee leadership “to make those documents available to our full Committee membership and to mitigate the damage done by Chairman Nunes and others.”
The FBI also has been pushing for access to the document.
“The FBI has requested to receive a copy of the memo in order to evaluate the information and take appropriate steps if necessary. To date, the request has been declined,” a spokesman for the bureau said.
A spokesman for Mr. Nunes didn’t respond to a request for comment, but many Republicans on Capitol Hill say that the material contained in the document alarmed them and that it should be released publicly.
“The memo has now been made available to all members of Congress. I’ve read it. And it is disturbing,” said Rep. Ted Poe, a Texas Republican. “I think it ought to be declassified and let the public have access to it.”

>>109718
No disrespect but i will wait for a better source although i would not be suprised if it were accurate

lol

Your move Nunes

>>109767
Yeah! Awesome.
>wonder what excuse the Democrats will use for the memo not being released

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/955947841826033665

We have an informant

>>109797
I thought we weren't doing rumours. ;) Just kidding.

>>109797
Nice

>>109806
I wouldnt really call it a rumor when you have a congressman saying it happened

https://twitter.com/repmarkmeadows/status/956008110270877696

Mega salt in the replies

>THREAD–explaining the context around the Peter Strzok/Lisa Page text messages, and why they're connected to both the Hillary investigation and this so-called "Russian-collusion" investigation

>Remember the key figure here: Peter Strzok, the former deputy of counter-intelligence at the FBI. Guy who ran the 2016 Clinton investigation, who interviewed key witnesses including Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin, and Hillary Clinton. Former Mueller team member. Strzok is the guy here

>We have all these anti-Trump texts in 2016 from Peter Strzok, talking about an "insurance policy" in case Trump gets elected President. We have texts from Strzok to Lisa Page saying "We can't take the risk" Trump wins the Presidency. By itself, that's a huge problem.

>But there's more. We now have a text between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, FBI agents, directly talking about the pressure to finish the Hillary Clinton investigation–a text which occurred right after Donald J. Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee

>We have a text from May 4, 2016 where Peter Strzok says: “Now the pressure really starts to finish MYE…” (or 'Mid-Year Exam,' the FBI’s code name for the Clinton investigation.) May 4, 2016 is important–because it's when Ted Cruz dropped out. That day, Trump was the nominee.

>So we have Peter Strzok, the deputy of FBI counter-intelligence and lead Clinton investigator, who we already know blasted Trump in text messages, talking about the need to end the Clinton investigation… right after he knew Hillary would be running against Trump. Major problem.

>Now pause, and circle to FBI Director Comey. Remember Director Comey's exoneration letter? The letter from 2016 that, at first, called Hillary Clinton "grossly negligent" but was mysteriously changed to "extremely careless"? That change is massively important.

>Remember, "gross negligence" under the "reasonable person standard" is a crime. "Extreme carelessness" is not, however. That change is hugely significant. Had Dir. Comey called Hillary "grossly negligent" in his letter, he would've essentially been saying she committed a crime.

>Now take that letter change, and go back to Peter Strzok. We have email documentation that suggests the "gross negligence" claim in Director Comey's exoneration letter was changed to "extremely careless" between May 4, 2016 and May 6, 2016… by none other than Peter Strzok.

>Think about how important that is. We have a text from Peter Strzok talking about the pressure to end the Clinton investigation, and then–within 48 hours–documents suggesting Peter Strzok changed Dir. Comey's letter from criminal charges to just "carelessness." That's major.

>Folks, this stinks to high heaven. If this is anything what it looks like–the FBI changing course on investigation, putting their thumb on the scale to undermine Donald Trump and essentially help Hillary Clinton–that is as wrong as it gets. This demands further investigation.

>And remember, this doesn't even address a host of other questions! The dossier. The Carter Page FISA application (that they still won't show us). The 5 months of mysteriously "missing" Page/Strzok texts. The FBI communicating with Fusion GPS/DNC-hired Christopher Steele. Come on.

>This is not party politics. This is not partisan bickering. This is an issue that gets at the very heart of who we are as a nation. If any officials at the FBI were engaged in this kind of behavior, we need to know.

>Bottom line: tell us the truth. Tell us the truth about what happened with the Clinton investigation, the 2016 election, and leading up to this "collusion" investigation. All of it. Americans deserve the truth.

>>109917
Full image version

>>109917
Best Twitter reply ever:
>Listen carefully to the voices. They're telling you to delete your account

>>110240
Will Obama sail under the "presidential immunity" or is he eligible for jail/hanging?

Watergate + "red scare" = The Storm.

>>110252
Anon i dont think this has ever happened before.
Your guess is as good as mine

>>110363
Amazing video.
>wonder how many leftist will be redpilled by watching it

A TIMELINE OF TREASON: How the DNC and FBI Leadership Tried to Fix a Presidential Election [Updated]
https://directorblue.blogspot.com/2017/12/a-timeline-of-treason-how-fbi.html

>>110588
Checked. Source?

>>110588
>>110590
Okie Dokie Lokie :)

https://youtu.be/WsPZXi6Vd3U