So many articles on the failure of the most cherished proREgressive memes...renewable energy, economy, and the obamunistic love of koranderthalism.
Video: Iranian Official Confesses Regime Aided Travel of 9/11 Hijackers
A top Iranian official recently admitted the Islamic Republic aided passage of jihadists behind the 9/11 terror attack on New York City’s World Trade Center.
Mohammad-Javad Larijani, a foreign policy official in Iran’s judiciary, told state-run media on May 30 that al-Qaeda militants were granted free travel through the country and were not required to have their passports stamped.
According to the Daily Caller, Larijani said:
Our government agreed not to stamp the passports of some of them because they were on transit flights for two hours, and they were resuming their flights without having their passports stamped. However their movements were under the complete supervision of the Iranian intelligence.
The unprecedented interview marks the first time Iran admitted to its role in the attacks.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the architect of the 9/11 terror attack, previously alleged several highjackers transited through the Islamic Republic to Afghanistan because Saudi passports were rarely stamped.
Obama and his puppet master, Jarrett should be tried and hanged for treason for its support for Iran.
More stories to come...
(Note: link contains internal links)
Admission That Iran Facilitated 9/11 Provides Perspective on Obama’s Collusion
The admission that Iran facilitated 9/11 provides context for Barack Obama’s pandering to America’s most vociferous enemy, which he took to perfidious extremes:
• He threw cold water on an uprising against the regime in 2009, in stark contrast to his avid support for the revolution in Egypt that replaced U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak with our vehement enemy the Muslim Brotherhood.
• He illegally sent the ayatollahs pallets of cash as a reward for kidnapping Americans.
• His nuclear deal with Iran was an abomination that freed up $150 billion for Iran to spend on its terror war against the West.
• He allowed the terror group Hezbollah to smuggle cocaine into the USA at the request of Iran.
• While brazenly lying to the public about it, he tried to get U.S. banks to launder money for Iran in violation of sanctions.
• His administration secretly assured European countries that there would be no consequences if they violated sanctions too.
Robert Spencer is correct when he writes, “In a sane political environment, Barack Obama would be tried for treason.” After all, Iran has been at war with the USA since 1979; this war has claimed numerous American casualties through the years.
Now Iranian officials admit that Iran facilitated 9/11 by assisting al Qaeda:
Mohammad-Javad Larijani, an international affairs assistant in the Iran’s judiciary, disclosed in Farsi-language remarks broadcast on Iran’s state-controlled television that Iranian intelligence officials secretly helped provide the al Qaeda attackers with passage and gave them refuge in the Islamic Republic, according to an English translation published by Al Arabiya. …
The remarks represent the first time senior Iranian officials have publicly admitted to aiding al Qaeda and playing a direct role in facilitating the 9/11 attacks.
The 9/11 Commission had already concluded that Iran helped bring about the deadliest terror attack in U.S. history. Now this has been confirmed, as has Obama’s status as our worst president.
Robert Mueller has had little luck finding collusion with our rival Russia. Maybe Washington should investigate a more serious matter: collusion with our sworn enemy Iran.
When politicians speak of "good paying green energy jobs", they only mean a small handful. It don't take much labor to run a windfarm or solar field.
More jobs equal lower pay to keep the consumer from overpaying for power and less jobs mean more pay for the same reasons. If power cost is too high, we move to lighting via LED's and consume less anyway, which decreases the need for the labor to produce power.
Good paying green energy jobs? That's a farce and someone is watching too much 'Star Trek'...
Fired FBI Official Discovers Former Employer Sucks at Transparency
After being fired by the attorney general in March, a former top FBI official requested records from the bureau citing the federal freedom of information law. However, he was quick to discover that the agency he led for a brief period last year isn’t really that into transparency or the rule of law after all.
Andrew McCabe, who was the acting FBI director following the firing of James Comey last year, filed a lawsuit against the bureau on Tuesday after it failed to produce a slew of records requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The FBI and the Justice Department proved less than cooperative.
McCabe was fired by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in March after stepping down as the FBI’s deputy director in late January. In April, the Justice Department Inspector General’s Office (OIG) concluded that McCabe had violated agency rules by allowing subordinates to share details about an ongoing FBI probe with reporters.
Citing a public-interest exception, McCabe has said he allowed officials to speak with reporters to correct a false narrative being reported to protect the FBI’s institutional reputation. He has denied the allegations contained in the OIG report, claiming he was misunderstood, and later alleged his firing was politically motivated.
In a complaint filed Tuesday with the D.C. District Court, McCabe criticized the FBI over its “continuing pattern and practice of violating the proactive disclosure requirements of FOIA and applicable regulations.” McCabe has sought access to several documents that may be relevant to his own firing, such as internal policies for FBI-media interaction, and argued that some should have been made automatically public years ago.
In regards to FOIA, the FBI is notoriously noncompliant. Often it takes absurd amounts of time to gain access to FBI records, even when their disclosure is clearly of public interest. Several years to process legitimate, non-exempt requests is not uncommon.
That a career FBI official of some 22 years had the occasion to gripe about the bureau’s lack of transparency and disregard for FOIA regulations is priceless—at least, to virtually anyone who’s battled the bureau for access to public records at any point over the past several decades.
NSA Nate @NSANate
Not so fun when you're on the outside, is it.
“I’m glad Mr. McCabe is recognizing how difficult it is to get records from the FBI under FOIA,” said Adam Marshall, an attorney at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “I hope he has a greater appreciation for the tireless efforts of journalists who face similar difficulties in gathering information to inform the public.”
“I wonder how much the FOIA process would improve,” Marshall added, “if federal employees had to rely on it to get the records they need to do their job.”
McCabe’s aforementioned FOIA requests seek access to a wide range of FBI documents, a majority of them unclassified manuals and policy directives; the FBI Manual of Administrative Operations and Procedures; its media relations policy; and the FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, to name a few.
“I profoundly identify with Mr. McCabe’s frustration and welcome him to the family with open arms,” FOIA attorney Dan Novack told Gizmodo.
In particular, the McCabe complaint argues the FBI has habitually violated FOIA’s subsection (a)(2), which requires federal agencies to continuously and proactively disclose records that should be made available to the public, even before someone asks to see them.
Although it’s debatable whether the FBI ever took heed, federal agencies were at least advised by DOJ in 2009 to “systematically post information online in advance of any public request.” “Providing more information online reduces the need for individualized requests and may help reduce existing backlogs,” the department wrote.
The push to increase the minimum wage for entry level jobs looks to reduce the number of jobs available:
Copied from AOS.
McDonald's To Begin Equipping Stores with Self-Ordering Kiosks, 1000 Per Quarter, Until All Human Order-Takers Are Replaced by 2020 —Ace of Spades
This doesn't just make economic sense. It makes customer-service sense, too. With the country no longer insisting or even urging a proficiency in English (even among native English speakers), the most frustrating part of any visit to McDonald's is the lengthy back-and-forth with an order-taker trying to get them to understand the words that have come out of your mouth.
It's easy enough just to push buttons. Double quarter pounder with cheese, Hold Pickles, Hold Bun. Not that difficult for customers to figure out. You don't have to be a genius to push big buttons that correspond with the food you want to buy.
A tight labor market (Thanks, Trump!) plus the leftists' demands that even the most menial, unskilled labor positions be paid a minimum of $15 per hour makes this inevitable.
The Fight for $15 has been proclaimed a success everywhere it brought about an increase in the minimum wage but, as almost anyone could have predicted, the end result is going to be more automation and, probably, fewer jobs. I'm saying "probably" fewer jobs because the official word from McDonald’s and other chains is that they aren’t necessarily cutting staff just reassigning them to other jobs in the restaurant. What jobs exactly? That's never been entirely clear. No doubt there will always be one person on hand to take orders but it could come down to just one person there to help people use the kiosks.
As the industry leader, this move is likely to get any competitors who were still on the fence moving in the same direction. Already, Wendy's, Shake Shack, and Subway have suggested they are making similar moves.
I imagine McDonald's will avoid immediate cuts to staff but will let the staffs attrit naturally without hiring replacements for the now-redundant order-takers.
Annony Mouse's Link
Comey, who should go right to friggin’ jail, the TOP DAWG INVESTIGATOR in THE UNITED STATES, who claims he didn’t know Weiner was married to Abedin, was using unsecured gmail accounts to conduct government business!!!
If you or I were being investigated by the FBI, they’d know what brand cereal we preferred. But James Comey, who was supposedly investigating Hillary Clinton, didn’t know her top aide was married to a disgraced congressman.
Wow, he really dug deep. And then he says “no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case against Hillary,” leaving off the part “because if the top FBI guy is doing it, it can’t be illegal, can it?”
Truly zeidanic logic ;o)
CFP: Why is no one asking this question?
Are the tens of thousands of National Archives records destroyed by the former Obama administration a cover up for the corruption of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential election and removal of every scrap of truth that the RussiaGate investigation is a total fabrication?
How was it even possible for tens of thousands of key records of the Obama administration to go missing from the National Archives?
The United States is a nation not a movie.
But if it were a movie, it would be one we’ve seen before. The records are missing, and although the perps have been identified, they’re getting to skate off, scott free.
National Archivist David Ferriero admits tens of thousands of records have gone missing. Respected founding Times Book publisher Thomas H. Lipscomb reported on the story to RealClearPolitics last Sunday. The mainstream and social media yawned.
Most significantly: Why did no one sound the alarm on the missing records until after the horse was well out of the barn?
Anyone would have to admit the sheer audacity of this grand larceny is breathtaking in scope.
This time the perps didn’t need need paper shredders, tons of trucks or Sandy Berger’s socks.
Here’s how they were able to get away with it.
“The former president, it must be noted, signed a law that put electronic communications under the 1950 Federal Records Act. However, it doesn’t seem that his practice is quite what he preaches. (Western Journal, June 11, 2018)
“Lipscomb wrote that “the accumulation of recent congressional testimony has made it clear that the Obama administration itself engaged in the wholesale destruction and ‘loss’ of tens of thousands of government records covered under the act as well as the intentional evasion of the government records recording system by engaging in private email exchanges.” MORE HERE
Annony Mouse's Link
All roads lead to Obama.
“Yesterday’s report from the IG also reveals President Obama was one of 13 people who had direct contact with Hillary Clinton on her private email address,” Fox News’ Tucker Carlson said Friday. “Back in 2015, the then-president claimed he only learned of the private address when it became known to the public. That apparently was a lie.”
“The most damning revelation, I think you just nailed it, is that Barack Obama receiving emails from Hillary Clinton’s personal, not state.gov account, which she didn’t have,” Bongino said on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on Friday.
The White House Communications Agency had to “whitelist” Clinton’s email address, Bongino said, as it is the office responsible for the president’s communications.
“In other words, somebody had to tell WHCA ‘hey, put that personal email address in Barack Obama’s phone,'” Bongino continued. “Who told them?”
continued at link
From the link:
"...In fact, the overlooked bombshell of the report is the inspector general's confirmation that classified information contained in Clinton's emails was in fact compromised by foreign intelligence services, and that Clinton had recklessly emailed President Barack Obama using her unsecured personal email from the territory of a hostile foreign adversary..."
Former President Barack Obama’s cybersecurity czar confirmed Wednesday that former national security adviser Susan Rice told him to “stand down” in response to Russian cyber attacks during the 2016 presidential campaign.
Michael Daniel, whose official title was “cybersecurity coordinator,” confirmed the stand-down order during a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing held to review the Obama and President Donald Trump’s administrations’ policy response to Russian election interference.
Rice’s order to Daniel was first reported in “Russian Roulette,” a book published in March that details Russia’s meddling in the election.
In the book, authors Michael Isikoff and David Corn reported that Daniel was developing strategies to respond to Russian cyber attacks on U.S. companies and political campaigns. He proposed using what’s known as denial of service attacks to take down Russian propaganda news sites and to attack Russian intelligence agencies. (more at link)
Remember Anthony Weiner, also known as “Carlos Danger” — the former congressman who kept texting people pictures of well, umm, that part of his name? It all made quite the splash because he is married to Hillary Clinton’s consigliere and constant sidekick, Huma Abedin.
Turns out that Anthony was such a perp — and so enthralled with his own — that he was sexting with a minor. That is a federal offense carrying up to 10 years in prison. So, he got raided by the New York Police Department and the New York office of the FBI.
They seized his laptop computer. It would have been bad enough if it had only had contained all his porn. But it posed a huge problem for the FBI, DOJ and Mrs. Clinton.
Comey had already exonerated Hillary of her blatant Espionage Act violations and obstruction of justice violations two months before — in time for her to wrap up the election they all expected and wanted her to win.
Peter Strzok and the Trump-hating key players in the Clinton email “investigation” were already well into crafting and leaking the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.
Then, the unthinkable happened.
Only a few hours after the New York office of the FBI took possession of the Weiner laptop, on September 26, 2016, the FBI computer expert discovered it contained more than 140,000 emails involving Hillary Clinton. They were from multiple domain names: State.gov, Clintonemail.com, ClintonFoundation.org, HillaryClinton.com and Blackberry devices. The agent had what he told the inspector general was an “oh shit moment” — recognizing that he had found evidence important to the most important investigation — and he immediately reported it up the chain.
According to the inspector general’s report of June 14, specifically Chapters IX-XI, the treasure “trove” of emails covered Mrs. Clinton’s entire tenure as Secretary of State.
We already knew that President Barack Obama was emailing her on her unsecure server at Clintonemail.com, and Cheryl Mills had written an email noting how “obvious” it was to anyone that this was not State.gov and therefore unsecure. The president jolly-well knew it was not a secure communication as he used an alias.
This was a gargantuan problem for the FBI and for Mrs. Clinton. Other people knew about it, too.
Indeed, according to the inspector general, 39 high-ranking FBI agents knew of it, along with the New York office and people in the New York U.S. Attorney’s office. The New York FBI informed them all during a secure video-conference on September 28 — chaired by Andrew McCabe.
One agent said the announcement of finding hundreds of thousands of Clinton emails on Weiner’s laptop was “like dropping a bomb in the middle of the meeting.”
The New York agent Sweeney followed up with two calls to McCabe later that evening — after McCabe did not call him as promised.
So . . . what did McCabe, Comey and Strzok do? They sat on it until police officers in New York and FBI agents in New York threatened to expose them.
They declared they weren’t going to prosecute her, twice, but couldn’t possibly have looked at all the emails they recovered from the Weiner laptop which encompassed all the emails from Clinton, including the mysteriously missing ones that she never turned over that were under subpoena. When will we see those?
Via Daily Caller:
The Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Hillary Clinton have a HUGE Weiner problem that is even bigger than we first realized.
According to the recently released inspector general report, on September 28 and 29, 2016 the New York office of the FBI immediately reported to the Washington headquarters its discovery of, first, 141,000 and then 350,000 emails on the laptop of Anthony Weiner — also known as “Carlos Danger,” a now-convicted sex offender. Mr. Weiner is the husband of Hillary Clinton’s inseparable aide Huma Abedin.
Now we know by October 4, the New York office had found 700,000 emails. The New York agents had seen and reported to FBI leadership they had seen email headers, all domain names, Mrs. Clinton’s initials on one sensitive but not classified document, and the missing BlackBerry backups.
The New York agents described it as the “entire file” of all Hillary Clinton emails from 2006 until 2016, including the BlackBerry messages that Comey himself had referred to as “the golden emails.”
Did a change in leadership sway the decision?
Via The Hill:
A federal district judge ruled Thursday that the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) violates the Constitution, countering a January ruling from a federal appeals court.
Judge Loretta Preska of the Southern District of New York ruled that the CFPB’s creation as an independent agency with a director that could only be dismissed for wrongdoing was unconstitutional.
In January, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the CFPB’s structure was constitutional, reversing a 2016 verdict issued by a panel of the court’s judges. The appeals court’s initial opinion, written by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, sought to fix the issue by ruling that the CFPB director could be fired at will.
Preska, an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush, concurred with part of the D.C. appellate court’s initial ruling against the CFPB, which held that the agency “is unconstitutionally structured because it is an independent agency that exercises substantial executive power and is headed by a single Director.”
She ruled that the entire section of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act that established the CFPB should be stricken, and she dismissed the CFPB from the case, which was filed in May 2017 by then-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D). Preska did not issue an order to shut down the bureau.
Acting CFPB Director Mick Mulvaney last month sought to protect the agency’s involvement in its case against RD Legal Funding, which was initiated by his predecessor, Richard Cordray. The suit claims that RD Legal scammed both survivors of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and former NFL players battling the effects of severe concussions out of monetary compensation for their injuries.
While the CFPB is now dismissed from the lawsuit, Preska ruled that New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood (D), who replaced Schneiderman in May, could pursue the case against RD Legal under Dodd-Frank.
Thursday’s ruling raises the likelihood that the Supreme Court will take up the issue of the CFPB’s constitutionality in an upcoming term. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals will also hear a challenge to the CFPB’s constitutionality, and a ruling against the bureau could force the high court to reconcile the conflicting opinions.
The CFPB was created by Dodd-Frank to crack down on predatory lending, enforce consumer protection laws and police the financial services industry against unfair, deceptive and abusive practices.
The bureau was designed and staffed primarily by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) when she served as a special adviser to former President Obama before her 2012 election to the Senate.
Before getting to the new news, let's review what we know about "FBI Attorney 2" and "Agent 5."
A House Republican Tuesday unmasked two of the five FBI investigators cited in the recently released inspector general’s report for expressing anti-Trump and pro-Clinton sentiment in work-related instant messages.
The previously unnamed FBI officials -- "FBI Attorney 2" and "Agent 5" -- are Kevin Clinesmith and Sally Moyer, respectively, according to House Oversight Committee member Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), who revealed their identities over the objection of the FBI during a hearing on the IG's findings.
The two were assigned to the bureau's Hillary Clinton email investigation, according to the IG's report, while Clinesmith also later worked as a top lawyer on the Trump-Russia investigation and the special-counsel probe.
...
Horowitz testified that the FBI was withholding the names of the other rogue agents from Congress and the public because "they work on counterintelligence" and can't be exposed.
But Meadows argued that both Clinesmith and Moyer work for the FBI's office of legal counsel, and are no longer in "counterintelligence," as the FBI claimed.
"They don’t work in counterintelligence," Meadows said in an exchange with Horowitz. "If that's the reason the FBI is giving, they're giving you false information, because they work for the general counsel."
Wait, wait, wait -- let me get this straight: The FBI is lying again?
I can't believe that.
Horowitz confirmed the two worked in that office, which was headed by Trisha Anderson, who also recently resigned. Anderson also worked closely with Strzok and was married to a top Obama White House official. FEC records show she gave political contributions to Obama.
Moyer, in an Oct. 28, 2016, instant message, said she was "sick" of Trump and later called his supporters "retarded." On Election Day, she said Clinton had “better win... otherwise i'm gonna be walking around with both my guns...and like quitting on the spot,” adding, “screw you trump.”
...
Meanwhile, Clinesmith lamented Clinton's loss the day after the election, messaging to several FBI employees, "I am numb." He added, "I am so stressed about what I could have done differently."
Clinesmith also expressed regret over the reopening of the Clinton email case on Oct. 28, 2016, arguing that it "broke the momentum" of Clinton’s campaign. He warned at the time that the belated move, which was pressured by leaks over the discovery of additional classified emails on the laptop of Clinton’s aide in New York, could initiate "the destruction of the republic."
After Clinesmith messaged another FBI employee that he was "just devastated" over Trump's unexpected victory, he launched into a rant: "I just can't imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress we made over the last 8 years. ACA is gone. Who knows if the rhetoric about deporting people, walls, and crap is true. I honestly feel like there is going to be a lot more gun issues, too, the crazies won finally. This is the tea party on steroids. And the GOP is going to be lost, they have to deal with an incumbent in 4 years. We have to fight this again. Also Pence is stupid."
Weeks later, the Russiagate investigator added, "Viva le resistance," signaling he planned to fight back against Trump.
So, if you wanted to make sure the George Papadopolous interview came out "right" -- like the Hillary Email investigation was rigged to come out "right" -- who would you turn to?
Mr. Viva Le Resistance, of course.
An FBI attorney who sent anti-Trump text messages -- including one calling for "resistance" against Trump -- took part in at least one interview last year with George Papadopoulos, the former Trump campaign adviser who has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.
The lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, was part of the FBI team that interviewed Papadopoulos on Feb. 16, 2017, a source familiar with the interview tells TheDCNF.
...
While Meadows, a close President Donald Trump ally, did not explicitly say that Clinesmith was FBI Attorney 2, The Daily Mail reported that he was.
Recall that Mark Meadows made another surprising claim during his questioning of IG Horowitz -- that there was "growing evidence" that FBI Interview Form 302s had been "edited and changed."
"I think the other thing that I would ask you to look into, there is growing evidence that 302s were edited and changed," Meadows said. "Those 302s, it is suggested that they were changed to either prosecute or not prosecute individuals. And that is very troubling."
I'm pretty sure this is Trump's fault.
Dem Chief Of Staff Tried To Expose Theft Ring On Capitol Hill, Was Met With Resistance
Good for her. Challenging the people behind this is a challenge.
Via Daily Caller:
Rep. Yvette Clarke’s deputy chief of staff came into the office on a Saturday in December 2015 and caught the New York Democrat’s part-time IT aide, Abid Awan, rummaging through the congresswoman’s work area with new iPods and other equipment strewn around the room, according to a House document and interviews with Hill staff.
Wendy Anderson told Abid to get out of the office, the document said. She told Capitol Hill investigators that she soon suspected Clarke’s chief of staff, Shelley Davis, was working with Abid on a theft scheme, multiple House staffers with knowledge of the situation told The Daily Caller News Foundation. They also said that Anderson pushed for Abid’s firing.
But Clarke did not fire Abid until six months after the congresswoman formally acknowledged that $120,000 in equipment was missing, records show — not until after House investigators independently announced a review that would potentially catch financial discrepancies. Even then, Anderson told investigators she believed another top staffer in Clarke’s office was subverting their efforts, a House staffer with knowledge of the investigation said.
Annony Mouse's Link
Lee Smith: The Seven Mysterious Attempts to Infiltrate/Entrap Trump Campaign Associates —Ace of Spades
It's almost as if there were a covert operation against Trump, directed by high partisan officials of the US government.
Here's the first approach, and the second.
I have long found it very interesting that one man with connections to Western intelligence attempted to "incept" George Papadoplous with the claim that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton, and then another man with connections to Western intelligence then arranged, for some reason, to meet with Papadopolous and extract this same information from him.
Then this information was fed to the US government, and used as the basis for opening an investigation.
Almost as if this was all a set-up.
Also, note the very interesting detail near the end.
The first approach appears to have occurred on April 24, 2016. Over breakfast in a London hotel, a Maltese academic named Joseph Mifsud allegedly told George Papadopoulos, a volunteer adviser with the Trump campaign, that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton. According to the Mueller team's charges against Papadopoulos, the information potentially damaging to Clinton was "in the form of thousands of emails."
As RCI previously reported, Mifsud denies having said anything about emails. It's not clear what information regarding Clinton, emails, or Russia he may have mentioned to Papadopoulos. According to the same indictment, Mifsud was believed to have "substantial connections to Russian government officials." However, as RCI has previously reported, the bulk of Mifsud's network consisted of Western, mostly British and Italian, intelligence officials, diplomats, and politicians.
...
Papadopoulos never mentioned Clinton emails to anyone in the campaign. But over a drink at a London bar, he told Australia's high commissioner to the United Kingdom, Alexander Downer, that the Russians had some potentially damaging information on Clinton.
Downer, according to an interview in the Australian press, had asked for the meeting with the then 28-year-old Trump aide. Like Mifsud, Downer was an associate of several former high-ranking British intelligence officials. Downer also had long ties to the Clinton Foundation, once arranging for Australia to donate $25 million to its AIDS prevention and education efforts.
Downer's was the second approach made to the Trump campaign. Congressional investigators believe that Downer may have been assigned to collect whatever damaging information that the Maltese academic deposited with Papadopoulos.
Shortly after the meeting, Downer contacted the U.S. Embassy in London to report his conversation with an American citizen. This was unusual. As Australia's former foreign minister, a post charged with overseeing the country;s foreign intelligence service, Downer knew that such information must be shared through official intelligence channels. The person he instead chose to share this information with was Elizabeth Dibble, the U.S. Embassy's deputy chief of mission who had previously served under Hillary Clinton as the principal deputy assistant secretary of state.
It is unclear whether Dibble passed the information directly to the DOJ or to her superiors at the State Department. In any case, nearly two months passed before the FBI launched its full investigation into Trump/Russia ties -- and another 18 months would pass before it was leaked to the New York Times that that decision was a response to the Downer tip.
The reasons for the two-month delay are not clear. Dibble did not respond to request for comment. Nor did DOJ spokespersons.
A lot of this stuff involves Hillary's State Department cronies.
FBI Agent, Who Exposed Hillary Clinton's Cover-up, Found Dead
One of the comments the lined story does make one consider...especially what has been found in the investigations of the DOJ and FIB.
"...As previously reported Raynor's wife, Donna Fisher, was also found dead at the scene and is part of this implausible "murder suicide". An autopsy will be completed to determine the exact cause of death according to police. However, expect nothing out of this fiasco ... autopsy reports are routinely fixed in coverups..."
I wouldn't trust hilary even is she was deported to Mars. However, how do they know that he was shot before he was stabbed? Maybe she shot him, then stabbed him, then shot herself.
I just don't think hilary is competent enough to have this vast array of people who are willing and able to pull off so many killings and then keep them covered up by multiple local LE agencies.
OTOH, if you have ever testified against her or planned to, better watch you back.
A group of Republican lawmakers have requested Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein hand over the names of every individual working on special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe.
The seven GOP lawmakers told Rosenstein they are “disturbed” by the perceived anti-Trump bias demonstrated by FBI agent Peter Strzok and attorneys Lisa Page and Kevin Clinesmith — previous members of Mueller’s team. They are asking for the names of every staffer working on the probe — previous and current — over concerns “there may be more politically biased investigators.”
“We know that these biases were shared among multiple people at the FBI and could be easily uncovered by Mr. Mueller with simple vetting,” the Congressmen wrote the Justice Department’s second-highest ranking official. “These individuals should not have been given an opportunity to influence – directly or indirectly – this special counsel investigation.”...
Paul Sperry reports at RealClearInvestigations — the investigative reporting affiliate of trusted polling aggregator RealClearPolitics — that the FBI is refusing to allow members of Congress to review intelligence that alleges Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch interfered in the Hillary Clinton email investigation:
The FBI had little problem leaking “unverified” dirt from Russian sources on Donald Trump and his campaign aides – and even basing FISA wiretaps on it. But according to the Justice Department’s inspector general, the bureau is refusing to allow even members of Congress with top security clearance to see intercepted material alleging political interference by President Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch.
That material – which has been outlined in press reports – consists of unverified accounts intercepted from putative Russian sources in which the head of the Democratic National Committee allegedly implicates the Hillary Clinton campaign and Lynch in a secret deal to fix the Clinton email investigation.
“It is remarkable how this Justice Department is protecting the corruption of the Obama Justice Department,” said Tom Fitton, president of Washington-based watchdog Judicial Watch, which is suing for the material.
Read the rest of the story at RealClearInvestigations.
Terry
Annony Mouse's Link
By Jeff Carlson
A quick update. Devin Nunes has sent a letter to Chairman Gowdy and Chairman Goodlatte.
In it, Nunes refers 17 highly recognizable names to the joint task force of the Committees on Oversight & Government Reform and the Judiciary for interviews.
Note that the names cut off at a certain political level. Below Sally Yates at DOJ and below Comey at FBI.
This is almost certainly by intent. Without the IG Report on FISA Abuse, it’s too early to move any higher.
As unsatisfying as this may be to some, I consider this to be a good start. Most of these individuals – but not all – have left their positions so enforcement will prove interesting.
The letter is as follows:
Dear Chairman Gowdy and Chairman Goodlatte:
The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (the Committee) is conducting an ongoing investigation of FISA abuse and other matters related to certain actions taken by officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Department of Justice (DOJ).
During this investigation, the Committee discovered matters that likely fall within the purview of the joint task force of the Committees on Oversight & Government Reform and the Judiciary that is conducting ongoing oversight relating to FBI and DOJ. I refer to your task force these current and former FBI and DOJ employees who may have relevant information:
Trisha Anderson, DOJ lawyer
James Baker, former FBI general counsel
Gregory Brower, former FBI congressional liaison
John Carlin, former head of the DOJ’s national security division
Kevin Clinesmith, FBI lawyer
Tashina Gauhar, DOJ official
David Laufman, former head of DOJ’s counterintelligence division
Andrew McCabe, former FBI deputy director
Mary McCord, former DOJ lawyer
Jonathan Moffa, FBI official
Sally Moyer, FBI lawyer
Bruce Ohr, former associate deputy attorney general
Lisa Page, former FBI lawyer
Joseph Pientka, FBI agent
E.W. “Bill” Priestap, assistant director of the FBI counterintelligence division
Peter Strzok, FBI agent
George Toscas, DOJ official
For the sake of transparency and to keep the American people as fully informed as possible about these matters, the task force should consider interviewing these individuals in an open setting.
This was clearly a coordinated and planned effort. I would add a few names but overall this is a solid beginning.
IG Report: Loretta Lynch-Bill Clinton Tarmac Meeting Was Planned Via Secret Service, FBI
The plot thickens.
Via BPR:
Stunning revelations from the IG report by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz suggests that the 2016 tarmac meeting between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton was coordinated — contradicting their claims that the meeting was accidental and coincidental.
In 2016, Lynch — the U.S. attorney general under Barack Obama — secretly met for 30 minutes with Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac in Arizona. At the time, then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was being investigated by the FBI over her 30,000 deleted emails and her destroyed government-issued phones, which she and her team smashed with hammers.
Several days after the tarmac meeting, the DOJ (which was headed by then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch) decided not to file any charges against Hillary for her unauthorized use of an unsecured, private email server to conduct government business and her mass-deletion of 30,000 emails.
Page 203 of the IG report suggests that Bill Clinton’s Secret Service detail had contacted Lynch’s FBI detail about their meeting when their planes were on the tarmac:
With all their info. And was replaced with a fake.
Via Daily Caller:
A secret memo marked “URGENT” detailed how the House Democratic Caucus’s server went “missing” soon after it became evidence in a cybersecurity probe. The secret memo also said more than “40 House offices may have been victims of IT security violations.”
In the memo, Congress’s top law enforcement official, Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving, along with Chief Administrative Officer Phil Kiko, wrote, “We have concluded that the employees [Democratic systems administrator Imran Awan and his family] are an ongoing and serious risk to the House of Representatives, possibly threatening the integrity of our information systems and thereby members’ capacity to serve constituents.”
The memo, addressed to the Committee on House Administration (CHA) and dated Feb. 3, 2017, was recently reviewed and transcribed by The Daily Caller News Foundation. The letter bolsters TheDCNF’s previous reporting about the missing server and evidence of fraud on Capitol Hill.
It details how the caucus server, run by then-caucus Chairman Rep. Xavier Becerra, was secretly copied by authorities after the House Inspector General (IG) identified suspicious activity on it, but the Awans’ physical access was not blocked.
By now everyone has reported about ABC journalist Brian Ross and his Producer Rhonda Swartz resigning from the network. However, almost everyone pointing back to Ross’s fake news report on Michael Flynn in December; and almost no-one is pointing out the more obvious motive for the resignation.
Brian Ross was almost guaranteed to be “Reporter 4” in the federal indictment of Senate former senior senate intelligence committee staffer James Wolfe. The notorious Senate Intelligence “leaker”.
CTH originally pointed this out when the details of the indictment were released (full pdf below), and research was possible to determine each reporter. It did not come as a surprise to see the staff from this specific committee leaking secret and top-secret classified information. The committee rots from the head down.
According to the indictment Wolfe was notified by the FBI of a classified intelligence leak investigation on/around October 30th, 2017. From the indictment we see that Wolfe was interviewed and confronted by FBI investigators on December 15th, 2017. After admitting he lied to those FBI investigators Wolfe resigned from his position.
On December 15th, 2017 Wolfe was busted; the FBI had him dead-to-rights. However, the grand jury proceedings didn’t start until May 3rd, 2018; and the indictment was sealed until June 7th, 2018. That means six months of investigative work was taking place between busting Wolfe on Dec. 15th, and indicting Wolfe on June 7th.
On December 15th, according to the indictment, the FBI investigators were aware of four specific journalists, “reporters”, who participated in the leak material. The FBI likely had more to choose from, but selected those four reporters -with specific intents and purposes- during the interview with Mr. Wolfe. The four reporters are not named, but their activity is outlined enough to make it possible to determine who is who.
From the indictment [Note Male-1 is Carter Page]:
Reporter #1 is likely Manu Raju of CNN. Reporter #2 is definitely Ali Watkins of New York Times. Reporter #3 is likely Marianna Sotomayor of NBC Reporter #4 is likely Brian Ross of ABC
Accepting there has been a great deal of work on the leak investigation; and accepting the purpose therein; the Wolfe indictment appears strategic in that it captures four of the largest media outlets within the net. Four mainstream media enterprises are now on notice. With more than six months of investigation, and with the timing of the indictment becoming public, it’s likely the FBI leak task-force caught more than just Wolfe.
Wolfe is simply the first to be identified. Suspicion: Wolfe will likely lead to Dan Jones.
On December 15th, with the evidence and admissions therein; and specifically noting the FBI showed Mr. Wolfe photographic evidence (he was also under physical surveillance); James Wolfe opened the door to an investigative path that was almost certainly followed. In essence, anyone in contact with Wolfe would now be inside the investigative review.
[*Side-note* Consciousness of Guilt – On the day before this December 15th interview, Reporter #2 Ali Watkins (NYT), announced she would no longer be covering the Senate Intelligence Committee.]
This is important because Wolfe wasn’t arrested until six months after he was clearly busted. Within this time-frame other people would be under investigation.
The FBI would be able to use the information gathered from Wolfe, and exploit his compromise, for search and surveillance warrants on other participants within his contact circle. The investigators would not want the downstream participants to know.
(continued at link)
It’s difficult for me to give any credit to Sessions. He’s been disappointing so far in his tenure.
This thread seems to think the plea deal was simply a way to get a trial for Awan outside of the swamp.
This has not become draining the swamp, but pumping out the septic system.
Strzok Failed His Polygraph Yet Retained Security Clearance
What will the left’s spin be? MUELLER WILL NOT PRESENT COLLUSION EVIDENCE AT MANAFORT TRIAL
Mueller...adding more personnel, still groping and still got NUTHIN...
Justice Department documents released on Friday confirm that the DOJ attorney known as Robert Mueller’s “pit bull” arranged a meeting with journalists in April 2017 to discuss an investigation into Paul Manafort.
The documents show that Andrew Weissmann arranged a meeting with DOJ and FBI officials and four Associated Press reporters on April 11, 2017, just over a month before Mueller was appointed special counsel.
Manafort’s lawyers obtained the documents on June 29 and revealed them in a briefing filed in federal court in Virginia. The attorneys are pushing for a hearing into what they say are possible leaks of secret grand jury information, false information and potentially classified materials from the meeting.
“The meeting raises serious concerns about whether a violation of grand jury secrecy occurred,” a lawyer for Manafort, Kevin Downing, wrote in a motion requesting a hearing. “Based on the FBI’s own notes of the meeting, it is beyond question that a hearing is warranted.”
Manafort’s attorneys have for months questioned whether Weissmann, the number two official on the Mueller team, leaked information about Manafort to The AP. At the time of the meeting, Weissmann served as chief of the Justice Department’s criminal fraud section.
continued at link
Hillary was deemed careless.
Via Fox News:
The former Navy sailor pardoned by President Trump after serving a year in federal prison for taking photos of classified sections of his submarine filed a lawsuit on Monday against Obama administration officials, alleging that he was subject to unequal protection of the law.
In his federal lawsuit, filed in Albany, N.Y., Kristian Saucier alleges that the U.S. government was overzealous in prosecuting him mishandling classified information, while going easy on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for more serious violations of the same law.
Saucier’s lawsuit names as defendants former President Barack Obama, former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former FBI Director James Comey, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who led the inquiry into Clinton’s email account.
Saucier told Fox News he was scapegoated by Obama officials who found themselves under fire for not aggressively responding to Clinton’s handling of classified information through her private email servers.
“I could have just taken the pardon by President Trump and gone on with my life,” Saucier said to Fox News, adding that he feels an obligation to get to the truth of what he sees as a double standard that let Clinton get off scot-free.
“The U.S. Constitution clearly states that all citizens are born with inalienable rights to be free from persecution by the government,” Saucier said. “My conviction and subsequent sentence for a minor military infraction compared to the treatment of politically connected individuals is a glaring example of a violation of the rights of all Americans to have equal protection under the law.”
Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2018/07/state-response-to-foia-lawsuit-questions-atf-arms-export-criminality/#ixzz5KtxvK0wd Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook
“Did the State Department issue the Justice Department a license or a written waiver in order to allow for the transfer of thousands of weapons across the U.S.-Mexico border?” an internal Oct. 31, 2011 email anticipating questions for closed hearings with the full Senate and House asked (see pg. 10 of response, below).
“Under the Arms Export Control Act the Justice Department was required to receive a written waiver from the State Department to account for their intent to cause arms to be exported to drug cartels in Mexico.
“If no such waiver was received, Justice Department officials have violated the law,” the inquiry continued. “And you would agree with that, correct?”
If an answer was provided to those questions, it is not reflected in the 100 page June 29 response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed against State by attorney Stephen Stamboulieh representing Kent Terry, the brother of slain Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, and me. State’s response prior to this has been essentially non-responsive, to include material not asked for, copies of material already widely and publicly available, blank pages and copies of heavily-redacted documents where it’s impossible to tell who said what to whom.
This latest response, while hardly candid and comprehensive, offers glimpses of previously unseen internal concerns, and the question of Arms Export Control Act violations goes to the heart of what our FOIA was attempting to determine. It actually, and for the first time, officially discusses concerns raised in July 2011:
“Did Fast & Furious violate the Arms Export Control Act?” attorney and author David T. Hardy asks on his Of Arms and the Law blog. He’s referring to the Arms Export Control Act that “authorizes the President to define defense articles and regulate their export.”
There’s no exemption from the State Department permit requirement for “official use” since no one is admitting walked guns are part of approved U.S. foreign policy, so the bottom line seems to be: Any person who willfully violates these provisions “shall upon conviction be fined for each violation not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.” Hardy also notes that U.S. Code also includes provisions for “principals” who “induce” or “willfully cause” offenses, so presumably those who did not physically walk guns but nonetheless induced lawbreaking could be in for a world of hurt if caught.
That understanding is reflected in another item appearing in State’s document production from the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs with the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (see pg. 40) “prepared for the Secretary’s upcoming budget testimony”:
When did the State Department find out about Fast and Furious, and what was the Department’s role? Were you aware that Operation Fast and Furious was part of Project Gunrunner?
Put another way, what did Hillary Clinton know and when did she know it? If the answer is she knew, then where are the authorizing documents and why was the ATF attaché to Mexico kept in the dark and told to “stand down” (see pg. 36 of Joint Staff Report) when he found out? If the answer is Clinton did not know and no such authorizing documents exist, why have charges not been filed against ATF officials as “principals” who “induced” or “willfully caused” offenses?
Also of direct interest to the FOIA inquiry is an email forwarded by Kevin M. O’Reilly at State (see pg. __ of response) reporting on an Amnesty International-backed letter to the president by that, among other things, recommended:
“Expand the reporting rule for assault weapons that is currently in effect for the border state” and “Ratify the Arms Trade Treaty recently approved by the UN General Assembly.”
O’Reilly’s inclusion is relevant because requests for communications involving him have met repeated dead ends over the years. He was the National Security Council North American Affairs Director, with a White House office, who got information from the Phoenix SAC about gun running operations along with the disclaimer “You didn’t get this from me.”
They moved O’Reilly out of country to a State Department position in Iraq when House Oversight initially wanted to talk to him, he declined though his lawyer to speak with the Office of Inspector General, and finally, Barack Obama’s White House Counsel told Oversight and Judiciary they were not going to allow O’Reilly to speak with them. Why?
That’s part of what we’re trying to find out, and despite specifically asking, State’s latest response continues to avoid the issue.
A lot of noise has been made in recent months about the Department of Justice giving up more Fast and Furious documents to the House Oversight Committee. Those documents will not address any of this, because no one else has been asking about the issues raised in our FOIA.
Until such time as someone with power and reach gets serious about going after lawbreaking officials on criminal charges for an operation with an untold (and still accumulating) death count, all we will continue to hear is noise. No one will be held truly accountable.
BREAKING REPORT: Top Hillary Aide Huma Abedin Gave False Statements to FBI Agents in 2017 Interview
Bluff Called: Speaker Ryan Plans to Hold Vote on Bill to Abolish ICE, Infuriating Democrats
Democrats sponsoring the bill now say they’ll vote against it.
Three House Democrats are ticked at House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) because he plans to bring their ‘abolish ICE’ legislation to the floor for debate and vote.
They’re the ones who introduced the bill, but if Paul schedules the bill, they claim the Republicans are avoiding the issue.
The left has made abolishing ICE a rallying point and is actively pushing Congress to do something.
Democratic Reps. Mark Pocan (WI), Pramila Jayapal (WA), and Adriano Espaillat (NY) introduced a bill on Thursday to do just that. The bill states that within 30 days of passage, Congress shall establish and convene the Commission to Study and Establish a Fair and Humane System of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” The Commission will then identify the “essential functions of ICE” and then “[D]etermine the most effective means of ensuring that all immigration enforcement functions transferred to other Federal agencies.”
Ryan criticized the bill. From CNN:
“They have really jumped the sharks on the left,” Ryan said. “This is the agency that gets gangs out of communities, that helps prevent drugs from flowing into our schools, that rescues people from human trafficking. They want to get rid of this agency?”
“It’s the craziest position I’ve ever seen,” Ryan continued. “And they are just they are tripping over themselves to move too far to the left. They are out of the mainstream of America. And that is one the reasons why I feel very good about this fall.”
Facebook Twitter YouTube RSS Feed
HOME QUICK TAKES COLLEGE CARTOONS FORUM ABOUT TAGS DONATE
Bluff Called: Speaker Ryan Plans to Hold Vote on Bill to Abolish ICE, Infuriating Democrats Comments Permalink Posted by Mary Chastain Friday, July 13, 2018 at 5:00pm
Democrats sponsoring the bill now say they’ll vote against it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_LxIq6nXes
Three House Democrats are ticked at House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) because he plans to bring their ‘abolish ICE’ legislation to the floor for debate and vote.
They’re the ones who introduced the bill, but if Paul schedules the bill, they claim the Republicans are avoiding the issue.
The left has made abolishing ICE a rallying point and is actively pushing Congress to do something.
Democratic Reps. Mark Pocan (WI), Pramila Jayapal (WA), and Adriano Espaillat (NY) introduced a bill on Thursday to do just that. The bill states that within 30 days of passage, Congress shall establish and convene the Commission to Study and Establish a Fair and Humane System of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” The Commission will then identify the “essential functions of ICE” and then “[D]etermine the most effective means of ensuring that all immigration enforcement functions transferred to other Federal agencies.”
Ryan criticized the bill. From CNN:
“They have really jumped the sharks on the left,” Ryan said. “This is the agency that gets gangs out of communities, that helps prevent drugs from flowing into our schools, that rescues people from human trafficking. They want to get rid of this agency?”
“It’s the craziest position I’ve ever seen,” Ryan continued. “And they are just they are tripping over themselves to move too far to the left. They are out of the mainstream of America. And that is one the reasons why I feel very good about this fall.”
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) announced later in the day that leadership intends to bring the bill to the floor. He said the Democrats want to “have a debate about it” and that’s what will happen.
The Democrats get their way so they must be happy, right?
Nope! They’re throwing a hissy fit and the three lawmakers now say they will vote NO on their own bill. From The Hill:
“We know Speaker Ryan is not serious about passing our ‘Establishing a Humane Immigration Enforcement System Act,’ so members of Congress, advocacy groups, and impacted communities will not engage in this political stunt,” the Democrats said in a joint statement.
“If Speaker Ryan puts our bill on the floor, we plan to vote no and will instead use the opportunity to force an urgently needed and long-overdue conversation on the House floor,” it continued. “We will discuss the thousands of families still separated by President Trump’s cruel zero-tolerance policy, the 800,000 young people whose lives have been thrown into turmoil by the President’s decision to end DACA, and the abuses carried out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
Continued at link
