FBI Still Corrupt? What’s Up Wray?


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Posted September 22, 2020

 

If Americans actually elect the perpetuation of Obama/Crooked Hillary/Biden corrupt government on November 3, 2020; those Americans deserve the despotism that will be in their future! Trump should win if sane voters outnumber the insane. Pending a Trump reelection, FBI Director Christopher Wray should be fired. It is becoming more and more apparent that Wray is as crooked a cop as his predecessor James Comey. Comey crimes are still being covered up by Wray. WHY? It smells of swamp stench to me.

 

Here is a Gateway Pundit and a video from Tracy Beanz (H/T uncoverdc.com) on FBI corruption – and NO WRAY CLEANUP!

 

JRH 9/22/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee, that includes immune boosting products.

****************************

FBI Agent Who Uncovered Weiner Laptop with Hillary’s Emails says FBI Leadership Told Him to Erase All of His Findings

 

By Joe Hoft

September 21, 2020 at 7:30am

The Gateway Pundit

 

John Robertson

 

John Robertson, was an FBI Agent who investigated crimes against children.  This is how he stumbled upon Hillary Clinton’s emails.

 

We first reported on Robertson in August of 2018 when the mainstream media was focused on the Trump Russia Mueller sham investigation.

 

John was assigned to the Anthony Weiner case, a top Democrat married to Hillary Clinton adviser Huma Abedin. During his investigation of Weiner’s computer John discovered thousands of Hillary Clinton emails and blew the whistle on the Comey-McCabe and Strzok cover-up of evidence.

 

Yesterday the Washington Examiner reported:

 

“The crickets I was hearing was really making me uncomfortable because something was going to come down,” Robertson said he later told Justice Department investigators. “Why isn’t anybody here? Like if I’m the supervisor of any [counterintelligence] squad … and I hear about this, I’m getting on with headquarters and saying, ‘Hey, some agent working child porn here may have [Hillary Clinton] emails. Get your ass on the phone, call [the case agent], and get a copy of that drive,’ because that’s how it should be. And that nobody reached out to me within, like, that night, I still to this day don’t understand what the hell went wrong.” Robertson wrote a “Letter to Self” in late October after an Oct. 19, 2016, meeting, during which he implored Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Kramer of the Southern District of New York to push FBI leadership to look at the thousands of emails he had unearthed.

 

“I have very deep misgivings about the institutional response of the FBI to the congressional investigation into the Hillary Clinton email matter … Put simply: I don’t believe the handling of the material I have by the FBI is ethically or morally right. But my lawyer’s advice — that I simply put my SSA on notice should cover me — is that I have completed CYA [Cover Your Ass], and I have done so,” Robertson wrote. “Further, I was told by [Kramer] that should I ‘whistleblow,’ I will be prosecuted.”

 

Robertson continued: “I possess — the FBI possesses — 20 times more emails than Comey testified to. … While Comey did not know at the time about what I have, people in the FBI do now, and as far as I know, we are being silent. … If I say or do nothing more, I am falling short ethically and morally. And later, I may be accused of being a Hillary Clinton hack because of the timing of all this. … But if I say something (i.e., whistleblow), I will lose my reputation, my career, and risk prosecution. I will also be accused of being a Donald Trump hack.”

 

The Daily Mail reports on Robertson saying:

 

The only advice from his bosses was to erase his office computer, which meant leaving no record of his investigations, a new book says.

 

Charles Ortel, who’s an expert on the corruption within the Clinton Foundation believes that there were a number of Clinton Foundation emails on the Weiner laptop:

 

 

Others believe that what was found on the Weiner laptop was shocking, we reported on this in August 2018 as well.  In late 2016 shortly before the 2016 election on November 4th, 2016, Erik Prince, founder of Blackwater, was on Breitbart radio and he said shocking things about Weiner’s emails –

 

Prince claimed he had insider knowledge of the investigation that could help explain why FBI Director James Comey had to announce he was reopening the investigation into Clinton’s email server last week.

 

“Because of Weinergate and the sexting scandal, the NYPD started investigating it. Through a subpoena, through a warrant, they searched his laptop, and sure enough, found those 650,000 emails. They found way more stuff than just more information pertaining to the inappropriate sexting the guy was doing,” Prince claimed.

 

“They found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times,” he said.

 

“The amount of garbage that they found in these emails, of criminal activity by Hillary, by her immediate circle, and even by other Democratic members of Congress was so disgusting they gave it to the FBI, and they said, ‘We’re going to go public with this if you don’t reopen the investigation and you don’t do the right thing with timely indictments,’” Prince explained.

 

“I believe – I know, and this is from a very well-placed source of mine at 1PP, One Police Plaza in New York – the NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants and the additional arrests they were making in this investigation, and they’ve gotten huge pushback, to the point of coercion, from the Justice Department, with the Justice Department threatening to charge someone that had been unrelated in the accidental heart attack death of Eric Garner almost two years ago. That’s the level of pushback the Obama Justice Department is doing against actually seeking justice in the email and other related criminal matters,” Prince said.

 

Prince shared that the NYPD kept a copy of all the emails on Weiner’s computer, and the following –

 

Prince agreed, but said, “If people are willing to bend or break the law and don’t really care about the Constitution or due process – if you’re willing to use Stalinist tactics against someone – who knows what level of pressure” could be brought to bear against even the most tenacious law enforcement officials?

 

We still don’t know what happened to the Weiner emails.  We now know that Robertson did a CYA to protect himself.  The American people deserve to know what was on the laptop and in those emails.

 

Joe Hoft is the twin brother of TGP’s founder, Jim Hoft. His posts have been retweeted by President Trump and have made the headlines at the Drudge Report. Joe worked as a corporate executive in Hong Kong and traveled the world for his work, which gives him a unique perspective of US and global current events. He has ten degrees or designations and is the author of three books. His new book: ‘In God We Trust: Not in Lying Liberal Lunatics’ is out now – please take a look and buy a copy.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

VIDEO: The Weiner Laptop Emerges Again: FBI Agent Speaks

Posted by Tracy Beanz

120K subscribers – Sept 20, 2020

 

Original Thread: https://twitter.com/tracybeanz/status/985526771557814273

New Thread: https://twitter.com/tracybeanz/status/1307675664884158468

Abedin: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1118147754595966977.html

Telegram- The library: https://t.me/The_Library_II

 

MORE TO READ

______________________________

FBI Agent Who Uncovered Weiner Laptop with Hillary’s Emails says FBI Leadership Told Him to Erase All of His Findings

 

© 2020 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

 

Judge Lambeth Orders Crooked Hillary Deposition


Judge Royce C. Lamberth rules Crooked Hillary must face an in-person deposition from Judicial Watch over her illegal mail server that corrupt FBI Director James Comey gave her a pass. Hopefully enough dirt is exposed in this deposition that not even Teflon Dem crooks have to face jury trials.

 

Below is the Fox News and Judicial Watch versions of the Crooked Hillary deposition news.

 

JRH 3/3/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

 

BLOG EDITOR (In Fascistbook jail since 1/20/20): I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

***************************

Federal judge orders Hillary Clinton deposition to address private emails: ‘Still more to learn’

 

By Ronn Blitzer

March 2, 2020

Fox News

 

A federal judge Monday granted a request from conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch to have former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sit for a sworn deposition to answer questions about her use of a private email server to conduct government business.

 

Clinton has argued that she has already answered questions about this and should not have to do so again — the matter did not result in any charges for the then-presidential candidate in 2016 after a high-profile investigation — but D.C. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth said in his ruling that her past responses left much to be desired.

 

“As extensive as the existing record is, it does not sufficiently explain Secretary Clinton’s state of mind when she decided it would be an acceptable practice to set up and use a private server to conduct State Department business,” Lamberth said.

 

The judge went on to recognize that while Clinton responded to written questions in a separate case, “those responses were either incomplete, unhelpful, or cursory at best. Simply put her responses left many more questions than answers.” Lamberth said that using written questions this time “will only muddle any understanding of Secretary Clinton’s state of mind and fail to capture the full picture, thus delaying the final disposition of this case even further.”

 

Lamberth even gave some examples of lingering questions about Clinton’s emails, such as how did she come to believe that her private emails would be preserved under normal State Department processes, who told her this and when, at what point did she learn department records management officials did not know about the server, “[a]nd why did she think that using a private server to conduct State Department business was permissible under the law in the first place?”

 

The ruling comes after Judicial Watch revealed at a December 2019 status conference that the FBI released “approximately thirty previously undisclosed Clinton emails,” and that the State Department “failed to fully explain” where they came from.

 

The State Department has been pushing for the discovery phase of the case to come to a close, but Lamberth said he is not ready to do so, saying that “there is still more to learn.”

 

Judicial Watch, which initiated this case in 2014, is looking for information regarding whether Clinton used her private email server to intentionally get around the Freedom of Information Act, whether the State Department acted in bad faith when they tried to settle the case years ago, and whether the department had adequately looked for records in response to Judicial Watch’s initial FOIA request.

 

Given that the settlement attempts and records search took place after Clinton left office, the judge ruled that the deposition should focus on whether she intentionally tried to use her private server to evade FOIA and her understanding of the State Department’s record management requirements.

 

Lamberth also granted Judicial Watch’s request to depose former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills, IT specialist Paul Combetta who was involved in deleting Clinton’s emails, as well as Brett Gittleson and Yvette Jacks, who were State Department officials familiar with Clinton’s private email server.

 

Judicial Watch also wanted to question Clinton and Mills about government talking points in the aftermath of the 2012 Benghazi attack. Lamberth said that while they “cannot be questioned about the underlying actions taken after the Benghazi attack,” they can face questions regarding “their knowledge of the existence of any emails, documents, or text messages related to the Benghazi attack.”

 

Fox News’ Bill Mears contributed to this report. 

++++++++++++++++++++++

Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Orders Deposition of Hillary Clinton on Emails and Benghazi Attack Records

 

Crooked Hillary JW Photo

 

Press Releases

March 02, 2020

Judicial Watch

 

Court: ‘It is Time to Hear Directly from Secretary Clinton’

 

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch today announced that U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth granted Judicial Watch’s request to depose former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about her emails and Benghazi attack documents. The court also ordered the deposition of Clinton’s former Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills and two other State Department officials.

 

Additionally, the court granted Judicial Watch’s request to subpoena Google for relevant documents and records associated with Clinton’s emails during her tenure at the State Department.

 

The ruling comes in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit that seeks records concerning “talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack” (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)). Judicial Watch famously uncovered in 2014 that the “talking points” that provided the basis for Susan Rice’s false statements were created by the Obama White House. This Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of the Clinton email system in 2015.

 

In December 2018, Judge Lamberth first ordered discovery into whether Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server was intended to stymie FOIA; whether the State Department’s intent to settle this case in late 2014 and early 2015 amounted to bad faith; and whether the State Department has adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request. The court also authorized discovery into whether the Benghazi controversy motivated the cover-up of Clinton’s email. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.” The State and Justice Departments continued to defend Clinton’s and the agency’s email conduct.

 

Judge Lamberth today overruled Clinton’s and the State and Justice Department’s objections to limited additional discovery by first noting:

 

Discovery up until this point has brought to light a noteworthy amount of relevant information, but Judicial Watch requests an additional round of discovery, and understandably so. With each passing round of discovery, the Court is left with more questions than answers.

 

Additionally, Judge Lamberth said that he is troubled by the fact that both the State Department and Department of Justice want to close discovery in this case:

 

[T]here is still more to learn. Even though many important questions remain unanswered, the Justice Department inexplicably still takes the position that the Court should close discovery and rule on dispositive motions. The Court is especially troubled by this. To argue that the Court now has enough information to determine whether State conducted an adequate search is preposterous, especially when considering State’s deficient representations regarding the existence of additional Clinton emails. Instead, the Court will authorize a new round of discovery

 

With respect to Clinton, the court found that her prior testimony, mostly through written sworn answers, was not sufficient:

 

The Court has considered the numerous times in which Secretary Clinton said she could not recall or remember certain details in her prior interrogatory answers. In a deposition, it is more likely that plaintiff’s counsel could use documents and other testimony to attempt to refresh her recollection. And so, to avoid the unsatisfying and inefficient outcome of multiple rounds of fruitless interrogatories and move this almost six-year-old case closer to its conclusion, Judicial Watch will be permitted to clarify and further explore Secretary Clinton’s answers in person and immediately after she gives them. The Court agrees with Judicial Watch – it is time to hear directly from Secretary Clinton.

 

“Judicial Watch uncovered the Clinton email scandal and we’re pleased that the court authorized us to depose Mrs. Clinton directly on her email conduct and how it impacted the people’s ‘right to know’ under FOIA,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

++++++++++++++++++

BLOG EDITOR (In Fascistbook jail since 1/20/20): I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

__________________________

Federal judge orders Hillary Clinton deposition to address private emails: ‘Still more to learn’

 

©2020 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

______________

Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Orders Deposition of Hillary Clinton on Emails and Benghazi Attack Records

 

© 2020 Judicial Watch, Inc.

Judicial Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions are received from individuals, foundations, and corporations and are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

 

Be Aware the Left Lies to Justify Means to a Deluded End


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

June 8, 2019

 

I am quite annoyed with the Dems and Left Stream Media doing their utmost to convict and/or impeach President Trump for crimes he did not commit. In that spirit here are some articles that provide a vastly different picture than the lies disseminated by the Left.

 

JRH 6/8/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

********************

EXCLUSIVE: Another Key Witness Noted Over 100 Times in Mueller Report, Felix Sater, Is a Clinton and Loretta Lynch Linked Deep State Spy

 

By Joe Hoft

June 7, 2019

The Gateway Pundit

 

Bill Clinton & Felix Sater

 

Felix Sater is a deep state Democrat with ties to the Clintons and the Mueller gang.  He’s mentioned over 100 times in the Mueller report but not one mention refers to these connections with Deep State Democrats.

 

In March, the far left and dishonest Democrat leader Adam Schiff announced that he had invited Felix Sater to provide a testimony before Congress.  Sater eventually did not testify as Schiff and his party realized that Sater’s testimony would be detrimental to their Russia-Collusion sham.

 

 

A few weeks before Schiff’s announcement on Sater, far Left Buzzfeed released another bogus report stating President Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen was following President Trump’s orders to lie about an unsupported story on Russia.

 

Mueller’s team in an attempt to prevent a leak investigation into its operations came out 24 hours later and said the story was false.

 

Now we know that the entire junk report was provided to Buzzfeed by Clinton and Mueller lackey, Felix Sater.

 

 

Paul Sperry reported that the individual behind the Buzzfeed fake news story lying about President Trump was none other than Sater, a deep state dirt-bag close to the Clintons and Mueller and his gang of crooks:

 

 

Sperry was right. Sater was seen in pictures with Bill Clinton – (see above). Sater has also been pictured with far left media reporters pushing the Trump-Russia collusion fairy tale:

 

Felix Sater with News

 

Most shocking is Sater’s connections to the Clintons and the Mueller gang of corrupt and criminal attorneys and investigators.

 

It was reported that Sater’s connections began in 1998 [emphasis added]:

 

Sater pleaded guilty to racketeering in December 1998. But instead of being sentenced, Sater, like 16 other defendants in the case, signed a cooperation agreement with the US government, and his entire case file was sealed.

 

Signing Sater’s cooperation agreement for the Department of Justice was Andrew Weissmann, then an assistant US attorney and now a key member of the special counsel’s team. Mueller himself would be the FBI director for most of the time Sater served as a source.

 

The US attorney who oversaw Sater’s pump-and-dump case was Loretta Lynch, later the attorney general under President Barack Obama. While the Senate was considering her confirmation, Sen. Orrin Hatch asked Lynch about how her office handled Sater’s fraud case. In a written response, she said:

 

“The defendant in question, Felix Sater, provided valuable and sensitive information to the government during the course of his cooperation, which began in or about December 1998. For more than 10 years, he worked with prosecutors providing information crucial to national security and the conviction of over 20 individuals, including those responsible for committing massive financial fraud and members of La Cosa Nostra. For that reason, his case was initially sealed.”

 

To the government, he was no longer Felix Sater; in public he was referred to as John Doe, while in hundreds of pages of FBI interview reports, his code name was “The Quarterback.”

 

None of this stopped the Mueller gang from using Sater as a material witness in their Russia collusion sham.

 

In the Mueller report Sater is mentioned in the text and footnotes more than 100 times!  The Mueller team introduces Sater in the report as a New York based real estate adviser:

 

In the late summer of 2015, the Trump Organization received a new inquiry about pursuing a Trump Tower project in Moscow. In approximately September 2015, Felix Sater, a New York based real estate advisor, contacted Michael Cohen, then-executive vice president of the Trump Organization and special counsel to Donald J. Trump.

 

Not once in the Mueller report does the Mueller gang refer to Sater’s connections with the Clintons, Loretta Lynch or with Andrew Weissmann, the suspected drafter of the Mueller report. 

 

Today John Sullivan from the Hill released information that another key witness referred to as a Russian is not even Russian:

 

In Mueller’s report, Ukrainian businessman, Konstantin Kilimnik — the so-called Russian who Paul Manafort shared internal polling data with (gasp) isn’t a Russian, he’s actually as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters, reported Solomon.

 

It looks like Kilimnik is not the only source the Mueller team used to frame President Trump!

 

The entire Clinton-Mueller cabal is coming undone. The Mueller Report is a joke as more and more lies are unveiled in the Democrats’ attempted coup to remove President Trump from office.

 

Hat Tip D. Manny

++++++++++++++++

Trump-Russia Hysteria: Oh Look, Another Glaring Omission In The Mueller Report

 

By Matt Vespa

Jun 07, 2019 6:10 PM

Townhall.com

 

Bob Mueller Source: AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

 

The House Democrats’ ongoing debate about whether to push for a full-blown impeachment proceeding may be dominating the news, along with President Trump’s visit to the UK, but the Mueller report isn’t going away, especially after more tidbits about the investigation itself are coming to light. Special Counsel Robert Mueller is gone. His investigation is over. And yet, we have stories about key witness’s child porn charges being ignored. The Federalist’s Sean Davis did not mince words. He feels that the Mueller report that debunked Russian collusion showed that the special counsel and his team of die-hard Democrats tried to prove that there was such a conspiracy. For two years, they dug and found nothing. Now, after being unable to give Democrats the impeachment ammunition the needed, Mueller, in his exiting presser, all but gave the green light to start such proceedings. It’s that presser that many saw this whole investigation as nothing more than a political hit job and a perversion of a basic tenet of our legal system: innocent until proven guilty. Granted, a lot of us already knew there was no collusion.

 

I mean after the 456th bombshell on this story that had zero evidence to back it up—because there was none—the writing was on the wall months ago. The liberal media continued to peddle it, however, because Trump Derangement Syndrome is real and the Left is desperate to get rid of the president. As for the FBI, well, did they even verify the Trump dossier that was compiled by ex-MI6 spy Christopher Steele and used reportedly as credible evidence to secure a FISA spy warrant against Carter Page, a former foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign? Based on these glaring errors in the report, don’t bet the mortgage on it. Also, the State Department knew this document, funded by the Democrats and the Clinton campaign, was biased political opposition research. John Solomon of The Hill has been doing excellent work tracking the sordid details of this investigation. So, while the focus is on the DOJ/FBI for their alleged misdeed with this investigation, the State Department could be yanked into this storm:

 

Donald Trump’s campaign, it sat buried for more than 2 1/2 years in the files of a high-ranking State Department official.

 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s written account of her Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with FBI informant Christopher Steele shows the Hillary Clinton campaign-funded British intelligence operative admitted that his research was political and facing an Election Day deadline.

 

And that confession occurred 10 days before the FBI used Steele’s now-discredited dossier to justify securing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA warrant to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and the campaign’s ties to Russia.

 

And now we have this omission about a Russian who was actually a State Department intelligence source, though he’s portrayed as some nefarious Kremlin operative working with Paul Manafort. Solomon detailed this “deception by omission” in a lengthy piece (via The Hill) [emphasis mine]:

 

In a key finding of the Mueller report, Ukrainian businessman Konstantin Kilimnik, who worked for Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, is tied to Russian intelligence.

 

But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel Robert Mueller possessed since 2018 — describe Kilimnik as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters.

 

Why Mueller’s team omitted that part of the Kilimnik narrative from its report and related court filings is not known. But the revelation of it comes as the accuracy of Mueller’s Russia conclusions face increased scrutiny.

 

[…]

 

Kilimnik was not just any run-of-the-mill source, either.

 

He interacted with the chief political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, sometimes meeting several times a week to provide information on the Ukraine government. He relayed messages back to Ukraine’s leaders and delivered written reports to U.S. officials via emails that stretched on for thousands of words, the memos show.

 

The FBI knew all of this, well before the Mueller investigation concluded.

 

Alan Purcell, the chief political officer at the Kiev embassy from 2014 to 2017, told FBI agents that State officials, including senior embassy officials Alexander Kasanof and Eric Schultz, deemed Kilimnik to be such a valuable asset that they kept his name out of cables for fear he would be compromised by leaks to WikiLeaks.

 

[…]

 

Three sources with direct knowledge of the inner workings of Mueller’s office confirmed to me that the special prosecutor’s team had all of the FBI interviews with State officials, as well as Kilimnik’s intelligence reports to the U.S. Embassy, well before they portrayed him as a Russian sympathizer tied to Moscow intelligence or charged Kilimnik with participating with Manafort in a scheme to obstruct the Russia investigation.

 

Kasanof’s and Purcell’s interviews are corroborated by scores of State Department emails I reviewed that contain regular intelligence from Kilimnik on happenings inside the Yanukovych administration, the Crimea conflict and Ukrainian and Russian politics. For example, the memos show Kilimnik provided real-time intelligence on everything from whose star in the administration was rising or falling to efforts at stuffing ballot boxes in Ukrainian elections.

 

Those emails raise further doubt about the Mueller report’s portrayal of Kilimnik as a Russian agent. They show Kilimnik was allowed to visit the United States twice in 2016 to meet with State officials, a clear sign he wasn’t flagged in visa databases as a foreign intelligence threat.

 

The emails also show how misleading, by omission, the Mueller report’s public portrayal of Kilimnik turns out to be.

 

For instance, the report makes a big deal about Kilimnik’s meeting with Manafort in August 2016 at the Trump Tower in New York.

 

By that time, Manafort had served as Trump’s campaign chairman for several months but was about to resign because of a growing controversy about the millions of dollars Manafort accepted as a foreign lobbyist for Yanukovych’s party.

 

Specifically, the Mueller report flagged Kilimnik’s delivery of a peace plan to the Trump campaign for settling the two-year-old Crimea conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

 

“Kilimnik requested the meeting to deliver in person a peace plan for Ukraine that Manafort acknowledged to the Special Counsel’s Office was a ‘backdoor’ way for Russia to control part of eastern Ukraine,” the Mueller report stated.

 

But State emails showed Kilimnik first delivered a version of his peace plan in May 2016 to the Obama administration during a visit to Washington. Kasanof, his former handler at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, had been promoted to a top policy position at State, and the two met for dinner on May 5, 2016.

 

[…]

 

So Kilimnik’s delivery of the peace plan to the Trump campaign in August 2016 was flagged by Mueller as potentially nefarious, but its earlier delivery to the Obama administration wasn’t mentioned. That’s what many in the intelligence world might call “deception by omission.”

 

Yeah, sounds like “deception by omission” indeed. I’ll let you debate among yourselves, but this sounds like another example that the Mueller team tried to twist the fact in order to prove that Trump-Russia myth was real. At the same time, while the staff was loaded with liberal Democrats, I see that as a positive. There was nothing to this investigation and that fact that only partisan lefties were digging and still found nothing only adds more credibility to the conclusion: no collusion. There’s no way to pivot away from this. No wonder why Attorney General Barr is investigating the investigators who conducted this circus.

 

+++++++++++++++++++

Judicial Watch: FBI Docs Show Notes about Meeting with Intelligence Community Inspector General about Clinton Emails are ‘Missing’ and CD Containing Notes Is Likely ‘Damaged’ Irreparably

 

JW Press Room

JUNE 07, 2019

Judicial Watch

 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the FBI released 277 pages of redacted records in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that show the FBI failed to produce information from an August 2015 meeting with Intelligence Community Inspector General about Hillary Clinton’s email server. The FBI claimed that notes are “missing” and the CD containing notes from meeting is likely “damaged” irreparably.

 

The records, which were posted on the FBI’s website, are the 32nd release of documents in response to  a Judicial Watch 2016 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:16-cv-02046). Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the Justice Department failed to comply with a July 7, 2016, FOIA request for:

 

  • All FD-302 forms prepared pursuant to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server during her tenure.

 

  • All records of communications between any agent, employee, or representative of the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding, concerning, or related to the aforementioned investigation. This request includes, but is not limited to, any related communications with any official, employee, or representative of the Department of Justice, the Executive Office of the President, the Democratic National Committee, and/or the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton.

 

  • All records related to the meeting between Attorney General Lynch and former President Bill Clinton on June 27, 2016.

 

Included in the documents are February 2019 FBI electronic communications documenting the damaged CD and the missing notes from the August 3, 2015, meeting between FBI special agents and the ICIG about Clinton’s server:

 

For reference, Special Agents (SAs) [redacted] have been gathering and copying materials from the captioned case located in the Washington Field Office (WFO) CI-13 Workbox in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) tasking from Information Management Division (IMD; formerly known as Records Management Division).

 

On or about February 6, 2019, SAs [redacted] opened [redacted]-CYBER-1A27, which contained a CD with a crack on it (a damaged CD). SA [redacted] attempted to copy the damaged CD at the WFO Computer Analysis Response Team (CART) self-service area, but was not able to do so. SA [redacted] spoke with FBI information technology specialists on the ground floor of WFO regarding the damaged CD, who indicated it was unlikely the CD could be copied.

 

The electronic communication regarding the missing “Notes from Meeting” says:

 

On or about February 4, 2016, Special Agents (SAs) [redacted] attempted to locate [redacted] 1A4, described as “Notes from Meeting” acquired by [redacted] (see referenced serial). The SAs looked through all case materials in the CI-13 file and workbox area, however they were not able to locate this item.

 

SA [redacted] inquired with Supervisory Intelligence Analyst (SIA) [redacted] regarding the item, as he was previously the IA assigned to the case. SIA [redacted] contacted [redacted] regarding the item, who indicated he remembered handing over his case notes to SA [redacted] (see attached email).

 

On February 6, 2019, SA [redacted] contacted SA [redacted] regarding the notes.  SA [redacted] explained he documented all relevant case materials before leaving the case and did not retain any notes or other case materials.

 

As such, WFO CI-13 considers the item missing and will enclose this document into 1A4 as a placeholder until the missing item is located.

 

The email referred to in the electronic communication on the missing “Notes from Meeting” reads as follows:

 

From: [Redacted]
To: [Redacted]
CC: [Redacted] [Redacted] [Redacted]
Subject: RE: MYE Serial #??
Date: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 10:43:14 AM

 

I actually remember turning over my original notes for the file for this (it was right at the beginning of the case). I gave them to [redacted] who was running the file then. The only question will be whether or not I kept a copy for myself. I’ll look and see what I have.

 

Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) said during a hearing with Strzok that in 2015 ICIG investigator Fred Rucker advised Strzok of an “anomaly” on Hillary Clinton’s emails going through the private server. The forensic analysis found that all of those emails except four – over 30,000 – “were going to an address that was not on the distribution list.” It was later reported that it was a “Chinese state-owned company” that hacked Clinton’s server. The ICIG referred the Clinton email investigation to the FBI on July 6, 2015, just under a month before the meeting for which the notes were “lost.”

 

The document production contains emails between Justin Cooper (the former close aide to Bill Clinton, who helped set up Hillary Clinton’s email system) and Huma Abedin regarding an attempted breach of the Clinton email server. On January 9, 2011, Cooper emailed Abedin: “I had to shut down the server Someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in i didnt [sic] want to let them have the chance to. I will restart it in the morning.” Despite Abedin’s having explicitly warned Sullivan and Mills that Clinton’s unsecure non-government server had been attacked, the documents contain handwritten FBI notes of Abedin’s 2016 FBI interview in which she told agents she didn’t recall any hacking attempts.

 

“The Obama FBI was frantic to target then-candidate Trump while magically losing or destroying important evidence in the sham investigation of Hillary Clinton’s illicit email system,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This new information underscores the need for a fresh, unbiased investigation into the Clinton email scandal.”

 

In a related case, Judicial Watch recently obtained documents from the DOJ showing that on August 5, 2016 – a month after Comey’s exoneration of Clinton – FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok and Jonathan Moffa were notified by a FBI assistant general counsel from the national security law branch that several FBI 302 interview reports were in need of processing:

 

Today [Redacted] brought over additional 302s from the WFO [Washington Field Office]. Are those supposed to go through the redaction process for production to DOJ on Monday? We’re trying to figure out what needs to be completed this weekend.

 

Page responded by writing to Strzok, Moffa and others that four FBI 302 reports of interviews related to the Clinton “Midyear Exam” investigation had never even been written:

 

[Redacted] to the best of my knowledge, yes they will when Pete identified for [redacted] the DOJ edits that needed to be made to the 302s [redacted] discovered that there were four (I think) 302s that had never been written. What I don’t know is whose 302s they are but unless Pete or Jon are able to respond in short order, I would throw them on the pile for redactions. Thanks so much.

 

Additionally, Judicial Watch recently filed a lawsuit against the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for details of a meeting with the FBI regarding national security threats associated with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s “private” email system.

 

+++++++++++++++++

“The Supreme Court will nix a House Impeachment”

 

By Mark Langfan, INN

June 7, 2019

Israpundit

 

President Donald Trump can and will successfully apply to the Supreme Court the moment the US House of Representatives passes any Impeachment resolution, if that occurs. Legal luminaries such as Professor Alan Dershowitz wrote an article positively treating President Trump’s Supreme Court Impeachment claims. Other constitutional scholars and articles have hysterically panned President Trump’s likely Supreme Court Gambit.

 

Both sides have referenced the 1993 impeachment case of “Nixon v. US” as their legal authority. No, not that “Nixon” as in President Richard M. Nixon of Watergate fame, but one Walter L. Nixon, Jr. a disgraced Federal judge who was actually convicted by a jury “beyond a reasonable doubt” of two separate counts of making false statements before a federal Grand Jury, and actually sentenced to prison.

 

Walter Nixon refused to “resign” his federal judgeship, and was collecting a federal judicial salary in prison. So, the government had to “impeach” him to stop his federal paycheck. The Judge Nixon Supreme Court majority’s legal reasoning is actually the very legal basis for President Trump’s applying to the Supreme Court, and defeating his Impeachment: not on the House “procedures” of Impeachment, but on the substance of the constitutional term of art “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

The Nixon v. US case involved claims by the then-Judge Nixon that the Senate’s impeachment “procedures” were somehow infirm, and therefore, the Senate’s finding him guilty of impeachment was infirm. The specific details of Judge Nixon’s claims about the Senate’s procedures aren’t really important for purposes of this article. What is important is that Judge Nixon only claimed the Senate’s impeachment procedures were infirm, not that the substance of the charges against him were somehow not “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Since, Judge Nixon was actually found guilty by a federal jury that he was “beyond a reasonable doubt” guilty of making false statements to a Federal Grand Jury, Judge Nixon’s actually adjudicated felony crimes clearly hurdled the definitional constitutional requirement of “high crimes.”

 

In President Trump’s case, President Trump will not seek the Supreme Court’s adjudication of a veto over the House’s impeachment procedures. Rather, President Trump will attack the likely legally lightweight factually alleged claims as not raising to the substantive level of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

And it is on the turn of the very question of Impeachment “procedure” as opposed to Impeachment “substance” that the Supreme Court, based on Nixon v US, will find the definitional substance of “high crimes and misdemeanors” “justiciable” and rule for President Trump, and void a House impeachment.

 

To understand the coming Trump v. House-based legal arguments better, one has to look a little deeper at the actual US Constitution itself. The key aspect of the US Constitution itself that will be determinative for a Trump v. House Supreme Court determination is not the Impeachment procedures that are empowered to the Congress in Article 1, or the “Legislative Article” of the Constitution.

 

But rather President Trump will challenge the House under the constitutional Impeachment definitional substance of “high crimes and misdemeanors” found in Article 2, or the “Executive Article” of the US Constitution. As we will see, this Legislative Article 1 versus Executive Article 2 distinction will be determinative in the Supreme Court’s ultimate finding for President Trump.

 

In Nixon v. US, Chief Justice Rehnquist writing for the majority stated the legal standard for the Nixon v US decision as:

 

“A controversy is nonjusticiable—i. e., involves a political question—where there is “a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it . . . .” Baker v. Carr, 369 U. S. 186, 217 (1962).” Nixon v. US, 506 U.S. 224, at 228 (1993)

 

This sounds complicated, but it isn’t. It means to be a too hot potato “political question” for the Supreme Court to rule on, the issue has to be either

 

1) One where the US Constitution specifically relegates the issue at issue as one solely of one of the three branches of government, or,

 

2) One where the claimed constitutional issue is susceptible to meaningful legal interpretation. President Trump will satisfy both of these Nixon “political question” prongs, and will defeat the House on its impeachment definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

On the first Nixon “solely one branch” constitutional prong, unlike Nixon v US, where Judge Nixon solely raised a question on just the text of an Article 1 “Legislative” Article procedural constitutional infirmity, President Trump will be raising an Article 2, “Executive” Article substance constitutional infirmity of the House definition of the Article 2 “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

By the very definition of President Trump’s claim, the Supreme Court will have to look outside of the text and constitutional authority of the Legislative Article 1, and into the heart of the powers and obligations of the Executive Article 2.

 

Therefore, by definition, President Trump’s case “textually demonstrates” it is not solely a Legislatively based Article 1 issue, but really an Article 2 Executive question. Therefore, President Trump will not satisfy the first Nixon prong for being characterized as a “political question.”

 

On the second Nixon “judicially discoverable” constitutional prong, President Trump will receive help from a very unlikely source: the Democrat majority House Judiciary Committee of 1974. The Democratic House Judiciary Impeachment Report of 1974, issued in the wake of the Nixon Watergate scandal, was issued under the Democrat Chairman Peter Rodino, Jr. and entered into the record by the Democrat Zoe Lofgren of California. The report stated that:

“High Crimes and Misdemeanors” has traditionally been considered a ‘term of art,’ like such other constitutional phrases as ‘levying war’ and ‘due process.’

 

“The Supreme Court has held that such phrases must be construed, not according to modern usage, but according to what the framers meant when they adopted them,” Chief Justice Marshall wrote of another such phrase:

 

“It is a technical term. It is used in a very old statute of that country whose language is our language, and whose laws form the substratum of our laws. It is scarcely conceivable that the term was not employed by the framers of our constitution in the sense which had been affixed to it by those from whom we borrowed it.57”

 

Therefore, the Democrat House Judiciary is on record as stating that “high crimes and misdemeanors” is a “term of art”, and hence, is completely susceptible to “judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving” its meaning. And secondly, the Supreme Court has already ruled on similar questions because, “The Supreme Court has held that such phrases must be construed, not according to modern usage, but according to what the framers meant when they adopted them.” Hence, the House Committee has stated that the Supreme Court “must” construe legal “terms of art” found in the US Constitution. Thirdly, they specifically cite Chief Justice Marshall for finding that a constitutional “term of art” “judicially discoverable” and capable of “manageable standards.”

 

In conclusion, President Trump has only begun to fight, and fight he will. Be prepared for many other legal claims that will throw the House Democrats into hysteria and will surely win President Trump a second term.

 

Author: Mark Langfan is Chairman of Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI). He specializes in security issues, and has created an original, educational 3D Topographic Map System of Israel to facilitate clear understanding of the dangers facing Israel and its water supply. It has been studied by U.S. lawmakers and can be seen at www.MarkLangfan.com.

___________________

EXCLUSIVE: Another Key Witness Noted Over 100 Times in Mueller Report, Felix Sater, Is a Clinton and Loretta Lynch Linked Deep State Spy

 

© 2019 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

___________________

Trump-Russia Hysteria: Oh Look, Another Glaring Omission In The Mueller Report

 

Townhall.com is the leading source for conservative news and political commentary and analysis.


Copyright © Townhall.com/Salem Media. All Rights Reserved.

___________________

Judicial Watch: FBI Docs Show Notes about Meeting with Intelligence Community Inspector General about Clinton Emails are ‘Missing’ and CD Containing Notes Is Likely ‘Damaged’ Irreparably

 

© 2019 Judicial Watch, Inc.

_________________

“The Supreme Court will nix a House Impeachment”

 

Copyright © 2017- Israpundit – All Rights Reserved

 

Dan Bongino on the FBI raid on Whistleblower


John R. Houk

© December 6, 2018

I ran into a social media post linking to the audio of a Dan Bongino podcast. I usually give credit to such discoveries, but I can only remember it was on a G+ Community.

 

Bongino takes about an hour to discuss the ramifications of the FBI raid on Whistleblower Dennis Cain in Chicago. The surprise is Cain was supposed to be a cooperating Whistleblower protected by Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA).

 

So, why would the FBI get a search warrant and raid a person supposedly under the protection of the ICWPA? Bongino theorizes three possibilities:

 

  • The initial theory the raid is good.

 

  • Bongino’s theory (which I think is plausible) the raid might be to prevent incriminating evidence against the FBI.

 

  • OR a combination of 1 & 2.

 

Below is the nearly long Youtube version of the Bongino podcast followed by the Epoch Times pierce referred to Bongino, then a Daily Caller update on the FBI raid on Cain’s home posted on 12/5.

 

JRH 12/6/18

So readers, I’ve been using a seven year old laptop to fulfill the old blogging habit. My lovely wife sprang for a Christmas upgrade. I’m a relatively small-time blogger but with a consistently growing readership despite some token censorship from the liberal-oriented blog and social platforms. Still looking to defray the Christmas costs.  

Whatever my readers can chip in will be appreciated: https://www.paypal.me/johnrhouk

Please Support NCCR

******************

Ep. 863 It’s About To Hit The Fan. The Dan Bongino Show 12/3/2018

 

Posted by Dan Bongino

Published on Dec 3, 2018

 

For show notes, visit https://bongino.com/ep-863-its-about-to-hit-the-fan/

 

Please subscribe to the podcast at: iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-dan-bongino-show/id965293227?mt=2

 

Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/dan-bongino

 

Android: http://subscribeonandroid.com/feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:136343638/sounds.rss

+++++++++++++

4 Investigations Share a Common Thread

 

By JEFF CARLSON

November 30, 2018 Updated: December 4, 2018

The Epoch Times

 

VIDEO: 4 Investigations Share a Common Thread #SPYGATE

 

[Posted by DECLASSIFIED

Published on Dec 4, 2018

 

A series of four investigations that recently came to light suggest that something larger is at play in clearing out corruption in the United States. In this episode of Declassified, we take a look at these investigations and their significance.

 

🔹 Follow Jeff Carlson www.themarketswork.com

 

https://twitter.com/themarketswork

 

Thank you for supporting us! 💟

 

Please make sure you subscribe to Declassified and hit the notification bell, so you don’t miss any of our new videos:

 

https://www.youtube.com/c/Declassified]

 

News Analysis

 

If anyone tells you they are tired of nothing happening with regard to ongoing investigations, perhaps they should take a closer look at a number of events that came to light over the past few days.

 

In a matter that caused no small amount of worry and consternation among supporters of President Donald Trump, The Daily Caller reported on Nov. 29 that the FBI had raided the home of whistleblower Dennis Nathan Cain.

 

The raid, which took place on Nov. 19, involved 16 FBI agents who had obtained a court order signed on Nov. 15 by federal magistrate Stephanie A. Gallagher in the U.S. District Court for Baltimore, according to The Daily Caller. No reason for the 10-day delay between the raid and his lawyer’s public announcement was given.

 

Cain, whose name is new to the public, isn’t just any whistleblower. He retains a top-level security clearance and maintains a number of security-related credentials, according to his resume, which has since been deleted online. Specialties include the FISA Amendment Act (FAA) Section 702 and USSID SP0018 Minimization Procedures and Signals Intelligence Authorities.

 

According to the article, Cain “privately delivered documents pertaining to the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One to a government watchdog, according to the whistleblower’s attorney.”

 

“The Justice Department’s inspector general was informed that the documents show that federal officials failed to investigate potential criminal activity regarding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Rosatom, the Russian company that purchased Uranium One,” the article states.

 

Read More

 

Cain also had obtained official whistleblower status from DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz. Michael Socarras, Cain’s lawyer, told The Daily Caller that Cain had met with a “senior member of Horowitz’s office” and delivered a flash drive along with a sealed envelope containing documents. The same materials reportedly were also delivered to the Senate and House Intelligence committees.

 

The FBI agents seized all of the original documents in Cain’s possession, according to Socarras. The Daily Caller said that one document they reviewed showed that then-FBI Director Robert Mueller “failed to investigate allegations of criminal misconduct pertaining to Rosatom and to other Russian government entities attached to Uranium One.” How The Daily Caller was able to review any documents, following what was reported to be a full seizure, remains unexplained.

 

There have been strong reactions to the news, with many perceiving it as some sort of coverup. However, a few facts are worth entertaining. Regardless of the FBI’s seizure, both IG Horowitz and the House and Senate intelligence committees already have the documents in their possession. The FBI’s seizure of documents from Cain doesn’t indicate the documents are being hidden.

 

As noted in the article, the FBI agents obtained a court order which means their identities are known. FBI Director Chris Wray, if he doesn’t already know, could easily determine the agents’ identities—this wasn’t a clandestine operation.

 

FBI Director Christopher Wray at FBI headquarters in Washington on Sept. 28, 2017. (SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

 

Another possible issue might have to do with Cain himself. Very little is known about him other than that he’s a whistleblower, which generally conveys images of positive actions taken by a well-intentioned individual. However, we know nothing of Cain’s true motivations or the actions that lay behind them. It may turn out that an invasive raid by the FBI was fully warranted.

 

Another explanation may lie within the documents themselves. The FBI’s actions may be related to chain-of-custody issues. The FBI may have been required to ensure that all evidence was accumulated and taken into their custody. It’s possible this document seizure by the FBI may indicate a case against the Clintons and/or their Foundation is actively underway.

 

The Chicago Raid

 

The FBI raid on Cain’s house wasn’t the only one.

 

On Nov. 29, federal agents raided the offices of Alderman Edward Burke, a powerful Chicago politician who has held his position in Chicago politics for 50 years. Burke’s office windows were covered and FBI agents remained on the premises for about seven hours, according to media reports.

 

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who abruptly announced in September that he would not seek re-election, said his office had no advance warning of the raid, noting: “I know what I read in the paper. I’m out here. That’s it. … You are asking hypotheticals and I am not going to do that with the FBI walking around his office.”

 

Burke, who has been under federal scrutiny on several occasions, has never been convicted or indicted. His investigation is being handled by the public corruption squad from the local FBI office.

 

Burke’s law firm specializes in property-tax reductions for his clients, and some have speculated that the raid could be connected to work that Burke’s law firm did for the president, but there are several problems with that theory.

 

A federal agent leaves the Southside office of 14th Ward Alderman Ed Burke on Nov. 29, 2018. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

 

The Burke investigation, according to the Chicago Tribune, “was being conducted in conjunction with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago, not Mueller’s office.” Additionally, the Sun-Times reported, “the raids were in response to new allegations, and not prompted by any past controversies that have swirled around Burke.”

 

Dan Mihalopoulos, a reporter for WBEZ in Chicago, was somewhat more direct: “Worth also noting today: Burke’s huge role in the local Democratic judge-making process. One judge just told me, ‘Everyone’s crapping themselves here.’”

 

The investigation probably has more to do with corrupt Chicago politics than anything related to the president.

 

Money-Laundering Probes

 

Two other events with a more international scope also have been underway.

 

Several banks are currently under investigation for a massive money-laundering scandal that is likely to only grow larger.

 

Danske Bank is being investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice, and new charges were filed this week by Danish authorities. The bank’s CEO and chairman both have been forced to resign and numerous current employees are under investigation. Danske Bank has admitted that approximately $230 billion has flowed through one of its units in Estonia, but the focus now appears to be shifting to other financial institutions:

 

“Howard Wilkinson, a former Danske Bank A/S manager who blew the whistle on its multibillion-dollar laundromat, told lawmakers in Brussels that when it comes to shell companies, or limited liability partnerships, the U.K. is ‘worst of all.’ He said he was legally prevented from naming the other banks involved, but urged lawmakers to treat the Danske scandal as a case that goes well beyond its core in Estonia,” Bloomberg reported Nov. 21.

 

The corporate headquarters of Deutsche Bank in Frankfurt, Germany, on Nov. 29, 2018. German law enforcement and tax authorities raided the offices over suspicions of tax evasion and money laundering. (Thomas Lohnes/Getty Images)

 

Also on Nov. 29, Deutsche Bank’s headquarters was also raided by German officials. Transactions being examined by investigators relate to the bank’s wealth-management division, which previously has come under scrutiny.

 

According to a spokeswoman for prosecutors, the investigation covers the five-year period from 2013 to 2018 and is related to disclosures made in the Panama Papers—11.5 million leaked documents from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, then the world’s fourth-biggest provider of offshore services.

 

The Deutsche Bank raids continued for a second day and reportedly included the executive management board’s floor. Deutsche was one of Danske’s correspondent banks, as are JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America. Any potential involvement of other banks will bear close watching.

 

Clinton Donor Charged

 

Lastly, in a Nov. 29 DOJ press release, three executives including Abul Huda Farouki were charged “for their roles in a scheme to defraud U.S. military contracts in Afghanistan, engaging in illegal commerce in Iran, and laundering money internationally.” Farouki was the CEO of Anham, a defense contractor based in the United Arab Emirates

 

This wasn’t the first time Farouki or his company have been involved in allegations of misconduct. In a 2013 article by The Daily Caller, headlined “Clinton Donors Get a Pass on Shady Contracting,” Farouki and his company were highlighted:

 

“In June 2011, the Defense Department’s Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) released a scathing report on a defense contracting company called Anham. The title of the report and its conclusion were the same: ‘Poor Government Oversight of Anham and Its Subcontracting Procedures Allowed Questionable Costs to Go Undetected.’”

 

The article then asked a simple question: Given prior violations, how was Anham able to secure an $8 billion contract in Afghanistan that “allowed it to illegally ship supplies through two Iranian border crossings and a seaport controlled by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard?”

 

The $8 billion contract, along with the illegal shipment of supplies, being cited in the 2013 article appear to be exactly the same violations being alleged in the 2018 DOJ indictment. So why weren’t Farouki and his company charged with these same, known violations back in 2013?

 

The answer may lie within Farouki’s many connections to the Democratic Party. The Daily Caller notes that Farouki is a longtime donor to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), and donated to Obama for America in 2008. But Farouki’s closest ties lie with the Clintons and their Foundation.

 

Farouki, a member of the now-shuttered Clinton Global Initiative, participated in annual CGI meetings since the group’s formation in 2005 through at least 2010 and made multiple donations to the Clinton Foundation. Farouki also made donations to Terry McAuliffe and has been photographed with Huma Abedin.

 

There appears to be a common thread among what might appear to be unrelated events: the raid on the whistleblower, the raid on the Chicago politician, the investigations of European banks, and the charges brought against a Clinton donor. All the activities targeted were either occurring during the Obama era or, in the case of the DOJ whistleblower, were directly related to underlying events from that time.

 

There may be more going on than meets the casual eye.

Jeff Carlson is a CFA charterholder. He worked for 20 years as an analyst and portfolio manager in the high-yield bond market. He runs the website TheMarketsWork.com.

+++++++++++++++++

WHISTLEBLOWER ADVOCATES, ATTORNEYS CONDEMN FBI RAID ON CLINTON FOUNDATION WHISTLEBLOWER

 

By Richard Pollock

4:48 PM 12/05/2018

The Daily Caller

 

  • Whistleblower activists condemned the FBI’s raid of a recognized whistleblower, Dennis Cain.

 

  • Cain had previously shared documents with Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

 

  • The documents contained potential wrongdoing regarding the Clinton Foundation, the Uranium One deal and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, according to Cain’s lawyer.

 

Whistleblower advocates across the political spectrum condemned an FBI raid on the home of a recognized whistleblower who reported potential wrongdoing surrounding the Clinton Foundation, the Uranium One deal and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

 

The Daily Caller News Foundation, in a bombshell report, detailed how 16 FBI agents raided the home of Dennis Cain, a former employee of an FBI contractor, on Nov. 19. They rummaged through his home for six hours even though he told them that Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz awarded him whistleblower status, according to Cain’s lawyer, Michael Socarras.

 

Horowitz instructed a top aide to personally hand-carry the documents to the House and Senate intelligence committees over the summer after he received them from Cain, Socarras said. (EXCLUSIVE: FBI Raids Home Of Whistleblower On Clinton Foundation, Lawyer Says)

 

Everyone TheDCNF interviewed said the raid should never have occurred. They said it appeared Cain followed the rules in accordance to the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, which protects federal whistleblowers from retaliation.

 

“I really do question the need for this raid at all,” said Nick Schwellenbach, the investigations director for the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan watchdog group that frequently works with whistleblowers. “On its face it doesn’t seem like it was necessary.”

 

“This isn’t how we should be treating whistleblowers who are coming forward with information about high level wrongdoing,” he told TheDCNF. “It sends a very strong message that you will be treated as a criminal even though what you’re trying to do is expose crime or a potential crime.”

 

Former US Secretary of State [Crooked] Hillary Clinton gives a public lecture. REUTERS/Clodagh Kilcoyne

 

Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen, the liberal advocacy group founded by Ralph Nader, told TheDCNF: “Well it certainly sounds like an absolute violation of the spirit of what the whistleblower law is supposed to be all about.”

 

The documents Cain possessed, which he gave to the special agent leading the search, show that federal officials failed to investigate potential criminal activity pertaining to Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, and the Russian company that purchased Uranium One, according to a document TheDCNF reviewed.

 

The court order and all the documents justifying the raid are sealed and are not available for public viewing. Federal magistrate Stephanie A. Gallagher of the U.S. District Court of Maryland in Baltimore issued the court order on Nov. 15.

 

TheDCNF asked the court on Friday to unseal the documents. Gallagher has not yet responded.

 

A conservative attorney on ethics law, Cleta Mitchell, questioned whether the FBI was truthful when it sought the court order.

 

“If they did not fully advise the court of his whistleblower status, then I would find that to be extremely troublesome,” she said. “The main question is whether or not they properly informed the court that this individual is a whistleblower and that he had gone through the procedures to receive whistleblower status.”

 

“Until Mr. Cain’s attorney is able to see what the FBI or the U.S. Attorney presented to the court in order to obtain this search warrant, then we have no way of knowing and he has no way of knowing whether they fully and properly advised the court that he had whistleblower status, and whether they informed the judge that he had gone through all of the proper procedures,” Mitchell continued.

 

Schwellenbach said the judge should release the original documents filed by the FBI and the U.S. Attorney.

 

“I would love to see what’s in their subpoena request to the judge,” he told TheDCNF. “What facts do they present to the judge? I think that is a document that should see the light of the day.”

 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley asked FBI Director Christopher Wray in a Nov. 30 letter whether the bureau was “aware at the time of the raid that Mr. Cain had made what appeared to be lawful disclosures to the Inspector General?”

 

FBI Director Christopher Wray testifies during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing. REUTERS/Leah Millis

 

Texas defense attorney Stuart Baggish told TheDCNF that the search of Cain’s home could be a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizures. Baggish is challenging a recent raid on his client’s business after local law enforcement allegedly omitted key facts before a judge when justifying the search.

 

Baggish is challenging a recent raid on his client’s business by local law enforcement for omitting key facts before a judge when justifying a raid on his client’s business.

 

“If the search warrant for Mr. Cain’s property was based on an affidavit that purposely or recklessly omitted his whistleblower status, like my client’s case against the Smith County Sheriff [in Texas], the search could be ruled unreasonable and hence a Fourth Amendment violation,” he said.

 

“Material information may occasionally inadvertently be left out of a search warrant affidavit, but it is rare and dangerous when it is done purposely or recklessly,” Baggish continued.

 

Schwellenbach, the POGO investigator, told TheDCNF: “I think the FBI needs to be thoughtful how it uses these powers. Judges need to be skeptical of FBI claims.”

 

“They shouldn’t be raiding people’s homes unless there’s a real compelling reason to do so and alternative means have been exhaustive,” he continued.

 

Baggish warned that such raids also undermine the judiciary and violate civil rights.

 

“When law enforcement officers intentionally mislead a court to obtain a search warrant, they are entering a realm of malfeasance that harms not just the individual or entity whose property is raided, destroyed and confiscated, they also harm the judiciary itself by depriving it of its efficacy as the guardian of Americans’ civil rights,” he said.

 

Follow Richard on Twitter

_______________________

Dan Bongino on the FBI raid on Whistleblower

John R. Houk

© December 6, 2018

______________________

4 Investigations Share a Common Thread

 

Copyright @ 2000 – 2018

 

About The Epoch Times

 

The Epoch Times, published by The Epoch Times Association, Inc., a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, is dedicated to seeking the truth through insightful and independent journalism.

 

We stand outside of political interests and the pursuit of profit, to educate readers about today’s most critical issues with the intention of broadening minds and uplifting society. A well-informed society is the cornerstone of a flourishing democracy.

Being independent, we investigate issues overlooked—or avoided—by other media outlets. We do this because we believe journalism must play the role of being truly responsible to society.

 

We strive to highlight solutions and what’s good in society rather than the conflicts that divide us. We recognize the value of the traditional arts and their ability to inspire humankind towards its highest ideals.

 

In our newsroom and our reporting, we are committed to being honest, respectful, and compassionate.

 

We stand against the systematic destruction of traditional culture by destructive ideologies such as communism, which continues to harm societies around the world.

 

We are inspired in this mission by our own experience. The Epoch Times was founded in 2000 to bring honest and uncensored news to people oppressed by the lies and violence of communism.

 

Fulfilling this mission is our passion and our greatest honor.

The Epoch Times provides award-winning newspapers and news platforms with the goal of being the global newspaper of record, with a positive influence on society. The Epoch Times provides critical in-depth analysis that has often been overlooked by other mainstream media outlets.

 

Our History

 

Having witnessed events like Tiananmen Square and the persecution of the spiritual group Falun Gong, and at a great risk to themselves and their loved ones, a group of Chinese-Americans started publishing The Epoch Times in Chinese in May 2000 in New York City. Some reporters in China were jailed, and some suffered severe torture. Yet despite the risks, they could see the growing need for uncensored coverage of events in China.

 

Local editions published by regional bureaus soon followed. Today it is the largest Chinese-language newspaper outside of Mainland China and Taiwan.


The English edition of The Epoch Times launched in September 2003 on the web, and in August 2004 as a newspaper in New York. READ THE REST

__________________

WHISTLEBLOWER ADVOCATES, ATTORNEYS CONDEMN FBI RAID ON CLINTON FOUNDATION WHISTLEBLOWER

 

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

 

© Copyright 2010 – 2018 | The Daily Caller

 

%d bloggers like this: