In this June 21, 2017 file photo, former FBI Director Robert Mueller, the special counsel probing Russian interference in the 2016 election, departs Capitol Hill following a closed door meeting in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
Jerome Corsi filed a lawsuit against Robert Mueller for “illegal surveillance and leaking” in relation to Corsi (I’m confident Corsi isn’t the only person whose Rights were impugned). The DOJ tried to have the lawsuit tossed or at least delayed due to the government shutdown.
EPIC FAIL ! The presiding Judge would have none of it.
Here’s the story pedigree as to how I came across it: I read about on a MeWe Group OFFICIAL TEA PARTY USA (12/28/18 12:31 PM), who got it from David J Harris Jr. via Facebook (12/28/18 10:30 AM), who posted from his (i.e. Harris) website DavidHarrisJr.com though attributed to Steven Ahle (12/28/18), who excerpted from the Washington Times (12/27/18).
Below I am cross posting the details from the DavidHarrisJr.com website.
The good guys finally won one. The DOJ tried to get the corruption lawsuit against Robert Mueller tossed out. The judge even refused a delay and said the trial will go on as originally planned. The DOJ insisted that the trial be put off because of the partial shutdown, but since the Mueller investigation isn’t being halted, that motion was nothing more than a joke. Mueller must now answer for his illegal surveillance and leaking to the media. Jerome Corsi, who brought the lawsuit applauded the judge’s ruling and says he plans to be in court for the proceeding.
Lawyers for the Justice Department requested the stay on Wednesday, potentially delaying next week’s court date indefinitely.
“The Department does not know when funding will be restored by Congress,” James Gilligan, acting director of the federal programs branch of the Justice Department’s civil division, wrote in the motion. “Absent an appropriation, Department of Justice attorneys are generally prohibited from working, even on a voluntary basis, except in very limited circumstances,” Mr. Gilligan added, including “emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property.”
Mr. Corsi’s lawyer, conservative watchdog Larry Klayman, cried foul in a response filed in court within hours.
“Defendants’ motion is, in practice, proffered tactically for delay,” argued Mr. Klayman. “Indeed, the so called ‘government shutdown’ is only partial, and Defendants Robert Mueller and the Office of the Special Counsel, which is an integral part of the U.S. Department of Justice, is excepted in any event. Thus, Special Counsel Mueller’s prosecutors and legal counsel can, at a minimum, be present at the hearing on January 3, 2019.”
To stay up to date with David’s No Nonsense News, make sure to subscribe to his newsletter on his website and follow him on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr
David James Harris Jr. is a passionate pursuer of life, love, and hope, and seeks to use his platform as Founder/CEO of Uncorked Health & Wellness, Inc. to help individuals across the world lead happier, healthier lives. David has been an entrepreneur for over 20 years, launching his first business at just 20 years old. Within two years, he had turned it into a multi-million dollar company. However, he has also had a taste of the many setbacks life can bring, both personally and professionally. From this, he has learned to seek growth opportunities in every downfall that arises.
Many may already know this, but I just ran into this story after largely light blogging during Christmas. I just read a WND story that the U.S. Assistant Attorney in Nevada intends to appeal U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro’s dismissal of all charges against Cliven Bundy, his sons and supporters for the 2014 armed standoff with Bureau of Land Management agents.
Why were the charges dismissed?
BECAUSE the Federal Prosecutors “… conduct in the case as “outrageous” and “flagrant,” asserting prosecutors concealed evidence favorable to the defense.”
President Trump needs to drain that Obama swamp in Nevada!
[Thanks to all who offered Christmas support in this Blogger’s laptop update. Your generosity is always appreciated: Please Support NCCR]
The case was dismissed “with prejudice,” meaning the government is not allowed to retry the defendants regarding the standoff.
Now, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch, has told WND that Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth White of the district of Nevada informed him the federal government has prepared an appeal brief.
Klayman said he asked for confirmation in a letter to the Justice Department solicitor general, Noel Francisco.
“In light of the history of this case and the gross injustice which has already been meted out against my client Cliven Bundy, his sons, and family by rogue Obama-era prosecutors,” Klayman wrote, the only reason for an appeal would be to cover up for “corrupt prosecutors.”
And he noted that the behavior of prosecutors in the case remains “under review” by the Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility and the Inspector General.
“It is time to allow my clients to go on with their lives and not continue to be persecuted by a Department of ‘Injustice,’ which rather than meting out justice, ‘circles the wagons’ to try to unethically and unlawfully protect its own,” he wrote.
Klayman included with the letter a lengthy statement by whistleblower Larry Wooten, a special agent with the Department of Interior and Bureau of Land Management, who detailed alleged misconduct in the case.
His description begins: “I routinely observed, [in the case] and the investigation revealed a widespread pattern of bad judgment, lack of discipline, incredible bias, unprofessionalism and misconduct, as well as likely policy, ethical, and legal violations among senior and supervisory staff at the BLM’s Office of Law Enforcement and Security.”
Wooten said the issues he uncovered put “our agency and specific law enforcement supervisors in potential legal, civil, and administrative jeopardy.”
When he went to superiors, he found they either knew of the issues already or had “instigated the misconduct.”
He charges “gross mismanagement,” “abuse of authority,” violations of the merit system principles and “prohibited personnel practices.”
WND, formerly WorldNetDaily, can best be explained by its mission statement: “WND is an independent news company dedicated to uncompromising journalism, seeking truth and justice and revitalizing the role of the free press as a guardian of liberty. We remain faithful to the traditional and central role of a free press in a free society – as a light exposing wrongdoing, corruption and abuse of power.
“We also seek to stimulate a free-and-open debate about the great moral and political ideas facing the world and to promote freedom and self-government by encouraging personal virtue and good character.”
Indeed, WND is a fiercely independent news site committed to hard-hitting investigative reporting of government waste, fraud and abuse.
Founded by Joseph and Elizabeth Farah in May 1997, it is now a leading Internet news site in both traffic and influence.
I realize there are a lot of unsubstantiated Conspiracy Theories out there. Because of this Conspiracy Theories are much like the old story of a Boy who Cried Wolf. In this day and age of television, video games, laptops, etc.; parents may not share classic stories like Aesop’s Fables that end with a learning moral. The moral of the Boy who Cried Wolf is if you tell an alarming lie all the time, when you tell the alarming truth, no one will believe you.
Deciphering the credible from the incredible Conspiracies brings up the Boy who Cried Wolf scenario in believability. I have unappreciated disagreements with Conspiracy Theory enthusiasts about the credible and incredible.
The current Deep State conspiracy to bring down the Trump Administration by any lying means necessary is remarkably credible hence believable.
The sad thing about this anti-Trump conspiracy is that a huge swath of Americans that ONLY get their information from the primary Mainstream Media (MSM), televised or print, are probably duped into believing President Trump is a corrupt criminal. The problem is the MSM is a part of the Deep State cabal conspiring against President Trump and the agenda he was elected to perform.
Ergo, if the MSM actually tells the truth about some info, their dishonesty has been so pervasive, I can’t believe them. AND YOU shouldn’t believe their wolf crying either.
Thanks to the Winning America Now e-newsletter, I have discovered some Deep State info that Chief Justice John Roberts may have been blackmailed into being the deciding Justice in validating Obamacare.
What was the possible dirt collecting method against Chief Justice Roberts? Illegal surveillance by the CIA and/or NSA perpetrated by the Obama Administration.
In full disclosure of the credibility/incredibility scale, one of the sources involved in making this public is former Sheriff Joe Arpaio who nearly convinced me that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya rather than Hawaii. Arpaio made some very credible assessments of Obama’s Birth Certificate validity. **
** On a personal level of opinion, I believe Obama was indeed born in Hawaii rather than Kenya. However, sometime between Hawaii to Indonesia and back to Hawaii, something hinky happened with Obama’s citizenship status. It is my opinion that Obama’s citizenship records were thus messed up in the travels that may have even gotten him into Occidental College as a foreign exchange student. For me this explains the suspicious Birth Certificate and the reasons Obama school records from childhood through college have been sealed from public exposure. That’s my conjecture and not a proven fact.
Below is the illegal Obama surveillance story that if true, should cause a huge Constitutional crisis with Obama forcing an unconstitutional law into constitutional validity via clandestine blackmail.
Evidence shows that John Roberts, chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, was “hacked” by a Deep State surveillance operation overseen by Obama administration CIA director John Brennan and Obama director of national intelligence James Clapper.
Roberts, the Bush appointee who made the decisive vote to uphold the constitutionality of Obamacare before the 2012 election, was allegedly the victim of the same Deep State surveillance program that spied on President Donald Trump.
Tapes released by Federal Judge G. Murray Snow — preserved on a Whistleblower Soundcloud page — show real estate billionaire Timothy Blixseth explaining Brennan and Clapper’s surveillance program to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and detective Mike Zullo. The existence of this surveillance program has been corroborated by Wikileaks’ “Vault 7” release and bythe public comments of former CIA and NSA contractor Dennis Montgomery, who says he worked on the program for Brennan and Clapper.
Montgomery has gone public with his claims exposing how the program was used to spy on President Donald Trump when he was a private citizen. Montgomery has gained immunity and desperately wants House Intelligence Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes or other lawmakers to call him to testify about what he knows.
On the explosive tapes, Blixseth walks Arpaio and Zullo through the details of the program on a computer screen. At one point, the three begin pulling up specific names of targeted individuals.
“You know who that guy is? That’s the head of the FISA court they hacked into, Reggie Walton,” Blixseth tells the investigators.
“John Roberts, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, was hacked,” Blixseth tells Arpaio and Zullo.
Insiders have always been skeptical of Roberts’ motives for siding with President Obama on the 2012 Obamacare case. While there’s still no available evidence that Roberts was blackmailed, the allegation that he was “hacked” by Obama officials provides some more context into the justice’s controversial career.
As Big League Politics reported, former FBI director James Comey seized and buried volumes of information that demonstrated this wide-ranging government surveillance operation targeting Donald Trump before he became president.
Larry Klayman, attorney for former NSA and CIA contractor and whistleblower Dennis Montgomery, delivered to the FBI 47 hard drives and data amounting to more than 600 million pages of documentation on the surveillance scheme. Then-FBI director James Comey’s general counsel James Baker took the data into his possession, according to multiple sources. But despite possessing Montgomery’s bombshell whistleblower revelations, Comey never acted on or publicized the information.
Additionally, Comey’s former firm Lockheed Martin granted entry to Montgomery to one of its facilities to help him work on the alleged mass surveillance program, which was allegedly overseen by Obama administration officials John Brennan and James Clapper and specifically targeted Trump.
“This guy showed me 900 million phone calls. And I see myself in there. I see people I know. I see Donald Trump in there a zillion times, and Bloomberg is in there,” Blixseth said on the tape, referring to information that Montgomery allegedly showed him.
“We don’t have any comment,” the FBI told Big League Politics when questioned about the existence of the program.
“I provided to the FBI seventeen businesses of Donald Trump, including the Trump Tower, the Trump leasing programs, all of these different programs, and including Trump himself and the various family members that had been wiretapped under these programs,” Montgomery said in a recent interview. “There has been a wiretap on Trump for years.”
“I started by going to Maricopa County and showing that Sheriff Arpaio himself was wiretapped under the Obama administration,” the whistleblower said.
“I was a CIA contractor both under John Brennan and under James Clapper and these individuals were running domestic surveillance programs in the United States collecting information on Americans. This isn’t political. They were collecting information on Republicans and Democrats. But they collected everything they could find. Bank accounts, phone numbers, chats, emails, and they collected a massive amount of it under the Obama administration,” Montgomery said.
Big League Politics is a fast-paced news site led by a team of top-level investigative reporters, filmmakers, and citizen journalists all over the country. We challenge powerful politicians in both the Republican and Democratic Parties. We are not conservative. We are not liberal. We are road warriors fighting the good fight for journalism. How did this happen? It happened because the mainstream media and corporate journalism outlets are bought off by shady interests and they don’t tell the truth. We got sick and tired of it. That’s why most of our writers are completely incapable of getting a job anywhere else.
All stories on Big League Politics are factually accurate.
All stories on Big League Politics are in the public interest. We don’t suck up to politicians. We expose corruption and give people the best information on the politics of the day. If we’re reporting it, then it’s important.
No target is too big or too small. If someone has broken the public trust, we will be there in his/her face with a video camera.
We let our writers have a voice. It is not our job to agree with everything that our writers say. But free speech is under attack at most publications and we think that’s wrong. At Big League Politics, censorship is …READ THE REST
Judge Andrew Napolitano has caused quite a stir amongst the Media, the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), and officials in the U.S. government when the Judge stipulated that GCHQ surveilled the Trump campaign for the treasonous President Barack Hussein Obama. Here is the segment on Fox & Friends Tuesday March 14 morning:
Very shortly after the Judge said he had three sources, the Judge mysteriously – without comment – was removed from Fox News air time. Incidentally, if you listened to the segment, the Judge remarked that the GCHQ person who complied with Obama resigned after Trump was inaugurated. Fox’s censorship means Napolitano can neither name the three intelligence sources nor the name of the person who resigned from GCHQ. ALSO, Fox News used later-in-the-day news anchors to walk back Napolitano’s GCHQ/Obama assertion.
Fox censorship, Napolitano silence on suspension, GCHQ public denial and an U.S. apology is a set-up the typically credible Napolitano to look like a tinfoil conspiracist.
AND YET, is Judge Andrew Napolitano a discredited source on Obama surveillance of President Trump’s campaign? Since I have contended that Barack Hussein Obama was a crooked President from day one of his Administration, I am not prepared to throw the Judge under the bus as all others have seeming done.
Below are two articles that should give you pause before you consider throwing Napolitano under the bus. The first article is from today (3/22/17) from Bob Unruh and the second is from Cliff Kinkaid of AIM posted on 3/21/17.
The first is close to breaking news corroborated by Fox News. The second article pretty much elaborates the details that Judge Andrew Napolitano alluded to in his 2-minute 50-second Fox & Friends segment. In fact, there is so much detail in the second article it is a bit lengthy. You may want to come back a few times to complete and digest the information that demonstrates a Crooked Obama and a nefarious Intel community, not to mention an extremely untrustworthy Director James Comey of the FBI.
The lawyer who founded Judicial Watch and later Freedom Watch, Larry Klayman, has sent a letter to Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, asking him to look at a whistleblower’s evidence of “systematic illegal surveillance on prominent Americans, again including the chief justice of the Supreme Court, other justices, 156 judges, prominent businessmen such as Donald Trump, and even yours truly.”
That spying was done, Klayman’s letter contends, by the FBI.
It’s become a major issue following President Trump’s assertion that he and Trump Tower were spied upon by the federal government, and the subsequent denials by intelligence and law-enforcement officials, including FBI Director James Comey, who famously cleared Hillary Clinton on accusations she mishandled classified information as secretary of state.
Klayman has been working with Dennis Montgomery, a former NSA and Central Intelligence Agency contractor who “left the NSA and CIA with 47 hard drives and over 600 million pages of information, much of which is classified.”
Montgomery then “sought to come forward legally as a whistleblower to appropriate government entities, including congressional intelligence committees, to expose that the spy agencies were engaged for years in systematic illegal surveillance on prominent Americans.”
Explained Klayman: “Working side by side with former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who lied in congressional testimony, and former Obama Director of the CIA, the equally ethically challenged John Brennan, Montgomery witnessed ‘up close and personal’ this “Orwellian Big Brother’ intrusion on privacy, likely for potential coercion, blackmail or other nefarious purposes.”
But he said the testimony has been essentially ignored.
Now, however, with the issue pending before Congress, there even are media reports that appear to substantiate the general claims that the government has been spying. The New York Times in January referenced wiretapping at Trump Tower, and just this week ABC News documented that the FBI monitored Trump Tower.
The report claimed, “But it was not placed at the behest of Barack Obama, and the target was not the Trump campaign of 2016. For two years ending in 2013, the FBI had a court-approved warrant to eavesdrop on a sophisticated Russian organized crime money-laundering network that operated out of unit 63A in Trump Tower in New York.”
It resulted in the indictments of more than 30 people, ABC said.
Explained the report: “The FBI investigation did not implicate Trump. But Trump Tower was under close watch. Some of the Russian mafia figures worked out of unit 63A in the iconic skyscraper – just three floors below Trump’s penthouse residence – running what prosecutors called an ‘international money-laundering, sports gambling and extortion ring.’”
Klayman, a Washington watchdog who repeatedly took on the Clinton political machine to investigate suspicion of wrongdoing, explained in his letter to Nunes, which was copied to other members of Congress, that he previously won a judgment from U.S. District Judge Richard Leon preliminarily halting the “illegal, warrantless, and massive surveillance of U.S. citiznes [sic] and lawful residents” in 2015.
As part of Nunes’ hearing on claims of government spying, he invited “anyone who has information about these topics to come forward.”
Klayman said that is exactly what Montgomery has done.
“There is a myriad of evidence, direct and circumstantial, of the illegal and unconstitutional surveillance disclosed to the FBI by Montgomery,” said Klayman, describing how his client made an on-camera interview with the agency about the misdeeds some time ago.
He said Montgomery “holds much of the roadmap to ‘draining the swamp’ of this corruption of our democracy.”
Montgomery, Klayman said, has information “that the spy agencies were engaged for years in systematic illegal surveillance on prominent Americans.”
During Montgomery’s interview with FBI General Counsel James Baker, under grants of immunity, he “laid out how persons like then businessman Donald Trump were illegally spied upon by Clapper, Brennan, and the spy agencies of the Obama administration.”
“He even claimed that these spy agencies had manipulated voting in Florida during the 2008 presidential election, where illegal tampering resulted in helping Obama to win the White House.”
But that interview, “conducted and videotaped by Special FBI Agents Walter Giardina and William Barnett, occurred almost two years ago, and nothing that I know of has happened since.”
Klayman wrote that it appears to have been “buried” by Comey, possibly because “the FBI itself collaborates with the spy agencies to conduct illegal surveillance.”
He said he previously visited with a staff lawyer, Allen Souza, to inform Nunes of questions that needed to be put to Comey while under oath.
“My expressed purpose: to have Chairman Nunes of the House Intelligence Committee ask Comey, under oath, why he and his FBI have seemingly not moved forward with the Montgomery investigation while, on the other hand, the FBI director recently claimed publicly, I believe falsely, that there is ‘no evidence’ of surveillance on President Trump and those around him by the Obama administration.
“Indeed, there is,” he wrote.
He tells members of Congress that Comey needs to be grilled during a subsequent hearing, now set for March 28. He asks Nunes to respond by March 24 to let “the American people, and Mr. Montgomery … know where you and the other members of your committee stand.”
“Do you intend to get at and investigate the full truth, or as has regrettably been the case for many years in government, sweep the truth under the carpet?”
Other recipients of the letter were Reps. Adam Schiff, Mike Conaway, Peter King, Frank LoBiondo, Tom Rooney, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Michael Turner, Brad Wenstrup, Chris Stewart, Rich Crawford, Trey Gowdy, Elise Stefanik, Will Hurd, Jim Hines, Terri Sewell, Andre Carson, Jackie Speier, Mike Quigley, Eric Swalwell, Joaquin Castro and Denny Heck.
A special report from the Accuracy in Media Center for Investigative Journalism; Cliff Kincaid, Director.
[AIM CIJ Director’s Note:
UPDATE: Former NSA/CIA contractor Dennis Montgomery has told Accuracy in Media through his attorney Larry Klayman that it is entirely possible that the British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) was used as a back channel to collect and pass information-based on electronic surveillance of Trump associates and Donald J. Trump personally-to officials in the Obama administration. Montgomery said the procedure known as shell-game eavesdropping, in which the NSA can deny they are wiretapping, and the GCHQ can also deny that they are wiretapping, could have been used in this case. In other words, the NSA, CIA or FBI would ask the British to conduct the surveillance on behalf of the U.S. government so that U.S. officials could deny their own involvement.
Montgomery said that he has provided extensive evidence of illegal wiretapping by U.S. intelligence agencies to the FBI, but that the Bureau has failed to act on the evidence since he provided it almost two years ago.
Judge Andrew Napolitano of Fox News had said, “The NSA has given GCHQ full 24/7 access to its computers, so GCHQ – a foreign intelligence agency that, like the NSA, operates outside our constitutional norms – has the digital versions of all electronic communications made in America in 2016, including Trump’s.” [Bold Text Editor JRH] However, it may be difficult to find Obama’s personal “fingerprints” on what happened, Napolitano warned. Under these circumstances, the House Intelligence Committee should ask FBI Director James Comey about Montgomery’s evidence of illegal wiretapping and then call in Montgomery for his own personal testimony. Klayman says Montgomery can shed important light on how Trump and many other innocent people can be targeted.
Please call the office of Rep. Devin Nunes at 202-225-4121 and urge that Congress question FBI Director Comey about the Dennis Montgomery case.]
(Editor’s Note: Public hearings on this controversy are scheduled for March 20 and 28 by the House Intelligence Committee.)
Senate Intelligence Committee leaders from both parties, Senators Richard Burr (R-NC) and Mark Warner (D-VA), have issued a disingenuous statement that “no element of the United States government” surveilled “Trump Tower.” They dishonestly evade the fact that media reporting two days earlier had said that British intelligence operating at U.S. behest had likely been implicated in wiretapping Trump and Trump associates, all at the instigation of the U.S. government.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said on March 16 that Fox News sources have reported through retired Judge Andrew Napolitano that then-President Obama had used two officials to arrange with the British NSA, called GCHQ or Government Communications Headquarters, to carry out the wiretapping of both Trump and Trump associates. (See this AIMguest column.) The British now dispute this claim.
This evasive use of British spying is done in order to leave no American “fingerprints” on the highly illegal operation, as the White House quoted Judge Napolitano. It is a long-standing practice under treaty-like intelligence agreements that British intelligence can use NSA facilities, and vice versa, for shell-game eavesdropping.
The trick is for the two agencies to swap places so that the NSA can deny they are wiretapping, and the GCHQ can deny that they are wiretapping. The Brits are trying to escape in between these moves of what a key expert has called the US-UK “wiretapping shell game.”
This is the first time that news sources have explicitly stated that Obama personally ordered the wiretapping of Trump himself, through Obama officials going to the British, though it has been implied in the past by the suspicious lack of any circumspect denials, even when The New York Times said on January 19 and 20 that “wiretapped communications” went to the Obama White House. No one in the article said “Obama White House-but not Obama personally.”
Consider how one important person-President Trump-got the clear media message that he was indeed the target of the spying: President Trump told Fox News’s Tucker Carlson that he read this New York Times story of January 20 before he tweeted about Obama “wiretapping” him. White House spokesman Spicer quoted from this article.
President Trump told Carlson on Fox on March 15 why he tweeted what he did: “Well, I’ve been reading…I think it was January 20…New York Times article where they were talking about wiretapping….I think they used that exact term.”
NEW YORK TIMES (print edition) Jan. 20, 2017, Headline:
“Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides”
“found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing … [but]
“… Wiretapped communications had been provided to the [Obama] White House.” [Emphasis added; bracketed [ ] text added.]
And since the “wiretapped communications” had been given to the Obama “White House,” according to The New York Times, it naturally leads to the inference that Obama himself knew and approved of the “wiretapping” of the Trump team. Otherwise, the question would indeed be Watergate déjà vu: What did Obama know and when did he know it?
Remember, this is the same New York Times, along with other hostile media, that is attacking President Trump for making what it calls “baseless” and “unsubstantiated” claims of Obama administration wiretapping of Trump. It is its own reporting that President Trump was referring to.
The Times hypocritically suppresses its own front-page headline stories about “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides” which claimed that these “wiretapped communications” reports went to the Obama White House (New York Times, Jan. 20, 2017).
White House spokesman Spicer forcefully made this point to the press, which viciously dodged his points to continue insisting that “there’s no evidence of this” at all, repeatedly and rudely interrupting Spicer in an acrimonious confrontation.
Again, the question is: What did Obama know and when did he know it?
How the “Wiretap Shell Game” Works
Some reports claim that the Obama administration sought and/or obtained FISA Court warrants to tap phone calls and hack emails in Trump Tower.
But FISA warrants are routinely avoided by a little-known intelligence trick of using U.S.-British intelligence “reciprocity agreements” to dodge U.S. laws and vice versa. There are now direct reports of this Obama-orchestrated British wiretapping of Trump, cited by the White House to back up President Trump’s statements and tweets.
The British are issuing denials. But it is well-known that U.S. intelligence agencies can routinely arrange for British intelligence officers to use NSA facilities to spy on Americans, so that the U.S. agencies can claim that “they” (the U.S.) did no wiretapping or surveillance of Americans. It is a type of “plausible denial” government lie (see more on this in the appendix to this article). [Bold Text Editor JRH]
The strange involvement of an “ex” British MI6 agent, Christopher Steele, in conducting “opposition research” during a U.S. election has raised no questions in the left-wing media. It bears consideration, as it could represent in reality a British “reciprocity” covert operation on behalf of Obama’s CIA, one to fabricate discrediting disinformation about Trump, not a mere intelligence-gathering or wiretapping operation.
The exact means and exact agency by which this wiretapping, or much of it, has been done had been left unclear until now, when the claimed British connection surfaced. These types of British surveillance wiretaps are known as operations under “UKUSA” and “BRUSA” intelligence “reciprocity” agreements, which are the functional equivalent of formal treaties in the spy world.
Such “reciprocity” operations are designed to evade the laws of each country, the U.S. and the UK, by having the British spy on Americans who the Americans want spied on, and having the Americans spy on the British who the Brits want spied on. [Bold Text Editor JRH] Each side then exchanges the wiretap and other data the other side wants, thus without directly incriminating themselves. UKUSA reciprocity treaty “requests” have the force of direct orders to the other country’s intelligence agencies.
The wiretap data is exchanged under bogus traditional claims of the “extreme sensitivity” of “foreign liaison” intelligence, in order to obstruct outside oversight and thus in reality conceal surveillance of questionable legality. The UKUSA arrangements go beyond mere data searches and exchanges, by having, for example, British agents use NSA equipment and facilities on a rental lease basis to spy on the Americans that U.S. agencies want surveilled (and vice versa) so that the best equipment in the best position of access is used.
Former Justice Department Nazi-hunter John Loftus has documented how this British-U.S. “wiretap shell game” works, and pointed out how it is used to spy on political candidates in elections, and is covered up from Congress. Loftus reported:
“Over the years the British back-channel inside the NSA was used for a variety of political dirty tricks. A large number of American candidates for public office have been placed under electronic surveillance by British intelligence officers sitting at their ‘temporary listening post’ at [NSA] Fort Meade.” [Loftus, Secret War Against the Jews, 1997, p. 195]
The media have been saying that their government sources report that the CIA-NSA-FBI intercept targeting of Russians shifted to the targeting of the Trump team by September, 2016-possibly as early as June, 2016. There are reports of rejected FISA court applications in June and July of 2016 which would indicate that change of focus. (Incidentally, rejections by the FISA court are normally almost unheard-of.)
The BBC’s twist on the third alleged try at a FISA warrant, allegedly granted on October 15, was that it was narrowly drawn against only two Russian banks. But the BBC was at pains to assure us that they had an unnamed source who said that “three of Mr. Trump’s associates were the subject of the inquiry.”
“But it’s clear this is about Trump,” the source told the BBC.
New York Times Lies About Its Own Reporting
Meanwhile The New York Times is doubling down on its lies, pretending it never reported that Trump or his aides had been wiretapped, and with supreme chutzpah claims, “It is not clear why Mr. Trump thought he was wiretapped or what led him to make the claim.” Again, look at the front-page New York Times headline.
The New York Times has been forced by confused readers to grudgingly admit that President Trump’s tweets on Obama’s wiretapping actually do “echo certain aspects of The New York Times’s reporting from recent weeks.” But they try to offer up sorry excuses to explain away the glaring contradiction in their own reporting of Obama administration wiretapping of Trump and/or Trump people-and then their denials of it. The New York Times claims that what they originally said was that Obama officials merely investigated past wiretap data in archives of “routine” surveillance already done, but did not wiretap into future data.
But the New York Times stated in January that after past recordings of phone calls of Trump people had been checked, that the FBI “asked” the NSA to continue to “collect as much information as possible”-evidently without restraint or limitations-in what were clearly all future wiretapped calls between Russians and Trump people. It’s known as an intelligence “collection requirement.” (New York Times on January 20 and February 14; see also the BBC on January 12.)
White House spokesman Spicer, days before the Times’ excuse-making, clearly explained that President Trump’s tweets on March 4 were based on open-source news media reporting of the wiretaps-thus including The New York Times-over the last few months.
In fact, the news media have been reporting since at least September 23, 2016, that U.S. intelligence has been “actively monitoring” the “talks” (conversations), “wiretapping” the phone “calls,” and intercepting other communications of Trump aides or Trump himself-communications allegedly made with the Russians.
“Active monitoring” means wiretapping and surveillance of future phone calls, emails, texts, and other communications on an ongoing basis.
Not a shred of any New York Times or other reporting since September, 2016 on the “wiretapping” of Trump and/or his aides has demonstrated any concern whatsoever for Trump’s civil rights or the sanctity of the election process. No concern was expressed by the CIA, FBI, NSA or other agencies, or by the Obama White House-or by the media doing the reporting. In fact, they have been quite excited and eager about the prospect of illegal snooping on Trump.
As White House spokesman Spicer pointed out, efforts were made by Obama officials during their last days in office to lessen the protections of wiretap data in order to spread more widely any highly-sensitive wiretap data on Trump. The New York Times reported on March 1 that the Obama administration’s lowering of “classification levels” of NSA data was done to “spread” the Trump wiretaps around various agencies and even foreign governments (see Obama DNI James Clapper’s orders lowering security protections of raw NSA intercept data, December. 15, 2016).
The New York Times had originally reported on January 12 that this massive lowering of NSA wiretap data security was in contrast to Obama’s previous tightening of regulations in 2014, after the Snowden mass leak, to give “privacy protections to foreigners,” like they were Americans. But not for Trump.
The New York Times headline story on March 1 that said Obama officials had “Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking” also admitted that officials say that alleged Trump collusion with Russia “has not been confirmed” in any of that intelligence wiretap data.
So what were they “rushing” to “preserve?” It is the purported Trump “conspiracy” with Russia that is utterly unsubstantiated and baseless. Wiretapping one’s political opponents in an election, as Obama or his minions have done, is a classic Watergate-style threat to the democratic process.
The Fake “Trump Dossier”
“As part of the inquiry,” wrote The New York Times, this “wiretapping” was done by the CIA, FBI and/or NSA to try to “investigate” the alleged Trump-Russian connections claimed in what is known as the (fake) “Trump dossier”-within a broader investigation of alleged Russian hacking and other supposed election interference (NY Times, January 20, February 14, 2017).
This “Trump dossier” is the controversial document composed by ex-British agent Christopher Steele, who had been paid by Hillary Clinton’s still unidentified backers to do election “opposition research” against then-candidate Trump. It is riddled with absurd self-contradictions and vile allegations against President Trump.
The “dossier” cannot even make up its mind, so to speak, as to whether the Russians did spend “years” passing political dirt on Hillary Clinton to Trump to help “cultivate” relationship with him-or did not in fact ever pass such info to Trump (Steele report, June 20, 2016). There are at least eight different origins of the hacked or leaked DNC emails claimed in the “dossier,” including that Trump hacked them, not the Russians, or that they were all just “created” or “made up.”
The one-party opposition media have managed to ignore the ridiculous contents of the bogus “Trump dossier” with its raving lunatic absurdities.
For example, thousands of Russian retirement “pensioners,” according to the “dossier,” did the hacking of the DNC emails and passed them on to Russian officials, apparently in secret meetings at (we infer) park benches and shuffleboard affairs in Miami and elsewhere (Steele reports 095 and 111 and Newsweek, November 4, 2016).
These Russian retirement pensioners living in the U.S. are “hacking…cyberoperatives” according to Newsweek, in its pre-election article heavily based on Steele’s “Trump dossier,” oblivious to the patent absurdity of the claim.
You will not hear about that from the anti-Trump media, which so desperately wants the “Trump dossier” to be believed, regardless of whether any of it is true.
Former Justice Department Nazi-hunter, John Loftus, has explained how this US-British reciprocity scheme-or “wiretap shell game,” as he calls it-works. Loftus’ evidence of the top secret trick of US-British, NSA-GCHQ wiretapping of Americans is based on numerous NSA sources and others from many agencies stretching back decades, including censorship of this information from his and another expert’s early book manuscripts because of “classification” (Loftus, Secret War Against the Jews, 1997, pp. 188-195, 548-9).
According to Loftus this is how the illegal wiretapping “game” is played:
“… the NSA headquarters [at Fort Meade, Md.] is also the chief British espionage base in the United States. The presence of British wiretappers at the keyboards of American eavesdropping computers is a closely guarded secret….”
“The NSA is a giant vacuum cleaner. It sucks in every form of electronic information, from telephone calls to telegrams, across the United States. The presence of British personnel is essential for the American wiretappers to claim plausible deniability.
“Here’s how the game is played. The British liaison officer at [NSA Hq] Fort Meade types the [NSA-supplied] target list of ‘suspects’ into the American computer. The NSA computer sorts through its wiretaps and gives the British officer the recording of any American citizen he wants.
“Since it is technically a British target of surveillance, no American search warrant is necessary. [Loftus’ italics] The British officer then simply hands the results over to his American liaison officer. Of course, the Americans provide the same service to the British in return….”
“According to our sources, this duplicitous, reciprocal arrangement disguises the most massive, and illegal, domestic espionage apparatus in the world….
“Through this charade, the intelligence services of each country can claim that they are not targeting their own citizens. The targeting is done by an authorized foreign agent, the intelligence liaison resident in Britain or the United States” [Loftus, pp. 189-190; endnotes omitted].
Loftus describes how the courts tried to shut down some of the domestic wiretapping abuses, and how the FBI succeeded in evading the judiciary. Then the Bureau got its dream come true with the FISA law, which only applied to U.S. agencies, not the British:
“In 1978 Congress finally passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FIS) Act [or FISA], a feeble attempt to stamp out some of the worst excesses of domestic espionage…. [But FISA] was restricted only to targeting by American agencies, leaving the British liaison officer with a major loophole. The restrictive language added to the FIS Act [FISA] left unchanged the arrangement under which the British wiretapped American suspects and then passed on the information to the NSA.”
“To this day Congress does not realize that the British liaison officers at the NSA are still free to use American equipment to spy on American citizens. And, in fact, they are doing just that. Congress has been kept in the dark deliberately” [Loftus, pp. 191-2].
Naturally, such dirty-trick U.S.-British spying schemes have led to political abuses. In a comment of eerie timeliness today, with the claims of Obama directing the wiretapping of candidate Trump through British intelligence, Loftus states that:
“Over the years the British back-channel inside the NSA was used for a variety of political dirty tricks. A large number of American candidates for public office have been placed under electronic surveillance by British intelligence officers sitting at their ‘temporary listening post’ at [NSA] Fort Meade.” [Loftus, p. 195]
The views expressed in the articles published inFamilySecurityMatters.org are those of the authors. These views should not be construed as the views of FamilySecurityMatters.org or of the Family Security Foundation, Inc., as an attempt to help or prevent the passage of any legislation, or as an intervention in any political campaign for public office. COPYRIGHT 2016 FAMILY SECURITY MATTERS INC.
You’d think after the election cycle that the Dems would be content to stall the GOP/Trump agenda by whatever legal means necessary, right?
Unfortunately, it is becoming clear that the Soros/Obama and probably Clinton faction of the Dems have become so unhinged for losing to President Trump that between November 8, 2016 and Inauguration Day January 20, 2017; the Leftist Moonbats conspired a shadow government disruption of the Trump Administration.
So, the question every American that honors America’s Founding Documents should be, “WHY?”
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and Ranking Member Schiff have approved the Scope of Investigation for the inquiry by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence into the Russian active measures campaign targeting the 2016 U.S. election.
One of the issues is: What possible leaks of classified information took place related to the Intelligence Community Assessment of these matters?
There is an easy way to answer this: subpoena the Post columnist getting the leaks. We know who he is. Read my column.
Do you believe in elected constitutional government? Or should the “deep state” run our affairs as a nation?
A great conservative lawyer, Larry Klayman, has described in detail what the “alternative government” is doing to the Trump Administration.
President Trump gave a good speech on Tuesday night, but his presidency is still hanging by a thread. Attorney Larry Klayman says an “alternative government” in the intelligence community continues to target him. “These intelligence agencies are more powerful than the president himself,” Klayman said on the Fox Business Network. “They have the ability to blackmail people in this administration to the point that the American people’s interests are going to be subverted.”
Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch, said, “How can he [President Trump] represent the interests of the American people when he knows the NSA is likely wiretapping everything he says with foreign leaders and everyone else?”
It may seem like ancient history, but the media used to be concerned about surveillance of American citizens by U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies. After President Trump was elected, such concern suddenly disappeared. In fact, the media became the recipients of illegal leaks of private conversations by Trump administration officials. One such leak forced the resignation of national security adviser Michael T. Flynn.
Claude Barfield, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), writes that there was nothing improper with U.S. intelligence surveillance of phone calls to and from the Russian ambassador. However, in regard to Flynn, existing law does not permit the NSA or FBI to “listen to the communications of Americans who may be caught in…eavesdropping.”
The allegation that Flynn violated “the ancient 18th century Logan Act that forbids diplomatic activity by private U.S. citizens is no longer relevant, according to almost all legal experts,” notes Barfield. So the wiretaps could not be justified on that flimsy basis.
Flynn was forced out on the equally spurious grounds that he forgot to tell Vice President Mike Pence about elements of the conversations he had with the Russian official.
Barfield says that “a criminal—and certainly civil rights—violation did occur with the public leaks of the details of his conversations with the foreign ambassador from someone (or some persons) in the intelligence community.” The leak violated the Espionage Act, which makes intentional disclosure of classified “communications intelligence activities” a felony. What’s more, citing Timothy H. Edgar of Brown University, it is also a crime for national security officials “to leverage legitimate foreign intelligence collection to reveal public information in order to damage [an] individual they do not believe should serve.”
It is well-known that Flynn’s appointment as national security adviser was opposed by elements in the intelligence community, especially the CIA.
Edgar writes that “Flynn himself may be the first victim of civil liberties abuse during the Trump administration.” He says, “If officials had concerns about Flynn, the law requires they lodge those complaints through the system and not through leaks.”
This means that some intelligence officials viewed Flynn as a threat and wanted him out, using any means possible.
Edgar suggests that Flynn call the ACLU for legal help, but a far better course of action would be to call litigator Larry Klayman, who says it’s clear that “the NSA is spying on the President, his White House, and the administration in general.”
Klayman believes that “loyalists to former President Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton, and their leftist comrades” are behind the illegal surveillance.
Former Congressman Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) told Newsmax TV that the NSA “can collect on the Russian embassy, no problem,” but that “when they collect on an American, whether it’s here in the United States or when we collect inadvertently on an American overseas, that information immediately should be what we call minimized. The name should be taken away.”
“Hoekstra explained that a court order must be granted in order to receive permission to release the name of any American captured by the NSA’s spying techniques,” the Newsmax story said.
Rather than be minimized or eliminated, the name was illegally leaked to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius. We discussed this sequence of events in the column, “Why the CIA Wants to Destroy Flynn.” Ignatius quoted “a senior U.S. government official” as the source of the information about Flynn.
During his appearance on the Fox Business Channel, Klayman discussed this illegal surveillance and offered to represent Flynn in a legal action. He repeated his claim that the intelligence community was engaged in illegal surveillance not only of Flynn but of other Trump officials, including the President himself.
Klayman has asked for an emergency hearing on this matter from Judge Richard Leon, who had previously ruled in Klayman’s favor in a lawsuit against NSA surveillance. He said the evidence suggests the existence of an “alternative government,” based in the intelligence community, which is more powerful than elected officials.
On the same program, a clip was played of Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, saying that the Flynn case represented an abuse of authority. He said that Flynn had his telephone call listened to by the government and leaked to the press, and that if this had happened to a member of the Obama administration, “you can imagine the Democrats in the House and Senate would be going crazy…”
Nunes said that, in order for the intelligence community to listen to an American such as Flynn, a special warrant is required. “I am quite sure this wasn’t done in this case,” he said.
The Washington Monthly, a liberal publication, published a story by Martin Longman that began, “When it comes to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, I have long seen him as an informal member of the intelligence community who often acts as their mouthpiece.” Longman concluded that “the intelligence community took down Flynn…”
The official bio for Ignatius mentions that he covered the CIA when he worked for The Wall Street Journal.
At the Post, Ignatius has expressed concern about whether Obama CIA director John Brennan’s “modernization” of the agency will survive Trump. “After interviewing several dozen CIA officers and veterans over the past several months,” Ignatius wrote, “my conclusion is that Brennan’s reforms should continue…”
Based on stories like this, it would appear that Ignatius is more than willing, even anxious, to advertise his CIA connections.
Any investigation of what Trump calls “illegal leaks” should begin with him.
TRUMP TWEETS HIS OUTRAGE OVER OBAMA WIRE TAPPING TRUMP TOWER DURING CAMPAIGN
In a possible reaction to a Breitbart storypublished yesterday, in which writer, Joel Pollak, detailed Mark Levin’s analysis of ten ways the Obama administration tried to undermine the presidential campaign and administration of Donald Trump.
June 2016: FISA request.The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.
October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.
The article sums up the ten actions, Levin says, should be the target of a Congressional investigation:
In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
In response, President Trump began tweeting for all to see.
The minutemen were among the first people to fight in the American Revolution; their teams constituted about a quarter of the entire militia. Generally younger and more mobile, they served as part of a network for early response. They provided a highly mobile, rapidly deployed force that allowed the colonies to respond immediately to war threats, hence the name.
The term has also been applied to various later United States civilian-based military forces to recall the success and patriotism of the originals.
MinutemenNews.com honors the minuteman spirit: patriotic, politically enthused, poised to help when the need arises.
This website is not just about publishing the latest and most relevant news. It’s not just about informing individuals. It’s about facilitating community and fostering conversation. It’s about seeing a new media militia supporting each other and becoming increasingly equipped to challenge the progressive onslaught.
So, we want to hear your opinions. So after you’ve read an article, please leave a comment. When you receive a newsletter from us, with links to the most important stories of the day, please consider clicking one of the headlines and typing your thoughts at the end of the article. Make an impact, make your voice heard, share your insights, learn from others.
Again, we value your being part of MinutemenNews.com. We’re looking forward to getting to know you on this website.
With patriotic appreciation,
The Minutemen (and Minutewomen) at MinutemenNews.com
I’m probably a bit behind the curve on this; nevertheless I am pleased to announce the Leftists annoyed with Sheriff Joe Arpaio were duly defeated in their moronic efforts to get a recall election on the books in Maricopa County Arizona. The Left Wingnuts failed to turn in the 355,000 needed signatures of registered voters to force a recall vote.
The Left Wingnuts were probably organized in Arizona but their financial backing came from out of State. And so it is fair to guess that much of Arpaio’s campaign support came from outside of Arizona as well. That works for me since the Obama Administration was paramount in punishing Arpaio politically through the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security.
Did I mention the Obama Administration is wracked with scandal for using government tools to persecute individual Conservatives and Conservative organizations? I would not be surprised to discover Arpaio was part of an IRS investigation or a Justice Department investigation because of the good Sheriff’s anti-Obama political stand.