Video: BOMBSHELLS: Nunes Says Strzok-Page ‘Insurance Policy’ Part of Original FISA Spy Application

And exculpatory evidence exists for Papadopoulos


By Jon Dougherty
TheNationalSentinel.com

In an explosive and revealing interview Tuesday night with Fox News‘ Sean Hannity, House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes dropped a couple of bombshells related to the Obama regime’s “Spygate” scandal aimed at taking down President Donald Trump.

— Nunes told Hannity that he and congressional investigators believe that while the “bulk” of the original FISA application was based on the likely uncorroborated “Steele Dossier,” the other portion dealt with the “insurance policy” that former FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page discussed in texts — a policy aimed at keeping Trump out of the White House.

“Remember the talk of the insurance policy?” Nunes said. “We believe that insurance policy is not just about investigating the Trump campaign. We believe it is to ensure that they were able to get the FISA warrant on Carter Page so they could go in and look at all the emails in the campaign.”

That, as Hannity noted, was a way for the Obamaites to “get a back door into the Trump campaign,” for which Nunes agreed, “and even the Trump presidency.”

“It’s horrible what they have done to many Americans,” Nunes continued. But it’s worse than that, he continued.

“We’ve been living for three years with the perverted fantasies of [Fusion GPS founder] Glenn Simpson and the Clinton campaign” regarding the fake Russian collusion narrative, said Nunes. He added that a sizable portion of Americans still believe that narrative is true, despite the fact that special counsel Robert Mueller has ‘officially’ debunked it and no investigation in Congress or the FBI has turned up any evidence that it’s true.

“Those [Americans] have been poisoned,” he said, adding that “at some point” Fusion, the Clinton campaign, and the FBI “became intertwined, and they were working in conjunction on this.”

— Bombshell No. 2: Nunes said the FBI actually has “exculpatory evidence” regarding onetime Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos, who was indicted by Mueller and convicted of allegedly lying to federal agents.

But the bureau won’t give it up.

“We believe there is information on Papadopoulos that is exculpatory that should be out there,” Nunes said. “It rests at the FBI. We’ve asked for it to be declassified. That’s really all I can say about it. It’s exculpatory evidence.”

Americans of either political party or no political party should be seriously outraged at the manner in which Barack Obama politicized the U.S. intelligence community, the FBI, the Justice Department, and the FISA court to spy on a presidential campaign and for no other reason than the pursuit of raw power — the power to continue governing through Hillary Clinton.

Thank God for President Trump and for lawmakers like Devin Nunes, who continue to pursue this scandal to the bitter end so that Americans still concerned about the future of our republic can vote accordingly.

 

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Robert Mueller’s 10 Most Egregious Missteps During Anti-Trump Russia Investigation


Last week’s testimony by Attorney General William Barr confirmed these blunders and bared additional concerns with the probe into Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election.

 

By Margot Cleveland
TheFederalist.com

The release of the special counsel’s report in April exposed several significant missteps Robert Mueller made over the last two years. Last week’s testimony by Attorney General William Barr before the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed these blunders and bared additional concerns with Mueller’s handling of the probe into Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election and President Trump’s supposed collusion and obstruction of justice.

Here are ten.
 

1. Mueller Spent $30 Million But Didn’t Do His Job

The special counsel probe reportedly cost more than $30 million, yet Mueller failed to do his job. Federal regulations expressly provide that at the conclusion of the special counsel’s work he must “provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.”

But in Volume 2 of the special counsel report, which addressed whether Trump obstructed justice, Mueller “determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment” of whether “to initiate or decline a prosecution.” Instead, Mueller passed the prosecutorial buck and spent some 200 pages sliming Trump.
 

(c) Closing documentation.  At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.
 

During an earlier press conference, Barr stressed that Mueller had flouted his prosecutorial responsibilities by rendering a non-decision: “The very prosecutorial function and all our powers as prosecutors, including the power to convene grand juries and compulsory process that’s involved there, is for one purpose only. It’s to determine yes or no, was alleged conduct criminal or not criminal. That is our responsibility and that’s why we have the tools we have. And we don’t go through this process just to collect information and throw it out to the public.”

Barr reiterated this point during last week’s hearing, again stressing that the special counsel “was appointed to carry out the investigative and prosecutorial functions of the Department.” The attorney general noted that both he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein were “surprised” when they first learned Mueller would not make a decision about obstruction, and he called it “irresponsible” to release Mueller’s report without providing such a decision.

The attorney general continued: “The function of the Department of Justice in this arena is to determine whether or not there has been criminal conduct. It’s a binary decision. Is there enough evidence to show a crime and do we believe a crime has been committed? We don’t conduct criminal investigations just to collect information and put it out to the public. We do so to make a decision.”
 

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Criminal Indictments Are Coming For Obama/Clinton Associates


Normally such a claim would cause more than a few eye rolls and shakes of the head as for a very long time, the upper echelons of the Deep State continued to dance just beyond the realm of real legal accountability for their nefarious actions. Former U.S. prosecutor Joe diGenova is a proven reliable source, though, and so if he says indictments are coming, he’s likely right.

The question then is if someone like John Brennan will take all the heat or if he will choose to point at those who approved his actions—namely figures like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Valerie Jarrett.

The situation in D.C. is getting VERY interesting these days…

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

5 Times The Mueller Probe Broke Prosecutorial Rules That Ensure Justice


 
There are rules against using the power and authority of a prosecutor to smear a defendant without giving him his day in court.
 

By Adam Mill
TheFederalist.com

 

CNN recently published an article arguing that Special Counsel Robert Mueller should not have issued a report suggesting the president may have committed obstruction of justice without actually reaching this conclusion. CNN is obviously disappointed because inside the leftist echo chamber the obstruction case seems undisputable.

For example, the Mueller report suggests that the president committed some kind of sin for wanting to fire former FBI director James Comey for being a party to the plot to blackmail or frame the president. Some believe presidents should fire FBI chiefs who participate in hoaxes against their boss.

Mueller did no favor to CNN’s client Democrats, who now face three terrible choices: (1) Impeach President Trump using their majority in the House, which will lead to a self-destructive trial in the Senate; (2) Drop it and move on in defiance of a rabid get-Trump base; or (3) use their majority in the House to drag the country through a Mueller 2.0 investigation, which runs the risk of distracting from Democratic messaging in the upcoming 2020 election.

Like Aesop’s scorpion on the frog’s back, the partisans on Mueller’s team just couldn’t help themselves. The Mueller report poisons public opinion without bringing charges. It should have been written on a postcard, because the outcome of a criminal proceeding is binary: Guilty or not guilty. There’s no middle ground under constitutional principles. President Trump is not guilty until the Senate convicts him otherwise.

Do you remember why Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein wrote that Comey should be fired? If Rosenstein is still capable of embarrassment, it must have been hard to stand behind the lectern as he did what he has told us prosecutors and cops should never do.

Let’s review his words about Comey: “the [FBI]Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation. Derogatory information sometimes is disclosed in the course of criminal investigations and prosecutions, but we never release it gratuitously. The Director laid out his version of the facts for the news media as if it were a closing argument, but without a trial. It is a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do.”

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

7 Glaring Omissions In The Mueller Report That Kill Its Credibility



 
While there is much within the Mueller report that suggests skepticism was well-founded,
what is perhaps most probative is what the report omitted.
 
By Ben Weingarten
TheFederalist.com
 

Robert Mueller’s special counsel was presented to the American public as unimpeachable. From its beginning, a distinct minority in politics and media, including several Federalist writers, were skeptical, citing the special counsel’s past prosecutorial abuses, the past alleged misconduct of its pivotal investigators, and the team’s peculiar partisan makeup.

Once in action, its seemingly limitless powers, heavy-handed usage of such powers, and more questionable if not dubious indictments, far removed from “collusion,” seemed to confirm our worst fears. While there is much within the Mueller report that further suggests this skepticism was well-founded, what is perhaps most probative is what the report omitted.

The following are seven of the most glaring omissions from the collusion section of the redacted Mueller report—since collusion, not obstruction, was the theory from which the investigation stemmed.
 

1. No Attempt to Grapple with the Investigation’s Troubling Underpinnings

Russiagate in many ways appears to be the fruit of a poisonous tree of epic proportions. Allegations of a treasonous Russian conspiracy led to beyond novel legal theories, including the ludicrous invocation of the Logan Act, pervasive unmasking, spying on a presidential campaign by a political adversary based in part on a salacious and unverified dossier gleaned from sketchy Russian sources by a foreign agent and paid for by an opposition campaign, chicanerous circularity in the warrants backing the spying, the use of informants to perhaps entrap campaign members, a deluge of leaks (some of which were illegal), and much else.

We can layer on top of these malevolent acts the biases, ethical infractions, outright criminality, and clear double standards applied by law enforcement figures common to the Trump-Russia and Hillary Clinton emails investigations.

The collusion section of the Mueller special counsel report barely addresses any of the foregoing. How could such an investigation have any credibility without dealing with any, if not all of these issues?
 

2. No Discussion of Whether the Special Counsel’s Appointment Was Legitimate

From the special counsel’s inception, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy and others have harped on a single fundamental question: Was the special counsel appointed in accordance with Department of Justice (DOJ) regulations?

A special counsel must be appointed based on a criminal investigation. The Mueller special counsel stemmed from a counterintelligence investigation. A special counsel’s scope must be tailored to “a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.” The Mueller special counsel order did not seem to adhere to this standard, and in practice, its scope was virtually unlimited.

The Mueller report does not even attempt to address this basic challenge to its legitimacy. Nor does it deal with the arguable conflicts of interest and improper actions taken by those associated with its creation, including former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, former FBI director James Comey, and the man overseeing the special counsel, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein—who, as Sean Davis points out, was a participant, witness, and perhaps target of the investigation himself.
 

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Mark Levin Blasts Mueller Report As 'Impreachment' Manual For House Dems and Media


The Mueller report is a 400-page, $35 million op-ed that amounts to an “impeachment report” for the liberal media and House Democrats, argued Mark Levin on his Sunday program, “Life, Liberty & Levin." '

The Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s nearly two-year investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election found “no collusion” between President Trump and Russia. The Department of Justice released a redacted version of the report in two volumes on Thursday

Levin called the result a "pathetic joke of a report" that established nothing the general public didn't already know and its findings didn't warrant a "special investigation."

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Mueller's Report Exposes an Empire of Bullshit


 

By James Howard Kunstler
Kunstler.com

After two years of gaslighting the public while it blew smoke up America’s ass, the Jacobin news media enjoyed its final feeding frenzy with the release of the 400-page Mueller report. They expected 1000 pounds of raw filet mignon, but it turned out to be tofu fried in olestra. The ensuing fugue of hyperventilating hysteria was also duly expected and William Barr stoically endured their hebephrenic peevings at the release ceremony — a press conference which itself offended the media.

The threats and raving continued all the livelong day and far into the peeper-filled night with CNN’s Chris Cuomo blustering “It’s time to rumble,” and the lugubrious hack David Gergen muttering soulfully, “This was not fake news,” and The Times’ Maggie Haberman fuming that the White House had played the “Nazi anthem” Edelweiss — very fake news, it turned out, since the tune was written for Rodgers’ and Hammerstein’s 1959 Broadway show, The Sound of Music (and sung by the anti-Nazi hero Baron von Trapp).

Meanwhile Rachel Maddow had the balls to confab in prime time with disgraced former FBI mandarin Andy McCabe, officially identified as a liar by his own colleagues at the agency. What a circus of perfidious freakery!

Understand that the Mueller Report itself was the mendacious conclusion to a deceitful investigation, the purpose of which was to conceal the criminal conduct of US government officials meddling in the 2016 election, in collusion with the Hillary Clinton campaign, to derail Mr. Trump’s campaign, and then disable him when he managed to win the election. Mr. Mueller was theoretically trying to save the FBI’s reputation, but he may have only succeeded in injuring it more gravely.

The whole wicked business began as a (failed) entrapment scheme using shadowy US Intel “assests” Stefan Halper and Joseph Mifsud to con small fish Papadopoulos and Carter Page into incriminating themselves (they declined to be conned) and moved on to ploys like the much-touted Trump Tower meeting to ensnare Trump Junior and then to several efforts (also failed) to flip Paul Manafort, and Michael Cohen — the final product of which was an epic failure to find one instance of real chargeable criminal collusion between anyone connected to Mr. Trump and Russia.

By the way, the Mueller Report failed to mention that the two Russians present in that August 2016 Trump Tower meeting, lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin, were on the payroll of Hillary Clinton’s oppo research contractor Fusion GPS, and met with that company’s principal, Glenn Simpson, both before and after the meeting — just one example among many of the Mueller Team’s shifty tactics, but a move that speaks volumes about Mr. Mueller’s actual intent, which was to keep his prosecutorial circus going as long as possible to interfere with Mr. Trump carrying out his own duties.

The Special Prosecutor’s main bit of mischief, of course, was his refusal to reach a conclusionon the obstruction of justice charge. What the media refuses to accept and make clear is that a prosecutor’s failure to reach a conclusion is exactly the same thing as an inability to make a case, and it was a breach of Mr. Mueller’s duty to dishonestly present that failure as anything but that in his report — and possibly an act of criminal prosecutorial misconduct.

Like any tantrum, the media’s frenzy will run out of steam (and credibility) and now they will be whipped like dogs for betraying their public trust. There is a counter-narrative to the “Resistance” narrative, and it is a true crime story. That suppressed story is finally going to roll out in the implacable workings of actual (not fake) justice and it is going to crush a lot of people who concocted this epic political hoax, including some members of the press who knowingly and dishonestly abetted it.

Many criminal referrals have already been made on the likes of James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Bruce Ohr, and a big net has been cast to pull in the figures who have been hiding in the thickets lo these two-and-a-half-years of smoke and gaslight: Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, William Brennan, James Clapper, Nellie Ohr, Samantha Power, Bill Priestap, Jim Rybicki, James Baker, Mike Kortan, John Carlin, Mary McCord, Josh Campbell and more. Some of these are going to jail and some have already flipped.

The fetchings should reach the Obama White House. Mr. Mueller himself, even in his majestic granitic silence, will be liable for failing to inform his boss, the Attorney General, that the predicate document for his witch hunt was known to be a fraud back in 2016, and was used anyway to spy on a presidential candidate.

Let congress put on a carnival of its own now. It will be greeted like a TV commercial for a hemorrhoid remedy while the real national psychodrama plays out in grand juries and courtrooms, demonstrating what a grievous injury was done to this republic by its own vested authorities.

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Giuliani Reacts To Details Emerging From Mueller Report


You're not going to find a darn thing' in special counsel Robert Mueller's report that shows that the Trump campaign 'had any kind of connection with whatever the Russians were doing,' says President Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)