President Trump Orders Intel Community: Declassify Docs And Fully Cooperate With AG Barr


By Sara Carter
SaraCarter.com


President Donald Trump directed the intelligence community Thursday to “quickly and fully cooperate” with Department of Justice Attorney General William Barr’s investigation into surveillance activities during the 2016 presidential election, said White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders.

In Thursday’s memo Trump ordered the Department of State, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, Secretary of Energy, Homeland Security, Director of National Intelligence and the director of the CIA to assist Barr in his review of the activities of the agencies during the FBI’s probe into alleged – now debunked – collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

“Today, at the request and recommendation of the Attorney General of the United States, President Donald J. Trump directed the intelligence community to quickly and fully cooperate with the Attorney General’s investigation into surveillance activities during the 2016 Presidential election,” said Sanders in a statement released late Thursday. “The Attorney General has also been delegated full and complete authority to declassify information pertaining to this investigation, in accordance with the long established standards for handling classified information.”

“Today’s action will help ensure that all Americans learn the truth about the events that occurred, and the actions that were taken, during the last Presidential election and will restore confidence in our public institutions,” she added.

The review will be expansive, according to the memo and department’s involved. Declassification and downgrading of highly classified material will be involved, as stated in the president’s memo.

Documents expected to be declassified range from possible exculpatory evidence pertaining to short term Trump campaign advisors Carter Page and George Papadopolous.

Lawmakers have been calling on Trump to declassify the documents for more than a year.  Those documents include the DOJ’s Gang of Eight briefing notebook that was presented only to a select group of lawmakers in the Senate and House last summer, who have access to classified material, according to numerous congressional sources.

The third bulk of documents consists of 12 interviews the FBI conducted with DOJ official Bruce Ohr in 2016 regarding his communications with former British spy Christopher Steele, who compiled the anti-Trump unverified dossier. Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, worked for the now embattled research firm Fusion GPS, that was hired by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign to investigate alleged ties between Trump’s campaign and Russia. Steele was hired by Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, who among others has testified to Congress about his role.

From Trump’s Memo:

With respect to any matter classified under Executive Order 13526 of December 29, 2009 (Classified National Security Information), the Attorney General may, by applying the standard set forth in either section 3.1(a) or section 3.1(d) of Executive Order 13526, declassify, downgrade, or direct the declassification or downgrading of information or intelligence that relates to the Attorney General’s review referred to in section 1 of this memorandum.  Before exercising this authority, the Attorney General should, to the extent he deems it practicable, consult with the head of the originating intelligence community element or department.  This authority is not delegable and applies notwithstanding any other authorization or limitation set forth in Executive Order 13526.

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

Video: AG Barr on FBI “Spygate” Explanations: “Inadequate” and “Don’t Hang Together”…


TheConservativeTreehouse.com

Fox News correspondent Bill Hemmer interviewed U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr in El Salvador during a visit to address the crisis on the U.S-Mexico border, MS-13, drug trafficking and human trafficking.

During the interview Bill Hemmer asked about AG Barr’s ongoing review of DOJ and FBI activity during the 2016 election.

 

BARR: “I’ve been trying to get answers to the questions and I’ve found that a lot of the answers have been inadequate and some of the explanations I’ve gotten don’t hang together, in a sense I have more questions today than when I first started.”

HEMMER: “What doesn’t hang together?”

BARR: “Some of the explanations of what occurred.”

HEMMER: “Why does that matter?”

BARR: “People have to find out what the government was doing during that period. If we’re worried about foreign influence, for the very same reason we should be worried about whether government officials abuse their power and put their thumb on the scale.”

 

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

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)

Video: Levin: Impanel Grand Jury NOW


By Jon Dougherty
TheNationalSentinel.com

It’s pretty obvious that fired FBI Director James Comey is getting nervous about his future because he’s projecting what it could possibly be onto POTUS Donald Trump.

On Thursday, Comey continued to insist that president is guilty — of something — and that if he loses in 2020, he could be summarily indicted by the Justice Department for — something — after he officially leaves office.

The Washington Times reported:

Former FBI Director James B. Comey said Thursday that he thinks President Trump likely has committed crimes that could be cause for indictment once he leaves office and, were he not president, likely would already have been indicted.

In a CNN town-hall-style meeting, Mr. Comey was asked by host Anderson Cooper whether Mr. Trumpacted with corrupt intent to interfere with an ongoing investigation.

“It sure looks that way,” Mr. Comey replied, saying he based that judgment on his reading of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report and leaning most heavily on Mr. Trump’s order to White House Counsel Don McGahn to fire Mr. Mueller.

Boy, for a ‘Republican,’ Comey has sure become a fav of the Left-wing media these days, hasn’t he? The worst part for him is that he appeared on CNN, which means hardly anyone saw him.

Never mind that, according to Attorney General William Barr, former special counsel Robert Mueller told him specifically that his decision not to file any charges against the president had nothing to do with Justice Department policy regarding the indictment of a sitting president. Asked whether the Justice Department’s policy against indicting a sitting president “had anything to do with” Mueller’s refusal to reach a decision on obstruction of justice, Barr responded that Mueller “made it very clear that … [h]e was not saying that but for the [Office of Legal Counsel] OLC opinion, he would have found a crime.”

And never mind that no matter what the president said, he never ‘obstructed’ Mueller’s probe. He provided documents, witnesses, and resources; never fired Mueller or anyone on his staff; never ordered him fired; never actually impeded the probe on any level. So…obstruction? How?

But let’s play along. Recall that Comey is the hack who allowed Hillary Clinton — allowed her — to get away scot-free after her serial criminal violations of the Espionage Act, having exchanged highly classified information via her home-brew, unsecured email server.

And why? Because Comey was just so sure that’s who he’d be working for come January 2017 when it came time to inaugurate a new president.

Wrong.

Continue Reading

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

Video: Louie Gohmert Fires Back At Dems: The Real Scandal Is Attempted Coup’ Against President Trump


Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, has had enough of Democrats targeting Attorney General William Barr, describing what he considers a nonsensical campaign to place the head of the Justice Department in contempt of Congress.

Gohmert told his colleagues that the true scandal is the Obama intelligence apparatus’ “attempted coup” against President Trump.

“We’ve never had the Intelligence Community, the FBI, people at the top of the DOJ abusing their powers to create a case against a president where there was none. Where assets were actually used to try to set up members of the Trump campaign when there was no case. To try to create a case. We ought to be all over that. We ought to be demanding answers,” Gohmert said.

 

“This was an attempted coup, and history is bringing that into focus more and more clearly,” he added. “And what does this committee do about the abuses, the attempted coup? It comes in and decides, ‘We’re going to go after the attorney general who’s trying to clean up the mess.’”

On Wednesday, Democrats on the committee successfully pushed through a measure to hold AG Barr in contempt of Congress. The House Judiciary Committee voted along party lines.

President Trump has invoked executive privilege over select contents of the Mueller report. The move coincided with the Democrat-led committee’s decision to advance the contempt of Congress measure. It will now head to the House for a full floor vote.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders defended the move as a response to the “blatant abuse of power” by House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

“Neither the White House nor Attorney General Barr will comply with Chairman Nadler’s unlawful and reckless demands,” Sanders added.

In an op-ed for Fox News, California RNC Committeewoman Harmeet Dhillon described the Democrat initiative in the Judiciary Committee as “long on partisanship but short on historical memory.”

Dhillon writes:

Two examples demonstrate House Democrats’ true motivation. One, as they hurl vicious personal attacks on Barr, calling him a liar and various other slurs and fixating on his March 24 letter to Congress, House Democrats conveniently ignore that 92 percent of the report has been available to the American public to review for weeks. They hope by repeating their invective to create a new political “fire” because the report itself did not provide them the fuel to keep their Russian collusion and obstruction of justice narrative of the past two and a half years going through the 2020 election.

 

  • 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)

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)