Video: Reality Check: FBI Spy Embedded in the Trump Campaign?


The FBI planted a spy in the Trump campaign? Turns out that claim is true. But the story is so much deeper than that. Who that spy has turned out to be, is a man with CIA connections who has inserted himself into presidential campaigns before. This is a Reality Check you won't get anywhere else.

 

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

Video: New Revelation Mueller’s Lawyers Obtained ‘Special Status’ Show Probe is Unconstitutional Under Article II


LEVIN DROPS A MOAB:

Constitutional expert Mark Levin dropped a MOAB on Mueller’s witch hunt Tuesday evening, arguing the ‘special status’ obtained by the special counsel’s lawyers show the probe is unconstitutional under Article II.

As previously reported, Robert Mueller and his team of liberal hack lawyers know they don’t stand a chance in Judge Ellis’ court so they are running a shady, legal shell game to salvage their case against Paul Manafort.

Mueller’s lawyers filed for, and obtained an obscure special status giving them dual roles as not only special counsel prosecutors, but also as ‘Special Assistant US Attorneys (SAUSAs) which could make it difficult for Judge Ellis to hand the case over to other prosecutors.

According to Politico’s reporting, this special status given to Mueller’s lawyers theoretically allows them to rove around and pursue matters outside of the special counsel’s mandate.

This bombshell revelation may be the key to dismantling Mueller’s entire operation, says Mark Levin.

Since Mueller’s lawyers have dual status as US Attorneys, that makes Mueller a US Attorney rather than a Special Counsel. Only a President can appoint a US Attorney. By appointing Mueller, Rod Rosenstein usurped the President of the United States.

THIS IS A HUGE DEVELOPMENT.

Via Fox News:

Levin said the attorneys in the case before an Alexandria, Va. federal judge are simultaneously considered “Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys.”

He said that therefore, their direct supervisor — Mueller — should be lawfully considered a “roving” U.S. Attorney.

He said the Constitution designates the president as the person who must nominate all “principal officers” — including U.S. attorneys and cabinet members.

But, Mueller was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and was not confirmed by the Senate, as anyone working as a U.S. attorney should be by law, according to Levin.

Levin said that the scenario therefore “violates the Constitution [via] the Appointments Clause” in Article II.

“Rosenstein usurped the authority of the president of the United States to nominate whoever he wants as a prosecutor,” Levin said.

“Mr. Mueller is serving unconstitutionally in violation of the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution because of the way Rod Rosenstein appointed him.”

Watch Mark Levin break it down:

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

Video: Nunes: DOJ or FBI Is Leaking About Informant, So ‘Show Us the Information’


 
 
 

 

 

By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com

House intelligence committee chairman Devin Nunes said he still has not received "specific documents" from the Justice Department about an alleged FBI informant who reportedly met with two or three members of the Trump campaign.

“They continue to leak out things about this informant,” Nunes told Fox News’s Maria Bartiromo on Sunday.

“And we don't know if there's one informant or more informants, because there's so much out there now, it's really getting tough to follow, and all we're asking is, give us the documentation that you used to start this investigation."

Nunes noted that the Steele dossier -- opposition research paid for by the DNC and the Clinton campaign -- was used to get a FISA warrant to surveil Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. "So we're trying to get to the bottom of, you know, what else was used in that FISA, because you have many people in the Department of Justice who claim that we're wrong (that the Steele dossier was the sole basis for the warrant). So, if we're wrong, show us the information,” Nunes said.

Former FBI Director Jim Comey recently told Fox News's Bret Baier that the FISA warrant did not depend solely on the unverified, salacious Steele dossier. Comey said he recollects that the FISA warrant stemmed from a "broader mosaic of facts that were laid before the FISA judge."

“Yeah, we're looking for the pieces of Mr. Comey and the FBI's mosaic," Nunes said. "We have a right to get the information, if James Comey and many others…people that are currently at the Department of Justice today continue to say there is nothing to see here. Well, if there's nothing to see here, show us the documents that we're asking for. And they refuse to do it.”

Nunes said someone at the Justice Department or FBI continues to "leak" following Nunes' and Rep. Trey Gowdy’s recent meeting at the Justice Department to discuss the documents they want to see.

"We're not going to go to another meeting where we don't get documents and then the meeting leaks out,” Nunes said. “And this should make people very suspicious. They were trying to get Mr. Gowdy and I to go on Friday to the Department of Justice for supposedly another briefing. We said, look, unless we're going to get documents -- we found out Thursday night they were not going to provide documents -- so therefore, we're not going to go.

“Now, if you look what happened on Friday night -- probably the mother of all leaks of all time to two major newspapers that came out late Friday night. Now, Had Mr. Gowdy and I went to that meeting, you can bet they would have tried to pin that on us.”

Both The New York Times and The Washington Post reported on Friday night that the FBI used a retired American professor to interact with several Trump campaign officials as part of the FBI's Trump-Russia probe. Neither newspaper named the person they described as an "informant" (not a spy), saying that to name him might endanger him or his connections.

Nunes noted that both newspaper reports had "lots and lots and lots of details."

"So remember, we don't have any documents, we can't confirm whether there's an informant or not an informant because we've never been told, nor given documents, and in fact, we've never asked for the name of any informants or any sources whatsoever. So if any of that is true -- if they ran a spy ring or an informant ring -- and they were paying people within the Trump campaign -- if any of that is true -- that is an absolute red line,” Nunes said.

“There is not an honest person in this country who can believe that taxpayer dollars going to fund this ring and operate like this...if any of that is true -- that's a red line in this country. You can't do this to political campaigns. This was done, I mean, according to them, this was done in the spring, I mean, before the counter-intelligence investigation was even opened. If that's true, we need to know about it.”

According to the New York Times, “FBI agents sent an informant to talk to two (Trump) campaign advisers (George Papadopoulos and Carter Page) only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign.”

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

Who Is Stefan Halper? Meet the ‘FBI Informant’ Inside Trump’s 2016 Campaign


 

By Joshua Caplan
Breitbart.com

Last week, reports indicated Stefan Halper, a Cambridge professor and longtime aide to some of Washington’s most powerful figures, was outed as an FBI informant planted inside Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

The New York Post writes:

Halper made his first overture when he met with Page at a British symposium. The two remained in regular contact for more than a year, meeting at Halper’s Virginia farm and in Washington, DC, as well as exchanging emails.

The professor met with Trump campaign co-chair Sam Clovis in late August, offering his services as a foreign-policy adviser, The Washington Post reported Friday, without naming the academic.

Days later, Halper contacted Papadopoulos by e-mail. The professor offered the young and inexperienced campaign aide $3,000 and an all-expenses-paid trip to London, ostensibly to write a paper about energy in the eastern Mediterranean region.

Here are a few fast facts about Halper’s history in politics.

Got His Start in Nixon/Ford Years

The Stanford and Oxford-educated Halper started his career in government in 1971 as a member of President Richard Nixon’s Domestic Policy Council. The foreign policy expert served as the Office of Management and Budget’s Assistant Director of Management and Evaluation Division between 1973-1974. Halper then served as an assistant to all three of President Gerald Ford’s Chief of Staffs — Alexander Haig, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney — until 1977.

Accused of Leading a Spy Ring Inside Jimmy Carter’s Presidential Campaign

The Reagan-Bush presidential campaign hired Halper to serve as Director of Policy Coordination in 1980 and would later be embroiled in the Debategate affair, a scandal in which CIA operatives were accused of leaking the Carter campaign’s foreign policy positions to the Republican ticket.

The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald reports:

Four decades ago, Halper was responsible for a long-forgotten spying scandal involving the 1980 election, in which the Reagan campaign – using CIA officials managed by Halper, reportedly under the direction of former CIA Director and then-Vice-Presidential candidate George H.W. Bush – got caught running a spying operation from inside the Carter administration. The plot involved CIA operatives passing classified information about Carter’s foreign policy to Reagan campaign officials in order to ensure the Reagan campaign knew of any foreign policy decisions that Carter was considering.

Halper also worked as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs during President Ronald Reagan’s first term.

Had a Stint as a Bank Executive

In 1984, Halper was chairman of three financial institutions — National Bank of Northern Virginia, Palmer National Bank, and George Washington National Bank. White House official Oliver North wired loaned funds from the Palmer National Bank to a Swiss bank account, which were later used to aid the contras.

Believed Hillary Clinton Would Be a Better Steward for U.S.-UK Relations

In March 2016, Halper told Russia’s Sputnik News that he believed then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton would prove to be a steadier hand in preserving the “special relationship” enjoyed by the United States and Britain.

“I believe Clinton would be best for US-UK relations and for relations with the European Union. Clinton is well-known, deeply experienced and predictable. US-UK relations will remain steady regardless of the winner although Clinton will be less disruptive over time,” Halper said.

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

DOJ Confirms Inspector General Will Probe "Impropriety, Political Motivation" Of Obama FBI Spying On Trump


ZeroHedge.com

Just a few hours after President Trump "hereby demanded" that the DoJ investigate whether or not the "FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump campaign for Political Purposes," Axios' Jonathan Swan reports that Justice has confirmed a probe has begun. DoJ's Sarah Isgur Flores:

"The Department has asked the Inspector General to expand the ongoing review of the FISA application process to include determining whether there was any impropriety or political motivation in how the FBI conducted its counterintelligence investigation of persons suspected of involvement with the Russian agents who interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

As always, the Inspector General will consult with the appropriate U.S. Attorney if there is any evidence of potential criminal conduct."

The Deputy Attorney General issued the following statement:

“If anyone did infiltrate or surveil participants in a presidential campaign for inappropriate purposes, we need to know about it and take appropriate action.

The liberal media is in full panic, meltdown mode, exclaiming that Trump has "interfered" with the investigation...

And The New York Times..."...in ordering up a new inquiry, Mr. Trump went beyond his usual tactics of suggesting wrongdoing and political bias by those investigating him, and crossed over into applying overt presidential pressure on the Justice Department to do his bidding, an extraordinary realm where past presidents have hesitated to tread...

Legal experts said such a presidential intervention had little precedent, and could force a clash between the sitting president and his Justice Department that is reminiscent of the one surrounding Richard M. Nixon during Watergate, when a string of top officials resigned rather than carry out Nixon’s order to fire a special prosecutor investigating him."

“I can’t think of a prior example of a sitting president ordering the Justice Department to conduct an investigation like this one,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

“That’s little more than a transparent effort to undermine an ongoing investigation.”

And The Deep State is furious... (or worried they're about to get busted)

Continue Reading

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

Video: DOJ Inspector General Completes Long-Awaited Review of Hillary Clinton Probe


The Department of Justice inspector general has reportedly completed a draft of his report on the FBI's handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation; Reps. Jim Jordan and Ron DeSantis join Sara Carter on 'Hannity' with reaction.
 

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

Audio: Mark Levin Breaks Down the FBI’s Secret ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ ‘Cabal’ Against Trump


On his radio show Wednesday night, LevinTV host Mark Levin discussed new revelations about a “secret cabal” of FBI agents that began surveillance of President Trump and his campaign over three months before the November 2016 election.

Levin referred to a report at the New York Times earlier that day which outlines the origins of the FBI’s secretive probe into what it suspected were the Trump campaign’s dealings with the Kremlin. According to the story, what was then known as “Crossfire Hurricane” amongst the handful of agents involved, began months before election day.

The story serves to further vindicate Levin, who was widely attacked as a conspiracy theorist for his assertions that publicly-available evidence clearly suggested that the Trump campaign had been surveilled.

“They clear the decks for Hillary despite her serial felonies under the Espionage Act and then immediately genuflect and go after Trump with this secret cabal of FBI agents,” Levin remarked, “That’s what the New York Times has revealed tonight whether or not they realize it.”

 

 
 

 

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

Mueller Told Trump's Legal Team He Will Not Indict The President


Editor's Note: Mueller knew from the very beginning what the DOJ Policy was regarding not being permitted to indict a sitting President yet he deliberately withheld this information so he could keep a black cloud of doubt over Trump's head exactly like James Comey did.  If you'll remember, it came out that James Comey told the President that he "was not under investigation" yet refused to say to publicly in order to create the false impression that he was under investigation.

 

By Samuel Chamberlain, John Roberts
Fox News

President Trump's attorney, Rudy Giuliani, told Fox News on Wednesday that special counsel Robert Mueller has told the president's legal team he will follow Justice Department guidance and not seek an indictment against Trump.

Giuliani, himself a former federal prosecutor and mayor of New York City, also told Fox News that Mueller's investigators have not responded to five information requests from the president's team. That has forced Trump's legal team to push off making a decision about whether the president will sit for an interview with the special counsel -- a decision they had hoped to reach by Thursday.

The precedent that federal prosecutors cannot indict a sitting president is laid out in a 1999 Justice Department memo. Giuliani told Fox News that Mueller has no choice but to follow its guidanc

"This case is essentially over," Giuliani said. "They're just in denial."

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––
 

Giuliani joined Trump's legal team last month and has repeatedly warned that an in-person interview of the president by the special counsel's team would constitute a "perjury trap." Complicating matters, Trump himself has refused to rule out agreeing to an interview with Mueller.

In an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity earlier this month, Giuliani said that the Mueller team had ruled out allowing the Trump team to submit written answers to the special counsel's questions.

The attorney whom Giuliani replaced on Trump's team, John Dowd, has said that Mueller has floated the idea of issuing a grand jury subpoena for Trump to answer questions. If that were to occur, the president could still fight it in court or refuse to answer questions by invoking his Fifth Amendment right to protection from self-incrimination.

Giuliani said last week that the president's legal team would oppose any subpoena unless they could "reach agreement on the ground rules." He argued that Trump could invoke executive privilege, and the team would point to Justice Department opinions in fighting a subpoena and "on both law and the facts, we would have the strongest case you could imagine."

Giuliani has also noted the handover of 1.2 million documents to the Mueller team as evidence of cooperation.

Thursday marks one year after Mueller's appointment to oversee the FBI investigation into alleged collusion between Russian officials and members of the Trump campaign. So far, investigators have charged 19 people — including four Trump campaign advisers — and three Russian companies.

Both Trump's former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, and his deputy campaign chairman, Rick Gates, have pleaded guilty and are now cooperating with the probe. Several other former White House and campaign staffers, including Reince Priebus and Steve Bannon, as well as Inauguration Day committee chairman Tom Barrack, have been interviewed.

Continue Reading

Two Colleagues Contradict Brennan's Denial of Reliance on Dossier


By Paul Sperry
RealClearInvestigations

Former CIA Director John Brennan’s insistence that the salacious and unverified Steele dossier was not part of the official Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian interference in the 2016 election is being contradicted by two top former officials.

Recently retired National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers stated in a classified letter to Congress that the Clinton campaign-funded memos did factor into the ICA. And James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence under President Obama, conceded in a recent CNN interview that the assessment was based on “some of the substantive content of the dossier.” Without elaborating, he maintained that “we were able to corroborate” certain allegations.

These accounts are at odds with Brennan’s May 2017 testimony before the House Intelligence Committee that the Steele dossier  was "not in any way used as the basis for the intelligence community's assessment" that Russia interfered in the election to help elect Donald Trump. Brennan has repeated this claim numerous times, including in February on “Meet the Press.”

In a March 5, 2018, letter to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, Adm. Rogers informed the committee that a two-page summary of the dossier — described as “the Christopher Steele information” — was “added” as an “appendix to the ICA draft,” and that consideration of that appendix was “part of the overall ICA review/approval process.”

His skepticism of the dossier may explain why the NSA parted company with other intelligence agencies and cast doubt on one of its crucial conclusions: that Vladimir Putin personally ordered a cyberattack on Hillary Clinton’s campaign to help Donald Trump win the White House. 

Rogers has testified that while he was sure the Russians wanted to hurt Clinton, he wasn't as confident as CIA and FBI officials that their actions were designed to help Trump, explaining that such as assessment "didn't have the same level of sourcing and the same level of multiple sources.”

Continue Reading

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