Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Andrew McCabe and his close circle of "fighters with organized crime"

Politicized law enforcement, or "For friends everything, for enemies the law"
FBI established that Hillary broke the law, and then drafted acquittal despite ongoing investigation

News Color revolutions Recommended Links NeoMcCartyism Do the US intelligence agencies  influence the US Presidential elections ? The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections
Peter Strzok use of Steele dossier role in establishing surveillance on members of Trump Team (Strzok-gate) American intelligence services Maydan against Trump Brennan elections machinations "Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit Michael Flynn removal DNC and Podesta emails leak: blaming Vladimir Putin MSM as an attack dogs of color revolution Rosenstein role
Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak Anti Trump Hysteria Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war MSM as fake news industry   Hillary Clinton email scandal History of American False Flag Operations
Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few Trump vs. Deep State Frustrated underachievers NGOs as braintrust of color revolutions The Real War on Reality Media as a weapon of mass deception Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair Two Party System as polyarchy Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich
US and British media are servants of security apparatus Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA Media-Military-Industrial Complex Neoconservatism New American Militarism Corporatist Corruption Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism Bernie Sanders betrayal of his supporters Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite
Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war The Deep State The Iron Law of Oligarchy National Security State Pope Francis on danger of neoliberalism Militarism and reckless jingoism of the US neoliberal elite Skeptic Quotations Politically Incorrect Humor Hypocrisy and Pseudo-democracy

Rep. Trey Gowdy from South Carolina, speaking about the current FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe on Dec. 15, said: "I'll be a little bit surprised if he's still an employee of the FBI this time next week." McCabe skipped his scheduled testimony before the Congress a wekk befor that datek when infomation about Bruce Ohr contacts with former MI6 Agent Christopher Steele and the Fusion GPS surfaced. Including the fact that  Ohr's wife worked on the Russia case for Fusion GPS.

McCabe surfaced in Stele dossier saga in May  2017 —In a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on May 2, Senator Charles Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asked if now-acting FBI director Andrew McCabe was involved in approving or establishing the FBI’s reported arrangement with Christopher Steel, the British MI6 agent who prepared a widely-discredited dossier on now President Trump for the Clinton campaign, or if McCabe vouched for or otherwise relied on this dossier in the course of the FBI investigation of alleged collusion between President Trump’s associates and the Russians.

McCabe for years worked Russian organized crime in New York for the FBI, previous to his Washington D.C. rise. He led the FBI’s Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force, a joint
operation with the NYPD.  In this role he has close contacts with MI6 (Steele) and Justice Department (Bruce Ohr).

Timeline: Hillary server details exposed to the public. Jill McCabe was asked to run for the Senate around that time. Andrew and Jill McCabe meet with Democrats about donations. Hillary makes appearance to raise money for Jill. Andrew McCabe gets a promotion. Andrew’s promotion entitles Andrew to work personally on email case. Hillary Emails, the McCabe's and Who is Peter Strzok - American Digital News

The Steele dossier, is a series of memos which were ordered by Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS (currently under investigation by House intelligence committee) and by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele (born 1964) for enumeration of around $160K.  Steele delivered a total of 16 reports to Fusion GPS between June and early November 2016. All of them found way to FBI almost immediately. That raises several questions about the role of FBI in Steele dossier creation and propagation. Steele is not some unknown to FBI player. He was a member of old McCabe squad and it is possible that it was McCabe who ordered this hit job to Steele and try to mask it via Fusion GPS (via Bruce Ohr or other channels). So McCabe might well be in the center of this scandal (Trump Dossier Author Christopher Steele Worked With FBI's McCabe & DOJ's Ohr on Russian Organized Crime Long Before 2016 Election):

...Steele was well known by the Bureau and CIA long before that and shared Intel with both agencies on cases with British links, especially dealing with MI6's interest in Russian Organized crime, federal law enforcement sources said. It is little wonder the Justice Department and the FBI refuse to release any documents dealing with Steele. Or the payments from government coffers -- including the FBI -- to Steele or Fusion GPS.

We are getting definitive Intel from FBI and federal law enforcement sources that Christopher Steele worked with the FBI when he was a MI6 Agent working Russian Organized Crime. Before his retirement from the British spy agency. That's the same desk and the exact same time frame FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe worked before coming the Washington, D.C., heading up the FBI Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force in Manhattan, along with NYPD Intel sources and resources. And on the Justice Department side, also in New York at the very same time, Bruce Ohr was working organized crime for the DOJ in the Southern District of New York, beginning in the 1990s through the identical timeline of Steele and McCabe. That's the same Bruce Ohr who was just demoted at DOJ for conducting secret meetings with Fusion GPS, who hired Steele to write the Trump Dossier. And Fusion GPS also hired Ohr's wife, a former CIA employee.

"You're finding that they all worked together," one FBI source said. "That's huge." If you wonder how Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson met Steele, look no further than Ohr. Or Ohr's wife. Or McCabe. Ohr ran the DOJ's Organized Crime and Racketeering Section from 1999 to 2011, mostly out of New York City. McCabe ran the FBI Eurasian Task Force up until 2006. Ohr's Organized Crime and Racketeering Section and the FBI were debriefed by Steele in London in 2010 on the FIFA corruption crime scheme, a major case for the DOJ. According to the Guardian, Steele trekked to Rome in 2010 to also swap Intel on FIFA with a FBI contact from its Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force. That was McCabe's old squad.

This information is one search "McCabe and MI6" away, but you will never read about this in Neoliberal MSM like WaPo, or NYT ;-) As McCabe was the special agent of the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force from 2003 to 2006 and undoubtedly maintained close contacts with MI6. Did McCabe use his contacts in the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force to facilitate the direct intervention of FBI into the US Presidential elections?

From Wikipedia:

Andrew George McCabe[1] (born May 5, 1968) is an American attorney who is the Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

From May 9, 2017 to August 2, 2017, McCabe was the Acting Director of the FBI after James Comey was dismissed by President Donald Trump. U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions stated that McCabe was one of several candidates under consideration for Director. President Trump ultimately chose Christopher A. Wray, the former Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Criminal Division, to succeed Comey.[2] Once Wray was sworn in, McCabe returned to the position of Deputy Director.[3]

McCabe graduated from The Bolles School in Jacksonville, Florida, in 1986.[4] He graduated from Duke University in 1990 and obtained a J.D. degree from Washington University in St. Louis in 1993.[5][1] During law school he interned in the criminal division of the United States Department of Justice.[5] Because of a hiring freeze,[5] McCabe spent three years in a private law practice before joining the FBI in 1996.[6]

McCabe began his FBI career in the New York Field Office.[6] While there, he was on the SWAT team.[7] In 2003, he began work as a supervisory special agent at the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force.[8] Later, McCabe held management positions in the FBI Counterterrorism Division,[6] the FBI National Security Branch[9] and the FBI's Washington Field Office.[10] In 2009, he served as the first director of the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group, a program to research interrogation techniques that was created after the Department of Defense Directive 2310 ban of waterboarding and other interrogation techniques.[5] McCabe was part of the investigation of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing.[7] McCabe secured the arrest of Ahmed Abu Khattala for suspected involvement in the 2012 Benghazi attack.[7]

FBI Director James Comey appointed McCabe as Deputy Director of the FBI on January 29, 2016, and he assumed those duties on February 1, 2016.[11]

The Inspector General of the Department of Justice and the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee are investigating McCabe for concerns that he should have recused himself from the investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server because of a potential conflict of interest caused by donations to his wife's Virginia State Senate campaign.[12][13]

On May 9, 2017, McCabe became acting Director of the FBI after President Trump dismissed James Comey as Director.[14] In the absence of a Senate-confirmed Director, the Deputy Director automatically becomes acting Director.[9] Statute allows the president to choose an interim FBI director (acting Director) outside of the standard order of succession.[15] That process began on May 10, 2017, as Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein interviewed four candidates to serve as interim FBI director.[16] Sessions said that McCabe was "also under consideration."[16]

McCabe is married to Dr. Jill McCabe, a pediatrician. They have two children. McCabe is a triathlete who bikes 35 miles to his office from his home in Virginia.[7]

Connections with Steele, McCabe and Ohr

Information about connections between McCabe and Bruce Ohr surfaced in December 2017: McCabe cancels House Intelligence testimony, something far more sinister to come out in connection with Fusion GPS -- Puppet

FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe abruptly cancelled his closed door testimony in front of the House Intelligence Committee as news emerged that the wife of Senior DOJ official Bruce Ohr worked for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm which assembled the infamous "Trump dossier." Ohr was demoted last week after allegedly trying to conceal his contacts with Fusion.

Fox News reporter Chad Pergram's sources tell him "McCabe has an Ohr problem," and they believe "FBI DepDir McCabe not coming to Hse Intel Cmte tomorrow because he'd be asked about Bruce Ohr & Ohr's wife Nellie who worked for Fusion GPS," adding "something far more sinister."

Pergram also tweeted "Expect subpoenas to compel McCabe to appear this wk."

As we reported yesterday, Nellie Ohr, the wife of disgraced DOJ official Bruce Ohr, was employed at Fusion GPS last year. Her term of employment overlapped with the period when the Trump dossier was being compiled. Though Fox was unable to discern the exact nature of her role at the firm, its reporters discovered that she has done extensive research on Russia-related topics for think tanks based in the Washington, DC area.

Fox News reports:

A senior Justice Department official demoted last week for concealing his meetings with the men behind the anti-Trump "dossier" had even closer ties to Fusion GPS, the firm responsible for the incendiary document, than have been disclosed, Fox News has confirmed: The official's wife worked for Fusion GPS during the 2016 election.

Contacted by Fox News, investigators for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) confirmed that Nellie H. Ohr, wife of the demoted official, Bruce G. Ohr, worked for the opposition research firm last year. The precise nature of Mrs. Ohr's duties - including whether she worked on the dossier - remains unclear but a review of her published works available online reveals Mrs. Ohr has written extensively on Russia-related subjects. HPSCI staff confirmed to Fox News that she was paid by Fusion GPS through the summer and fall of 2016.
Also notable is the fact that Bruce Ohr's wife not only worked for Fusion GPS, but also represented the CIA's "Open Source Works" group in a 2010 "expert working group report on international organized crime" along with Bruce Ohr and Fusion GPS cofounder Glenn Simpson.
Of note Open Source Works is described as the "CIA's in-house open source analysis component, devoted to intelligence analysis of unclassified, open source information." So - Nellie Ohr, the wife of recently demoted DOJ official Bruce Ohr - worked for both Fusion GPS and the CIA. It is unclear whether her time at Fusion overlapped with her time at the CIA.
Open Source Works, which is the CIA's in-house open source analysis component, is devoted to intelligence analysis of unclassified, open source information. Oddly, however, the directive that established Open Source Works is classified, as is the charter of the organization. In fact, CIA says the very existence of any such records is a classified fact. "The CIA can neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of records responsive to your request," wrote Susan Viscuso, CIA Information and Privacy Coordinator, in a November 29 response to a Freedom of Information Act request from Jeffrey Richelson of the National Security Archive for the Open Source Works directive and charter.

"The fact of the existence or nonexistence of requested records is currently and properly classified and is intelligence sources and methods information that is protected from disclosure," Dr. Viscuso wrote. This is a surprising development since Open Source Works - by definition - does not engage in clandestine collection of intelligence. Rather, it performs analysis based on unclassified, open source materials. -FAS
House investigators determined that during the 2016 election, Bruce Ohr met with former MI6 spy Christopher Steele, and shortly after the 2016 election he met with Glenn Simpson, the co-founder of Fusion GPS - who commissioned Steele to assemble the dossier.
 

Another factor in McCabe's sudden cancellation is a report from The Hill's John Solomon that Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) recently interviewed a retired FBI supervisor who told him he was instructed by Deputy Director Andrew McCabe not to call the 2012 Benghazi attack an act of terrorism when distributing the FBI's findings to the larger intelligence community - despite knowing exactly who conducted the attack.

The agent found the instruction concerning because his unit had gathered incontrovertible evidence showing a major al Qaeda figure had directed the attack and the information had already been briefed to President Obama, the lawmaker said. -The Hill
If true, it means McCabe lied for the Obama administration in a clear, partisan violation of the FBI's mandate to "detect and prosecute crimes against the United States," not "lie for the President so as not to offend Islam." As Rep. DeSantis told The Hill:
"What operational reason would there be to issue an edict to agents telling them, in the face of virtually conclusive evidence to the contrary, not to categorize the Benghazi attack as a result of terrorism? By placing the interests of the Obama administration over the public's interests, the order is yet another data point highlighting the politicization of the FBI."
Whether McCabe cancelled over his "Ohr problem," or for instructing a retired FBI supervisor to lie about the Benghazi attack, or because he doesn't want to talk about Peter Strzok's dismissal from the Mueller probe - one thing is for sure; Devin Nunes can't be happy, and we can probably expect subpoenas to start flying off his desk as soon as this morning.

 

Botched prosecution of the Queen

When somebody is above the law it is called royalty. That why we can call Hillary Clinton to be Queen.

Too Big to Jail, Too Innocent to Flail, or Both

Should Clinton have been prosecuted at all? It depends on whether you wish to apply the law (many do), to apply what others consider common sense, or to rebalance the scale of unequal prosecution. And if the latter, rebalance in which direction? Should Clinton go to jail, or should Manning, among others, go free? I would personally be fine if Clinton never saw a courtroom and prisoners like Manning were freed. For the overall good of the nation, I would take that trade. Others, I’m sure, would choose differently.

Returning to why Clinton wasn’t prosecuted — was it just that Clinton is too important, too protected, to prosecute? “Too big to jail” in other words? Too high to be brought down by something as low as the law? After all, starting with Nixon, the circle of those who can never be punished for their crimes has grown constantly more inclusive. (I almost wrote “for their non-violent crimes,” but then I remembered the torturing George W. Bush.) That’s certainly a possible explanation, even a likely one, given our recent failure to prosecute even a straight-up thief like former Goldman Sachs chief, ex-governor and Democratic Party fundraiser Jon Corzine.

But we live in a punishing, prosecutorial state as well, one that treats its enemies as harshly as it treats its friends gently, especially its inner circle friends. It’s this second aspect, not just who is too big to jail, but who is too high-minded and innocent to torture and flail — too “loyal” to be treated, in other words, like Sterling and Manning — that must be considered before we can understand the unequal application of these laws. Clinton, for all her faults in James Comey’s eyes, was no Chelsea Manning.

As Wheeler says in her closing, this is “another way of saying our classification system is largely a way to arbitrarily label people you dislike disloyal.” On reflection, it’s hard to disagree.

As early as August, 2015 some former highly placed official were suggesting that Clinton committed a felony: Platte River Networks Clinton Email Investigation Timeline

August 20, 2015: Former CIA Director James Woosley suggests Clinton could have committed a felony.

Woolsey, who was CIA director from 1993 to 1995 under President Bill Clinton, comments on Clinton’s email scandal: “What is really wrong here was setting up this separate email system and using it for government work. If anybody wants to set one up and use it for yoga appointments, wedding planning, okay, fine. But to have a server in a bathroom closet in Colorado that is dealing with potentially extremely classified material because it is material that is passing through the secretary of state’s conversations with her staff, that’s really very irresponsible. It is a felony. I think and there are some ways of dealing with this, putting something in the wrong place and making a mistake that are only a misdemeanor. But we’ve had now several of my successors in the intelligence business at senior levels plead to charges and be in situations where it is clear they violated the law, around some of those things look very similar to what has happened here.”(Fox News, 8/20/2015)

As Edward Snowden noted: “Anyone who has the clearances that the secretary of state has or the director of any top level agency has knows how classified information should be handled. When the unclassified systems of the United States government—which has a full time information security staff—regularly get hacked, the idea that someone keeping a private server in the renovated bathroom of a server farm in Colorado, is more secure is completely ridiculous.” (Al Jazeera America, 9/3/2015)

What charges and sanctions were lingering

There are at least four legal charges that are implicit in "emailgate" scandal and more or less applicable to this case. Violation of NDA was the clear among them for anybody who took time to study the main facts. Each of which might lead to criminal conviction:

  1. [Dropped] Mishandling of classified information. This was the most serious change but due to Comey statement those changes were dropped. Sill it is the fact that Hillary copied all her emails on several USB sticks and gave them to her private lawyer and his staff. That involves the Espionage Act. Section 793(d) which makes it a felony if a person entrusted with “information relating to the national defense” “willfully communicates, delivers [or] transmits” it to an unauthorized person. While in case of server she can claim gross negligence, but passing copies of emails on USB to her lawyer was definitely done willfully and that can be proved. There were several top secret email discovered. Adjusting for the typical for government tendency to overclassify they probably were just secret. But that's enough. Also, most if not all of the Obama--Clinton email exchanges were presumptively classified. Yet, both Obama and Clinton knowingly conducted them not only outside the government’s secure system for classified information but using the private email server.
  2. Lying about the situation with her bathroom server to Congress. This change is now active and is supposedly investigated by FBI after referral by congress of July 12, 2016. See 8 Times Hillary Clinton Lied About Her Emails - Breitbart
  3. RICO changes connected with Clinton Foundation. Investigation might be active. Comey refused to answer the question whether FBI is investigating Clinton Foundation.
  4. Revealing identities of CIA operatives. This is similar to famous Valeria Plame case. Valeria Plame was the wife of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson. Plame had her identity as covert officer of the CIA leaked to the press by members of the George W. Bush administration and subsequently made public.
  5. Obstruction of justice and/or destruction of evidence. Obstruction charges can be laid if a person alters, destroys, or conceals physical evidence, even if he was under no compulsion at any time to produce such evidence. wiping the server clean here might qualify. Often, no actual investigation or substantiated suspicion of a specific incident need exist to support a charge of obstruction of justice.
  6. Attempt to violate government employees disclosure rules by deleting emails from the server. Apparently Hillary’s problems with the FOIA cases will worsen after Comey statement. It is also clear that maintaining private email server was done deliberately to hide information about her activities from public and obstructing the national record of elected officials correspondence. As Dan Metcalfe states in POLITICO, “Hillary’s Email Defense Is Laughable...I should know — I ran FOIA for the U.S. government.”
  7. Violation of State Department procedures and installation of private email server into State Department environment (essentially a Trojan Horse). Which was managed by personnel without any government security clearance. As well as the use of a retail version of Blackberry to access them. Such a setup during the lifetime of the server also include moving the server from her house to unidentified NJ datacenter where backups to the cloud for the server content were accidentally made. Here we can talk about gross negligence.

There are several sanctions that can be applied to Hillary Clinton:

The Espionage Act Under Obama and Queen Clinton

Reproduced verbatim from Gaius Publius Picking Up James Comey’s Pieces — What He Did, What He Should Have Done & Why naked capitalism

It turns out that the Espionage Act has become a popular tool of punishment under the Obama administration, which has broadened its application from use against actual espionage to use against unfriendly leakers and whistle-blowers:

Under the Obama administration, seven Espionage Act prosecutions have been related not to traditional espionage but to either withholding information or communicating with members of the media. Out of a total eleven prosecutions under the Espionage Act against government officials accused of providing classified information to the media, seven have occurred since Obama took office.[89] “Leaks related to national security can put people at risk,” the President said at a news conference in 2013. “They can put men and women in uniform that I’ve sent into the battlefield at risk. I don’t think the American people would expect me, as commander in chief, not to be concerned about information that might compromise their missions or might get them killed.”[90]

As Glenn Greenwald (among many others) has recently noted:

Secrecy is a virtual religion in Washington. Those who violate its dogma have been punished in the harshest and most excessive manner – at least when they possess little political power or influence. As has been widely noted, the Obama administration has prosecuted more leakers under the 1917 Espionage Act than all prior administrations combined. Secrecy in DC is so revered that even the most banal documents are reflexively marked classified, making their disclosure or mishandling a felony. As former CIA and NSA Director Michael Hayden said in 2010, “Everything’s secret. I mean, I got an email saying ‘Merry Christmas.’ It carried a top secret NSA classification marking.”

People who leak to media outlets for the selfless purpose of informing the public – Daniel Ellsberg, Tom Drake, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden – face decades in prison. Those who leak for more ignoble and self-serving ends – such as enabling hagiography (Leon Panetta, David Petreaus) or ingratiating oneself to one’s mistress (Petraeus) – face career destruction, though they are usually spared if they are sufficiently Important-in-DC. For low-level, powerless Nobodies-in-DC, even the mere mishandling of classified informationwithout any intent to leak but merely to, say, work from home – has resulted in criminal prosecution, career destruction and the permanent loss of security clearance.

Even when no leakage or other damage was contemplated or occurred, the Espionage Act was applied against violators. Here’s what happened to Naval Reserve Engineer Brian Nishimura (link via Greenwald above):

A Naval reservist was sentenced for mishandling classified military materials.

A federal attorney announced Wednesday that Bryan Nishimura of Folsom, California, pleaded guilty to the unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials.

Nishimura, deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008 as a regional engineer, admitted to downloading classified briefings and digital records onto his personal electronic devices. He carried the materials off base and brought them back to the U.S. when his deployment ended.

An FBI search of Nishimura’s home turned up classified materials, but did not reveal evidence he intended to distribute them.

How was his case handled? He was obviously prosecuted, as the lead paragraph tells us. Then:

He was sentenced to two years of probation and a $7,500 fine, and was ordered to surrender his security clearance. He is barred from seeking a future security clearance.

This is a Navy engineer who took home downloaded briefings and records. We’re not told under what act he was prosecuted, but we don’t need to be told, just that doing what he did was a crime. The Espionage Act is perfectly suited to that crime, if the prosecutors wished to use it.

Here’s a bit from the FBI’s description of Nishimura’s case:

According to court documents, Nishimura was a Naval reservist deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. … In the United States, Nishimura continued to maintain the information on unclassified systems in unauthorized locations, and copied the materials onto at least one additional unauthorized and unclassified system

Sounds like what Clinton did to a T. Should she be prosecuted? Loretta Lynch, speaking through James Comey, doesn’t think so. To understand why not, let’s look at three more notorious and more vigorously prosecuted cases: Jeffrey Sterling, Thomas Drake and Chelsea Manning. Those cases not only reveal why Clinton, in the eyes of many, should be prosecuted; they reveal why she wasn’t.

Jeffrey Sterling, Thomas Drake and Chelsea Manning

This gets to the heart of the problem related to when and why to prosecute. There’s first a question of what should happen and what does happen. Then there’s a question of intent, as in, what intent if any is the target of the law, and what intent is the target of prosecutors who apply the law. These are not the same.

Greenwald doesn’t think Clinton should be prosecuted, since in isolation her crime, as he sees it, doesn’t merit it. What Clinton did was attempt to shield all of her communications to the extent she could, an act that in his mind doesn’t deserve jail time, despite the letter of the law. I would add that we’re talking about applying the Espionage Act after all, and Clinton in no way committed or intended to commit espionage.

But that kind of sensible thinking isn’t what does happen. What does happen is that under Obama, certain people are prosecuted and sentenced very harshly. Greenwald again (bolded emphasis mine):

But this case does not exist in isolation. It exists in a political climate where secrecy is regarded as the highest end, where people have their lives destroyed for the most trivial – or, worse, the most well-intentioned – violations of secrecy laws, even in the absence of any evidence of harm or malignant intent. And these are injustices that Hillary Clinton and most of her stalwart Democratic followers have never once opposed – but rather enthusiastically cheered. In 2011, Army Private Chelsea Manning was charged with multiple felonies and faced decades in prison for leaking documents that she firmly believed the public had the right to see; unlike the documents Clinton recklessly mishandled, none of those was Top Secret. Nonetheless, this is what then-Secretary Clinton said in justifying her prosecution…

Clinton’s justification for Manning’s prosecution is this (emphasis Greenwald’s):

“I think that in an age where so much information is flying through cyberspace, we all have to be aware of the fact that some information which is sensitive, which does affect the security of individuals and relationships, deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so.

Seems damning in retrospect, especially the emphasized portion. For Clinton, “necessary steps” to protect “sensitive” information that’s “flying through cyberspace” means the following:

In 2010, Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning, the United States Army Private First Class accused of the largest leak of state secrets in U.S. history, was charged under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which incorporates parts of the Espionage Act 18 U.S.C. § 793(e). At the time, critics worried that the broad language of the Act could make news organizations, and anyone who reported, printed or disseminated information from WikiLeaks, subject to prosecution, although former prosecutors pushed back, citing Supreme Court precedent expanding First Amendment protections.[103] On July 30, 2013, following a judge-only trial by court-martial lasting eight weeks, Army judge Colonel Denise Lind convicted Manning on six counts of violating the Espionage Act, among other infractions.[98]

And the punishment was this:

Manning was sentenced in August 2013 to 35 years’ imprisonment, with the possibility of parole in the eighth year, and to be dishonorably discharged from the Army.[2]

That harsh punishment doesn’t count the torture she endured while in pre-trial detention. The fate that befell Chelsea Manning was (and is) draconian. Again, in retrospect Clinton’s words at the time are damning.

Let’s look at two more cases, starting with Jeffrey Sterling. As you read, see if you can see the thread that ties these three cases together:

Jeffrey Alexander Sterling, a former CIA agent was indicted under the [Espionage] Act in January 2011 for alleged unauthorized disclosure of national defense information to James Risen, a New York Times reporter, in 2003 regarding his book State of War. The indictment described his motive as revenge for the CIA’s refusal to allow him to publish his memoirs and its refusal to settle his racial discrimination lawsuit against the Agency. Others have described him as telling Risen about a backfired CIA plot against Iran in the 1990s.[91]

But the evidence of wrong-doing was almost non-existent, flimsily circumstantial, and the conviction relied heavily on the jury’s reaction to the government’s presentation of motive.

The government’s case consisted mostly of records of emails and phone calls between Sterling and Risen that began in 2001 and continued into 2005. The emails were very short, just a line or so, and did not reference any CIA programs. The phone calls were mostly short too, some just a few seconds, and the government did not introduce recordings or transcripts of any of them.

Sterling was represented by two lawyers, Edward MacMahon Jr. and Barry Pollack. In his opening statement, MacMahon pointed to the lack of hard evidence against his client.

“Mr. Trump is a fine lawyer,” MacMahon said. “If he had an email with details of these programs or a phone call, you would have heard it, and you’re not going to hear it in this case .… Mr. Trump told you that [Sterling] spoke to Risen. Did you hear where, when, or anything about what happened? No. That’s because there isn’t any such evidence of it whatsoever .… You don’t see a written communication to Mr. Risen from Mr. Sterling about the program at all, no evidence they even met in person.”

Nevertheless, despite this lack of real evidence:

[T]he jury convicted Sterling, based on what the judge, Leonie Brinkema, described at the sentencing as “very powerful circumstantial evidence.” She added, “In a perfect world, you’d only have direct evidence, but many times that’s not the case in a criminal case.” …

A few minutes before three in the afternoon, Judge Brinkema said that Sterling would go to prison for three and a half years. This was far below the sentencing guidelines — and was seen as a rebuke of the prosecution’s portrayal of Sterling as a traitor who had to be locked away for a long time. But that wasn’t much comfort for Sterling or his wife, because he would nonetheless be locked away. After the hearing ended, Sterling walked to the front row of seats to console his sobbing wife. You could hear her wails in the courtroom.

His lawyers requested that he be allowed to serve his sentence in his home state of Missouri, so that his wife and other family members could easily visit him. Earlier this week, Sterling reported to the prison that was selected for him. It is in Colorado.

We still don’t know for sure that Sterling was the person who leaked information to reporter James Risen. Nothing showing that they worked together was presented in court. Nothing. Yet the prosecutor did a good job of painting Sterling as “a traitor” motivated by “anger, bitterness, selfishness,” adding, “The defendant struck back at the CIA because he thought he had been treated unfairly. He had sued the agency for discrimination and demanded that they pay him $200,000 to settle his claim. When the agency refused, he struck back with the only weapon he had: secrets, the agency’s secrets.”

On that basis and almost no evidence, the jury convicted.

Finally, in the case of Thomas Drake, mentioned above by both Wheeler and Greenwald, this happened:

In April 2010, Thomas Andrews Drake, an official with the National Security Agency (NSA), was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 793(e) for alleged willful retention of national defense information. The case arose from investigations into his communications with Siobhan Gorman of the Baltimore Sun and Diane Roark of the House Intelligence Committee as part of his attempt to blow the whistle on several issues including the NSA’s Trailblazer project.[92][93][94][95][96] Considering the prosecution of Drake, investigative journalist Jane Mayer wrote that “Because reporters often retain unauthorized defense documents, Drake’s conviction would establish a legal precedent making it possible to prosecute journalists as spies.”[97]

What sets Drake, Sterling and Manning apart from Clinton in the way their violations of the Espionage Act are treated? It’s not just her elite status.

Why Is Clinton’s Case Different?

Clinton may well have been let off because the Justice Department thought prosecution was just the wrong thing to do. Given all the arcane rules of classification, and the fact that Clinton, put plainly, is not a spy, Comey and Lynch may well have decided that prosecution was pointless. Espionage, after all, was never her intent, and getting Hillary Clinton convicted on espionage charges may have looked to them like a very heavy lift. Yet espionage was never the intent of Sterling, Drake or Manning, yet they had the proverbial book thrown at them, and more. (Read the rest of the article on Sterling to see how his prosecution nearly destroyed his life, literally.)

The government’s behavior in these four cases isn’t clarified when comparing motives, at least not initially. It could be argued that the motives of Sterling, Drake and Manning were entirely beneficial, since whistle-blowers intend to perform a societal good, whereas Clinton’s motives were more self-centered, less morally defensible, and possibly illegal — at the very least, she was attempting to move all of her communication beyond the reach of FOIA records requests. (We’ll have to wait to see if she may have had other motives, such as shielding the Clinton Foundation from embarrassing scrutiny, or worse. I keep seeing mention of a separate investigation into that.)

Which brings us to the the matter of intent — not the intent contemplated by the law (intent to steal or to otherwise mishandle government secrets), but the intent contemplated by the prosecutors in applying the law. Look again at the Sterling conviction and what the prosecution relied on to get it. The man was painted by his prosecutors as, in effect, evil — a man whose goal was to harm the government, a betrayer, a traitor, motivated by anger, bitterness, selfishness, a man taking revenge. Though most stark in Sterling’s prosecution (and in Manning’s torture), you see this thread in all three whistle-blower cases.

What separates these cases from Clinton’s is the desire of the government to punish “evil deeds,” attempts to harm the country as the prosecutors defined harm, then secondarily to use the Espionage Act as a tool of that punishment, wielded in such a heavy way as to frighten others. Note that this initial filter — looking for who has done the kind of harm deserving of punishment, as opposed to looking for who violated the law — precedes the prosecution itself. What doesn’t precede the prosecution — certainly not in Clinton’s case — is an even-handed application of the law.

Yes, this is selective prosecution, but it’s much more than elites protecting elites, though it’s that as well. It’s also and primarily using the prosecutorial weight of the established state to mercilessly crush the perceived enemies of that state, while protecting its friends from that weight should they also stray under the law’s dark umbrella.

In other words, the key to determining who will be prosecuted is indeed intent, but not intent to violate the law. What’s being prosecuted is intent to violate the state as the state perceives it.

So we return where we started, to Marcy Wheeler, who calls the real crime of Sterling and Drake “disloyalty” and not a violation of the Espionage Act itself. Wheeler (my emphasis):

I can only imagine Comey came to his improper public prosecutorial opinion via one of two mental tricks. Either he — again, not the prosecutor — decided the only crime at issue was mishandling classified information (elsewhere in his statement he describes having no evidence that thousands of work emails were withheld from DOJ with ill intent, which dismisses another possible crime), and from there he decided either that it’d be a lot harder to prosecute Hillary Clinton (or David Petraeus) than it would be someone DOJ spent years maligning like Sterling or Drake. Or maybe he decided that there are no indications that Hillary is disloyal to the US.

Understand, though: with Sterling and Drake, DOJ decided they were disloyal to the US, and then used their alleged mishandling of classified information as proof that they were disloyal to the US (Drake ultimately plead to Exceeding Authorized Use of a Computer).

Ultimately, it involves arbitrary decisions about who is disloyal to the US, and from that a determination that the crime of mishandling classified information occurred.

This entirely ignores the political dimension, which I’ll take up at another time. But it perfectly characterizes, as I see it, the legal one.

Comey statement

After a brief introduction, Comey states the FBI was looking into

“whether classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on [Clinton’s] personal system in violation of the Federal statute that makes it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way; or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.”

And he presented the evidence of guilt. Of the approximately 30,000 emails Hillary Clinton turned over to State in 2014, the FBI found

110 emails, in 52 email chains, have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received.

Eight of those chains contained information that was ‘Top Secret’ at the time they were sent; 36 of those chains contained ‘Secret’ information at the time; eight contained ‘Confidential’ information at the time.”

See Supplement 1: FBI director's statement on Hillary Clinton email investigation

Why she was not indicted by FBI for mishandling of classified information?

“If it were me, I would have been out the door and probably in jail.”

General Michael Flynn during CNN appearance.

This chain of events has reinforced the American public’s perception that there are now no prosecutions of unlawful conduct by persons of sufficient wealth, power and influence who consider themselves to be above the law.

It’s not a right-wing theory, a conservative fever dream, conspiracy nonsense or anti-Hillary fear-mongering of a rabid Sanders or Trump supporter. It’s a cold hard facts:

Comey motives for no indicting her created a cottage industry of pundits. No question the case was highly politicized, especially after impromptu meeting of Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch. For some reason Obama also behaves as if he wants to join Clinton Foundation after the end of his term in office. Who in his sound mind endoce a person under FBI investigation. Only constitutional scholars do that ;-).

Looks like Comey was forced to lie about several aspects of this Clinton case and later was caught during congressional hearings (for which he, surprisingly, instantly agreed). If might well be tht he played dual role: mortally wounding Hillary candidacy and at the same time saving his boss (and indirectly Obama administration) from further embarrassment:

Dou Gen , July 13, 2016 at 9:45 am

This article doesn't explain why a punishment such as the one given to Petraeus was not considered by Comey or the DOJ. Petraeus was an elite insider who was not a spy and did not threaten the state, yet he still received a minor punishment so as not to delegitimatize the legal system and in order to give at least a minimal impression of fairness. Since Comey said it was possible - and most experts say very possible - that foreign governments read Hillary's emails, she may have caused significant damage to the US national interest over four years. Therefore even a loyal elite could expect to be at least fined for such gross negligence. Why wouldn't a fine and a reprimand and/or temporary loss of security clearance be normal even for a loyal DC insider? This suggests that the power of the Clinton Machine and its real-world ability to deliver retribution was the deciding factor in the lack of any suggestion of indictment. Comey surely wants to keep his job.

The article also fails to deal with the fact that Comey mistakenly claimed that only one person had ever been prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act. This is clearly not the case, and you list some of those prosecuted. There have also been several other convictions, including US vs. McGuinness in 1992 (see Andrew C. McCarthy, "Military Prosecutions Show That A Gross Negligence Prosecution Would Not Unfairly Single Out Mrs. Clinton" National Review (7/7/2016), CIA director John Deutch in 1997 (pardoned by Bill Clinton), James Hitselberger (who carried classified documents off his naval base in 1997 and simply kept them), and Jason Brezler, a Marine Major who sent classified information about a dangerous Afghan mayor in order to warn a colleague in 2014 (he is now appealing his conviction based on Comey's criteria).

Also please see Jared Beck, "Why Hillary Clinton's Emails Matter: A Legal Analysis" (6/6/2016): Beck lists 4 convictions under 793(f) alone. Also see Beck's "Comey's Volley, Or The Indictment That Wasn't" (7/11/2016). You also need to deal with the question of why Comey ignored the obvious fact that Hillary willfully and knowingly broke State Department rules in setting up the private server and therefore knew she was endangering security. The fact that Comey gave a false number of prosecutions under s. 793 and avoided mention of willful, knowing acts by Hillary suggests his decision to oppose indictment was a political decision, not a legal decision.

The article also fails to deal with the theory that Comey, taking into account various evidence, such as his talks with DOJ attorneys and the fact that Lynch agreed to meet Bill Clinton, decided that that there was no possibility that the Democrat-staffed DOJ would indict Hillary. Therefore Comey decided to make the best of a difficult situation by giving a two-part speech that first laid out reasons why Hillary could be indicted and then explained that it was not "reasonable" to indict her. "Reasonable" is of course a legal term, but it also covers a variety of meanings, including political motives. Do you reject this theory, or were you just unaware of it?

Criminality of this actions aside, all-in-all in dealing with this scandal she behaved more like a member of a clan that a statesman. That reminds me Godfather II.

Why did Hillary Clinton need to use a private server exclusively? I ask why Clinton needed this server in my latest YouTube segment, and I’m especially interested in learning why from Hillary supporters. The answer could very likely lead to Hillary Clinton’s indictment, which would then automatically lead to a Bernie Sanders nomination and Bernie destroying Trump by 8 points in the general election.

On CNN, Lt. General Michael Flynn stated that Hillary Clinton should “drop out” of the presidential race and states “If it were me, I would have been out the door and probably in jail.” I mentioned Lt. General Flynn’s views on the FBI investigation during my latest CNN appearance.

In regards to the unique aspects of the FBI’s email investigation, POLITIFACT states “Although some former secretaries of state occasionally used personal emails for official business, Clinton is the only one who never once used an @state.gov email address in the era of email.”

Thus, asking why she’s the only Secretary of State who refused to use an @state.gov email address is not only relevant, but vital to understanding the severity of the FBI’s investigation. As Dan Metcalfe states in POLITICO, “Hillary’s Email Defense Is Laughable...I should know—I ran FOIA for the U.S. government.” Saying others did worse also can’t explain the fact 100 FBI agents have worked on the case, especially since there’s never been a presidential candidate in American history linked to an ongoing FBI investigation.

National Review suggested "her lax handling of our most sensitive national-security information, Clinton all but served it to foreign intelligence services on a platter." (National Review):

Clinton held one of the highest offices of the United States, and communications involving high-level intelligence were a routine part of her job. Despite her protestations to the contrary, it was inevitable that classified information would be exchanged in her “private” e-mails and stored on her “private server.”

What was inevitable is now undeniable. Inspectors general from both the intelligence community and the State Department have reported to Congress that Clinton’s e-mails contain classified information. And remember, they have been able to review only portions of the 30,000-odd e-mails Clinton deigned to surrender (in paper-copy form) on the State Department’s demand, two years after she departed.

Regarding the access to sensitive information, the position of the Secretary of State is not that different from the position of Army Generals and high level officials at CIA. It might well be more close to the latter, taking into account State Department role in collecting intelligence information and staging color revolutions abroad. A similar level official at CIA or Pentagon would receive much harsher treatment: despite "bathroom server" scandal and a clear, provable violation of NDA she signed, Hillary Clinton retained her security clearance (mcclatchydc.com):

Hillary Clinton retains a security clearance allowing her access to classified information despite an FBI inquiry into her handling of sensitive government information on the private email account she used during her tenure as secretary of state.

... ... ...

While Clinton has kept her clearance, it’s common practice to suspend them while an investigation or internal inquiry is ongoing, according to some national security experts on Capitol Hill and in private practice.

... ... ...

Whether you’re a member of the military, a high-ranking executive branch official or anybody else with a security clearance, people should be treated equally,” said Grassley, R-Iowa. “If rank-and-file military and intelligence community employees have their clearances suspended during security investigations, then senior officials should not get any special exemptions.”

The key here in not personality of Hillary Clinton and her conduct, but the role of Obama in this misconduct. He is, so to speak, complicit in Mrs. Clinton’s misconduct by communicating with her on unprotected private server, which was set-up by personnel from Clinton Foundation. While, most probably, he personally does feel much sympathy for "this woman", the "preservation of legacy" dictated the polices that helped to get her off the hook.

We we now know after FBI announcement, mishandling of classified information changes were dropped. She was cleaned on any wrongdoing in this aspect of "emailgate". But all other relevant aspects of "emailgate" such as violation of FOIA, destruction of evidence, are still pending.

Comparison with General Petraeus case

General Petraeus ( who was the most promising GOP candidate for the current Presidential election) transgressions (aka Petraeus scandal - Wikipedia ) are the most relevant previous similar case. He also did not have any criminal intent that FBI director Comey used to dismiss changes against Hillary Clinton. Moreover his only correspondent has top security clearness while multiple people with who Hillary Clinton shared her email did not. Congressman Issa called this a double standard Congressman Issa Says FBI Director Comey Is Lying About Hillary Clinton's Criminal Intent! - YouTube

They are minimal in comparison with what Hillary Clinton did: Hillary Clinton Emailed Names of US Intelligence Officials, Unclassified. He revealed the information to a single person (his biographer), who was an army intelligence officer with top security clearance. While Hillary Clinton revealed her emails to her private lawyer and his staff as well as indirectly to all server administrators of the "bathroom server". She also potentially guilty in lying to Congress under the oath.

The punishment for him included two year probation and fine. See for example How Gen. David Petraeus Gets It, And Hillary Clinton Still Doesn't ( huffingtonpost.com, 09/29/2015):

At one point, we thought General David Petraeus would be a strong candidate for U.S. President. Certainly against this crop of GOP candidates, he’d be the clear front-runner. But then, he shared classified information, and more than that, with his biographer-turned-mistress (Paula Broadwell), according to ABC News, undoing an impressive military career, with plenty of political upside. ...instead of offering the typical hubris, misdirection, or blame shifting, he thought it was important to again show true remorse for his actions

... ... ...

Hillary Clinton, the former New York Senator and Secretary of State, has been the anti-Petraeus. As of last week, she still was claiming to the Associated Press that she had done nothing wrong and her actions were allowed. Even in her “apology,” she was still claiming it was just a “mistake” according to Fox News. Well, here’s what kind of “mistake” Clinton’s actions might cause. The U.S. National Security Agency Chief, Admiral Mike Rogers, explained that it would really help the NSA if someone like Vladimir Putin or the Supreme Leader of Iran had done the same, using classified information on a private email, as noted in The Guardian.

When classified information gets in the hands of our enemies and rivals, bad things happen for our beleaguered intelligence forces. Sometimes, it leads to the capture, and possible deaths, of our agents and sources. There’s no excuse for putting them in any more harm than they already face. General Petraeus gets that it is wrong. But as Clinton blames Republicans for her woes on NBC’s Meet the Press, it’s clear she still just doesn’t get it.

Please note that as Andrew C. McCarthy pointed in his June 11, 2015 article ( National Review ) when Obama’s Justice Department prosecuted former CIA director David Petraeus for mishandling classified information, it included notes of “defendant DAVID HOWELL PETRAEUS’s discussions with the President of the United States of America.” That completely destroys Hillary Clinton’s defense that the classified e-mails were not “marked” as such? Well, Petraeus’s notes were not marked either. But this was not a problem to his prosecution. Here is how it was revered -- it also included the use of email:

It is reasonable to assume that Hotmail mailbox is on the same of higher level of securty as private email server Hillary Clinton used. It also did not have two facto authentication and mailbox contained sensitive information. If you read Wikipedia article about emailgate ( Hillary Clinton email controversy) and compare it with General Petraeus transgressions the question of double standards definitely comes to mind.

Effectively pardoned by Obama: FBI did not recommend indictment

"They were careless people ... they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made . . . . ”

― F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby

FBI director said Crooked Hillary compromised our national security. No charges. Wow! #RiggedSystem

-- Donald Trump Twit, Jul 5, 2016

In order to get Hillary Clinton off the hook FBI rewrote the existing and pretty strict statute:

Although denying that he was effectively re-writing the language of any relevant statute to reach his conclusion, Director Comey asserted that it was appropriate to ignore the express “gross negligence” element in one such statute dealing with the gathering of defense-related information (18 U.S. Code §793(F)). He based his decision to ignore the “gross negligence” statutory element, despite his own statement that Hillary Clinton had been “extremely careless” in the “handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,” on his understanding of past precedent.

He explained that federal prosecutors have brought only one case based on gross negligence in the last 99 years because, in part, of constitutional concerns with convictions in cases where there is no showing of criminal intent. He also concluded that it would be unfair to embark on what he called “celebrity hunting” by singling out Hillary Clinton for prosecution for “gross negligence” when only one such case has been brought in 99 years.

Similarly, the director disputed that the requisite criminal intent was provable under a separate criminal statute involving the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material in an unauthorized location (18 U.S. Code § 1924), even though that is precisely what Hillary Clinton did.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) had an exchange with Director Comey that set out the case for concluding that Hillary Clinton had criminal intent based on such circumstantial evidence. It is worth quoting from at length (Comey's Peculiar Explanations Frontpage Mag):

“GOWDY: …I’m going to ask you to put on your old hat. False exculpatory statements — they are used for what?

COMEY: Well, either for a substantive prosecution, or for evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution.

GOWDY: Exactly. Intent, and consciousness of guilt, right? Is that right?

COMEY: Right.

GOWDY: Consciousness of guilt, and intent. In your old job, you would prove intent, as you just referenced, by showing the jury evidence of a complex scheme that was designed for the very purpose of concealing the public record. And you would be arguing, in addition to concealment, the destruction that you and I just talked about, or certainly the failure to preserve. You would argue all of that under the heading of intent.

You would also be arguing the pervasiveness of the scheme: when it started, when it ended, and the number of e-mails, whether they were originally classified or up-classified. You would argue all of that under the heading of intent…

She affirmatively rejected efforts to give her a state.gov account, she kept these private e-mails for almost two years, and only turned them over to Congress because we found out she had a private e-mail account.

So you have a rogue e-mail system set up before she took the oath of office; thousands of what we now know to be classified e-mails, some of which were classified at the time; one of her more frequent e-mailed comrades was, in fact, hacked, and you don’t know whether or not she was; and this scheme took place over long period of time and resulted in the destruction of public records — and yet you say there is insufficient evidence of intent?

You say she was “extremely careless,” but not intentionally so. Now, you and I both know intent is really difficult to prove. Very rarely do defendants announce, “On this day, I intend to break this criminal code section. Just to put everyone on notice, I am going to break the law on this day.” It never happens that way. You have to do it with circumstantial evidence — or, if you’re Congress, and you realize how difficult it is to prove specific intent, you will formulate a statute that allows for “gross negligence.”

Even before FBI Director James Comey announcement chances of her indictment after Obama announced his support of her candidacy were next to zero. Especially after what was billed as a private meeting on Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch:

But she indicated it had nothing to do with the controversies swirling around the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate.

'Our conversation was a great deal about grandchildren, it was primarily social about our travels and he mentioned golf he played in Phoenix,' Lynch said.

Lynch's husband apparently was along for the trip as well.

'I did see President Clinton at the Phoenix airport as he was leaving and spoke to myself and my husband on the plane,' she said.

The tarmac talk took place at Sky Harbor International Airport.

Usually well-informed The Washington Post promoted this theory as early as March 8 (Why Hillary Clinton is unlikely to be indicted over her private email server). "This woman" is above the law:

For those of you salivating — or trembling — at the thought of Hillary Clinton being clapped in handcuffs as she prepares to deliver her acceptance speech at the Democratic convention this summer: deep, cleansing breath. Based on the available facts and the relevant precedents, criminal prosecution of Clinton for mishandling classified information in her emails is extraordinarily unlikely.

There are two main statutory hooks. Title 18, Section 1924, a misdemeanor, makes it a crime for a government employee to “knowingly remove” classified information “without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location.” Prosecutors used this provision in securing a guilty plea from former CIA director David H. Petraeus, who was sentenced to probation and fined $100,000. But there are key differences between Petraeus and Clinton.

... ... ...

Another possible prosecutorial avenue involves the Espionage Act. Section 793(d) makes it a felony if a person entrusted with “information relating to the national defense” “willfully communicates, delivers [or] transmits” it to an unauthorized person. That might be a stretch given the “willfully” requirement.

Section 793(f) covers a person with access to “national defense” information who through “gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust.” The government has used the “gross negligence” provision to prosecute a Marine sergeant who accidentally put classified documents in his gym bag, then hid them in his garage rather than returning them, and an Air Force sergeant who put classified material in a Dumpster so he could get home early.

You can well think about Hillary Clinton server as a "dumpster". Copying emails to USB sticks is probably worse that putting classified documents in a gym bad. Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey highlights that Hillary has violated at least 4 federal criminal laws: #18USC1924 #18USC793f #18USC2071 #18USC1519 #Hillary2016's private server violated at least 4 federal criminal laws: #18USC1924 #18USC793f #18USC2071 #18USC1519 ( twitter.com )

As Andrew C. McCarthy noted in http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18):

The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.

But those consideration are now mute. On July 5, FBI Director James Comey has completed his investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server. His agency recommended to the Justice Department that Clinton not face criminal prosecution, despite calling Clinton and her staff, 'extremely careless.' As one commenter to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3XvTonyUeg noted:

toasteh2 hours ago

Clinton won in the legal arena but could yet lose in the court of public opinion. Now Hillary opponents were given enough ammunition by the FBI report to keep the issue alive and emphasize the issue of trust until election day. Moreover, as Hillary Clinton was essentially put above the law that can double efforts in ares were she was not cleared by FBI investigation.

Political fallout for Hillary Clinton started along the lines that she’s inherently untrustworthy or, in Trump’s words: “a world-class liar”. Even as Comey helped clear the way for Clinton to be legally exonerated, he rebuked her for being “extremely careless” in using a private email server for classified information, adding that lesser government officials might have faced administrative sanction. Contrary to what Comey said in such cases intent does not matter.

In other way Donald Trump powerful ammunition to attack Hillary Clinton about her mishandling of classified information and lying about it till the election day. Just listen to C-Span viewers reaction: C-SPAN Callers VERY DISAPPOINTED In The FBI Decision Not To Charge Hillary Clinton - YouTube. Here are some comments to this recording:

Ross Meldrum

When Comey stated there would be no recommendation for prosecution what I think he was indirectly saying was that no one in the Obama administration or the DOJ is willing to bring an indictment or prosecute her. Even though there is ample evidence of criminality. Obama does not want prosecution because Obama would be called as a witness and found to be guilty himself of knowing she was using an unsecured server. Thus making him guilty as well.

Clooz

people the age of these callers allowed Clinton's election cheating to be successful by voting for her. We had the chance for an anti corruption, for the people candidate, and we threw it away for "first women president" or some bull. Even without the indictment I hope we get another candidate. The world is changing, we don't need corporations, lobbyist, and politicians that only care about the advancement of their careers!

Dr. Tim Williams

With the latest announcement from the FBI shows that Hillary Clinton was very negligent during her tenure as Secretary of State. A series of gross negligence moves concerning classified e-mails is equivalent to what the military terms as a dereliction of duty in her performance as Secretary of State. As the Democratic convention looms ahead the findings by the FBI has to be a real wake up call for every delegate to consider the weakness of a Clinton candidacy. It has to be noted that Senator Sanders who the media continues to ignore has moved the nation into realizing that change is needed to secure that our democratic process returns to the way our founding fathers intended. Make no mistake that if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee leaves open the more than probability that Trump will win in November. Or if the wheels of corruption by the DNC and the already super delegates that are being pulled by Clinton's purse strings succeed at striping the nomination away from Senator Sanders manage to convince enough voters in November it will be a sad day for all Americans.

Trish McRae

The democratic leaders need to lead and ask for Hillary to step down and allow Bernie to be the nominee. Congress needs to make sure Loretta Lynch indicts Hillary for her crimes. Bernie is honest and brings much enthusiasm. I don't understand why I constantly hear the media asking Sanders to step down when Hillary is the worst candidate. Watching the election fraud videos from San Diego and not hearing about any of it in the news is disgusting. It feels like Hillary brought much corruption to our party. I am a lifelong democrat and will never vote for Hillary. I may have to leave it.

FBI director James Comey Testifies on Clinton Email Probe

It provided some additional facts.

Congressman Gowdy asked Director Comey point-blank if Clinton’s testimony that she did not e-mail “any classified material to anyone on my e-mail” was true. Comey said it was not true. Was Clinton telling the truth when she said that she used only one device while Secretary of State? Comey said she used multiple devices. Did she return all work-related e-mails to the State Department as she had claimed? No was the reply. “We found work-related emails, thousands that were not returned,” Comey said.

There were also funny exchange in which Comey suggested that Hillary might be not "sophisticated enough" to understand that classified markings are present (in other word that she is not qualified for any government position):

FBI Director James Comey is suggesting that it's possible Hillary Clinton may not have been able to identify classified markings on emails.

Comey's investigation found that there were 113 emails that were sent or received by Clinton containing classified material, contradicting Clinton's previous statements.

Comey says under questioning from a Republican lawmaker that they asked Clinton about three emails that bore "C'' markings indicating that the documents are classified. He says there's a question of whether Clinton was "sophisticated enough" to understand what the C markings meant.

North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows says a reasonable person would think someone who is the secretary of state would understand what that means. Meadows says after Clinton's time in the Senate and at the State Department, "that's hard to believe."

Looks like there might be multiple servers in the basement. Here are some interesting fragments:

  1. Trey Gowdy GRILLS James Comey On Hillary Clinton Emails 7-7-16 - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ
  2. Palmer Questioning FBI Director Comey - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMg9CjtsykY
  3. Jason Chaffetz Digs in on Comey at Start of Capitol Hearing ‘We Are Mystified and Confused’ - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2vyE4QWk1o
  4. Rep. Hurd Grills James Comey - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T119FRJRnyU
  5. Highlights James Comey Testimony in Clinton Email Hearing - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsYOfAZZq_s
  6. Rep. Jody Hice questions FBI Director James Comey (Full video) - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyK5xPafkGI
  7. Georgia Reps. grill James Comey - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zfugJDD6jk
  8. Clinton dodges questions after FBI interrogation - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzFIVntNOck

Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jan 22, 2018] Top FBI, DOJ Officials Use Drug-Cartel-Style Burner Phones to Dodge Federal Investigators, Lawmakers

That's a really fishy development. Like a mafia running inside FBI ;-)
Notable quotes:
"... Intel points to top FBI and DOJ officials communicating via: ..."
"... Burner or disposable smart phones purchased with cash and charged with cash or money order ..."
"... Encrypted phone and web apps, including SIGNAL employed for anonymous texting ..."
"... Phones issued in the name of a spouse or family member, conceivably out of reach of federal subpoenas ..."
"... Use of such telecom devices as part of official government business violates a host of federal laws, insiders said. ..."
"... With many key personnel in the FBI currently under the microscope of the Inspector General -- for potential criminal violations -- top FBI and DOJ officials are communicating on disposable phones via text, voice and internet access to encrypted texting apps, FBI insiders confirm. ..."
"... "The IG is aware of this," one FBI insider said. "They have been up on these guys for a long time." The FBI source's comments reflect the fact that the Inspector General has had court-approved wiretaps running on key members in the FBI and DOJ linked to an assortment of public scandals. ..."
"... "It is OK to publicize this now, because they have dug themselves a very big hole," the FBI source said. "They have switched to burners." ..."
"... The FBI "failed to preserve" five months worth of text messages exchanged between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two FBI employees who made pro-Clinton and anti-Trump comments while working on the Clinton email and the Russia collusion investigations. ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | truepundit.com

Members of the FBI and Justice Department's top brass at their Washington D.C.headquarters and other field offices are now using burner phones to stay under the radar of federal investigators and lawmakers, according to FBI insiders.

The shocking revelations come on the heels of news that the FBI deleted thousands of text messages between anti-Trump FBI agents before investigators could review their content.

While that is disturbing on one level, FBI and DOJ hierarchy employing the telecom habits of drug cartel bosses reaches a new low for the once-heralded federal law enforcement agency and the DOJ. And breaks federal laws as well.

Intel points to top FBI and DOJ officials communicating via:

Use of such telecom devices as part of official government business violates a host of federal laws, insiders said.

But that hasn't slowed their use by top law enforcement personnel in the United States.

With many key personnel in the FBI currently under the microscope of the Inspector General -- for potential criminal violations -- top FBI and DOJ officials are communicating on disposable phones via text, voice and internet access to encrypted texting apps, FBI insiders confirm.

"The IG is aware of this," one FBI insider said. "They have been up on these guys for a long time." The FBI source's comments reflect the fact that the Inspector General has had court-approved wiretaps running on key members in the FBI and DOJ linked to an assortment of public scandals.

One of the main reasons why the Inspector General's report of its investigation of the FBI has been delayed is because investigators keep getting wiretap intelligence on the key players, the FBI official said.

"It is OK to publicize this now, because they have dug themselves a very big hole," the FBI source said. "They have switched to burners."

Multiple FBI and federal law enforcement sources disclosed earlier that the IG was running wiretaps on FBI and DOJ officials to True Pundit but requested an embargo on publishing the information which would interfere with the investigation. True Pundit agreed to withhold until given the green light to publish.

The FBI "failed to preserve" five months worth of text messages exchanged between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two FBI employees who made pro-Clinton and anti-Trump comments while working on the Clinton email and the Russia collusion investigations.

The disclosure was made Friday in a letter sent by the Justice Department to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC).

"The Department wants to bring to your attention that the FBI's technical system for retaining text messages sent and received on FBI mobile devices failed to preserve text messages for Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page," Stephen Boyd, the assistant attorney general for legislative affairs at the Justice Department, wrote to Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of HSGAC.

He said that texts are missing for the period between Dec. 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017.

Boyd attributed the failure to "misconfiguration issues related to rollouts, provisioning, and software upgrades that conflicted with the FBI's collection capabilities."

"The result was that data that should have been automatically collected and retained for long-term storage and retrieval was not collected," Boyd wrote.

[Jan 21, 2018] Brennan Calls For Coup Against Trump if Mueller is Fired

Jan 21, 2018 | www.trunews.com

On Friday at the Aspen Security Forum former CIA director John Brennan said senior officials in the executive branch should refuse the order if President Trump fires special counsel Robert Mueller

(VERO BEACH, FL) Speaking on a panel to CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer with former DNI chief James Clapper, John Brennan effectively called for a coup against the president if he should give the order to fire the DOJ appointed investigator.

"I think it's the obligation of some executive branch officials to refuse to carry that out," Mr. Brennan said . "I would just hope that this is not going to be a partisan issue. That Republicans, Democrats are going to see that the future of this government is at stake and something needs to be done for the good of the future.

"If he's fired by Mr. Trump, or is attempted to be fired by Mr. Trump, I hope, I really hope that our members of congress, our elected representatives, will stand up and say enough is enough, and stop making apologies and excuses for things that are happening that really flaunt, I think, our system of laws and government here," Mr. Brennan said.

The editorial staff of ZeroHedge, an influential global blog which covers politics, economics, and war from a libertarian perspective, also concluded that Mr. Brennan's statement was "effectively calling for a coup" should President Trump give the order to fire Mr. Mueller.

[Jan 21, 2018] Brennan Officials should refuse Trump if he fires Mueller Daily Mail Online

Jul 25, 2017 | www.educationviews.org

CIA's former boss calls on government officials to refuse to obey Trump if he fires Mueller

[Jan 21, 2018] "FBI, Mueller, Rosenstein, Strzok, Comey, Brennan, McCabe: Up to Their Gills in Collusion" by Donna Garner

Dec 05, 2017 | www.educationviews.org

12.5.17

From May 17, 2017 through Sept. 30, 2017, Robert Mueller's Russia probe spent nearly $7 Million of taxpayers' dollars. In seven months, no solid evidence has been produced to prove that Pres. Trump colluded with the Russians to impact the elections. The budget for Mueller's investigation was approved by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. -- 12.5.17 –"Mueller's Russia probe spent nearly $7M in four months – May 17, 2017 through Sept. 30, 2017" – Fox News -- http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/05/muellers-russia-probe-spent-nearly-7m-in-first-few-months.html

=============

12.5.17 –"Fired FBI official at center of Flynn, Clinton, dossier controversies revealed" – by Nicole Darrah, Pamela K. Browne – Fox News -- http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/05/fired-fbi-official-at-center-flynn-clinton-dossier-controversies-revealed.html

Excerpts from this article:

Now there's a face to go with the name of the biased FBI operative at the center of multiple probes and controversies dogging the Trump administration.

Fox News has obtained a photo of Peter Strzok, the longtime FBI deputy fired by Special Counsel Robert Mueller over his bias against President Trump. Strzok (pronounced "Struck"), was sacked by Mueller after electronic messages he reportedly sent to a colleague emerged, but not before he played key roles in the probes swirling around Trump.

Strzok, a former deputy to the assistant director for counterintelligence at the FBI, oversaw the bureau's interviews with ousted National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, changed former FBI Director James Comey's early draft language about Hillary Clinton's actions regarding her private email server from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless" and reportedly helped push the largely unverified dossier on Trump that was initially prepared by Fusion GPS for the Clinton campaign's opposition research.

Strzok's messages were reportedly not only anti-Trump, but also pro-Hillary. That has raised the ire of critics because, prior to joining Mueller's probe, he made edits to Comey's speech exonerating Hillary Clinton.

The language being edited was important because classified material that's been mishandled for "gross negligence" calls for criminal consequences, analysts point out.

The wording change came to light last month after newly reported memos to Congress showed that a May 2016 draft of Comey's statement closing out the email investigation accused the former secretary of state of being "grossly negligent." A June 2016 draft stated Clinton had been "extremely careless."

The modified language was final when Comey announced in July 2016 that Clinton wouldn't face any charges in the email investigation.

A source close to the matter told Fox News that the probe, which will examine Strzok's roles in a number of other politically sensitive cases, should be completed by "very early next year."

=======

12.3.17 – "Mueller aide fired for anti-Trump texts now facing review for role in Clinton email probe" -- By James Rosen, Jake Gibson -- FoxNews -- http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/03/mueller-aide-fired-for-anti-trump-texts-now-facing-review-for-role-in-clinton-email-probe.html

Excerpts from this article

EXCLUSIVE – Two senior Justice Department officials have confirmed to Fox News that the department's Office of Inspector General is reviewing the role played in the Hillary Clinton email investigation by Peter Strzok, a former deputy director for counterintelligence at the FBI who was removed from the staff of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III earlier this year, after Mueller learned that Strzok had exchanged anti-Trump texts with a colleague.

The task will be exceedingly complex, given Strzok's consequential portfolio. He participated in the FBI's fateful interview with Hillary Clinton on July 2, 2016 – just days before then-FBI Director James Comey announced he was declining to recommend prosecution of Mrs. Clinton in connection with her use, as secretary of state, of a private email server.

As deputy FBI director for counterintelligence, Strzok also enjoyed liaison with various agencies in the intelligence community, including the CIA, then led by Director John Brennan.

Key figure

House investigators told Fox News they have long regarded Strzok as a key figure in the chain of events when the bureau, in 2016, received the infamous anti-Trump "dossier" and launched a counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling in the election that ultimately came to encompass FISA surveillance of a Trump campaign associate.

The "dossier" was a compendium of salacious and largely unverified allegations about then-candidate Trump and others around him that was compiled by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS. The firm's bank records, obtained by House investigators, revealed that the project was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., has sought documents and witnesses from the Department of Justice and FBI to determine what role, if any, the dossier played in the move to place a Trump campaign associate under foreign surveillance.

Strzok himself briefed the committee on Dec. 5, 2016, the sources said, but within months of that session House Intelligence Committee investigators were contacted by an informant suggesting that there was "documentary evidence" that Strzok was purportedly obstructing the House probe into the dossier.

In early October, Nunes personally asked Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein – who has overseen the Trump-Russia probe since the recusal of Attorney General Jeff Sessions – to make Strzok available to the committee for questioning, sources said.

While Strzok's removal from the Mueller team had been publicly reported in August, the Justice Department never disclosed the anti-Trump texts to the House investigators

When a month had elapsed, House investigators – having issued three subpoenas for various witnesses and documents – formally recommended to Nunes that DOJ and FBI be held in contempt of Congress.

Nunes continued pressing DOJ, including a conversation with Rosenstein as recently as last Wednesday

Contempt citations?

Responding to the revelations about Strzok's texts on Saturday, Nunes said he has now directed his staff to draft contempt-of-Congress citations against Rosenstein and the new FBI director, Christopher Wray. Unless DOJ and FBI comply with all of his outstanding requests for documents and witnesses by the close of business on Monday, Nunes said, he would seek a resolution on the contempt citations before year's end.

"We now know why Strzok was dismissed, why the FBI and DOJ refused to provide us this explanation, and at least one reason why they previously refused to make [FBI] Deputy Director [Andrew] McCabe available to the Committee for an interview," Nunes said in a statement.

Those witnesses are FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and the FBI officer said to have handled Christopher Steele, the British spy who used Russian sources to compile the dossier for Fusion GPS. The official said to be Steele's FBI handler has also appeared already before the Senate panel.

In addition, Rosenstein is set to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on Dec. 13.

Sources close to the various investigations agreed the discovery of Strzok's texts raised important questions about his work on the Clinton email case, the Trump-Russia probe, and the dossier matter.

A top House investigator asked: "If Mueller knew about the texts, what did he know about the dossier?"

Carr declined to comment on the extent to which Mueller has examined the dossier and its relationship, if any, to the counterintelligence investigation that Strzok launched during the height of the campaign season.

[Jan 21, 2018] Remarks from Robert Mueller III

Looks like Mueller has strong connections to CIA and according to Brennan is his personal friend. This glowing introduction by none other then Brenner rises several questions. One is did CIA controlled Mueller during his tenure of FBI director.
The fact the Muller was in charge after 9/11 attacks rases additional questions.
Jun 20, 2014 | www.youtube.com

LazyJack2003 , 1 month ago

"In Mueller we trust!"

Kathy Collins

Listening to this, I feel very confident that Mr. Mueller will be able to get to the very bottom of the Russian investigation. I think he is probably three or more steps ahead of any tricks our "President" might try. This man is a head chess player.

Ash Pro

No wonder Trump and co are scared of this man. He is gonna take the whole thing down.

[Jan 19, 2018] #ReleaseTheMemo Extensive FISA abuse memo could destroy the entire Mueller Russia investigation by Alex Christoforou

Highly recommended!
Looks like Rosenstein might lose his position.
Jan 19, 2018 | theduran.com

Classified documents obtained by members of Congress reportedly show extensive FISA abuses.

André De Koning , January 19, 2018 5:16 AM

What a bombshell! Finally some truth about the "Justice system" in the US.

Following on from this should be the whole subsequent story of the DNC-Fusion-Steele dossier in detail, exposing the MSM too for what it has been worth.
Perhaps then Trump dares to go against the deep state swamp and stop wars instead of following the dictates of CIA, Israel and Military Industrialists. That would be a real POTUS PLUS result.

foxenburg , January 19, 2018 5:13 AM

I thought Trump explained all this last March when he said his campaign was wiretapped, and he called for a Congressional investigation?

"Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!"

12:35 PM - Mar 4, 2017

Rick Manigault foxenburg , January 19, 2018 6:01 AM

Trump gave in to the lie about Russian interference and the republicans who hated him went along with this hoax until recently.

louis robert , January 19, 2018 3:07 PM

""It's troubling. It is shocking," North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows said. "Part of me wishes that I didn't read it because I don't want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening in this country that I call home and love so much.""

***

Come on, child! Enough with that spectacle. Get real. Have the basic courage to know and to admit what everybody has known about your country for ages!... The entire world already knows.

Franz Kafka , January 19, 2018 11:28 AM

More proof, if any were needed, that the only threat to the people of the USA comes from their own government. The 'external threat' is a fiction calculated to enslave the US population and enrich the Oligarchy.

Gano1 , January 19, 2018 8:11 AM

The DOJ, FBI and Democrats have colluded 100%.

Franz Kafka Gano1 , January 19, 2018 11:29 AM

Why omit the US Masked [sic] Media?

Franz Kafka , January 19, 2018 11:31 AM

If the 'swamp' gets drained all at once, can the bottom fall out of the pond?

WeAreYourGods , January 19, 2018 8:14 AM

Somebody's going to leak this in short order. Let's take a real look at what both Dems and Repubs just expanded, let's look at the monster they are feeding in broad daylight.

Rick Manigault , January 19, 2018 6:00 AM

This should be the focus until there are actual convictions of high level perpetrators.

Franz Kafka , January 19, 2018 2:05 PM

Why is Hannity afraid of using the 'C' word? CONSPIRACY!

Sueja , January 19, 2018 4:57 PM

Has the House Intelligence committee's Twitter account really been shut down. How corrupt is Twitter?

[Jan 19, 2018] Russiagate Has Blown Up In The Face Of Its Originators -- the FBI, DOJ, and Hillary by Paul Craig Roberts

Jan 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

It is exactly as I told you. Russiagate is a conspiracy between the FBI, the DOJ, and the Hillary campaign to overturn Donald Trump's election. We have treason committed at the highest levels of the FBI and Department of Justice and the Democratic National Committee.

If you believed one word of Russiagate, you now must laugh or cry at your incredible gullibility.

This scandal should also bring down the presstitute media who have done the dirty work for the conspiracy against Trump.

watch-v=oUAt4DsscXA

[Jan 19, 2018] GOP Rep. Gaetz Calls on House to Release 'Important Intelligence Document' - Goes to 'Very Foundations of Our Democracy,' Invol

Notable quotes:
"... Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor ..."
Jan 19, 2018 | www.breitbart.com

GOP Rep. Gaetz Calls on House to Release 'Important Intelligence Document' -- Goes to 'Very Foundations of Our Democracy,' Involves FBI, DoJ and Trump

. @mattgaetz : "The allegations contained in this important intelligence document go to the very foundations of our democracy and they require an immediate release to the public in my opinion." pic.twitter.com/kqjxp21GcA

-- FOX Business (@FoxBusiness) January 18, 2018

by Jeff Poor 18 Jan 2018 0

18 Jan, 2018 18 Jan, 2018 Thursday on the Fox Business Network, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) teased an intelligence memo that he claimed went "to the very foundations of democracy" and called on his colleagues in the House of Representatives to make the memo public.

Gaetz told host Liz Claman the memo involved the FBI, the Department of Justice and President Donald Trump.

"The allegations contained in this important intelligence document go to the very foundations of our democracy, and they require an immediate release to the public in my opinion," Gaetz said. "Unfortunately, I can not talk about the specific facts contained within this memo. I can only share my observation -- that if the American people knew what was happening if they saw the contents of this memo, a lot would become clear about the information that I've been talking about the last several months. And so, I am calling on our leadership to hold a vote on the floor of the House to make public the key contents of this intelligence memo regarding the FBI, the Department of Justice and President Trump."

According to Gaetz, a vote could be held simultaneously with a continuing resolution vote that would make the "critical allegations" in the document on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

[Jan 18, 2018] Explosive, Shocking And Alarming FISA Memo Set To Rock DC, End Mueller Investigation Zero Hedge

Jan 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

All hell is breaking loose in Washington D.C. tonight after a four-page memo detailing extensive FISA court abuse was made available to the entire House of Representatives Thursday. The contents of the memo are so explosive, says Journalist Sara Carter, that it could lead to the removal of senior officials in the FBI and the Department of Justice and the end of Robert Mueller's special counsel investigation.

These sources say the report is "explosive," stating they would not be surprised if it leads to the end of Robert Mueller's Special Counsel investigation into President Trump and his associates. - Sara Carter

A source close to the matter tells Fox News that "the memo details the Intelligence Committee's oversight work for the FBI and Justice, including the controversy over unmasking and FISA surveillance." An educated guess by anyone who's been paying attention for the last year leads to the obvious conclusion that the report reveals extensive abuse of power and highly illegal collusion between the Obama administration, the FBI, the DOJ and the Clinton Campaign against Donald Trump and his team during and after the 2016 presidential election.

Lawmakers who have seen the memo are calling for its immediate release, while the phrases "explosive," "shocking," "troubling," and "alarming" have all been used in all sincerity. One congressman even likened the report's details to KGB activity in Russia. " It is so alarming the American people have to see this, " Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan told Fox News . " It's troubling. It is shocking ," North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows said. " Part of me wishes that I didn't read it because I don't want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening in this country that I call home and love so much. "

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., offered the motion on Thursday to make the Republican majority-authored report available to the members.

" The document shows a troubling course of conduct and we need to make the document available, so the public can see it, " said a senior government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the document. " Once the public sees it, we can hold the people involved accountable in a number of ways ."

The government official said that after reading the document " some of these people should no longer be in the government. " - Sara Carter

Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz (R) echoed Sara Carter's sentiment that people might lose their job if the memo is released:

" I believe the consequence of its release will be major changes in people currently working at the FBI and the Department of Justice ," he said, referencing DOJ officials Rod Rosenstein and Bruce Ohr .

https://www.youtube.com/embed/z4ByDYn-taE

Meanwhile, Rep. Matt Gatetz (R-FL) said not only will the release of this memo result in DOJ firing, but "people will go to jail."

Former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino says " Take it to the bank, the FBI/FISA docs are devastating for the Dems ."

The dossier was used in part as evidence for a warrant to surveil members of the Trump campaign, according to a story published this month . Former British spy Christopher Steele, who compiled the dossier in 2016, was hired by embattled research firm Fusion GPS. The firm's founder is Glenn Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter who has already testified before Congress in relation to the dossier. In October, The Washington Post revealed for the first time that it was the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC that financed Fusion GPS.

Congressional members are hopeful that the classified information will be declassified and released to the public.

" We probably will get this stuff released by the end of the month ," stated a congressional member, who asked not to be named. - Sara Carter

Releasing the memo to the public would require a committee vote, a source told Fox , adding that if approved, it could be released as long as there are no objections from the White House within five days .

Reactions from the citizenry have been on point:

... ... ....

Even WikiLeaks has joined the fray, offering a reward in Bitcoin to anyone who will share the memo:

Oddly, the Twitter account for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence - @HPSCI - has been mysteriously suspended.

Of all the recent developments in the ongoing investigation(s), this one is on the cusp of turning into a genuine happening.

WTFRLY -> IridiumRebel Jan 18, 2018 10:30 PM Permalink

This. Cut the Joominati out and light them on fire plz

Automatic Choke -> ACP Jan 18, 2018 10:35 PM Permalink

is somebody watching the airports?

Ahmeexnal -> NoDebt Jan 18, 2018 10:36 PM Permalink

Seems like the Deep State has no option but to fire some ballistic nukes from "black submarines" and blame it on the ruskies/norks/chinks.

JimmyJones -> Ahmeexnal Jan 18, 2018 10:37 PM Permalink

I pray you are wrong. I hope that this pans out.its blatantly obvious we have major corruption that needs to be dealt with.

overbet -> ACP Jan 18, 2018 10:36 PM Permalink

This statement shows the level of corruption that is acceptable. If something illegal was done they might lose their job:

Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz (R) echoed Sara Carter's sentiment that people might lose their job if the memo is released .

Bigly Jan 18, 2018 10:27 PM Permalink

Hannity was big tonight on this.

I think it is just becoming too apparent. If it's released, there are names in there. Then they can be indicted and swing.

GOLD AND SILVE Jan 18, 2018 10:30 PM Permalink

I'm sure there's a reasonable explanation for all of this and hey, it's the weekend. - Jeff Sessions

IridiumRebel -> DarthVaderMentor Jan 18, 2018 10:39 PM Permalink

https://reason.com/archives/2017/01/18/the-most-transparent-administr

[Jan 13, 2018] The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate by Ray McGovern

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, with almost four decades of membership in the House and Senate, openly warned incoming President Trump in January 2017 against criticizing the U.S. intelligence community because U.S. intelligence officials have "six ways from Sunday to get back at you" if you are "dumb" enough to take them on. ..."
"... Senate Judiciary Committee chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, says he will ask Strzok to explain the "insurance policy" when he calls him to testify. What seems already clear is that the celebrated "Steele Dossier" was part of the "insurance," as was the evidence-less legend that Russia hacked the DNC's and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's emails and gave them to WikiLeaks . <img src="https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/fbiseal-291x300.jpg" alt="" width="291" height="300" srcset="https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/fbiseal-291x300.jpg 291w, https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/fbiseal.jpg 350w" sizes="(max-width: 291px) 100vw, 291px" /> ..."
"... There is a snowball's chance in hell that this is raw intelligence gathered by Steele; rather he seems to have drawn on a single 'trusted intermediary' to gather unsubstantiated rumor already in existence. ..."
"... "The fact that you do not control your sources frequently means that they will feed you what they think you want to hear. Since they are only doing it for money, the more lurid the details the better, as it increases the apparent value of the information. The private security firm in turn, which is also doing it for the money, will pass on the stories and even embroider them to keep the client happy and to encourage him to come back for more. When I read the Steele dossier it looked awfully familiar to me, like the scores of similar reports I had seen which combined bullshit with enough credible information to make the whole product look respectable." ..."
"... How, you might ask, could Strzok and associates undertake these extra-legal steps with such blithe disregard for the possible consequences should they be caught? The answer is easy; Mrs. Clinton was a shoo-in, remember? This was just extra insurance with no expectation of any "death benefit" ever coming into play -- save for Trump's electoral demise in November 2016. The attitude seemed to be that, if abuse of the FISA law should eventually be discovered -- there would be little interest in a serious investigation by the editors of The New York Times and other anti-Trump publications and whatever troubles remained could be handled by President Hillary Clinton. ..."
Jan 11, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Special Report: In the Watergate era, liberals warned about U.S. intelligence agencies manipulating U.S. politics, but now Trump-hatred has blinded many of them to this danger becoming real, as ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern notes.

... ... ...

[Jan 07, 2018] Mueller, Rosenstein, and Comey The Three Amigos from the Deep State by Roger Stone

Notable quotes:
"... Rod Rosenstein, current Deputy Attorney General under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is also a member of the Mueller Gang, having worked directly under Robert Mueller at the Department of Justice as far back as 1990. When Comey was still working as the Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division for the U.S. Attorney's office in New York, Mueller and Rosenstein were becoming thick as thieves. ..."
"... He supervised the investigation that found no basis for criminal prosecution of White House officials who had obtained classified FBI background reports. He did a great job covering for the Team Bill Clinton, including covering for Hillary, as she was one of the people who had access to the reports, and may have even requested them. Convenient for the Clintons, no indictments were filed. ..."
"... Having proven his loyalty to the powers that be, Rosenstein was appointed to work in the US Office of the Independent Counsel under Ken Starr on the Whitewater Investigation into then President Bill Clinton. By some miracle, or clever work by insiders, the Clintons escaped culpability once again. Rod wasn't alone, he had help from his co-worker James Comey, who was also making sure the Clintons were exonerated during the Whitewater affair. ..."
"... Who is surprised when three of the top lawman fixers for the Clinton/Bush cabal have axes in their eyes for President Donald J. Trump? ..."
Jun 22, 2017 | stonecoldtruth.com

There is a longtime and incestuous relationship between the fixers who have been tasked with taking down President Trump, under the fake narrative of enforcing the law. James Comey worked in the DOJ directly under Mueller until 2005. Rod Rosenstein and Mueller go even further back.

James Comey wasn't just some associate of Mueller back then, but rather his protégé. Under the George W. Bush presidency, when Comey was serving as Deputy Attorney General under John Ashcroft, Robert Mueller was Comey's go-to guy when he needed help. The two men, as it came to light years later, conspired to disobey potential White House orders to leave Ashcroft alone when he was incapacitated in March of 2004. These two men, when together, will not obey orders if they think they know better. Being filled with hubris and almost two decades of doing just about anything they want, they always think they know better.

Rod Rosenstein, current Deputy Attorney General under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is also a member of the Mueller Gang, having worked directly under Robert Mueller at the Department of Justice as far back as 1990. When Comey was still working as the Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division for the U.S. Attorney's office in New York, Mueller and Rosenstein were becoming thick as thieves.

We look back at Rod's loyal work for Hillary Clinton, when he became a clean-up man for the Clinton Administration as an Associate Independent Counsel from 1995 until 1997. He supervised the investigation that found no basis for criminal prosecution of White House officials who had obtained classified FBI background reports. He did a great job covering for the Team Bill Clinton, including covering for Hillary, as she was one of the people who had access to the reports, and may have even requested them. Convenient for the Clintons, no indictments were filed.

Having proven his loyalty to the powers that be, Rosenstein was appointed to work in the US Office of the Independent Counsel under Ken Starr on the Whitewater Investigation into then President Bill Clinton. By some miracle, or clever work by insiders, the Clintons escaped culpability once again. Rod wasn't alone, he had help from his co-worker James Comey, who was also making sure the Clintons were exonerated during the Whitewater affair.

Here is Robert Mueller, sitting in the middle of his two wunderkinds, making sure the path before them is smooth and obstacle free, and practically shepherding their careers along the way. Is it any wonder that once Jeff Sessions shamelessly recused himself from the Russia Collusion Conspiracy investigation and turned it over to his deputy Rod Rosenstein, that Rosenstein would reach out to his old mentor for help? Who is surprised when three of the top lawman fixers for the Clinton/Bush cabal have axes in their eyes for President Donald J. Trump?

Enter Lisa Barsoomian, wife of Rod Rosenstein. Lisa is a high-powered attorney in Washington, DC, who specializes in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the Deep State, err, I mean, the Intelligence Communities.

... ... ...

Al Benson Jr. , June 25, 2017 5:54 PM

Same question I have asked before, why are all these Clinton supporters and Obama clones still part of the Trump White House? Why have they not been removed. It almost seems as if Trump is handing these people the rope they plan to hang him with. You can bet the farm if Obama was still in office there would be no supporters of a previous Republican administration in his White House. They would all have been shoved out the back door long ago. Is there no way either Trump or Sessions can get rid of these people? And if not, why not?

The Trump administration is more than overloaded with Obama holdovers and you can bet none of them is there to help him enact his America First agenda. Those people have been working to make sure it's "America Last" for decades now.

One wonders how long they will be able to keep pushing that famous non-event, the Trump/Russian collusion theory before they realize that people are just not buying it anymore.

Years ago, and some of you all may remember it, there was a hamburger commercial on where a little old lady stepped up to the counter and asked "Where's the beef?" Today the public could just as easily step up and ask the Establishment "Where's the evidence?" when it comes to Trump and the Russians because all we have heard from the Trump detractors is lots of political bloviation all dressed up in legalese--but no real evidence to back it up.

Might I suggest that Mr. Trump and/or Mr. Sessions see about removing these people that are willfully preventing the Trump administration from doing what we elected it to do?

Alan Rhoads Al Benson Jr. , August 10, 2017 4:18 PM

Send your letter modified to be a formal complaint. I have just sent the following letter to Rosenstein by Certified Mail so that "Someone" needs to sign for it.
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Attention: Deputy Attorney General, Mr. Ron Rosenstein, Esq.

August 10, 2017

Subject: Mr. Robert Mueller, Esq. serving as Special Council, and calling for a Grand Jury

Dear Mr. Deputy Attorney General:

I am writing to you primarily as a way to establish a historical record of your endeavor to investigate any collusion between President Donald J. Trump and the Russians, during the 2016 Federal Election process. Your temporary responsibilities as acting Attorney General caused you to be attuned to the entire Department of Justice case load. And so, you would be fully aware of all facets of the Trump-Russia 2016 Election collision, if any. No collusion was discovered. And so, it would behoove the present Attorney General Mr. Jeffrey Sessions, Esq., to un-recuse himself now that there is no evidence of a Trump felony. You, however, Mr. Deputy Attorney General, are complicit with Attorney Robert Mueller, Esq. in establishing a Special Council and appointed Mr. Mueller to that position.

It is known in public circles that Mr. Mueller is a close friend of former Dir. FBI, James B. Comey. When the President of the United States, Donald Trump fired Comey, Attorney. Robert Mueller can be seen as an extremely biased prosecutor. Mueller's assignment, at the suggestion of Comey and its actual enactment, is, in my opinion illegal.

The Special Council began his investigation in May 2016, it has been noted in the Main Stream Media. We are now almost midway into August and there has been no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.

I am aware that a Special Council is triggered by ongoing or previous criminal activity and is based upon hard evidence that can be used to prosecute a felon. Yet Atty. Robert Mueller was made Special Council without any criminal activity performed by a felon and without any evidence. And then, to establish a Grand Jury for the prosecution, that is totally out of line with ethical justice and the Rule of Law. The final partisan development is that Special Council Mueller has moved the Grand Jury from Virginia to Washington D. C., wherein he is likely to load the Grand Jury with Democrats who, politically are biased against President Trump.

How is that possible at such a high level in the DOJ to allow such misdeeds of justice? The complicit activity described in the body of this letter is the criminal activity, in my opinion. No, the Mueller investigation and Grand Jury is not a witch hunt. Rather it is a stronger term, a Vendetta.

Alan Dale Rhoads, 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, Oreland, PA, 19075-1401

Pitchman , December 14, 2017 3:42 PM

Lisa Barsoomian, Rod Rosenstein's wife was FBI FOiA Shot Blocker and covert communication masking official. Did Rosenstein mention her FBI oversight duties yesterday?

Stewie Steve , December 14, 2017 10:54 PM

you don't think that maybe this is a honeypot? I think these over zealous criminals are creaming their pants and hanging themselves, remember Rogers and the NSA be listening to err thing in the house

D.Plorable , October 25, 2017 4:48 AM

Deeply disturbing but not surprising. Rosenstein struck me immediately as another one just like Andrew McCabe, who supposedly was investigating Hilary's infamous server -- he's married to a Virginia Democrat candidate

https://www.cbsnews.com/new...

though this MSM once-over, like all the others, won't go anywhere near the curious fact that the FBI never actually examined the server, it took the word of Google-funded puppet Crowdstrike, which just happens to be run by a famously anti-Russian activist

https://libertyblitzkrieg.c...

http://dailycaller.com/2017...

and Terry McAuliffe does seem to lead the charmed life doesn't he? His career seems to be a laundry list of grossly unethical but just-not-quite-illegal behavior...I guess it helps to have friends in high places.

newbedave , July 6, 2017 6:03 AM

Document location http://akdart.com/obama111....
Updated July 4, 2017.

[Jan 06, 2018] George Papadopoulos sage timeline

Looks like another "insurance" plot
Jan 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

englishmike , Next New Comment January 4, 2018 at 4:39 am GMT

George Papadopoulos ... in 03/06//16, he joined the Trump campaign as a low-level foreign policy adviser.

Between 03/15/16 and 09/15/16 he tried six times to to arrange meetings between the Trump campaign and Russians, all of them rejected.

On 04/26/16 he met with a Russian contact in London and was "reportedly" offered "dirt" on Hillary.

05/21/16. According to Mueller's investigation, a Trump campaign official refused Papadopoulos's offer to broker meetings with Russian officials.

09/15/16. Papadopoulos emailed a Russian contact, Boris Epshteyn, trying to connect him with Sergei Milliam, author of much of the Fusion GPS "dossier".

01/27/17. Papadopoulos was interviewed by the FBI, which resulted in his eventual indictment for lying to the Bureau.

As Pat Buchanan discusses above, on 12/30/17, the NYT's Maggie Haberman (known to be linked with the DNC), marketed a narrative that the FBI opened its Trump investigation due to Papadopoulos, and not because of the "dossier".

These dated facts are taken, mostly verbatim, from a timeline compiled by Doug Ross

I recommend his: A TIMELINE OF TREASON: How the DNC and FBI Leadership Tried to Fix a Presidential Election [Updated Saturday, December 30, 2017].

It's an excellent account of the key events, from 05/31/13 to the present, with dates and links to key documents.

You can find it at his dougross timelineoftreason website.

[Jan 03, 2018] Shocking Trump-Russia Investigation Corruption Exposed

YouTube video. Highly recommended.
Notable quotes:
"... Mr.Molyneux, You've really become the best journalist alive today, thank you for your commitment to courageous integrity in reporting the insane conditions of our society. ..."
Jan 03, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Jeiku Anime Review , 4 weeks ago

We are at war, a war for our minds.

RoseThistleArtworks , 4 weeks ago

Thank you for this detailed analysis and breakdown.

jerrywh3 , 4 weeks ago

Never doubted for a moment that Trump wasn't involved with Russia.

Sam Nel , 4 weeks ago

Trump is innocent

Saint Michael , 4 weeks ago

When does this fictitious investigation become treason?

Fun fun times oh boy , 4 weeks ago

Reading the news feels like I'm living in an alternate reality gone wrong

Lexi Rae , 4 weeks ago

It's great that The Deep State's attempted coup against Trump has (thus far) failed... BUT, given all the serious crimes that The Left has been caught red-handed involved in, and the complete lack of legal repercussions that have resulted, I'm losing faith in our ability to mend the American justice OR political systems :/

JFBalz , 4 weeks ago

Tell me this Agent investigated the Seth Rich murder too...

Alanna Peebles , 4 weeks ago (edited)

Glad you are covering this.

jonnbravo119806 , 4 weeks ago

All these witch hunts have done, is continue to exonerate Trump, and expose crimes, and corruption from the deep stare, MSM, DNC, Clintons, and Obama. As well as further discredit our intelligence agencies, and destroy what little faith the people had in them.

Jade Lee , 4 weeks ago

Double standards abound

Anj Kovo , 4 weeks ago

All this debacle, constantly demonizing Trump is the Dems way of hiding there own corruption. Smoke & mirrors. The Dems remind me of an Ouroboros like creature eating its own tail but destroying itself

Papinoo 11 , 4 weeks ago

Very nice. I enjoy your shorter vids more. The long stuff is quite an ear full. Still love all your work.

Joe Wayne , 4 weeks ago

Mr.Molyneux, You've really become the best journalist alive today, thank you for your commitment to courageous integrity in reporting the insane conditions of our society.

[Jan 02, 2018] How Much Did Mueller and Rosenstein Know about Uranium One

Notable quotes:
"... As early as 2009 "secret recordings and intercept emails showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act . ..."
"... The investigation was supervised by then-U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein , who is now President Trump's Deputy Attorney General, and then-Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe , who is now the deputy FBI director under Trump. Robert Mueller was head of the FBI from Sept 2001-Sept 2013 until James Comey took over as FBI Director in 2013. They were BOTH involved in this Russian scam being that this case started in 2009 and ended in 2015." -- Looks like a nest of traitors and incompetent opportunists fattening on the US taxpayers' money ..."
Dec 25, 2017 | www.unz.com

Anonymous, Disclaimer December 25, 2017 at 10:32 pm GMT

"How Much Did Mueller and Rosenstein Know about Uranium One?" by Daniel John Sobieski: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/10/how_much_did_mueller_and_rosenstein_know_about_uranium_one.html#ixzz52JY32H15

As early as 2009 "secret recordings and intercept emails showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act .

The investigation was supervised by then-U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein , who is now President Trump's Deputy Attorney General, and then-Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe , who is now the deputy FBI director under Trump. Robert Mueller was head of the FBI from Sept 2001-Sept 2013 until James Comey took over as FBI Director in 2013. They were BOTH involved in this Russian scam being that this case started in 2009 and ended in 2015."
-- Looks like a nest of traitors and incompetent opportunists fattening on the US taxpayers' money

[Jan 02, 2018] What investigative reporters should be like but most defintely are NOT like these days

Jan 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Winston Smith 2009 -> takeaction Dec 31, 2017 4:54 PM

Links to his blog below. He's what investigative reporters should be like but most definitely are NOT like these days. He's sharp as a tack and doesn't miss a thing.

Transparent DOJ and FBI Desperation: New York Times Attempts "Trump Operation" Justification
December 30, 2017

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/30/transparent-doj-and-fbi

BREAKING: Senator Lindsey Graham Just Confirmed The Steele Dossier Was Used For 2016 FISA Warrant
December 30, 2017

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/30/breaking-senator-lindse

The article found below is where he discusses his first clue about the HUGE scandal confirmed at the above DETAILED analyses. If this doesn't result in just a whole bunch of high level swamp creatures doing a perp walk or AT THE VERY LEAST losing their jobs, you'll know there's no hope:

THE BIG UGLY – Why U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras Recusal From Mike Flynn Case is a Big Deal
December 8, 2017

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/08/the-big-ugly-why-u-s-di

[Jan 02, 2018] Trump versus the FBI

Notable quotes:
"... The attempt to tease, weave and develop a narrative against President Donald J. Trump over a Russian connection began almost immediately after his victory in November last year. This was meant to be institutional oversight and probing, but in another sense, it was also intended to be an establishment's cry of hope to haul the untenable and inconceivable before some process. No one could still fathom that Trump had actually won on his merits (or demerits). There had to be some other reason. ..."
"... Central to the Trump-Bannon approach to US politics has been the fist of defiance against those entities of establishment fame. There is the Central Intelligence Agency, which Trump scorned; there is the FBI, which Trump is at war with. Then there is the Department of Justice, which he regards as singularly unjust. ..."
"... Australia , Washington's ally with an enthusiastic puppy dog manner, wanted to help, to tip off US authorities that a great Satan, Russia, might be involved. ..."
"... Australian ex-officials were by no means the only ones involved in providing succour to the anti-Trump effort. A picture was being painted by other sources – British and Dutch, for instance – pointing to the Kremlin as central to the Democratic email hacks. The FBI probe, in time, would become the full-fledged investigation led by a former director of the organization, Robert Mueller . ..."
"... "Many people in our Country are asking what the 'Justice' Department is going to do about the fact that totally Crooked Hillary, AFTER receiving a subpoena from the United States Congress, deleted and 'acid washed' 33,000 Emails? No justice!" ..."
"... More to the point, Trump is certainly right in questioning the historic inability of the FBI to be a credible instrument of justice, even if history is not his strong suit. The Bureau under J. Edgar Hoover was a monster of surveillance, its reputation, despite being in deserved tatters, defended by one president after the other. ..."
"... As for bias, Trump is certainly right on the score that certain FBI officials, foremost amongst them lawyer Lisa Page and FBI special agent Peter Strzok , were demonstrably favourable to Clinton over him. ..."
"... Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com ..."
Jan 02, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

The attempt to tease, weave and develop a narrative against President Donald J. Trump over a Russian connection began almost immediately after his victory in November last year. This was meant to be institutional oversight and probing, but in another sense, it was also intended to be an establishment's cry of hope to haul the untenable and inconceivable before some process. No one could still fathom that Trump had actually won on his merits (or demerits). There had to be some other reason.

Central to the Trump-Bannon approach to US politics has been the fist of defiance against those entities of establishment fame. There is the Central Intelligence Agency, which Trump scorned; there is the FBI, which Trump is at war with. Then there is the Department of Justice, which he regards as singularly unjust.

The FBI investigation into Trumpland and its reputed nexus with Russia remains both bane and opportunity for Trump. As long as it continues, it affords Trump ammunition for populist broadsides and claims that such entities are sworn to destroy him.

To watch this story unfold is to remember how a soap opera can best anything done in celluloid. The New York Times has given us a New Year's Eve treat, claiming that former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos spilt the beans to former Australian foreign minister Alexander Downer at London's Kensington Wine Rooms in May 2016.

The two men had, apparently, been doing what any decent being does at such a London venue: drink. Papadopoulos' tongue started to wag as the imbibing continued. There was a Russian connection. There was dirt to be had, featuring Hillary Clinton.

Downer, however hazed, archived the discussion. He could make a name for himself with this decent brown nosing opportunity. Australia , Washington's ally with an enthusiastic puppy dog manner, wanted to help, to tip off US authorities that a great Satan, Russia, might be involved. So commenced the long road to the fall of Trump's former aide, who conceded, in time, to have lied to the FBI. Trump's response was to degrade Papadopoulos as a "low-level volunteer" and "liar", giving him the kiss of unimportance.

Australian ex-officials were by no means the only ones involved in providing succour to the anti-Trump effort. A picture was being painted by other sources – British and Dutch, for instance – pointing to the Kremlin as central to the Democratic email hacks. The FBI probe, in time, would become the full-fledged investigation led by a former director of the organization, Robert Mueller .

This provides the broader context for the Trump assault on all manner of instruments in the Republic. Earlier in December, Twitter was again ablaze with the president's fury. The blasts centered on the guilty plea by former national security advisor Michael Flynn. He had, in fact, had conversations with the former Russian ambassador. Trump's approach was two-fold: claim that Flynn's actions had been initially, at least, lawful, while the conduct of the FBI and Department of Justice had been uneven and arbitrary.

"So General Flynn lies to the FBI and his life is destroyed, while Crooked Hillary Clinton, on that now infamous FBI holiday 'interrogation' with no swearing in and no recording, lies many times and nothing happens to her?"

He then reserved a salvo for the DOJ.

"Many people in our Country are asking what the 'Justice' Department is going to do about the fact that totally Crooked Hillary, AFTER receiving a subpoena from the United States Congress, deleted and 'acid washed' 33,000 Emails? No justice!"

The persistent inability to understand Trumpland as a series of bullying an exploitative transactions blunts the value of the FBI investigation. Whatever it purports to be, it smacks of desperation, an effort in search of an explanation rather than a resolution. The Trump Teflon remains in place, immovable.

More to the point, Trump is certainly right in questioning the historic inability of the FBI to be a credible instrument of justice, even if history is not his strong suit. The Bureau under J. Edgar Hoover was a monster of surveillance, its reputation, despite being in deserved tatters, defended by one president after the other.

As for bias, Trump is certainly right on the score that certain FBI officials, foremost amongst them lawyer Lisa Page and FBI special agent Peter Strzok , were demonstrably favourable to Clinton over him.

... ... ...

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

[Jan 02, 2018] Trump has now publicly acknowledged that McCabe violated several federal laws, not the least of which is the Hatch Act by Karl Denninger

Jan 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Trump has now publicly acknowledged that McCabe violated several federal laws, not the least of which is the Hatch Act. Yet he now proposes to allow McCabe to retire next year, keeping his federal pension and benefits.

Not only that but Congress has that evidence now too -- but note that the House Judiciary Committee is not issuing a single word about the fact that such actions are violations of several federal laws.

What Trump should do is have Sessions immediately indict him - after firing McCabe for cause, which terminates his right to any sort of federal pension or benefit. If McCabe wants to sue for his pension let him, because that will force into the public record all of the evidence on exactly what he did as he will have to defend the claim that his firing "for cause" wasn't actually for cause.

Good luck with that.

But Trump isn't going to do that. Instead he's going to let McCabe walk off with your money America. Money he will steal from you for the rest of his life after having taken actions that, the President has good reason to believe, were felony violations of the law and abuses of his office, effectively using the FBI as a political weapon in a Presidential contest.

Karl Denninger

[Jan 02, 2018] Rep Bud Cummins Discuss FBI Plot Against Trump Presidency

Video
Notable quotes:
"... The best part about Trump is that he does not have to run false flags to get the public's support. ...No inside jobs like 9/11 and no fake shootings like Sandy Hook. He just has some solid policies that benefit normal Americans! ..."
"... Failure to do something IS consent. ..."
Jan 02, 2018 | www.prisonplanet.com

Fox News host Maria Bartiromo interviews Representative Bud Cummins about the 2016 weaponization of the FBI and DOJ and the same group of people in 2017 working to undermine the Trump administration.

https://youtu.be/XZtA7MJ5haw

This Tuesday FBI Asst. Director Andrew McCabe will meet with the House Intelligence Committee. Around the same time Trump lawyers will be meeting with Robert Mueller. Could be a big news week.

Lutz • 12 days ago

Only the chosen tribe can shut down an agency like the F.B.Lie. Control through money distribution. They control everyone, PERIOD.

Tom Turek > Claude Taylor • 13 days ago

FBI? On site the night before 911, On site within minutes after Sen Wellstone's chartered almost new Twin Turboprop Beachcraft with 2 pro plots smashed into the ground on approach.

Wellstone was about to expose 911. Illegally taking over the TWA800 investigation from NTSB and many times removing evidence overnight that investigators found suspicious of a missile strike. Told us that a low voltage wire in a fuel tank overheated and caused the plane to break into 2. Wreckage still under armed guard!

About what 'IDEALS' is DJT talking??

Doctor72 • 13 days ago

The best part about Trump is that he does not have to run false flags to get the public's support. ...No inside jobs like 9/11 and no fake shootings like Sandy Hook. He just has some solid policies that benefit normal Americans!

MikeG the Deplorable > Doctor72 • 13 days ago

What a refreshing change.

Cyrano • 13 days ago

This man is afraid to call it treason...

centurion • 13 days ago

It's a very sad day for Trump supporters when they elected a person to jail the law breakers in Washington, CIA, FBI, BLM, NSA, the Clintons, the Bush's and Trump does absolutely nothing about it. Failure to do something IS consent.

Mistaron • 13 days ago

Why is this guy dancing around? It's not 'bad management' mate, it's bloody Treason!

Elim • 13 days ago

I just saw a clip of Trump answering questions at a news conference. He was answering questions about the Russian collusion crap, and was saying that Putin and his government denied any interference, just as he denied any collusion. When Trump was asked what he personally believed, he said that he supported what the intelligence agencies said about it. In other words, he believes what he was told by our intelligence services...which is what, exactly? He didn't answer the question.

[Jan 01, 2018] Gregg Jarrett Did the FBI and the Justice Department, plot to clear Hillary Clinton, bring down Trump

Dec 15, 2018 | www.foxnews.com

There is strong circumstantial evidence that an insidious plot unprecedented in American history was hatched within the FBI and the Obama Justice Department to help elect Hillary Clinton and defeat Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

And when this apparent effort to improperly influence the election did not succeed, the suspected conspirators appear to have employed a fraudulent investigation of President Trump in an attempt to undo the election results and remove him as president.

Such a Machiavellian scheme would move well beyond what is known as the "deep state," a popular reference to government employees who organize in secret to impose their own political views on government policy in defiance of democratically elected leadership.

However, this apparent plot to keep Trump from becoming president and to weaken and potentially pave the way for his impeachment with a prolonged politically motivated investigation – if proven – would constitute something far more nefarious and dangerous.

Such a plot would show that partisans within the FBI and the Justice Department, driven by personal animus and a sense of political righteousness, surreptitiously conspired to subvert electoral democracy itself in our country.

As of now, we have no proof beyond a reasonable doubt of such a plot. But we have very strong circumstantial evidence.

And as the philosopher and writer Henry David Thoreau wrote in his journal in 1850: "Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk."

Newly revealed text messages about the apparent anti-Trump plot are the equivalent of a trout in the milk. It smells fishy.

The Plans

The mainstream media and Democrats dismiss talk of an anti-Trump conspiracy by the FBI and Justice Department as right-wing nonsense – paranoid fantasies of Trump supporters with no basis in facts. But there are plenty of facts that lay out a damning case based on circumstantial evidence.

Recently disclosed text messages between FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page suggest there may have been two parts of the apparent anti-Trump plot.

"Part A" was to devise a way to exonerate Clinton, despite compelling evidence that she committed crimes under the Espionage Act in her mishandling of classified documents on her private email server.

Absolving Clinton cleared the way for her to continue her candidacy at a time when all polls and just about every pundit predicted she would be elected president in November 2016. If Clinton had been charged with crimes she would likely have been forced to drop her candidacy, and if she remained in the race her candidacy would have been doomed.

But "Part A" of the apparent anti-Trump plot was not enough. A back-up plan would be prudent. It seems the Obama Justice Department and FBI conjured up a "Part B" just in case the first stratagem failed. This would be even more malevolent – manufacturing an alleged crime supposedly committed by Trump where no crime exists in the law.

And so, armed with a fictitious justification, a criminal investigation was launched into so-called Trump-Russia "collusion." It was always a mythical legal claim, since there is no statute prohibiting foreign nationals from volunteering their services in American political campaigns.

More importantly, there was never a scintilla of evidence that Trump collaborated with Russia to influence the election.

No matter. The intent may have been to sully the new president while searching for a crime to force him from office.

But thanks to the discovery of text messages, circumstantial evidence has been exposed.

The Texts

The text messages exchanged between Strzok and Page, who were romantically involved, confirm a stunning hostility toward Trump, calling him an "idiot" and "loathsome."

At the same time, the texts were filled with adoring compliments of Clinton, lauding her nomination and stating: "She just has to win now."

One text between Strzok and Page dated Aug. 6, 2016 stands out and looks like the proverbial smoking gun.

Page: "And maybe you're meant to stay where you are because you're meant to protect the country from that menace." (This is clearly a reference to a Trump presidency).

Strzok: "Thanks. And of course I'll try and approach it that way. I can protect our country at many levels . "

It is reasonable to conclude that Strzok had already taken steps to "protect" the country from what he considered would be a dangerous and harmful Trump presidency.

Just one month earlier, then-FBI Director James Comey had announced he would recommend that no criminal charges be filed by the Justice Department against Clinton. Given all the incriminating evidence against Clinton, Comey's view that she should not be prosecuted made no sense by any objective standard.

This is where Strzok played a pivotal role. As the lead investigator in the Clinton email case, he is the person who changed the critical wording in Comey's description of Clinton's handling of classified material, substituting "extremely careless" for "gross negligence."

As I explained in an earlier column , this alteration of two words had enormous consequences, because it allowed Clinton to evade prosecution. This removed the only legal impediment to her election as president.

Documents made available by the Senate Homeland Security Committee also show that Comey intended to declare that the sheer volume of classified material on Clinton's server supported the "inference" that she was grossly negligent, which would constitute criminal conduct. Yet this also was edited out, likely by Strzok, to avoid finding evidence of crimes.

This seems to be what Page and Strzok meant when they discussed his role as protector of the republic. It appears that Strzok was instrumental in clearing Clinton by rewriting Comey's otherwise incriminating findings.

Were Page and Strzok also referring to the investigation of Trump that was begun in July 2016, right after Clinton was absolved? After all, Strzok was the agent who reportedly signed the documents launching the bureau's Trump-Russia probe. And he was a lead investigator in the case before jumping to Robert Mueller's special counsel team.

If there is any doubt that Strzok and Page sought to undermine the democratic process, consider this cryptic text about their "insurance policy" against the "risk" of a Trump presidency.

Strzok: "I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office – that there's no way he gets elected – but I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40. "

The reference to "Andy" is likely Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who was also supervising the investigation of Clinton's emails at the same time his wife was receiving roughly $675,000 in campaign money in her race for elective office in Virginia from groups aligned with Clinton.

What was the "insurance policy" discussed in Andy's office? Was it the FBI's investigation of Trump and his associates? Or was it the anti-Trump "dossier" that may have been used by the FBI and the Justice Department as the basis for a warrant to wiretap and spy on Trump associates? Perhaps it was both.

The Dossier

The "dossier" was a compendium of largely specious allegations about Trump, compiled by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS. The dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Comey called it "salacious and unverified."

Various congressional committees suspect the dossier was illegally used to place a Trump campaign associate, Carter Page, under foreign surveillance. When asked about that on Wednesday during a hearing on Capitol Hill, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein refused to answer, which sounds like an implicit "yes."

Using a dubious, if not phony, document in support of an affidavit to obtain a warrant from a federal judge constitutes a fraud upon the court, which is a crime.

The dossier scandal recently ensnared Bruce Ohr, a top Justice Department official, who was demoted last week for concealing his meetings with the men behind the document.

Ohr's wife worked for Fusion GPS. This created a disqualifying conflict of interest for Mr. Ohr. He was legally obligated under Justice Department regulations to recuse himself from the Mueller investigation of Russia's role in the election, but he did not.

Congress needs to find out whether the dossier was exploited as a pretext for initiating the Russia probe against President Trump. It would also be unconscionable, if not illegal, for the FBI and Justice Department to use opposition research funded by Clinton's campaign to spy on her opponent or his campaign.

Both agencies have been resisting congressional subpoenas and other demands for answers, which smacks of a cover-up. Since the Justice Department cannot be trusted to investigate itself, a second special counsel should be appointed.

This new counsel should also reopen the Clinton email case and investigate the conduct of Strzok, Page, Comey and others who may have obstructed justice by exonerating Clinton in the face of substantial evidence that she had committed crimes.

If Strzok or anyone else allowed their political views to shape the investigations of either Clinton or Trump and dictate the outcomes, that is a felony for which they should be prosecuted.

The Mueller investigation is now so tainted with the appearance of corruption that it has lost credibility and the public's trust.

It is very much like a trout in the spoiled milk.

[Jan 01, 2018] Attacks on McCabe are esentially attacks on Mueller and they are successful

Notable quotes:
"... The apparent tone deafness from Mueller, who is by all accounts shrewd D.C. tactician, is surprising. He's compounded the doubts some have in the process by assembling a seemingly stacked prosecution team , rife with democratic party donors -- including some who contributed to Clinton's presidential run and actually served as counsel for the Clinton Global Initiative. Not one of his team donated to Trump. ..."
"... Former DOJ lawyer Andrew C. McCarthy (no relation), writing for National Review, opines that the devalued "dossier" might have been the insurance policy that Strzok and Page were referencing. ..."
"... Then it's discovered that a senior DOJ official, Bruce G. Ohr has been demoted due to concealing that he had met with those behind the infamous "dossier." It was later learned that his wife held a position at the firm that compiled it, Fusion GPS. ..."
"... The Clinton campaign famously paid for the lurid details contained in the since widely discredited opposition research. And some -- including Congressman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) -- have publically posited that the "dossier" was used to secure FISA warrants to then spy on the Trump campaign. ..."
Jan 01, 2018 | thehill.com

McCabe was no stranger to public scrutiny. He had been roundly criticized in right wing media circles once it was revealed this his wife, Dr. Jill McCabe, a one-time candidate for state office in Virginia, had taken a sizable campaign contribution from a political action committee affiliated with Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe (D) -- a longtime ally of Bill and Hillary Clinton. McCabe had failed to recuse himself until late in the Clinton private server email investigation.

Revelations like this fuel Trump and impulsively prompt him to attack the current special prosecutor, Robert S. Mueller III, who was Comey's predecessor at the bureau. Mueller's appointment was once heralded by both sides of the political divide when he assumed the independent position ten days following Comey's firing.

What infuriated Trump and the right wing most was the fact that Mueller's selection was made a day following Mueller's job interview with Trump for the top position at the bureau, and with the knowledge that Mueller has had a long, personal relationship with Comey.

The apparent tone deafness from Mueller, who is by all accounts shrewd D.C. tactician, is surprising. He's compounded the doubts some have in the process by assembling a seemingly stacked prosecution team , rife with democratic party donors -- including some who contributed to Clinton's presidential run and actually served as counsel for the Clinton Global Initiative. Not one of his team donated to Trump.

And then, a bizarre double down on an increasingly one-sided special prosecution team with the discovery that Mueller's top lieutenant, Andrew Weissmann -- referred to by the New York Times as "Mueller's Legal Pit Bull" -- lauded then Acting Attorney General Sally Yates Sally Caroline Yates Sally Yates joins prosecutors in bail battle Yates: Trump has a 'complete indifference to truth' Bharara, Yates tamp down expectations Mueller will bring criminal charges MORE for openly defying Trump during his administration's original foray into implementation of a travel ban.

And all this, of course, before the bombshell revelation that two senior FBI executives, Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok and one-time counsel to McCabe, Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer, had shared private text messages on a government device in which they denigrated candidate Trump and professed support for Clinton. The most damning of the 375 exchanged texts released by DOJ, spoke of an "insurance policy" ostensibly to prevent Trump from accessing the Oval Office, and referenced as having been discussed in "Andy's office" (McCabe?)

Former DOJ lawyer Andrew C. McCarthy (no relation), writing for National Review, opines that the devalued "dossier" might have been the insurance policy that Strzok and Page were referencing.

Then it's discovered that a senior DOJ official, Bruce G. Ohr has been demoted due to concealing that he had met with those behind the infamous "dossier." It was later learned that his wife held a position at the firm that compiled it, Fusion GPS.

The Clinton campaign famously paid for the lurid details contained in the since widely discredited opposition research. And some -- including Congressman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) -- have publically posited that the "dossier" was used to secure FISA warrants to then spy on the Trump campaign.

In the immortal words of Arsenio Hall, these are things that can fairly make a reasonable person go "Hmmm "

[Jan 01, 2018] Trump Dossier Author Christopher Steele Worked With FBI's McCabe DOJ's Ohr on Russian Organized Crime Long Before 2016 Electi

Jan 01, 2018 | truepundit.com

...Steele was well known by the Bureau and CIA long before that and shared Intel with both agencies on cases with British links, especially dealing with MI6's interest in Russian Organized crime, federal law enforcement sources said. It is little wonder the Justice Department and the FBI refuse to release any documents dealing with Steele. Or the payments from government coffers -- including the FBI -- to Steele or Fusion GPS.

We are getting definitive Intel from FBI and federal law enforcement sources that Christopher Steele worked with the FBI when he was a MI6 Agent working Russian Organized Crime. Before his retirement from the British spy agency. That's the same desk and the exact same time frame FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe worked before coming the Washington, D.C., heading up the FBI Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force in Manhattan, along with NYPD Intel sources and resources. And on the Justice Department side, also in New York at the very same time, Bruce Ohr was working organized crime for the DOJ in the Southern District of New York, beginning in the 1990s through the identical timeline of Steele and McCabe. That's the same Bruce Ohr who was just demoted at DOJ for conducting secret meetings with Fusion GPS, who hired Steele to write the Trump Dossier. And Fusion GPS also hired Ohr's wife, a former CIA employee.

"You're finding that they all worked together," one FBI source said. "That's huge." If you wonder how Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson met Steele, look no further than Ohr. Or Ohr's wife. Or McCabe. Ohr ran the DOJ's Organized Crime and Racketeering Section from 1999 to 2011, mostly out of New York City. McCabe ran the FBI Eurasian Task Force up until 2006. Ohr's Organized Crime and Racketeering Section and the FBI were debriefed by Steele in London in 2010 on the FIFA corruption crime scheme, a major case for the DOJ. According to the Guardian, Steele trekked to Rome in 2010 to also swap Intel on FIFA with a FBI contact from its Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force. That was McCabe's old squad.

A portion of the FBI's official bio on McCabe helps tell the story: "Mr. McCabe began his career as a special agent with the FBI in 1996. He first reported to the New York Division, where he investigated a variety of organized crime matters. In 2003, he became the supervisory special agent of the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force, a joint operation with the New York City Police Department."

McCabe was the supervisory special agent of the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force from 2003 to 2006 and based on source Intel, the task force iliasoned with MI6 and Steele. Steele was on the Russian desk of the British spy agency until 2009 and worked Russian organized crime in the United States, the identical beat of McCabe and Ohr. So, how did Steele simply waltz into FBI HQ in Washington, D.C, before the 2016 election?

Was it McCabe then who dialed up his old contact Steele to help plot and wage a coup against President Donald Trump? And helped pay Steele to write Trumps bogus dossier with tax dollars. Or was it Ohr? Or both? "This means that basically they are paying a foreign power to take down the presidential candidate slash sitting president now," one FBI source said. "This is crazy."

[Dec 31, 2017] EXCLUSIVE FBI s Own Political Terror Plot; Deputy Director and FBI Brass Secretly Conspired to Wage Coup Against Flynn Trump

Highly recommended!
At the congregation where McCabe went off the political rails and vowed to destroy Flynn and Trump, there were as many as 16 top FBI officials, inside intelligence sources said. No lower-level agents or support personnel were present.
Notable quotes:
"... This was one of several such meetings held in seclusion among key FBI leaders since Trump was elected president, FBI sources confirm. At the congregation where McCabe went off the political rails and vowed to destroy Flynn and Trump, there were as many as 16 top FBI officials, inside intelligence sources said. No lower-level agents or support personnel were present. ..."
"... If you are among the millions of Americans who have pondered in recent months whether the Obama-era "Deep State" intelligence apparatus and FBI are working for or against Trump, this is the first definitive proof that the country's once-premiere law enforcement agency has gone rogue. ..."
"... Embattled FBI Director James Comey did not attend these private meetings of his interoffice revolutionaries, sources said, though he was aware of the gatherings yet did not discourage them or McCabe's inflammatory and dangerous rhetoric. Some FBI agents have questioned if the Anti-Trump attitude shared in the secret sit downs with the bureau's top brass is now the official platform of the FBI. The FBI, many agents quietly agree, has proven no friend to the newly minted US president. And they are beginning to understand why. ..."
"... Democratic factions controlled by a Hillary Clinton insider paid the deputy director of the FBI's wife almost $700,000 in campaign funds before McCabe, who was supervising Clinton's investigation, lobbied against charging her criminally, according to records and interviews obtained by True Pundit. ..."
"... According to one FBI insider, the McAuliffe-generated campaign funds may have ultimately bought Clinton some strategic breathing room ..."
"... "McCabe was one of the few people who backed Comey's decision not to refer Hillary Clinton to the Justice Department for indictment," a FBI source said of the July 2016 decision not to refer Clinton for criminal charges for violating email and document safeguards for classified and Top Secret national security intelligence. "McCabe and Comey are both lawyers. They aren't street agents. They're more political. We wanted her (Clinton) indicted. They did not." ..."
"... McAuliffe's contributions to Dr. McCabe's campaign match the exact time frame of the FBI's parallel Clinton investigation. No contributions were made prior to the FBI's probe of Clinton. McCabe was overseeing personnel decisions, including assigning agents to the Clinton investigation team, at the FBI's Washington D.C.'s field office when his wife began her 2015 campaign. His wife lost the election after spending an estimated $1.8 million on the senate run. Three months later, Comey promoted McCabe to FBI Deputy Director in February 2016. The promotion helped fill a very large void created by the retirement of John Giacalone, who was the supervisor of the bureau's National Security Branch and also the FBI brains and genesis behind the Clinton email and private server investigation. Since the inception of the case, Giacalone had spearheaded the Clinton investigation, and helped hand select top agents who were highly skilled but also discreet. Many of those agents were concerned when Giacalone abruptly resigned in the middle of the investigation. ..."
"... FBI insiders said Giacalone used the term "sideways" to describe the direction the Clinton probe had taken in the bureau. Giacalone lamented privately he no longer had confidence in the direction the investigation was headed. ..."
"... in the midst of the Clinton investigation, Giacalone handed the bureau his retirement papers in February 2016. ..."
"... The day after Giacalone's departure, Comey tapped McCabe to help oversee the ongoing Clinton case and personally serve "as the eyes and ears" for Comey, sources confirmed. Since early July 2016, Comey has come under intense fire from critics and the majority of Americans who believe he granted Clinton a get-out-of-jail-free card by refusing to refer the case to the Justice Department for a probable slam-dunk indictment on at least one of potential dozens of criminal charges. ..."
"... Now Comey, McCabe and their rogue FBI Sanhedrin face a new dilemma: Colleagues who have blown the whistle on the partisan agency, specifically how personal and political philosophies have crept into the FBI and commandeered the bureau's powerful reach and resources to tamper with law-abiding White House personnel, including the president. That's called public corruption, a crime the FBI is tasked with investigating ..."
Mar 14, 2017 | www.prisonplanet.com

Mere days before Gen. Michael Flynn was sacked as national security advisor, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe gathered more than a dozen of his top FBI disciples to plot how to ruin Flynn's aspiring political career and manufacture evidence to derail President Donald Trump, according to FBI sources.

McCabe, the second highest ranking FBI official, emphatically declared at the invite-only gathering with raised voice: "Fuck Flynn and then we Fuck Trump," according to direct sources. Many of his top lieutenants applauded and cheered such rhetoric. A scattered few did not.

This was one of several such meetings held in seclusion among key FBI leaders since Trump was elected president, FBI sources confirm. At the congregation where McCabe went off the political rails and vowed to destroy Flynn and Trump, there were as many as 16 top FBI officials, inside intelligence sources said. No lower-level agents or support personnel were present.

If you are among the millions of Americans who have pondered in recent months whether the Obama-era "Deep State" intelligence apparatus and FBI are working for or against Trump, this is the first definitive proof that the country's once-premiere law enforcement agency has gone rogue.

The non-elected hierarchy that steer the FBI have declared war on President Trump and his White House inner circle. Make no mistake.

Days after the McCabe tirade, Flynn was forced to resign. That was no coincidence. This is how secret coups waged by the top law enforcement personnel in the top law enforcement agency in any country operate. Efficiently. If the FBI wants you silenced or out of a job, you'll be unemployed. Ask Michael Flynn and countless others.

Part of the plan hatched at that gathering was to make sure Flynn's wiretapped conversations were leaked to the media, FBI and intelligence sources said. They were. Did the FBI leak this classified intelligence to the news media? Isn't that a question President Trump and Congress should be posing? If nothing else, McCabe and his FBI secret council are certainly now suspects of who possibly leaked the intelligence. Seems that a number of polygraphs should be in order.

Embattled FBI Director James Comey did not attend these private meetings of his interoffice revolutionaries, sources said, though he was aware of the gatherings yet did not discourage them or McCabe's inflammatory and dangerous rhetoric. Some FBI agents have questioned if the Anti-Trump attitude shared in the secret sit downs with the bureau's top brass is now the official platform of the FBI. The FBI, many agents quietly agree, has proven no friend to the newly minted US president. And they are beginning to understand why.

As far as waging political coups go: So far, so good. The FBI's secret plan to ruin Flynn worked. And fast. Flynn is long gone. Now they can focus on ruining President Trump. After all, Isn't that the role of the FBI? Tampering with the president of the United States and his inner circle, neither of whom have broken any laws?

It turns out, however, the FBI isn't very good at the spy game. McCabe's dictatorial tone ruffled a number of agents at FBI headquarters who still believe the mission of the bureau is not to wage clandestine warfare against the sitting president and his administration.

McCabe and Comey did not respond to requests for comment. Flynn could not be reached for comment.

This isn't McCabe's first rodeo in the cross-hairs of controversy at the FBI where he is outranked only by Comey. In fact, McCabe garnered problematic headlines during the 2016 presidential election.

Democratic factions controlled by a Hillary Clinton insider paid the deputy director of the FBI's wife almost $700,000 in campaign funds before McCabe, who was supervising Clinton's investigation, lobbied against charging her criminally, according to records and interviews obtained by True Pundit.

Dr. Jill McCabe was a Virginia state senate candidate in 2015. Longtime Clinton family consigliere and Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, sent her approximately $675,000 to fund the Democrat hopeful's campaign coffers. Dr. McCabe, a physician, is married to the FBI deputy director. Mrs. McCabe is a registered Democrat. FBI agents who work with McCabe say he and his wife were both staunch Hillary Clinton supporters.

According to one FBI insider, the McAuliffe-generated campaign funds may have ultimately bought Clinton some strategic breathing room.

"McCabe was one of the few people who backed Comey's decision not to refer Hillary Clinton to the Justice Department for indictment," a FBI source said of the July 2016 decision not to refer Clinton for criminal charges for violating email and document safeguards for classified and Top Secret national security intelligence. "McCabe and Comey are both lawyers. They aren't street agents. They're more political. We wanted her (Clinton) indicted. They did not."

Gov. McAuliffe has been an important Clinton family insider for decades. During Bill Clinton's presidential candidacy and subsequent reelection, McAuliffe often spearheaded investigations into Clinton critics and helped silence women who alleged Bill Clinton harassed or sexually assaulted them, sources said.

Ironically, McAuliffe is currently under investigation by the FBI for alleged campaign-related finance infractions.

McAuliffe's contributions to Dr. McCabe's campaign match the exact time frame of the FBI's parallel Clinton investigation. No contributions were made prior to the FBI's probe of Clinton. McCabe was overseeing personnel decisions, including assigning agents to the Clinton investigation team, at the FBI's Washington D.C.'s field office when his wife began her 2015 campaign. His wife lost the election after spending an estimated $1.8 million on the senate run. Three months later, Comey promoted McCabe to FBI Deputy Director in February 2016. The promotion helped fill a very large void created by the retirement of John Giacalone, who was the supervisor of the bureau's National Security Branch and also the FBI brains and genesis behind the Clinton email and private server investigation. Since the inception of the case, Giacalone had spearheaded the Clinton investigation, and helped hand select top agents who were highly skilled but also discreet. Many of those agents were concerned when Giacalone abruptly resigned in the middle of the investigation.

FBI insiders said Giacalone used the term "sideways" to describe the direction the Clinton probe had taken in the bureau. Giacalone lamented privately he no longer had confidence in the direction the investigation was headed. He felt it was simpler to quietly step aside, walk away instead of fight to keep the investigation on its proper track. Giacalone was a true heavyweight agent at FBI. In fact, he likely should have been running the entire show. His pedigree included running and creating FBI divisions in New York, Philadelphia, Washington D.C. and even serving as deputy commander in the Iraqi theater of operations. But in the midst of the Clinton investigation, Giacalone handed the bureau his retirement papers in February 2016.

The day after Giacalone's departure, Comey tapped McCabe to help oversee the ongoing Clinton case and personally serve "as the eyes and ears" for Comey, sources confirmed. Since early July 2016, Comey has come under intense fire from critics and the majority of Americans who believe he granted Clinton a get-out-of-jail-free card by refusing to refer the case to the Justice Department for a probable slam-dunk indictment on at least one of potential dozens of criminal charges.

Now Comey, McCabe and their rogue FBI Sanhedrin face a new dilemma: Colleagues who have blown the whistle on the partisan agency, specifically how personal and political philosophies have crept into the FBI and commandeered the bureau's powerful reach and resources to tamper with law-abiding White House personnel, including the president. That's called public corruption, a crime the FBI is tasked with investigating.

Just like it "investigated" $700,000 in donations from the Clinton family to the wife of the FBI's deputy director who, during the exact time frame was tasked with overseeing the investigation of Hillary Clinton. She ultimately was never charged with any crime and McCabe received a FBI promotion. Does anyone have the phone number for the FBI's public corruption unit? Or does that line ring directly to McCabe and Comey?

We would normally demand a federal investigation into such allegations of collusion. But who would conduct it, the FBI?

[Dec 27, 2017] Mueller investigation can be viewed as an attempt to avoid going after Clinton and hide the fact that a corrupted intelligence service worked to derail Sanders

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... It should be Clinton-Gate not Russia-Gate. It seems that once again, as with late 02 and into 03, the populace has been hoodwinked into believing government falseness--as with the non-existent WMD and invasion of Iraq. ..."
Dec 27, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sid2 , Dec 26, 2017 8:24:09 PM | 55

It's very difficult to get the head wrapped around the Mueller investigation as a contrivance to avoid going after Clinton, which shows a corrupted intelligence service working for political ends and saving the Democratic Party, which needs replacing. The evidence against Clinton is much more substantial than the continuing Mueller foray into inconsequence.

If you need more on Clinton beyond the massive email problems she had to avoid revealing how much pay money she was getting, search on the DNC convention entirely corrupted over to her and then the Uranium One deal. Why is all this not being investigated?

It should be Clinton-Gate not Russia-Gate. It seems that once again, as with late 02 and into 03, the populace has been hoodwinked into believing government falseness--as with the non-existent WMD and invasion of Iraq.

[Dec 27, 2017] Mueller investigation as about attempt to avoid going after Clinton, which shows that a corrupted intelligence service working for political ends to save Clinton wing dominance in the Democratic Party, which needs to be replaced by Sanders wing and would be replaced if not this level of interference

Dec 27, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

55

Sid2 , Dec 26, 2017 8:24:09 PM | 55

It's very difficult to get the head wrapped around the Mueller investigation as a contrivance to avoid going after Clinton, which shows a corrupted intelligence service working for political ends and saving the Democratic Party, which needs replacing. The evidence against Clinton is much more substantial than the continuing Mueller foray into inconsequence. If you need more on Clinton beyond the massive email problems she had to avoid revealing how much pay money she was getting, search on the DNC convention entirely corrupted over to her and then the Uranium One deal. Why is all this not being investigated? It should be Clinton-Gate not Russia-Gate. It seems that once again, as with late 02 and into 03, the populace has been hoodwinked into believing government falseness--as with the non-existent WMD and invasion of Iraq.

[Dec 27, 2017] Did the FBI Conspire to Stop Trump, by Pat Buchanan

Essentially FBI has pushed Sunders under the bus and as such rigged the elections. In no way Hillary can become candidate if she woouls have benn charged with "gross negligence". In this sense they are criminals.
Notable quotes:
"... And so Hillary walked. Why is this suspicious? First, whether or not to indict was a decision that belonged to the Department of Justice, not Jim Comey or the FBI. His preemption of Justice Department authority was astonishing. Second, while Comey said in his statement that Hillary had been "extremely careless" with security secrets, in his first draft, Clinton was declared guilty of "gross negligence" -- the precise language in the statute to justify indictment. ..."
"... Who talked Comey into softening the language to look less than criminal? One man was FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose wife, Jill, a Virginia state senate candidate, received a munificent PAC contribution of $474,000 from Clinton family friend and big bundler Terry McAuliffe. ..."
"... Also urging Comey to soften the fatal phrase "gross negligence" was key FBI agent Peter Strzok. In text messages to his FBI lover Lisa Page, Strzok repeatedly vented his detestation of the "idiot" Trump. After one meeting with "Andy" (McCabe), Strzok told Page an "insurance policy" was needed to keep Trump out of the White House. ..."
"... JFK wanted to break the CIA into a million pieces and I think Trump needs to shatter the FBI into a million pieces after these latest revelations. The FBI stinks to high heaven and have for quite a long time now. They have become a highly politicized federal law enforcement agency ..."
"... If any Joe or Jane Shmo at Boeing or Lockheed-Martin had done what Hillary did he or she would have been fired and fined or jailed or both. His or hers security clearance would have been permanently revoked. So much for liberty and justice for all. ..."
"... What was the original mandate for Robert Mueller? If after all this time he has not been able to find any connection between Trump campaign and Putin then that phase of the investigation must end. The Justice Department appointed him and they should put a stop to that portion of the investigation. They can always give him a new mandate to investigate Hillary campaign's connection with Russia. These investigations should never be open ended. Lots of money is wasted and it gives the investigator an opportunity to satisfy personal vendetta. ..."
"... This connects the dots in a reasonable fashion on most of the major issues brought out by what this is: the Clinton crowd/deep state effort to "get" Trump. ..."
"... The only thing I would take exception with is to call the phony allegations of the GPS Steele dossier to be "Kremlin" based. They might have talked to Russians, but they were not acting on behalf of the Putin government when they talked. These individuals were doing no more than telling the Clinton researchers what they thought they would want to hear so that generous payments would be forthcoming. ..."
"... Rather obvious Steele made it all up. ..."
Dec 26, 2017 | The Unz Review
List of Bookmarks

The original question the FBI investigation of the Trump campaign was to answer was a simple one: Did he do it?

Did Trump, or officials with his knowledge, collude with Vladimir Putin's Russia to hack the emails of John Podesta and the DNC, and leak the contents to damage Hillary Clinton and elect Donald Trump?

A year and a half into the investigation, and, still, no "collusion" has been found. Yet the investigation goes on, at the demand of the never-Trump media and Beltway establishment.

Hence, and understandably, suspicions have arisen.

Are the investigators after the truth, or are they after Trump?

Set aside the Trump-Putin conspiracy theory momentarily, and consider a rival explanation for what is going down here:

That, from the outset, Director James Comey and an FBI camarilla were determined to stop Trump and elect Hillary Clinton. Having failed, they conspired to break Trump's presidency, overturn his mandate and bring him down.

Essential to any such project was first to block any indictment of Hillary for transmitting national security secrets over her private email server. That first objective was achieved 18 months ago.

On July 5, 2016, Comey stepped before a stunned press corps to declare that, given the evidence gathered by the FBI, "no reasonable prosecutor" would indict Clinton. Therefore, that was the course he, Comey, was recommending. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, compromised by her infamous 35-minute tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton -- to discuss golf and grandkids -- seconded Comey's decision.

And so Hillary walked. Why is this suspicious? First, whether or not to indict was a decision that belonged to the Department of Justice, not Jim Comey or the FBI. His preemption of Justice Department authority was astonishing. Second, while Comey said in his statement that Hillary had been "extremely careless" with security secrets, in his first draft, Clinton was declared guilty of "gross negligence" -- the precise language in the statute to justify indictment.

Who talked Comey into softening the language to look less than criminal? One man was FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose wife, Jill, a Virginia state senate candidate, received a munificent PAC contribution of $474,000 from Clinton family friend and big bundler Terry McAuliffe.

Also urging Comey to soften the fatal phrase "gross negligence" was key FBI agent Peter Strzok. In text messages to his FBI lover Lisa Page, Strzok repeatedly vented his detestation of the "idiot" Trump. After one meeting with "Andy" (McCabe), Strzok told Page an "insurance policy" was needed to keep Trump out of the White House.

Also, it appears Comey began drafting his exoneration statement of Hillary before the FBI had even interviewed her. And when the FBI did, Hillary was permitted to have her lawyers present.

One need not be a conspiracy nut to conclude the fix was in, and a pass for Hillary wired from the get-go. Comey, McCabe, Strzok were not going to recommend an indictment that would blow Hillary out of the water and let the Trump Tower crowd waltz into the White House.

Yet, if Special Counsel Robert Mueller cannot find any Trump collusion with the Kremlin to tilt the outcome of the 2016 election, his investigators might have another look at the Clinton campaign.

For there a Russian connection has been established.

Kremlin agents fabricated, faked, forged, or found the dirt on Trump that was passed to ex-British MI6 spy Christopher Steele, and wound up in his "dirty dossier" that was distributed to the mainstream media and the FBI to torpedo Trump.

And who hired Steele to tie Trump to Russia?

Fusion GPS, the oppo research outfit into which the DNC and Clinton campaign pumped millions through law firm Perkins Coie.

Let's review the bidding.

The "dirty dossier," a mixture of fabrications, falsehoods and half-truths, created to destroy Trump and make Hillary president, was the product of a British spy's collusion with Kremlin agents.

In Dec. 26′s Washington Times, Rowan Scarborough writes that the FBI relied on this Kremlin-Steele dossier of allegations and lies to base their decision "to open a counterintelligence investigation (of Trump)." And press reports "cite the document's disinformation in requests for court-approved wiretaps."

If this is true, a critical questions arises:

Has the Mueller probe been so contaminated by anti-Trump bias and reliance on Kremlin fabrications that any indictment it brings will be suspect in the eyes of the American people?

Director Comey has been fired. FBI No. 2 McCabe is now being retired under a cloud. Mueller's top FBI investigator, Peter Strzok, and lover Lisa, have been discharged. And Mueller is left to rely upon a passel of prosecutors whose common denominator appears to be that they loathe Trump and made contributions to Hillary.

Attorney General Bobby Kennedy had his "Get Hoffa Squad" to take down Teamsters boss Jimmy Hoffa. J. Edgar Hoover had his vendetta against Dr. Martin Luther King. Is history repeating itself -- with the designated target of an elite FBI cabal being the President of the United States?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."

KenH , Next New Comment December 26, 2017 at 11:07 pm GMT

JFK wanted to break the CIA into a million pieces and I think Trump needs to shatter the FBI into a million pieces after these latest revelations. The FBI stinks to high heaven and have for quite a long time now. They have become a highly politicized federal law enforcement agency who often collaborate with mortal enemies of America like the ADL and other "watchdog" groups in addition to assuming the biases of said organizations against certain groups of Americans.

They behave like a bunch of cowboys and police state thugs and their treatment of and unnecessary raid on Paul Manafort's home was just the tip of the iceberg. The FBI is becoming a clear and present danger to civil liberties.

Rich , Next New Comment December 27, 2017 at 1:34 am GMT
Trump was a bit of a wild card to the establishment elites. He lived in the public spotlight for most of his adult life, so his foibles were well known, and he had too much money to be bought off. Mueller was given his job to make sure Trump doesn't stray too far from the elitists program. He appears to have been cowed and is walking the straight left of center republican line, now.
T. G. , Next New Comment December 27, 2017 at 1:42 am GMT
"A game going on inside the intelligence community":
anonymous , Disclaimer Next New Comment December 27, 2017 at 1:58 am GMT
"For there a Russian connection has been established.

Kremlin agents fabricated, faked, forged, or found the dirt on Trump that was passed to ex-British MI6 spy Christopher Steele, and wound up in his "dirty dossier" that was distributed to the mainstream media and the FBI to torpedo Trump."

No worries -- as long as somebody can still accuse "Kremlin agents" of something, the Establishment will be just fine.

Time for Mr. Napolitano to take his turn at the spinning wheel?

MEexpert , Next New Comment December 27, 2017 at 6:52 am GMT

Second, while Comey said in his statement that Hillary had been "extremely careless" with security secrets, in his first draft, Clinton was declared guilty of "gross negligence" -- the precise language in the statute to justify indictment.

If any Joe or Jane Shmo at Boeing or Lockheed-Martin had done what Hillary did he or she would have been fired and fined or jailed or both. His or hers security clearance would have been permanently revoked. So much for liberty and justice for all.

What was the original mandate for Robert Mueller? If after all this time he has not been able to find any connection between Trump campaign and Putin then that phase of the investigation must end. The Justice Department appointed him and they should put a stop to that portion of the investigation. They can always give him a new mandate to investigate Hillary campaign's connection with Russia. These investigations should never be open ended. Lots of money is wasted and it gives the investigator an opportunity to satisfy personal vendetta.

exiled off mainstreet , Next New Comment December 27, 2017 at 8:05 am GMT
This connects the dots in a reasonable fashion on most of the major issues brought out by what this is: the Clinton crowd/deep state effort to "get" Trump.

The only thing I would take exception with is to call the phony allegations of the GPS Steele dossier to be "Kremlin" based. They might have talked to Russians, but they were not acting on behalf of the Putin government when they talked. These individuals were doing no more than telling the Clinton researchers what they thought they would want to hear so that generous payments would be forthcoming.

LondonBob , December 27, 2017 at 11:40 am GMT
@anonymous

Rather obvious Steele made it all up.

[Dec 27, 2017] Trump claims FBI used bogus dossier to go after his campaign by REBECCA MORIN

Notable quotes:
"... "WOW, @foxandfrlends "Dossier is bogus. Clinton Campaign, DNC funded Dossier. FBI CANNOT (after all of this time) VERIFY CLAIMS IN DOSSIER OF RUSSIA/TRUMP COLLUSION. FBI TAINTED." ..."
"... Rooney said the agency – and in particular Peter Strzok, a top FBI agent who was involved in the Hillary Clinton email investigation – needs to be purged. ..."
"... "I would like to see the directors of those agencies purge it," Rooney said. "And say, look, we've got a lot of great agents, a lot of great lawyers here, those are the people that I want the American people to see and know the good works being done, not these people who are kind of the deep state." ..."
"... On Saturday and Sunday, Trump targeted FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose role in the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server has come under scrutiny because his wife, Jill McCabe, accepted $450,000 in campaign contributions from Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe's PAC and more than $207,000 from the state Democratic Party when she ran for Virginia state Senate in 2015 -- money donated before McCabe was promoted to deputy director. ..."
Dec 25, 2017 | www.politico.com

President Donald Trump on Tuesday asserted that the FBI is "tainted" and it is using a "bogus" dossier alleging ties between his campaign and Russia to go after him.

"WOW, @foxandfrlends "Dossier is bogus. Clinton Campaign, DNC funded Dossier. FBI CANNOT (after all of this time) VERIFY CLAIMS IN DOSSIER OF RUSSIA/TRUMP COLLUSION. FBI TAINTED."

And they used this Crooked Hillary pile of garbage as the basis for going after the Trump Campaign!" Trump tweeted. Trump seemed to reference a segment from "Fox & Friends," a TV show that the president watches and often praises. GOP Rep. Francis Rooney on Tuesday also raised doubt about the FBI's intentions. The Florida congressman said during an interview on MSNBC that the "American people have very high standards" for government agencies and suggested they aren't being met. Rooney said the agency – and in particular Peter Strzok, a top FBI agent who was involved in the Hillary Clinton email investigation – needs to be purged.

"I would like to see the directors of those agencies purge it," Rooney said. "And say, look, we've got a lot of great agents, a lot of great lawyers here, those are the people that I want the American people to see and know the good works being done, not these people who are kind of the deep state."

The president's Tuesday tweet followed a series the president posted over the holiday weekend bashing the FBI and its leadership.

On Saturday and Sunday, Trump targeted FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose role in the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server has come under scrutiny because his wife, Jill McCabe, accepted $450,000 in campaign contributions from Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe's PAC and more than $207,000 from the state Democratic Party when she ran for Virginia state Senate in 2015 -- money donated before McCabe was promoted to deputy director.

In two of his weekend tweets, Trump referenced something he saw on Fox News.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 3:27 PM-Dec 23, 2017

How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin' James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 for wife's campaign by Clinton Puppets during investigation?

Donald J. Trump О @realDonaldTrump 3:30 PM-Dec 23, 2017

FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is racing the clock to retire with full benefits. 90 days to go?!!!

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 3:32 PM-Dec 23, 2017

Wow, "FBI lawyer James Baker reassigned," according to @FoxNews.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 7:25 AM-Dec 24, 2017

@FoxNews-FBI's Andrew McCabe, "in addition to his wife getting all of this money from M (Clinton Puppet), he was using, allegedly, his FBI Official Email Account to promote her campaign. You obviously cannot do this. These were the people who were investigating Hillary Clinton."

McCabe is expected to retire in the new year, according to a Washington Post report .

[Dec 25, 2017] Trump-Russia inquiry- Why attacks on Robert Mueller are mounting by Anthony Zurcher

The interests and sympathies of British government are clear form this peace:they are definitely afraid about reopening Clinton investigation. If British government was behind Steele dossier that was a very dirty job.
Notable quotes:
"... All of it could be setting the ground for new investigations into the FBI or Democrat Hillary Clinton's actions while secretary of state - something Mr Trump himself has suggested - or perhaps even for the president to order the end of Mr Mueller's probe. ..."
Dec 17, 2017 | www.bbc.com

In recent weeks, conservative commentators and politicians have begun arguing, with growing intensity, that Robert Mueller's investigation into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia is the result of an intentional effort by biased investigators to undermine the Trump presidency.

There are a number of components to the case they are presenting, from doubts about the impartiality of Mr Mueller and his team to questions about the integrity of the FBI and the Obama-era Justice Department.

All of it could be setting the ground for new investigations into the FBI or Democrat Hillary Clinton's actions while secretary of state - something Mr Trump himself has suggested - or perhaps even for the president to order the end of Mr Mueller's probe.

Such an action would provoke a major political crisis and could have unpredictable consequences. For Mr Trump's defenders, it may be enough simply to mire Mr Mueller's investigation in a partisan morass. Here are some are some of the ways they're trying to do that.

Tell-tale texts?

Peter Strzok, a senior counter-intelligence agent in the FBI and until this summer a top member of Mr Mueller's special counsel team, has become Exhibit A of anti-Trump bias in the Russia investigation.

A Justice Department inspector general review of the FBI's handling of its 2016 election investigations unearthed text messages between Mr Strzok and Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer who also temporarily worked on the Mueller investigation and with whom Mr Strzok was having an extramarital affair.

Some of the messages, which were provided to reporters, showed the two had a hostility toward then-candidate Trump in 2016. Ms Page called Mr Trump a "loathsome human" in March, as the candidate was cementing his lead in the Republican primary field. Three months later - after Mr Trump had secured the nomination - Mr Strzok wrote that he was an "idiot" who said "bigoted nonsense".

In an August text, Mr Strzok discussed a meeting with then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe in which Ms Page apparently had mentioned there was "no way" Mr Trump could be elected.

"I'm afraid we can't take that risk," Mr Strzok wrote. "It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40."

Some have theorised that the "insurance policy" in question was an FBI plan to destroy Mr Trump if he were to win. Others have suggested that it was simply a reference to the need to continue working the Trump-Russia investigation even though his election seemed unlikely.

Media caption President Trump renews attack on 'disgraceful' FBI

"It is very sad when you look at those documents," Mr Trump said on Friday, apparently referring to the texts. "And how they've done that is really, really disgraceful, and you have a lot of very angry people that are seeing it." He said it was a shame what had happened to the FBI and that it would be "rebuilt".

Since the first coverage of the story, reporters have reviewed more of the Strzok-Page texts and found the two made disparaging comments about a wide range of public figures, including Chelsea Clinton, Democrat Bernie Sanders, then-Attorney General Eric Holder, Republican presidential candidates Ted Cruz and John Kasich, and Mrs Clinton.

"I'm worried about what happens if HRC is elected," Mr Strzok wrote, referring to Mrs Clinton by her initials.

Why it could matter: If Mr Strzok, a high-ranking member of the FBI who officially launched the initial investigation of ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, harboured anti-Trump animus, there is the possibility it could have motivated him to influence the investigation to the president's disadvantage.

Why it might not: Government employees are allowed to express political views as long as they don't influence their job performance. The breadth of the Strzok-Page texts could indicate they were just gossiping lovers. Without context, Mr Strzok's "insurance" line is vague. When Mr Mueller learned of the text this summer, Mr Strzok was removed from the independent counsel investigation and reassigned to a human resources job.

The Clinton case

Mr Strzok also figures prominently in Republican concerns about the FBI's handling of its investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.

Mr Strzok took part in interviews with key Clinton aides and reportedly was involved in drafting the report that concluded Mrs Clinton's actions did not warrant criminal charges, including changing the description of her handling of classified material from "grossly negligent" - which might have suggested illegal behaviour - to "extremely careless".

During the campaign Mr Trump repeatedly insisted that the Justice Department should re-open its investigation into Mrs Clinton and, after backing away from the idea early in his presidency, has once again renewed those calls.

"High ranking FBI officials involved in the Clinton investigation were personally invested in the outcome of the election and clearly let their strong political opinions cloud their professional judgement," Republican Congressman Bob Goodlatte said during a House Judicial Committee hearing.

There's also the possibility that there were more communications between Ms Page and Mr Strzok about the Clinton investigation that have yet to come to light.

"We text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can't be traced, you were just venting [because] you feel bad that you're gone so much but it can't be helped right now," Ms Page wrote in one text.

Chuck Grassley, the Republican chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said he wants more information about the use of these "untraceable" phones.

Why it could matter: If FBI agents backed off their investigation of Mrs Clinton in 2016 it could be further evidence of bias within the bureau that could affect its ongoing investigation into Mr Trump. If public confidence in the FBI is eroded, the ultimate findings of Mr Mueller's probe may be cast in doubt.

Why it might not: Lest anyone forget, Mrs Clinton's candidacy was the one wounded by FBI actions in the final days of the 2016 campaign. Then-Director James Comey's announcement of new evidence in the inquiry into her private email server - perhaps prompted by anti-Clinton leaks from the bureau's New York office - dominated the headlines and renewed concerns about the former secretary of state. News of the ongoing Trump-Russia investigation, on the other hand, didn't emerge until well after the election.

Marital woes

When it comes to the ongoing investigations into the investigations, it's not just the actions of the principals involved that have come under the spotlight. Spouses have figured prominently, as well.

FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the bureau's second-in-command, is married to Jill McCabe, a paediatrician who ran as a Democrat for a Virginia state senate seat in 2015 (before Mr McCabe was promoted to his current position). During the hotly contested race, Ms McCabe received $467,500 in campaign contributions from a political action committee controlled by Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, a close political ally of the Clinton family.

Conservatives contend that this donation should have disqualified Mr McCabe from involvement in the Clinton case - and was yet another example of possible anti-Trump bias in the FBI's Russia investigation.

"If Mr McCabe failed to avoid the appearance of a partisan conflict of interest in favour of Mrs Clinton during the presidential election, then any participation in [the Russia] inquiry creates the exact same appearance of a partisan conflict of interest against Mr Trump," Senator Grassley wrote in a letter to then-Director Comey in March.

Meanwhile, the wife of Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce G Ohr was recently reported as being employed in 2016 by Fusion GPS, the political research firm that produced the dossier containing unconfirmed allegations of Mr Trump's Russia entanglements. Mr Ohr himself has been connected to Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence agent who collected the material for the dossier.

Fusion GPS's anti-Trump research efforts were originally funded by a Republican donor and later backed by groups associated with the Democratic Party and the Clinton presidential campaign.

Why it matters: "Power couples" - spouses with influential, complementary political jobs - are a Washington tradition, and the actions of one partner are often considered to reflect on the views and behaviour of the other. In Mr McCabe's case, his wife's Democratic activism and allegiances could shed light on his political sympathies. For Mr Ohr, his marriage could have served as a conduit to inject Democratic-funded opposition research into the Justice Department.

Why it might not: Having a political spouse is not evidence of official bias. The identity of the individuals or groups that funded and gathered anti-Trump research and how it ended up in government hands does not necessarily have a bearing on whether the information is valid or merits further investigation.

Follow the money

The individuals working on the Russia investigation have been billed as a "dream team" by Democrats and liberal commentators hoping the efforts will eventually topple the Trump presidency.

Many conservatives beg to differ.

In June, as details of the special counsel hires began to emerge, conservatives noted that some of the biggest names - Andrew Weissmann, James Quarles, Jeannie Rhee and Michael Dreeben - had given money to Democratic presidential candidates.

"Republicans are delusional if they think the special counsel is going to be fair," former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich tweeted . "Look who he is hiring."

Ms Rhee's private law work included representing Democrats, such as Obama Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes and the Clinton Foundation in a lawsuit brought by a conservative activist group.

Florida Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz recently travelled to Florida with Mr Trump and said he told the president that the independent counsel investigation was "infected with bias" against him - a view echoed in the conservative press.

"What we've seen over the past seven months of the Mueller investigation reveals a lot about how big government can end up becoming a threat to representative democracy," Laura Ingraham said on her Fox News programme. "And the more we look at the web of Clinton and Obama loyalists who burrowed into Mueller's office, the more obvious it all becomes."

Why it could matter: Political donations and legal work may be evidence of the ideological tilt of Mr Mueller's investigative team. That he has assembled a group of lawyers that may lean to the left could mean the investigation itself is predisposed to findings damaging to Mr Trump.

Why it might not: Investigators are adversarial by nature, and as long as Mr Mueller's team builds its cases with hard evidence, personal political views should not matter. While political partisans may focus on staff-level appointments, the investigation will rise and fall based on perceptions of Mr Mueller himself.

Mr Mueller's waiver

Prior to accepting the position as special counsel investigating possible Trump campaign ties to Russia, Mr Mueller requested - and received - an "ethics waiver" for possible conflicts of interest from the US Department of Justice.

The government has confirmed the existence of the waiver but has not revealed any details, although speculation at the time was that it had to do with Mr Mueller's work at the law firm WilmerHale, which represented former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort - who Mr Mueller has since indicted on money-laundering charges - and the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Why it could matter: Without further information about the nature of the waiver, some are speculating that there is more to this request than simply routine ethical paperwork. Given that Mr Mueller is a former director of the FBI, with ties to many of the bureau officials who are now coming under conservative scrutiny, Mr Mueller's own allegiances are being called into question.

Why it might not: Mr Mueller is a decorated war veteran who, prior to taking the special counsel role was widely praised for his independence and probity. He was appointed FBI head by Republican George W Bush in 2001. If Mr Mueller's waiver had explosive details indicating clear bias, it probably would have leaked by now.

[Dec 25, 2017] Let him do his job : Forty former government officials and attorneys pen letters telling President Trump that firing Robert Mueller would lead to severe repercussions

Notable quotes:
"... The letters come a week after speculation that Trump wanted Mueller fired over recent revelations that two former FBI agents, assigned to investigate the alleged collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia, had sent each other hundreds of 'anti-Trump' text messages during the campaign and election. ..."
Dec 23, 2017 | dailymail.co.uk

More than 40 bipartisan former government officials and attorneys [Deep State globalists] are telling President Trump and Congress to leave Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller alone so he can do his 'job.'

In two letters, the former U.S. attorneys and Republican and conservative officials pushed back against efforts to discredit the special counsel investigating [alleged] Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The letters come a week after speculation that Trump wanted Mueller fired over recent revelations that two former FBI agents, assigned to investigate the alleged collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia, had sent each other hundreds of 'anti-Trump' text messages during the campaign and election.

[Dec 25, 2017] McCabe Grilled, New Subpeonas Coming - Political Graffiti - SurfTalk

Dec 25, 2017 | www.stripersonline.com

· #1

Posted Wednesday at 11:38 PM (edited)

McCabe was grilled today behind closed doors. It is being reported that based on that grilling, as well as new evidence that has come to the committees, new subpoenas will be issued for other key figures in this. Among them Ohr's wife, the FBI general counsel and others.

This is turning into the mother of all narrative torpedoes (MoANT) as the demands of the Lib/Prog/Dems for a special counsel appears to be poised to blowing the lid off of the weaponization of the DoJ/FBI/Mueller probe.

Meanwhile, the investigation into Debbie 2-names IT specialists shows that his used car business may have been a front for a money laundering operation that supported Hezbollah.

And then there is the whole Hezbollah suppression operation meant to smooth the Iran nuke deal. The way Mary Hart is foaming at the mouth on Fox News defending herself and her old bosses, me thinks there is far more truth to that story than the "smart foreign policy" people of the last team would like us to believe. As we know, when Putin embarrassed Obama in a big way, BO changed the focus of his foreign policy legacy from Russian reapporachment to the Iran Deal. And, as a result, that was a "get it done at any and all costs" type of pursuit.

But hey Media and Lefties, lets lie about who is going to benefit most from the new tax bill, right?

· #6

Posted Thursday at 03:31 AM EXCLUSIVE: Congressional investigators tell Fox News that Tuesday's seven-hour interrogation of Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe contained numerous conflicts with the testimony of previous witnesses, prompting the Republican majority staff of the House Intelligence Committee to decide to issue fresh subpoenas next week on Justice Department and FBI personnel.

While HPSCI staff would not confirm who will be summoned for testimony, all indications point to demoted DOJ official Bruce G. Ohr and FBI General Counsel James A. Baker, who accompanied McCabe, along with other lawyers, to Tuesday's HPSCI session.

The issuance of a subpoena against the Justice Department's top lawyer could provoke a new constitutional clash between the two branches, even worse than the months-long tug of war over documents and witnesses that has already led House Speaker Paul Ryan to accuse DOJ and FBI of "stonewalling" and HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., to threaten contempt-of-Congress citations against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray.

"It's hard to know who's telling us the truth," said one House investigator after McCabe's questioning.

Fox News is told that several lawmakers participated in the questioning of McCabe, led chiefly by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

Sources close to the investigation say that McCabe was a "friendly witness" to the Democrats in the room, who are said to have pressed the deputy director, without success, to help them build a case against President Trump for obstruction of justice in the Russia-collusion probe. "If he could have, he would have," said one participant in the questioning.

Investigators say McCabe recounted to the panel how hard the FBI had worked to verify the contents of the anti-Trump "dossier" and stood by its credibility. But when pressed to identify what in the salacious document the bureau had actually corroborated, the sources said, McCabe cited only the fact that Trump campaign adviser Carter Page had traveled to Moscow. Beyond that, investigators said, McCabe could not even say that the bureau had verified the dossier's allegations about the specific meetings Page supposedly held in Moscow.

The sources said that when asked when he learned that the dossier had been funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, McCabe claimed he could not recall – despite the reported existence of documents with McCabe's own signature on them establishing his knowledge of the dossier's financing and provenance.

The decision by HPSCI staff to subpoena Ohr comes as he is set to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is conducting its own probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Until earlier this month, when Fox News began investigating him, Ohr held two titles at DOJ: associate deputy attorney general, a post that placed him four doors down from his boss, Rosenstein; and director of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF), a program described by the department as "the centerpiece of the attorney general's drug strategy."

Ohr will retain his OCDETF title but was stripped of his higher post and ousted from his office on the fourth floor of "Main Justice." Department officials confirmed that Ohr had withheld from superiors his secret meetings in 2016 with Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the dossier with input from Russian sources; and with Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele with funds supplied by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Subsequently, Fox News disclosed that Ohr's wife Nellie, an academic expert on Russia, had worked for Fusion GPS through the summer and fall of 2016.

Former FBI Director James Comey, testifying before the House in March, described the dossier as a compendium of "salacious and unverified" allegations against then-candidate Donald Trump and his associates. The Nunes panel has spent much of this year investigating whether DOJ, under then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, used the dossier to justify a foreign surveillance warrant against Page, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign.

DOJ and FBI say they have cooperated extensively with Nunes and his team, including the provision of several hundred pages of classified documents relating to the dossier. The DOJ has also made McCabe available to the House Judiciary Committee for a closed-door interview on Thursday.

The Justice Department and FBI declined to comment for this report.

[Dec 24, 2017] GOP Rep Gaetz We Have Email Evidence From Andrew McCabe Indicating That Hillary Clinton Was Going to Get a HQ Special

Notable quotes:
"... we have email evidence from Andrew McCabe indicating that Hillary Clinton was going to get an 'HQ Special,' a headquarters special. ..."
"... he had a very small group of people that had a pro-Hillary Clinton bias who had a direct role in changing that investigation from one that likely should have been criminal to one where she was able to walk. And so I think that we've gotta ensure that that never happens again, that the same processes that would apply to any American would also apply to people who were running for president of the United States ..."
"... Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor ..."
Dec 24, 2017 | www.breitbart.com

Friday on FNC's "America's Newsroom," Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) said a congressional committee had evidence FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe indicated Hillary Clinton was going to get an "HQ special" regarding the investigation of her unauthorized email server and ties to the Clinton Foundation during her tenure as secretary of state.

Gaetz, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, described the circumstances at the FBI regarding the investigation as "extreme pro-Hillary Clinton bias."

"The Judiciary Committee is engaged in an investigation, particularly as it relates to the handling of the Hillary Clinton email scandal and any potential investigations of the Clinton Foundation and the handling of bribes or other types of improper payments," Gaetz said. "I can certainly say that my impression after these interviews is that there was extreme pro-Hillary Clinton bias that benefitted her in this investigation and that she received special treatment as a consequence of her candidacy for president. That shouldn't happen. The law should apply equally to all Americans whether they're political candidates or not. And so, we need to institute reforms through the Judiciary Committee for more oversight, for more transparency so that this never happens again."

He went on explain that it was the committee's intention to find out if there was a departure from standard "procedures."

"[O]ur view is we need to find out if whether or not the procedures were departed from," he added. "And we have email evidence from Andrew McCabe indicating that Hillary Clinton was going to get an 'HQ Special,' a headquarters special. That meant that the normal processes of the Washington field office weren't followed and he had a special. And he had a very small group of people that had a pro-Hillary Clinton bias who had a direct role in changing that investigation from one that likely should have been criminal to one where she was able to walk. And so I think that we've gotta ensure that that never happens again, that the same processes that would apply to any American would also apply to people who were running for president of the United States."

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

[Dec 24, 2017] The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), has called for McCabe's ouster, saying he "ought to go for reasons of being involved in some of the things that took place in the previous administration.

Looks like "Mueller gambit" played on trump draw some additional sacrificial pawns.
Dec 24, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

Extracted from: FBI Deputy Director McCabe Retiring After Trump Insurance Policy Debacle Zero Hedge

McCabe, who has been the target of Republican critics for more than a year, spent hours in Congress this past week, facing questions behind closed doors from members of three committees.

Republicans said they were dissatisfied with his answers:

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), has called for McCabe's ouster, saying he "ought to go for reasons of being involved in some of the things that took place in the previous administration. We want to make sure that there's not undue political influence within the FBI -- the [Justice] Department and the FBI."

[Dec 24, 2017] Trump also tweeted that McCabe is racing the clock to retire with full benefits. 90 days to go?

He and Peter Strzok were two principal people have been involved in
He has also been deeply involved in the FBI's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election and the potential involvement of the Trump campaign
Ac
Dec 24, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

Extracted from: Donald Trump accuses FBI deputy director of Hillary Clinton bias

The US president, Donald Trump , has again questioned the impartiality of the deputy director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, who is planning to retire from the bureau in the months ahead after being buffeted by attacks over alleged anti-Trump bias in the agency.

In a tweet on Saturday, the president wrote: "How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin' James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 for wife's campaign by Clinton Puppets during investigation?"

... ... ...

From his South Florida home, where he is spending the holidays, Trump also tweeted that McCabe "is racing the clock to retire with full benefits. 90 days to go?!!!".

[Dec 23, 2017] A Break Down Of The Top FBI And DOJ Players. Possible Deep State!

Some people think that it now time to look closely into Mueller team.
Dec 23, 2017 | www.youtube.com

Some nice graphics, almost useless interview.

[Dec 23, 2017] Mueller himself who far from being a stand-up fellow with a spotless record, and an unshakable commitment to the rule of law

Dec 23, 2017 | www.unz.com

The second point we want to make, relates to Mueller himself who–far from being a "stand-up fellow" with a spotless record, and an unshakable commitment to principle–is not the exemplar people seem to think he is. In fact, his personal integrity and credibility are greatly in doubt. Here's a little background on Mueller from former-FBI Special Agent Colleen Rowley who was named Time's Person of the Year in 2002:

"Mueller's FBI was also severely criticized by Department of Justice Inspector Generals finding the FBI overstepped the law improperly serving hundreds of thousands of "national security letters" to obtain private (and irrelevant) metadata on citizens, and for infiltrating nonviolent anti-war groups under the guise of investigating "terrorism."

Comey and Mueller were complicit with implementing a form of martial law, perpetrated via secret Office of Legal Counsel memos mainly written by John Yoo and predicated upon Yoo's singular theories of absolute "imperial" or "war presidency" powers, and requiring Ashcroft every 90 days to renew certification of a "state of emergency."

Mueller was even okay with the CIA conducting torture programs after his own agents warned against participation. Agents were simply instructed not to document such torture, and any "war crimes files" were made to disappear. Not only did "collect it all" surveillance and torture programs continue, but Mueller's (and then Comey's) FBI later worked to prosecute NSA and CIA whistleblowers who revealed these illegalities

Mueller didn't speak the truth about a war he knew to be unjustified. He didn't speak out against torture. He didn't speak out against unconstitutional surveillance. And he didn't tell the truth about 9/11." ("Comey and Mueller: Russia-gate's Mythical Heroes", Colleen Rowley, Counterpunch)

Illegal spying on American citizens? Infiltration of nonviolent anti-war groups? Martial law? Torture??

This is NOT how Mueller is portrayed in the media, is it?

The fact is, Mueller is no elder statesman or paragon of virtue. He's a political assassin whose task is to take down Trump at all cost. Unfortunately for Mueller, the credibility of his investigation is beginning to wane as conflicts of interest mount and public confidence dwindles. After 18 months of relentless propaganda and political skullduggery, the Russia-gate fiction is beginning to unravel.

Anon , Disclaimer December 23, 2017 at 7:48 pm GMT

Please, let Mueller stay to become a poster boy for borgistas. With each day, the incompetence of the CIA' and FBI' brass has been revealing with the greater and greater clarity. They have sold out the US citizenry for personal gains.
Rod Rosenstein' role in particular should be well investigated so that his name becomes tightly connected to the "dossier" and all its racy tales.
" there was never sufficient reason to appoint a Special Counsel. The threshold for making such an appointment should have been probable cause, that is, deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein should have shown why he thought there was 'reasonable basis to believe that a crime had been committed.' That's what's required under the Fourth Amendment, and that's the standard that should have been met. But Rosenstein ignored that rule because it improved the Special Counsel's chances of netting indictments. Even so, there's no evidence that a crime has been committed. None."
-- Anti-Consttutonal activity by Rod Rosenstein = Treason.
Anon , Disclaimer December 23, 2017 at 8:17 pm GMT
@Corvinus

You mean, we should have better read the New Times and WaPo instead, in order to get the "gigantic scope of the investigation?" -- Thank you very much. But these ziocons' nests have not provided any hard facts related to the main goal of this particular investigation. However, a true and immense value of the investigation is the exposure of the incompetence of and political manipulations by the FBI deciders -- as well as the sausage making under Clinton leadership in the DNC kitchen.

Anon , Disclaimer December 23, 2017 at 8:33 pm GMT
@Realist

"It should have never been started. Trump and his administration screwed themselves."
– Disagree.
The investigation is the best thing for the US. It has exposed traitors (leakers) in the US government, the corruption of the FBI (which provided the leaks and did not investigate the allegedly hacked DNC computers and white-washed Clinton's criminal negligence), and the spectacular incompetence of the DNC-FBI deciders (the cooperation with foreigners in order to derail the governance of the US by the elected POTUS). Cannot wait to hear more about Awan affair (the greatest breach of the US cybersecurity under the watch of the current FBI brass) and about the investigation of Seth Rich murder.

fnn , December 23, 2017 at 8:41 pm GMT
Relic Adlai Stevenson-type liberal law prof Jonathan Turley:

https://jonathanturley.org/2017/12/20/muellers-muscle-play-why-the-gsa-email-seizure-was-both-unprecedented-and-unnecessary/

For those familiar with Mueller, the blunt-force approach taken toward the GSA is something of a signature of Mueller and his heavy-handed associates like Andrew Weissmann. As I have previously written, Mueller has a controversial record in attacking attorney-client privilege as well as harsh tactics against targets. As a U.S. attorney, he was accused of bugging an attorney-client conversation, and as special counsel he forced (with the approval of a federal judge) the attorney of Paul Manafort to become a witness against her own client. Weissmann's record is even more controversial, including major reversals in past prosecutions for exceeding the scope of the criminal code or questionable ethical conduct.

Anonymous , Disclaimer December 23, 2017 at 11:50 pm GMT
"There is no proof of hacking,"

Nor will any be produced either. If Trump were to drop dead tomorrow or, alternatively, decide to pack it in and go back to running hotels, Mueller's Star Chamber Committee would close down the day after. Mueller is a tool of The Powers That Be. And they want Trump OUT -- no matter what the cost.

[Dec 23, 2017] McCabe draws blank on Democrats funding of Trump dossier, new subpoenas planned by James Rosen & Jake Gibson

Notable quotes:
"... Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., to threaten contempt-of-Congress citations against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray. ..."
"... "It's hard to know who's telling us the truth," said one House investigator after McCabe's questioning. ..."
"... Investigators say McCabe recounted to the panel how hard the FBI had worked to verify the contents of the anti-Trump "dossier" and stood by its credibility. But when pressed to identify what in the salacious document the bureau had actually corroborated, the sources said, McCabe cited only the fact that Trump campaign adviser Carter Page had traveled to Moscow. Beyond that, investigators said, McCabe could not even say that the bureau had verified the dossier's allegations about the specific meetings Page supposedly held in Moscow. ..."
"... The sources said that when asked when he learned that the dossier had been funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, McCabe claimed he could not recall – despite the reported existence of documents with McCabe's own signature on them establishing his knowledge of the dossier's financing and provenance. ..."
"... Ohr will retain his OCDETF title but was stripped of his higher post and ousted from his office on the fourth floor of "Main Justice." Department officials confirmed that Ohr had withheld from superiors his secret meetings in 2016 with Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the dossier with input from Russian sources; and with Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele with funds supplied by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. ..."
"... Subsequently, Fox News disclosed that Ohr's wife Nellie, an academic expert on Russia, had worked for Fusion GPS through the summer and fall of 2016. ..."
"... The Nunes panel has spent much of this year investigating whether DOJ, under then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, used the dossier to justify a foreign surveillance warrant against Page, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. ..."
"... Lets face it, the FBI officials and the DOJ jumped at the chance to investigate the Trump campaign and it was a combined effort between, McCabe, Ohr and his wife Nellie Ohr, Peter Strzok and his mistress Lisa Page and the Lord only knows how many more and they used a dosser which they hardly verified and they used a dossier that come through the DNC to obtain warrants from the FISA court to spy on the Trump campaign and at the end they come up empty and they are still coming up empty. ..."
"... The truth has already been found. All you need is the email between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. In that email it say's "we need an insurance policy". Look at the word "we". Now we know they Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page where in McCabe's office discussing the Trump campaign and the email between Lisa and Peter developed from that meeting ..."
Dec 23, 2017 | www.foxnews.com

Congressional investigators tell Fox News that Tuesday's seven-hour interrogation of Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe contained numerous conflicts with the testimony of previous witnesses, prompting the Republican majority staff of the House Intelligence Committee to decide to issue fresh subpoenas next week on Justice Department and FBI personnel.

While HPSCI staff would not confirm who will be summoned for testimony, all indications point to demoted DOJ official Bruce G. Ohr and FBI General Counsel James A. Baker, who accompanied McCabe, along with other lawyers, to Tuesday's HPSCI session.

The issuance of a subpoena against the Justice Department's top lawyer could provoke a new constitutional clash between the two branches, even worse than the months-long tug of war over documents and witnesses that has already led House Speaker Paul Ryan to accuse DOJ and FBI of "stonewalling" and HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., to threaten contempt-of-Congress citations against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray.

"It's hard to know who's telling us the truth," said one House investigator after McCabe's questioning.

Fox News is told that several lawmakers participated in the questioning of McCabe, led chiefly by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

Sources close to the investigation say that McCabe was a "friendly witness" to the Democrats in the room, who are said to have pressed the deputy director, without success, to help them build a case against President Trump for obstruction of justice in the Russia-collusion probe. "If he could have, he would have," said one participant in the questioning.

Investigators say McCabe recounted to the panel how hard the FBI had worked to verify the contents of the anti-Trump "dossier" and stood by its credibility. But when pressed to identify what in the salacious document the bureau had actually corroborated, the sources said, McCabe cited only the fact that Trump campaign adviser Carter Page had traveled to Moscow. Beyond that, investigators said, McCabe could not even say that the bureau had verified the dossier's allegations about the specific meetings Page supposedly held in Moscow.

The sources said that when asked when he learned that the dossier had been funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, McCabe claimed he could not recall – despite the reported existence of documents with McCabe's own signature on them establishing his knowledge of the dossier's financing and provenance.

The decision by HPSCI staff to subpoena Ohr comes as he is set to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is conducting its own probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Until earlier this month, when Fox News began investigating him, Ohr held two titles at DOJ: associate deputy attorney general, a post that placed him four doors down from his boss, Rosenstein; and director of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF), a program described by the department as "the centerpiece of the attorney general's drug strategy."

Ohr will retain his OCDETF title but was stripped of his higher post and ousted from his office on the fourth floor of "Main Justice." Department officials confirmed that Ohr had withheld from superiors his secret meetings in 2016 with Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the dossier with input from Russian sources; and with Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele with funds supplied by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Subsequently, Fox News disclosed that Ohr's wife Nellie, an academic expert on Russia, had worked for Fusion GPS through the summer and fall of 2016.

Former FBI Director James Comey, testifying before the House in March, described the dossier as a compendium of "salacious and unverified" allegations against then-candidate Donald Trump and his associates. The Nunes panel has spent much of this year investigating whether DOJ, under then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, used the dossier to justify a foreign surveillance warrant against Page, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign.

DOJ and FBI say they have cooperated extensively with Nunes and his team, including the provision of several hundred pages of classified documents relating to the dossier. The DOJ has also made McCabe available to the House Judiciary Committee for a closed-door interview on Thursday.

The Justice Department and FBI declined to comment for this report.

James Rosen joined FOX News Channel (FNC) in 1999 and is the network's chief Washington correspondent. Jake Gibson is a producer working at the Fox News Washington bureau who covers politics, law enforcement and intelligence issues.

Nam
I cannot find out much about the hearing the Senate Judiciary Committee had with Andrew McCabe but I have managed to find this. One, McCabe's testimony is not matching up with testimony from others who have been questioned so now the Judiciary Committee has issued a new set of subpoenas . The second thing I found out is when McCabe was asked when was it that he discovered that the dosser had come from the DNC, he said he could not recall, even though the committee has documents with McCabe's signature on them that shows that he McCabe did know it come from the DNC and was paid for by the Clinton campaign.

Also they found out that the FBI only verified one thing in the dosser before they jumped on it and used it. I also found out during the questioning of McCabe by the Democrats on the committee that they the Democrats busted their chops trying to tie Trump to the Russians but they come up empty. I also know that Bruce Ohr is going to get a new round of questioning by the Judiciary Committee.

Lets face it, the FBI officials and the DOJ jumped at the chance to investigate the Trump campaign and it was a combined effort between, McCabe, Ohr and his wife Nellie Ohr, Peter Strzok and his mistress Lisa Page and the Lord only knows how many more and they used a dosser which they hardly verified and they used a dossier that come through the DNC to obtain warrants from the FISA court to spy on the Trump campaign and at the end they come up empty and they are still coming up empty.

ytubepuppy

I heard a rumor that McCabe was grilled for 7½ hours.

BrianrrInfluencer

Congress will NEVER get the truth from these professional crooks and liars. if there is evidence just charge them.
NowelhillLeader1d
Democrats can't seem to ever remember anything, yet they keep begging to be in power. I don't remember what for.
freedomtomarryLeaderNowelhill
Democrats are the majority and we have won six of the last seven elections popular vote. Without your electoral college handicap, the GOP doesn't stand a chance of winning the White House. Never forget that Trump got second place, and that was only after he paid Russians to hack voting systems in 21 states.

Nam -> MelGlass

The truth has already been found. All you need is the email between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. In that email it say's "we need an insurance policy". Look at the word "we". Now we know they Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page where in McCabe's office discussing the Trump campaign and the email between Lisa and Peter developed from that meeting.

The word "we" says it is organized and we know they were plotting. They needed an insurance police just in case. That is criminal. So we have "we" which constitutes organized and we have criminal. That has RICO written all over it. Off to the dungeons with them.

[Dec 22, 2017] FBI Reassigned Suspected Leaker And Comey Ally James Baker

Dec 22, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

Just hours after FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe delivered private testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, his boss, FBI Director Christopher Wray, announced that the bureau's top lawyer would be leaving his post, an attempt to bring in "new blood" to an agency whose reputation has been hopelessly compromised by revelations that agents' partisan bias may have influenced two high-profile investigations involving President Donald Trump and his former campaign rival, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

As the Washington Post reported, the FBI's top lawyer, James Baker, is being reassigned. WaPo says Baker's removal is part of Wray's effort to assemble his own team of senior advisers while he tries to defuse allegations of partisanship that have plagued the bureau in recent months.

James Baker

But reports published over the summer said Baker was "the top suspect" in an interagency leak investigation, as we reported back in July

Three sources, with knowledge of the investigation, told Circa that Baker is the top suspect in an ongoing leak investigation, but Circa has not been able to confirm the details of what national security information or material was allegedly leaked.

A federal law enforcement official with knowledge of ongoing internal investigations in the bureau told Circa, "the bureau is scouring for leakers and there's been a lot of investigations."

The revelation comes as the Trump administration has ramped up efforts to contain leaks both within the White House and within its own national security apparatus.

The news of the staff shakeup comes as Trump and his political allies have promised to "rebuild" the FBI to make it "bigger and better than ever" following its "disgraceful" conduct over the Trump probe . Baker played a key role in the agency's handling of major cases and policy debates in recent years, including the FBI's unsuccessful battle with Apple over the growing use of encryption in cellphones.

CuttingEdge -> wmbz , Dec 22, 2017 9:41 AM

Getting a bit tired of this "one of the most trusted, longest-serving et al" shite they troll out for every one of these vermin.

They said Comey was honourable...

Ditto Mueller

Ditto McCabe

Ditto Baker

Ditto Rosenstein

Ditto Ohrr

And so many more...

Joe Davola -> ne-tiger , Dec 22, 2017 10:11 AM

And the DOJ attorney who was in the meetings with Ohr needs to be looked at also. From my post a week ago:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/fashion/weddings/trisha-anderson-charl...

who's husband was on the NSC

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C0rbx2ui4ZcJ:https...

and as the article states, the husband is going to be working again with a guy who just so happened to be:

Prior to assuming his role in the NSD, Mr. Carlin served as Chief of Staff and Senior Counsel to Robert S. Mueller, III, former

https://www.mofo.com/people/john-carlin.html

Wondering if Newmann's name would be found on some unmasking requests or he's gotten some texts from Strok/Page.

Abaco -> wmbz , Dec 22, 2017 2:02 PM

Just like Clapper admitting to perjuring himself before congress and he is brought on TV to comment as if he is a decent person instead of being thrown in prison like anyone else would be.

[Dec 20, 2017] Peter Strzok's insurance text and the FBI's plot to stop Trump by Alexander Mercouris

Strzok's "insurance" text shows the FBI disregarded warnings that launching Russiagate was wrong and the reason of launching investigation was purely politcal
Notable quotes:
"... Over the course of this discussion Page expressed the view – commonplace in August 2016 – that Donald Trump had no prospect of winning the election. She therefore counselled that the proposed Russiagate investigation was unnecessary. Strzok responded that the FBI had no choice but to proceed with the Russiagate investigation because of the risk of not doing so was too great. ..."
"... The proposal to launch the Russiagate investigation clearly ran into resistance from some members of the FBI. Clearly they were unhappy because they were worried that it would amount to improper interference in the election. Undoubtedly they were also worried that it might violate the Hatch Act, which forbids misuse of public office to engage in partisan political activity especially during an election. ..."
"... The hardliners – and Strzok's text message clearly identifies Strzok as one of the hardliners – however overrode those objections. They insisted the Russiagate investigation had to be launched. They did so because the mere possibility of Trump winning the election, however remote, was too great a risk for them to accept. ..."
"... The key piece in the jigsaw is again the Trump Dossier. It is now known that Christopher Steele – the Trump Dossier's compiler – was in contact with the FBI in early July 2016, before publication of the DNC emails by Wikileaks on 22nd July 2016. The very first entry of the Trump Dossier dated 20th June 2016 and almost certainly seen by Strzok before Wikileaks published the DNC emails and therefore before the earliest possible date for the launch of the Russiagate investigation already claimed that the Russians had compromising material on Trump because of Trump's supposed orgy with Russian prostitutes in the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Moscow in 2013. ..."
"... Later entries in the Trump Dossier dated 19th July 2016, 30th July 2016, 5th August 2016 and 10th August 2016, and one entry incorrectly dated 26th July 2015 but which can be clearly dated to July 2016, not only claimed that the Russians were meddling in the election on Donald Trump's behalf – purportedly on the direct orders from President Putin himself – but also claimed that Trump's campaign was actively colluding with the Russians in doing this. Some of these entries would almost certainly have been seen by Strzok before the Russiagate investigation was launched, and he had probably seen all of them before he texted Page on 15th August 2016. ..."
"... It is now known that the FBI gave credence to the Trump Dossier in the summer of 2016 to the point where it used information obtained from the Trump Dossier to obtain FISA warrants, notably one authorising surveillance of Carter Page. ..."
"... There is one further possibility which is more speculative. It is now know that sometime in August 2016 the CIA forwarded to President Obama a report alleging that the Russians were meddling in the US election. All the facts show that this report was based on the Trump Dossier. Assuming that the FBI and the CIA were consulting each other and exchanging information about the Trump Dossier – as is highly likely – it is possible that the discussion in McCabe's office was also about the report the CIA was proposing to send to Obama, with some people within the FBI concerned that the Trump Dossier's unverified allegations were being used to compile a report for the President of the United States. Regardless of this second possibility, the Strzok text is key evidence because it shows that the FBI pressed ahead with the Russiagate investigation despite the objections of some of its members. ..."
Dec 20, 2017 | theduran.com

Strzok's "insurance" text shows the FBI disregarded warnings that launching Russiagate was wrong

The last few days the media has been buzzing with speculation about the precise meaning of a text message sent by the sacked FBI investigator Peter Strzok to his lover FBI lawyer Lisa Page on 15th August 2016. I am puzzled by this speculation. I don't think there is any mystery at all about this text. There is no doubt it refers to the Russiagate investigation and its meaning is perfectly clear. Let's look first at the text itself

"I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40 ."

"Andy" is FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. "He" is Donald Trump. If that was not so someone by now would have said so. The text shows Strzok and Page took part in a discussion in McCabe's office in which Donald Trump and the election were discussed. Over the course of this discussion Page expressed the view – commonplace in August 2016 – that Donald Trump had no prospect of winning the election. She therefore counselled that the proposed Russiagate investigation was unnecessary. Strzok responded that the FBI had no choice but to proceed with the Russiagate investigation because of the risk of not doing so was too great.

The Russiagate investigation is obviously the "insurance" Strzok is talking about. Nothing else makes sense. Does the text message tell us anything else? The short answer is it does, and it is important.
The proposal to launch the Russiagate investigation clearly ran into resistance from some members of the FBI. Clearly they were unhappy because they were worried that it would amount to improper interference in the election. Undoubtedly they were also worried that it might violate the Hatch Act, which forbids misuse of public office to engage in partisan political activity especially during an election.

That there were discussions within the FBI about the Hatch Act over the course of the summer of 2016 we know because concern about a possible violation of the Hatch Act was the reason former FBI Director James Comey gave for his refusal to sign the US intelligence community's 7th October 2016 statement which blamed Russia for meddling in the US election.

It was clearly in response to these concerns about the possible unlawfulness of the Russiagate investigation and its possible impropriety that Page who is a lawyer suggested that there was no need to launch the Russiagate investigation because Trump was certain to lose the election anyway.

The hardliners – and Strzok's text message clearly identifies Strzok as one of the hardliners – however overrode those objections. They insisted the Russiagate investigation had to be launched. They did so because the mere possibility of Trump winning the election, however remote, was too great a risk for them to accept.

As to why this was so, the answer is that Strzok and the other members of the FBI who supported him had by this point clearly convinced themselves that the claims that Donald Trump was connected to the Russians were true.

The key piece in the jigsaw is again the Trump Dossier. It is now known that Christopher Steele – the Trump Dossier's compiler – was in contact with the FBI in early July 2016, before publication of the DNC emails by Wikileaks on 22nd July 2016. The very first entry of the Trump Dossier dated 20th June 2016 and almost certainly seen by Strzok before Wikileaks published the DNC emails and therefore before the earliest possible date for the launch of the Russiagate investigation already claimed that the Russians had compromising material on Trump because of Trump's supposed orgy with Russian prostitutes in the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Moscow in 2013.

Later entries in the Trump Dossier dated 19th July 2016, 30th July 2016, 5th August 2016 and 10th August 2016, and one entry incorrectly dated 26th July 2015 but which can be clearly dated to July 2016, not only claimed that the Russians were meddling in the election on Donald Trump's behalf – purportedly on the direct orders from President Putin himself – but also claimed that Trump's campaign was actively colluding with the Russians in doing this. Some of these entries would almost certainly have been seen by Strzok before the Russiagate investigation was launched, and he had probably seen all of them before he texted Page on 15th August 2016.

It is now known that the FBI gave credence to the Trump Dossier in the summer of 2016 to the point where it used information obtained from the Trump Dossier to obtain FISA warrants, notably one authorising surveillance of Carter Page.

That fact alone is sufficient to explain why hardliners within the FBI like Strzok were insisting in the summer of 2016 that the Russiagate investigation had to be launched despite the doubts about its lawfulness and propriety expressed by some people within the FBI.

It was in order to arrive at a decision whether or not to launch the Russiagate investigation despite the doubts some were expressing about it that the meeting in McCabe's office was called, with the decision being to proceed as Strzok wanted despite the doubts.

All this seems to me obvious from the wording of Strzok's text, from its date, and from the surrounding circumstances.

There is one further possibility which is more speculative. It is now know that sometime in August 2016 the CIA forwarded to President Obama a report alleging that the Russians were meddling in the US election. All the facts show that this report was based on the Trump Dossier. Assuming that the FBI and the CIA were consulting each other and exchanging information about the Trump Dossier – as is highly likely – it is possible that the discussion in McCabe's office was also about the report the CIA was proposing to send to Obama, with some people within the FBI concerned that the Trump Dossier's unverified allegations were being used to compile a report for the President of the United States. Regardless of this second possibility, the Strzok text is key evidence because it shows that the FBI pressed ahead with the Russiagate investigation despite the objections of some of its members.

Should there ever be an investigation by a second Special Counsel of the FBI's conduct during the election, and should criminal charges ever be brought against its top officials for the things they did during the election, this may prove to be important. It would show that they pressed ahead and did things disregarding warnings that what they were proposing to do was wrong.

[Dec 19, 2017] Former FBI agent spreads deliberate disinformation about Russia actions during Presidential elections

Yet another "national security parasite". Watt intentionally lied about wiretapping
Notable quotes:
"... "When he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee last week, former FBI agent Clint Watts described how Russians used armies of Twitter bots to spread fake news using accounts that seem to be Midwestern swing-voter Republicans. ..."
"... In an interview Monday with NPR's Kelly McEvers, Watts, a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, says the Russian misinformation campaign didn't stop with the election of President Trump. ..."
"... One example, he says, is Trump's claim that he was wiretapped at Trump Tower by the Obama administration. "When they do that, they'll then respond to the wiretapping claim with further conspiracy theories about that claim and that just amplifies the message in the ecosystem," Watts says. ..."
"... The White House has blamed Democrats for the allegations of Russian interference in the U.S. election, saying the theory is a way to shift the blame for their election loss. ..."
Apr 03, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

im1dc , April 03, 2017 at 04:50 PM

Putin paid Millions of Rubles to get his puppet into office and keep Hillary Clinton out

Do you really believe he will sit back and do nothing now that he's been discovered

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/04/03/522503844/how-russian-twitter-bots-pumped-out-fake-news-during-the-2016-election

"How Russian Twitter Bots Pumped Out Fake News During The 2016 Election"

Listen 4:17

'Heard on All Things Considered' by Gabe O'Connor & Avie Schneider...April 3, 2017...4:53 PM ET

"When he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee last week, former FBI agent Clint Watts described how Russians used armies of Twitter bots to spread fake news using accounts that seem to be Midwestern swing-voter Republicans.

"So that way whenever you're trying to socially engineer them and convince them that the information is true, it's much more simple because you see somebody and they look exactly like you, even down to the pictures," Watts told the panel, which is investigating Russia's role in interfering in the U.S. elections.

In an interview Monday with NPR's Kelly McEvers, Watts, a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, says the Russian misinformation campaign didn't stop with the election of President Trump.

"If you went online today, you could see these accounts -- either bots or actual personas somewhere -- that are trying to connect with the administration. They might broadcast stories and then follow up with another tweet that tries to gain the president's attention, or they'll try and answer the tweets that the president puts out," Watts says.

Watts, a cybersecurity expert, says he's been tracking this sort of activity by the Russians for more than three years.

"It's a circular system. Sometimes the propaganda outlets themselves will put out false or manipulated stories. Other times, the president will go with a conspiracy."

One example, he says, is Trump's claim that he was wiretapped at Trump Tower by the Obama administration. "When they do that, they'll then respond to the wiretapping claim with further conspiracy theories about that claim and that just amplifies the message in the ecosystem," Watts says.

"Every time a conspiracy is floated from the administration, it provides every outlet around the world, in fact, an opportunity to amplify that conspiracy and to add more manipulated truths or falsehoods onto it."

Watts says the effort is being conducted by a "very diffuse network." It involves competing efforts "even amongst hackers between different parts of Russian intelligence and propagandists -- all with general guidelines about what to pursue, but doing it at different times and paces and rhythms."

The White House has blamed Democrats for the allegations of Russian interference in the U.S. election, saying the theory is a way to shift the blame for their election loss.

But Watts says "it's way bigger" than that. "What was being done by nation-states in the social media influence landscape was so much more significant than the other things that were being talked about," including the Islamic State's use of social media to recruit followers, he says."

[Dec 17, 2017] Trump team claims Russia investigator unlawfully got emails

Notable quotes:
"... Comey, for his part, wrote a memo alleging Trump had asked him to drop his investigation into Flynn, an act which some say could constitute obstruction of justice and thus grounds for seeking Trump's impeachment. ..."
Dec 17, 2017 | www.breitbart.com

Comey, for his part, wrote a memo alleging Trump had asked him to drop his investigation into Flynn, an act which some say could constitute obstruction of justice and thus grounds for seeking Trump's impeachment.

[Dec 15, 2017] FBI Edits To Clinton Exoneration Go Far Beyond What Was Previously Known; Comey, McCabe, Strzok Implicated Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... In addition to Strzok's "gross negligence" --> "extremely careless" edit, McCabe's damage control team removed a key justification for elevating Clinton's actions to the standard of "gross negligence" - that being the " sheer volume " of classified material on Clinton's server. In the original draft, the "sheer volume" of material "supports an inference that the participants were grossly negligent in their handling of that information." ..."
"... It's also possible that the FBI, which was not allowed to inspect the DNC servers, was uncomfortable standing behind the conclusion of Russian hacking reached by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike. ..."
"... Johnson's letter also questions an " insurance policy " referenced in a text message sent by demoted FBI investigator Peter Strzok to his mistress, FBI attorney Lisa Page, which read " I want to believe the path you threw out to consideration in Andy's office -- that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk." It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40...." ..."
"... One wonders if the "insurance policy" Strzok sent to Page on August 15, 2016 was in reference to the original counterintelligence operation launched against Trump of which Strzok became the lead investigator in "late July" 2016? Of note, Strzok reported directly to Bill Priestap - the director of Counterintelligence, who told James Comey not to inform congress that the FBI had launched a counterintelligence operation against then-candidate Trump, per Comey's March 20th testimony to the House Intelligence Committee. (h/t @TheLastRefuge2 ) ..."
"... That's not to say Hillary shouldn't have been prosecuted. But what we're seeing here looks like perfectly normal behavior once the decision has been made not to prosecute; get the statements to be consistent with the conclusion. In a bureaucracy, that requires a number of people to be involved. And it would necessarily include people who work for Hillary Clinton, since that's whose information is being discussed. ..."
"... And the stuff about how a foreign power might have, or might possibly have, accessed her emails is all BS too. We already know they weren't hacked, they were leaked. ..."
"... Maybe people who don't understand complicated organizations see something nefarious here, but nobody who does will. Nothing will come of this but some staged-for-TV dramatic pronouncements in the House, and on FOX News, and affiliated websites. There's nothing here. ..."
"... Debatable re. biggest story being kept quiet. The AWAN Brothers/Family is a Pakistani spy ring operating inside Congress for more than a decade, and we hear nothing. They had access to virtually everything in every important committee. They had access to the Congressional servers and all the emails. Biggest spy scandal in our nations hsitory, and........crickets. ..."
"... They have had a year to destroy the evidence. Why should the CIA controlled MSM report the truth? ..."
"... Precisely. That's actually a very good tool for decoding the Clintons and Obama. "You collaborated with Russia." Means "I collaborated with Saudi Arabia." It takes a little while and I haven't fully mastered it yet, but you can reverse alinsky-engineer their statements to figure out what they did. ..."
"... And get this, Flynn was set up! Yates had the transcript via the (illegal) FISA Court of warrant which relied on the Dirty Steele Dossier, when Flynn deviated from the transcript they charged him Lying to the FBI. Comey McCabe run around lying 24/7. Their is no fucking hope left! The swamp WINS ALWAYS. ..."
Dec 15, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

FBI Edits To Clinton Exoneration Go Far Beyond What Was Previously Known; Comey, McCabe, Strzok Implicated Tyler Durden Dec 15, 2017 10:10 AM 0 SHARES detailed in a Thursday letter from committee chairman Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) to FBI Director Christopher Wray.

James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok

The letter reveals specific edits made by senior FBI agents when Deputy Director Andrew McCabe exchanged drafts of Comey's statement with senior FBI officials , including Peter Strzok, Strzok's direct supervisor , E.W. "Bill" Priestap, Jonathan Moffa, and an unnamed employee from the Office of General Counsel (identified by Newsweek as DOJ Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson) - in what was a coordinated conspiracy among top FBI brass to decriminalize Clinton's conduct by changing legal terms and phrases, omitting key information, and minimizing the role of the Intelligence Community in the email investigation. Doing so virtually assured that then-candidate Hillary Clinton would not be prosecuted.

Heather Samuelson and Heather Mills

Also mentioned in the letter are the immunity agreements granted by the FBI in June 2016 to top Obama advisor Cheryl Mills and aide Heather Samuelson - who helped decide which Clinton emails were destroyed before turning over the remaining 30,000 records to the State Department. Of note, the FBI agreed to destroy evidence on devices owned by Mills and Samuelson which were turned over in the investigation.

Sen. Johnson's letter reads:

According to documents produced by the FBI, FBI employees exchanged proposed edits to the draft statement. On May 6, Deputy Director McCabe forwarded the draft statement to other senior FBI employees, including Peter Strzok, E.W. Priestap, Jonathan Moffa, and an employee on the Office of General Counsel whose name has been redacted. While the precise dates of the edits and identities of the editors are not apparent from the documents, the edits appear to change the tone and substance of Director Comey's statement in at least three respects .

It was already known that Strzok - who was demoted to the FBI's HR department after anti-Trump text messages to his mistress were uncovered by an internal FBI watchdog - was responsible for downgrading the language regarding Clinton's conduct from the criminal charge of "gross negligence" to "extremely careless."

"Gross negligence" is a legal term of art in criminal law often associated with recklessness. According to Black's Law Dictionary, gross negligence is " A severe degree of negligence taken as reckless disregard ," and " Blatant indifference to one's legal duty, other's safety, or their rights ." "Extremely careless," on the other hand, is not a legal term of art.

According to an Attorney briefed on the matter, "extremely careless" is in fact a defense to "gross negligence": "What my client did was 'careless', maybe even 'extremely careless,' but it was not 'gross negligence' your honor." The FBI would have no option but to recommend prosecution if the phrase "gross negligence" had been left in.

18 U.S. Code § 793 "Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information" specifically uses the phrase "gross negligence." Had Comey used the phrase, he would have essentially declared that Hillary had broken the law.

In addition to Strzok's "gross negligence" --> "extremely careless" edit, McCabe's damage control team removed a key justification for elevating Clinton's actions to the standard of "gross negligence" - that being the " sheer volume " of classified material on Clinton's server. In the original draft, the "sheer volume" of material "supports an inference that the participants were grossly negligent in their handling of that information."

Also removed from Comey's statement were all references to the Intelligence Community's involvement in investigating Clinton's private email server.

Director Comey's original statement acknowledged the FBI had worked with its partners in the Intelligence Community to assess potential damage from Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server. The original statement read:

[W]e have done extensive work with the assistance of our colleagues elsewhere in the Intelligence Community to understand what indications there might be of compromise by hostile actors in connection with the private email operation.

The edited version removed the references to the intelligence community:

[W]e have done extensive work [removed] to understand what indications there might be of compromise by hostile actors in connection with the personal e-mail operation.

Furthermore, the FBI edited Comey's statement to downgrade the probability that Clinton's server was hacked by hostile actors, changing their language from "reasonably likely" to "possible" - an edit which eliminated yet another justification for the phrase "Gross negligence." To put it another way, "reasonably likely" means the probability of a hack due to Clinton's negligence is above 50 percent, whereas the hack simply being "possible" is any probability above zero.

It's also possible that the FBI, which was not allowed to inspect the DNC servers, was uncomfortable standing behind the conclusion of Russian hacking reached by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike.

The original draft read:

Given the combination of factors, we assess it is reasonably likely that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's private email account."

The edited version from Director Comey's July 5 statement read:

Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail account.

Johnson's letter also questions an " insurance policy " referenced in a text message sent by demoted FBI investigator Peter Strzok to his mistress, FBI attorney Lisa Page, which read " I want to believe the path you threw out to consideration in Andy's office -- that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk." It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40...."

One wonders if the "insurance policy" Strzok sent to Page on August 15, 2016 was in reference to the original counterintelligence operation launched against Trump of which Strzok became the lead investigator in "late July" 2016? Of note, Strzok reported directly to Bill Priestap - the director of Counterintelligence, who told James Comey not to inform congress that the FBI had launched a counterintelligence operation against then-candidate Trump, per Comey's March 20th testimony to the House Intelligence Committee. (h/t @TheLastRefuge2 )

Transcript , James Comey Testimony to House Intel Committee, March 20, 2016

The letter from the Senate Committee concludes; "the edits to Director Comey's public statement, made months prior to the conclusion of the FBI's investigation of Secretary Clinton's conduct, had a significant impact on the FBI's public evaluation of the implications of her actions . This effort, seen in the light of the personal animus toward then-candidate Trump by senior FBI agents leading the Clinton investigation and their apparent desire to create an "insurance policy" against Mr. Trump's election, raise profound questions about the FBI's role and possible interference in the 2016y presidential election and the role of the same agents in Special Counsel Mueller's investigation of President Trump ."

Johnson then asks the FBI to answer six questions:

  1. Please provide the names of the Department of Justice (DOJ) employees who comprised the "mid-year review team" during the FBI's investigation of Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server.
  2. Please identify all FBI, DOJ, or other federal employees who edited or reviewed Director Comey's July 5, 2016 statement . Please identify which individual made the marked changes in the documents produced to the Committee.
  3. Please identify which FBI employee repeatedly changed the language in the final draft statement that described Secretary Clinton's behavior as "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless. " What evidence supported these changes?
  4. Please identify which FBI employee edited the draft statement to remove the reference to the Intelligence Community . On what basis was this change made?
  5. Please identify which FBI employee edited the draft statement to downgrade the FBI's assessment that it was "reasonably likely" that hostile actors had gained access to Secretary Clinton's private email account to merely that than [sic] intrusion was "possible." What evidence supported these changes?
  6. Please provide unredacted copies of the drafts of Director Comey's statement, including comment bubbles , and explain the basis for the redactions produced to date.

We are increasingly faced with the fact that the FBI's top ranks have been filled with political ideologues who helped Hillary Clinton while pursuing the Russian influence narrative against Trump (perhaps as the "insurance" Strzok spoke of). Meanwhile, "hands off" recused Attorney General Jeff Sessions and assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein don't seem very excited to explore the issues with a second Special Counsel. As such, we are now almost entirely reliant on the various Committees of congress to pursue justice in this matter. Perhaps when their investigations have concluded, President Trump will feel he has the political and legal ammunition to truly clean house at the nation's swampiest agencies.

swmnguy -> 11b40 , Dec 15, 2017 4:42 PM

All I see in this story is that the FBI edits their work to make sure the terminology is consistent throughout. This is not a smoking gun of anything, except bureaucratic procedure one would find anywhere any legal documents are prepared.

That's not to say Hillary shouldn't have been prosecuted. But what we're seeing here looks like perfectly normal behavior once the decision has been made not to prosecute; get the statements to be consistent with the conclusion. In a bureaucracy, that requires a number of people to be involved. And it would necessarily include people who work for Hillary Clinton, since that's whose information is being discussed.

Now, if Hillary hadn't been such an arrogant bitch, we wouldn't be having this conversation. If she had just take the locked-down Android of iOS phone they issued her, instead of having to forward everything to herself so she could use her stupid Blackberry (which can't be locked down to State Dep't. specs), everything would have been both hunky and dory.

And the stuff about how a foreign power might have, or might possibly have, accessed her emails is all BS too. We already know they weren't hacked, they were leaked.

Maybe people who don't understand complicated organizations see something nefarious here, but nobody who does will. Nothing will come of this but some staged-for-TV dramatic pronouncements in the House, and on FOX News, and affiliated websites. There's nothing here.

youarelost , Dec 15, 2017 8:59 AM

What did Obozo know and when did he know it

E.F. Mutton -> youarelost , Dec 15, 2017 9:04 AM

False Flag time - distraction needed ASAP

Bigly -> E.F. Mutton , Dec 15, 2017 9:14 AM

We need to look for this as there are a LOT of people who need to be indicted and boobus americanus needs distraction.

My concern is that there are not enough non-corrupts there to handle and process the swamp as Trump did not fire and replace them 10 months ago.

shitshitshit -> Bigly , Dec 15, 2017 9:16 AM

I wonder how high will this little game go...

That obongo of all crooks is involved is a sure fact, but I'd like to see how many remaining defenders of the cause are still motivated to lose everything for this thing...

In other terms, what are the defection rates in the dem party, because now this must be an avalanche.

cheka -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 9:45 AM

applied neo-bolshevism

macholatte -> cheka , Dec 15, 2017 10:23 AM

I am tired of this shit. Aren't you?

Please, EVERYONE with a Twitter account send this message Every Day (tell your friends on facebook):

Mr. President, the time to purge the Obama-Clinton holdovers has long passed. Please get rid of them at once. Make your base happy. Fire 100+ from DOJ - State - FBI. Hire William K. Black as Special Prosecutor

send it to:

@realDonaldTrump
@PressSec
@KellyannePolls
@WhiteHouse


Does anybody know how to start an online petition?
Let's make some NOISE!!

Bay of Pigs -> macholatte , Dec 15, 2017 12:02 PM

Sadly, I don't see this story being reported anywhere this morning. Only the biggest scandal in American history. WTF?

11b40 -> Bay of Pigs , Dec 15, 2017 1:22 PM

Debatable re. biggest story being kept quiet. The AWAN Brothers/Family is a Pakistani spy ring operating inside Congress for more than a decade, and we hear nothing. They had access to virtually everything in every important committee. They had access to the Congressional servers and all the emails. Biggest spy scandal in our nations hsitory, and........crickets.

Of course, they may all be related, since Debbie Wasserman-Shits brought them in and set them up, then intertwined their work in Congress with their work for the DNC.

grizfish -> Bay of Pigs , Dec 15, 2017 1:53 PM

They have had a year to destroy the evidence. Why should the CIA controlled MSM report the truth? It's just like slick willy. Deny. Deny. Deny.

ThePhantom -> grizfish , Dec 15, 2017 3:35 PM

The Media is "in on it" and just as culpabale.... everyone's fighting for their lives.

grizfish -> Bay of Pigs , Dec 15, 2017 4:29 PM

Just more theater. Throwing a bone to the few citizens who think for themselves. Giving us false hope the US legal system isn't corrupt. This will never be prosecuted, because the deep state remains in control. They've had a year to destroy the incriminating evidence.

Lanka -> macholatte , Dec 15, 2017 2:27 PM

Tillerson is extremely incompetent in housecleaning. He needs to be replaced by Fred Kruger, Esq.

TerminalDebt -> cheka , Dec 15, 2017 12:43 PM

I guess we know now who the leaker was at the FBI and on the Mule's team

Joe Davola -> TerminalDebt , Dec 15, 2017 1:27 PM

I'm guessing the number of leakers is bigger than 1

eclectic syncretist -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 10:01 AM

What's next? The FBI had Seth Rich killed? Is that why Sessions and everyone else appears paralyzed? How deep does this rabbit hole go?

Overfed -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 10:58 AM

I'm sure that Chaffets and Gowdy will hand down some very stern reprimands.

Mr. Universe -> Overfed , Dec 15, 2017 11:24 AM

Ryan and his buddies in Congress will make strained faces (as if taking a dump) and wring their hands saying they must hire a "Special" Investigator to cover up this mess.

Duane Norman -> Mr. Universe , Dec 15, 2017 11:31 AM

http://fmshooter.com/claiming-fbis-reputation-integrity-not-tatters-comp...

Yeah, but it won't make a difference.

Gardentoolnumber5 -> Overfed , Dec 15, 2017 3:12 PM

Chaffets left Congress because he couldn't get any more help from Trump's DOJ than he did from Obama's. Sad, as he was one of the good guys. imo

ThePhantom -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 3:38 PM

did you notice the story yesterday about "Russian hacker admits putin ordered him to steal dnc emials" ? someones worried about it....

grizfish -> ThePhantom , Dec 15, 2017 4:38 PM

They tweet that crap all the time. Usually just a repeat with different names, but always blaming a Ruskie. About every 6 months they hit on a twist in the wording that causes it to go viral.

Bush Baby -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 11:37 AM

Before Trump was elected , I thought the only way to get our country back was through a Military Coup, but it appears there may be some light at the end of the tunnel.

eclectic syncretist -> Bush Baby , Dec 15, 2017 11:57 AM

I wonder if that light is coming from the soon to be gaping hole in the FBI's asshole when the extent of this political activism by the agency eventually seeps into the public conciousness.

rccalhoun -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 12:43 PM

you can't clean up a mess of this magnitude. fire everyone in washington---senator, representative, fbi, cia, nsa ,etc and start over---has NO chance of happenning

the only hope for a non violent solution is that a true leader emerges that every decent person can rally behind and respect, honor and dignity become the norm. unfortunately, corruption has become a culture and i don't know if it can be eradicated

Lanka -> rccalhoun , Dec 15, 2017 2:31 PM

Just expose the Congress, McCabe, Lindsey, McCabe, Clinton, all Dem judges, Media, Hollywood, local government dems as pedos; that will half-drain the swamp.

shankster -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 4:11 PM

Does the US public have a consciousness?

lew1024 -> Bush Baby , Dec 15, 2017 2:54 PM

If Trump gets the swamp cleaned without a military coup, he will be one of our greatest Presidents. There will be people who hate that more than they hate being in jail.

checkessential -> BennyBoy , Dec 15, 2017 1:00 PM

And they say President Trump obstructed justice for simply asking Comey if he could drop the Michael Flynn matter. Wow.

TommyD88 -> checkessential , Dec 15, 2017 1:09 PM

Alinsky 101: Accuse your opponent of that which you yourself are doing.

Overfed -> redmudhooch , Dec 15, 2017 2:47 PM

Getting rid of the FBI (and all other FLEAs) would be a good thing for all of us.

A Sentinel -> TommyD88 , Dec 15, 2017 2:13 PM

Precisely. That's actually a very good tool for decoding the Clintons and Obama. "You collaborated with Russia." Means "I collaborated with Saudi Arabia." It takes a little while and I haven't fully mastered it yet, but you can reverse alinsky-engineer their statements to figure out what they did.

lurker since 2012 -> checkessential , Dec 15, 2017 4:09 PM

And get this, Flynn was set up! Yates had the transcript via the (illegal) FISA Court of warrant which relied on the Dirty Steele Dossier, when Flynn deviated from the transcript they charged him Lying to the FBI. Comey McCabe run around lying 24/7. Their is no fucking hope left! The swamp WINS ALWAYS.

Ramesees -> BaBaBouy , Dec 15, 2017 9:31 AM

I have - it's was NBC Nightly News - they spent time on the damning emails from Strozk. Maybe 2-3 minutes. Normal news segment time. Surprised the hell out of me.

A Sentinel -> Ramesees , Dec 15, 2017 2:14 PM

Someone probably got fired for that.

ThePhantom -> Ramesees , Dec 15, 2017 3:41 PM

the "MSM" needs to cover their own asses ...like "an insurance policy" just in case the truth comes out... best to be seen reporting on the REAL issue at least for a couple minutes..

[Dec 08, 2017] Did the FBI, CIA and NSA conspired to destroy Donald Trump?

Notable quotes:
"... You are correct that there is no public source yet confirming the FBI paid Steele. However, the FBI's refusal to turn over relevant documents regarding their relationship with Steele tells me there was money paid. What is indisputable is that th information in the dossier was used as a predicate to seek permission from a FISA court to go after Trump and his team. That is outrageous. ..."
"... This is increasingly my take as well -- the FBI, CIA and NSA do seem to have "conspired" to destroy Donald Trump. I finger Brennan, Clapper, Susan Rice, Benjamin Rhodes, and maybe Samantha Power as being involved in the flood of illegal leaks earlier in the year that did so much to pave the way for Mueller's appointment. ..."
Dec 08, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Publius Tacitus -> sbjonez... , 06 December 2017 at 10:35 AM

You are correct that there is no public source yet confirming the FBI paid Steele. However, the FBI's refusal to turn over relevant documents regarding their relationship with Steele tells me there was money paid. What is indisputable is that th information in the dossier was used as a predicate to seek permission from a FISA court to go after Trump and his team. That is outrageous.

Sylvia 1 , 06 December 2017 at 12:48 PM

This is increasingly my take as well -- the FBI, CIA and NSA do seem to have "conspired" to destroy Donald Trump. I finger Brennan, Clapper, Susan Rice, Benjamin Rhodes, and maybe Samantha Power as being involved in the flood of illegal leaks earlier in the year that did so much to pave the way for Mueller's appointment.

What I fail to understand is why Democrats are sitting back and cheering as these agencies work together to destroy a duly elected President of the USA. Does anyone really believe that if these agencies get away with it this time they will stop with Trump?
All these agencies are out of control and are completely unaccountable.

blue peacock , 07 December 2017 at 12:18 AM
Publius Tacitus
The real story is that the FBI, the NSA and the CIA effectively conspired to try to destroy the Presidency of Donald Trump.

How can this conspiracy be investigated? Who could do it? Clearly not anyone from the DoJ, FBI, CIA and NSA as they are fully compromised.

[Jun 14, 2017] Strange Oversight by Comey tells us a lot by Ray McGovern

Notable quotes:
"... Given the stakes involved in the Russia-gate investigation – now including a possible impeachment battle over removing the President of the United States – wouldn't it seem logical for the FBI to insist on its own forensics for this fundamental predicate of the case? Or could Comey's hesitancy to demand access to the DNC's computers be explained by a fear that FBI technicians not fully briefed on CIA/NSA/FBI Deep State programs might uncover a lot more than he wanted? ..."
"... "In the case of the DNC, and, I believe, the DCCC, but I'm sure the DNC, we did not have access to the devices themselves. We got relevant forensic information from a private party, a high-class entity, that had done the work. But we didn't get direct access." ..."
"... "Isn't content an important part of the forensics from a counterintelligence standpoint?" ..."
"... "It is, although what was briefed to me by my folks – the people who were my folks at the time is that they had gotten the information from the private party that they needed to understand the intrusion by the spring of 2016." ..."
"... Burr demurred on asking Comey to explain what amounts to gross misfeasance, if not worse. Perhaps, NBC could arrange for Megyn Kelly to interview Burr to ask if he has a clue as to what Putin might have been referring to when he noted, "There may be hackers, by the way, in the United States who very craftily and professionally passed the buck to Russia." ..."
"... Given the congressional intelligence "oversight" committees' obsequiousness and repeated "high esteem" for the "intelligence community," there seems an even chance that – no doubt because of an oversight – the CIA/FBI/NSA deep-stage troika failed to brief the Senate "oversight committee" chairman on WikiLeaks "Vault 7" disclosures – even when WikiLeaks publishes original CIA documents. ..."
Jun 13, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

Given the stakes involved in the Russia-gate investigation – now including a possible impeachment battle over removing the President of the United States – wouldn't it seem logical for the FBI to insist on its own forensics for this fundamental predicate of the case? Or could Comey's hesitancy to demand access to the DNC's computers be explained by a fear that FBI technicians not fully briefed on CIA/NSA/FBI Deep State programs might uncover a lot more than he wanted?

Comey was asked again about this curious oversight on June 8 by Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Richard Burr:

BURR: "And the FBI, in this case, unlike other cases that you might investigate – did you ever have access to the actual hardware that was hacked? Or did you have to rely on a third party to provide you the data that they had collected?"

COMEY: "In the case of the DNC, and, I believe, the DCCC, but I'm sure the DNC, we did not have access to the devices themselves. We got relevant forensic information from a private party, a high-class entity, that had done the work. But we didn't get direct access."

BURR: "But no content?"

COMEY: "Correct."

BURR: "Isn't content an important part of the forensics from a counterintelligence standpoint?"

COMEY: "It is, although what was briefed to me by my folks – the people who were my folks at the time is that they had gotten the information from the private party that they needed to understand the intrusion by the spring of 2016."

Burr demurred on asking Comey to explain what amounts to gross misfeasance, if not worse. Perhaps, NBC could arrange for Megyn Kelly to interview Burr to ask if he has a clue as to what Putin might have been referring to when he noted, "There may be hackers, by the way, in the United States who very craftily and professionally passed the buck to Russia."

Given the congressional intelligence "oversight" committees' obsequiousness and repeated "high esteem" for the "intelligence community," there seems an even chance that – no doubt because of an oversight – the CIA/FBI/NSA deep-stage troika failed to brief the Senate "oversight committee" chairman on WikiLeaks "Vault 7" disclosures – even when WikiLeaks publishes original CIA documents.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst for a total of 30 years and now servers on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). Reprinted with permission from Consortium News .

[Mar 26, 2017] There are cliques of employees in all these govt agencies who have political and religious views just like the rest of the world, except they have access to spy satellites, phone tapping, and every other spy tool just like Snowden tried to expose.

Mar 26, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
Korprit_Phlunkie , Mar 25, 2017 6:53 PM

There are cliques of employees in all these govt agencies who have political and religious views just like the rest of the world, except they have access to spy satellites, phone tapping, and every other spy tool just like Snowden tried to expose. Finally after watching the evil satan worshipping liberals for all these years use these tool to further the NWO thru clintons and hussein, the patriot Christian conservative side is finally leaking info they have access to to TRUMP and he is able to fight back a little. THis is good versus evil, no doubt in my mind. Choose this day whom you will serve. Especially you crossroad demon from hell.

[Mar 23, 2017] The FBI did wiretap Trump Tower to monitor Russian activity, but it had nothing to do with the 2016 Presidential election, it has been reported

Still waiting for any evidence to appear that Russians interfered with the elections or colluded with Trump.
Notable quotes:
"... The FBI did wiretap Trump Tower to monitor Russian activity, but it had nothing to do with the 2016 Presidential election, it has been reported. ..."
"... The Dems who were all for collecting on everyone can't (non-hypocritically) complain about Trump having all that now. I mean, we can never know how far the extremist have penetrated into our government unless we trace where all that Saudi money terrorist influence goes. ..."
"... The surveillance state bites the politicians that created it in the ass. I love that. They are not happy, I love that too. ..."
"... It was already a farce when McCain went after Paul. Though it was, before that, a horror film, with the 'ways the intelligence community can get you.' ..."
"... It is a satire, wrapped in a parody, hidden in slapstick, on top of a farce, buried in a bro-mance between a man with a tower and another man riding a horse without a shirt (and the man isn't wearing a shirt either .) ..."
"... Revealing this is treason. ..."
"... People will die. ..."
"... I agree that everybody is surveilled all the time, especially in the Beltway, where probably there are multiple simultaneous operations run against . well, everybody. ..."
Mar 23, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

There's also this showing evidence that Trump Tower was specifically monitored during the Obama administration, although the probe was targeting Russian mafia and not Trump and was done well before he declared his candidacy.

The FBI did wiretap Trump Tower to monitor Russian activity, but it had nothing to do with the 2016 Presidential election, it has been reported.

Between 2011 and 2013 the Bureau had a warrant to spy on a high-level criminal Russian money-laundering ring, which operated in unit 63A of the iconic skyscraper - three floors below Mr Trump's penthouse.

Not exactly a confirmation of Trump's rather wild claims, but something. Still waiting for any evidence to appear that Russians interfered with the elections or colluded with Trump.

uncle tungsten , March 22, 2017 at 9:40 pm

Ok, so they were just after the Russian mafia, phew I feel better already. So they got the felons and they are all arrested?

What utter BS! Why is Semion Mogilevitch still at large in Hungary and no extradition process? What about Felix Sater and Steve Wynn and on and on. Why are they incapable of prosecuting mafia mobsters and instead chasing politicians?

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , March 22, 2017 at 5:29 pm

That said, it was what happening potentially to all citizens, not just Donald Trump. I dislike this intensely, but why should Trump get special dispensation over other citizens? Would like to know the reason for that.

Like Watergate, it's really about the denial or the lying. "When did you know about the, er, collecting?" For how many days have we ridiculed Trump for his alternative universe imagination?

Lambert Strether Post author , March 23, 2017 at 3:25 am

> He can join the other 310 million of us who can be "incidentally collected".

Didn't your mother tell you that 310 million wrongs don't make a right? Neither party establishment cares about that quaint concept, civil liberties. If Obama's flip flip on FISA reform in July 2008, giving the Telco's retroactive immunity for Bush's warrantless surveillance, didn't convince you, then his 17-city paramilitary crackdown on Occupy should have.

fritter , March 23, 2017 at 10:38 am

Not to mention monitoring a politician opens up a whole new can of worms. I'm convinced Trump must pretty clean relatively because the IC hasn't gotten rid of him yet and you know they have all of his communications.

I'm with Lambert on neither party caring. I knew all I needed to when Obama voted for FISA and the following years just reinforced how corrupt the Dems were. There is an import point here though. I don't think Trump would have thought that all of the surveillance would be applied to him personally. It was just about other people. It was probably a legitimate eye opener. Now Trump is at the head of the surveillance apparatus. Instead of asking Wikileaks to release all of Clintons emails, he should just do it himself.

The Dems who were all for collecting on everyone can't (non-hypocritically) complain about Trump having all that now. I mean, we can never know how far the extremist have penetrated into our government unless we trace where all that Saudi money terrorist influence goes.

Code Name D , March 22, 2017 at 3:15 pm

Not just incidental, in Congressional hearings, Comey flat out says that Trump and his team were investigated for Russian connections, and that none were found. The question now is was the investigations properly secured or not. Something completely in the air.

But team Dem is still playing the "wire tap" canad.

Randy , March 22, 2017 at 4:13 pm

The surveillance state bites the politicians that created it in the ass. I love that. They are not happy, I love that too.

allan , March 22, 2017 at 5:25 pm

This is now turning into high comedy low farce:

Devin Nunes Commits "Felonious Leaking" [Emptywheel]

and @mkraju:

WYDEN, member of Senate Intel, says Nunes' statements "would appear to reveal classified information, which is a serious concern."

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , March 22, 2017 at 5:32 pm

It was already a farce when McCain went after Paul. Though it was, before that, a horror film, with the 'ways the intelligence community can get you.'

polecat , March 22, 2017 at 7:01 pm

they're going all Fellini on us now --

wilroncanada , March 22, 2017 at 9:44 pm

And here I thought they were only looking through a glass, darkly.

fresno dan , March 22, 2017 at 7:29 pm

MyLessThanPrimeBeef
March 22, 2017 at 5:32 pm

It is a satire, wrapped in a parody, hidden in slapstick, on top of a farce, buried in a bro-mance between a man with a tower and another man riding a horse without a shirt (and the man isn't wearing a shirt either .)

Lambert Strether Post author , March 23, 2017 at 3:31 am

And scripted by Cersei Lannister

allan , March 22, 2017 at 6:48 pm

Also, this kind of incidental collection has been known about for years. Here's a Barton Gellman, Julie Tate and Ashkan Soltani article (linked to by Emptywheel)
from the WaPo in 2014 and based on the Snowden documents:

In NSA-intercepted data, those not targeted far outnumber the foreigners who are
[WaPo]

Ordinary Internet users, American and non-American alike, far outnumber legally targeted foreigners in the communications intercepted by the National Security Agency from U.S. digital networks, according to a four-month investigation by The Washington Post.

Nine of 10 account holders found in a large cache of intercepted conversations, which former NSA contractor Edward Snowden provided in full to The Post, were not the intended surveillance targets but were caught in a net the agency had cast for somebody else.

And what was the reaction of many Congresspersons
(including many Dems, and all of the GOP except maybe Rand Paul and Justin Amash)?
Revealing this is treason. People will die.
And Trump's CIA Director, Mike Pompeo, has called for Snowden's execution.

fresno dan , March 22, 2017 at 7:19 pm

allan
March 22, 2017 at 6:48 pm

Sorry allan – I got all excited at seeing a Nunes article in ZeroHedge and posted a comment – your article is better and it makes for more coherent comment threads to keep them together – I should have looked before I leaped (posted).

Nunes: "I recently confirmed that, on numerous occasions, the Intelligence Community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.
Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration-details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value-were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.
I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition team members were unmasked.
To be clear, none of this surveillance was related to Russia or any investigation of Russian activities or of the Trump team."

==============================================
So the worm turns. The hypocrisy espoused by all sides is ..well, 11th dimensional.

3.14e-9 , March 22, 2017 at 10:35 pm

fresno dan, this was a major topic of discussion during the committee hearing with Comey and Rogers on Monday. I listened to the whole thing – all five hours and 18 minutes' worth – because I suspected that the corporate media would omit important details or spin it beyond recognition. And so they did.

The bipartisan divide is being portrayed as Democrats wanting to get to the truth of Russian efforts to snuff out Democracy, and Republicans wanting to "plug leaks" (see Lambert's RCP except above), with some reports suggesting the Rs are advocating stifling free speech, prosecuting reporters for publishing classified information, and the like.

Republican committee members were indeed focused on the leaks, and there was talk about how to prevent them, but their concern – at least as they expressed publicly on Monday – was specifically related to whether all those current and former officials, senior officials, etc., quoted anonymously in the NYT and WaPo (the infamous "nine current and former officials, who were in senior positions at multiple agencies") violated FISA provisions protecting information about U.S. persons collected incidentally in surveillance of foreign actors.

Sure, they're playing their own game, and it could be a ruse to divert attention from the Trump campaign's alleged Russian ties or simply to have ammo against the Ds. Even so, after listening to all their arguments, I believe they are on more solid ground than all the Dem hysteria about Russian aggression and Trump camp treason.

I don't think I'll ever get Trey Gowdy's cringe-worthy performance during the Benghazi hearings out of my head, but he made some pretty good points on Monday, one of which was that investigating Russian interference and possible ties between Trump advisers and Russia is all well and good, but there may or may not have been any laws broken; whereas leaking classified information about U.S. citizens collected incidentally under FISA is clearly a felony with up to 10 years. Comey confirmed that by saying that ALL information collected under FISA is classified.

And then he repeatedly refused to say whether he thought any classified information had been leaked or existed at all (I counted more than 100 "no comment" answers from Comey, who astonishingly managed to find 50 different ways to say it).

My beef isn't so much the leak of classified information, but the gross dereliction of duty – if not outright abuse of First Amendment powers – by reporters who collaborate with intelligence agencies and then quote them anonymously, giving everyone cover to say or write whatever they want with zero accountability.

In fact, there were some interesting comments in Monday's hearing about the possibility that some of what has been reported was fabricated. Then, you might expect Comey to say something like that. For all his talk about not tolerating leaks from his agency, blahblah, it was clear that he'll provide his own people with cover, if necessary. I think that's what Gowdy and a couple other Republicans were getting at.

It goes without saying, but I'll add that the Dems were hardly even trying to disguise their real goal, which isn't protecting the American People® from the evil Russkies, but taking down Trump.

fresno dan , March 22, 2017 at 11:56 pm

3.14e-9
March 22, 2017 at 10:35 pm

Thanks for watching the whole thing – the nation owes you a debt of gratitude.

"My beef isn't so much the leak of classified information, but the gross dereliction of duty – if not outright abuse of First Amendment powers – by reporters who collaborate with intelligence agencies and then quote them anonymously, giving everyone cover to say or write whatever they want with zero accountability."

First, I a squillion percent agree with you. This is a big, bit deal because essentially the military/IC/neocons is trying to wrest control of the civilian government – the idea that the CIA is some noble institution that wants the best for all Americans is preposterous, yet accepted by the media, which proves how much propaganda we are fed. The sheep like following, the mandatory use of the adjective "murderous thug" before the name of "Putin" just shows that most of the media has been bought off or has lost all their critical thinking faculties.

But I also don't want to be a hypocrite so I will explain that I don't have too much of a problem with leaks. WHAT I do have a problem with is the purposeful naivete or ignorance of the media that the CIA and/or facets of the Obama administration is trying to thwart rapprochement with Russia. Administrations BEFORE they are sworn in talk to foreign governments – the sheer HYSTERIA, the CRIME of talking to a Russian is beyond absurd. We are being indoctrinated to believe all Russia, all bad

There is a ton of information about Podesta and the Clintons dealing with Russia for money. If Flynn and whatshisname are just grifting that is pedestrian stuff and everybody in Washington does it (I thing they call it "lobbying"). If there is REAL treason something should have come out by now.

3.14e-9 , March 23, 2017 at 3:27 am

Thanks, fd.

I began covering congressional hearings while I was still in j-school and sat though many like this during my years as a reporter in D.C. Even though I haven't worked as a full-time journalist for many years, I still prefer original sources and am willing to take the time to dig for them or, in this case, to sit through a hearing as though I were covering it as a member of the press – especially when I don't even have to wash my hair or get dressed!

I didn't mean to imply that I have a problem with leaks. I certainly encouraged enough of them in my time, and I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with publishing leaked material, even certain kinds of classified information. It depends.

There's the kind of "classified" information that is restricted expressly to keep the public from knowing something they have a right to know, and there's information that's classified to protect individual privacy. The first kind should be leaked early and often. The second kind, close to never (and off the top of my head I can't think of an instance when it would be OK).

Even though journalists aren't (and shouldn't be) held liable for publishing classified information given to them by a third party, they need to be scrupulous in their decisions to do so. Is it in the public interest? Who or what might be harmed? Would sitting on the information cause more harm than publicizing it? Does it violate someone's constitutional rights?

These questions can get tricky with someone like Flynn, who's clearly a public figure and thus mostly fair game. However, if I had been reporting that story, I think I would have sat on it until I had more information, even at the risk of getting scooped – unless, of course, I was in cahoots with the leakers and out to get him and his boss.

At that point, I am no longer an objective journalist committed to fair and accurate reporting, but a participant in a political cause. Although newspapers throughout history have taken sides, and pure "fact-based" journalism is a myth, there's a big difference between having an editorial slant and being an active participant in the story. Evidently, BezPo has decided that the latter is not only acceptable, but advantageous.

Sorry, didn't mean to ramble on when I'm likely preaching to the converted. I feel very strongly about this issue, and it's disconcerting to me, as a lifelong Democrat, that I agreed more with the Republicans in that hearing. At the same time, the D's propaganda machine is pumping out so much toxic fog that it's shaking my faith in unfettered freedom of the press.

Exactly what Putin wants, right?

Lambert Strether Post author , March 23, 2017 at 3:46 am

> I began covering congressional hearings while I was still in j-school and sat though many like this during my years as a reporter in D.C. Even though I haven't worked as a full-time journalist for many years, I still prefer original sources and am willing to take the time to dig for them

Hmm. NC needs an in-house emptywheel

Lambert Strether Post author , March 23, 2017 at 3:38 am

I agree that everybody is surveilled all the time, especially in the Beltway, where probably there are multiple simultaneous operations run against . well, everybody.

It doesn't, er, bug me that 70-year-old Beltway neophyte Trump used sloppy language - "wiretap" - to describe this state of affairs. (I don't expect any kind of language from Trump but sloppy.) All are, therefore one is. It does bug me that the whole discussion gets dragged off into legal technicalities about what legal regimen is appropriate for which form of Fourth Amendment-destruction (emptywheel does this a lot). The rules are insanely complicated, and it's fun to figure them out, rather like taking the cover off the back of a Swiss watch and examining all the moving parts. But the assumption is that people follow the rules, and especially that high-level people (like, say, Comey, or Clapper, or Morrel, or Obama) follow the complicated rules. That assumes facts not in evidence.

Lambert Strether Post author , March 23, 2017 at 3:28 am

Incidental collection was always a likely scenario.

We've also seen statements from people like GHCQ that clains they surveilled Trump at Obama's behest were "absurd," but those are non-denial denials. I can't recall a denial denial. Am I missing something?

[Oct 30, 2016] Computer seized in Weiner probe prompts FBI to take new steps in Clinton email inquiry

Why thousands of emails were forwarded to unsecured computer shared by Abedin with her husband?
How they were forwarded, were they forwarded individually or as a batch operation ?
How many of them are those 30K deleted by Hillary "private" emails ?
Does this batch contains any of previously discovered classified emails?
What was the purpose of forwarding those emails to home computer.
Notable quotes:
"... Somebody at the F.B.I. must have picked up on the fact that the "FIX" was exposed hence on Friday an announcement was made by the F.B.I. that they had found further e-mails, I suspect that all the e-mails will have to be re-examined in the light of the lenient views taken by some F.B. I. Officers taken at the first pass or some more deletions will of necessity have to take place. ..."
"... Meanwhile Clinton is shouting and screaming at the F.B.I. because she now knows that a new fix will be very difficult or impossible in the light of the revealed information and her "charity donations" of over $800,000 have not only been wasted but have exposed her flank! ..."
"... ...the agents discovered the existence of tens of thousands of emails, some of them sent between Ms. Abedin and other Clinton aides, according to senior law enforcement officials ..."
"... Nevertheless, how do you forward tens of thousands of emails? I don't think it can be a batch operation, they must have been forwarded individually. And what of the 30,000 destroyed (by Clinton) emails? ..."
"... "We don't know what this means yet except that it's a real bombshell. And it is unthinkable that the Director of the FBI would take this action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified e-mails and call it to the attention of congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that's where we are..." ..."
Oct 30, 2016 | www.washingtonpost.com
Don Smith 4:38 PM EDT
The other day I was reading an article which was talking about two "charity donations" given to the wife of an F.B.I. Officer involved in the e-mail investigation by "friends of the Clinton's".

The article was very low key it's author briefly wondered if the officer concerned should have excused himself from the investigation. I also thought it strange that the officers interest had not been declared. Some time later I was reading about details concerning the e-mails sent from Clinton's staff to members of the F.B.I. ,basically what was happening was that the security rating of the information contained in non deleted mails was being talked down, at which point for me at least alarm bells were ringing loud and clear but I did not expect there to be any reaction. O.K. So I'm that cynical.

Somebody at the F.B.I. must have picked up on the fact that the "FIX" was exposed hence on Friday an announcement was made by the F.B.I. that they had found further e-mails, I suspect that all the e-mails will have to be re-examined in the light of the lenient views taken by some F.B. I. Officers taken at the first pass or some more deletions will of necessity have to take place.

Meanwhile Clinton is shouting and screaming at the F.B.I. because she now knows that a new fix will be very difficult or impossible in the light of the revealed information and her "charity donations" of over $800,000 have not only been wasted but have exposed her flank!

CanardNoir 2:20 PM EDT [Edited]
My Fellow Americans - Here is what the NYT is reporting in contrast to the WaPost's email count of more than 1,000, in terms of an actual number of emails to be reviewed:

"...the agents discovered the existence of tens of thousands of emails, some of them sent between Ms. Abedin and other Clinton aides, according to senior law enforcement officials."

Subsequently, that could change what the initial investigation by the Bureau had to look at this summer, and the understanding that all of the parties acknowledge that about 30k emails were deleted. So the "tens of thousands" may be duplicates or perhaps copies of the "thumb-drive" that one of HRC's lawyers was said to have been given?

At any rate, this must bring into play at least 18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally - and raise the question about whether conflicting DOJ internal "policy" has any affect on any of the Administration's current or former appointees, in terms of their "oath of office" or moving forward. And that would bring 5 U.S. Code § 3331 - Oath of office - into play as well as the 5-year statute of limitations.

We're likely still "Doomed" - so don't get too happy just yet, because EPA could still disallow "draining" anything as a result of the Clean Water Act, as amended.

CanardNoir 2:41 PM EDT
And here's the Sec. 2071 reason "why":

(b) "Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States..."

Rick B. 1:57 PM EDT
Time to appoint Patrick Fitzgerald as special counsel
9:57 AM EST

[Edited] Lynch had to recuse herself after meeting with Bill Clinton. Had there not been information showing intent to violate espionage laws, Comey would have never acted. The fact is she is a criminal and cannot be elected . Image an elected Hillary who is impeached. The USA deserves better than a this and must turn the Clintons out to pasture forever.

Avatar666 8:23 AM EST

The FBI used to be a respected agency. Now, not so much. Working for, and in collusion with Obama, Loretta Lynch, the Clinton's and the media makes their "investigation" suspect, to say the least.

Avatar666 8:07 AM EST

Hillary "will say anything and do anything" (Obama's words, not mine) to get elected. Trying to blame her malfeasance on the FBI is simply stupid. She is so obsessed with money and power that she openly states "I have spent my life helping children and women". Right. Like when she was an 8 year Senator who only introduced 3 bills naming a couple highways and a bank. Her followers are dupes and dunces and we can only hope they don't outnumber rationally thinking people.

Kathleen Galt 5:31 AM EST

To think that Weiner and who knows who else had access to U.S. National Security information on the Weiner/Abedin computer. Sure sounds like the FBI is after Abedin not Clinton.

Dems loved Comey when he slapped Clinton on the wrist for playing loose with U.S. National Security on her email server. Now those same Dems want to burn Comey at the stake.

Let's not forget how Comey has come to be such a respected official
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...
In vivid testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday, Comey said he alerted FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and raced, sirens blaring, to join Ashcroft in his hospital room, arriving minutes before Gonzales and Card. Ashcroft, summoning the strength to lift his head and speak, refused to sign the papers they had brought. Gonzales and Card, who had never acknowledged Comey's presence in the room, turned and left.
ad_icon

The sickbed visit was the start of a dramatic showdown between the White House and the Justice Department in early 2004 that, according to Comey, was resolved only when Bush overruled Gonzales and Card. But that was not before Ashcroft, Comey, Mueller and their aides prepared a mass resignation, Comey said. The domestic spying by the National Security Agency continued for several weeks without Justice approval, wheresthechow 2:27 AM EST The Clinton's are just so amazing in their cavalier above-the-law attitude that they can't even renovate their house without breaking the law.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/us/politics/chap...

wwrfla 2:59 AM EST

[Edited] "The Case Against Hillary Clinton"...as written by Christopher Hitchens.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&...

Truer words have never been written.

#NeverHillary!!! #BernieOrBust!!!

dcammer 10/29/2016 9:31 PM EST

Mr. Weiner has not aged well.....and it is not over....avoid park benches do not visit remote areas.....People you and I know may have a Boat moored in a slip at a Dock or a Yacht club that's Normal Americana....Yet A.G.Loretta Lynch was waiting on the Tarmac in her Jet Plane as Bill Clinton leaves His Jet Plane to chat with Loretta ....this is an area of privilege far above yacht club status....and this meeting broke several laws very quickly...so the A.G. has no authority to comment on what the head of F.B.I. has done regarding The Weiner Email discovery and whatever Bill had swindled for future favors or past I.O.U's has now become a waste of AA jet fuel for the,"IN", crowd.....Hillary is starting to look a little like Mr.Weiner; facial tension ,gaunt,hollow cheeks,terse lips,Bill was supposed to take care of all this....right?Now Mr. Comey had taken the J. Edgar Hoover pledge to Serve and protect and that would have been us under all other circumstances.....but he has to be loyal to his associates for they are the top 2% of the entire population and they deserve to be treated as the most important the bureau has....what transpired on the first pass left them in Mayberry P.D. limbo and will never happen could someone help Loretta Lynch to see the light or the exit sign ....Please

711810943 10/29/2016 10:56 PM EST

Yep, we're definitely talking about the battle of the twin dumpster fires here...

Celebrity gossip trumps policy, if you'll forgive the expression. But what can you expect in a country that can name three Kardashian sisters, but not one foreign head of state.

Hmmm... Those deck chairs need rearranging... See ya...

canaffordit 10/29/2016 9:09 PM EST

Laptop or PC is property of US once claissified info discovered. 18USC 798, right? Who says a warrant is needed to seize, protect? No so. And, for sure, they will read, use of which may or may not be impeded thereby. Still, there is allot to investigate, incl. numerous apparent violations of ethics in govt. act, etc, failures to disclose gifts / income, etc.

RTDP 10/29/2016 8:29 PM EST

The Clintons run a morally corrupt RICO that holds itself above the law. With Obama's support, the Justice Dept., IRS, FBI, State Dept. have aided and abetted the Clinton corruption of our government. This illustrates Hayek's point in The Road To Serfdom that when very powerful government institutions are created, "the worst rise to the top". Public power and money attract the least scrupulous, least honest, most power hungry, and most determined. Though Clinton's cabal publicly poses themselves as humanitarian progressives, the Doug Band statement of operations among Teneo, CGI, the Foundation, and the Clintons presents the underlying purpose of selling influence and the crony capital structure devised to split the proceeds. The Clinton Foundation operates outside the law. So where's the MSM, the IRS, the FBI, Justice...what justice?

See: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/10/a_...

Kathleen Galt 5:31 AM EDT

To think that Weiner and who knows who else had access to U.S. National Security information on the Weiner/Abedin computer. Sure sounds like the FBI is after Abedin not Clinton.

Dems loved Comey when he slapped Clinton on the wrist for playing loose with U.S. National Security on her email server. Now those same Dems want to burn Comey at the stake.

Let's not forget how Comey has come to be such a respected official
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...
In vivid testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday, Comey said he alerted FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and raced, sirens blaring, to join Ashcroft in his hospital room, arriving minutes before Gonzales and Card. Ashcroft, summoning the strength to lift his head and speak, refused to sign the papers they had brought. Gonzales and Card, who had never acknowledged Comey's presence in the room, turned and left.
ad_icon

The sickbed visit was the start of a dramatic showdown between the White House and the Justice Department in early 2004 that, according to Comey, was resolved only when Bush overruled Gonzales and Card. But that was not before Ashcroft, Comey, Mueller and their aides prepared a mass resignation, Comey said. The domestic spying by the National Security Agency continued for several weeks without Justice approval, he said.

"I was angry," Comey testified. "I thought I just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man, who did not have the powers of the attorney general because they had been transferred to me."

tjonathan 10/29/2016 7:38 PM EDT

Watergate's Carl Bernstein: FBI Wouldn't Reopen A Probe Unless It Is "A Real Bombshell"

HappyInSF 10/29/2016 7:09 PM EDT

[Edited] In a previous release of information as a result of a Freedom of Information suit, it became known that Huma Abedin had forwarded emails from Clinton's private email server, to Ms. Abedin's personal yahoo email account.

The new bit of news today, is that the FBI found TENS OF THOUSANDS of Clinton related emails on Weiner's (shared with Abedin?) laptop. I understand that Mrs. Clinton was SOS for four years.

Nevertheless, how do you forward tens of thousands of emails? I don't think it can be a batch operation, they must have been forwarded individually. And what of the 30,000 destroyed (by Clinton) emails?

The only thing that makes sense, is that the newly discovered emails include some of the missing emails. As Carl Bernstein (one of the two original Post reporters who broke the Watergate story, which led to Nixon's resignation) said yesterday:

"We don't know what this means yet except that it's a real bombshell. And it is unthinkable that the Director of the FBI would take this action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified e-mails and call it to the attention of congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that's where we are..."

[Oct 29, 2016] Why such the abrupt reversal by Comey, who by all indications is Obama man and helped to squash the investigation?

Notable quotes:
"... So we have a traitor as POTUS that is not only corrupt, but compromised...and a woman that is a serial liar, perjured herself multiple times at the Hearing whom is running for POTUS. ..."
Oct 29, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com
Fred C. Dobbs : October 29, 2016 at 02:08 PM
(You would suppose that the FBI director is under the control of the Justice Department, but evidently not.)

Officials warned FBI head about decision on e-mails
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/10/29/officials-warned-fbi-head-about-decision-mails/AsSTVmOMuZFsg7xnOTmcSK/story.html?event=event25

Sari Horwitz - Washington Post - October 29, 2016

WASHINGTON - Senior Justice Department officials warned the FBI that Director James B. Comey's decision to notify Congress about renewing the investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email server was not consistent with long-standing practices of the department, according to officials familiar with the discussions.

... ... ...

im1dc -> Fred C. Dobbs... , October 29, 2016 at 02:13 PM
Comely went off the farm all on his own and must answer for his actions. Simple as that.

BTW, imo this will not impact the outcome of the Election November 8th.

likbez -> im1dc... October 29, 2016 at 05:29 PM
"Comely went off the farm all on his own and must answer for his actions. Simple as that."

IMHO that's extremely naïve. Such a "career limiting move"(CLM) in Washington-speak almost never done "on his own". Exception are whistleblowers like William Binney, who already decided for themselves that "this is the last stand" and are ready to face consequences.

Few Washington bureaucrats want to became outcasts within the administration, even the lame duck administration. Bureaucracy, at the end, is just another flavor of a political coalition and they tend to cling to power by whatever means possible including criminal.

Moreover, Comey so far was viewed as an "Obama man" who abruptly squashed the "emailgate" investigation instead of expanding it investigating Bill Clinton for his "accidental" meeting with Loretta Lynch and possibly putting the old fogey on the bench for the obstruction of justice. And who at the end granted immunity to all key members of Clinton entourage including Huma Abedin who proved to be, security wise, not the sharpest tool in the shed.

See http://www.softpanorama.org/Skeptics/Political_skeptic/Neocons/Hillary/Emailgate/understanding_hillary_clinton_email_scandal.shtml

So why such the abrupt reversal?

The only plausible explanation that I see is that Comey action reflects a deep split within the USA elite including internal cracks and pressure within FBI brass (possibly from rank-and-file investigators, who understand what's going on) as for viability Hillary as the next POTUS.

I would ask you a very simple question: do you really want a POTUS that has, say, 80% probability to be impeached by the House during the first year of his/her administration?

And any security specialist will tell you that Hillary creation of "shadow IT" within the State Department is a crime. The behavior that would never be tolerated not only in super-secretive State Department (which recently assumed some functions previously performed by CIA), but in any large corporation.

It also might well be that there are new highly compromising evidence (not necessary from Wiener case) which changed the "grand calculation".

Here is an interesting post that I recently come across:
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/27/team-clinton-head-emails-published-wikileaks-mood/#comment-2971488944

DoruSlinger✓ᵀᴿᵁᴹᴾ

Wikileaks needs to get this out (I have not verified the info sent to me last night):

So here's the REAL story.​ ​

Amb. Stevens was sent to Benghazi post haste in order to retrieve US made Stinger missiles supplied to Ansar al Sharia without Congressional oversight or permission.

Hillary brokered the deal through Stevens and a private arms dealer named Marc Turi. Then some of the shoulder fired missiles ended up in Afghanistan used against our own military. It was July 25th, 2012 when a Chinook helicopter was taken down by one of our own Stingers, but the idiot Taliban didn't arm the missile and the Chinook didn't explode, but had to land anyway.

An ordnance team recovered the serial number off the missile which led back to a cache of Stingers being kept in Qatar by the CIA

Obama and Hillary were now in full panic mode and Stevens was sent in to retrieve the rest of the Stingers. This was a "do-or-die" mission, which explains the stand down orders given to multiple commando teams.

It was the State Dept, not the CIA that supplied them to our sworn enemies, because Petraeus wouldn't supply these deadly weapons due to their potential use on commercial aircraft. Then, Obama threw Gen. Petraeus under the bus after he refused to testify that he OK'd the BS talking points about a spontaneous uprising due to a Youtube video.

Obama and Hillary committed treason...and THIS is what the investigation is all about, why she had a private server, (in order to delete the digital evidence), and why Obama, two weeks after the attack, told the UN that the attack was because of a Youtube video, even though everyone knew it was not.

Further...the Taliban knew that this administration aided and abetted the enemy without Congressional approval when Boehner created the Select Cmte, and the Taliban began pushing the Obama Administration for the release of 5 Taliban Generals. Bowe Bergdahl was just a pawn...everyone KNEW he was a traitor.

So we have a traitor as POTUS that is not only corrupt, but compromised...and a woman that is a serial liar, perjured herself multiple times at the Hearing whom is running for POTUS.

Only the Dems, with their hands out, palms up, will support her. Perhaps this is why no military aircraft was called in because the administration knew our enemies had Stingers.

[Oct 21, 2016] Dennis Kucinich FBI Investigation of Hillary Clinton Was Fixed in Her Favor

Notable quotes:
"... Instead of the investigative process being focused on achieving justice, Kucinich says it was "a very political process" that had "everything to do with the 2016 presidential election" in which Clinton is the Democratic nominee. Kucinich elaborates that "the executive branch of government made an early determination that no matter what came up that there was no way that Hillary Clinton was going to have to be accountable under law for anything dealing with the mishandling of classified information." ..."
Oct 18, 2016 | The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Speaking Monday on Fox News with host Neil Cavuto, former Democratic presidential candidate and United States House of Representatives Member from Ohio Dennis Kucinich opined that, from early on, the US government's investigation of Hillary Clinton for mishandling confidential information while she was Secretary of State was fixed in her favor.

Instead of the investigative process being focused on achieving justice, Kucinich says it was "a very political process" that had "everything to do with the 2016 presidential election" in which Clinton is the Democratic nominee. Kucinich elaborates that "the executive branch of government made an early determination that no matter what came up that there was no way that Hillary Clinton was going to have to be accountable under law for anything dealing with the mishandling of classified information."

Watch Kucinich's complete interview here: watch-v=K00frqv-XI8

[Oct 14, 2016] 18 US 2071: Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

Oct 14, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

hooligan2009 Oct 14, 2016 9:18 AM

still no mention of the clincher - that proves the entire democrat party has no respect for the office of president - or any other government office for that matter..

stay on target!!!

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be

disqualified from holding any office under the United States .

As used in this subsection, the term "office" does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States."
(Source: 18 U.S. Code § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally )

[Sep 28, 2016] It is not that we do not trust the agents, we do not trust the FBI leadership

Notable quotes:
"... Only three references to Comey as a "Treas-Weasel" appear in a Google search. ..."
"... Are there no longer any "deep throats" left at the FBI? Because now would be an excellent opportunity for one of them to start making phone calls – but to who? Greenwald maybe? He seems to be the only investigative journalist left but he doesn't even live in this country .. ..."
Sep 28, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Roger Smith September 28, 2016 at 2:45 pm

Re: (Pop Goes the) Weasels

"I knew there were going to be all kinds of rocks thrown, but this organization and the people who did this are honest, independent people."

Well Comey, it is not that we do not trust the agents, we do not trust the leadership. If any of the underground reports I have seen are indications, the agents were trying and struggling to do their jobs.

Reply
Jim Haygood September 28, 2016 at 2:53 pm

Only three references to Comey as a "Treas-Weasel" appear in a Google search.

All three are on naked capitalism in July 2016. And I know who did it.

*peers out window for suspicious unmarked vehicles*

Reply
justanotherprogressive September 28, 2016 at 3:01 pm

Are there no longer any "deep throats" left at the FBI? Because now would be an excellent opportunity for one of them to start making phone calls – but to who? Greenwald maybe? He seems to be the only investigative journalist left but he doesn't even live in this country ..

Jen September 28, 2016 at 3:11 pm

Just do a data dump on Reddit. We already know the FBI won't look there.

crittermom September 28, 2016 at 4:33 pm

Roger Smith–

" it is not that we do not trust the agents, we do not trust the leadership."

Perfectly stated. Nailed it!

Sooo ..I wonder how those low-ranking soldiers in the military are faring using the same defense?

I remain infuriated that nothing happened to her. I now have yet another head (Comey) I want to see in my front yard guillotine. Grrrrrrr

Reply
cwaltz September 28, 2016 at 5:57 pm

http://lunaticoutpost.com/thread-693407.html

Still seeing jail time ..they aren't super special snowflakes like Clinton.

[Sep 26, 2016] Clinton Campaign Manager Unable to Answer Questions on Hillary Coverup Operation

It was a cover up operation. No questions about that. Such instruction by a person under any investigation clearly mean tha attempt of cover up...
Notable quotes:
"... There was a document dump on Friday, that we learned from the FBI that an IT contractor managing Hillary Clinton's private email server made reference to the "Hillary coverup operation" in a work ticket. He used those words after a senior Clinton aide asked him to automatically delete emails after 60 days. This IT worker certainly sounded like he was covering something up, no? ..."
"... The FBI dumped another 189 pages of documents pertaining to Clinton's use of an unsecured private server during her time as Secretary of State online Friday, with one note about a "coverup" raising eyebrows: ..."
"... After reviewing an email dated December 11, 2014 with the subject line 'RE: 2 items for IT support,' and a December 12, 2014 work ticket referencing email retention changes and archive/email cleanup, [redacted] stated his reference in the email to ' the Hilary [sic] coverup [sic] operation ' was probably due to the requested change to a 60 day email retention policy and the comment was a joke. ..."
"... "The fact an IT staffer maintaining Clinton's secret server called a new retention policy designed to delete emails after 60 days a 'Hillary coverup operation' suggests there was a concerted effort to systematically destroy potentially incriminating information. It's no wonder that at least five individuals tied to the email scandal, including Clinton's top State Department aide and attorney Cheryl Mills, secured immunity deals from the Obama Justice Department to avoid prosecution," said Trump spokesman Jason Miller in a statement on Friday. ..."
"... Comey told the House Oversight Committee on July 7 that the FBI "did not find evidence sufficient to establish that she knew she was sending classified information beyond a reasonable doubt to meet that - the intent standard" while claiming that prosecuting Clinton for gross negligence would perpetuate a "double standard." ..."
Sep 26, 2016 | Breitbart
CNN anchor Jake Tapper confronted Hillary Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook Sunday over an IT worker handling her private email server joking in a 2014 email about a "Hillary coverup operation," with Mook dodging the question and blaming Republicans for "selectively leaking documents."

TAPPER: There was a document dump on Friday, that we learned from the FBI that an IT contractor managing Hillary Clinton's private email server made reference to the "Hillary coverup operation" in a work ticket. He used those words after a senior Clinton aide asked him to automatically delete emails after 60 days. This IT worker certainly sounded like he was covering something up, no?

MOOK: Look, Jake, I'm - first of all I'm glad you asked that question. A lot of this stuff is swirling around in the ether. It's important to pull back and look at the facts here. The FBI did a comprehensive and deep investigation into this. And at the conclusion of that, FBI Director Comey came out and said to the world that there was no case here, that they have no evidence of wrongdoing on Hillary's part.

TAPPER: So what's the "Hillary coverup operation" that the IT worker was referring to?

MOOK: Well, well, but this is - but this is - this is the perfect example of what's going on here. Republicans on the House side are selectively leaking documents for the purpose of making Hillary look bad. We've asked the FBI to release all information that they've shared with Republicans so they can get the full picture. But again, I would trust the career professionals at the FBI and the Justice Department who looked into this matter, concluded that was no case, than I would Republicans who are selectively leaking information.

The FBI dumped another 189 pages of documents pertaining to Clinton's use of an unsecured private server during her time as Secretary of State online Friday, with one note about a "coverup" raising eyebrows:

After reviewing an email dated December 11, 2014 with the subject line 'RE: 2 items for IT support,' and a December 12, 2014 work ticket referencing email retention changes and archive/email cleanup, [redacted] stated his reference in the email to ' the Hilary [sic] coverup [sic] operation ' was probably due to the requested change to a 60 day email retention policy and the comment was a joke.

The Trump campaign quickly leapt on the FBI's findings.

"The fact an IT staffer maintaining Clinton's secret server called a new retention policy designed to delete emails after 60 days a 'Hillary coverup operation' suggests there was a concerted effort to systematically destroy potentially incriminating information. It's no wonder that at least five individuals tied to the email scandal, including Clinton's top State Department aide and attorney Cheryl Mills, secured immunity deals from the Obama Justice Department to avoid prosecution," said Trump spokesman Jason Miller in a statement on Friday.

Comey told the House Oversight Committee on July 7 that the FBI "did not find evidence sufficient to establish that she knew she was sending classified information beyond a reasonable doubt to meet that - the intent standard" while claiming that prosecuting Clinton for gross negligence would perpetuate a "double standard."

[Sep 26, 2016] It was Obama who pardoned Hillary by exerting pressure on FBI

Notable quotes:
"... Were I advising Trump I would have him cite the two criminal codes the FBI decided not to pursue..... by title and section. The rest of the questioning is inconsequential in relation to the huge favor the FBI gave Mrs. Clinton. ..."
"... Might be a wrong advice. This would be more directed at Obama, then Hillary. It was Obama who pardoned Hillary by exerting pressure on FBI. ..."
Sep 26, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com
ilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... , Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 09:39 AM
Were I advising Trump I would have him cite the two criminal codes the FBI decided not to pursue..... by title and section. The rest of the questioning is inconsequential in relation to the huge favor the FBI gave Mrs. Clinton.
likbez -> ilsm... , -1
ilsm,

"...two criminal codes the FBI decided not to pursue....."

Might be a wrong advice. This would be more directed at Obama, then Hillary. It was Obama who pardoned Hillary by exerting pressure on FBI.

[Sep 24, 2016] Hillary Emailgate How One Twitter User Proved The Intent That The FBI Missed After Months Investigating

Sep 24, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com
Zero Hedge

Earlier this week, a twitter user named " Katica " seemingly proved the "intent" of the Hillary campaign to destroy and/or tamper with federal records by revealing the Reddit thread of Paul Combetta (aka the "Oh Shit" guy; aka "stonetear"). But what's most crazy about this story is that "Katica" was able to discover the greatest "bombshell" of the entire Hillary email scandal with just a couple of internet searches while the FBI, with unlimited access to government records, spent months "investigating" this case and missed it all . The only question now is whether the FBI "missed" this evidence because of gross incompetence or because of other motivating factors ?

Now, courtesy of an opinion piece posted on The Daily Caller , we know exactly how "Katica" pieced her "bombshell" discovery together... the folks at the FBI may want to take some notes.

Per the twitter discussion below with @RepStevenSmith , "Katica" discovered Combetta's Reddit thread on September 16th. But while she suspected that Paul Combetta and the Reddit user known as "stonetear" were, in fact, the same person, she had to prove it...

[Sep 22, 2016] The Hidden Smoking Gun the Combetta Cover-Up Clinton Email Investigation Timeline

This is a really outstanding article.
Notable quotes:
"... When Samuelson described the sorting process in her FBI interview , she said that her first step was to find all the emails to or from Clinton and the people she regularly worked with in the State Department, and put all of those emails in the "work-related" category. ..."
"... But from the Abedin emails released so far, about 200 are previously unreleased emails between her and Clinton . Anyone who looks at these can see that the vast majority, if not all, of them are work-related. ..."
"... The Abedin emails released so far are only a small percentage of all her emails that are going to be released on a monthly basis well into 2017 . It is likely that Clinton's supposed 31,000 "personal" emails contain thousands of work-related emails to and from Abedin alone. Consider that only about 15% of the 30,000 Clinton emails released so far were between her and Abedin. ..."
"... It is further worth noting that these emails were not handed over with the rest of Clinton's 30,000 work-related emails, despite clearly being work-related, but were somehow uncovered by the State Department inspector general 's office. Those very emails are good examples of the kind of material Clinton may have tried to keep secret by controlling the sorting process. ..."
"... How many more headlines like that would there be if all 31,000 deleted emails became public before the November 2016 presidential election? It's easy to imagine a political motive for Clinton wanting to keep some work-related emails secret. ..."
"... on or around December 2014 or January 2015 , Mills and Samuelson requested that [Platte River Networks (PRN) employee Paul Combetta] remove from their laptops all of the emails from the July and September 2014 exports. [Combetta] used a program called BleachBit to delete the email-related files so they could not be recovered." ..."
"... With the emails of Mills and Samuelson wiped clean, and the old version of the server wiped clean, that left just two known copies of the emails: one on the new server, and one on the back-up Datto SIRIS device connected to the new server. ..."
"... Mills was interviewed by the FBI in April 2016 . She claimed that in December 2014 , Clinton decided she no longer needed access to any of her emails older than 60 days . Note that this came not long after the State Department formally asked Clinton for all of her work-related emails, on October 28, 2014 . Mills told the FBI that she instructed Combetta to modify the email retention policy on Clinton's clintonemail.com email account to reflect this change. Emails older than 60 days would then be overwritten several times, wiping them just as effectively as BleachBit. ..."
"... So although the retention policy change sounds like a mere technicality, in fact, Clinton passed the message through Mills that she wanted all her emails from when she was secretary of state to be permanently wiped. ..."
"... Think about Clinton wanting to delete all her old "personal" emails. As a politician with a wide network of contributors and supporters, the information in them could be highly valuable for her. For instance, if a major donor contacted her, she probably would want to review their past correspondence before responding. She'd preserved these emails for nearly two years, but just when investigators started to demand to see them, she decided she didn't want ANY of them, and all traces of them should be permanently wiped. And yet we're supposed to believe the timing is just a coincidence? ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... According to what Combetta later told the FBI, at some point between these two calls, he had an "Oh shit!" moment and remembered that he'd forgotten to make the requested retention policy change back in December . So, even though he told the FBI that he was aware of the emails from Mills mentioning the Congressional request to preserve all of Clinton's emails, he took action. ..."
"... the Datto backups of the server were also manually deleted during this timeframe ." ..."
"... Already, Combetta's behavior is damning. He didn't just change the data retention policy, as Mills had asked him to do, causing them to be permanently deleted 60 days later. He immediately deleted all of Clinton's emails and then wiped them for good measure, and almost certainly deleted them from the Datto back-up device too. ..."
"... To make matters worse for Combetta, on March 20, 2015 , the House Benghazi Committee sent a letter to Clinton's lawyer Kendall , asking Clinton to turn her server over to a neutral third party so it could be examined to see if any work-related emails were still on it. This was reported in the New York Times ..."
"... However, despite all these clear signs that the emails should be preserved, not only did Combetta confess in an FBI interview that "at the time he made the deletions in March 2015 , he was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton's email data on the [server]," he said that " he did not receive guidance from other PRN personnel, PRN's legal counsel or others regarding the meaning of the preservation request." So he confessed to obstruction of justice and other possible crimes, all to the apparent benefit of Clinton instead of himself! ..."
"... The FBI interviewed PRN's staff in September 2015. This almost certainly included Combetta and Bill Thornton, because they were the only two PRN employees actively managing Clinton's server. ..."
"... The fact that the FBI falsely claimed Combetta was only interviewed twice grows in importance given a recent New York Times ..."
"... Then, in May 2016 , he completely changed his story. He said that in fact he did make the deletions in late March 2015 after all, plus he'd wiped her emails with BleachBit, as described earlier. He also confessed to being aware of the Mills email with the preservation request. ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... For the FBI to give Combetta an immunity deal and then still not learn if he had been told to delete the emails by anyone working for Clinton due to a completely legally indefensible "attorney-client privilege" excuse is beyond belief. It would make sense, however, if the FBI was actually trying to protect Clinton from prosecution instead of trying to find evidence to prosecute her. ..."
"... In one Reddit post , he asked other server managers: "I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a .pst file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out. Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?" ..."
"... Recall how Clinton allegedly claimed she didn't want to keep any of her deleted emails. It looks like that wasn't true after all. It sounds exactly as if Mills or someone else working for Clinton told him to make it look like all the "personal" emails were permanently deleted due to the 60 day policy change, while actually keeping copies of emails they still wanted. ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... First off, it's interesting that he said he did "a bunch" of "email filters and cleanup," because what has been reported by the FBI is that he only made a copy of all of Clinton's email and sent them off to be sorted in late July 2014 . That fits with his July 2014 Reddit post where he was trying to modify somebody's email address. ..."
"... For now, let us turn back to events in the fall of 2015 . In mid-August 2015 , Senator Ron Johnson (R) asked for and got a staff-level briefing from PRN about the management of Clinton's server, as part of Republican Congressional oversight of the FBI's investigation. It seems very likely that Combetta was a part of that briefing, or at least his knowledge heavily informed the briefing, because again only two PRN employees actively managed her server, and he was one of them. ..."
"... The dishonesty or ignorance of PRN in this time period can be clearly seen due to a September 12, 2015 Washington Post ..."
"... Datto expressed a willingness to cooperate. But because Datto had been subcontracted by PRN to help manage Clinton's server, they needed PRN's permission to share any information relating to that account. When PRN was first asked in early October 2015 , they gave permission. But about a week later, they changed their mind , forcing Datto to stay quiet. ..."
"... But more importantly, consider what was mentioned in an NBC News ..."
"... In an August 18, 2015 email, Combetta expressed concern that CESC, the Clinton family company, had directed PRN to reduce the length of time backups, and PRN wanted proof of this so they wouldn't be blamed. But he said in the email, "this was all phone comms [communications]." ..."
"... On September 2, 2016 , the FBI's final report of their Clinton email investigation was released (along with a summary of Clinton's FBI interview). This report revealed the late March 2015 deletions for the first time. Combetta's name was redacted, but his role, as well as his immunity deal, was revealed in the New York Times ..."
"... Chaffetz also wants an explanation from PRN how Combetta could refuse to talk to the FBI about the conference calls if the only lawyers involved in the call were Clinton's. ..."
"... PRN employees Combetta and Thornton were also given subpoenas on September 8 , ordering them to testify at a Congressional hearing on September 13, 2016 . Both of them showed up with their lawyers, but both of them pled the Fifth , leaving many questions unanswered. ..."
"... In a Senate speech on September 12, 2016 , Senator Charles Grassley (R) accused the FBI of manipulating which information about the Clinton email investigation becomes public . He said that although the FBI has taken the unusual step of releasing the FBI's final report, "its summary is misleading or inaccurate in some key details and leaves out other important facts altogether." He pointed in particular to Combetta's deletions, saying: "[T]here is key information related to that issue that is still being kept secret, even though it is unclassified. If I honor the FBI's 'instruction' not to disclose the unclassified information it provided to Congress, I cannot explain why." ..."
"... Regarding the FBI's failure to inform Congressional oversight committees of Combetta's immunity deal, Representative Trey Gowdy (R) recently commented, "If there is a reason to withhold the immunity agreement from Congress-and by extension, the people we represent-I cannot think of what it would be." ..."
"... The behavior of the FBI is even stranger. Comey was a registered Republican most of his life, and it is well known that most FBI agents are politically conservative. Be that as it may, if Comey made a decision beforehand based on some political calculation to avoid indicting Clinton no matter what the actual evidence was, that the FBI's peculiar behavior specifically relating to the Combetta deletions make much more sense. It would be an unprecedented and bold move to recommend indicting someone with Hillary Clinton's power right in the middle of her presidential election campaign. ..."
"... In this scenario, the FBI having Combetta take the fall for the deletions while making a secret immunity deal with him is a particularly clever move to prevent anyone from being indicted. Note that Combetta's confession about making the deletions came in his May 2016 FBI interview, which came after Mills' April 2016 interview in which she claimed she'd never heard of any deletions. Thus, the only way to have Combetta take the fall for the deletions without Mills getting caught clearly lying to the FBI is by dodging the issue of what was said in the March 31, 2015 conference with a nonsensical claim of "attorney-client privilege." ..."
"... I believe that criminal behavior needs to be properly investigated and prosecuted, regardless of political persuasion and regardless of the election calendar. Combetta clearly committed a crime and he even confessed to do so, given what he admitted in his last FBI interview. If he got a limited immunity deal instead of blanket immunity, which is highly likely, it still would be possible to indict and convict him based on evidence outside of his interviews. That would help explain why he recently pled the Fifth, because he's still in legal danger. ..."
"... But more importantly, who else is guilty with him? Logic and the available evidence strongly suggest that Clinton's lawyer Cheryl Mills at least knew about the deletions at the time they happened. Combetta has already confessed to criminal behavior-and yet somehow hasn't even been fired by PRN. If he didn't at least tell Mills and the others in the conference call about the deletions, there would be no logical reason to assert attorney-client privilege in the first place. Only the nonsensical assertion of this privilege is preventing the evidence coming out that should lead to Mills being charged with lying to the FBI at a minimum. And if Mills knew, can anyone seriously believe that Clinton didn't know too? ..."
Sep 22, 2016 | www.thompsontimeline.com
To understand the 2015 deletions , we have to start further back in time, in June 2013 . Clinton had ended her four-year tenure as secretary of state earlier in 2013 , and she hired the Platte River Networks (PRN) computer company to manage her private email server. This was a puzzling hire, to say the least, because PRN was based in Denver, Colorado, far from Clinton's homes in New York and Washington, DC, and the company was so small that their office was actually an apartment in an ordinary apartment building with no security alarm system. The company wasn't cleared to handle classified information, nobody in it had a security clearance, and it hadn't even handled an important out of state contract before.

PRN assigned two employees to handle the Clinton account: Paul Combetta and Bill Thornton . In late June 2013 , these two employees moved Clinton's server from her house in Chappaqua, New York, to an Equinix data center in Secaucus, New Jersey. They removed all the data from the server, moved it to a new server, and then wiped the old server clean. Both the new and old server were kept running at the data center. At the same time, PRN subcontracted Datto, Inc. , to back up the data on the new server. A Datto SIRIS S2000 was bought and connected to the server , functioning like an external hard drive to make periodic back-ups.

... ... ...

Clinton's emails get sorted

Fast forward to the middle of 2014 . The House Benghazi Committee was formed to investigate the US government's actions surrounding the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya , and soon a handful of emails were discovered relating to this attack involving Clinton's hdr22@clintonemail.com email address. At this point, nobody outside of Clinton's inner circle of associates knew she had exclusively used that private email account for all her email communications while she was secretary of state, or that she'd hosted it on her own private email server.

The Benghazi Committee began pressing the State Department for more relevant emails from Clinton. The State Department in turn began privately pressing Clinton to turn over all her work-related emails.

Cheryl Mills (left) David Kendall (center) and Heather Samuelson (Credit: public domain)

Cheryl Mills (left) David Kendall (center) and Heather Samuelson (Credit: public domain)

Instead of turning over all her emails, Clinton decided to have them sorted into work-related and personal, and then only turn over the work-related ones. She gave this task to three of her lawyers : Cheryl Mills (Clinton's former chief of staff), David Kendall (Clinton's longtime personal lawyer), and Heather Samuelson (a relatively inexperienced State Department staffer during Clinton's tenure). It seems Samuelson did most of the sorting , even though she had no experience for this task nor any security clearance .

It was decided that over 30,000 emails were work-related, and those were turned over to the State Department on December 5, 2014 . These have all since been publicly released, though with redactions. Another over 31,000 emails were deemed personal , and Clinton kept those. They were later deleted in controversial circumstances that this essay explores in detail.

It has become increasingly clear in recent months that this sorting process was highly flawed. Clinton has said any emails that were borderline cases were given to the State Department, just to be on the safe side. But in fact, the FBI later recovered about 17,500 of Clinton's "personal" emails . It is probable no government agency has yet gone through all of these to officially determine which ones were work-related and which ones were not, but FBI Director James Comey has said that " thousands " were work-related.

We can get a glimpse of just how flawed the sorting process was because hundreds of emails from Huma Abedin have been released in recent months, as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit . Abedin was Clinton's deputy chief of staff and still is one of her closest aides.

When Samuelson described the sorting process in her FBI interview , she said that her first step was to find all the emails to or from Clinton and the people she regularly worked with in the State Department, and put all of those emails in the "work-related" category.

But from the Abedin emails released so far, about 200 are previously unreleased emails between her and Clinton . Anyone who looks at these can see that the vast majority, if not all, of them are work-related. Many involve Abedin's state.gov government address, not her clintonemail.com private address, so how on Earth did Samuelson's sorting process miss those? It has even come to light recently that a small number of emails mentioning "Benghazi" have been found in the 17,500 recovered by the FBI, but Samuelson told the FBI she had specifically searched for all emails using that word.

A sample of an email between Clinton and Abedin using her state.gove address. (Credit: public domain)

A sample of an email between Clinton and Abedin using her state.gov address. (Credit: public domain)

The Abedin emails released so far are only a small percentage of all her emails that are going to be released on a monthly basis well into 2017 . It is likely that Clinton's supposed 31,000 "personal" emails contain thousands of work-related emails to and from Abedin alone. Consider that only about 15% of the 30,000 Clinton emails released so far were between her and Abedin. If the rest of her deleted emails follow the same pattern as the Abedin ones, it is highly likely that the majority, and maybe even the vast majority, of Clinton's deleted "personal" emails in fact are work-related.

... ... ...

FBI Director Comey has said he trusts that Clinton had made a sincere sorting effort, but the sheer number of work-related emails that keep getting discovered suggests otherwise. Furthermore, logic and other evidence also suggest otherwise. For instance, in home video footage from a private fundraiser in 2000 , Clinton talked about how she had deliberately avoided using email so she wouldn't leave a paper trail: "As much as I've been investigated and all of that, you know, why would I? I don't even want Why would I ever want to do email? Can you imagine?"

Practical considerations forced her to start using email a few years later. But what if her exclusive use of a private email address on her own private server was not done out of " convenience " as she claims, but so she could retain control of them, only turning over emails to FOIA requests and later government investigators that she wanted to?

Note also that in a November 2010 email exchange between Clinton and Abedin, Abedin suggested that Clinton might want to use a State Department email account due because the department computer system kept flagging emails from her private email account as spam. Clinton replied that she was open to some kind of change, but " I don't want any risk of the personal being accessible ." It is further worth noting that these emails were not handed over with the rest of Clinton's 30,000 work-related emails, despite clearly being work-related, but were somehow uncovered by the State Department inspector general 's office. Those very emails are good examples of the kind of material Clinton may have tried to keep secret by controlling the sorting process.

Consider that out of the relatively small number of deleted emails that have been made public due to the Abedin monthly releases, a handful of them have created headlines about possible conflicts of interest between Clinton's secretary of state job and the Clinton Foundation . How many more headlines like that would there be if all 31,000 deleted emails became public before the November 2016 presidential election? It's easy to imagine a political motive for Clinton wanting to keep some work-related emails secret.

... ... ...

The deletions begin

Heather Samuelson (Credit: Getty Images)

Heather Samuelson (Credit: Getty Images)

This essay will explore this possibility more later. But if it is the case that she wanted to keep those 31,000 "personal" emails out of the public eye, she had obstacles to overcome. In 2014 , PRN had managerial control of both Clinton's new and old server. Thus, in July 2014 and again in September 2014 , PRN employee Combetta had to send copies of all the emails to the laptop of Clinton lawyer Cheryl Mills, and another copy to the laptop of Clinton lawyer Heather Samuelson, to be used for the sorting process.

With the sorting done, if Clinton didn't want the public to ever see her deleted emails, you would expect all these copies of those emails to be permanently deleted, and that's exactly what happened. According to a later FBI report, " on or around December 2014 or January 2015 , Mills and Samuelson requested that [Platte River Networks (PRN) employee Paul Combetta] remove from their laptops all of the emails from the July and September 2014 exports. [Combetta] used a program called BleachBit to delete the email-related files so they could not be recovered."

The FBI report explained, "BleachBit is open source software that allows users to 'shred' files, clear Internet history, delete system and temporary files, and wipe free space on a hard drive. Free space is the area of the hard drive that can contain data that has been deleted. BleachBit's 'shred files' function claims to securely erase files by overwriting data to make the data unrecoverable." BleachBit advertises that it can "shred" files so they can never be recovered again.

With the emails of Mills and Samuelson wiped clean, and the old version of the server wiped clean, that left just two known copies of the emails: one on the new server, and one on the back-up Datto SIRIS device connected to the new server.

Mills was interviewed by the FBI in April 2016 . She claimed that in December 2014 , Clinton decided she no longer needed access to any of her emails older than 60 days . Note that this came not long after the State Department formally asked Clinton for all of her work-related emails, on October 28, 2014 . Mills told the FBI that she instructed Combetta to modify the email retention policy on Clinton's clintonemail.com email account to reflect this change. Emails older than 60 days would then be overwritten several times, wiping them just as effectively as BleachBit.

Clinton essentially said the same thing as Mills when she was interviewed by the FBI . Clinton also was interviewed by the FBI. According to the FBI summary of the interview, she claimed that after her staff sent the 30,000 work-related emails to the State Department on December 5, 2014 , "she was asked what she wanted to do with her remaining [31,000] personal emails. Clinton instructed her staff she no longer needed the emails."

So although the retention policy change sounds like a mere technicality, in fact, Clinton passed the message through Mills that she wanted all her emails from when she was secretary of state to be permanently wiped.

Think about Clinton wanting to delete all her old "personal" emails. As a politician with a wide network of contributors and supporters, the information in them could be highly valuable for her. For instance, if a major donor contacted her, she probably would want to review their past correspondence before responding. She'd preserved these emails for nearly two years, but just when investigators started to demand to see them, she decided she didn't want ANY of them, and all traces of them should be permanently wiped. And yet we're supposed to believe the timing is just a coincidence?

But there was a problem with deleting them. Combetta later claimed that he simply forgot to make this change.

More than two months passed, which meant all of Clinton's deleted emails should have been permanently wiped already. Meanwhile, the House Benghazi Committee and others were making more requests to see her emails . In January 2015 , a reporter even filed a FOIA request in court for all of her emails .

Then, on March 2, 2015 , the headline on the front page of the New York Times was a story revealing that while Clinton was secretary of state, she had exclusively used a private email address hosted on her private server, thus keeping all of her email communications secret. This became THE big story of the month, and the start of a high-profile controversy that continues until today.

On December 2, 2014 , the House Benghazi Committee had asked Clinton for all Benghazi-related emails from her personal email address. But one day after the New York Times blockbuster story, the committee sent Clinton a letter asking her to preserve ALL her emails from that address.

Then, a day after that, on March 4, 2015 , the committee issued two subpoenas to her . One subpoena ordered her to turn over all emails relating to the Benghazi attack. The committee had already received about 300 such emails from the State Department in February 2015 , but after the Times story, the committee worried that the department might not have some of her relevant emails. (That would later prove to be the case, given the small number of Benghazi emails eventually recovered by the FBI.) The second subpoena ordered her to turn over documents it requested in November 2014 but still has not received from the State Department, relating to communications between Clinton and ten senior department officials.

Cheryl Mills (Credit: Twitter)

Cheryl Mills (Credit: Twitter)

If Clinton had already deleted her emails to keep them from future investigators, these requests shouldn't have been a problem. On March 9, 2015 , Mills sent an email to PRN employees , including Combetta, to make sure they were aware of the committee's request that all of Clinton's emails be preserved. One can see this as a CYA ("cover your ass") move, since Mills would have believed all copies of Clinton's "personal" emails had been permanently deleted and wiped by this time. The Times story and the requests for copies of Clinton's emails that followed had seemingly come too late.

But that wasn't actually the case, since Combetta had forgotten to make the deletions!


Combetta deletes everything that is left

Sitting behind Combetta is co-founder of Platte River Brent Allshouse (left) and PRN attorney, Ken Eichner. (Credit: CSpan)

Sitting behind Combetta is co-founder of Platte River Brent Allshouse (left) and PRN attorney, Ken Eichner. (Credit: CSpan)

According to a later Combetta FBI interview, he claimed that on March 25, 2015, there was a conference call between PRN employees , including himself, and some members of Bill Clinton's staff. (Hillary Clinton's private server hosted the emails of Bill Clinton's staff too, and one unnamed staffer hired PRN back in 2013 .) There was another conference call between PRN and Clinton staffers on March 31, 2015 , with at least Combetta, Mills, and Clinton lawyer David Kendall taking part in that later call.

According to what Combetta later told the FBI, at some point between these two calls, he had an "Oh shit!" moment and remembered that he'd forgotten to make the requested retention policy change back in December . So, even though he told the FBI that he was aware of the emails from Mills mentioning the Congressional request to preserve all of Clinton's emails, he took action. Instead of simply making the retention policy change, which would have preserved the emails for another two months, he immediately deleted all of Clinton's emails from her server. Then he used BleachBit to permanently wipe them.

The Datto SIRIS S2000 was used for back-up services. (Credit: Datto, Inc.)

The Datto SIRIS S2000 was used for back-up services. (Credit: Datto, Inc.)

However, recall that there was a Datto SIRIS back-up device connected to the server and periodically making copies of all the data on the server. Apparently, Combetta didn't mention this to the FBI, but the FBI found "evidence of these [server] deletions and determined the Datto backups of the server were also manually deleted during this timeframe ." The Datto device sent a records log back to the Datto company whenever any changes were made, and according to a letter from Datto to the FBI that later became public, the deletions on the device were made around noon on March 31, 2015 , the same date as the second conference call. (Although the server and Datto device were in New Jersey and Combetta was working remotely from Rhode Island, he could make changes remotely, as he or other PRN employees did on other occasions.)

A recent Congressional committee letter mentioned that the other deletions were also made on or around March 31, 2015 . So it's probable they were all done at the same time by the same person: Combetta.

Already, Combetta's behavior is damning. He didn't just change the data retention policy, as Mills had asked him to do, causing them to be permanently deleted 60 days later. He immediately deleted all of Clinton's emails and then wiped them for good measure, and almost certainly deleted them from the Datto back-up device too.

The FBI's Clinton email investigation didn't formally begin until July 10, 2015 -more than two months after Combetta took those actions. However, State Department inspector general Steve Linick began investigating Clinton's email usage in April 2015 , and he could have given her an order to preserve all her documents-we don't know. Furthermore, CNN has reported that the FBI investigation actually began informally in late May 2015 , which is less than two months after the deletions. So Combetta could have prevented the State Department and/or the FBI from easily recovering all the emails in time.

To make matters worse for Combetta, on March 20, 2015 , the House Benghazi Committee sent a letter to Clinton's lawyer Kendall , asking Clinton to turn her server over to a neutral third party so it could be examined to see if any work-related emails were still on it. This was reported in the New York Times and other media outlets.

Then, on March 27, 2015 , Kendall replied to the committee in a letter that also was reported on by the Times and others that same day. Kendall wrote, "There is no basis to support the proposed third-party review of the server To avoid prolonging a discussion that would be academic, I have confirmed with the secretary's IT [information technology] support that no emails for the time period January 21, 2009 through February 1, 2013 reside on the server or on any back-up systems associated with the server."

David Kendall (Credit: Above the Law)

David Kendall (Credit: Above the Law)

When Kendall mentioned Clinton's IT support, that had to have been a reference to PRN. So what actually happened? Did Kendall or someone else working for Clinton ask Combetta and/or other PRN employees if there were any emails still on the server in the March 25, 2015 conference call, just two days before he sent his letter? Did Combetta lie in that call and say they were already deleted and then rush to delete them afterwards to cover up his mistake? Or did someone working for Clinton tell or hint that he should delete them now if they hadn't been deleted already? We don't know, because the FBI has revealed nothing about what was said in that conference call or the one that took place a week later.

However, despite all these clear signs that the emails should be preserved, not only did Combetta confess in an FBI interview that "at the time he made the deletions in March 2015 , he was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton's email data on the [server]," he said that " he did not receive guidance from other PRN personnel, PRN's legal counsel or others regarding the meaning of the preservation request." So he confessed to obstruction of justice and other possible crimes, all to the apparent benefit of Clinton instead of himself!


Investigations and cover-ups

This is perplexing enough already, but it gets stranger still, if we continue to follow the behavior of Combetta and PRN as a whole.

An inside look at the Equinix facility in Secaucus, NJ. (Credit: Chang W. Lee / New York Time)

An inside look at the Equinix facility in Secaucus, NJ. (Credit: Chang W. Lee / New York Time)

By August 2015 , the FBI's Clinton investigation was in full swing, and they began interviewing witnesses and confiscating equipment for analysis. Because the FBI never empanelled a grand jury, it didn't have subpoena power, so it had to ask Clinton for permission to seize her server. She gave that permission on August 11, 2015 , and the server was picked up from the data center in New Jersey the next day . But remember that there actually were two servers there, an old one and a new one. All the data had been wiped from the old one and moved to the new one, so the new one was the more important one to analyze. But the FBI only picked up the old one.

According to the FBI's final report, "At the time of the FBI's acquisition of the [server], Williams & Connolly [the law firm of Clinton's personal lawyer David Kendall] did not advise the US government of the existence of the additional equipment associated with the [old server], or that Clinton's clintonemail.com emails had been migrated to the successor [server] remaining at [the] Equinix [data center]. The FBI's subsequent investigation identified this additional equipment and revealed the email migration." As a result, the FBI finally picked up the new server on October 3, 2015 .

It was bad enough that Clinton's lawyer wasn't forthcoming about this, especially since Clinton and her staff had switched to using new email accounts located on a different server with a different domain name in late 2014 , so the servers in question weren't urgently needed anymore. But who else could have told the FBI about the data getting transferred to the new server? PRN.

A snippet from the invoice published by Complete Colorado on October 19, 2015. (Credit: Todd Shepherd / Complete Colorado) (Used with express permission from CompleteColorado.com. Do not duplicate or republish.)

The FBI interviewed PRN's staff in September 2015. This almost certainly included Combetta and Bill Thornton, because they were the only two PRN employees actively managing Clinton's server.

It's particularly important to know if Combetta was interviewed at this time. The FBI's final report clearly stated that he was interviewed twice, in February 2016 and May 2016 , and repeatedly referred to what was said in his "first interview" and "second interview." However, we luckily know that he was interviewed in September 2015 as well, because of a PRN invoice billed to Clinton Executive Service Corp. (CESC), a Clinton family company, that was made public later in 2015 . The invoice made clear that Combetta, who was working remotely from Rhode Island, flew to Colorado on September 14, 2015, and then "federal interviews" took place on September 15 . Combetta's rental car, hotel, and return airfare costs were itemized as well. As this essay later makes clear, PRN was refusing to cooperate with anyone else in the US government but the FBI by this time, so "federal interviews" can only mean the FBI.

Bryan Pagliano (Credit: public domain)

Bryan Pagliano (Credit: public domain)

The fact that the FBI falsely claimed Combetta was only interviewed twice grows in importance given a recent New York Times report that the Justice Department gave Combetta some form of legal immunity .

One other person in the investigation, Bryan Pagliano, was given immunity as well. But his immunity deal was leaked to the media and had been widely reported on since March 2016 . By contrast, Combetta's immunity wasn't even mentioned in the FBI's final report, and members of Congress were upset to first read about it in the Times , because they had never been told about it either.

The mystery of this situation deepens when one looks at the FBI report regarding what Combetta said in his February 2016 and May 2016 interviews. In February 2016 , he claimed that he remembered in late March 2015 that he forgot to make the change to the email retention policy on Clinton's server, but that was it. He claimed he never did make any deletions. He also claimed that he was unaware of the March 9, 2015 email from Mills warning of the Congressional request to preserve all of Clinton's emails.

Paul Combetta (Credit: public domain)

Paul Combetta (Credit: public domain)

Then, in May 2016 , he completely changed his story. He said that in fact he did make the deletions in late March 2015 after all, plus he'd wiped her emails with BleachBit, as described earlier. He also confessed to being aware of the Mills email with the preservation request.

It still hasn't been reported when Combetta's immunity deal was made. However, it seems probable that this took place between his February 2016 and May 2016 interviews, causing the drastic change in his account. Yet, it looks that he still hasn't been fully honest or forthcoming. Note that he didn't confess to the deletion of data on the Datto back-up device, even though it took place at the same time as the other deletions. The FBI learned that on their own by analyzing the device.


Attorney-client privilege?!

More crucially, we know that Combetta has not revealed what took place in the second conference call between PRN and Clinton employees. Here is all the FBI's final report has to say about that: "Investigation identified a PRN work ticket, which referenced a conference call among PRN, Kendall, and Mills on March 31, 2015. PRN's attorney advised [Combetta] not to comment on the conversation with Kendall, based upon the assertion of the attorney-client privilege ."

Paul Combetta (left) Ken Eichner (right) (Credit: CSpan)

Sitting behind Paul Combetta at the House Oversight Committee hearing on September 13, 2016, is Platte River Networks attorney Ken Eichner. (Credit: CSpan)

This is extremely bizarre. What "attorney-client privilege"?! That would only apply for communications between Combetta and his lawyer or lawyers. It's clear that Combetta's lawyer isn't Mills or Kendall. The New York Times article about the immunity deal made a passing reference to his lawyer, and, when Combetta showed up for a Congressional hearing on September 12 , he was accompanied by a lawyer who photographs from the hearing make clear is Ken Eichner, who has been the legal counsel for PRN as a whole regarding Clinton's server.

Even if Combetta's lawyer Eichner was participating in the call, there is no way that should protect Combetta from having to tell what he said to Clinton employees like Mills or Kendall. If that's how the law works, criminals could simply always travel with a lawyer and then claim anything they do or say with the lawyer present is inadmissible as evidence due to attorney-client privilege. It's absurd.

For the FBI to give Combetta an immunity deal and then still not learn if he had been told to delete the emails by anyone working for Clinton due to a completely legally indefensible "attorney-client privilege" excuse is beyond belief. It would make sense, however, if the FBI was actually trying to protect Clinton from prosecution instead of trying to find evidence to prosecute her.


Combetta's Reddit posts

A side-by-side shot of Combetta at the House Oversight Committee hearing (left) and a captured shot of Combetta as Stonetear (right). (Credit: CSpan and public domain)

A photo comparison of Combetta at the House Oversight Committee hearing (left) and a captured shot of Combetta as stonetear (right). (Credit: CSpan and public domain)

Furthermore, how much can Combetta be trusted, even in an FBI interview? It has recently come to light that he made Reddit posts under the username "stonetear." There can be no doubt this was him, because the details match perfectly, including him signing a post "Paul," having another social media account for a Paul Combetta with the username "stonetear," having a combetta.com website mentioning his "stonetear" alias, and even posting a photo of "stonetear" that matches other known photos of Combetta.

In one Reddit post , he asked other server managers: "I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a .pst file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out. Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?"

The date of the post- July 24, 2014 -is very significant, because that was just one day after Combetta sent CESE (the Clinton family company) DVDs containing some of Clinton's emails , so Clinton's lawyers could start the sorting process. Also on July 23, 2014 , an unnamed PRN employee sent Samuelson and Mills the same emails electronically directly to their laptops.

A response captured in the Reddit chat warning Combetta that what he wants to do is illegal. (Credit: Reddit)

A response captured in the Reddit chat warning stonetear aka Combetta that what he wants to do could result in major legal issues. (Credit: Reddit)

Popular software made by companies like Microsoft have tried to make it impossible for people to change email records, so people facing legal trouble can't tamper with emails after they've been sent. Thus, when Combetta posed his problem at Reddit, other Reddit users told him that what he wanted to do "could result in major legal issues." But that didn't deter him, and he kept asking for various ways to get it accomplished anyway.

It isn't clear why Clinton would have wanted her email address removed from all her emails, since her exact address had already been exposed in the media back in March 2013 by the hacker known as Guccifer. One Gawker reporter even used it to email Clinton on March 20, 2013 : "[W] ere your emails to and from the hdr22@clintonemail.com account archived according to the provisions of the President Records Act and Freedom of Information Act?" (Clinton never replied, maybe because it's clear in hindsight that an honest answer would have been "no.") But the fact that Combetta was willing to at least try to do this raises questions, especially his seeming willingness to do something illegal for his "VIP" customer Hillary Clinton.

Combetta made another important Reddit post a few months later:

"Hello- I have a client who wants to push out a 60 day email retention policy for certain users. However, they also want these users to have a 'Save Folder' in their Exchange folder list where the users can drop items that they want to hang onto longer than the 60 day window. All email in any other folder in the mailbox should purge anything older than 60 days (should not apply to calendar or contact items of course). How would I go about this? Some combination of retention and managed folder policy?"

Another sample captured of Combetta as 'stonetear' asking Reddit users for help. (Credit: Reddit)

Another question was captured of 'stonetear' aka Combetta asking Reddit users for technical help. (Credit: Reddit)

Again, the timing is telling, because this post was made on December 10, 2014 . Recall that December 2014 (or January 2015 ) was when he deleted and then wiped Clinton's emails from the laptops of Mills and Samuelson. December also was the month that Mills asked him to change the retention policy on Clinton's server to 60 days , which is precisely the issue he was asking about in his Reddit post.

A captured shot of Combetta's 'stonetear' GMail account with picture included. (Credit: public domain)

A captured shot of Combetta's 'stonetear' Gmail account with picture included. (Credit: public domain)

Recall how Clinton allegedly claimed she didn't want to keep any of her deleted emails. It looks like that wasn't true after all. It sounds exactly as if Mills or someone else working for Clinton told him to make it look like all the "personal" emails were permanently deleted due to the 60 day policy change, while actually keeping copies of emails they still wanted.

Looking at Combetta's two Reddit posts detailed above, there are only two possibilities. One is that Combetta failed to disclose crucial information to the FBI, despite his immunity deal. The second is that he did, but the FBI didn't mention it in its final report. Either way, it's already clear that the FBI has failed to present the full story of Combetta's actions to the public. And how much of what Combetta has said can be trusted, even in his most recent and supposedly most forthcoming FBI interview?

David DeCamillis (Credit: Twitter)

David DeCamillis (Credit: Twitter)

Remarkably, there is a hint that Combetta was being dishonest even before his late March 2015 deletions. On March 3, 2015 , one day after the front-page New York Times story revealing Clinton's use of a private server, PRN's vice president of sales David DeCamillis sent an email to some or all of the other PRN employees. The email has only been paraphrased in news reports so far, but he was already wondering what Clinton emails the company might be asked to turn over .

Combetta replied to the email , "I've done quite a bit already in the last few months related to this. Her [Clinton's] team had me do a bunch of exports and email filters and cleanup to provide a .pst [personal storage file] of all of HRC's [Hillary Rodham Clinton's] emails to/from any .gov addresses. I billed probably close to 10 hours in on-call tickets with CESC related to it :)."

First off, it's interesting that he said he did "a bunch" of "email filters and cleanup," because what has been reported by the FBI is that he only made a copy of all of Clinton's email and sent them off to be sorted in late July 2014 . That fits with his July 2014 Reddit post where he was trying to modify somebody's email address.

But also, assuming that there aren't important parts to his email that haven't been mentioned by the media, consider what he didn't say. The topic was possibly turning over Clinton's emails, and yet by this time Combetta had already deleted and wiped all of Clinton's emails from the laptops of two Clinton lawyers and been asked to change the email retention policy on Clinton's server so that all her emails would be permanently deleted there too, and yet he didn't bother to mention this to anyone else at PRN. Why?

We can only speculate based on the limited amount of information made public so far. But it seems as if Combetta was covering up for Clinton and/or the people working for her even BEFORE he made his late March 2015 deletions!


Who knows about the deletions, and how?

Senator Ron Johnson (Credit: John Shinkle / Politico)

Senator Ron Johnson (Credit: John Shinkle / Politico)

For now, let us turn back to events in the fall of 2015 . In mid-August 2015 , Senator Ron Johnson (R) asked for and got a staff-level briefing from PRN about the management of Clinton's server, as part of Republican Congressional oversight of the FBI's investigation. It seems very likely that Combetta was a part of that briefing, or at least his knowledge heavily informed the briefing, because again only two PRN employees actively managed her server, and he was one of them.

Regardless of whether he was there or not, it is clear that PRN was not honest in the briefing. Almost nothing is publicly known about the briefing except that it took place. However, from questions Johnson asked PRN in later letters, one can see that he knew nothing about the March 2015 deletions by Combetta. In fact, just like the FBI, there is no indication he knew anything about the transfer of the data from the old server to the new in that time period, which would be a basic fact in any such briefing.

Andy Boian (Credit: public domain)

The dishonesty or ignorance of PRN in this time period can be clearly seen due to a September 12, 2015 Washington Post article. In it, PRN spokesperson Andy Boian said, " Platte River has no knowledge of the server being wiped ." He added, "All the information we have is that the server wasn't wiped." We now know that not only was this untrue, but a PRN employee did the wiping!

This leads to two possibilities. One is that Combetta lied to his PRN bosses, so in September 2015 nobody else in PRN knew about the deletions he'd made. The other is that additional people at PRN knew, but they joined in a cover-up.

At this point, it's impossible to know which of these is true, but one of them must be. PRN employees created work tickets and other documentary evidence of the work they made, so one would think the company leadership would have quickly learned about the deletions if they did any examination of their managerial actions to prepare for investigative briefings and interviews.

But either way, PRN as a whole began acting as if there was something to hide. Although the company agreed to the briefing of Congressional staffers in mid-August 2015 , when Senator Johnson wanted to follow this up with interviews of individual PRN employees in early September, PRN said no . When Congressional committees began asking PRN for documents, they also said no, and kept saying no. Recently, as we shall see later, they've even defied a Congressional subpoena for documents.

Austin McChord, founder and CEO of Datto, Inc. (Credit: Erik Traufmann / Hearst Connecticut Media)

Austin McChord, founder and CEO of Datto, Inc. (Credit: Erik Traufmann / Hearst Connecticut Media)

At the same time Congressional committees began asking PRN for documents and interviews, they made those requests to Datto as well.

Datto expressed a willingness to cooperate. But because Datto had been subcontracted by PRN to help manage Clinton's server, they needed PRN's permission to share any information relating to that account. When PRN was first asked in early October 2015 , they gave permission. But about a week later, they changed their mind , forcing Datto to stay quiet.

To make matters worse, in early November 2015 , PRN spokesperson Andy Boian gave a completely bogus public excuse about this, saying that PRN and Datto had mutually agreed it was more convenient for investigators to deal with just one company. Datto immediately complained in a letter sent to PRN and Senator Johnson that no such discussion or agreement between PRN and Datto had ever taken place.

What is PRN hiding?


The Datto cloud mystery

There is another strange twist to Datto's involvement. Back in June 2013 when Datto was first subcontracted to help with backing up the server data, the Clinton family company CESC made explicit that they didn't want any of the data to be stored remotely . But due to some snafu or miscommunication, it turns out that in addition to local back-ups being stored on the Datto device connected to the server, Datto had been making periodic copies of the server data the whole time in the "cloud!" That means back-up copies of the data were being transferred over the Internet and stored remotely, probably on other servers controlled by Datto.

Co-founders of PRN are Brent Allshouse (left) and Treve Suazo (right) (Credit: PRN)

Co-founders of PRN are Brent Allshouse (left) and Treve Suazo (right) (Credit: PRN)

PRN only discovered this in early August 2015 , around the time the roles of PRN and Datto had with the server began to be made public. PRN contacted Datto, told them to stop doing this, put all the data on a thumb drive, send it to them, and then permanently wipe their remote copies of the server data.

It is unclear what happened after that. The FBI's final report mentions a Datto back-up made on June 29, 2013 , just after all the data had been moved from the old server to the new sever with the back-up, had been useful to investigators and allowed them to find some Clinton emails dating all the way back to the first two months of her secretary of state tenure. However, it isn't clear if this is due to the local Datto SIRIS device or the accidental Datto cloud back-up. Congressional committee letters show that they don't know either and have been trying to find out.

Adding to the mystery, one would think that if Datto was making periodic back-ups either or both ways, the FBI would have been able to recover all of Clinton's over 31,000 deleted emails and not just 17,000 of them. Consider that when PRN employees sent Clinton's lawyers all of Clinton's emails to be sorted in July and September 2014 , they simply copied what was on the server at the time, which presumably was the same amount of emails from years earlier than had been there in June 2013 , and thus backed up by Datto many times.

It's likely there are more twists to the cloud back-up story that have yet to be revealed.


What did Clinton and her aides know about the deletions?

Meanwhile, let's consider what Clinton and her aides may have known and when they knew it. When Mills was interviewed by the FBI in April 2016 , according to the FBI, "Mills stated she was unaware that [Combetta] had conducted these deletions and modifications in March 2015 ." Then, when Clinton was interviewed by the FBI in July 2016 , "Clinton stated she was unaware of the March 2015 email deletions by PRN."

This is pretty hard to believe. Mills was and still is one of Clinton's lawyers, and even attended Clinton's FBI interview. So why wouldn't she have mentioned the deletions to Clinton between April and July 2016 , after she learned about them from the FBI's questions to her? One would think Clinton would have been extremely curious to know anything about the FBI's possible recovery of her deleted emails.

Clinton making a joking wipe gesture while speaking at a town hall on August 18, 2015, in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Credit: John Locher / The Associated Press)

Clinton making a joking wipe gesture while speaking at a town hall on August 18, 2015, in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Credit: John Locher / The Associated Press)

But more importantly, consider what was mentioned in an NBC News report on August 19, 2015 . Clinton's campaign acknowledged "that there was an attempt to wipe [Clinton's] server before it was turned over last week to the FBI. But two sources with direct knowledge of the investigation told NBC News that the [FBI] may be able to recover at least some data."

Is it plausible that people within Clinton's campaign knew this, and yet neither Mills nor Clinton did? How could that be? Note that just one day before the NBC News report, Clinton had been directly asked if her server had been wiped. She dodged the question by making the joke , " What-like with a cloth, or something?" Then she said she didn't "know how it works digitally at all." Despite the controversy at the time about the cloth joke, her spokesperson claimed one month later, "I don't know what 'wiped' means."

It's highly likely the issue had to have been discussed with Clinton at the time, but there was a conscious effort not to have her admit to knowing anything, due to the on-going FBI investigation.

But more crucially, how could anyone at all working for Clinton know about the deletions as far back as August 2015 ? Recall that this was within days of PRN giving a briefing to Congressional staffers and not telling them, and several weeks prior to a PRN public comment that there was no evidence the server had been wiped.

Moreover, we have no evidence that the FBI knew about the deletions yet. Datto conducted an analysis of its device that had been attached to Clinton's new server, and in an October 23, 2015 email, told the FBI for the first time that deletions had taken place on that device on March 31, 2015 . Keep in mind that even in his February 2016 FBI interview, Combetta claimed that no deletions had taken place in that time frame. Does it make sense that he would have said that if he had reason to believe that PRN had been talking to Clinton's staff about it in the months before? (None of the interviews in the FBI"s investigations were done under oath, but lying to the FBI is a felony with a maximum five-year prison sentence.)

A sample of the letter sent to the FBI by Datto attorney, Steven Cash on October 23, 2015. (Credit: House Science Committee)

A sample of the email sent to the FBI by Datto attorney, Steven Cash on October 23, 2015. (Credit: House Science Committee)

So, again, how could Clinton's campaign know about the wiping in August 2015 ? The logical answer is that it had been discussed in the conference call on March 31, 2015 , that took place within hours of the deletions.

Paul Combetta (Credit: public domain)

Paul Combetta (Credit: public domain)

Perhaps Mills, Kendall, or someone else working for Clinton told Combetta to make the deletions, possibly during the first conference call on March 25, 2015 . If that is the case, there should be obstruction of justice charges brought against anyone involved. Or maybe Combetta did that on his own to cover his earlier mistake and then mentioned what he'd done in the second conference call. If either scenario is true, Mills should be charged with lying to the FBI for claiming in her FBI interview that she knew nothing about any of this. Clinton might be charged for the same if it could be proved what she knew and when.


"Shady shit" and "Hillary's cover-up operation"

But there's still more to this strange story. Somehow by October 5, 2015 , Senator Johnson got hold of a curious email exchange between Combetta and Thornton , and he mentioned it in a letter to PRN that got leaked to the public the next day. (Recall that Bill Thornton is the other PRN employee who actively managed Clinton's server.)

Just as the email retention policy on the Clinton server was changed on the orders of people working for Clinton, so was the retention policy on the Datto device connected to the server, in the same time period.

In an August 18, 2015 email, Combetta expressed concern that CESC, the Clinton family company, had directed PRN to reduce the length of time backups, and PRN wanted proof of this so they wouldn't be blamed. But he said in the email, "this was all phone comms [communications]."

Paul Combetta (left) Bill Thornton (right) (Credit: AP)

Paul Combetta (left) Bill Thornton (right) (Credit: The Associated Press)

The next day , there was another email, this one written by Thornton to Combetta and possibly others in PRN . The email has the subject heading "CESC Datto." Thornton wrote: "Any chance you found an old email with their directive to cut the backup back in Oct-Feb. I know they had you cut it once in Oct-Nov, then again to 30 days in Feb-ish." (Presumably this refers to October 2014 through February 2015 .)

Thornton continued: "If we had that email, then we're golden. [ ] Wondering how we can sneak an email in now after the fact asking them when they told us to cut the backups and have them confirm it for our records. Starting to think this whole thing really is covering up some shady shit. I just think if we have it in writing that they [CESC] told us to cut the backups, and we can go public with our statement saying we have had backups since day one, then we were told to trim to 30 days, it would make us look a WHOLE LOT better."

Combetta replied: "I'll look again, but I'm almost positive we don't have anything about the 60 day cut. [ ] It's up to lawyer crap now, so just sit back and enjoy the silly headlines."

As an aside, it's curious that Combetta made some unsolicited additional comments in that same email that was supportive of Clinton's position in the email controversy: "It wasn't the law to be required to use government email servers at the State Department, believe it or not. Colin Powell used an AOL address for communicating with his staff, believe it or not."

If we take this email exchange at face value, then it appears that Clinton employees requested an email retention policy change that would result in more deletion of data on the Datto back-up device in the October to November 2014 time range. Keep in mind that the State Department formally asked Clinton for all of her work-related emails , on October 28, 2014 , after informally asking starting in July 2014 . Then, around February 2015 , Clinton employees asked for another change that would have resulted in more deletions. Plus, they did this on the phone, leaving no paper trail. Is it any wonder that Thornton wrote, "Starting to think this whole thing really is covering up some shady shit?"

Details are lacking, but roughly around this time period, one unnamed PRN employee made a joke that they were "Hillary's cover-up operation ." That may have been much more accurate than they realized.


The FBI speaks up, only raising more questions

News about PRN went quiet for the first half of 2016 . Congressional committees kept asking PRN and Datto for more information (including another request for interviews in January 2016 ), and PRN kept saying no as well as not giving Datto permission to respond.

James Comey (Credit: Fox News)

James Comey (Credit: Fox News)

Then, on July 5, 2016 , FBI Director James Comey gave a surprise public speech in which he announced he wouldn't recommend any criminal charges against Clinton or anyone else in the investigation. In the course of his speech, he said it was "likely" that some emails may have disappeared forever because Clinton's lawyers "deleted all emails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery." But he said that after interviews and technical examination, "we believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort."

Trey Gowdy (Credit: Brendan Smialowski / Getty Images)

Trey Gowdy (Credit: Brendan Smialowski / Getty Images)

Two days later, on July 7, 2016 , Comey had to explain his decision in front of a Congressional committee. During that hearing, he was asked by Representative Trey Gowdy (R), "Secretary Clinton said neither she nor anyone else deleted work-related emails from her personal account. Was that true?"

Comey replied: "That's a harder one to answer. We found traces of work-related emails in-on devices or in slack space. Whether they were deleted or whether when the server was changed out, something happened to them. There's no doubt that the work-related emails were removed electronically from the email system."

Consider that response. By the time Comey made those comments, the FBI's final report had already been finished, the report that detailed Combetta's confession of deliberately deleting and then wiping all of Clinton's emails from her server. Comey was explicitly asked if "anyone" had made such deletions, and yet he said he wasn't sure. Comey should be investigated for lying to Congress! Had he revealed even the rough outlines of Combetta's late March 2015 deletions in his July 5, 2016 public speech or his Congressional testimony two days later , it would have significantly changed the public perception of the results of the FBI investigation. That also would have allowed Congressional committees to start focusing on this two months earlier than they did, enabling them to uncover more in the limited time before the November presidential election.

The SECNAP Logo (Credit: SECNAP)

Despite the fact that the Combetta deletions were still unknown, Congressional committees began putting increasing pressure on PRN anyway. On July 12, 2016 , two committees jointly wrote a letter to PRN , threatening subpoenas if they still refused to cooperate. The letter listed seven PRN employees they wanted to interview, including Combetta and Thornton. Similar letters went out to Datto and SECNAP. (SECNAP was subcontracted by PRN to carry out threat monitoring of the network connected to Clinton's server.)

On August 22, 2016 , after all three companies still refused to cooperate, Representative Lamar Smith (R), chair of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, issued subpoenas for PRN, Datto, and SECNAP .

On September 2, 2016 , the FBI's final report of their Clinton email investigation was released (along with a summary of Clinton's FBI interview). This report revealed the late March 2015 deletions for the first time. Combetta's name was redacted, but his role, as well as his immunity deal, was revealed in the New York Times article published a few days later.


Congressional investigators fight back

160918ChanningPhillipspublic

Channing Phillips (Credit: public domain)

Since the report has been released, Congressional Republicans have stepped up their efforts to get answers about the Combetta mystery, using the powers of the committees they control. On September 6, 2016 , Representative Jason Chaffetz (R), chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wrote a letter to Channing Phillips , the US attorney for the District of Columbia. He asked the Justice Department to "investigate and determine whether Secretary Clinton or her employees and contractors violated statutes that prohibit destruction of records, obstruction of congressional inquiries, and concealment or cover up of evidence material to a congressional investigation." Clearly, this relates to the Combetta deletions.

House Oversight Committee Chair Representative Jason Chaffetz. (Credit: Cliff Owen / The Associated Press)

Representative Jason Chaffetz. (Credit: Cliff Owen / The Associated Press)

On the same day , Chaffetz sent a letter to PRN warning that Combetta could face federal charges for deleting and wiping Clinton's emails in late March 2015 , due to the Congressional request to preserve them earlier in the month that he admitted he was aware of. Chaffetz also wants an explanation from PRN how Combetta could refuse to talk to the FBI about the conference calls if the only lawyers involved in the call were Clinton's.

Chaffetz serves the FBI a subpoena during a House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee hearing on September 9, 2016. (Credit: ABC News)

Chaffetz serves the FBI a subpoena during a House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee hearing on September 9, 2016. (Credit: ABC News)

On September 9 , Chaffetz served the FBI a subpoena for all the unredacted interviews from the FBI's Clinton investigation, especially those of Combetta and the other PRN employees. This came after an FBI official testifying at a hearing remarkably suggested that Chaffetz should file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to get the documents, just like any private citizen can.

On September 8, 2016 , Congressional committees served the subpoenas they'd threatened in August. PRN, Datto, and SECNAP were given until the end of September 12 to finally turn over the documents the committees had been requesting for year. Datto complied and turned over the documents in time. However, PRN and SECNAP did not.

Representative Lamar Smith (Credit: public domain)

Representative Lamar Smith (Credit: public domain)

The next day, September 13 , Representative Lamar Smith (R) said , "just this morning SECNAP's [legal] counsel confirmed to my staff that the Clinton's private LLC [Clinton Executive Service Corp.] is actively engaged in directing their obstructionist responses to Congressional subpoenas."

PRN employees Combetta and Thornton were also given subpoenas on September 8 , ordering them to testify at a Congressional hearing on September 13, 2016 . Both of them showed up with their lawyers, but both of them pled the Fifth , leaving many questions unanswered.


An FBI cover-up?

In a Senate speech on September 12, 2016 , Senator Charles Grassley (R) accused the FBI of manipulating which information about the Clinton email investigation becomes public . He said that although the FBI has taken the unusual step of releasing the FBI's final report, "its summary is misleading or inaccurate in some key details and leaves out other important facts altogether." He pointed in particular to Combetta's deletions, saying: "[T]here is key information related to that issue that is still being kept secret, even though it is unclassified. If I honor the FBI's 'instruction' not to disclose the unclassified information it provided to Congress, I cannot explain why."

Senator Charles Grassley takes to the Senate floor on September 12, 2016. (Credit: CSpan))

Senator Charles Grassley takes to the Senate floor on September 12, 2016. (Credit: CSpan)

He also said there are dozens of completely unclassified witness reports, but even some of his Congressional staffers can't see them "because the FBI improperly bundled [them] with a small amount of classified information, and told the Senate to treat it all as if it were classified." The normal procedure is for documents to have the classified portions marked. Then the unclassified portions can be released. But in defiance of regulations and a clear executive order on how such material should be handled, "the FBI has 'instructed' the Senate office that handles classified information not to separate the unclassified information." As a result, Grassley claims: "Inaccuracies are spreading because of the FBI's selective release. For example, the FBI's recently released summary memo may be contradicted by other unclassified interview summaries that are being kept locked away from the public."

He said he has been fighting the FBI on this, but without success so far, as the FBI isn't even replying to his letters.

Thus, it seems that Comey failing to mention anything about the Combetta deletions in the July 7, 2016 Congressional hearing, even when directly asked about it, was no accident. Having the FBI report claim that Combetta was only interviewed twice when there is clear evidence of three interviews also fits a pattern of concealment related to the deletions.

James Comey testifies to the House Benghazi Committee on July 7, 2016. (Credit: Jack Gruber / USA Today)

James Comey testifies to the House Benghazi Committee on July 7, 2016. (Credit: Jack Gruber / USA Today)

Regarding the FBI's failure to inform Congressional oversight committees of Combetta's immunity deal, Representative Trey Gowdy (R) recently commented, "If there is a reason to withhold the immunity agreement from Congress-and by extension, the people we represent-I cannot think of what it would be."

Gowdy, who is a former federal prosecutor, also said on September 9 that there are two types of immunity Combetta could have received : use and transactional. "If the FBI and the Department of Justice gave this witness transactional immunity, it is tantamount to giving the triggerman immunity in a robbery case." He added that he is "stunned" because "It looks like they gave immunity to the very person you would most want to prosecute."

This is as much as we know so far, but surely the story won't stop there. PRN has been served a new subpoena. It is likely the requested documents will be seized from them soon if they continue to resist.


Taking the fall and running out the clock

But why does PRN resist so much? Computer companies often resist sharing information with the government so their reputation with their clients won't be harmed. But defying a subpoena when there clearly are legitimate questions to be answered goes way beyond what companies normally do and threatens PRN's reputation in a different way. Could it be that PRN-an inexplicable choice to manage Clinton's server-was chosen precisely because whatever Clinton aide hired them had reason to believe they would be loyal if a problem like this arose?

David DeCamillis (Credit: public domain)

David DeCamillis (Credit: public domain)

There is some anecdotal evidence to support this. It has been reported that PRN has ties to prominent Democrats . For instance, the company's vice president of sales David DeCamillis is said to be a prominent supporter of Democratic politicians, and once offered to let Senator Joe Biden (D) stay in his house in 2008 , not long before Biden became Obama's vice president. The company also has done work for John Hickenlooper, the Democratic governor of Colorado. And recall the email in which Combetta brought up points to defend Clinton in her email controversy, even though the email exchange was on a different topic.

The behavior of the FBI is even stranger. Comey was a registered Republican most of his life, and it is well known that most FBI agents are politically conservative. Be that as it may, if Comey made a decision beforehand based on some political calculation to avoid indicting Clinton no matter what the actual evidence was, that the FBI's peculiar behavior specifically relating to the Combetta deletions make much more sense. It would be an unprecedented and bold move to recommend indicting someone with Hillary Clinton's power right in the middle of her presidential election campaign.

It's naive to think that political factors don't play a role, on both sides. Consider that virtually every Democratic politician has been supportive of Clinton in her email controversy, or at least silent about it, while virtually every Republican has been critical of her about it or silent. Comey was appointed by Obama, and if the odds makers are right and Clinton wins in November , Comey will continue to be the FBI director under President Clinton. (Comey was appointed to a ten-year term, but Congress needs to vote to reappoint him after the election.) How could that not affect his thinking?

Comey could be trying to run out the clock, first delaying the revelations of the Combetta's deletions as much as possible, then releasing only selected facts to diminish the attention on the story.

In this scenario, the FBI having Combetta take the fall for the deletions while making a secret immunity deal with him is a particularly clever move to prevent anyone from being indicted. Note that Combetta's confession about making the deletions came in his May 2016 FBI interview, which came after Mills' April 2016 interview in which she claimed she'd never heard of any deletions. Thus, the only way to have Combetta take the fall for the deletions without Mills getting caught clearly lying to the FBI is by dodging the issue of what was said in the March 31, 2015 conference with a nonsensical claim of "attorney-client privilege."

Unfortunately, if that is Comey's plan, it looks like it's working. Since the FBI's final report came out on September 2, 2016 , the mainstream media has largely failed to grasp the significance of Combetta and his deletions, focusing on far less important matters instead, such as the destruction of a couple of Clinton's BlackBerry devices with hammers-which actually was better than not destroying them and possibly letting them fall into the wrong hands.

The House Benghazi Committee in session in 2015. (Credit: C-SPAN3)

The House Benghazi Committee in session in 2015. (Credit: C-SPAN3)

What happens next appears to largely be in the hands of Congressional Republicans, who no doubt will keep pushing to find out more, if only to politically hurt Clinton before the election. But it's also in the hands of you, the members of the general public. If enough people pay attention, then it will be impossible to sweep this controversy under the rug.

I believe that criminal behavior needs to be properly investigated and prosecuted, regardless of political persuasion and regardless of the election calendar. Combetta clearly committed a crime and he even confessed to do so, given what he admitted in his last FBI interview. If he got a limited immunity deal instead of blanket immunity, which is highly likely, it still would be possible to indict and convict him based on evidence outside of his interviews. That would help explain why he recently pled the Fifth, because he's still in legal danger.

Paul Combetta and Bill Thornton plead the Fifth on September 13, 2016. (Credit: CSpan)

Paul Combetta and Bill Thornton plead the Fifth on September 13, 2016. (Credit: CSpan)

But more importantly, who else is guilty with him? Logic and the available evidence strongly suggest that Clinton's lawyer Cheryl Mills at least knew about the deletions at the time they happened. Combetta has already confessed to criminal behavior-and yet somehow hasn't even been fired by PRN. If he didn't at least tell Mills and the others in the conference call about the deletions, there would be no logical reason to assert attorney-client privilege in the first place. Only the nonsensical assertion of this privilege is preventing the evidence coming out that should lead to Mills being charged with lying to the FBI at a minimum. And if Mills knew, can anyone seriously believe that Clinton didn't know too?

As the saying goes, "it's not the crime, it's the cover up." This is an important story, and not just election season mudslinging. The public needs to know what really happened.

Note to Readers!

If you found this essay informative, check out the Clinton email investigation timeline , as well as the Clinton Foundation timeline , written and updated daily by the same author. Stay up to date with the newest timeline entries by checking out our Recently Added Entries page , and join our Facebook group for intelligent discussions about the latest breaking news throughout the day.

[Sep 16, 2016] Whats The FBI Hiding That Triggered A Congressional Subpoena by Andrew Napolitano

Notable quotes:
"... Because many members of Congress do not believe that the FBI acted free of political interference, they demanded to see the full FBI files in the case, not just the selected portions of the files that the FBI had released. In the case of the House, the FBI declined to surrender its files, and the agent it sent to testify about them declined to reveal their contents. This led to a dramatic service of a subpoena by the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on that FBI agent while he was testifying - all captured on live nationally broadcast television. ..."
"... According to Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI violated federal law by commingling classified and unclassified materials in the safe room, thereby making it unlawful for senators to discuss publicly the unclassified material. ..."
"... Imposing such a burden of silence on U.S. senators about unclassified materials is unlawful and unconstitutional. What does the FBI have to hide? Whence comes the authority of the FBI to bar senators from commenting on unclassified materials? ..."
"... What is going on here? The FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton has not served the rule of law. The rule of law - a pillar of American constitutional freedom since the end of the Civil War - mandates that the laws are to be enforced equally. No one is beneath their protection, and no one is above ..."
Sep 16, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

Zero Hedge (reprinted from LewRockwell.com )

It is hard to believe that the FBI was free to do its work, and it is probably true that the FBI was restrained by the White House early on. There were numerous aberrations in the investigation. There was no grand jury; no subpoenas were issued; no search warrants were served. Two people claimed to have received immunity, yet the statutory prerequisite for immunity - giving testimony before a grand or trial jury - was never present.

Because many members of Congress do not believe that the FBI acted free of political interference, they demanded to see the full FBI files in the case, not just the selected portions of the files that the FBI had released. In the case of the House, the FBI declined to surrender its files, and the agent it sent to testify about them declined to reveal their contents. This led to a dramatic service of a subpoena by the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on that FBI agent while he was testifying - all captured on live nationally broadcast television.

Now the FBI, which usually serves subpoenas and executes search warrants, is left with the alternative of complying with this unwanted subpoena by producing its entire file or arguing to a federal judge why it should not be compelled to do so.

On the Senate side, matters are even more out of hand. There, in response to a request from the Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI sent both classified and unclassified materials to the Senate safe room. The Senate safe room is a secure location that is available only to senators and their senior staff, all of whom must surrender their mobile devices and writing materials and swear in writing not to reveal whatever they see while in the room before they are permitted to enter.

According to Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI violated federal law by commingling classified and unclassified materials in the safe room, thereby making it unlawful for senators to discuss publicly the unclassified material.

Imposing such a burden of silence on U.S. senators about unclassified materials is unlawful and unconstitutional. What does the FBI have to hide? Whence comes the authority of the FBI to bar senators from commenting on unclassified materials?

Who cares about this? Everyone who believes that the government works for us should care because we have a right to know what the government - here the FBI - has done in our names. Sen. Grassley has opined that if he could reveal what he has seen in the FBI unclassified records, it would be of profound interest to American voters.

What is going on here? The FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton has not served the rule of law. The rule of law - a pillar of American constitutional freedom since the end of the Civil War - mandates that the laws are to be enforced equally. No one is beneath their protection, and no one is above

Short Squeeze •Sep 16, 2016 12:12 PM

My theory is that when Comey stated "no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute", he already knew of her health issues. Would a prosecutor go after someone with 6 months to live?

saloonsf •Sep 16, 2016 12:03 PM

That's not FBI's responsibilities-exposing the elites cupabilities. The FBI primary objective is to protect the elites and the system that benefit them.

Atomizer •Sep 16, 2016 12:10 PM

The wagons are circling around the Clinton Foundation. Chelsea's husband is going to get nicked.

withglee •Sep 16, 2016 12:25 PM

Sen. Grassley has opined that if he could reveal what he has seen in the FBI unclassified records, it would be of profound interest to American voters.

So what's keeping Grassley from asking that those unclassified documents be taken from the room and laid on his desk. He is not allowed to talk about what he saw in the room. But for sure he is allowed to talk about unclassified documents laid upon his desk ... even if they were once in the room. If that wasn't the case, the government would just run every document through the room ... to give it official immunity from inspection and exposure.

[Sep 16, 2016] Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times. From your link, an individual email account on the server was breached

Notable quotes:
"... The State Deptartment had been using Blackberries since 2006, and diplomats overseas had been using them for just as long. ..."
"... Hillary Clinton didn't need to use a fancy NSA-approved smartphone to access classified data. Whenever she went overseas, she had a team of IT specialists who was able to provide her with ClassNet access, and they're able to do so without any technical support from a US Embassy. ..."
"... The Exchange and BES software were likely purchased by Hillary '08, and properly licensed for that usage. But as far as after that.... ..."
"... In a country where a standing governer running as VP could be found explicitly and intentionally using Yahoo email for the express purpose of avoiding FOIA on relevant government business, and there be no investigation whatsoever well. Let's just say there's an exceedingly strong whiff of double standards in the air. ..."
"... Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times. From your link, an individual email account on the server was breached. ..."
"... This happens all the time, for varying reasons, mostly due to a phishing compromise of the account, and occasionally due to password re-use and related vectors of compromise. While it's bad for the individual account's contents, it's absolutely irrelevant beyond that. ..."
"... If that's the worst they can find then personally I'm actually impressed. I was expecting that the server(s) had been root/fully compromised at least once, given how they get perennially described. If that turns out to not be the case, then they've actually been run better and more securely than the State Department's [at least non-classified] servers, from all reports. ..."
"... A 'breach' of an account is not a breach of the server. The account being access via TOR implies the user credentials were acquired through some means. Was this 'breached' account a classified account? ..."
"... "multiple times" is 3 times in this case, and it wasn't the server that was breached, it was 1 person's email. ..."
Sep 16, 2016 | arstechnica.com
Ars Scholae -> Palatinae reply Sep 3, 2016 10:22 AM

Hillary Clinton didn't need to use her own Blackberry. The State Deptartment had been using Blackberries since 2006, and diplomats overseas had been using them for just as long.

Hillary Clinton didn't need to use a fancy NSA-approved smartphone to access classified data. Whenever she went overseas, she had a team of IT specialists who was able to provide her with ClassNet access, and they're able to do so without any technical support from a US Embassy.

corsairmarks Smack-Fu Master, in training reply Sep 2, 2016 4:27 PM

Quote: First, the Clintons had requested, according to a PRN employee interviewed by the FBI, that the contents of the server be encrypted so that only mail recipients could read the content. This was not done, largely so that PRN technicians could "troubleshoot problems occurring within user accounts," the FBI memo reports.

Also, while the Clintons had requested only local backups, the Datto appliance initially also used Datto's secure cloud backup service until August of 2015. \

Sounds like some of the problem was the contractor not following the procedures established by the client.

Rommel102 Ars Praefectus et Subscriptor reply Sep 2, 2016 4:27 PM

Popular Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

Sean Gallagher IT Editor reply Sep 2, 2016 4:39 PM

vcsjones wrote: I wonder what the odds are that all of the OS / Exchange / BES CALs were actually licensed correctly.

The Exchange and BES software were likely purchased by Hillary '08, and properly licensed for that usage. But as far as after that....

diaphanein Smack-Fu Master, in training reply Sep 2, 2016 4:51 PM Uxorious wrote:

Just to clarify, the move to a hosted solution - with requested encryption - was initiated after Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State (January 21, 2009 – February 1, 2013) was completed in February, 2013, and FOIA requests were no longer applicable as she was no longer a government employee.

I think that would depend on the scope of the migration. Did they migrate all of the history over to the hosted solution? i.e. Did they migrate the OS, Exchange and BES servers into PRN's datacenter? Or, did they start from scratch with a clean slate, fresh install and no data migration. If it's the former and not the latter, I'd be pretty damned certain it'd still be subject to FOIA requests.

Rommel102 wrote:

Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times. From your link, an individual email account on the server was breached.

This happens all the time, for varying reasons, mostly due to a phishing compromise of the account, and occasionally due to password re-use and related vectors of compromise. While it's bad for the individual account's contents, it's absolutely irrelevant beyond that.

If that's the worst they can find then personally I'm actually impressed. I was expecting that the server(s) had been root/fully compromised at least once, given how they get perennially described. If that turns out to not be the case, then they've actually been run better and more securely than the State Department's [at least non-classified] servers, from all reports.

Look, getting all up in arms over crap like that link is why people like me are no longer convinced there's anything here worth paying attention to. I'm actually willing to listen if there's some kind of smoking gun, but that's some petty bullshit right there.

taswyn Ars Tribunus Militum reply Sep 2, 2016 5:03 PM

Popular ziegler wrote: Rommel102 wrote: Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

Not sure why you are being down voted on newly revealed information that seems to confirm that one of the servers email accounts was breached.

If you're down voting him, perhaps an explanation as to why?

Do you say that "google's servers got breached" every time an individual email account on them is compromised?

What he said is factually incorrect. The server was not breached. An individual email account was accessed. They're not the same thing. Not even an OS user level account. An email account.

omniron Ars Praefectus reply Sep 2, 2016 5:13 PM Popular

Rommel102 wrote: Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

"multiple times" is 3 times in this case, and it wasn't the server that was breached, it was 1 person's email.

Even if this person was clinton herself, we already know there was not much damaging information stored on this server. And considering this seems more like someone used a weak password or was phished, this is a vulnerability no matter what email provider you're using.

aexcorp Ars Scholae Palatinae reply Sep 2, 2016 5:18 PM

Danrarbc wrote: Rommel102 wrote: Danrarbc wrote: ziegler wrote: Rommel102 wrote: Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

Not sure why you are being down voted on newly revealed information that seems to confirm that one of the servers email accounts was breached.

If you're down voting him, perhaps an explanation as to why?
Probably because we know DOJ email servers have also been breached. He's implying that her servers were less secure and somehow put information in harms way. History seems to show us that it wasn't at any more risk.

I didn't imply that at all. Here we have fairly solid evidence that a breach of Hillary's server happened. That seems to contradict the FBI's stance, Comey's statement and testimony, and is a first as far as I know.

And in comparison, the DOJs non-classified email systems were hacked. There is no evidence that the classified system ever was.

A 'breach' of an account is not a breach of the server. The account being access via TOR implies the user credentials were acquired through some means. Was this 'breached' account a classified account?

I could be wrong, but I think that all classified emails from DoD and State have to go through SIPRNet.

If this was strictly respected, then Clinton's server should contain no classified information. In real-life, we saw that a few classified things went through her personal email system, so it wasn't fully respected, or some of the info was not yet classified.

Sean Gallagher IT Editor reply Sep 2, 2016 5:21 PM

Story Author Popular omniron wrote: Rommel102 wrote: Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

"multiple times" is 3 times in this case, and it wasn't the server that was breached, it was 1 person's email.

Even if this person was clinton herself, we already know there was not much damaging information stored on this server. And considering this seems more like someone used a weak password or was phished, this is a vulnerability no matter what email provider you're using.

We're going to get into this in a story I'm currently writing (probably for next week, so it's not a Friday newsdumpster move). But it's worth noting THE ENTIRETY OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT'S UNCLAS EMAIL SYSTEM WAS PWNED FOR OVER A YEAR. I'm sorry, did I type that in all-caps? Also, between Chelsea Manning/ Wikileaks and the repeated hacks of State, the White House, etc between 2009 and 2014, it is highly likely that everything short of the TS/SAP stuff (and even some of that) that Clinton touched was already breached.

This does not excuse Clinton and her staff's-I'm looking at you, Jake Sullivan-for the extreme error of passing Top Secret/ Special Access Program classified data back and forth over Blackberries and a non-governmental e-mail system. I would expect that Sullivan, at a minimum, will have his clearance revoked and he will not be getting a job as a national security adviser if Clinton wins the election. Or at least, I think that's a reasonable expectation.

[Sep 05, 2016] Hillary Clinton email investigation: FBI notes reveal laptop and thumb drive missing

Everything, absolutely everything demonstrates really terrifying level of incompetence: the transfer of emails to Apple laptop, to Gmail account, then transfer back to window system, handing of USB drive. Amazing level of incompetence. This is really devastating level of incompetence for the organization that took over a lot of CIA functions. Essentially Hillary kept the position which is close to the role of the director of CIA What a tragedy for the country...
Notable quotes:
"... It is painfully clear that she traded access and favors for money and reciprocal favors. It is painfully clear that she made little distinction between working for the State Department, the Clinton foundation and her family and tried to keep the records of what was going on inaccessible. The more honest defense would be, all politicians do it, and you have to suck it up because Trump is worse. Which is true. But trying to downplay this and explain it away is offensive, not all of the public are complete idiots. ..."
"... Her brazen air of arrogance and entitlement is about to fade as she comes to realise, that albeit Comey having been got at, he has still succeeded in striking a severe blow against her, and in addition, at the not-so-tin-hat conspiracy of inappropriate, and increasingly overt, institutional support. ..."
"... All this in the face of documented lies, in your face hypocrisy, and unbridled corruption, oozing from every orifice of a maverick administration. ..."
"... Clinton is the one waging war in the middle east. She is the one being bullish and provocative with Russia. Trump has only been conciliatory with these issues, he has been against the war on Iraq ..."
"... HRC is still likely to be the next President, but this scandal does have legs. She put herself in a corner by claiming lack of recall due to a medical condition (i.e., the concussion). This leaves two possibilities, neither of which is helpful to her cause, to wit: either she was being dishonest or she was (and could still be) cognitively impaired. ..."
"... Reagan was certainly not someone I admired but at least he tried to reduce the chance of nuclear war. Clinton is an out and out Hawke with the blood of many innocent people on her hands in both Syria and Libya. She is hiding her communications because she does not want to be exposed for the role she played in The destruction of Libya and the gun running of weapons to terrorists in Syria. That is to Al Qaeda and ISIS. World War 3 is more likely under Clinton than any other world leader. Even Trump. ..."
"... Not forgetting that she was key in making sure the US didn't side with Assad. Had the US done at the beginning, instead of being at the behest of the Saudis and the petrodollar, then the whole thing would have been over in 6 months and IS would never have got more than a dusty district of northern Iraq. ..."
"... So the applicant to the US presidency does not know what (c) stands for in her emails, archives high security data on a laptop and then losses it for years, uploads same emails on Google's gmail account and then losses devices again. She does not recall many things, not even the training she received on handling the confidential and secure communication. She couldn't recall the procces of drone strikes. (Will she be killing people at a whim, without an accountable protocol?) She is either demented or dangerously reckless or lying. All of these conditions disbar her form her candidacy. ..."
"... If she could only manage a couple of hours a day because of concussion and a blood clot she should have temporarily stood down until she recovered fully, and had a senior official take over her duties until she was well. You can't have a brain-damaged person in charge of the US's affairs - even though there is a long history of nutters the State Dept. ( ie the Military Industrial Complex HQ). ..."
"... the clinton foundation does not pay taxes..and dont forget that slick willie has been on the paedophile plane more times than the pilot ..."
"... She failed to keep up with recordkeeping she agreed to, then when asked to turn over records, somebody destroyed them, but Clinton did not order destruction, or does not remember having done so. Turned over all records-oops I thought WE did! She either lied or has alzheimers ..."
"... Political baggage is a bitch. If this election cycle has demonstrated anything it is that the leadership of both parties is totally out of touch with the voters and really has no interest except supporting the Neoliberal tenet of fiscal nonintervention. This laissez-faire attitude toward corporate interests is paralysing the American government. ..."
"... I cannot believe Clinton has got this far in the election, I believe Obama wants her in to hide many of his embarrassing warmongering mistakes. ..."
"... Today of all days Hillary Clinton puts out a tweet with the following: 'America needs leadership in the White House, not a liability' -- As we have to assume she's not referring to herself it confirms people's suspicion that the person who writes Hillary's tweets is a hostile to her campaign. The tweets are often completely off the mark. ..."
"... Either Comey is on their payroll, or they have threatened his family. Either way it is business as usual. The NWO decided a long time ago that Hillary was their next puppet PONTUS. ..."
"... I was a low-level officer at US Embassies and Consulates in various foreign countries. Clinton's claim that she didn't know what (C) was, or that she "she did not pay attention to the difference between top secret, secret and confidential" and "could not recall any briefing or training by state related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information." Are beyond ridiculous. Any fool knows enough to be aware of different levels of classified info, and the obvious fact that you don't get sloppy with classified info. ..."
"... to paraphrase Leona Helmsley's comment about paying taxes, "security is for little people." So in that respect Hillary is no different from the rest of them. ..."
"... You'd better hope she's lying, because if the incompetence is genuine she shouldn't be allowed near any confidential information ever again. I hate to admit it but Trump is right on this one. Jesus wept. ..."
"... The fact that the Sec State could have an email server built at her home and operate with such laughable gross negligence when it comes to national security is surreal and appalling. ..."
"... If the FBI were not themselves co-conspirators and hopelessly corrupt, they would indict some of the lower level actors and offer them immunity. They could start with the imbecile who put that laptop in the mail and couldn't remember if it was UPS or USPS. ..."
"... Caddell has voiced an interesting concern that others are beginning to share: that the news media has crawled so far in bed with Hillary Clinton they won't be able to get back out. That the news media in America has lost its soul. Even Jake Tapper started asking this question several weeks ago in the middle of his own show. ..."
"... The pyramid scheme of created debt has destroyed capitalism and democracy within 40 years of full operation. Captured Govt has bailed out incompetence and failure at every turn, and in so doing, inverted the yield curve and destroyed the future. It is for this reason alone I cannot respect these financial paedophiles or support anything they do. In this contest for the White House, Clinton is the manifestation of the establishment. ..."
"... "The documents provided a number of new details about Mrs. Clinton's private server, including what appeared to be a frantic effort by a computer specialist to delete an archive of her emails even after a congressional committee had requested they be preserved." -NY Times ..."
"... Hillary's treatment of top-secret US documents was willful and uncorrected. If she had done the same thing with medical records, the individuals whose medical records had been mishandled could have filed charges and Hillary would have been personally liable for up to $50,000 fine per incident. ..."
"... Clinton is an absolute liability. Apart from this scandal she's a status quo candidate for a status quo that no longer exists. She stands for neo-liberalism, US hegemony and capitalist globalization all of which are deader than the dodo. That makes her very dangerous in terms of world peace and of course she will do absolutely nothing for the millions of Americans facing joblessness, hunger, bankruptcy and homelessness except make things worse ..."
"... The entire corrupt establishment want Clinton at all cost, so that they can continue fleecing the future and enslaving the entire world in created debt. All right minded individuals should this as a flashing red light to turn round and vote the other way. ..."
www.theguardian.com

A Clinton Foundation laptop and a thumb drive used to archive Hillary Clinton's emails from her time as secretary of state are missing, according to FBI notes released on Friday.

The phrase "Clinton could not recall" litters the summary of the FBI's investigation, which concluded in July that she should not face charges. Amid fierce Republican criticism of the Democratic presidential candidate, the party's nominee, Donald Trump released a statement which said "Hillary Clinton's answers to the FBI about her private email server defy belief" and added that he did not "understand how she was able to get away from prosecution".

he FBI documents describe how Monica Hanley, a former Clinton aide, received assistance in spring 2013 from Justin Cooper, a former aide to Bill Clinton, in creating an archive of Hillary Clinton's emails. Cooper provided Hanley with an Apple MacBook laptop from the Clinton Foundation – the family organisation currently embroiled in controversy – and talked her through the process of transferring emails from Clinton's private server to the laptop and a thumb drive.

"Hanley completed this task from her personal residence," the notes record. The devices were intended to be stored at Clinton's homes in New York and Washington. However, Hanley "forgot" to provide the archive laptop and thumb drive to Clinton's staff.

In early 2014, Hanley located the laptop at her home and tried to transfer the email archive to an IT company, apparently without success. It appears the emails were then transferred to an unnamed person's personal Gmail account and there were problems around Apple software not being compatible with that of Microsoft.

The unnamed person "told the FBI that, after the transfer was complete, he deleted the emails from the archive laptop but did not wipe the laptop. The laptop was then put in the mail, only to go missing. [Redacted] told the FBI that she never received the laptop from [redacted]; however, she advised that Clinton's staff was moving offices at the time, and it would have been easy for the package to get lost during the transition period.

"Neither Hanley nor [redacted] could identify the current whereabouts of the archive laptop or thumb drive containing the archive, and the FBI does not have either item in its possession."

... ... ...

The FBI identified a total of 13 mobile devices associated with Clinton's two known phone numbers that potentially were used to send emails using clintonemail.com addresses.

The 58 pages of notes released on Friday, several of which were redacted, also related that Hanley often purchased replacement BlackBerry devices for Clinton during Clinton's time at the state department. Hanley recalled buying most of them at AT&T stores in the Washington area. Cooper was usually responsible for setting them up and synching them to the server.

Clinton's closest aide, Huma Abedin, and Hanley "indicated the whereabouts of Clinton's devices would frequently become unknown once she transitioned to a new device", the documents state. "Cooper did recall two instances where he destroyed Clinton's old mobile devices by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer."

The notes also contain a string of admissions by Clinton about points she did not know or could not recall: "When asked about the email chain containing '(C)' portion markings that state determined to currently contain CONFIDENTIAL information, Clinton stated that she did not know what the '(C)' meant at the beginning of the paragraphs and speculated it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order."

Clinton said she did not pay attention to the difference between top secret, secret and confidential but "took all classified information seriously". She did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not have been on an unclassified system. She also stated she received no particular guidance as to how she should use the president's email address.

In addition, the notes say: "Clinton could not recall when she first received her security clearance and if she carried it with her to state via reciprocity from her time in the Senate. Clinton could not recall any briefing or training by state related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information."

Clinton was aware she was an original classification authority at the state department, but again "could not recall how often she used this authority or any training or guidance provided by state. Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined."

... ... ...

The House speaker, Paul Ryan, said: "These documents demonstrate Hillary Clinton's reckless and downright dangerous handling of classified information during her tenure as secretary of state. They also cast further doubt on the justice department's decision to avoid prosecuting what is a clear violation of the law. This is exactly why I have called for her to be denied access to classified information."

Reince Priebus, chair of the Republican National Committee, said: "The FBI's summary of their interview with Hillary Clinton is a devastating indictment of her judgment, honesty and basic competency. Clinton's answers either show she is completely incompetent or blatantly lied to the FBI or the public.

"Either way it's clear that, through her own actions, she has disqualified herself from the presidency."

The Clinton campaign insisted that it was pleased the notes had been made public. Spokesman Brian Fallon said: "While her use of a single email account was clearly a mistake and she has taken responsibility for it, these materials make clear why the justice department believed there was no basis to move forward with this case."

Terrence James 3h ago

This is the equivalent of the dog ate my homework. This woman could not utter an honest sentence if her life depended on it. She is a corrupt and evil person, I cannot stand Trump but I think I hate her more. Trump is just crazy and cannot help himself but she is calculatingly evil. We are doomed either way, but he would be more darkly entertaining.


Smallworld5 3h ago

Has any of Clinton's state department employees purposely built their own server in their basement on which to conduct official government business, in gross violation of department policy, protocols, and regulations, they would have been summarily fired at a minimum and, yes, quite possibly prosecuted. That's a fact.

The issue at hand is why Clinton sycophants are so agreeable to the Clinton Double Standard.

The presumptive next president of the U.S. being held to a lower standard than the average U.S. civil servant. Sickening.


Laurence Johnson 8h ago

Hillary's use of gender has no place in politics. When it comes to the top job, the people need the best person for the job, not someone who is given a GO because they represent a group that are encouraged to feel discriminated against.


foggy2 9h ago

For the FBI's (or Comey's) this is also a devastating indictment of their or his judgment, honesty and basic competency.

YANKSOPINION 10h ago

Perhaps she has early onset of Alzheimers and should not be considered for the job of POTUS. Or maybe she is just a liar.


AlexLeo 10h ago

It is painfully clear that she traded access and favors for money and reciprocal favors. It is painfully clear that she made little distinction between working for the State Department, the Clinton foundation and her family and tried to keep the records of what was going on inaccessible. The more honest defense would be, all politicians do it, and you have to suck it up because Trump is worse. Which is true. But trying to downplay this and explain it away is offensive, not all of the public are complete idiots.

KaleidoscopeWars

Actually, after you get over all of the baffooning around Trump has done, he actually would make an ideal president. He loves his country, he delegates jobs well to people who show the best results, he's good at building stuff and he wants to do a good job. I'm sure after he purges the terribly corrupted system that he'll be given, he'll have the very best advisors around him to make good decisions for the American people. I'm sure Theresa May and her cabinet will be quick to welcome him and re-solidify the relationship that has affected British politics so much in the past decade. Boris Johnson is perfect for our relations with America under a Trump administration. Shame on you Barack and Hillary. Hopefully Trump will say ''I came, I saw, they died!''

Ullu001 12h ago

Ah, The Clintons. They have done it all: destruction of evidence, witness tampering, fraud, lying under oath, murder, witness disappearance. Did I leave anything? Yet, they go unpunished. Too clever, I guess too clever for their own good!

samwoods77 12h ago

Hillary wants to be the most powerful person on earth yet claims she doesn't understand the classification system that even the most most junior secretary can....deeply troubling.

Mistaron 13h ago

The 'masters' in the shadows are about to throw the harridan under the bus. Her brazen air of arrogance and entitlement is about to fade as she comes to realise, that albeit Comey having been got at, he has still succeeded in striking a severe blow against her, and in addition, at the not-so-tin-hat conspiracy of inappropriate, and increasingly overt, institutional support.

All this in the face of documented lies, in your face hypocrisy, and unbridled corruption, oozing from every orifice of a maverick administration.

The seeds have been planted for a defense of diminished responsibility. Don't fall for it! Hillary, (and her illustrious spouse), deserve not a smidgen of pity.

''We came, we saw, he died'', she enthusiastically and unempathically cackled.

Just about sums her up.


wtfbollos 14h ago

hiliary clinton beheaded libya and created a hell on earth. here is the proof:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/28/hillary-clinton-undercut-on-libya-war-by-pentagon-/?page=all#pagebreak

jean2121 -> ken711 13h ago

Again, total misunderstanding about what is going on. Clinton is the one waging war in the middle east. She is the one being bullish and provocative with Russia. Trump has only been conciliatory with these issues, he has been against the war on Iraq. So far all evidences point to the fact that the Clintons want another big war and all evidence points to the fact that Trump wants co operation. This has totally escape your analysis. It is a choice between the Plague and the Cholera, I agree, but FGS try to be a little less biased.


ungruntled 15h ago

The best case for HC looks pretty grim.
She has no recollection of......??
Laptops and Thumb drives laying about unattended
Total lack of understanding about even the most basic of Data Securit arrangements

All of these things giver her the benefit of the doubt....That she wasnt a liar and a corrupted politician manipulating events and people to suit her own ends.
So, with the benefit of the doubt given, ask yourself if this level of incompetance and unreliabilty makes a suitable candidate for office?
In both cases, with and without BOTD, she shouldnt be allowed anywhere near the corridors of power, let alone the White House.

IAtheist 17h ago

Mrs Clinton is deeply divisive. Bought out since her husbands presidency by vested interests in Wall Street and the HMO's (private healthcare insurance management businesses) and having shown lamentable judgement, Benghazi, private Email server used for classified documents and material.

She has failed to motivate the Democrats white and blue collar working voters male and female. These are the voting demographic who have turned to Trump is significant numbers as he does address their concerns, iniquitous tax rules meaning multi millionaires pay less tax on capital gains and share dividends than employees do on their basic wages, immigration and high levels of drug and gun crime in working class communities Black, White and Hispanic, funding illegal immigrants and failed American youth living on a black economy in the absence of affordable healthcare or a basic welfare system.

Trump may very well win and is likely to be better for the US than Hilary Clinton.

digamey 18h ago

I sympathize with the American electorate - they have to choose between the Devil and the deep blue sea. Given their situation, however, I would definitely choose the Devil I know over the Devil I don't! And that Devil is - - - ?

MoneyCircus -> digamey 10h ago

That willful ignorance is your choice! A public businessman can be examined more closely than most.

Besides, there is a long history of "placemen" presidents whose performance is determined by those they appoint to do the work. Just look in the White House right now.

As for the Clinton record (they come, incontrovertibly, as a package) from Mena, Arkansas, to her husband's deregulation of the banks which heralded the financial crash that devastated millions of lives... the same banks that are currently HRC's most enthusiastic funders... is something that any genuine Democrat should not be able to stomach...

ID9761679 19h ago

My feeling is that she had more to worry about than the location of a thumb drive (I can't recall how many of those I've lost) or even a laptop. When a Secretary of State moves around, I doubt that look after their own appliances. Has anyone asked her where the fan is?

Karega ID9761679 18h ago

Problem is she handled top secret and classified information which would endanger her country's security and strategic interests. She was then US Secretary of State. That is why how she handled her thumb drive, laptop nd desktops matter. And there lies the difference between your numerous lost thumb drives and hers. I thought this was obvious?

EightEyedSpy 23h ago

HRC is still likely to be the next President, but this scandal does have legs. She put herself in a corner by claiming lack of recall due to a medical condition (i.e., the concussion). This leaves two possibilities, neither of which is helpful to her cause, to wit: either she was being dishonest or she was (and could still be) cognitively impaired.

1iJack -> EightEyedSpy 22h ago

either she was being dishonest or she was (and could still be) cognitively impaired.

Its entirely possible its both.

Dick York 24h ago

California survived Arnold Schwarzenegger, the U.S. survived Ronald Reagan, Minnesota survived Jesse "The Body" Ventura and I believe that we will survive Donald Trump. He's only one more celebrity on the road.

providenciales -> Dick York 23h ago

You forgot Al Franken.

antipodes -> Dick York 21h ago

Reagan was certainly not someone I admired but at least he tried to reduce the chance of nuclear war. Clinton is an out and out Hawke with the blood of many innocent people on her hands in both Syria and Libya. She is hiding her communications because she does not want to be exposed for the role she played in The destruction of Libya and the gun running of weapons to terrorists in Syria. That is to Al Qaeda and ISIS. World War 3 is more likely under Clinton than any other world leader. Even Trump. The Democrats must disendorse her because the details of her criminality are now becoming available and unless she can stop it Trump will win. Get rid of her Democrats and bring back Bernie Sanders.

Sam3456 1d ago

We cannot afford a lying, neo-liberal who is more than willing to make her role in government a for profit endeavor.

Four years of anyone else is preferable to someone who is more than willing for the right contribution to her foundation, sell out the American worker and middle class.

MakeBeerNotWar 1d ago

I'm more interested $250k a pop speeches HRC gave to the unindicted Wall St bankster felon scum who nearly took down their country and the global economy yet received a taxpayer bailout and their bonuses paid for being greedy incompetent crooks. How soon we forget....

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/how-wall-streets-bankers-stayed-out-of-jail/399368/

sorrentina -> MakeBeerNotWar 22h ago

even worse is her support for the military coup in Honduras- and her blatant lies in defense of that coup: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS-tDVwSHlA

trow 1d ago

Its seems there is just one scandal after another with this women but she seems to be bullet proof mainly because the msm media will not go after her for reasons best known to themselves this is causing them to lose credibility and readers who are deserting them for alternative media .

bashh1 1d ago

Finally today in an article in The NY Times we learn where Clinton has been for a good part of the summer. In the Hamptons and elsewhere at receptions for celebrities and her biggest donors like Calvin Klein and Harvey Weinstein, raking in the millions for her campaign. Trump on the other hand has appeared in towns in Pennsylvania like Scranton, Erie and Altoona where job are disappearing and times can be tough. Coronations cost money I guess.

chiefwiley -> bashh1 1d ago

She is doing what she does best --- raise money.

ksenak 1d ago

Not forgetting that she was key in making sure the US didn't side with Assad. Had the US done at the beginning, instead of being at the behest of the Saudis and the petrodollar, then the whole thing would have been over in 6 months and IS would never have got more than a dusty district of northern Iraq.

ksenak 1d ago

Hillary is humiliated woman. Humiliated to the core by her cheating hubby she would rather kill than let him go. She is paying her evil revenge to the whole world. As a president of USA Hillary Clinton would destabilise the world and lead it to conflicts that threaten to be very heavy.

As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was part of the "Arab Spring" (also part of the "Jasmine Revolution), which overthrew leaders such as Gaddafi to Mubarak. Before Gaddafi was overthrown he told the US that without him IS will take over Libya. They did.
-Benghazi Scandal which ended up killing a US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and other Americans.
The Arab Spring destabilized the Middle East, contributed to the Syrian civil war, the rise of ISIS and the exodus of Middle Eastern Muslims.

Sam3456 OXIOXI20 1d ago

Meh. Obama characterized ISIS as the "JV Team" and refused to acknowledge the threat. I assume he was acting on information provided by his Secretary of State, Clinton.

Michael109 1d ago

It's quite possible that Clinton, because she had a fall in 2012 and bonked her head, believes she is telling the truth when she is lying, except that it is not lying when you believe you are telling the truth even though you are lying.

She said she did not recall 30 times in her interviews with the FBI. She could be suffering from some sort of early degeneration disease. Either way, between her health and the lying and corruption she should be withdrawn as the Dem frontrunner.

1iJack -> LakumbaDaGreat 1d ago

She's going to blow it.

I think she already did. Its like all the shit in her life is coming back on her at once.

Early on, when it was announced she would run again, I remember one Democrat pundit in particular that didn't think she could survive the existence of the Internet in the general election (I can't remember who it was, though). But it has turned out to be a pretty astute prediction.

When asked what he meant by that remark, he went on to say "the staying power of the Internet will overwhelm Clinton with her dirty laundry once she gets to the general election. The Clintons were made for the 24 hour news cycles of the past and not the permanent unmanaged exposure of the digital world. Everything is new again on the internet. Its Groundhog Day forever on the Internet."

That's my best paraphrase of his thoughts. He felt Clinton was the last of the "old school" politicians bringing too much baggage to an election. That with digital "bread crumbs" of some kind or another (email, microphones and cameras in phones, etc) the new generation of politicians will be a cleaner lot, not through virtue, but out of necessity.

I've often thought back to his remarks while watching Hillary head into the general.

ImperialAhmed 1d ago

So the applicant to the US presidency does not know what (c) stands for in her emails, archives high security data on a laptop and then losses it for years, uploads same emails on Google's gmail account and then losses devices again.
She does not recall many things, not even the training she received on handling the confidential and secure communication.
She couldn't recall the procces of drone strikes. (Will she be killing people at a whim, without an accountable protocol?)
She is either demented or dangerously reckless or lying. All of these conditions disbar her form her candidacy.


AudieTer
1d ago

If she could only manage a couple of hours a day because of concussion and a blood clot she should have temporarily stood down until she recovered fully, and had a senior official take over her duties until she was well. You can't have a brain-damaged person in charge of the US's affairs - even though there is a long history of nutters the State Dept. ( ie the Military Industrial Complex HQ). And in the White House for that matter ...Nurse -- nurse -- Dubya needs his meds!

thedingo8 -> Lenthelurker 1d ago

the clinton foundation does not pay taxes..and dont forget that slick willie has been on the paedophile plane more times than the pilot

Littlefella 1d ago

She destroyed devices and emails after they were told that all evidence had to be preserved. There are then two issues and the FBI and DOJ have not taken any action on either.

It's no longer just about the emails, it's the corruption.

DaveG123 1d ago

Clinton's closest aide, Huma Abedin, and Hanley "indicated the whereabouts of Clinton's devices would frequently become unknown once she transitioned to a new device"
-------------
Probably in the hands of a foreign government. Pretty careless behaviour. Incompetent. Part of a pattern of incompetance that includes bad foreign policy decisions (Libya) and disrespect for rules surrounding conflict of interest (Clinton Foundation).

YANKSOPINION -> HansB09 1d ago

She failed to keep up with recordkeeping she agreed to, then when asked to turn over records, somebody destroyed them, but Clinton did not order destruction, or does not remember having done so. Turned over all records-oops I thought WE did! She either lied or has alzheimers

Andy White 1d ago

In addition, the notes say:

"Clinton could not recall when she first received her security clearance and if she carried it with her to state via reciprocity from her time in the Senate. Clinton could not recall any briefing or training by state related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information."

Clinton was aware she was an original classification authority at the state department, but again "could not recall how often she used this authority or any training or guidance provided by state. Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined." ...................secretary of state and could not recall basic security protocols???

....and people complain about trump....this basic security was mentioned in the bloody west wing series for god's sake.....in comparison even trump is a f'ing genius.......love him or hate him trump has to win over clinton,there is something very,very wrong with her....she should NEVER be in charge of a till at asda......and she is a clinton so we all know a very practised liar but this beggers belief,i can see why trump is angry if that was him he would have been publicly burnt at the stake.....this clinton crap just stink's of the political elite....a total joke cover up and a terrible obvious one to....clinton is just a liar and mentally i think she is very unstable....makes the DON look like hawking lol.....

namora 1d ago

Political baggage is a bitch. If this election cycle has demonstrated anything it is that the leadership of both parties is totally out of touch with the voters and really has no interest except supporting the Neoliberal tenet of fiscal nonintervention. This laissez-faire attitude toward corporate interests is paralysing the American government.

duncandunnit 1d ago

I cannot believe Clinton has got this far in the election, I believe Obama wants her in to hide many of his embarrassing warmongering mistakes.

fedback 1d ago

Today of all days Hillary Clinton puts out a tweet with the following: 'America needs leadership in the White House, not a liability' -- As we have to assume she's not referring to herself it confirms people's suspicion that the person who writes Hillary's tweets is a hostile to her campaign. The tweets are often completely off the mark.

Hercolubus 1d ago

Either Comey is on their payroll, or they have threatened his family. Either way it is business as usual. The NWO decided a long time ago that Hillary was their next puppet PONTUS.

BG Davis 2d ago

Clinton has always been a devious weasel, but this reveals a new low. I was a low-level officer at US Embassies and Consulates in various foreign countries. Clinton's claim that she didn't know what (C) was, or that she "she did not pay attention to the difference between top secret, secret and confidential" and "could not recall any briefing or training by state related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information." Are beyond ridiculous. Any fool knows enough to be aware of different levels of classified info, and the obvious fact that you don't get sloppy with classified info.

That said, over the past few years the entire handling of classified info has become beyond sloppy - laptops left in taxis, General Petraeus was sharing classified info with his mistress, etc. I guess nowadays, to paraphrase Leona Helmsley's comment about paying taxes, "security is for little people." So in that respect Hillary is no different from the rest of them.

Scaff1 2d ago

You'd better hope she's lying, because if the incompetence is genuine she shouldn't be allowed near any confidential information ever again. I hate to admit it but Trump is right on this one. Jesus wept. I said it before: Clinton is the only candidate who could possibly make a tyrant like Trump electable.


charlieblue -> gizadog 2d ago

Where are you getting "looses 13 devices"? (Try loses, nobody is accusing Sec.Clinton of making things loose) I actually read the article, so my information might not be as exciting as yours, but this article states that from the 13 devices that had access to the Clinton server, two (a laptop and a thumb drive) used by one of her aids, are missing. This article doesn't specify whether any "classified" information was on either of them. The FBI doesn't know, because, well... they are missing.

What the fuck is it with you people and your loose relationship with actual facts? Do you realize that just making shit up undermines whatever point you imagine you are trying to make?

gizadog 2d ago

Also: Clinton told FBI she thought classified markings were alphabetical paragraphs

"When asked what the parenthetical 'C' meant before a paragraph ... Clinton stated she did not know and could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order," the FBI wrote in notes from its interview with her."

Wow...and there are people that want her to be president.

Casey13 2d ago

In my job as a government contractor we are extremely vigilant about not connecting removable devices to work computers, no work email access outside of work, software algorithms that scan our work mails for any sensitive information, and regular required training on information security. The fact that the Sec State could have an email server built at her home and operate with such laughable gross negligence when it comes to national security is surreal and appalling. I could never vote for her and neither could I vote for Trump.

MonotonousLanguor 2d ago

>>> A Clinton Foundation laptop and a thumb drive used to archive Hillary Clinton's emails from her time as secretary of state are missing, according to FBI notes released on Friday.<<<

Oh golly gee, what a surprise. Should we offer a reward??? Maybe Amelia Earhart has the laptop and thumb drive. Were these missing items taken by the Great Right Wing Conspiracy???

Dani Jenkins 2d ago

Wtf, from the sublime to the ridiculous, springs to mind..

Time to get a grip of the gravity involved, here at the Guardian.. This is a total whitewash of the absurd kind.. That leaves people laughing in pure unadultered astonishment..

SHE lost not just a MacBook & thumb drive with such BS..

So Trump it is then , like many of us have stated ALL ALONG. Sanders was the only serious contender.. A complete mockery of democracy & the so called Democrats have made the way for Trump to cruise all the way to the Whitewash House..

Well done Debbie , did the Don pay you?

chiefwiley -> Lenthelurker 2d ago

Because the revelations are essentially contradicting all of Hillary's defenses regarding her handling of highly classified information. None of the requirements of the State Department mattered to her or her personal staff. It won't go away --- it will get worse as information trickles out.

Casey13 2d ago

Being President of the USA used to be about communicating a vision and inspiring Americans to get behind that dream . Think Lincoln abolishing slavery or JFK setting a goal to put man on the moon. Hillary is boring,has no charisma,and no vision for her Presidency beyond using corruption and intimidation to secure greater power for her and her cronies . Nobody wants to listen to her speeches because she is boring, uninspiring, and has no wit beyond tired cliches. Trump has a vision but that vision is a nightmare for many Americans.

imperfetto 2d ago

Clinton is a dangerous warmonger. She is a danger to us Europeans, as she might drag us into a conflict with Russia. We must get rid of her, politically, and re-educate the Americas to respect other nations, and give up exporting their corrupting values.

Tom Voloshen 2d ago

Liar liar liar....give her a chance, and another and another and another and another...
.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/cnn-stunned-fact-checkers-confirm-clinton-phones-destroyed-hammers/

JCDavis 2d ago

"After reading these documents, I really don't understand how she was able to get away from prosecution."

If the FBI were not themselves co-conspirators and hopelessly corrupt, they would indict some of the lower level actors and offer them immunity. They could start with the imbecile who put that laptop in the mail and couldn't remember if it was UPS or USPS. Or did he actually send it to the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK by accident?

1iJack 2d ago

"The job of the media historically, in terms of the First Amendment – what I call the unspoken compact in the First Amendment – is that the free press, without restraint, without checks and balances, is there in order to protect the people from power. Its job is to be a check on government, and those who rule the country, and not to be their lapdogs, and their support system. That's what we're seeing in this election.

There is an argument to make that the major news media in this country, the mainstream media, is essentially serving against the people's interest. They have made themselves an open ally of protecting a political order that the American people are rejecting, by three quarters or more of the American people. That makes them a legitimate issue, in a sense they never have been before, if Trump takes advantage of it."

Pat Caddell, 2 Sept 2016

Caddell has voiced an interesting concern that others are beginning to share: that the news media has crawled so far in bed with Hillary Clinton they won't be able to get back out. That the news media in America has lost its soul. Even Jake Tapper started asking this question several weeks ago in the middle of his own show.

Will the American press ever have credibility with Americans again? Even Democrats see it and will remember this the next time the press turns against them. There was a new and overt power grab in this election that is still being processed by the American people: the American press "saving" America from Donald Trump. They may never recover from this.

It even scares my Democrat friends.

ConBrio 2d ago

"An unknown individual using the encrypted privacy tool Tor to hide their tracks accessed an email account on a Clinton family server, the FBI revealed Friday.

"The incident appears to be the first confirmed intrusion into a piece of hardware associated with Hillary Clinton's private email system, which originated with a server established for her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

The FBI disclosed the event in its newly released report on the former secretary of state's handling of classified information.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/clinton-email-server-tor-227697

fanUS 2d ago

Clinton is a very dodgy character and cannot be trusted.

Boris Johnson, UK Foreign Secretary on Clinton: "She's got dyed blonde hair and pouty lips, and a steely blue stare, like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital"

CleanPool330 2d ago

The collective mind of the establishment is mentally ill and spinning out of control. In all rites they should be removed but their arrogance, corruption and self-entitlement mean they are incapable of admitting guilt. They have corrupted the weak minds of the majority and will take everybody down with them.

The pyramid scheme of created debt has destroyed capitalism and democracy within 40 years of full operation. Captured Govt has bailed out incompetence and failure at every turn, and in so doing, inverted the yield curve and destroyed the future. It is for this reason alone I cannot respect these financial paedophiles or support anything they do. In this contest for the White House, Clinton is the manifestation of the establishment.

unusedusername 2d ago

If I understand this correctly a laptop and a flashdrive full of classified emails was put in a jiffy bag and stuck in the post and now they're missing and this is, apparently, just one of those things? Amazing!

Blair Hess 2d ago

I'm in the military. Not a high rank mind you. It defies all common logic that HRC has never had a briefing, training, or just side conversation about classified information handling when i have about 50 trainings a year on it and i barely handle it. Sheeple wake up and stop drinking the kool aid

Ullu001 2d ago

The Clintons have always operated on the edge of the law: extremely clever and dangerous lawyers they are.

USADanny -> Ullu001

Hillary may be criminally clever but legally: not so much. You do know that she failed the Washington DC bar exam and all of her legal "success" after that was a result of being very spouse of a powerful politician.

calderonparalapaz 2d ago

"The documents provided a number of new details about Mrs. Clinton's private server, including what appeared to be a frantic effort by a computer specialist to delete an archive of her emails even after a congressional committee had requested they be preserved." -NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/03/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi.html?_r=0

USADanny -> Lee Knutsen 2d ago

Virtually every American healthcare worker has to take annual HIPAA training, pass a multiple-choice test and signed a document attesting that they have taken the training and are fully aware of the serious consequences of inadvertent and willful violations of HIPAA. Oh the irony – HIPAA is a Clinton era law.

Hillary's treatment of top-secret US documents was willful and uncorrected. If she had done the same thing with medical records, the individuals whose medical records had been mishandled could have filed charges and Hillary would have been personally liable for up to $50,000 fine per incident.

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/solutions-managing-your-practice/coding-billing-insurance/hipaahealth-insurance-portability-accountability-act/hipaa-violations-enforcement.page?

Other than Hillary negligently handling top-secret documents, having a head injury that by her own admission has impaired her memory and using her relationship with the Clinton foundation when she was Secretary of State to extort hundreds of millions of dollars, she is an excellent candidate for the president.

oeparty 2d ago

Clinton is an absolute liability. Apart from this scandal she's a status quo candidate for a status quo that no longer exists. She stands for neo-liberalism, US hegemony and capitalist globalization all of which are deader than the dodo. That makes her very dangerous in terms of world peace and of course she will do absolutely nothing for the millions of Americans facing joblessness, hunger, bankruptcy and homelessness except make things worse.

And yet, and yet, we must vote Clinton simply to Stop Trump. He is a proto-fascist determined to smash resistance to the 1% in America and abroad via military means. He is a realist who realises capitalism is over and only the purest and most overwhelming violence can save the super rich and the elites now. Certainly their economy gives them nothing any more. The American Dream is toast. The Green Stein will simply draw a few votes from Clinton and give Trump the victory and it is not like she is a genuinely progressive candidate herself being something of a Putin fan just like Trump. No, vote Clinton to Stop Trump but only so that we can use the next four years to build the revolutionary socialist alternative. To build the future.

dongerdo 2d ago

The Americans are screwed anyways because both easily are the most despicable and awful front runners I can think of in any election of a western democracy in decades (and that is quite an achievement in itself to be honest), the only thing left to hope for is a winner not outright horrible for the rest of the world on which front Clinton loses big time: electing her equals pouring gasoline over half the world, she is up for finishing the disastrous job in the Middle East and North Africa started by her as Secretary of State. Her stance on relations with Russia and China are utterly horrific, listening to her makes even the die-hard GOP neo-cons faction sound like peace corps ambassadors.
If the choice is between that and some isolationist dimwit busy with making America great again I truly hope for the latter.

Who would have thought that one day world peace would depend on the vote of the American redneck.....

Michael109 2d ago

Clinton's "dog ate my server", I can't (30 times) remember, didn't know what C meant on top of emails - why it means Coventry City, M'amm - excuses are the Dems trying to stagger over the line, everyone holding their noses. But even if she is elected, which is doubtful, this is not going away and she could be arrested as USA President.

The FBI will rue the day they did not recommend charges against her when they had the chance. She's make Tony Soprano look like the Dalia Lama.

CleanPool330 2d ago

The entire corrupt establishment want Clinton at all cost, so that they can continue fleecing the future and enslaving the entire world in created debt. All right minded individuals should this as a flashing red light to turn round and vote the other way.

[Sep 03, 2016] Gowdy FBI barely probed Clinton about intent on emails

Aug 25, 2016 | TheHill

FBI officials failed to aggressively question Hillary Clinton about her intentions in setting up a private email system, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) claimed this week, exposing a potential key vulnerability in the bureau's investigation.

"I didn't see that many questions on that issue," Gowdy told Fox News's "The Kelly File" on Wednesday evening.

The detail could be crucial for Republican critics of the FBI's decision not to recommend charges be filed against the former secretary of State for mishandling classified information.

... ... ...

"I looked to see what witnesses were questioned on the issue of intent, including her," he said on Fox News. "I didn't see that many questions on that issue."

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz(R-Utah) has called for the FBI to create unclassified versions of the Clinton case file that it gave to Congress, so that the material can be released publicly. Gowdy reiterated the call on Fox News.

"There's no reason in the world you could not and should not be able to look at the same witness interviews that I had to go to Washington and look at in a classified setting," he said.

[Sep 02, 2016] FBI Releases Full Report Into Hillary Clinton Email Probe Zero Hedge

Sep 02, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

Just as we predicted on a sleepy Friday afternoon ahead of a long weekend, The FBI has released a detailed report on its investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she was secretary of state, as well as a summary of her interview with agents, providing, what The Washington Post says is the most thorough look yet at the probe that has dogged the campaign of the Democratic presidential nominee.

Official FBI Statement:

Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure .

We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter. We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI's electronic FOIA library.

As The Washington Post adds, the documents released total 58 pages, though large portions and sometimes entire pages are redacted.

FBI Director James B. Comey announced in July that his agency would not recommend criminal charges against Clinton for her use of a private email server. Comey said that Clinton and her staffers were "extremely careless" in how they treated classified information, but investigators did not find they intended to mishandle such material. Nor did investigators uncover exacerbating factors - like efforts to obstruct justice - that often lead to charges in similar cases, Comey said.

The FBI turned over to several Congressional committees documents related to the probe and required they only be viewed by those with appropriate security clearances, even though not all of the material was classified, legislators and their staffers have said.

Those documents included an investigative report and summaries of interviews with more than a dozen senior Clinton staffers, other State Department officials, former secretary of state Colin Powell and at least one other person. The documents released Friday appear to be but a fraction of those.

...

Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon has said turning over the documents was "an extraordinarily rare step that was sought solely by Republicans for the purposes of further second-guessing the career professionals at the FBI."

But he has said if the material were going to be shared outside the Justice Department, "they should be released widely so that the public can see them for themselves, rather than allow Republicans to mischaracterize them through selective, partisan leaks."

Though Fallon seems to have gotten his wish, the public release of the documents will undoubtedly draw more attention to a topic that seems to have fueled negative perceptions of Clinton . A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll found 41 percent of Americans had a favorable impression of Clinton, while 56 percent had an unfavorable one.

Key Excerpts...

  • *CLINTON DENIED USING PRIVATE EMAIL TO AVOID FEDERAL RECORDS ACT
  • *CLINTON KNEW SHE HAD DUTY TO PRESERVE FEDERAL RECORDS: FBI
  • *COLIN POWELL WARNED CLINTON PRIVATE E-MAILS COULD BE PUBLIC:FBI
  • *FBI SAYS CLINTON LAWYERS UNABLE TO LOCATE ANY OF 13 DEVICES
  • *AT LEAST 100 STATE DEPT. WORKERS HAD CLINTON'S E-MAIL ADDRESS
  • CLINTON SAID SHE NEVER DELETED, NOR INSTRUCTED ANYONE TO DELETE, HER EMAIL TO AVOID COMPLYING WITH FEDERAL RECORDS LAWS OR FBI OR STATE REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
  • CLINTON AIDES SAID SHE FREQUENTLY REPLACED HER BLACKBERRY PHONE AND THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE OLD DEVICE WOULD "FREQUENTLY BECOME UNKOWN"
  • CLINTON CONTACTED POWELL IN JANUARY 2009 TO INQUIRE ABOUT HIS USE OF A BLACKBERRY WHILE IN OFFICE; POWELL ADVISED CLINTON TO 'BE VERY CAREFUL
  • Hillary Clinton used 13 mobile devices and 5 iPads to access clintonemail.com. The FBI only had access to 2 of the iPads and The FBI found no evidence of hacking on those 2...

    And here is the email from Colin Powell telling her that emails would need to be part of the "government records" ...

    And here is Clinton denying that she used a private server to "avoid [the] Federal Records Act" as she just assumed that "based on her practice of emailing staff on their state.gov accounts, [that] communications were captured by State systems." Yes, well what about the "official" communications had with people outside of the State Department? Did retention of those emails ever cross Hillary's mind? * * * Full Report below...

    Hillary Clinton FBI Part 1 of 2

    [Jul 20, 2016] FBI Agents Silenced on Hillary Probe

    Notable quotes:
    "... FBI agents who worked on the investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server reportedly had to sign an unusual non-disclosure form banning them from talking about the case unless they were called to testify. ..."
    "... Unnamed sources tell the New York Post they'd never heard of the special form - known as a "case briefing acknowledgment" - being used before, though all agents initially have to sign nondisclosure agreements to obtain security clearance. ..."
    Jul 13, 2016 | www.newsmax.com

    FBI agents who worked on the investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server reportedly had to sign an unusual non-disclosure form banning them from talking about the case unless they were called to testify.

    Unnamed sources tell the New York Post they'd never heard of the special form - known as a "case briefing acknowledgment" - being used before, though all agents initially have to sign nondisclosure agreements to obtain security clearance.

    "This is very, very unusual. I've never signed one, never circulated one to others," one unnamed retired FBI chief tells the Post. "I have never heard of such a form. Sounds strange," an anonymous FBI agent said.

    The Post additionally reports some FBI agents are disappointed that Director James Comey decided against recommending that charges be brought against Clinton for her mishandling of classified information.

    "FBI agents believe there was an inside deal put in place after the [Attorney General] Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton tarmac meeting" just hours before the release of a House report on the Benghazi, Libya terror attack in 2012, one unnamed source tells the Post.

    Another Justice Department source tells the newspaper he was "furious" with Comey, deriding him for having "managed to piss off right and left."

    [Jul 12, 2016] FBI s Critique of Hillary Clinton Is a Ready-Made Attack Ad

    Notable quotes:
    "... Hillary Clinton may not be indicted on criminal charges over her handling of classified email, but the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, all but indicted her judgment and competence on Tuesday - two vital pillars of her presidential candidacy - and in the kind of terms that would be politically devastating in a normal election year. ..."
    www.nytimes.com

    Hillary Clinton may not be indicted on criminal charges over her handling of classified email, but the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, all but indicted her judgment and competence on Tuesday - two vital pillars of her presidential candidacy - and in the kind of terms that would be politically devastating in a normal election year.

    ... ... ...

    To her charge that he is "reckless," Mr. Trump may now respond by citing Mr. Comey's rebuke: that Mrs. Clinton and her team "were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."

    To her promises to defend the United States, Mr. Trump may now retort with Mr. Comey's warning that "it is possible that hostile actors gained access" to Mrs. Clinton's email account and the top secret information it contained.

    And to her reproofs about his temperament and responsibility, Mr. Trump may now point to Mr. Comey's finding that "there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes" on handling classified information - though Mr. Comey said that other factors, like Mrs. Clinton's intent, argued against criminal charges.


    Worst of all was the totality of Mr. Comey's judgment about Mrs. Clinton's judgment.

    She is running as a supremely competent candidate and portraying Mr. Trump, in essence, as irresponsible and dangerous. Yet the director of the F.B.I. basically just called her out for having committed one of the most irresponsible moves in the modern history of the State Department.

    ... ... ...

    Her clearest selling point - that she, unlike Mr. Trump, can manage challenging relationships with allies and adversaries - has now been undercut because she personally mismanaged the safeguarding of national security information.

    [Jul 11, 2016] FBI Findings Damage Many of Hillary Clinton s Claims by STEVEN LEE MYERS

    Jul 05, 2016 | www.nytimes.com

    Mr. Comey said the emails included eight chains of emails and replies, some written by her, that contained information classified as "top secret: special access programs." That classification is the highest level, reserved for the nation's most highly guarded intelligence operations or sources.

    Another 36 chains were "secret," which is defined as including information that "could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security"; eight others had information classified at the lowest level, "confidential."

    [Jul 08, 2016] The Clinton Email Probe and the Question of Gross Negligence

    Notable quotes:
    "... ...Mr. Comey also referenced a more obscure provision of the Espionage Act that has little to do with intent or state of mind, but rather makes it a crime to disclose classified information through "gross negligence." ..."
    "... But the crime of "gross negligence" in the Espionage Act doesn't appear to require proof of any intentional mishandling of documents, according to Stephen I. Vladeck , a national security scholar at the University of Texas. ..."
    "... Specifically, the law makes it a felony to permit classified information relating to national defense to be "removed from its proper place of custody" through gross negligence. ..."
    "... Why are you focusing on the gross negligence aspect? ..."
    "... Where is the removal from the proper place of custody? I've seen nothing in any legal analysis in this paper that talks about it. Is the presence of classified material on a private server of one who is authorized to have it equivalent to such a removal? ..."
    "... She was specifically not authorized to have a private server. ..."
    "... "From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department in 2014, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was TOP SECRET at the time they were sent; 36 of those chains contained SECRET information at the time; and eight contained CONFIDENTIAL information at the time. That's the lowest level of classification." ..."
    "... "We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account." ..."
    "... Making an argument for the difference between "gross negligence" and "extreme carelessness" is the sort of semantic hair-splitting that Hillary Clinton ought to have been compelled to do in court - in the same way that her husband prevaricated over "what the meaning of the word 'is' is," shortly before he lost his law license. ..."
    Jul 05, 2016 | WSJ

    ...Mr. Comey also referenced a more obscure provision of the Espionage Act that has little to do with intent or state of mind, but rather makes it a crime to disclose classified information through "gross negligence."

    That provision of the Espionage Act, the primary law governing the handling of classified information, could require at least proof that the offender knew the classified information disclosed could harm the United States or benefit a foreign power if it got into the wrong hands.

    But the crime of "gross negligence" in the Espionage Act doesn't appear to require proof of any intentional mishandling of documents, according to Stephen I. Vladeck, a national security scholar at the University of Texas.

    Specifically, the law makes it a felony to permit classified information relating to national defense to be "removed from its proper place of custody" through gross negligence.

    What would constitute a degree of recklessness that rises to gross negligence? Mr. Vladeck offered an example of accidentally leaving a briefcase stuffed with classified national security secrets on a busy sidewalk in Washington, D.C.

    ... ... ...

    Charles Silva

    Why are you focusing on the gross negligence aspect?

    Where is the removal from the proper place of custody? I've seen nothing in any legal analysis in this paper that talks about it. Is the presence of classified material on a private server of one who is authorized to have it equivalent to such a removal?

    Lee Hartwig

    @Charles Silva She was specifically not authorized to have a private server.

    Clifford Crouch

    @Michael Piston

    "From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department in 2014, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was TOP SECRET at the time they were sent; 36 of those chains contained SECRET information at the time; and eight contained CONFIDENTIAL information at the time. That's the lowest level of classification."

    -FBI Director James Comey, July 5, 2016

    "We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account."

    -James Comey, July 5, 2016

    Making an argument for the difference between "gross negligence" and "extreme carelessness" is the sort of semantic hair-splitting that Hillary Clinton ought to have been compelled to do in court - in the same way that her husband prevaricated over "what the meaning of the word 'is' is," shortly before he lost his law license.

    [Jul 07, 2016] Why the FBI concluded Hillary Clintons email practices did not rise to the level of criminal charges -

    Hillary coped her emails and gave all of the to her private lawyer, who has no security clearance, on the USB stick. That's alone qualifies for gross negligence.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Hillary Clinton also used the department's secure email system for transmitting classified information, but the FBI found that some of the regular communications with her staff on the personal server involved facts and details that she should have known were classified. In a few cases, the emails bore markings to indicate they contained classified information. ..."
    "... Stewart Baker, a top national security lawyer in the Bush administration, called Comey's statement "pretty damning for Secretary Clinton, even if the facts don't make for an impressive criminal case. He suggests that she should have been, or arguably could still be, subjected to 'security or administrative sanctions.' What he doesn't say, but what we can infer, is that she ran those incredible risks with national security information because she was more worried about the GOP reading her mail than of Russian or Chinese spies reading it. That's appalling," he said. ..."
    "... HIllary lied about her servers, she lied about sending classified information, she lied about the re-classification of confidential, secret and SAP documents. Some two hours after Comey's announcement, she and Obama took off on Air Force One for a rally together. ..."
    "... But a new security regimen is dawning for those who hold security clearances. According to the FBI, they are now free to transfer data between secure and non-secure networks without punishment, as long as the INTENT is not to harm the United States. ..."
    "... A retired FBI agent on Fox said this : The Comey conference was to take the heat off of Lynch - because if the FBI had just been quiet with their results, and it would have been Lynch who came out and said...No charges - AFTER the Phoenix scandal, people would really be skeptical. end - ..."
    "... Of course this took AG-LL off the hook. NOW - for all of this to fall in place? Had to be some meetings beforehand - AG - FBI and Whitehouse general council - 3 US government lawyers colluding this event - to make SURE they have jobs the next 4 years and the GRATITUDE of Potus Hillary. ..."
    "... Corrupt? I would not go that far...let's just say DIRTY. ..."
    "... "Gross negligence" is the standard under 18 U.S.C., section 793-f. FBI Director Comey said Hillary Clinton was "extremely careless" in her handling of highly classified information. What's the difference, other than semantics, between "gross negligence" and "extremely careless?" ..."
    "... Hillary's emails may be great confirmation of Hillary's war role in the Mid-east and even Ukraine. However, more to the point they confirm for all Democrats that Hillary's agenda is the Neo-con one of Geo. W. Bush's handlers from PNAC, Chicago School of Economics, Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan and his wife Victoria Nuland. (The Neo-con/Neo-liberal company includes Larry Summers, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.) She is not a run of the mill hawk like John McCain, she is a New World Order marionette just as Geo W was. She needs to be dumped as she is beholden to anti-democratic values of elitism. ..."
    "... Bill Kristol is attacking Donald Trump because his candidate is Hillary. ..."
    "... This was historical. Law enforcement does not make decisions on prosecution. That is left to prosecutors. Law enforcement are fact finders who should have presented the case to a career professional prosecutor to make a decision. ..."
    "... The question is, why was well established policy and protocol violated and the case not presented to a prosecutor for a decision? Ask any local D.A. If they reject a case, they write a "reject" documenting their rationale. In a very public or complicated case, that reject is written in great detail regarding each and every potential charge. ..."
    "... The Obama Administration has prosecuted more people under the same WW I espionage act than all other administrations COMBINED. Comey has prosecuted a person under this act for a 21-word email .not 30,000 destroyed emails. ..."
    "... Everybody knows this was fixed. The examples of similar incidents, putting people in jail, are coming out of the shadows. It is time to vote the career politicians out of office and take our country back. ..."
    "... NSA has copies of every email sent to/from US, & likely most others, for last 10+ years. So they have all 30,000+ of the emails she deleted. ..."
    "... When in the Navy I saw a LT. career destroyed for leaving a top secret safe open over night. We did not know who maybe got in. The assumption by NCIS was that someone did enter and Top Secret information was taken. He was prosecuted for maybe forgetting and Clinton no prosecution for being dumb? ..."
    LA Times

    "It's just not a crime under current law to do nothing more than share sensitive information over unsecured networks," said Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas. "Maybe it should be, but that's something for Congress to decide going forward."

    John M. Deutch, another former CIA director, narrowly avoided a misdemeanor charge for having taken hundreds of top secret files home on his laptop computer. He was pardoned by Clinton before charges were filed.

    ... ... ...

    Hillary Clinton also used the department's secure email system for transmitting classified information, but the FBI found that some of the regular communications with her staff on the personal server involved facts and details that she should have known were classified. In a few cases, the emails bore markings to indicate they contained classified information.

    However, investigators did not find evidence she knowingly or intentionally disclosed government secrets or that she exposed secrets through gross negligence. Clinton's apparent interest was in maintaining her privacy.

    ... ... ...

    Stewart Baker, a top national security lawyer in the Bush administration, called Comey's statement "pretty damning for Secretary Clinton, even if the facts don't make for an impressive criminal case. He suggests that she should have been, or arguably could still be, subjected to 'security or administrative sanctions.' What he doesn't say, but what we can infer, is that she ran those incredible risks with national security information because she was more worried about the GOP reading her mail than of Russian or Chinese spies reading it. That's appalling," he said.

    knox.bob.xpg

    No amount of facts, no amount of evidence, and no amount of lies will change the minds of supporters of Hillary Clinton. Her coronation was pre-determined. Ideology is more important to her supporters than the quality of the candidate. While brash, Trump nailed it yesterday. The fix was in and the optics played out.

    HIllary lied about her servers, she lied about sending classified information, she lied about the re-classification of confidential, secret and SAP documents. Some two hours after Comey's announcement, she and Obama took off on Air Force One for a rally together.

    Obama would have never done this if Comey's decision was to seek criminal charges. Presidential travel is not spur of the moment, it is carefully planned weeks in advance. So what happened here ? I believe Comey knew that DOJ would not seek criminal charges against her despite the overwhelming evidence of gross negligence.

    Comey "fried" her yesterday and now she will be tried in the court of public opinion. There are simply some people who believe that global warming, income inequality, and transgender bathrooms are more important than ISIS, our economy, terror, or national debt.

    unclesmrgol

    Hillary has been freed from any punishment, for some animals are more important than others.

    But a new security regimen is dawning for those who hold security clearances. According to the FBI, they are now free to transfer data between secure and non-secure networks without punishment, as long as the INTENT is not to harm the United States.

    That is the new standard, and a mighty fine one it is -- right?

    SandyDago

    A retired FBI agent on Fox said this : The Comey conference was to take the heat off of Lynch - because if the FBI had just been quiet with their results, and it would have been Lynch who came out and said...No charges - AFTER the Phoenix scandal, people would really be skeptical. end -

    That seems very obvious at this point...The FBI does not do - what James Comey did yesterday. No comment is how they roll - Yet we get a play by play yesterday.

    Of course this took AG-LL off the hook. NOW - for all of this to fall in place? Had to be some meetings beforehand - AG - FBI and Whitehouse general council - 3 US government lawyers colluding this event - to make SURE they have jobs the next 4 years and the GRATITUDE of Potus Hillary.

    Corrupt? I would not go that far...let's just say DIRTY.

    Chris Crusade

    "Gross negligence" is the standard under 18 U.S.C., section 793-f. FBI Director Comey said Hillary Clinton was "extremely careless" in her handling of highly classified information. What's the difference, other than semantics, between "gross negligence" and "extremely careless?"

    lon.ball

    Hillary's emails may be great confirmation of Hillary's war role in the Mid-east and even Ukraine. However, more to the point they confirm for all Democrats that Hillary's agenda is the Neo-con one of Geo. W. Bush's handlers from PNAC, Chicago School of Economics, Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan and his wife Victoria Nuland. (The Neo-con/Neo-liberal company includes Larry Summers, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.) She is not a run of the mill hawk like John McCain, she is a New World Order marionette just as Geo W was. She needs to be dumped as she is beholden to anti-democratic values of elitism.

    Bill Kristol is attacking Donald Trump because his candidate is Hillary. (See this article in this issue.) So, it is not about Democrat vs. Republican. The new political dichotomy is Centralization (corporatism, totalitarian, collectivism) vs. Personal Constitutional freedom. I am a lifelong Democrat and Sanders man who is "never Hillary" for good reason. I cannot sit by idly and watch as our national Democracy continues to devolve into world fascism with the Neo-cons. Hillary is a traitor to the Nation and to the late great Democratic Party.

    It is time for the old right and old progressive left to unite for preservation of the US Constitution and personal freedom. Never Hillary; never New World Order!" less

    tommy501

    This was historical. Law enforcement does not make decisions on prosecution. That is left to prosecutors. Law enforcement are fact finders who should have presented the case to a career professional prosecutor to make a decision.

    The question is, why was well established policy and protocol violated and the case not presented to a prosecutor for a decision? Ask any local D.A. If they reject a case, they write a "reject" documenting their rationale. In a very public or complicated case, that reject is written in great detail regarding each and every potential charge.

    Something's fishy.

    andytek2

    @tommy501 he didn't make a prosecutorial decision he only said that no reasonable prosecutor would file charges.

    DennisWV

    The Obama Administration has prosecuted more people under the same WW I espionage act than all other administrations COMBINED. Comey has prosecuted a person under this act for a 21-word email .not 30,000 destroyed emails.

    Everybody knows this was fixed. The examples of similar incidents, putting people in jail, are coming out of the shadows. It is time to vote the career politicians out of office and take our country back.

    Outside the Herd

    NSA has copies of every email sent to/from US, & likely most others, for last 10+ years. So they have all 30,000+ of the emails she deleted.

    FBI & O knew months ago what was in all of them, & delayed looking away until primaries were clinched. Which was also crooked, ask Bernie's peep's.

    Andre-Leonard

    "A second law makes it a crime to "remove" secret documents kept by the government or to allow them to be stolen through "gross negligence."

    Funny how they went after Edward Snowden for the very same thing. Yet no one in their 'right' mind expected a Justice Department led by Obama to allow for Billary to be indicted. It's all about favorites here and justice is 'not' really blind.

    kenwrite9

    When she was in foreign countries she should have known that those countries spy on American officials. I now that, why she did not is strange. When in the Navy I saw a LT. career destroyed for leaving a top secret safe open over night. We did not know who maybe got in. The assumption by NCIS was that someone did enter and Top Secret information was taken. He was prosecuted for maybe forgetting and Clinton no prosecution for being dumb?

    [Jul 06, 2016] FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook by Andrew C. McCarthy

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18) ..."
    "... The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence. ..."
    "... It is a common tactic of defense lawyers in criminal trials to set up a straw-man for the jury: a crime the defendant has not committed. ..."
    "... Judges generally do not allow such sleight-of-hand because innocence on an uncharged crime is irrelevant to the consideration of the crimes that actually have been charged. ..."
    "... Meanwhile, although there may have been profound harm to national security caused by her grossly negligent mishandling of classified information, we've decided she shouldn't be prosecuted for grossly negligent mishandling of classified information. ..."
    "... To my mind, a reasonable prosecutor would ask: Why did Congress criminalize the mishandling of classified information through gross negligence? The answer, obviously, is to prevent harm to national security. So then the reasonable prosecutor asks: Was the statute clearly violated, and if yes, is it likely that Mrs. Clinton's conduct caused harm to national security? If those two questions are answered in the affirmative, I believe many, if not most, reasonable prosecutors would feel obliged to bring the case. ..."
    National Review

    Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was "extremely careless" and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services.

    In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.

    ... ... ...

    It is a common tactic of defense lawyers in criminal trials to set up a straw-man for the jury: a crime the defendant has not committed. The idea is that by knocking down a crime the prosecution does not allege and cannot prove, the defense may confuse the jury into believing the defendant is not guilty of the crime charged.

    Judges generally do not allow such sleight-of-hand because innocence on an uncharged crime is irrelevant to the consideration of the crimes that actually have been charged. It seems to me that this is what the FBI has done today. It has told the public that because Mrs. Clinton did not have intent to harm the United States we should not prosecute her on a felony that does not require proof of intent to harm the United States.

    Meanwhile, although there may have been profound harm to national security caused by her grossly negligent mishandling of classified information, we've decided she shouldn't be prosecuted for grossly negligent mishandling of classified information. I think highly of Jim Comey personally and professionally, but this makes no sense to me. Finally, I was especially unpersuaded by Director Comey's claim that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case based on the evidence uncovered by the FBI.

    To my mind, a reasonable prosecutor would ask: Why did Congress criminalize the mishandling of classified information through gross negligence? The answer, obviously, is to prevent harm to national security. So then the reasonable prosecutor asks: Was the statute clearly violated, and if yes, is it likely that Mrs. Clinton's conduct caused harm to national security? If those two questions are answered in the affirmative, I believe many, if not most, reasonable prosecutors would feel obliged to bring the case.

    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook

    Recommended Links

    Softpanorama hot topic of the month

    Softpanorama Recommended

    Top articles

    Sites



    Etc

    FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit exclusivly for research and educational purposes.   If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. 

    ABUSE: IPs or network segments from which we detect a stream of probes might be blocked for no less then 90 days. Multiple types of probes increase this period.  

    Society

    Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

    Quotes

    War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotesSomerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose BierceBernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

    Bulletin:

    Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

    History:

    Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOSProgramming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC developmentScripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

    Classic books:

    The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-MonthHow to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

    Most popular humor pages:

    Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

    The Last but not Least


    Copyright © 1996-2016 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org was created as a service to the UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License.

    The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

    Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

    FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

    This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

    You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info

    Disclaimer:

    The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.

    Last modified: January, 22, 2018