EXCLUSIVE: RELEASED TEXT MESSAGES AND EMAILS SHOW MUELLER TEAM’S COZY RELATIONSHIP WITH PRESS
Released messages document how Mueller’s spokesman took dozens of meetings with reporters over three months in 2017.
Reporters from nearly every major media outlet have been jockeying for influence and favoritism within the special counsel’s office.
One awkward exchange illustrates a reporter from CNN trashing an article written by White House correspondent Jim Acosta.
Hundreds of pages of emails and text messages released from the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) special counsel’s office through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request show an ongoing relationship between Robert Mueller’s team and the press, according to an investigation by The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Please don’t forget that the corrupt Peter Strzok was on his team also.
The documents, released in September, span months of communication and include messages from reporters ranging from a variety of outlets, including TheDCNF, The Washington Post and BuzzFeed.
While the vast majority of correspondences between Mueller’s spokesman Peter Carr and a variety of journalists ends with a “no comment,” the messages expose Mueller’s team was willing to meet with a number of reporters in private meetings and over the phone.
Coordinating such meetings cuts against the narrative that the special counsel has been hesitant to give information to the press, instead opting to give information only through public announcements and statements.
No matter if snopes lies about these SOB’s, they are friends and criminals in bed together. (Click The Picture)
The New York Times ran a story in August poking fun at the secrecy of the special counsel, with one reporter writing that Carr’s “‘no comment’ replies have become a running dark joke among the Washington press corps.”
But on July 21st, 2017, Adam Goldman from TheNYT sent an email to Carr about arranging a “touch base” meeting, according to documents provided by the DOJ.
That meeting was later rescheduled, but it is just one in a pattern of meetings and private calls from reporters jockeying for opportunities to solicit information from an investigation that has been labeled as “leak proof” from the press.
Ironically, Vox was one of those exact outlets that proclaimed Mueller’s team as immune to leaks — despite one of its reporters communicating extensively with Carr via text.
During one interaction, Alex Ward asks Carr off the record if the investigation would continue should President Donald Trump fire Mueller.
“As guidance only, the [Deputy Attorney General] testified last week that he, not the President, would be the one to make the decision. 28 CFR 600 outlines under what circumstances a Special Counsel can be removed. If it came to that, a replacement would likely be found,” Carr answers.
A day later, Carr aids Ward in describing the room in which the investigation takes place. Despite Carr’s assistance, he is never mentioned in Ward’s piece published over a month later.
From late July until the end of September 2017, Carr held at least dozens of meetings with various reporters. Those meetings have rarely been discussed with the public, by both the government or the press, until the release of these documents.
TheDCNF could not find any evidence of impropriety by Mueller’s office, nor any evidence that Carr favored specific outlets.
Regardless, the messages document hours of conversations and meetings between a spokesman involved in a politicized investigation and reporters eager to cover for him in hopes of further access.
Other messages released by the DOJ illustrate more awkward interactions, showing how some reporters will even undermine colleagues in order to build trust in their relationship with the special counsel’s office.
CNN’s Evan Perez, who had extensive conversations with Carr from at least May through August 2017, expressed frustration at a story co-authored by the network’s White House correspondent Jim Acosta.
“I had nothing to do with it. Didn’t see it until after it was published. I would not have published that. But I’m also in a poor position to stop things,” Perez said of Acosta’s reporting.
Perez then communicates concern that the story could damage the validity of the special counsel’s investigation because of the attorney general’s politics.
“By the way, this story and the pick up its [sic] getting makes it so the public will think Mueller is in bed with (one of) the most partisan left-leaning AG in the nation. I’m sure he has good people working there but the leadership has a pretty partisan agenda,” Perez says to Carr.
“Maybe that’s what the Special Counsel wants,” he adds.
A month later, Perez ran a follow-up story on the Mueller investigation, prompting Carr to offer a phone call in case he needed any additional information or clarifications.
They don’t want the truth and no matter if Brett Kavanaugh is innocent they hate Donald Trump, so therefore Kavanaugh is a misogynistic pig.
Some of the things we discussed on last night show:
Insane Professor Shoots Himself At School To Protest Trump . Brett Kavanaugh Accuser’s Lawyer Defended Bill Clinton, And Al Franken. Christine Blasey Ford Accused Kavanaugh Of Rape When He Was 17 Years Old. Paul Manafort Deal Looks Like Good News for Trump, Terrible News for Democrats. ABC News Chief Political Analyst Matthew Dowd Alleges Clarence Thomas Is a ‘Sexual Predator.
Nearly half of residents in America’s top five largest cities speak a foreign language at home, a new study by the Center for Immigration Studies reveals.
Researchers Steven Camarotta and Karen Zeigler analyzed data from the Census Bureau, finding that more than 48 percent of residents in America’s largest cities — New York City, Houston, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Phoenix — speak a foreign language in the home instead of speaking English.
In Los Angeles, California, nearly 60 percent of residents speak a foreign language at home, while 49 percent speak a foreign language at home in New York City and Houston. In Chicago, about 36 percent of residents speak a foreign language at home and in Phoenix, about 38 percent speak a foreign language at home.
Between 1980 and 2017, Nevada had a 1,080 percent increase in the number of foreign speakers that live in the state, while Georgia experienced a 945 percent increase and North Carolina saw a 771 percent increase in the number of foreign speakers.
There are now more than 66.5 million residents in the United States that speak a language other than English at home.
As Breitbart News reported, America’s major cities are home to the majority of the more than 44 million foreign-born residents living in the country.
Those cities are enclaves of liberal and Democrat voters, as evidence in the 2016 presidential election where cities like New York City, Chicago, and Philadelphia, and regions like San Francisco voted strongly for candidate Hillary Clinton.
Every year, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 million legal immigrants. In 2017, the foreign-born population boomed to a 108-year record high, making up nearly 14 percent of the total U.S. population. By 2023, the Center for Immigration Studies estimates that the legal and illegal immigrant population of the U.S. will make up nearly 15 percent of the entire U.S. population.
On Tuesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show,” former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton defended the calls for an FBI investigation into the allegations against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and stated the White House and Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are trying to put Ford “in the dock and try to rush this through.”
Hillary said, “I heard Kellyanne Conway say we shouldn’t be subjecting her to insult, and I think you can’t avoid the appearance of insult if you don’t have an investigation so that she is, you know, able to be evaluated fairly. And what I think the White House and the Republicans on the committee are trying to do is, you know, basically, put her in the dock and try to rush this through.”
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley on Tuesday raised the possibility that next week’s high-stakes open hearing to examine the sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh could be canceled if the accuser doesn’t accept the committee’s invitation.
Grassley, R-Iowa, scheduled a hearing for Monday for Kavanaugh and accuser Christine Blasey Ford to answer questions from senators about the allegation. But Grassley said during a Tuesday radio interview that his office has reached out several times to Ford and her attorneys to discuss her allegation, but has heard nothing back.
“We have reached out to her in the last 36 hours three or four times by email and we have not heard from them, and it kind of raises the question, do they want to come to the public hearing or not?” Grassley said on The Hugh Hewitt Show.
Asked whether there would be a hearing if Ford did not agree to appear, Grassley suggested he couldn’t see a reason to hold one.
“What would be the purpose of the hearing if Dr. Ford doesn’t want to respond?” Grassley said.
In the case Ford accepts the invitation, Grassley said he is considering the possibility of having an independent questioner ask all the questions to Ford.
Ford, a California-based professor, revealed her identity over the weekend in a Washington Post report. She said that Kavanaugh, while in high school, pinned her down, tried to remove her bathing suit and put his hand over her mouth when she attempted to scream. Kavanaugh has denied the allegation.
The announcement of the last-minute hearing evoked memories of the 1991 Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings, where senators scrambled to arrange a hearing after Thomas was confronted with sexual harassment accusations by law professor Anita Hill. Thomas denied the accusations and was narrowly confirmed.
During television appearances on Monday, Ford’s attorney, Debra Katz, indicated her client was “willing to take whatever it takes to get her story forth,” and would testify before the committee under oath. But Katz has not confirmed that Ford will show up for Monday’s open hearing, which would be aired live on television.
Speculation about whether Ford will ultimately accept the invitation follows reports she was reluctant to go public with her accusation after tipping off congressional Democrats.
Grassley, announcing the Monday hearing, said it would “give these recent allegations a full airing.”
White House spokesman Raj Shah said Kavanaugh is willing to testify.
“Judge Kavanaugh looks forward to a hearing where he can clear his name of this false allegation. He stands ready to testify tomorrow if the Senate is ready to hear him,” Shah said.
Democrats have called for delaying Kavanaugh’s vote until there is a full FBI review of the matter.
But Grassley told Hewitt on Tuesday that the FBI investigation “is closed” and that the FBI is not doing any further investigation.
Meanwhile, Kavanaugh was spotted Tuesday arriving at the White House for meetings – as he did the day before.
President Trump on Monday stood by Kavanaugh, calling him one of the “finest people that I have ever known” while acknowledging a “little delay” may be necessary before the nomination is voted on in the Senate.
In his first public comments on the controversy, the president also criticized Democrats over the timing of the allegation.
“I wish the Democrats could have done this a lot sooner because they had this information for many months,” Trump told reporters at the White House. “And they shouldn’t have waited until literally the last days. They should have done it a lot sooner.”
The president said he’s open to delaying the confirmation proceedings in Congress while the allegations are investigated.
“If it takes a little delay it’ll take a little delay,” Trump said. “It shouldn’t certainly be very much.”
Kavanaugh has forcefully denied the sexual assault accusations Ford alleged took place while the two were in high school.
“This is a completely false allegation. I have never done anything like what the accuser describes — to her or to anyone,” Kavanaugh said in a statement. “Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making the accusation until she identified herself yesterday.”
All 10 Democrats on the committee on Monday have urged Grassley to postpone the vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Multiple sources told Fox News Thursday’s committee confirmation vote has been postponed amid the newly scheduled hearing.
Pope Francis commissioned a four-book study in 2010 as archbishop of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires attacking sexual abuse victims and defending a priest convicted of molesting a teenage boy.
Francis, who was then known as Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, asked a lawyer and jurist by the name of Marcelo Sancinetti to carry out a more than 2,600-page study encompassing four volumes for the Argentinian Episcopal Conference to discredit the alleged victims of Father Julio César Grassi.
The volumes described the victims as “false accusers” and claimed their accusations were just ways of projecting their own sexual desires on Grassi, who was convicted of sexually abusing a boy at his Happy Children Foundation — an organization dedicated to rescuing homeless children — and sentenced to 15 years in prison.
Grassi was a national celebrity who established relationships with wealthy and powerful figures in Argentine society, while his victims were poor, teenage residents of his homeless shelters under the Happy Children Foundation (Fundación Felices los Niños) — which generated millions of dollars in donations each year.
Juan Pablo Gallego, who represented Grassi’s teen victims, told the local Spanish-language media outlet Infobae that as archbishop and head of the Argentinian Episcopal Conference, Francis commissioned the series titled “Studies on the Grassi Case” to reportedly influence judges on Argentina’s Supreme Court to maintain Grassi’s innocence.
“The books arrived to the judges of the [Supreme] Court, presumably delivered by supposed emissaries of Francis,” Gallego told Infobae. “What is certain is that we determined that they were received by every judge that had to decide on the Grassi case. They weren’t only delivered to the Supreme Court, where they are held, for example, by Ricardo Lorenzetti; they were also delivered to the judges of the provincial appeals court.”
“I am certain that the judges of the Supreme Court have these books and that they came to them in the name of the Church,” Gallego said.
The volumes were never released to the public, but the final book in the series published in 2013 had a passage stating who was behind the study, El Paisreported.
“With this [volume], these ‘Studies on the Grassi case’ are concluded, and the labor assigned by the Argentinean Episcopal Conference, in particular by Cardinal Bergoglio, then its president and today His Holiness Francis,” the text reportedly read on the first page.
People who defended the study claimed the volumes were solely intended for the bishops sitting on the Argentinean Episcopal Conference, but multiple news outlets confirmed that the volumes had been sent to the country’s Supreme Court.
Infobae confirmed in 2016 with sources in the Argentinian Supreme Court that court members had received the volumes.
Carlos Mahiques, one of the judges on the court, told the French television news program Cash Investigation in March 2017 that he personally received the four-volume study.
“You received this counter-inquiry?” the Cash Investigation reporter asked.
“Yes, I did,” responded Mahiques.
Mahiques added that the study Bergoglio commissioned was meant “to exert a subtle form of pressure on the judges” in Grassi’s favor.
“I think it’s partial in some areas, and extremely partial in others. It’s clearly in favor of Father Grassi,” Mahiques said. “They were trying to exert a subtle form of pressure on the judges.”
Even with these reports of sexual abuse in Francis’s diocese, the pope claimed in his 2010 book On Heaven and Earth that instances of sexual abuse by clergy members “never occurred in my diocese” and “in the diocese, it never happened to me.”
But despite Francis’s denial of any instances of sexual abuse taking place under his watch, many victims stepped forward and wrote letters to Francis while he was archbishop detailing the abuses they suffered.
Francis would not meet with these victims of sexual abuse within his archdiocese and did not even answer their letters. The pope has also refused to remove Grassi from the priesthood. Grassi was still listed as a practicing priest in the Diocese of Morón — the diocese under the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires — as of August 2017.
The Diocese of Morón, however, stated that it was not their responsibility to remove Grassi and that it was up to the Vatican to remove him from the priesthood.
Although a source “close to Francis” claimed the diocese is responsible for Grassi’s case, the diocese released a statement in March 2017 revealing that the Vatican ordered the Diocese of Morón to submit a report on Grassi’s case.
The Vatican, however, had not acted on the report — leaving Grassi a priest with all his privileges despite his status as a convicted sex offender.
One witness at Grassi’s trial told Cash Investigation that the sex abuser priest repeatedly said during the trial that Francis stood by him.
“I’ll never forget what Father Grassi kept repeating at his trial: “Bergoglio never let go of my hand.” Now, Bergoglio is Pope Francis, but he has never gone against Grassi’s words. So I’m certain that he never did let go of Grassi’s hand!”
Grassi reportedlyusedthe same language in a 2009 interview with Infobae.
“[Bergoglio] never let go of my hand. He is at my side as always,” Grassi reportedly said.
Even as the Catholic Church is reeling from the sexual abuse scandals by its clergymen, Francis doubled down against those who accuse clergymen of sexual abuse during a homily Thursday morning, saying that those who accuse bishops of sexual abuse are like Satan, “the Great Accuser.”
