House Committee on the Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte on Friday subpoenaed former FBI Agent Peter Strzok to appear for a deposition next week.
Goodlatte issued the subpoena even though Strzok’s attorney said that Strzok is willing to testify voluntarily before Congress.
“We regret that the Committee felt it necessary to issue a subpoena when we repeatedly informed them that Pete was willing to testify voluntarily,” Strzok lawyer Aitan Goelman said in a statement after Goodlatte issued the subpoena.
A statement on the Judiciary Committee’s website said that the panel has “repeatedly requested to interview Mr. Strzok regarding his role in certain decisions, but he has yet to appear.”
As the FBI’s deputy chief of counterintelligence, Strzok oversaw the bureau’s investigation into possible Trump campaign ties to the Russian government. He was also a top investigator on the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton email probe. (RELATED: Strzok: ‘We’ll Stop’ Trump Presidency)
While working on the Trump-Russia matter, Strzok sent numerous text messages criticizing the then-presidential candidate. In one Aug. 8, 2016 text message, Strzok told FBI attorney Lisa Page that “we’ll stop” Trump’s presidency.
A Department of Justice inspector general’s report released June 14 blasted Strzok over the text messages, saying that the messages indicated a “biased state of mind” and implied “a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.”
Strzok was escorted from FBI headquarters June 15. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said on Thursday that Strzok no longer has his security clearance. (RELATED: Strzok Loses Security Clearance)
Goelman said that his client “intends to answer any question put to him, and he intends to defend the integrity of the Clinton email investigation, the Russia collusion investigation to the extent that that’s a topic, and his own integrity,” in a letter sent to Goodlatte on Saturday.
Goelman said that Strzok “wants the chance to clear his name and tell his story.”
This Is Organized By Soros Are Some Vile Anti-America Scum.
Twitter / @JewishAction
Protesters descended on the Alexandria townhouse of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen Friday morning, demanding the Trump administration reunite illegal immigrant families at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Philip Lewis
✔@Phil_Lewis_
Protestors are outside of DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen’s Alexandria townhouse, playing audio of the detained children. She appears to be still be home.
Demonstrators were heard chanting “free the kids” and“no justice, no sleep,” according to HuffPost’s Philip Lewis. Many people in the crowd carried signs bearing Nielsen’s likeness, captioned: “CHILD SNATCHER.”
Amanda House
✔@AmandaLeeHouse
“Beware of Child Snatcher” flyers outside @SecNielsen’s house warn neighbors that this “ruthless hencman” and “human rights abuser” is ripping children from their parents and imprisoning them in cages. Happy Friday! (Credit: Matthew Perdie/@BreitbartNews)
Protestors are outside of DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen’s Alexandria townhouse, playing audio of the detained children. She appears to be still be home. pic.twitter.com/akIcxOcM3q
Philip Lewis
✔@Phil_Lewis_
Protestors are chanting “NO JUSTICE NO SLEEP!” and “FREE THE KIDS!”
Update: Nielsen is hiding in her house and won’t come out to explain her cruel and inhumane actions. Her neighbors are pretty interested, however. Secretary, it doesn’t have to be this way. Resign. #FamiliesBelongTogether#moralemergency#FreeOurFuture
Protesters shouted “Shame!” as Nielsen walked from her home to her security detail.
Secret Service officers monitored the nearly hour-long demonstration, according to FOX 5 DC.
The demonstration outside the Secretary’s home comes days after members of the D.C. chapter of the Democrat Socialists of America drove Nielsen out of a Mexican restaurant on Tuesday. “No borders! No walls! Sanctuary for all!” the activists shouted as she ate at MXDC.
“Aren’t you a mother too?” The far-left agitators asked Nielsen. “Kirstjen Nielsen, you’re a villain! Lock her up!”
Nielsen eventually vacated the restaurant amid fears the situation would escalate.
She was also targeted by actor Peter Fonda, who shared a violent and sexually degrading fantasy about the Trump Cabinet leader Tuesday night. “Kristjen Nielsen is a lying gash that should be put in a cage and poked at by passersby,” Fonda tweeted. “The gash should be pilloried in Lafayette Square naked and whipped by passersby while being filmed for posterity.”
On Wednesday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at preventing the separation of immigrant children from their border-crossing parents.
Nielsen praised the executive action and called on Congress to find a long-term solution to close the border policy loophole.
“We ask them to do their jobs. The laws need to be changed,” she said.
How In The Hell Can Anyone Not See This Corruption?
Remember Anthony Weiner, also known as “Carlos Danger” — the former congressman who kept texting people pictures of well, umm, that part of his name? It all made quite the splash because he is married to Hillary Clinton’s consigliere and constant sidekick, Huma Abedin.
Turns out that Anthony was such a perp — and so enthralled with his own — that he was sexting with a minor. That is a federal offense carrying up to 10 years in prison. So, he got raided by the New York Police Department and the New York office of the FBI.
They seized his laptop computer. It would have been bad enough if it had only had contained all his porn. But it posed a huge problem for the FBI, DOJ and Mrs. Clinton.
Comey had already exonerated Hillary of her blatant Espionage Act violations and obstruction of justice violations two months before — in time for her to wrap up the election they all expected and wanted her to win.
Peter Strzok and the Trump-hating key players in the Clinton email “investigation” were already well into crafting and leaking the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.
Then, the unthinkable happened.
Only a few hours after the New York office of the FBI took possession of the Weiner laptop, on September 26, 2016, the FBI computer expert discovered it contained more than 140,000 emails involving Hillary Clinton. They were from multiple domain names: State.gov, Clintonemail.com, ClintonFoundation.org, HillaryClinton.com and Blackberry devices. The agent had what he told the inspector general was an “oh shit moment” — recognizing that he had found evidence important to the most important investigation — and he immediately reported it up the chain.
We already knew that President Barack Obama was emailing her on her unsecure server at Clintonemail.com, and Cheryl Mills had written an email noting how “obvious” it was to anyone that this was not State.gov and therefore unsecure. The president jolly-well knew it was not a secure communication as he used an alias.
This was a gargantuan problem for the FBI and for Mrs. Clinton. Other people knew about it, too.
Indeed, according to the inspector general, 39 high-ranking FBI agents knew of it, along with the New York office and people in the New York U.S. Attorney’s office. The New York FBI informed them all during a secure video-conference on September 28 — chaired by Andrew McCabe.
One agent said the announcement of finding hundreds of thousands of Clinton emails on Weiner’s laptop was “like dropping a bomb in the middle of the meeting.”
The New York agent Sweeney followed up with two calls to McCabe later that evening — after McCabe did not call him as promised.
So . . . what did McCabe, Comey and Strzok do? They sat on it until police officers in New York and FBI agents in New York threatened to expose them.
By October 28, it was only 11 days before the election. Comey panicked. The jig was up. They had been hiding it for three weeks. Comey’s guilt and concern for his own career caused him to realize he could not keep it quiet any longer.
Everything exploded when Comey wrote a letter to Congress vaguely reporting the discovery of “additional emails that appear to be related to the investigation.” He wrote further, “the FBI cannot assess at this time whether or not the material may be significant.”
Comey’s words to Congress are belied by the inspector general’s report who bought none of their excuses for the multi-week delay in addressing the emails.
On October 30, 2016, The Daily Caller reported that the Department of Justice had not even sought a warrant for review of the 350,000 Clinton emails.
Breitbart reported on November 4, 2016 that the New York Police Department officers who had seen the evidence on Weiner’s laptop had threatened to blow the whistle. Remarkably, the “Justice Department” shut them down by allegedly threatening to indict NYPD officers on the two-year old death of Eric Gardner if the NYPD disclosed it.
In a stunning assertion, Director Comey told the Inspector General he did not know Anthony Weiner was married to Huma Abedin. Perhaps they should have told him it was “Carlos Danger?”
Either Comey was bald-faced lying, which is punishable under 18 U.S.C. §1001, or the level of ignorance and incompetence inherent in that representation alone warranted his termination.
Moreover, if Comey’s claim were true, then Comey, McCabe and Strzok should have flown into action at the mere thought of a perverted stranger in a sexual offense investigation having 350,000 emails of the secretary of state including highly classified information — covering her entire tenure there.
From the FBI’s and DOJ’s “handling” of the “Weiner problem,” there is more than enough evidence to demand immediate production of the Weiner laptop and all emails should be obtained from NSA or otherwise to be given to an independent special prosecutor for a full and thorough investigation.
In addition, all of this raises scores upon scores of additional questions.
Here are just 10 such questions:
1. What are the names of all the people the FBI has identified as having emailed Hillary Clinton on her obvious unsecured server at Clintonemail.com? (We already know Obama emailed her on it under an alias. Which other high-ranking officials also emailed Clinton at her unsecured server? What about Robert Mueller? What about Eric Holder?
2. Did the inspector general ask Lynch about threats to NYPD to prosecute officers if they didn’t back down on exposing the email cover-up? Why not?
3. Did the FBI show Hillary the email by Cheryl Mills stating it was “obvious” Clintonemail.com was not secure?
4. Who are the three — just three — FBI agents who reviewed the Weiner laptop and conducted the miraculous de-duping and review in only a few days of 350,000 emails that covered her entire tenure as Secretary of State?
5. Who in the Department of Justice reviewed the 350,000 Clinton emails on Weiner laptop?
6. Who in Department of Justice talked to the New York office about the Weiner laptop?
7. How many classified, top-secret and even more secret chains were found from Clinton’s own production on Weiner’s laptop?
8. Who stripped the classified and confidential markings from the documents Mrs. Clinton received before sending them to her?
9. Where is Weiner’s laptop right now?
10. Who made that phone call from the Department of Justice to the New York Police Department? Exactly what was said?
President Donald Trump blamed the establishment media on Tuesday for criticizing his tough enforcement of immigration and asylum laws.
He reminded Americans during a speech at the National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB) 75th-anniversary celebration in Washington, DC, that people who legally applied for asylum at the ports of entry were not prosecuted.
“The fake news media back there doesn’t talk about that. They are fake,” Trump said, pointing at reporters in the room. “They are helping these smugglers and these traffickers like nobody would believe. They know it, they know exactly what they’re doing, and it should be stopped.”
The president suggested that the media was focusing on the border crisis and purposefully ignoring the congressional hearings about the Justice Department Inspector General report on the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton.
“They want to keep the cameras away from the hearings,” Trump said. “Because those hearings are not good for them. In fact, they’re a disaster for them. The whole thing is a scam.”
Trump said traffickers were using the current weak system of immigration laws to infiltrate the country, claiming that trafficking of women and children was currently the worst in history.
“They game the system. It’s so easy for them. They’re smart,” he said, and added, “These smugglers know these rules and regulations better than the people that drew them.”
Everyone Associated With Hillary Clinton Is A Liar.
The Justice Department inspector general report released Friday revealed more personal messages between FBI agents working on the Clinton email probe that suggest a cooked outcome.
The report released new messages from an FBI agent who was one of four case officers handling the “day-to-day” activities of the investigation, and one of two FBI agents who interviewed Clinton.
In one exchange in February 2016, the FBI agent, identified only as “Agent 1,” talked to another FBI employee about interviewing Hillary Clinton’s personal IT staffer. The FBI employee asked how the interview went.
Agent 1 replied: “Awesome. Lied his ass off.”
He continued: “Went from never inside the scif [sensitive compartmented information facility] at [Clinton’s residence], to looked in when it was being constructed, to remove the trash twice, to troubleshot the secure fax with HRC a couple times, to everytime there was a secure fax i did it with HRC. Ridic,”
Lying to investigators is a federal crime, one that former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is being charged with, as well as former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos. However, the FBI employee joked it “would be funny” if the guy was charged.
The FBI employee replied: “would be funny if he was the only guy charged n this deal.”
Agent 1 responded that even though he lied, “aint noone gonna do s–t.”
He wrote: “I know. For 1001. Even if he said the truth and didnt have a clearance when handling the secure fax — aint noone gonna do s–t”
The report revealed other exchanges that revealed Agent 1’s belief that the outcome of the probe was cooked, in text messages he sent to a fellow FBI agent on the case with whom he was also involved in a relationship.
He advocated against even interviewing Clinton. “We have nothing—shouldn’t even be interviewing”
He also messaged: “My god … I’m actually starting to have embarrassment sprinkled on my disappointment. … Ever been forced to do something you adamantly opposed.”
In a later message, he wrote: “done interviewing the president” in reference to Clinton.
Agent 5 sent a message to him on February 9, 2016, complaining about the investigative work she was being given. He wrote her back:
“Yeah, I hear you. You guys have a shitty task, in a shitty environment. To look for something conjured in a place where you cant find it, for a case that doesnt matter and is predestined.”
On election day, he sent her, “You should know; … that I’m … with her.”
He also called the investigation “the most meaningless thing I’ve ever done,” a “continued waste of resources and time and focus.”
“Its just so obvious how pointless this exercise is …” he wrote.
He later told inspector general investigators that he was “embarrassed” his messages were read and denied it affected his actions in the investigation.
“You know, guys, I just, I think this was primarily used as a personal conversation venting mode for me. I’m embarrassed for it,” he said.
If 1 Of These Bastards Is Your Leader You Will Be Corrupt.
A bombshell inspector general report released Thursday revealed that several FBI employees improperly received gifts from reporters, in connection with possible leaks of sensitive information.
Although public details of these exchanges are scant, they could constitute prosecutable violations of federal gift-giving rules.
The gifts in question included “tickets to sporting events, golfing outings, drinks and meals, and admittance to nonpublic social events.”
A Monkey Could See This Corruption.
“We will separately report on those investigations as they are concluded, consistent with the Inspector General Act, other applicable federal statutes, and OIG policy,” the report reads.
Gifting rules for executive branch officials are strict and exacting. The U.S. Office of Government Ethics provides that “executive branch employees may not solicit or accept gifts that are given because of their official positions or that come from certain interested sources (‘prohibited sources’).”
The rules define a prohibited source as a person who:
Is seeking official action by, is doing business or seeking to do business with, or is regulated by the employee’s agency; or
Has interests that may be substantially affected by performance or nonperformance of the employee’s official duties.
These rules apply to government officials, and it is not clear if any reporters involved in these dealings could face any sort of punishment.
It’s also not clear a reporter should be considered a “prohibited source” within the meaning of the provided definitions.
Violations of gift-giving rules are sometimes prosecuted as violations of the honest services fraud (HSF) statute. High profile office-holders indicted for gift violations under this law include Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey and former GOP Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia. Jack Abramoff, the notorious Washington lobbyist, was convicted of honest services fraud.
The HSF statute is a controversial tool, as its vague provisions permit an enterprising prosecutor to make a criminal case out of good faith mistakes or generally harmless conduct. The U.S. Supreme Court dramatically narrowed the reach of the law in a 2010 case called Skilling v. U.S., confining its use to cases involving bribes or kickbacks.
Violations of federal anti-corruption laws occur when a public employee takes “official action” in exchange for gifts. The high court has confined the meaning of “official action” to include only formal exercises of power in official proceedings. It’s not clear that leaking to a reporter falls within this definition, although other federal laws may criminalize this conduct.
Criminal cases notwithstanding, unauthorized media contacts involving the exchange of gifts could serve as a basis for other administrative penalties, like reassignment, suspension or termination.
