President Trump on Saturday reacted to the indictment of 12 Russian military officers “for conspiring to interfere with the 2016 presidential election” by blaming former President Obama and the “deep state.”
“The stories you heard about the 12 Russians yesterday took place during the Obama Administration, not the Trump Administration,” he tweeted from Scotland. “Why didn’t they do something about it, especially when it was reported that President Obama was informed by the FBI in September, before the Election?”
He also expelled 35 Russian diplomats from the U.S. and ordered two Russian compounds to be closed.
Special counsel Robert Mueller is now leading the investigation into Russian interference in the election, as well as possible collusion within the Trump campaign. His probe led to the 12 indictments announced on Friday by the Justice Department. They are charged with hacking Democratic National Committee (DNC) officials and dispersing the stolen documents online.
The Trump administration has emphasized that the indictments do not indicate any level of collusion by a member of the Trump campaign. Trump has repeatedly said there was no collusion.
Trump went on to question “Where is the DNC Server, and why didn’t the FBI take possession of it?”
He proposed that the server could have been kept hidden by the “Deep State.”
The deep state is a conspiracy theory that claims high-level officials run a shadow government working against Trump.
Trump has suggested in the past a conspiracy around the computer servers at the DNC that Russians hacked during the election.
The FBI reportedly has not directly assessed the hacked server during the agency investigation, instead relying on information from a private security firm.
Newly available records do not fully comply with congressional House subpoenas, and barring new developments Friday, recent documents from the FBI and Justice Department do not meet deadlines set by a House resolution, according to a source close to the discussions.
Three House Republican committee chairmen, Trey Gowdy on Oversight, Devin Nunes on Intelligence and Bob Goodlatte on Judiciary, requested the records, with one subpoena issued as long ago as August of last year.
The source said House staffers — who reviewed records Thursday at the Justice Department (DOJ) because lawmakers were out of town for the holiday recess — concluded that Justice and the FBI have still not provided information and records about FBI activities before the investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 elections officially opened on July 31 of that year.
“The House Judiciary Committee has been in contact daily with the Justice Department to ensure they produce all the documents subpoenaed by the committee earlier this year,” a Republican House Judiciary Committee aide said. “The Justice Department has produced more documents over the past weeks and has requested more time to produce additional documents. This request seems to be reasonable, and we expect the department to comply with the terms of the subpoena.”
An Intelligence Committee spokesperson told Fox News, “The DOJ gave the committee some, but not all, of the outstanding documents, so they are not in compliance.”
A Justice Department official emphasized last weekend that the DOJ and FBI had told both chambers’ intelligence committees that records, previously limited to congressional leadership known as Gang of Eight, were now available to lawmakers and cleared staff. The records were widely reported to include documents about the FBI’s alleged use of confidential sources to contact Trump campaign aides during the 2016 campaign.
In April, a subpoena was issued for a key set of records, focused on FBI activities before the bureau’s Russia case officially opened.
“What put this in motion? And of course, was what put this into motion, was something that is politically motivated, or was it based on legit law enforcement evidence?” said Thomas Dupree, former deputy assistant attorney general under President George W. Bush. “Based on [last week’s congressional] hearing and the back-and-forth we have seen over the last few months, we are in an extremely unusual, and in my view disturbing, situation, where there has been a complete breakdown and a fracture of trust.”
FBI Director Christopher Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein were on Capitol Hill last week, and faced new pressure to comply after the passage, along party lines, of a nonbinding House resolution calling on Rosenstein to provide withheld documents. The resolution had the effect of putting all House members on the record.
Those who have worked with Rosenstein emphasize he is in a difficult position because, they say, it is not routine to provide records from ongoing investigations.
“I know Rod and I think he’s an honorable person and I think anybody in that position would take it personally if they’re going to say, ‘You personally have been obstructing Congress or holding things back,’’’ said Robert Driscoll, former assistant attorney general. “He views himself as a point of a spear in a process and the one who has to interact with Congress.”
Separately on Thursday, Nunes referred 15 names for public testimony to the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees. The majority are directly linked to the infamous Steele Dossier, as well as the firm Fusion GPS that was paid by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign to compile the research.
A Justice Department spokesperson declined to answer Fox’s questions, adding that Justice would respond to the House committees directly.
Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.
President Donald Trump claims the Obama administration offered U.S. citizenship to thousands of Iranians, including the families of certain government employees, during the negotiations on the Iran nuclear deal.
“Just out that the Obama Administration granted citizenship, during the terrible Iran Deal negotiation, to 2,500 Iranians – including to government officials,” he tweeted Tuesday, adding, “How big (and bad) is that?”
Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump
Just out that the Obama Administration granted citizenship, during the terrible Iran Deal negotiation, to 2,500 Iranians – including to government officials. How big (and bad) is that?
The president, who announced U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (Iran deal) in May, appears to be referencing a Fox News story citing a recent report from Iran’s semi-official Far News agency.
Obama Loves To Kiss Iran Ass More Than Anything
“When Obama, during the negotiations about the JCPOA, decided to do a favor to these men, he granted citizenship to 2,500 Iranians and some officials started a competition over whose children could be part of these 2,500 Iranians,” Hojjat al-Islam Mojtaba Zolnour, the conservative head of the Iranian parliament’s nuclear committee and a member of the national security and foreign policy committees, revealed recently, according to Far News. He explained that the Obama administration sought to curry favor with senior Iranian officials aligned with President Hassan Rouhani.
“If today these Iranians get deported from America, it will become clear who is complicit and sells the national interest like he is selling candies to America,” Zolnour, who is close to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, further arguing that “It should be stated exactly which children of which authorities live in the United States and have received citizenship or residency.”
Fox noted that is unclear whether the Iranian politician meant citizenship or legal permanent resident (green card) status.
In 2015, the year the Iran nuclear deal was signed, the U.S. awarded green cards to 13,114 Iranians, and another 13,298 received green cards the following year, according to Department of Homeland Security data. Another 10,344 Iranians were naturalized in 2015, while 9,507 were granted citizenship in 2016.
If true, this would represent another concession by the Obama administration during negotiations for the Iran nuclear deal.
There are also longstanding concerns about the $1.7 billion payment to Iran that was portrayed by the administration as a legal settlement but coincided with the release of American prisoners, leading many observers to call it a ransom.
The Iranian politician’s comments are questionable, though. Fox News analyst and former Obama State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said his comments sound like “totally made up BS.”
The inspector general’s report on the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server when she was secretary of state has already documented just how riddled the bureau was with bias against Donald Trump when he was the Republican candidate for president.
Now, one conservative commentator is suggesting the report holds proof that the corruption went all the way to the top of the Justice Department.
In a Twitter post last week, Paul Sperry, who has written extensively about the FBI in columns published by the New York Post, hinted that Inspector General Michael Horowitz could have solid grounds to show “obstruction” in the Clinton email case – by none other than former Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
Sperry wrote that Horowitz testified on Capitol Hill about parts of his report that remain classified, and Sperry had a guess as to some of what it contained.
BREAKING: IG Horowitz testifies material implicating Lynch in possible obstruction of Hillary email case is contained in classified section of his report and that he will work with Congress to declassify it. Here is the possible smoking gun:
“BREAKING: IG Horowitz testifies material implicating Lynch in possible obstruction of Hillary email case is contained in classified section of his report and that he will work with Congress to declassify it,” Sperry wrote. “Here is the smoking gun …”
Sperry linked to one of his own columns in the Post from July 2017 that described a document indicating that Lynch had assured Clinton’s presidential campaign that she would make sure the FBI did not “go too far” in its investigation of the email case.
From even public information about the case, it’s pretty clear that Lynch kept a tight rein on it.
Did Loretta Lynch rein in the FBI’s Hillary Clinton investigation?
Former FBI Director James Comey has publicly testified that Lynch wanted him to refer to the Clinton probe as a “matter” rather than an “investigation.” (Comey pretended he was “confused” and “concerned” by the semantic choice. Can a man who made it to the top of the FBI be that obtuse? The answer is “no.”)
But if the IG report really does contain proof that Lynch put a limit on the FBI’s investigation to benefit the woman most of the political world expected to be elected president of the United States in November 2016, it puts things in a different light.
Lynch’s now infamous meeting with former President Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac in Arizona on June 27, 2016, has never been adequately explained. The then-attorney general’s story that the two had crossed paths by accident never passed the laugh test.
On Sunday, The Washington Times reported that Clinton himself told investigators he only went to see Lynch on her Justice Department airplane because he did not want to be rude when he found out the two were parked at the same facility.
That doesn’t seem likely, to put it mildly.
What seems very possible, though, is that Lynch was keenly interested in keeping her job as the attorney general. And that Bill Clinton was interested in sounding her out about how much control she was exercising over the investigation into Hillary Clinton. Bill Clinton might have been in a position to guarantee Lynch would stay on as attorney general if Hillary won the election — or remind Lynch of a guarantee already made.
Does the still-classified section of the IG report hold proof that Lynch was willing to keep the FBI from going “too far” in investigating Hillary?
Democrats and the liberal media have been claiming – ludicrously – that Horowitz’s damning report actually cleared the FBI. It actually exposed the agency as filled with bias, staffed by agents who thought nothing of using the bureau’s awesome powers to try to rig a presidential election.
That was bad enough. But the biggest shoe might still be waiting to drop.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.
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?
FIVE ANTI-TRUMP FBI OFFICIALS REFERRED FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION OVER PRIVATE MESSAGES
Five FBI officials, including Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, have been referred to the bureau for possible disciplinary action over anti-Trump text messages.
In addition to Strzok and Page, the three other officials referred for disciplinary action are two FBI agents and an attorney who worked on the special counsel’s Russia investigation. The investigation will focus on whether the employees violated the FBI’s Offense Codes and Penalty Guidelines.
“The conduct of the five FBI employees … has brought discredit to themselves, sowed doubt about the FBI’s handling of the Midyear investigation, and impacted the reputation of the FBI,” reads the report.
“In its review of collected materials, the OIG found that several FBI employees had exchanged text messages, instant messages, or both, that included political statements hostile to or favoring particular candidates, and appeared to mix political opinion with discussions” about the Hillary Clinton email probe.
Anti-Trump exchanges between Strzok and Page have been well documented. The pair, who were having an extramarital affair, frequently criticized Trump while they were both working on the FBI’s Russia investigation.
“F Trump,” Page, an FBI attorney, wrote in one message to Strzok, the bureau’s deputy chief of counterintelligence.
Strzok was removed from the special counsel’s investigation last July after the OIG discovered the messages.
Thursday’s report reveals for the first time that three other FBI officials exchanged anti-Trump and pro-Clinton messages. One FBI lawyer who worked on the Clinton investigation and served as the bureau’s top attorney on the Russia probe said he felt “numb” by Trump’s November 2016 election win.
And on Nov. 22, 2016, he wrote “Viva le Resistance” when asked about Trump.
The lawyer, who has not been identified, joined Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team last May but left in late February 2018 after the OIG revealed the private messages.
The OIG report also flags messages exchanged between two agents referred to as “Agent 1” and “Agent 5.” Both worked on the Clinton investigation but not on the Trump-Russia probe.
Agent 1 was one of the agents who, along with Strzok, interviewed Hillary Clinton in July 2016.
“I’m done interviewing the President,” the agent wrote, referring jokingly to then-candidate Clinton.
In another exchange, the agent wrote that they were “Not sure if Trump or the [FBI’s] fifth floor is worse.”
Agent 5 responded “I’m so sick of both.”
The agents also suggested in text messages on Election Day that there would be riots if Trump defeated Clinton.
“You think HRC is gonna win right? You think we should get nails and some boards in case she doesnt,” Agent 1 wrote.
“She better win… otherwise i’m gonna be walking around with both of my guns,” Agent 5 responded.
Though the OIG, led by Michael Horowitz, blasted the FBI officials over the messages, the agency said it “found no evidence to connect the political views expressed by these employees with the specific investigative decisions” in the Clinton email probe.
The report did not assess whether Strzok, Page or the other agents displayed bias that affected their work on the Trump-Russia investigation.
Internet Responds To Hillary’s Three Word Fit At James Comey
Hillary Clinton threw an absolute fit when it was revealed in the IG report that James Comey had himself had a private email with which he had conducted some business.
It got over a half a million likes and was cheered by many on the left. Despite the fact that it basically amounts to a “he did it too!” which doesn’t excuse her. Not to mention what she did was far worse because she created a private server specifically to avoid government oversight of her emails, she sent and received classified emails, she exposed the server to attack and it was in fact breached with secret info taken by foreign actors, and she wiped the server and her assistants destroyed their phones.
