Ex-AG Loretta Lynch and Stone Cold 'Heads I Win Tails You Lose' Swamp Liars
So, the former chief law enforcement of the US is appealing to the mob and imported paid anarchists to commit violence in the US in pursuit of the overthrow of a president who was elected in the existing constitutional order. Holder would be proud of her. Like him she is lost in a fantasy in which the civil rights struggle of the '60s and '70s must continue to be fought at all costs. Is this appeal of hers not a criminal inducement to violence in light of the actions of creatures like the rioters at Berkeley yesterday? - Col. Patrick Lang, USA ret.
This is the woman America who ultimately would've signed off on or at least been aware despite her likely denials under oath of any FISA warrant targeting the Trump campaign or the candidate's associates while Obama himself insists he didnaknownuffin.
On Saturday, March 4 President Donald Trump accused his predecessor Barack Hussein Obama of ordering the wiretapping of Trump Tower during and likely after the 2016 presidential campaign. The response to that bombshell charge was widespread pearl clutching and 'how dare he!' and 'he has no evidence!' reactions from the same so-called liberals and legacy media who have without proof accused the President of being a Russian agent. The Washington Establishment and dirty Deep State has kicked into overdrive, with Obama spokespersons and the dying Democrat Party anchored legacy media putting on a clinic in Beltway obfuscation and lawyer talk. Like the perjurer, the former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, they have disavowed any knowledge of the widely (including as we'll see below by Heat Street, the UK Guardian and New York Times!) reported existence of a FISA court warrant targeting Trump Tower last year. But at the same time, media and 'Russians!' proxies have insisted that IF such a wiretap was approved in secret by a federal judge it must've been justified and Trump ought to be worried if not resigning right now.
This typically Washingtonian 'heads I win, tails you lose' bullshit called out by former U.S. Secret Service agent Dan Bongino above is shamelessly promulgated despite the lame duck, vengeful and leaking like a sieve Obama Administration failing to present any evidence -- only innuendo -- on its way out the door of collusion between any member of team Trump and the Russian government. Nor could Clapper over the past weekend or the FBI's no. 2 in the last two weeks confirm any evidence of Trump camp-Rooskie collusion after months of leaks related to an investigation and innuendo accusing prominent Trump surrogates like Roger Stone of such contacts. Despite the media and 'Russians!' Twitter trolls best attempts to slag his reputation, Mr. Stone maintains that the FBI has never contacted him and he never had contact with Russians or with Wikileaks, but only heard about what the activist group had planned through an intermediary who travels to the UK.
Mark Zaid and a Former Druggie/Rock Groupie Client, Louise Mensch and the Wall of Deep State Denial and Doublethink-ing Lawyer-speak
Certain 'moderate' observers, like former NSA counsel Stewart Baker writing for the Lawfare blog, have tried to explain away this apparent case of doublethink through clever arguments. They've insisted that candidate or president elect Trump's phone calls or emails may've only been listened to or read by NSA incidentally, as part of a narrowly authorized mandate to monitor individuals in Trump's business or political circles allegedly in contact with Russians, whether government officials or much more likely, prominent biznismen with purported Kremlin connections.
However, the fact that Trump as commander in chief is essentially free to declassify at any moment the FISA court orders pertaining to himself or any other American and therefore would have little reason or need to lie about its existence when Democratic Senate Intelligence Committee members could easily contradict him -- but are instead issuing carefully worded denials of their knowledge of such an order -- has been acknowledged by even the most smug of Trump-hating 'Swamp dwellers'. This would include national security attorney Mark S. Zaid.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper disavows any knowledge of FISA court-approved wiretap activity against the Trump campaign. You will note the similarity of his denial in lawyer drafted wording to those of Senate Intel Committee Democrats.
Well, that's an important revelation at this point. Let me ask you this. Does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials?
We did not include any evidence in our report, and I say, "our," that's N.S.A., F.B.I. and C.I.A., with my office, the Director of National Intelligence, that had anything, that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was no evidence of that included in our report.
I understand that. But does it exist?
Not to my knowledge.
If it existed, it would have been in this report?
This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government." Meet the Press 5 March 2017
Known perjurer who was given NSA questions by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) in advance back in 2013 before Snowden's revelations denies any knowledge of Trump Tower 'tapp'...
Carefully Crafted Denials and Coordinated Talking Points --
The 'National Security' Attorney Who Labels Deep State Subversion as 'Whistleblowing'
Mr. Zaid insists -- like the Clinton News Network hack Jake Tapper -- that Trump would make such a politically explosive charge against the Obama Administration and leave himself open to ridicule if not Congressional censure on the basis of a Breitbart News story, rather than personally reviewing the still-classified FISA court orders alongside White House counsel. The other part of Zaid and his law partner Bradley Moss's absurd two facedness, is the fact that their own acknowledged client Louise Mensch -- an ex-rock groupie turned Rupert Murdoch paid neocon journalist -- triumphantly reported as a 'scoop' for Heat Street back on the day before the election, the FISA court warrant. The same FISA warrant, whose very existence Zaid has temporized about on Twitter...
By 'coincidence', over the weekend the former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and several Senate Intel Committee Democrats also proclaimed their ignorance of any such FISA order. Yet we have the testimony of former CIA and State Department analyst Larry C. Johnson, that the decision to tap Trump involved both then ODNI James Clapper (who already perjured himself in his infamous 2013 Congressional testimony without facing any consequences) and CIA Director John Brennan. It also appears that the 'intelligence' justifying such a wiretap and the arguments Obama Justice Department officials presented to the secret court may have came from Great Britain, via the NSA's 5Eyes sister agency GCHQ, and possibly the Dutch intelligence service. Former CIA agent Phil Girardi, who like Johnson is a member of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) group, came to a similar conclusion regarding a British intel connection to Washington's Russia hysteria in his February 28th article about the Flynn affair. Former British barrister Alexander Mercouris, looking over the NYT article from just days before Trump's explosive allegations in which Obama Admin officials bragged about circulating classified intercepts on Trump or associates as broadly as possible within the government (including to unnamed foreign intelligence services) comes to the same conclusion:
Confirmation that the Obama administration did indeed circulate claims about the Trump campaign’s alleged contacts with Russia as widely as possible throughout the bureaucracy and to foreign governments was provided by an article by The New York Times. The Moon of Alabama blog has thoroughly discussed the implications of the revelations in this article. I would merely add to that discussion the following:
(1) The New York Times article provided further confirmation to my previous claim that there is a British connection to this affair, with some of the warnings about supposed contacts between people associated with the Trump campaign and various Russians coming from British and Dutch intelligence (I should say that Dutch intelligence has a very long history of close collaboration with British intelligence extending back before the setting up of NATO);
The British FakeINT Invasion:
'Ex' MI6 Man Steele's Libelous Dossier, GCHQers and Crazy Louise All Connected?
Louise Mensch is a British subject and former Conservative Party MP living in New York. If you believe Zaid depending on his mood while tweeting, Zaid's client and her publication Heat Street are either purveyors of #fakenews and Trump made up the FISA court order against himself (which makes no sense), or alternatively it's totally justified and maybe his batshit crazy McCarthyite client who thinks Putin not only controls Trump but ordered the murder of Andrew Breitbart back in 2012 is correct. Again it is the nature D.C. Swamp creatures to refer to their credentials and shamelessly argue heads they win, tails you lose, and you or the President of the United States, rather than their self-acknowledged mental illness-effected client are the conspiracy nut. QED.
The other more important issues with Mensch which may soon come to light are
A) what sources whether inside the Obama Administration or outside it tipped her off regarding the successfully obtained FISA court warrant to surveil Trump Tower from October, assuming a FISA warrant can be obtained against her to read emails left on her computer by the Trump Justice Department
B) are Ms. Mensch (as we suspect, along with her ex-US Naval War College Professor 'tweep' Mr. 20CONmittee John R. Schindler) merely frontwomen and men for a broader conspiracy stretching into the United Kingdom tying together globalist #NeverTrump billionaires, Trump hating NATO/EU state funded propagandists, and of course numerous derp staters fanatically opposed to Trump's promises of detente with Russia. Related to question B, Zerohedge reports Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) has written to FBI Director James Comey to find out IF the Bureau paid now absconded ex-MI6 sleazebag Christopher Steele, and WHY it would fund a man agents had to know was tasked with digging up any kind of 'dirt' on Trump, no matter how preposterous, for political ends:
In late February, The Washington Post reported that the FBI reached an agreement with Steele whereby the British spy would continue his investigation on behalf of the bureau.
“While Trump has derided the dossier as 'fake news' compiled by his political opponents, the FBI’s arrangement with Steele shows that the bureau considered him credible and found his information, while unproved, to be worthy of further investigation,” the Post, which has been spoon-fed every piece of leaked wiretapped information involving the Trump administration, reported at the time.
However, today Grassley pushed back and demand the FBI provide information relevant to its relationship with and use of the British spy, whose salacious allegations - among which an infamous golden shower scene involving hookers - have infuriated Trump and his allies.
“The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican nominee for President in the run-up to the election raises further questions about the FBI’s independence from politics, as well as the Obama administration’s use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends,” Grassley wrote.
“It is additionally troubling that the FBI reportedly agreed to such an arrangement given that, in January of 2017, then-Director Clapper issued a statement stating that ‘the [intelligence community] has not made any judgment that the information in this document is reliable, and we did not rely upon it in any way for our conclusions.’”
In his letter, Grassley asks for all records regarding Steele’s investigation, details of the agreement between the FBI and Steele, the FBI’s policies for using outside investigators, and whether the bureau has relied on any of the information Steele has provided in seeking warrants.
Grassley also wants to know how the FBI obtained a copy of Steele’s documents, whether it has additional documents that were not published by Buzzfeed, and whether any FBI activity was influenced by the Steele memo.
As the Russia Analyst has previously written concerning Mr. Steele, if he can be compelled to testify in British libel court or questioned under oath by the Senate Intelligence Committee as to which billionaire adversary of Trump financed the entire 'dodgy dossier' project, it's a safe bet that Steele's patrons are linked to other Trump adversaries including 'ex' CIA man Evan McMullin and quite possibly, the Florida-based pervert and GOP consultant Rick Wilson. Exposing the murky links between supposedly private slush funds used for globalist investigations and the three letter agencies that aid and abet such 'investigators' would shine a spotlight on the dirty deep state, including its '5Eyes' or British Empire legacy component.
The Russia Analyst used to think the LaRouche movement people were paranoid about British meddling in American politics. Not anymore. For good (Nigel Farage) or bad (Louise Mensch), 5Eyes agreement and denials that NSA and GCHQ 'swap (warrant-less) surveillance' on each other's citizens be damned, we don't doubt that Her Majesty's Secret Service MI6 (which was caught creating numerous 'Free Syrian Army' and White Helmets social media accounts promoted in North America via London PR firms) and the City of London are still very engaged in the manipulation of American politics. To be fair to our British cousins, President Obama shamelessly meddled in a Brexit vote that was none of his business as well, as did nearly the entire legacy media in coming out against the UK leaving the European Union.
What 'Minimization Procedures'? Whether It Was #NeverTrump ers at NSA or Obama Hacks at DoJ or All of the Above, Someone or Some Groups of People Broke FISA Laws
Even if Zaid weren't a shyster trying to have his argument both ways with respect to a FISA warrant pertaining to Trump or his associates, he and the increasingly fanatical in their defense of the Obama DoJ Washington Swamp dwellers have another problem. As First Amendment attorney (dissed by Zaid on Twitter) Robert Barnes wrote on March 4, "Yes, There Could Be Serious Legal Problems if Obama Admin Involved in Illegal Surveillance" there is not only the issue of legality in political appointees of an Administration like an Attorney General Trump-ing up a foreign intelligence connection as a pretext to get the FISA court to approve a wiretap that may turn up all sorts of juicy stuff on a political opponent (though apparently the wiretapping didn't produce much, or it would've leaked by now). There's also the issue Zaid and his law partner Bradley Moss have to consider when offering their legal advice to Obama Justice Department officials, who face being charged with perjury and grossly violating the mandatory minimization procedures designed to protect the identities of U.S. persons subject to 'incidental' intelligence collection under the FISA law:
FISA can only be used for “foreign intelligence information.” Now that sounds broad, but is in fact very limited under the law. The only “foreign intelligence information” allowed as a basis for surveillance is information necessary to protect the United States against actual or potential “grave” “hostile” attack, war-like sabotage or international terror. Second, it can only be used to eavesdrop on conversations where the parties to the conversation are a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. An agent of a foreign power cannot be a United States person unless they are knowingly involved in criminal espionage. No warrant is allowed on that person unless a FISA court finds probable cause the United States person is knowingly engaged in criminal espionage. Even then, if it involves a United States person, special steps must be taken to “minimize the acquisition and retention, and prohibit the dissemination, of non publicly available information concerning un-consenting United States persons.”
This includes procedures that require they never identify the person, or the conversation, being surveilled, to the public where that information is not evidence of a particular crime. Third, the kind of information sought concerns solely information about a pending or actual attack on the country. That is why the law limits itself to sabotage incidents involving war, not any form or kind of “sabotage,” explicitly limiting itself to those acts identified in section 105 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
This bring us to Watergate-on-Steroids, or #ObamaGate. Here are the problematic aspects of the Obama surveillance on Trump’s team, and on Trump himself. First, it is not apparent FISA could ever be invoked. Second, it is possible Obama’s team may have perjured themselves before the FISA court by withholding material information essential to the FISA court’s willingness to permit the government surveillance. Third, it could be that Obama’s team illegally disseminated and disclosed FISA information in direct violation of the statute precisely prohibiting such dissemination and disclosure. FISA prohibits, under criminal penalty, Obama’s team from doing any of the three.
At the outset, the NSA should have never been involved in a domestic US election. Investigating the election, or any hacking of the DNC or the phishing of Podesta’s emails, would not be a FISA matter. It does not fit the definition of war sabotage or a “grave” “hostile” war-like attack on the United States, as constrictively covered by FISA. It is your run-of-the-mill hacking case covered by existing United States laws that require use of the regular departments of the FBI, Department of Justice, and Constitutionally Senate-appointed federal district court judges, and their appointed magistrates, not secretive, deferential FISA courts.
Out of 35,000+ requests for surveillance, the FISA court has only ever rejected a whopping 12. Apparently, according to published reports, you can add one more to that — even the FISA court first rejected Obama’s request to spy on Trump’s team under the guise of an investigation into foreign agents of a pending war attack, intelligence agents apparently returned to the court, where, it is my assumption, that they did not disclose or divulge all material facts to the court when seeking the surveillance the second time around, some of which they would later wrongfully disseminate and distribute to the public. By itself, misuse of FISA procedures to obtain surveillance is itself, a crime.
This raises the second problem: Obama’s team submission of an affidavit to to the FISA court. An application for a warrant of any kind requires an affidavit, and that affidavit may not omit material factors. A fact is “material” if it could have the possible impact of impacting the judicial officer deciding whether to authorize the warrant. Such affidavits are the most carefully drawn up, reviewed, and approved affidavits of law enforcement in our system precisely because they must be fully-disclosing, forthcoming, and include any information a judge must know to decide whether to allow our government to spy on its own. My assumption would be that intelligence officials were trying to investigate hacking of DNC which is not even a FISA covered crime, so therefore serious questions arise about what Obama administration attorneys said to the FISA court to even consider the application. If the claim was “financial ties” to Russia, then Obama knew he had no basis to use FISA at all.
Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves...
As the Guerrilla Warned RogueMoney Readers, Comey is NOT a White Hat: FBI Director Reveals True Colors in Demanding AG Sessions Disavow POTUS Allegations While Covering Up the Admission of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe that Russia Investigation Has Uncovered NOTHING Tying Trump or Trump's Campaign to the Russian Government
As Conservative Treehouse has documented, Director Comey has finally laid his cards on the table and they're hostile to President Trump, revealing his ultimate loyalties to the derp state rather than his oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Notwithstanding Hillary loyalists whining that Comey's reopening of the investigation into Emailgate cost their glue horse candidate the election, the fact is that Deputy Director McCabe has been manipulated by the Democrats through their compromising of his Virginia State Senate candidate wife, Dr. Jill McCabe. President Trump is of course, well aware of these facts, hence his fury over the weekend that his loyal AG Sessions was forced to recuse himself from any Russia-related investigations, likely including a Trump DoJ audit of Obama's Justice Department to see if political appointees manipulated the FBI and FISA surveillance requests:
According to the New York Times, FBI Director James Comey is reported to be requesting the President Trump Department of Justice to refute the possibility of the FBI having intercepted communications from Trump Tower in the latest “Wire Tapping” denial.
So lets give this request by Director Comey some context.
It was only a few weeks ago when the same FBI went to President Trump’s Chief of Staff and told Reince Priebus there was no truth to media reports, based on FBI leaks, of FBI evidence showing Trump campaign officials involved with Russian officials regarding the 2016 election. It was all a complete nothingburger.
Details – On February 15th while discussing another issue FBI Assistant Director Andrew McCabe asked Reince for 5 minutes alone after the meeting. At the one-on-one meeting McCabe told Priebus the New York Times Russia and Trump campaign story was a “bunch of BS”.
Priebus asked McCabe if McCabe would be able to say that publicly and get the media off his back about a ridiculously false narrative. Asst. Director McCabe said he would check with his boss, FBI Director James Comey. Later, McCabe called back and said he couldn’t issue a statement about it...
Got that? The Deputy Director of the FBI was asked by White House spokesman Sean Spicer not to exonerate President Trump, but simply to issue a statement regarding what the FBI has found after MONTHS of investigating, and refused. Considering the enormous pressure the FBI is under and the strong evidence the deputy director and likely director too are being blackmailed into supporting the soft coup against Trump, this is not surprising.
It's going to be a long and hot summer in Washington.
In a world where the rules no longer apply, it quickly becomes every man for himself and that’s what is happening in Washington right now.The Left accusing Trump of colluding with the Russians is not just a reckless political attack. It’s war on the very system of governance. It’s the sort of thing that goes on when the political system is breaking down. Trump’s charge that Obama was spying on his campaign makes perfect sense in light of what see happening. The evidence of some sort of Nixonian skulduggery is pretty strong.
Of course, in a world where the scrupulous following of protocol is essential to maintaining the status quo, a break down in the rules puts everyone at risk. That seems to be Trump’s game here with the spying charges. The establishment has tossed out the rules in their effort to attack him, so he is threatening to further bust up the system, which works to his favor and to their disadvantage. it’s a foolish game the Left has decided to play as they have much more to lose in a world without rules.
There’s another aspect to this. Trump has fewer skeletons in his closet than any president in generations. In Washington, that makes him a very dangerous man. All of these guys have shady deals in their closet. All of them bend the rules to reward themselves and their associates. No one says anything about it because everyone is dirty. Washington is a lot like a corrupt police precinct, where everyone is on the take so no one dares rat on anyone else. Trump’s life is an open book so he does not have to play along.
That’s probably why he went nuclear over the weekend. He’s looking around at a city full of crooked politicians calling for investigations so he is turning the table and threatening to open the investigation up to everything. Imagine Trump coming out and asking for a special prosecutor to look into Obama, Clinton, the IRS people, the DOJ and maybe even the FBI itself. There’s a lot of people in Washington with a lot to hide and Trump certainly knows it, which is why he is going on the attack over the tapping of his offices.