WHAT COLLUSION?

Pissed off by now “ ?  You should be! All sane heads realize that this Mueller investigation has one objectiveto bring down President Trump. Let’s look at “COLLUSION” – Defined as a secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose – acting in collusion with the enemy. So what does have to do with the campaign and election of Donald Trump?

How can you collude to tip an election in your favor? And who doesn’t collude to do this. But in the Trump case the question is what Russia could do to accomplish a Trump win, like maybe have “illegal aliens vote for him, stuff the ballot box, have dead voters pull the lever.” OMG we forgot to mention fake YouTube productions that conspired to bring Hillary down, and Facebook, what else can we say about bad actors discussing Trumps affairs, secret meetings with Russian co-conspirators. To us this seems more of what the Hillary Campaign did. And not one peep out of the FBI, no independent prosecutor either. But one thing did happen, much of the evidence to prove a conspiracy regarding collusion has been by the Hillary campaign. And we bet a great deal of this evidence has been sanitized, burned or wiped clean with a cloth. Where are those emails?

All of that non withstanding, Americans of the Red White and Blue stripe know full well that COLLUSION to win an election is all but impossible.

To do this voters would have to drink the Kool Aid Kool-Aid Drink Mix, 16 Flavors Variety Pack, 48 Packets (Kool Aid Party Variety 48 pk)en-mass. They sure did, but those who did are the ones who voted for Hillary. The real collusion was between the DNC and Clinton campaign who hired GPS Fusion to spread false information. But don’t forget the collusion involving Hillary and the breaking of Federal Law regarding her raiding PAC money. And that is not all, Hillary condoned the voting by illegal voters by helping them sign up to vote. Recently, 19 illegals have been caught in North Carolina. How about colluding with anti-Trump activists in the FBI, Strozk, Page, McCabe, Comey, Mueller, Rosenstein who did the Deep State Drilling for Hillary. 

LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP NOW

HARRY REID – A CRIMINAL BY NO OTHER NAME – A VAIN ATTEMPT TO TAKE DOWN THE FREELY ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

To protect Hillary “lock her up” Clinton in the run for the White House FAKE information given to pugnacious Senator, “Harry Black Eye” Reid was the meal ticket utilized to sabotage the Trump run for the Presidency of the United States.  JOHN BRENNAN! Yes Brennan, under the head of the CIA under Obama told Reid not to release it, but did he?

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) sends a letter to then-FBI Director Comey voicing concern over Russian interference in the election and asking Comey to open an FBI investigation.

 – The Washington Times – Saturday, May 12, 2018

Then-Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid released a letter in the heat of the 2016 election alleging Trump-Russia collusion even though the CIA director at the time urged him not to, according to a person familiar with their conversation.

Mr. Reid’s Aug. 27 letter to the FBI appears to mark the first time a Democrat officially accused President’ Trump’s campaign of colluding with the Russian government to hack his party’s computers.

The letter has come to represent for conservatives the “deep state” — Obama loyalists leaking unproven allegations to the press against Mr. Trump and his people to ruin the campaign, the transition and the White House.

“The evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign continues to mount,” Mr. Reid wrote to FBI Director James B. Comey.

Mr. Reid wrote and leaked his letter after receiving a secret telephone briefing from then-CIA Director John Brennan.

The retired senator has portrayed the letter as having the blessing of Mr. Brennan, a fierce Trump critic who suggests the president is beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin for fear of blackmail.

But now the Brennan side rebuts Mr. Reid’s contention that the then-CIA director was actively trying to leak damaging anti-Trump information during the election.

Nick Shapiro, former deputy chief of staff for Mr. Brennan as CIA director, told The Washington Times that his ex-boss considered the information sensitive. He expressly urged Mr. Reid to confine the information to private discussions with Mr. Comey.

That August, Mr. Brennan was briefing the so called “gang of eight” congressional leaders on Russian computer hacking and on suspicious that Trump people were involved.

Mr. Shapiro, now a Brennan adviser, provided this version of the Brennan-Reid phone call:

“Brennan used the same exact notes to brief Reid as he used with the other members of the Gang of Eight. In fact, most of the conversation was spent with Senator Reid telling Brennan what he had heard about Russians and the Trump campaign. Senator Reid informed Brennan that he was in the process of drafting a letter to Comey about his concerns. When Senator Reid asked Brennan whether he could reference this information in the letter to Comey, Brennan said ‘no,’ as the intelligence was being tightly controlled and he was worried that the letter would get out into the public. Brennan told him that Comey had been fully briefed on the intelligence and if he wanted to, it would be better to talk to him about it in a secure manner when he returned to D.C. instead of putting it in a letter.”

Mr. Reid, Nevada Democrat, wrote the letter anyway. And it was leaked to The New York Times and then migrated throughout the mainstream media.

It contained references to a Trump aide traveling to Moscow and allegedly meeting with two sanctioned Kremlin figures — an allegation contained in the Democratic Party-financed dossier written by ex-British spy Christopher Steele. The unnamed person is Carter Page, who has denied under oath he ever met the two people named by Mr. Steele.

The dossier at that point had not been published. The FBI possessed copies and had opened a counter-intelligence investigation into Russia meddling the previous month.

Mr. Reid’s version of his phone call from Mr. Brennan is contained in the best-selling book, “Russian Roulette,” which embraces the Trump-Russia conspiracy and promotes the Steele dossier.

The book says:

“Reid also had the impression that Brennan had an ulterior motive,” the authors said. “He concluded the CIA chief believed the public needed to know about the Russian operation, including the information about the possible links to the Trump campaign. When Reid later was asked if Brennan directly or indirectly had enlisted him to push information held by the intelligence community into the public realm, he told an interviewer, ‘Why do you think he called me?’

Mr. Shapiro, Mr. Brennan’s adviser, said that specific book excerpt is inaccurate. He also told The Times that rather than trying to sell Trump-Russia collusion during the campaign, the Obama White House and Mr. Brennan stayed silent.

The Washington Times submitted questions to Mr. Reid’s associates at a public policy institute in Nevada where he serves as co-chairman. The queries went unanswered.

Mr. Reid did not stop his drumbeat on Trump-Russia. After Mr. Steele leaked his dossier narrative to selected reporters in Washington, Yahoo News, whose Michael Isikoff co-authored “Russian Roulette,” wrote a story.

But The New York Times dampened the narrative with an Oct. 31 story headlined, “Investigating Donald Trump, FBISees No Clear Link to Russia.”

Mr. Reid was furious

Adam Jentleson, his deputy chief of staff, tweeted, “I’ll say it: NYT interviewed Reid for this story. He said things contrary to the story. NYT discarded the interview.”

“Maybe some want to know why the NYT seemed to cover for Comey’s FBI? Maybe even some at the NYT? Maybe not? I’m just asking questions,” Jentleson said. The New York Times would go on to become one of journalism’s chief proponents of Trump-Russia collusion.

The Washington Times has examined Mr. Steele’s series of collusion charges and found that none has been confirmed independently and publicly at this point. Special counsel Robert Mueller continues to investigate.

However, the FBI’s investigation remained a secret during the campaign. Despite public pressure, including public letters from then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid on August 29 and October 30, 2016, the latter claiming that the FBI was concealing “explosive information about close ties and coordination between Trump and his top advisers, and the Russian government,” the FBI did not disclose its investigation until after the election. In fact, on October 31, 2016, The New York Times reported that FBI officials had not found evidence demonstrating links between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.
David Kris is a founder of Culper Partners LLC. He previously served as assistant attorney general for national security, associate deputy attorney general, trial attorney at the Department of Justice, general counsel at Intellectual Ventures, and deputy general counsel and chief ethics and compliance officer at Time Warner. He is the author or co-author of several works on national security, including the treatise National Security Investigations and Prosecutions, and has taught at Georgetown University and the University of Washington.

The Carter Page FISAs are out via the Freedom of Information Act. Here are a few observations, relatively brief but still just a bit too long for Twitter.

First, a huge amount of information is redacted in these FISA applications, but they still represent a monumental disclosure to the public. The government considers FISA applications to be very sensitive—and their disclosure, even heavily redacted, may have long-term, programmatic consequences long after we’re finished with President Trump. The government seems to have accepted that FOIA applies to FISA. Without taking a position on the issue it made me recall this Lawfare post that argues to the contrary.

Second, for those who don’t remember, the controversy about these FISA applications first arose in February when House intelligence committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes released a memo claiming that the FBI misled the FISA Court about Christopher Steele, the former British secret agent who compiled the “dossier” on Trump-Russia ties and who was a source of information in the FISA applications on Page. The main complaint in the Nunes memo was that FBI whitewashed Steele—that the FISA applications did not “disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials.”

In response to the Nunes memo, the Democrats on the committee released their own memo. That memo quoted from parts of the FISA applications, including a footnote in which the FBI explained that Steele was hired to “conduct research regarding Candidate #1,” Donald Trump, and Trump’s “ties to Russia,” and that the man who hired him was “likely looking for information that could be used to discredit [Trump’s] campaign.”

Based on this back and forth between the HPSCI partisans, I wrote on Lawfare at the time that the FBI’s disclosures on Steele “amply satisfie[d] the requirements” for FISA applications, and that the central irony of the Nunes memo was that it “tried to deceive the American people in precisely the same way that it falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court.” The Nunes memo accused the FBI of dishonesty in failing to disclose information about Steele, but in fact the Nunes memo itself was dishonest in failing to disclose what the FBI disclosed. I said then, and I still believe, that the “Nunes memo was dishonest. And if it is allowed to stand, we risk significant collateral damage to essential elements of our democracy.”

Now we have some additional information in the form of the redacted FISA applications themselves, and the Nunes memo looks even worse. In my earlier post, I observed that the FBI’s disclosures about Steele were contained in a footnote, but argued that this did not detract from their sufficiency: “As someone who has read and approved many FISA applications and dealt extensively with the FISA Court, I will anticipate and reject a claim that the disclosure was somehow insufficient because it appeared in a footnote; in my experience, the court reads the footnotes.” Now we can see that the footnote disclosing Steele’s possible bias takes up more than a full page in the applications, so there is literally no way the FISA Court could have missed it. The FBI gave the court enough information to evaluate Steele’s credibility.

There’s also more detail on the previous disclosure from the House intelligence committee Democrats’ memo on how Steele went to the press with the “dossier” when FBI Director James Comey sent his October 2016 letter to Congress disclosing the possible newfound importance of the Weiner laptop in the Clinton investigation. According to the FISA applications, Steele complained that Comey’s action could influence the election. But when Steele went to the press, it caused FBI to close him out as an informant—facts which are disclosed and cross-referenced in the footnote in bold text.

While I am sure people will try, my initial impression is that with all the redactions it is going to be very tough to figure out the full scope of information supporting the Court’s repeated finding of probable cause to believe that Carter Page was an agent of Russia. There is a mention of two Russians, one of whom pleaded guilty to being an unregistered agent of a foreign government and was sentenced to 30 months, but even that is disconnected from the redacted discussion that precedes it. Substantively, the government seems to have hewed as closely to the prior disclosures as it could in applying FOIA.

But it is worth noting that—and as the Democrats previously pointed out—the judges who signed off on these four FISA applications were all appointed by Republican presidents, including one George H.W. Bush appointee (Anne Conway), two George W. Bush appointees (Rosemary Collyer and Michael Mosman) and one Reagan appointee (Raymond Dearie). I know some of those judges, and they certainly are not the types to let partisan politics affect their legal judgments.

This illusion to the Republican appointed judges is in fact not telling the whole story because,  the FISA applications did not “disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials.”

SO WHAT!

The expected cratering event produced but a whimper. We knew all the stuff before it came out. So what happens now. Since the carniverous dogs have let loose on Trump, the time has come to reverse the process. “Lock Her Up” is the first step. 

But others must walk in lock step with this murderer of our Benghazi Four. “Nobody is above the law.” Clinton’s beating was unexpected by the FBI. Her illegal fund raising, emails, lies and whatever else she did must come full circle. Indictments, indictments and more indictments. Yes, this is not a tit for tat or retribution, this is the law. The FBI and Congress can’t abrogate the law and due process.  Americans can’t let her get away with spitting at them; this is contemptible. Calling us deplorable will have consequences. One way or another Trump has to bring in the those who will exact justice.

CLICK HERE FOR MICHAEL HOROWITZ’S 5OO PAGE DOSSIER.

CLICK HERE FOR HANNITY’S TAKE ON THE IG REPORT

Examine carefully the words used to describe the Lynch-Clinton tarmac take down. 

UPDATE: MOLE FERRETED OUT – SPY BE TOLD – THE PLOT TO BRING DOWN OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

The (click)MOLE has been identified. (click)Stefan Halper, a University of Cambridge professor, has been identified as an FBI plant in the Trump campaign, according to multiple news outlets.  (The Institute of World Politics) President Trump tweeted Friday that confirmation of an FBI plant in his campaign would become the nation’s “all time biggest political scandal.”Voa chinese Stefan Halper 8Apr10.jpg

“Reports are there was indeed at least one FBI representative implanted, for political purposes, into my campaign for president,” Trump wrote. “It took place very early on, and long before the phony Russia Hoax became a “hot” Fake News story. If true – all time biggest political scandal!”

The Washington Post said it received warnings from U.S. officials that revealing Halper’s identity posed a security risk.

Meanwhile, reports vary on when the FBI tapped Halper to snoop on the Trump campaign.

The New York Times reported in December that during “a night of heavy drinking at an upscale London bar in May 2016,” Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos had disclosed to an Australian diplomat the Russians had dirt on the Clinton campaign. The Australians then tipped off the FBI, prompting the agency to launch “Crossfire Hurricane” on July 31, 2016.

(CLICK HERE)As reported earlier, the Obama White House placed a spy inside the Trump Campaign several months before the election, So far the PLANT has not been named, but known to the very individuals whose intent was to destroy Donald Trump and elect “Lock Her Up” Clinton.

This type of clandestine behavior is reminiscent of Communist countries. A Kafka novel would be the place for such a plot which is described as Kafkaesque. Franz Kafka was a writer famous for stories of bewildered individuals betrayed by an irrational and pointless society. His work, which fuses elements of realism and the fantastic, typically features isolated protagonists faced by bizarre or surrealistic predicaments and incomprehensible social-bureaucratic powers, and has been interpreted as exploring themes of alienation, existential anxiety, guilt, and absurdity. The term Kafkaesque has entered the English language to describe situations like those in his writing.Black-and-white photograph of Kafka as a young man with dark hair in a formal suit

Former Utah congressman Jason Chaffetz said Saturday that reports of an FBI informant who was placed inside the 2016 Trump campaign is “spying by the very definition.”

A New York Times report stated that the investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia began in the summer of 2016 and was code-named Crossfire Hurricane.

The report also stated that “at least one government informant met several times” with Carter Page and George Papadopoulos

VOLCANIC ERUPTION ABOUT TO BLOW IN WASHINGTON D.C.

Lava flow is emanating from the fissures of Kilauea destroying property along the way. Volcanic ash is raining down on the Big Island with vigor and aplomb. Although this feature of Mother Nature is intriguing to watch from a scientific perspective the violent nature of this phenomena is a sight to behold. To a religious zealot the destruction is the result of an angry god pouring forth deserved punishment.The Soputan volcano spews lava and ash during an eruption on Indonesia's Sulawesi island in January 2016.Reuters Photo

A volcano of a different sort is ready to blow in Washington D.C. – it is of the man made variety. Sometimes they are more dangerous than a natural one. What we are talking about is a FBI-CIA cabal that infiltrated the Trump campaign early on. Smoke is pouring out of the FBI building as we speak; this is a tell tale sign of more volcanic activity about to be released. From information flow leaking from the fissures atop the J. Edgar Hoover edifice warns of a violent eruption about to roar and destroy anything in its path. Stay tuned!

ALAN DERSHOWITZ WEIGHS IN

Many traditional civil libertarians have allowed their intense hatred of President Trump to erase their longstanding commitment to neutral civil liberties and equal justice for all – a dangerous move that threatens the rights of us all.

The anti-Trump forces are now so desperate to get the president convicted of a crime or impeached that they are prepared to compromise the most basic due process rights of the president and people associated with him who are caught up in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s ever-widening Russia probe and a related investigation of the president’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen.

The Trump opponents forget an important lesson of history: compromises that weaken the legal protections of our enemies are often used as precedents to weaken the legal protections of our friends – or of ourselves. Some of President Trump’s most vocal opponents might themselves be harmed in the future by the erosion of legal protections they are advocating for the president and his associates today.

Too often, today’s fair weather civil libertarians are unwilling to give President Trump – who they regard as the devil – the same legal rights that all Americans are entitled to.

Consider the issue of criticizing Mueller. Trump opponents view any criticism or even skepticism regarding Mueller’s past conduct as illegitimate – grounded not in fact, but simply motivated by a desire to help the president stave off allegations of collusion with the Russians to win election and allegations of obstruction of justice.

But no one – including Mueller – has the right to immunity from criticism or examination of his or her past record.

Mueller has a long record. He was an assistant U.S. attorney in Boston and the head of that office’s criminal division. He was later the head of the criminal division for the Justice Department and director of the FBI. His tenure in law enforcement paralleled the most scandalous miscarriage of justice in the modern history of the Boston FBI.

While Mueller was in positions of responsibility, four innocent people were framed by the FBI in order to protect mass-murdering gangsters who were working as FBI informers while they were killing innocent people. An FBI agent who is now in prison was tipping off organized crime boss Whitey Bulger as to who might testify against him, so that these individuals could be killed. The FBI agent also tipped off Bulger about his impending arrest, allowing him to escape and remain on the lam for 16 years.

What responsibility, if any, did Robert Mueller – who was in key positions of authority and capable of preventing these horrible miscarriages of justice – have in this sordid incident? Only a thorough and objective investigation will uncover the truth.

A former member of the Massachusetts Parole Board – a liberal Democrat who also served as mayor of Springfield, Massachusetts – swears that he saw a letter from Mueller urging the denial of release for at least one of these wrongfully convicted defendants. When he went back to retrieve the letter, it was not in the file, he says.

I see no reason to doubt his credibility.

This vanishing letter – if it existed – should surprise no one, since Judge Mark Wolf (himself a former prosecutor), who conducted extensive hearings about this entire mess, found there had been “recurring irregularities” in FBI record-keeping conduct involving Bulger, including possible “FBI misconduct.” And the judge made a finding that directly references Mueller’s state of knowledge regarding the “history.”

It is therefore not beyond the realm of possibility that Mueller wrote a letter to the Parole Board that kept one or more innocent men in prison – even if such a letter is no longer in the files. If Mueller wrote such a letter without thoroughly investigating the circumstances, he surely bears some responsibility.

Moreover, it is widely believed among Boston law enforcement observers that the FBI was not really looking for Whitey Bulger during the years that Mueller was its director. It is believed that the FBI was fearful about what Bulger would disclose about his relationship with FBI agents and other law enforcement officers over the years. It took a member of the U.S. Marshals Service to find Bulger, who was hiding in plain view in Santa Monica, California.

Recently a former federal judge, who used to be a civil libertarian, rushed to Mueller’s defense, declaring “without equivocation” that Mueller “had no involvement” in the massive miscarriage of justice. Her evidence is the lack of evidence in the files.

But absence of evidence is not conclusive evidence of absence, especially in this case.

No civil libertarians should place such great trust in government files, especially in light of Judge Wolf’s findings. They should join my call for an objective investigation by the inspector general of the Justice Department before they assure the public “without equivocation” that Mueller had absolutely “no involvement.”

But these “Get Trump At Any Cost” partisans have rejected my call for an investigation, out of fear that it may turn up information that might tarnish the image of the Muller and weaken his investigation of President Trump. Instead, they criticize those of us who point out that Mueller was at the center of the Justice Department and FBI, while this miscarriage of justice involving the four wrongfully convicted men occurred.

All civil libertarians should want the truth about this sordid episode – and Mueller’s possible role in it – regardless of its impact, if any, on the Trump investigation. Mueller also should welcome an objective investigation, which might eliminate any doubt about his role in this travesty. But too many former civil libertarians are prepared to sacrifice civil liberties and the quest for truth on the altar of “Get Trump.”

This is all too typical of the about-face many civil libertarians have taken since Donald Trump became president. I have previously written about the ACLU’s abdication of its traditional role in challenging governmental overreaching. For the new ACLU, getting Trump trumps civil liberties.

It is ironic to see many right-wingers being the ones to criticize overreach by law enforcement, while many left-wingers now defend such overreaching. Hypocrisy and selective outrage abound, as neutral principles take a back seat.

Conservatives used to say that “a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.” I would respond that “a liberal is a conservative who is being audited or whose kid was busted for pot.” Today a civil libertarian is a conservative whose candidate is being investigated, while a law-and-order type is a liberal who wants to see President Trump charged with a crime or impeached.

I am a liberal who did not vote for Trump, but who insists that the president’s civil liberties must be respected to protect the civil liberties of us all. Just as the first casualty of war is truth, so, too, the first casualty of hyper-partisan politics is civil liberties.

Alan M. Dershowitz is Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard Law School and author of, “Trumped Up! How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy,” which is now available. Follow Alan Dershowitz on Twitter: @AlanDersh Facebook: @AlanMDershowitz.

TIME TO BRING THE HAMMER DOWN

James Comey and his memoir are tripping the media light fantastic, though what’s defined that trip so far is its lack of news. Mr. Comey explains the many and varied ways that he does not like President Trump. Mr. Comey explains the many and varied ways that he does like himself. Tell us something we don’t know.

People forget that directors of the Federal Bureau of Investigation — by necessity — are among Washington’s most skilled operators, experts in appearing to answer questions even as they provide pablum. Yet the publicity tour rolls on, which means that upcoming interviewers still have an opportunity to do the country — and our profession — a favor. Here are a few basic questions Mr. Comey should be expected to answer:

You admit the Christopher Steele dossier was still “unverified” when the FBI used it as the basis of a surveillance warrant against Carter Page. Please explain. Also explain the decision to withhold from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the dossier was financed by the Hillary Clinton campaign.

You refer to Mr. Steele as a “credible” source. Does the FBI routinely view as “credible” sources who work for political operatives? Did the FBI do any due diligence on his employer, Fusion GPS? Were you aware it is an opposition-research firm? If not, why not?

Keep reading Kimberley Strassel’s column in the Wall Street Journal.

TIME TO BRING IN THE BIG GUNS

The FBI breaks into Cohen’s house, offices, safety deposit boxes, whatever, with a fake warrant issued by a criminal judge appointed by Clinton. The attorney-client communication is now up for grabs. ILLEGAL! The FBI on the other hand has not handed over the documents requested by the Nunes. Excuses coming from the FBI are fallacious, bordering on criminality. They have the documents, but are hiding them to protect the guilty. McCabe, the leaker was fired by President Trump. He is one of the individual involved in the stonewalling to some extent, remember his wife was a Hillary Clinton operative. McCabe’s call for the continuation of four different investigations was halted by higher-ups or was it. WHY?  Who are those who pushed the squash button.  

The Dumbocrats are now using every name in the book  in attacking Comey. For instance from the mouth of Lanny Davis, a former special counsel to former President Bill Clinton, slammed Comey as a “liar” in an Op-Ed for The Hill.  Just imagine the cajones these critics have. If it weren’t for Comey calling her “reckless” instead of negligent, she would have had to recuse herself from running. These attack dogs are rabid as you can find anywhere in Washington.

To get the documents requested requires patience says the FBI, but ours is running thin. Busting into Cohen’s house provides the TRUMP TEAM with a blue print. Yes, we recommend barging into the FBI building with force. We need to get to the bottom of this politicized institution and find out who they are hiding and sheltering. JUST DO IT!

TIME FOR TRUMP TO TAKE MUELLER OUT

Trump attacks Mueller ‘witch hunt’ as WH source calls investigation ‘out of control’

Trump also accused Mueller’s investigators of being “the most biased group of people [with] the biggest conflicts of interest” and said Attorney General Jeff Sessions “made a terrible mistake for the country” when he recused himself from overseeing the Russia investigation last year.

A source close to the White House told Fox News’ John Roberts that the raid showed that the Mueller investigation “is out of control” and was a “demonstration of bad faith” on the part of the special counsel.

“What in the name of God is Mueller doing?” the source told Roberts. “He wants to take down the President.”

This guy Mueller is one step closer to getting his ass hand to him by the President. Raiding the offices of Trump’s lawyer goes beyond the pale. In 18 months Mueller hasn’t uncovered squat. On the other hand he has wasted upwards of $20,000,000 dollars looking for a crime to fit the bill.

SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER’S TEAM HAS ONLY ONE KNOWN REPUBLICAN

In February, Fox News reported that most of the 17 confirmed attorneys on Mueller’s team were registered Democrats or made Democratic political donations.

A source close to the Trump legal team told Fox News’ Catherine Herridge that the raid on Cohen was “aggressive” and designed to “squeeze the president.” The source, who has knowledge of talks between Mueller and the president’s legal team, added that the raid “puts a fork in” the prospect of Trump agreeing to be interviewed by the special counsel.

Still, the existence of a referral from Mueller’s office to the Manhattan U.S. Attorney suggests that the matter isn’t related to Russia.

Under Justice Department regulations, Mueller is required to consult with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein when his investigators uncover new evidence that may fall outside his original mandate. Rosenstein then would determine whether to allow Mueller to proceed or to assign the matter to another U.S. attorney or another part of the Justice Department.

Inside the FBI are hundreds of Hillary-Obama-Democrat operatives, they are guilty of committing the most egregious of all crimes; sedition – an inside coup d’etat. Peter Strozk and Lisa Page coordinated with Comey and McCabe to use a fake dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton to get an illegal FISA warrant to tap the Trump Tower. This swamp is deep and it must be drained. Fire Rosenstein, Wray and Mueller. Give Sessions his walking papers; bring in Chris Christie to shoot the fish in the barrel.

WHERE ARE THE INDICTMENTS? RICO – THROW THE BOOK AT THEM – LOCK THEM UP

 

Charitable charity ! ! ! !

Just good down home folks doing good work
!

A Charitable Foundation Folds

Have you wondered why the Clinton Foundation folded so suddenly after Hillary was no longer in a position of influence? Perhaps this summary will provide some insight??

They list 486 employees (line 5)!  It took 486 people who are paid $34.8 million and $91.3 million in fees and expenses, to give away $5.1 MILLION

This is real. You can check the return yourself (see below). The real heart of the Clintons can be seen here.  Staggering but not surprising.. These figures are from an official copy of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation for the tax year 2014. The copy of the tax return is from the National Center for Charitable Statistics web site. You can obtain the latest tax return on any charitable organization there.

The Clinton Foundation:

Number of Employees (line 5)  486
Total revenue (line 12)  $177,804,612.00
Total grants to charity (line 13) $5,160,385.00  (this is less than 3%)
Total expenses of  $91,281,145.00

Expenses include:
Salaries (line 15) $34,838,106.00
Fund raising fees (line 16a) $850,803.00
Other expenses (line 17) $50,431,851.00    HUH??????
Travel  $8,000,000.00
Meetings $12,000,000.00
Net assets/fund balances (line 22) $332,471,349.00

So it required 486 people, who were paid $34.8 million, plus $91.3 million in fees and expenses, to give away $5.1 MILLION!  And they call this a CHARITY?

(It is alleged that this is one of the greatest white-collar crimes ever committed. And just think—one of the participants was a former president and one (gasp!) wanted to be elected president of the United States.  If justice was truly served they would both be in prison).

Feel free to pass this on to your friends so they can also be informed

A 2011 memo that raises questions as to where Bill Clinton’s philanthropic endeavors ended and for profit ventures began.

The memo was released on Wednesday as part of a Wikileaks dump of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s hacked emails.

Doug Band, a long-time aide to Bill Clinton, wrote the 2011 memo as part of an internal audit at the Clinton Foundation. In trying to explain his role in the Foundation, Band also brought up a series of instances he and his consulting company, Teneo Holdings, helped Bill Clinton secure for-profit contracts.

The memo, which was being circulated to some in Clinton’s inner circle including Podesta, reinforces Republican criticisms of the blurred lines between the foundation and professional interests of the Clintons and their associates.

“Independent of our fundraising and decision-making activities on behalf of the Foundation, we have dedicated ourselves to helping the President secure and engage in for-profit activities — including speeches, books, and advisory service engagements,” Band wrote. “In that context, we have in effect served as agents, lawyers, managers and implementers to secure speaking, business and advisory service deals. In support of the President’s for-profit activity, we also have solicited and obtained, as appropriate, in-kind services for the President and his family — for personal travel, hospitality, vacation and the like.”

At one point, Band even referred to the former president’s money-making enterprises as “Bill Clinton, Inc.”

Band said he and Justin Cooper, another long-time aide, weren’t separately compensated for helping Bill Clinton profit.

“We do not receive a fee for, or percentage of, the more than $50 million in for-profit activity we have personally helped to secure for President Clinton to date or the $66 million in future contracts, should he choose to continue with those engagements,” he continued.

Band offered specific examples of donors who also worked with Bill Clinton in a private capacity as well.

Band noted that Laureate International Universities was a foundation donor, having donated $1.4 million at the time the memo was written. The for-profit college network ultimately retained the former president as an adviser, paying him millions of dollars over several years.

“Laureate is a Foundation relationship that evolved into a personal advisory services business relationship for President Clinton,” Band wrote in the memo. He said he began managing the relationship which Teneo partners took over in 2011, and which Band said “is very time-consuming. Laureate pays President Clinton $3.5 million annually to provide advice and serve as their Honorary Chairman.”

Another Teneo client, GEMS education, had donated approximately $780,000 by the time the memo was written in 2011.

“Gems approached President Clinton in 2009 to seek his personal services as an advisor to the company,” Band wrote. “Justin and I convinced them to initiate a relationship to the Foundation, which they did; that relationship has grown into a business relationship for President Clinton and a donor relationship for CGI.”

In an email to Podesta, who at the time was involved with the Clinton Foundation, Band brought up the fact he had been required to sign a conflict of interest policy because his wife designed bags for the charity and his consulting firm represented some of the foundation donors.

“Oddly, wjc (William Jefferson Clinton) does not have to sign such a document even though he is personally paid by 3 cgi (Clinton Global Initiative) sponsors, gets many expensive gifts from them, some that are at home etc,” Band wrote. “I could add 500 different examples of things like this.”

A spokesperson from Teneo forwarded a statement to USA TODAY.

“As the memo demonstrates, Teneo worked to encourage clients, where appropriate, to support the Clinton Foundation because of the good work that it does around the world. It also clearly shows that Teneo never received any financial benefit or benefit of any kind from doing so,” the statement said.

The email with the memo was part of a near-daily dump by Wikileaks. The Clinton campaign has neither confirmed or denied the authenticity of the emails, but they blame the Russians for the hack, saying President Vladimir Putin is trying to skew the election for Donald Trump.

Trump immediately jumped on the report at a rally in Ohio Thursday.

“The more emails Wikileaks releases the more lines between the Clinton Foundation, the secretary of state’s office and the Clinton’s personal financiers — they all get blurred,” Trump said.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed Thursday a federal prosecutor was evaluating certain issues involving the FBI, the (click)Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, but said he would not appoint a second special counsel at this point.