Tag Archives: Indictments are coming

Biden Caves: “I Would Obey Any Subpoena That Was Sent to Me” for Trump Impeachment Trial

by Kristinn Taylor December 28, 2019 147 Comments

Tough talking Joe Biden, the former vice president leading the race for the Democrat’s presidential nomination, reversed his defiant stance from just 24 hours ago that he would defy any subpoena issued by the Senate to compel his testimony in President Trump’s looming impeachment trial, telling a Fairfield, Iowa audience Saturday night, “I would obey any subpoena that was sent to me”.

The reversal comes after Biden told the Des Moines Register in a Friday meeting with the paper’s editorial board that he stood by previous statements that he would defy a subpoena if issued to him. Biden then posted a statement to Twitter Saturday morning attempting to clarify his stance after strong criticism that he was acting as if he were above the law. Saturday night he caved after comments by rival candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) that he should obey a subpoena.

Video of Biden’s remarks was posted by Fox News reporter Madeleine Rivera:

Biden spoke to reporters earlier Saturday trying to clarify his stance, but leaving himself wiggle room, saying “I would honor whatever the Congress in fact legitimately asked me to do.” When asked if he would challenge a subpoena in court, Biden said, “The answer is I don’t think that’s gonna happen to begin with, let’s cross that bridge when it comes. I would in fact abide by whatever was legally required of me, I always have.”

Video of Warren on Biden:

Biden’s colossal flip flop was noted by Des Moines Register Chief Politics reporter Brianna Pfannenstiel, “.
@JoeBiden says here in Fairfield he *would* obey “any subpoena that was sent to me.” He told our editorial board yesterday he would not. He tried to clarify this morning, tweeting that he has previously complied with “legitimate” oversight requests.”

DOJ IG Report Slams Bruce Ohr’s Failure To Report Repeated Interactions With Steele

DOJ IG Report Slams Bruce Ohr’s Failure To Report Repeated Interactions With Steele

December 9, 2019 By Tristan Justice

The long-anticipated report from Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz released Monday criticized department attorney Bruce Ohr at length for failing to report repeated contacts with former British spy Christopher Steele.

Steele, the author of the debunked Steele dossier that was used to justify a federal investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign, met with Ohr 12 times after Steele was terminated as a confidential human source by the bureau. As the report notes, Ohr failed to report the repeated interactions with Steele to his DOJ supervisors, depriving the department of the opportunity to request that Ohr halt communication with the fired informant. Instead, Ohr continued to feed Steele’s information to the department and FBI, circumventing Steele’s termination as a reliable source.

According to the report, Ohr acknowledged to the DOJ that it was because of the possibility he would be told to stop these meetings with Steele that he chose not to report them to his direct supervisors.

While Horowitz stopped short of recommending Ohr for a criminal referral, the DOJ inspector general spent more than 36 pages of the report singling out the bureaucrat for circumventing his supervisors and referred Ohr to the Office of Professional Responsibility. Horowitz also referred Ohr’s actions to his supervisors in the criminal justice division, leaving the door open to future criminal prosecution.

“We found that, while no Department or ODAG policy specifically prohibited Ohr’s activities, Ohr was clearly cognizant of his responsibility to inform his supervisors of his interactions with Steele, the FBI, and State Department,” the report states. “We are referring our finding to the Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility for any action it deems appropriate. We are also providing our finding to Ohr’s current supervisors in CRM for any action they deem appropriate.” Tristan Justice is a staff writer at The Federalist focusing on the 2020 presidential campaigns. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com. Bruce OhrChristopher SteelecollusionDOJFBIFISAFISA abuseMichael HorowitzRussiaRussia collusionRussiagateRussian collusionSpygateSteele Dossier

Brennan Lied About Not Including Steele Dossier In Intelligence Community Assessment On 2016 Russian Election Interference

Brennan Lied About Not Including Steele Dossier In Intelligence Community Assessment On 2016 Russian Election Interference

December 9, 2019 By Madeline Osburn

The new report from Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz confirmed former CIA Director John Brennan lied to Congress about whether the dossier authored by Christopher Steele was used in the Obama administration’s Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA).

The ICA, a report conducted by intelligence officials in 2016 on Russian election interference, was used to brief President Barack Obama and President-elect Donald Trump in January 2017. According to the IG report, there was significant discussion by top intelligence officials as to whether the unverified Steele dossier should be included in the main body of the ICA report, summarized in an appendix, or even included at all.

FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said that “he felt strongly that the Steele election reporting belonged in the body of the ICA, because he feared that placing it in an appendix was ‘tacking it on’ in a way that would ‘minimiz[e]’ the information and prevent it from being properly considered.”

Ultimately, the ICA included a short summary and assessment of the dossier, which was incorporated in an appendix. “In the appendix, the intelligence agencies explained that there was ‘only limited corroboration of the source’s reporting’ and that Steele’s election reports were not used ‘to reach analytic conclusions of the CIA/FBI/NSA assessment,’” the IG report states.

A few months later, on May 23, 2017, when testifying before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Brennan categorically denied that the CIA relied on the Steele dossier for the ICA report. Here is the full exchange with former Rep. Trey Gowdy:

Mr. Gowdy: Do you know if the Bureau ever relied on the Steele dossier as any — as part of any court filings, applications, petitions, pleadings?

Mr. Brennan: I have no awareness.

Mr. Gowdy: Did the CIA rely on it?

Mr. Brennan: No.

Mr. Gowdy: Why not?

Mr. Brennan: Because we — we didn’t. It wasn’t part of the corpus of intelligence information that we had. It was not in any way used as a basis for the Intelligence Community assessment that was done. It was — it was not.

Brennan claimed the unverified dossier was not “part of the corpus of intelligence information we had.” On page 179 of the IG report, IG investigators asked former FBI Director James Comey if he remembered discussions with Brennan on presenting the dossier to Obama. Comey said Brennan and other officials argued it was “important” enough to include in the ICA — clearly part of the “corpus of intelligence information” they had.

Madeline is a staff editor at the Federalist and the producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Follow her on Twitter. Photo Wikimeida Commons

https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/09/brennan-lied-about-not-including-steele-dossier-in-intelligence-community-assessment-on-2016-russian-election-interference/

Inspector General Ramps Up Investigations of FBI Employees

December 5, 2019 Updated: December 5, 2019 

Open investigations of FBI employees by the Justice Department’s Inspector General (IG) have about doubled in recent years and, as far as available records go, there have never been so many investigations of this kind.

The Office of IG Michael Horowitz had 104 “open criminal or administrative investigations of alleged misconduct related to FBI employees” as of Sept. 30, according to its latest semi-annual report to Congress (pdf).

The number fell from 112 open investigations just six months earlier, but still fit into a heightened trend. In fiscal 2018, the IG reported 84 and 93 open investigations, respectively. In the decade before that, the average was a bit under 51.

It’s not clear what’s behind the increase.

In the past few years, the IG has worked on a number of high-profile investigations, including one into former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe for a self-serving media leak and another into former FBI Director James Comey for disclosure of sensitive information.

In June 2018, the IG released a report on his review of the investigation into the purported mishandling of classified information by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. While the report criticized several FBI officials involved in the probe for political bias, it concluded that “we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions we reviewed.”

Anticipated Report

Horowitz is expected to release on Dec. 9 his review of FBI actions to obtain a spying warrant on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page and the counterintelligence probe into several associates of Donald Trump. The warrant was in large part based on the Steele dossier, a collection of unsubstantiated claims about collusion between Russia and the campaign of then-candidate Trump.

The warrant was taken out by the bureau in the fall of 2016, was renewed several times, and remained active well into 2017.

The FBI officially opened a counterintelligence investigation into claimed Russian ties of four Trump associates on July 31, 2016. In 2017, the investigation was taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller, whose appointment was prompted by Comey’s release of sensitive information about his personal conversations with the newly elected President Trump.

Mueller released his final report in April, saying the investigation didn’t establish any collusion between Trump or his associates and Russian interference with the 2016 election.

In October, Page sued the Justice Department, saying his requests to review a draft of the IG report and other related records haven’t been met.

He also alleged that the department violated his privacy rights by sending copies of the surveillance warrant application to The New York Times before presenting him an opportunity to review the documents.

Former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith was reportedly referred for criminal prosecution by Horowitz for allegedly altering an email connected to the Page warrant.

Clinesmith was revealed by Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) as the “FBI Attorney 2” mentioned 56 times in the IG’s Clinton probe report.

On Nov. 22, 2016, Clinesmith’s supervisor, Sally Moyer, asked him in a message whether he’d rethought his “commitment to the Trump administration,” to which he replied, “[Expletive] no. Viva le resistance,” according to the report, which identified them as “FBI Attorney 1” and “FBI Attorney 2.”

Based on those designations, Clinesmith also lamented Trump’s win the day after the election, writing to another employee that he was “devastated” and couldn’t wait to “leave today and just shut off the world for the next four days.”

“Plus, my [expletive] name is all over the legal documents investigating his [Trump’s] staff,” he also wrote.

Source: Inspector General Ramps Up Investigations of FBI Employees

Rudy Drops Ukraine Grenade on Biden & Obama With Mysterious Tweet About Billions of Missing U.S. Cash – True Pundit

Should Rep. Adam Schiff be kicked out of Congress?The Accounts Chamber in Ukraine found an alleged misuse of $5.3B in U.S. funds during the Obama administration while Biden was “Point Man.” Obama embassy urged Ukrainian police NOT to investigate! Stay tuned to find out why. 51.2K 7:36 PM – Dec 5, 2019 Twitter Ads info and privacy28.6K people are talking about this

And what a surprise, MORE missing money linked to Biden and his former boss.

And talk of another Obama-linked cover up.

This is getting interesting.

And ugly. Fast.

Source: Rudy Drops Ukraine Grenade on Biden & Obama With Mysterious Tweet About Billions of Missing U.S. Cash – True Pundit

BREAKING: Twitter suspends journalist Andy Ngo – The Post Millennial

Prominent journalist Andy Ngo, who is the Editor-at-large at The Post Millennial, has been temporarily suspended from Twitter following a response tweet to human rights campaigner, Clinton Foundation operator, and political heir Chelsea Clinton regarding trans murder rates.The tweet by Clinton highlights the deaths of more than 150 trans people who “have been murdered in the U.S.” since 2013, “the majority black transgender women.”The post included a quoted tweet and a video by the Human Rights Camp

Source: BREAKING: Twitter suspends journalist Andy Ngo – The Post Millennial

It’s HAPPENING!! RIGHT NOW! Just One IG Report Delivered Today! More Reports To Come!

The FBI Management of its Confidential Human Source Validation Processes.

Trump Releases April Transcript of Phone Call With Ukrainian President

https://twitter.com/swsog/status/1195359065385263104?s=20
(L)-President Donald Trump addresses the United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters in New York City on Sept. 24, 2019. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images) (R)-President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky addresses the United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters on Sept. 25, 2019. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

(L)-President Donald Trump addresses the United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters in New York City on Sept. 24, 2019. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images) (R)-President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky addresses the United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters on Sept. 25, 2019. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images) Trump Presidency

Trump Releases April Transcript of Phone Call With Ukrainian President

By Jack Phillips Comments November 15, 2019 Updated: November 15, 2019 Share

President Donald Trump released a rough transcript of the first call had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky regarding his election win, inviting him to the White House, which happened months before another phone call between the two leaders that House Democrats have used as the basis of their impeachment inquiry into the president.

The April transcript didn’t contain any mention of former Vice President Joe Biden or his son, Hunter Biden. The younger Biden served on the board of a Ukrainian gas company while his father was in office.

The transcript shows that Trump agreed to meet Zelenksy at the White House with no preconditions. House Democrats have alleged that U.S. military aid to Ukraine was tied to a White House meeting along with investigations.

The 16-minute call is mostly genial and congratulatory. Zelensky invited Trump to attend his inauguration, and Trump suggested that his counterpart could visit the White House.

“When you’re settled and ready, I’d like to invite you to the White House,” Trump tells Zelensky in the call. “We’ll have lots of things to talk about, but we’re with you all the way.”

“Well, thank you for the invitation. We accept the invitation and look forward to the visit,” Zelensky responds. “Very good,” Trump says in return.

“We’ll let you know very soon, and we will see you very soon, regardless,” Trump says.

(White House)
(White House)
(White House)
(White House)
(White House)
(White House)

Zelensky has not visited the White House to date.

In the call, there is little talk about politics.

“That was an incredible election,” Trump tells Zelensky. “Again, thank you so very much. As you can see, we tried very hard to do our best. We had you as a great example.”

Trump adds: “I think you will do a great job. I have many friends from Ukraine and they think—frankly—expected you to win. And it’s a really amazing thing that you’ve done.”

Zelensky then asks if Trump could attend the inauguration.

“I’d also like to invite you, if it’s possible, to the inauguration. I know how busy you are, but if it’s possible for you to come to the inauguration ceremony, that would be a great, great thing for you to be with us on that day,” Zelensky says.

Trump replies: “Give us the date and, at a very minimum, we’ll have a great representative.”

The White House noted that the release of the April transcript is an uncommon move for a president to make, highlighting the Trump administration’s transparency.

“The President took the unprecedented steps to declassify and release the transcripts of both of his phone calls with President Zelensky so that every American can see he did nothing wrong,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement Friday.

Why Is This Mueller Alumnus in Charge of the Justice Department’s FARA Unit?

Of the thousands of attorneys in the Department of Justice, it should be possible to find one who was not so closely associated with a project to use the Foreign Agents Registration Act as a pretext to meddle in and undermine the results of an American election.

Adam Mill – October 29th, 2019

Did the FBI tamper with the record of what former Trump campaign official and National Security Advisor Michael Flynn said to FBI agents? According to documents filed by Flynn’s attorney last week, it appears that none other than former FBI attorney Lisa Page participated in the editing of Flynn’s statement.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team then used the edited statement as proof of Flynn’s “lie.”

How can Brandon Van Grack, the lead prosecutor in the Flynn case, possibly defend a conviction of Flynn for lying to the FBI when the “lie” Flynn supposedly told was actually a statement edited and altered without Flynn’s participation? This latest bombshell is disturbing evidence that the U.S. Department of Justice remains a weapon in the hands of Democrats and the permanent bureaucracy.

Van Grack is more than just the tip of the spear for a particularly egregious operation to criminalize the Justice Department’s political targets—in this case, members of the 2016 Trump presidential campaign. He’s also a key veteran of the Mueller investigation. Unlike his colleagues who returned to private practice, Van Grack stayed behind to assume a powerful position within the Justice Department.

Van Grack currently wears two hats. In one of Attorney General Barr’s less-considered decisions, he placed Van Grack in charge of enforcing the very law that the Justice Department (and later the Mueller team) used as a pretext to spy on and leak against Trump in the 2016 election and his subsequent administration. Yes, Van Grack now wields the awesome and highly discretionary power of the unit that investigates and prosecutes violations of the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA).

To understand what a colossal mistake it is to put Van Grack in charge of FARA, it is helpful to review the FARA statute and its history.

In 1938, Congress passed the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which was intended to force agents of enemy governments such as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union to self-identify so the public could evaluate their speech or propaganda in light of their stated loyalties. Between 1966 and 2015, the Justice Department brought a total of seven cases, only one of which resulted in a conviction.

Beginning in 2016, however, FARA cases became all the rage.

The Justice Department recently created a new unit dedicated to sniffing out potential violators. On its surface, the statute has a politically neutral objective of informing the public of foreign influence. In practice, however, the law has become the go-to tool for partisan federal prosecutors. FARA prosecutions have tended to focus on Republicans even when Democrats commit the mirror image of the same violations.

One obvious recent example was the blatantly political selection of Paul Manafort as a FARA defendant, while politically connected Tony Podesta received an immunity deal for essentially the same behavior involving the same foreign clients.

Fusion GPS, which famously underwrote the Russia collusion hoax dossier, has piled up multiple FARA complaints (including unregistered work for Russia) that the Justice Department continues to ignore.

FARA is vague and subject to unbridled prosecutorial discretion. To demonstrate how vague, travel agents now register as “foreign agents” under the theory that marketing a tourist trip is a legally reportable act. It’s a perfect weapon to invoke secret surveillance pursuant to FISA and can be used against anyone with an international clientele. Nobody really knows what’s illegal until the Justice Department targets you.

A Potent Political Weapon in the Wrong Hands

Van Grack, who donated to Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign, will also have enormous power in 2020 to decide whether candidate Joe Biden’s family should be investigated for foreign entanglements. For example, if Biden represented Ukraine natural gas company Burisma’s interests in demanding that the Ukrainian prosecutor be fired, Van Grack might be the person evaluating whether to charge that conduct.

FARA is a potent political weapon. Candidate Hillary Clinton hired Fusion GPS to gin up suspicions of a Trump-Russia association in order to create a hook for the Justice Department to launch a surveillance operation. The department predicated the application for the Carter Page FISA warrant upon supposed suspicions that he worked as an “agent” of a foreign power. Once the intelligence community had its surveillance in place, it repeatedly and illegally leaked the fruits (or supposed fruits) to undermine the insurgent candidate and later the new president.

Many of those illegal leaks appear to have come directly from the Mueller team during Van Grack’s tenure. It’s highly problematic that Barr would place Van Grack in charge of the kind of sensitive FARA-related information the Mueller team may have leaked during the investigation.

Indeed, Van Grack is a logical witness in potential investigations into those leaks. Guilt by association with foreigners remains such an irresistible weapon that Hillary Clinton recently (and improbably) accused Democratic presidential candidate and U.S. military veteran Tulsi Gabbard of being groomed by the Kremlin to run as a third-party spoiler in 2020.

But Van Grack’s participation in the abuse of the FARA law might not have begun with the Mueller team. Prior to working as the head of the FARA Unit and on Mueller’s team, Van Grack worked in the Justice Department’s national security division. There he worked with John Carlin, the architect of the Carter Page FISA warrant application. Carlin also signed one of the FISA court certifications that the court later found to be deceptive.

Conflicts of Interest

The Trump-hating press has already started cheerleading the prospect of Van Grack opening up a new front against Trump. A few days ago, The New Republic ran a story, “The Law that Could Take Down Rudy Giuliani,” referring to Van Grack’s new area of responsibility, the FARA law.

The New Republic is not alone. The corporate leftist legacy media, including the Washington Post, NPR, and Politico, have pushed Justice Department to use FARA to take down the president’s current attorney. Politico asks, “Is Rudy Giuliani Going To Jail?” The author is optimistic that Van Grack is well positioned to stick it to Giuliani. Another author drew up a mock indictment of Giuliani incorporating allegations related to the recent arrest of Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two non-citizens the media have tied to the former New York City mayor.

Van Grack’s role as the Flynn prosecutor is totally incompatible with the role of prosecuting new FARA violations. Flynn’s attorney has accused Van Grack’s prosecution team of several acts of misconduct. I profiled a number of these violations here. Flynn’s legal defense team alleged multiple incidents of the government failing to disclose and/or preserve evidence. Remember the text messages between Lisa Page and her lover, former FBI counterintelligence chief Peter Strzok? There were actually two sets of cell phones, one issued by the FBI and a second the couple used while working for Mueller. When Mueller learned of the disturbing text messages sent between the first set of cell phones, he allowed the second set to be wiped of their data.

Flynn’s attorneys have alleged Van Grack committed misconduct in failing to ensure those cell phones were preserved and disclosed before Flynn’s plea. Questions about the political motivations of the Flynn prosecution persist. Flynn’s attorney also accused Van Grack’s team of attempting to coerce Flynn into lying, threatening to prosecute Flynn’s son, and hiding and even destroying evidence.

Thus, Van Grack brings all of that baggage into any new FARA prosecution which makes him less effective at catching real criminals posing real security threats to the United States. Indeed, Van Grack (who considers himself to be a “trial attorney”) has already lost two high profile cases in his new role.

Mueller’s entire investigation will be forever tainted by the blatant political corruption that infected it from the very beginning. Under Mueller, the spying and surveillance that began against candidate Trump continued against our sitting president (sometimes in coordination with Mueller and likely Van Grack).

In the Summer of 2017, Justice Department agents raided the offices of Trump’s private attorney, Michael Cohen, securing audio recordings that later leaked to the press. Justice officials obtained warrants for surveillance against Cohen. Mueller seized thousands of the Trump transition team’s emails without a warrant. Roger Stone complained that the Mueller’s team pressured him to lie in the headlong effort to get Trump at any cost.

Of the thousands of attorneys in the Department of Justice, one hopes it would be possible to find one to supervise the FARA unit who was not so closely associated with a project to use FARA as a pretext to meddle in and undermine the results of an American election. Van Grack should not be in a position to meddle in the 2020 election until he is cleared of any involvement in the FARA abuses and leaking of sensitive FARA-related information.